The Iliad

Google

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world’s books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that’s often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book’s long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines
Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the

public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.

We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individual
personal, non-commercial purposes.

and we request that you use these files for

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google’s system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attribution The Google “watermark” you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can’t offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book’s appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world’s books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web
ai[http: //books . google. com/|

THE ILIAD

Eze

Qa
XA

= eal τ

1)

te,

=>"

THE ILIAD

ὅση δ ἢ

EDITED WITH ENGLISH NOTES AND INTRODUCTION

BY

WALTER LEAF, M.A.

LATE FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE

VOL. 1.

BOOKS I-XII.

London
MACMILLAN AND CO.
1886

.PREFACE

THE object of the present edition of the Iliad is to offer a guide
to students anxious to know more of Homer than they can learn
from elementary school books. It must be confessed that, when
once the strict limits of a verbal commentary are passed, it is hard
to know which path to choose from the many which open into the
world revealed to us by the Homeric poems. We find ourselves
at the starting-point of all that has given Greece her place in the
world—of Greek history, of Greek art, of Greek philosophy,
theology, and myth. The poems are our ultimate resource for
the study of the history of the Greek language, and it is to them
that we owe all our knowledge of the one great school of Greek
criticism. An editor may be pardoned if, at the risk of apparent
superficiality and discursiveness, he attempts, not of course to
follow all or any of these roads, but barely to indicate the
_ direction in which they lead.

Unfortunately for the English student, the works which he
must study if he wishes to pursue these lines of enquiry are
almost entirely in German; unfortunately also for the editor,
who can hardly escape the appearance of pedantry when he has
to be continually quoting works in a foreign language. The
difficulty is one however which it lies with English scholars
themselves to remove.

Where the acumen and industry of Germany have been for
nearly a century so largely devoted to the Iliad and Odyssey, it
is not to be expected, or even desired, that in a commentary for

vill PREFACE.

general use a new editor should contribute much that is really
original, The proper place for new work is in the pages of
philological journals and dissertations. Indeed it is not possible
for any man to be sure of the novelty of any suggestion he may
make, so vast is the mass of Homeric literature which has been
annually poured forth since Wolf revived the study. While
believing therefore that some few improvements on old interpreta-
tion will be found in the following pages, I am at no pains to
specify them, and shall be quite content if I see them adopted
without acknowledgment. On the other hand, I have freely
taken wherever I have found, only acknowledging in the case
of recent work which has not yet passed into the common stock,
and reserving for this place a general statement of the great
debts which I owe to previous authors.

Prominent among these! I must place Ameis’ edition of the
Iliad, and more particularly Dr. Hentze’s Appendix thereto; the
references given in it are of inestimable value to the student.
Heyne’s large Iliad, and the editions of Pierron, Diintzer, Paley,
La Roche, Christ, Nauck, Nagelsbach, Fasi, and Mr. Monro, have
all been consulted; the last two continually and with especial
respect. References to notes on the Odyssey have, as far as
possible, been confined to Merry and Riddell’s edition of the first
twelve books, but here again Ameis and Hentze have been valued
guides. Ebeling’s great Lexicon Homericum, at last completed, has
been of course an indispensable companion, though often usefully
supplemented by Seiler’s smaller dictionary. The other principal
authorities will be found in the list at the end of the introduction ;
isolated papers and monographs can hardly be enumerated.

I have further to express my thanks to Mr. J. A. Platt,
Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, who has been so good as

1 If Ido not place Mr. Monro’s Homeric Grammar in the first place, it is be-
cause I trust that the continual references to it will keep before the reader my
immense debt to it.

PREFACE. ix

to read through the proofs, and contribute many valuable re-
marks,

Finally I have to name with affectionate remembrance my
friend, the late John Henry Pratt, Fellow of Trinity College,
Cambridge. The eight years which have elapsed since his
lamentable death by drowning in the lake of Como have so
greatly modified the work which I inherited from him that I
have no right to make him responsible for any opinion expressed
in the following pages; but I would emphatically say that their
existence is entirely due to him, and that it is my earnest hope
that I have said nothing which would not have met with his
approval, had he lived.

The Frontispiece is from a red-figured Attic amphora from
Vulci, published in the Monumenti dell Instituto, i. 35, 36. It
clearly represents the ending of the duel between Aias and
Hector, after the exchange of gifts related in H 303. The name
@OINIX instead of Idaios seems to be merely an instance of
carelessness such as is not uncommon on vases in the case of
secondary personages.

INTRODUCTION

THE TEXT.

THE critic may set about the construction of a text of Homer with
either of two aims in view. He may propose to reproduce so far as
may be the original words of the poems, as they were first composed ;
or he may on the other hand set before himself only the humbler
ambition of amending the vulgate till he can give it in the purest form
preserved by tradition.

The former method, which has to rely, to a large extent, upon
conjectural divination and philological comparison, came into existence
with Bentley’s discovery of the traces of the digamma in the common
text, and for the last century has been steadily worked with a large
measure of success. Among the more important classes of emendation
thus fixed, a few may be specially named.

First in order comes the restoration of the initial digamma. Heyne,
Bekker, Cobet, Nauck, and others have shewn how large a proportion
of the apparent “violations” of this consonant can be corrected by
emendations of more or less probability; in the Iliad at least, the
number of recalcitrant lines in passages of undoubted antiquity has
been reduced to a comparatively small number. Nauck has further
shewn that many words which, as we write them, contain a diphthong
are always scanned in such a manner that we may write two open
vowels in place of the diphthong; we may for instance always write
σκηπτόοχος for σκηπτοῦχος, θέϊος for θεῖος, ἠόα for ἠῶ ; and when we find
the same rule in words like κόϊλος for κοῖλος, ᾿Ατρεΐδης for ᾽Ατρείδης,
and others where we know that a digamma originally existed between
the two open vowels, we have come as near as the case will allow to a
restoration of the medial as well as of the initial digamma.

Ahrens has done important service in shewing that the poems
contain many evident traces of a genitive of the second declension in
-oo, an intermediate form between -o1o and -ov; and he has further
pointed out numerous corruptions which have crept into the text
through ignorance or neglect of the fact that the hiatus in certain
parts of the Homeric hexameter is legitimate and far from uncommon.

Fick’s recent work, though it has as yet not obtained general

xii INTRODUCTION.

acceptance, and is far less cogent in its results, will be found to have
rendered services to criticism, even though its form and much of its
substance be rejected. While not admitting that the Aeolic into which
he converts the poems is in any way to be regarded as the original
dialect, I believe that his proof that the poems were not originally in
an Ionic form will be found to hold good; and that the peculiarly
Ionic forms which the metre will not let us alter are in many cases
evidence of the later origin of the passages where they occur. But
our knowledge of the old Aeolic dialect 1s so imperfect—the inscrip-
tions, the only really trustworthy evidence, are all later than the fifth
century, and most of them even than the Christian era—that this
criterion is one which we shall never be able to apply with confidence
until we have a satisfactory knowledge of the Greek dialects as they
were at least in the seventh century B.C.

A particular question of some importance which, though not first
raised by Nauck, has been prominently brought forward by his work, is
that of the form of the dative plural of the first and second declensions.
It is well known that the Ionic dialect, as found both in Herodotos and
the inscriptions, admits only the longer form in -ῃσι and -οισι, to the
exclusion of -ys and -o1s. The same is the case in the Aeolic inscrip-
tions, except with the article, which is always found in the short form
τοῖς, tats. If we examine the text of Homer, we shall find in a very
large majority of cases that the shorter form where it occurs precedes
a vowel, and may therefore be written -οισ᾽, -yo’. There is a further
large class of phrases where the long form can easily be introduced ;
namely, in the combinations like ἀγανοῖς βελέεσσι, πλείοις δεπάεσσι,
τρητοῖς λεχέεσσι, and so on, which can at once be altered to ἀγανοῖσι
βέλεσσι, πλείοισι δέπασσι, τρητοῖσι λέχεσσι ; and similarly we may write
μειλιχίοισι βέπεσσι, etc. When these alterations are made it will be
found that the number of cases where we must leave the short form is
extremely small; according to Nauck there is no instance left in seven
of the twenty-four books of the Iliad (AZINOZ®) and only thirty-nine
in all the rest ; with seventy-five in the Odyssey. Hence both Nauck,
who wishes to reduce the dialect to old Ionic, and Fick, who wishes
to find nothing but Aeolic, alike endeavour to remove these remaining
obstacles by conjecture or excision. The case is undoubtedly a strong
one, but there are several reasons for hesitation for those who do not
believe in the purely Ionic or Aeolic origin of the poems, and are not
satisfied to find in the “Attic” forms an evidence of the now discredited
story of the recension of Peisistratos. Even a follower of Fick must
remember that in the fragments of Sappho we find the long and short
forms used side by side.’ If therefore with Fick we accept the in-
scriptions, late though they are, as evidence for old Aeolic, we are
driven to the conclusion that Sappho did not write in a pure dialect,

1 See fr. 11, 20, 78 (1), 57, Bergk; Meister, Gr. Dial. i. p. 165.

INTRODUCTION. xiii

and can hardly fail to see a trace of the influence of the Epic language
in something like its present form, at least so far as this point is
concerned. Again it may be noticed that in two dialects, Arcadian
and Cyprian, which shew a particularly close affinity with one another,
and in many ways with the Epic language, the short form is regular ;
though there is at least one case of the longer in Arcadian (Collitz,
1183, ᾿Αλειοῖσι, a pre-Ionic inscription). Finally, for those who believe
that the poems, or at least the dialect, arose on the mainland of Greece
proper, it is significant that the shorter form is on the whole as char-
acteristic of this region (Thessaly, Boeotia, Elis, Attica, etc.) as the
longer is of the colonies in Asia Minor. Since then a complete
uniformity is not to be attained without considerable violence to the
text, it is better not to aim at it, and to see in the remains of the
shorter form what was, in the later home of the poems in Asia Minor,
not a modernism but an archaism.

However this may be, the importance of these investigations is
not to be mistaken; but even if we allow that each one of them has
brought us a step nearer to the primitive language of the poems, it is
none the less clear that we can never actually reach this ultimate
goal. For every difference which is deduced by metrical analysis—
and it is on this, in the last resort, that everything depends—there
may, for all we know, be fifty which have not betrayed themselves by
a difference of scansion. Until this doubt is settled, and this it can
hardly ever be, we can have no confidence that we have really carried
the tradition back to the original form. Here and there we have
made a certain correction, but those of which we know nothing may
be infinite. And short of the original form of the poems, there is for
the same reason no intermediate port for which we can steer when
once we cut adrift from the safe hold of tradition. We then have no
test whatever which will enable us to prove the outcome of our
labour to be such a text as ever was, or ever could be, at one time in
the mouths of men; for we cannot tell that the corruptions which
we remove came in together, or if not, in what order they appeared.

The most scientific course therefore would be to carry back the
tradition as far as may be, and thus to fix our text, leaving to notes
and monographs all conjectured earlier forms. This is the aim of the
text of the present edition. The canon by which every reading has
been judged is the best tradition of the fifth century B.c. The object is
not to produce an Iliad as it was first composed, for this is beyond
our power, but an Iliad such as Herodotos and Thukydides read,
for this may at least approximately be done.

Not the least valuable part of Prof. Ludwich’s recent work on
Aristarchos is his demonstration that the great critic aimed only at
emending a vulgate, and that this vulgate is in the main our common
text of to-day. And in the Scholia we find a name which enables
us to carry back this long tradition to the fifth century. This name

xiv INTRODUCTION.

is that of Antimachos of Kolophon, who, as we know, lived in the
second half of the fifth century, and published an edition of the Iliad.
Now this edition happens to be sometimes quoted, but always as an
authority for very small and unimportant variations of the text.}
The conclusion is very strong; namely, that the edition of Antimachos
was in the main the same as our present vulgate, probably not
differing from it much more than a good extant MS. differs from a
bad one.

It appears therefore that the basis from which we start is the
same as that of Aristarchos; and it is to him and his school that we
mainly owe our power of emendation. Our materials are as follows:—
(1) A very large number of MSS., probably some 200, of one or other
or both poems. A short account of the most important of these is
appended. Of these all represent the vulgate with more or less
accuracy, with the single exception of A, which is written under
Aristarchean influence. (2) The very numerous variants collected by
Aristarchos and recorded in the Scholia A. (3) The notices of
readings of other ancient critics, notably of Zenodotos, preserved in
the same work. (4) Scattered quotations, of which the most im-
portant are those in the Lexica, especially Hesychios, Apollonios the
Sophist, and the Etymologicum Magnum. Quotations in the MSS. of
other classical authors are never quite free from the suspicion of
having been “cooked” into agreement with the vulgate; the variants
which they give are seldom of importance, and may often be shown
to arise from mere slips of memory; for in ancient times verbal
accuracy in quotation was less rigidly demanded than now.

Of these four classes it may be said at once that the MSS. are as
a rule good ones, very free from the blunders of stupid copyists, and
never presenting us with the mere nonsense which is but too common
in many important codices. Itacism and similar small sources of
error are of course to be found in all; but in so large a number the
“personal coefficient” can easily be eliminated. A in particular is
probably the finest and most accurate MS. of any classical work in
existence ; Hoffmann has detected only three instances of itacism in
the 1126 lines of books ® and X. In critical value the variants of
Aristarchos are, it need hardly be said, of higher value than the
readings of any codex; for the great critic, it would seem, made it
his business to collect them from all the resources of the Alexandrian
library, where he commanded materials a thousand-fold more valuable
than any in our possession. Ludwich has shewn how baseless is the

1 The following instances may be tions are ἑλκήσουσι κακῶς for ἑλκήσουσ'
given :—Antimachos, with others, is ἀικῶς Χ 336, νόημα for veoln Ψ 604;
quoted as an authority for μαχέσσομαι, ἐξείλετο τόξον χερσίν for ἐπεθήκατ᾽ ὀιστὸν
not μαχήσομαι in A 298, and forxara(not τόξῳ, 870; κλέψαι μὲν ἀμήχανον for κλέψαι
μετὰ) daira, 423, for οἰνοχόει, not ὠνοχόει, μὲν edoopev, 271.

598. Somewhat more important varia-

INTRODUCTION. xv

supposition to which the schools of Nauck and Cobet continually recur,
that the readings of Aristarchos are due to his own conjecture. That
they may in some cases have been so is possible; but the manner in
which his followers speak of his respect for his authorities precludes
us from assuming that his variants were in any large number of cases
based on other than documentary authority. At the same time we
must remember that Aristarchos was far from a mere collator. He
had very strong views indeed, and there is no doubt that he, like any
other critic worth the name, did not slavishly follow any one MS. or
class of MSS. but adopted the readings, if their authority were only
respectable, which fell in with theories sufficiently proved, in his
opinion, on other grounds.

Of the readings of Zenodotos and others we know little, as they
are rarely quoted unless when attacked by Aristarchos—or rather by
Aristonikos, to whom the bitterly polemical tone of the Scholia is
probably due. But even from this imperfect side-light we see that
they often contain most valuable tradition, and were frequently re-
jected by Aristarchos for reasons which we know to be invalid. Though
we have no positive testimony as to Zenodotos’ dealings with his
authorities, as we have in the case of Aristarchos, yet what we know
about him gives us little reason to suppose that he handled the text
in any arbitrary way. A larze number of hi are 80 peculiar
as almost to preclude the idea of coni
cases they contain the best of evidence in their own favour, by pre-
serving a correct tradition of tie digamma. of which Zenodotos, like
Aristarchos, must have been w!

The fourth class, the quotati
needs little remark, as they
employed with great caution. and

* zt
forward to i)

of textual criticism.

A fifth means of correcti
be entirely excluded : but the
as to restrict it within very 5
however in a few cases of «
corrected in the present
antiquity as to find more
of the digamma” and οἹ

the error has produced a
ground a very few cases οἱ
the text; as for instance ‘I<,
or two others; but equalis «
ἀδελφειοῦ and the like, have teen τοῖν
traditional reading is not. «+.
scanned as a trochee cing 1.

Xvi INTRODUCTION.

traditional sens. rather than che linzonscticaiy preferable fos te. A
193, With these ἐσέ ρου an-l a few sporede cases. week are men-
tiemed im the notes, there ty, 1 bedeve. ne reading im the text which
cannes be shewn to have some support in ancien: ‘tradition, or at least
in the reaslings of some MS. of respectabniity.

Wrbin the limits of tradition the critic ἘΞ free to follow the teach-
ings of modern μὲ! οἶσε. Of readmes which have any authority he
it bound to chesee thas which reiams, however unconsciously, the
tradition of a bet digamma In parts of the line where modern
research has ahewn that the ancient Epic poets, unlike their imitators,
permatied hiatus, we must ομέστης pesriiuz: choose the reading which
presents the hiatus. Where there is vanation between a baz vowel
and ἃ short in the itu: of the foot, the short vowel, if permissible on
other grounds, is to be chosen ; for it appears that lencthening by the
ictus was far commoner in the oldest poets than the later Greeks con-
ecived. With these rules m view there is no reason why we should
despair of reproducmg the Homer of Thukydides or even of Pindar—
or perhaps even a amitically better text than any which, in their nen-
critical time, had been compsced from the emstng bat scattered
materials.

On similar grounds the use of brackets to denote spunous lines
has been rarely adopted, except where the omission is found in one at
leaat of the better class of MSS. A mere athetesis by Anstarchos has
net been emsiderei sufficient ground of condemnation: but where, as
often, we are wild that Aristarchos agreed with Aristophanes in
athetizing a line, and that Zenodotos omitted it altogether (οὐδὲ
ἔγρεῴεν), it will seametimes be found bracketed in the present edition,
if stromy critical reasons indicate spuriousness. Less cogent evidence
ean hardly be taken to show that the line was not duly recognized by
the tradition of the fifth century ; and if we endeavour to go back
beyond that date, “interpolation ἡ and “ spuriousness ” are words which
soon begin to Inxe their meaning.

Ancther point of difference from the ordinary text may be men-
tumed. The patronymics Τιζείφης, Πηλείΐζης, and the like, are written
with diaeresis, as qua/drisyllables. We know they must have had this
seansion at one time, for they undoubtedly come from [In AcFidys,
Τιῤεξίδης, and the fact that Pindar and the tragedians use the open
forms has been accepted as sufficient proof that the tradition lasted
till the fifth century. The fact that the trisyllabic measure is never
needed in the hexameter is of less weight, and has not induced me to
write ᾿Αργέϊος, Geis, etc., with Nauck; for here we have no evidence
to shew that the memory of what was probably the primitive form
lasted till historic times.

The text formed on these principles agrees in most points with
Hentze’s revision of Dindorf’s edition (Teubner series, ed. 5, 1884-5):
and I have followed this in most minor points of accentuation and

INTRODUCTION. XV1L
spelling.’ The apparatus criticus from which the MS. readings are
quoted is that of J. La Roche (Homeri Ilias, Lipsiae, 1873-1876).
Unfortunately this work leaves much to be desired. It is over-
burdened by petty variants which merely illustrate on the practice of
each scribe, and do not indicate either error or difference of reading—
a large number deal, for instance, merely with the question of the
omission or addition of the v ἐφελκυστικόν in a word which ends a line.
It is full of misprints, and is unhappily far from being either trust-
worthy or complete. Many of the readings are copied from Heyne,
who often copied from Barnes, who was a sadly careless collator.
Some of the most important of the second class of codices are still
uncollated, notably Ven. B; while the Townleianus, which is probably
of high value, still requires careful examination, as Heyne’s variants
are scanty and sometimes incorrect. Even the collation of C and D,
the two Laurentian MSS., which forms the most valuable part of La
Roche’s new material, is said to be very imperfect. It is certain that
a new and complete apparatus for the Iliad is urgently needed in
order to complete the work which C. A. J. Hoffman began in his
careful and scholarly edition of the 21st and 22nd books.

The principal MSS. quoted by name in the notes are as follows :—

A: Codex Venetus, no. 454 (see La Roche, Hom. Teztkritik, p. 458,
no. 6), 10th century: “liber quo non est emendatior ullus,” as Cobet
says. It has lost nineteen leaves which are supplied by a late hand; they
comprise E 336-635, P 277-577, 729-761, T 126-326, 2 405-504. This
MS. stands quite by itself in preserving the signs of Aristarchos and
the Scholia; the text shows considerable signs of Aristarchean in-
fluence.

B: Codex Venetus, no. 453 (La Roche, H. T. p. 458, no. 6), eleventh
century. This is only quoted for the Scholia, the text not having been
collated.

C: Laurentianus, xxxii, 5 (La R. p. 460, no. 14), at Florence ; tenth
or eleventh century. A valuable MS. with a good many peculiar
readings, though rather carelessly written.

D: Laurentianus, xxxii, 15 (La R. p. 460, no. 15), eleventh century ;
very carefully written, and probably the next best MS. after A.

‘“‘Townleianus,” in the British Museum, among the Burney MSS.
(La R. p. 467, no. 65); a good codex not properly collated.

None of the other complete MSS. are of special importance.
There are, however, several fragments of great interest. Among these

1 It might be thought that it would
have been better boldly to adopt La
Roche’s rules of accentuation, which are
based upon the tradition of the gram-
marians as well as of the best MSS. ;
but the gain thus made is small, as the
grammarians themselves can have had

no very ancient tradition to guide them
in such matters, and it would hardly
compensate the appearance of pedantry
in unessential matters which is given
by such forms as φύλλά τε καὶ φλοιόν,
Οὔλυμπον δὲ, and the like.

xviii INTRODUCTION.

are three fragments of papyrus, of which two at least probably date
from the first century B.c. They are fully described by La Roche,
H. T. pp. 439-450. These venerable relics are of no critical import-
ance, and in some cases are written with gross inaccuracy (κατουλυπον
νηφόελπος for kar Οὐλύμπου νιφόεντος, οἴ... The fragments of the
Codex Ambrosianus (La R. p. 450, no. 4) are better ; they probably date
from about the sixth century, and comprise altogether 800 lines from
all parts of the Iliad. The text is that of the ordinary good modern
vulgate, without any very noteworthy variations. The same may be
said of the Syrian Palimpsest (Syr) in the British Museum, which con-
tains 3873 lines from M-II and 2-0. This dates from the sixth or
seventh century, and is not quite so accurately written as the Ambr.
Thus all these fragments are chiefly of importance as showing us the
chain of tradition extending continuously backwards from the modern
vulgate nearly to the age of Aristarchos without noteworthy variation.!

THE SCHOLIA.

THE Scholia on the Iliad are so important in the history of criticism
as well as for the elucidation of the text, that it will not be out of
place to give a short account of them, together with some of the
preliminary information. needed by students who desire to study them
for themselves. The Venetian Scholia were first published by Villoison
(Venice, 1788). A more complete, but still imperfect, collection from
this and other sources is that of J. Bekker (Berlin, 1825). It is now
superseded by Dindorf’s edition (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1875-7) so
far as it goes; and it is to this work that all references are made.

The bulk of the Scholia consists apparently of excerpts from a
larger work, a sort of “Variorum” commentary, of the origin of
which we know little for certain, except that it was composed between
the ages of Porphyrios (A.D. 260) and Eustathios (A.D. 1160). A con-
siderable portion of this corpus, especially in Ven. B, is taken from the
“Homeric Problems” of Porphyrios, and a great deal more from the
lucubrations of other allegorizing interpreters. This is of little value.
We occasionally find however references to the work of Aristarchos,
which may be accepted as correct when we have no other reason to

1 For the sake of those who may wish A = Venetus A (6); C = Laurentianus

to use La Roche's edition, I add the
signification of the letters which he
employs to denote his MSS., but of
which he has not published any explana-
tion ; the numbers in brackets are those
under which an account of each MS.
will be found in his Hom. Textkritik,
pp. 458-479.

xxxii, 3 (14); Ὁ = Laurentianus, xxxii,
16 (15); E = Eustathius; G = Vindo-
bonensis 39 (92) ; H = Vindobonensis
117 (95); L = Vindobonensis 5 (105) ;
M = Venetus 456 (107); N = Venetus

459 chartaceus, and O = Ven. 459,
bombycinus (10) ; = Stuttgartensis
5 (111).

INTRODUCTION. Xix

doubt their accuracy. They also contain a number of mythological
traditions taken from Apollodoros and others, which are not without
their value; and aesthetical criticisms on the poetry, which are
interesting and often instructive. We know this original work chiefly
through four abstracts of it contained in the MSS. known as A, B, the
Townleianus, and the Lipsiensis (L). Of these, the Schol. A occupy
the two first, and the Schol. B the third and fourth volumes of the
Oxford edition. The Townley Scholia will form two more volumes,
but are not yet published. They are however to some extent known
through the Scholia Victoriana (V), given by a late MS., which is
apparently copied from Townl. (without the text), and was employed
by Bekker in his edition. The Leipzig Scholia (L) are also partly
reproduced by Bekker, but are of little value. The same may be
said of one or two other collections (“ Leidensis,” ‘“ Mosquensis,” etc.),
which apparently would not be worth publishing.

Fortunately however A contains, beside much of these comparatively
unimportant excerpts, a large mass of information of far higher value ;
and fortunately too it has preserved for us a distinct statement of the
source from which it comes. This is repeated at the end of every book
in similar words, of which the following at the end of the third book
may serve as a specimen :---παράκειται τὰ ᾿Αριστονίκον σημεῖα, καὶ τὰ
Διδύμου περὶ τῆς ᾿Αρισταρχείου διορθώσεως, τινὰ δὲ καὶ ἐκ τῆς ᾿Ιλιακῆς
προσφῳδίας ᾿Ηρωδιανοῦ καὶ Νικάνορος περὶ τῆς ᾿Ομηρικῆς στιγμῆς.

Of the four authorities here named Nikanor and Herodianos are
the latest in date, being contemporary with Hadrian and M. Aurelius.
Both were decided but often ill-informed followers of Aristarchos.
Nikanor’s views on punctuation often of course deal with the inter-
pretation of the text and frequently give us interesting information.
The notes of Herodianos on prosody—which, in the Greek sense of the
word, included accentuation—are of less value to the commentator,
though they form a valuable supplement to the other works of
Herodianos which have come down to us.

But it is in the extracts from Aristonikos and Didymos that the chief
value of the Scholia is to be found; for these are the direct and
authentic tradition of the teaching of Aristarchos himself.

' The great critic, as we know from other sources, marked the lines
of Homer upon which he commented with various signs, of which we
are chiefly concerned with four; the ὀβελός (—), the διπλῇ (+ ), the
διπλῆ περιεστιγμένη (S41), and the dorepicxos, (-x:). Of these the first
marked lines which were “athetized” (ἀθετεῖται) or condemned as
spurious ; the second was a general mark of reference to notes on
grammar, Homeric usage, etc.; the διπλῆ περιεστιγμένη was affixed to

1 Romer has shown that with the ex- 876 from the same source as V (Townl.),
ception of the extracts from Porphyrios, but more carelessly condensed and of
which are independent, the Scholia B 1658 authority.

ΧΧ INTRODUCTION.

passages where the reading of Aristarchos differed from that of
Zenodotos ; while the ἀστερίσκος marked lines which occurred elsewhere
in the poems. Where Aristarchos regarded the repetition as faulty
he added the ὀβελός (ἀστερίσκος σὺν ὀβελῷ). The work οὗ Aristonikos
περὶ τῶν σημείων gave the notes οἱ Aristarchos which explained these
marks.

The work of Didymos περὶ τῆς ᾿Αριστάρχον διορθώσεως, on the
critical edition of Aristarchos, is the most important of all. He, like
Aristonikos, lived under Augustus ; yet it seems that even at this
early date the tradition of the teaching of Aristarchos was already
falling into oblivion. Didymos, called yaAxévrepos from his amazing
industry and powers of work, set himself to restore it, and collected
so far as possible the variants which distinguished the corrected text
of Aristarchos from the vulgate. It would seem however that he
often doubted as to the truth; indeed from one remarkable scholion
of his, on K 389, we learn that even Ammonios, the immediate successor
of Aristarchos at Alexandria, had to write a treatise to prove that
Aristarchos had published no more than two editions of Homer.'

The works of these four scholars are presented to us by the Scholia
only in the form of very brief extracts, often made with little in-
telligence and occasionally contradictory of one another. There can
be no doubt however that the statements of any one of the four
(except in a few cases where they are obviously errors) are far
superior in authority to those of any of the other scholia; and they
are quite sufficient to give us a clear and consistent view of the method
of the greatest critic of antiquity. They are in most cases easily to be
distinguished both from the “ Variorum” Scholia and from one another
by their contents and even by their style. Whenever we find a
scholion dealing with questions of punctuation we may safely attribute
it to Nikanor; those affecting scansion and accentuation belong to
Herodianos. The excerpts from Aristonikos always deal explicitly with
some critical sign, and are generally marked by containing the word
ὅτι, before which we must understand ἡ διπλῇ (or ὁ ὀβελός, ἀστερίσκος,
or whatever be the mark appended to the line in question) παράκειται,
“the diple is affixed, because,” and then the reason follows.”

The Scholia of Didymos are known by their contents. It may be
said however that every scholion with οὕτως (or more fully οὕτως
’Apiorapxos) is Didymean. This indicates that the notes were origin-
ally appended to an Aristarchean text. That of A has been to a great
extent brought into harmony with that of Aristarchos, but considerable

1 There can be no doubt that this is every scholion beginning with ὅτι is by
the meaning of the expression περὶ τοῦ = Aristonikos, as the later commentators
μὴ γεγονέναι πλείους ἐκδόσεις τῆς ᾿Αρι- sometimes used the word asacompendium
orapxelou διορθώσεως, sc. τῶν δύο. Lehrs, for σημειωτέον ὅτι, ‘note that,” a general
Ar p introduction to any remark they may
2 It is not quite safe to assume that have to make.

INTRODUCTION. _ xxi

differences still remain, so that otrws now often indicates a reading
which differs from the MS. instead of agreeing as it should. It is
curious that many of these notes, which are among the most valuable
we possess, have been added by a happy afterthought on the part of
the scribe of A; they are then written in very minute letters, and
squeezed into the narrow space left between the text and the main
scholia which fill the greater part of the margin of the MS.

These remarks should be sufficient to explain the references to the
Scholia which occur in the following commentary. But the student
should not fail to read the great work of Lehrs, de Aristarchi Studtis
Homericis)} which first sifted and arranged the mass of material.
Equally indispensable to a proper knowledge of the subject is the
recent work of Ludwich, Avristarch’s Homerische Textkritik, aus den
Fragmenten des Didymos hergestellt und beurtheilt.2 As an illustration
of the methods which have to be used we may take the Scholia on B
160-167, which contain extracts from all the different authorities.

To 160-1-2 in the text are prefixed the dorepicxos and ὀβελός.
Schol.: ἀπὸ τούτου ἕως tot “ ἐν Τροίῃ dréXovro” (sc. line 162) ἀθετοῦνται
στίχοι τρεῖς, καὶ ἀστερίσκοι παράκεινται, ὅτι οἰκειότερον ἐν τῷ τῆς ᾿Αθηνᾶς
λόγῳ ἑξῆς εἰσὶ τεταγμένοι (sc. 176), νῦν δὲ κοινότερον (ἀνοικειότερον,
Lehrs) λέγονται. This is of course from Aristonikos.

161 has the διπλῆ περιεστιγμένη as well as the ἀστερίσκος σὺν
ὀβελῷ. Schol.: ᾿Αργείην Ἑλένην" ὅτι Ζηνόδοτος γράφει “’Apyeinv θ᾽
Ἑλένην," σὺν τῷ συνδέσμῳ, ὥστε εἶναι χωρὶς καύχημα, καὶ σὺν τούτῳ τὴν
Ἑλένην. οὐ λέγει δὲ οὕτως, ἀλλ᾽ αὐτὴν τὴν Ἑλένην καύχημα. This is
again by Aristonikos, the ὅτι explaining the reason for the διπλῆ
περιεστιγμένη. Notice the characteristically flat contradiction with
which Zenodotos is disposed of.

* "Apyeinv: ἡ Λακωνικὴ πέμπτον τῆς ὅλης Πελοποννήσου. A good
specimen of a late scholiast of the feebler sort. The * in Dindorf’s
edition indicates that it 1s not one of the main marginal scholia, but
like those already mentioned squeezed into the narrow space beside
the text.

162. φίλης ἀπὸ πατρίδος αἴης" οὐκ ἀναστρεπτέον τὴν πρόθεσιν (1.6. We
are not to write ἄπο) ὡς Τυραννίων καὶ Πτολεμαῖος" ὁπότε γὰρ γενικῇ
συντάττεται ἡ ἀπό, τηρεῖ τὸν τόνον" “ καὶ γάρ τίς θ᾽ ἕνα μῆνα μένων ἀπὸ ἧς
ἀλόχοιο (see 292). This deals with accentuation, and is therefore
by Herodianus. It must have been imperfectly extracted, however,
as it omits part of the doctrine of the anastrophe of prepositions ;
hence Lehrs adds after ἡ ἀπό, “ μὴ μεταξὺ πιπτουσῶν λέξεων, καὶ σημαίνει
τὸ ἄποθεν." Tyrannion and Ptolemy of Askalon held that when ἀπό
meant “far away from,” it should be written ἄπο. This Herodianus
denies.

1 2nd edition, 1865; 3rd, 1882. 2 Leipzig, vol. i., 1884: vol. ii., 1885.

XXxil INTRODUCTION.

163. *otrw “Kara λαὺν᾽ συμφώνως εἶχον araco.—Didymos, one
of the additions between the main scholia and the text. “All the
editions” had κατά, not μετά, which was found in some of the inferior
copies, and is preserved in one of our MSS., ἢ. 164 has ἀστερίσκος
σὺν oBeAp. Schol.: σοῖς δ᾽ ἀγανοῖς" χωρὶς tov δ᾽ εἶχον ai χαριέσταται,
σοῖς ἀγανοῖς" καὶ ἡ ᾿Αριστοφάνους οὕτως εἶχεν. ἀγανοῖς δὲ, ἄγαν προσηνέσι,
πράοις, ὑπάγεσθαι δυναμένοις" οὕτω γὰρ ἔδει μαλάσσειν τὸν θυμὸν ζέοντα.
ἀθετεῖται δὲ καὶ ἀστερίσκος παράκειται, ὅτι καὶ οὗτος πρὸς ᾿Αθηνᾶς οἰκείως
πρὸς ᾿δυσσέα λέγεται (sc. 180), καὶ ψεῦδος περιέχει νῦν. οὐ γὰρ ἡ ᾿Αθηνᾶ
παρίσταται ἑκάστῳ, ἀλλ᾽ ὃ ᾿δυσσεύς. Here there are three hands.
The first part is of course by Didymos (to οὕτως εἶχεν), the last by
Aristonikos (from ἀθετεῖται). The explanation of ἀγανοῖς belongs to
the class of “exegetic” Scholia, and is found, as we should expect, in
similar words in B. The same is the case with the intermarginal note
which follows, * ψιλωτέον τὸ ἀγανός" τοιοῦτο yap τὸ a πρὸ τοῦ γ, 16, AS
we see from the rather fuller form in Sch. B, we must not read, as
some did, dyaves, for a never has the rough breathing before y, except
in ἁγνός. This may come from Herodianus.

167 has the διπλῆ. Schol. * τελεία (a full stop) eri τὸ ἀΐξασα"
ἀσύνδετον yap τὸ ἑξῆς πρὸς τὸ erdvw—Nikanor. Οὐλύμποιο" ὅτι ὄρος ὁ
"OAvpros—Aristonikos. The διπλῆ here marks a Homeric usage, namely,
that "Ολυμπος means the actual mountain, not, as in later Greek, a
celestial abode of the gods,

Of course it is not always so easy to assign the Scholia as in these
instances; but they will give a good idea of the general manner in
which the distinctions are to be made.

THE ORIGIN OF THE POEMS.

The question of the origin of the poems is one which is too closely
bound up with their interpretation to be omitted entirely in an edition
like the present. So far as is necessary for the explanation of each
book, short special introductions will be found at the beginning of the
notes on each; but for the sake of clearness it seems advisable to offer
here a general sketch of the scheme of development which has been
assumed. One cannot however but feel at a disadvantage in giving a
bare statement of a view which is far from popular in England, in a
space which forbids defence or even adequate explanation. The
scheme here proposed is not identical with that of any one German
scholar; it is based upon considerations which will be found in the
works of Bergk, Niese, Kayser, Grote, Christ, Fick, and others, among
whom particular reference may be made to the introductions to the
separate books in Hentze’s appendix to Ameis’ edition of the Iliad—a
clear and able series of articles to which I have to acknowledge my

xxiii

INTRODUCTION.

continual obligations. Scholars who dislike the dissection of the Iliad
will, it is to be hoped, at least study the arguments of the critics above
mentioned, and of others of their school, before finally condemning
the present sketch.?

That some disintegration of the Iliad is necessary hardly any will
deny ; for there are few indeed so conservative as to hold that Καὶ
belongs to the original story ; in manner and matter alike it is a little
world by itself, a loose stone which can be taken away without loss to
the structure. It is with I that the real dispute begins—a dispute
which has been hotly fought, and has strangely divided even the
apostles of disintegration. For myself, the cumulative evidence of
style, language, and plot is sufficient to show that the ninth book does
not belong to the original components of the Iliad. With the ninth
book the eighth must go; indeed we might argue conversely that the
eighth is so abundantly condemned on internal evidence that it must
carry the ninth with it. Of the remaining books, it may be said at

+ once that none, if we except certain passages of which the Catalogue
is the longest, shews marked evidence of difference of style; but that
the contradiction in matter between Γ- A and H, and between parts of

ΡῈ and Z, and the confusion of motives at the beginning of B, prevent
our conceiving these different parts of the tale as composed in their
present form and order for their present places.

So much for destructive criticism. We are bound to see how far
we can rebuild the original fabric. And here it must be said at once
that no one is more sensible than myself of the hypothetical and
tentative nature of the following statements. An apparently dogmatic
and categorical form is used merely to avoid the continual repetition of
guarding clauses, “ we may suppose,” “ it is probable,” and the like ; the
reader is requested to insert them from time to time when he thinks
proper,

The original poem, the work of “Homer” himself, was the Mis
᾿Αχιλλέως, which related in comparatively brief but undying form the

1 On the question of the composition
of the original Mavs I find myself in
entire agreement with Fick, the first
part of whose Homerische Iias appeared
after the earlier books had passed through
the press. In one point I have made a
slight alterati consequence of his
arguments, viz. in thinking that the
arming of the Greeks in B 443-483
belongs to the original poem, and that
the point when the ἀγορή was inserted is
still to be recognized in the substitution
of κηρύσσειν ἀγορήνδε in 51 for the
κηρύσσειν πολεμόνδε of 449, which origin-
ally followed 50. By tho explanation
of θρωσμὸς πεδίοιο ἴῃ: A 56, however, I
may claim to have removed from his

hypothesis the awkward device by which
‘Ais joined on to B 483 by means of an
isolated line taken from © (55). But I
cannot with him follow Grote and
Diintzer in seeing in the bulk of B-H
an entirely independent poem, an Otros
Ἰλίου as he calls it, forcibly inserted into
its present position. ‘The fact that
Achilles is never an actor shews that
these books must have been composed
with the Μῆνις as a background; to
suggest, as Fick does, that the Otros
may have been originally composed for
a period of the siege when Achilles was
absent from the camp on one of his
raiding expeditions is a shift unworthy
of its author.

XXIV INTRODUCTION.

story of the quarrel of Achilles and Agamemnon, the defeat of the
Greeks in consequence of the prayer of Thetis to Zeus, the partial
relenting of Achilles, leading to the death of Patroklos, the final
arousing of the hero, and the death of Hector. It consisted of the
following portions of the Iliad :—The quarrel and the prayer of Thetis
(A), the dream of Agamemnon followed at once by the arming of the
host (B 1-50, 443-483), the defeat of the Greeks and wounding of the
chief heroes, with the message of Patroklos to Nestor (A 56-805, or
perhaps to the end; omitting 665-762), the battle at the ships (which
cannot now be extricated from M-N--O), the sending of Patroklos and
his death (the greater part of II), the carrying of the news to Achilles
(the first part of =), the reconciliation with Agamemnon (in T, but
apparently much altered), the victorious career of Achilles (parts of
Y and ®) and the killing of Hector (X). This forms a magnificent
poem in itself, containing all the dramatic interest of the story, painted
in few but vivid colours, with clear and strong motives of human
passion throughout—the first and greatest of Epic poems.

Into this superb framework other pictures now began to be fitted,
mainly perhaps from the desire to immortalize national heroes, who,
like Diomedes, played but an insignificant part in the original story.
The first of these accretions may be found in the ἀριστεία of Diomedes,
with its introduction, the last part of A (421-544), its sequel, the sixth
book, and the duel of Aias and Hector in the seventh ; all noble work.
Later than this came a variation of the duel episode, the combat
between Menelaos and Paris, and the violation of the truce (I-A 1-
222); of the great scene in the assembly, in the second book, we can
only say that it belongs to this series of additions, but is not clearly
later or earlier than any of them.!

Now it is important to remark that though these are accretions
upon the original story, 1t does not follow that they are by another
hand from that to which we owe the Myvs. Not one of them is
unworthy of the greatest of poets, and the style is entirely uniform.
It has repeatedly been urged that it is in the last degree improbable
that there should have been more than one poet in any age who was
capable of writing any poetry of the high level of the Iliad and
Odyssey. But if it be worth while to discuss questions of probability
at all, it must be pointed out that the presumption is entirely in the
opposite direction. The existence at any time of an artistic genius of
the highest order appears to involve as a necessary corollary the near
neighbourhood of others of almost equal rank; Aischylos involves
Sophokles and Euripides, Shakespear Marlowe and Milton, Beethoven
Mozart and Schubert, and so on through all history. If then we hold,
as seems probable, that the [liad and Odyssey are the only great

1 The question of the composition of the last twelve books is reserved for the
second volume.

INTRODUCTION. xxv

poetical creations of the pre-historic and pre-cyclic age of Greece, we
must admit that a priori they are likely to be the work not of one poet
but of several.

In spite of this probability, I see no reason for denying that so
much of the Iliad as has already been put together may be the work
of one poet ; it consists of the whole of the first book, half the second,
the greater part of the next five (I'-H), and of the eleventh. To
another hand or hands we must ascribe the eighth and ninth, and to
yet another the tenth. As for the twelfth, it contains large passages
which may be by the first hand, and probably a good deal of subsequent
extension by the poet to whom the greater part of the battle at the

. ships is due. There remain only a few pieces of different origin.
The Catalogue seems to be in the main early, but not to belong to
its present position. The ἐπιπώλησις of Agamemnon in the fourth
book, the wounding of Aphrodite and Ares in the fifth, the building of
the wall in the seventh, the episode of Phoinix in the ninth, and the
story of Nestor’s youthful exploits in the eleventh, are all interpolations,
of very different merit, as to whose authorship it is not worth while
speculating. Beyond these there remain to be accounted for only
short interpolations of a few lines each, which are left to be noticed not
in the introductions to the different books, but only in the notes on the
passages concerned.!

Finally, a word may be added as to the place of origin of
the poems. The argument for their birth in continental Greece,
first stated by Mr. Gladstone, and lately enforced with more effect,
if less enthusiasm, by Mr. Monro in the English Historical Review
(i. p. 43), appears to me unanswerable. It is to the courts of the
great princes of Achaia, whose homes and even whose remains have
been found by Schliemann and explained by Helbig, that we have
to look for the dwelling of Homer. The Achaian fugitives from the
Dorian invasion took with them to the coasts of Asia Minor this most
precious of their possessions, and from thence they began, like their
descendants with the Romans, to lead their conquerors captive. To
the Achaian time I would refer all the work which I have attributed
to Homer himself ; but the later additions may have been added in
the new Asiatic home, for it is in them only that we find traces of
personal knowledge of Asia Minor.

10 will follow that the original Epic dialect was Achaian, and past
recovery for us. We can only say that this Achaian seems to have
been nearly akin to several dialects which we know in their later forms,
notably to the Asiatic Aeolic, and to the Cyprian, which, as is well

1 Out of the 7589 lines of the first may be the work of “Homer”; Θ and I
twelve books this hypothesis will give account for 1278, K for 579, and the
about 1800 lines to the Μῆνι;, and 2700 remaining 1700 lines belong to the later
to the earlier accretions, say 4000 which additions of larger compass.

c

XXVi INTRODUCTION.

known, leads us to Arcadia. Whether or no the poems passed through
a stage of Asiatic Aeolic, or were transferred at once from Achaian to
Ionic, it is beyond our power to say ; but that such a change of dialect
has been made Fick has almost proved ; to have done so is a notable
service to the Homeric question, however little he may satisfy us by
the actual dress in which he has clothed them.

INDEX TO ABBREVIATED REFERENCES.

Ahrens, Beitrdge.—Beitrage zur Griechischen und Lateinischen Etymologie, von
H. L. Ahrens. Erster Heft. Leipzig, Teubner, 1879.

Ameis, Am.-H.—Homers Ilias, fiir den Schulgebrauch erklart, von K. F. Ameis.
Erster Heft. Dritte berichtigte Auflage, besorgt von Dr. C. Hentze.
Teubner, 1877 (and second and first editions of other parts).

» Anh,—Anhang zu Homers Ilias, Schulausgabe von K. F. Ameis. 1 Heft.
Zweite berichtigte und mit Einleitungen versehene Auflage, besorgt
von Dr. C. Hentze. Teubner, 1877 (and first edition of subsequent
parts). The Anhang is frequently cited as ‘‘ Hentze” only.

Ap. Lex.—Apollonii Sophistae Lexicon Homericum. Ἔχ recensione I. Bekkeri.
Berolini, 1833.

Ar. — Aristarchos (chiefly as quoted by Didymos and Aristonikos).
Bekker, H. B.—Homerische Blatter, von Imman. Bekker. Bonn, vol. i. 1863, vol.
ii. 1872.

Bergk, Gr. Zit, —Griechische Literaturgeschichte, von Theodor Bergk. Vol. i.
Berlin, 1872.

Brugman, Prob.—Ein Problem der Homerischen Textkritik und der vergleichenden
Sprachwissenschaft. Von Karl Brugman. Leipzig, 1876.

Buchholz, H. R.—Die Homerischen Realien. Von Dr. E. Buchholz. Leipzig, 6
parts in 3 vols., 1873-1885.

Buttmann, Lexil.—Lexilogus . . . for Homer and Hesiod. By Philip Buttmann.
Translated and edited by the Rev. J. R. Fishlake. 5th edition.
London, 1861.

Cobet, Jf. C.—Miscellanea Critica. Scripsit C. G. Cobet. Lugduni Batavorum,
1876

Collitz.— Sammlung der griechischen Dialekt-Inschriften. Herausg. von Dr.
Hermann Collitz. Erster Band, Gottingen, 1884.

Curtius, £¢.—Grundziige der Griechischen Etymologie, von G. Curtius. 5th ed.
Leipzig, 1879.

” Vb.—Das Verbum der Griechischen Sprache, seinem Baue nach dargestellt.
Von 6. Curtius. Vol. i., 2d ed., Leipzig, 1877. Vol. ii. 1876.

,» Stud.—Studien zur griechischen und lateinischen Grammatik, herausg,
von Georg Curtius, Leipzig, 1868-1878.

Delbruck, S. F.—Syntaktische Forschungen, von B. Delbriick und Εἰ, Windisch.
i, Der Gebrauch des Conjunctivs und Optativs im Sanskrit und
Griechischen, von B. Delbriick ; Halle, 1871. iii, die Grundlagen der
Griechischen Syntax, erortert von B. Delbriick, 1879. (Wrongly
quoted as Etym. Forsch. on H 171.)

Déderlein, Gloss.—Homerisches Glossarium, von L. Déderlein. Erlangen, 1850-
185

Ebel. Lex.—Lexicon Homericum, edidit H. Ebeling, Lipsiae, 1885.

Et, Mag.— Etymologicon Magnum.

Fick, Hom. Od.—Die Homerische Odyssee in der urspriinglichen’ Sprachform
wiederhergestellt ; von August Fick. Gottingen, 1883. 3

Gobel, Zexil.—Lexilogus zu Homer und den Homeriden. Von Dr. Anton Gobel.
i Band, Berlin, 1878 ; ii Band, 1880.

H.— Homer.

H. G.— A Grammar of the Homeric Dialect. By D. B. Monro. Oxford, 1882.

XXVill INDEX TO ABBREVIATED REFERENCES.

Hartel, H. S.—Homerische Studien. Beitrige zur Homerischen Prosodie und
Metrik. Von W. Hartel. 2nd ed. Berlin, 1873.

Helbig, H. #.—Das Homerische Epos aus den Denkmilern erldutert. Archio-
logische Untersuchungen von W. Helbig. Leipzig, 1884.

Hentze.—See Ameis.

Hinrichs, Acol. (Hom. El.)—De Homericae Elocutionis Vestigiis Aeolicis. Scripsit
G. Hinrichs. Jena, 1875.

J. H.S.— The Journal of Hellenic Studies. London, from 1880.

Knéos, de dig. Hom.—De Digammo Homerico quaestiones. Scripsit Olaus Vilelmus
Knos. Upsala, vol. i. 1872, ii. 1873, 111, 1878.

Lange, EI.—Der Homerische Gebrauch der Partikel EI. Von Ludwig Lange.
i, Einleitung und εἰ mit dem Optativ. Leipzig, 1872. ii, ef κεν (ἄν)
mit dem Optativ, und εἰ ohne Verbum finitum, 1873 (not completed).

La Roche, Hom. Textkr. (H. T.).—Die Homerische Textkritik im Alterthum, von
Jacob La Roche. Leipzig, 1866.

H. U.—Homerische Untersuchungen von J. La Roche. Leipzig, 1869.

Lehrs, Ar.—De Aristarchi Studiis Homericis. Scripsit K. Lehrs. Editio recognita.
Lipsiae, 1865.

Ep.—Quaestiones Epicae. Konigsberg, 1837. .

Ludwich.—Aristarch’s Homerische Textkritik, aus den Fragmenten des Didymos
dargestellt und beurtheilt. Von "Arthur Ludwich. Leipzig, vol. i.
1884, ii. 1885.

M. and R.—Homer’s Odyssey. Edited by W. W. Merry and James Riddell.
Oxford, 1876,

Nagelsbach (or Aut.-Nig.).—C. F. von Nigelsbach’s Anmerkungen zur Ilias (A B
1-483, Γ᾽. “Dritte vielfach vermehrte Auflage, bearbeitet von Dr. G.
Autenrieth. Niirnberg, 1864.

- Η. T.—C. F. von Nigelsbach’s Homerische Theologie. Dritte Auflage,
bearbeitet von Dr. G. Autenrieth. Niirnberg, 1884.
Schrader, 8. pnd U.—Sprachvergleichung und Urgeschichte, von Dr. O. Schrader.
ena, 1883.

The books of the Iliad are referred to by the capitals, and those of the Odyssey
by the small letters, of the Greek alphabet.

ΙἽΛΙΑΔΟΣ A.

Λοιμός.

͵ ͵ ͵
Μῆνιν ἄείδε, θεά; Τηληιάδεω ᾿Αχιλῆος

Μῆνις.

οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ ᾿Αχαιοῖς ἄχγε᾽ ἔθηκεν,
πολλὰς δ᾽ ἰφθίμους ψυχὰς “Ais. προΐαψεν

ἡρώων, αὐτοὺς δὲ ἑλώρια τεῦχε κύνεσσιν

Α

The first book has been the arena in
which some of the severest battles of the
School of Lachmann have been fought.
The surpassing artistic merits of the
book, both asa poem in itself, and as
an introduction to the Iliad at large,
have been so universally recognised, that
it has been felt that a successful attack
by which it could be eplit up into smaller

of independent origin would go far
to decide the question for the whole of
the Tliad.

The principal point on which Lach-
mann and his followers have relied is
the inconsistency involved in 428, where
it is said that all the gods went ““yester-
day” to the Aethiopians ; whereas Apollo
ia elsewhere conceived as still shooting
his darts at the Grecks, and in 474
as present at Chryse; and Hera and
Athene are watching the strife in the
assembly, the latter descending to Troy
and returning to Olympos μετὰ δαίμονας
ἄλλου. A further difficulty is also
found in ἐκ τοῖο, 493, which refers back,
not to the day indicated in the preceding
lines, as we should expect, but to the
interview between Thetis and her son
ΑΔ ended in 424, and sines which at
jeast one night, and apparently several,
ἀπ μι θα μὲ ρον

From this Lachmann concludes that
the first book consists of an original
‘song, consisting of 1-347, with two con-
tinuations, the first consisting of 480-
492, the second of 348-429 and 498 on-

“COB

wards, of which the former may be by
the poet of the first song, while the
latter is of different origin, and not
very skilfully adapted to the ‘place into
which it has been put.

‘The inconsistency as to the where-
abouts of the gods cannot be denied ;
but that it is sufficient to prove the inde-
pendent origin of the passage, or rather
of the few words in question (θεοὶ δ᾽ ua
πάντες ἕποντο) may well be disputed.
The consistency with which the epic
poet is concerned is the consistency of
the picture of the moment; the con-
sistency of details in different scenes—so
far as they do not touch the story itself
‘as given by the legend on which he
worke is of minor importance. And,
though the contradiction is here within
a smaller range than usual, it is ve
possible, as von Christ has suggestea
that 817 may have formed a point at
which a thapsody ended for purposes of
recitation, so that to the Pearer, the
separation would be far wider than it is
to the reader. The same supposition
would also account for the repetition in
370-392 of the events, and even the
words, of the opening of the book.

With Lachmann’s first continuation,
the restoration of Chryseis (430-492),
the case is somewhat different. The

e reference of ἐκ τοῖο, though not
indefensible (as the preceding lines
naturally lead the thought back to the
point to which ἐκ τοῖο belongs, cf. 488
with 422), is certainly not what we
thould expect, Further, the whole

9 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A ὦ

οἰωνοῖσί τε δαῖτα, Διὸς δ᾽ ἐτελείετο βουλή, 5
ἐξ οὗ δὴ τὰ πρῶτα διαστήτην ἐρίσαντε
᾿Ατρεΐδης τε ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν καὶ δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς.
’ 3. ΓΝ A Ν , ,
τίς T ap σφωε θεῶν ἔριδι ξυνέηκε μάχεσθαι ;

episode can be cut out without being
missed—we have only to make 490 follow
430 immediately —and is of no import-
ance to the story. A large portion
(about half) consists of lines which are
found in other parts of the Homeric
poems (including two which appear in
the hymn to the Delian Apollo) ; and of
these, one at least, 462, seems more
suited to its place in the third book of
the Odyssey than here, while 469-470
seem to contradict a well-marked Homeric
custom. On the other hand it must be
noticed that the episode is most artistic-
ally introduced into a pause in the main
action, and offers a skilful contrast, in
its peace and feasting, to the stormy
scenes of the beginning and end of the
book. Whatever view be taken of this
portion will not affect the general ques-
tion of the composition of the Iliad, as
it might have been interpolated at any
time by a poet of sufficient artistic feeling
to see his opportunity.

Beyond these two, the first book offers
no serious difficulties in the region of
the higher criticism.

1. θεά, the Μοῦσα of a 1, who tells the
poet the history which he has to relate ;
see B 484-492, and compare x 347,
αὐτοδίδακτος δ᾽ εἰμί, θεὸς δέ μοι ἐν φρεσὶν
οἴμας παντοίας ἐνέφυσεν, and 0 44, 64,
488. ἹἸΠηληιάδεω, originally no doubt
IIyAndda'(o). This is one of a class of
patronymics formed with a double suffix,
the adjectival -.o- and the purely
patronymic -adyn-s: while the commoner
orm IIn\e-(dy-s has only one.

2. οὐλομένην, ‘‘accursed”; it bears
the same relation to the curse ὅλοιο as
ὀνήμενος (8 93) to the blessing ὄναιο. It
is distinctly passive in sense in σ 273,
but in other cases it may he active,
‘**deadly”’; hence Curtius would take it
a3 a present participle for ὀλ-νόμενος
(Vb. i. 246). pupla, ‘‘countless”; in
its later sense, 10,000, the word is
accented μύριοι.

3. ἴφθιμος, a word of doubtful form-
ation, but apparently connected with
ἴφιο. The feminine, ἰφθίμη, is also
found, but only applied to women—e.g.
T 116. “Ads, a metaplastic dative of
“Aténs, which in H. always means the

god, not his realm—with the exception,
apparently, of Y 244. προΐαψε-- προ
implies ‘‘ forth on their way,” as in προ-
πέμπειν, προιέναι (195, 422, etc.) lar-=
iac-, 80 that προΐαψεν = pro-iec-it exactly.

4, αὐτούς, the body is to Homer the
real self, the ψυχή is a mere shadow;
cf. & 65, where the soul of Patroklos is
πάντ᾽ αὐτῷ elxvia, like the real man.

5. Satra is the reading of Zenod.,
fortunately preserved by Athenaeus
(1, p. 12 f.): Ar. and all MSS., πᾶσι.
The former is obviously the most vigor-
ous and poetical expression, and seems
to be alluded to by Aeschylos, Supp.
800, κυσὶν δ᾽ bre’ ἕλωρα κἀπιχωρίοις
ὄρνισι δεῖπνον οὐκ ἀναίνομαι πέλειν. Cf.
Eur. Jon. 508, Hec. 1076. πᾶσι was pre-
ferred by Ar. in accordance with his
dogina that dals could only be used of a
human feast—which does not say much
for his poetical feeling. But the fact
that there is no trace of δαῖτα in the
MSS. shows that he only adopted the
vulgate of his own day; there is no
reason to suppose, as some have done,
that he foisted an arbitrary conjecture
into the text ; still less to imagine that
Zenodotos did so. Ariston. only men-
tions that Zenod. athetized this line and
the next, which is of course not incon-
sistent with his having given them with
this variant. For βουλή there is an old
variant βουλῇ.

6. ἐξ οὗ may refer to the preceding
line, ‘‘the will of Zeus was being ful-
filled from the time when” (so Ar.); or
better, to ἄειδε in the first line, ‘* take
up the song from the point when,” as in
@ 500, φαῖνε δ᾽ ἀοιδήν, ἔνθεν ἑλὼν, ws of
μέν, κ.τ.λ.

8. For’ ἄρ A reads rap, which, accord-
ing to Herodianus (and perhaps Ar. ), was
a particle like γάρ, but enclitic: so aleo
65, 98, and elsewhere. But the point is
not of such importance, nor is tradition
80 unanimous, as to render an alteration
of the ordinary text advisable. ἔριδι
goes with ξυνέηκε, “ brought them together
for strife.” owe, according to the rule
of Ar. that this form belongs to the 3d
person. Zenod. here and elsewhere read
σφῶι, which Ar. confined to the 2d
person.

IAIAAOE A (2) 3

Λητοῦς καὶ Διὸς vids.

ὁ γὰρ βασιλῆι χολωθείς

νοῦσον ἀνὰ στρατὸν ὦρσε κακήν, ὀλέκοντο δὲ λαοί, τὸ
οὕνεκα τὸν Χρύσην ἠτίμασεν ἀρητῆρα

᾿Ατρεΐδης.

ὁ γὰρ ἦχθε θοὰς ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν

λυσόμενός τε θύγατρα φέρων τ᾽ ἀπερείσι ἄποινα,
στέμματ' ἔχων ἐν χερσὶν ἑκηβόλου ᾿Απόλλωνος.
χρυσέῳ ἀνὰ σκήπτρῳ, καὶ λίσσετο πάντας ᾿Αχαιούς, 15
᾿Ατρεῖδα δὲ μάλιστα ; δύω, κοσμήτορε λαῶν"
“ ᾿Ατρεΐδα τε καὶ ἄλλοι ἐὐκνήμίδες, ᾿Αχαιοί,
ὑμῖν μὲν θεοὶ δοῖεν ᾿Ολύμπια δώματ᾽ ἔχοντες
ἐκπέρσαι Πριάμοιο πόλιν, ἐὺ δ᾽ οἴκαδ᾽ ἱκέσθαι"
παῖδα δ᾽ ἐμοὶ λύσαιτε φίλην τὰ δ᾽ ἄποινα δέχεσθαι, 20
ἁξόμενοι Διὸς υἱὸν ἑκηβόλον ᾿Απόλλωνα."
ἔνθ᾽ ἄλλοι μὲν πάντες ἐπευφήμησαν ᾽Αχαιοὶ
αἰδεῖσθαί θ᾽ ἱερῆα καὶ ἀγλαὰ δέχθαι ἄποινα"
ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ᾿Ατρείδῃ ᾿Αγαμέμνονι ἥνδανε θυμῷ,
ἀλλὰ κακῶς ἀφίει, κρατερὸν δ᾽ ἐπὶ μῦθον ἔτελλεν" 35

11. ἠτίμασεν is the reading of A and
a few other MSS; vulg. #rluno’. Both
verbs are found, but the aor, is elsewhere
only ἠτίμησεν, and ἀτιμάζω is peculiar to
the Odyssey. Rhythm, however, is a
strong argument here in favour of the
text. Nauck indeed wishes to expel
ἀτιμάω from the text of Homer alto-
gether; but . Οἱ
aw X

ρύσην.

article which ‘is scarcely to be paralleled
in Homer.” In other examples with a
proper noun it is used with an adver-
sative particle (αὐτάρ, μέν, δέ), and only
of ἃ person already mentioned, eg. B
105. (D. B. M.) π would simplify this
if we could take Χρύσης as an
eppelatirg “chat man of Chryee, even
priest”; but I do not find any other
instance cither of a local name thus
formed in τς, or of @ person addressed
directly by a local name, as in ὦ Χρύση,

fauck conj. τοῦ, sc. ᾿Απόλλωνος.

18. λυσόμενος, the mid. of the person
who offers the ransom, the act. of him
who accepts it, ¢.g. 20.

14. ἔχων is subordinate to the preced-
ing participles, indicating a detail, not
a main object, of his journey. It is
therefore best to retain the vulg. instead
of reading στέμμα 7’ with Bentley (to
agree with στέμμα in 28), The στέμμα is

Apollinis infula of Aen, ii, 480, 0
‘wreath of wool wrapped round the staff

in token of suppliantship, cf. the ἐριό-
στεπτος κλάδος of Acsch. Supp. 23. Tt is
probably the fillet worn, in ordinary
circumstances, by the priest himself, or
possibly, as ‘has been suggested, ‘the
wreath from the image of the god.

5. λίσσετο, so A Ar.; vulg, ἐλίσσετο.
But “λίσσομαι ‘apparently had a second
initial consonant, and is never preceded
by a short vowel.

18. Bentley conj. ὄμμι θεοὶ μὲν δοῖεν,
which is probably right, as the synizesia
of θεός in H. is very improbable (ξ 261 is
the only other case) ; indeed even for
θεῖος wo ought probably always to read
θέιος, as the word is always found with
the last syllable in arsi.

30. λύσαιτε, so A and others; two

ive λῦσαί re, the old vulg. is λύσατε (!).
frrevch a matter SIS. aus jority is worth
nothing; but the opt. is perhaps more
suitable ‘to a suppliant, while the MS.
reading is τὰ δ᾽, not τά τ΄. Seo H. G.
299 2, and for the article τά δ᾽ ἄποινα, “on
the other an aceept ransom,” § 259, 1.

22, ray, gave pious assent,
probably by shoutin iranky by silence,
were eh, ker wat of the won Forth
use of the infin. to express purpose,
HL G. § 231.

24. θυμῷ is not a “whole and part”
construction with ᾿Αγαμέμνονι, Dut a
locative, ‘in his soul,” as appears from
numerous other passages.

4 IAIAAOS A ὦ

“μή σε, γέρον, κοίλῃσιν ἐγὼ παρὰ νηυσὶ κιχείω
ἢ νῦν δηθύνοντ᾽ ἢ ὕστερον αὗτις ἰόντα,
μή νύ τοι οὐ χραίσμῃ σκῆπτρον καὶ στέμμα θεοῖο.
τὴν δ᾽ ἐγὼ οὐ λύσω" πρίν μιν καὶ γῆρας ἔπεισιν
ἡμετέρῳ ἐνὶ οἴκῳ ἐν “Apyei, τηλόθι πάτρης, 80
ἱστὸν ἐποιχομένην καὶ ἐμὸν λέχος ἀντιόωσαν.
ἀλλ᾽ ἴθι, μή μ᾽ ἐρέθιζε, σαώτερος ὥς κε vénat.”
ὧς ἔφατ᾽, ἔδεισεν δ᾽ ὁ γέρων καὶ ἐπείθετο μύθῳ,
BRS ἀκέων παρὰ θῖνα πολυφλοίσβοιο θαλάσσης. -
2 "») 93 3 ’ Ἁ 9 an? ¢ Ν
πολλὰ δ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽ ἀπάνευθε κιὼν ἠρᾶθ᾽ ὁ γεραιὸς 85
᾽ / Ν \ 37 VA 4
Απόλλωνι ἄνακτι, Tov ἠύκομος τέκε Λητώ"
“κλῦθί μευ, ἀργυρότοξ᾽, ὃς Χρύσην ἀμφιβέβηκας
Κῶλλαν τε ζαθέην Τενέδοιό τε ἶφι ἀνάσσεις,
Σμινθεῦ, εἴ ποτέ τοι χαρίεντ᾽ ἐπὶ νηὸν ἔρεψα,
ἢ εἰ δή ποτέ τοι κατὰ πίονα μηρί᾽ ἔκηα 40
4 9 9 9 A 4 , 47
ταύρων ἠδ᾽ aiyav, τόδε μοι κρήηνον ἐέλδωρ"
/ > A , a ͵ ᾿ 2}
τίσειαν Δαναοὶ ἐμὰ δάκρνα σοῖσι βέλεσσιν.

26. For κιχείω, Curtius (776. 11. 55-63)
and others would read κιχήω, but 2.
note on H 439 (and H. G. App. C.) It
is not necessary to supply any verb
before μή, which is an independent pro-
hibitive particle ; the literal meaning is
‘*Far be the thought that I shall find
thee.” H. 6. § 278; Delbriick, S. F.i. 22.
The same explanation can be given in
28, though here the u7-clause is obviously
on its way to become subordinate.

29-31. ἀθετοῦνται, ὅτι ἀναλύουσι τὴν
ἐπίτασιν τοῦ νοῦ καὶ τὴν ἀπειλήν. ἦσ-
μένισε γὰρ καὶ ὁ Χρύσης εἰπούσης (an
συνούσης ? Cobet) αὐτῆς τῴ βασιλεῖ. ἀπ-
ρεπὲς δὲ καὶ τὸ τὸν ᾿Αγαμέμνονα τοιαῦτα
λέγειν. ‘Quod autem dixit patri gratwm
essc filiam suam esse Regis concubinam,
Alexandriae fortasse in aula dissoluta
verum esse poterat, sed non apud heroicae
aetatis homines.”—Cobet (M. C. p. 280,
in an amusing essay on ἀπρεπῆ). It is
in such judgments that Ar. appears at
his worst.

31. ἀντιόωσαν with acc. only here ;
cf. Soph. Aj. 491, τὸ σὸν λέχος ξυνῆλθον,
and H. 6. § 136 (1), with other instances
there given: ‘ resenting herself to me
in the matter of my bed.” ἐποιχομέγην
implies the walking backwards and for-
wards which was necessary with the
ancient loom.

33. ἔδεισεν, so Ar. ; this is evidently a

piece of genuine tradition from the form
ἔδβεισεν :- MSS. ἔδδεισεν. For the article
in ὃ γέρων and ὁ yepatds see H. G.
§ 261, 3.

37. Chryse and Killa are towns in
the south of the Troad, on the gulf of
Adramyttium. ἀμφιβέβηκας, “standest
round about,” as protecting deity, like a
walrior protecting a fallen friend, e.g.
P 4. Cf. Aesch. Sept. 174, ἰὼ φίλοι

«δαίμονες λυτήριοι ἀμφιβάντες πόλιν.

39. Σμινθεῦ, lit. ‘‘ Mouse-god”; Apollo
was worshipped under this title in the
Troad, as at Smyrna as ‘‘ Locust-god,”
Παρνόπιος ; and even on late coins of
Alexandria Troas he appears with a mouse
at his feet. In an interesting chapter of
Custom and Myth, Mr. Lang argues that
this indicates the amalgamation of the
Greek Apollo with a local mouse-god,
originally a tribal totem. The common
rationalising explanation is that the word
is a familiar abbreviation of Σμινθοφθόρος,
destroying the field-mice which ravaged
the vineyards: οἱ γὰρ Κρῆτες τοὺς μύας
σμίένθους καλοῦσιν, Schol. A. ἔρεψα seems
to indicate the most primitive form of
temple—a mere roof to protect the image
of a god standing in a grove; for it was
to groves, not to buildings, that sanctity
originally belonged. χαρίεντα seems to
be proleptic, ‘‘for thy pleasure.” For
the construction of the prayer cf. E 1165.

IAIAAOE A (ἡ) δ

ὡς ἔφατ᾽ εὐχόμενος, τοῦ δ᾽ ἔκλυε Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων,
βῆ δὲ κατ᾽ Οὐλύμποιο καρήνων χωόμενος κῆρ,
τόξ᾽ ὥμοισιν ἔχων ἀμφηρεφέα τε φαρέτρην. 45
ἔκλαγξαν 8 ἄρ᾽ διστοὶ ἐπ᾿ ὥμων χωομένοιο,
αὐτοῦ κινηθέντος" ὁ δ᾽ ἤιε νυκτὶ ἐοικώς.
ἕξετ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽ ἀπάνευθε νεῶν, μετὰ δ᾽ ἰὸν ἕηκεν"
δεινὴ δὲ κλαγγὴ γένετ᾽ ἀργυρέοιο βιοῖο.
οὐρῆας μὲν πρῶτον ἐπῴχετο καὶ κύνας ἀργούς, 50
αὐτὰρ ἔπειτ᾽ αὐτοῖσι βέλος ἐχεπευκὲς ἐφιεὶς
Badr” αἰεὶ δὲ πυραὶ νεκύων καίοντο θαμειαί.
ἐννῆμαρ μὲν ἀνὰ στρατὸν ᾧχετο κῆλα θεοῖο,
τῇ δεκάτῃ δ᾽ ἀγορήνδε καλέσσατο λαὸν ᾿Αχιλλεύς"
τῷ γὰρ ἐπὶ φρεσὶ θῆκε θεά, λευκώλενος Ἥρη" δ5
κήδετο γὰρ Δαναῶν, ὅτι ῥα θνήσκοντας ὁρᾶτο.
οἱ δ᾽ ἐπεὶ οὖν ἤγερθεν ὁμηγερέες τε γένοντο,
τοῖσι 8 ἀνιστάμενος μετέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς"
«Ἰλτρείδη, νῦν ἄμμε πάλιν πλαήχθέντας ὀΐω
ἂψ ἀπονοστήσειν, εἴ κεν θάνατόν γε φύγοιμεν, 60
εἰ δὴ ὁμοῦ πόλεμός τε δαμᾷ καὶ λοιμὸς ᾿Αχαιούς.

47. αὐτοῦ, “he” emphatic, ‘the god” ;
a use which reminds us of the Pytha-
gorean αὐτὸς ἔφα. We should havo ex-
pected the word to imply an opposition
to some other person as in 51; merely
to contrast the god with the arrows
seems weak. It was probably this which
induced Zenodotos, followed by Bentley
and Bekker, to athetize this and the

receding line; but the couplet is too
Ene to be sacrificed. Zenod. also read
ἐλυσθείς for ἐοικώς, as appears from the
Schol. on M 463.

60. ἐπῴχετο, “visited”; the word is
used in this sense only of attacks made
by a god or under immediate divine
inspiration ; Ὁ. note on K 487.

. αὐτοῖσι, the men.

52. The position of βάλλ᾽ is the most
emphatic possible: the same effect is
obtained by Milton, ‘Over them tri-
umphant death his dart | Shook ; but
delayed to strike.” ἐχεπευκές, lit. having

ess or bitterness; wux is appar-
ently another form of mix, cf. πευκεδανός
πικρός, and for the physical sense of
root, Lat. pug of pungo (Curt, Et,

no, 100).

68. The rhythm of this line is very
strange; the connection of the preposi-

tion with its case is 80 close as hardly to
admit a cacsura ; but there is no other
in the third or fourth foot, cf. Σ 191.
ἐννῆμαρ... τῇ δεκάτῃ, the regular
formula for ἃ vague number of days;
174, Ὦ 610, and clsewhere often.

55. τῷ ἐπὶ φρεσὶ θῆκε, s0 Θ 218;
146, ἔπος ἐρέω καὶ ἐπὶ φρεσὶ θήσω, ete.
‘A rather commoner phrase is ἐνὶ φρεσὶ
(θυμῷ, στήθεσσι), which shows that ἐπὶ
φρεσί is to he taken in a locative sense.

59, πλαγχθέντας, foiled, lit. driven
from the course: cf, B 189, οἵ we μέγα
πλάζουσι. The MSS. write παλιμπλαγ-
xdlyrasin one word, which isso far right,
as it indicates that πάλιν is to be taken
ina purely local sense. ‘There is an old.
and wrong explanation, that πάλιν means
“once again,” and contains an allusion
to the legend, unknown to Homer, of
a provious expedition, against Troy’ in
which the Grecks had lost their way,
and invaded Mysia by mistake.

60, ἄ xev with the opt. assumes as a
mere supposition, which is expressed as
unlikely, whilo in the next line εἰ with
the future indic. assumes 88 an acknow-
ledged fact (Cf. Lange, EI, pp.510-2). After
δίω ἀπονοστήσειν ἐξ comes in like a sudden
correction of a too confident expression.

6 IAIAAOS A (1)

GAN ἄγε δή τινα μάντιν ἐρείομεν ἢ ἱερῆα
Δ 3 / ὔ 28: Ν 3 / 3
ἢ καὶ ὀνειροπόλον, καὶ yap τ᾽ ὄναρ ἐκ Διὸς ἐστιν,
ὅς κ᾽ εἴποι, ὅτι τόσσον ἐχώσατο Φοῖβος Ἀπόλλων,
εἴ τ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὅ γ᾽ εὐχωλῆς ἐπιμέμφεται εἴ θ᾽ ἑκατόμβης, 65
al κέν πως ἀρνῶν κνίσης αἰγῶν τε τελείων

4 3 ’ 4 A 3 A 4 3 A 43
βούλεται ἀντιάσας ἡμῖν ἀπὸ λουγὸν ἀμῦναι.

Ψ >, Φ 9 N ΜΝ» “A >, 9 4

ἢ τοι ὅ γ᾽ ὧς εἰπὼν κατ᾽ ap ἕζετο, τοῖσι δ᾽ ἀνέστη
Κάλχας Θεστορίδης, οἰωνοπόλων by’ ἄριστος,
ὃς ἤδη τά τ᾽ ἐόντα τά T ἐσσόμενα πρό τ᾽ ἐόντα, 70
καὶ νήεσσ᾽ ἡγήσατ᾽ ᾿Αχαιῶν Ἴλιον εἴσω .

e A
ἣν διὰ μαντοσύνην, THY οἱ πόρε Φοῖβος ’AmoAXAwv:
ὅ σφιν ἐὺ φρονέων ἀγορήσατο καὶ μετέειπεν"
“ ὦ ᾿Αχιλεῦ, κέλεαί με, διίφιλε, μυθήσασθαι
μῆνιν ᾿Απόλλωνος, ἑκατηβελέταο ἄνακτος" 75
3 AN , A 4

τουγὰρ ἐγὼν ἐρέω, σὺ δὲ σύνθεο καὶ μοι ὄμοσσον
ἣ μέν μοι πρόφρων ἔπεσιν καὶ χερσὶν ἀρήξειν. -.- a.
ἢ γὰρ ὀίομαι ἄνδρα χολωσέμεν, ὃς μέγα harap AO
42 4 / / e 4 3 ’
Ἀργείων κρατέει καί οἱ πείθονται ᾿Αχαιοί.

62. The ἱερεύς is mentioned merely as
an authority on ritual (65), not as a
diviner ; for the Homeric priest as such
seems to have had no functions of divina-
tion; there are no omens from sacrifices.

63. ὀνειροπόλος, a dreamer of dreams,
one who has converse with the god
in sleep. The root πολ seems to
have been a very primitive word for
agricultural and pastoral duties; cf.
οἰωνοπόλος beside αἰ-πόλ-ος (βον-κόλ-ος is
probably from the same root kar, Curt.
#t. p. 470). It thus means ‘‘one who
attends to dreams,” or perhaps, as we
might say, ‘‘cultivates” them ; compare
the double significance of Lat. col-ere.
There is no other mention of a profes-
sional dreamer in Homer, hence Zenod.
athetized the line.

64. ὅτι is the rel. pron., not the ad-
verb, and is, like τόσσον, a cognate acc.,
expressing the content of ἐχώσατο ; cf.
ε 215 μή μοι τόδε χώεο, and E 188.

65. εὐχωλῆφ, because of a vow unful-
filled, or hecatomb omitted. For the
gen. cf. H. G. § 151 δ; and for cases of
res pro rei defectu, ἘΞ 178, 457.

67. βούλεται, a very rare instance of a
subjunctive of a thematic tense with a
short vowel. Hence we ought perhaps
to read βούλητ᾽ with Curtius, V0. ii. 72.

69. 8x’, a word which only occurs in
the phrase ὄχ’ ἄριστος, and is of quite
uncertain origin. It is generally com-

ared with ἔξοχος, where, however, the
idea of eminence is given by the ἐξ. L.
Ahrens and Benfey refer it to Skt. vahu
= very.

71. ἡγέομαι, with dat. = to guide, as
X 101, y 134, etc; with gen. = to com-
mand. εἴσω = els, and is always found
with the ace. in I]. ; in Od. it sometimes
takes the gen. as in later Greek. The
earlier history of the expedition is evi-
dently presumed as a familiar story. The
μάντις was in historical times a regular
official in every Greek army.

73. ἐὺ φρονέων may be either (1) with
good sense, opposed to ἀφρονέων, Ο 104;
or (2) with good intent, opposed to κακῶς
φρονέων. This double meaning runs
through later Greek: eg. (1) Aesch.
Prom. 385, κέρδιστον εὖ φρονοῦντα μὴ
δοκεῖν φρονεῖν ; and (2) Ag. 1487, Αἴγισθος
ὡς τὸ πρόσθεν εὖ φρονῶν ἐμοί.

77. 4 μέν is the regular Homeric
formula of swearing, Att. ἢ μήν. The
short vowel is confirmed by the metre in
= 275, Τ 261. μέν and μήν are of course
only two forms of the same word.

78. ἄνδρα is of course the object of
the transitive χολωσέμεν.

IAIAAOS A (1) 7

κρείσσων γὰρ βασιλεύς, ὅτε χώσεται ἀνδρὶ χέρηι" 80
εἴ περ γάρ τε χόλον γε καὶ αὑτῆμαρ καταπέψῃ,
ἀλλά τε καὶ μετόπισθεν ἔχει κότον, ὄφρα τελέσσῃ,

ἐν στήθεσσιν ἑοῖσι.

Σὺ δὲ φράζαι, εἴ με σαώσεις."

τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς"
“θαρσήσας μάλα εἰπὲ θεοπρόπιον, ὅτι οἶσθα" 85
οὐ μὰ yap ᾿Απόλλωνα διίφιλον, ᾧ τε σύ, Κάλχαν,
εὐχόμενος Δαναοῖσι θεοπροπίας ἀναφαίνεις,
οὔ τις ἐμεῦ ζῶντος καὶ ἐπὶ χθονὶ δερκομένοιο
σοὶ κοίλῃς παρὰ νηυσὶ βαρείας χεῖρας ἐποίσει
συμπάντων Δαναῶν, οὐδ᾽ ἣν ᾿Αγαμέμνονα εἴπῃς, 90
ὃς νῦν πολλὸν ἄριστος ᾿Αχαιῶν εὔχεται εἶναι."

καὶ τότε δὴ θάρσησε καὶ ηὔδα μάντις ἀμύμων"
“οὔτ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὅ γ᾽ εὐχωλῆς ἐπιμέμφεται οὔθ᾽ ἑκατόμβης,
ἀλλ᾽ ἕνεκ᾽ ἀρητῆρος, ὃν ἠτίμησ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνων
οὐδ᾽ ἀπέλυσε θύγατρα καὶ οὐκ ἀπεδέξατ᾽ ἄποιγα, 96
τούνεκ᾽ ἄρ᾽ adye’ ἔδωκεν ἑκηβόλος ἠδ᾽ ἔτι δώσει.
οὐδ᾽ ὅ γε πρὶν Δαναοῖσιν ἀεικέα Χουγὸν ἀπώσει,
πρίν γ᾽ ἀπὸ πατρὶ φίλῳ δόμεναι ἑλικώπιδα κούρην

Ὁ. χέρην, another form οἵ χερείονι,
probably Acolic, from the analogy of
πλέε; = πλείονες (see on B 129).
recurs in A 400, = $82.

81. καταπέψῃ, swallow down, lit. di-
gest. Cf.on B 237, and Pindar, Ο. i. 87,
κατ. μέγαν ὄλβον. χόλον, a8 sudden
anger, is contrasted by ye with κότον,
a ‘ing resentment. until. εἴπερ

. re—re here marks the two
sentences as being correlative ; 80 K 225
@ (δὴν 4160.

consider ; noithor act. nor
mid. means “say” in Homer.
|. Oeompémov—the neuter form occurs
only here (and possibly Z 438, where how-
ever it is merely a question of accent),
and seems harsh in the immediate neigh-
bourhood of the commoner θεοπροπίη
87). Hence both θεοπρσπιῶν and -πέων
fauck, as 109) have been conjectured
᾿ς θεοπρόπος is probably one who
prays to a god (προπ- is perhaps conn.
with Lat. prec-, procus, etc.)

88. Cf. Π 489. Βλέπειν is commonly
used in Attic in the sense of living ; ¢.g.
Enur. Ale, 192, καὶ πῶς ἂν αὑτὸς κατθάνοι
τε καὶ βλέποι;

91. ᾿Αχαιῶν, 80. Ar. Zenod. and
Aristoph.: MSS. ἐνὶ στρατῷ, εὔχεται

does not imply any boastfulness in our
sense of the word, but merely a naive
consciousness of his position, False
modesty is unknown to the Homeric
ἢ yoe—Nauck ἠτίμασσ᾽ (

94. fauck ἠτίμασσ᾽ (one or
two MSS. give ἠτίμασ᾽) ; see on 11.

97. Δαναοῖσιν ἀεικέα λοιγὸν ἀπώσει ;
80 the editions of Ar. and Rhianus, and
the Μασσαλιωτική. MSS. give λοιμοῖο
elas χεῖρα ἀφέξει, “he will not with-
hold his hands from the pestilence,”
which is meaningless. To translate ‘he
will not Keep off (from us) the heavy
hands of the pestilence” involves a very
un-Homeric personification of obs,
which is not much improved by Mark-
land’ con, afpas for xsias (ch ν 268).

ja with the masc. ἐλίκωπες
(Argue) has been variously explained ;
(1) by. the ancients “black-eyed,” Ὁ but
uxés in such a sense is a grammarian’s
figment: (2) with round eyes, ἕλιξ =
curved ; but ἔλιξ rather means “twisted,”
and is not used of a circular curve: (3)
rolling the eyes : (4) aparkin -eyed (root
σελ- of σέλας : 80 Ameia). The choice
lies between (3) and (4), of which the
former seems preferable. The epithet
well expresses a vivacious keen spirit,

8 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (1)

3 4 3 4 ΝΜ e A e 4
ἀπριάτην ἀνάποινον, ἄγειν θ᾽ ἱερὴν ἑκατόμβην

ἐς Χρύσην" τότε κέν μιν ἱλασσάμενοι πεπίθοιμεν."

100

ἡ τοι ὅ γ᾽ ὧς εἰπὼν κατ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἕζετο, τοῖσι δ᾽ ἀνέστη
ν 3 > A , > /
ἥρως “Arpeldns εὐρὺ κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων
ἀχνύμενος" μένεος δὲ μέγα φρένες ἀμφὶ μέλαιναι

’ 3 4 e “ 4 3
πίμπλαντ᾽, ὄσσε δέ οἱ πυρὶ λαμπετόωντι ἐίκτην.

/
Κάλχαντα πρώτιστα κάκ᾽ ὀσσόμενος προσέειπεν"

105

“ μάντι κακῶν, OU πώ ποτέ μοι TO κρήγυον εἶπας"
αἰεί τοι τὰ κάκ᾽ ἐστὶ φίλα φρεσὶ μαντεύεσθαι,
ἐσθλὸν δ᾽ οὔτε τί πω εἶπας ἔπος οὔτε τέλεσσας.
καὶ νῦν ἐν Δαναοῖσι θεοπροπέων ἀγορεύεις,

ὡς δὴ τοῦδ᾽ ἕνεκά σφιν ἑκηβόλος ἄλγεα τεύχει,

110

οὕνεκ᾽ ἐγὼ κούρης Χρυσηίδος ἀγλά᾽ ἄποινα
οὐκ ἔθελον δέξασθαι,---ἐπεὶ πολὺ βούλομαι αὐτὴν

Ν »
ΟἰκΚοί ἔχειν.

Καὶ γάρ ῥα Κλυταιμνήστρης προβέβουλα,

> , 4 φ Δ 4 ,
κουριδίης ἀλόχου, ἐπεὶ ov ἐθέν ἐστι χερείων,
ριοίη xX XEP

such as the Greeks were conscious of

ossessing ; while, as applied to a woman,
it will imply eagerness and youthful
brightness. It is therefore needless to
look beyond the familiar sense of ξελικ-
for an interpretation. This, however,
does not explain ἑλικοβλέφαρον ’Adpo-
δίτην in Hesiod, Th. 16.

99. ἀπριάτην and ἀνάποινον were re-
garded by Ar. as adverbs — perhaps
rightly. ἀπριάτην is certainly so used
in € 317; for the form cf. ἀντιβίην, etc.

103. ἀμφὶ μέλαιναι is the Alexandrine
reading ; most edd. give ἀμφιμέλαιναι---
a reading which, as Autenrieth has
shown in an Excursus to Nagelsbach, is
of late origin. The phrase recurs in
P 83, 499, 573 (6 661 is probably inter-
polated from this passage). It then
means ‘‘his midriff Mack (with anger)
was full of fury on both sides (above and
below).” This connection of ἀμφί with
φρένες is common ; 6.6. ἔρως φρένας ἀμφε-
κάλυψε, Τ' 442 ; πόνος φρένας ἀμφιβέβηκε,
Z 355; and other instances in H. 6.
8 181; φρένας ἀμφιγεγηθώς, Hym. Apoll.
273. For the epithet μέλαιναι, as ex-
pressing deep emotion, cf. Aesch. Pers.
. 118, ταῦτά μοι μελαγχίτων φρὴν ἀμύσσε-
ται φόβῳ: Cho. 406, σπλάγχνα δέ μοι
κελαινοῦται ; Theog. 1199, κραδίην ἐπάταξε
μέλαιναν, as well as the Homeric κραδίη
πόρφυρε. This (Autenriecth’s) explana-
tion seems much superior to the ordinary
interpretation of ἀμφιμέλαιναι as “ lying
in the midmost darkness of the body,

which is hardly Homeric either in
thought or expression. Although in
P 499, 573, anger is not in question, yet
both refer to moments of strong emotion.
The metaphor seems to come from the
surface of water darkened by a breeze
blowing over it ; cf. 2 79, and especially
= 16, ws ὅτε πορφύρῃ πέλαγος... ds ὁ
γέρων ὥρμαινε.

106. κάκ᾽ ὀσσόμενος, ὅτι ἀπὸ τῶν
ὄσσων κακῶς ὑπιδόμενος, οὐκ ἀπὸ τῆς
ὄσσης, τῆς φωνῆς, κακολογήσας, Ariston.
The verb is from root ak, to see, but is
always used of the mind’s eye in the
sense of ‘‘boding”; θυμός is generally
added, 6.0. x 874, o 154, Σ 224.

106. xpfryvov, a doubtful word; it
evidently means ‘‘ good,” though in late
Greek it is sometimes used in the sense
of ‘‘ true.”

107. For the personal constr. φίλα
ἐστὶ μαντεύεσθαι, cf. A 345, φίλ᾽ drradéa
κρέα ἔδμεναι ; p 347, αἰδὼς οὐκ ἀγαθή
κεχρημένῳ ἀνδρὶ παρεῖναι, εἴα. ; see H. G.
8 232.

108, The best MSS. read οὐδέ... οὐδ᾽,
and so Ar. on the ground that the re-

etition gives force (ἐμῴφαντικόν ἐστω).
ut it is very doubtful Greek when pre-
ceded by δέ.

112. βούλομαι, prefer, as in 117, A 319,
Ψ 594, and often ; and with πολύ, P 331.
αὐτήν, emphatic, as opposed to the
ransom.

114. κουριδίης, a difficult word; the
most plausible, but not entirely satis-

IAIAAOS A (1) 9

ov δέμας οὐδὲ φυήν, οὔτ᾽ ἂρ φρένας οὔτε τι ἔργα. 115
\ /
ἀλλὰ καὶ ws ἐθέλω δόμεναι πάλιν, εἰ τό γ᾽ ἄμεινον"
4 3 \ \ /
βούλομ᾽ ἐγὼ λαὸν σόον ἔμμεναι ἢ ἀπολέσθαι.
3 \ 2 \ / > > e 4 3 ” \ 9
αὐτὰρ ἐμοὶ γέρας: αὐτίχ᾽ ἑτοιμάσατ᾽, ὄφρα μὴ οἷος
9 /
Ἀργείων ἀγέραστος ἔω, ἐπεὶ οὐδὲ ἔοικεν"

λεύσσετε γὰρ TO γε πάντες, ὅ μοι γέρας ἔρχεται ἄλλῃ."

120

τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα ποδάρκης δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς"
“ "Atpeldn κύδιστε, φιλοκτεανώτατε πάντων,
πῶς γάρ τοι δώσουσι γέρας μεγάθυμοι ᾿Αχαιοί;
οὐδέ τί που ἴδμεν ξυνήια κείμενα πολλά,
ἀλλὰ τὰ μὲν πολίων ἐξεπράθομεν, τὰ δέδασται, 125
λαοὺς δ᾽ οὐκ ἐπέοικε παλίλλογα ταῦτ᾽ ἐπαγείρειν.
ἀλλὰ σὺ μὲν νῦν τήνδε θεῷ πρόες, αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχαιοὶ
τρυπλῇ τετραπλῇ T ἀποτίσομεν, αἴ κέ ποθι Ζεὺς
δῷσι πόλιν Τροίην ἐυτείχεον ἐξαλαπάξαι."

factory, explanation is that of Curtius
(Stud, i. 253), who derives it from κείρω,
and refers it to the custom of cutting
the bride’s hair before marriage ; hence
*¢wedded.” So κοῦρος from the custom
of cutting the πλόκαμος θρεπτήριος at
the age of puberty.

115. The distinction of δέμας and φνή
is not quite clear. From phrases like
δέμας πυρός it would seem natural to
take δέμας as ‘‘ outward appearance ”
generally ; φνή as ‘‘ growth,” 1.6. ‘‘stat-
ure.” But this latter meaning belongs
to δέμας in E 801, Τυδεύς τοι μικρὸς μὲν
ἕην δέμας. Perhaps we may render
‘‘stature and figure” with about the
same degree of vagueness. Cf. N 432,
κἀλλεϊζ καὶ Epyoow ἰδὲ φρεσίν.

117. ὅτι Ζηνόδοτος αὐτὸν ἠθέτηκεν ὡς
τῆς διανοίας εὐήθους οὔσης. οὐ δεῖ δὲ αὐτὸν
ἰδίᾳ προφέρεσθαι, ἀλλὰ συνάπτειν τοῖς ἄνω"
ἐν παρενθέσει (MS. ἐν ἤθει) γὰρ λέγεται,
Ariston., rightly. (For the emendation
of ἐν ἤθει see Mr. Verrall on Eur. Med.
148; so in Schol. A on A 234, E 150).
σόον, the reading of A, is undoubtedly
preferable to the σῶν of Ar., which is
not a Homeric form at all.

118. γέ s thegiftofhonourtothekin ,
set aside tefore the division of the spoil.

119. οὐδὲ ἔοικεν, perhaps ‘‘it is not
even decent,” much less reasonable.

123. For πῶς γάρ A has πῶς rdp,
which is preferred ἢ Cobet and Bekker.

124. κείμενα πο go together, ‘‘a
common store laid up in abundance.”
ξυνήια recurs as an adj. in Ψ 809.

125. τὰ μέν is here the relative, ‘‘ what
we have plundered out of the towns, that
is divided.” But this use of τά is not
consistent with the usual practice, and
we ought probably to read ἀλλά θ᾽ ἃ μέν.
See H. G. § 262. The preceding ten
years of war have been mainly occupied in
plundering neighbouring towns ; Achilles
counts twenty-three such forays in I 328,
and they are often alluded to elsewhere.

126. λαούς is perhaps to be taken
after ἐπαγείρειν, in the sense ‘“‘to gather
again from the people,” with the double
acc. usual after verbs of taking away.
ém- thus expresses, as often, the idea of
going over a space, or round a number
of people, cg. ἐπινεῖμαι, ἐπιπωλεῖσθαι,
ἐπιστρωφᾶν (Paley).

129. Τροΐην, Ar., as an adj., ‘“‘a city
of Troas,” not “the town of Troy.” It
would appear in that case better to read
Tpwhv, the usual form of the adj. (v.
Cobet, M. C. 252); but as this must
have occurred to Ar. and been rejected
by him, in spite of his desire to make
the text as uniform as possible, we must
conclude that he had strong authority
for the trisyllabic form. Ar. held that
H. does not use the expression πόλις
Tpoly for ‘the town of Troy,” but πόλις
Τρώων, though in ἃ 510 πόλις Tpoly (Ar.
Tpotn) must mean ‘‘ Troy”; and there
seems no reason to reject this sense here.
Zoilos, the famous ‘Ounpoudoré, accused
Homer of solecism in this line for using
a plural verb instead of a singular; he
must therefore have read δῶσι, and pos-

10 IAIAAOS A (1)

τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων" 180
“μὴ δὴ οὕτως, ἀγαθός περ ἐών, θεοείκελ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεῦ,
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
= 247 ἐς 3 > A\ ΝΜ , 3 A ? 3
ἡ ἐθέλεις, ὄφρ᾽ αὐτὸς ἔχῃς γέρας, αὐτὰρ ἔμ᾽ αὔτως
4 , / , + » a
ἧσθαι Sevopevov, κέλεαι δέ με τήνδ᾽ ἀποδοῦναι;

ἀλλ᾽ εἰ μὲν δώσουσι γέρας μεγάθυμοι ᾿Αχαιοί,

135

ΝΜ / 524 2 ,ὕ ΝΜ
ἄρσαντες κατὰ θυμόν, ὅπως ἀντάξιον ἔσται"
2 / \ a 2 AN / > A
εἰ δέ κε μὴ δώωσιν, ἐγὼ δέ κεν αὐτὸς ἕλωμαι
a \ a v 2N Va a 3 A
ἢ τεὸν ἢ Αἴαντος ἐὼν γέρας, ἢ ᾿Οδυσῆος
Μ e , e ’ , “ rd
ἄξω ἑλών" ὁ δέ Kev κεχολώσεται, ὅν κεν ἵκωμαι.

[οὶ ’
ἀλλ᾽ ἡ τοι μὲν ταῦτα μεταφρασόμεσθα καὶ αὖτις,

sibly this is right as a singular, from
which δῴσι is formed by epenthesis
(Curt. Vb. 1, 57).

131. wep seems here to have merely
its original force of ‘‘ very,” rather than
of ‘‘ though,” which indeed belongs pro-
perly to the participle. The idea seems to

e, ‘* Beinga great warrior (the Hom. sense
of ἀγαθός), be content with that, and do
not attempt to outdo me in cunning too.”

132. νόῳ is here instrumental rather
than locative; lit. ‘‘by thought” as
opposed to brute force. Cf. Soph. Zi.
56 λόγῳ κλέπτοντες ; and ΚΞ 217 πάρ-
φασις, ἢ τ᾽ ἔκλεψε νόον πύκα περ φρονεόν-
των ; and for παρελεύσεαι, ν 291 κερδαλέος
κ᾽ εἴη καὶ ἐπίκλοπος, ὅς σε παρέλθοι, ε 104
παρεξελθεῖν Διὸς νόον. So Theog. 1185,
δόλῳ παρελεύσεαι.

188. Three ways of translating this
line have been proposed. (a) “" Wouldest
thou, while thou thyself keepest thy
prize, have me for my part sit idle wit
empty hands?” (ὁ) ‘‘ Wouldest thou,
in order that thou mayest keep,” etc.
(c) ‘‘ Dost thou wish that thou shouldest
keep thy prize, but that I should sit,”
etc. In favour of the construction of
ἐθέλειν with ὄφρα instead of the infin. in
(c) E 690 is quoted, λελιημένος ὄφρα
τάχιστα ὥσαιτ᾽ ᾿Αργείους, and so'A 465;
but in neither of these passages is it
necessary to join ὄφρα with the participle.
Cf. also Z 361, θυμὸς ἐπέσσνται ὄφρα.
In II 653 ὄφρα with the opt. seems to
be epexegetic of εἶναι : but that single
passage does not justify our assuming so
iarsh a construction here. It is not so
easy to decide between (a) and (6) ; either

ives a good sense, (a) referring to the
distance of time at which the recompense
is to be made (128), (ὁ) Achilles’ refusal
to accord the restitution at once. But

140

(5) is preferable, because &¢pa when it
stands alone is commonly a final particle ;
in the sense of ἕως it is regularly followed
by τόφρα (not always, v. Ψ 47, A 346;
H. G. § 287). The αὐτάρ is not of course
logical, but the interposition of an ad-
versative particle to accent the contrast
between the two persons is a perfectly
natural anacoluthon. A very similar
instance is I’ 290, εἰ δ᾽ ἂν... αὐτὰρ ἐγώ.
Ar. athetized the two lines on subjective
and insufficient grounds.

136. It seems natural to take ὅπωθ
dvr. ἔσται in the sense ‘‘be sure that
the recompense is adequate”; but this
construction, though found in Herod,
and Attic, is not Homeric; and the
clause ἄρσαντες κατὰ θυμόν should come
in the apodosis rather than the protasis.
It is therefore best to suppose an aposio-
pesis, ‘‘If they will give me a prize,
suited to my mind, such that the recom-
pense is equal— good!” This is not
uncommon when two mutually exclusive
suppositions are made on only one of
which any emphasis is laid.

137. There is some doubt as to the
punctuation here, some putting a colon
after ἕλωμαι, but this makes the repeti-
tion of the participles lw»... ἑλών ve
awkward. That given in the text is
unobjectionable. 139 was rejected by
Ar. as superfluous and εὔηθες. This
athetesis is accepted by those who would
banish xe with the fut. ind. from the
text of Homer; the grounds given by
Ar. are not in themselves convincing,
but the omission of the line would cer-
tainly be no loss. So also Bentley,
Bekker, Heyne, Kichly.

140. μεταφρασό i.e. we will
postpone the consideration of this for
the present.

IAIAAOE A (ἡ) 1

νῦν δ᾽ ἄγε νῆα μέλαιναν ἐρύσσομεν εἰς ἅλα δῖαν,
ἐν δ᾽ ἐρέτας ἐπιτηδὲς ἀγείρομεν, ἐς δ᾽ ἑκατόμβην
θείομεν, ἂν δ᾽ αὐτὴν Χρυσηίδα καλλιπάρῃον
βήσομεν" εἷς δέ τις ἀρχὸς ἀνὴρ βουληφόρος ἔστω,

ἢ Alas ἡ ᾿Ιδομενεὺς ἢ δῖος ᾿δυσσεὺς

145

ἠὲ σύ, Πηλείδη, πάντων ἐκπαγλότατ᾽ ἀνδρῶν,
ὄφρ᾽ ἡμῖν ἑκάεργον ἱλάσσεαι ἱερὰ ῥέξας."
τὸν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπόδρα ἰδὼν προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς"

«

ὦμοι, ἀναιδείην ἐπιειμένε, κερδαλεόφρον,
πῶς τίς τοι πρόφρων ἔπεσιν πείθηται ᾿Αχαιῶν

150

ἢ ὁδὸν ἐλθέμεναι ἢ ἀνδράσιν Idi μάχεσθαι;

οὐ γὰρ ἐγὼ Τρώων aver’ ἤλυθον αἰχμητάων

δεῦρο μαχησόμενος, ἐπεὶ, οὔ τί μοι͵ αἴτιοί εἰσιν"

οὐ γάρ πώ ποτ΄ ἐμὰς βοῦς ἤλασαν οὐδὲ μὲν ἵππους,

οὐδέ ποτ᾽ ἐν Φθίῃ ἐριβώλακι βωτιανείρῃ

155

καρπὸν ἐδηλήσαντ᾽, ἐπεὶ % μάλα πολλὰ μεταξύ,

οὔρεά τε σκιόεντα θάλασσά τε ἠχήεσσα"

ἀλλὰ σοί, ὦ μέγ᾽ ἀναιδές, ἅμ᾽ ἑσπόμεθ᾽, ὄφρα σὺ χαίρῃς,
τιμὴν ἀρνύμενοι Μενελάῳ σοί τε, κυνῶπα,

πρὸς Τρώων" τῶν οὔ τι μετατρέπῃ οὐδ᾽ ἀλεγίζεις"

160

καὶ δή μοι γέρας αὐτὸς ἀφαιρήσεσθαι ἀπειλεῖς,
ᾧ ἔπι πολλὰ μόγησα, δόσαν δέ μοι υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν.
οὐ μὲν σοί ποτε ἶσον ἔχω γέρας, ὁππότ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοὶ
Τρώων ἐκπέρσωσ᾽ ἐὺ ναιόμενον πτολίεθρον:

ἀλλὰ τὸ μὲν πλεῖον πολυάικος πολέμοιο

165

χεῖρες ἐμαὶ διέπουσ᾽, ἀτὰρ ἤν ποτε δασμὸς ἵκηται,

144. Soxés is predicate: let one, a
member of the council, be in command.
For those who had the right to be sum-
moned to the royal βουλή see B 404.

146, ἔκπαγλος is not entirely a word
of blame, ef. £170. It is perhaps for
Ex-whay-Ros (root πλακ-), meaning “vehe-
08, tpi of 21, ped

49. 6214, μεγάλην ἐπιει-
μένον ἀλκήν ; Ὑ 205, δύναμιν περιθεῖναι, to
clothe as with armour. κερδαλεόφρον,
greedy, or perhaps crafty ; οἵ. Z 153,
ΣΙσυῴος, bs κέρδιστος γένετ' ἀνδρῶν.

160. πείθηται, a subjunctive express-
ing expectation ; ef. H. G. § 277.

161. ὁδόν, whether military or diplo-

matic. ». T 375.
167. σκιόεντα MSS., σκιόωντα (casting
long shadows) Ar. ‘The epithet is very

expressive of the importance of shade in
. a8 xalpon bj. b ἢν

. Xa ‘subj., because the pur-
pose expressed by éowdueda is still Tre.
sent, hence also the present participle
ἀρρόμενοι follows. τιμήν, recompense.
The heroic point of honour is not ab-
stract ; it requires to be realized in
the shape of ransom or material recom-
pense. The present ἀρνύμενοι implies
“trying to win.”

163, ὁππότε is here “whenever,” and
Τρώων πτολίωρον = a town of the Tro-
jan land, seo note on 129. Homer never
uses Tp. πτολίεθρον of Troy, but Τρώων.
πόλις or Ἰλίου πτολίεθρον. Indeed the
expression of ποτε ἔχω cannot t possibly
mean οὐχ ἕξω, and 166 ff. obviously refer
to repeated experience in the past.

19 LAIAAOS A (1)

σοὶ τὸ γέρας πολὺ μεῖξον, ἐγὼ δ᾽ ὀλίγον τε φίλον τε
ἔρχομ᾽ ἔχων ἐπὶ νῆας, ἐπεί κε κάμω πολεμίξων.
νῦν δ᾽ εἶμι Φθίηνδ᾽, ἐπεὶ ἦ πολὺ φέρτερόν ἐστιν

Ν δ᾽ ” \ \ , 7Q/s 3.2)
OLKAO LEV σὺν νηυσι KOP@VICL), οὐδέ Tf οἰω

170

> ΨΝ \ Υ̓͂ a
ἐνθάδ᾽ ἄτιμος ἐὼν ἄφενος καὶ πλοῦτον ἀφύξειν.᾽"
XN 3. » / > ww ww > “Ὁ 3 /
τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων"

ες a s\> ow ἌΝ. Ὁ, 9 >» 2

φεῦγε μάλ᾽, εἴ τοι θυμὸς ἐπέσσυται, οὐδέ σ᾽ ἐγώ γε

/ “) > 9 “ / > 2) ’ wv
λίσσομαι εἵνεκ᾽ ἐμεῖο μένειν" Trap ἐμοί γε Kal ἄλλοι,

“ / / , \ / /
οἵ κέ με τιμήσουσι, μάλιστα δὲ μητίετα Ζεύς.

178

ἔχθιστος δέ μοί ἐσσι διοτρεφέων βασιλήων"
3.Ὰ 4 Μ / / 4 4
αἰεὶ yap τοι Epis TE φίλη πολεμοί TE μάχαι τε.
2 , , 2 / t 2 »
εἰ μάλα καρτερὸς ἐσσι, θεὸς που col τό γ᾽ ἔδωκεν.
οἴκαδ᾽ ἰὼν σὺν νηυσί τε ons καὶ σοῖς ἑτάροισιν

Μυρμιδόνεσσιν ἄνασσε, σέθεν δ᾽ ἀγὼ οὐκ ἀλεγίζω
ρμ γ

180

οὐδ᾽ ὄθομαι κοτέοντος" ἀπειλήσω δέ τοι ὧδε'
ὡς ἔμ᾽ ἀφαιρεῖται Χρυσηίδα Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων,
τὴν μὲν ἐγὼ σὺν νηΐ τ᾽ ἐμῇ καὶ ἐμοῖς ἑτάροισιν
πέμψω, ἐγὼ δέ « ἄγω Βρισηίδα καλλιπάρῃον

αὐτὸς ἰὼν κλισίηνδε, τὸ σὸν γέρας, ὄφρ᾽ ἐὺ εἰδῇς

167. ὀλίγον τε φίλον τε, ἃ proverbial
expression ; δόσις ὀλίγη τε φίλη τε, £
208 ; Touchstone’s ‘‘a poor thing, but
mine own.” φίλος here indeed is little
removed from its original sense ‘‘own”’
(prob. for o¢-f\os, pron. stem sva of ὅς,
swus, etc. ; v. on 393).

168. ἐπεί κε κάμω, so Ar.; MSS. ἐπὴν
κεκάμω Perhaps ἐπεὶ xexduw is best
(see H. G. § 296), though it is strange
that this reduplicated form should occur
only in passages where the first syllable
may be the particle.

170. σ᾽, z.e. σοι ; this elision does not
recur (except possibly Φ 122), but is
sufficiently supported by μ᾽ for μοι, which
is found several times. Wan Leeuwen
(Mnemosyne, xiii. 2) has shown good
reason for thinking that it was originally
commoner, but has been expelled as
against the rules of later prosody. The
sense is, ‘‘ I have no mind to draw wealth
for you,” like a slave set to draw water
from a well for his master. The fut.
ἀφύξω by aor. ἤφυσα is abnormal; it
only occurs here, and perhaps should
be ἀφύσσειν, or ἀφύσειν (Apvoca, B
349).

8. μάλα, ironical, ‘‘run away by all
means”; cf. 85.

175. τιμήσουσι, perhaps τιμήσωσι, as

185

the use of xe with the fut. indic. has
been seriously called in doubt, and is
not well attested except by lines of
doubtful authenticity (v. 189). The fut.
indic. and aor. subj. are often indis-
tinguishable.

177 was athetized by Ar. here, as
wrongly interpolated from E 891; πόλεμοι
and μάχαι are no rebuke to a hero in the

eld.

179. νηυσί re σῇξ, a case in which it
is impossible to restore the old form of
the dat. plur. in -o.. But it is in these
monosyllables that the short form seems
first to have arisen.

182. The thought with which the
sentence starts is, ‘‘As Apollo takes
Chryseis from me, so will I take Briseis
from you.” But the second clause is
broken up into two, correlated by μέν
and dé, A very similar sentence with a
double antithesis will be found in © 268-
272. (It might appear simpler, though
losing the emphasis in ἐμέ, to take ὡς =
since. But this causal use is found in
Homer only when ws follows the prin-
cipal verb of the sentence, and is thug
equivalent to ὅτι οὕτως). Kein 184 indi-
cates that ἄγω is contingent upon πέμψω,
virtually meaning ‘‘and then I wil]
bring.” H. 6. § 275, a.

IAIAAOS A ὦ 13

ὅσσον φέρτερός εἰμι σέθεν, στυγέῃ δὲ καὶ ἄλλος
ἴσον ἐμοὶ φάσθαι καὶ ὁμοιωθήμεναι ἄντην."

ὡς φάτο: Πηλεΐωνι δ᾽ ἄχος γένετ᾽, ἐν δέ οἱ ἦτορ
στήθεσσιν λασίοισι διάνδιχα μερμήριξεν,

ἢ ὅ γε φάσγανον ὀξὺ ἐρυσσάμενος παρὰ μηροῦ

190

τοὺς μὲν, ἀναστήσειεν, ὁ. δ᾽ ἐλτρείδην ἐναρίξοι,

ἣε χόλον παύσεϊεν ἐρητύσεϊέ τε θυμόν. .
εἶος ὁ ταῦθ᾽ ὥρμαινε κατὰ φρένα καὶ κατὰ θυμόν, -
ἕλκετο δ᾽ ἐκ κολεοῖο μέγα ξίφος, ἦλθε δ᾽ ᾿Αθήνη

οὐρανόθεν" πρὸ γὰρ ἧκε θεά, λευκώλενος Ἥρη,

* 195

ἄμφω ὁμῶς θυμῷ φιλέουσά τε κηδομένη τε.

στῆ δ᾽ ὄπιθεν, ξανθῆς δὲ κόμης Ere Πηλεΐωνα,

οἴῳ φαινομένη, τῶν δ᾽ ἄλλων οὔ τις ὁρᾶτο.

θάμβησεν 8 ᾿Αχιλεύς, μετὰ δ᾽ érpdmer’, αὐτίκα 8 ἔγνω

Παλλάδ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίην" δεινὼ δέ of ὄσσε φάανθεν.

200

καί μιν φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα.
“πίπτ᾽ abt’, αἰγιόχοιο Διὸς τέκος, εἰλήλουθας ;
ἢ ἵνα ὕβριν ἴδῃ ᾿Αγαμέμνονος ᾿Απρείδαο;

ἀλλ᾽ ἔκ τοι ἐρέω, τὸ δὲ καὶ τελέεσθαι ὀίω"

ἧς ὑπεροπλίῃσι τάχ᾽ ἄν ποτε θυμὸν ὀλέσσῃ."

205

τὸν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπε θεά, γχαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη"
“ἦλθον ἐγὼ παύσουσα τὸ σὸν μένος, αἴ κε πίθηαι,
a

187. ἴσον is an adverb, ἰσαγορῆσαί μοι
(Schol.), not an adj., as it would then
rather belsos. Cf. ἀντία δεσποίνης φάσθαι,
v 377.

188. ἐν is hero still an adverb, “within,
his heart in his ah breast.” M9
according to the Schol. A, because they
cover the heart, ἐν j ἐστὶ τὸ πυρῶδες καὶ
θερμὸν καὶ μανικὸν τῆς ψυχῆς . . . ἡ
θέρμη γὰρ αἰτία τῆς ἐκφύσεως τῶν τριχῶν.
Rather because abundant hair is gener-
ally held ἃ sign of bodily strength.
διάνδιχα pep 860 note on © 167 ;
(ὁ 6Bedbs) ὅτι δύο ἐμερίμνησεν οὐκ ἐναντία
ἀλλήλοις, ὅπερ ἐκλαβὼν (2) τις προσέθηκεν
“ἧς χόλον παύσειεν᾽"; and on 192, ὅτι
ἐκλύεται τὰ τῆς ὀργῆφ᾽ (the picture of
passion is weakened) διὸ 40ere?rai—Aris-
ton. ‘These remarks are perfeety right:
διάνδιχα μερμήριξεν means “he had ‘half
a mind,’” and does not require two alter-
natives expressed ; and 192 entirely spoils

the plctor,

191. ὁ δέ as often repeats the subject
of the first clause: the contrast is with
τοὺς μέν.

197. στῆ, came up; this is the usual
sense of the aor. ἔστην.

200. of may refer to Athene—her eyes
gleamed terrible ; or to Achilles—terrible
shone her eyes on him. Cf. T 17, which
is in favour of the former view.

202. αὖτε, “‘again,” an expression of
impatience, implying “one vexation after
another.” ΟΥ̓, 540.

203, ἴδῃ most MSS. with Ar.; ἴδῃς
Zenod. The act. aud middle voice of
this verb appear to be used without
distinction.

205. τάχα, “soon,” never perhaps”
in Homer. For ἄν with subj. as a solemn
threat see H. G. § 275 ὁ.

206, γλαυκῶπις to Homer meant, no
doubt, 7‘ nehteyed ἢν but this is not
inconsistent with’ the possibility of the
word having originally meant “owl-
faced,” Athene having T pean no doubt
identified with an owl-deity or totem,
as Apollo with the mouse. According
to Pausanias (i 14, 5) the epithet was
brought into connexion with the Libyan
legend of Athene, and her marine origin

ee eee ee ee ... meres πον

pe

14 IAIAAO® A (1)

οὐρανόθεν" πρὸ δέ μ᾽ ἧκε θεά, λευκώλενος “Ἥρη,
ἄμφω ὁμῶς θυμῷ φιλέουσά τε κηδομένη τε.
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε Ary’ ἔριδος, μηδὲ ξίφος ἕλκεο χειρί" 210
ἀλλ᾽ ἢ τοι ἔπεσιν μὲν ὀνείδισον ὡς ἔσεταί περ.
ὧδε γὰρ ἐξερέω, τὸ δὲ καὶ τετελεσμένον ἔσται"
καί ποτέ τοι τρὶς τόσσα παρέσσεται ἀγλαὰ δῶρα
ὕβριος εἵνεκα τῆσδε" σὺ δ᾽ ἴσχεο, πείθεο δ᾽ ἡμῖν."
τὴν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς"
“von μὲν σφωίτερόν γε, θεά, ἔπος εἰρύσσασθαι, 216
καὶ para περ θυμῷ κεχολωμένον" ὧς yap ἄμεινον"
ὅς κε θεοῖς ἐπιπείθηται, μάλα τ᾽ ἔκλυον αὐτοῦ."
ἢ καὶ ἐπ᾿ ἀργυρέῃ κώπῃ σχέθε χεῖρα βαρεῖαν,
dp δ᾽ ἐς κουλεὸν ὦσε μέγα ξίφος, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησεν 290
μύθῳ ᾿Αθηναίης" ἡ δ᾽ Οὐλυμπόνδε βεβήκειν
δώματ᾽ ἐς αἰγιόχοιο Διὸς μετὰ δαίμονας ἄλλους.
Πηλεΐδης δ᾽ ἐξαῦτις ἀταρτηροῖς ἐπέεσσιν
᾿Ατρεΐδην προσέειπε, καὶ οὔ πω λῆγε χόλοιο"

from the Tritonian lake (cf. Glaukos, the
marine deity); but this is doubtless of
later origin.

211. ὡς ἔσεταί wep is the object of
ὀνείδισον, ““ cast in his teeth how it will
be,” what will follow, as Achilles pro-
ceeds to do. Cf. ¢ 212, σφῶιν δ᾽ ws ἔσεταί
περ ἀληθείην καταλέξω, and so τ 312,
+ 255; and for the construction of ὀνει-
δίζειν B 255, ὀνειδίζειν ὅτι. . . διδοῦσψ;
ef. I 84, σ 880. ὀνειδίζειν occurs without
an expressed object only in H 95.

213. παρέσσεται, shall be laid before
thee. τρὶς τόσσα, cf. 2 686.

216. σφωίτερον, because Athene speaks
for Here as well as for herself. εἰρύσ-
σασθαι, in the sense of observing, guard-
ing, is not connected with the similar
forms from root Fep-, Fepu-, meaning ‘‘to
draw ” (for which see Curtius, Zt. no. 497
δ). It is more probably from cepv-, re-
lated to Lat. servare, with which it very
frequently agrees in sense. It happens
that the two words approach very closely
in use when applied to wounded war-
riors or bodies which are drawn away,
or saved, from the enemy; but this is
merely a coincidence. The F is present,
with rare exceptions, when the sense
“draw ’’ is required, cf. line 190; in the
sense ‘‘ protect” it is often impossible,
and never required (exc. in. 194 = κ 444,

apparently a mistaken alteration of ξ 260
= p 429). In the middle, in the non-
thematic forms, with ἐ for the first
syllable (ἔρυτο, etc. ), and in those formed
from εἰρύομαι and ῥύομαι (for σρύ-ομαι),
the sense ‘‘ protect” is necessary or ad-
missible. e active forms are all from
Fepv-, to draw. The ambiguous forms
are chiefly those of the 1 aor. middle,
and the perf. and pipf.

218. The τ᾽ is called a “ gnomic” τε.
It may, however, be for τοι (cf. 170); or
possibly we should read ὅς re for ὅς xe, in
which case the repeated τε will simply
mark the correlation of the two clauses,
as often in gnomic lines; v. on 81, and
H. G. 8 332. The αὐτοῦ at the end,
however, seems so weak as to raise ‘a
more serious doubt as to the authenti-
city of the line, which is in itself rather
flat, and precisely of the sort which would
be likely to be interpolated in the age
of Hesiod or the ‘‘seven sages” (Déder-
lein conj. αὖ τοῦ).

221. βεβήκει, “the pf. βέβηκα expresses
the attitude of walkin , the step or
stride ; hence βεβήκει, ‘was in act to
go,’ comes to mean ‘started to go’ (not
‘had gone’).”—Mr. Monro.

223. & pots, a word of doubtful
origin ; Hesych, ἀταρτᾶται᾽ λυπεῖ, βλάτ-
tet, Cf. β 248, Μέντορ ἀταρτηρέ.

IAIAAOE A (1) 15

“ oivoBapés, κυνὸς ὄμματ᾽ ἔχω;

κραδίην δ᾽ ἐχάφοιο,

οὔτε ποτ᾽ ἐς πόλεμον ἅμα λαῷ ϑωρηχθῆναι

a

οὔτε λόχονδ᾽ ἰέναι σὺν ἀριστήεσσιν ᾿Αχαιῶν
τέτληκας θυμῷ. τὸ δέ τοι κὴρ εἴδεται εἶναι.
4} πολὺ λώιόν ἐστι κατὰ στρατὸν εὐρὺν ᾿Αχαιῶν

δῶρ᾽ ἀποαιρεῖσθαι, ὅς τις σέθεν ἀντίον εἴπῃ"

280

δημοβόρος βασιλεύς, ἐπεὶ οὐτιδανοῖσιν ἀνάσσεις"

ἢ γὰρ ἄν, ᾿Ατρεΐδη, νῦν ὕστατα λωβήσαιο.

ἀλλ᾽ ἔκ τοι ἐρέῳ καὶ ἐπὶ μέγαν͵ ὅρκον ὀμοῦμαι"

ναὶ μὰ τόδε σκῆπτρον' τὸ μὲν οὔ ποτε φύλλα καὶ ὄξους

φύσει, ἐπεὶ δὴ πρῶτα τομὴν ἐν ὄρεσσι λέλοιπεν,

235

οὐδ᾽ ἀναθηλήσει" περὶ γάρ ῥά ἑ χαλκὸς ἔλεψεν
φύλλα τε καὶ φλοιόν" νῦν αὗτέ μιν υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν
ἐν παλάμῃς φορέουσι δικασπόλοι οἵ τε θέμιστας
πρὸς Διὸς εἰρύαται" ὁ δέ τοι μέγας ἔσσεται ὅρκος"

ἢ ποτ᾽ ᾽λ

χιλλῆος ποθὴ ἵξεται, υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶν

240

σύμπαντας" τότε 8 οὔ τι δυνήσεαι ἀχνύμενός περ
χραισμεῖν, εὖτ᾽ ἂν πολλοὶ ὑφ᾽ “Ἕκτορος ἀνδροφόνοιο
θνήσκοντες πίπτωσι" σὺ δ᾽ ἔνδοθι θυμὸν ἀμύξεις .
χωόμενος, ὅ τ᾽ ἄριστον ᾿Αχαιῶν οὐδὲν ἔτισας."

ὡς φάτο Πηλείδης, ποτὶ δὲ σκῆπτρον βάλε γαίῃ

245,

225. For the dog as the type of shame-
lessness, of. 169, and the curious compar.

κύντερον.

228. Observe tho distinction between
πόλεμος, open battle in which the whole
host, (ads) is engaged, and λόχος, the
heroic ‘forlorn hope,” reserved for the
dite (ἀριστῆες). ΑΒ a test of courage the
λόχος is vividly described in Ν 275-286.

228. κήρ, cf. T 454, ἴσον γάρ σφιν πᾶσιν
ἀπήχθετο κηρὶ μελαίνῃ.

230, ἀποαιρεῖσθαι, so 275, but ἀφαι-
ρεῖται, 182, etc, There is no plausible
explanation of these occasional signs of
an evanescent initial consonant (Curt.

Et, p. 557).

231. δημοβόρος, devourer of the com-
mon stock. For δῆμος in this sense see on
B47, 2 For the exclamatory nom,
H. G.§163. οὐτιδανοῖσι, inen of naught;

cf. 203-4, which ©
in the next line.

Iain the γάρ, “else,”
‘or the form compare

ἠπεδανός by ἥπιος. For do wo WE
should rather have ex] the aor.
indie. ; cf. on E 811, T 2:

284. The does not belong to
Achilles, but κα tiee which i handed by
the herald to the speaker as a sign that

he is ‘‘in possession of the house.” See
Σ 505, ¥ 666, β 37.

235, πρῶτα, “at tho first,” ἐδ. once
for all, just as in T 9; cf. A 6, Z 489,
etc. So ubi primum, “as soon as ever.”

238, ϑικασπόλος, qui jus colit, see on
63; the σ, however, is unexplained, as
compounds are not formed directly from
the acc. θέμιστας εἰρύαται, guard (216)
the traditions, which are deposited as
a sacred mystory in the keeping of the
kings. So in old Iceland and Ireland
law was a tradition preserved entirely by
the special knowledge of a few men ; tho
plur. θέμιστες is used exactly in the sense
of our “ precedents.”

289. πρὸς Διός, like de par le Roi, by
commission of Zeus. Of. ξ 57, πρὸς γὰρ
Διός εἰσιν ξεῖνοι, and I 99. Or we may
tako it with θέμιστας, laws given bi
Zeus. ὅρκος is here used in the primi-
tive senso of the object sworn ὃ

242. ὑπό, because πίκτωσι is in sense
passive, as P 428 ; 80 also with φεύγω,

χω, ete,

244. 8 4, ac. 8 re = ὅτι τε. On the
difficult question of the elision of ὅτι see
H. G. § 269 ad fin.

16 IAIAAOS A (1)

/ Ψ , σ > 3 ,
χρυσείοις ἥλοισι πεπαρμένον, ἕξετο δ᾽ αὐτὸς"

᾿Ατρεΐδης δ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἐμήνιε.

τοῖσι δὲ Νέστωρ

ἡδυεπὴς ἀνόρουσε, λιγὺς Πυλίων ἀγορητής,
τοῦ καὶ ἀπὸ γλώσσης μέλιτος γλυκίων ῥέεν αὐδή.

τῷ δ᾽ ἤδη δύο μὲν γενεαὶ μερόπων ἀνθρώπων

250

ἐφθίαθ᾽, οἵ οἱ πρόσθεν ἅμα τράφεν ἠδὲ γένοντο
3 4 3 4 N N 4 wv
ἐν Πύλῳ ἠγαθέῃ, μετὰ δὲ τριτάτοισιν ἄνασσεν.
ὅ σφιν ἐὺ φρονέων ἀγορήσατο καὶ μετέευπεν"
con , ,., 2 ἔνθος ᾽Α δ a e 7
ὦ πόποι, } μέγα πένθος ᾿Αχαιίδα γαῖαν ἱκάνει"

ἢ κεν γηθήσαι Πρίαμος ἸΠριάμοιό τε παῖδες,

255

ἄλλοι Te Τρῶες μέγα κεν κεχαροίατο θυμῷ,

εἰ σφῶιν τάδε πάντα πυθοίατο μαρναμένοιιν,

οἱ περὶ μὲν βουλὴν Δαναῶν, περὶ δ᾽ ἐστὲ μάχεσθαι.
ἀλλὰ πίθεσθ᾽" ἄμφω δὲ νεωτέρω ἐστὸν ἐμεῖο.

ΜΝ 4 > 9 A \ 3 / 39 ec a
ἤδη Yap ToT ἐγὼ καὶ ἀρείοσιν ἠὲ περ ὑμῖν

260

ἀνδράσιν ὡμίλησα, καὶ οὔ ποτέ μ᾽ οἵ γ᾽ ἀθέριζον.

246. The golden nails fastened the
blade to the handle; cf. A 29, and a full
explanation of the whole question in
Helbig, H. £. PP. 238 ff.

249. The καί is very unusual as intro-
ducing a merely epexegetic sentence—in
this case merely an expansion of what
has already been said.

250. Nestor is represented as having
lived through more than two generations,
and still being a king in the third ; ze.
between his 70th and 100th years, if
with the Greeks we count three yeveal to
a century. In y 245 he is said to have
reigned over three generations, which
seems to be an instance of the growth
- of the legendary into the miraculous.
μερόπων, an epithet of which the real
sense was in all probability forgotten
in Homeric days, as it is used only
in purely stereotyped connexion with
ἄνθρωποι (exc. B 285, g.v.) We can
only say with confidence that it does
not mean “articulate,” μερίζοντες τὴν
Sra, as in so ancient a word the F of
Féy would not be neglected. The other
derivations which have been proposed
are quite problematical.

251. + ἠδ᾽ éyévovro—for the ὕστε-
pov πρότερον cf. μ 134, θρέψασα τεκοῦσά
τε μήτηρ, and elsewhere. ἐφθίατο is
probably plpf., but it might be aor.

252. ἠγάθεος, an epithet, like ζάθεος,
applied only to places; no doubt both

mean ‘‘divine,” as they are only applied
to localities connected with particular
ods. Weshould perhaps read ἀγάθεος
from ἄγαν), the first syllable being
jengthened metrically. ἦγ. is used of
Pytho (6 80), Lemnos (B 722), and
Νυσήιον (Z 133). It has been thought
that it is another form of ἀγαθός, which
is, however, never applied to localities,

257. For the construction cf. ἃ 505,
Πηλῆος ἀμύμονος οὔτι πέπυσμαι : lit. “if
they were to hear all this about you
fighting.” πυθέσθαι τινος for wept rivos,
as O 224, etc.; cf. εἰπεῖν τινος, X 174;
ws γνῶ χωομένοιο, A 357; cf. H. 6.
8 151 d.

258. Construe περίεστε μὲν βουλὴν Aa-
ναῶν, περίεστε δὲ μάχεσθαι ; cf. περίειμε
γυναικῶν, τ 326. For the co-ordination
of substantive and infin., O 642 ἀμείνων
παντοίας ἀρετὰς, ἡμὲν πόδας ἠδὲ μάχεσθαι.
The edition called the πολύστιχος, of
which we know nothing, read βουλῇ.

260. ὑμῖν, so Zenod., and a few MSS.:
Ar. A D read ἡμῖν, thus saving Nestor’s
politeness at the cost of his point. Ar.’s
objection to Zenod. reading is ἐφύβριστος
ὁ λόγος ; in other words, ἥδ wished to
import into heroic language the conven-
tional mock-modesty of the Alexandrian
Court. The whole meaning of Nestor’s
speech is that he himself is the peer of
better men than those he is advising
(v. Cobet, M. C. p. 229).

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (1) 17

3 4 7 3 4 IQ\ »
ov yap πω τοίους ἴδον ἀνέρας οὐδὲ ἴδωμαι,
οἷον Πειρίθοόν τε Δρύαντά τε ποιμένα λαῶν
Καινέα τ᾽ ᾿Εξάδιόν τε καὶ ἀντίθεον Πολύφημον

[Θησέα τ᾽ Αἰγεΐδην, ἐπιείκελον ἀθανάτοισιν].

265

κάρτιστοι δὴ κεῖνοι ἐπιχθονίων τράφεν ἀνδρῶν"
κάρτιστοι μὲν ἔσαν καὶ καρτίστοις ἐμάχοντο,
φηρσὶν ὀρεσκῴοισι, καὶ ἐκπάγλως ἀπόλεσσαν.
καὶ μὲν τοῖσιν ἐγὼ μεθομίλεον ἐκ Πύλου ἐλθών,

τηλόθεν ἐξ ἀπίης -yains: καλέσαντο γὰρ αὐτοί"

270

, > wv 9 3 N > 4 Ν
καὶ μαχόμην κατ᾽ ἔμ᾽ αὐτὸν ἐγώ" κείνοισι δ᾽ ἂν οὔ τις
τῶν, οἱ νῦν βροτοί εἰσιν ἐπιχθόνιοι, μαχέοιτο.

/ / , ’ ,
καὶ μέν μευ βουλέων ξύνιεν πείθοντὸ τε μύθῳ.
3 \ / Ν) 3 / ν᾽
ἀλλὰ πίθεσθε καὶ ὕμμες, ἐπεὶ πείθεσθαι ἄμεινον.

, ‘ ’ Δ.» / 2\ 3 ’
μήτε σὺ TOVd ἀγαθὸς περ ἐὼν ἀποαίρεο κούρην,

275

ἀλλ᾽ ἔα, ὥς οἱ πρῶτα δόσαν γέρας υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν'
μήτε σύ, Πηλεΐδη, θέλ᾽ ἐριζέμεναι βασιλῆι
ἀντιβίην, ἐπεὶ οὔ ποθ᾽ ὁμοίης ἔμμορε τιμῆς

262. Cf. £ 201, οὐκ ἔσθ᾽ οὗτος ἀνὴρ
διερὸς βροτὸς οὐδὲ γένηται. The sub-
junctive is an emphatic future, see H. G.
§ 276, a.

268. οἷον ΙΠειρίθοον, accus. by attrac-
tion to the case of τοίους, for οἷος ἢν
Πειρίθοος. The names are those of the
chiefs of the Lapithai.

265. This line is quoted by Pausanias
(X 29, 4), and is found added by later
hands in a few MSS. ; it is no doubt the
interpolation of a patriotic Athenian,
from the pseudo-Hesiodean ‘‘ Shield of
Herakles,”’ 182. Theseus is mentioned
again only in A 822, 631, both doubtful
passages ; the latter indeed is expressly
said by tradition to be an interpolation
of Peisistratos—in this case a mere per-
sonification of Athenian patriotism.

268. The fight of the Centaurs and
Lapithai is mentioned at some length in
@ 295-304, and is alluded to in B 743,
where the word φῆρες is again used. It
is no doubt an Aeolic form for θῆρες,
‘‘wild men.” There is no allusion in
Homer to the mixed bodies of the later
legend, and it is very probable that he
conceived them as purely human beings ;
the myth may very likely refer to
ancient struggles with a primitive race
of autochthones. The last half of the
compound ὀρεσκῷοι is possibly connected
with xot-ros (κεῖμαι), and means ‘‘ couch-
ing in the mountains”; or else from

σ

κῶς or κόος = a cave (Hesych.); cf.
«155, alyas ὀρεσκῴους. In that case we
should read ὀρεσκόϊος for -κόξ-ιος.

270. ἀπίης is generally derived from
ἀπό as = “‘distant”; but there is hardly
a Greek analogy for such a formation.
It is used by Aesch., Soph., and others,
as a name of Peloponnesos (ἀπία γῆ),
and may be the same here in spite of the
difference of quantity. For a suggested
etymology see Curtius, ΖΦ. p. 469.

271. κατ᾽ ἔμ’ αὐτὸν, ‘for my own
hand,” as we say ; as a champion acting
independently. Cf. in a slightly differ-
ent sense κατὰ σφέας μαχέονται, B 366.

272. βροτοὶ ἐπιχθόνιοι together form
the predicate.

275. @mwoalpeo; for this syncopated
form (for -péeo) cf. H. G. § 5 (and Fritzsch
in Curt. Stud. vi. 128); so 2202, B 202,
etc.

277. Aristarchus read Πηλείδἤθελ᾽, or,
as we should write it, Πηλείδη ἔθελ᾽, on the

ound that ἐθέλειν is the only Homeric
orm. But it is better to admit the
possibility of a single appearance of a
form so common in later Greek than to
have recourse to an unparalleled synizesis,
rendered the harsher by the slight pause
after Πηλεΐδη. (See H. 6. § 378.)

278. οὐχ ὁμοίης = ‘‘very different ”
by litotes ; cf. E 441; non simili
Aen. 1, 186. It has been objected, with
force, to this line and the.next that they

18 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (Ὁ

σκηπτοῦχος βασιλεύς, ᾧ τε Ζεὺς κῦδος ἔδωκεν.

εἰ δὲ σὺ καρτερός ἐσσι, θεὰ δέ σε γείνατο μήτηρ,

280

ἀλλ᾽ Bde, φέρτερός ἐστιν, ἐπεὶ πλεόνεσσιν ἀνάσσει.
3 \ a a \ , ’ “. 3 ?
Ατρεΐδη, σὺ δὲ παῦε τεὸν μένος" ἀὐτὰρ ἐγώ γε
λίσσομ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλῆι μεθέμεν χόλον, ὃς μέγα πᾶσιν
ἕρκος ᾿Αχαιοῖσιν πέλεται πολέμοιο κακοῖο."

τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων"

285

“ yal δὴ ταῦτά ye πάντα, γέρον, κατὰ μοῖραν ἔειπες.
ἀλλ᾽ ὅδ᾽ ἀνὴρ ἐθέλει περὶ πάντων ἔμμεναι ἄλλων,
πάντων μὲν κρατέειν ἐθέλει, πάντεσσι δ᾽ ἀνάσσειν,
πᾶσι δὲ σημαίνειν, ἅ tw’ οὐ πείσεσθαι ὀίω.

εἰ δέ μιν αἰχμητὴν ἔθεσαν θεοὶ αἰὲν ἐόντες,

290

, sie θέ 3 , ’ 3»
τούνεκά of προθέουσιν ὀνείδεα μυθήσασθαι ;

are a pointless generality here, as
Achilles is just as much a σκηπτοῦχος
βασιλεύς as Agamemnon; the real ground
for his yielding is given by 281.

280. The antithesis of καρτερός and
φέρτερος (‘‘in greater place ”’) is the same
as in 178, 186. The similarity of the
terminations has its effect, though they
are of course different in origin and
meaning as well as accent.

282-4. The connexion of thought in
these three lines is not very clear, and
has given rise to suspicions of interpola-
tion, which do not seem to me Jjustifi-
able. The reiterated entreaty, the almost
pathetic appeal to personal influence, is
entirely in accordance with Nestor’s
character, human nature, and the neces-
sities of the situation, which is not one
where we need demand strict logical
consistency. Nestor, after appealin
equally to both, ends with an especia
prayer to Agamemnon, who is obviously
the offending party. αὐτὰρ ἐγώ γε,
‘“Nay, it is I, Nestor, who ask it.” There
is no antithesis with σὺ δέ, which is
merely the common use of the pronoun
after a vocative ; αὐτάρ is not adversative
except in so far as it marks the transi-
tion to a new line of remonstrance.

283. ᾿Αχιλλῆι may be taken with
χόλον (thine anger with Achilles), or
better, on account of the order of the
words, with μεθέμεν as a sort of ‘‘dat.
commodi,” ‘‘ relax in favour of Achilles.”
Cf. μέθιεν χαλεποῖο χόλοιο Τηλεμάχῳ,
φ 877. μέγα is perhaps an adverb, such
as continually precedes πάντες ; cf. 78,
μέγα πάντων ᾿Αργείων κρατέει, and ἐύ
πάντα, μάλα πάντα; ἅμα πάντα, often.

287-9. The tautological repetitions of
these three lines are very suitable to
unreasoning fury ; they have to do duty
for arguments.

289. σημαίνειν with dat. = to give
orders, as B 806. τινα, ‘‘one,” a gene-
ra] expression in form, though Agamem-
non is of course thinking of himself.
Nagelsbach compares Soph. Ané. 751, 43
οὖν θανεῖται καὶ θανοῦσ᾽ ὀλεῖ τινα (sc. ἐμέ).

29]. προθέουσιν---(ἡ διπλῆ) ὅτε συνήθως
ἑαυτῷ προθέουσι τὰ ὀνείδη, t.e. the plural
verb with the neuter plural is in accord-
ance with the poet’s practice. We are
not told how Ar. explained this difficult
expression. Mr. Monro compares, for
the ‘‘half personified”’ ὀνείδεα, Herod.
vii. 160, ὀνείδεα κατιόντα ἀνθρώπῳ φιλέει
ἐπανάγειν τὸν θυμόν (though the other
passage which he quotes from i. 112
seems to weaken the relevancy of this) ;
and for the use of προθέω, ὦ 319, ἀνὰ
ῥῖνας. . . δριμὺ μένος προὔῦτυψε (where
μένος is rather a physical conception
than a personification, cf. μένος πνείοντες).
He translates ‘‘‘ therefore do his revil-
ings dash forward to be spoken?’ 7.e.
‘is that a reason for this outburst of
abuse ?’” The extreme harshness of this
metaphor has led most recent editors to
regard προθέουσι as another form for
προτιθέασιν, ‘do they set before him,
i.e. put in his mouth, revilings for him
to utter.” This certainly gives a better
sense, but no satisfactory analogy for
the form of the verb has been given
(there is a doubtful ἀνέθει in an Lonic
inscription, C. I. 1195; v. Curtius, Verb.
i, 213). Perhaps Bekker’s suggestion,
προθέωσι, deserves more consideration

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (1) 19

τὸν δ᾽ ap’ ὑποβλήδην ἠμείβετο δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς"
cc CU 4 ὃ / ὶ 3 ὃ Ν /
ἢ γὰρ Kev δειλὸς TE καὶ OUTLOAVOS καλεοίμην,
εἰ δὴ σοὶ πᾶν ἔργον ὑπείξομαι, ὅττι Kev εἴπης"
ἄλλοισιν δὴ ταῦτ᾽ ἐπιτέλλεο, μὴ γὰρ ἐμοί γε 296
[σήμαιν᾽" οὐ γὰρ ἐγώ γ᾽ ἔτι σοι πείσεσθαι ὀίω.}
ἄλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω, σὺ δ᾽ ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῆσιν"
χερσὶ μὲν͵ οὔ τοι ἐγώ γε μαχήσομαι, εἵνεκα, κούρης
Υ \ ,, Ψ' > / > 5 λ 7 /
οὔτε σοὶ οὔτε τῳ ἄλλῳ, ἐπεί μ᾽ ἀφέλεσθέ ye δόντες"
τῶν δ᾽ ἄλλων, ἅ μοι ἔστι θοῇ παρὰ νηὶ μελαίνῃ, 800
τῶν οὐκ ἄν τι φέροις ἀνελὼν ἀέκοντος ἐμεῖο.
3 > ow A / of 4 6
εἰ δ᾽ ἄγε μὴν πείρησαι, iva γνώωσι καὶ οἵδε"
_ αἶψά τοι αἷμα κελαινὸν ἐρωήσει περὶ δουρί."
ὡς τώ γ᾽ ἀντιβίοισι μαχησαμένω ἐπέεσσιν
’ , A 2 9 \ ν. » A .
ἀνστήτην, λῦσαν δ᾽ ἀγορὴν παρὰ νηυσὶν ᾿Αχαιῶν. 305
Πηλεΐδης μὲν ἐπὶ κλισίας καὶ νῆας ἐίσας

than it has received. The subjunctive
might be explained as one of expectation :
‘fare we to look for them to suggest
words of insult.” If this be not accepted,
I see no choice but to regard the passage
as hopelessly corrupted.

292. ὑποβλήδην, interrupting; οἵ.
UBBddAew, T 80: ὑποβαλὼν τὸν ἴδιον λόγον,
Schol. B. Observe that Achilles begins
without the usual formula of address.

294. ὑπείξομαι, future rather than
aor. subj., cf. 61. There is a slight
change of attitude, as so often happens,
after the opt. καλεοίμην : what Achilles
in 293 conceives only as a supposition
he here vividly realizes as an admitted
fact (this is of course the same, however
we take ὑπείξομαι).

295. (ἡ διπλῇ) ὅτι κοινὸν τὸ ἐπιτέλλεο
καὶ ὁ γὰρ περισσός. οὕτως δὲ γίνεται περισ-
σὸς ὁ ἑξῆς " διὸ ἀθετεῖται, Ariston. (emended
by Cobet). Je. Ar. obelized 296 on
the ground that σήμαινε had been added
in order to supply a verb which was
wrongly supposed to be required by the
second clause of 295. This is a fertile
source of interpolation of whole lines ;
e.g. 2 558, ® 570. For the use of μή
without a finite verb see the instructive
remarks of Lange, EI, p. 468, where for
γάρ he compares at γάρ in wishes.

298. χερσὶ μέν, as though he meant to
continue, ‘‘ but by abstention from war
I will.” But in 300 the course of thought
is changed, and τῶν ἄλλων is made the
antithesis to κούρης.

299. ἀφέλεσθέ ye δόντες : Achilles re-

cognizes that the γέρας is a free gift, not a
matter of right, like the share of the spoil.

302. εἰ δ᾽ dye; here, as in its other
uses, εἰ is what Lange callsan “‘adhibitive”’
particle as opposed to the ‘‘ prohibitive ”
μή; it may be compared to our familiar
‘look here”; the speaker appropriates
to himself the thought which he expresses
—whether wish, supposition, or, as here,
command, just as by μή he rejects it.
Cf. 1 46, ef δὲ φευγόντων. Any ellipse (as
el βούλει) is totally inadmissible.

303. épwhoe only in this line (=z
441) means “‘ flow,” and cannot be sepa-
rated from root sru. The connexion of
this with the usual sense, to hang back,
and of both with the subst. ἐρωή, is very
obscure.

306. éloas, a form found only in the
fem. with cases of νηῦς, ἀσπίς, dals; in
Od. only φρένας, and once besides B 765.
In the last passage it clearly means ἴσας,
but in the other cases this is by no
means certain. ἀσπὶς πάντοσ᾽ élon is
explained as ‘‘having the rim always
at an equal distance From the centre” ;
which seems a geometrical rather than
a Homeric phrase for ‘‘round.” So
with dals it cannot always mean ‘‘ equal,”’
but at most ‘‘ well-proportioned ” ; see on
H 320. Of ships it is commonly explained
“‘equal on both sides,” symmetrical ; but
here we should expect ἀμφί to be added.
But no certain explanation has been given.
Hesych. has εἶσον * ἀγαθόν, but this may
only be deduced from the considerations
already given. Ahrens would derive it

90 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (Ὁ

ἤιε σύν τε Μενοιτιάδῃ καὶ οἷς ἑτάροισιν,
᾿Ατρεΐδης δ᾽ ἄρα νῆα θοὴν ἅλαδε προέρυσσεν,
? > > 2 » ? ? > ς /
ἐν δ᾽ ἐρέτας ἔκρινεν ἐείκοσιν, ἐς δ᾽ ἑκατόμβην

βῆσε θεῷ, ἀνὰ δὲ Χρυσηίδα καλλιπάρῃον

910

eloev ἄγων" ἐν δ᾽ ἀρχὸς ἔβη πολύμητις ᾿Οδυσσεύς.
οἱ μὲν ἔπειτ᾽ ἀναβάντες ἐπέπλεον ὑγρὰ κέλευθα,

λαοὺς δ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδης ἀπολυμαίνεσθαι ἄνωγεν.

οἱ δ᾽ ἀπελυμαίνοντο καὶ εἰς ἅλα λύματ᾽ ἔβαλλον,

ἔρδον δ᾽ ᾿Απόλλωνι τεληέσσας ἑκατόμβας

315

ταύρων ἠδ᾽ αἰγῶν παρὰ θῖν᾽ ἁλὸς ἀτρυγέτοιο"
κνίση δ᾽ οὐρανὸν ἧκεν ἑλισσομένη περὶ καπνῷ.

φ. e \ \ / / 9 ὦ) "A

ὧς οἱ μὲν τὰ πένοντο κατὰ στρατόν" οὐδ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνων
Any ἔριδος, τὴν πρῶτον ἐπηπείλησ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆι,

ἀλλ᾽ ὅ ye Ταλθύβιόν τε καὶ Εὐρυβάτην προσέειπεν,

320

τώ οἱ ἔσαν κήρυκε Kal ὀτρηρὼ θεράποντε"
“ ἔρχεσθον κλισίην Ἰ]ηληιάδεω ᾿Αχιλῆος"
χειρὸς ἑλόντ᾽ ἀγέμεν Βρισηίδα καλλιπάρῃον"
εἰ δέ κε μὴ δώῃσιν, ἐγὼ δέ κεν αὐτὸς ἕλωμαι

ἐλθὼν σὺν πλεόνεσσι" τό οἱ καὶ ῥίγιον ἔσται.᾽"

$25

ὧς εἰπὼν προΐει, κρατερὸν δ᾽ ἐπὶ μῦθον ἔτελλεν.
τὼ δ᾽ ἀέκοντε βάτην παρὰ θῖν᾽ ἁλὸς ἀτρυγέτοιο,
Μυρμιδόνων δ᾽ ἐπί τε κλισίας καὶ νῆας ἱκέσθην.
τὸν δ᾽ εὗρον παρά τε κλισίῃ καὶ νηὶ μελαίνῃ

ἥμενον" οὐδ᾽ ἄρα τώ γε ἰδὼν γήθησεν ᾿Αχιλλεύς.

880

from root Fix, for ἐΐσση, ‘‘seemly” ; the
form ἔισσος exists in Doric. Gobel and
others refer it to Fc, ‘‘conspicuous, splen-
did” ; but this sense can hardly be got
from a root which means ‘‘to discern.”
In this uncertainty it is perhaps best
to adhere to the traditional connexion
with ἴσος (FicFos, Curt. Et. no. 569).
307. The story of Troy is regarded as
familiar, even apart from the lliad ; for
Patroklos, like Agamemnon in 1]. 7, is
first introduced by his patronymic alone.
314. Perhaps the Greeks had abstained
from ablution during the plague in sign
of mourning, and now typically threw
off their sin, the restitution having been
made. εἰς ἅλα, because θάλασσα κλύζει
πάντα τἀνθρώπων κακὰ (Eur. 1. 7’. 1193).
λύματα, defilement, as in & 170 (“Hp»),
ἀπὸ χροὸς ἱμερόεντος λύματα πάντα κάθηρεν.
Thus it is meant that they washed in the
sea, not that they washed on land and

threw the defiled water into the sea. Cf.
καθάρματα in Aesch. Cho. 98. &

an aor. form, as E 805. Some would
write ἀνώγει in order that, as a pluper-
fect, it might come under the analogy of
the common form ἄνωγα. But the aor.
form is guaranteed by an interesting in-
scription in the Cyprian dialect (Collitz,
Ῥ. 29). Cf. H. 6. § 27.

317. περὶ καπνῷ, for περὶ meaning tn-
side, cf. X 95, of a snake, ἑλισσόμενος
περὶ χειῇ, and II 157 περὶ φρεσὶν ἄσπετος
ἀλκή.

320. Both these names are legendary
names of heralds generally ; for
hereditary heralds of Sparta were called
Talthybiadae, and Eurybates is the
herald also of Odysseus, B 184.

325. ῥίγιον, a comparative (cf. plywra,
E 873) formed directly from the substant-
ive piyos, cf. κύντερος, ἐχθίων, κύδιστος,
κέρδιον.

ΙΔΙΑΔΟΣ A (Ὁ) 21

τὼ μὲν ταρβήσαντε καὶ αἰδομένω βασιλῆα
στήτην, οὐδέ τί μιν προσεφώνεον οὐδ᾽ ἐρέοντο"
αὐτὰρ ὁ ἔγνω ἧσιν ἐνὶ φρεσὶ φώνησέν τε"

“ χαίρετε, κήρυκες, Διὸς ἄγγελοι ἠδὲ καὶ ἀνδρῶν"

ἄσσον ἴτ᾽" οὔ τί μοι dupes ἐπαίτιοι, ἀ;

᾿Αγαμέμνων, 835

ὃ σφῶι προΐει Βρισηίδος εἵνεκα κούρης.
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε, διογενὲς Πατρόκλεις, ἔξαγε κούρην

καί σφωιν δὸς ἄγειν.

τὼ δ᾽ αὐτὼ μάρτυροι ἔστων

πρός τε θεῶν μακάρων πρός τε θνητῶν ἀνθρώπων

καὶ πρὸς τοῦ βασιλῆος ἀπηνέος, εἴ ποτε δὴ αὖτε

χρειὼ ἐμεῖο γένηται ἀεικέα λοιγὸν ἀμῦναι

τοῖς ἄλλοις.

ἢ γὰρ ὅ γ᾽ ὀλοιῇσι φρεσὶ θύει,

οὐδέ τι οἷδε νοῆσαι ἅμα πρόσσω καὶ ὀπίσσω,
ὅππως οἱ παρὰ νηυσὶ σόοι μαχεοίατ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοί."

ὡς φάτο, Πάτροκλος δὲ φίλῳ ἐπεπείθεθ᾽ ἑταίρῳ,

Ξ
δι

I

ἐκ δ᾽ ἄγαγε κλισίης Βρισηίδα καλλιπάρῃον,

δῶκε δ᾽ ἄγειν.

τὼ δ᾽ αὖτις ἴτην παρὰ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν,
ἡ δ᾽ ἀέκουσ᾽ ἅμα τοῖσι γυνὴ κίεν.

αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς

δακρύσας ἑτάρων ἄφαρ ἕζετο νόσφι λιασθεὶς

θῖν ἔφ᾽ ἁλὸς πολιῆς, ὁρόων ἐπὶ οἴνοπα πόντον"

850

381. ταρβήσαντε, the aor. seems to
mean “ with’ alarm” at his look
(δεινὸς ἀνήρ - τάχα κεν καὶ ἀναίτιον αἰτιό-
ro, Patroklos says, A 654); while the
pres. αἰδομένω implies their’ permanent
Tespect. For the juxtaposition of the two
ideas compare the favourite δεινὸς αἰδοῖός

τε.
884. Διὸς & cf. © 517, κήρυκες
διίφιλοι. The herald has no connexion
with Hermes till post-Homeric times.
886. For the difference between σφῶν
and σφωιν (338) see on 1. 8; H. G.§ 103.
890, πρός, before the face of} the phrase
occurs occasionally in later Greek, e.g.
Ken. Anab, i. 6, 6, βουλευόμενος 5 τι
δικαιόν ἐστι καὶ πρὸς θεῶν καὶ πρὸς ἀνθρώ-
πων. Hence the use in oaths and en-
treaties, πρὸς πατρὸς γουνάζομαι, ete. It
seems to be derived from the purely local
sense, as in πρὸς adds, ‘in the direction
of the sea”; πρὸς Διὸς εἰρύαται, 289, 9.v.:
of. Z 456. 4 him th
340, τοῦ βασιλῆος ἀπηνέος, him the
king untoward. The order of the words
shews that τοῦ is not the article. ἀπη-
vfs, lit. with averted face (cf. Skt. dna=
mouth, face; πρηνής, tarfyn=that which
is under the mouth), of one who turns

προσηνής. ἄ ποτε δὴ αὖτε is the reading
recommended by analogy ; MSS. 8’ αὖτε,
but there is no place here for δέ. See
note on 540, and H. G. § 350. αὖτε,
hereafter, 88 in E 232, H 80, ete.

343. ‘To look before and after” is,
as in Hamlet, the prerogative of reason,
which argues from the past to the future.

344. ὅππωξ, here an adv. of manner,
“how his men might fight,” clearly
shewing th transition to the final use.
μαχεοίατ᾽ is a conj. (Barnes) for μαχέ-
ow7o of MSS., which is intolerable both
because of the hiatus in this place, and
because the form -owro nowhere elseoccurs
in Homer. Porson conj. μαχέωνται, Bok-
ker μαχέονται (fut. indic., B 366); but
the opt. is better, as removi g the idea
from the region of assertion (indic.) or ex-
pectation (subj.) to that of imagination.

350. ἐπὶ οἴνοπα, so MSS.; Ar. ἐπ’
ἀπείρονα, perhaps ‘on tho ground that
οἴνοπα is inconsistent with πολιῆς. But,
if the epithets are to be pressed, it might
be urged that there is very vivid truth
in the contrast of the “purple deep”
with the greenish gray of the shallow
water near the shore, which is almost

away from the ae apposed. to

99 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (1)

πολλὰ δὲ μητρὶ φίλῃ ἠρήσατο χεῖρας ὀρεγνύς"
“μῆτερ, ἐπεί μ᾽ ἔτεκές γε μινυνθάδιόν περ ἐόντα,
τιμήν πέρ μοι ὄφελλεν Ὀλύμπιος ἐγγναλίξαι
Ζεὺς ὑψιβρεμέτης" νῦν δ᾽ οὐδέ με τυτθὸν ἔτισεν.

ἢ γάρ μ᾽’ ᾿Ατρεΐδης εὐρὺ κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων

355

ἠτίμησεν" ἑλὼν yap ἔχει γέρας, αὐτὸς ἀπούρας."
ὧς φάτο δάκρυ χέων, τοῦ δ᾽ ἔκλυε πότνια μήτηρ

ἡμένη ἐν βένθεσσιν ἁλὸς παρὰ πατρὶ γέροντι.

καρπαλίμως δ᾽ ἀνέδυ πολιῆς ἁλὸς ἠύτ᾽ ὀμίχλη,

καί pa πάροιθ᾽ αὐτοῖο καθέζετο δάκρυ χέοντος,

960

χειρί τέ μιν κατέρεξεν, ἔπος 7 ἔφατ᾽ ἔκ τ᾽ ὀνόμαξεν"
“τέκνον, τί κλαίεις; τί δέ σε φρένας ἵκετο πένθος;
ἐξαύδα, μὴ κεῦθε νόῳ, ἵνα εἴδομεν ἄμφω."

τὴν δὲ βαρὺ στενάχων προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς"

, ry ’ὔ 9 [4
“ οἶσθα" τί ἦ τοι ταῦτα ἰδυίῃ πάντ᾽ ἀγορεύω;

865

ὠχόμεθ᾽ ἐς Θήβην, ἱερὴν πόλιν ᾿Ηετίωνος,
\ \ 4 / \ ΝΥΝ 3 lA 4
τὴν δὲ διεπράθομέν τε καὶ ἤγομεν ἐνθάδε πάντα.

always the meaning of ἅλς. Φ 59 is al-
most the only exception. Ameis thinks
that the ‘‘infinite” sea intensifies the
feeling of despair and desolation —a
German rather than a Greek idea.

352. The ye and περ seem to indicate
a change in the thought while it is being
uttered. There is a contrast between
ἔτεκες and μινυνθάδιον, as though Achilles
meant, ‘‘it was you that gave me life,
short though that life may be”; and
μινυνθάδιον is then marked by περ as the
emphatic word for what follows, the
claim which he has upon Zeus. Or we
may take érexes as involving the claim,
the divinity of his mother being under-
stood: ‘‘since you, a goddess, Pore me,
the gods should have dealt better by
me.” Perhaps there is a mixture of
both. In the first case rep must mean
‘‘very,” without involving the idea of
‘‘ although.”

353. Here wep =at all events: ‘‘my
life being short should at least be glori-
ous.” ὄφελλεν = Gere, not to be con-
fused with the quite distinct ὀφέλλω =
augeo.

356. αὐτός, by his own arbitrary
will, not in the name of justice.
ἀπούρας = dwé-Fpa-s, root var (Lat.
verrere 3), from ἀπ-αυράω, cf. ἀπο-έρσειε,
© 283, 329 (Curt. Ht. no. 497, ὃ.)

358. The πατὴρ γέρων or ἅλιος γέρων
is known to later mythology as Nereus,

but is never named in Homer. (In 6
Proteus also is called ἅλιος γέρων.) The
nymphs are named Νηρηΐδες only in a
passage of doubtful authenticity, Z 38-52.

361. κατέρεξε, stroked, so E 424,
kappéfovoa. This can hardly be con-
nected with the ordinary sense of
(F)pé{w ; Autenrieth refers it to root reg
of 6-pé-y-w.

366-392 were condemned by Ar. as
superfluous, and contradictory of 365.
The real objection is, of course, that they
are not required, at least from 368, for
the sake of the hearer. For Θήβη see
Z 397, B 691.

It is difficult to say whether ἱερός as
applied to cities retains the primitive
meaning of strong (Skt. ishiras for tsaras,
answering to Gk. dapés). It seems to
have this sense in II 407, ἱερὸς ἰχθύς 3
but all the derivatives, ἱερεύς, ἱερήιδν,
etc., involve only the idea of ‘‘ sacred.”
Whatever, therefore, the origin of the
epithet in these cases may have been, it
can hardly have suggested the primitive
meaning in Epic times; the secondary
sense probably seemed natural from the
fact that every town was undey the
patronage of some god—a relic no doubt
of the feeling that such settlements were
a departure from the normal pastoral
life, and required a special sanction to
make them possible.

367. ἤγομεν is properly used of living

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A () 23

‘\ \ \ Φ 7 Ν / 3 A
καὶ τὰ μὲν εὖ δάσσαντο μετὰ σφίσιν vies ᾿Αχαιῶν,
ἐκ δ᾽ ἕλον ᾿Ατρεΐδῃ Χρυσηίδα καλλιπάρῃον.

Χρύσης δ᾽ αὖθ᾽ ἱερεὺς ἑκατηβόλου ᾿Απόλλωνος

870

ἦλθε θοὰς ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων

λυσόμενός τε θύγατρα φέρων τ᾽ ἀπερείσι᾽ ἄποινα,

στέμματ᾽ ἔχων ἐν χερσὶν ἑκηβόλου ᾿Απόλλωνος

χρυσέῳ ἀνὰ σκήπτρῳ, καὶ λίσσετο πάντας ᾿Αχαιούς,
᾿Ατρεΐδα δὲ μάλιστα δύω, κοσμήτορε λαῶν. 375
ἔνθ᾽ ἄλλοι μὲν πάντες ἐπευφήμησαν ᾿Αχαιοὶ

αἰδεῖσθαί θ᾽ ἱερῆα καὶ ἀγλαὰ δέχθαι ἄποινα"

ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ᾿Ατρεΐδῃ ᾿Αγαμέμνονι ἥνδανε θυμῷ,

ἀλλὰ κακῶς ἀφίει, κρατερὸν δ᾽ ἐπὶ μῦθον ἔτελλεν.

χωόμενος δ᾽ ὁ γέρων πάλιν ᾧχετο" τοῖο δ᾽ ᾿Απόλλων

880

εὐξαμένου ἤκουσεν, ἐπεὶ μάλα οἱ φίλος ἦεν,
ἧκε δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ᾿Αργείοισι κακὸν βέλος" οἱ δέ νυ aol
θνῆσκον ἐπασσύτεροι, τὰ δ᾽ ἐπῴχετο κῆλα θεοῖο

4 > \ > A 3 A
πάντῃ ava στρατὸν εὐρὺν ᾿Αχαιῶν.

ἄμμι δὲ μάντις

εὖ εἰδὼς ἀγόρευε θεοπροπίας ἑκάτοιο. 885
> 7 9 9 A A / νι ὦ

αὐτίκ᾽ ἐγὼ πρῶτος κελόμην θεὸν ἱλάσκεσθαι"

᾿Ατρεΐωνα δ᾽ ἔπειτα χόλος λάβεν, αἶψα δ᾽ ἀναστὰς

3 σι ’ 3 /

ἠπείλησεν μῦθον, ὃ δὴ τετελεσμένος ἐστίν.
A A A a 6 / 3

τὴν μὲν γὰρ σὺν νηὶ θοῇ ἑλίκωπες ᾽Αχαιοὶ

3 4 / bd \ “a v
és Χρύσην πέμπουσιν, ἄγουσι δὲ δῶρα ἄνακτι"

390

τὴν δὲ νέον κλισίηθεν ἔβαν κήρυκες ἄγοντες

κούρην Βρισῆος, τήν μοι δόσαν υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν.
3 ᾽ 3 4 7 Ν ca
ἀλλὰ σύ, εἰ δύνασαί ye, περίσχεο παιδὸς ἑοῖο

things; here, in spite of the neuter
πάντα, Achilles is thinking mainly of
the captives.

372-379 are verbatim from 12-25.

383. ἐπασσύτεροι, the Alexandrian
derivation from ἄγχι is no doubt correct :
it means ‘‘close upon one another”; cf.
ἀσσοτέρω as compar., p 572, 7 506. The
υ is called Aeolic.

385. ἑκάτοιο, a short and almost
familiar form (Kosename) for ἑκατηβόλος.
Fick has shewn that this method of
shortening is one which has very largel
prevailed in the formation of Gree
proper names.

388. The rhythm—a single word of
two spondees filling the first foot—is
almost unique in Homer, and seems to
give the effect of weighty displeasure.

393. ἑοῖο, so four MSS., with Zenod:

Ar. and most MSS. give ἐῆος. This
form is supposed to come from évs or
hus, ‘‘brave”; Ar. denying that éés
could be used of any person but the
third. Brugman, however, has shewn
(Ein Problem der Hom. Textkritik) that
the pronominal stem sva was originally
applicable to all persons and numbers,
the adjectival form meaning no more
than ‘‘own”—in this case ‘‘thine own.”
That this was the original reading here
and in a number of similar cases seems
almost certain, from the fact that we
never find éjos, but always ἑοῖο, in those
lines where the reference is to the third
person ; which would be a curious co-
incidence if ἐῆος was the original word,
as it is obviously equally applicable in
all cases. It is also certain that the
Alexandrine poets (Ap. Rhodius, etc.)

94 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (1)

ἐλθοῦσ᾽ Οὐλυμπόνδε Δία Aloat, εἴ ποτε δή τι

ἢ ἔπει ὥνησας κραδίην Διὸς ἠὲ καὶ ἔργῳ.

395

πολλάκι γάρ σεο πατρὸς ἐνὶ μεγάροισιν ἄκουσα
εὐχομένης, ὅτ᾽ ἔφησθα κελαινεφέι Κρονίωνι

οἴη ἐν ἀθανάτοισιν ἀεικέα λουγὸν ἀμῦναι,
ὁππότε μιν ξυνδῆσαι ᾿Ολύμπιοι ἤθελον ἄλλοι,

“Hon τ᾽ ἠδὲ Ποσειδάων καὶ Παλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη.

400

ἀλλὰ σὺ τόν γ᾽ ἐλθοῦσα, θεά, ὑπελύσαο δεσμῶν,
ὦχ᾽ ἑκατόγχειρον καλέσασ᾽ ἐς μακρὸν "᾽Ολυμπον,
ὃν Βριάρεων καλέουσι θεοί, ἄνδρες δέ τε πάντες
Αἰγαίων᾽" ὁ γὰρ atre βίῃ οὗ πατρὸς ἀμείνων"

ὅς ῥα παρὰ Κρονίωνι καθέξετο κύδεϊ γαίων"

found various forms of the stem sva
applied to other persons than the third,
as they continually use them so in their
imitative poetry. Brugman thinks that
éjos was introduced by Ar. from the
false analogy of & 505, o 450, where it
means ‘‘a lord” ; from ἑεύς ΞΞ ἐσεύς (Lat.
erus for esus?) (See for the opposite
view, H. G. pp. 174-5. The passages
where ‘‘éjos is found for ἑοῖο, meaning
his own” there quoted— 11, Σ 71, 188—
must be an oversight ; in the first case
éjos is not, according to La Roche’s
Apparatus criticus, found in a single
MS.; in the other two it is given only
by a small minority of the worst).

396. σέο must go with ἄκουσα. πατρός
= my father’s (Peleus’). Zenod. athetized
896-406, probably on the ground that it
was superfluous for Achilles to tell his
mother what she had done. But here
of course the enlightenment of the
reader is sufficient justification.

400. As the Scholiast remarks, these
three divinities were the allies of the
Greeks, which would be a strong argu-
ment for Thetis’ prayer for help to the
Trojans. For Παλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη Zenod.
read Φοῖβος ᾿Απολλών, which, as Ariston.
remarks, ἀφαιρεῖται τὸ πιθανόν, spoils the
effectiveness of the appeal.

403. The other instances in Homer
of double names in the language of men
and gods are B 813, τὴν δ᾽ ἤτοι ἄνδρες
Βατίειαν κικλήσκουσιν, ἀθάνατοι δέ τε σῆμα
πολυσκάρθμοιο Μυρίνης : & 291, ὄρνιθι,
ἥν τ᾽ ἐν ὄρεσσιν χαλκίδα κικλήσκουσι θεοί,
ἄνδρες δὲ κύμινδιν : T 74, Ξάνθον μὲν κα-
λέουσι θεοί, ἄνδρες δὲ Σκάμανδρον. Cf.
κ 305, μῶλυ δέ μιν καλέουσι θεοί : μ᾽ 6],
Πλαγκτὰς δ᾽ ἥ τοι τάς γε θεοὶ μάκαρες

405

καλέουσι. The natural supposition
would be that the ‘‘divine” words are
archaic survivals, perhaps from an older
race. It is sometimes said that the ©
divine name has usually a clearer mean-
ing than the human, which might seem
to overthrow such a supposition. But
this is only the case with the χαλκές and
κύμινδις, and possibly Ξάνθος and Σκάμα»-
dpos, which fowever look like different
renderings of the same foreign word.
μῶλυ is not a Greek form, nor is the
theory borne out by isolated instances else-
where, 6.0. Diog. Laert. i. 11, 6, ἔλεγεν
(ὁ Φερεκύδης) ὅτι οἱ θεοὶ τὴν τράπεζαν '
θνωρὸν καλοῦσιν. Again the Pelasgian
Hermes was called “IuSpos; compare
with this the statement of Steph. Byzant.,
Ἑρμοῦ, ὃν Ἴμβρον λέγουσι μάκαρες. Both
Βριάρεως and Αἰγαίων may be equally
referred to Greek roots (Spe of βριαρός,
βριθύς, and alyis, cf. Αἰγαῖον πελαγΎοΞ).
The father of Briareus was, accordi
to the legend, Poseidon, who him
was sometimes called Alyalwy or Alyafos.
Zenod. read here ὁ γὰρ αὖτε Bly πολὺ
φέρτατος ἦεν τῶν ὁπόσοι (so Bentley, MS,
φέρτατος ἁπάντων ὁππόσοι) ναίουσ᾽ ὑπὸ
τάρταρον εὐρώεντα. The legend is one of
a number referring to revolts against the
Olympian gods, as of the Titans, Prome-
theus, etc. adre, ‘‘again” ; as Poseidon,
in union with the other gods, was stronger
than Zeus, so his son again was stronger
than he. For Bly Ar. read βίην.

405. γαίων occurs only in this phrase,
E 906 of Ares, Θ 51 and A 81 of Zeus,
The line in E was rejected by Ar. on the
ground that Ares could hardly be said
to “‘rejoice in his glory” immediate]
after his ignominious defeat by a mortal,

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (Ὁ) 25

Ν \ e 4 U \ 3 7 > νΝ
τὸν καὶ ὑπέδεισαν μάκαρες θεοὶ οὐδέ T ἔδησαν.
τῶν νῦν μιν μνήσασα παρέζεο καὶ λαβὲ γούνων,
Ν / 54 ἢ 3 4 > A
αἴ κέν πως ἐθέλῃσιν ἐπὶ Τρώεσσιν ἀρῆξαι,
τοὺς δὲ κατὰ πρύμνας τε καὶ aud’ ἅλα ἔλσαι ᾿Αχαιοὺς
κτεινομένους, ἵνα πάντες ἐπαύρωνται βασιλῆος, 410
A \ \ 9? A > \ 3 7
γνῷ δὲ καὶ ᾿Ατρεΐδης εὐρὺ κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων

ΝΜ [χὰ > Ww > “A Or μὴ 3)
ἣν ἄτην, ὅ τ᾽ ἄριστον ᾿Αχαιῶν οὐδὲν ἔτισεν.

---

τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα Θέτις κατὰ δάκρυ χέουσα"
“ ὦ μοι, τέκνον ἐμόν, τί νύ σ᾽ ἔτρεφον αἰνὰ τεκοῦσα;
αἴθ᾽ ὄφελες παρὰ νηυσὶν ἀδάκρυτος καὶ ἀπήμων 415
ἧσθαι, ἐπεί νύ τοι αἶσα μίνυνθά περ, ov Te μάλα δήν"
νῦν δ᾽ ἅμα τ᾽ ὠκύμορος καὶ ὀιζυρὸς περὶ πάντων
ἔπλεο" τῶ σε κακῇ αἴσῃ τέκον ἐν μεγάροισιν.
τοῦτο δέ τοι ἐρέουσα ἔπος Διὶ τερπικεραύνῳ
εἶμ᾽ αὐτὴ πρὸς "Ολυμπον ἀγάννιφον, αἴ κε πίθηται. 420
ἀλλὰ ov μὲν viv νηυσὶ παρήμενος ὠκυπύροισιν
pnve ᾿Αχαιοῖσιν, πολέμου δ᾽ ἀποπαύεο πάμπαν"
Ζεὺς γὰρ ἐς ᾿Ωκεανὸν μετ’ ἀμύμονας Αἰθιοπῆας

But Hentze suggests that κῦδος may refer
rather to the outward splendour of a
divinity (cf. κυδαίνω, E 448), so that the
phrase means ‘‘ brilliant with splendour.”
“γαίων is then to be connected with γάνος.

406. οὐδέ τ᾽ ἔδησαν, perhaps for οὐδέ
F ἔδησαν. For the loss of F’=é, him,
ef. 0 164.

409. ἀμφ᾽ ἅλα, round the bay, where
the ships were drawn up. Fédca:, from
εἴλω, Curt. Et. no. 660. κατά, as ᾧ 225,
Τρῶας ἔἕλσαι κατὰ ἄστυ, “in the region of”
the sterns, which were drawn up towards
the land.

410. ἐπαύρωνται is generally taken to

be ironical, ‘‘that they may have
profit of the king.” Buttman how-
ever shows (Lezil. s.v.) that it is a neut-
ral word, not necessarily implying profit,
but meaning rather ‘‘that they may
have experience of their king?’—may get
what they shall get. The Attic ἐπαυρεῖν
means simply ‘‘ to reach, attain.”

412. The Homeric idea of ἄτη is best
explained by Agamemnon himself in T
85-114. Nauck would restore the old
form d(F)drn to Homer throughout (cf.
Pind. αὐάτη) ; but this is impossible in
T 88, 0 28; and the contracted forms of
the verb ἄσατο T 95, ave d 61, are opposed
toit. 8 τ᾽ =8r τε, see H. G. 8 269 (3).

414. alvd, adv., ‘‘cursed in my child-

bearing,” the same idea as κακῇ aloy in
418. ,

416, The omission of the substantive
verb with an adverb is perhaps unique.
For the use of adverbs with elul see Z
131 δὴν ἦν, H 424 διαγνῶναι χαλεπῶς Fr,
I 551 Κουρήτεσσι κακῶς jv, and cf. A 466,
plyvOa δέ οἱ γένεθ᾽ ὁρμή.

418. κακῇ αἴσῃ must have the same
sense as aloa above, and therefore mean
“to an evil fate”; cf. X 477 in ἄρα γεινό-
μεθ᾽ αἴσῃ, H 218 προκαλέσσατο χάρμῃ,
and perhaps II 203 χόλῳ ἄρα σ᾽ ἔτρεφε
μήτηρ. α is one of the Homeric
words which the Cyprian inscriptions
have shown us yet alive in the primitive
sense of measure ; τῶ Διὸς τῷ Folvw αἷσα
ἔτι ¥ χόες (Collitz, no. 73). τῶ, not τῷ,
is the reading of A in all passages where
it means ‘‘therefore”; and with this
grammatical tradition agrees. It seems
to be a genuine relic of the old instru-
mental ; compare πω with πως, and per-
haps οὕτω with οὕτως.

423. For the theories which have been
founded on the absence of the gods here
as compared with 222, see the Introduc-
tion. For the journey of the gods to the
Aethiopians, compare a 22-26, where
Poseidon alone is entertained by them.
They dwell on the extreme limits of the
world, on the stream of Ocean.

26 IAIAAOZ A (1)

χθιζὸς ἔβη κατὰ δαῖτα, θεοὶ δ᾽ ἅμα πάντες ἕποντο"

δωδεκάτῃ δέ τοι αὗτις ἐλεύσεται Οὐλυμπόνδε,

/ \ n
καὶ τότ᾽ ἔπειτά τοι εἶμι Διὸς ποτὶ χαλκοβατὲς δῶ,
43
καί μιν γουνάσομαι, καί μιν πείσεσθαι ὀίω.
Φ wv / > 9 4 ‘ A f_9 9 a
ὧς dpa φωνήσασ᾽ ἀπεβήσετο, Tov δὲ λίπ᾽ αὐτοῦ
4 ’
χωόμενον κατὰ θυμὸν ἐυξώνοιο γυναικὸς,

, ς lj 97 3 ΙΑ
τήν pa βίῃ ἀέκοντος ἀπηύρων.

αὐτὰρ ᾿Οδυσσεὺς 430

3 Ὰ (rd wv ς A e /
és Χρύσην ἵκανεν ἄγων ἱερὴν ἑκατόμβην.

4
οἱ δ᾽ ὅτε δὴ λιμένος πολυβενθέος ἐντὸς ἵκοντο,

/

ἱστία μὲν στείλαντο, θέσαν δ᾽ ἐν νηὶ μελαίνῃ,
e Ν 35 ἐ ’ lk , e ’
ἱστὸν δ᾽ ἱστοδόκῃ πέλασαν προτόνοισιν ὑφέντες

4 \ » 3 [τ 4 9 a
καρπαλίμως, THY δ᾽ εἰς ὅρμον προέρεσσαν ἐρετμοῖς.

485

ἐκ δ᾽ εὐνὰς ἔβαλον, κατὰ δὲ πρυμνήσι᾽ ἔδησαν"
ἐκ δὲ καὶ αὐτοὶ βαῖνον ἐπὶ ῥηγμῖνι θαλάσσης,
ἐκ δ᾽ ἑκατόμβην βῆσαν ἑκηβόλῳ ᾿Απόλλωνι" "
ἐκ δὲ Χρυσηὶς νηὸς βῆ ποντοπόροιο.

τὴν μὲν ἔπειτ᾽ ἐπὶ βωμὸν ἄγων πολύμητις ᾿Οδυσσεὺς

440

πατρὶ φίλῳ ἐν χερσὶ τίθει, καί μιν προσέειπεν"

“ᾧ Χρύση, πρό μ᾽ ἔπεμψεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων
παῖδά τε σοὶ ἀγέμεν Φοίβῳ θ᾽ ἱερὴν ἑκατόμβην

ῥέξαι ὑπὲρ Δαναῶν, ὄφρ᾽ ἱλασόμεσθα ἄνακτα,

le , a 33
ὃς νῦν ᾿Αργείοισι πολύστονα κήδε᾽ ἐφῆκεν.

445

as εἰπὼν ἐν χερσὶ τίθει, ὁ δὲ δέξατο χαίρων

παῖδα φίλην.

τοὶ δ᾽ ὦκα θεῷ ἱερὴν ἑκατόμβην

424, κατά Ar., μετά MSS. κατά
means ‘‘in the matter of a banquet,”
cf. H. 6. 8 212 (3); μετά would be ‘‘ to
look for” a banquet, which is a some-
what undignified expression as used of a
god. For ἕποντο Ar. read ἕπονται,
apparently meaning ‘‘are following him
to day.” But ἕπεσθαι in Greek always
means ‘*to accompany,” or some imme-
diately related notion. It never means
**to follow” at an interval.

430. On the question of the genuine-
ness of this episode (to 489) see Intro-
duction. βίῃ ἀέκοντος seems to be a
pleonastic expression, ‘‘in spite of him
unwilling.” We cannot construe ἀέκοντος
with ἀπηύρων, as verbs of robbing take
a double acc.

432. For ἐντός Ar. read ἐγγύς, but
this is not neccessary, as ὅρμον in 435 is
the mooring-place inside the harbour,
and is not identical with λιμήν, as he
probably considered.

433. στείλαντο, the mid. may mean
‘*furled their sails,” but in this sense it
occurs only here. στεῖλάν re has been
conjectured.

434. The ἱστοδόκη was a crutch, a
forked piece of wood at the stern of the
ship, into which the mast was lowered
by slackening the forestays. See the
diagram and Excursus in Merry and
Riddle’s Odyssey, pp. 541-8.

435. προέρεσσαν Ar., with three old
editions (ἡ ᾿Αργολικὴ καὶ ἡ Σινωπικὴ καὶ
ἡ Σωσιγένου:) ; MSS. προέρυσσαν, which
is clearly wrong.

436. The edval are heavy stones with
hawsers thrown out to moor the bows of
the ship, while the stern is secured by
the stern ropes (πρυμνήσια) to moorings
on shore, probably to a stone with a
ole set up for the purpose (τρητὸς λίθος,
v 77).

438. This is the only case in Homer
where the F of FexnBé)os is neglected.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (1) 27

e , ” 97 Ἢ '
ἑξείης ἔστησαν ἐύδμητον περὶ βωμόν,
/ > WM \ > , 3 4

χερνίψαντο δ᾽ ἔπειτα καὶ οὐλοχύτας ἀνέλοντο.

a \ , 4x3 ΝΜ a > 4
τοῖσιν δὲ Χρύσης μεγάλ, εὔχετο χείρας ἀνασχων" 450
“κλῦθί μευ, ἀργυρότοξ᾽, ὃς Χρύσην ἀμφιβέβηκας
Κῶλλαν τε ζαθέην Τενέδοιό τε ἶφι ἀνάσσεις"
> \ 4 > 9 “~ , ΝΜ > /
ἠμὲν On ποτ᾽ ἐμεῦ πάρος ἔκλυες εὐξαμένοιο,
τίμησας μὲν ἐμέ, μέγα δ᾽ invao λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν"
ἠδ᾽ ἔτι καὶ νῦν μοι τόδ᾽ ἐπικρήηνον ἐέλδωρ" 455
Ν a a 2 / \ Υ̓͂ ”
ἤδη νῦν Δαναοῖσιν ἀεικέα λοιγὸν ἄμυνον.

as ἔφατ᾽ εὐχόμενος, τοῦ δ᾽ ἔκλυε Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων.

3 \ 3 4᾽ wv 3 4 ,
αὐτὰρ ἐπεί ῥ᾽ εὔξαντο καὶ οὐλοχύτας προβάλοντο,
αὐέρυσαν μὲν πρῶτα καὶ ἔσφαξαν καὶ ἔδειραν,
μηρούς τ᾽ ἐξέταμον κατά τε κνίσῃ ἐκάλυψαν 460
δίπτυχα ποιήσαντες, ἐπ᾽ αὐτῶν δ᾽ ὠμοθέτησαν.
καῖε δ᾽ ἐπὶ σχίξῃς ὁ γέρων, ἐπὶ δ᾽ αἴθοπα οἶνον
λεῖβε" νέοι δὲ παρ᾽ αὐτὸν ἔχον πεμπώβολα χερσίν.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ κατὰ μῆρα Kan καὶ σπλάγχνα πάσαντο,

449. χερνίψαντο, a dat λεγόμενον
which is unique in form among Greek
compounds. οὐλοχύτας, barley grains
which were to be sprinkled upon the
victim’s head (see 458), so οὐλαί, y 441.
They appear to have been merely bruised
—a relic, such as often appears in ritual,
of a forgotten time before grinding was
invented, The intention seems merely
to have been to make the feast more
savoury to the gods; just as barley is
sprinkled over the ox which is being
cooked in Σ 560. ἀνέλοντο, ‘‘took up in
their hands from the basket.”” Compare
the whole description of the sacrifice in
γ 430-463.

453. ἠμέν. . . ἠδέ, here ‘Sas... 80.”

454. τίμησας, an “explicative” asynde-

ton, merely expanding the sense of ExAves.
Bekker would read τιμήσας, which how-
ever is not necessary. ἵψαο, didst smite:
Lat. ic-ere, cf. ἱπούμενος, crushed down,
Aesch. P. V. 365. So tWera, B 193.
- 459. addpvoay, probably for dF-Fépvcay
by assimilation from dy-Fep, ‘‘ they lifted
up,” perhaps in sign of dedication to the
heavenly gods. Most MSS. give αὖ
ἔρυσαν, which cannot be right, as αὖ
never = κατόπισθε.

460. μηρούς, the thigh bones with the
flesh adhering. These are covered with
a layer of fat doubled over them, and
pieces of flesh from other parts of the

body are laid upon them (ὠμοθετεῖν, cf.
€ 427) in order to symbolise an offering
of the whole animal. μῆρα in 464 seems
to be identical with μηρούς, but, like the
commoner μηρία, is only used in the sac-
rificial sense: so B 427, μ 364, y 179,
ν 26.

461. δίπτυχα, acc. singular, ‘‘ making
it (the fat) into a fold.”

462-3. Cf. Ὑ 459, where the lines are
certainly more appropriate, as the νέοι
there are Nestor’s sons, who help him
with the sacrifice. Here the idea of young
men is not in place. The πεμπώβολα
are very ancient implements of ritual ;
an illustration will be found in Hel-
big, Hom. Epos, pp. 257-8. Eustathius
says that the use of five prongs was
peculiar to Kyme in Aecolis, other Greeks
using only the three-pronged form.
The use of such a fork is more obvious
where the sacrifice was boiled (as in 1
Sam. ii. 13) than where, as in the heroic
ages, it was only roasted.

464. For pfipa there is a curious old
variant—said to have been approved by
Ar.— μῆρε, a supposed metaplastic form
for μήρω. The “ tasting” of the entrails
at this stage seems to have been sym-
bolical—unless it means simply that
they were more rapidly cooked than the
other parts, and thus formed a “ first
course. ”

98 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A ᾳ)

μίστυλλόν 7 ἄρα τἄλλα καὶ ἀμφ᾽ ὀβελοῖσιν ἔπειραν,

465

ΝΥ 4 4 > ἡ 4 4
ὥπτησάν τε περιφραδέως, ἐρύσαντὸ Te πάντα.

A
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ παύσαντο πόνου τετύκοντό τε δαῖτα,
δαίνυντ᾽, οὐδέ τε θυμὸς ἐδεύετο δαιτὸς ἐίσης.

3 A 9 Ἁ 4 3 , 3 Ν
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ πόσιος καὶ ἐδητύος ἐξ ἔρον ἕντο,

κοῦροι μὲν κρητῆρας ἐπεστέψαντο ποτοῖο,

470

’ > ΚΝ a 3 , [4
νώμησαν δ᾽ ἄρα πᾶσιν ἐπαρξάμενοι δεπάεσσιν,

e A , a N 4
οἱ δὲ πανημέριοι μολπῇ θεὸν ἱλάσκοντο,
καλὸν ἀείδοντες παιήονα, κοῦροι ᾿Αχαιῶν,

LA e 4 e \ / / > » 4
μέλποντες ἑκάεργον" ὁ δὲ φρένα τέρπετ᾽ ἀκούων.

ἦμος δ᾽ ἠέλιος κατέδυ καὶ ἐπὶ κνέφας ἦλθεν,

475

δὴ τότε κοιμήσαντο παρὰ πρυμνήσια νηός.

ἦμος δ᾽ ἠριγένεια φάνη ῥοδοδάκτυλος ‘Hos,

καὶ τότ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽ ἀνάγοντο μετὰ στρατὸν εὐρὺν ᾿Αχαιῶν"
τοῖσιν δ᾽ ἴκμενον οὖρον ἵει ἑκάεργος ᾿Απόλλων.

/
of δ᾽ ἱστὸν στήσαντ᾽ ava θ᾽ ἱστία λευκὰ πέτασσαν"

480

ἐν δ᾽ ἄνεμος πρῆσεν μέσον ἱστίον, ἀμφὶ δὲ κῦμα

465. ( seems to be an adverb ; they

ierced them with spits on both sides,

2.€. 80 88 to make the spit project on
both sides.

468. For ἐΐσης see on 306.

470. ἐπεστέψαντο here retains the
original meaning of the root, ‘‘to fill
fall”; cf. Lat. stipo, our stuff: Curt.
Et. no. 224. It was thus a misinter-
pretation which led to Virgil’s socii
cratera coronant, and the actual crown-
ing of the goblet with flowers.

471. ἔπάρχεσθαι denotes the libation of
a few drops taken by a ladle from the
mixing bowl, xpyrjp, and poured into
the drinking cups (δεπάεσσιν being a
locative dat.) ἄρχεσθαι is particularly
used of ritual acts of all sorts, and ἐπὶ
implies ‘‘going round” the guests.
They first poured out these drops to the
gods and then had their cups filled to

rink. (See Buttmann, Levil. p. 169, and
Riddle and Merry on y 340.) The diffi-
culty here is that the libation is men-
tioned when the drinking is efded
(πόσιος, 469), contrary to the rule. The
whole passage from 450 to 486 entirely
consists of lines appearing elsewhere,
except 456, 472, 474, 478; and it seems
to be betrayed by this oversight as an
unskilfully made cento—unless, with
Diintzer, it be preferred to reject 469-474
altogether. Bekker rejects 473 only,
and the two participles, with κοῦροι

᾿Αχαιῶν interposed, are certainly awk-
ward. In 472 πανημέριοι must = ““ 8}}
the rest of the day” in which the
assembly and voyage to Chryse have
already happened. For this use compare
παννυχίη, β 484 (with 388).

478. παιήονα, ἃ h of rejoicing,
not necessarily to Apollo, see X 391. τὸ
καλὸν ἀντὶ τοῦ καλῶς, Ariston., rightly.

474, ἑκάεργον, here apparently Aver-
runcus, the ‘‘ keeper afar” of pestilence ;
the opposite and complemen function
to that of ᾿Εκηβόλος, and fitly mentioned
now that his anger is appeased.

477. ἠριγένεια, ‘‘early-born” ; accord-
ing to Fick ἦρι is a locative, conn. with
Goth. air =ear-ly, Zend ayar = day;
whence ἄρ-ιστον, the early meal. Sea
Curtius, Zé. no. 613.

479. ἴκμενον, either from root lx, as
(1) a wind that goes with the ship,
secundus ; or (2) a wind. that has come
to the sailors’ prayer, ‘‘wel-come”; or
perhaps better, with L. Meyer, from Skt.
ak to wish (only here in Il.)

480. στήσαντο, like στείλαντο, 483.
Here we could equally read στῆσάν 7°.

481. πρῆσεν : the root mpa means to
puff, spirt out, blow, and is used (1), as
here, of air; (2) of fire, πυρί or πυρός
being generally added in Homer; (8) of
fluids, e.g. II 350 alua... ἀνὰ στόμα

πρῆσε χανών.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (1) 29

4 4~ 9 + Ν > 9
στείρῃ πορφύρεον μεγάλ᾽ ἴαχε νηὸς ἰούσης"
e > \ aA / /
ἡ δ᾽ ἔθεεν κατὰ κῦμα διαπρήσσουσα κέλευθον.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεί ῥ᾽ ἵκοντο κατὰ στρατὸν εὐρὺν ᾿Αχαιῶν,

a \ A f > 3 9 / ΝΜ
νῆα μὲν οἱ γε μέλαιναν ἐπ᾿ ἠπείροιο ἐρυσσαν

485

ὑψοῦ ἐπὶ ψαμάθοις, ὑπὸ δ᾽ ἕρματα μακρὰ τάνυσσαν,
αὐτοὶ δ᾽ ἐσκίδναντο κατὰ κλισίας τε νέας τε.

αὐτὰρ ὁ μήνιε νηυσὶ παρήμενος ὠκνπόροισιν
διογενὴς Πηλῆος υἱός, πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς"

ΝΜ 3 3 3 \ “4 ’ὔ
οὔτε TOT εἰς ἀγορὴν πωλέσκετο κυδιάνειραν

490

’ A
οὔτε ποτ᾽ ἐς πόλεμον, ἀλλὰ φθινύθεσκε φίλον κῆρ
φ ’ lA 3. 9 4 / /
αὖθι μένων, ποθέεσκε δ᾽ ἀυτήν τε πτόλεμόν τε.
2 > ὦ » eo 9 A ’ / > 9 7
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δή ῥ᾽ ἐκ τοῖο δυωδεκάτη γένετ᾽ ἠώς,

καὶ τότε δὴ πρὸς ᾽ολυμπον ἴσαν θεοὶ αἰὲν ἐόντες

πάντες ἅμα, Ζεὺς δ᾽ ἦρχε.

494
Θέτις δ᾽ οὐ λήθετ᾽ ἐφετμέων

παιδὸς ἑοῦ, GAN ἦ γ᾽ ἀνεδύσετο κῦμα θαλάσσης,
ἠερίη δ᾽ ἀνέβη μέγαν οὐρανὸν Οὔλυμπόν τε.
εὗρεν δ᾽ εὐρύοπα Kpovldny ἄτερ ἥμενον ἄλλων
ἀκροτάτῃ κορυφῇ πολυδειράδος Οὐλύμποιο.

καί ῥα πάροιθ᾽ αὐτοῖο καθέζετο καὶ λάβε γούνων

482. στείρῃ, the stem ; the solid beam
which had to take the shock when the
vessel was beached. πορφύρεον, a word
which seems to be properly used, as
here, of the dark colour of disturbed
waves: cf. πορφύρω (so La Roche).

483. διαπ voa here, with the
addition of κέλευθον, shews the transi-
tion from the primary meaning ‘‘ to
over” (root wpa of περά-ω etc.) to that
of ‘‘ accomplishing.”

486. tppara, ‘‘shores,” either large
stones or beams of wood, set so as to
keep the ship upright. The line seems
to be from Hymn. Ap. ii. 829.

489. υἱός as an iambus, see P 575:
MSS. (except two) Πηλέος ; the synizesis
is not found in similar cases, as the old
form was IIn\éFos.

- 490. κυδιάνειραν, elsewhere an epithet of
μάχη only ; cf. I 441, ἀγορέων ἵνα τ᾽ ἄνδρες
dpurpemées τελέθουσιν. These assemblies
and battles must be taken as falling
within the twelve days after the quarrel.

491. φίλον in this and similar phrases
simply =his own, ἐόν ; see on 167.

493. ἐκ roto, sc. from the interview
with Thetis. This vague reference be-
comes far more intelligible if we omit
430-489,

500

497. ἠερίη either = ἠύτ᾽ ὀμίχλη (359), or
perhaps better ‘‘in the early morning,”
a. with 7p of ἠριγένεια (for dyep, see
477).

498. It has been debated from old
times whether εὐρύοπα is’ from Féy,
voice, or from root ὁπ to see. The
former would of course express the far-
reaching voice of the thunder. In fay-
our of this it may be said that the
compounds of ὁπ make -ωπα, not -oma,
οὗ, ἑλικῶπις, εὐώπιδα, etc. ; and there can
be no doubt of the derivation from Féy
in Pindar’s Kpoviday βαρυόπαν στεροπᾶν
πρύτανω, P. vi. 24. The word is gener-
ally a nom. On the analogy of βαρυό-
παν we ought perhaps to read εὐρυόπαν
for the accus. Otherwise we must as-
sume a second nom. * evptoy.

500. αὐτοῖο, cf. αὐτοῦ in 47. For the
suppliant’s attitude cf. ©; 371, γούνατ᾽
ἔκυσσε καὶ ἔλλαβε χειρὶ γενείου : in K 454
the touching of the chin only is men-
tioned. This act perhaps symbolises the
last resource of the disarmed and fallen
warrior, who can only clasp his enemy’s
legs to hamper him, and turn aside his
face so that he cannot see to aim the
final blow, until he has at least heard
the prayer for mercy.

80 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (1)

σκαιῇ, δεξιτερῇ δ᾽ ap ὑπ᾽ ἀνθερεῶνος ἕλοῦσα
Η] ?
λισσομένη προσέειπε Ala Kpoviwva ἄνακτα"
ἐς le) 4 ») / > » Ul wv
Zed πάτερ, εἴ ποτε δή σε pet ἀθανάτοισιν ὄνησα
A A / / 2)
3
ἢ ἔπει ἢ ἔργῳ, τόδε μοι κρήηνον ἐέλδωρ"

/ / e/ 3 ,ὔ bh
τίμησόν μοι υἷον, ὃς ὠκυμορώτατος ἄλλων

505

ἔπλετ᾽- ἀτάρ μιν νῦν ye ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων
ἠτίμησεν" ἑλὼν γὰρ ἔχει γέρας, αὐτὸς ἀπούρας.
ἀλλὰ σύ πέρ μιν τῖσον, ᾿Ολύμπιε μητίετα Zed:
τόφρα δ᾽ ἐπὶ Τρώεσσι τίθει κράτος, ὄφρ᾽ ἂν ᾿Αχαιοὺ

υἱὸν ἐμὸν τίσωσιν ὀφέλλωσίν τέ ἑ τιμῇ.

510

ὧς φάτο" τὴν δ᾽ οὔ τι προσέφη νεφεληγερέτα Ζεύς,

ἀλλ᾽ ἀκέων δὴν ἧστο.

Θέτις δ᾽ ὡς ἥψατο γούνων,

ὡς ἔχετ᾽ ἐμπεφυυΐα, καὶ εἴρετο δεύτερον αὗτις"
“ νημερτὲς μὲν δή μοι ὑπόσχεο καὶ κατάνευσον,

ἢ ἀπόειπ᾽, ἐπεὶ οὔ τοι ἔπι δέος, ὄφρ᾽ ἐὺ εἰδῶ,

515

ὅσσον ἐγὼ μετὰ πτᾶσιν ἀτιμοτάτη θεός ely.”

τὴν δὲ μέγ᾽ ὀχθήσας προσέφη νεφεληγερέτα Ζεύς".
“ἣ δὴ λοίγια ἔργ᾽, ὅ τέ μ᾽ ἐχθοδοπῆσαι ἐφήσεις
“Ἥρῃ, ὅτ᾽ ἄν μ᾽ ἐρέθῃσιν ὀνειδείοις ἐπέεσσιν.

ς δὲ So” > ν᾿. 9 "0 , θ a
ἢ OF KAL αὕτως μα AlEV EV ἀσανατοίσι VEOLOLV

520

a 7 7 / / , > ,
νεικεῖ, καί TE μέ φησι μάχῃ Τρώεσσιν apnyety.

501. On the analogy of © 371 ἔλλαβε
χειρί γενείου, it would seem that ὑπό is
here an adverb, ‘‘taking him by the
chin beneath.”

505. The μοι long in thesi can hardly
be right. auck. conj. υἱέα μοι τίμησον,
Menrad τίμησόν σύ μοι υἱόν. For ἄλλων
after the superlative cf. Soph. Ané. 100
κάλλιστον τῶν προτέρων φάος, and 1191
δυστυχέστατον κέλευθον ἕρπω τῶν παρελ-
θουσῶν ὁδῶν. The gen. means ‘‘ doomed
to swiftest death as compared with all
others”: it is ablatival, and “ expresses
the point from which the higher (here the
highest) degree of a quality is separated,”
Η. G. § 152.

506. ἔπλετο, ‘‘he was made before...
but now in addition.”

510. ὀφέλλωσι τιμῇ, generally trans-
lated augeant eum honore, “exalt him with
honour” ; but Hentze suggests that τιμῇ
is rather the fine paid; so that the
words mean “ make him rich with recom-

ense.” This is a thoroughly Homeric
idea, see note on 158. 6 εἰν is not
elsewhere used wi a personal object.

512. ὡς... as she had em-

braced him, soshe clung to him.” ‘'Theo-
kritos’ ws (Sov, ὧς ἐμάνην, Virgil’s Ut vidi
ut perit, seem to rest on a misunderstand-

ing.

513. ἐμπεφυνῖα, a hyperbolical ex-
pression for ‘‘ clinging close,” as in ἐν δ᾽
ἄρα ol φῦ χειρί, and so περιφύς, τ 416
προσφύς, μ 488.

515. δέος, no reason to fear (any superior
court of appeal). Cf. M 246, cot δ᾽ οὐ
δέος ἔστ᾽ ἀπολέσθαι ; and θ 563.

518. λοίγια ἔργα, an exclamation,
‘sad work,” as we say: it is hardl
necessary to supply ἔσται if we read
& τε with Bekker; MSS. ὅτε, which
gives a rather weaker sense. See H. Ὁ.
ξ 269, ad fin. οἴω λοίγι᾽ ἔσεσθαι occurs
in ᾧ 533, Ψ 310. ἐχθοδοπῆσαι, ἅπαξ
εἰρημένον and of obscure origin. See
Curtius, £¢. p. 628. Ar. is said to have

ut a stop after ἐφήσεις, and read Ἥρη
for Ἥρῃ (but Ludwich doubts this). In
any case such an order of the words
would not be Homeric.

520. καὶ αὕτως, even as it is: compare
the use of καὶ ἄλλως, ‘even at the Post
of times.”

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (1) 31

’ \ \ \ a a 2 / , ὔ
ἀλλὰ σὺ μὲν νῦν αὗτις ἀπόστιχε, μή τι νοήσῃ
“ΧΗ 3 \ δέ “ / Μ
pn’ ἐμοὶ O€ κε ταῦτα μελήσεται, Opa τελέσσω.
3 > wv A a, ¥ /
εἰ δ᾽ ἄγε τοι κεφαλῇ κατανεύσομαι, ὄφρα πεποίθης"
le) \ > > 9 > 9 7 “
τοῦτο γὰρ ἐξ ἐμέθεν γε μετ᾽ ἀθανάτοισι μέγιστον 525
τέκμωρ" οὐ γὰρ ἐμὸν παλινάγρετον οὐδ᾽ ἀπατηλὸν
. +O 9 / 4 A / 2)
οὐδ᾽ ἀτελεύτητον, ὅτι κεν κεφαλῇ κατανεύσω.
Φ N / > » » 4 “
ἡ καὶ κνανέῃσιν én’ ὀφρύσι νεῦσε Kpoviwr:
ἀμβρόσιαι δ᾽ ἄρα χαῖται ἐπερρώσαντο ἄνακτος
κρατὸς am’ ἀθανάτοιο, μέγαν δ᾽ ἐλέλιξεν "Ολυμπον. 580
, > Φ 4 4 ς \ 4
τώ γ᾽ ὧς βουλεύσαντε διέτμαγεν" ἡ μὲν ἔπειτα
εἰς ἅλα ἄλτο βαθεῖαν an’ αἰγλήεντος ᾿Ολύμπου,
Ζεὺς δὲ ἑὸν πρὸς δῶμα. θεοὶ δ᾽ ἅμα πάντες ἀνέσταν
3 @ / A Ἁ 3 3 a wv
ἐξ ἑδέων, shod πατρὸς ἐναντίον" οὐδέ τις ἔτλη
A 3 / 3 > 23 / μή “ -
μεῖναι ἐπερχόμενον, ἀλλ᾽ ἀντίοι ἔσταν ἅπαντες. 535
ὧς ὁ μὲν ἔνθα καθέζετ᾽ ἐπὶ θρόνον" οὐδέ μιν “Ἥρη
> 4 4 a Xe@ e lA δ
ἠγνοίησεν ἰδοῦσ᾽ ὅτι οἱ συμφράσσατο βουλὰς
3 / ἢ 4 ε ’
apyupotrela Θέτις, θυγάτηρ ἁλίοιο γέροντος.
αὐτίκα κερτομίοισι Δία Κρονίωνα προσηύδα"
“ris δ᾽ αὖ τοι, δολομῆτα, θεῶν συμφράσσατο βουλάς; 540

522. μή τι αἱ ᾿Αριστάρχου καὶ αἱ ἄλλαι
σχεδὸν πᾶσαι διορθώσεις, Didym.; the
κοινή, as distinct from the διορθώσεις,
was μή σε, which is given by all our MSS.

525. ἐμέθεν ye, Zeus perhaps means that
he alone is not required to swear ; even
Hera has to take an oath (Ξ 271, O 36).

526. τέκμωρ, see note on H 30. ἐμόν,
anything of mine (or possibly any τέκμωρ
of mine). This use is, however, very
strange ; ἐμοί would seem more natural.
παλινάγρετον, from dypéw, which is said
to be the Aeolic form of alpéw. For the
use of ‘‘take back” =revoke compare
A 357, πάλιν δ᾽ ὅ ye Adfero μῦθον."

528. ἔπι-νεῦσε go together in the sense
of xaravedw above (Schol. A mentions
indeed a variant ἐπινεύσομαι in 524).
κνανέῃσιν can mean only ‘‘dark”’; cf.
Ω 94, κάλυμμα... κυάνεον, τοῦ δ᾽ of τι
μελάντερον ἔπλετο ἔσθος. These lines are
said by Strabo to have inspired Pheidias
with the conception of his famous statue
of Zeus at Olympia.

530. ἐλέλιξεν, ‘‘shook,” not to be
confounded with ἐλελιχθέντες, ‘‘rallied,”
which is merely an error for Fedx-
θέντες (ἑλίσσω). The root in this case
seems to be λιγ for rag, Skt. réq’, to
shake, with reduplication and prothetic

ε. So also 6 199, X 448. In P 278, N
558, either sense would suit.

532. ἄλτο, for the form cf. Curt. Vo.
i. p. 131, where it is taken to be for
ἀἄ(σϑαλτο, the first ἀ representing the
augment. Possibly, however, we should
read ἄλτο on the analogy of ἄλμενος.

533. Ζεὺς δέ, sc. βῆ, a curious case of
zeugma.

534. ἑδέων, so best MSS. ; some give
ἑδρέων ; the words seem to be used in-
differently. So also 581.

536. μιν is to be taken with ἰδοῦσα
and ὅτι with ἠγνοίησεν.

539. κερτομίοισι, sc. ἐπέεσσιν (80
μειλιχίοις P 431, and often), literally
‘with cutting words,’ as the root seems
to be kar-t, to cut; cf. Lat. car-inare,
to scold. Curt. Zé. no. 53.

540. τίς 8’ ad MSS., τίς δὴ ad, Bekker
and others. The question is a doubtful
one; on the one hand we frequently
have questions introduced by δέ, 6.0.
O 244, Ἕκτορ. . . τίη δὲ σύ, κ-.τ.λ.,
answered in 247 by τίς δὲ σὺ ἐσσί, φέριστε
(so 2 387, and often): cf. Χ 331, “Ἕκτορ,
ἀτάρ που ἔφης. On the other hand δ᾽
must, on account of its position, represent
δή in H 24, τίπτε σὺ δ᾽ αὖ μεμαυῖα. On
the whole, therefore, it seems best to

32 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (1)

αἰεί τοι φίλον ἐστὶν ἐμεῦ ἀπονόσφιν ἐόντα
4 / , 3 ’ ’
κρυπτάδια φρονέοντα δικαζέμεν" οὐδέ τί πώ μοι
πρόφρων τέτληκας εἰπεῖν ἔπος, ὅττι νοήσῃς."
\ 3 3 J 3 Ἁ 3 A le)
τὴν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα πατὴρ ἀνδρῶν τε θεῶν τε"

“Hon, μὴ δὴ πάντας ἐμοὺς ἐπιέλπεο μύθους

545

3 / ” % 23 / > 9
εἰδήσειν" χαλεποί τοι ἔσοντ᾽ ἀλόχῳ περ ἐούσῃ.
3 939 ἃ ’ > 9 ? ’ Ν 4
ἀλλ᾽ ὃν μέν κ᾽ ἐπιεικὲς ἀκουέμεν, οὔ τις ἔπειτα
“ / ’
οὔτε θεῶν πρότερος τὸν γ᾽ εἴσεται οὔτ᾽ ἀνθρώπων"
ὃν δέ κ᾿ ἐγὼν ἀπάνευθε θεῶν ἐθέλωμι νοῆσαι,

μή τι σὺ ταῦτα ἕκαστα διείρεο μηδὲ μετάλλα."

550

τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα βοῶπις πότνια “ρη:
66 at f K (δ ἴω XN 90 4

ivorate Κρονίδη, ποῖον τὸν μῦθον ἔειπες.
καὶ λίην σε πάρος γ᾽ οὔτ᾽ εἴρομαι οὔτε μεταλλῶ,
ἀλλὰ μάλ᾽ εὔκηλος τὰ φράζεαι, doo ἐθέλῃσθα"

νῦν δ᾽ αἰνῶς δείδοικα κατὰ φρένα, μή σε παρείπῃ

555

ἀργυρόπεξα Θέτις, θυγάτηρ ἁλίοιο γέροντος"
ἠερίη γὰρ σοί γε παρέζετο καὶ λάβε γούνων"
τῇ σ᾽ ὀίω κατανεῦσαι ἐτήτυμον, ὡς ᾿Αχιλῆα

retain the MS. reading, while admitting
the probability that it represents δὴ αὖ
(see Η. G. ἃ 350, 378). αὖ expresses
vexation, cf. αὖτε in 202.

541. It is impossible to say whether
ἀπὸ νόσφιν or ἀπονόσφιν is best ; here
the best MSS. give the second, but the
authority of grammarians is in favour of
the first (cf. B 233) ; they took ἀπὸ with
ἐόντα. For the participle in the acc.,
though tot has preceded, cf. H. G. §
240; ἐόντι would give the meaning ‘‘ you
like when you are apart from me to
decide.”

542. δικαζέμεν, to give decisions, as O
431. κρνπτάδια goes with φρονέοντα.

543. πρόφρων, of free will, witro. It
is always used as a predicate, never as
an epithet. ros, ‘‘a matter,” as when
used with τελέσσαι, 108.

547. ἀκονέμεν, sc. ‘‘for any one to
hear.” To translate ‘‘ for thee to hear”
would hardly make sense in connexion
with what follows. ἔπειτα, as though
εἴ τινα had preceded instead of the
equivalent ὅν.

549. ἐθέλωμι is restored by conj.
(Hermann’s) for ἐθέλοιμι of MSS. There
are some traces in other passages of the
adoption of similar forms by Ar. ; ¢.g.
Didymus on © 23, ἐθέλοιμι, ᾿Αρίσταρχος

ἐθέλωμι. On the significance of the
form, and a list of instances in H.,
see Curt. Vb. i. 40. Inthe MSS. it has
almost entirely been superseded by the
familiar opt. in -οιμί. Both here and in
© 23 the opt. is, however, defensible.

550. μετάλλα, on this word see Curt.
Et. no. 661. It is not to be connected
with μέταλλον, which is probably not a
pure Greek word at all; nor Svs Butt-
mann) with μετ᾽ ἄλλα, ‘‘to go after other
things.”

553. καὶ λίην, most assuredly: © 358,
ete.

555. Cf. ε 300, δείδω μὴ δὴ πάντα θεὸς
νημερτέα εἶπεν. Hence van Herwerden
is probably right in reading παρεῖπεν
here ; I 244, δείδοικα, μή. . . ἐκτελέσωσει,

roves nothing. παρα- here of course
involves the metaphor ‘‘ out of the right
road.”

558. ὡς τιμήσεις, so one (good) MS.
only; vulg. τιμήσῃς... ὀλέσῃς. ὡς, lit.
“how” you will do honour, expressing
the content of the promise. It is also
possible to take it as a final conjunction,
with the subj., expressing the purpose of
the βουλὴ Διός : ‘you assented in order
that you may honour,” etc., the subj.
being used because the event contem-
plated is still future.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (Ὁ 33

4 9 / δὲ 4 > \ \ ᾽ a ”
τιμήσεις, ὀλέσεις δὲ πολέας ἐπὶ νηυσὶν ᾿Αχαιῶν.
7 ͵

τὴν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη νεφεληγερέτα Ζεύς" 560
66 ὃ >. \ 2 δέ 40 ᾿

αιμονίη, αἰεὶ μὲν dieat, οὐδέ σε λήθω,

le) δ᾽ ΝΜ "ἢ ὃ / 3 3 4 XN “A
πρῆξαι δ᾽ ἔμπης ov τι δυνήσεαι, ἀλλ᾽ ἀπὸ θυμοῦ

a 3 4 ἃ δέ ς ΝΜ
μᾶλλον ἐμοὶ ἔσεαι" τὸ δέ τοι καὶ ῥίγιον ἔσται.
εἰ δ᾽ οὕτω τοῦτ᾽ ἐστίν, ἐμοὶ μέλλει φίλον εἶναι.
ἀλλ᾽ ἀκέουσα κάθησο, ἐμῷ δ᾽ ἐπιπείθεο μύθῳ, 565

v4 a, 3 ’ὔ Ψ θ ί > 9 9 3 ’ὔ
μή νύ τοι οὐ χραίσμωσιν, ὅσοι θεοί εἰσ᾽ ἐν ᾽᾿Ολύμπῳ,
4 47 > ow , 7 a ’ , 99
ἄσσον ἰόνθ᾽, ὅτε κέν τοι ἀάπτους χεῖρας ἐφείω.

a / /

as ἔφατ᾽, ἔδεισεν δὲ βοῶπις πότνια “Ἥρη,

7, 4“. »Ὧ “ A 3 4 f “A
καί ῥ᾽ ἀκέουσα καθῆστο, ἐπιυγνάμψασα dirov κῆρ.

ὥχθησαν δ᾽ ἀνὰ δῶμα Διὸς θεοὶ Οὐρανίωνες"

570

τοῖσιν δ᾽ “Ἥφαιστος κλυτοτέχνης ἦρχ᾽ ἀγορεύειν,
μητρὶ φίλῃ ἐπὶ ἦρα φέρων, λευκωλένῳ “Ἡρῃ:

561. δαιμόνιος seems to mean properly
one who is under the influence of a δαίμων
or unfavourable divine intelligence; that
is, one whose actions are elther unac-
countable or ill-omened. Hence it some-
times means ‘‘fool” (δαιμόνιοι, μαίνεσθε,
o 406), B 200, I 40, N 448, 810, 6 774;
or indicates severe remonstrance, B 190,
I 399, A 31, Z 326, 521, o 15, 7 71, and
here (this shade of meaning is hardly
translatable ; we say colloquially ‘‘I am
indeed surprised at you”); or tender
remonstrance, Z 407, 486, κ 472, y 166,
174, 264; in 2 194, & 443, it perhaps
expresses pity, ‘‘ill-starred.” (This is
Nagelsbach’s explanation, H. 7. p. 75).
ὀίεαι, you are always fancying, suppos-
ing; in allusion to ὀίω in 558.

562. ἀπὸ θυμοῦ, far away from my
good pleasure: cf. ἐκ θυμοῦ πεσέειν Ψ
595, ἀποθύμια ΞΞ 261. Fordwé=far from,
cf. I 858, 437.

564. τοῦτο, sc. that of which you
accuse me. μέλλει, you may be sure it
will be my good pleasure: cf. the same
phrase in B 116; so ᾧ 83, Q 46, ὃ 377,
o 19. ὦ expresses an assurance
founded on knowledge that the persons
or circumstances concerned are such as to
bring about a certain result.

567. ἄσσον ἰόνθ᾽, ὅτι Ζηνόδοτος γράφει
ἄσσον ἰόντε. οὐκ ἔστι δὲ, ἀλλ᾽ ἀντὶ τοῦ ἰόν-
τος. συγχεῖ δὲ καὶ τὸ ducxdy.—Ariston.
That is, Zenodotus took ἰόνθ᾽ to be for
ἰόντε in the sense of ἰόντες, agreeing with
θεοί. His theory was that the dual and
plural were interchangeable—a theory
which has been held, partly on historical

D

grounds, by some modern philologists,
and is strongly, but not quite convine-
ingly, supported by several passages in
Homer: see Εἰ 487, © 74. Aristarchos
opposed this view, and took /évé’ here for
ἰόντα (sc. ἐμέ, acc. after χραίσμωσιν)ὴ : ἀντὶ
τοῦ ἰόντος meaning that we should have
expected a gen. absolute, ‘‘ when I come
near,” as the construction χραισμεῖν τινί
τινα, ‘to ward one person off another,”
is not found elsewhere, though we have
χραισμεῖν τινί τι (e.g. H 144), which is
perhaps sufficient analogy, Bentley
conj. ἄσσον ἰών, while Diintzer would
eject the line altogether. ἀάπτους,
Aristoph. déwrovs, which is perhaps to
be preferred ; it will stand for ἀ-σεπ-τους,
‘*not to be dealt with or handled,” 1,6.
irresistible. It is possible however
that drrw, to touch, was originally from
the same root sa-k as rw (as I have en-
deavoured to shew elsewhere); so that
either form would ultimately mean the

same.

572. ἐπὶ ἦρα φέρων, doing kind service
to his mother: a very ancient phrase,
appearing in the Vedic vdra bhar, lit.
to bring the wishes. (So in a few other
standing formulae: μένος ἡύτ-ε Ved. vasu
manas ; δωτῆρες ἐάων =ddtaras vdsuam :
κλέος ἄφθιτον = gravas akshitam). Ar.
read ἐπίηρα as a neut. pl., καὶ ἐπ-
ἐκράτησεν ἡ ᾿Δριστάρχου, kalrot (leg. καίπερ)
λόγον οὐκ ἔχουσα, Schol. A; Ξ 132 ἦρα
φέροντες without ἐπί being decisive against
him: cf. also φέρειν χάριν in the same
sense, 1613, etc. Fipa is an acc. singular,
root var to choose, desire.

34 IAIAAOS A (1)

““ἢ δὴ λοίγια ἔργα τάδ᾽ ἔσσεται οὐδ᾽ ἔτ᾽ ἀνεκτά,
εἰ δὴ σφὼ ἕνεκα θνητῶν ἐριδαίνετον ὧδε,

ἐν δὲ θεοῖσι κολῳὸν ἐλαύνετον" οὐδέ τι δαιτὸς

575

ἐσθλῆς ἔσσεται ἧδος, ἐπεὶ τὰ χερείονα νικᾷ.
μητρὶ δ᾽ ἐγὼ παράφημι, καὶ αὐτῇ περ νοεούσῃ,
πατρὶ φίλῳ ἐπὶ ἦρα φέρειν Διί, ὄφρα μὴ αὗτε

’ , \ > @€ A “ 4
νεικείησι πατήρ, σὺν δ᾽ ἡμῖν δαῖτα ταράξῃ.

εἴ περ γάρ κ᾽ ἐθέλῃσιν ᾿Ολύμπιος ἀστεροπητὴς

δ80

ἐξ ἑδέων στυφελίξαι" ὁ γὰρ πολὺ φέρτατός ἐστιν.
ἀλλὰ σὺ τόν γ᾽ ἐπέεσσι καθάπτεσθαι μαλακοῖσιν"
3 3. ΜΝ 3 6 3 / ΝΜ e a_ 99
αὐτίκ᾽ ἔπειθ᾽ ἵλαος ᾿Ολύμπιος ἔσσεται ἡμῖν.
ὧς ἄρ᾽ ἔφη, καὶ ἀναΐξας δέπας ἀμφικύπελλον

μητρὶ φίλῃ ἐν χειρὶ τίθει, καί μιν προσέειπεν"

585

“ τέτλαθι, μῆτερ ἐμή, καὶ ἀνάσχεο κηδομένη περ,
μή σε φίλην περ ἐοῦσαν ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ἴδωμαι
θεινομένην" τότε δ᾽ οὔ τι δυνήσομαι ἀχνύμενός περ
χραισμεῖν" ἀργαλέος γὰρ ᾿Ολύμπιος ἀντιφέρεσθαι.

ἤδη γάρ με καὶ ἄλλοτ᾽ ἀλεξέμεναι μεμαῶτα

590

pire ποδὸς τεταγὼν ἀπὸ βηλοῦ θεσπεσίοιο.
πᾶν δ᾽ ἦμαρ φερόμην, ἅμα δ᾽ ἠελίῳ καταδύντι
κάππεσον ἐν Λήμνῳ, drdtyos δ᾽ ἔτι θυμὸς ἐνῆεν"

575. κολφόν, din; cf. κολῳᾶν, Β 212:
conn. with κολοιός, “ [86 noisy ” jackdaw.
It is perhaps for xodof és (cf. Hesych. κο-
λονᾶν θορυβεῖν), in which case we should
read κολωόν with a few MSS. and the
grammarian Philoxenos ; the ¢ subscribed
may have been added to support the
derivation from κολοιός.

576. τὰ χερείονα, compare τὸ κρήγυον,
τὰ κακά, 106-7, for the use of the article.

577. παράφημι, to advise; else only
in aor. (mid.) to prevail upon.

579. σύν of course goes with ταράξῃ,
not with ἡμῖν.

581. It is not necessary to supply any
apodosis after ef πέρ x ἐθέλῃσι : it is a
supposition made interjectionally, ‘ only
suppose he wished to drive us away !”

582. καθάπτεσθαι is used here in a
neutral sense, ‘‘to address”; and so β
39, « 70; but it more generally means
‘*to attack, revile” ; cf. y 345.

583. fraos elsewhere has a (I 635, T
178), but a is according to analogy of
words which have -ews in Attic.

584. ἀμφικύπελλον, double - handled.
This interpretation, due to Aristarchos,
is decisively supported by Helbig, H. £.

pp. 260-271. He derives it from κυπέλη,
conn. with κώπη, handle, as an Aeolic
form (cf. Lat. capulus): hence an adj.
kume\-tos = κυπελλοςς The explanation
of Aristotle, followed by Buttmann and
others, that it meant ‘‘a double cup,”
1.6. ἃ quasi-cylindrical cup divided in
the middle by a horizontal partition,
so that each end would serve either as
a foot or a cup, he shows to be quite
untenable. The two-handled type is the
commonest of all forms of drinking cu
from the earliest times—Hissarlik an
Mykenai—till the latest.

590. ἀλεξέμεναι, to keep him off, ap-
parently in defence of Hera ; the allusion
seems to be the same asin 0 18-24. For
another different legend of the fall of
Hephaistos from heaven see Σ 395.

591. Cf. ῥίπτασκον τεταγὼν ἀπὸ βηλοῦ,
Ο 23 ; for τε-ταγ-ών cf. Curt. Et. no. 280,
ὃ, where it is connected with Lat. ta(n)g-o
(our ‘‘ take’”’?)

593. Lemnos was sacred to Hephaistos
on account of the volcano Mosychlos.
The Σίντιες are named as inhabitants of
the island by Thuc. ii. 98, 1, Hellanikos
Jr. 112; they are called Pelasgian, and

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (1) 35

” θ » ὃ 5 ’ , ”
ενσα μέ am bLUTLES AV pes apap Κομίσαντο TEC OVTaA.

ὧς φάτο, μείδησεν δὲ θεά, λευκώλενος ” Hpn,

595

μειδήσασα δὲ παιδὸς ἐδέξατο χειρὶ κύπελλον.
αὐτὰρ ὁ τοῖς ἄλλοισι θεοῖς ἐνδέξια πᾶσιν
οἰνοχόει γλυκὺ νέκταρ, ἀπὸ κρητῆρος ἀφύσσων.

» > vw 9 43 A / 7 a
ἄσβεστος δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐνῶρτο γέλως μακάρεσσι θεοῖσιν,

ὡς ἴδον “Ἥφαιστον διὰ δώματα ποιπνύοντα.

600

ὧς τότε μὲν πρόπαν ἦμαρ ἐς ἠέλιον καταδύντα
δαίνυντ᾽, οὐδέ τι θυμὸς ἐδεύετο δαιτὸς ἐίσης,
οὐ μὲν φόρμιγγος περικαλλέος, ἣν ἔχ᾽ ᾿Απόλλων,
Μουσάων θ᾽, αἱ ἄειδον ἀμειβόμεναι ὀπὶ καλῇ.

αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ κατέδυ λαμπρὸν φάος ἠελίοιο,

θ0ὅ

οἱ μὲν κακκείοντες ἔβαν οἰκόνδε ἕκαστος,
ἦχι ἑκάστῳ δῶμα περικλυτὸς ἀμφιγυήεις
“Ἥφαιστος ποίησεν ἰδυίῃσι πραπίδεσσιν,
Ζεὺς δὲ πρὸς ὃν λέχος He ᾿Ολύμπιος ἀστεροπητής,

ΝΜ Ul “Δ @e \ a e
ἔνθα πάρος Kowal’, ὅτε μιν γλυκὺς ὕπνος ἱκάνοι"

610

ἔνθα καθεῦδ᾽ ἀναβάς, παρὰ δὲ χρυσόθρονος “Ἡρη.

their name is derived from their pirati-
cal habits (σίνομαι).

596. παιδός, from her son ; χειρί, with
her hand (not ‘‘at her son’s hand ” ; the
dat. is used after δέξασθαι, O 87, etc., but
only of persons, being a strict dat. ethicus).
For the gen. cf. & 203 δεξάμενοι ‘Pelns,
I 632, A 124, and particularly Q 305,
κύπελλον ἐδέξατο ἧς ἀλόχοιο.

597. ἐνδέξια, going from left to right
of the company ; see Merry on γ 340,
and ¢ 141. o

598. olvoxde (MSS. φνοχόει) is applied
to nectar by a slight generalisation such
as is common in all languages (cf.
the sailor’s ‘‘in Cape Town the tops of
the houses are all copper-bottomed with
ead ’’).

599. Bentley’s γέλος for γέλως is no
doubt right here, and similar forms should
be restored in other passages, and so with
Epos ; but as we have no evidence of the
date at which the corruption took place,
I have adhered to the MSS. From this
passage comes the phrase ““ Homeric
laughter.”’

603. οὐ μέν is equivalent to ἀλλ᾽ οὐδέ
of prose ; so 154.

604. Cf. w 60, μοῦσαι δ᾽ ἐννέα πᾶσαι
ἀμειβόμεναι ὀπὶ καλῇ, where, however,

the mention of nine muses is one of many
roofs of the later origin of ὦ. For

ἀμειβόμεναι ef. Vergil’s ‘‘amant alterna

Camenae,” Ec. iii. 59.

607. ἀμφιγνήεις, a much disputed
word, generally explained ‘‘ ambidex-
trous,” or wtringue validis artubus in-
structus, which overlooks the fact that
there is nothing in the word to express
validis: and the direct derivation from
yviov is doubtful on account of the loss of
the « The same objection applies to the
old derivation from γυιός, ‘‘ lame of both
feet.” I have elsewhere argued that
the word really means ‘‘ with a crooked
limb on each side” Ξεκυλλοποδίων ; from
a noun ᾿γύη = crook (cf. γύης in Lexx. ).

611. καθεύδω occurs only here in II.
See note on B 2. It is quite possible, as
Christ has suggested, that the Iliad was
often recited in different portions, e.g.
that a rhapsode may have wished to pro-
ceed from the end of A to the beginning
of A, omitting all the intermediate books,
which are not needed for the story ; and
a line such as this would naturally be
added in order to wind up A. The in-
terpolation will then probably include
609-10 (notice the F of βόν neglected) ;
B 1 following quite naturally after 608.

86 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Β (11.)

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B.

Ν 4
ὄνειρος. διάπειρα.

Βοιωτία ἢ κατάλογος νεῶν.

ἄλλοι μέν ῥα θεοί τε καὶ ἀνέρες ἱπποκορυσταὶ
εὗδον παννύχιοι, Δία δ᾽ οὐκ ἔχεν ἥδυμος ὕπνος,
ἀλλ᾽ ὅ γε μερμήριζε κατὰ φρένα, ὡς ᾿Αχιλῆα

,ὕ 3. / \ / 2 \ 3 a
τιμήσῃ, ὀλέσῃ δὲ πολέας ἐπὶ νηυσὶν ᾿Αχαιῶν.

B.

THE second book falls into two parts, as
indicated by the Greek title. The
‘*Catalogue” (484-877) is so distinct
that the MSS. of the Iliad generally
divide it from the rest of the book by a
fresh rubric. Two of the better class,
D and Townl., omit altogether from 494
to the end of the book.

i. The first part of the book is diffi-
cult to the critic on account of the
obvious confusion of motives. It begins
with an apparent contradiction of the
end of A, for which see note on line 2.
But a more serious question is that of
the place of the dream in the plot. It
seems to have nothing to do with the
development of the story. The natural
result of the assurance given by Zeus
would be that Agamemnon should im-
mediately attack the Trojans with high
hopes, and be wofully disappointed.
Nothing of the sort happens. e pro-
ceeds to test the feeling of the arm
by a ruse which could only be justified,
poetically as well as practically, by
success. This ruse is introduced by
the description of the council (53-86),
which is meagre in itself, chiefly made
up of repetitions (21 lines out of 34), and
leads to no result; the chiefs entirel
fail to carry out the instructions whic
Agamemnon has given them, and the
intervention of Athena is necessary in
order to stop the flight. Indeed, but
for the two lines 143 and 194, which
are quite unnecessary to the context,

ν᾿

the βουλή is entirely ignored in the
sequel.

he explanation which seems best to
avoid these difficulties is that the
story of the dream belonged to the
original form of the Iliad, in which A
was followed immediately by A. We
thus obtain a forcible sequence of events ;
after the delusive promise of Zeus the
arming of Agamemnon is described in
all its splendour, and is followed Ὁ
his brilliant ἀριστεία in a way whi
heightens the contrast with the wound-
ing of the heroes and the flight of the
Greeks with which the book closes.
But subsequently the Iliad was enlarged
—perhaps by the original poet; and
by a stroke of the highest art this point
is chosen in order to give us a general
view of the feelings and doings of the
Achaian host. To this end Agamemnon
calls an assembly in which, depressed
by the retirement of Achilles, he seriously
advises flight—as he does on another
similar occasion in the beginning of
Book 1x. ; he is only stopped by the in-
tervention of Athene and the higher
spirit of Odysseus, as by Diomedes in I
32 f. With this supposition the wonder-
ful scene from 87 to 483 forms a perfectly
consistent whole. But when this was
introduced, the ‘‘dream” was still left
in its place in order to form an introduc-
tion to A if it were desired to recite that
portion of the poem immediately after A.
Subsequently, in order to make a se-
quence possible between the dreamand the
rest of Book 11., and to bridge over the

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B 11.) 37

noe δέ οἱ κατὰ θυμὸν ἀρίστη φαίνετο βουλή,

On

πέμψαι ἐπ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδῃ ᾿Αγαμέμνονι οὗλον ὄνειρον"
καί μιν φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
“ βάσκ᾽ ἴθι, οὖλε ὄνειρε, θοὰς ἐπὶ νῆας᾽ Αχαιῶν'

obvious inconsistency between the de-
spair of Agamemnon and the promise of

eus, the council-scene was interpolated,
and the serious advice of Agamemnon
turned into a mere fictitious attempt to
sound the feeling of the army. The
idea is certainly an ingenious one; it
is suggested by the words of Odysseus
in 193, which are really a device worthy
of their author, to save the honour of
Agamemnon and undo the effect of his
unfortunate speech.

The interpolation probably begins
with line 42, as it will be found that A
joins on perfectly to B 41; while from
42 to 52 more than half is found in
other parts of the poems.

ii. There is a singular unanimity
among critics in rejecting the whole
Catalogue as a Jater interpolation. The
style is different from that of the rest of
the poems, though this may chiefly be
due to the difference of matter. The
whole Catalogue looks as though it de-
scribed the fleet sailing from Aulis ;
phrases like ἄγε νῆας and νέες ἐστιχό-
wvro are hardly suitable to ships which
have been for ten years drawn up on
dry land. A large proportion of the
leaders named never appear in the sequel,
while others who do appear are omitted
in the Catalogue (see for instance ᾧ
154).

That the Catalogue was not composed
for its present place seems therefore
certain. But it does not follow that it
was of late origin—nothing convincing
has been urged to show this. We know
from the story of Solon and the Mega-
rians that the Catalogue was considered
a canonical work, a Domesday Book of
Greece, at a very early age. It agrees
with the poems in being pre- Dorian
(excepting only the Rhodian legend,
653-670, g.v.); and moreover is, like
them, from the standpoint of a dweller
on the mainland. There seems there-
fore to be no valid reason for doubtin
that it, like the bulk of the Iliad an
Odyssey, was composed in Achaian
times, and carried with the emigrants
to the coast of Asia Minor. The only
difficulty is the legend mentioned by
Thucydides (i. 12), that the Boeotians

were driven from Arne in Thessaly, and
settled in the country which was then
called Kadmeis, but afterwards took its
name from them, sixty years after the
fall of Troy, and only twenty years be-
fore the Doric invasion. But the value
of such a tradition is very small where
a number of years is the vital point.

2. There is a real inconsistency be-
tween this line and A 611, which it
has been proposed to avoid by takin
ἔχε to mean ‘did not keep hold” al
night long; i.e. he awoke after going
to sleep. But ἔχε implies only the
presence of sleep (cf. Ψ 815), and this
pregnant sense cannot be read into it in
the absence of fuller expression. It is
better either to assume that A 611 is a
moveable line (see the note there), or to
admit such a small inconsistency as
would hardly be noticed at a point
which forms a natural break in the
narrative. K 1-4 follows I 713 in pre-
cisely the same manner, but the contra-
diction there is hardly noticeable, and
in any case proves nothing, in view of
the doubts as to the position of K in the
original poem. For ἥδυμος MSS. give
νήδυμος, 8 word which has never been
satisfactorily explained, and no doubt
arose, as Buttmann saw, from the adhe-
sion of the ν which, in seven cases out
of the twelve where it occurs, ends the
preceding word; a phenomenon which
may be paralleled in English, eg. a
nickname for an ekename (though the
converse is commoner, 6.6. an orange
for a norange, etc.). ἥδυμος itself was in
use as a poetical word in much late
times ; the Schol. quotes Simonides and
Antimachos as employing it, and Hesiod,
Epicharmos, and Alkman are attested
by others. It is also in the Hymns, iii.
241, 449; xix. 16. Ar. read νήδυμος, it
may be presumed, because of the hiatus
in Π 454, μ 366, » 79; of course he could
not know that βήδυμος began with F.
His authority should not prevail against
that of the poets from Homeric times
till the fifth century. There is no inde- -
pendent evidence for the form νήδυμος,
except Hymn iv. 171. For the form
ἥδυμος by ἡδύς cf. κάλλιμος by καλός,
and numerous cases οὗ adjectives formed

38 IAIAAOS Β (μι)

ἐλθὼν ἐς κλισίην ᾿Αγαμέμνονος ᾿Ατρεΐδαο
πάντα μάλ᾽ ἀτρεκέως ἀγορευέμεν, ὡς ἐπιτέλλω. 10
θωρῆξαί é κέλευε κάρη κομόωντας ᾿Αχαιοὺς
πανσυδίῃ" νῦν γάρ κεν ἕλοι πόλιν εὐρνυάγνιαν
Τρώων" οὐ γὰρ ἔτ᾽ ἀμφὶς ᾿Ολύμπια δώματ᾽ ἔχοντες
ἀθάνατοι φράζξονται" ἐπέγναμψεν γὰρ ἅπαντας
Ἥρη λισσομένη, Τρώεσσι δὲ κήδε᾽ ἐφῆπται." 15
Φ 4 a > ΜΝ > 3 Ν a ΝΜ
ὧς φάτο, βῆ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὄνειρος, ἐπεὶ τὸν μῦθον ἄκουσεν "
καρπαλίμως δ᾽ ἵκανε θοὰς ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν.
βῆ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδην ᾿Αγαμέμνονα" τὸν δὲ κίχανεν
Ψ > 9 >» 9 ’ , 24 {ὦ
εὕδοντ᾽ ἐν κλισίῃ, περὶ δ᾽ ἀμβρόσιος κέχυθ᾽ ὕπνος.
στῆ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπὲρ κεφαλῆς Νηληΐίῳ υἷι ἐοικὼς 90
Νέστορι, τόν ῥα μάλιστα γερόντων Tt ᾿Αγαμέμνων"
τῷ μιν ἐεισάμενος προσεφώνεεν οὗλος ὄνειρος"

from other adjectives by secondary suf-
fixes without apparent differences of
meaning, φαιδιμόεις, θηλύτερος, etc. etc.
4. τιμήσῃ, so all MSS. for the -ce’ of
the vulg. which Bekker retained, conjec-
turing ὀλέσαι for -y. (A, however, gives

τιμήσηι, and Schol. A B say τιμήσει εὐκτι-
xév.) The subj. is much less natural than
the opt. ina purely narrative passage, the
‘‘historic present” being a form of speech
not employed by Homer. Compare how-
ever II 650, where both moods occur side
by side; a passage quite sufficient to
justify the subjunctive here, especially as
the reminiscence of A 559 has obviously
an influence in the same direction. There
is also a very similar instance in T 354
and 348. Sce H. G. § 306, n.

6. οὖλον, here ‘‘ baneful,” from ὁλ- of
ὄλελυμι, etc. It appears to be only the
particular dream which is personified ;
there is no trace in Homer of a separate
Dream-god.

8. οὖλε ὄνειρε, ἃ case of so-called
“hiatus illicitus” ; Lange and Naber
(and now Christ) would read οὖλος, the
vocative occasionally having the same
form as the nom. in the 2d declension :
cf. A 189, φίλος ὦ Μενέλαε.

12. For ἕλοι (Zen. and best MSS.)
Aristarchos read ἕλοις, a change of person
which appears needlessly harsh. The
opt. is potential.

13. ἐμ (s, ‘‘on two sides,” .6. divided
in counsel: N 345,

15. ἐφῆπται, lit. ‘‘are fastened upon
the Trojans,” ζ.6. hang over their heads.
So Z 241, H 402, 518. For the second

half of this line there was an old variant,
δίδομεν (or διδόμεν, infin. as imper.) δέ οἱ
εὖχος ἀρέσθαι, quoted oy Aristotle.

19. ἀμβρόσιος, “delicious,” as sleep
is commonly called γλυκύς, besides being
ἥδυμος and μελίφρων in the compass of a
few lines. So νὺξ ἀμβροσίη, because it
gives men sleep, or perhaps use of
the peculiar fragrance of a still warm
night. Mr. Verrall has shewn that the
idea of fragrance is always suitable to
the use of ἀμβρόσιος, while there is no
clear instance of its meaning tmenortal
only. It is probably not a pure Greek
word at all, but borrowed from the
Semitic amara, ambergris, the famous
perfume to which Oriental nations assign
mythical miraculous properties; so that
ἀμβροσία has taken the lace of the old
Aryan Soma. ἄμβροτος, though in someof
its uses it undoubtedly means tmmortai, in
others is a synonym of ἀμβρόσιος, the two
senses being thus from different sources
and only accidentally coincident in sound
(ἄμβρ. ἔλαιον 6 365, κρήδεμνον 847, εἵματα
Il 670, νὺξ ἄμβροτος A 880, and νὺξ ἀβρότη
= 78=vvt ἀμβροσίη). That the epithets
are chiefly restricted to divine objects is
clearly the result of a Volksetymologie.

20. Νηληίῳ υἷι, an unusual expression,
with which we may compare Τελαμώνιε
wai, Soph. 47. 134.

21. γερόντων, members of the royal
council, without regard to age; see 68,
Young men like Diomedes and Achilles
belonged to the council. μιν (22) is of
course acc. after προσεφώνεε.

22. otdos here is given by one MS.,
and is mentioned as a variant in A; the

ΙΛΊΑΔΟΣ B 11) 39

“ εὕδεις, ᾿Ατρέος υἱὲ δαΐφρονος ἱπποδάμοιο"
3 \ 4 e “ ”
ov χρὴ παννύχιον εὕδειν βουληφόρον ἄνδρα,
ᾧ λαοί 7 ἐπιτετράφαται καὶ τόσσα μέμηλεν. 25
νῦν δ᾽ ἐμέθεν ξύνες mua Διὸς δέ τοι ἄγγελός εἰμι,
ΦΨ Ν 4 4 4 39 (Ὁ ’
ὅς σευ ἄνευθεν ἐὼν μέγα κήδεται ἠδ᾽ ἐλεαίρει.
θωρῆξαί σ᾽ ἐκέλευσε κάρη κομόωντας ᾿Αχαιοὺς
πανσυδίῃ" νῦν γάρ κεν ἕλοις πόλιν εὐρνάγνιαν
Τρώων" οὐ γὰρ ἔτ᾽ ἀμφὶς ᾿Ολύμπια δώματ᾽ ἔχοντες 80
ἀθάνατοι φράζονται" ἐπέγναμψεν γὰρ ἅπαντας
Ἥρη λισσομένη, Τρώεσσι δὲ κήδε᾽ ἐφῆπται

ἐκ Διός.

ἀλλὰ σὺ σῇσιν ἔχε φρεσί, μηδέ σε λήθη

αἱρείτω, εὖτ᾽ ἄν σε μελίφρων ὕπνος ἀνήῃ."
ὧς ἄρα φωνήσας ἀπεβήσετο, τὸν δὲ Alm’ αὐτοῦ 35
τὰ hpovéovt ava θυμόν, ἅ ῥ᾽ ov τελέεσθαι ἔμελλεν.
φῆ γὰρ ὅ γ᾽ αἱρήσειν ἸΠριάμου πόλιν ἥματι κείνῳ,
νήπιος, οὐδὲ τὰ ἤδη, ἅ ῥα Ζεὺς μήδετο ἔργα"
θήσειν γὰρ ἔτ᾽ ἔμελλεν ἐπ᾽ ἄλγεά τε στοναχάς τε
Τρωσί τε καὶ Δαναοῖσι διὰ κρατερὰς ὑσμίνας. 40
ἔγρετο δ᾽ ἐξ ὕπνου, θείη δέ μιν ἀμφέχυτ᾽ ὀμφή.
ἕξετο δ᾽ ὀρθωθείς, μαλακὸν δ᾽ ἔνδυνε χιτῶνα
καλὸν νηγάτεον, περὶ δὲ μέγα βάλλετο φᾶρος"
ποσοὶ δ᾽ ὑπὸ λιπαροῖσιν ἐδήσατο καλὰ πέδιλα,
ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὥμοισιν βάλετο ξίφος ἀργυρόηλον" 45

rest give θεῖος, which cannot be right,
as this word, as Nauck has shewn, always
has εἰ in thesi, 1.6. it is always a tri-
syllable, θέιος.

27. This line occurs in Q 174, and was
rejected by Aristarchos here, as the
‘‘ nity” seems out of place. σεν is gen.
after κήδεται, not ἄνευθεν. σε is of course
to be supplied to ἐλεαίρει, from σεν.

33. It is not usual for Homeric
messengers to exceed the words of their
message. In © 423-4 a similar addition
is suspected for other reasons.

36. ἔμελλεν, so Zen. and MSS.: Ar.
ἔμελλον. He seems to have preferred
the plural wherever the choice was pos-
sible, relying on passages such as B 135,
H 6, 102, and others, where the verb
cannot be in the singular.

40. διά, either ‘‘through the whole
course’’ of battles, as we find διὰ νύκτα
in a temporal sense; or better ‘‘by
means of,” like ἣν διὰ μαντοσύνην A 72,

διὰ μῆτιν ᾿Αθήνης K 497; battles being

_Zeus’ instrument for working his will.

41. ἀμφέχντο, surrounded him, 7.e.
rang in his ears. ὀμφή in Homer is
always accompanied either with θείη or
θεοῦ, θεῶν.

48, γηγάτεον occurs only here and &
185 in‘a similar phrase. The exact
meaning of the word is doubtful ; it is
generally derived from νέος and ya- of
γίγνομαι (yé-ya-a), as meaning ‘‘ newly
produced”; but it may be questioned
whether the root ya- is ever employed to
express the production of manufactured
objects, and ven- from véFo- never
coalesces to »n-; least of all in a genuine
Homeric word. Of other derivations
perhaps the least unlikely is Goebel’s,

om νη- priv.and ἀγατᾶσθαι = βλάπτεσθαι
(Heaych.) in the sense integer, fresh, not
worn (Lexil. II 588). Similarly Diintzer
refers it to root dy- of dyos=pollution,
as meaning ‘‘ undefiled.”

40 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Β (11)

εἵλετο δὲ σκῆπτρον πατρώιον, ἄφθιτον αἰεί"
σὺν τῷ ἔβη κατὰ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων.
"Has μέν pa θεὰ προσεβήσετο μακρὸν "Ολυμπον
Ζηνὶ φόως ἐρέουσα καὶ ἄλλοις ἀθανάτοισιν'
αὐτὰρ ὁ κηρύκεσσι λυγυφθόγγοισι κέλευσεν 50
κηρύσσειν ἀγορήνδε κάρη κομόωντας ᾿Αχαιούς"
οἱ μὲν ἐκήρυσσον, τοὶ δ᾽ ἠγείροντο μάλ᾽ ὧκα.
βουλὴν δὲ πρῶτον μεγαθύμων ἷξε γερόντων
Νεστορέῃ παρὰ νηὶ ἸΠυλουγενέος βασιλῆος.
\ Ὁ 4 \ 3 4 4
τοὺς 6 γε συγκαλέσας πυκινὴν ἠρτύνετο βουλὴν" 55
“ κλῦτε, φίλοι" θεῖός μοι ἐνύπνιον ἦλθεν ὄνειρος
ἀμβροσίην διὰ νύκτα, μάλιστα δὲ Νέστορι δίῳ
εἶδός τε μέγεθός τε φυήν T ἄγχιστα ἐῴκειν.
ol > wi 3 ¢€ \ nA ί \ σι Ν
στῆ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπὲρ κεφαλῆς, καί με πρὸς μῦθον ἔευπεν"
‘ εὕδεις, ᾿Ατρέος υἱὲ δαΐφρονος ἱπποδάμοιο" 60
3 \ 7 ef , ΝΜ
οὐ χρὴ παννύχιον εὕδειν βουληφόρον ἄνδρα,
ᾧ λαοί 7° ἐπιτετράφαται καὶ τόσσα μέμηλεν.
νῦν δ᾽ ἐμέθεν ξύνες ὦκα" Διὸς δέ τοι ἄγγελός εἶμε,
a ” 2A / / 90 ’ἤ
ὅς σευ ἄνευθεν ἐὼν μέγα κήδεται ἠδ᾽ ἐλεαίρει"
θωρῆξαί σ᾽ ἐκέλευσε κάρη κομόωντας ᾿Αχαιοὺς 65
πανσυδίῃ" viv yap Kev ἕλοις πόλιν εὐρνάγνιαν
Τρώων" οὐ γὰρ ἔτ᾽ ἀμφὶς ᾿Ολύμπια δώματ᾽ ἔχοντες
ἀθάνατοι φράζονται" ἐπέγναμψεν γὰρ ἅπαντας
Ἥρη λισσομένη, Τρώεσσι δὲ κήδε᾽ ἐφῆπται
ἐκ Διός. ἀλλὰ σὺ σῇσιν ἔχε φρεσίν. ads ὁ μὲν εἰπὼν 70

46. ἄφθιτον, as the work οὗ a god
(see 1. 101) and the symbol of a divine
authority.

49. épéovora, heralding the approach of
light; so Ψ 226, ἑωσφόρος εἶσι φόως ἐρέων
ἐπὶ γαῖαν.

53. For βουλήν of Zenod. and MSS.
Aristarchos read βουλή, taking [fe as in-
transitive, as is usual in Homer (e.g. 1].
96 and 792). The transitive use appears
to recur only in Q 553. The BovdAy was
composed of a small number of the most
important chiefs (γέροντες) special]
summoned; sec K 195. From K 108-
114 there would seem to have been about
nine members in the absence of Achilles:
viz. Agamemnon, Menelaos, Nestor,
Diomedes, Odysseus, the two Aiantes,
Meges, and Idomeneus.

; δά. Neoropéy = Νέστορος, as NyAnly,
. 20.

56 = £495. ἐνύπνιον, which does not
recur in Homer, is an adverbial neut. of the
adj. ἐνύπνιος (like ἦλθον ἐναίσιμον; Z 519),
and 18 80 found in -Ar. Vesp, 1218, ἐνύπνιον
ἑστιώμεθα. Compare the Attic use of
ὄναρ. In later Greek, however, ἐνύπνιον
was generally used as a substantive, and
accordingly Zenod. read θεῖον here.

57. 'στα -- ἄγχιστα, rather tauto-
logical, though the two words do not
perhaps mean exactly the same; μάλιστα
= to Nestor more than to any other,
ἄγχιστα = very closely resembled. But
58 = § 152, and has probably been
adopted by the interpolator without due
care. For φνή, cf. A 115.

60-70. In place of this third repetition
of the dream Zen. read— ;
ἠνώγει σε πατὴρ ὑψίζυγος αἰθέρι ναίων
Τρωσὶ μαχήσασθαι προτὶ Ἴλιον. ὡς ὁ μὲν

εἰπών, κιτ.λ.

ΙΛΊΙΑΔΟΣ Β it.) 41

ν > 9 4 > \ \ \ ef +A
@YET ἀποπτάμενος, ἐμὲ δὲ γλυκὺς ὕπνος ἀνῆκεν.
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγετ᾽, αἴ κέν πως θωρήξομεν υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶν.
πρῶτα δ᾽ ἐγὼν ἔπεσιν πειρήσομαι, ἣ θέμις ἐστίν,
Ν , \ ‘ , ,
καὶ φεύγειν σὺν νηυσὶ πολυκλήισι κελεύσω"
ὑμεῖς δ᾽ ἄλλοθεν ἄλλος ἐρητύειν ἐπέεσσιν." 75
φ μή > Φ 3 \ > wWw 3S & a δ᾽ > ἡ
ἢ τοι ὅ γ᾽ ὧς εἰπὼν Kat ap ἕξετο, τοῖσι δ᾽ ἀνέστη
Νέστωρ, ὅς ῥα Πύλοιο ἄναξ ἣν ἠμαθόεντος"
ὅ σφιν ἐὺ φρονέων ἀγορήσατο καὶ μετέειπεν"
“ὦ φίλοι, ᾿Αργείων ἡγήτορες ἠδὲ μέδοντες,
9 4 \ wv 42 “A wv: »
εἰ μὲν TLS τὸν ὄνειρον Αχαιῶν ἄλλος ἐνισπεν, 80
φεῦδός κεν φαῖμεν καὶ νοσφιζοίμεθα μᾶλλον"
les > A / > w 3 “A v
νῦν δ᾽ ἴδεν, ὃς μέγ᾽ ἄριστος ᾿Αχαιῶν εὔχεται εἶναι.
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγετ᾽, αἴ κέν πως θωρήξομεν υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶν."
ὧς ἄρα φωνήσας βουλῆς ἐξ ἦρχε νέεσθαι,
e > 93 / / , ζω
οἱ & ἐπανέστησαν πείθοντο τε ποιμένι λαῶν 8ὅ

σκηπτοῦχοι βασιλῆες.

’ὔ
ἐπεσσεύοντο δὲ λαοί.

9. 3 3 4 ’ 9 ’
ἠύτε ἔθνεα εἶσι μελισσάων ἀδινάων,

73. The idea of tempting the army has
been compared with a similar story told of
Cortez: a proposal on his part to return
was made merely to excite thespirits of his
followers, and met with complete success.

81. φαῖμέν κεν is potential; ‘‘we
inight deem it a delusion.”

82. The idea clearly is that the supreme
king has an innate might to communica-
tions from heaven on behalf of the
people at large. Nestor’s silence with
respect to Agamemnon’s last proposition
may perhaps be explained as due to dis-
approval of a resolution which he sees
it 1s useless to resist. But the speech is
singularly jejune and unlike the usual
style of Nestor; 1. 82 seems much more in
place in 22 222; and Aristarchos rejected
76-83 entirely, on the ground that it was
for Agamemnon and not for Nestor to
lead the way out from the council.

87. ἀδινάων (or as Aristarchos seems,
from a scholium of Herodianus on this
passage, to have written the word, aé-
vdwy), ‘* busy.” The word seems to ex-
press originally quick restless motion ;
and is thus applied to the heart (II 481,
τ 516), to sheep (a 92, ὃ 820), and to
flies (B 469); then to vehemence of
grief ( 225, w 317, and often), and to
the passionate song of the Sirens (y 326).
According to the explanation of the
ancients, adopted by Buttmann, the
primary sense is ‘‘dense”; but this

gives a much less satisfactory chain of
significations. It is then particularly
hard to explain the application of the
word to the heart; few will be
thoroughly satisfied with the supposi-
tion that it means ‘‘composed of «dense
fibres,” while a more probable epithet
than ‘‘ busy” or ‘‘ beating” could not
be found. Goebel’s derivation of the
word from ἀ- intens., and root δι- to
move (v. Curt. Ht. no. 268), is at least
as good as Buttmann’s, who connects it
with adpés. It may be noticed that both
ἔθνεα εἶσι (which Bentley emended ἔθνε᾽
ἴασι), and al δέ re ἔνθα (1. 90) are cases
of hiatus illicitus ; 1,6, they occur at
points where there is no caesura nor an
tendency to a break in the line whic
might account for them. Of the fifty-
three cases of such hiatus in Homer,
twenty-three occur at the end of the
second foot, and twenty-one at the end
of the fifth ; six are found in the first,
two in the third, and only one in the
fourth. A complete list will be found
in Knos, De digammo Homerico, Ὁ. 47.
The hiatus is legitimate if found (1) in
the trochaic caesura of the third foot ;
(2) in the bucolic diaeresis ; (3) at the end
of the first foot. (In reckoning cases of
hiatus Knos omits genitives in -ao and
-oto, Which in his opinion do not suffer
elision, and words like zrepé, τι, and others,
which certainly do not.)

49 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B (11)

4 3 A 3 ’ 3 4
πέτρης ἐκ γλαφυρῆς αἰεὶ νέον ἐρχομενάων'
βοτρυδὸν δὲ πέτονται ἐπ᾽ ἄνθεσιν εἰαρινοῖσιν"

e VA > [τ / e , 54 ᾿
αἱ μέν τ᾽ ἔνθα ἅλις πεποτήαται, at δέ τε ἔνθα" 90
ὧς τῶν ἔθνεα πολλὰ νεῶν ἄπο καὶ κλισιάων
ἠιόνος προπάροιθε βαθείης ἐστιχόωντο
ἰλαδὸν εἰς ἀγορήν" μετὰ δέ σφισιν boca δεδήειν
9 a > of \ Ν e > 2
ὀτρύνουσ᾽ ἰέναι, Διὸς ἄγγελος" οἱ δ᾽ ἀγέροντο.

4 > 9 fe \ \ a
τετρήχει δ᾽ ἀγορή, ὑπὸ δὲ στεναχίζετο γαῖα 95

λαῶν ἱζόντων, ὅμαδος δ᾽ ἦν.

ἐννέα δέ σφεας

κήρυκες βοόωντες ἐρήτυον, εἴ ποτ᾽ ἀντῆς

’ ᾽ 9 4 \ 4 ᾽
σχοίατ᾽, ἀκούσειαν δὲ διοτρεφέων βασιλήων.
σπουδῇ δ᾽ ἕζετο λαός, ἐρήτυθεν δὲ καθ᾽ ἕδρας

παυσάμενοι κλαγγῆς.

ἀνὰ δὲ κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων

100

μὲ “ » Ν \ Ω͂ 4 ᾽
ἔστη σκῆπτρον ἔχων" τὸ μὲν “Ἥφαιστος κάμε τεύχων.
Ἥφαιστος μὲν δῶκε Aci Κρονίωνι ἄνακτι,

αὐτὰρ ἄρα Ζεὺς δῶκε διακτόρῳ ἀργεϊφόντῃ"

“Ἑρμείας δὲ ἄναξ δῶκεν Πέλοπι πληξίππῳ,

αὐτὰρ ὁ αὗτε Πέλοψ δῶκ᾽ ᾿Ατρέι ποιμένι λαῶν'

105

᾿Ατρεὺς δὲ θνήσκων ἔλιπεν πολύαρνι Θυέστῃ,.
αὐτὰρ ὁ αὖτε Θυέστ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνονι λεῖπε φορῆναι,
πολλῇσιν νήσοισι καὶ "Apyet παντὶ ἀνάσσειν.
τῷ ὅ η᾽ ἐρεισάμενος Ere ᾿Αργείοισι μετηύδα"

88. νέον, ‘‘in fresh supplies,” as we
say.

0. βοτρυδόν naturally reminds us of
the settling of a new swarm of bees,
hanging down in a solid mass like a
bunch of grapes. But ἄνθεσιν rather
indicates that no more is meant than
the thronging of them upon the flowers
in the eager search for honey.

90. ἅλις is here used in its primary
sense, ‘‘in throngs,” from Fax, to squeeze
(βείλειν, ἀ-ολλ-έες, etc.) ; it is thus almost
identical with ἰλαδόν, 1. 93.

93. δεδήει ; this metaphor isa favourite
one with Homer, especially of battle (cf.
ws οἱ μὲν μάρναντο δέμας πυρὸς αἰθομένοιο,
21; and the word dats); it is applied
even to οἰμωγή in v 353. For the per-
sonification of ὅσσα, heaven-sent rumour,
cf. w 413, and see Buttinann, Lexil. 8.0.

95. τετρήχει, plpf. intrans., from τα-
ράσσω. The form recurs in H 346.

99. σπουδῇ, ‘‘with trouble,” ize.
hardly. So E 893, A 562, w 119, etc.

108. διακτόρῳ ἀργεϊφόντῃ: these
names of Hermes are obscure. The

former probably means ‘‘the runner,”
from διακ-, a lengthened form of &-a-,
root δὶ to run, whence also δεώκ-ω.
(Goebel derives both διάκτορος and διώκω
from διά and root ἀκ- to be swift ; whence
ὠκύς and διάκονος.) ᾿Αργεϊφόντης is tradi-
tionally explained ‘‘slayer of Argos”;
but Homer does not a to have
known this legend, which may v
likely have arisen by “ Volksetymologie
from the name. Goebel is therefore
probably right in translating ‘‘ swift
appearing,” a fitting name for the fleet
messenger. Forms from ¢ev- to slay,
and φαν- to shine, are often identical.
108. Argos here, from its opposition
to the islands, can hardly mean legs
than the whole of the mainland over
which the suzerainty of Agamemnon
extended. See Gladstone, Juv. Munds,
p- 46, and the remarks of Thucydides,
1 9, where he calls this passage the
σκήπτρου παράδοσις. This famous line
seems to have reached even the ‘‘ Morte
d’Arthur”; ‘‘ king he was of all Ireland
and of many isles,” i, 24. ;

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Β 11.) 43

“@ φίλοι ἥρωες Δαναοί, θεράποντες Άρηος,

110

Ζεύς με μέγα Κρονίδης ἄτῃ ἐνέδησε βαρείῃ,
σχέτλιος, ὃς πρὶν μέν μοι ὑπέσχετο καὶ κατένευσεν
Ἴλιον ἐκπέρσαντ᾽ ἐυτείχεον ἀπονέεσθαι,

νῦν δὲ κακὴν ἀπάτην βουλεύσατο, καί με κελεύει

δυσκλέα ἴΑργος ἱκέσθαι, ἐπεὶ πολὺν ὥλεσα λαόν.

115

οὕτω που Aut μέλλει ὑπερμενέι φίλον εἶναι,

ὃς δὴ πολλάων πολίων κατέλυσε κάρηνα

ἠδ᾽ ἔτι καὶ λύσει" τοῦ γὰρ κράτος ἐστὶ μέγιστον.
αἰσχρὸν γὰρ τόδε η᾽ ἐστὶ καὶ ἐσσομένοισι πυθέσθαι,

μὰψ οὕτω τοιόνδε τοσόνδε τε λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν

120

ἄπρηκτον πόλεμον πολεμίζειν ἠδέ μάχεσθαι
ἀνδράσι παυροτέροισι, τέλος δ᾽ οὔ πώ τι πέφανται.
εἴ περ γάρ K ἐθέλοιμεν ᾿Αχαιοί τε Τρῶές τε,
ὅρκια πιστὰ ταμόντες, ἀριθμηθήμεναι ἄμφω,

Τρῶες μὲν λέξασθαι, ἐφέστιοι ὅσσοι ἔασιν,

125

ἡμεῖς δ᾽ ἐς δεκάδας διακοσμηθεῖμεν ᾿Αχαιοί,
Τρώων δ᾽ ἄνδρα ἕκαστοι ἑλοίμεθα οἰνοχοεύειν,
πολλαί κεν δεκάδες δευοίατο οἰνοχόοιο.
τόσσον ἐγώ φημι πλέας ἔμμεναι υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶν

111. μέγα, ‘‘ with might” ; so MSS.
with Zenod. Aristarchos read μέγας,
according to the explicit statement of
Didymos, who expressly contradicts
Aristonikos on this point. 111-118 =
I 18-25, g.v. Zen. omitted 112-118 here.

113. The main idea is given by ἐκ-
πέρσαντα : we should say, ‘‘ that I should
not return till I had wasted TIlios.”
The acc. is the regular idiom. (Cf. A
541.)

115. δυσκλέα must be a contracted
form for dvoxdeéa: it would seem that
we should write either δυσκλεᾶ, or more
probably δυσκλεέ. The same question
arises on 1 189; v. also 2 202; H. 6. 8
105, 4.

116. πον μέλλει, ‘it must be that,”
as © 83, μέλλω wou ἀπεχθέσθαι Ad πατρί.
Bekker brackets 116-18, urging that such
an appeal to Zeus as destroyer of citics
contradicts what Agamemnon has just
been saying. This, however, actually
weakens the passa e; for surely the
thought that Zeus has so often ‘‘ over-
thrown fenced cities” heightens the
bitterness of the ἄτη which Agamemnon
says has come upon him. For κάρηνα

used of cities compare the frequent
epithet εὐστέφανος.
125. λέξασθαι, to number themselves.
t, v.e. citizens in the town, as
opposed to the allies from other lands.
ρῶες Ar., MSS. Τρῶας, which would
mean ‘‘to muster the Trojans.” After
Τρῶες above the nom. is more natural,
‘‘the Trojans to muster themselves.”
For εἴ wep... xe with opt. see Lange,
EI, p. 195, where he shows that it
differs only by a shade from the single
el with opt. For the sentiment compare
Virg. din, xii. 238, Vix hostem, alterni
st congrediamur, habemus.

127. ἕκαστοι, 1.56. each set of ten.
The MSS. all give ἕκαστον : the text,
which is more idiomatic and vigorous,
is apparently the old reading, as Schol.
A (Didymos) mentions ἕκαστον as the
reading of one Ixion.

129. πλέας, a comparative form=
πλέονας, apparently for m)e-eas = πλε-
jeo-as, the suffix -7εσ- being the same
as Lat. -ior. (H. G. § 121). It is an
Aeolic word, and remained in common
use to historical times, being found in
an inscription from Mytilene?(Collitz,

44 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Β (1)

Τρώων, of ναίουσι κατὰ πτόλιν" ἀλλ᾽ ἐπίκουροι 130
/ 3 ’ 3 ᾽ ΝΜ) ΝΜ)
πολλέων ἐκ πολίων ἐγχέσπαλοι ἄνδρες ἔνεισιν,
¢/ / 4 \ 3 IA > 37h
οἵ με μέγα πλάζουσι Kai οὐκ εἰῶσ᾽ ἐθέλοντα
᾽ , ? / 2. μ ί θ
Γλίου ἐκπέρσαι ἐὺ vavopevov πτολίεθρον.
ἐννέα δὴ βεβάασι Διὸς μεγάλου ἐνιαυτοί,
καὶ δὴ δοῦρα σέσηπε νεῶν καὶ σπάρτα λέλυνται" 135
ai δέ που ἡμέτεραί τ᾽ ἄλοχοι Kal νήπια τέκνα
εἴατ᾽ ἐνὶ μεγάροις ποτιδέγμεναι" ἄμμι δὲ ἔργον
le)
αὔτως ἀκράαντον, οὗ εἵνεκα δεῦρ᾽ ἱκόμεσθα.
3 ιν 3 € A 3 A » , 4
ἀλλ᾽ dyed’, ws ἂν ἐγὼ εἴπω, πειθώμεθα πάντες"
4 A 3 ’ὔ ἰοὺ
φεύγωμεν σὺν νηυσὶ φίλην ἐς πατρίδα yaiay: 14
οὐ γὰρ ἔτι Τροίην αἱρήσομεν εὐρυάγυιαν.
Φ 4 ΄ \ \ 5. / ”
ὡς φάτο, τοῖσι δὲ θυμὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ὄρινεν
A \ 4 . 3 ΄- 4 7
πᾶσι μετὰ πληθύν, ὅσοι οὐ βουλῆς ἐπάκουσαν.
κινήθη δ᾽ ἀγορὴ φὴ κύματα μακρὰ θαλάσσης,
, 3 , \ o£. (9 De? τ’
πόντου ᾿Ϊκαρίοιο" τὰ μέν T Kvpos τε Νότος τε 145
v > » \ \ 3 4
wpop ἐπαΐξας πατρὸς Διὸς ἐκ νεφελάων.

no. 212, 9), ταὶς ἄρχαις παίσαις ταὶς ἐμ
Μ[υτιλή]ναι πλέας τ[ῶ]ν αἰμίσεων. The
nom. πλέες is found in A 395. A similar
forin is xépys, v. A 80.

130-131 were athetized by Ar. on the
ground that all the ‘‘ barbarians,” Trojans
and allies together, are elsewhere always
said to be fewer than the Grecks. The
objection rather is that elsewhere the
Trojans always play the prominent part
in the defence, while the allies are of
secondary importance. See especially
P 221.

131. ἔνεισιν, so one of the editions of
Ar., as in E 477, οἵπερ τ᾽ ἐπίκουροι
ἔνειμεν, and this gives a better sense than
éaow of MSS.

132. πλάζουσι, lead me astray, drive me
wide of the mark: cf. πάλιν πλαγχθέντας,
A 59.

133. Ἰλίου, so MSS.: ΑΥ΄ Ἴλιον. Both
constructions are found ; the acc. in line
501 and passim in the Catalogue, the
gen. in a 2 Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον,
ο 198, ete.

135. Observe the neuter plurals followed
_by one verb in the sing. and the other
in the plur.

143 wag rejected by Aristarchos as
involving unnecessary repetition; the
πληθύς of course knew nothing of the
council. For a more important objec-
tion to the line see the introduction to
the book. For the construction μετὰ

πληθύν, where we should have e

the dative, compare I 54, π 419, and
5 652 (though in the latter

ἡμέας may mean ‘‘next to us’’); and
also μετὰ χεῖρας, Herod. vii. 16, 2, Thuc.
1, 138, etc. See H. 6. § 195.

144. Aristonikos has here preserved for
us the reading of Zenodotos, φή for ws of
MSS. ; and there can be no doubt that it is
correct, though ‘Arist. rejected it with the
brief comment οὐδέποτε “Ὅμηρος τὸ φή
ἀντὶ τοῦ ὡς τέταχεν. This merely means
that the word had generally aropped out
of the MSS. in his ὧν : itis foun i
in & 499, ὁ δὲ ph κώδειαν ἀνασχών, where
it was written φῇ, and, in defiance of
Homer’s idiom, translated ‘‘said.”” The
word is doubtless for F4, an instrumental
case, from the prononimal stem ofo-;
cf. Goth. své=how; the o hardened the
F to ¢, as in σφεῖς, odds, and then dis-
appeared (so Curt. Et. no. 601, and p.
442). Others derive it from the rel.
stem Fo-, of which ὡς is possibly the
abl. Or again, φή might exactly =
Skt. νᾶ, ‘‘sicut.” But it has not yet
been proved that F can pass directly
into φ.

145. “Ixaplovo, so called from a small
island near Samos. πόντου seems to be
in apposition with θαλάσσης, as the part
to the whole.

146. pope, transitive, as ὃ 712, yp
222, in which passages it is clearly an

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Β (μὴ 45

ws δ᾽ ὅτε κινήσῃ Ζέφυρος βαθὺ λήιον ἐλθών,
λάβρος ἐπαυγίζων, ἐπί T ἠμύει ἀσταχύεσσιν,
Φ a“ n~ 9 9 \ / 9. 9 A
ὧς τῶν πᾶσ᾽ ἀγορὴ κινήθη, τοὶ δ᾽ ἀλαλητῷ

a » > » Ul a + ς / “
νῆας én’ ἐσσεύοντο, ποδῶν δ᾽ ὑπένερθε κονίη
τοὶ δ᾽ ἀλλήλοισι κέλευον

ΜΨ 3 3 /
ἰστατ ἀειρομεένη.

150

ἅπτεσθαι νηῶν ἠδ᾽ ἑλκέμεν εἰς ἅλα δῖαν,

> 4 > 93 4 > \ 3 3 \
οὐρούς τ᾽ ἐξεκάθαιρον" ἀυτὴ δ᾽ οὐρανὸν Ixev
οἴκαδε ἱεμένων" ὑπὸ δ᾽ ἥρεον ἕρματα νηῶν.

» 3 / e / / > 2
ἔνθα κεν Ἀργείοισιν υπέρμορα νόστος ἐτύχθη,

155

εἰ μὴ ᾿Αθηναίην “Ἥρη πρὸς μῦθον ἔειπεν"

“ὦ πόποι, αἰγιόχοιο Διὸς τέκος, ἀτρυτώνη,
οὕτω δὴ οἰκόνδε, φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν, /
3 a ’ > 3 > "“ a /, ‘
Αργεῖοι φεύξονται ἐπ᾽ εὐρέα νῶτα θαλάσσης ;

aorist : cf. also r 201. In N 78, 6 539,
it is intrans. and may be a perf. =Spwpe.
The usual form of the trans. aor. is of
course ὦρσε.

Some edd. have taken unnecessary
offence at the two similes. They seem
to express rather different pictures ; that
of the stormy sea bringing before us the
tumultuous rising of the assembly, while
the cornfield expresses their sudden
bending in flight all in one direction.
For the multiplication of similes cf. infra,
453-483. If either is to be rejected, it
is the first, 144-146 ; both on account of
the rather awkward addition of πόντου
Ἰκαρίοιο after θαλάσσης, and also because
it indicates a familiarity with the Asian
shore of the Aegaean sea, which is a note
of later origin.

148, tbe, sc. the cornfield. ἐπί,
before the blast. For the change from
subj. to indic. compare I 324, A 156.

152. δῖαν, here in its primitive sense,
“bright.” So of the αἰθήρ, Π 365, τ 540,
and dawn, I 240, etc. It is twice used
of the earth, = 347, Q 532; in the latter
passage the epithet seems somewhat
otiose, but in the former ‘‘ bright” is
obviously appropriate. In relation to
men and gods it appears to mean
‘‘ illustrious,” either for beauty or noble
birth ; but here again it becomes otiose
as applied to the swineherd Eumaios in
the Odyssey.

153. otpots, ‘‘the launching- ways,”
trenches in the sand by which the ships
were dragged down to the sea T¥ppara,
the props, probably large stones, placed
under the ships’ sides to keep them
upright, see A 486. The former word,

which does not recur, is perhaps conn.
with ὀρύσσω (Curtius, however, regards
the root of ὀρύσσω as pux, Et. p. 325).

155. ὑπέρμορα, a rhetorical expression
only: nothing ever actually happens in
Homer against the will of fate, as a god
always interferes to prevent it. For
similar expressions compare P 327, T 30,
336; and also Π 698, and a 34, with
Merry and Riddell’s note: and for
vrép=against, ὑπὲρ ὅρκια, Τ' 299, etc.

157. ἀτρντώνη, one of the obscure
titles of gods, of which we cannot even
say with confidence that they are of
Hellenic or Aryan origin at The
common explanation is that it means
‘*unwearied one,” from τρύω to rub (in
the sense ‘‘to wear out”). It is equally
likely that it may be connected with the
first element in the equally obscure
Τριτογένεια, for which see note on A 515.
(Reference may also be made to Auten-
rieth, App. to Nagelsbach’s Hom. Theo-
logie, ed. ὃ, p. 413.) ᾿

169. The punctuation of 159-162 is
rather doubtful. Some edd. put one
note of interrogation after αἴης, and
another (or a comma, which is the same
thing) after θαλάσσης : while others have
no note of interrogation at all. In &
88, O 201, 553, ε 204, οὕτω δή introduces
an indignant question; and this cer-
tainly gives the most vigorous sense
here. In ὃ 485, ἃ 848, οὕτω δή occurs
indeed in direct statements ; but there
it does not stand in the emphatic position
at the beginning of the sentence. On
the other hand, it seems better to place
a simple full stop after αἴης, because the
opt. is not suited to the tone of re-

σ
΄
Ι

46 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B 11.)

κὰδ δέ κεν εὐχωλὴν Πριάμῳ καὶ Τρωσὶ λίποιεν 180
᾿Αργείην “Ἑλένην, ἧς εἵνεκα πολλοὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν
ἐν Τροίῃ ἀπόλοντο, φίλης ἀπὸ πατρίδος αἴης.
ἀλλ᾽ ἴθι νῦν κατὰ λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων,
σοῖς ἀγανοῖς ἐπέεσσιν ἐρήτνε φῶτα ἕκαστον,
” A fed 3. @ / 9 99
μηδὲ ἔα νῆας Grad’ ἑλκέμεν ἀμφιελίσσας. 165
ὧς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησε θεώ, γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη"
lo) \ ? 3 / / 3
βῆ δὲ κατ᾽ Οὐλύμποιο καρήνων ἀΐξασα.
[καρπαλίμως δ᾽ ἵκανε θοὰς ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν].
εὗρεν ἔπειτ᾽ ᾿Οδυσῆα Διὲ μῆτιν ἀτάλαντον
ς 4 3 23Q9 ᾧ N 3 ’» ’
ἑσταότ᾽" οὐδ᾽ ὅ γε νηὸς ἐυσσέλμοιο μελαίνης 170
ἅπτετ᾽, ἐπεί μιν ἄχος κραδίην καὶ θυμὸν ἵκανεν.

ἀγχοῦ δ᾽ ἱσταμένη προσέφη γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη"

“ διογενὲς Λαερτιάδη, πολυμήχαν᾽ ᾿Οδυσσεῦ,

οὕτω δὴ οἰκόνδε, φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν,

φεύξεσθ᾽ ἐν νήεσσι πολυκλήισι πεσόντες ; 175
κὰδ δέ κεν εὐχωλὴν Πριάμῳ καὶ Τρωσὶ λίποιτε

monstrant questioning. Thus δέ in 160
almost = our ‘‘Why!” For εὐχωλή-Ξ
subject of boasting, compare X 433,
ὅ μοι. . . εὐχωλὴ κατὰ ἄστν πελέσκεο.

164, Ar. not without reason regarded
this line as interpolated from 180: the
task is more suited to Odysseus than
Athene, and is entirely committed to
him. Ar. equally obelized 160-162, as
being in place only in 176-178. This
however does notseem necessary. Zenod.
cut out 157-168 bodily, reading ᾿Αθηναίη
λαοσσόος ἦλθ᾽ dx’ Ὀλύμπου for ᾿Αθ. Ἥρη
πρὸς μῦθον ἔειπεν in 156.

165. μηδὲ a (so all MSS.: Bekk. after
Heyne, μηδέ τ᾽) ; a hiatus before ἐᾶν is
several times found, viz. Ρ 16, X 339,
ὃ 805, κ 536, o 420 after «, Θ 428 after
von, Ψ 78 after -oo. In seventy-nine
passages however the supposition of an
initial consonant is inadmissible (Kn6s,
de dig. Hom. p. 199). The origin of the
word is very obscure ; and it is possible
that we ought in all cases to remove
the hiatus by reading ela, etc., though
the form is nowhere actually found.

ιἐλίσσας is a word of somewhat
doubtful meaning, as it is only applied
to ships. The traditional explanation,
‘‘rowed on both sides,” is insufficient,
as there is no ground to suppose that
ἑλίσσω (FeX-) was ever used for ἐρέσσω
(root dp-), from which we actually have
ἀμφήρης, Eur. Cycl 15. Nor will

‘frolling both ways’ do, for ἑλίσσω is
not=caretw. The two meanings which
are generally adopted are (1) curved at
both ends, 1.6. rising at both bow and
stern (see note 8 to Butcher and Lang’s
Odyssey); or (2) with curved sides.
Against both these it may be urged that
ἑλίσσειν never seems to imply ‘‘ curving,”
but always “turning round,” “whirling,”
and the like, a very different idea ; and
further, with regard to (1) ἀμφί always
means ‘‘ at both sides,’ not ““ both ends.”
I venture to submit that the only sense
consonant with the use of the word
ἑλίσσω is ‘‘wheeling both ways,” de,
easily turned round, ‘‘handy.” It
might also be suggested that, if ἑλεικῶπις
=‘‘with sparkling eyes,” root ced- of
σέλας, etc., ἀμφιέλισσα might mean.
‘‘sparkling on both sides,” as used of
the bright reflexion from the hull of a
ship seen coming over the sea. This,
however, seems less appropriate.

168 is omitted by all the best MSS. :
Nikanor did not read it, for his scholion
speaks of the asyndeton after ἀΐξασα.

175. πεσόντες implies tumultuous and
disorderly flight ; so Z 82, ἐν χερσὶ γυναι-
κῶν φεύγοντας πεσέειν, οἱ αἰ. The phrase
ἐν νηυσὶ πεσέειν is however also used of
a violent attack upon the ships, and
hence an ambiguity frequently arises ;

_ eg. 1 285, A 811 (cf. 825).

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B (11) 47

᾿Αῤγείην “Ἑλένην, ἧς εἵνεκα πολλοὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν
ἐν Τροίῃ ἀπόλοντο, φίλης ἀπὸ πατρίδος αἴης.
ἀλλ᾽ ἴθι νῦν κατὰ λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν, μηδέ τ᾽ ἐρώει,
va) + 9 a 5 4 > ἢ ΄- Ψ -
σοῖς δ᾽ ἀγανοῖς ἐπέεσσιν ἐρήτυε φῶτα ἕκαστον, 180
μηδὲ ἔα νῆας ἅλαδ᾽ ἑλκέμεν ἀμφιελίσσας."
ὧς bab’, ὁ δὲ ξυνέηκε θεᾶς ὄπα φωνησάσης,
βῆ δὲ θέειν, ἀπὸ δὲ χλαῖναν βάλε: τὴν δέ κόμισσεν
κῆρυξ Εὐρυβάτης ᾿Ιθακήσιος, ὅς οἱ ὀπήδει.
αὐτὸς δ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδεω ᾿Αγαμέμνονος ἀντίος ἐλθὼν 185
δέξατό of σκῆπτρον πατρώιον, ἄφθιτον αἰεί"
σὺν τῷ ἔβη κατὰ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων.
Φ fo! 4 v 4
ὅν τινα μὲν βασιλῆα καὶ ἔξοχον ἄνδρα κιχείη,
τὸν δ᾽ ἀγανοῖς ἐπέεσσιν ἐρητύσασκε παραστάς"
“ δαιμόνι᾽, οὔ σε ἔοικε κακὸν ὡς δειδίσσεσθαι, 190
ἀλλ᾽ αὐτός τε κάθησο καὶ ἅλλους ἵδρυε λαούς.
οὐ γάρ πω σάφα οἶσθ᾽, οἷος νόος ᾿Ατρεΐωνος"
νῦν μὲν πειρᾶται, τάχα δ᾽ ἴψεται υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶν.
9 A 3 > 4 3 ’ ΝΜ
ἐν βουλῇ δ᾽ οὐ πάντες ἀκούσαμεν, οἷον ἔειπεν ;

179. ἐρώει, refrain not, hold not back.
The verb is generally used with the gen.,
πολέμοιο, χάρμης, etc.; but it occurs
without a case, μ 75, X 185, Ψ 433. In
N 57 it is transitive, ‘‘drive back.’ In
a similar sense ἐρωή (πολέμου) is used,
‘* cessation,” II 302, P 761; but ἐρωή in
its ordinary meaning of ‘‘swing, im-
petus,” must be an entirely different
word : and so also ἐρωήσει in A 808.

186. This is the sceptre described in
46, 101-109. It is of course handed over
as a sign to all that Odysseus was acting
on behalf of Agamemnon. oi, ‘‘at his
hand,” a dativus ethicus. See note on
παιδὸς ἐδέξατο χειρὶ κύπελλον, A 596.

188. μέν is answered by δ᾽ αὖ, 198.
The asyndeton at the beginning οὗ a
fresh stage in the narration is unusual.
Hence Zenod. removed the full stop
after χαλκοχιτώνων, reading Bds for ἔβη.

190. δειδίσσεσθαι is uniformly transi-
tive in Homer, and there is no reason
why it should not be so here; Odysseus
actually ‘‘ terrifies” the common sort
into the assembly (199), but will not
employ more than persuasion to the
chiefs. It would be better to write
οὐ σὲ than οὔ σε, to emphasize this
contrast ; and so Herodianus thought,
though the ‘‘usage” was against him
(ἡ μέν ἀκρίβεια ὀρθοτονεῖ, ἐγκλίνει δὲ ἡ

συνήθεια). The same schol. (Β) adds
δειδίσσεσθαι ἀντὶ τοῦ εὐλαβεῖσθαι, a wrong
interpretation, which has been generally
adopted. Mr. Monro (Journ. Phil. No.
21, p. 127) compares O 196, χερσὶ δὲ μή
τί με πάγχν κακὸν ws δειδισσέσθω : and A
280, σφῶϊ μὲν οὐ γὰρ ἔοικ᾽ ὀτρυνέμεν.
Among the solecisms derided by Lucian,
Pseudosoph. 554, is that of using dedlrro-
μαι ἴῃ the sense of ‘‘fear”; πρὸς δὲ τὸν
εἰπόντα, Δεδίττομαι τὸν ἄνδρα καὶ φεύγω,
Σύ, ἔφη, καὶ ὅταν τινα εὐλαβηθῇς, διώξῃ.

198. Aristarchos rejected this and the
following four lines as ἀπεοικότες καὶ οὐ
προτρεπτικοὶ els καταστολήν--- not very
convincing remark. On the other hand,
he inserted here 203-5, as being evidently
addressed to the kings, not to the
common folk. But as spoken to chiefs
the words would eminently be οὐ προ-
τρεπτικοὶ els καταστολήν, and likely rather
to arouse the spirit of independence and
opposition ; they gain immensely in rhe-
torical significance if addressed to the
multitude, to whom they ‘can cause no
offence.—For ἵψεται see A 454.

194, This line is probably an inter-
polation (see introduction). As it stands,
it is commonly printed without a note
of interrogation ; but ‘‘by reading it as
a rhetorical question” (an alternative
given by Schol. B) ‘‘the connexion of

48 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Β (n.)

μή τι χολωσάμενος ῥέξῃ κακὸν υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶν. 195
θυμὸς δὲ μέγας ἐστὶ διοτρεφέων βασιλήων, .
τιμὴ δ᾽ ἐκ Διός ἐστι, φιλεῖ δέ ἑ μητίετα Ζεύς."
ὃν δ᾽ αὖ δήμου ἄνδρα ἴδοι βοόωντά τ᾽ ἐφεύροε,
τὸν σκήπτρῳ ἐλάσασκεν ὁμοκλήσασκέ τε μύθῳ"

“ δαιμόνι᾽, ἀτρέμας ἧσο καὶ ἄλλων μῦθον ἄκονε,

οἱ σέο φέρτεροί εἰσι, σὺ δ᾽ ἀπτόλεμος καὶ ἄναλκις,
wv > 9 ’ 3 / ww > 9 “A
οὔτε ποτ᾽ ἐν πολέμῳ ἐναρίθμιος οὔτ᾽ ἐνὶ βουλῇ.
3 Ul ᾽ 4 3 » 9 ’
οὐ μέν πως πάντες βασιλεύσομεν ἐνθάδ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοί.
οὐκ ἀγαθὸν πολυκοιρανίη" εἷς κοίρανος ἔστω,
εἷς βασιλεύς, ᾧ δῶκε Kpovou πάις ἀγκυλομήτεω 205
n / x 3 ON , ¢/ ’ 4 99
[σκῆπτρον τ᾽ ἡδὲ θέμιστας, ἵνα σφίσι βασιλεύῃ].

the speech is considerably improved.
Odysseus has begun by explaining the
true purpose of Agamemnon. Then he
affects to remember that he is speaking
to one of the ‘kings’ who formed the
council. ‘ But why need I tell you this ?
Did we not all—we of the council—hear
what he said?’”—-Mr. Monro. This also
suits line 143, πᾶσι μετὰ πληθύν, ὅσοι οὐ
βουλῆς ἐπάκουσαν. On the other hand
there is no doubt that the council is
always regarded as consisting only of a
small number of ‘‘ kings,” not as includ-
ing all the chiefs. Nine persons, Aga-
memnon, Menelaos, Odysseus, Nestor,
Achilles, the two Aiantes, Diomedes and
-‘Idomeneus, ‘‘are the only undeniable
kings of the Iliad, as may be seen from
comparing together B 404-9, T 309-311,
and from the transactions of K 34-197.
Particular phrases or passages might raise
the question whether four others, Meges,
Eurypylos, Patroklos, and Phoinix, were
not viewed by Homer as being also
kings.” —Gladstone, Juv. M. p. 417-18.
This is clearly too small a number to be
expressed by line 188, and this considera-
tion no doubt led to the rejection of the
note of interrogation.

196. Zenod. read διοτρεφέων βασιλήων,
and so Aristotle and others quote; Ar.
(followed by the best MSS.) -éos and
-hos, which looks like an alteration made
in support of his theory that é could
not be used, as Zenod. maintained, and
as the practice of later poets (e.g. Hymn.
Ven. 267) exemplified, for a plural (sec
on A 393). It is however quite possible
to retain the plural used generically, and
yet take ἑ as sing. used of a particular
instance, as is proved by 3 691—

ἥ τ᾽ ἐστὶ δίκη θείων βασιλήων,
ἄλλον κ᾽ ἐχθαίρησι βροτῶν, ἄλλον κε φιλοίη.
Compare Eurip. And. 421—

οἰκτρὰ yap τὰ δυστνχῇ
βροτοῖς ἅπασι, κἂν θυραῖος ὧν κυρῇ.
(Monro ut sup. and H. G. § 255). The
line is quoted with the gen. pl. by Aris-
totle, t. ii. 2, Schol. A on A 178, and
elsewhere.

198. ϑήμον ἄνδρα, so best MSS. ; vulg.
δήμου τ' ἄνδρα : the τ’ is probably in-
serted only to avoid the hiatus, which
is rare in this place. We should rather
read δήμοι (and so in Ψ 481, Q 578).
Numerous indications point to the con-
clusion! that the final -o of the gen. was
readily elided in early Epic poetry. If
τε be retained, it must connect ἔδοι with
ἐφεύροι, or otherwise we get a false
opposition between the common sort and
the shouters.

202. ἐναρίθμιος, i nullo numero, “ not
counted.”

203. οὐ pév=Att. od δήπου, as 238:
μέν is virtually=qv, and has no ad-
versative force here. For the nent.
ἀγαθόν in the next line οὗ triste Teuepus
stabulis, Verg. Ec. iii. 80.

206 is apparently inserted in order
to supply an object to δῶκε, which does
not need one. For this fertile source of
interpolation see on A 296. It is
clumsily altered from I 99, apparently
at a time when the sense of metre was
dying out. It is, however, as old as the
age of Trajan, for Dio Chrysostom (Or. i.
p. 8) knows it. It is found only in two
second-class MSS. It is hardly worth
while discussing the reference of σφισι,
which may have been supposed = ὑμῖν,
or simply transferred from I 99 without

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B (11) 49

? eo 7 , , e δ᾽ 9 4 ὃ
ὡς 0 γε κοιρανέων δίεπε στρατόν" οἱ δ᾽ ἀγορήνδε
A ΝΜ
αὗτις ἐπεσσεύοντο νεῶν ἄπο καὶ κλισιάων
ἠχῇ, ὡς ὅτε κῦμα πολυφλοίσβοιο θαλάσσης

αἰγιαλῷ μεγώλῳ βρέμεται, σμαραγεῖ δέ τε πόντος.

210

ἄλλοι μέν ῥ᾽ ἕξοντο, ἐρήτυθεν δὲ καθ᾽ ἕδρας,
Θερσίτης δ᾽ ἔτι μοῦνος ἀμετροεπὴς ἐκολῴα,
ced eo wv # 4 4 ΝΜ
ὅς p ἔπεα φρεσὶν ἧσιν ἄκοσμά τε πολλά τε ἤδη,
/ ΣΝ 3 / ) , aA
pay ἀτὰρ ov κατὰ κόσμον ἐριζέμεναι βασιλεῦσιν,

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι οἱ εἴσατο γελοίιον ᾿Αργείοισιν
αἴσχιστος δὲ ἀνὴρ ὑπὸ Ἴλιον ἦλθεν"

ἔμμεναι.

215

φολκὸς ἔην, χωλὸς δ᾽ ἕτερον πόδα" τὼ δέ of ὥμω
κυρτώ, ἐπὶ στῆθος συνοχωκότε'" αὐτὰρ ὕπερθεν
φοξὸς ἔην κεφαλήν, ψεδνὴ δ᾽ ἐπενήνοθε λάχνη.

further consideration. If the line is to
be made metrical, βουλεύησι would be
better than Barnes's ἐμβασιλεύῃ.

209. On ὡς ὅτε in similes v. 394.

212. Θερσίτης is apparently an Aeolic
form from θράσος : cf. Θερσίλοχος P 216,
Πολυθερσεΐδης φιλοκέρτομος x 287. ἐκο-

λῴα, see A 575. Gperpoerfs is illus-
trated by Soph. Phil. 442—

Θερσίτης τις ἦν
ὃς οὐκ ἂν εἵλετ᾽ εἰσάπαξ εἰπεῖν ὅπου
μηδεὶς ἐῴη.

214. The infin. in this line is epexe-
getic, and is qualified by μὰψ ἀτὰρ οὐ
κατὰ κόσμον. For ἄκοσμά re πολλά τε we
should have in Attic πολλά τε καὶ ἄκοσμα,
and for ἀτὰρ οὐ, οὐδέξς For the litotes οὐ
κατὰ κόσμον cf. πληγεὶς οὐ κατὰ x. Θ 12,
and οὐ κόσμῳ Μ 225. Schol. A rightly
πολλά Te kal ἄτακτα λέγειν ἠπίστατο, ὥστε
μάτην καὶ οὐ πρὸς λόγον φιλονεικεῖν τοῖς
βασιλεῦσιν. In the next line we may
understand λαλεῖν or the like after ἀλλά.

The Scholiasts give two curious legends
about Thersites: one that he had been
Homer’s guardian, and in that capacity
had robbed him of his inheritance, and
is thus caricatured in immortal revenge ;
the other that he had been crippled by
Meleagros, who threw him down a pre-
cipice because he skulked in the chase of

the boar of Kalydon. They also point

out that Homer mentions neither his —

father nor his country, in order to
indicate his base origin. He is the only
common soldier mentioned by name in

the Iliad.
217. φολκός, φοξός, Webvds are all dx.
λεγόμενα in Homer, and it is impossible

to be sure of their derivation and mean-

E

ing. The first seems never to recur in
all existing Greek literature. φολκὸς
ὁ τὰ φάη εἱλκυσμένος ὃ ἐστιν ἐστραμμένος
(ὦ. 6. squinting), Schol. A. This ety-
mology was universally accepted by
antiquity, but it is of course untenable.
Buttm. Lexil. p. 536, points out that
the order of the adjectives clearly shews
that φολκός refers to the feet or legs.
He is robably right in explaining
‘* bandy-legged,” but hardly in connect-
ing it with valgus. It goes rather with
φάλκης, the rib of a ship, Lat. falz, flecto
(Curt. Εἴ. no. 115). φοξός is explained
as meaning strictly “warped in burning,”
of pottery (gota κυρίως εἰσὶ τὰ πυριρραγῆ
ὄστρακα, Schol., who quotes Simonides,
αὔτη δὲ φοξίχειλος ᾿Αργείη κύλιξ), and
hence with a distorted head. In this
sense ‘‘the works of the old physicians
shew that it continued in constant use,
not merely as a poetical word, but as
one of daily occurrence” (Buttm. 1.1.).
Perhaps conn. with φώγω, bake (Buttm.,
Curt.), in the sense of overbaked. ψεδ-
vés, παρὰ τὸ YG, ὄνομα ῥηματικὸν Wedves
ὁ μαδαρός, Schol. L (.6. falling away,
sparse).

219. ἐπ -εν - ἤνοθε, ‘‘sprouted upon
it,” either from a stem ἀνοθ for ἀνθ of
ἄνθος etc. (Curt. Et. no. 304, after Buttm.
Lexil. pp. 110 sqqg.), or rather a redu-

licated perf. from évé@w, perhaps “had
its place upon it”; dve@ making ἀνήνοθα.
A 266. For συνοχωκότε of MSS. Cobet
(Misc. Crit. 304) is doubtless right in
reading συνοκωχότε, the only correct form
from cuvéxw, which is given by Hesych.
λάχνη, ‘‘down,” ‘‘stubble.” λαχνήεις is
used of swine, I 548.

50 LAIAAOS B (rr)

ἔχθιστος δ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆν μάλιστ᾽ ἦν ἠδ᾽ ᾿Οδυσῆι" 200

τὼ yap νεικείεσκε.

ὀξέα κεκληγὼς λέγ᾽ ὀνείδεα" τῷ δ᾽ ἄρ

τότ᾽ avr ᾿Αγαμέμνονι δίῳ

> ΚΝ 9

᾿Αχαιοὶ

ἐκπώγλως κοτέοντο νεμέσσηθέν τ᾽ ἐνὶ θυμῷ.

αὐτὰρ ὁ μακρὰ βοῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνονα νείκεε μύθῳ"

© ᾿Ατρεΐδη, τέο δὴ adr’ ἐπιμέμφεαι ἠδὲ χατίζεις ; 295
πλεῖαί Tor χαλκοῦ κλισίαι, πολλαὶ δὲ γυναῖκες

εἰσὶν ἐνὶ κλισίῃς ἐξαίρετοι, ἅς τοι ᾿Αχαιοὶ

πρωτίστῳ δίδομεν, εὖτ᾽ ἂν πτολίεθρον ἕλωμεν.

ἢ ἔτι καὶ χρυσοῦ ἐπιδεύεαι, ὅν κέ τις οἴσει

Τρώων ἱπποδάμων ἐξ ᾿Ιλίου υἷος ἄποινα, 230
ὅν κεν ἐγὼ δήσας ἀγάγω ἢ ἄλλος ᾿Αχαιῶν,

ἠὲ γυναῖκα νέην, ἵνα μίσγεαι ἐν φιλότητι,

Ὁ 3 9. AN 3 ,
ἥν τ᾽ αὐτὸς ἀπονόοσφι κατίσχεαι ;

᾽ \
ov μὲν ἔοικεν

ἀρχὸν ἐόντα κακῶν ἐπιβασκέμεν υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶν.

ὦ πέπονες, κάκ᾽ ἐλέγχε᾽, ᾿Αχαιίδες, οὐκέτ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοί,

οἴκαδέ περ σὺν νηυσὶ νεώμεθα, τόνδε δ᾽ ἐῶμεν

222, λέγε in the strict Homeric sense,
“counted out,” enumerated, débitait ses
injures. τῷ is clearly Agamemnon.
Thersites is at the moment the accepted
spokesman of the mob, who are indig-
nant with Agamemnon for his treatment
of Achilles ; and it is by a subtle piece
of psychology that they are made ashamed
of themselves and brought to hear reason
by seeing their representative exhibited
in an absurd and humiliating light, and
their own sentiments caricatured till they
dare not acknowledge them.

225. τέο : the gen. is the same as A 65,
ἤ τ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὅ γ᾽ εὐχωλῆς ἐπιμέμφεται ἥ θ᾽ éxa-
τόμβης. Thersites pretends that avarice
is Agamemnon’s only reason for wishing
to continue the war.

228, εὖτ᾽ dv, as often as we take any
Trojan stronghold. See A 163. Ther-
sites seems purposely to allude to Achil-
les’ words (Autenricth).

229. ἦ, ‘‘can it be that.” «éwith the
fut. indic. here implies ‘‘if the war goes
on.” Cf. A139, 522, etc. Similarly nev
ἀγάγω, 231, ‘“whom in that case I shall
bring.”

232. γυναῖκα νέην is strict]
dinate with χρυσοῦ (229), an
therefore to be gen. The intervening
acc. in the preceeding line no doubt
caused the change, which is natural
enough toa speaker. plo-yent and κατίσ-
Xeat must be subj. ; but the short vowel

co-or-
ought

cannot be right. Curt. V0. ii. 72, would
read -yae in both cases, the η being -
metrically shortened before the vowel,
as in βέβληαι A 880—unless we prefer in
all cases to scan -na as one syllable by
crasis. Christ reads ployy and κατίσχη.

233. οὐ μέν as 203. Bentley conj. of
oe, Heyne οὐδέ, Christ yes b

234. κακῶν βασκέμεν, bring into
trouble. This causal sénse is probably
not elsewhere found with the verb-suffix
-ox-. Cf. © 285, 1546, ¥18. Zenodotos
rejected 227-8 (reading πλεῖαι δὲ “γυναι-
κῶν) and 281-4, apparently thinking

them too comical for Epic .

235. πέπονες : this ord ie toand in
H. only in the voc. It is generally a
polite address, sometimes with a shade
of remonstrance, such as is often ex-
pressed in our ‘‘My good sir!” It is
always found in the sing. except here
and N 120, and in these two
only it has a distinctly contemptuous
meaning, ‘‘weaklings.” ἐλέγχεα, an ab-
stract noun used as a concrete. Monro
(H. 6. 8 116) compares ὁμηλικίη = ὁμῆλιξ,
X 209, δῆμον ἐόντα one of the common
sort, M 213. It should be substituted for
ἐλεγχέες in A 242, g.v. Sora δ᾽ ἐλέγχεα
πάντα λέλειπται, 2260. *AxarBes, οὐκέτ᾽
᾿Αχαιοί = H 96, imit. by Vergil, en.
ix. 617, o vere Phrygiac, neque enim
Phryges.

236. οἴκαδέ περ, ‘‘let us have nothing

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Β (μ.) 51

᾽ a 9 VN ’ὔ 4 4 We, 3
αὐτοῦ ἐνὶ Τροίῃ γέρα πεσσέμεν, ὄφρα ἴδηται,
ἤ ῥά τί οἱ χ᾽ ἡμεῖς προσαμύνομεν He καὶ οὐκί"
A “A 3 “Ὁ Ψ , > 23 / A
ὃς καὶ viv ᾿Αχιλῆα, ἕο μέγ᾽ ἀμείνονα φῶτα,

» γ ey N \ v / > _\ 3 4
ἡτίμησεν" ELOY γὰρ EXEL γέρας, AUTOS ἀπούρας.

240

ἀλλὰ μάλ᾽ οὐκ ᾿Αχιλῆι χόλος φρεσίν, ἀλλὰ μεθήμων"
4 ΝΜ, 3 . “ ef 4 9
ἢ yap av, ᾿Ατρεΐδη, viv ὕστατα λωβήσαιο.

ὧς φάτο νεικείων ᾿Αγαμέμνονα ποιμένα λαῶν
Θερσίτης" τῷ δ᾽ ὦκα παρίστατο δῖος ᾿Οδυσσεύς,

καί μιν ὑπόδρα ἰδὼν χαλεπῷ ἠνίπαπε μύθῳ"

245

‘cc a > 9 ’ ’ 4«Ὰ 3 4
Θερσῖτ᾽ ἀκριτόμυθε, Nuys περ ἐὼν ἀγορητής,
ἴσχεο, μηδ᾽ ἔθελ᾽ οἷος ἐριξέμεναι βασιλεῦσιν.
> \ > A ᾽ ἤ Ν 3
οὐ γὰρ ἐγὼ σέο φημὶ χερειότερον βροτὸν ἄλλον
ἔμμεναι, ὅσσοι ἅμ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδῃς ὑπὸ Ἴλιον ἦλθον.
a 3 a 2 \ / o>» 3 /
τῶ οὐκ ἂν βασιλῆας ἀνὰ otop ἔχων ayopevots, 260
καί σφιν ὀνείδεώ τε προφέροις νόστον τε φυλάσσοις.
3 / 4 [4 ” 4 Ν
οὐδέ τί πω σάφα ἴδμεν, ὅπως ἔσται τάδε ἔργα,

short of return home” (Monro, H. G. 8
353).

237. γέρα πεσσέμεν, ‘‘to digest, gorge
himself on, meeds of honour,” enjoy
them by himself. Cf. A 81.

238. x’ ἡμεῖς, 1.6. xal. Some read of
x’ (i.e. xe). But προσαμύνομεν must be
the pres. indic. ; if it were aor. subj. it
would mean ‘‘if we shall help him,” a
sense clearly precluded by the nature of
Thersites’ proposition. «xe too is quite
out of place in a general question. καί
must be taken closely with ἡμεῖς, we
also of the common sort, as well as great
chiefs like Achilles. So 6111, εἴσεται εἰ
καὶ ἐμὸν δόρυ μαίνεται. The second καί is
that commonly used to give emphasis to
one of two alternatives in an indirect
disjunctive question, e.g. 299. On the
question of crasis in Homer see Z
260.

241. a goes with οὐκ, as in Germ.
gar nicht. These two lines are an ob-
vious allusion to the dispute in the
assembly, Achilles’ very words being
quoted, τοῦτο πρὸς τὸ ἀτελὲς τῆς ξιφουλ-
κίας φησίν, Schol. B.

245. ἠνίπαπε, from ἐνίπτω, a strange
reduplication, like ἠρύκακε. ἐν seems
to be the preposition, and -ἰπαπ- for -ur-
jam-, a reduplication of root ἐπ (trropa,
to hurt, oppress), with its by-form dar
(ἰάπ- τω, iac-io). The form ἐνένιπε (II
626, etc.) arises either from a misunder-
standing of the preposition (Curt. Vo.

ii. 26), or a real reduplication of it,
such as appears to be found in Skt.
(Fritzsche, C. St. vi. 330).

246. ἀκριτόμνθε, see 796 del τοι μῦθοι
φίλοι ἄκριτοί εἰσιν, @ 505 ἄκριτα πόλλ᾽
ἀγορεύειν. The latter passage shows
that the word means ‘‘ indiscriminate,”
inconsistent, rather than countless; a
sense which it would not be easy
to derive from κρίνω. So ἀκριτόμυθοι
ὄνειροι, 7 560, ‘‘hard to be discerned.”
dye’ ἄκριτα (Τ' 412, Q 91), ἄκριτον πεν-
θήμεναι (o 174, τ 120), of grief which is
not brought to a determination, ‘‘end-
less ;” ἀκριτόφυλλος B 868, with con-
fused foliage. Avybs is a word of praise
(A 248) used ironically.

248. xepadrepov, virtually = χερείονα.
See A 80.

250. οὐκ ἂν ἀγορεύοις, an ironically
mild request, ‘‘ I would ask you not to
have kings’ names on your tongues.”
So = 126, ν 135 (Monro, H. 6. § 800, 8).
Or we may take τῶ as virtually a pro-
tasis, ‘‘if that were not so.”

251. mpodépors, ‘‘ cast in their teeth,”
as T 64. νόστον φυλάσσοις, ‘be on
the watch for departure.” The next
two lines refer to this ; but they hardly
seem in place here, and would come
more suitably after 298. Lehrs would

ut 250-1 after 264. Ar. rejected 252-6.

e repeated τῶ (250, 254) certainly
looks rather like two readings combined
in one recension.

οι
te

TAIAAO® B (11)

a 9 4 a ὔ le 3 Α A
ἢ εὖ NE κακῶς νοστήσομεν υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν.
τῶ νῦν ᾿Ατρεΐδῃ ᾿Αγαμέμνονι, ποιμένι λαῶν,

ἦσαι ὀνειδίζων, ὅτι of μάλα πολλὰ διδοῦσιν 25

on

[μή \ \ 4 3 4
ἥρωες Δαναοί" σὺ δὲ κερτομέων ἀγορεύεις.

/ ν
ἀλλ᾽ ἔκ τοι ἐρέω, τὸ δὲ καὶ τετελεσμένον ἔσται"
vo» > 93 / 4 σ ’ ὃ
εἴ κ᾽ ἔτι σ᾽ ἀφραίνοντα κυχήσομαι, ὥς νύ περ ὧδε,
μηκέτ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽ ᾿Οδυσῆι κάρη ὦμοισιν ἐπείη,

255. Ar. objected against this line
that Thersites was standing when he
spoke, and therefore the word ἦσαι could
not be properly used. But it is fre-
quently found with a participle in a
weak sense, meaning no more than to
‘‘keep on” doing a thing: 6.9. A 134,
B 137 ; sce also A 412 (comp. with 366).

258. κιχήσομαι, fut. indic. The aor.
subj. is κιχείω (or -jw), A 26. La R.’s
assertion (Crit. note on P 558) that ‘‘ εἴ
xe apud Homerum cum indicativo futuri
nusquam iungitur’’ is opposed to the ac-
cepted text, as well as to his own read-
ing elke... τελευτήσει in o 524 (where
however it would seem better to read
καί for xe, with most MSS. See on 238).
So E 212, ef δέ xe voorjow καὶ ἐσόψομαι
ὀφθαλμοῖσιν (where the form and con-
struction of the sentence, with a ‘‘ wish-
ing” clause as apodosis, exactly cor-
respond), O 213, 2 417. The question
is considerably complicated by the fact
that the forms of the aor. subj. and fut.
indic. are almost always either identical
or interchangeable by a slight alteration
of reading, which La R. adopts against
MS. authority in P 558. But the con-
struction is one which we should ὦ priori
expect to find in H., if we once admit the
fut. indic. with xe in simple sentences,
for the nuance of conditioned assertion
of futurity which it gives is eminently
suitable for use in conditional sentences.
In other words κιχήσομαί κέ σ᾽ ddpalvovra
would mean ‘‘in some case or other I
shall catch you.” The e puts this
qualified prophecy in the form of a
supposition ; ‘‘let us make this suppo-
sition—in some case I shall catch you”’;
and then the next clause goes on to
express the wish which arises in con-
nexion with such a thought. In sub-
ordinate relative clauses xe with the fut.
is not rare in our texts, e.g. 1. 229, A175
of κέ με τιμήσουσιν, Χ 70 of xe... xel-
σονται, etc. (all the p
found brought together in Ebel. L. H.
i. pp. 696-7, H. 6. 8 328, 4).

259. The apodosis here, as in E 212
sqq., virtually consists of a whole con-
ditional sentence, a second condition
occurring to the mind of the speaker as
he rhetorically expands the simple
λαβών σε ἀποδύσω which would form the
logical continuation. Telemachos is
mentioned in the Il. only here and A 354,
q.v., in an equally curious phrase. οὐχ
ἑαυτῷ viv ἀρᾶται, ἀλλὰ τῷ wacdl. καὶ
ἔστιν ἡ μὲν πρώτη κατάρα κατὰ τοῦ 'Odve-
σέως, ἡ δὲ δευτέρα κατὰ τοῦ Ἰηλεμιάχου"
εἰ γὰρ ἀπόλοιτο ὁ παῖς, οὐκέτι πατήρ ἐστιν
Ὀδυσσεύς (Schol. A). It is possible that
the origin of the expression may be more
recondite, and lie in the strange but wide-
spread use among savages of ‘‘ paedony-
mics” instead of patronymics. £.g. ‘‘In
Australia when a man’s eldest child is
named the father takes the name of th
child, Kadlitpinna the father of Kadi;
the mother 18 called Kadlingangki, or
mother of Kadli, from ngangki a female
or woman. This custom seems y
general throughout the continent. In
America we find the same habit. . . . In
Sumatra the father in many parts of the
country is distinguished by the name of
his first child, and loses, in this acquired,
his own proper name... The women never
change the name given them at the time
of their birth; yet frequently they are
called through courtesy, from their
eldest child, ‘Ma si ano,’ the mother
of such an one; but rather as a polite
description than a name.”—Lubbock,
Origin of Civilization, p. 358. The same
is the case among the Kaffirs (Theale,
Kafir Folk- Lore, P. 117). An Arab in
his full style will also call himself ‘‘ Abu
Mohammad,” father of Mohammad, or
whatever his eldest son’s name may be;
and when we are on Semitic ground we
are near enough to Greece to understand
the possibility of the same custom ob-
taining even in an Aryan race. Odysseus
thus means, ‘‘may I lose my proudest
title.’ ᾿Αλθαία Medeaypls (Ibycus, fr.
12) is another instance of a paedonymic

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Β (it) 53

μηδ᾽ ἔτι Τηλεμάχοιο πατὴρ κεκλημένος εἴην,

200

εἰ μὴ ἐγώ σε λαβὼν ἀπὸ μὲν φίλα εἵματα δύσω,

χλαῖνάν τ᾽ ἠδὲ χιτῶνα, τά T αἰδῶ ἀμφικαλύπτει,
> A \ / > \ fol 3 7

αὐτὸν δὲ κλαίοντα θοὰς ἐπὶ νῆας ἀφήσω

πεπληγὼς ἀγορῆθεν ἀεικέσσι πληγῇσιν."

as ἄρ᾽ ἔφη, σκήπτρῳ δὲ μετάφρενον ἠδὲ καὶ ὥμω

265

πλῆξεν" ὁ δ᾽ ἰδνώθη, θαλερὸν δέ ot ἔκπεσε δάκρυ.
σμῶδιξ δ᾽ αἱματόεσσα μεταφρένου ἐξυπανέστη
σκήπτρου ὕπο χρυσέου" ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἕζετο τάρβησέν τε,
3 ’ 3 2 a 20 7 3 / 4

ἀλγήσας δ᾽, ἀχρεῖον ἰδών, ἀπομόρξατο δάκρυ.

οἱ δὲ καὶ ἀχνύμενοί περ ἐπ᾿ αὐτῷ ἡδὺ γέλασσαν"

210

ὧδε δέ τις εἴπεσκεν ἰδὼν ἐς πλησίον ἄλλον"

“ὦ πόποι, ἦ δὴ μυρί᾽ Ὀδυσσεὺς ἐσθλὰ ἔοργεν

βουλάς 7’ ἐξάρχων ἀγαθὰς πόλεμόν τε κορύσσων'
A / > 9 9 Μ)

νῦν δὲ τόδε μέγ᾽ ἄριστον ἐν ᾿Αργείοισιν ἔρεξεν,

ὃς τὸν λωβητῆρα ἐπεσβόλον ἔσχ᾽ ἀγοράων.

275

Υ̓͂ 7) 4 9 3 / \ 3 7
οὔ θήν μιν πάλιν αὖτις ἀνήσει θυμὸς ὠγήνωρ

(quoted in Geddes, Prob. of Hom. Poems,
p- 84, n. 5), but I am not aware of
materials sufficient to prove that the
custom was ever prevalent in Greece ;
or that there are any relics there of the
savage’s reluctance to reveal his own
name, with which it is not improbably
connected.

266. ἔκπεσε, so MSS.: Ar. read ἔκφυγε,
on what authority we cannot tell.
θαλερόν, big; apparently from the idea
‘‘well-grown,” “flourishing,” in which
the word generally occurs (but always of
men, their limbs, grief, and the like;
never in the most literal sense, of grow-
ing trees).

269. ἀχρεῖον ἰδών, with helpless look ;
σ΄ 163 ἀχρεῖον δ᾽ ἐγέλασσε, ‘‘she laughed
an idle unmeaning laugh,” not being
really gay. So here the word seems to
imply a dazed ‘‘silly” expression, as
though Thersites could not recover from
the sudden shock and grasp the position.
So Schol. B, ἀκαίρως ὑποβλέψας.

270. The assembly are vexed to see
themselves humiliated in their spokes-
man’s person, and to lose their hope of
returning home; but Odysseus has
gained his point by getting the laugh on

is side.

271. For τις as the ‘‘public opinion ” of
Homer reference may be made to Glad-
stone, J. M. p. 436. The passages are—
Γ 297, 319; A 81, 85, 176; Z 459, 479;

H 87, 178, 201, 300; P 414, 420; X
106, 372; β 824; 6 769; ¢275; 0 328;
k 37; v 167; p 4823 o 72, 400; uv 875;
¢ 361, 396; y 148.

273. ἐξάρχειν elsewhere always takes
the gen. ; γόοιο Σ 51, etc., μολπῆς Σ 606
[δ 19], and in mid. κακῆς ἐξήρχετο βουλῆς,
μ. 829. The acc. is quasi-cognate, de-
pending no doubt on a reminiscence
of the familiar βουλὰς βουλεύειν : the
meaning is ‘‘taking the lead in giving
counsel,” whereas with the gen. it means
rather ‘‘ beginning,” “starting.” We
may compare ὁδὸν ἡγήσασθαι, ἀέθλους
τοὺς ἐπειρήσαντ' ᾽Οδυσῆος, θ 28, and other
exx. in Monro, Η. 6. 8 186.

276. τὸ μὲν πάλιν ἐς τοὐπίσω τὸ δὲ
αὗτις χρονικὸν ἐξ ὑστέρον, Schol. A.
Aristarchos repeatedly insisted that
πάλιν in H. never means ‘‘a second
time,” but always ‘‘ back again,” in the
local sense ; but it requires some forcing
to make the present passage consistent
with the theory. There is no doubt
that the temporal grew out of the local
sense, through the idea of ‘‘ going back
again”’ to a former state of things; and
it is better to recognise in such phrases
as this instances of the transitional use
than to attempt to force an arbitrary
rule on Homer. So x 456, πάλιν ποίησε
γέροντας. ἀγήνωρ may be ironical, as it
is generally a word of praise. But as
applied to Achilles in I 699, to Laome-

54 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B (1)

νεικείειν βασιλῆας ὀνειδείοις ἐπέεσσιν."
ὧς φάσαν ἡ πληθύς" ἀνὰ δ᾽ ὁ πτολίπορθος ᾽Οδυσσεὺς
ἔστη σκῆπτρον ἔχων" παρὰ δὲ γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη
εἰδομένη κήρυκι σιωπᾶν λαὸν ἀνώγειν, 280
ὡς ἅμα θ᾽ οἱ πρῶτοί τε καὶ ὕστατοι υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν
μῦθον ἀκούσειαν καὶ ἐπιφρασσαίατο βουλήν.
6 σφιν ἐὺ φρονέων ἀγορήσατο καὶ μετέευπεν"
“᾿Ατρεΐδη, νῦν δή σε, ἄναξ, ἐθέλουσιν ᾽Αχαιοὶ
πᾶσιν ἐλέγχιστον θέμεναι μερόπεσσι βροτοῖσιν, 285
οὐδέ τοι ἐκτελέουσιν ὑπόσχεσιν, ἣν περ ὑπέσταν
ἐνθάδ᾽ ἔτι στείχοντες ἀπ’ “Apyeos ἱπποβότοιο,
Ἴλιον ἐκπέρσαντ᾽ ἐυτείχεον ἀπονέεσθαι.
ὥς τε γὰρ ἦ παῖδες νεαροὶ χῆραί τε γυναῖκες

ἀλλήλοισιν ὀδύρονται οἰκόνδε νέεσθαι.

290

4 \ / 3 ὶ 3 θέ ’» θ
ἢ μὴν καὶ πόνος ἐστὶν ἀνιηθέντα νέεσθαι.

don ᾧ 443, and perhaps to the suitors in
the Odyssey, it may have conveyed a
shade of blame. So Schol., αὐθαδὴς
ὑβριστὴς καὶ θρασύς.

278. πτολίπορθος recurs in I]. as an
epithet of Odysseus, only K 363. In
Od. it is of course common, in allusion
to the capture of Troy by his cunning,
see x 230, σῇ δ᾽ ἥλω βουλῇ IIpidpuou
πόλις evpvdyua. In 1]. it is frequently
applied to Achilles, and once each to

nyo E 333, Oileus B 728, Otrynteus
T 384, and Ares T 152.

281. The θ᾽ is perhaps inserted to
prevent hiatus; which is in any case
allowable at the end of the first foot (see
on 87), without the necessity of taking
oi for the pron. Fo, with Nauck. If 6’
is to be kept, Doderlein’s explanation
seems the most satisfactory, viz. that
there is a confusion between ἅμα τε
πρῶτοι καὶ ὕστατοι, and ἅμα πρῶτοί re καὶ
ὕ. : in other words, ἅμα has, as often, at-
tracted a τε into its neighbourhood from
its proper place in the sentence, 6.6. I
519, ξ 403; but the word is again re-
peated, just as we often find a κεν or
ἄν occurring twice, once in its right place,
and once following a word which it is
desirable to emphasize. πρῶτοι and
ὕστατοι are used in a local sense, those
in front and those behind.

284. For νῦν δή Aristarchos seems to
have read viv γὰρ, “ἔθος de αὐτῷ (sc.
‘Outpy) ἀπὸ τοῦ yap ἄρχεσθαι᾽᾽ (e.g. H
827, Καὶ 61, 424, Ψ 156). In all other
cases however the γὰρ is either in a

question or in an explanation by antici-
pation (H. G. § 848, 2); it is far less
natural here in a principal sentence.

289. The %... τε of MSS. is an ob-
vious difficulty. Bentley proposed to
write εἰ for 4, so that ὥς re γὰρ el = ds
εἴ re: but ws ef are never separated in
H. Ameis, after Bekker, writes ἢ, as
y 348 ὥς τέ τευ ἣ παρὰ πάμπαν ἀνείμονος
ἠδὲ πενιχροῦ, and τ 109 ὥς τέ τευ ἢ βασι-
λῆος, in both which passages the MSS.
have 4, though it is clearly out of place
(in the former passage MSS. also have ἠέ,
not ἠδέ. But there does not seem to
be any certain case of this use of Hina
simile—where indeed so strongly affirm-
ative a particle seems out of place. Still
it is adopted in the text as an only re-
source, better than taking the sequence
%... Teas a very violent anacoluthon.

290. For this pregnant use of ὀδύρο-
μαι, cf. Ψ 75, ὀλοφύρομαι. The infin.
νέεσθαι in fact stands in the place of the
accus., exactly as in ε 152, ν 279 νόστον
ὀδύρεσθαι, ν 219 ὁ δ᾽ ὀδύρετο πατρίδα
γαῖαν.

291. The obvious sense of this line,
if it stood alone, would be, “ Verily it
is a trouble even to return home in
gricf.” But this does not cohere with
what follows, and the only interpreta-
tion which really suits the sense is that
given by Lehrs (Ar. p. 74), and probably

y Aristarchos (who noted that πόνος
is used in the true Homeric sense of
‘‘labour,” not grief): ‘‘Truly here is
toil to make a man depart disheartened.”

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Β rr) 55

\ “ ’ >, o& “A / 3 \ 3 /
καὶ yap τίς θ᾽ ἕνα μῆνα μένων ἀπὸ ἧς ἀλόχοιο
ἀσχαλάᾳ σὺν νηὶ πολυζύγῳ, ὅν περ ἄελλαι
3
χειμέριαι εἶλέωσιν ὀρινομένη τε θάλασσα"

ἡμῖν δ᾽ εἴνατός ἐστι περιτροπέων ἐνιαυτὸς
τῷ οὐ νεμεσίξζομ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοὺς

ἐνθάδε μιμνόντεσσι.

295

ἀσχαλάαν παρὰ νηυσὶ κορωνίσιν" ἀλλὰ καὶ ἔμπης
αἰσχρόν τοι δηρόν τε μένειν κενεόν τε νέεσθαι.
τλῆτε, φίλοι, καὶ μείνατ᾽ ἐπὶ χρόνον, ὄφρα δαῶμεν,

ἢ ἐτεὸν Κάλχας μαντεύεται ἦε καὶ οὐκί.

800

εὖ γὰρ δὴ τόδε ἴδμεν ἐνὶ φρεσίν, ἐστὲ δὲ πάντες

μάρτυροι, obs μὴ κῆρες ἔβαν θανάτοιο φέρουσαι"

χθιζά τε καὶ πρωίζ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἐς Αὐλίδα νῆες ᾿Αχαιῶν
ἠγερέθοντο κακὰ IIpidup καὶ Τρωσὶ φέρουσαι"

ἡμεῖς δ᾽ ἀμφὶ περὶ κρήνην ἱεροὺς κατὰ βωμοὺς 805
ἔρδομεν ἀθανάτοισι τεληέσσας ἑκατόμβας,

καλῇ ὑπὸ πλατανίστῳ, ὅθεν ῥέεν ἀγλαὸν ὕδωρ᾽

ἔνθ᾽ ἐφάνη μέγα σῆμα' δράκων ἐπὶ νῶτα δαφοινός,

ἢ μὴν καί thus introduces an excuse, just
as in I 57. The difficulty is the very
bare use of the acc. and infin. with a
violent change of subject. Lehrs com-
pares 8 284, οὐδέ τι ἴσασιν θάνατον καὶ
κῆρα μέλαιναν | bs δή σφι σχεδόν ἐστιν,
ἐπ᾿ ἤματι πάντας ὀλέσθαι, a not very satis-
factory parallel. Monro (Journ. Phil.
xi. 129, Η. G. 8 233) adds μοῖρ᾽ ἐστὶν
ἀλύξαι, ὥρη εὕδειν, and other similar
phrases, which would explain the infin.
after πόνος ἐστίν in the first translation
given above, but not the second, which
they are quoted tosupport. A somewhat
better case may perhaps be found in A
510, οὔ σφι λίθος χρὼς οὐδὲ σίδηρος χαλκὸν
ἀνασχέσθαι, where in later Greek we
should look for a ὥστε. Cf. also the infin.
after τοῖος, τηλίκος (8 60, p 20, etc.), and
H 239, τό μοι ἔστι ταλαύρινον πολεμίζειν.

299. ἐπὶ χρόνον as ~ 193, μ 407, ο 494,
etc. Zenod. ἔτι, ““ ἀπιθάνως ᾽" (Schol. A).

300. 4. So Ar.: MSS. εἰ, except A,
which has 4 with ef written over it. In
such conflict of authorities it is impossible
for us to decide absolutely in favour of
either ; v. 349.

302. This is the only case in H. of
the use of μή for οὐ in a ‘‘ quasi-condi-
tional”’ relative clause with the indic.
Cf. 338, 148, H 236, Σ 363 (Monro, H.
G. 8 358).

808, χθιζά τε καὶ πρωιζά, a pro-
verbial expression, more common in the

form πρώην re καὶ χθές, as in Hdt. 2,
53, μέχρι οὗ wp. τ. x. χθές, until very
lately. So Ar. Ran. 726 and Plat.
There are three leading explanations: (1)
The principal verb is ἐφάνη (308), but the
construction of the sentence is virtually
forgotten in the subordinate clause ὅτε
... φέρουσαι and the quasi-parenthetical
ἡμεῖς. .. ὕδωρ, and is resumed by ἔνθα.
In this case the phrase is used to make .
light of the long duration of the war, ‘‘it
is as it were but yesterday, when,”’ etc.
Or (2) ἣν is to be supplied after πρωιζά,
‘‘it was a day or two after the fleets
had begun to assemble in Aulis.” Nag.
and Aut. support this at length, com-

aring y 180 τέτρατον ἦμαρ ἔην ὅτ᾽ ἐν
Apyct νηᾶς ἐΐσας | Tudeldew ἕταροι Διομή-
δεος ἱπποδάμοιο | ἵστασαν, ᾧ 81 ἠὼς δέ
μοί ἐστιν | ἥδε δυωδεκάτη ὅτ᾽ ἐς Ἴλιον
εἰλήλουθα. The passages they quote for
the omission of ἣν are insufficient, for
they are all in rel. or subord. clauses.
(3) Lehrs, Ar. p. 366, takes χθ. re καὶ
πρωιζὰ with ἦγερ, transl. vix cum Aulida
advecti eramus, tum (v. 308) portentum
accidit. This is far the best; the inter-
pretation coincides with (2); ‘‘ when
the ships had been gathering but a day
or twoin A.” This omen cannot fail to
recall the famous portent of the eagles
and the hare in Agam. 104-105, told of
the same place and time. .

808. Sa-cowds: δα- = fa-, for δια-

56 [AITAAO® B (11)

σμερδαλέος, τόν ῥ᾽ αὐτὸς ᾿Ολύμπιος ἧκε φόωσδε,

βωμοῦ ὑπαΐξας πρός ῥα πλατάνιστον ὄρουσεν. $10
ἔνθα δ᾽ ἔσαν στρουθοῖο νεοσσοί, νήπια τέκνα,

ὄξζῳ ἐπ᾽ ἀκροτάτῳ, πετάλοις ὑποπεπτηῶτες,

ὀκτώ, ἀτὰρ μήτηρ ἐνάτη ἦν, ἣ τέκε τέκνα.

Μ 8 ὦ \ Ν 7 a

ἔνθ᾽ ὅ γε τοὺς ἐλεεινὰ κατήσθιε τετρυγῶτας"

μήτηρ δ᾽ ἀμφεποτᾶτο ὀδυρομένη φίλα τέκνα" 315
τὴν δ᾽ ἐλελιξάμενος πτερύγος λάβεν ἀμφιαχυΐαν.

αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ κατὰ τέκνα φάγε στρουθοῖο καὶ αὐτήν,

τὸν μὲν ἀίξηλον θῆκεν θεός, ὅς περ ἔφηνεν"

λᾶαν γάρ μιν ἔθηκε Kpovov πάις ἀγκυλομήτεω"

ς A x e ’ 4 > ἢ

ἡμεῖς δ᾽ ἑσταότες θαυμάξομεν, οἷον ἐτύχθη. 320

intensive. gowds, Π 159, is generally re-
ferred to dev, for dovtos, gory, 1.6. blood-
red. Goebel however refers it to daf
to shine, for dof-iwo-s (Curt. Et. p. 621,
divides φο-ινό-ς as though he agreed with
this, but cf. no. 410), in the sense of
fiery red (hence φοῖνιξ, φοίνιον o 97,
φοινήεις M 202).

311. Observe how the word τέκνα
(and τέκε) is repeated so as to give a sort
of human pathos to the passage. Cf. M
170, π 217, and © 248, Π 265, P 133
(réxos). νήπια especially emphasizes
this association. Notice also the rhymes,
311-3-5 and 312-4. This phenomenon,
though not rare in H., is so sporadic
that we have no ground for supposing it
to have been in any case intentional, even
if it was consciously observed.

312. ὑποπεπτηῶτες, st. wra, as in Θ
136 καταπτήτην, the only form found
beside the pf. part. (v 98, 354), other
parts being} supplied from the secondary
stem πτα-κ (πτήσσω).

814. ἐλεεινά, adv. with τετριγῶτας,
‘* cheeping in piteous fashion.”

315. In_ the principal caesura the
hiatus is ‘‘licitus’’; we do not therefore
need Bentley's con]. ἀμφεποτᾶτ᾽ ὀλοφυρο-
μένη. τέκγα, acc. after ἀμφεποτᾶτο.

816. ἐλελιξάμενος (which should be
Fedé., see A 520),‘‘ coiling himself up for
the spring.” ἀμφιαχνῖαν, an anomalous
form, for which see Fritzsche in Curtius’
St. vi. 327; for the perf. with ὁ as re-
duplicative vowel, he is inclined to com-
pare δίξζημαι (= δί - δ᾽ η- μα). Monro, H.

.8 28, 5. The Scholion of Herodianus
on the accent of πτερύγος is characteristic :
παροξυτόνως. καὶ ὁ μὲν κανὼν θέλει wpo-
παροξυτόνως, ὡς dolduxos. ἀλλ᾽ ἐπειδὴ

οὕτως δοκεῖ τονίζειν τῷ ᾿Αριστάρχῳ, πει-
θόμεθα αὐτῷ ὡς πάνν ἀρίστῳ Ὑγραμ-
ματικφῳ.

818. ἀίζηλον, ὅτι (sc. Ar. marked the
line with the διπλῇ περιεστιγμένη, because)
Ζηνόδοτος γράφει ἀρίδηλον καὶ τὸν
ἐχόμενον (the next line) προσέθηκεν. τὸ
γὰρ ἀρίδηλον ἄγαν ἐμφανὲς, ὅπερ ἀπίθανον.
ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν πλάσῃ τοῦτο ἀναιρεῖ (7.e. what-
soever a god creates, that he brings to
naught again. But there seems to be
some lacuna in the quotation). λέγει
μέντοι γε ὅτι ὁ φήνας αὐτὸν θεὸς καὶ ἄδηλον
ἐποίησεν (Aristonikos). It seems clear
therefore that Ar. read ἀέξηλον (or ἀΐδηλον)
‘‘invisible,” athetizing 319 altogether.
(But MSS. ἀρίξηλον, except Ambros. 1 man.
alg, Apoll. Lex., Et. ML in quotations,
and Hesych. ἀέζξηλος ἄδηλος.) Cf. didera
in the same sense, Hesiod, fr. 180. Cic.,
who translates the passage in Div. 2, 80,
63, took the word in the same way—
Qui luci ediderat genitor Saturnius, idem

Abdidit.”
Curt., Et.> 662, takes the same view,
explaining ἀίζηλον as= ἀίδηλον phonetic-
ally, but with pass. instead of act.
signification. The question is admirabl
discussed at length in Buttm. Lea. 53-58,
and decided in the same sense. ἀρίζηλον
must be explained, ‘‘ god who created
him made of him an evident sign,” which
is comparatively weak. (Cf. however the
fate of the Phaeacian ship, v 156, θεῖναι
λίθον ἐγγύθι γαίης νηὶ θοῇ ἵκελον, ἵνα
θαυμάζωσιν ἅπαντες.) Cicero goes on to
translate 319 also—
“Abdidit, et duro firmavit tegmina saxo”’;
as though the serpent were hidden away
in the rock into which he is turned.

320. οἷον and similar constructions are

TAITAAO® B (11)

©
“1

ὡς οὖν δεινὰ πέλωρα θεῶν εἰσῆλθ᾽ ἑκατόμβας,

Κάλχας δ᾽ αὐτίκ᾽ ἔπειτα θεοπροπέων ἀγόρευεν"

‘rimt ἄνεῳ ἐγένεσθε, κάρη κομόωντες ᾿Αχαιοί;

ἡμῖν μὲν τόδ᾽ ἔφηνε τέρας μέγα μητίετα Ζεύς,

ὄψιμον ὀψιτέλεστον, ὅου κλέος οὔ ποτ᾽ ὀλεῖται. 325
ὡς οὗτος κατὰ τέκνα φάγε στρουθοῖο Kal αὐτήν,

ὀκτώ, ἀτὰρ μήτηρ ἐνάτη ἦν, ἣ τέκε τέκνα,

ὧς ἡμεῖς τοσσαῦτ᾽ ἔτεα. πτολεμίξομεν αὖθι,

τῷ δεκάτῳ δὲ πόλιν αἱρήσομεν εὐρυάγυιαν.

A f A ἴω a
κεῖνος τὼς ayopEevEe’ τὰ δὴ νῦν πάντα τελεῖται.

990

ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε μίμνετε πάντες, ἐυκνήμιδες ᾿Αχαιοί,
αὐτοῦ, εἰς 6 κεν ἄστυ μέγα Πριάμοιο EXwpev.”
ὧς ἔφατ᾽, ᾿Αργεῖοι δὲ μέγ᾽ ἴαχον, ἀμφὶ δὲ νῆες
4 4 > 4 e x 3 la)

σμερδαλέον κονάβησαν ἀυσάντων ὑπ᾽ ᾿Αχαιῶν,

“ 3 4 3 A /
μῦθον ἐπαινήσαντες ᾿Οδυσσῆος θείοιο. 335
τοῖσι δὲ καὶ μετέειπε Γερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ"
« / 9 \ / 3 /

ὦ πόποι, ἣ δὴ παισὶν ἐοικότες ἀγοράασθε
νηπιάχοις, οἷς οὔ τι μέλει πολεμήια ἔργα.

a \ / Ψ / ca
πῇ δὴ συνθεσίαι τε καὶ ὅρκια βήσεται ἡμῖν;

ἐν πυρὶ δὴ βουλαί τε γενοίατο μήδεά τ᾽ ἀνδρῶν

840

σπονδαί τ᾽ ἄκρητοι καὶ δεξιαί, ἧς ἐπέπιθμεν"

commonly explained by the ellipse of the
antecedent (H. G. § 267), or less scientific-
ally by resolving οἷον into ὅτι τοῖον, ws
(e.g. A 157) into ὅτε οὕτως. But it is
better to regard them as originally in-
dependent clauses of a quasi-interjectional
nature ; ‘‘ we wondered—what a thing
was wrought!” The manner in which
wishes introduced by εἰ gradually became
the grammatical protases of conditional
sentences is very similar (H. G. § 318,
after L. Lange). Cf. Z 166, Ο 95, P 173,
with X 347, ὃ 611, ἕ 392, and often.
(Nag. and Aut. ad loc.)

325. Sov, doubtless an error in tran-
scription for 60, an intermediate form of
the gen. which has disappeared from
MSS. but may often be restored with
confidence. See H. G. § 98.

329. tw: on this use of the article
with numerals v. H. 6. § 260 (ὁ).

330. ras, so Ar.: MSS. θ᾽ ὥς with
Herodianus. Cf. & 48, o 271, where
MSS. are divided. The word recurs
only Γ 415, τ 234.

335. For a participle belonging to the
leading clause of a sentence, after a
virtual parenthesis, we may perhaps

compare A 153, where χαλκῷ δηιόωντες
seems to belong to ἱππεῖς δ᾽ ἱππῆας in 151.
But the construction seems very awkward.

337. For the long a of ἀγοράασθε
cf. ἀπονέεσθαι 113, 288, etc., ἀθάνατος
306, etc., δυναμένοιο a 276, ᾿Απόλλωνα
A 21, διά T 357, A 135, A 435, and other
instances. It is due to the ictus.
d-yopdoua: occurs elsewhere in H. only in
impf. and aor.

338. For οὐ a later writer would prob-
ably have used μή, but the only instance
in Η, of such a use of μή with the rel. is
in line 302 (q¢.v.). See H 236, Σ 363,
y 349. οὐ shews that the claim is added
as a general description of a class, while
in 302 μή is used to make an exception to
what the speaker has already said (H.
G. § 59).

339. Cf. 286, Aen. iv. 426. For ἐν
πυρί, cf. Ε 215. He means of course “all
our oaths are so much useless lumber.”

341. ἄκρητοι, solemnised with un-
mixed wine, as A 159. See however
Γ 269, with note. σπονδαί here includes
both the literal meaning of ‘‘libation”
and the metaphorical “‘ ratification of
agreement.” δεξιαί; handclasping as

58 LAIAAO® B (11)

αὕτως yap ἐπέεσσ᾽ ἐριδαίνομεν, οὐδέ τι μῆχος
ς ἢ ᾽ὔ Ἁ / θ ao ,
εὑρέμεναι δυνάμεσθα, πολὺν χρονον ἐν ἐόντες.
᾿Ατρεΐδη, σὺ δ᾽ ἔθ᾽, ὡς πρίν, ἔχων ἀστεμφέα βουλὴν
bd 39.» \ e
dpxev’ ᾿Αργείοισι κατὰ κρατερὰς ὑσμίνας, 845
τούσδε δ᾽ ἔα φθινύθειν, ἕνα καὶ δύο, τοί κεν ᾿Αχαεῶν
Ul 4 3 # 3 3 ΝΜ 3 “~
νόσφιν βουλεύωσ᾽, ἄνυσις δ᾽ οὐκ ἔσσεται αὐτῶν,
ΝΜ 3. 3/7 Ν 9 /
πρὶν “ApyooS’ ἰέναι, πρὶν καὶ Διὸς αὐγιόχοιο
γνώμεναι, εἴ τε ψεῦδος ὑπόσχεσις εἴ τε καὶ οὐκί.
φημὶ γὰρ οὖν κατανεῦσαι ὑπερμενέα Κρονίωνα 850
ἤματι τῷ, ὅτε νηυσὶν ἐν ὠκυπόροισιν ἔβαινον
3 a 4 , “A /
Apyeiot Τρώεσσι φόνον καὶ κῆρα φέροντες,
3 [4 3 3 93 / 4 /
ἀστράπτων ἐπιδέξι᾽, ἐναίσιμα σήματα φαίνων.
τῶ μή τις πρὶν ἐπευγέσθω οἰκόνδε νέεσθαι,
πρίν τινα πὰρ Τρώων ἀλόχῳ κατακοιμηθῆναι, 855
7 9. ἐ / e / 4 /
τίσασθαι δ᾽ ‘Edévns ὁρμήματά τε στοναχάς τε.

the sign of a pledge is mentioned Z 298,
ᾧ 286. It is of course familiar in later
Greek: 6.9. δεξιὰς φέρειν παρά τινος, to
bring a pledge from a man, Aen. An, 2,
3, 11. ἐπέπιθμεν, for the rather rare non-
thematic plpf. see H. G. § 68.

344. ἀστεμφέα, see Curt. Ef. no. 219:
lit. “not to be squeezed” (στέμφυλον =
pressed olives), hence ‘‘ unflinching, im-
movable,” as I 219. Additional force
is lent to this remark if it be supposed
that Agamemnon had seriously advised
flight.

345. ἀρχεύειν, only here and E 200
with dat., as ἄρχειν E 592, 6 107,
ἡγεμονεύειν Β 816, y 386, etc., ἡγεῖσθαι
A 71, X 101; always of ‘‘shewing the
way. 3)

346. ᾿Αχαιῶν νόσφιν, a rhetorical
subterfuge, apparently, in order to
separate the malcontents, by represent-
ing them as secret caballers, from the
majority who were but lately in sym-
pathy with them. τούσδε is sufficient
to shew that Thersites is aimed at, not,
as some commentators have thought,
Achilles and Patroklos, for it must in-
dicate some who are present.

347. αὐτῶν, it is hard to say whether
this is masc. or neut. (sc. βουλευμάτων or
the like). αὐτός is so rarely used of things
in H. that the presumption is in favour
of the former, which we must then under-
stand to mean “there will be no fulfilment
on their part.” This clause is paren-
thetical, ἰέναι depending on βουλεύωσι.

849. dre... εἴ τε, 80 most and best

prefer Fre...

MSS., vulg. efre. . . Re; La R. would
K 444) 403, But Le Lan ge (ΕῚ oP
, . Bu EI,
227 ff.) has shewn that there is εὖ reabon
for abandoning the best attested reading.
etre . . ovx\in a disjunctive indirect
question is found even in Attic, e.g.
ὅπως ἴδης
εἴτ᾽ ἔνδον εἴτ᾽ οὐκ tvdov.—Soph. 44). 7.

(It appears however to be found only
where the predicate of the first clause is
repeated: see Kiihner, Gr. p. 749). This
instance is, as Lange remarks, virtually
equivalent to ef with indic., where εἰ
ov seems to be the original and more
natural construction, though it was
afterwards superseded by εἰ μή by force
of analogy. See note on A 160, and H.
G. ὃ 316, 341. For the predicative use
of ψεῦδος cf. I 115.

353. ἀστράπτων, a very natural ana-
coluthon, the thought in the speaker's
mind being κατένευσε Kpovlwy.

355. twa as though ἕκαστον, like 382,
II 209, ete.

356. A much disputed line. The
χωρίζοντες of Aristarchos’ time took it to
mean ‘‘ Helen’s searchings of heart and
groanings, and urged that this view of

elen’s resistance to her abduction was

eculiar to the 1]., while the poet of the

d. represented her as going willingly with
Paris. Aristarchos replied, ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν
ἐπ᾽ αὐτῆς ὁ λόγος ἀλλ᾽ ἔξωθεν πρόθεσιν τὴν
““ περὶ" δεῖ λαβεῖν, ἵν᾽ ἢ ““ περὶ Ἑλένης."
καὶ ἔστιν ὁ λόγος, τιμωρίαν λαβεῖν ἀνθ᾽ ὧν
ἐστενάξαμεν καὶ ἑμεριμνήσαμεν περὶ EXéyns -

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B 1.) 59

εἰ δέ τις ἐκπάγλως ἐθέλει οἰκόνδε νέεσθαι,
ἁπτέσθω ἧς νηὸς ἐυσσέλμοιο μελαίνης,

4 J, > Ν 4 / 3 /
ὄφρα πρόσθ᾽ ἄλλων θάνατον καὶ πότμον ἐπίσπη.

δ ’ 4 / ,
ἀλλά, ἄναξ, αὐτὸς τ᾽ ἐὺ μήδεο πείθεο τ᾽ ἄλλῳ:

960

οὔ τοι ἀπόβλητον ἔπος ἔσσεται, ὅττι κεν εἴπω"
Kp’ ἄνδρας κατὰ φῦλα, κατὰ φρήτρας, ᾿Αγάμεμνον,
ὡς φρήτρη φρήτρηφιν ἀρήγῃ, φῦλα δὲ φύλοις.

εἰ δέ κεν ὧς ἔρξῃς καί τοι πείθωνται ᾿Αχαιοί,

3 ? / \ “
γνώσῃ ἔπειθ᾽, ὅς θ᾽ ἡγεμόνων κακὸς ὅς τέ νυ λαῶν,

86ὅ

ἠδ᾽ ὅς κ᾽ ἐσθλὸς enor κατὰ σφέας γὰρ μαχέονται"
lA 3 3 / / ᾿ 3 3 ’ἤ
γνώσεαι δ᾽, εἰ καὶ θεσπεσίῃ πόλιν οὐκ ἀλαπάξεις
A 3 lal 4 3 ’ 7 35
ἢ ἀνδρῶν κακότητι καὶ ἀφραδίῃ πολέμοιο.
Ν > ) ’ / 3 /
τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων'

παραλειπτικὸς (fond of omitting) γὰρ προ-
θέσεών ἐστιν ὁ ποιητής. Apart from the
gratuitous insertion of the preposition
there can be little doubt that his view is
right. However much Helen may have
been excusable by the deceit of Aphrodite,
there can be.no doubt that Homer repre-
sents her as having deserted her husband
voluntarily as far as the outward aspect
of her action went; and she could not
therefore be regarded by the Greeks as
a victim whose sufferings were to be
avenged. The chief passages in H. are
ὃ 145, 260, Γ' 164, [py 218-224]. See
also Mr. A. Lang’s note to ‘‘ Helen
of Troy.” For the gen. compare ἄχος
ἡνιόχοιο, grief for the charioteer, Θ 124,
etc., ἄχος σέθεν A 169, πένθος παιδὸς
ἀποφθιμένοιο Σ 88, and others in H. G.
§ 147, 1.

357. ἐκπάγλως, cf. ἵεται αἰνῶς B 327,
a curious parallel to some expressions of
modern slang.

359. This line is a threat, ‘‘let him
so much as touch his ship, he shall im-
mediately be slain before the face of the
rest.” (The alternative explanation,
“ἢ will start homeward only to perish
on the road sooner than the others,” is
clearly inferior. See Ameis, Anh., p.
127).

362. This tactical counsel, like the
advice to build a wall round the ships in
H 337-343 (qg.v.), appears singularly out
of place in the last year of the war ; it is
only poetically justifiable as intended to
illustrate the position of Nestor as the
leading counsellor of the Greek army.

For φρήτρας cf. ἀφρήτωρ I 68: the word
does not recur in H. It seems to bea

relic of the patriarchal time when the
family, not the tribe, was the unit.

365. After each ὅς we must apparently
supply x’ ἔῃσι from the next line; ἐστι
would almost make Nestor call in
question the existence of brave men
while insisting on the presence of
cowards (Ameis).

366. κατὰ σφέας, cf. uaxdunv: κατ᾽
ἔμ᾽ αὐτὸν ἐγώ, A271: ‘‘they will fight
each tribe on their own account,” and so
every man will have a motive for ambi-
tion in the glory which will accrue to
his tribe or family from success. (Cf.
‘*Quodque praecipuum fortitudinis in-
citamentum est, non casus neque fortuita
conglobatio turmam aut cuneum facit,
sed familiae et propinquitates,” Tac.
Germ. 4; ‘‘ Batavi Transrhenanique,
quo discreta virtus manifestius spec-
taretur, sibi quaeque gens consistunt,”
Hist. iv. 28.

367. θεσπεσίῃ, a substantivized adj.,
like many others in H.; ἀμβροσίη
ἀναγκαίη ἰθεῖα ἴση τραφερή ὑγρή, and
cases used as here adverbially, ἀντιβίην
ἀπριάτην (v. A 99) ἀμφαδίην (Ameis,
Anh. to a 97). There is no need to
supply any ellipse. ἀλαπάξεις, fut. in
potential sense (cf. Z 71, N 260, La R.),
or perhaps as taking up with some slight
irony Agamemnon’s despairing tone, οὐ
γὰρ ἔτι Τροίην αἱρήσομεν εὐρνάγνιαν, 141.
Bekker’s conj. ἀλαπάζεις is needless.
εἴ, so MSS., but edd. generally give
%. Considering that εἰ and ἤ are virtu-
ally identical in use in indirect questions,
so far as tradition goes, there seems to
be no reason for departing from the at-
tested reading. See on 349.

60 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B (11)

“ἣ μὰν αὖτ᾽ ἀγορῇ νικᾷς, γέρον, υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶν. 870
ai γάρ, Ζεῦ τε πάτερ καὶ ᾿Αθηναίη καὶ Γλπολλον,

τοιοῦτοι δέκα μοι συμφράδμονες εἶεν ᾿Αχαιῶν"

τῷ κε τάχ᾽ ἠμύσειε πόλις Πριάμοιο ἄνακτος

χερσὶν ὑφ᾽ ἡμετέρῃσιν ἁλοῦσά τε περθομένη τε.

ἀλλά μοι αἰγίοχος Κρονίδης Ζεὺς ἄνγε᾽ ἔδωκεν, 815
ὅς με μετ᾽ ἀπρήκτους ἔριδας καὶ νείκεα βάλλει.

καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼν ᾿Αχιλεύς τε μαχησάμεθ᾽ εἵνεκα κούρης
ἀντιβίοις ἐπέεσσιν, ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἦρχον χαλεπαίνων"

εἰ δέ ποτ᾽ ἔς γε μίαν βουλεύσομεν, οὐκέτ᾽ ἔπειτα

Τρωσὶν ἀνάβλησις κακοῦ ἔσσεται, οὐδ᾽ ἠβαιόν. 380
νῦν δ᾽ ἔρχεσθ᾽ ἐπὶ δεῖπνον, ἵνα ξυνώγωμεν “Apna.

εὖ μέν τις δόρυ θηξάσθω, εὖ δ᾽ ἀσπίδα θέσθω,

εὖ δέ τις ἵπποισιν δεῖπνον δότω ὠκυπόδεσσιν,

εὖ δέ τις ἅρματος ἀμφὶς ἰδὼν πολέμοιο μεδέσθω,

ὥς κε πανημέριοι στυγερῇ κρινώμεθ᾽ “Apne. 385
ov γὰρ παυσωλή γε μετέσσεται, οὐδ᾽ ἠβαιόν,

371. This formula (also A 288, H 132, II
97, and several times in Od.) gives a typical
instance of the transition from ‘‘ wishing-
clauses,” followed by a paratactic clause
expressing the result, to regular con-
ditional sentences ; if it were not for the
appeal to the gods, which proves that a
real wish is expressed, 371-2 might quite
well form a protasis to 373-4. See L.
Lange, EI, 41, sqq.

374. ὑπὸ χερσίν, this instrumental
use of ὑπό with dat. is developed from
the local by a transition which is quite
easy in phrases like the present, where
‘*subjection”’ or ‘‘ falling prostrate” is
the leading idea: in ὑπὸ δουρὶ rumels, ὑπὸ
νούσῳ φθίσθαι (N 667) ὕπνῳ ὕπο γλυκερῷ
ταρπώμεθα, the local sense almost fades
away, but never quite disappears. Obs.
ἁλοῦσα, aor. of the moment of capture ;
περθομένη, pres. of a continuing state.

376. ἀπρήκτους, fruitless, not conduc-
ing to any result: cf. οὐ γάρ τις πρῆξις
πέλεται κρυεροῖο γόοιο 2 524, ἀπρήκτους
ὀδύνας β 79.

379. μίαν, sc. βουλήν, to be supplicd
from the verb: so τὴν ἴαν ἃ 435, supply
μοῖραν from διεμοιρᾶτο.

380. ἠβαιόν occurs only in this phrase,
and always at the end of a line, except
ι 462, ἐλθόντες δ᾽ ἠβαιὸν ἀπὸ σπείους. It
would seem that some of the ancients

preferred to write οὐδ᾽ ἢ βαιόν or οὐ δὴ
βαιόν. Sonne explains the ἡ 85 an instru-
mental of the pronoun-stem, in the sense
‘‘how”’ or ‘‘so”’ little, as we say ““ ποῖ
ever so little.” The materials are in-
sufficient for a decision.

381. ξυνάγωμεν dpna, committere prae-
liwm, compare i 448, II 764, for
similar phrases.

382. θέσθω, not here in the later sense
of ‘‘grounding arms,” but ‘‘ place ready,”
“bestow well,” as I 88, τίθεντο Sépra:
so εὖ θέσθαι ὅπλα, to keep armour in
order, Xen. Cyr. 4, 5, 3; els δῆριν ἔθεντο
ὅπλα, ap. Dem. 322, 6.

384. ἀμφίς, so MSS.; Bekk., after
Heyne and Buttm. (Lex. p. 104), ἀμφί,
which is however found with gen. in H.
only II 825, 6 267. Monro, H. 6. § 184,
comp. Att. περιορῶμαι with gen. = to look
round after, take thought about (Thuc.
4, 124), and also the gen. with dueud-
χεσθαι 11 496, etc. dudls with gen.
appears elsewhere always in the sense
‘* aside from.”

385. κρινώμεθα, measure ourselves,”
ef. the same root in de-cern-cre, cer-tamen.
From the primary idea of separation (by
sifting, etc.) comes that of two parties
standing in opposition. So διακρινέει,
“part,” 387, cl. 362, I 98, π 268 μένος
κρίνηται ἄρηος, σ 264, w 507.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Β 11.) 61

εἰ μὴ νὺξ ἐλθοῦσα διακρινέει μένος ἀνδρῶν.
ἱδρώσει μέν τευ τελαμὼν ἀμφὶ στήθεσφιν
ἀσπίδος ἀμφιβρότης, περὶ δ᾽ ἔγχεϊ χεῖρα καμεῖται"

e 7 7 Φ“ 97 σ 7
ἱδρώσει δέ τευ ἵππος ἐύξοον ἅρμα τιταίνων.

990

a ’ > 9 ἡ" 3 / / 4 ἢ /
ὃν δέ κ᾿ ἐγὼν ἀπάνευθε μάχης ἐθέλοντα νοήσω
μιμνάζειν παρὰ νηυσὶ κορωνίσιν, οὔ οἱ ἔπειτα
“ 4
ἄρκιον ἐσσεῖται φυγέειν κύνας ἠδ᾽ οἰωνούς."
φ δ > » “Ὁ \ 4/39 e [χὰ le)
ὧς pat’, ᾿Αργεῖοι δὲ μέγ᾽ ἴαχον, ὡς ὅτε κῦμα

ἀκτῇ ἐφ᾽ ὑψηλῇ, ὅτε κινήσῃ Νότος ἐλθών,

395

a \ ᾽
προβλῆτι σκοπέλῳ" τὸν δ᾽ ov ποτε κύματα λείπει
/ 9 ’ ῳΦῳ »» Μ) > A MH 4
παντοίων ἀνέμων, ὅτ᾽ ἂν ἔνθ᾽ ἢ ἔνθα γένωνται.
“ A
ἀνστάντες δ᾽ ὀρέοντο κεδασθέντες κατὰ νῆας,
κάπνισσάν τε κατὰ κλισίας καὶ δεῖπνον ἕλοντο.

ἄλλος δ᾽ ἄλλῳ ἔρεξε θεῶν αἰευγενετάων,

400

εὐχόμενος θάνατόν τε φυγεῖν καὶ μῶλον ἤΑρηος.
3 \ e le) 47 ΝΜ 3 Lal 3 /
αὐτὰρ ὁ βοῦν ἱέρευσεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων
πίονα πενταέτηρον ὑπερμενέι Κρονίωνι,
κίκλησκεν δὲ γέροντας ἀριστῆας Ἰ]Παναχαιῶν,

, \ 4 ΑΛ 3 “ δ᾽
Νέστορα μὲν πρώτιστα καὶ ᾿Ιδομενῆα ἄνακτα,

387. μένος ἀνδρῶν, ἃ periphrasis for
‘‘brave warriors,” as μένος ᾿Αλκινόοιο,
etc.

888. rev virtually = ἑκάστου, at least
for purposes of translation. We must in
the next line supply τις as subject to
καμεῖται. This passage may be added to
those in H. G. § 186, in which it is
doubtful whether περί is prep. or adv.
(= exceedingly).

391. ἐθέλοντα of ‘‘the active wish,
which looks forward to its accomplish-
ment as soon as circumstances shall
allow: H 364 πάντ᾽ ἐθέλώ δόμεναι, I 120
ay ἐθέλω ἀρέσαι," Buttm. Lex. Ὁ. 194.
νοήσω, in sense ‘‘ perceive” voew takes
a partic.; ‘‘to think over, remember,”
an infin. E 665,.A 62, ete.

393. ἄρκιον, ‘‘there shall be nothing
on which he can rely, nothing to give
him any well-grounded hope of escaping
the dogs and birds,” Buttm. Lex. pp.
163-4, comparing O 502 viv ἄρκιον 4
ἀπολέσθαι | ἠὲ σαωθῆναι ; he deduces this
sense from the verb ἀρκεῖν, through the
sense ‘‘ sufficient,” ‘“‘able to help,” and
thence ‘‘that on which one can rely.”
So K 304, μισθὸς δέ of ἄρκιος ἔσται, his
reward shall be certain. The passage of
course means ‘‘he shall certainly be
slain and left unburied.”

405

394. On ws ὅτε without a finite verb
see L. Lange, Hom. Geb. d. Part. EI, p.
254, where it is compared with the
similar use of ws εἰ in similes. He argues
that there is no need to supply any
ellipse ; the ὅτε is really indef., ‘‘as on a
time,” and is strictly speaking super-
fluous. The construction recurs A 462,
132, N 471, 571, O 362, 679, Σ 219,
406, Ψ 712, © 281, \ 368, 7 494. For
the simile itself cf. 144 and 209.

397. ἀνέμων, for this use of the gen. cf.
ἀνέμων δυσαήων μέγα κῦμα ν 99, νέφεα
ἀργεστᾶο Νότοιο A 305, and νοῦσον Διός
ι 411, ἃ sickness sent from Zeus. γένων-
ται, sc. ἄνεμοι (but Ar. thought κύματα,
and some actually wrote γένηται).

400. ἔρεζε, the F is neglected as in
ἄρεκτον T 150, ἔρεξας Ψ 570, ἔρεζον w
458. From here eleven consecutive lines
have the trochaic caesura, which was in
all probability originally the only caesura
of the hexameter. (For the genesis of
the Homeric hexameter reference may be
made to a very interesting paper by F. A.
Allen of Cincinnati, in Kuhn’s Zésch.
xxiv. 558 (1879), where it and the
Saturnian verse, as well as the ical
old German measure, are traced back to
8. common origin still found as a metre
in the Zend-Avesta. )

62 IAIAAOS B (1)

αὐτὰρ ἔπειτ᾽ Αἴαντε δύω καὶ Τυδέος υἱόν,
ἕκτον δ᾽ avr ᾿Οδυσῆα Act μῆτιν ἀτάλαντον.
αὐτόματος δέ οἱ ἦλθε βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Μενέλαος"
ἤδεε γὰρ κατὰ θυμὸν ἀδελφεόν, ὡς ἐπονεῖτο.
βοῦν δὲ περίστησάν τε καὶ οὐλοχύτας ἀνέλοντο. 410
τοῖσιν δ᾽ εὐχόμενος μετέφη κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων"
“ Ζεῦ κύδιστε μέγιστε, κελαινεφές, αἰθέρε ναίων,
μὴ πρὶν ἐπ᾽ ἠέλιον δῦναι καὶ ἐπὶ κνέφας ἐλθεῖν,
πρίν με κατὰ πρηνὲς βαλέειν IIpidpoto μέλαθρον
αἰθαλόεν, πρῆσαι δὲ πυρὸς δηίοιο θύρετρα, 415
e / \ Ἂ ’
Exropeov δὲ χιτῶνα περὶ στήθεσσι δαΐξαι
a e 7 ἤ > 9 9 ΝΑ ς n

χαλκῷ pwyaréov: πολέες δ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ αὐτὸν ἑταῖροι
πρηνέες ἐν κονίῃσιν ὀδὰξ λαζοίατο γαῖαν."

ὧς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἄρα πώ οἱ ἔπεκραίαινε Κρονίων,

ἀλλ᾽ ὅ γε δέκτο μὲν ἱρά, πόνον δ᾽ ἀλίαστον ὄφελλεν.

420

αὐτὰρ ἐπεί ῥ᾽ εὔξαντο καὶ οὐλοχύτας προβάλοντο,
αὐέρυσαν μὲν πρῶτα καὶ ἔσφαξαν καὶ ἔδειραν,
μηρούς 7 ἐξέταμον κατά τε κνίσῃ ἐκάλυψαν
δίπτυχα ποιήσαντες, ἐπ᾿ αὐτῶν δ᾽ ὠμοθέτησαν.

409. ἀδελφεός is the only Homeric
form (cf. Z 61); so δένδρεον, never δένδρον.

410. περίστησάν te, so edd. with
Bekk. for -στήσαντο of MSS.: so u 356,
and cf. A 532. The aor. mid. is always
transitive in H. (v. A 480, β 431, etc.).
Σ 533, ¢ 54 (στησάμενοι δ᾽ ἐμάχοντο μάχην)
are ambiguons, but no doubt are also
trans., as Herod. also says στήσασθαι
πολέμους. οὐλοχύτας, A 449.

412, κελαινεφές, apparently for κελαινο-
νεφής, “god of the black cloud.” The
epithet is also applied to blood, ‘‘dusky,”
the significance of the second element
having been weakened —a phenomenon
familiar in the Tragedians but very rare
in H.

413. ἐπί, ‘‘that the sun set not wpon
us,’ a pregnant expression which is vir-
tually an anticipation of the ἐπέ imme-
diately following, and may be compared
with Eph. 4, 26, ὁ ἥλιος μὴ ἐπιδυέτω
ἐπὶ τῷ παροργισμῷ ὑμῶν. See also Θ 488,
Τρωσὶν μέν ῥ᾽ ἀέκουσιν ἔδν φάος. Some
have, without necessity, conj. ἔτ᾽ or γ᾽:
La R. thinks that the word was inserted
when it was forgotten that πρίν was
originally long by nature (for rpocov, the
comparative of πρό). For μή with infin.
expressing a prayer, see H. 6. § 361. μή
appears fundamentally to express the

idea ‘‘away with the thought that,”
“let us not suppose that,” and may thus
be properly used with the infin. without
the need of supplying any elli of δός
or the like. Cf. IT 285, H 179, p 354,
where the infin. expressing the mere
thought indicates, by the form of inter-
jectional utterance, a strong wish; and
also the use of the infin. as an imper.
The idiom is common in later Gk., eg.
ὦ θεοὶ πολῖται, μή pe δουλείας τυχεῖν,
Aesch. Supp. 235. (It is virtually a case
of the use of μή without a verb, such as
we find in A 295 and ὅτε μήτε “‘ except,”
see Lange, EI, p. 162 (468), where the
key to the question is given.)

410. πυρός, for this use of gen. see
H. G. § 151, d, where it is classed asa
‘ quasi-partitive” use, as though the
idea of material used implied a stock
drawn upon: 80 πυρὸς μειλισσέμεν H
410, πυρὸς θέρηται, Z 331. For τ’

A 481. δήιος with πῦρ, in the lit. sense
‘‘ blazing,” root δα, dalw: so πῦρ κήλεον
(καίω), Θ 217.

417. ῥωγαλέον, proleptic; as II 841,
αἱματόεντα. But αἰθαλόεν, 415, seems to be
a standing epithet of the hall; v χ 239.

420. ἀλίαστον Ar.: MSS. ἀμέγαρτον.
ten = A 458-461; 427-432 = A 464-

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B (.) 68

καὶ τὰ μὲν ἂρ σχίζησιν ἀφύλλοισιν κατέκαιον, 425
σπλάγχνα δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἀμπείραντες ὑπείρεχον Ἡφαίστοιο.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ κατὰ μῆρα Kan καὶ σπλάγχνα πάσαντο,
μίστυλλόν T ἄρα τἄλλα καὶ ἀμφ᾽ ὀβελοῖσιν ἔπειραν,
ὥπτησάν τε περιφραδέως ἐρύσαντό τε πάντα.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ παύσαντο πόνου τετύκοντό τε δαῖτα, 480
ὃ ’ 3 δέ \ 25 ’ἤ ὃ \ 399

αἰνυντ᾽, οὐδέ τι θυμὸς ἐδεύετο δαιτὸς ἐίσης.

> \ 2 Ν , 3 ’, 3 Φ
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ πόσιος καὶ ἐδητύος ἐξ ἔρον ἕντο,
τοῖς ἄρα μύθων ἦρχε Γερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ'

9 4 ” 3 “ 9 4
“ Arpeldn κύδιστε, ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν Αγάμεμνον,
μηκέτι νῦν δήθ᾽ αὖθι λεγώμεθα, μηδ ἔτι δηρὸν 435

ΝΜ)
ἀμβαλλώμεθα ἔργον, ὃ δὴ θεὸς ἐγγναλίζει"
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε κήρυκες μὲν ᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων
Ce eee βὰν ee KO

λαὸν κηρύσσοντες AYELPOVT@Y κατὰ νῆας,

ς n δ᾽ .θ 4 NY.) ὰ \ > AN "A ca)
ἡμεῖς δ᾽ ἁθροοι é ε κατὸ στρατὸν εὐρὺν χαιῶν
ν 4 A
ἰομεν, OMpa KE ὕασσον ἐγείρομεν οξυν na. 440

μεν, ὄφρα 503 9 Tent ἐξ A Ρ ’

ὧς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων"
αὐτίκα κηρύκεσσι λυγυφθόγγοισι κέλευσεν )
, 4 3

κηρύσσειν πολεμόνδε κάρη κομόωντας ᾿Αχαιούς.
οἱ μὲν ἐκήρυσσον, τοὶ δ᾽ ἠγείροντο μάλ᾽ ὦκα.

οἱ δ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐωνα διοτρεφέες βασιλῆες

445

θῦνον κρίνοντες, μετὰ δὲ γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη
aiylS ἔχουσ᾽ ἐρίτιμον, ἀγήραον ἀθανάτην Te:

426. ᾿Ηφαίστοιο-Ξ- πυρὸς, as ᾿Αμφιτρίτη
= θάλασσα μ 97, ᾿Αφροδίτη = ev} x
444, “Apns = πόλεμος passim. Cf. φλογὸς
‘Ho. I 468.

435. μηκέτι viv δήθ᾽ αὖθι, so MSS.
and Ar., δὴ ταῦτα Zenod., δὴ viv αὖθι
Kallistratos. Ar. explained ‘£5704 πολὺν
χρόνον, αὖθι αὐτοῦ, λεγώμεθα συναθροί-
ζωμεθα᾽" (Didymos ap. Schol. A). Against
Zenod.’s reading it is justly urged (Butt.
Lex, 398) that the phrase μηκέτι δὴ viv
ταῦτα Δ. is always used to cut short a
long conversation (N 292, T 244, ν 296,
y 240); whereas here the object is to
prevent conversation beginning. λέγειν
and λέγεσθαι are rarely used in Homer,
except in the above-mentioned phrase, in
the sense of ‘‘ relating,” nor do they ever
occur without an object in the sense of
‘‘conversing.” There seems therefore
no choice but to adopt the interpretation
of Aristarchos, with his reading; or with
the reading of Zenod. to suppose that

unk. τ. rey. is ‘fa customary formula for
breaking off a conversation; and that
when Nestor rose from table, at which
there had naturally been some conver-
sation, though the poet does not mention
it, he broke it off with these words”
(Butt. 1.1) Neither alternative is en-
tirely satisfactory.

447. For the aegis see also O 308, P
593, A 167, E 738: it clearly symbolizes
the storm-cloud, and as such belongs
properly to Zeus; Apollo wields it O
318, 361, 2 20; Athene here, E 738,
= 204, 400. The tassels round the
edge seem to be mentioned rather as a
majestic ornament (cf. = 181) than as
‘*a symbol of the lightning-flashes play-
ing about the thunder-cloud.” See also
Herod. (iv. 189), who derives it from the
leathern corselets worn by the Libyans.
ἀγήραον and ἀθανάτην are co-ordinated
by τε, and therefore epexegetic and sub-
ordinate to ἐρίτιμον.

64 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Β (11.)

τῆς ἑκατὸν θύσανοι παγχρύσεοι ἠερέθονται,
πάντες ἐνπλεκέες, ἑκατόμβοιος δὲ ἕκαστος"
σὺν τῇ παιφάσσουσα διέσσυτο λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν 450
ὀτρύνουσ᾽ ἰέναι" ἐν δὲ σθένος ὧρσεν ἑκάστῳ
καρδίῃ, ἄλληκτον πολεμίζειν ἠδὲ μάχεσθαι.
τοῖσι δ᾽ ἄφαρ πόλεμος γλυκίων γένετ᾽ ἠὲ νέεσθαι
ἐν νηυσὶ γλαφυρῇσι φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν.
3. 9 a 2 ὃ 3 [4 ΝΜ we
ἠύτε πῦρ ἀίδηλον ἐπιφλέγει ἄσπετον ὕλην 455
4 3 “Ὁ [κέ “ 4 3 4
οὔρεος ἐν κορυφῇς, ἕκαθεν δέ τε φαίνεται αὐγή,
ὧς τῶν ἐρχομένων ἀπὸ χαλκοῦ θεσπεσίοιο
Μ / 3 324 7 3 \
αἴγλη παμφανόωσα δι’ αἰθέρος οὐρανὸν Trev.
“Ἂ 3 Ψ 3% 2 J fal Ν ΄
τῶν δ᾽, ὥς T ὀρνίθων πετεηνῶν ἔθνεα πολλά,
χηνῶν ἢ γεράνων ἢ κύκνων δουλιχοδείρων, 460
᾿Ασίω ἐν λειμῶνι, Καύστρίου ἀμφὶ ῥέεθρα,
ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα ποτῶνται ἀγαλλόμενα πτερύγεσσεν,

448, θύσανος (see Curt. Zt. no. 320),
from θυ-σ- (root θυ-), on account of their
violent swinging; perhaps with a re-
miniscence of θύελλα. ἠερέθονται, so
Ar. and most MSS.: Zenod. -ovro. The
present is quite in place in describing
the immortal gear of the gods; see a
striking instance in E 726-8 compared
with 729.

450. παιφάσσουσα, ‘‘ dazzling,” by
intensive reduplication from a secondary
form of root φα-, either gax-y or gac-7.
The latter derivative is common in Skt.
(bhds-), but is doubtful in Greek.

451. ὀτρύνουσα, clearly not by words,
but by her invisible presence and the
supernatural power of the aegis.

455-483. The accumulation of similes
has given much offence to critics, and
most edd. reject one or more. But each
is vivid and Homeric, and refers to a
particularly striking point in the aspect
of the Greck host, the gleam of their
weapons (455-8), the clamour of their
advance (459-466), their multitudinous
unrest (469-473). Then follow two de-
scribing the leaders in general and
Agamemnon in particular. The effect
is that of a majestic prologue, and would
be greatly enhanced if the direct action
of the poem followed on immediately,
and were not interrupted by the Catalogue.
ἀίδηλον, lit. “making invisible,” ἀφανίζων,
i.e. ‘‘ destroying,” see Curt. Et.5 p. 662.

456. For this use of ἕκαθεν, where we
say ‘‘to a distance,” see II 634. Observe

the characteristic use of δέ re in similes
(456 and 463) to introduce an additional
touch, often, but not always, containing
the tertium comparationis.

461. ᾿Ασίω, so best MSS. with Ar.,
who regarded it as the gen. of a proper
name ᾿Ασίας (for ’Aclew), said to have
been a king of Lydia. So Herod. iv.
45, καὶ τούτου μὲν μεταλαμβάνονταε τοῦ
οὐνόματος Λυδοὶ, φάμενοι ἐπὶ ᾿Ασίεω τοῦ
Κότυος τοῦ Μάνεω κεκλῆσθαι τὴν ᾿Ασίαν.
Virgil, on the other hand, clearly read
᾿Ασίῳ:

‘varias pelagi volucres, et quae
Asia circum
Dulcibus in stagnis rimantur prata
Caystri.”—{Georg. 1. 383.)
“Ceu quondam nivei liquida inter nubila
cyeni

Cum sese ec pastu referunt et longa

canoros

Dant per colla modos, sonat amnis et

Asia longe
_ Pulsa palus.”—( Aen. vii. 699. )

This is the only passage in the Iliad
indicating knowledge in detail of any
part of the coast of Asia Minor beyond
the Troad.

462. ἀγαλλόμενα, perhaps here in the
primitive sense (root γαλ to shine),
“ preening themselves.” There was an
old variant ἀγαλλόμεναι, which would be
perfectly good Greek but for the mase.
προκαθιζόντων in the next line (Aut.-

Nag.)

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B (11) 65

\ ͵ ΄ς“: J, 4,
κλαγγηδὸν προκαθιζόντων, σμαραγεῖ δέ τε λείμων,
Φ a Μ) \ “ ΝΜ N 4
ὧς τῶν ἔθνεα πολλὰ νεῶν ἄπο Kal κλισιάων

᾿ / , > / ΣΝ eA \
és πεδίον προχέοντο Σκαμάνδριον, αὐτὰρ ὑπὸ χθὼν

465

σμερδαλέον κονάβιξε ποδῶν αὐτῶν τε καὶ ἵππων.
ἔσταν δ᾽ ἐν λειμῶνι Σκαμανδρίῳ ἀνθεμόεντι
/ e μ A μα oP “ μ
4 σ
μυρίοι, ὅσσα τε φύλλα καὶ ἄνθεα γύγνεται ὥρῃ.
97 , 3 4 4
ἠύτε μυιάων ἀδινάων ἔθνεα πολλά,
v4 \ \ 7 3 iA
ai τε κατὰ σταθμὸν ποιμνήιον ἠλάσκουσιν 470
A 4
ὥρῃ ἐν εἰαρινῇ, ὅτε τε γλώγος ἄγγεα Sever,
. /
τόσσοι ἐπὶ Τρώεσσι κάρη κομόωντες ᾿Αχαιοὶ
ἐν πεδίῳ ἵσταντο διαρραῖσαι μεμαῶτες.
\ 3 @ 3 93 ’ fs? 3 fal 3 4 δ᾽
τοὺς δ᾽, ὥς T αὐπολια TAATE αὐγῶν αἰπόλοι ἄνδρες

ῥεῖα διακρίνωσιν, ἐπεί κε νομῷ μυγέωσιν,

475

ὧς τοὺς ἡγεμόνες διεκόσμεον ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα
ὑσμίνηνδ᾽ ἰέναι, μετὰ δὲ κρείων ᾽Αγαμέμνων,
ὄμματα καὶ κεφαλὴν ἴκελος Act τερπικεραύνῳ,

"Αρεῖ δὲ ζώνην, στέρνον δὲ Ἰ]οσειδάωνι.

ἠύτε βοῦς ἀγέληφι μέγ᾽ ἔξοχος ἔπλετο πάντων 480
ταῦρος: ὁ γάρ τε βόεσσι μεταπρέπει: ἀγρομένῃσιν'
δι v9 9 A A Ν
τοῖον ἄρ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδην θῆκε Ζεὺς ἤματι κείνῳ,
9 y 39 Ὁ wv Ρ 4
ἐκπρεπέ ἐν πολλοῖσι καὶ ἔξοχον ἡρώεσσιν.
ἔσπετε νῦν μοι, μοῦσαι ᾿Ολύμπια δώματ᾽ ἔχουσαι,

463. προκαθιζόντων, a pregnant ex-
pression, ‘‘keep settling ever forwards” ;
the whole y moves forward by the
- continual advance of single birds who
keep settling in front of the rest.
opapaye may here, as in the two other
passages where it occurs (210, 199), be
taken to refer either to bright light or
loud noise, bat the latter 18 generally
adopted, and suits the simile best.

465. ὑπό must go with ποδῶν, the
gen. indicating a transition from the
ocal to the causal meaning of the pre-
position (La R.). Cf. % 285 ποδῶν ὕπο
with T 363 ὑπὸ ποσσίν.

469. ἀδινάων, ‘‘busy.” See on 87.
The simile indicates both the multitude
of the Greeks and their restless eagerness
for their object: cf. Π 641, where line
471 also recurs. Homer has another
striking simile of the fly in P 570.

474, αἰπόλοι: G. Meyer, in Curt. Sé.
viii. 121, shows reason for deriving αἰπόλος
not from aly-wédos for αὖγι- πόλος, for
which there is no analogy, but from
ἀξι-πόλος, where afi-=Skt. avi-, bs, ovis.

F

It will then be used of goats by the same
idiom which gives us ἵπποι βουκολέοντο
YT 221, BovOurety ὗν Ar. Plut. 819, etc.,
aided by the similarity of sound to αἴξ.
πλατέα, because of the wide spaces over
which they range.

479. ζώνην, the waist. Except A 234,
where it also seems to mean the ‘‘ waist”
of the corselet, the word is used only of a
woman’s girdle.

480. ἔπλετο, for this use of the aor. in
similes as virtually a present cf. H 4,
etc. ; and for Bots ταῦρος cf. σῦς κάπρος,
ἴρηξ κίρκος (v 86), ὄρνιθες αἰγνπιοί (H 59).

483. It would hardly be possible in
Homeric language to join πολλοῖσι with
ἡρώεσσιν : rather ‘‘preéminent in the
multitude and excellent amid warriora—

484-877. The “Catalogue of the Ships,”
and of the Trojans and allies. e
principal critical questions belonging

ere are briefly indicated in the introduc-
tion to the book. ἔσπετε, prob. a redupl.
aor. for σέ-σπ-ετε, or else for ἐν-σπ-ετε,
root cer = sak, our say. Observe the

rhyme μοῦσαι---ἔχουσαι. πάρεστε, either

66 LAIAAOS B (11)

ὑμεῖς yap θεαί ἐστε πάρεστέ τε ἴστε τε πάντα, 485
ἡμεῖς δὲ κλέος οἷον ἀκούομεν οὐδέ τι ἴδμεν,
οἵ τινες ἡγεμόνες Δαναῶν καὶ κοίρανοι ἦσαν.
πληθὺν δ᾽ οὐκ ἂν ἐγὼ μυθήσομαι οὐδ᾽ ὀνομήνω,
οὐδ᾽ εἴ μοι δέκα μὲν γλῶσσαι, δέκα δὲ στόματ᾽ εἶεν,
φωνὴ δ᾽ ἄρρηκτος, χάλκεον δέ μοι ἦτορ ἐνείη, 490
εἰ μὴ Ὀλυμπιάδες μοῦσαι, Διὸς αὐγιόχοιο
θυγατέρες, μνησαίαθ᾽ ὅσοι ὑπὸ Ἴλιον ἦλθον.
ἀρχοὺς αὖ νηῶν ἐρέω νῆάς τε προπάσας.
Βοιωτῶν μὲν Πηνέλεως καὶ Λήιτος ἦρχον
᾿Αρκεσίλαός τε ἸΙΠροθοήνωρ τε Κλονίος τε, 495
of θ᾽ “Ὑρίην ἐνέμοντο καὶ Αὐλίδα πετρήεσσαν
Σχοῖνόν τε Σκῶλόν τε πολύκνημόν τ᾽ ᾿Ἑτεωνόν,
Θέσπειαν Γραῖάν τε καὶ εὐρύχορον Μυκαλησσόν,
οἵ τ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ “Αρμ᾽ ἐνέμοντο καὶ Εϊλέσιον καὶ ᾿ρύθρας,

οἵ τ᾽ ᾿Ἔλεῶν᾽ εἶχον ἠδ᾽ “ὕλην καὶ Πετεῶνα,

500

᾿᾽Ωκαλέην Μεδεῶνά τ᾽, ἐυκτίμενον πτολίεθρον,
Κώπας Εὔτρησίν τε πολυτρήρωνά τε Θίσβην,
οἵ τε Κορώνειαν καὶ ποιήενθ᾽ ᾿Αλίαρτον,

οἵ τε Πλάταιαν ἔχον ἠδ᾽ οἱ Γλίσαντα νέμοντο,

οἵ θ᾽ “Ὑποθήβας εἶχον, ἐνκτίμενον πτολίεθρον,

δ0ὅ

᾿Ογχηστόν θ᾽ ἱερόν, ἸΤοσιδήιον ἀγλαὸν ἄλσος,
οἵ τε πολυστάφυλον “Apyny ἔχον, οἵ τε Μίδειαν

‘are present at all that hap ns,” or
‘*stand at the poet’s side.”’ e Muses
are particularly appropriate in such a
lace as this, for they are goddesses of

emory (Μοῦσα = Movtja, root man;
see Curt. Εἴ. no. 429), though the legend
which made them daughters of Mne-
mosyne is post-Homeric.

488. For ἄν with aor. subj. as apodosis
to a clause containing εἰ with opt. cf.
A 386, and the equivalent fut. indic.
ἐσσεῖται with ὅτε μὴ ἐμβάλοι, N 317.
Possibly μυθήσομαι is fut. indic., and
ὀνομήνω is independent of ἄν, 88 in A
262, οὐδὲ ἴδωμαι. ἄν here seems to enforce
the contrast, see H. G. § 276, β.

490. ἦτορ, Lat. animus, primarily of
vitality, as here; then, as most com-
monly, of the passions. Though the
word probably comes from dw to breathe,
it would be quite against all Homeric
use to understand it, as some comment-
ators have done, of the lungs.

492, μνησαίατο, made mention of; as

5 118, ο 400. προπάσας, all from end
to end: so πρόπαν ἦμαρ, ete.

494, The prominent position given to
the Boeotians here, in marked contrast to
their unimportance in the story, has led
to the conjecture that the Ca © was
the work of the Boeotian or Hesiodic
school, which was notably given to the
compilation of lists of names (Lauer).

502. πολντρήρωνα, Chandler was led
to the discovery of the ruins of Thisbe
(near the coast of the Corinthian
by the number of wild doves which
haunted them.

505. Ὑπ s, ἃ lower Thebes in the
plain, an offshoot from the great city
which we are to regard as still lyi
waste after its destructian by the Epigoni.

507. For "Άρνην Zenod. read Ἄσκρην,
but Ar. objected that the epithet
πολυστάφυλος could not belong to
Hesiod’s birthplace, as he describes it as
χεῖμα κακή, θέρει ἀργαλέη. Thuc. i. 12
also read “Apyy, for he says that in his

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B ar) 67

Nicdy te ζαθέην ᾿Ανθηδόνα τ᾽ ἐσχατόωσαν'
τῶν μὲν πεντήκοντα νέες κίον, ἐν δὲ ἑκάστῃ

κοῦροι Βοιωτῶν ἑκατὸν καὶ εἴκοσι βαῖνον.

510

οἱ δ᾽ ᾿Ασπληδόνα ναῖον iS "Opyouevov Μινύειον,
τῶν ἦρχ᾽ ᾿Ασκάλαφος καὶ ᾿Ιάλμενος, υἷες “Apnos,
ods τέκεν ᾿Αστυόχη δόμῳ “Axtopos ᾿Αζεΐδαο,
παρθένος αἰδοίη, ὑπερώιον εἰσαναβᾶσα,

“Apne κρατερῷ: ὁ δέ οἱ παρελέξατο λάθρῃ"

515

τοῖς δὲ τριήκοντα γλαφυραὶ νέες ἐστιχόωντο.
αὐτὰρ Φωκήων Σχεδίος καὶ ᾿Ἐ"πίστροφος ἦρχον,

υἱέες ᾿Ιφίτοο μεγαθύμου Ναυβολίδαο,

οὗ Κυπάρισσον ἔχον Πυθῶνά τε πετρήεσσαν

Κρῖσάν τε ξαθέην καὶ Δαυλίδα καὶ Ἰ]ανοπῆα,

520

οἵ τ᾽ ᾿Ανεμώρειαν καὶ Ὑάμπολιν ἀμφενέμοντο,
δ > ν \ \ σ΄ 4
οἵ τ᾽ ἄρα πὰρ ποταμὸν Κηφισὸν δῖον ἔναιον,
οἵ τε Δέλαιαν ἔχον πηγῇς ἔπι Knducoio-
τοῖς δ᾽ ἅμα τεσσαράκοντα μέλαιναι νῆες ὅποντο.

οἱ μὲν Φωκήων στίχας ἵστασαν ἀμφιέποντες,

525

Βοιωτῶν δ᾽ ἔμπλην ἐπ᾽ ἀριστερὰ θωρήσσοντο.
Λοκρῶν δ᾽ ἡγεμόνευεν ᾿᾽Οιλῆος ταχὺς Alas,

μείων, οὔ τι τόσος γε ὅσος Τελαμώνιος Αἴας,

ἀλλὰ πολὺ μείων" ὀλίγος μὲν ἔην, λινοθώρηξ,

ἐγχείῃ δ᾽ ἐκέκαστο Ἰ]ανέλληνας καὶ ᾿Αχαιούς"

5380

οἱ Κῦνόν τ᾽ ἐνέμοντ᾽ ᾽᾿Οπόεντά τε Καλλίαρόν τε
Βῆσσάν τε Σκάρφην τε καὶ Αὐγειὰς ἐρατεινὰς

day the Boeotians had been expelled from
Arne by the Thessalians.

_ 508. ἐσχατόωσαν, as lying on the
Euboic sea.

511. The territory of the Minyae was
afterwards part of Boeotia. For Orcho-
menos see 1 381. We ought perhaps to
read Ἔρχομενός, its own local name.
There was another in Arkadia (605).
Ares was the tribal god of the great tribe
of the Minyae, and hence the two chiefs
claim descent from him. Minyas himself
was, according to one account, son of Ares.

514. αἰδοίη, there was no dishonour in
the love ofa god. ὕπερ. εἶσαν. goes with
τέκε in the sense ‘‘conceived,” as 742.
Compare Π 184.

518. ᾿Ιφίτοο, a certain restoration for
᾿φίτου of MSS. ; the second syllable of
the name is short, see P 306; for this
form of the gen. see H. G. § 98, and for

lengthening of the short vowel before
initial μ, 8 371.

526. ἔμπλην = πλησίον: a rare form,
apparent y from the locative termination
-dm, said to be found in Skt., and root
πελ- (πέλας), and thus = ‘‘in the neigh-
bourhood of” (Autenrieth ap. Hentze),

528 was rejected by Zenodotos, and
529-530 by Aristarchos also; partly on
account of the obvious tautology, partly
because of the word Ilav&Anvas, used,
contrary to the Homeric practice, to
denote the Argive host. λινοδώ ees
with the character of light infantry and
bowmen which is attributed to the Lok-
rians in N 714, but is hardly consistent
with the praise of Aias the less as a
spearman ; in N 712 he, as a hoplite, is
separated from his followers. He does
nothing in actual battle to justify the
praise in 530.

68 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B (1)

Τάρφην τε @povidv τε Boaypiov ἀμφὶ ῥέεθρα"

τῷ δ᾽ ἅμα τεσσαράκοντα μέλαιναι νῆες ἕποντο

Λοκρῶν, of ναίουσι πέρην ἱερῆς ᾿Ευβοίης. 58:
οἱ δ᾽ ᾽᾿Ἐύβοιαν ἔχον μένεα πνείοντες ΓΑβαντες,

Χαλκίδα 7 Εἰρέτριάν τε πολυστάφυλόν θ᾽ “Ἱστίαιαν

Κήρινθόν 7 ἔφαλον Δίου τ᾽ αἰπὺ πτολίεθρον,

οἵ τε Κάρυστον ἔχον ἠδ᾽ οἱ Στύρα ναιετάασκον,

τῶν αὖθ᾽ ἡγεμόνεν᾽ ᾿Ελεφήνωρ ὄξος “Apnos, 540

Χαλκωδοντιάδης, μεγαθύμων ἀρχὸς ᾿Αβάντων.

τῷ δ᾽ ἅμ᾽ ἴΑβαντες ἕποντο θοοί, ὄπιθεν κομόωντες,

αἰχμηταί, μεμαῶτες ὀρεκτῇσιν μελίῃσιν

θώρηκας ῥήξειν δηίων ἀμφὶ στήθεσσιν"

τῷ δ᾽ ἅμα τεσσαράκοντα μέλαιναι νῆες ἕποντο. 545
οἱ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ᾿Αθήνας εἶχον, ἐυκτίμενον πτολίεθρον,

δῆμον ᾿Ἔ ρεχθῆος μεγαλήτορος, ὅν ποτ᾽ ᾿Αθήνη

θρέψε Διὸς θυγάτηρ, τέκε δὲ ζείδωρος ἄρουρα"

κὰδ δ᾽ ἐν ᾿Αθήνῃς εἷσεν, ἑῷ ἐνὶ πίονι νηῷ"

ἔνθα δέ μιν ταύροισι καὶ ἀρνειοῖς ἱλάονται 580

κοῦροι ᾿Αθηναίων περιτελλομένων ἐνιαυτῶν"

τῶν αὖθ᾽ ἡγεμόνεν᾽ νἱὸς Πετεῶο Μενεσθεύς.

535. v, “over against,” as Χαλκίδος
πέραν, Aesch. Ag. 190. It might, how-
ever, mean ‘‘beyond,” if we suppose
that the poet’s point of view is that of
an Asiatic Greek.

537. ‘Iorlavay, trisyllable by synizesis,
as Αἰγυπτίους I 382, ὃ 88.

542. ὄπιθεν κομόωντες τὰ ὀπίσω μέρη
τῆς κεφαλῆς κομῶντες ἀνδρείας χάριν. ἴδιον
δὲ τοῦτο τῆς τῶν Εὐβοέων κουρᾶς, τὸ
ὄπισθεν τὰς τρίχας βαθείας ἔχειν, Schol. A.
So of two Libyan tribes, οἱ μὲν MdyAves
τὰ ὀπίσω κομέουσι τῆς κεφαλῆς οἱ δὲ Αὐσεῖς
τὰ ἔμπροσθε, Herod. iv. 180. Compare
Θρήικες ἀκρόκομοι, A533. These seem all
to indicate that part of the head was
shaved according to a tribal fashion,
such as is familiar to us in the case of
the Chinese, whereas the usual Greek
practice was to let the hair grow long
all over; the κάρη κομόωντες ᾿Αχαιοί
being thus distinguished from many or
most of their barbarian neighbours.

547. δῆμον, here in the strict local
sense, ‘‘realm.” It probably comes
from root da- of dafw and means the
common land of the tribe apportioned
for tillage among the tribesmen, as is
still done in the Slavonic village com-

munities ; cf. on M 422. So Nausithoos
ἐδάσσατ᾽ ἀρούρας, £10. Ina still earlier
stage δῆμος indicates a yet more complete
communism, meaning the common stock
of what we should call ‘‘ personal”
property, 6.9. δημόθεν τ 197, els δῆμον A
704, and δήμιος P 250, δημοβόρος A 231,

καταδημοβορῆσαι 2301. (Mangold, Curt.
St. vi. 403-413.)
548. réxe—tpovpa is of course paren-

thetical—an allusion to Athenian
autochthony—and ᾿Αθήνη is the subject
of elce. The temples of Athene Polias
and Erechtheus were always under one
roof. So » 81, where Athene repairs to
Athens, she δῦνεν ᾿Ερεχθῆος πυκινὸν δόμον,
ζείδωρος, ‘‘the graingiver,” from fed
(Skt. javas), has of course nothing to do
with ‘‘life-giving” ({a-w from root gi-
(?); Curt. £¢. p. 491). alow, se. with
offerings.

550. μιν, Ercchtheus; for cows and
ewes were offered to female desses.
The festival where these offerings were
made was the (annual) ‘‘lesser Pana-
thenaea,” in honour of the two founders
of agriculture.

552. Πετεῶο, gen. of Πετεώς, as Πενε-
λέωο & 489. The three following lines

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Β (μ} 69

A b » , e σι 3 / , > >» A
τῷ δ᾽ οὔ πώ τις ὁμοῖος ἐπιχθόνιος γένετ᾽ ἀνὴρ
κοσμῆσαι ἵππους τε καὶ ἀνέρας ἀσπιδιώτας"
Νέστωρ οἷος ἔριξεν" ὁ γὰρ προγενέστερος ἦεν. 555
τῷ δ᾽ ἅμα πεντήκοντα μέλαιναι νῆες ἕποντο.
Αἴας δ᾽ ἐκ Σαλαμῖνος ἄγεν δυοκαίδεκα νῆας"
[στῆσε δ᾽ ἄγων, iv ᾿Αθηναίων ἵσταντο φάλαγγες.
«Ὁ Σ) Ν ᾽ ’ 4 /
ot δ᾽ “Apyos τ᾽ εἶχον Τίρυνθά τε τειχιόδεσσαν,
“Ἑρμιόνην ᾿Ασίνην τε βαθὺν κατὰ κόλπον ἐχούσας, 560
Τροιζῆν᾽ ᾿ιόνας τε καὶ ἀμπελόεντ᾽ ᾿Επίδαυρον,
o > νΝ # 4 , le) 3 fa)
οἵ τ᾽ ἔχον Αἴγιναν Maonra τε κοῦροι ᾿Αχαιῶν,
an 442" ¢ / \ 3 \ /
τῶν αὖθ᾽ ἡγεμόνευε βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης
καὶ Σθένελος Καπανῆος ἀγακλειτοῦ φίλος υἱός"
τοῖσι δ᾽ ἅμ᾽ Εὐρύαλος τρίτατος κίεν, ἰσόθεος φώς, 565
Μηκιστῆος vids Ταλαϊονίδαο ἄνακτος.

were rejected by Zenodotos, and they

have all the appearance of an addi-
tion designed to soothe the vanity of the
Athenians, which was doubtless much hurt
by the small part played by their nation
in the Iliad (cf. A 264). Menestheus
does not afterwards appear as a dis-
tinguished general. In A 326-348
Agamemnon speaks of him in unflatter-
ing terms. He is mentioned again only
M 331, 373, N 195, 690, O 331, when
the fighting is left to the heroes of the
second rank. But the lines can be
traced back with certainty to the
beginning of the fifth century, as they
are mentioned by Herodotos (vii. 161);
and Aischines (Kées. 185) quotes an in-
scription as having been set up by the
Athenians in honour of their country-
men’s victory over the Persians at the
Strymon, which begins as follows :

ἔκ ποτε τῆσδε πόληος Gy’ ᾿Ατρείδῃσι
Μενεσθεύς
ἡγεῖτο ζάθεον Ἰϊρωικὸν ἂμ πεδίον,
ὅν ποθ’ Ὅμηρος ἔφη Δαναῶν πύκα
χαλκοχιτώνων

κοσμητῆρα μάχης ἔξοχον ἄνδρα μολεῖν.

557-8. This celebrated couplet is said
to have played an important part, in the
dispute between Athens and Megara for
the possession of Salamis. 558 is
omitted by the best MSS. The text
was put forward by Solon to establish
the Athenian claim before the Spartan
arbitrators, but the Megarians said that
the true reading was Alas δ᾽ ἐκ 2. ἄγεν
νέας ἔκ re TloAlyvns Ex τ᾽ ᾿Αγειρούσσης
Νισαίης re Τριπόδων τε (Strabo, ix. 394),

thus connecting Aias with Megarian
towns, but giving no number of ships.
The story is alluded to by Aristotle,
Fhet. i. 15, and numerous other author-
ities (quoted in Hentze, Anh. ad loc. ;
Lehrs, Ar. p. 447), but cannot be
regarded as entirely trustworthy. Some
said that the line was inserted by
Peisistratos. At all events it shews
how, during the period of Attic litera-
ture, the Catalogue was regarded as
having a canonical authority. But the

assage as it stands cannot possibly be
in its original form; for it would be
quite alien from the spirit of the ‘‘ Cata-
logue” to dismiss so great a hero as
Aias with a single line, or even two.—
ἵνα in the local sense occurs here, 604,
and Tf 478, in 1]. : otherwise it is peculiar
to Od.

559. τειχιόεσσαν, the ‘‘Cyclopean”
walls of Tiryns are as great a marvel at
the present day as in the time of Homer.

560. κατεχούσας, ‘‘enfolding the deep
(Saronic) gulf.” The word applies of
course to the territories, not the cities.
There is no sufficient analogy for taking
ἐχούσας by itself as intrans.=lying. It
is only of Argos in the narrower sense,
the city, that Diomedes was king.

564. ἀγακλειτοῦ, as one of the Seven
against Thebes, A 404-410.

566. TadatovlSao, son of Talaos. This
is one of a number of patronymics
formed with a double termination ;
another case of -cwy + dys is ᾿Ιαπετιονίδης
(Hes.) Forms like Πηληιάδης, Φηρητιάδης,
etc., are quite similar ; they contain the

70 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B (11)

συμπάντων δ᾽ ἡγεῖτο βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης"
τοῖσι δ᾽ ἅμ᾽ ὀγδώκοντα μέλαιναι νῆες ἕποντο.
οὗ δὲ Μυκήνας εἶχον, ἐυκτίμενον πτολίεθρον,
ἀφνειόν τε Κόρινθον ἐυκτιμένας τε Krewvds, 570
"Opverds 7 ἐνέμοντο ᾿Αραιθυρέην τ᾽ ἐρατεινὴν
καὶ Σικυῶν᾽, ὅθ᾽ ἄρ᾽ Αδρηστος πρῶτ᾽ ἐμβασίλευεν,
οἵ θ᾽ ὙὝπερησίην τε καὶ αἰπεινὴν Tovoeccay
Πελλήνην τ᾽ εἶχον, ἠδ᾽ Αὔγιον ἀμφενέμοντο
Aiyadov τ᾽ ἀνὰ πάντα καὶ ἀμφ᾽ Ἑλίκην εὐρεῖαν, 575
τῶν ἑκατὸν νηῶν ἦρχε κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων

᾿Ατρεΐδης.

ἅμα τῷ γε πολὺ πλεῖστοι καὶ ἄριστοι

λαοὶ ἕποντ᾽" ἐν δ᾽ αὐτὸς ἐδύσετο νώροπα χαλκὸν

κυδιόων, πᾶσιν δὲ μετέπρεπεν ἡρώεσσιν,

οὕνεκ᾽ ἄριστος ἔην, πολὺ δὲ πλείστους ἄγε λαούς. 580
ot δ᾽ εἶχον κοίλην Λακεδαίμονα κητώεσσαν

Φᾶρίν τε Σπάρτην τε πολυτρήρωνά τε Μέσσην,

Βρυσειάς τ᾽ ἐνέμοντο καὶ Αὐγειὰς ἐρατεινάς,

οἵ τ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ᾿Αμύκλας εἶχον “Enos τ᾽ ἔφαλον πτολίεθρον,

οἵ τε Λάαν εἶχον ἠδ᾽ Οἴτυλον ἀμφενέμοντο,

585

τῶν οἱ ἀδελφεὸς ἦρχε, βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Μενέλαος,
eg ἢ a 2 ᾽ \ /

ἑξήκοντα νεῶν" ἀπάτερθε δὲ θωρήσσοντο.

3 3 3 \ / a

ἐν δ᾽ αὐτὸς κίεν ἧσι προθυμίῃσι πεποιθώς,
ὀτρύνων πολεμόνδε" μάλιστα δὲ ἵετο θυμῷ

suff. -ἰο- (which itself is capable of bein

used for a patronymic, as Τελαμώνιος Alas
+ dons; of on Al. For the double suffix
compare Κορινθ-ια-κό-ς (Angermann, C.
δέ. i. 1). For Μηκιστῆος MSS. give
Μηκιστέος or -réws. See on A 489.

570. Aristarchos observed that when
the poet speaks in his own name (here
and N 664) he calls the city ‘‘ Corinth”;
but puts in the mouth of the hero
Glaukos the older name ᾿Εφύρη, Z 152.

572. πρῶτα ; according to the legend
Adrastos had been driven from Argos,
and dwelt with his grandfather in Sikyon,
where he gained the royal power, but
afterwards he returned and reigned in

Argos,

575. Αἱ év, the N. shore of Pelo-
ponnese, afterwards called Achaia. τῶν
18 gen. after νηῶν, ships of these folk.

578. vépora is found six times in 1].
and twice in Od. (w 467, 500), always as
an epithet of χαλκόν. It is generally in-
terpreted ‘‘gleaming,” ‘‘shining,” but

the derivation of the word is quite un-
certain, and of many interpretations that
have been proposed none is convincing.

579. πᾶσιν 5é,so Ar.: MSS. ὅτι πᾶσι.
Zenod. obelized this line and the next ;
580 seems unnecessary and tautological.

581. κοίλην A. κητώεσσαν, ‘ L. lying
low among the rifted hills.” κητώεσσαν
no doubt refers to the numerous volcanic
ravines which are characteristic of the
Laconian mountains. See Buttm. Lezil.
s.v. There was another reading, attri-
buted to Zenod. by the Schol. on ὃ 1,
καιετάεσσαν, which was explained as
meaning ‘‘rich in καλαμινθός or xaleros,”
a herb growing abundantly in the district ;
but might equally mean “‘ full of clefts,”
from xalara; cf. καιάδας, the gulf into
which political criminals were cast at
Sparta. See Merry and R. on 6 1.

582. Μέσση-- Μεσσήνη, Schol.

587. ἀπάτερθε, 1.6. Menelaos’ contin-
ent was independent of that ruled by

is brother. For 590 see 356.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Β (11) 71

,ὕ € / ς / / 4
τίσασθαι ᾿Ελένης ὁορμήματά τε στοναχάς Te.

590

ot δὲ Πύλον τ᾽ ἐνέμοντο καὶ ᾿Αρήνην ἐρατεινὴν
καὶ Θρύον ᾿Αλφειοῖο πόρον καὶ ἐύκτιτον Aird,
4 > / ΝΜ
καὶ Κυπαρισσήεντα καὶ ᾿Αμφιγένειαν ἔναιον
καὶ Πτελεὸν καὶ “Ελος καὶ Δώριον, ἔνθα τε μοῦσαι

4 A κι
ἀντόμεναι Θάμυριν τὸν Θρήικα παῦσαν ἀοιδῆς,

595

Οἰὐχαλίηθεν ἰόντα παρ᾽ Εὐρύτου Οἰχαλιῆος"
στεῦτο γὰρ εὐχόμενος νικησέμεν, εἴ περ ἂν αὐταὶ
μοῦσαι ἀείδοιεν, κοῦραι Διὸς αἰγιόχοιο"

αἱ δὲ χολωσάμεναι πηρὸν θέσαν, αὐτὰρ ἀοιδὴν

θεσπεσίην ἀφέλοντο καὶ ἐκλέλαθον κιθαριστύν.

600

A ,

τῶν αὖθ᾽ ἡγεμόνευε Γερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ'
A > 9 / , 3 ’

τῷ δ᾽ ἐνενήκοντα γλαφυραὶ νέες ἐστιχόωντο.

591. Three cities named Pylos, on the
W. coast of Peloponnesos, claimed the
honour of being Nestor’s home (ἔστι Πύλος
πρὸ Πύλοιο' Πύλος γε μὲν ἔστι καὶ ἄλλος,
Aristoph. Hg. 1059, and Strabo). One
was in Elis, and cannot be meant here
(see 615-6). Another disappeared in
very early times, and was not known to
Pausanias ; it was in Triphylia, and its
claim was supported by Strabo, who
thought that it ought to be further
north than the third candidate, the
famous Messenian Pylos, now Navarino,
on account of the details in A 682 ff,
where however see the note. There can
be little doubt that the last is really
Nestor’s Pylos. See notes on E 397,
I 149 ff.

592. Θρύον, evidently the Θρυόεσσα

πόλις of A 711.

595. τὸν Optica, ‘that Thracian.”
Thamyris, like Orpheus, was one of the
legendary Thracians who dwelt in Pieria
at the foot of Olympos, and from whom
the cultus of the Muses was said to come.
In Rhesos, 921-925, the Muses speak of
the time

ὅτ᾽ ἤλθομεν γῆς χρυσόβωλον els λέπας
Πάγγαιον ὀργάνοισιν ἐξησκημέναι
Μοῦσαι, μεγίστην εἰς ἔριν μελῳδίας
δεινῷ σοφιστῇ Θρῃκί, κἀτνφλώσαμεν
Oduupuy, ὃς ἡμῶν πόλλ᾽ ἐδέννασεν τέχνην.

596. The poet evidently conceives
Thamyris as a minstrel wandering from
court to court. This does not seem to
be the Homeric view; it is well known
that minstrels are not mentioned in the
Il., and in the Od. they appear all to
be attached to the household of par

ticular chiefs. For the legend of E
of Oichalia (in Thessaly, 780) see @ 224
ϑ4ᾳ., Φ 18 sq.

597. This appears to be the only case
in H. of ef . . . ἄν with opt. (it is not
mentioned either in H. G. or in Ebel.
Lex, 8.0. el), but it is virtually equi-
valent to ef xe with opt., which is not
very rare; ¢g. A 60, B 128, etc. (H. G.
8 313). ἄν with the opt. puts a state-
ment in the form of a merely imaginary
supposition (H. G. § 300), and εἰ shews
that this supposed case is made the basis
of a conclusion, the apodosis. The oratio
recta would have been νικήσω (fut., as A
60) εἴπερ av αὐταὶ μοῦσαι ἀείδοιεν. There
is no necessity or other justification for
saying that the opt. represents the
subj. of or. recta: the subj. might have
been used (I’ 25, E 225), but would have
expressed a more confident tone. (L.
Lange, EI, p. 209).

599. πηρόφ a doubtful word, tradition-
ally explained ‘‘ blind,” as in Aesop, 17,
ἀνὴρ πηρός, cf. ἐτυφλώσαμεν in Rhes.
ut sup. Others say ‘“‘ maimed,” deprived
either of voice (so Ar.) or of the right
hand: and in this general sense the
word is common in later Greek. Ar.
referred to θ 64 to show that blind-
ness was no disqualification for a
minstrel. Brugman explains it as
waF-pos from pav- (πα-ίω, pav-io) to
smite; Curt. Ef. no. 356, conn. with
πείρω. αὐτάρ is continuative, as 465, etc.,
‘‘and moreover.” ἐκλέλαθον, for this
trans. use of the redupl. aor. cf. O 60,
and λελαχεῖν always (H 80, X 343,
etc. )

72 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B (11)

οἱ δ᾽ ἔχον ᾿Αρκαδίην ὑπὸ Κυλλήνης ὄρος αἰπύ,
Αὐπύτιον παρὰ τύμβον, tv’ ἀνέρες ἀγχιμαχηταΐ,
οἱ Φενεόν τ᾽ ἐνέμοντο καὶ ᾿Ορχομενὸν πολύμηλον 605
“Ῥίπην te Στρατίην τε καὶ ἠνεμόεσσαν ᾿Ἔνίσπην,
καὶ Τεγέην εἶχον καὶ Μαντινέην ἐρατεινήν,
Στύμφηλόν τ᾽ εἶχον καὶ ἸΠαρρασίην ἐνέμοντο,
τῶν ἦρχ᾽ ᾿Αγκαίοιο πάις κρείων ᾿Αγαπήνωρ
ἑξήκοντα νεῶν" πολέες δ᾽ ἐν νηὶ ἑκάστῃ 610
᾿Αρκάδες ἄνδρες ἔβαινον ἐπιστάμενοι πολεμίζειν.
αὐτὸς γάρ σφιν ἔδωκεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων
νῆας ἐυσσέλμους περάαν ἐπὶ οἴνοπα πόντον,
᾿Ατρεΐδης, ἐπεὶ οὔ σφι θαλάσσια ἔργα μεμήλειν.
οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα Βουπράσιόν τε καὶ "Ἤλιδα δῖαν ἔναιον, 615
ὅσσον ἐφ᾽ “Ὑρμίνη καὶ Μύρσινος ἐσχατόωσα
πέτρη τ᾽ ᾿Ωλενίη καὶ ᾿Αλείσιον ἐντὸς ἐέργει,
τῶν αὖ τέσσαρἐές ἀρχοὶ ἔσαν, δέκα δ᾽ ἀνδρὶ ἑκάστῳ
νῆες ἕποντο θοαί, πολέες δ᾽ ἔμβαινον ᾿Ἐπειοί.
τῶν μὲν ἄρ᾽ ᾿Αμφίμαχος καὶ Θάλπιος ἡγησάσθην, 620
υἷες ὁ μὲν Κτεάτου, ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ Evpurou, ᾿Ακτορίωνε"
τῶν δ᾽ ᾿Αμαρυγκεΐδης ἦρχε κρατερὸς Διώρης"
τῶν δὲ τετάρτων ἦρχε Πολύξεινος θεοειδής,
υἱὸς ᾿Αγασθένεος Αὐγηιάδαο ἄνακτος.
οἱ δ᾽ ἐκ Δουλιχίοιο ᾿ΕἸχινάων θ᾽ ἱεράων 625
νήσων, ab ναίουσι πέρην ἁλός, Ἤλιδος ἄντα,

604. The Arcadians are never men-
tioned again in H. except H 134 in a tale
of Nestor’s, though their sixty ships
formed one of the Fargest contingents to
the army. The tomb of Aipytos son
of Elatos is mentioned by Pausanias as
being at the foot of the mountain Σηπία.
See Pind. Ol. vi. 33.

612-4 were obelized by Zenodotos ;
but they are obviously designed to meet
a possible ‘‘ historic doubt,” and cohere
with the rest of the paragraph.

615. See A 756 for Buprasion, the
Olenian rock, and Aleision, as landmarks
of Elis. The four localities in 616-7
seem to be regarded as being at the four
corners of the valley known as κοίλη
*HXts. There is a slight confusion of
construction in ὅσσον ἐπί. . . ἐντὸς
ἐέργει, or in other words the object of
ἐέργει is not, as we should expect, and
as we find in 0 544, ὅσσον, but Ἤλιδα,
to be supplied from the previous line.

Instead of ὅσσον ἐπί, the usual phrase
is ὅσον τ' ἐπί (H 451, O 358, etc.) ere
would seem to have been a fourfold
tribal division of Elis. *Eweot was the
proper name for the inhabitants of Elis,
A 688.

621. ’Axroplwve is properly the title
of Kteatos and Eurytos (not of course
the same as in 596), as ‘‘sons of Aktor,”
at least as putative father. But the
patronymic is here, as often, transferred
to the grandsons; Αἰακίδης is a familiar
case, and Priam is Δαρδανίδης from a
yet more remote ancestor. It is better
therefore to read the dual with Ar. and
A, than to follow the other MSS., which
give ‘Axroplwvos, as N 185. For the
curious legends about the sons of Aktor
see A 709, Ψ 638.

626. af, Zen. of ; but the analogy of
vaerday as applied to places by a sort
of personification (A 45, a 404, etc.) is
sufficient to justify the reading of Ar.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Β (11) 73

τῶν αὖθ᾽ ἡγεμόνευε Μέγης ἀτάλαντος “Apne,
Φυλείδης, ὃν τίκτε διίφιλος ἱππότα Φυλεύς,

4 t 9 4 4 4
OS ποτε Δουλιεχιὸνδ ἀπενάσσατο πατρὶ χολωθείς"

“ δ᾽ A / ‘Na ~ Ψ
T@ ἄμα TETCAPAKOVTA [LE Vat VINES ETTOVTO.

630

αὐτὰρ Ὀδυσσεὺς ἦγε Κεφαλλῆνας μεγαθύμους,
οἵ ῥ᾽ ᾿Ιθάκην εἶχον καὶ Νήριτον εἰνοσίφυλλον,
καὶ ἹΚροκύλει᾽ ἐνέμοντο καὶ Αὐἰγίλυπα τρηχεῖαν,
οἵ τε ZaxvvOov ἔχον ἠδ᾽ of Σάμον ἀμφενέμοντο,

A > Ν 54 293 2 /
οἵ τ᾽ ἤπειρον ἔχον nd ἀντιπέραια νέμοντο"

635

τῶν μὲν ᾽Οδυσσεὺς ἦρχε Atl μῆτιν ἀτάλαντος"

τῷ δ᾽ ἅμα νῆες ἕποντο δυώδεκα μιλτοπάρῃοι.
Αἰτωλῶν δ᾽ ἡγεῖτο Θόας ᾿Ανδραίμονος vids,

οἱ ΤΠλευρῶν᾽ ἐνέμοντο καὶ "Ὥλενον ἠδὲ Πυλήνην

Χαλκίδα 7’ ἀγχίαλον Καλυδῶνά τε πετρήεσσαν"

640

4 \ » 3 9. A 7 e;/
ov yap ἔτ᾽ Oivijos μεγαλήτορος υἱέες ἦσαν,
οὐδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔτ᾽ αὐτὸς ἔην, θάνε δὲ ξανθὸς Μελέαγρος"

and MSS. The Echinean islands as a
matter of fact lie opposite Akarnania, a
considerable distance N. of Elis ; but the
Homeric geography of the W. coast of
Greece is apparently based on imperfect
hearsay, not on knowledge. Dulichion
cannot be identified. See Merry and
R. Od. App. wi.

629. Phyleus had to leave his home
because he bore witness against his
father Augeias, who endeavoured to cheat
Herakles of the reward promised him
for the cleansing of the stables. See
Pind. O. xi. 28. The people of Meges are
called ᾿Επειοί in N 692, O 519; this
indicates. that consciousness of their
tribal unity with the inhabitants of Elis
which is quite consistent with the legend
that their king came to them from
there.

632. For the geography of Ithaka see
Merry and R.’s App., quoted above.
εἰνοσίφυλλον = év-Foot-, from Fod, root of
ὠθέω, etc. (Curt. Ht. no. 324) ‘‘ making
its foliage to shake,” ¢.e. with tremblin
leafage. So Hesych. κινησίφυλλον, an
cf. évvoolyatos. Νήριτον, v 351 ¢ 21.

635. ἀντιπέραια, the coast of the
mainland opposite Ithaka (regarded as
part of Elis). That the inhabitants of
the islands had such possessions on
the mainland is consistent with ὃ 635,
where Noemon speaks of crossing over
to Elis, ἔνθα μοι ἵπποι | δώδεκα θήλειαι,
ὑπὸ δ᾽ ἡμίονοι ταλαεργοί.

637. μιλτοπάρῃοι, with cheeks painted
with vermilion. This does not indicate
so much a personification of the ship as
a literal painting of a face upon the bows,
the red paint being used as a primitive
approximation to the colour of flesh. So
φοινικοπάρῃος \ 124, ἡ 271. Though this
practice is not expressly recorded other-
wise in H., there can be little doubt that
it existed then as it did, and still does,
all over the world, from Chinese junks
to Mediterranean and Portuguese fishing
boats, to-say nothing of its survival in
the ‘‘figure-head.” In early vase-paint-
ings the ship of war has an animal’s
head for the bows, generally a pig’s snout.
The original idea seems to have been to
give the ship eyes with which to see its
way. Of course the actual painting may
in Homer’s ships have degenerated into
a purely conventional daub; but the
epithet in question shows that even in
that case some consciousness of its origin
had survived. Ar. remarked ἤδη ἡ ἐκ
χρωμάτων μίξις ἣν ἐπιπολάσασα πρὸς τὴν
ζωγραφικήν. Cf. Herod. iii. 58, τὸ δὲ
παλαιὸν πᾶσαι al νῆες ἦσαν μιλτηλιφέες.

641. For the Homeric legend of Oi-
neus and Meleagros see I 529 sgg. Zenod.
obelized 641-2, apparently because Mele-
agros alone is named of all the sons of
Oineus. As the Schol. remarks, αὐτὸς
may refer either to Oineus or to Mele-
agros, according to the punctuation. τῷ
δέ, sc. Thoas.

74 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B (11)

τῷ δ᾽ ἐπὶ πάντ᾽ ἐτέταλτο ἀνασσέμεν Αἰτωλοῖσιν"
τῷ δ᾽ ἅμα τεσσαράκοντα μέλαιναι νῆες ἕποντο.
Κρητῶν δ᾽ ᾿Ιδομενεὺς δουρικλυτὸς ἡγεμόνευεν, 645
of Κνωσόν τ᾽ εἶχον Γόρτυνά τε τειχιόεσσαν,
Λύκτον Μίλητόν τε καὶ ἀργινόεντα Λύκαστον
Φαιστόν τε ‘Puriov τε, πόλις ἐὺ ναιετοώσας,
ἄλλοι θ᾽, of Κρήτην ἑκατόμπολιν ἀμφενέμοντο.
τῶν μὲν ἄρ᾽ ᾿Ιδομενεὺς δουρικλυτὸς ἡγεμόνενεν 650
Μηριόνης τ᾽ ἀτάλαντος ᾿Ενναλίῳ ἀνδρεϊφόντῃ"
τοῖσι δ᾽ ἅμ᾽ ὀγδώκοντα μέλαιναι νῆες ἕποντο.
Τληπόλεμος δ᾽ Ἡρακλεΐδης jus τε μέγας τε
ἐκ Ῥόδου ἐννέα νῆας ἄγεν Ῥοδίων ἀγερώχων,
οἱ Ρόδον ἀμφενέμοντο διὰ τρίχα κοσμηθέντες, 655
Λίνδον ᾿Ιηλυσόν τε καὶ ἀργινόεντα Κάμειρον.

645. The enumeration having passed
from Boiotia S. and W. through Pelo-
ponnesos and the Western islands to
Aitolia, now takes a fresh start from the
S. of the Aegaean Sea and passes through
the islands to Thessaly. The Cretan
towns named are all at the foot of Ida
in the middle of the island. See τ 172-
7 for the Homeric account of Crete.

646. Kvwods, 2 591.

647. Μίλητος, said to be the metro-
polis of the famous Ionic Miletos.

649. In 7 174 Crete is said to contain
ninety cities ; a divergence on which, as
we learn from the Schol., the χωρίζοντες
founded one of their arguments.

651. Bvvahte ἀνδρεϊφόντῃ : if this
reading is right there is a violent synizesis
of τῳ dv- into one syllable. But perhaps
we ought to write ἀδριφόντῃ, where ἀδρι-
is a lighter form of ἀνδρι ; and so λιποῦσ᾽
ἀδρότητα II 857, X 363, for dvdpéryra, like
ἀβρότη dppt -Bporos, where the β has, like
the 6 of ἀνδρι, arisen from the nasal,
which then disappeared. H. G. § 370,
note.

653. The Rhodians, in spite of this
elaborate panegyric, are not again men-
tioned in Homer : of Tlepolemos we have
only the account of his death, E 628
sqq. Bergk (Gr. Lit. i. p. 559) regards
that episode, as well as the present
passa e, as interpolated into the original

liad by a Rhodian bard at about the time
of the maritime supremacy of Rhodes,
928-905 B.c. (or possibly later). If so
we have a terminus inferior for the age
of the Catalogue. It is hardly possible

to suppose that a Dorian colony and
Herakleid hero were ever admitted to
the Trojan expedition by the origi
legend, in which the Dorians and Hera-
kleidai are elsewhere absolutely ignored
(except 7 177); especially as the char-
acteristic triple division of the Dorian
tribes is so emphatically insisted upon.
The legend of Tlepolemos is given in
full in hep O. vii. ἢ

654. ἀγερώχων, apparently a desperate
word ; many verivations have been ro-
posed, but not one carries conviction.
t is applied by Homer to the Trojans,
the Mysians, and once to an individual
Periklymenos, ἃ 286. In Homer and
Pindar it seems to be a word of praise,
but later writers use it to mean ‘‘ over-
bearing,” ‘‘ haughty.” Pindar applies it
to things, N. vi. 64, O. x. 96, P.i. 96. It
is common in Polybios, Plutarch, Philo-
stratos, etc., though not found in pure
Attic. I give without comment a number
of proposed etymologies. (1) ἄγαν γεραό-
xos (Ar.): (2) ἀπὸ τοῦ ἄγαν ἐπὶ γέ
ὀχεῖσθαι (Εἰ. Mag.): (3) διὰ τὸ ἀγείρειν
ὀχήν, τούτεστι τροφήν : (4) ἀγείρειν ὄχους,
assemblers of chariots(Doderlein): (5) ἀγεί-
pew, ὠκύς swiftly gathering (Bottcher) :
(6) Aya(v) ἐρωή (suff. -xo-), violent, im-
petuous (Gobel) : (7) dya-, ἔρα, ἔχω, hav-
ng much land (Suidas): (8) ἀγαύρως ἔχειν,
holding themselves proudly (Pott): (9)
adj. ἀγερός, root dy, to admire, hence
ἀγερώσσει (Hesych.), and d-yépwxos = excit-
ing wonder (Schmalfeld): (10)=dyéAav-
xos, the bull proudly leading his herd :
Bergk (Gr. Lit. i. 129).

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Β (11) 75

τῶν μὲν Τληπόλεμος δουρικλυτὸς ἡγεμόνευεν,

ὃν τέκεν ᾿Αστυόχεια βίῃ Ἡρακληείῃ,

τὴν ἄγετ᾽ ἐξ ᾿Εφύρης, ποταμοῦ ἄπο Σελλήεντος,

πέρσας ἄστεα πολλὰ διοτρεφέων αἰζηῶν. 660

Τληπόλεμος δ᾽, ἐπεὶ οὖν τράφ᾽ ἐνὶ μεγάρῳ ἐυπήκτῳ,

αὐτίκα πατρὸς ἑοῖο φίλον μήτρωα κατέκτα

ἤδη γηράσκοντα, Λικύμνιον ὄζον “Apnos.

αἶψα δὲ νῆας ἔπηξε, πολὺν δ᾽ ὅ γε λαὸν ἀγείρας

βῆ φεύγων ἐπὶ πόντον: ἀπείλησαν γὰρ οἱ ἄλλοι 665

υἱέες vimvol τε βίης “Hpaxdnelns:

αὐτὰρ ὅ γ᾽ ἐς Ῥόδον ἷξεν ἀλώμενος ἄνγεα πάσχων"

τριχθὰ δὲ ᾧκηθεν καταφυλαδόν, ἠδὲ φίληθεν

ἐκ Διός, ὅς τε θεοῖσι καὶ ἀνθρώποισιν ἀνάσσει.

καί σφιν θεσπέσιον πλοῦτον κατέχευε Kpoviwv. 670
Νιρεὺς αὖ Σύμηθεν ἄγε τρεῖς νῆας ἐίσας,

Νιρεὺς ᾿Αγλαΐης υἱὸς Χαρόποιό τ᾽ ἄνακτος,

Νιρεύς, ὃς κάλλιστος ἀνὴρ ὑπὸ Ἴλιον ἦλθεν

τῶν ἄλλων Δαναῶν per ἀμύμονα Πηλεΐωνα"

ἀλλ᾽ ἀλαπαδνὸς ἔην, παῦρος δέ οἱ εἵπετο λαός. 675
ot δ᾽ dpa Νίσυρόν τ᾽ εἶχον Κράπαθόν τε Κάσον τε

καὶ Κῶν Εὐρυπύλοιο πόλιν νήσους τε Καλύδνας,

τῶν αὖ Φείδιππός τε καὶ Αντιφος ἡγησάσθην,

659 = Ο 531. ᾿ This river Selleeis (dif-
ferent of course from that mentioned
839, M 97, in Asia) was according to Ar.
in Thesprotia, in the country of the
Σελλοί (II 234); others said it was in
Elis, and that Herakles took Astyocheia
when he overthrew Augeias (80 Strabo).

661. τράφε, for this intrans. use cf.
E 555, ® 279; vulg. τράφη ἐν (as I 201,
A 222), but without MS. authority.

662. Likymnios was brother of Alk-
mena. See Pind. O. vii. 27. The homi-
cide was committed in a fit of anger
according to Pindar, but another legend
(ap. Schol. A) made it purely accidental.

665. yap οἱ MSS. with Ar.; but the
neglect of the digaroma in the pronoun
οἱ is so rare that it is better to read yap
ol. οἱ ἄλλοι is common enough in H. ;
e.g. A 75, 264, 524, 540, and many
other cases. V.Z 90.

670. There was a legend of a literal
rain of gold sent by Zeus upon Rhodes,
apparently founded upon this passage
and on πολὺν ὗσε χρυσόν, Pind. O. vii.
50. But this line, according to a Schol.

on Pindar, was obelized. There is no
mention of this in Schol. A, where we
find however that Ar. obelized the preced-
ing line, taking φίληθεν to mean ‘‘ they
were friendly to one another in spite of
the tribal division,” and regarding 669
as inserted in order to give another
explanation of φίληθεν. καταχέειν is
very often used metaphorically, e.g. χάριν
θ 19, etc., ἐλεγχείην Ψ 408 ; and Pindar’s
phrase is probably only a stronger form
of the same metaphor, which he would
not have misunderstood. The legend of
the rain is only a later fiction.

671. Nireus is not mentioned again.
The double epanalepsis is unique in H.
For τῶν ἄλλων after a superl. cf. A 505.
Zenod. obelized 673 and 675, not reading
674 at all.

676. These are small islands among
the Sporades: the Cyclades are not
mentioned at all. Phheidippos and An-
tiphos again are named only here: the
mention of their Herakleid descent looks
as if these lines came from the same
source as the Rhodian episode above.

76 IAIAAO® B rr)

Θεσσαλοῦ υἷε δύω “Ἡρακλεΐδαο ἄνακτος" —
τοῖς δὲ τριήκοντα γλαφυραὶ νέες ἐστιχόωντο. 680
νῦν αὖ τούς, ὅσσοι τὸ Πελασγικὸν “Apyos ἔναιον"
οἵ τ᾽ Αλον of τ᾽ ᾿Αλόπην οἵ τε Τρηχῖνα νέμοντο,
οἵ τ᾽ εἶχον Φθίην ἠδ᾽ “Ελλάδα καλλιγύναικα,
Μυρμιδόνες δ᾽ ἐκαλεῦντο καὶ “Ἕλληνες καὶ ᾿Αχαιοί,
τῶν αὖ πεντήκοντα νεῶν ἦν ἀρχὸς ᾿Αχιλλεύς. 685
ἀλλ᾽ οἵ γ᾽ οὐ πολέμοιο δυσηχέος ἐμνώοντο"
οὐ γὰρ ἔην, ὅς τίς σφιν ἐπὶ στίχας ἡγήσαιτο.
κεῖτο γὰρ ἐν νήεσσι ποδάρκης δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
κούρης χωόμενος Βρισηΐδος ἠυκόμοιο,
τὴν ἐκ Λυρνησσοῦ ἐξείλετο πολλὰ μογήσας, 690
Λυρνησσὸν διαπορθήσας καὶ τείχεα Θήβης,
κὰδ δὲ Μύνητ᾽ ἔβαλεν καὶ ᾿Επίστροφον ἐγχεσιμώρους,
υἱέας Evnvoto Σεληπιάδαο ἄνακτος"
τῆς ὅ γε κεῖτ᾽ ἀχέων, τάχα δ᾽ ἀνστήσεσθαι ἔμελλεν.
of δ᾽ εἶχον Φυλάκην καὶ Πύρασον ἀνθεμόεντα, 695
Δήμητρος τέμενος, “Irwvd τε μητέρα μήλων,

681. This line, marked by νῦν αὖ asa
fresh start, stands as an introduction to
the whole of the section about the Thes-
salian races, down to 759, and does not
belong merely to the forces of Achilles.
τούς, as though the poet meant to con-
tinue ἔσπετε (484) or ἐρέω (493) (Schol.
A). The ‘‘ Pelasgian Argos” includes
the whole of Thessaly, and even Dodona
in the later Epeiros. For the mythical
connexion between this region and the
‘¢ Achaian Argos” (T 115), Paley refers
to Aesch. Supp. 249 sqg., where the king
enumerates among Pelasgian lands

τήν τε ἸΪερραίβων χθόνα
Πίνδου τε τἀπίκεινα, Παιόνων πέλας,
ὄρη τε Δωδωναῖα.

682. These regions are all in the ex-
treme S. of Thessaly and round the head
of the Malian Gulf. The use of Ἑλλάς
as restricted to this region is regular in
H. (II 595, I 395, ἃ 496, etc.) The name
Ἕλληνες occurs here only in H. (except
Πανέλληνες, 530). Cf. Thue. i. 3.

685. According to II 170 there were
fifty men in each ship, and so with
Philoktetes, 719; but in 510 there are
120 on cach of the Boeotian ships.

686-694 were athetized by Zenod. ;
and they have all the appearance of an
interpolation intended to adapt to the
present juncture of affairs a poem origin-

ally describing the departure of the ex-
pedition from Aulis. So 699-709, 721-
728. (See introduction to Book 11.)

ἐμνώοντο = ἐμιμνήσκοντοι͵ The only
other pres. form from the simple stem is
the part. μνωόμενος, 6106, 0400. δυσηχής
apparently horrisonus as applied to war:
al. κακὰ ἄχη περιποιῶν, and so Doed.:
but the 7 is then unexplained. Cf. how-
ever δυσηλεγής.

687. ἡγήσαιτο, potent. opt. without
dy, as Ὑ 231; cf. T 321. ἐπὶ στίχας ap-
parently “into the ranks,” drawn up for

attle. Similarly T 353, ἐπὶ or. ἄλτο:
but in Γ' 118, ἵππους ἔρυξαν ἐπὶ o.,
it means ‘‘refrained into ranks,” i.e.
brought them into line.

691. See Z 397, T 296. Mynes was
husband of Briseis.
692. ἐγχεσιμώρους, v. A 242. The

anticipation of the story in 694 and 724
is not like Homer ; he occasionally alludes
to future events as prophetically known to
his persons, but does not foreshadow them
in his own words. (See Introd. to M.)

696. Ar. expressly says that Δημ.
τέμενος is not in apposition with Πύρασον,
but is a city called Δημήτριον. But in
this case the asyndeton would be very
strange ; and the analogy of 506, Ποσι-
δήιον ἀγλαὸν ἄλσος, is strongly in favour
of the more natural view. These towns

ΙΔΙΑΔΟΣ B (11)

~T
“τ

ἀγχίαλον τ᾽ ᾿Αντρῶνα ἰδὲ Πτελεὸν λεχεποίην,

τῶν av ἸΠρωτεσίλαος ἀρήιος ἡγεμόνευεν

ζωὸς ἐών" τότε δ᾽ ἤδη ἔχεν Kata γαῖα μέλαινα.

τοῦ δὲ καὶ ἀμφιδρυφὴς ἄλοχος Φυλάκῃ ἐλέλειπτο 700

καὶ δόμος ἡμιτελής" τὸν δ᾽ ἔκτανε Δάρδανος ἀνὴρ

νηὸς ἀποθρώσκοντα πολὺ πρώτιστον ᾿Αχαιῶν.

οὐδὲ μὲν οὐδ᾽ οἱ ἄναρχοι ἔσαν, πόθεόν γε μὲν ἀρχόν'

ἀλλά σφεας κόσμησε Ποδάρκης ὄξος ἔΑρηος,

Ἰφίκλου vids πολυμήλου Φυλακίδαο, 705

αὐτοκασίγνητος μεγαθύμου Ἰ]ρωτεσιλάου

ὁπλότερος γενεῇ" ὁ δ᾽ ἅμα πρότερος καὶ ἀρείων

ἥρως IIpwreciAaos ἀρήιος" οὐδέ τι λαοὶ

δεύονθ᾽ ἡγεμόνος, πόθεόν γε μὲν ἐσθλὸν ἐόντα'

τῷ δ᾽ ἅμα τεσσαράκοντα μέλαιναι νῆες ἕποντο. 710
ot δὲ Φερὰς ἐνέμοντο παραὶ Βοιβηΐδα λίμνην,

Βοίβην καὶ Γλαφύρας καὶ ἐυκτιμένην ᾿Ιαωλκόν,

τῶν ἦρχ᾽ ᾿Αδμήτοιο φίλος πάις ἕνδεκα νηῶν,

Εὔμηλος, τὸν ὑπ᾽ ᾿Αδμήτῳ τέκε δῖα γυναικῶν

ἼΛλκηστις, Πελίαο θυγατρῶν εἶδος ἀρίστη. 715
οἱ δ᾽ dpa Μηθώνην καὶ Θαυμακίην ἐνέμοντο

καὶ Μελίβοιαν ἔχον καὶ ᾿Ολιζῶνα τρηχεῖαν,

τῶν δὲ Φιλοκτήτης ἦρχεν, τόξων ἐὺ εἰδώς,

ἑπτὰ νεῶν’ ἐρέται δ᾽ ἐν ἑκάστῃ πεντήκοντα

ἐμβέβασαν, τόξων ἐὺ εἰδότες ἶφι μάχεσθαι. 720

lie near the W. shore of the Pagasaean
Gulf.

699. κάτεχεν as Γ' 243. Protesilaos’
ship plays a prominent part in the fight-
ing later on, N 681, O 705, Π 286.

700. ἀμφιδρνφής, explained by A 393,
τοῦ δὲ γυναικὸς μέν τ᾽ ἀμφίδρυφοί εἰσι
παρειαί.

701. ἡμιτελής ἤτοι ἄτεκνος ἢ ἀφῃρη-
μένος τοῦ ἑτέρου τῶν δεσποτῶν ἣ ἀτελείω-
τος ἔθος γὰρ ἣν τοῖς γήμασι θάλαμον
οἰκοδομεῖσθαι (Schol. A). The first ex-
planation is best ; he has only half com-

leted his household, as, though married,

e has left no son. The last is founded
upon Odysseus’ description of his build-
ing his own marriage chamber, Ψ 189 84.
Cf. also A 227, γήμας δ᾽ ἐκ θαλάμοιο. ..
ixero. But δόμος cannot mean “" wed-
ding-chamber.” The Δάρδανος ἀνήρ
was variously said to have been Aineias,
Euphorbos, or Hector; the latter was,

according to Proklos, the name given by
the ‘ Kypria’”; but Ar. held that it was
certainly wrong, as Hector was not a
Dardanian strictly speaking.

703. οὐδὲ μὲν οὐδ᾽ of, “yet neither
were they”; an emphasis is thrown on
the ol, which is not easily explicable
for there does not seem to be any strik-
ing contrast with some other leaderless
band such as the words wouldimply. In
726 they come naturally, as two lost
chieftains have already been mentioned.
The line is therefore interpolated here
from 726.

707. , so Ar.: MSS. dpa with
Zenod. 089 look like a gloss intended
to explain the apparently ambiguous 4,
and filled up from previous lines so as to
make two hexameters.

The towns following (711-15) lie N.
and (716-17) E. of the head of the Paga-
saean Gulf.

78 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B 11)

ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν ἐν νήσῳ κεῖτο κρατέρ᾽ ἄλγεα πάσχων,
Λήμνῳ ἐν ἠγαθέῃ, ὅθι μιν λίπον υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν
ἕλκει μοχθίζοντα κακῷ ὀλοόφρονος ὕδρου"
ἔνθ᾽ ὅ γε κεῖτ᾽ ἀχέων: τάχα δὲ μνήσεσθαι ἔμελλον
᾿Αργεῖοι παρὰ νηυσὶ Φιλοκτήταο ἄνακτος. 725
οὐδὲ μὲν οὐδ᾽ of ἄναρχοι ἔσαν, πόθεόν γε μὲν ἀρχόν"
ἀλλὰ Μέδων κόσμησεν, ᾿Οἰλῆος νόθος υἱός,
τόν ῥ᾽ ἔτεκεν 'Ῥήνη ὑπ᾽ ᾿Οιλῆι πτολιπόρθῳ.
οἱ δ᾽ εἶχον Τρίκκην καὶ ᾿Ιθώμην κλωμακόεσσαν,
οἵ τ᾽ ἔχον Οἰχαλίην πόλιν Εὐρύτου Οἰχαλεῆος, 780
τῶν αὖθ᾽ ἡγείσθην ᾿Ασκληπιόο δύο παῖδε,
ἰητῆρ᾽ ἀγαθώ, Ἰ]οδαλείριος ἠδὲ Μαχάων"
τοῖς δὲ τριήκοντα γλαφυραὶ νέες ἐστιχόωντο.
ot δ᾽ ἔχον ᾿᾽Ορμένιον οἵ τε κρήνην “Trrépeay,
οἵ τ᾿ ἔχον ᾿Αστέριον Τιτάνοιό τε λευκὰ κάρηνα, 735
τῶν ἦρχ᾽ Εὐρύπυλος ’Evaipovos ἀγλαὸς vids:
τῷ δ᾽ ἅμα τεσσαράκοντα μέλαιναι νῆες ἕποντο.
οἱ δ᾽ “Apytocay ἔχον καὶ Γυρτώνην ἐνέμοντο,
Ὄρθην ᾿Ἠλώνην τε πόλιν τ᾽’ ᾽Ολοοσσόνα λευκήν,

τῶν αὖθ᾽ ἡγεμόνενε μενεπτόλεμος Πολυποίτης,

740

υἱὸς Πειριθόοιο, τὸν ἀθάνατος τέκετο Ζεύς,
/ «>? ¢ \ / ’ \ € 4
τὸν ῥ᾽ ὑπὸ ἸΠειριθόῳ τέκετο κλυτὸς ᾿Ιπποδάμεια
ἤματι τῷ, ὅτε φῆρας ἐτίσατο λαχνήεντας,
τοὺς δ᾽ ἐκ Πηλίου ὦσε καὶ Αἰθίκεσσι πέλασσεν"

728. ὀλοόφρων is used in Il. only of
animals (O 630, P 21), in Od. only of
men (a 52, κ 137, λ 322). There is no
other allusion in H. to the story of
Philoktetes, but it must have been per-
fectly familiar as an essential part of the
legend of Troy. Zenod. athetized 724-6,
probably on this ground. Medon appears
again in N 694, but there he is leader of
the Phthians with Podarkes (704).

729. There is now a jump from the
S.E. to the W. of Thessaly, whence
came the cultus of Asklepios, which in
historical times had its chief seat in
Epidauros. Homer however does not
represent him as anything more than
a mortal chieftain, A194. κλωμακόεσσαν
(ἄπ. λεγ.) τὴν τραχεῖαν καὶ ὄρη ἔχουσαν,
Schol. B: πολλὰ ἀποκλίματα ἔχουσαν,
κρημνώδη, Hesych. Der. uncertain ; some
would connect with κλῖμαξ or κρημνός.
For Eurytos cf. 596.

731. ᾿Ασκληπιόο, see 518. MSS.
᾿Ασκληπιοῦ. ᾿

734-5. According to Strabo these were
in Magnesia: if so the lines should come
earlier, as we have now reached N.W.
Thessaly. For κάρηνα of city walls, cf
117, and Τροίης κρήδεμνα II 100; for the
fountain Hypereia, Z 457.

738. We are now in the N. of Central
Thessaly, the home of the Lapithae (M
128), near the later Larissa. Olodsson
is said to be still, under the name of
Elassona, conspicuous for its white lime-
stone rock.

742. The famous fight of the Lapiths
and Centaurs at the wedding of Peirithoos
and Hippodameia (réxero here must =
conceived, v. 513) is mentioned also A
263. κλνυτός fem., cf. ε 422, Σ 222 T
88, and even ὁλοώτατος ὀδμή ὃ 442, Ἡ.
G. §§ 116, 119.

744, The Aithikes apparently dwelt

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B it) 79

οὐκ οἷος, ἅμα τῷ ye Λεοντεὺς ὄξος “Apnos,

745

υἱὸς ὑπερθύμοιο Kopwvov Kauveldao:
“a 2 ἢ“ ᾽ὔ f nw
τοῖς δ᾽ ἅμα τεσσαράκοντα μέλαιναι νῆες ἕποντο.
Γουνεὺς δ᾽ ἐκ Κύφου ἦγε δύω καὶ εἴκοσι νῆας"
a 3.9 A 4 A s /
τῷ δ᾽ ᾿Ενιῆνες ἕποντο μενεπτόλεμοί τε ἸΠεραιβοί,

οὗ περὶ Δωδώνην δυσχείμερον οἰκί᾽ ἔθεντο,

750

οἵ τ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ἱμερτὸν Τιταρήσιον ἔργα νέμοντο,
ὅς ῥ᾽ ἐς Πηνειὸν προϊεῖ καλλίρροον ὕδωρ,

οὐδ᾽ ὅ γε Ἰ]ηνειῷ συμμίσγεται ἀργυροδίνῃ,
ἀλλά τέ μιν καθύπερθεν ἐπιρρέει ἠύτ᾽ ἔλαιον"

ὅρκου γὰρ δεινοῦ Στυγὸς ὕδατός ἐστιν ἀπορρώξ.

755

Μαγνήτων δ᾽ ἦρχε ἸΠρόθοος TevOpnddvos vids,
ot περὶ Πηνειὸν καὶ Πήλιον εἰνοσίφυλλον
ναίεσκον" τῶν μὲν Πρόθοος θοὸς ἡγεμόνενεν,
τῷ δ᾽ ἅμα τεσσαράκοντα μέλαιναι νῆες ἕποντο.

φ ν " ες ’ a
οὗτοι ap ἡγεμόνες Δαναῶν καὶ κοίρανοι ἦσαν.

760

τίς T ἂρ τῶν by’ ἄριστος ἔην, σύ μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα,
2 A ἠδ᾽ rf ἃ “ 9? "A. ἕ rd

αὐτῶν ἠδ᾽ ἵππων, οἱ ἅμ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδῃσιν ἕποντο.

ἵπποι μὲν μέγ᾽ ἄρισται ἔσαν Φηρητιάδαο,

τὰς ᾿Εύμηλος ἔλαυνε ποδώκεας ὄρνιθας ὥς,

in Pindos to the W. of Thessaly. One
Demokrines actually read Αἰθιόπεσσι,

745. οὐκ οἷος, the verb to be supplied
is of course ἡγεμόνευε (740) ; 741-4 being
parenthetical.

749. The Peraiboi are not mentioned
again in H. Their home was in the
extreme N. of Thessaly, and as Dodona
was in Epeiros, far away to the W., we
must suppose either that the tribe had
split into two parts, one living to
the W. of Pindos, or that there was
an older Dodona in N. Thessaly, or that
the poet made an error in geography.
See note on 681.

751. Τιταρήσιον, the later Europos.
What idea the poet had in his mind
about the meeting of the rivers it is hard
to say. It is said that the Europos is
a clear stream which is easily to be dis-
tinguished for some distance after it has
joined the Peneios white with chalk : but

poilvy is a strange epithet ito use
for a river if the emphasis is laid on its
want of clearness. The connexion of
the river with the Styx is no doubt due
to the existence of some local cultus of

the infernal deities of which we know
nothing. ἔργα, tilth, as M 283, in a
purely local sense of tilled fields. The
word is of course common in Homer in
the pregnant sense of agricultural labour.

755. ὅρκος here, as often, means the
object sworn by, the ‘‘ sanction ” of the
oath. Cf. O 38, τὸ κατειβόμενον Στυγὸς
ὕδωρ, ὅστε μέγιστος | ὅρκος δεινότατός re
πέλει μακάρεσσι θεοῖσιν. For a god to
devote himself to the river of the dead
is to invoke death, which is a loss of
godhead. For ἀπορρόξ cf. « 514, Κώκυ-
Tbs θ᾽, ὃς δὴ Στυγὸς ὕδατός ἐστιν ἀπορρώξ,
and see Merry and R.’s note there on the
rivers of the infernal regions.

760. The ships enumerated amount to
1186. Fora calculation of the number of
men see Thuc. i. 10. If we take eighty-five
as mean of the highest and lowest numbers
mentioned in a ship’s crew, the total will
come to about 100,000.

761. For rls τ’ ἄρ see A 8.

763. Φηρητιάδαο, a patronymic applied
to a grandson: Admetos, father of
Eumelos (714), was son of Pheres. (Of
course the horses might be called the
horses of Admetos, not of Eumelos. )

80 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Β (11)

ὄτριχας οἰέτεας, σταφύλῃ ἐπὶ νῶτον ἐίσας" 765
τὰς ἐν Πηρείῃ θρέψ᾽ ἀργυρότοξος ᾿Απόλλων,
ἄμφω θηλείας, φόβον “Apnos φορεούσας"
’ a 4 oom Μ ΄ ”
ἀνδρῶν αὖ μέγ᾽ ἄριστος ἔην Τελαμώνιος Αἴας,
ὄφρ᾽ ᾿Αχιλεὺς μήνιεν: ὁ γὰρ πολὺ φέρτατος ἦεν,
ef 9 a) / 3 4 κ-
ἵπποι θ᾽, ot φορέεσκον ἀμύμονα 1]ηλεΐωνα. 774
ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν ἐν νήεσσι κορωνίσι ποντοπόροισιν
κεῖτ᾽ ἀπομηνίσας ᾿Αγαμέμνονι ποιμένι λαῶν
᾿Ατρεΐδῃ, λαοὶ δὲ παρὰ ῥηγμῖνι θαλάσσης
δίσκοισιν τέρποντο καὶ αἰγανέῃσιν ἱέντες
4 3 cA δ ν 54

τόξοισίν θ᾽" ἵπποι δὲ παρ᾽ ἅρμασιν οἷσιν ἕκαστος 718
λωτὸν ἐρεπτόμενοι ἐλεόθρεπτόν τε σέλινον
ἕστασαν" ἅρματα δ᾽ εὖ πεπυκασμένα κεῖτο ἀνάκτων
9 ’ e 3 > Ἁ 3 /
ἐν κλισίῃς" οἱ δ᾽ ἀρχὸν ἀρηίφιλον ποθέοντες

“ ΝΜ 4 N 3 Ul
φοίτων ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα κατὰ στρατὸν οὐδὲ μάχοντο.

οἱ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἴσαν, ὡς εἴ τε πυρὶ χθὼν πᾶσα νέμουτο" 780
γαῖα δ᾽ ὑπεστενάχιζε Ari ὡς τερπικεραύνῳ

ο 7θ8. ιχας οἰέτεας, the ὁ- here re-

presents the copulative sa-, as in 5-rarpos
A 257, see Curtius, Et. no. 598. The
explanation of the ε in οἰέτης is not clear ;
it appears to have arisen in some way
from the F. Dialectical forms given by
Hesych. are deréa, αὐετῆ, ὑετής (Curt.
Ft. no. 210). Probably the right form
here is é6Féreas, the first syllable being
lengthened by the ictus alone. σταφύλη
(distinguished by accent from σταφυλή,
a bunch of grapes) is explained by Schol.
A as λαοξοϊκὸς διαβήτης, ὃς dua πλάτος
καὶ ὕψος μετρεῖ, 1.6. the still familiar
mason’s level, consisting of a plummet
hanging in a T-square. The der. is
dubious, Curt. #¢. 219. The sense is
that the two nares were exactly of equal
height at every point as measured by a
level across their backs.

766. IInpeln, according to the old com-
mentators a town in Thessaly. It was
early corrupted into the more familiar
Πιερίῃ of most MSS. A gives IIneply,
the beginning of the corruption, and
the text is found only in Hustathius.
Valckenaer suggested Φηρείῃ, for it was
near Pherae that Apollo served his time
in subjection to Admetos, a legend which
is evidently alluded to here.

767. φόβον "Ap. φορεούσας, t.c. bring-
ing with them battle-panic to the enemy.
See the (doubtful) phrase μήστωρε φόβοιο,
E 272.

770 looks like an interpolation caused
by a reminiscence of Ψ 276.

772. ἀπομηνίσας, the ἀπο- here seems
to be intensive, as in our phrase
‘‘raging away,” giving full vent to his
anger. Cf. ἀπεχθαίρειν I’ 415, ἀπαρέσ-
σασθαι T 188, ἀποειπεῖν I 309, dwobar-
μάσαι $ 49; and Lat. desaevire, ete.
Schol. Vict. on H 230 says that Ar.
wrote ἐπιμην., but this is very doubtful.

774 = ὃ 626. αἰγανέῃσιν, either from
αἴξ, as a spear for hunting goats, or from
ἀΐσσω ; the former derivation is supported
by « 156, where they are actually used
against goats.

711]. πεπνυκα wrapped up with
covers, πέπλοι, as E 194, to keep them
clean while not in use. In Ψ 508 the
word seems to be used in a hyperbolical
sense, ‘‘ hidden by its ornaments.”

780. We have two more short similes
describing the march to battle, in addition
to those of 459 sqq., to be followed by
others at the beginning of [. 780 seems
to be an exaggeration of 455, and to
refer to light, which is as great as if the
whole earth were on fire. The idea is
not the same as in μάρναντο δέμας πυρὸς
αἰθομένοιο, A 596. νέμοιτο is pass. only
here. The act. means ‘‘to deal out” or
‘*drive to pasture” (¢ 233); the mid. to
feed upon (of fire, Ψ 177), to inhabit, or
to possess (Z 195).

781. The connexion of Zeus repwexé-

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Β (11) 81

4 td 3 3 \ 4 A e /
χωομένῳ, ὅτε T ἀμφὶ Τυφωέι γαῖαν ἱμασσῃ
3 3 ’ a \ 4 Mv ᾽ 4
εἰν ᾿Αρίμοις, ὅθι φασὶ Tudweos ἔμμεναι εὐνάς"
ὧς ἄρα τῶν ὑπὸ ποσσὶ μέγα στεναχίζετο γαῖα

ἐρχομένων" μάλα δ᾽ ὦκα διέπρησσον πεδίοιο.

Τρωσὶν δ᾽ ἄγγελος ἦλθε ποδήνεμος ὠκέα Ἶρις
πὰρ Διὸς αἰγιόχοιο σὺν ἀγγελίῃ ἀλεγεινῇ"
οἱ δ᾽ ἀγορὰς ἀγόρενον ἐπὶ ἸΠριάμοιο θύρῃσιν
πάντες ὁμηγερέες, ἠμὲν νέοι ἠδὲ γέροντες.

ἀγχοῦ δ᾽ ἱσταμένη προσέφη πόδας ὠκέα Ἶρις"

εἴσατο δὲ φθογγὴν υἷι ἸΙριάμοιο ἸΤολίέτῃ,

a , \ / ,

ὃς Τρώων σκοπὸς ἷξε, πτοδωκείῃσι πεποιθώς,
τύμβῳ ἐπ᾽ ἀκροτάτῳ Αἰσνήταο γέροντος,
δέγμενος ὁππότε ναῦφιν ἀφορμηθεῖεν ᾿Αχαιοί'

ραυνος with the phenomena of a volcanic
district has been thought to allude to the
violent electrical disturbances which often
accompany eruptions. ἔΑριμα is said to
be a volcanic region in Kilikia (according
to others in Mysia, Lydia, or Syria). But
A., perhaps following Ar., gives Εἰναρίμοις,
and so Vergil must have read, den. ix.
716, ‘‘durumque cubile Jnarime Iovis
imperiis imposta Typhoeo.” The meta-
phor of lashing reappears in the story of
the defeat of Typhoeus by Zeus in Hes.

Theog. 857, where he is described as a
monster with a hundred snake’s heads
spitting fire, the son of Gaia and Tartaros.
So also Pindar, in a magnificent pass-
age of Pyth. i., where his birthplace is
given as Kilikia, but his prison as beneath
Cumae and Aetna.

785. διέπρησσον πεδίοιο, for this local
gen. see H. G. 8 149; it ‘‘expresses a
vague local relation (within, in the sphere
of, etc.).” ‘‘ Note that this use of the
gen. is almost confined to se phrases ;
also that it is only found with the gen.
in -οἱο (the archaic form).” Cf. 801, and
ἵνα πρήσσωμεν ὁδοῖο 2 264, and note on
A 483.

. 786. We now come to the Catalogue of
the Trojans and allies, introduced by a
short narrative.

788. The gate of the king’s palace has
always been the place of justice and of
audience among eastern nations; a
familiar example is the “Sublime Porte.”

791-5 were obelized by Ar. on good
grounds: ‘‘if the advance of the Greeks
was all that had to be announced, there
was no need of the goddess; but if
the Trojans lacked courage and had to

G

785
790
be persuaded to advance, the goddess
must appear in person. When the gods

take human shape, they are wont to
leave at their departure some sign by
which they may be known. The message
is not adapted to the tone of a son
speaking to his father, but is intense
(ἐπιτεταμένοι) and reproachful: and the
words of 802 do not suit Polites; it is
Iris herself who should impose the
command.” On the other hand 1. 798
is rather suited to a human warrior than
to a goddess. But the whole passage
seems forced, and out of place. 804-5
should belong to a description of the first |
landing of the Greeks (compare the
similar advice of Nestor 362-8, and the
building of the wall in H 337-348) ; and
it has been remarked that as a matter of
fact the numbers of the enemy must
have been largely reduced by the tenth
year of the war, especially as the Myr-
midons are no longer among them.

793. The tomb of Aisyetes is not
again named as a landmark; but other
barrows are mentioned in a similar man-
ner, ¢.g. 811, and the σῆμα Ἴλου K 415,
A 166, 571, Ω 849. tea tert

794. Séypevos, apparently a perf. part.
with irregular accent. Cobet would read
δέχμενος as a syncopated pres. (a form
mentioned in the Etym. M. and found
as a variant on I 191 in A); comparing
ὅρμενος P 738, etc. His objection to
the text however applies only to the
ordinary view that déyuevos is an aor.
form (ἐδέγμην) ; but δέχαται M 147 is
clearly perf. For other cases of perf.
without reduplication see H. G. § 23
(οἶδα, Epxarat, ἔσσαι, ? lépevro, 2.125, and

82 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B (11)

τῷ μιν ἐεισαμένη προσέφη πόδας ὠκέα Ἶρις" 1%
“ὦ γέρον, αἰεί τοι μῦθοι φίλοι ἄκριτοί εἰσιν,
Ψ > 9 3 > 7 ’ + 9
ὥς ToT ἐπ᾽ εἰρήνης" πόλεμος δ᾽ ἀλίαστος ὄρωρεν.
ἢ μὲν δὴ μάλα πολλὰ μάχας εἰσήλυθον ἀνδρῶν,
ἀλλ᾽ οὔ πω τοιόνδε τοσόνδε τε λαὸν ὄπωπα"
λίην γὰρ φύλλοισιν ἐοικότες ἢ ψαμάθοισιν 800
ἔρχονται πεδίοιο μαχησόμενοι προτὶ ἄστυ.
“Ἕκτορ, σοὶ δὲ μάλιστ᾽ ἐπιτέλλομαι ὧδέ γε ῥέξαι"
πολλοὶ yap κατὰ ἄστυ μέγα ἸΠριάμον ἐπίκουροι,
ἄλλη δ᾽ ἄλλων γλῶσσα πολυσπερέων ἀνθρώπων"
τοῖσιν ἕκαστος ἀνὴρ σημαινέτω, οἷσί περ ἄρχει, 805
τῶν δ᾽ ἐξηγείσθω, κοσμησάμενος πολιήτας."
as ἔφαθ᾽, “Extwp δ᾽ οὔ τι θεᾶς ἔπος ἠγνοίησεν,
> 3 ᾽ , 3 7 2 9 4
αἶψα δ᾽ ἔλυσ᾽ ἀγορήν' ἐπὶ τεύχεα δ᾽ ἐσσεύοντο.
πᾶσαι δ᾽ ὠίγνυντο πύλαι, ἐκ δ᾽ ἔσσυτο λαός,
πεζοί θ᾽ ἱππῆές τε" πολὺς δ᾽ ὀρυμαγδὸς ὀρώρειν. 810
ΝΜ “ 4 4 3 a ,ὔ
ἔστι δέ τις προπάροιθε πόλιος αἰπεῖα κολώνη,

one or two other doubtful forms). Or
δέγμενος itself might be a syncopated
present ; there is probably no reason for
supposing that the affection of x by u
is confined to aor. and perfect stems.
ναῦφιν, this form of vais occurs only
for an ablatival gen., with a specially
locative sense. H. G. §§ 154-8.

796. φίλοι is pred., ἄκριτοι (uncon-
sidered, 1.6. long and untimely: see on
246) goes with μῦθοι.

801. προτί, so Ar., Aristoph., Zen. :
MSS. περί.

802. “Ἕκτορ, σοὶ δέ, for the use οὗ δέ
cf. ἬἭἬφαιστε, σοὶ δέ, Aesch. Pr. V. 8.

804. Cf. A 437-8; and A 364-5, old τε
πολλούς βόσκει γαῖα μέλαινα πολυσπερέας
ἀνθρώπους, where the epithet is more in
harmony with the metaphor of men as
fed by the soil: here it means no more
than ‘‘ widely scattered.” But if the
passage is to be saved from ludicrous
weakness, we must omit both 803 and
804; the injunction then becomes, not
an absurdly obvious piece of tactical ad-
vice, but a call to immediate action,
such as the context requires; ‘‘let each
commander give his men the word (to
advance) and lead them against the
enemy.”

805. For σημαινέτω cf. A 289.

806. πολιήτας, ἃ Herodotean form not
recurring in H.: πολίτης is found only
Ο 558, X 429, ἡ 131, p 206.

807. ἠγνοίησεν, ‘‘ the word which led
astray the interpolator of 791-5,” accord-
ing to Ar., may quite well mean “did
not ignore,” 7.c. disobey (Schol. A).

809. πᾶσαι ἀντὶ τοῦ ὅλαι (and so M
340) Ar., 1.6. the gates were thrown wide
open ; because, with the doubtful excep-
tion of πυλαὶ Δαρδανίαι E789, H. does not
seem to have conceived Troy as having
any gates except the Skaian. But in all
the other phrases (A 65, N 191, 408, 548,
etc., and even « 389) to which Ar.
referred to support his theory of was=
ὅλος, the emphasis lies on the fact that
the whole of something is affected when
it might have been only a part; the
difficulty here obviously is that we can
hardly conceive a part of a gate being
opened πᾶσαι could at the most mean
that both the cavides were opened, not
one only, and then it would obviously
be an unnatural phrase. It is better to
consider the poet as conceiving Ilios,
like all great towns, as many-gated, but
as only naming the one gate which was
specially recorded by his tradition.

811. The tomb of Myrine, like that of
Aisyetes, is not again named in the

Tliad; but both names are probably
traditional, and do not look like the
invention of an interpolator. Myrine is

said to have been one of the Amazons
who invaded Phrygia (Γ 189). For the
language of gods and men see A 408.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Β (n.) 88

3 / 3 4 / Μ \ wv

ἐν πεδίῳ ἀπάνευθε, περίδρομος ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα,
τὴν ἣ τοι ἄνδρες Βατίειαν κικλήσκουσιν,

2 4 / [οὶ ᾽ὔ ,
ἀθάνατοι δέ τε σῆμα πολυσκάρθμοιο Μυρίνης"

ἔνθα τότε Τρῶές τε διέκριθεν ἠδ᾽ ἐπίκουροι.

815

Τρωσὶ μὲν ἡγεμόνευε μέγας κορυθαίολος “Extwp
Πριαμίδης" ἅμα τῷ γε πολὺ πλεῖστοι καὶ ἄριστοι
λαοὶ θωρήσσοντο μεμαότες ἐγχείῃσιν.

Δαρδανίων ait’ ἦρχεν ἐὺς πάις ᾿Αγχίσαο

Αἰνείας, τὸν ὑπ᾽ ᾿Αγχίσῃ τέκε δῖ᾽ ᾿Αφροδίτη,

820

Ἴδης ἐν κνημοῖσι θεὰ βροτῷ εὐνηθεῖσα,
οὐκ οἷος, ἅμα τῷ γε δύω ᾿Αντήνορος υἷε,

3 h / 3.»,.ν»} lA , 3\ 90. ἢ ΄
ἈΑρχέλοχος τ᾽ ᾿Ακάμας τε, μάχης ἐὺ εἰδότε πάσης.
οὗ δὲ Ζέλειαν ἔναιον ὑπαὶ πόδα νείατον “léns,
ἀφνειοί, πίνοντες ὕδωρ μέλαν Αἰσήποιο, 825

Τρῶες, τῶν abt’ ἦρχε Λυκάονος ἀγλαὸς υἱὸς
Πάνδαρος, ᾧ καὶ τόξον ᾿Απόλλων αὐτὸς ἔδωκεν.
“Ὁ ».} 4 VA 9 \ A 3 “A
ot δ᾽ ᾿Αδρήστειάν τ᾽ εἶχον καὶ δῆμον ᾿Απαισοῦ
Ἁ ’ 4 wv > UA
καὶ 1]υτύειαν ἔχον καὶ Τηρείης ὄρος αἰπύ,

τῶν ἦρχ᾽ "Αδρηστός τε καὶ Αμφιος λινοθώρηξ,

830

ule δύω Μέροπος Ἰ]ερκωσίου, ὃς περὶ πάντων
ἤδεε μαντοσύνας, οὐδὲ ods παῖδας ἔασκεν
στείχειν ἐς πόλεμον φθισήνορα" τὼ δέ οἱ οὔ τι
/ A \ ” / 7
πειθέσθην" κῆρες γὰρ ἄγον μέλανος θανάτοιο.

τὴν μὲν δημωδεστέραν ἀνθρώποις τὴν δὲ
ἀληθῆ θεοῖς προσάπτει, Schol Β.

813. Βατίεια = Brier hill.

816. The Trojan Catalogue is naturally
shorter than the Greek, as the poet's
interest is entirely on the Achaian side.
It is remarkable, however, as K. O.
Mitller has pointed out, that the
Kaukones and Leleges are not named,
though they appear among the Trojan
allies, K 429, f 96, 329: so the Kilikians
Z 397. From 816 to 839 we have five
Trojan tribes: then follow the allies, of
whom three tribes are European (844-850)
and eight Asiatic (840-3, 851-877).

818. pepadres, for the variation in
quantity compared with μεμαῶτες N 40,
see H. G. § 26. The partic. is used
without an infin. = eager, N 40, 46 (78,
μαιμῶσιν), Ο 276, ete.

819. For the Dardanians
‘* Dardanelles”) see T 215 sqq.

821. Cf. E 318; and for θεὰ βροτῷ
εὐνηθεῖσα, II 176.

(whence

824. These Τρῶες are a separate clan
who had doubtless split off from the
Trojans proper, and settled a short dis-
tance away to the N.E. Their country
was called Lykia, see E 105, 173. The
Aisepos runs into the Sea of Marmora
near Kyzikos, velarov, nethermost,
where Ida runs down to the sea; ».
A 381.

827. τόξον, ‘‘the bow” in the sense
of skill in archery, acc. to Schol. A;
for Pandaros had acquired his bow him-
self, A 106 sqq. similar phrase is
used of Teukros, O 440.

828. These towns lie at the extreme
N. of the Troad, where the Hellespont
opens out into the Sea of Marmora.
Pityeia is possibly the later Lampsakos.
For λινοθώρηξ v. 529.

831-4 = A 329-332. In both places
MSS. give ovd’ ἑούς for οὐδὲ οὔς (σούς).
Merops seems to have migrated from
Perkote (v. 835).

84 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B (.)

οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα Περκώτην καὶ ἸΙράκτιον ἀμφενέμοντο 835
καὶ Σηστὸν καὶ ΓΑβυδον ἔχον καὶ δῖαν ᾿Αρίσβην,
τῶν αὖθ᾽ Ὑρτακίδης ἦρχ᾽ “Actos ὄρχαμος ἀνδρῶν,
"Actos Ὑρτακίδης, ὃν ᾿Αρίσβηθεν φέρον ἵπποι
αἴθωνες μεγάλοι, ποταμοῦ ἄπο Σελλήεντος.
Ἱππόθοος δ᾽ ἄγε φῦλα Πελασγῶν ἐγχεσιμώρων, 840
τῶν οἱ Λάρισαν ἐριβώλακα ναιετάασκον"
τῶν ἦρχ᾽ ᾿ἱἹππόθοός τε Πύλαιός τ᾽ ὄζος “Apnos,
υἷε δύω Λήθοιο Πελασγοῦ Τευταμίδαο.
αὐτὰρ Θρήικας ἦγ᾽ ᾿Ακάμας καὶ Ielpoos ἥρως,
ὅσσους ᾿Ελλήσποντος ἀγάρροος ἐντὸς ἐέργει. 845
Εὔφημος δ᾽ ἀρχὸς Κικόνων ἦν αἰχμητάων,
υἱὸς Τροιξήνοιο διοτρεφέος Κεάδαο.
αὐτὰρ Πυραίχμης ἄγε Ἰ]αίονας ἀγκυλοτόξους
τηλόθεν ἐξ ᾿Αμυδῶνος, ἀπ᾽ ᾿Αξιοῦ εὐρὺ ῥέοντος,

᾿Αξιοῦ, οὗ κάλλιστον ὕδωρ ἐπικίδναται αἷαν.

850

Παφλαγόνων δ᾽ ἡγεῖτο Πυλαιμένεος λάσιον Kap

835. Towns near the S. side of the
Hellespont.

839. al@wves, apparently ‘‘sorrel”’ or
brown. The epithet is used to mean (a)
shining, especially of iron or bronze,
(6) reddish coloured or tawny, of animals
(cf. fulvus from fulg-eo), especially the
lion, the bull (II 488), and eagle (O 690).
Others understand it to mean ‘‘ of fiery
courage,” others (v. Ameis on σ 372)
“shining” with sleek coats or feathers.
It is hardly possible to decide between
these; the only important argument
urged is that in Θ 185, where Hector’s
four horses are Ξάνθος, Πόδαργος, Αἴθων,
and Λάμπος, the two first clearly refer
to colour; but the last name would
support Ameis’s interpretation.

840. ἐγχεσιμώρων, seeon A242. This
Larisa seems to have lain on the coast of
Mysia near Kyme. The same name is
familiar in Thessaly, where it also was
considered a Pelasgian town ; clearly it
was 8 name common to two branches
of the Pelasgian race. Cf. P 288 and
301.

844. From here to the end of the
book, as pointed out by Schwarz, the
tribes named lie along four lines radiat-
ing from Troy ; the nation at the extre-
mity of each line being distinguished
by τηλόθεν or τῆλε. he Thracians,
Kikones, and Paiones lie N.W., in
Europe: the Paphlagonians and Ali-

zones N.E., along the S. shore of the
Euxine; the Mysians and Phrygians
S.E., and the Maionians, Karians, and
Lykians S.

845. ἐντὸς of a boundary on one
side only, see 617, M 201, and Q 644.

846. For the Kikones see « 39 agq.
They lived on the coast of Thrace.

848. The Paionians are elsewhere de-
scribed as spearmen and charioteers,
ἴ.6. heavy-armed soldiers, not archers
(except K 428). Asteropaios is not
mentioned among their leaders, although,
according to Φ 156, he must, by a strict
reckoning of days, have been in [Ilios
at the time which the Catalogue is made
to suit. The Axios (in Macedon, W.
of the Strymon) is said to be the Vis-
trizza, now a dirty stream. Herod.
mentions the legend that the Paionians
were of Trojan descent, v. 13 (vii. 20, 75,
113, 124).

851. λάσιον κῆρ, cf. A 189. The
‘*wild mules” are supposed to be Jag-
getais of Tartary (equus hemionus, Linn.),
ἃ species intermediate between the horse
and the .ss, of which some rumours
must have come westward along the
coast of the Euxine. The ’Everot (Strabo
‘Everol) were, according to later tradition,
the parent race of the Veneti of Venice.
In ὦ 278 Priam’s mules are a present
from the Mysians, who were neighbours
of the Paphlagonians.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ B (Ὁ 85

ἐξ "Evetav, ὅθεν ἡμιόνων γένος ἀγροτεράων,
οἵ ῥα Κύτωρον ἔχον καὶ Σήσαμον ἀμφενέμοντο
ἀμφί τε Παρθένιον ποταμὸν κλυτὰ δώματ᾽ ἔναιον,
Κρῶμνάν τ᾽ Αὐγιαλόν τε καὶ ὑψηλοὺς ᾿Ερυθίνους. 855
αὐτὰρ ᾿Αλιξζώνων ᾿Οδίος καὶ ᾿Επίστροφος ἦρχον
τηλόθεν ἐξ ᾿Αλύβης, ὅθεν ἀργύρου ἐστὶ γενέθλη.
Μυσῶν δὲ Χρόμις ἦρχε καὶ "Evvopos οἰωνιστής"
ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ οἰωνοῖσιν ἐρύσσατο κῆρα μέλαιναν,
ἀλλ᾽ ἐδάμη ὑπὸ χερσὶ ποδώκεος Αἰακίδαο 860
ἐν ποταμῷ, ὅθι περ Τρῶας κεράιζε καὶ ἄλλους.
Φόρκυς αὖ Φρύγας ἦγε καὶ ᾿Ασκάνιος θεοειδὴς
τῆλ ἐξ ᾿Ασκανίης" μέμασαν δ᾽ ὑσμῖνι μάχεσθαι.
Myocw αὖ Μέσθλης τε καὶ ἔΑντιφος ἡγησάσθην,
υἷε Ταλαιμένεος, τὼ Γυγαίη τέκε λίμνη, 865
of καὶ Myovas ἦγον ὑπὸ Thaor@ γεγαῶτας.
Νάστης αὖ Καρῶν ἡγήσατο βαρβαροφώνων,
of Μίλητον ἔχον Φθιρῶν τ᾽ ὄρος ἀκριτόφυλλον
Μαιάνδρου τε ῥοὰς Μυκάλης τ᾽ αἰπεινὰ κάρηνα"

τῶν μὲν ἄρ᾽ ᾿Αμφίμαχος καὶ Νάαάστης ἡγησάσθην,

870

Νάστης ᾿Αμφίμαχός τε, Νομίονος ἀγλαὰ τέκνα,
ὃς καὶ χρυσὸν ἔχων πολεμόνδ᾽ ἴεν ἠύτε κούρη,

857. ᾿Αλύβη, according to Strabo, for
Χαλύβη : the Chalybes in historical times
were famous miners, but produced iron
only, not silver; Xen. Anab. v. 5, 1,
Strabo, xii. 3, 19. Armenia however,
close to them, was the home of silver
(v. O. Schrader, Sprachw. und Urgesch..,
pp. 249, 251). γενέθλη = ““ birthplace”
only here. Paley compares ἀργύρον πηγή
of the silver mines of Laurion in Aesch.
Pers. 238.

861. ἐν ποταμῷ sc. ᾧ 15 sqq., where
Ennomos is however not named (see how-
ever P 218); hence Aristarchos obelized
860-1.

865. Γνγαίη λίμνη, cf. T 391: acvcord-
ing to Strabo a lake near Sardis, after-
wards called KoAéy. Their mother was
of course the Νηίς or nymph of the lake.
Cf. Z 22, % 444, Υ 384. ere is perhaps
no other case in H. of maternity attri-
buted to a lake, though rivers are often
fathers (e.g. ® 159). There was an old
variant λίμνῃ, apparently introduced to
avoid this objection, by making Γυγαίη
the name of the nymph.

867. βαρβαροφώνων seems to refer

only to the harshness of the dialect, as
Thuc. remarked (i. 3). H. does not
make any broad distinction between
Achaians and barbarians. So Σίντιας
dyptopuvous, θ 294.

868. ἀκριτόφυλλον, 1.6. with foliage
massed together, so that the eye could
not distinguish separate trees. Accord-
ing to the Scholia the small cones of the
pine were called φθεῖρες from some fancied
resemblance to those insects.

872. ὅς would naturally refer to Am-
phimachos as the last named, and so
Ar. took it: but Schol. A says that
Simonides held it to mean Nastes as
the principal leader. But perhaps L.
Miiller is right in regarding 870-1 as
spurious, though there is no obvious
reason for their insertion. χρυσόν evi-
dently means golden ornaments, such as
Euphorbos wore, P 52. As neither of
these leaders is named in the fight in
the river in ®, 874-5 must have been
obelized like 860-1; there is nol schol.
to that effect in A, but in the text
the lines are actually marked with the
obelus. ΝΣ

86

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Β (11)

νήπιος, οὐδέ τί οἱ τό γ᾽ ἐπήρκεσε λυγρὸν ὄλεθρον,

ἀλλ᾽ ἐδάμη ὑπὸ χερσὶ ποδώκεος Αἰακίδαο

ἐν ποταμῷ, χρυσὸν δ᾽ ᾿Αχιλεὺς ἐκόμισσε δαΐφρων. &75
Σαρπηδὼν δ᾽ ἦρχεν Λυκίων καὶ Γλαῦκος ἀμύμων

τηλόθεν ἐκ Λυκίης, Ἐάνθου ἄπο δινήεντος.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Τ' (it) 87

IAIAAO® I.

ὅρκοι. τειχοσκοπία.

᾿Αλεξάνδρου καὶ Μενελάου

μονομαχία.

3 3 \ 4 Ψ > ε 4
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ κόσμηθεν ἅμ᾽ ἡγεμόνεσσιν ἕκαστοι,
Τρῶες μὲν κλαγγῇ τ᾽ ἐνοπῇ τ᾽ ἴσαν ὄρνιθες ὥς,
9.29, \ 4 ’ 3 / ’
ἠύτε περ κλαγγὴ γεράνων πέλει οὐρανόθι πρό,
A > 9» ad “A 4 3 /
ai τ᾽ ἐπεὶ οὖν χειμῶνα φύγον καὶ ἀθέσφατον ὄμβρον,

Γ

The main subject of the third book is
the single combat of Paris and Menelaos,
into the relation of which are interwoven
the episodes of the τειχοσκοπία, where
Priam and Helen watch the Greek army
from the walls of Troy, and the recon-
ciliation of Helen to Paris after her
momentary repentance.

Setting aside Lachmann’s captious cri-
ticisms, which have been fully answered
even by German scholars free from con-
servative prejudice, the chief objection
which has been brought inst the
book is that it appears to belong rather
to the opening than to the tenth year
of the war. This is true, at least of the
τειχοσκοπία, for we can hardly sup-
pose Priam to have been surprised at
the numbers of the Greeks, or not to
have known their chief warriors by sight,
after so many years of siege. But to
the hearer or reader of the Tied this is
the opening of the war, and no further
justification for the book, as an introduc-
tion to the long tale of battles, is needed
from a poetical point of view than the
book itself. the principal actors
whom we have not learnt to know in
the first two books are, with the curious
exception of Diomedes, set before us in
the most artistic and natural manner:
the frequent mention of earlier events, by
allusion or narration, clears the ground
for the continuous action upon which

we are gradually launched; while the
contrast of Menelaos and Paris, and the
prominence given to Helen and her sub-
servience to Aphrodite, give the moral
bias which guides our sympathy to the
Achaian side.

But, though the anger of Achilles is
tacitly assumed in his absence from the
scene, this book, like the three which
follow it, makes no use of the motives of
the action so fully set forth in Book 1:
the promise of Zeus to Thetis is never
mentioned, and bears no fruit till the
beginning of Book viru. Thus this
book, with all from the second to the
seventh, seems to have been added to
the original poem, in which Book I. was
followed by a defeat of the Greeks—either,
as Grote thought, in Book vIII., or as
Christ argues, I think decisively, in ΧΙ.

1. The tale is taken up from B 483.
ἕκαστοι each tribe, not ‘‘ Trojans as well
as Greeks.”

8. The simile is copied by Vergil,
Aen. x. 264 sqq.—

‘‘Quales sub nubibus atris
Strymoniae dant signa grues, atque
aethera tranant
Cum sonitu, fugiuntque notos clamore
secundo, ”

οὐρανόθι πρό, before the face of heaven.
πρό goes with the locative instead of the
gen. in two other phrases, ᾿Ιλιόθι πρό
© 561, ἠῶθι πρό A 50. Η. G. § 226.

4. ᾧφύγον : observe the aor. in the

88 TAIAAO® T° (πὸ

κλαγγῇ ταί ye πέτονται ἐπ᾽ ᾿Ωκεανοῖο ῥοάων

an

3 7 ’ , A ,
ἀνδράσι ἸΠυγμαίοισι φόνον καὶ κῆρα φέρουσαι"
ἠέριαι δ᾽ ἄρα ταί γε κακὴν ἔριδα προφέρονται"
οἱ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἴσαν συγῇ μένεα πνείοντες ᾿Αχαιοί,
ἐν θυμῷ μεμαῶτες ἀλεξέμεν ἀλλήλοισιν.
Φῳ. ᾽ν a , ͵ > 7
εὖτ᾽ ὄρεος κορυφῇσι Νότος κατέχενεν ὀμίχλην, 10

4 ” 4 , \ 3 ’

ποιμέσιν οὔ τι φίλην, κλέπτῃ δέ τε νυκτὸς ἀμείνω"
’ 7 > 9 4 Ψ > 2 na of
τόσσον τίς T ἐπὶ λεύσσει, ὅσον T ἐπὶ λᾶαν ino:
a ” “A e \ \ ’ ” > » A
ὡς ἄρα τῶν ὕπο ποσσὶ κονίσαλος ὥρνυτ ἀελλῆς
3 4 > 44 ’
ἐρχομένων" μάλα δ᾽ ὦκα διέπρησσον πεδίοιο.
οἱ δ᾽ ὅτε δὴ σχεδὸν ἦσαν ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλοισιν ἰόντες, 15
Τρωσὶν μὲν προμάχιζεν ᾿Αλέξανδρος θεοειδής,
,ὔ ww ΝΜ 4 4

παρδαλέην ὦμοισιν ἔχων καὶ καμπύλα τόξα
καὶ ξίφος, αὐτὰρ ὁ δοῦρε δύω κεκορυθμένα χαλκῷ
πάλλων ᾿Αργείων προκαλίζετο πάντας ἀρίστους

simile—a sort of ‘‘gnomic”’ aor. followed
by the present. For ἀθέσφατος v. Buttm.
Lex., where the word is explained as a
hyperbole, ‘‘such as not even a god
could utter”; but such hyperbole is
not Homeric. But no quite satisfacto

explanation has been given of the word.

δ. ἐπί with gen. =towards, as E 700:
H. G. § 200-3. The war of cranes and
pygmies (‘‘Thumblings”) does not re-
appear in H.

. ἔριδα προφέρονται, apparently our
‘Soffer battle,” so θ 210; and ἔριδα
προβαλόντες A 529: cf. E 506, K 479.
épiat, in early morning, A 497, « 52,
though the significance of the epithet
here is not very clear. Verg. Georg. i.
375, seems to have thought, perhaps
rightly, that it meant “flying high in
the air”; aeriae fugere grucs.

8. The silence of the Achaian advance
is contrasted with the Trojan clamour
again, A 429-436, and is one of the very
few signs by which H. appears to mark
a national difference between the two
enemies, who are always represented as
speaking the same language.

10. εὖτ᾽ ὄρεος : so MSS. (except ὥς τ᾽
ὄρεος G) with Ar.: nore ὄρευς was read
by the editions of Chios and Massilia
and others, according to Didymos
(Schol. A); this must be an error for
ἠύτ᾽ ὄρευς. Aristarchus’ objection to the
latter, that H. does not use the con-
tracted form of this gen., is not con-
vincing, for we might read ἠύτ᾽ ὄρεος
(disyll. by synizesis), as πόλιος B 811,

etc., and the contracted form is actually
found in ᾿Ερέβευς, θάρσευς, θέρευς, θάμβευς
(ΒΕ. 6. 8 105, 1). In any case εὖτε must
here = ἠύτε, a particle of comparison,
and so it is found again in T 386, but
nowhere else. Some commentators,
both ancient and modern, have taken
εὖτε to mean ‘‘ when,” making line 12
the apodosis ; but this would be a form
of expression quite unparalleled in H.
ἠύτε and εὖτε are indeed doubtless forms
of the same word; and tho - the
differentiation in use is general, it does
not follow that it is universal. So we
use ‘‘as”’ in ἃ temporal sense as well as
to express a comparison.

12. re... τε, as Often, indicate merel
the correlation of clauses. The
which regularly follows τόσσον and ὅσσον
(v. on B 616), is construed with it; but
according to the canon of Ar. does not
throw back the accent on account of
the intervening particle (υ. Le Qu.
Ep. 75-78). ost MSS. (but not <A)
read ἐπιλεύσσει.

18, ἀελλής, a dx. dey. = rolling to-
gether, dense; virtually the same as
ἀολλής (d- =sa-, together: and εἴλειν, root
Fed of vol-v-o). According to Schol. B,
Aristophanes read κονισάλου ὥρνυτ᾽ ἀελλής,
but there is no analogy for such a sub-
stantive as ἀελλής.

19-20 were obelized by Ar. (and Zenod.
included 18 also) on the ground that a
warrior would not be arrayed with a bow
and panther-skin if he were challenging
heavily-armed foes to combat. But this

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ T (τ) 89

3 ,ὔ 4 3 3. A A
ἀντίβιον μαχέσασθαι ἐν αἰνῇ δηιοτῆτι. 20
τὸν δ᾽ ws οὖν ἐνόησεν apnidiros Μενέλαος
ἐρχόμενον προπάροιθεν ὁμίλου μακρὰ βιβάντα,
ὥς τε λέων ἐχάρη μεγάλῳ ἐπὶ σώματι κύρσας,
εν ἃ ee ~
εὑρὼν ἢ ἔλαφον κεραὸν ἢ ἄγριον alya,
4 4 4 ὔὕ ¥ > δ
πεινάων" μάλα yap Te κατεσθίει, εἴ περ ἂν αὐτὸν 25
σεύωνται ταχέες τε κύνες θαλεροί τ᾽ αἰζηοί"
as ἐχάρη Μενέλαος ᾿Αλέξανδρον θεοειδέα
ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ἰδών: φάτο γὰρ τίσεσθαι ἀλείτην.
> » > % \ , a A
αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἐξ ὀχέων σὺν τεύχεσιν ἄλτο χαμᾶξε.
τὸν δ᾽ ὡς οὖν ἐνόησεν ᾿Αλέξανδρος θεοειδὴς 80
3 4 / / 4 4
ἐν προμάχοισι φανέντα, κατεπλήγη φίλον Top,
A 2 @ 4 > μή ᾽ “ a> 3 ’
ἂψ δ᾽ ἑτάρων εἰς ἔθνος ἐχάξετο κῆρ᾽ ἀλεείνων.
e 3 Ψ«{ 4 4 ION 3 /
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε Tis Te δράκοντα ἰδὼν παλίνορσος ἀπέστη
» 3 ’ e ’ a
οὔρεος ἐν βήσσῃς, ὗπο Te τρόμος ἔλλαβε γυῖα,
ayy δ᾽ ἀνεχώρησεν, ὦχρός τέ μιν εἷλε παρειάς, 35
bd 4 3 @ ¥ 4 3 4
ὧς αὗτις καθ᾽ ὅμιλον ἔδυ Τρώων ἀγερώχων
δείσας ᾿Ατρέος υἱὸν ᾿Αλέξανδρος θεοειδής.
\ > LAN 2 a. 9 Sf
τὸν δ᾽ “Extwp νείκεσσεν ἰδὼν αἰσχροῖς ἐπέεσσιν"
“ Δύσπαρι, εἶδος ἄριστε, γυναιμανὲς ἠπεροπευτά,

objection would equally apply to προμά-
χιζεν above. Ar. and most of the other
ancient critics also omitted the 6 in 18, but
Didymos for once ventures to disagree,
remarking that Homer frequently employs
phrases like ὁ δέ, etc., without any change
of subject. He quotes: 373, which is not
a very happy instance: more appropriate
would be A 191 (g.v.) or II 466 (Schol. B).
Observe that Paris is not challenging to
a duel properly speaking, but only toa
combat in the midst of the general
engagement; for this is the only ad-
missible sense of δηιότης.

23. σώματι, μεγάλῳ fiw ἐπιτυχών"
νεκροῦ γάρ φασι σώματος μὴ ἅπτεσθαι
λέοντα, Schol. A. This is aimed against
a dictum of Ar. that H. always uses
σῶμα of a dead body ; it is better to side
with Ar. and consider that H. was
ignorant of the habits of the lion to
which the Schol. refers, for it cannot be
supposed that in such a phrase H. would
use σῶμα by itself to mean ‘‘animal.”
πεινάων, in the emphatic position, .may
mean that the lion is driven by stress of
hunger to this unusual repast. The
idea seems to be that a lion lights upon

a deer just killed by the hunters, and
eats it in spite of them.

25. μάλα, 1.6. ‘‘ greedily,” referring to
wewdwy, εἴ περ, ‘‘although,” as often,
e.g. B 598.

26. altnol, a word of doubtful origin,
used of men and youths in the prime of
life. Benfey derives from abhi-jdva (juv-
enis, ἤβη, etc.); al. al = ἀρι- and ¢-, the
stem of ζῆν.

28. τίσεσθαι, so A and one other MS.:
vulg. τίσασθαι. The fut. is clearly more
suitable here, but cf. 112, 366.

33. παλίνορσος, only here in H. ; on
account of the o it seems distinct from
root op of παλινψόρμενος (or πάλιν 6.) A
326; Curt. conn. with root ers-, Lat.
err-o0: 80 ἄψορρος (Ht. p. 556).

36. For ἀγερώχων see B 654.

88. αἰσχροῖσι τοῖς αἰσχύνην ἐνεγκεῖν
δυναμένοις, Lresych. So Ψ 473, αἰσχρῶς
ἐνένιπεν.

39. Cf. A 385. Δύσπαρι, so μῆτερ
δύσμητερ W 97, Avoedéva Eur. Or. 1388:
cf. ρος ἄιρος o 73, Κακοίλιον, τ 260,
Αἰνόπαρις, Eur. Hec. 944, and Δύσπαρις
Αἰνόπαρις, κακὸρ Ἑλλάδι Bwriavelpy,
Alkman, ap. Schol. A.

90 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Γ (μὴ)

WA? ww

aid” ὄφελες ἄγονός τ᾽ ἔμεναι ἄγαμός τ' ἀπολέσθαι: 40
καί κε τὸ βουλοίμην, καί κεν πολὺ κέρδιον ἧεν

ἢ οὕτω λώβην τ᾽ ἔμεναι καὶ ὑπόψιον ἄλλων.

ἢ που καγχαλόωσι κάρη κομόωντες ᾿Αχαιοί,

φάντες ἀριστῆα πρόμον ἔμμεναι, οὕνεκα καλὸν

εἶδος ἔπ᾽, GAN οὐκ ἔστι βίη φρεσὶν οὐδέ τις ἀλκή. 45
ἣ τοιόσδε ἐὼν ἐν ποντοπόροισι νέεσσιν

πόντον ἐπιπλώσας, ἑτάρους ἐρίηρας ἀγείρας,

μιχθεὶς ἀλλοδαποῖσι γυναῖκ᾽ ἐνειδέ᾽ ἀνῆνγες

ἐξ ἀπίης γαίης, νυὸν ἀνδρῶν αἰχμητάων,

πατρί τε σῷ μέγα πῆμα πόληί τε παντί τε δήμῳ, 50
δυσμενέσιν μὲν χάρμα, κατηφείην δὲ σοὶ αὐτῷ;

οὐκ ἂν δὴ μείνειας ἀρηίφιλον Μενέλαον;

γνοίης χ᾽, οἵου φωτὸς ἔχεις θαλερὴν παράκοιτιν.

οὐκ ἄν τοι χραίσμῃ κίθαρις τά τε Sap’ ᾿Αφροδίτης,

40. ἄγονος should mean ‘‘childless,”’
and so Augustus understood the line
when he applied it to his daughter
Julia; but this sense does not suit the
passage, for it was not through his
offspring that Paris harmed the Trojans ;
indeed we hear of no child of his by
Helen except in an obscure tradition
mentioned by Schol. A, and even that is
inconsistent with 512. The only good
sense that could be got out of the word
would be ‘‘cursed by heaven” (with
sterility) as I 454, which is too weak and
indirect to suit the context. The only
alternative is to translate ‘‘unborn”;
and so Eur. Phoen. 1598—

kal πρὶν és φῶς μητρὸς ἐκ γονῆς μολεῖν
ἄγονον ᾿Απόλλων Λαΐῳ μ᾽ ἐθέσπισεν
φονέα γενέσθαι πατρός.

For τε. . re we should rather have
expected 4... 4%: but as neither wish
is possible of fulfilment there is a certain
gain of rhetorical force, with the loss of
logical accuracy, in combining both into
one vehement wish.

42. ὑπόψιον, an object of contempt or
hatred, lit. ‘‘looked at from below,’ i.e.
with the feelings intimated by the
familiar ὑπόδρα. Aristoph. ἐπόψιον,
i.e. publicly, in the sight of all men.
For a similar formation cf. πανόψιος,
© 397.

44. Apparently ἀριστῆα is subj.,
πρόμον predicate; ‘‘saying that a prince
is our champion (only) because a fair
favour is his.” Else it must be “deeming

(1.6. having at the first moment deemed)
that it was a princely champion (whom
they saw).” πρόμος = primus, a super.
of πρό: in use it = πρόμαχος.

seems really to be a predicate, but we
can only translate it as an epithet. 45
may represent the words of the Achaians.

46. ἢ, not 4, is the reading of the best
MSS., with Herodian and Nikanor ; but
there is no opposition with what precedes.
The question In 52 goes closely with that
in 46-51: ‘‘can it be that thou couldst
brin . ? and now canst not thou
dare?” 53 then expresses the result,
‘‘then wouldst thou find.” τοιόσδε
ἐών, hiatus illicitus, cf. B 8, Εἰ 118,
T 288, Ψ 263, y 480, ¢ 151, 7 185. τοι-
otros is an obvious conjecture.

49, ἀπίης, v. A 270. Observe the
alliteration in the next line. In Greek
poetry, unlike Latin, this phenomenon
is sporadic and apparently accidental ;
some of the most marked instances in
Homer occur in places where no parti-
cular effect is produced, e.g. Σ 285, T
217.

0 1. Cf. P 636, £185; and for κατηφείη,
98.

54. The correlation of subj. and opt.

is the same as in A 386-7—

el μὲν δὴ ἀντίβιον σὺν τεύχεσι πειρηθείης
οὐκ ἄν τοι χραίσμῃσι βιὸς καὶ ταρφέες lol.
In both there is an apparent logical
inconsistency, for the subj. expresses
confident anticipation (H. G. § 276),
which is however based upon a con-

TATAAO® PF (1. 91]

Φ ’ὔ ’ὔ 4 ..2 ,., 59 / / -
i τε κόμη τό τε εἶδος, ὅτ᾽ ἐν κονίῃσι μιγείης. 55
ἀλλὰ para Τρῶες δειδήμονες" ἧ τέ Kev ἤδη
λάινον ἕσσο χιτῶνα κακῶν ἕνεχ᾽, ὅσσα ἔοργας."
τὸν δ᾽ αὗτε προσέειπεν ᾿Αλέξανδρος θεοειδής"
ες "Rh 2 / 3 4 3 ί 2 δ᾽ eA 9
κτορ, ἐπεί με κατ᾽ αἶσαν ἐνείκεσας οὐδ᾽ ὑπὲρ αἶσαν,
> J / Ψ 3 3 4
αἰεί τοι κραδίη πέλεκυς ὥς ἐστιν ἀτειρής, 60
Cd 3 4 \ ς 3 9 ’ 4 @e 4 4
ὅς τ᾽ εἶσιν διὰ δουρὸς ὑπ᾽ ἀνέρος, ὅς pa τε τέχνῃ
, 4 4 3 4 2 9 Ν 4 /
νήιον ἐκτάμνῃσιν, ὀφέλλει δ᾽ ἀνδρὸς ἐρωήν"
ὧς σοὶ ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ἀτάρβητος νόος ἐστίν"
7 a 9 9 4 4 3 ’;
μή μοι δῶρ᾽ ἐρατὰ πρόφερε χρυσέης ᾿Αφροδίτης"
ov τοι ἀπόβλητ᾽ ἐστὶ θεῶν ἐρικυδέα δῶρα, 65
(sd 3 “A e \ 3 3 Ν
ὅσσα κεν αὐτοὶ δῶσιν" ἑκὼν δ᾽ οὐκ ἄν τις ἕλοιτο.
νῦν αὖτ᾽, εἴ μ᾽ ἐθέλεις πολεμίζειν ἠδὲ μάχεσθαι,
ἄλλους μὲν κάθισον Τρῶας καὶ πάντας ᾿Αχαιούς,
αὐτὰρ ἔμ᾽ ἐν μέσσῳ καὶ ἀρηίφιλον Μενέλαον
, > 9 2 ¢ , \ / A , .-
συμβάλετ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ “Εἰλένῃ καὶ κτήμασι πᾶσι μάχεσθαι. 70
ὁππότερος δέ κε νικήσῃ κρείσσων τε γένηται,
, > ὁ Ν 2 4 a +f ¥ > 9 ’
κτήμαθ᾽ ἑλὼν ἐὺ πάντα γυναῖκά τε οἴκαδ᾽ ἀγέσθω"

dition considered as purely imaginary:
we are accustomed to observe the strict
rule of thought, and to make the conclu-
sion as supposititious as the condition on
which it is based. But the confidence
expressed in these two passages is relative
rather than absolute ; if the condition be
once granted, then the result is certain.
So also X 42, g.v. As far as the lines
before us are concerned, indeed, we
might say that Hector, though he
chooses to put the case of Paris’ fall as
hypothetical only, yet at any rate for
rhetorical purposes clearly means to in-
timate that he does expect it; but this
explanation would not apply so well to
A 386.

57. Cf. 453. It is pretty clear from
the context that the ‘‘robe of stone”
indicates public execution by stoning,
such asthe Chorus fear for Aias, πεφό-
βημαι λιθόλευστον “Apy in Soph. Aj. 253.
The phrase itself is precisely similar to
one which is common in later poetry,
but only as a euphemism for burial ; 6.0.
Pind. Nem. xi. 21. Cf.—

τρισώματός τὰν Τ᾽ηρυὼν ὁ δεύτερος
πολλὴν ἄνωθεν, τὴν κάτω γὰρ οὐ λέγω,
χθονὸς τρίμοιρον χλαῖναν ἐξηύχει λαβών,
ἅπαξ ἑκάστῳ κατθανὼν μορφώματι.

Ag. 870-3.

Observe tooo without reduplication, and
F neglected (MSS. give λαίνον as a dis-
syllable, which Heyne thinks right).

59. The thought is, ‘‘Since thy re-
buke is just, I will say no more than
this—Cast not in my teeth the gifts of
the gods’ (64): 60-63 are parenthetical.

61. tn’ ἀνέρος, as though εἶσιν were
ἃ passive verb ; as often with πίπτειν, etc.

62. The subject of ὀφέλλει is of course
πέλεκυς. ἐρωή, ‘‘effort,” as N 590. Paris
clearly speaks partly in anger and partly
in admiration of Hector’s straightfor-
wardness, which thrusts aside without
relenting (drdp8yros) all conventional

obstacles.

64. πρόφερε as B 251. So Herod. i.
3 τὴν Μηδείης ἁρπαγήν σφι προφέρειν, iii.
120 εἰπεῖν τινι προφέροντα = to speak
tauntingly.

65. ἀπόβλητος = abiectus, contempt-
ible, as B 361.

66. ἑκών, even if he would, lit. ‘‘ by
wishing for them” (or rather ‘‘as a
matter of choice,” Mr. Monro); the
original participial meaning of the word
survives in this phrase, Curt. Zt. no. 19.

72. & seems to go with the verb,
“aright,” i.e. δικαίως. Paley quotes
Aesch. Supp. 73, 528, ἄλευσον ἀνδρῶν
ὕβριν εὖ orvyjcas. Some however take
it with πάντα as though μάλα πάντα,

92

LAIAAOS Γ' (m1)

οἱ δ᾽ ἄλλοι φιλότητα καὶ ὅρκια πιστὰ ταμόντες
ναίοιτε Τροίην ἐριβώλακα, τοὶ δὲ νεέσθων
Αργος ἐς ἱππόβοτον καὶ ᾿Αχαιίδα καλλυγύναικα.᾽

ὧς ἔφαθ᾽, “Extwp δ᾽ αὗτε χάρη μέγα μῦθον ἀκούσας,

καί ῥ᾽ ἐς μέσσον ἰὼν Τρώων ἀνέεργε φάλαγγας,
[μέσσον δουρὸς ἑλών" τοὶ δ᾽ ἱδρύνθησαν ἅπαντες].
τῷ δ᾽ ἐπετοξάζοντο κάρη κομόωντες ᾿Αχαιοί,
3 “ ὔ» 4 / >
ἰοῖσίν τε τιτυσκομενοι λάεσσί τ᾽ ἔβαλλον.
9 ς Ν Ν Ν 9 A 3 lA

αὐτὰρ ὁ μακρὸν ἄυσεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων.-
“ἴσχεσθ᾽, ᾿Αργεῖοι, μὴ βάλλετε, κοῦροι ᾿Αχαιῶν"

“A 4 μη > ἢ ad 39
στεῦται γάρ τι ἔπος ἐρέειν κορυθαίολος “Exrwp.

φ Ν 3 eg? yv 7 ΜΝ /

ὧς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ ἔσχοντο μάχης dve@ τε γένοντο
ἐσσυμένως. “Ἑκτωρ δὲ pet’ ἀμφοτέροισιν ἔειπεν"

bead |
on

30

85

“ κέκλυτέ μευ, Τρῶες καὶ ἐυκνήμιδες ᾿Αχαιοί,
μῦθον ᾿Αλεξάνδροιο, τοῦ εἵνεκα νεῖκος ὄρωρεν.
ἄλλους μὲν κέλεται Τρῶας καὶ πάντας ᾿Αχαιοὺς
τεύχεα κάλ᾽ ἀποθέσθαι ἐπὶ χθονὶ πουλυβοτείρῃ,
αὐτὸν δ᾽ ἐν μέσσῳ καὶ apnidirov Μενέλαον 90
” 9 > ¢ / 4 A /
οἴους aud “Ἑλένῃ καὶ κτήμασι πᾶσι μάχεσθαι.
ὁππότερος δέ κε νικήσῃ κρείσσων τε γένηται,
4 x e Ν aN 4 ΄- 4 ΝΜ > 9 Ul
κτήμαθ᾽ ἑλὼν ἐὺ πάντα γυναῖκά τε οἴκαδ᾽ ayécOw>-
οἱ δ᾽ ἄλλοι φιλότητα καὶ ὅρκια πιστὰ τάμωμεν.᾽"
φ Ν 3 e 2 4 3 \ 3 nw
as ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ dpa πάντες ἀκὴν ἐγένοντο σιωπῇ. 95
A \ ’ Ἁ 3 Α ,ἤὔ
τοῖσι δὲ καὶ μετέειπε βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Μενέλαος"
“ κέκλυτε νῦν καὶ ἐμεῖο" μάλιστα γὰρ ἄνγος ἱκάνει
θυμὸν ἐμόν" φρονέω δὲ διακρινθήμεναι ἤδη

quite all. There certainly seems to
have been a tendency to join ἐὺ πάντες
together, but there is no case in H.
where we cannot take ἐύ with the verb:
in ¢@ 369 we must (τάχ᾽ οὐκ ἐὺ πᾶσι
πιθήσεις, ‘thou wilt not do well to obey
the multitude ”).

73. The sentence begins as if of μέν or
ὑμεῖς μέν. . . ol δέ were to follow in
distributive apposition ; but the change
made is a very natural one. ὦ 483 is
precisely similar. φιλότητα goes with
ταμόντες by a rather violent zeugma.

74. valovre, either a concessive opt.,
admitting a possibility (v. H. G. 8 299
J), or a real opt. expressing a wish.

78. Apparently interpolated from H 56,
as it is omitted by A. Hector holds his
spear horizontally in order to press back
the advancing ranks. For the ‘‘ quasi-

partitive” gen. Sovpés, see H. G. 8
151 a.

80. The construction passes from the
partic. to the finite verb, as though not
to include stone-throwing under the
general head of ἐπιτοξάζεσθαι.

83. στεῦται, has set himself to say
something. See on = 191.

86. κέκλυτέ pev μῦθον : this construc-
tion is used only here in the sense ‘‘ hear
from me”; κλύειν τι = hear (a sound) ;
A 455, etc. The ordinary phrase is xéx-
λυτέ μευ μύθων, κ 189, 311, etc. We also
have κλύειν τινι ἀρῆς, 5 767, where the
dat. is ethical.

98. φρονέω may be taken in two ways:
(1) ΧΙ am of the mind that Arg. and
Tr. be at once separated,” 2.¢. I desire to
see them separated ; (2) “1 deem that
they are already separated,” {.6. I accept

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ TI (μι) 93

᾿Αργείους καὶ Τρῶας, ἐπεὶ κακὰ πολλὰ πέπασθε

εἵνεκ᾽ ἐμῆς ἔριδος καὶ ᾿Αλεξάνδρου ἕνεκ᾽ ἀρχῆς.

100

ἡμέων δ᾽ ὁπποτέρῳ θάνατος καὶ μοῖρα τέτυκται,
τεθναίη" ἄλλοι δὲ διακρινθεῖτε τάχιστα.

οἴσετε δ᾽ ἄρν᾽, ἕτερον λευκόν, ἑτέρην δὲ μέλαιναν,
γῇ τε καὶ ἠελίῳ" Διὶ δ᾽ ἡμεῖς οἴσομεν ἄλλον.

ἄξετε δὲ Ἰ]ριάμοιο βίην, ὄφρ᾽ ὅρκια τάμνῃ

10ὅ

αὐτός, ἐπεί οἱ παῖδες ὑπερφίαλοι καὶ ἄπιστοι"
4 e \ a ,
μή τις ὑπερβασίῃ Διὸς ὅρκια δηλήσηται.
αἰεὶ δ᾽ ὁπλοτέρων ἀνδρῶν φρένες ἠερέθονται"
οἷς δ᾽ ὁ γέρων μετέῃσιν, ἅμα πρόσσω καὶ ὀπίσσω

4 Ὁ wv Ἀ ΓΝ > 5 / / b>)
λεύσσει, ὅπως OY ἄριστα μετ ἀμφοτέροισι γένηται.

110

ὧς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ ἐχάρησαν ᾿Αχαιοί τε Τρῶές τε,
ἐλπόμενοι παύσασθαι ὀιζυροῦ πολέμοιο.

the challenge, and think that an end has
thereby been put to the war. Of these
the former best suits the simplicity of
Homeric expression and the ἐπεί of the
next line; for the use of φρονέειν,
virtually = to hope, cf. P 286, φρόνεον δὲ
μάλιστα | ἄστυ πότι σφέτερον ἐρύειν καὶ
κῦδος ἀρέσθαι.

99. πέπασθε, so A and Ar., for πέτ-
αθτε, see H. G. § 22, 5, and compare
the participle πεπαθυῖα, p 555: vulg.
πέποσθε, which Curtius takes to be for
πέ-πονθ-τε (Vb. ii. 165).

100. ἀρχῆς, the original offence, the
beginning of trouble ; a pregnant sense,
for which compare Herod. viii. 142, περὶ
τῆς ὑμετέρης ἀρχῆς ὁ ἀγὼν ἐγένετο.
Zenod. ἄτης, to which Ar. objected ἔσται
ἀπολογούμενος Μενέλαος ὅτι ἄτῃ περιέπεσεν
ὁ ᾿Αλεξανδροςς ἄτη however is often =
sin, and regarded as deserving moral
condemnation ; see 4.0. I 510-12; and
certainly Achilles is not ‘apologising ”
for Agamemnon in A 412. In Q 28 Ar.
himself read ἄτης (though there was a
variant ἀρχῆς), and so Z 356. A more
serious objection however is that ἄτη is
for dFdry, and that the uncontracted
form can be restored everywhere in
Homer except T 88, the first syllable
being always in thesis.

102. τεθναίη, “may he lie dead,” as
τέθναθι X 365, spoken to the dead
Hector. Compare τεθναίης, Z164. Both
optatives are ‘‘ pure,” expressing ἃ wish.

103. οἴσετε and ἄξετε (105) are aor.
imper. For the sigmatic aor. with the
thematic vowel see H. G. § 41. The

cases are enumerated in Curt. V0. ii. 282-
4, and explained as due to the analogy
of the non-sigmatic (strong) aorists,
which prevail in Epic Greek. In Alex-
andrian times the converse phenomenon
is found, as the non-sigmatic aorists
constantly take a as thematic vowel
(ἤνεγκα, εἶπα, etc.) on the analogy of the
sigmatic aorists, which by that time
were far commonest.

v is probably for ἄρνε, but it may
be for ἄρνα. Observe the difference of
gender, the male offering to the male
god, the female to the female. So also
the white ram suits the bright sun, the
black ewe the dark earth: cf. Δ 33.

108. ἠερέθονται lit. ‘‘ flutter,” are
blown about by the wind (B 448), zc.
cannot be trusted. Cf. ® 386. Ar.
obelized this line and the two following :
the only reason given is that ἀπολογία
ἐστὶν αὕτη ὑπὲρ τῶν παραβάντων Πριαμι-
δῶν. This of course is insufficient: the
lines quite suit the eminently courteous
character of Menelaos. ols (109) is left
without a very accurate reference by the
change of subject to ὁ γέρων (which seems
to be employed in a generic sense, not
for Priam only).

112. παύσεσθαι vulg., but all good
authorities read παύσασθαι. The ques-
tion has been warmly debated, some (6. 9.
La Roche, Ameis) maintaining that the
aor. infin. can be used ‘‘apart from the
idea of time and duration, to indicate
the inception (Hintreten) of an action,
even in the future.” Later usage of the
Greek language hardly bears out this

94 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Γ cat)

’ "5 A 4 3 9 2 ow > a
καί ῥ᾽ ἵππους μὲν ἔρυξαν ἐπὶ στίχας, ἐκ δ' ἔβαν αὐτοὶ
τεύχεά τ᾽ ἐξεδύοντο' τὰ μὲν κατέθεντ᾽ ἐπὶ γαίῃ

πλησίον ἀλλήλων, ὀλύγη δ᾽ ἦν ἀμφὶς ἄρουρα.

11ὅ

“Ἕκτωρ δὲ προτὶ ἄστυ δύω κήρυκας ἔπεμπεν,

καρπαλίμως ἄρνας τε φέρειν Πρίαμόν τε καλέσσαι.

αὐτὰρ ὁ Ταλθύβιον προΐει κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων

νῆας ἔπι γλαφυρὰς ἰέναι, ἠδ᾽ ἄρνα κέλευεν

οἰσέμεναι" ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ οὐκ ἀπίθησ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνονε δίῳ. 120
Ἶρις δ᾽ αὖθ᾽ “Ελένῃ λευκωλένῳ ἄγγελος ἦλθεν

εἰδομένη γαλόῳ, ᾿Αντηνορίδαο δάμαρτι,

τὴν ᾿Αντηνορίδης εἶχε κρείων ᾿Ελικάων,

Λαοδίκην ἸΙριάμοιο θυγατρῶν εἶδος ἀρίστην.

τὴν δ᾽ εὗρ᾽ ἐν μεγάρῳ" ἡ δὲ μέγαν ἱστὸν ὕφαινεν, 1

mR

δίπλακα πορφυρέην, πολέας δ᾽ ἐνέπασσεν ἀέθλους
Τρώων θ᾽ ἱπποδάμων καὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων,

view; and Cobet (Misc. Crit. p. 328)
argues that the future can in every case
be restored in place of the aor. or pres.
infinitive. In one passage at least it is
clear that all MSS. are corrupt, for in II
830 ἄξειν shews that we must read xep-
aitéuev for κεραϊζέμεν. See H. G. § 238,
where it is said that ‘‘no similar correc-
tion can be made in Jl. xiii. 666-8,
Od. xv. 214.” In the latter of these
cases the infin. is ἰέναι, which may be a
future; in the former it has been sug-
gested that 666 may be parenthetical,
and φθίσθαι epexegatic of κῆρα. But
in 5 254, which is not mentioned either
by Cobet or Monro, we appear to have
an irreducible case, ὥμοσα. .. μὴ μὲν
ἀναφῆναι. This is sufficient to establish
the possibility of the use of the aor.
infin. ; and this once admitted, there is
no sufficient reason to read παύσεσθαι here
against all authority. Unfortunately
MSS. are by no means consistent; A
gives τίσεσθαι in 28, τίσασθαι in the
precisely similar 366. There is still the
possibility of translating ‘‘ hoping that
they had now got to an end”; but this
is hardly simple enough for Homer:
one φρονέω διακρινθήμεναι above
98).
115. ἀλλήλων refers to τεύχεα, and
ἀμφίς means ‘“‘there was but little
ground (uncovered) between the heaps
of arms.” (This interpretation is clearly
established by Buttm. Lex. s.v. ἀμφίς,
as against the tradition that ἀλλήλων
referred to Trojans and Achaians, so that

ἄρουρα meant the μεταίχμμον between the
armies,) See also note on H 342.

120. οἰσέμεναι, aor. as 108. La R
strangely makes it fut., saying that the
infin. of these aor. forms is not used; a
very unwarrantable assertion in the face
of © 111, 564, Ω 663, and four or five
other passages. He seems hardly to be
conscious of any distinction in sense be-
tween the fut. and aor. infin.

121. Iris is introduced as acting on
her own mere motion, against the usual
rule that she only goes at the bidding
of the gods. But cf. Ψ 199, B 786.

124. Cf. Z 252. Λαοδίκην, ace. for
dat. by attraction to the case of the
relative λα

126. δίπλακα, apparently “large enough
to be worn doub ἊΣ of K 134, ἢ 230,
ν 224, τ 226. évéraccey must mean
‘*embroidered,” and cannot be simul-
taneous with the weaving, though the
expression, which is not very exact, seems
to imply it; but the Jacquard loom
was not invented in Homeric times.
For other instances of similar work
compare = 179, X 441 (where there is,
as here, a variant μαρμαρέην for πορ-
pupénv). Helbig (Hom. Ep. p. 158)
shews that the use of richly embroidered
garments belongs to the early period,
while Greece was still under the influence
of Asiatic arts, and ceased in the fifth
century. One cannot but be reminded
of the Bayeux tapestry, on which the
ladies of Normandy embroidered their
duke’s victories.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Τ' (it) . 9ὅ

ods ἔθεν εἵνεκ᾽ ἔπασχον ὑπ᾽ “Apnos παλαμάων.
ἀγχοῦ δ᾽ ἱσταμένη προσέφη πόδας ὠκέα Ἶρις"
“ δεῦρ᾽ ἴθι, νύμφα φίλη, ἵνα θέσκελα ἔργα ἴδηαι 180
Τρώων θ᾽ ἱπποδάμων καὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων'
ot πρὶν ἐπ᾿ ἀλλήλοισι φέρον πολύδακρυν “Apna
ἐν πεδίῳ, ὀλοοῖο λιλαιόμενοι πολέμοιο,
οἱ δὴ νῦν ἕαται σιγῇ, πόλεμος δὲ πέπαυται,
ἀσπίσι κεκλιμένοι, παρὰ δ᾽ ἔγχεα μακρὰ πέπηγεν. 135
αὐτὰρ ᾿Αλέξανδρος καὶ ἀρηίφιλος Μενέλαος
μακρῇς ἐγχείῃσι μαχήσονται περὶ σεῖο"
τῷ δέ κε νικήσαντι φίλη κεκλήσῃ ἄκοιτις."
ὡς εἰποῦσα θεὰ γλυκὺν ἵμερον ἔμβαλε θυμῷ
ἀνδρός τε προτέροιο καὶ ἄστεος ἠδὲ τοκήων. 140
αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἀργεννῇσι καλυψαμένη ὀθόνῃσιν
ὡρμᾶτ᾽ ἐκ θαλάμοιο τέρεν κατὰ δάκρυ χέουσα,
οὐκ οἴη, ἅμα τῇ γε καὶ ἀμφίπολοι δύ᾽ ἕποντο,
Αἴθρη 11Πυτθῆος θυγάτηρ Κλυμένη τε Βοῶπις.

128. €ev: orthotone, not enclitic, be-
cause it refers to the subject of the
principal sentence, swt causa.

130. νύμφα is the name by which to
this day a Greek woman calls her
brother’s wife. It is no doubt an Aeolic
form (see Hinrichs, Aeol. p. 93); the
statement of Schol. A, ᾿Ιωνικὰ νύμφα
τόλμα, is not borne out by tradition as
far as the former word is concerned.
Compare 6 743 with Merry and Riddell’s
note, and H. G. § 92. It appears to be
the only fem. a- stem in Homer which
forms the voc. differently from the
nom. θέσκελα, a word of uncertain
derivation. Curtius refers it to root
sek, oem, say (θέ-σκ-ελα), comparing θεσ-
ga-ros (or rather θε-σπέ-σιοο). The old
derivation θεοῖς ἴκελος (root Fix) is
obviously impossible.

132. The first of is relative, the second
(134) demonstrative. Observe the rhyme
in 133, a ‘‘Leonine” verse. For the
form fara v. Curt. Vb. i. 97: it is for
*Ho-arat = ἦσ-νται : €aro occurs H 414,
cf. ἦντο, 153.

138. κε is very rarely found with a
partic. in H.: this is probably the only
case (except 255), and even here it might
possibly go with κεκλήσῃ, but only by
violence. Mr. Monro takes it so, how-
ever, and says that ‘‘the use” (of κεν,
or of ἄν only?) ‘‘with the participle is
wholly post-Homeric,” H. G. § 362, 8.

140. τοκήων, Leda and Tyndareos,
though the latter was only her putative
father, v. 199, 426, ὃ 184: the legends
vary as to the paternity of the children
of Leda, v. \ 298 (Merry and R.’s note).

141. ὀθόνη, linen veil; v. Σ 595.
Kad: , this reflexive use of the
middle, in which the agent is the direct
object of the action, is comparatively
rare: H. G. § 8 (2).

142. τέρεν, round: Lat. éer-cs. The
word is used by H. (1) of flesh, A
237, N 553, = 406; (2) of tears, Γ 142,
II 11, T 323, π 332; (3) of leaves, N
180, μ 357 ; (4) ἄνθεα wolns, + 449. The
ordinary explanation, ‘‘tender,’’ does
not suit either (1) or (2), for the flesh to
which it is applied is always that of
stalwart warriors, not of women or
children: it rather indicates the firm
rounded muscles (cf. Lat. tor-us). As
applied to leaves and bloom it means
“swelling with sap,” full of fresh life
(so Goebel, Lexil. ii. 406).

144, Aithre daughter of Pittheus
was, according to the legend, mother of
Theseus. But itis impossible to suppose
that she is meant here: ἀπιθανὸν γάρ
ἐστιν Ἑλένης ἀμφίπολον εἶναι τὴν οὕτως
ὑπεραρχαίαν, ἣν οὐκ ἐκποιεῖ (it is not
possible) ἕῆν διὰ τὸ μῆκος τοῦ χρόνου
(Schol. A). A legend is quoted from
Hellanikos that Peirithoos and Theseus
stole Helen when a child; and that in

96 | IAIAAOS® Τ' (az)

αἶψα δ᾽ ἔπειθ᾽ ἵκανον, ὅθι Σκαιαὶ πύλαι ἦσαν. 145

οἱ & ἀμφὶ Πρίαμον καὶ Πάνθοον ἠδὲ Θυμοίτην
Λάμπον τε Κλυτίον θ᾽ ‘Ixerdovd τ᾽ ὄζον “Apnos,
Οὐκαλέγων τε καὶ ᾿Αντήνωρ, πεπνυμένω ἄμφω,
εἴατο δημογέροντες ἐπὶ Σκαιῇσι πύλῃσιν,
γήραϊ δὴ πολέμοιο πεπαυμένοι, ἀλλ᾽ ἀγορηταὶ 150
ἐσθλοί, τεττίγεσσιν ἐοικότες, οἵ τε καθ᾽ ὕλην
δενδρέῳ ἐφεζόμενοι ὄπα λειριόεσσαν ἱεῖσιν"
τοῖοι ἄρα Τρώων ἡγήτορες Hur ἐπὶ πύργῳ.
οἱ δ᾽ ὡς οὖν εἴδονθ᾽ “Ἑλένην ἐπὶ πύργον ἐοῦσαν,

‘\ 3 ΄, ¥ / > > ἢ ~

ἧκα πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἔπεα πτερόεντ aryopevoy* 155
ce 9 , A 3 / > \

ov νέμεσις Τρῶας καὶ ἐυκνήμιδας ᾿Αχαιοὺς

return for the outrage her two brothers
captured Aithre and made her a slave.
But this may have only been manu-
factured to suit the present passage,
and the coincidence of names must be
regarded as purely accidental, unless,
which is equally likely, this line is
interpolated in allusion to the legend:
so Ar., who athetized it. βοῶπις is
elsewhere applied only to Hera, except
in H 10 and 2 40, of which the latter
is a doubtful passage ; it arose no doubt
at first in the time when the gods
had animal shape, Hera being a cow-
goddess. Hence the use of the epithet
for a mortal woman marks a time when
the old tradition had quite died out.
149, Doderlein argues that Ukalegon
and Antenor were the two δημογέρον-
res, “quasi tribuni plebis,” appointed
to wait upon Priam and his suite as
representatives of the popular party.
Antenor certainly appears as an opponent
of the royal power in H 347; but such
an idea is quite unsupported by any
other passage, and implies political
development far beyond that of the
Iliad. It is more reasonable to suppose
that of ἀμφὶ IIp. x.7.’. means ‘‘ the party
consisting of” Priam and the others, so
that Panthoos, etc., are all included
among the δημογέροντες, and that the
last two names are for the sake of variety
put grammatically in the nominative
case, 1n which logically all the preceding
may be considered to be. The idiom by
which a man is thus included among οἱ
ἀμφὶ him is of course familiar in Attic
prose, and is found in H. also, B 445,
Z 436, A 295, O 301, etc. Indeed in later
Greek οἱ ἀμφὶ Πρίαμον might = Πρίαμος,

and even in Herod. οἱ ἀμφὲ Μεγαρέας = οἱ
Μεγαρέες (9, 69). δημογέρων recurs only
A 372, and there it is used of a king.

152. λειριόεσσαν : it is hard to say
how a voice can be “lily-like.”’ Com-
mentators generally are content to say
that the idea of delicacy is transferred
from the flower tothe sound. The Schol.
explain ἐπιθυμητήν, ἡδεῖαν. It is true
that the Greeks felt particular pleasure
in the voice of the cicada; but here,
instead of such epithets, we should rather
expect one meaning “shrill” or “in-
cessant.” The word is applied to the
skin in N 830, but the lily is not else-
where mentioned by H. It looks as
though some archaic word had been
corrupted into a more familiar form ;
but it is hardly safe to trust to the gloss
of Hesych., who explains Xecpés by
ἰσχνός (Paley). Later poets frequently
apply the epithet to sound, but that is
probably only a reminiscence of this
passage. For δενδρέῳ Zen. read
which Christ accepts, cf. the Attic δέν-
δρεσι, but δένδρεον is established in N
437, ὃ 458. δένδρεα and δενδρέων, the
only other forms, are ambiguous. ᾿

153. §vro, a unique form for efaro,
or rather ἥατο, v. Curt. Vb. 97, who
says ‘‘it is perhaps one of the criteria
for the later origin of the τειχοσκοπία "
(why ?).

Lessing, in a well-known
of the Laokoon (ch. xxi.), quotes the
admiration of the old men as a supreme
instance of the manner in which poetry
can convey the idea of exceeding personal
beauty without any attempt to describe
a single feature.

156. οὐ νέμεσις, ‘‘there is no place

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Τ' (11)

97

ad? 3 \ \ \ id ww 4
τοιῇδ ἀμφὶ γυναικὶ πολὺν χρόνον ἄλγεα πάσχειν'᾽
3. A A
αἰνῶς ἀθανάτῃσι θεῆς εἰς ὦπα ἔοικεν.
Ἰλλὰ ὶ Φφ / 3a 39 3 } 7 θ
ἀλλὰ καὶ ὧς, τοίη περ ἐοῦσ᾽, ἐν νηυσὶ νεέσθω,

δ᾽ ς κα 7 3 9 ¥ ΝΣ ri: 33
μηὸ ημιν TEKEETOL Τ οπίισσω πήὴμα λίποιτο.

160

᾿ fal
ὡς dp ἔφαν, Upiapos δ᾽ “Ἑλένην ἐκαλέσσατο φωνῇ
A > A ra
“ δεῦρο πάροιθ ἐλθοῦσα, φίλον τέκος, Lev ἐμεῖο,
Μ ΕΣ / / / 4
ὄφρα ἴδῃ πρότερόν τε πόσιν πηούς τε φίλους τε"
οὔ τί μοι αἰτίη ἐσσί, θεοί νύ μοι αἴτιοί. εἰσιν,

οἵ μοι ἐφώρμησαν πόλεμον πολύδακρυν ᾿Αχαιῶν"

165

ὥς μοι καὶ τόνδ᾽ ἄνδρα πελώριον ἐξονομήνῃς,
ὅς τις ὅδ᾽ ἐστὶν ᾿Αχαιὸς ἀνὴρ ἠύς τε μέγας τε.
ἢ τοι μὲν κεφαλῇ καὶ μείζονες ἄλλοι ἔασιν,
καλὸν δ᾽ οὕτω ἐγὼν οὔ πω ἴδον ὀφθαλμοῖσιν

οὐδ᾽ οὕτω γεραρόν" βασιλῆι γὰρ ἀνδρὶ ἔοικεν."

170

9 ΄-: A
τὸν ὃ ᾿Ελένη μύθοισιν ἀμείβετο, Sia γυναικῶν"
al
“ αἰδοῖός τέ μοί ἐσσι, pire Exupé, δεινός τε"
e Ν 4 4 ς A 4 e 7 A
ὡς ὄφελεν θάνατός μοι ἁδεῖν κακός, ὁππότε δεῦρο
vidi σῷ ἑπόμην, θάλαμον γνωτούς τε λιποῦσα

παῖδά τε τηλυγέτην καὶ ὁμηλικίην ἐρατεινήν.

17ὅ

ἀλλὰ τά γ᾽ οὐκ ἐγένοντο' τὸ καὶ κλαίουσα τέτηκα.
τοῦτο δέ τοι ἐρέω, ὅ μ᾽ ἀνείρεαι ἠδὲ μεταλλᾷς"

. >» pes Bp Ρ Ἶ με os
οὗτός y Arpeldns εὐρὺ κρείων Αγαμέμνων,

2 , 4 > 9 δ ) > 3 /
ἀμφότερον, βασιλεύς τ ἀγαθὸς κρατερός T αἰχμητής"

for indignation that,” as & 80, a 350:
so veneconréy I’ 410, etc.

᾿

160. λίποιτο, remain, as I 487. πῆμα,

in apposition, as 51, etc.

162. The order is δεῦρο ἐλθοῦσα ἵζεν
πάροιθ᾽ ἐμεῖο, and ὡς (166) is co-ordinated
with ὄφρα 164-5 being parenthet-
ical. πηούς, kinsfolk by marriage, ex-
plained by @ 582, γαμβρὸς ἢ πενθερός, of
τε μάλιστα | κήδιστοι τελέθουσι μεθ᾽ αἷμά
τε καὶ γένος αὐτῶν. It may mean “‘ac-
quired relations” (πέπαμαι).

168. καὶ μείζονες ἄλλοι go together,
“also others taller, and that by a
head.”

170. γεραρόν, majestic, only here and
211: see Curt. Et, 129 ὃ.

172. φίλε (oF )εκυρέ, cf. B 831.

173. θάνατος... ἁδεῖν, a curious phrase
apparently founded on the familiar ἥνδανε
βουλή The neglect of. the F of ἁδεῖν
(svad-) is very rare (με Fadew, Bentley ;
με ἑλεῖν, Nauck).

175. παῖδα, sc. Hermione, 514. τηλν-

H

yérnv : the explanation of this much dis-
puted word which now seems to be the
most generally accepted is that given
by Savelsberg in the Rhein. Mus., 1853,
᾿, 441. It is explained at length by

erry and R. on ὃ 11. The conclu-
sion there arrived at is that the word
means adolescens, lit. ‘‘ grown big,” from
“ τῆλυς = great, and that it indicates an
age of from thirteen to twenty or there-
abouts. This suits the statement of
Sophokles as quoted by the Schol. on 6
4, and Eustath., who say that Hermione
was given in marriage while Helen was
in Troy, so that she could not have
been very young when her mother left

er.

178. οὗτος is “anaphoric” not ‘‘ deic-
tic”; in other words it means ‘‘he of
whom you ask,” not ‘‘this warrior
whom you see.”
aL 79. his "aed or favourite line of

exander’s, v, exactly our
idiom, ‘‘ both a good king and.”

98 IAIAAOS Γ (ἀπ.

δαὴρ ait’ ἐμὸς ἔσκε κυνώπιδος, εἴ ποτ᾽ ἔην ye.” 180
ὧς φάτο, τὸν δ᾽ ὁ γέρων ἠγάσσατο φώνησέν τε"

{{

ὦ μάκαρ ᾿Ατρεΐδη, μοιρηγενές, ὀλβιόδαιμον,

ἢ ῥά νύ τοι πολλοὶ δεδμήατο κοῦροι ᾿Αχαιῶν.
ἤδη καὶ Φρυγίην εἰσήλυθον ἀμπελόεσσαν"
ἔνθα ἴδον πλείστους Φρύγας ἀνέρας αἰολοπώλους, 185
λαοὺς ᾽Οτρῆος καὶ Μύγδονος ἀντιθέοιο,
οἵ ῥα τότ᾽ ἐστρατόωντο παρ᾽ ὄχθας Σαγγαρίοιο"
καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼν ἐπίκουρος ἐὼν μετὰ τοῖσιν ἐλέχθην
ἤματι τῷ, ὅτε T ἦλθον ᾿Αμαζόνες ἀντιάνειραι"
ἀλλ᾽ οὐδ᾽ οἱ τόσοι ἦσαν, ὅσοι ἑλίκωπες ᾿Αχαιοί.᾽ 190
δεύτερον att ᾿Οδυσῆα ἰδὼν ἐρέειν᾽ ὁ γεραιός"
“εἴπ᾽ ἄγε μοι καὶ τόνδε, φίλον τέκος, ὅς τις ὅδ᾽ ἐστίν,
μείων μὲν κεφαλῇ ᾿Αγαμέμνονος ᾿Ατρεΐδαο,
εὐρύτερος δ᾽ ὦμοισιν ἰδὲ στέρνοισιν ἰδέσθαι.
τεύχεα μέν οἱ κεῖται ἐπὶ χθονὶ πουλυβοτείρῃ, 195
αὐτὸς δὲ κτίλος ὃς ἐπιπωλεῖται στίχας ἀνδρῶν"
ἀρνειῷ piv ἐγώ γε ἐίσκω πηγεσιμάλλῳ,
ὅς T ὀίων μέγα trav διέρχεται ἀργεννάων.᾽
τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειθ᾽ “Ἑλένη Διὸς ἐκγεγαυῖα"

180. εἴ ποτ᾽ ἔην γε, this phrase occurs
in five other places, viz. A 762, 2 426,
o 268, τ 315, w 289. It is always, except
in 2 and w, preceded by some form of
εἶναι. The meaning seems to be ‘‘if in-
deed it is not all a dream,” si unguam
Suit quod non est amplius, i.e. si recte
dict potest fuisse quod ita sui factwm est
dissimile ut fursse nu m credas, G.
Hermann. The doubt expressed is of
course only a rhetorical way of emphasiz-
ing the bitter contrast between the past
and the present. It is perhaps a case of
the interjectional use of εἰ, as in εἰ δ᾽ ἄγε,
“‘well, [suppose he was!” Curtius’ objec-
tions to this explanation (Stud. i. 2, 286)
are therefore unfounded, and we need
not follow him in altering the phrase to
4 ποτ᾽ ἔην ye, ‘‘ surely once he was.”

182. poupnyevés, ‘‘child of fortune,”
born to a happy fate. Doderlein ex-
plains “ born for destruction (of enemies),”
on the ground that μοῖρα means evil fate.
But this is only the case in phrases like
μοῖραι θανάτοιο and others; in v 76 it is
opposed to ἀμμορίη, and clearly means
‘*good fortune”: μοίρῃ γενόμενος would
answer to the κακῇ αἴσῃ τέκον of A 418.

183. δεδμήατο, ζ.6. ‘are, as I now see,

subject to you”; the plpf. being used
like the imperf. in ἤμελλον, ἣν (ἄρα),

etc.

185. The rhythm shows that ᾧ
ἀνέρας go closely together.
cf. πόδας αἰόλος ἵππος T 404, with nimble
horses. πλ is predicate, with

ΟΡ.

188. ἐλέχθην, cither ‘‘ was numbered
among them ” (Aey-) or “lay down (bivou-
acked) among them ” (Aex-). e same
ambiguity is found in © 619, I 67. H.
mentions the Amazons once again, Z 186.

196. κτίλος, the ram who leads the
flock, ‘‘bell wether”: the simile is given
again, at full length, in N 492. In later
Greek the word seems to be used only as
an adj. = tame; its origin is doubtful.
See Curt. Z¢. no. 78. It is better not to
mention Bentley’s unfortunate emenda-
tion of this line.

197. πηγεσιμάλλῳ, thick-fleeced ; ef.
πηγός of horses and waves, I 124, ε 388.
The formation of the word is hard to
explain; the analogy of τανυσίπτε
ἑλκεσίπεπλος, ταμεσίχροος, ἀερσίποδες, and
many others, shows that it must be
derived from the verb-stem wyy-, not
from πηγός. H. 6. § 124 ὁ.

IAIAAO® Τ' cm.) 99

“οὗτος δ᾽ av Λαερτιάδης πολύμητις ᾿Οδυσσεύς,

200

ὃς τράφη ἐν δήμῳ ᾿Ιθάκης κραναῆς περ ἐούσης
ION / . / ᾽ὔ 3;
εἰδὼς παντοίους τε δόλους καὶ μήδεα πυκνά.
τὴν δ᾽ abr ᾿Αντήνωρ πεπνυμένος ἀντίον ηὔδα"
cc Φ 4 = 4 “ Ν Ν .
ὦ γύναι, ἣ μάλα τοῦτο ἔπος νημερτὲς ἔευπες"-

ἤδη γὰρ καὶ δεῦρό ποτ᾽ ἤλυθε δῖος ᾿Οδυσσεύς, -

20ὅ

σεῦ ἕνεκ᾽ ἀγγελίης, σὺν ἀρηιφίλῳ Μενελάῳ"

7 τοὺς δ᾽ ἐγὼ ἐξείνισσα καὶ ἐν μεγάροισι φίλησα,
ἀμφοτέρων δὲ φυὴν ἐδάην καὶ μήδεα πυκνά.
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ Τρώεσσιν ἐν ἀγρομένοισιν ἔμιχθεν,

στάντων μὲν Μενέλαος ὑπείρεχεν εὐρέας ὦμους,

210

ἄμφω δ᾽ ἑζομένω, γεραρώτερος ἦεν ᾿Οδυσσεύς.
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ μύθους καὶ μήδεα πᾶσιν ὕφαινον,
ἢ τοι μὲν Μενέλαος ἐπιτροχάδην ἀγόρευεν,

201. δήμῳ, ‘‘realm” in local sense,
v. B 547. περ, the idea seems to be,
‘*poor though the soil of Ithaka be, yet
it has succeeded in producing a great

man.” Cf. 5 605.
206. ἀγγελίης ἀντὶ τοῦ ἄγγελος, Ar., a
much disputed doctrine. In the present

passage we may perfectly well take ayy.
as governed by ἕνεκα (as π 334, τῆς αὐτῆς
ἕνεκ᾽ ἀγγελίης) and ored as an objective gen.
after it (as x 245, ἀγγελίην ἑτάρων ἐρέων).
So A 884, ἀγγελίην ἐπὶ Τυδῆ στεῖλαν
"Axaol, is ambiguous, for we may read
ἔπι for ἐπί: and A 140, Μενέλαον. ..
ἀγγελίην ἐλθόντα, with the analogy of
ἐξεσίην ἐλθόντι Ὦ 235, P 20. But in N
252, ἠέ rev ἀγγελίης μετ᾽ ἔμ᾽ ἤλυθες ;
O 640, ὅς Εὐρυσθῆος ἄνακτος ἀγγελίης
οἴχνεσκε Bly Ἡρακληείῃ, we must either
make the word a nom. with Ar., or
read ἀγγελίην with Zenod., or extend the
“* causal” use of the genitive beyond all
analogy, even in the freedom of Homeric
usage. The termination -ys for -as after
a vowel in masculines is very rare in H.
(cf. Τειρεσίας Avyelas, otc.): ταμίης is
perhaps the only instance ; this also has
the fem. ταμίη, only in the concrete
sense, not abstract like ἀγγελίη. Nor is
there in H. any other instance of the
appellative termination -las, common
though it was afterwards. It may be
said therefore that the evidence is in-
sufficient for a positive decision, but is
on the whole against the Aristarchean
doctrine. It is of course possible that
the nom. may have been formed by
a misunderstanding of the ambiguous

passages or similar phrases, but in the
case of a word which was so familiar in
all periods of the Greek language this is
in the highest degree improhable.

209. ἀγρομένοισι, sc. when they first
made their appearance in the ἀγορά.

210. ordvrwvseemstorefer tothe whole
multitude; the dignity of Odysseus is
emphasized byshis being more stately,
when they sat down, even than the man
whose shoulders stood out not only above
his, but above all the Trojans. ὑπείρεχεν
is here intrans., with gen., as ἠέλιος
ὑπερέσχεθε γαίης A 735: ὑπερέχειν in
the trans. sense means ‘‘ to hold over,”
6.0. B 426, a sense which does not suit
this passage.

211. There is an anacoluthon here ;
the construction is just like K 224, σύν
τε δύ᾽ ἐρχομένω καί re πρὸ ὁ τοῦ ἐνόησεν.
In both cases the sentence begins as if
ἄμφω-(δύο) were to be continued in dis-
tributive apposition (ἀπὸ ὅλου els μέρη)
by an ὁ μέν... ὁ δέ (asa 95, δὴ τότ᾽
ἀνασχομένω ὁ μὲν ἤλασε δεξιὸν ὦμον | Ἶρος,
ὁ δ᾽ αὐχέν᾽ ἔλασσεν) But here the
second member is forgotten altogether ;
in K the two are run together into πρὸ
ὁ τοῦ. Cf. also μ 73, οἱ δὲ δύω σκόπελοι ὁ
μέν. ,. followed by τὸν δ᾽ ἕτερον 101.
Zenod. read ἑζομένων, apparently regard-
ing ἄμφω as indeclinable (it is not found
in H. except in nom. and acc.)

213. ἐπιτροχάδην, fluently (as σ 26),
not stumbling for want of words; it is
explained by the whole of what follows,
παῦρα being taken up by οὐ πολύμυθος,
and λιγέως (which seems to mean clear

100

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Τ' (m1)

παῦρα μέν, ἀλλὰ μάλα λιγέως, ἐπεὶ οὐ πολύμυθος,

οὐδ᾽ ἀφαμαρτοεπής" 7 καὶ γένει ὕστερος Hev.

215

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ πολύμητις ἀναΐξειεν ᾿Οδυσσεύς,

στάσκεν, ὑπαὶ δὲ ἴδεσκε κατὰ χθονὸς ὄμματα πήξας,
σκῆπτρον δ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ὀπίσω οὔτε προπρηνὲς ἐνώμα,

ἀλλ᾽ ἀστεμφὲς ἔχεσκεν, aidpet φωτὶ ἐοικώς"

φαίης κε ξάκοτόν τέ τιν᾽ ἔμμεναι ἄφρονά τ᾽ αὔτως. 220
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ ὄπα τε μεγάλην ἐκ στήθεος ein

καὶ ἔπεα νιφάδεσσιν ἐοικότα χειμερίῃσιν,

οὐκ ἂν ἔπειτ᾽ ᾿Οδυσῆί γ᾽ ἐρίσσειε βροτὸς ἄλλος"

οὐ τότε γ᾽ ὧδ᾽ ᾿Οδυσῆος ἀγασσάμεθ᾽ εἶδος ἰδόντες."

3 /
τὸ τρίτον att Αἴαντα ἰδὼν épéew’ ὁ γεραιός"

225

“ris τ᾽ ap ὅδ᾽ ἄλλος ᾿Αχαιὸς ἀνὴρ ἠύς τε μέγας τε,
” δ / ᾽ > 7 ΝΜ 32)
ἔξοχος ᾿Αργείων κεφαλήν τε καὶ εὐρέας ὦμους;

τὸν δ᾽ “Ἑλένη τανύπεπλος ἀμείβετο, δῖα γυναικῶν"
“οὗτος δ᾽ Αἴας ἐστὶ πελώριος, ἕρκος ᾿Αχαιῶν"

᾿Ιδομενεὺς δ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἐνὶ Κρήτεσσι θεὸς ὡς

280

in utterance) by οὐδ᾽ ἀφαμαρτοεπής, ‘‘no

stumbler in words either” (cf. A 511,,

οὐχ ἡμάρτανε μύθων, and N 824,
duaproerés). J.e. Menelaos spoke con-
cisely, but what he did say he said
clearly and without stumbling.

215. εἰ καί, most MSS. ; but A has
#, and the Aristarcheans seem only to
have hesitated between # and 4: their
testimony is however of less importance
because they considered # as virtually
identical with εἰ, and the MSS. continu-
ally confuse the two words. But # is
justified by X 280, ἢ τοι ἔφης γε, ‘‘ yet
surely thou saidst so”; so also Π 61,
H 393. See H. 6. 8 338.

216. ἀναΐξειεν, whenever he rose to
speak, στάσκεν being iterative. tral=
‘‘down” only here: the original sense
seems to have been ‘‘upwards.” (H. G.
§ 201: ‘even in 1]. 3, 217 it is the face
that is bent downwards; cp. 1]. 19, 17,”
which is hardly clear, seeing his eyes
are ‘‘fixed upon the ground”; ὑπὸ
βλεφάρων, ‘from under the eyelids,” is
quite different.) For κατὰ with gen. =

own upon, cf. II 123, and H. G. § 218.

220. ζάκοτον : the idea seems to be
what we call ‘‘sulky”; κότος implies
resentment rather than open anger, and
is thus contrasted with χόλος in A 82.
Odysseus, by not employing the outward
signs of appeal and persuasion, looks like
ἃ. man who in deep resentment chooses

to hold aloof from his fellows. For
φαίης κε = diceres, crederes, cf. 392, A
429, O 697, etc. αὕτως, a mere sim-
pleton: A 133.

221. εἴη, so best MSS. (ef A, an
obvious slip): al. Ye, but the opt. is
supported by dvatteer above.

224 comes in awkwardly here. It
must mean ‘‘ then we no longer thought
of being surprised at the meanness of his
appearance.” Giseke would put it after
220, interpreting ‘‘then we did not so
much admire his aspect.” The double
neglect of the F is suspicious, especially
in root Fé.

227. τε καί, so Ar. MSS. ἠδ᾽. See
Ahrens, Beitr. i. 782; he would read
καί simply, the length being preserved
by the bucolic diaeresis.

228. τανύπεπλοςξ, as a comparison of
the other compounds of τανυ- shews,
cannot mean ‘“‘with long robes.” It
may mean either ‘‘ with thin robes ” and
refer to fineness of material as in Lat.
tenu-is ; or, as Helbig argues (Hom. Ep.
pp. 132 7,.),ὄ ‘with straight (stretched)
robes,”’ thus alluding to the straight
lines and smooth surfaces which dis-
tinguished early Greek drapery, as he
shews, from the flowing curves and folds
of the classical period. Cf. note on
éxradln, K 134.

230. It is remarkable that Aias should
be dismissed in one line, and Diomedes

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Γ᾽ (μα)

101

ε , 2 Ν UA a 3 ‘2? /
ἕστηκ᾽, ἀμφὶ δέ μιν Κρητῶν ἀγοὶ ἠγερέθονται.
πολλάκι μιν ξείνισσεν ἀρηΐφιλος Μενέλαος
οἴκῳ ἐν ἡμετέρῳ ὁπότε Kpnrndev ἵκοιτο.
νῦν δ᾽ ἄλλους μὲν πάντας ὁρῶ ἑλίκωπας ᾿Αχαιούς,
οὕς κεν ἐὺ γνοίην καί τ᾽ οὔνομα μυθησαίμην" 235
δοιὼ δ᾽ οὐ δύναμαι ἰδέειν κοσμήτορε λαῶν,
Κάστορά θ᾽ ἱππόδαμον καὶ πὺξ ἀγαθὸν Πολυδεύκεα,
αὐτοκασυγνήτω, τώ μοι μία γείνατο μήτηρ.
A 9 ey \ , 1 2 a
ἢ οὐχ ἑσπέσθην Λακεδαίμονος ἐξ ἐρατεινῆς,
A ’ἤ Ψ / 3 4
ἢ Sevpw μὲν ἕποντο νέεσσ᾽ ἔνι ποντοπόροισιν, 240
νῦν αὖτ᾽ οὐκ ἐθέλουσι μάχην καταδύμεναι ἀνδρῶν,
Ν / 3 , / > Ψ Ν >?

αἴσχεα δειδιότες καὶ ὀνείδεα TroAr, ἅ μοι ἔστιν.

ὧς φάτο, τοὺς δ᾽ ἤδη κάτεχεν φυσίζοος ala
ἐν Λακεδαίμονι αὖθι, φίλῃ ἐν πατρίδι γαίῃ.

4 > 4 ΝΜ A / a 4

κήρυκες δ᾽ ava ἄστυ θεῶν φέρον ὅρκια πιστά, 245
dpve δύω καὶ οἶνον ἐύφρονα, καρπὸν ἀρούρης,
ἀσκῷ ἐν αἰγείῳ" φέρε δὲ κρητῆρα φαεινὸν

altogether omitted: the name of the
latter indeed does not occur at all before
A 365, except in the Catalogue, B 563,
567, and he drops entirely out of the
action after A, except in the games in ¥
and one speech in & (109 sqq.). It is not
impossible that Idomeneus was intro-
duced into the Iliad after the first draft,
and has here supplanted the description
of the more famous warriors.|

235. γνοίην, “1 could recognise and
name,” a sort of assimilation of the first
clause to the second, for ‘‘ whom I re-
cognise and could name” (Mr. Monro).

237. For another (post - Homeric ? )
legend of Kastor and Polydeukes v. ἃ
300 sqg., the only other, place where
they are mentioned in H. That passage
is clearly inconsistent with 243-4, as
they are said to have shared immortality
after death by alternate days.

238. αὐτοκασιγνήτω according to the
grammarians means ‘‘ whole brothers” ;
we have-not evidence enough of the
early forms of the Dioskuri myth to say
if Homer regarded them both as children
of Zeus; in A they are distinctly made
sons of Tyndareos, and it is probable
that Helen herself may have been to
H. really his daughter, and only in a
more distant degree descended from
Zeus. But see on 140. pla = ἡ αὐτή

as T 293: pot goes with it, ‘‘the same
as me.”

240. δεύρω only here for δεῦρο ; the
quantity of the last syllable is however
merely due to the ictus, and we should.
write δεῦρο. Cf. δύω by δύο. If we
write 4—#with Nikanor, the two sup-
positions take the form of alternative
assertions ; Herodianus preferred ἥ --- ἦ
when we must put a note of interroga-
tion after ἔστιν. See H. G. 8 340. |

241. αὖτε = δέ, αὐτάρ, A 287, etc.

242, αἴσχεα, ὀνείδεα, in objective sense,
the insults and revilings of men.

243. Observe the way—to our idea in-
appropriate—in which the conventional
epithet φυσίζοος is introduced.

244. αὖθι, ‘‘there,” ¢.c. in their own
place. For φίλῃ Zenod. read ἐῇ, ‘‘ their,”
which was probably rejected by Ar. on
the ground that és could not be used for
the 3d pers. plural. See on A 393.

245. ὅρκια here and 269, ‘‘ oath-offer-
ings,” including wine as well as victims ;
in the phrase ὅρκια τάμνειν, 252, the
victims alone are signified, properly
speaking ; but the original signification
of the phrase became so conventional
that ultimately ὅρκια = a treaty, e.g.
A 269, and even the sing. ὅρκιον is found,
A 158. Buttmann has an excellent
article on the Greek conception of oaths
(Lextl. 8.v.).

102

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Γ (πὸ

κῆρυξ ᾿Ιδαῖος ἠδὲ χρύσεια κύπελλα"
ὦτρυνεν δὲ γέροντα παριστάμενος ἐπέεσσιν'

“ ὄρσεο, Λαομεδοντιάδη, καλέουσιν ἄριστοι

250

Τρώων θ᾽ ἱπποδάμων καὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων
ἐς πεδίον καταβῆναι, iv ὅρκια πιστὰ τάμητε"
αὐτὰρ ᾿Αλέξανδρος καὶ ἀρηίφιλος Μενέλαος
μακρῇς ἐγχείῃσι μαχήσοντ᾽ ἀμφὶ γυναικί"

τῷ δέ κε νικήσαντι γυνὴ καὶ κτήμαθ᾽ ἕποιτο"

255

οἱ δ᾽ ἄλλοι φιλότητα καὶ ὅρκια πιστὰ ταμόντες

ναίοιμεν Τροίην ἐριβώλακα, τοὶ δὲ νέονται

"Apryos ἐς ἱππόβοτον καὶ ᾿Αχαιίδα καλλυγύναικα."
ὧς φάτο, ῥίγησεν δ᾽ ὁ γέρων, ἐκέλευσε δ᾽ ἑταίροις

ἵππους ζευγνύμεναι' τοὶ δ᾽ ὀτραλέως ἐπίθοντο.

260

ἂν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔβη Πρίαμος, κατὰ δ᾽ ἡνία τεῖνεν ὀπίσσω"
πὰρ δέ οἱ ᾿Αντήνωρ περικαλλέα βήσετο δίφρον.

τὼ δὲ διὰ Σκαιῶν πεδίονδ᾽ ἔχον ὠκέας ἵππους.

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δή ῥ᾽ ἵκοντο μετὰ Τρῶας καὶ ᾿Αχαιούς,

ἐξ ἵππων ἀποβάντες ἐπὶ χθόνα πουλυβότειραν

265

? , 7 A 3

ἐς μέσσον Τρώων καὶ Αχαιῶν ἐστιχόωντο.

Ν > sf > ν ΝΜ 3 a 3 ’ὔ
ὦρνυτο δ᾽ αὐτίκ᾽ ἔπειτα ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων,
ἂν δ᾽ ᾿Οδυσεὺς πολύμητις" ἀτὰρ κήρυκες ἀγαυοὶ
ὅρκια πιστὰ θεῶν σύναγον, κρητῆρι δὲ οἶνον

μῖσγον, ἀτὰρ βασιλεῦσιν ὕδωρ ἐπὶ χεῖρας ἔχευαν,

257. ναίοιμεν, as ναίοιτε 74; but for
that line we might, with Faesi, supply xe
from 255, unless indeed it goes with the
participle (v. 188). véowra: in fut. sense.

259. ἑταίροις, so Ar. and Zenod. with
best MSS. : al. τους. The construction
with dat. is common in H., and is found
also in Attic: Thuc. 8, 38, etc. The
rarity however of the short form of the
dative, except when elided, is in favour
of the accusative.

261. τεῖνεν, drew back so as to tighten
them ; they were tied to the front rail
when there was no one in the car, E 262,
etc.

262. Didymos (Schol. A) says προ-
κρίνει μὲν τὴν διὰ τοῦ ε γραφὴν βήσετο

(MS. βήσετο), πλὴν οὐ μετατίθησι ἀλλὰ
διὰ τοῦ a γράφει ὁ ᾿Αρίσταρχος (see also
on I 222). There is no doubt that
βήσετο is right; see on 103. It is
possible that Ar.’s hesitation may have

270

arisen from a doubt whether βήσατο
might not here be used transitively
like the active, in the sense ‘‘ drove the
chariot,” and not from overdue regard
to his authorities.

268. Σκαιῶν without πυλῶν only here.
ἔχον, “drove,” as often.

264. μετά, simply ‘‘to the place where
they were.”

265. ἐξ ἵππων, out of the chariot.
ἵπποι is continually used in this sense,
even with adjectives which properly
apply only to the horses ; 6.9. P 504, ἐπ᾽
᾿Αχιλλῆος καλλίτριχε βήμεναι ἵππω.

270. The wine used in treaties was
not mingled with water (v. B 841, A
159). The Schol. explain that here the
Trojan and the Achaian wine is all mixed
in one bowl, and the obvious typical
significance of such an act renders the
explanation most probable. Compare
the scene of the oath in Verg. Aen. xii.
161 sqq.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Τ' (μι)

108

᾽ ὦ \ 2 , / ,

Ατρεΐδης δὲ ἐρυσσάμενος χείρεσσι μάχαιραν,

Ψ e \ / 7 Ν 3 Ν

ἥ οἱ πὰρ ξίφεος μέγα κουλεὸν αἰὲν ἄωρτο,
ἀρνῶν ἐκ κεφαλέων τάμνε τρίχας" αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα
κήρυκες Τρώων καὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν νεῖμαν ἀρίστοις.
τοῖσιν δ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδης μεγάλ᾽ εὔχετο χεῖρας ἀνασχών' 275
“ Ζεῦ πάτερ, Ἴδηθεν μεδέων, κύδιστε μέγιστε,
2.» / > 4.) 9 a fo? 3 ,
ἠέλιος θ᾽, ὃς πάντ ἐφορᾷς καὶ πάντ᾽ ἐπακούεις,
καὶ ποταμοὶ καὶ γαῖα, καὶ οἱ ὑπένερθε καμόντας
ἀνθρώπους τίνυσθον, ὅτις κ᾿ ἐπίορκον ὀμόσσῃ,

271. μάχαιρα, the sacrificial knife,
never mentioned by H. as a weapon, and
not to be confused with the sword, ξίφος

or φάσγανον. See note on Σ 597.
272. dwpro, for this form see Curt.
Vb. ii. 219. It is from delpw (for dFep-

jw, root var, to lift up, Zt. no. 504), and
is the only certain instance in the perf.

. of the development of the e- sound
into the o- sound, which is so common
in the active, unless ἐδήδοται, x 56, is
genuine. For the sense “hung, dangled,”
cf. παρηέρθη, Π 341, and doprip, A 31,
etc

273. This cutting off a lock of hair
from the victims’ heads is called τρίχας
ἀπάρχεσθαι in the parallel pass., T 254 ;
cf. ξ 422, ἀπαρχόμενος κεφαλῆς τρίχας ἐν
πυρὶ βάλλεν. The hair is regarded as ἃ
foretaste of the victim, and was no doubt
a devotion of the whole body to the gods
(see 310). It is not burnt here, be-
cause no fire is used in the oath-sacrifice,
the victims being buried. Every one
of the chieftains takes a portion of the
hair in order to participate in the sacri-
fice.

276. Zed... ἠέλιος, according to the
rule, which is found in Sanskrit also,
that ‘‘where two persons are addressed
connected by re, the second name is put
in the nominative,” H. G. § 164. But
τ 406 is an exception, if the text is
right, γαμβρὸς ἐμὸς θύγατέρ ze. For
the oath compare T 258. Here Zeus is
named the god of Ida, and the Rivers,
which are local divinities, are included,
no doubt because the Trojans are parties.

278. καμόντας used to be explained
‘*those that have passed through the
toil of life,” as though κεκμηκότες, labori-
bus functi; or ‘‘men outworn,” dye-
νηνοί, of the feeble shadows of the dead ;
Nigelsbach, ‘‘those that endured ill in
life” = δειλοὶ βροτοί as opposed to the
happy gods. But Classen explains “ those

that grew weary, succumbed to the toils
of life’ = θανόντες. This best suits the
aor. part. , and is now generally accepted ;
v. Merry on ἃ 476. The phrase recurs
also Ψ 72,w 14. of... τίνυσθον must
mean Ζεύς τε καταχθόνιος καὶ ἑπαινὴ Περ-
σεφόνεια (I 457). We should have ex-
pected the 'Epwves, as in the parallel
passage, T 259, 'Ερινύες αἵ θ᾽ ὑπὸ γαῖαν ἀν-
ὀρώπους τίνυνται, ὅ τίς x’ ἐπίορκον ὁμόσσῃ.

enod., who regarded the dual and plural
as identical, said that the avengers were
Minos, Rhadamanthos, and Aiakos, but
this is certainly not Homeric. And
even if, with some modern philologists,
we hold that the plural was originally
developed from the dual, and "that in
Homer there still are traces of their
primitive identity, we should still have
to read of for αἵ if the Erinyes are to be
brought in. (La Roche and Nauck
would read τίνυσθε, holding that the
change was needlessly made in order to
avoid the hiatus, which is allowable in
the caesura.) Nitzsch, in his note on
Ἃ (p. 184 sqgq.), raises a more serious
question as to this present passage. He
says that the idea of punishment after
death is entirely alien to Homer’s con-
ception of the underworld ; vengeance
for sins is taken by the gods in this life
only. The punishments of Tityos, Tan-
talos, and Sisyphos (λ 576-600) occur in
an interpolated passage. The two oaths
(here and in T) are{the only inconsistent
places; and in T he would take ὑπὸ
γαῖαν with af τε, not with the verb,
**Ye that, dwelling beneath the earth
(for which see I 568), punish men,” a

ssible construction, though a very

arsh one. If this be so, it follows that
καμόντας in this pa cannot be right.
I do not see how the force of these
objections can be either denied or
explained away, and can only leave the
problem unsolved.

104

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Τ' (a)

ὑμεῖς μάρτυροι ἔστε, φυλάσσετε δ᾽ ὅρκια πιστά" 280
εἰ μέν κεν Μενέλαον ᾿Αλέξανδρος καταπέφνῃ,

αὐτὸς ἔπειθ᾽ “Ἑλένην ἐχέτω καὶ κτήματα πάντα,

ἡμεῖς δ᾽ ἐν νήεσσι νεώμεθα ποντοπόροισιν"

εἰ δέ κ᾿ ᾿Αλέξανδρον κτείνῃ ξανθὸς Μενέλαος,

Τρῶας ἔπειθ᾽ “Ελένην καὶ κτήματα πάντ᾽ ἀποδοῦναε, 285
τιμὴν δ᾽ ᾿Αργείοις ἀποτινέμεν, ἣν τιν᾽ ἔοικεν,

ἦ τε καὶ ἐσσομένοισι μετ᾽ ἀνθρώποισι πέληται.

εἰ δ᾽ ἂν ἐμοὶ τιμὴν Πρίαμος ἸΙριάμοιό τε παῖδες

τίνειν οὐκ ἐθέλωσιν ᾿Αλεξάνδροιο πεσόντος,

αὐτὰρ ἐγὼ καὶ ἔπειτα μαχήσομαι εἵνεκα ποινῆς

αὖθι μένων, εἵως κε τέλος πολέμοιο κιχείω.
ν.» \ / 3 a 4 f “
ἢ καὶ ἀπὸ στομάχους ἀρνῶν τάμε νηλέι χαλκῷ.
καὶ τοὺς μὲν κατέθηκεν ἐπὶ χθονὸς ἀσπαίροντας,
θυμοῦ δευομένους" ἀπὸ γὰρ μένος εἵλετο χαλκός"

οἶνον δ᾽ ἐκ κρητῆρος ἀφυσσόμενοι δεπάεσσιν

295

Μ 20Ὸὔ bd a 3 ’

ἔκχεον, 7d εὔχοντο θεοῖς αἰευγενέτῃσιν.

ὧδε δέ τις εἴπεσκεν ᾿Αχαιῶν τε Τρώων τε"

“ Ζεῦ κύδιστε μέγιστε καὶ ἀθάνατοι θεοὶ ἄλλοι,

285. Ἰρῶας ἀποδοῦναι, usually ex-
plained by an ellipse of dére, a very
unscientific resource. It is clearly a
case of ‘‘the infin. for the imperative,”
however we explain that. This is one
of the few cases where this infin. occurs
for an imper. of the 3d person ; in the
2d pers. the subject is put in the nom.,
E 124 θαρσέων νῦν. . . μάχεσθαι, X
259 ὡς δὲ σὺ ῥέζειν. We also have in the
3d pers. ἢ δὲ. . . θεῖναι Z 87-92, but
this is after an interval of several lines.
(In Ψ 247, quoted in H. 6. § 291, λίπησθε
shews that the 2d person is in the
speaker’s mind. ) e must therefore
elther suppose that the accus. is em-
ployed when the 3d pers. is signified,
or, which is not improbable, that Τρῶες
is the right reading here, altered to suit
the more familiar construction. But it
may be remarked that a person directly
addressed is vividly present to the
speaker’s mind as the subject of the verb,
and hence naturally is in the nominative ;
but when he is only spoken of indirectly
in a prayer, he becomes in a sense the
olject of the prayer; thus the Trojans
here are regarded virtually as objects in
relation to the gods of the oath, who are
called upon to be the active parties.

The accus. may thus to some extent be
accounted for, and a certain sense is
given to the ‘‘ellipse of dére.” Cf. also
B 413, H 179, with ἡ 312, ὦ 376 (1st
pers.); and T 258 sqq.

287. πέληται goes closely with μετά,
lit. ‘‘go about among men.” Cf.
κλαγγὴ πέλει οὐρανόθι πρό, Τ' 3; σέο ὃ
ἐκ τάδε πάντα πέλονται͵ N 632; αἶσχος
λώβη τε μετ᾽ ἀνθρώποισι πέλοιτο, σ 225,
where the nouns are subjects, as here,
not predicates. For the pure subj. in
a relative final clause see H. 6. 8
232,

289. Observe the very rare use of οὐ
after εἰ ἄν with subjunctive; the negative
appears to go very closely with the verb,
as οὐκ εἰῶσι, Υ 139. Η. 6. § 316 ad fin.
᾿Αλεξάνδροιο πεσόντος does not seem to
be quite a gen. absolute, though it nearly
passes into one; it depends on τιμήν,
though the connexion is rather loose,
- pay me the price arising from the fall
Oo as

295. ἀφνυσσόμενοι, so Ar.: al. -duevor:
but the pres. (imperf.) participle better
expresses the continued repetition of the
act by many people. ey take the
wine in small cups from the κρητήρ of
269.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Γ (1)

105

e /
ὁππότεροι πρότεροι ὑπὲρ ὅρκια πημήνειαν,

ὧδέ oh ἐγκέφαλος χαμάδις ῥέοι, ὡς ὅδε οἶνος,

900

αὐτῶν καὶ τεκέων, ἄλοχοι δ᾽ ἄλλοισι Sapeiev.”
ὧς ἔφαν, οὐδ᾽ ἄρα πώ σφιν ἐπεκραίαινε Kpoviwv.
τοῖσι δὲ Δαρδανίδης ἸΙρίαμος μετὰ μῦθον ἔειπεν"

“ κέκλυτέ μευ, Τρῶες καὶ ἐυκνήμιδες ᾿Αχαιοί"
ἢ τοι ἐγὼν εἶμι προτὶ Ἴλιον ἠνεμόεσσαν

305

dp, ἐπεὶ οὔ πω TANTOM ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ὁρᾶσθαι
μαρνάμενον φίλον υἱὸν ἀρηιφίλῳ Μενελάῳ"

Ζεὺς μέν πον τό γε οἷδε καὶ ἀθάνατοι θεοὶ ἄλλοι,
ὁπ-ποτέρῳ θανάτοιο τέλος πεπρωμένον ἐστίν."

ἢ ῥα καὶ ἐς δίφρον ἄρνας θέτο ἰσόθεος φώς,

810

ἂν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔβαιν᾽ αὐτός, κατὰ δ᾽ ἡνία τεῖνεν ὀπίσσω"
πὰρ δέ οἱ ᾿Αντήνωρ περικαλλέα βήσετο δίφρον.

\ \ Vv > #¥ wf > /
τὼ μὲν ap ἄψορροι προτὶ ἔϊλιον ἀπονέοντο"

299. ὑπὲρ ὅρκια, by transgressing the
oaths (cf. ὑπερβασίη, 107, and ὑπὲρ
αἷσαν) : πημήνειαν, the object is seen to
be ‘‘the other party,” from A 66,
᾿Αχαιοὺς ὑπὲρ ὅρκια δηλήσασθαι : 80 also
A 236. MSS. here and in A give
ὑπερόρκια as an adv.; but this is nota
likely compound, in spite of the analo
of ὑπέρμορα. The opt. shews that the
infraction of the treaty is regarded as a
purely imaginary case (or possibly there
may be an attraction to the following
opt. ῥέοι, the prayer being the upper-
most thought in the speaker’s mind.
Cf. ws ἀπόλοιτο καὶ ἄλλος ὅτις τοιαῦτά
γε ῥέζοι, a 47 ; and Z 59).

300. The original symbolism of the
libation was merely that of drink
given to the gods to please them, e.g.
H 480. The occasion here suggests a
different thought, which however we
can hardly suppose to have been in-
herent in the fibation at an oath. Cf.
however Liv. i. 24, si prior defexit pub-
lico consilio dolo malo, tu illo die
Iuppiter populum Romanum sic ferito ut
ego hune porcum hic hodie feriam
(quoted by Nag.)

301. αὐτῶν after ogi, as ἃ 75, μοι---
ἀνδρὸς δυστήνοιο. The construction is
common with participles, eg. & 26,
¢ 157 (with M. and R.’s note). (See
H. G. § 240 n, which does not take
sufficient account of these construc-
tions.) For the dat. ἄλλοισι with the
pass. verb, H. G. 8 143 n, 5.

305. On ἠνεμόεσσαν Prof. Virchow

(App. to Schliemann’s Jilios, p. 682)
makes the following comment: ‘‘Our
wooden huts (at Hissarlik) which had been
put up at the foot of the hill, well below
the level of the old city, looked straight
down upon the plain from a height of
at least 60 feet, and the winds blew
about us with such force that we often
felt as if our whole settlement might be
hurled down the precipice.” For ἦνε-
μόεσσσαν we should doubtless read dve-
μόεσσαν, the a being lengthened by the
ictus, as in ἀθάνατος, ἀπονέεσθαι, etc.

306. οὔ πω = of πως, in nowise. The
two forms were of course originally
identical (cf. οὕτω by οὕτως), and their
differentiation is not complete in Homer.
It is only by great violence that the
sense ‘“‘not yet’’ can be brought in.
Cf. also M 270, ¢ 102, etc. (Some would
always read πὼς in this sense.)

310. The taking away of the victims
is strange: the Schol. says ἔθος ἣν τὰ
ἐπὶ τοῖς ὅρκοις γιγνόμενα ἱερεῖα τοὺς μὲν
ἐγχωρίους γῇ περιστέλλειν, τοὺς δὲ ἐπήλυ-
δας εἰς τὴν θάλασσαν ῥίπτειν. This is
probably only a deduction from the
present age and T 267, q.v. Perhaps
the victims were supposed to carry with
them the power of vengeance, and were
kept at hand to watch over the fulfil-
ment of the oath.

311. Observe ἔβαινε here com
with ἔβη 261 and βήσετο 312. It seems
hypercritical to attempt to draw a dis-
tinction here between the two tenses.

313. The schol. on this line is a

106

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Γ (πὸ

Ἕκτωρ δὲ Πριάμοιο πάις καὶ δῖος ᾿Οδυσσεὺς

χῶρον μὲν πρῶτον διεμέτρεον, αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα 815
κλήρους ἐν κυνέῃ χαλκήρεϊ πάλλον ἑλόντες,

ὁππότερος δὴ πρόσθεν ἀφείη χάλκεον ἔγχος.

λαοὶ δ᾽ ἠρήσαντο, θεοῖσι δὲ χεῖρας ἀνέσχον"

ὧδε δέ τις εἴπεσκεν ᾿Αχαιῶν τε Τρώων τε’

“ Ζεῦ πάτερ, Ἴδηθεν μεδέων, κύδιστε μέγιστε,

920

ommotepos τάδε ἔργα μετ᾽ ἀμφοτέροισιν ἔθηκεν,
τὸν δὸς ἀποφθίμενον δῦναι δόμον “Ardos εἴσω,
ἡμῖν δ᾽ αὖ φιλότητα καὶ ὅρκια πιστὰ γενέσθαι."
ὧς ἄρ᾽ ἔφαν, πάλλεν δὲ μέγας κορυθαίολος “Ἑκτωρ

ayy ὁρόων: Πάριος δὲ θοῶς ἐκ κλῆρος ὄρουσεν.

οἱ μὲν ἔπειθ᾽ ἵζοντο κατὰ στίχας, ἦχι ἑκάστου

ἵπποι ἀερσίποδες καὶ ποικίλα τεύχε᾽ ἔκειτο"

αὐτὰρ ὅ γ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ὦμοισιν ἐδύσετο τεύχεα καλὰ

δῖος ᾿Αλέξανδρος, ᾿Ελένης πόσις ἠυκόμοιο.

κνημῖδας μὲν πρῶτα περὶ κνήμῃσιν ἔθηκεν 330
καλάς, ἀργυρέοισιν ἐπισφυρίοις ἀραρυίας"

δεύτερον αὖ θώρηκα περὶ στήθεσσιν ἔδυνεν

οἷο κασιγνήτοιο Λυκάονος, ἥρμοσε δ᾽ αὐτῷ.

delicious specimen of the spirit in which
Porphyrius and his school invented and
solved their ‘‘ Homeric problems.” διὰ
τί χωρίζεται ὁ Ἰρίαμος ; καὶ of μέν φασιν
ὅτι ἵνα ἀφ᾽ ὕψους κρεῖσσον θεωρήσῃ ἀπὸ
τῆς πόλεως τὴν μονομαχίαν, οἱ δὲ, ἵνα
φυλάξη τὰ τείχη. ἄλλοι δὲ τὴν 'Ομηρικὴν
λύσιν προΐσχονται, τὸ “᾿οὕπω τλήσομ᾽
ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ὁρᾶσθαι.᾽᾽ ὅπερ καὶ ἄμεινον.

316. πάλλον, the actual shaking up
of the lots, which is always done by one
person, comes in 324; hence it has been
proposed to read βάλλον from H 176,

ut there is no authority for the change,
which is not necessary. The line is in
fact a formal one, recurring Ψ 861, x
206.

317. ἀφείη seems to represent a de-
liberative subj. of the or. recta. We
might be inclined to read here ἀφείῃ or
addin, but for « 331, πεπαλάχθαι" ἄνωγον
| Os τις τολμήσειεν.

818. Nikanor and two or three MSS.
read ἠρήσαντο θεοῖς, ἰδὲ, but only the
frivolous reason is given that the text
would imply that they were praying
to others than the gods to whom they
lift their hands: ὡς ἑτέροις ἔσονται θεοῖς
ἀνατείνοντες τὰς χεῖρας.

325. Πάριος, the only instance of a
case from this stem except nom. and acc.;
the gen. and dat. are elsewhere always
᾿Αλεξάνδρου -y.

326. ἑκάστου, so Ar.: MSS. ἑκάστῳ.

827. ἔκειτο belongs to τεύχεα only,
both in syntax and sense; with ἵπποι
supply ἦσαν. Cf. K 407 ποῦ δέ οἱ ἔντεα
κεῖται ἀρήια ποῦ δέ οἱ ἵπποι, ᾧ 611, ξ 291,
etc., and see note on E 356.

330 <9. Cf. A 17 sqq., 11131 sqq., T 869
sqq. The six pieces of armour are always
mentioned in the same order, in which
they would naturally be put on, except
that we should expect the helmet to
donned before the shield was taken on
the arm. The ἐπισφύρια were either
plates covering the ankle, attached to
the lower edge of the greaves, or more
probably a clasp fastening them round
the ankle. Unfortunately the monu-
ments of archaic art do not give any
illustration of such clasps, and the greaves
which survive shew no sign of any fast-
ening beyond the natural elasticity of
the metal clasping the leg.

333. Lykaon’s cuirass, because Paris
himself is always light-armed; v. 17.
ἥρμοσε probably trans.; ‘“‘he made it fit

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Τ' ar)

107

ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὥμοισιν βάλετο ξίφος ἀργυρόηλον

χάλκεον, αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα σάκος μέγα τε στιβαρόν τε"

335

κρατὶ δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἰφθίμῳ κυνέην ἐύτυκτον ἔθηκεν
ἵππουριν" δεινὸν δὲ λόφος καθύπερθεν ἔνενεν.
εἵλετο δ᾽ ἄλκιμον ἔγχος, ὅ of παλάμηφιν ἀρήρειν.
ὧς δ᾽ αὔτως Μενέλαος ἀρήιος ἔντε᾽ ἔδυνεν.

οἱ δ᾽ ἐπεὶ οὖν ἑκάτερθεν ὁμίλου θωρήχθησαν,

840

ἐς μέσσον Τρώων καὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν ἐστιχόωντο
δεινὸν δερκόμενοι" θάμβος δ᾽ ἔχεν εἰσορόωντας
Tpads θ᾽ ἱπποδάμους καὶ ἐυκνήμιδας ᾿Αχαιούς.
καί ῥ᾽ ἐγγὺς στήτην διαμετρητῷ ἐνὶ χώρῳ

σείοντ᾽ ἐγχείας, ἀλλήλοισιν κοτέοντε.

345

πρόσθε δ᾽ ᾿Αλέξανδρος προΐει δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος,
καὶ βάλεν ᾿Ατρεΐδαο κατ᾽ ἀσπίδα πάντοσ᾽ ἐίσην"
οὐδ᾽ ἔρρηξεν χαλκός, ἀνεγνάμφθη δέ οἱ αἰχμὴ

ἀσπίδ᾽ ἐνὶ κρατερῇ.

himself.” It may however possibly be
intrans,: there are two other ambiguous
passages, P 210, T 385, g.v. .

8384, There is a variant here, read
by Zenodotos: κρατὶ δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἰφθίμῳ κυνέην
εὔτυκτον ἔθηκεν ἵππουριν, δεινὸν δὲ λόφος
καθύπερθεν ἔνενεν " εἵλετο δ' ἄλκιμον ἔγχος
[8 οἱ παλάμηφιν ἀρήρει] ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὥμοισιν
βάλετ᾽ ἀσπίδα τερσανόεσσαν (ὶ.6. θυσα-
νόεσσαν) The order here is the more
natural, the shield coming last.

336. , simply ‘‘a helmet,”
nothin being im lied as to the material:
v. on Καὶ 335, J. H. 8. iv. p. 298.

340. ἑκάτερθεν, explained by the glos-
saries ἐξ ἑκατέρου μέρους, ἑκατέρωθεν, on
either side of the throng, i.e. either com-
batant retiring to the rear of his own
army.

346. δολιχόσκιον : Autenrieth quotes
from a German review of an edition of
the Makamat-al- Hariri, ‘‘the Arabs
declare that the shadow of the lance is
the longest shadow. Before the first
morning light the Arabian horseman
rides forth, and returns with the last ray
of evening: so in the treeless level of
the desert the shadow of his lance ap

to him all day through as the
longest shadow.” This is obviously less
applicable to the Greek soldier, but still
affords sufficient justification for the
ordinary explanation of the epithet,
which recently been disputed by

ὁ δὲ δεύτερος ὥρνυτο χαλκῷ

Diintzer, who proposes to derive it from
ὄσχος, as = with long shaft. But ὄσχος
(which does not occur in H.) means a
oung shoot, tendril, not a branch, much
ess a shaft.

347. πάντοσ᾽ ἐΐσην, commonly ex-
plained ‘‘circular.” There are supposed
to have been two sorts of shields, one
small and circular, the other large and
oval, to cover the whole body, ἀμφιβρότη
or ποδηνεκής. But this very shield is
called μέγα re στιβαρόν re a few lines
above, and that of Aeneas in T is πάντοσ᾽
élon in 274, ἀμφιβρότη in 281. So N 405,
Idomeneus κρύφθη tm’ ἀσπίδι παντόσ᾽ ἐίσῃ.
It is absurd to suppose that even Homeric
heroes carried a circular shield five feet
or more in diameter. There'is therefore
something to be said for Doderlein’s de-
rivation of ἐίση from root Fié, é-F.d-c-n,
‘*conspicuous from every side,” 7.¢.
brilliant from the shining metal (see
note on A 306). It thus = φαεινός, a
common epithet of the shield ; cf. χαλκῷ
παμφαῖνον = 11, and perhaps πανόψιον
ἔγχος ᾧ 397. Soalso φρένες ἔνδον dion,
λ 887, etc.=the mind bright within a

man.

848. χαλκός, so A with Ar., al.
χαλκόν. The same is the case in the
repetitions of the phrase, H 259, P 44.
H. always uses χαλκός of weapons of
offence, not of the shield; and the
following ol requires an expressed sub-
ject to refer to (La Roche).

108

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ IT (11)

᾿Ατρεΐδης Μενέλαος, ἐπευξάμενος Aut πατρί" 850
“ Ζεῦ ava, δὸς τίσασθαι, ὅ με πρότερος κάκ᾽ ἔοργεν,
δῖον ᾿Αλέξανδρον, καὶ ἐμῇς ὑπὸ χερσὶ δάμασσον,
ὄφρα τις ἐρρίγῃσι καὶ ὀψυγόνων ἀνθρώπων
ξεινοδόκον κακὰ ῥέξαι, ὃ κεν φιλότητα παράσχῃ.

ἢ pa καὶ ἀμπεπαλὼν προΐει δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος, 355
καὶ βάλε Πριαμίδαο κατ᾽ ἀσπίδα πάντοσ᾽ ἐίσην.
διὰ μὲν ἀσπίδος ἦλθε φαεινῆς ὄβριμον ἔγχος,
καὶ διὰ θώρηκος πολυδαιδάλου ἠρήρειστο"
ἀντικρὺς δὲ παραὶ λαπάρην διάμησε χιτῶνα
ἔγχος" ὁ δ᾽ ἐκλίνθη καὶ ἀλεύατο κῆρα μέλαιναν. 860
᾿Ατρεΐδης δὲ ἐρυσσάμενος ξίφος ἀργυρόηλον
πλῆξεν ἀνασχόμενος κόρυθος φάλον-: ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ αὐτῇ
τριχθά τε καὶ τετραχθὰ διατρυφὲν ἔκπεσε χειρός.
᾿Ατρεΐδης δ᾽ ᾧμωξεν ἰδὼν εἰς οὐρανὸν εὐρύν"
“ Ζεῦ πάτερ, οὔ τις σεῖο θεῶν ὀλοώτερος ἄλλος" 365
ἦ τ᾽ ἐφάμην τίσασθαι ᾿Αλέξανδρον κακότητος"
νῦν δέ μοι ἐν χείρεσσιν ἄγη ξίφος, ἐκ δέ μοι ἔγχος

352. Obelized by Ar. on the ground
that it is not necessary, and that Mene-
laos should not apply the word δῖον to
his foe. But the epithet is purely con-
ventional, #% X 393, Z 160, y 266, and
cf. ἀμύμων a 29, For δάμασσον Ar.
read δαμῆναι, which Ameis supports
mainly on the ground that it gives more
force to M.’s words that he should pray
to be himself the conqueror, not a mere
tool in the hands of Zeus.

357. διά, the lengthening of the ¢ is
due to the ictus; cf. Πριαμίδης, συβόσϊα
(A 679), etc. ; see Η. 6. 8Ψ 386.

358. ἠρήρειστο, forced its way. ἐρεί-
dew properly = to press ; the sense ‘‘ to
lean” one thing upon another is second-

ary.

362. ἀνασχόμενος, lifting his hand ;
so X 34 κεφαλὴν δ᾽ 8 ye κόψατο χερσίν |
ὑψόσ᾽ ἀνασχόμενος, and of two boxers
‘squaring up,” Ψ 660 πὺξ μάλ᾽ dvacxo-
μένω, and Ψ 686. φάλον. In J. H. S.
iv. 293 I have endeavoured to prove
that the φάλοι were metal projections,
originally representing the horns and
ears of the wild beast’s scalp, out of
which, as there is reason to believe, the
Greek helmet was originally developed.
These projections took various forms,
sometimes becoming an upright excres-
cence immediately over the forehead,

and such we must suppose to be the
case here; cf. K 258. e explanation
of Buttmann, that the φάλος was the
ridge on the helmet into which the crest
was fixed, fails to explain the epithet
τετράφαλος. Autenrieth thinks that this
may mean a ridge composed of four layers
of metal; but the evidence for this is
weak, and the peculiarity hardly seems
important enough to supply an epithet.
See also Helbig, Hom. Epos, pp. 207 ff.,
where Buttmann’s view is farther, but I
think not sufficiently, defended. MSS.
αὐτῷ : if this is right it ought in Homeric
usage to mean Menelaos and not the
φάλος. But Ar., and according to Schol.
V, al χαριέστεραι καὶ πλείονες (sc. editions,
ἐκδόσεις) read αὐτῇ ; this would mean the
body of the κόρυς as opposed to the φάλος,
and thus removes the ‘ifficulty.

365. For similar chiding of the gods
in momentary ill temper cf. M 164, N
631, v 201; and for ὀλοώτερος = more
baneful, mischievous, ἔβλαψάς μ', éxdepye,
θεῶν ὁλοώτατε πάντων, X 15.

866. τίσασθαι, here Cobet would read
τίσεσθαι (v. on 112), but the fut. sense is
not absolutely necessary ; Menelaos may
mean “1 thought (when I had the
opportunity to give the blow) that I
had gotten my vengeance.”

367. Observe ἄγη beside ἐάγη. Possibly

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I (nr)

109

ἠίχθη παλάμηφιν ἐτώσιον, οὐδ᾽ ἔβαλόν μιν."
φ \ » of. / , e ,
ἡ καὶ ἐπαΐξας κόρυθος λάβεν ἱπποδασείης,

ἕλκε δ᾽ ἐπιστρέψας pet ἐυκνήμιδας ᾿Αχαιούς"

370

wv / 4 e \ e \ e \ ,

ἄγχε δέ μιν πολύκεστος ἱμὰς ἁπαλὴν ὑπὸ δειρήν,

ὅς οἱ ὑπ᾿ ἀνθερεῶνος ὀχεὺς τέτατο τρυφαλείης.

καί νύ κεν εἴρυσσέν τε καὶ ἄσπετον ἤρατο κῦδος,
? LV MD gor “ \ ’ὔ 2 ,

εἰ μὴ ἄρ ὀξὺ νόησε Διὸς θυγάτηρ Αφροδίτη,

ἧ οἱ ῥῆξεν ἱμάντα Boos ἶφι κταμένοιο"

375

κεινὴ δὲ τρυφάλεια ἅμ᾽ ἕσπετο χειρὶ παχείῃ.

\ \ ΝΜ > > » , 2 ‘
τὴν μὲν ἔπειθ ἥρως per ἐυκνήμιδας ᾿Αχαιοὺς
ῥῖψ᾽ ἐπιδινήσας, κόμισαν δ᾽ ἐρίηρες ἑταῖροι.
αὐτὰρ ὁ ἂψ ἐπόρουσε κατακτάμεναι μενεαίνων

ἔγχεϊ χαλκείῳ" τὸν δ᾽ ἐξήρπαξ᾽ ᾿Αφροδίτη

980

ῥεῖα μάλ᾽, ὥς τε θεός, ἐκάλυψε δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἠέρι πολλῇ,
κὰδ δ᾽ elo’ ἐν θαλάμῳ ἐνώδεϊ κηώεντι.

αὐτὴ δ᾽ αὖθ᾽ “Ἑλένην καλέουσ᾽ ἴε" τὴν δὲ κίχανεν
πύργῳ ἐφ᾽ ὑψηλῷ, περὶ δὲ Τρωαὶ ἅλις ἦσαν.

χειρὶ δὲ νεκταρέου ἑανοῦ ἐτίναξε λαβοῦσα,

385

“ ? a / /
γρηὶ δέ μιν ἐικυῖα παλαυγενέι προσέειπεν
/
εἰροκόμῳ, ἥ οἱ Λακεδαίμονι ναιετοώσῃ
ἤσκειν εἴρια καλά, μάλιστα δέ μιν φιλέεσκεν"

the latter word contains a double aug-
ment like the post-Homeric ἑάλων.
Autenrieth (in Ameis, Anhang) suggests
that there may have been a nasalized
form of the root (F)ayy beside Fay,
and that édyn comes from the former
with compensatory lengthening.

368. παλάμ u after ἐκ, cf. οὐρανόθι
πρό, 1. 3, an iY G. § 156. οὐδ᾽ ἔβαλόν
μιν, so MSS.: Ar. οὐδὲ δάμασσα, on the

ound that βάλλω was used only of a

low with a missile.

369. κόρυθος, by the helmet: cf. II
406, ἕλκε δὲ δουρὸς ἑλών.

371. πολύκεστος for πολύ-κεντ-τος “" ὁ
πολυκέντητος " ἐκ δὲ τούτου ὁ ποικίλος
δηλοῦται (leg. δηλονότι) διὰ τὰς padds,”
Ariston. Cf. κεστός of the girdle of
Aphrodite, ΞΞ 214; and ἠκέστας Z 94.

372. τρνφαλείης, properly an adj., sc.
κόρυθος. Generally explained as = havin
a peak pierced for the eyes, 8 sort of fix
vizor. Autenrieth (Dict. s.v.) thinks
it means that the φάλος was pierced with
holes to receive the tufts of which the
crest was formed. But Fick is probably
right in explaining it as = τετρυφάλεια,

where τετρυ- = quadru; the first syllable
being dropped as in τράπεζα = τετράπεζα.

873. For ἤρατο Cobet (M. C. p. 400)
would read ἤρετο, this being the regular
formin H. So also & 510, 2 165, X 393,
5 107, ete.

375. ἴφι «rapévoto, because such
leather would be better than that of an
animal which had died of disease.
‘Hence in Hes. Opp. 541 shoes are
ordered to be made of the hide Bods ἴφι
κταμένοιο" (Faley). Upe looks like an
instrumental of fs = w-s; but the stem
in Greek seems to be ἐν- (plur. Wes). It
may therefore be the neut. of an adject.
ἴφις, occurring else only in the phrase
ἴφια μῆλα.

380. ἔγχεϊ, apparently a second r
(cf. 1. 18), though only one is named i
the arming of Paris, 338: but see A 43.

381. ὥς τε θεός, as being a goddess, as
may be expected of a goddess. Cf. Σ 518.

382. kyn@evre ; apparently from *x#Fos
= incense (καίω), 1.6. fragrant, cf. κηώδης,
Z 483. But the tautology εὐώδει, κηώεντι
has led some to derive it from *xafos=
cavus, as if = ‘* vaulted.”’

388. ἤσκειν, so Ar. apparently; but

110

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I (a)

τῇ μιν ἐεισαμένη προσεφώνεε δῖ᾽ ᾿Αφροδίτη"
“δεῦρ᾽ ἴθ᾽, ᾿Αλέξανδρός σε καλεῖ οἰκόνδε νέεσθαι. . 390
κεῖνος ὅ γ᾽ ἐν θαλάμῳ καὶ δινωτοῖσι λέχεσσιν
κάλλεϊ τε στίλβων καὶ εἵμασιν" οὐδέ κε φαίης
ἀνδρὶ μαχησάμενον τόν γ᾽ ἐλθεῖν, ἀλλὰ χορόνδε
ἔρχεσθ᾽ ἠὲ χοροῖο νέον λήγοντα καθίζξειν.᾽"
ὡς φάτο, τῇ δ᾽ ἄρα θυμὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ὄρινεν" 395
καί p ὡς οὖν ἐνόησε θεᾶς περικαλλέα δειρὴν
στήθεά θ᾽ ἱμερόεντα καὶ ὄμματα μαρμαίροντα,
θάμβησέν τ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔπειτα, ἔπος τ᾽ ἔφατ᾽ ἔκ 7 ὀνόμαξεν-
“ δαιμονίη, τί με ταῦτα λιλαίεαι ἠπεροπεύειν ;
7 πή με προτέρω πολίων ἐὺ ναιομενάων 400

there is no other case in H. of the parag.
yin the contracted form of the third
sing. imperf. It is frequently found,
however, in MSS. in the analogous third
sing. plupf., eg. E 661, 899. But
doubtless the original reading was ἤσκεε
Felina. There is no certain trace of the
F in this root in H., but we know it
existed ; Knos, de Dig. Hom. Ρ 98, Curt.
Et. no. 496. The subject of φιλέεσκεν
is Helen, not γραῦς.

391. κεῖνος, as though pointing to
him; T 344, etc. δινωτοῖσι, cf. τ 56,
κλισίην δινωτὴν ἐλέφαντι καὶ ἀργύρῳ.
Ariston. explains ἤτοι διὰ τὸ τετορνεῦσθαι
(turned in a lathe) τοὺς πόδας, ἢ διὰ τὴν
ἔντασιν τῶν ἱμάντων (ἴ.6. apparently,
that the leathern straps—for which see
y 201— were tightened by twisting or
winding them). But this latter does
not suit the chair in 7, while the idea
of ‘‘turning” is not easily connected
with ivory and silver ornament. In N
407 a shield is ῥινοῖσι Body καὶ vdpom
χαλκῷ | δινωτήν where the circular plates
of the shield are meant. The most
probable explanation of the word here is
*Sadorned with circles or spirals” of
silver or the like, inlaid. This pattern
is of high antiquity, being found e.g. by
Dr. Schliemann at Mykenai in profu-
sion. See the illustrations in Murray,
Hist. Gr. Sculp. pp. 38-40, ‘‘the forms
which most naturally arise from copper
working are spirals and circles, into either
of which a thread of this metal when
released at once casts itself.” The use
of ἀμφιδεδίνηται is similar in 6 405, Ψ
562.

396. Aristarchus rejected 396-418 on

the grounds (1) that the foddess could
not in the person of an old woman have
the outward beauty described in 396-7,
(2) that 406-7 are βλάσφημα, (3) that 414
is εὐτελὴς κατὰ τὴν διάνοιαν, beneath the
dignity of the dess. These argu-
ments are not weighty enough to prevail
against lines which are spirited and
thoroughly Homeric. With regard to
(1) it may be remarked that the goddess
takes a disguise primarily in order to
remain unknown to the bystanders, not
to Helen ; the gods in such cases often
give some sign which reveals them to
those to whom they speak, see N 72,
ἀρίγνωτοι δὲ θεοί wep, where Poseidon
has appeared in the character of Kalchas.

399. For the double acc. with
πεύειν cf. Xen. Anab. v. 7, 6, τοῦτο ὑμᾶς
ἐξαπατῆσαι, ws.

400. πολίων may be a partitive
gen. after wy, but it is more in ac-
cordance with Homeric use to take it
in the vague local sense, lit. ‘‘lead me
any farther on in the region of cities,
whether of Phrygia or Maionia.” These
regions of course are mentioned as being
farther eastward, away from home.

400-405. The punctuation is that of
Lehrs and Ameis. Most editors put
notes of interrogation after ἀνθρώπων and
παρέστης, and a comma after ἄγεσθαι.
But οὕνεκα regularly follows the clause
of which it gives the explanation ; Lehrs
(Ar. p. 57 a) denies that two clauses
correlated by οὔνεκα-τούνεκα occur in
Homer; he would also put a full stop
after ἔργα in N 727-9, g.v. and cf. A 91]-
3. by itself with indic. also appears
not to occur in an interrog. sentence
(Hentze, Anh.) Thus the victory of

ἄξεις ἢ ἢ Φρυγιης ΣΟ Δέσισιτι erste

εἴ τίς τοι καὶ κεῖτ: DAIS ει ται ΣΤΡασα:
οὕνεκα δὴ νῦν Cisry ΔΊΞΞΣΙ ΣΙ Δεεσξι τε
νικήσας ἐθέλει στιπνεῖ τ ἔωξ rest ἔπνεστε
τούνεκα δὴ νῦν ξεῖο 2: ἸΣΣΣΙΊΤΕΙΣΤΙΣ Taco.

ἧσο παρ᾽ αὐτὸν jovcs. ΤεΞ3: ς στιτιες eT
9 Ψ ry te ° 7,
μηδ᾽ ἔτι σοῖσι ποξεῖτ.: Doom is eres! OD ere.

> a - -
ἀλλ αἰεὶ περι ΚΕΙΙΟΣ 9.1: ε2.ὄ - Dt esr
εἰς ὅ κέ σ᾽ 7 ἄλογο: “9..γ.1::1. -

κεῖσε δ᾽ ἐγὼν οὖς εἶμ: τεωετττπιῖ τ eS τ΄

κείνου πορσαν έοισα λει 2°
πᾶσαι μωμήσονται, ἔχπ Σ Sys δε το Tw,

τὴν δὲ χολωσαμένη; τσ ξεύς: FT
“μή μ᾽ ἔρεθε, σχετλιτν, Wye
Tas δέ σ᾽ ἀπεχθήρω, ὡ: γχἴ: ἔστε ὦ: mars.
μέσσῳ δ᾽ ἀμφοτέρων ,ππιττως 2 πος
Τρώων καὶ Aarazr, σ-. 24 ὡς

ὧς ἔφατ᾽, ἔξεισε: 2 Lm os ra
βῆ δὲ KaTacyouer™ E508 sem τς
σιγῇ, πάσας Ce Less wee oye ge

Menelaos is made ἃ reasen fer little oe

that Aphrodite will ἱπετωτ σεται τ τος em oe

take further measures fee ὑπο πὸ oe OL = (te
3 = te, - 9 ee ott we

Helen. As Lehrs says, after tte eens gee,

of the notes of interrugat.co wae. Te -

biur evadit tronet, "
406. All MSS. give driers naamions -- SE

‘renounce the paths οἱ we τσ te Et gta ee
a Schol. of Didyinos 58... tree ws ely Ct
ταῖς ᾿Αρισταρχείοις οὔτε os mun τὰ τν " 7
μετρίων ἐπιφερόμενον Fes re: tsar pum ae 7
ἐν ταῖς ἐκδόσεσιν ἀλλα κε. “ἡ. τυ στο le "
μασιν (the dissertativu: τ 2: S72 oer re mL — a
τες οὕτως ἐκτίθεντα. 1 tt, um eee ὌΝ "7"
ment assertion is tru: : 4 We" | oe anes —
how ἀπόειπε cau het: weer bec egg, - wn. “
accepted by the ving wu τ στρ egy “ew
to guess why Arieweniny sul os we " °
ὃ ry

quoted it in his κί. uw Ze .-
407. ὑποστρέψειας. :--τὦ 4 "΄ ro eww

301, ete. "Ὄλυμπον π᾿. Ὡς
ud quem, H.G.gis . a ᾿ z ete ΄
408. ὀίζνε κακυταν: ~ tere. eee
D: ἐξ, suffer esse: r ind oe “ ow “δ
εἴνεκ᾽ ὀιζύομεν rene Ryan. =) >. "ΟΝ
152, y BUT. - fee” wage ew
409. 6 YO ek αὶ es ee, ae ;
the secon] ciaue . ce 2 gy ‘- ome
But in other jusooayr : cyere ae “ene ΄

4." aa a. “᾿

112

IAIAAOS I (nr)

ai δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ᾿Αλεξάνδροιο δόμον περικαλλέ᾽ ἵκοντο,
ἀμφίπολοι μὲν ἔπειτα θοῶς ἐπὶ ἔργα τράποντο,
ἡ δ᾽ εἰς ὑψόροφον θάλαμον κίε δῖα γυναικῶν.
τῇ δ᾽ ἄρα δίφρον ἑλοῦσα φιλομμειδὴς ᾿Αφροδίτη
ἀντί᾽ ᾿Αλεξάνδροιο θεὰ κατέθηκε φέρουσα" 425
ἔνθα καθῖζ᾽ “Ἑλένη κούρη Διὸς αἰγιόχοιο,
ὄσσε πάλιν κλίνασα, πόσιν δ᾽ ἠνίπαπε μύθῳ᾽
“ἤλυθες ἐκ πολέμου: ὡς ὥφελες αὐτόθ᾽ ὀλέσθαι
ἀνδρὶ δαμεὶς κρατερῷ, ὃς ἐμὸς πρότερος πόσις ἧεν.

ἣ μὲν δὴ πρίν γ᾽ εὔχε᾽ ἀρηιφίλου Μενελάου

480

σῇ τε βίῃ καὶ χερσὶ και ἔγχεϊ φέρτερος εἶναι"
ἀλλ᾽ ἴθι νῦν προκάλεσσαι ἀρηίφιλον Μενέλαον

ἐξαῦτις μαχέσασθαι ἐναντίον.

ἀλλά σ᾽ ἐγώ γε

παύεσθαι κέλομαι, μηδὲ ξανθῷ Μενελάῳ

ἀντίβιον πόλεμον πολεμίζειν ἠδὲ μάχεσθαι

435

bd , / 7 32 e 3 2 A , 99

ἀφραδέως, μή πως τάχ ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ δουρὶ δαμήῃς.
τὴν δὲ Πάρις μύθοισιν ἀμειβόμενος προσέειπεν"

“ μή με, γύναι, χαλεποῖσιν ὀνείδεσι θυμὸν ἔνυπτε.

in his own person. The plur. is used
as = θεοί in general, A 222,2 115, Ψ 595 ;
in T 188 we have the phrase πρὸς δαίμονος
ἐπιορκήσω, and similarly o 261, e 396
(where no god has been specified); and in
all other cases it is used either in the yet
more general sense of “the will of heaven”’
or ‘‘fate” (cf. δαίμονα δώσω, O 166), or
in the metaphor ἐπέσσυτο δαίμονι ἴσος.
See M. and R. on β 134, where however
the singularity of the present passage is
not brought out. If it were not for
the presence of Aphrodite in the follow-
ing lines, it would indeed, by Homeric
usage, be necessary to translate ‘‘ her
destiny, the divine power, led her on,”
as in ἀγάγοι δέ ἑ δαίμων, @ 201.

423-6. Zenodotos rejected these lines,
writing instead “αὐτὴ δ᾽ ἀντίον ἴζεν
᾿Αλεξάνδροιο ἄνακτος᾽᾽ " ἀπρεπὲς γὰρ αὐτῷ
ἐφαίνετο τὸ τῇ Ἑλένῃ τὴν ᾿Αφροδίτην
δίφρον βαστάζειν. ἐπιλέλησται δὲ ὅτι γραῖ
εἴκασται, καὶ ταύτῃ τῇ μορφῇ τὰ προσή-
κοντα ἐπιτηδεύει, Ariston. Cobet has
an amusing chapter on the question of
propriety as it appeared to the Alex-
andrian critics, Afise. Crit. 225 - 289.
(Schol. V quotes τ 34, where Athene
carries a lamp for Odysseus).

427. ὄσσε πάλιν KAlvaca, the aversa
tuetur of Aen. iv. 362. This is a most
instructive piece of Homeric psychology,

shewing the struggle of the weak human
mind against the overpowering will of
the gods. From the outward point of
view, as distinct from the presentation
of such secret springs of action, Helen is
presented to us, as Nagelsbach says, as
the counterpart of Paris,—vacillating
between repentance and love, as he
between sensuality and courage. 482-6
were obelized by Ar. as πεζότεροι καὶ τοῖς
νοήμασι ψνχροὶ καὶ ἀκατάλληλοι (incon-
sistent). But the sudden transition
marked by ἀλλά σ᾽ ἐγώ ye is the key to
the whole passage, as marking the point
at which the unwonted fit of penitence
breaks down, and the old habitual love
resumes its sway ; surely a profoundly
true conception of a woman’s character.

435. ἀντίβιον by Homeric use must
be an adverbial neut., not agreeing with
σέ or πόλεμον.

436. La R. considers that ὅπό goes
with δουρί, αὐτοῦ being simply ‘‘ his,”
comparing ἐμῷ ὑπὸ δουρὶ δαμῆναι, E 658,
etc. But this use οὗ αὐτοῦ as a simple
possess, gen. is very rare (see Π 405),
and it is more natural to construe “ by
him with his spear.”

438. ἐνίπτειν always takes a person as
object elsewhere, except v 17, κραδίην
ἠνίπαπε μυθῷς: The word really means
‘*hurt,” v. B 245.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ TI (ar)

113

νῦν μὲν yap Μενέλαος ἐνίκησεν σὺν ᾿Αθήνῃ,

a 9 4 9 , \ A ’ 3 ες oA
κεῖνον δ᾽ αὗτις ἐγώ" παρὰ γὰρ θεοί εἰσι καὶ ἡμῖν. 440
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε δὴ φιλότητι τραπείομεν εὐνηθέντε"

3 4 4 / > 4 4 > ΓΝ / 3 ’
οὐ γάρ πώ ποτέ μ ὧδέ y ἔρος φρένας ἀμφεκάλυψεν,
οὐδ᾽ ὅτε σε πρῶτον Λακεδαίμονος ἐξ ἐρατεινῆς
ἔπλεον ἁρπάξας ἐν ποντοπόροισι νέεσσιν,

, > 9 , 2 ’ > oan
νήσῳ ὃ ἐν Kpavan ἐμύγην φιλότητι καὶ εὐνῇ, 448
ὥς ceo νῦν ἔραμαι καί με γλυκὺς ἵμερος αἱρεῖ."

e , , [μὴ > ὦ > »
ἢ pa καὶ ἦρχε λέχοσδε κιών: ἅμα δ᾽ elmer ἄκοιτις.

τὼ μὲν ἄρ᾽ ἐν τρητοῖσι κατεύνασθεν λεχέεσσιν,
᾿Ατρεΐδης δ᾽ ἀν᾽ ὅμιλον ἐφοίτα θηρὶ ἐοικώς,
εἴ που ἐσαθρήσειεν ᾿Αλέξανδρον θεοειδέα" 450
’ td # / , a > » ,
ἀλλ᾿ οὔ τις δύνατο Τρώων κλειτῶν τ ἐπικούρων
δεῖξαι ᾿Αλέξανδρον τότ᾽ ἀρηιφίλῳ Μενελάῳ.
οὐ μὲν γὰρ φιλότητί γ᾽ ἐκεύθανον, εἴ τις ἴδοιτο"

440. αὖτις, ‘‘some day,” sc. νικήσω.

441. τραπείομεν, metathesis from rap-
πείομεν, let us take our pleasure. So
= 314, @ 292 λέκτρονδε᾽ τραπείομεν
εὐνηθέντες, where see M. and R. A
converse metath. seems to take place in
τερπικέραυνος, from rpérw. Other in-
stances are abundant, e.g. καρδίη κραδίη,
καρτερός κρατερός, θάρσος θρασύς, etc.

442. ἔρος, MSS. ἔρως, and so & 294;
but we must read ἔρος in & 315, and
as the cases are always formed from
this stem (Epp σ 212, ἔρον passim) there
can be little doubt that Bothe and
Heyne are night in restoring it here after
Eustath. he earliest trace of ἔρως
seems to be the acc. ἔρωτα in the
Homeric Hymn. Merc. 449. γ᾽ is evi-
dently interpolated on account of the
hiatus, which is allowable here.

445. vay according to Pausanias
lay in the Laconic gulf opposite Gytheion.
Others made it Kythera, as the dwelling
of Aphrodite.

448. τρητοῖσι, see M. and R. on a 440,
where it is explained to mean ‘‘morticed,”
on the strength of Plat. Pol. 279, τῶν δὲ
συνθετῶν τὰ μὲν τρητά, τὰ δὲ ἄνευ τρήσεως
σύνδετα. But Plato can hardly be quoted
as a decisive authority on Homeric
archaeology ; and the following passage
from y 196-201 is strongly in favour
either of the interpretation ‘‘ pierced
with holes through which straps were

assed to support the bedding,” or still
better ‘*pierced with holes by which to

I

rivet on the ornamental plates or disks ”’
(v. on δινωτοῖσι, 391) :—

κορμὸν δ᾽ ἐκ ῥίζης προταμὼν ἀμφέξεσα
χαλκῷ

εὖ καὶ ἐπισταμένως, καὶ ἐπὶ στάθμην ἴθυνα,

ἑρμῖν᾽ ἀσκήσας' τέτρηνα δὲ πάντα
τερέτρῳ.

ἐκ δὲ τοῦ ἀρχόμενος λέχος ἕξεον, ὄφρ᾽
ἑτέλεσσα,

δαιδάλλων χρυσῷ τε καὶ ἀργύρῳ ἠδ᾽ ἐλέ-
φαντι"

ἐν δ᾽ ἑτάνυσσ᾽ ἱμάντα βοὸς φοίνικι φαεινόν.

458, εἴ τις ἴδοιτο, a phrase discussed
at length by L. Lange, El, p. 400. He
regards it as one of a class where εἰ
with the opt. expresses a wish which is
‘*naively ” appropriated by the speaker
from the ψυχικὴ διάθεσις of another
person. Here οὐκ ἐκεύθανον involves the
thought ἔμελλον δεῖξαι, with which is
combined the wish ‘‘if one could but .
see him!” The phrase is thus similar
to P 679, ὄσσε φαεινώ | πάντοσε δινείσθην
. . « εἴ πον Νέστορος υἱὸν ἔτι ζώοντα
ἴδοιτο, ‘‘his eyes searched everywhere,
(with the thought) ‘would he could
see.’” It is parallel also with εἴ που
ἐσαθρήσειεν above (450); ‘‘ Atreides
ranged through the host—(with the
thought) would he could set eyes on
A. 1” Under the same category come
all cases where εἰ with opt. implies
‘trying whether” and the like, e.g.
after πειρᾶσθαι T 384, δίζημαι A 88, etc.
This view, which no doubt is right, far-

114 IAIAAOZ I (m1)

ἶσον γάρ σφιν πᾶσιν ἀπήχθετο κηρὶ μελαίνῃ.

τοῖσι δὲ καὶ μετέειπεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων" 456
“ κέκλυτέ μευ, Τρῶες καὶ Δάρδανοι ἠδ᾽ ἐπίκουροι"

νίκη μὲν δὴ φαίνετ᾽ ἀρηιφίλου Μενελάου"

ὑμεῖς δ᾽ ᾿Αργείην “Ελένην καὶ κτήμαθ᾽ ἅμ᾽ αὐτῇ

ἔκδοτε, καὶ τιμὴν ἀποτινέμεν, ἦν τιν᾽ ἔοικεν,

q τε καὶ ἐσσομένοισι per ἀνθρώποισι πέληται.᾽ 460
ὡς ἔφατ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδης, ἐπὶ δ᾽ ἤνεον ἄλλοι ᾿Αχαιοί.

fetched though it may seem, requires for
its full exposition more than can be com-
pressed into a note: the student should
refer to Lange’s original work, which is
well worth the fullest study.

457. φαίνεται, with gen. as we say
‘is declared for M.” The construction

with the gen. is essentially the same as
with adjectives (ἀρίστη φαίνετο βουλή,
te.

etc.)

459. For dworwésey Zen. read ἀπο-
τίνετον, on his theory of ‘‘dual for
plural.” We might easily read ἀποτίνετε,
as the hiatus is ‘‘licitus” in the bucolic
diaeresis ; but see A 20.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ iv.)

115

IAIAAO® Δ.

ὁρκίων σύγχυσις.

᾿Αγαμέμνονος ἐπιπώλησις.

οἱ δὲ θεοὶ πὰρ Ζηνὶ καθήμενοι ἠγορόωντο
χρυσέῳ ἐν δαπέδῳ, μετὰ δέ σφισι πότνια “Ἥβη
νέκταρ ἐῳνοχόει" τοὶ δὲ χρυσέοις δεπάεσσιν
δειδέχατ᾽ ἀλλήλους, Τρώων πόλιν εἰσορόωντες.

Δ

This book falls naturally into three
arts: (i.) the treacherous wounding of

enelaos by Pandaros (1-219); (ii.) the
ἐπιπώλησις, or review of the army by
Agamemnon (220-421) ; (iii.) the begin-
ning of the general engagement (422-
544). The critical difficulties are mostly
external, involving the relation of these
parts to one another and to the general
plan of the poem.

The opening scene in Olympos entirely
ignores the promise of Zeus to Thetis,
and indeed appears to regard the future
course of the war as an open 1 question.
The device by which the general engage-
ment is brought about—a base violation
of the truce at the instigation of the
gods—is strange; the more so because,
though the heinous nature of the offence
is insisted upon at the time, it has no
effect whatever upon the future develo
ment of the story, and is indeed barely
alluded to in a few lines which are them-
selves gravely suspected (see on E 206-8,
H 69, 351, 411). This silence is par-
ticularly strange in the account of the
death of Pandaros (E 286-296), an oc-
casion which would seem imperatively
to demand some allusion to his recent
crime, which so shortly preceded what
we should suppose to be its fitting punish-
ment.

The ἐπιπώλησις also has difficulties of
its own. It comes in as a retarding
episode at a point where the action
seems to demand rapidity ; delay is out

of place at a moment when the Trojans,
face to face with the Greeks, are about,
we should imagine, to follow up their
treacherous stroke by a sudden attack.
The speeches are so prolix as to empha-
size this retardation beyond all measure ;
and the gratuitous insults with which
Agamemnon assails Odysseus and Dio-
medes are out of keeping with his
character, as well as with the services
which the former hero has 80 recently
(B 169 ζ,, 278 7.) rendered to his chief.
On the other hand the strong touches
with which the modesty of Diomedes is
drawn are in the best style, and form
an admirable introduction to his ἀριστεία
in the next book. The words of Aga-
memnon to him (370-400) are also clearly
alluded to in Book 1x. (34-36), so that
the interpolation, if such it be, cannot
be later than that book.

The beginning of the battle is what
we should have expected after the ac-
count of the arming in B; 422, as
Lachmann observed, can follow B 483
or 780-785 without a break of any sort
being discoverable. This was, in my
belief, the actual sequence in one point
of the evolution of the Iliad from the
original germ. The episode of the duel,
I 1-A 222, was inserted in one piece,
and more happily begun than completed.
The ἐπιπώλησις may have been originall
in place before A 422, but this also, 1
am inclined to suppose, was a later
introduction, possibly by the poet of I,
who, though of unsurpassed rhetorical
power and fond of long speeches, was,

116

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ (v.)

αὐτίκ᾽ ἐπειρᾶτο Κρονίδης ἐρεθιζέμεν “Ἥρην 5
κερτομίοις ἐπέεσσι, παραβλήδην ἀγορεύων'
“δοιαὶ μὲν Μενελάῳ ἀρηγό ἰσὶ θεά
μὲν Μενελάῳ ἀρηγόνες εἰσὶ θεάων,
Ἥρη τ᾽ ᾿Αργείη καὶ ᾿Αλαλκομενηὶς ᾿Αθήνη.
ἀλλ᾽ ἢ τοι ταὶ νόσφι καθήμεναι εἰσορόωσαι
τέρπεσθον" τῷ δ᾽ αὖτε φιλομμειδὴς ᾿Αφροδίτη 10
αἰεὶ παρμέμβλωκε καὶ αὐτοῦ κῆρας ἀμύνει,
καὶ νῦν ἐξεσάωσεν ὀιόμενον θανέεσθαι.
ἀλλ᾽ 7 τοι νίκη μὲν ἀρηιφίλου Μενελάου"
ς “ / 4 bd 14 4 Ν
ἡμεῖς δέ φραξώμεθ᾽, ὅπως ἔσται τάδε ἔργα,
ἤ ῥ᾽ αὗτις πόλεμόν τε κακὸν καὶ φύλοπιν αἰνὴν 15
ὄρσομεν, ἣ φιλότητα μετ᾽ ἀμφοτέροισι βάλωμεν.
εἰ δ᾽ αὖ πως τόδε πᾶσι φίλον καὶ ἡδὺ γένοιτο,
ἢ τοι μὲν οἰκέοιτο πόλις Πριάμοιο ἄνακτος,

as we shall again have reason to suspect,
comparatively weak in the art of nar-
rating the episodes by which his speeches
are introduced. |

1. ἠγορόωντο, held assembly, as B 337
παισὶν ἐοικότες ἀγοράασθε: Ar. ἠθροίζοντο,
but it implies debate as well as mere
gathering together.

2. “HB reappears only in E 722, 905,
and the post-homeric passage A 603,
where, as In the later legends, she is the
wife of Herakles.

8. ἐοινοχόει (ἐξοι») is clearly the right
reading, v. A 598: Zenod. évwvoxde,
MSS. ἐῳνοχόει, and so apparently Ar.,
on the analogy of the false form ἑήνδανε.

4, δειδέχατο from δείκνυμαι, v. I 196
δεικνύμενος (H. G. § 24, 3, and Curt.
Vb. ii. 218), “pledging”; apparently a
secondary sense derived from the custom
of pointing to the person whose health
is to be drunk. Cf. δεικανάασθαι, O 86.

6. παραβλήδην, variously explained
‘‘maliciously ’ (with a side meaning) ;
‘“by way of retort” (so Ap. Rhod. ii.
450, seems to have taken it); ‘‘ by way of
invidious comparison”’ between Aphro-
dite and the two goddesses. None of
these is satisfactory; I would suggest
‘““by way of exposing himself to her”
(«drawing her fire” in modern meta-
phor), 1.5. wilfully tempting her to
retort upon himself. is sense of
παραβάλλεσθαι is (with the exception of
the purely literal meaning) the only one
which occurs in H. (see I 322), and re-
mained attached to the word throughout
Greek literature (v. L. and 8. s.¥.)

8. ᾿Αλαλκομενηίς : it is hard to say

whether the local or attributive sense
prevails in this title. Pausanias testifies
to a cultus of Athene at Alalkomenai,
near the Tritonian lake in Boiotia, down
to the times of Sulla; but the word is
evidently also significant, “the guardian”
(we hear also of Ζεὺς ᾿Αλαλκομεν εύς in the
Et. Mag.) Probably the name of the
town was either taken from the title of the
goddess or adapted to it from an older
name similar in form, or was itself the
cause of the adoption of the cultus; a
local adjective being then formed with a
distinct consciousness of its origi
significance. It is very probable that
the goddess ᾿Αθήνη and the town ᾿Αθῆναι
were equall brought into relationshi
by the similarity of name, the adjectiv
form ’A@nvaly offering a further anal

to ᾿Αλαλκομενηίς. So perhaps with the
worship of Apollo λυκηγενής or λύκειος in
Lykia ; see note on 101.

11. παρμέμβλωκε = παρμέμλωκε from
(μ)βλώσκω (μλο = word, Curt. Et. p. 538).
αὐτοῦ, the usual construction of ἀμύνειν
is τί τινι, not twos. But M 402, Ζεὺς
κῆρας ἄμυνεν | παιδὸς ἑοῦ. And the cases
where ἀπό is added are essentially similar,
νεῶν ἄπο λοιγὸν ἀμῦναι, Π 80, ete. H. G.
8 152.

17. αὖ πως, so Ar.: MSS. with Aris-
toph. αὕτως (or atrws). Ar. read πέλοιτο
for γένοιτο.

18. οἰκέοιτο. . . ἄγοιτο, potential o
tatives, but illustrating how the ‘‘ wish.
ing” opt. passes into this sense without
ἄν ; valare, I’ 74, in the mouth of one
who desires peace, is a shade nearer the
pure idea of ‘‘wish.” We exactly ex-

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (rv.)

117

αὗτις δ᾽ ᾿Αργείην Ἑλένην Μενέλαος ἄγοιτο."
ὧς ἔφαθ᾽, αἱ δ' ἐπέμνξαν ᾿Αθηναίη τε καὶ “Hpn- 20
πλησίαι al γ᾽ ἥσθην, κακὰ δὲ Τρώεσσι pedécOnv.
ἢ τοι ᾿Αθηναίη ἀκέων ἦν οὐδέ τι εἶπεν,
σκυξομένη Asi πατρί, χόλος δέ μιν ἄγριος ἥρειν'
Ἥρῃ δ᾽ οὐκ ἔχαδε στῆθος χόλον, ἀλλὰ προσηύδα"

ce

aivorate Kpovidn, ποῖον τὸν μῦθον ἔειπες. 25

πῶς ἐθέλεις ἅλιον θεῖναι πόνον ἠδ᾽ ἀτέλεστον,
ἱδρῶ θ᾽, ὃν ἵδρωσα μόγῳ, καμέτην δέ μοι ἵπποι
λαὸν ἀγειρούσῃ, Ἰ]ριάμῳ κακὰ τοῖό τε παισίν.
ἔρδ᾽- ἀτὰρ οὔ τοι πάντες ἐπαινέομεν θεοὶ ἄλλοι."
τὴν δὲ μέγ᾽ ὀχθήσας προσέφη νεφεληγερέτα Ζεύς" 80
“δαιμονίη, τί νύ σε IIpiapos ἸΠΙριάμοιό τε παῖδες
τόσσα κακὰ ῥέξουσιν, ὅ τ’ ἀσπερχὲς μενεαίνεις
Ἴλιον ἐξαλαπάξαι, ἐυκτίμενον πτολίεθρον ;
εἰ δὲ σύ γ᾽ εἰσελθοῦσα πύλας καὶ τείχεα μακρὰ
ὠμὸν βεβρώθοις ἸΠρίαμον ἹΠριάμοιό τε παῖδας 35
ἄλλους τε Τρῶας, τότε Kev χόλον ἐξακέσαιο.
ἔρξον, ὅπως ἐθέλεις" μὴ τοῦτό γε νεῖκος ὀπίσσω
σοὶ καὶ ἐμοὶ μέγ᾽ ἔρισμα μετ᾽ ἀμφοτέροισι γένηται.
ἄλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω, σὺ δ᾽ ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῇσιν'
ὁππότε κεν καὶ ἐγὼ μεμαὼς πόλιν ἐξαλαπάξαι 40
τὴν ἐθέλω, ὅθι τοι φίλοι ἀνέρες ἐγγεγάασιν,

press the ambiguity in translating ‘‘ then
may the city of P. be a habitation.”
Zeus is here not expressing a wish, but
only putting as a supposition the result
of his second alternative in 1. 16 (L.
Lange, EI, p. 371)

20. μύζειν, to ‘‘mutter,” ‘‘ murmur,”
a family of words derived onomatopoetic-
ally from an imitation of the sound of
the voice when the lips are closed.

22. ἀκέων is indeclinable here and Θ
459, and @ 89 ἀκέων δαίνυσθε καθήμενοι.
Elsewhere it is always declined like a
participle, and it is hard to see what
else it can be. Of course dxéovo’ could
easily be restored here, but there is
nothing to explain how such a corrup-
tion could have originated.

28. κακά, accusative ‘‘in apposition
to the sentence,” as it is generally called ;
i.e. “expressing the sum or result of an
action” (H. 6. § 136, 4); sol. 207, ὅν τις
ἔβαλεν. .. τῷ μὲν κλέος ἄμμι δὲ πέν-
θος : Ὦ 78ὅ, ῥίψει χειρὸς ἑλὼν ἀπὸ πύργου,
λυγρὸν ὄλεθρον. The construction is only

found after a verb governing an accus.
“of the external object” either expressed
or implied, and may be regarded as an
extension of the construction ῥέζειν τινά
Tt,
29. πάντες is the emphatic word. It
is indifferent as to the sense whether we
take ἐπαινέομεν as fut. or pres.; but it
must be the latter according to Cobet’s
canon, that in verbs where ε is not
changed to ἡ, if the antepenult. is Zong,
the fut. takes o, but where the ante-

nult. is short the σ always disappears
ite C. p. 307).

32. 8 re implies “848 I must conclude
they do, because,” etc. dovrepxés, appa-
rently for ἄνσπερχες, σπέρχω ‘‘ to press,”
lit. hastening, pressing on (so Curt. ΕἾ.
no. 176 ὃ, and Clemm in C, St. viii. 95).

35. For similar expressions v. X 347,
Q 212, and the words of Xenophon to
his soldiers, Anab. iv. 8, 14, τούτους, ἥν
πως δυνώμεθα, καὶ ὠμοὺς δεῖ καταφαγεῖν.
βεβρώθοις seems to be a perf. in -θα like
ἐγρηγόρθασι, v. H. 6. 8 22, 7 ὃ.

118

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ (tv.)

μή τι διατρίβειν τὸν ἐμὸν χόλον, ἀλλά μ᾽ ἐᾶσαι'
καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ σοὶ δῶκα ἑκὼν ἀέκοντί γε θυμῷ.
ai γὰρ ὑπ’ ἠελίῳ τε καὶ οὐρανῷ ἀστερόεντι
ναιετάουσι πόληες ἐπιχθονίων ἀνθρώπων, 45
τάων μοι περὶ κῆρι τιέσκετο Ἴλιος ἱρὴ
καὶ Πρίαμος καὶ λαὸς ἐυμμελίω ἸΠριάμοιο"
οὐ γάρ μοί ποτε βωμὸς ἐδεύετο δαυτὸς ἐίσης,
λοιβῆς τε κνίσης τε" τὸ γὰρ λάχομεν γέρας ἡμεῖς."
τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα βοῶπις πότνια “Ἡρη: 50
“ἣ τοι ἐμοὶ τρεῖς μὲν πολὺ φίλταταί εἰσι πόληες,
“Apyos τε Σπάρτη τε καὶ εὐρυάγνια Μυκήνη"
τὰς διαπέρσαι, ὅτ᾽ ἄν τοι ἀπέχθωνται περὶ κῆρι"
τάων οὔ τοι ἐγὼ πρόσθ᾽ ἵσταμαι οὐδὲ μεγαίρω.
εἴ περ γὰρ φθονέω τε καὶ οὐκ εἰῶ διαπέρσαι, 55
οὐκ ἀνύω φθονέουσ᾽, ἐπεὶ ἦ πολὺ φέρτερός ἐσσι.

48, ἑκὼν ἀέκοντί γε θυμῷ, not under
compulsion, but yet not of my own lik-
ing, as the Schol. explain: πολλὰ παρὰ
προαίρεσιν τῆς ψνχῆς πράττομεν πρὸς τὸ
κεχαρισμένον τῶν πέλας.

45. ναιετάουσι, ‘‘have their place,”
see B 626.

46. περὶ κῆρι: on this disputed phrase
see H. G. § 186, 2, where the evidence
is fully given. Mr. Monro takes the
dat. as a locative, ‘‘in the heart”; and
with much hesitation περί as = exceed-
ingly ; ‘‘ wepl κῆρι may have been meant
in the literal sense,—the feeling (fear,
anger, etc.) being thought of as filling
or covering the heart. On the whole,
however, the evidence is against this
view—unless indeed we explain περὶ
κῆρι as a traditional phrase used without
a distinct sense of its original meaning.”
The sense “exceedingly” is obviously
suitable here, but less so in 53.

47. évppeattw, “with good spear of
ash,” τοῦ εὖ ποτε τῇ μελίᾳ χρησαμένου,
πολεμικοῦ, Schol.; a somewhat strange
epithet to apply to Priam, who is not
represented as a warrior in Homer (ex-
cept 188); the word is also applied to
the sons of Euphorbos in P (9, 23, 59),
and to Peisistratos, y 400.

58. In this line many have seen an
allusion—the only allusion in H.—to
the Dorian conquest. But this is very
doubtful, for that invasion made Sparta
more prominent, and certainly did not

ruin Argos; while we have positive
evidence that Mykene was only destroyed
by the Argives so late as 468 B.c. (Diod.
Sic. xi. 65. Mr. Mahaffy has however
thrown some doubt upon this date ; see
Schliemann’s Tiryns, pp. 35-44). For
the almost complete absence of allusion
to the Dorians see on B 658.

55. φθονέξω and εἰῶ are taken by
Ameis as subj. ; he compares a 167, οὐδέ
τις ἥμιν | θαλπωρή, εἴ πέρ ris ἐπιχθονίων
ἀνθρώπων | φῇσιν ἐλεύσεσθαι, but this is
essentially different, as it refers to a
repetition of anticipated cases: so A 261,
el περ γάρ τ᾽ ἄλλοι. . . δαιτρὸν πίνωσιν.
Hera is here stating a fact which she
admits, in order to base another state-
ment upon it, and for this the indice. is
the proper mood; cf. H 117, εἴ rep ἀδειής
τ᾽ ἐστί. It is also more natural to find
ov after εἰ with the indic. than the subj. :
H. G. § 216, and τσ. on B 849, A 160,
though it is true that we do find εἰ od
with subj., 6.0. Υ 189, οὐκ εἰἶῶσι. In the
next line &véw may be either pres. or
fut. 55-6 were obelized by Ar., ὅτι τὴν
χάριν ἀναλύουσιν, εἰ καὶ ph προδεηθεὶς
δύναται τοῦτ᾽ ἔχειν, t.e. Hera is not doin
Zeus a favour if Zeus can work his will
without asking her. But this pround is
quite insufficient ; the turn of thought
is natural enough, ‘‘ have your way ;

ou know I cannot prevent it.” The
in the next line also clearly refers to 56,
‘*though you are more mighty, yet I
am not to count for nothing.”

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A rv.)

119

ἀλλὰ χρὴ Kal ἐμὸν θέμεναι πόνον οὐκ ἀτέλεστον"

καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ θεός εἰμι, γένος δέ μοι ἔνθεν, ὅθεν σοί,

καί με πρεσβυτάτην τέκετο Kpovos ἀγκυλομήτης,
ἀμφότερον, γενεῇ τε καὶ οὕνεκα σὴ παράκοιτις 60
κέκλημαι, σὺ δὲ πᾶσι μετ᾽ ἀθανάτοισιν ἀνάσσεις.

ἀλλ᾽ ἣ τοι μὲν ταῦθ᾽ ὑποείξομεν ἀλλήλοισιν,

σοὶ μὲν ἐγώ, σὺ δ᾽ ἐμοί: ἐπὶ δ᾽ ἔψονται θεοὶ ἄλλοι

> 4
ἀθάνατοι.

σὺ δὲ θᾶσσον ᾿Αθηναίῃ ἐπιτεῖλαι

ἐλθεῖν ἐς Τρώων καὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν φύλοπιν αἰνήν, 65
πειρᾶν δ᾽, ὥς κε Τρῶες ὑπερκύδαντας ᾿Αχαιοὺς
ἄρξωσι πρότεροι ὑπὲρ ὅρκια δηλήσασθαι.᾽
ὧς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησε πατὴρ ἀνδρῶν τε θεῶν τε"
αὐτίκ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίην ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
“αἶψα μάλ᾽ ἐς στρατὸν ἐλθὲ μετὰ Τρῶας καὶ ᾿Αχαιούς, 70
πειρᾶν δ᾽, ὥς κε Τρῶες ὑπερκύδαντας ᾿Αχαιοὺς
ἄρξωσι πρότεροι ὑπὲρ ὅρκια δηλήσασθαι.᾽"
ὧς εἰπὼν ὥτρυνε πάρος μεμαυῖαν ᾿Αθήνην,
βῆ δὲ κατ᾽ Οὐλύμποιο καρήνων ἀίξασα.

οἷον δ᾽ ἀστέρα ἧκε Κρόνου πάις ἀγκυλομήτεω, 75
59. πρεσβυτάτην, ‘‘senior” in dignity, unlikely for an hiatus, so that the
not age; so πρέσβα always (generally of conjecture is almost certainly right.

Hera), and other words from the same
stem, when the connotation of honour
or respect is rarely quite absent. Cf.
also γέρων, seigneur, as titles. Curt.
(Zt. p. 479) connects with Lat. pris-cus,
and refers it to a stem *wpes = Skt.
pra-jas, a compar. of pra = προ, so that
the idea of priority is fundamental,
whether it be of place or time.

60. ἀμφότερον, νυ. I' 179. γενεῇ, pa-
rentage, not necessarily age. σὺ δέ is
added paratactically to the second clause
only, to emphasize the importance im-
plied in the word of. Ameis compares
Z 126-7.

66. ὑπερκύδαντας, probably an adj.
like ἀκάμας ἀδάμας, from stem «vd (not
κυδεσὴ like xvd-pés. It does not occur
anywhere else.

67. See Τ' 299. It is clear here that
ὅρκια is governed by ὑπέρ, not by δηλή-
σασθαι. Here also MSS. give ὑπερόρκια.

75. ἀστέρα ἧκε, so MSS.: Bekker after
Bentley dorép’ Exe. The hiatus has
been explained as due to the fact that ἧκε
originally began with j, but this is very
uncertain, and the place, just before the
caesura κατὰ τρίτον τροχαῖον, is the most

See B 87. It is not easy to make out
exactly what the people saw and mar-
velled at (79); the metaphor clearly
indicates more than the mere swiftness
of descent, and implies at least a visible
flash, though we cannot suppose that
Athene actually changed herself into a
‘*fire-ball” or meteorite; but on the
other hand Homeric gods are not in the
habit of appearing to multitudes in their
own person. Of course the sparks in 77
are merely part of the description of such
a meteor, and do not belong to the com-
parison. very similar is P
547 sqqg., which describes the descent of
the same goddess clothed in a cloud like
a rainbow, spread by Zeus τέρας ἔμμεναι
ἢ πολέμοιο ἢ καὶ χειμῶνος. 82 shows
that the people did not know what had
happened, but only expected some divine
interference in a decisive way, whether
for good or ill. The edd. compare Hym.
Apoll. 362—

ἔνθ᾽ ἐκ νηὸς ὄρουσεν ἄναξ ἑκάεργος ᾿Απόλλων
ἀστέρι εἰδόμενος μέσῳ ἤματι τοῦ δ᾽ ἀπὸ

πολλαὶ
σπινθαρίδες πωτῶντο, σέλας δ᾽ εἰς οὐρανὸν
tev,

120

IAIAAOS Δ (rv.)

a ΜΝ , 2 aA > ἡ a
ἢ vauTnot τέρας ἠὲ στρατῷ εὐρέι λαῶν,
λαμπρόν: τοῦ δέ τε πολλοὶ ἀπὸ σπινθῆρες ἵενται"
τῷ ἐικυῖ᾽ ἤιξεν ἐπὶ χθόνα ἸΙ]αλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη,
κὰδ δ᾽ op’ ἐς μέσσον: θάμβος δ᾽ ἔχεν εἰσορόωντας

a / > e 4 3 4 3 4
Tpads θ᾽ ἱπποδάμους καὶ ἐυκνήμιδας ᾿Αχαιούς" 80
ὧδε δέ τις εἴπεσκεν ἰδὼν ἐς πλησίον ἄλλον"
“ἢ ῥ᾽ αὖτις πόλεμός τε κακὸς καὶ φύλοπις αἰνὴ
» A “ 393. 9 / /
ἔσσεται, ἢ φιλότητα μετ᾽ ἀμφοτέροισι τίθησιν
Ζεύς, ὅς τ᾽ ἀνθρώπων ταμίης πολέμοιο τέτυκται."

φ ΝΜ ν 3 A ,

ὡς apa τις εἴπεσκεν ᾿Αχαιῶν τε Tpwwy Te. 8ὅ
ἡ δ᾽ ἀνδρὶ ἰκέλη Τρώων κατεδύσεθ᾽ ὅμιλον,
Λαοδόκῳ ᾿Αντηνορίδῃ, κρατερῷ αἰχμητῇ,
Πάνδαρον ἀντίθεον διξημένη, εἴ που ἐφεύροι.
εὗρε Λυκάονος υἱὸν ἀμύμονά τε κρατερόν τε
e 4/9 3 / \ / J 4
éotaot: ἀμφὶ δέ μιν Kpatepal στίχες ἀσπιστάων 90
λαῶν, οἵ οἱ ἕποντο ἀπ᾽ Αἰσήποιο ῥοάων.
ἀγχοῦ δ᾽ ἱσταμένη ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
“ἢ ῥά νύ μοί τι πίθοιο, Λυκάονος υἱὲ δαΐφρον;
τλαίης κεν Μενελάῳ ἔπι προέμεν ταχὺν ἰόν,

a 4 4 ’ a bd
πᾶσι δέ κε Τρώεσσι χάριν καὶ κῦδος ἄροιο, 95
4 ’ \ 4 3 4 A
ἐκ πάντων δὲ μάλιστα ᾿Αλεξάνδρῳ βασιλῆι.

A \ 4 9 3 A ,
τοῦ κεν δὴ πάμπρωτα Tap ἀγλαὰ δῶρα φέροιο,

where however Apollo is actually meta-
morphosed into a ball of fire.

84 = T 224. For the genitive
ἀνθρώπων cf. A 28, τέρας ἀνθρώπων, a
portent in the eyes of men. It would
thus seem to depend on ταμίης, not
πολέμοιο. But cf. Εἰ 332, ἀνδρῶν πόλεμος.

86. Observe the long: οὗ ἀνδρί : this
is probably the primitive quantity of the
dat. sing. v. H. 6. 8 373.

88, εἴ πον ἐφεύροι, a wish-clause ex-
pressing the thought of the goddess,
‘‘would she might find him” (see on r
453). Zenod. was offended at the doubt
which he thought was expressed as to
the certainty of the goddess finding
him, and wrote εὗρε δὲ τόνδε, omittin
89 altogether. εὗρε 18 commonly foun
beginning a sentence asyndetically, e.g.
B 169, A 327, ΒΕ 169, 355, A 197, 473.
For 91 cf. B 825.

93. The question here implies a wish,
the opt. being potential; lit. ‘‘ might
you not listen to me?” This wish is
made a condition of the following clause,
and is thus exactly like ef μοί τι πίθοιο,

H 28. It thus illustrates the origin
of conditional sentences from the primi-
tive form of a wish followed by a clause
dependent on it (L. Lange, EI, p. 381).
We have the same form in H 48 and with
the addition of xe, o 857, but οὐκ ἄν is
more usual, Καὶ 204, I 52, x 182.

94. ἔπι προέμεν Ar., ἐπιπροέμεν MSS.
Cf. x 8, ἐπ’ ᾿Αντινόῳ ἰθύνετος Ameis con-
siders that by connecting ἐπί with the
subst. the idea of hostile intent is more
vividly brought out: the double com-
pound ἐπιπροιέναι is used in the simple
sense of ‘‘sending forth in a certain
direction,” I 520, P 708, Σ 58, ο 299.

95. Τρώεσσι, at the hands of the Tro-
jans, apparently a locative sense (H. G.
§ 145, 4). So I 303 ἢ γάρ κέν ode
μάλα μέγα κῦδος ἄροιο, X 217 οἴσεσθαι
μέγα κῦδος ᾿Αχαιοῖσιν, compared with
κλέος ἐσθλὸν ἐνὶ Τρώεσσιν ἀρέσθαι, P 16.

97. The simplest construction οὗ παρά
is with rod, but the rhythm is in favour
of joining the participle with the verb,
as the line is otherwise divided into two
equal halves (for which however Fasi

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (tv.)

121

ai κεν ἴδῃ Μενέλαον ἀρήιον ᾿Ατρέος υἱὸν
σῷ βέλεϊ δμηθέντα πυρῆς ἐπιβάντ᾽ ἀλεγεινῆς.

ΝΜ
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγ᾽ dlatevcov Μενελάου κυδαλίμοιο,

100

εὔχεο δ᾽ ᾿Απόλλωνε λυκηγενέι κλυτοτόξῳ
ἀρνῶν πρωτογόνων ῥέξειν κλειτὴν ἑκατόμβην
οἴκαδε νοστήσας ἱερῆς εἰς ἄστυ Ζελείης.᾽

ὧς φάτ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίη, τῷ δὲ φρένας ἄφρονι πεῖθεν"

> 4 / 4
αὐτίκ ἐσύλα τόξον ἐύξοον ἰξάλον αἰγὸς

105

3 Ψ es > 32. δ ς{ / /,

ἀγρίου, dv ῥά ποτ᾽ αὐτὸς ὑπὸ στέρνοιο τυχήσας

πέτρης ἐκβαίνοντα, δεδεγμένος ἐν προδοκῇσιν,

βεβλήκει πρὸς στῆθος" ὁ δ᾽ ὕπτιος ἔμπεσε πέτρῃ.
a / 3 a ς ’ 4

τοῦ κέρα ἐκ κεφαλῆς ἑκκαιδεκάδωρα πεφύκειν"

Ν 3 , ’ bd “
καὶ τὰ μὲν ἀσκήσας κεραοξόος ἤραρε τέκτων,

compares B 39, θήσειν γὰρ ἔτ᾽ ἔμελλεν
ἐπ᾽ ἄλγεά τε στοναχάς τε).

99. ἐπιβάντα, cf. I 546, πολλοὺς δὲ
πυρῆς ἐπέβησ᾽ ἀλεγεινῆς. The expression
is very natural, even as used of the dead.

101. Av . This and similar epi-
thets of aaNet at least a double con.
notation to the Greeks, that of Lykia and
of wolves. To these etymologists have
added a third, that of light ; Apollo being
the sun-god. (This explanation is as
old as Macrobius ; see Sat. I. xvii. 36-41,
pp. 96-7. J. A. P.) The two former
meanings were inextricably interwoven
in ancient mythology. Apollo is wor-
shipped as λυκοκτόνος (cf. Σμινθεύς, A 39)
and also in Lykia. Modern anthropo-
logists are inclined to make a wolf-god
of him ; ‘‘according to one myth, Leto
the mother of Apollo was changed into
a wolf, thus he was wolf-born (Aelian,
H. A. x. 26)” (A. Lang). For the possible
interaction of such local and mytho-
logical titles see on 1. 8 sup. (If the
name of Lykia is implied, it is here the
Trojan Lykia beneath Ida, not the more
famous country of Sarpedon, B 824.)

102. oyévev, apparently “‘ first-
lings,” the first-born of the year, the
πρόγονοι of « 221. The word however
suggests the Hebrew custom of offering
the first offspring of every animal.

105. ἐσύλα, “stripped ” the bow of
its covering ; in 116 “stripped the lid
off the quiver,” the object in one case
being the thing uncovered, in the other
the covering itself. The two uses of
καλύπτειν are exactly similar. For the
bow-case (ywpurés) see ¢ 54. It is not

110

clear if ἱξάλον is an adj. (of the wild
goat, cf. ξ 50, lovOddos ἀγρίου alyds) or a
specific name, asin βοῦς ταῦρος, etc. It is
pretty certain that the animal meant is
the ibex or steinbock, an animal still
found in the Alps, though it seems
doubtful if: it continues to inhabit
Greece (Buchholz, H. R., I, ii. 168).
It was however in historical times an
inhabitant of Crete; and Milchhofer
has published (Arch. Zeit. 1880, p. 213)
a bronze plate from that island repre-
senting two huntsmen, one of whom
bears on his neck an ibex, while the
other carries a bow evidently made of
ibex-horns ; it clearly shows the rings,
see next note. ὑπὸ στέρνοιο x σας
is added parenthetically, and ὅν is
overned Wy βεβλήκει, for τυχεῖν is not
found in H. with an acc. of the object
hit, as in later writers. Cf. E 579, M
189, 394, etc.

109. κέρα, perhaps rather xépa’ for
xépaa or κέραε. ἑκκαιδεκάδωρα, δῶρον
καλεῖται ὁ παλαιστής, 6 ἐστιν ἔκτασις τῶν
τῆς χειρὸς τεσσάρων δακτύλων, 1.6. ἃ. palm,
four fingers’ breadth, orabout threeinches.
The horns would then be four feet long,
which appears to be beyond the recorded
size of the horns of the ibex (but see
Paley’s note); hence either H. is ex-
aggerating, or he means that the united
length of the two was sixteen palms.
δῶρον in this sense seems not to recur ;
some have suggested that it may mean
the rings on the horns, by which the
animal’s age is known. For derivation
see Curt. Ht. no. 367.

110. ἀσκήσας is used of any artificial
preparation, ¢.g. wool I’ 388, a mixing-

122

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ (1v.)

πᾶν δ᾽ εὖ λειήνας χρυσέην ἐπέθηκε κορώνην.

καὶ τὸ μὲν εὖ κατέθηκε τανυσσάμενος ποτὶ γαίῃ
ἀγκλίνας" πρόσθεν δὲ σάκεα σχέθον ἐσθλοὶ ἑταῖροι,
μὴ πρὶν ἀναΐξειαν ἀρήιοι υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν,

πρὶν βλῆσθαι Μενέλαον ἀρήιον ᾿Ατρέος υἱόν.

11ὅ

αὐτὰρ ὁ σύλα πῶμα φαρέτρης, ἐκ δ᾽ ἕλετ᾽ ἰὸν
9 ΝᾺ ’ ‘4 > 4 4
ἀβλῆτα πτερόεντα, μελαινέων ἕρμ ὀδυνάων"
αἶψα δ᾽ ἐπὶ νευρῇ κατεκόσμεε πικρὸν ὀιστόν,
εὔχετο δ᾽ ᾿Απόλλωνι λυκηγενέι κλυτοτόξῳ

9 a / es 4 e 4
ἄρνων ππρωτογόνων ῥέξειν κλειτὴν ἑκατομβην

120

οἴκαδε νοστήσας ἱερῆς εἰς ἄστυ Ζελείης.

ἕλκε δ᾽ ὁμοῦ γλυφίδας τε λαβὼν καὶ νεῦρα βόεια"
νευρὴν μὲν μαζῷ πέλασεν, τόξῳ δὲ σίδηρον.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ δὴ κυκλοτερὲς μέγα τόξον ἔτεινεν,

λέγξε βιός, νευρὴ δὲ μέγ᾽ ἴαχεν, ἄλτο δ᾽ ὀιστὸς

125

ὀξυβελής, καθ᾽ ὅμιλον ἐπιπτέσθαι μενεαίνων.
οὐδὲ σέθεν, Μενέλαε, θεοὶ μάκαρες λελάθοντο
ἀθάνατοι, πρώτη δὲ Διὸς θυγάτηρ ἀγελείη,

bowl Ψ 743, etc. pape, joined with
a handle (πῆχυς) in the middle. The
κορώνη is the tip with a notch, into
which the loop is slipped in stringing.
At the other end there must have been
another κορώνη into which the string
was permanently fastened, or else a hole
through the horn.

112. εὖ κατέθηκε, laid it carefully
down, in order to take out the arrow.
ποτὶ γαίῃ ἀγκλίνας seem to go together,
‘*having strung it by resting the lower
end upon the ground” against his foot.
ἀγκλίνας is thus subordinate to τανυσ-
σάμενος.

117. ἀβλῆτα, never before shot. ἕρμα,
a well-known cruz. Various untenable
explanations have been given, the favour-
ite is that which compares it with ἕρμα
πόληος, ‘*a pillar of the state” (IIT 549,
etc. ), as if ‘‘a support, bearer, of pangs,”
on which pangs rest. But Curt., £¢. no.
502, connects it with ὁρμή, Skt. sar to
run, flow, sérmas streaming ; so that it
may literally be translated ‘‘a spring,
source, of woes,” 1.6. that which sets
pangs flowing, the later ἀφ-ορμ-ή. This
appears satisfactory, but for the fact
that ἕρμα is not an uncommon word in
other senses, and that there is no other
kindred form to ὁρμή which has the ε.
The German editors compare Tell’s words

to his arrow, in Schiller, ‘‘komm du
hervor, du Bringer bittrer Schmerzen.”
Another explanation is given by Ameis,
who takes ἕρμα as = chain, or pendant ;
he thinks it is used of the arrow regarded
as hanging from the hand at the moment
it is lifted from the quiver. But this,
like all the explanations except that of
Curtius, is far too artificial.

122. γλυφίδας, the notch: so ¢ 419,
ἕλκεν veuphy γλυφίδας re. The plural
possibly indicates that in addition to
the notch at the end which received the
string there was another in the side of
the shaft, made so as to give the fingers
a hold in drawing the arrow back (so
Am. Anh. to ¢ 419, after Riistow and
Kochly). only here = νευρή,
bowstring made of a bull’s sinew; see
151 for a different sense.

123. σίδηρον, the point of the arrow,
which was fastened to the shaft by a
thong, 151.

124. κυκλοτερές is predicate, bent into
a (semi) circle. Zenod. inverted the
order of this line and 123, but not well.

125. λῆγξε seems to be an imitative
word : it does not occur again in Greek.
Notice the personification of the weapons,
laxev, dro, μενεαίνων.

128. πρώτη, as if an affirmative had
preceded, ‘‘remembered,” instead of

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A tv.)

123

34 4 ΄ A 3 \ ΝΜ
ἥ τοι πρόσθε στᾶσα βέλος ἐχεπευκὲς ἄμυνεν.

ς Ν , Ν 3 Ν 4 e Ψ 7
ἡ δὲ τόσον μὲν EEPYEV απὸ χροὸς, WS OTE LNTHP

130

παιδὸς ἐέργῃ μυῖαν, ὅθ᾽ ἡδέι λέξεται ὕπνῳ"
> \ 3 oy Ψ “Ὁ .] ΄
αὐτὴ δ αὖτ᾽ ἴθυνεν, ὅθε ζωστῆρος ὀχῆες
4 4 “ ” 4
χρύσειοι σύνεχον Kal διπλόος ἤντετο θώρηξ.
ἐν δ᾽ ἔπεσε ζωστῆρι ἀρηρότι πικρὸς ὀιστός"

διὰ μὲν ἂρ ζωστῆρος ἐλήλατο δαιδαλέοιο,

18ὅ

καὶ διὰ θώρηκος πολυδαιδάλου ἠρήρειστο

μίτρης θ᾽, ἣν ἐφόρειν ἔρυμα χροός, ἕρκος ἀκόντων,
ἥ οἱ πλεῖστον ἔρυτο" διαπρὸ δὲ εἴσατο καὶ τῆς,
ἀκρότατον δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὀιστὸς ἐπέγραψε χρόα φωτός"

αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἔρρεεν αἷμα κελαινεφὲς ἐξ ὠτειλῆς.

‘*forgat not.” ἀγελείη, ‘she who leads
the spoil” (ἄγω, λεία) as goddess of
forays. This traditional interpretation
is supported by the epithet Anjiris, κ
460. The word is used only of Athene.

129. ἐχεπευκές, lit. ‘‘having sharp-
ness” (πυκ as pung-o, etc.: Curt. Fé. no.
100), like ἐχέφρων. For these ‘‘ object-
ive” compounds v. H. G. § 126.

130. τόσον, ‘‘just a little,” see on X
822, Ψ 454. The word is not correlative
with ws, for the point of the simile is
the watchful affection, not the distance to
which the arrow or the fly is driven away.

131. λέξεται, subj., root Aex.

132. For this couplet see on T 414,
and J. H. S. iv. p. 79. The arrow
lights on the very point where the
armour is thickest; the two plates of
the cuirass overlap at the side, and are
held together by the belt clasped over
them, while the upper edge of the
‘‘mitra” (137) inside reaches as high
as this, being fastened round the waist.

vrero, either ‘‘met the shot” or ‘‘ met
the belt.”

135-6. Cf. Τ' 357-8.

137. μίτρη, apparently a metal girdle
worn round the waist and protecting the
lower part of the abdomen, where the
breastplate, which was rather short, did
not cover it. It is a piece of archaic
and even pre-hellenic armour; it has
been found in Euboea, but most ex-
amples come from the oldest tombs in
Italy. (This explanation, from Helbig,
H. E. p. 200, seems satisfactory ; I had
originally regarded it as a leathern apron
or ‘‘taslet,” set with plates of metal,
J. H. 8. iv. p. 75; but this does not
adequately account for the phrase τὴν

140

χαλκῆες κάμον ἄνδρες, 216.) ἔρυμα, so
Ar.: cf. Xen. Cyr. iv. 8, 9, θώρακας
ἐρύματα σωμάτων. But Aristoph. and
Zenod. read ἔλυμα, ‘‘oldver efAupa” (ἃ
wrap, covering, ¢ 179) Didym.; and
as this form does not recur it is likely
to be the original reading altered to the
familiar ἔρυμα: there is no obvious
reason for the contrary change.

188, ἔρντο with dat. like ἀμύνειν τινί
(7), but there is no other instance of
this construction. We find the acc. of
the person N 555 Νέστορος υἱὸν ἔρυτο, of
the thing ἢ δ᾽ οὐκ ἔγχος ἔρυτο E 538,
etc. ; without an object expressed ἀλλ᾽
Ἥφαιστος ἔρυτο E 23 (La RK.) Here we
may supply ὀιστόν as object. εἴσατο : this
form, with the fut. εἴσομαι, occurs sixteen
times in Homer. Of these seven show
signs of an initial consonant (ἐπιείσατο,
éeloaro, etc.); four are doubtful, as the
bucolic caesura may account for the
hiatus, as here; two are indifferent, as
the word begins the line; and only three
(N 90, Q2 462, o 213) reject the consonant.
Hence Ahrens (Bettrdge, p. 112) separates
these forms from εἶμι (root z-) and refers
them to the Skt. root vi-, to go. Curtius
(Et. p. 581) prefers to see in these facts
the effect of a false analogy with the
similar forms from root Fd, but this
appears ἃ less probable explanation.

139. For ἄρ᾽ ὀιστός Zenod. read dpa
χαλκός, which Ar. rejected on the ground
that the point of the arrow was of iron
(123). Ar. also obelized 140, because
ὠτειλή ought to mean a wound given
not by a shot, but by a thrust or cut,
to which senses the verb οὐτάζω is
limited. So also 149. This however
is surely hypercritical.

124

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ ιν.)

ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε τίς 7 ἐλέφαντα γυνὴ φοίνικι μιήνῃ
Myovis ἠὲ Κάειρα, παρήιον ἔμμεναι ἵππων'

A > 3 , A A 3 4
κεῖται δ᾽ ἐν θαλάμῳ, πολέες TE μιν ἠρήσαντο
ἱππῆες φορέειν, βασιλῆι δὲ κεῖται ἄγαλμα,

ἀμφότερον, κόσμος θ᾽ ἵππῳ ἐλατῆρί τε κῦδος"

145

τοῖοί τοι, Μενέλαε, μιάνθην αἵματι μηροὶ

εὐφυέες κνῆμαί τε ἰδὲ σφυρὰ κάλ᾽ ὑπένερθεν.
ῥίγησεν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔπειτα ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων,

ὡς εἶδεν μέλαν αἷμα καταρρέον ἐξ ὠτειλῆς"

ῥίγησεν δὲ καὶ αὐτὸς ἀρηίφιίλος Μενέλαος.

150

ς ἴω ’ WwW 4 ἃ 4

ὡς δὲ ἴδεν νεῦρόν τε καὶ ὄγκους ἐκτὸς ἐοντας,

Ν , e @ \ 4 ὶ 4θ 3 / θ

ἄψορρον ot θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ὡγερθη.

τοῖς δὲ βαρὺ στενάχων μετέφη κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων,
χειρὸς ἔχων Μενέλαον" ἐπεστενάχοντο δ᾽ ἑταῖροι"

A ’ 4 ΦΨ )}ν
“φίλε κασίγνητε, θάνατόν νύ τοι pki ἔταμνον,

155

οἷον προστήσας πρὸ ᾿Αχαιῶν Τρωσὶ μάχεσθαι"

as σ᾽ ἔβαλον Τρῶες, κατὰ δ᾽ ὅρκια πιστὰ πάτησαν.
3 / Ψ UA ν 4 9 [οὶ

οὐ μέν πως ἅλιον πέλει ὅρκιον αἷμά τε ἀρνῶν

σπονδαί τ᾽’ ἄκρητοι καὶ δεξιαί, ἧς ἐπέπιθμεν.

141. μιήνῃ, imitated by Verg. den.
xii. 67—
‘‘Indum sanguineo veluti violaverit ostro
Si quis ebur.”’

So φθείρω is used of mixing colours.

142. ἵππων, so Ar. and MSS.: Bekk.
ἵππῳ. This was perhaps the reading of
Aristoph. ; but the Schol. (of Didymos) is
corrupt, and possibly we ought to ascribe
ἵπποιν, not ἵππῳ, to him ; the dual suits
the Homeric use of horses in pairs rather
than in threes or fours.

143. θαλάμῳ, of the treasure chamber,
B 337, Z 288, etc.

145. ἐλατῆρι in H. is used only of the
driver in a chariot race, A 702, Ψ 369 ;
the connotation of the word is thus very
appropriate to an ornament which would
be used for purposes of display rather
than of warfare.

146. μιάνθην, an isolated form, ‘‘ in
all probability the regular 3d dual of
a simple non-thematic aor. of μιααίνω, for
ἐ-μιάν-σθην (like πεφάνθαι tor πεφάνσθαι) ”
H. G. App. p. 320 (so Buttmann).
Curtius however (Vd. ii. 822) doubts
this, and prefers to write μέανθεν (or
μιάνθεν ?) with Ahrens, and to regard
the scansion as a relic of the original
length of the final syllable (from -evr).

Of this other traces are found in the
Doric accentuation of the 3d pL, e.g.
ἐλέγον (V0. i. 73).

151. νεῦρον, by which the base of the
tip was ‘‘whipped” to the shaft.
barbs (uncos): there were probably three
such, the point having three edges:
Helbig, H. ᾿ Ῥ. 245: υ. ὀνστῷ τριγλώχινσι
E 393, A 507. Only the actual point
has penetrated the flesh, the rest of the
tip remains in the armour.

155. φίλε, a trochee, as ΕἸ 359, 308,
and so φίλαι, giraro. If φίλος is for
(σ)φε-ιλος (from stem ofe, suus, etc.), as
appears to be the case, the lengthening
is accounted for by the contraction.
(Curtius, in δέ. vi. p. 430.) But the
ictus would be a sufficient explanation, as
in the case of διά. θάνατον, the acc. is
parallel to οὔ τι ψεῦδος ἐμὰς ἄτας κατέλεξας
I 11ὅ, ταῦτά τοι. . . ἀληθείην κατέλεξα
ἡ 297, where it expresses an attribute
of the action, and is thus a case of
the ‘‘accusative of the internal object”
(H. G. § 136 (2)).

157. ὧς = ὅτι οὕτως ; this is of course
really a case of parataxis; ‘‘how the
Trojans have smitten thee!” Cf. Z 109.

158. ὅρκιον, sing. only here, ‘‘an
oath - sacrifice” generically. 159 = B
341,

TATAAO® A (rtv.)

125

el περ γάρ τε καὶ αὐτίκ᾽ ᾿Ολύμπιος οὐκ ἐτέλεσσεν, 160
ΝΜ \ » \ A 4 4 b) /
ἔκ TE καὶ ὀψὲ τελεῖ, σύν TE μεγάλῳ ἀπέτισαν,
\ A A / ,
σὺν σφῇσιν κεφαλῇσι γυναιξί τε καὶ τεκέεσσιν.
εὖ γὰρ ἐγὼ τόδε οἶδα κατὰ φρένα καὶ κατὰ θυμόν'
ἔσσεται ἦμαρ, ὅτ᾽ ἄν ποτ᾽ ὀλώλῃ ἵλιος ἱρὴ
καὶ Πρίαμος καὶ λαὸς ἐυμμελίω Πριάμοιο, 165
Ζεὺς δέ σφι Κρονίδης ὑψίζυγος, αἰθέρι ναίων,
αὐτὸς ἐπισσείῃσιν ἐρεμνὴν αὐγίδα πᾶσιν

a > 9 4 4
τῆσδ᾽ ἀπάτης KOTEWD.

\ \ 4 > > “
TA μὲν ἔσσεται οὐκ ἀτέλεστα"

ἀλλά μοι αἰνὸν ἄχος σέθεν ἔσσεται, ὦ Μενέλαε,
Ν ’ \ / > 4 4 "»
αἴ κε θάνῃς καὶ πότμον ἀναπλήσῃς βιότοιο. 170
, , “ e + .
καί κεν ἐλέγχιστος πολυδίψιον ΓΑργος ἱκοίμην
αὐτίκα γὰρ μνήσονται ᾽Αχαιοὶ πατρίδος αἴης"

160. εἴ... οὐκ. This is clearly a
case like O 162, T 129, Ω 296, ete.,
where the negative does not coalesce
with the verb into a negative word, but
applies to the whole sentence. The use
of οὐκ with the indic. seems to be primi-
tive, and only to have been ousted by μή
through analogy. The use of ef with the
indic. is to place a statement in the form
of a supposition merely to the intellect,
i.e. without any indication of wish or
purpose on the part of the speaker ;
whereas μή appears originally to have
indicated a “mood” in the strictest
sense, 1.6. the active putting aside of a
thought (prohibition) ; so that εἰ μή with
the indic. was at first impossible. We
find μή with the indic. without εἰ in the

hrase μὴ ὥφελον, and also O 41, T 261
ἢ), K 880, (ΗΕ. G. § 358) where the
speaker not only denies a fact, but
repudiates the thought of it: a categori-
cal expression not suited for hypothetical
clauses. (See the notes there.) H. G.
8ξ 316, 328 (4), 359 c. In the latter §
the rule is given that ‘‘ with εἰ and the
indicative οὐ is used when the clause
with εἰ precedes the principal clause,”
except in « 410. The custom is probably
due to the fact that this is the older
order, and the more primitive expression
of thought, and is thus associated with
the older construction ; εἰ μή with indic.
is a use which grew up later by analogy,
and was employed in the more artificial
order of ideas.

161. τε, Bekk. conj. δέ; but this is
probably a case of the primitive use of
Te... τε to express mere correlation,
not conjunction, precisely as in the

similar sentence in A 81, q.v. (see von
Christ’s dissertation on the particle re,
Munich, 1880). It might be referred
also to the gnomic use of re, Η. G. 8
332, but it is hardly possible to separate
the re in the apodosis from that in the
protasis. The conjunction of the present
τελεῖ with the gnomic aor. ἀπέτισαν is
not unnatural. The subject to ἀπέτισαν
is general, ‘‘ transgressors”’; but, Zenod.
read τίσουσιν, and made it refer to the
Trojans. (The Schol. says he read
τελέσει also, but this must only mean
that he took τελεῖ as a future, while Ar.
held it to be a present.)

163-5 = Z 448-450. Some critics con-
sider the lines interpolated here, but
the supposition is quite tuitous.,
Appian says that Scipio, at the sight of
the ruins of Carthage, used these words
with reference to Rome (La R.) For
the construction of 164 cf. © 373, The
subjunctive expresses confident predic-
tion, and “ the use of ἄν gives definiteness
to the prediction, as though a particular
time were contemplated.” H. G. § 289,
1 ὁ.
166. ὑψίζνγος ἡ μεταφορὰ ἀπὸ τῶν ἐν
ναυσὶ ζυγῶν, ἐφ᾽ ὧν καθέζονται ol ἐρέσσον-
τες, Schol. A.

170. πότμον, so Ar.: MSS. μοῖραν,
cf. A 263 πότμον ἀναπλήσαντες, Θ 34
κακὸν οἶτον ἀναπλήσαντες, O 132 κακὰ
πολλὰ ἀναπ., ε 207 κήδεα. We use
precisely the same metaphor, ‘‘to fulfil
one’s destiny.”

171. πολυδίψιον ; this epithet caused
some trouble to the old commentators,
as Argos was a well-watered land (and
hence lrwoBérov), They were inclined

126

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ Av.)

κὰδ δέ κεν εὐχωλὴν Πριάμῳ καὶ Τρωσὶ λίποιμεν
᾿Αργείην "Ἑλένην" σέο δ᾽ ὀστέα πύσει ἄρουρα

κειμένου ἐν Τροίῃ ἀτελευτήτῳ ἐπὶ ἔργῳ.

175

καί κέ τις ὧδ᾽ ἐρέει Τρώων ὑπερηνορεόντων,
τύμβῳ ἐπιθρώσκων Μενελάου κυδαλίμοιο"

“αἴθ᾽ οὕτως ἐπὶ πᾶσι χόλον τελέσει᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνων,
ὡς καὶ νῦν ἅλιον στρατὸν ἤγαγεν ἐνθάδ᾽ ᾿Αχαιῶν,

καὶ δὴ ἔβη οἰκόνδε φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν

180

σὺν κεινῇσιν νηυσί, λιπὼν ἀγαθὸν Μενέλαον.

ὧς ποτέ τις ἐρέει" τότε μοι χάνοι εὐρεῖα χθών."
τὸν δ᾽ ἐπιθαρσύνων προσέφη ξανθὸς Μενέλαος"

“ θάρσει, μηδέ τί πω δειδίσσεο λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν.

οὐκ ἐν καιρίῳ ὀξὺ πάγη βέλος, ἀλλὰ πάροιθεν

185

3
εἰρύσατο ζωστήρ τε παναίολος ἠδ ὑπένερθεν

to explain it πολυπόθητον, much thirsted
after, or to read πολνίψιον = destructive
(so Strabo), διὰ rods πολέμους. Some

referred however to explain it by a
egend (found also in a fragment of
Hesiod) that Argos was waterless till
Danaos came with his daughters ; and
that Poseidon or Athene provided it
with wells. With this explanation we
must be content, supposing it to refer
to the introduction of some system of
irrigation.

178. See B 160.

175. ἀτελευτήτῳ ἐπὶ ἔργῳ, so π 111,
ἀνηνύστῳ ἐπὶ ἔργῳ, and 178 below, ἐπὶ
πᾶσι ‘*in all cases.” This use of ἐπὶ is
more common in Attic, 6.0. ἐπ᾽ εὐπραξίᾳ
μέμνησθέ μον, Soph. O. C. 1554, ἐπ’
ἀρρήτοις λόγοις ‘‘ with words unsaid,”
Eur. Jon. 228 ἐπ’ doddxros μήλοις
(Paley). ἐπ᾽ dpwyy, Ψ 574, is similar.

178. ave, whatever its derivation,
gives much the same idea as our “ Would
to God,” 1.6. a sort of hopeless despairing
wish. Thus its use here, in a phrase
which really expresses a triumphant
taunt, intensely emphasizes the bitter
irony of the imaginary words (L. Lange,
EI 343).

184. πω = πως, v. Τ' 806,

185. καιρίῳ, ἃ deadly spot. The sense
of xalpos is quite clear in H.; it is
always used in the phrase (τὸ) καίριον as
here (Θ 84, 326, A 439%); but the tra-
ditional derivation from καιρός appears
highly unsatisfactory. In the first place
neither καιρός nor any other derivative

occurs in H. ; in the second, a transition
from ‘‘opportune” to ‘‘fatal” seems
uite alien from the directness of Homeric

. Indeed even ‘‘ opportunity ”
is not the original inal signification of καιρός,
for in Hesiod, Opp. 692, and Theognis,
401, where it makes its first appearance,
it means only ‘‘due proportion,” in the
proverb καιρὸς δ᾽ ἐπὶ πᾶσιν Aporos. These
two considerations taken together are to
me convincing; for the transition of
meaning, though not quite incredible in
itself, could be excused only if the word
were quite familiar in its primitive use.
We need not go far for a more satisfactory
etymology. The exact sense required is
given by the word κήρ (Curt. Et. no. 58,

. 148), **Skt. kar to kill, kéras death-

low.” Homer himself supplies us with
the negative adj. in ἀκήριος, “unharmed,”
μ. 98, ν 828. Possibly therefore we
ought in H. to write κήῤιον, not καίριον,
the word being confused with the adjec-
tive xalptos = timely only in later Greek.
Indeed were it not for a single
which possibly stands in the way (ov γὰρ
és καιρὸν τυπεὶς ἐτύγχανε, Eur. «πάν.
1120), κήριος might be written for καίριος,
I believe, at least in all the tragedians
and Pindar, whenever it occurs in the
sense “deadly.”

πάροιθεν in temporal sense ‘‘ before it

got so far.” Others take it locally, with
ζωστήρ, *‘the belt, etc. in front of (ie.
protecting) my flesh.” It does not stand
In opposition to ὑπένερθεν, which is added
independently, as in the phrase πόδες καὶ
χεῖρες ὕπερθεν ; this is clear from 216.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ rv.)

127

ζῶμά te καὶ μίτρη, THY χαλκῆες κάμον ἄνδρες."
τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων'
“ αἷ γὰρ δὴ οὕτως εἴη, φίλος ὦ Μενέλαε"

ἕλκος δ᾽ ἰητὴρ ἐπιμάσσεται ἠδ᾽ ἐπιθήσει

190

φάρμαχ᾽, & κεν παύσῃσι μελαινάων ὀδυνάων."

ἢ καὶ Ταλθύβιον θεῖον κήρυκα προσηύδα"
“ Ταλθύβι᾽, rte τάχιστα Μαχάονα δεῦρο κάλεσσον,
far ᾿Ασκληπιοῦ υἱὸν ἀμύμονος inTipos,

ὄφρα ἴδῃ Μενέλαον ἀρήιον ᾿Ατρέος υἱόν,

195

ὅν τις ὀνστεύσας ἔβαλεν τόξων ἐὺ εἰδώς,
Τρώων ἢ Λυκίων, τῷ μὲν κλέος, ἄμμε δὲ πένθος."
Φ Ww 9 ΦΩΣ ¥ φ fo! 3 ’ 3 ’
ὧς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἄρα οἱ κῆρυξ ἀπίθησεν ἀκούσας,
A > 2) \ > a ’
βῆ δ᾽ ἰέναι κατὰ λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων

παπταίνων ἥρωα Μαχάονα.

τὸν δὲ νόησεν 200

᾿ἑσταότ'" ἀμφὶ δέ μιν κρατεραὶ στίχες ἀσπιστάων
λαῶν, οἵ οἱ ἕποντο Τρίκης ἐξ ἱπποβότοιο.

ἀγχοῦ δ᾽ ἱστάμενος ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"

“ 800°, ᾿Ασκληπιάδη, καλέει κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων,

ὄφρα ἴδῃ Μενέλαον ἀρήιον ἀρχὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν,

187. The archaic Greek cuirass, unlike
that of the classical period, was finished
off at the bottom by a projecting rim,
which formed a “waist” holding in its
place the belt ({worfp). This waist is the
ζῶμα, ‘‘the part girt down,” the proper
correlative of the form ζωστήρ. e thus
see how it is that in the enumeration of
the different layers of the armour here
as compared with 135-137 ζῶμα, the

art, takes the place of @wpnt, the whole.

or a fall discussion of the question see
J. H. S. iv. 78, and also Helbig, H. E.
201-203, where the same conclusion is
arrived at. Aristarchos seems to have
held the same opinion, but the tradi-
tional explanation makes ζῶμα the pend-
ent fringe of strips of leather (πτερύγιον),
which, tho h common in classical times,
is quite unknown in archaic armour,
and moreover does not suit the present

191. With παύσῃσι we must of course
supply σε as object; the constr. παύειν
τινά τινος occurs in B 595, etc.

194. and υἱὸν in apposition as ᾧ
546, cf. φ 26 φῶθ' ἹΗρακλῆα, ὃ 247 φωτὶ
δέκτῃ, the latter of which shows
clearly that the addition of φώς does
not imply anything like “manly” or

205

‘Sheroic.” ἀνήρ is used in just the same
way, cf. ἄνδρα Bujopa A 92, E 649; and
80 δῶρον ἀνδρὸς “Exropos, Soph. 4. 817.

It is needless to say that Pausanias (2,
26) is wrong in taking it to mean
‘‘*human son” as opposed to his divine

father. See on B 731.

195-7 were marked by Ar. with “obelos
and asterisk,” as being wrongly inter-

lated here from 205-7 infra. This

owever is not likely.

197. The Lykians are doubtless here
named as the chief allies of the Trojans,
Sarpedon’s army, not the followers of
Pandaros from Zeleia. κλέος, acc. ‘‘in
apposition with the sentence,” v. 1. 28.

204. Spero, 7.¢. ὄρ-σο, from the non-
sigmatic aor. "ὠρόμην ; while ὄρσευ
264 is ὄρσ-εν, from the sigmatic aor.
*dpabunv ; cf. λέξεο by λέξο.

205. ἴδῃ, so best MSS. and Ar.: vulg.
ἴδῃς, which certainly seems more natural
after the act. in 195. Possibly this was
one reason why Ar. condemned 198,
ἀρχὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν, al. ᾿Ατρέος υἱόν as 195;
the MSS. are very i larly divided,
only two of La Roche’s giving ἀρχὸν ’Ax.
i th places, one giving “Arpéos υἱόν
twice, and the rest varying.

128

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ (rv.)

ὅν τις ὀνστεύσας ἔβαλεν τόξων ἐὺ εἰδώς,
Τρώων ἢ Λυκίων, τῷ μὲν κλέος, ἄμμι δὲ πένθος."

φ 4 “a > \ 4 4

ὧς φάτο, τῷ δ᾽ apa θυμὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ὄρινεν"
βὰν δ᾽ ἰέναι καθ᾽ ὅμιλον ἀνὰ στρατὸν εὐρὺν ᾿Αχαιῶν.

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δή ῥ᾽ ἵκανον, ὅθι ξανθὸς Μενέλαος

210

/ ’ > A 9 ’ 54 ΝΜ
βλήμενος ἦν, περὶ δ᾽ αὐτὸν ἀγηγέραθ᾽ ὅσσοι ἄριστοι
4 ᾽ e ᾽ 4 ’ tA 3 , 4
κυκλόσ᾽, ὁ ὃ ἐν μέσσοισι παρίστατο ἰσόθεος φώς,
αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἐκ ζωστῆρος ἀρηρότος ἕλκεν ὀιστόν"
ἮΝ > 4 ,ὔ ’ὔ ” > / ¥
τοῦ ὃ ἐξελκομένοιο πάλιν ἄγεν ὀξέες ὄγκοι.

λῦσε δέ οἱ ζωστῆρα παναίολον ἠδ᾽ ὑπένερθεν

215

ζῶμά τε καὶ μίτρην, THY χαλκῆες κάμον ἄνδρες.
? 3 Ν “4᾽ Κὶ \ 3 f
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ ἴδεν ἕλκος, ὅθ᾽ ἔμπεσε πικρὸς ὀιστός,
> 594 ,ὔ > > w 39" ν᾿ , LAND)
alu éxpulnoas ἐπ᾿ ap ἤπια φάρμακα εἰδὼς
πάσσε, τά οἵ ποτε πατρὶ φίλα φρονέων πόρε Χείρων.

ὄφρα τοὶ ἀμφεπένοντο βοὴν ἀγαθὸν Μενέλαον,

220

τόφρα δ᾽ ἐπὶ Τρώων στίχες ἤλυθον ἀσπιστάων"
e > 4 ’ 2 / \ 4
οἱ δ αὗτις κατὰ τεύχε ἔδυν, μνήσαντο δὲ χάρμης.
ἔνθ᾽ οὐκ ἂν βρίζοντα ἴδοις ᾿Αγαμέμνονα δῖον
> , 3 > OQ) > 3524 ἢ ,
οὐδὲ καταπτώσσοντ οὐδ οὐκ ἐθέλοντα μάχεσθαι,

ἀλλὰ μάλα σπεύδοντα μάχην ἐς κυδιάνειραν.

212. For κυκλόσ᾽ Ar. strangely read
κύκλος a8 = κύκλος γενόμενοι, Comparing
ἀγρόμενοι πᾶς δῆμος, T 166. But, as
Herodianus remarks, this is a quite in-
sufficient analogy, as κύκλος is not a
noun of multitude like δῆμος. He there-
fore supported Nikias and Ptolemy of
Askalon in reading xux\éo’. Cf. P 392.
ἰσόθεος φώς is more naturally taken to
mean Machaon than Menelaos: παρίστατο
as usual signifying ‘‘came up,” and the
apodosis beginning with ὁ δέ.

214. πάλιν may be taken with ἐξελ-
κομένοιο, ‘‘drawn back the way it had
entered”; or with ἄγεν, ‘‘ were broken
backwards.” The barbs of course stick
in the hard armour. They have to be
cut out of the flesh in the case of EKury-
pylos, A 844.

219. of... πατρί, as P 196, & οἱ θεοὶ οὐρα-
vluves | πατρὶ φίλῳ ἔπορον. Cheiron is
mentioned again as having taught medi-
cine to Peleus in A 832, and as having
given him the ‘‘ Pelian spear,” II 143,
T 390, but none of the other legends
about him are alluded to by Homer.

222. χάρμης, generally explained ‘‘the
battle-joy,” and this is supported by N

225

82, χάρμῃ γηθόσυνοι τήν opw θεὸς ἔμβαλε
θυμῷ. But it is very remarkable that
Homer never represents his heroes as
taking any delight in battle, except by
the direct interposition of a god, as in
the above passage, B 453, A 13. On the
contrary, he lavishes all epithets of hatred
upon war, λυγρός, πολυδάκρυος, δυσηλεγής,
δυσηχής, alvés, etc., and in Εἰ 891 (A
177) fondness for battle appears as a
severe reproach. It seems therefore most
unlikely that he should have made one
of his commonest names for it out of
a word which originally meant ‘‘ joy,”
but which has entirely lost its connota-
tion except in a single passage. Curtius
therefore (Zt. no. 185) would recur to
the primitive meaning of root ghar, and
explain it as ‘‘ the glow, burning flame”
of battle, like dats from dalw; compare
the expression μάρναντο δέμας πυρὸς αἰθο-
μένοιο. We could then explain N 82 as
meaning “the glow, the fire, which the
god had put in them.” (For another
explanation see Mr. Postgate in Amer.
Journal of Philology, iii. 337.)

223. οὐκ ἂν ἴδοις expresses potentiality
in the past, like of xe φαίης Τ' 398, A
429, etc.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ (ιν.

129

4 \ \ ¥ \ eo a
ἵππους μὲν yap ἔασε Kal ἅρματα ποικίλα χαλκῷ"
καὶ τοὺς μὲν θεράπων ἀπάνευθ᾽ ἔχε φυσιόωντας
Εὐρυμέδων vids ἸΙ]τολεμαίου ἸΠειραΐδαο,

A λα, rr 9 7 rAX , e / /
τῷ μάλα πόλλ ἐπέτελλε παρισχέμεν, ὁππότε KEV μιν

γυῖα λάβῃ κάματος πολέας διὰ κοιρανέοντα"

290

αὐτὰρ ὁ πεζὸς ἐὼν ἐπεπωλεῖτο στίχας ἀνδρῶν.

καί ῥ᾽ ods μὲν σπεύδοντας ἴδοι Δαναῶν ταχυπώλων,
τοὺς μάλα θαρσύνεσκε παριστάμενος ἐπέεσσιν'
“᾿Αργεῖοι, μή πώ τι μεθίετε θούριδος ἀλκῆς"

3 \ 3 ἤ \ \ Μ᾿ > )ῶ
οὐ γὰρ ἐπὶ ψευδέσσι πατὴρ Ζεὺς ἔσσετ᾽ ἀρωγὸς.

235

3
ἀλλ᾽ οἵ περ πρότεροι ὑπὲρ ὅρκια δηλήσαντο,
τῶν ἦ τοι αὐτῶν τέρενα χρόα γῦπες ἔδονται,
ς a 9 2» 9 ἢ 4 ’
ἡμεῖς αὖτ᾽ ἀλόχους τε φίλας καὶ νήπια τέκνα
Ν ᾽ ’ 3 \ / : 3
ἄξομεν ἐν νήεσσιν, ἐπὴν πτολίεθρον ἕλωμεν.

οὕς τινας αὖ μεθιέντας ἴδοι στυγεροῦ πολέμοιο,

240

\ 4 ’ A 3 ᾽
TOUS μάλα νεικείεσκε χολωτοῖσιν ἐπέεσσιν"
a 4
“᾿Αργεῖοι ἰόμωροι, ἐλεγχέες, οὔ vu σέβεσθε;

228. Eurymedon is Agamemnon’s cha-
rioteer here only in H.; but the later
tradition accepted the name, for Pau-
sanias says that he was slain with
Agamemnon. Eurymedon isalso Nestor’s
charioteer, © 114, A 620.

229. παρισχέμεν, to have his horses
at hand. For the subj. λάβῃ after an
imperf. v. H. G. § 298; it is used
because ‘‘the action expressed by the
subordinate clause is still future at the
time of speaking”; but this differs from
the passages there quoted in that they
all give the actual words of a speaker to
whom the subordinate action is really
future ; but here the poet himself is the
speaker, and to him the action is neces-
sarily past, so that he has to put himself
in imagination into the place of Aga-
memnon giving the order. I gather
that Mr. Monro would prefer to read
λάβοι with two MSS. (“M Harl.” La R.) ;
but I do not see the necessity for the
change. See however on B 4.

231. For ἐπεπωλεῖτο cf. I 196, of
Odysseus, κτίλος Os ἐπιπωλεῖται στίχας
ἀνδρῶν.

284. πώ here again = πως, as 184,
Γ 306.

235. ψευδέσσι (ψευδής) Ar. : ψεύδεσσι
(ψεῦδος) Hermappias, on which a late
Schol. makes the characteristic remark,
μᾶλλον πειστέον ᾿Αριστάρχῳ 4 τῷ ‘Eppar-
πίᾳ, εἰ καὶ δοκεῖ ἀληθεύειν. There is not

Κ

much to choose between the two. Η.
does elsewhere use Ψεύστης, not ψευδής,
though he has φιλοψευδής and ἀψευδής,
but this argument is not of great weight.
If we read ψεύδεσσιν we must under-
stand it to mean ‘‘in case of, in con-
nexion with, lies,’’ as 175.

236. See Γ' 299, and for τέρην Γ' 142.

238. ἡμεῖς αὖτ᾽, so Ar.: MSS. δ᾽ αὖτ᾽,
For this use of αὖτε as a conjunction ».
Γ 241. Observe ἀλόχους contrasted
with αὐτῶν, the men themselves.

239. ἄξομεν, carry off as captives, Z
426, and the phrase ἄγειν καὶ φέρειν.

240. The neglect of the F of Fido
suggests that we should read ὅντινα δ᾽
αὖ μεθιέντα, as M 268, N 229.

242. ἰόμωροι, a word of uncertain
sense and derivation recurring only ΕΞ
479. We have éyxeoluwpos B 692, y
188, etc., ὑλακόμωροι of dogs ἕ 29, and
owdpwpos in Herod. and Attic. (1) The
analogy of ἐγχεσίμωρος makes it probable
that the first element of the word is ἰός,
an arrow, though this always has lin H.:
we find however ἱοχέαιρα in Pindar (P.
ii. 9) (ἰός is prob. for ἴσος, Skt. ishus,
so that we may compare Att. ἴσος by
ἶσος from FloFos). (2) Others refer it to
ld, lh, voice, a rare word found in an
oracle in Herod. (i. 85) and once or
twice in Trag. (so Goebel, Ameis, Glad-
stone). (8) Dod. tov, of the dark colour
of the hair, comparing ἰοπλόκαμος, but

180

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ (rv.)

’ , / 4
Tip?’ οὕτως ἔστητε τεθηπότες ἠύτε νεβροίΐ,
rd > 9 \ > Ψ 4 /
ai τ᾽ ἐπεὶ οὖν ἔκαμον πολέος πεδίοιο θέουσαι,

ἑστᾶσ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἄρα τίς σφι μετὰ φρεσὶ γίγνεται ἀλκή:

245

Φ ς A w 4 ΟΝ [4

ὧς ὑμεῖς ἔστητε τεθηπότες οὐδὲ μάχεσθε.

φ , A \ / ww nw

ἢ μένετε Τρῶας σχεδὸν ἐλθέμεν, ἔνθα τε νῆες
4 4 9 tA (ol 9 ’

εἰρύατ᾽ εὔπρυμνοι πολιῆς ἐπὶ θινὶ θαλάσσης,

ὄφρα ἴδητ᾽, αἴ κ᾽ bpp ὑπέρσχῃ χεῖρα Κρονίων ;᾿
ὧς ὅ γε κοιρανέων ἐπεπωλεῖτο στίχας ἀνδρῶν.

9

250

ἦλθε δ᾽ ἐπὶ Κρήτεσσι κιὼν ἀνὰ οὐλαμὸν avdpov:
οἱ δ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ᾿Ιδομενῆα δαΐφρονα θωρήσσοντο᾽
᾿Ιδομενεὺς μὲν ἐνὶ προμάχοις, oul εἴκελος ἀλκήν,
Μηριόνης δ᾽ ἄρα οἱ πυμάτας ὦὥτρυνε φάλαγγας.

τοὺς δὲ ἰδὼν γήθησεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων, 25

or

αὐτίκα δ᾽ ᾿Ιδομενῆα προσηύδα μειλυχίοισιν"
“Ἰδομενεῦ, περὶ μέν σε τίω Δαναῶν ταχυπώλων

this is improbable. The second element
is equally uncertain; the derivations
suggested are (a) smar, wep, to think of,
cf. μνήσαντο δὲ χάρμης, ‘‘thinking of
arrows,” ὁ.6. devoted to fighting with
the bow. To call a hoplite an archer
was to accuse him of cowardice, see the
taunt of Diomedes to Paris, A 385-7,
cf. also Ν 718-721. For the vowel cf.
δῶμα by déuw. Curt. compares for the
weakened sense of the root the compounds
of φρήν, μελίφρων, etc. (Ὁ) wap of μάρνα-
μαι, ‘‘fighting with arrows,” or, ‘‘ with
shouts”; but this hardly suits either
ὑλακόμωρος or σινάμωρος. (6) pap, to
glitter, μαρμαίρω, etc. So Ameis and
Goebel with (2), “eminent in shouting”’
(and nothing else). (d) Skt. mivras,
stormy, eager, earnest (Fick, and so
Brugman, C. St. iv. 161), for poF-pos,
conn. with Latin mov-eo (see also μῶρος,
Curt. Ht. no. 484), ‘‘ eager with arrows.”
This latter sense appears to suit all
uses best, if the Skt. analogy can be
relied upon, which is far from certain.
ἐλεγχέες, MSS., but the correct form is
certainly ἐλέγχεα, B 235, 2 260, and so
we should read in 2 239, E 787; in the
last passage indeed it is necessary, as
βεῖδος follows. ἐλεγχέες is apparently
a mere fiction invented to avoid a hiatus
which is perfectly legitimate in the
bucolic diaeresis. See however H. G. ὃ
116 (4).

243. ἔστητε, so Ptolemaios, and most
MSS. : ἔστητε, Ar. A. The former is
supported by T 178, Αἰνεία, ri νυ τόσσον

ὁμίλον πολλὸν ἐπελθών Earns; and cf. B
323, τίπτ᾽ dvew ἐγένεσθε: κ θά, πῶς
ἦλθες, ᾿Οδυσεῦ ; (Η. 6. § 76). There is
no analogy for the lengthening of the
vowel in perf. (cf. ἔστᾶτε A 340, T 354).
Bekk. compares ἐπίστηται II 248 by
ἐπίσταται (but that is probably a subj.)
βάτην by ἐβήτην, and some other forms
which however prove nothing. (H. B.
95, 11.) The difficulty is to see how
the idea of a point of time, such as the
aor. seems to imply, can be introduced.
In the p quoted above, B 323, T
178, κ 64, such a point is easily under-
stood, viz. the sudden silence of the
Greeks before the portent, the appearance
of Aineias to Achilles, the appearance of
Odysseus. But we may perhaps compare
the Attic use of ἤσθην, ἀπέπτυσα, etc.
Mr. Monro regards the aor. as charac-
teristic of ‘‘impatient questions.”

249. For the metaphor cf. E 433, I
420 (where we have the gen. ἐθέν instead
of the dat., and so 2 374).

253. There is a slight anacoluthon, as
᾿Ιδομενεύς has no verb, which can how-
ever easily be supplied from the following
clause, 6.9. πρώτας ὥτρυνε φάλαγγας.
For the Homeric idea of the boar’s
courage see P 21.

257. περί is here just on the boundary
line between an adverb and preposition,
as in A 258; cf. βουλῇ περιίδμεναι ἄλλων
N 728, with περὶ πάντων ἔμμεναι A 287.
It is unimportant which we call it,
though its position rather separates it
from the gen., which in any case is a

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ αν.)

131

5) Ν ἊΝ λέ δ᾽ ὑλλ ’ Δ»

ἡμὲν ἐνὶ πτολέμῳ ἠδ᾽ ἀλλοίῳ ἐπὶ ἔργῳ

ΣῸΣ 9 iQ? oo / / ν

ἠδ᾽ ἐν dail’, ὅτε πέρ τε γερούσιον αἴθοπα οἶνον

’ , ew 3 a ’
Αργείων οἱ ἄριστοι ἐνὶ Κρητήρι KEepwvTat:

260

9, 4 ? Ww: 4 4 9 A
εἴ περ yap T ἄλλοι ye κάρη κομόωντες ᾿Αχαιοὶ
Ἁ ’ Ἁ A A 4 4.

δαιτρὸν πίνωσιν, σὸν δὲ πλεῖον δέπας αἰεὶ
ἕστηχ᾽, ὥς περ ἐμοί, πιέειν ὅτε θυμὸς ἀνώγῃ.

3 > ΨΝ ’ 3 4 wv 43
ἀλλ᾽ ὄρσευ πολεμόνδ᾽, οἷος πάρος εὔχεαι εἶναι.

τὸν δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ᾿Ιδομενεὺς Κρητῶν ἀγὸς ἀντίον ηὔδα"

2θὅ

“ ΤΑτρεΐδη, μάλα μέν τοι ἐγὼν ἐρίηρος ἑταῖρος
ἔσσομαι, ὡς τὸ πρῶτον ὑπέστην καὶ κατένευσα"

3 > ww Μ , 4 4 4

ἀλλ᾽ ἄλλους ὄτρυνε κάρη κομόωντας ᾿Αχαιούς,
ὄφρα τάχιστα μαχώμεθ᾽, ἐπεὶ σύν γ᾽ ὅρκι᾽ ἔχεναν

Τρῶες" τοῖσιν δ᾽ αὖ θάνατος καὶ κήδε᾽ ὀπίσσω

270

Μ ᾽ > 4 ¢ Ψ ’ 3
ἔσσετ᾽, ἐπεὶ πρότεροι ὑπὲρ ὅρκια δηλήσαντο.

4 ” > 9 , \ ; ’ LA

as par’, ᾿Ατρεΐδης δὲ παρῴχετο γηθόσυνος κῆρ.
4 > >» » bd \ > ? \ 3 a
ἦλθε & ἐπ Αἰάντεσσι κιὼν ἀνὰ οὐλαμὸν ἀνδρῶν"

δ \ / [ud A A a

τὼ δὲ κορυσσέσθην, ἅμα δὲ νέφος εἵπετο πεζῶν.

ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἀπὸ σκοπιῆς εἶδεν νέφος αἰπόλος ἀνὴρ

275

9 / \ , e \ 4 > A
ἐρχόμενον κατὰ πόντον ὑπὸ Lepupoto iwns:

A ᾽ , UA
τῷ δέ τ ἄνευθεν ἐόντι μελάντερον ἠύτε πίσσα

gen. of comparison (ablative), not part-
itive.

259. γερούσιον, ἴ.6. at the assembly
of the counsellors. So » 8, ὅσσοι. ..
γερούσιον αἴθοπα olvoy αἰεὶ πίνετε.

260. κρητῆρι, so Ar.: MSS. κρητῆρσι,
but there would be only one mixing
bowl at the feast. κέρωνται, ‘‘ have the
wine mingled” ; Bekker writes κερῶνται,
on the analogy of κεραάσθε y 332, κερῶντο
o 500. The text would imply a present
κέραμαι (cf. δύνωμαι from δύναμαι), not
elsewhere found (see Curt. V0. i. 178):
it is expressly supported by Schol. L.

262. δαιτρόν, an allotted portion. For
the custom of honouring a guest by
keeping his cup full cf. Θ 161, περὶ μέν
σε τίον Δαναοὶ ταχύπωλοι | ἕδρῃ τε κρέασίν
re ἰδὲ πλείοις δεπάεσσιν", and so Μ 811.
Compare ‘‘ Benjamin’s mess.”

263. ἀνώγῃ, so La R. for ἀνώγοι of
MSS. with variant ἀνώγει. The authority
of MSS. is of little weight in such a
matter, and the subj. is more natural,
but, as Mr. Monro remarks, the opt.
might stand as expressing ‘‘ the remoter
event, depending on méew which is an
inf. of purpose.” Η, G. § 308 (1) π.
Cf. @ 70 (Θ 189 3), a reminiscence of

which passages may have misled the
rhapsodists.

264. For πάρος with the pres. of a
state of things continuing up to the time
of speaking, cf. A 553; and for the
pregnant use of οἷος, II 557.

269. The ye belongs to the whole
sentence ; cf. A 352.

273. The Aiantes are always repre-
sented as fighting side by side, N 701

84.

274. νέφος, for this simile cf. II 66,
P 755, Ψ 188.

276. lof is again used of the blowing
of wind in A 308, and of the rushing
of flame II 127; in K 139, p 261 (ἰωὴ
ΦόρμιγγοΞ9), of sound. The root seems
to be va to blow, Skt. va-me, 4-Fn-m,
etc. ; lwh = l-Fw-%, or rather Fi-Fw-% 3 for
the vowel cf. lwyf from Fay. (Knis,
Dig. Hom. p. 191). Curt. now (£2.
588 ὁ, ed. 5) refers the word however to
αὔω, for ἱἰ-ωβ- ἡ, and understands it of
noise only, though the present passage
requires the F,

277. ἐόντι, ἰόντι MSS. with Zenod. ;
but the ἐόντι of Ar. is clearly preferable.
μελάντερον ἠύτε πίσσα, blacker than
pitch. This is the only instance of the

182

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (1v.)

3 [ 4
φαίνετ᾽ ἰὸν κατὰ πόντον, ἄγει δέ τε λαίλαπα πολλήν᾽
ς, / ION e / 4 » a
ῥίγησέν τε ἰδὼν ὑπό τε σπέος ἤλασε μῆλα"

τοῖαι ἅμ᾽ Αἰάντεσσι διοτρεφέων αἰξηῶν

280

δήιον ἐς πόλεμον πυκιναὶ κίνυντο φάλαγγες
κυάνεαι, σάκεσίν τε καὶ ἔγχεσι πεφρικυῖΐαι.
καὶ τοὺς μὲν γήθησεν ἰδὼν κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων,
καί σφεας φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"

“Αἴαντ᾽, ᾿Αργείων ἡγήτορε χαλκοχιτώνων,

285

a \ 3 \ 4 > 93 7 » ’
σφῶι μὲν οὐ γὰρ ἔοικ ὀτρυνέμεν, οὔ τι κελεύω"
9 N A J Ἁ > v4 ’
αὐτὼ γὰρ μάλα λαὸν ἀνώγετον ἶφι μάχεσθαι.
wn 3 N
at yap, Zed re πάτερ καὶ A@nvain καὶ ΓΑπολλον,
τοῖος πᾶσιν θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσι γένοιτο"

A ’ὔ > 93 , or II ’ ΝΜ
T@ KE Ταχ HEVUGELE πολις PlapLoto AVAKTOS

290

es) ε / e ~ of , 39)
χερσὶν ὑφ ἡμετέρῃσιν ἁλοῦσά τε περθομένη τε.
ὧς εἰπὼν τοὺς μὲν λέπεν αὐτοῦ, βῆ δὲ μετ᾽ ἄλλους"
Ν )νφ A > \ / ᾽ ,
ἔνθ & ye Νέστορ ἔτετμε, λυγὺν Πυλίων ἀγορητὴν,
obs ἑτάρους στέλλοντα καὶ ὀτρύνοντα μάχεσθαι,

ἀμφὶ μέγαν Πελάγοντα ᾿Αλάστορά τε Χρομίον τε

Αἵμονά τε κρείοντα Βίαντά τε ποιμένα λαῶν.
ἱππῆας μὲν πρῶτα σὺν ἵπποισιν καὶ ὄχεσφιν,
πεζοὺς δ᾽ ἐξόπιθε στῆσεν πολέας τε καὶ ἐσθλούς,
ἕρκος ἔμεν πολέμοιο" κακοὺς δ᾽ ἐς μέσσον ἔλασσεν,

use of ἠύτε in this sense; probably we
ought to read ἠέ re, as Bekker suggested,
on the analogy of π 216, κλαῖον δὲ λιγέως,
ἀδινώτερον % τ᾽ οἰωνοί (where Buttmann
would read nie). It is not possible to
get a natural sense if we take ἠύτε in its
regular meaning ; we can only make it
mean ‘‘ growing blacker and blacker, like
pitch,” or else ‘‘all the blacker because
of its distance” (so Ameis and Fasi) ;
neither of which alternatives is satis-
factory. But Ap. Rhodius seems to have
taken the passage in this way, i. 269,
κλαίουσ᾽ ἀδινώτερον, ἠύτε κούρη. .. μύρεται.
The meanings ‘‘as” and ‘‘than” are so
closel allied that we need not be sur-

rised to find a word capable of taking

oth, like the German wie, als, Latin
quam. Hentze objects that ‘‘ blacker
than pitch” is merely hyperbolical and
therefore un-Homeric ; but cf. λευκότεροι
χιόνος, x 364. Besides, a heavy thunder
cloud may seem really blacker, because
dead in hue, than pitch, which always
has its darkness relieved by bright re-
flexions froin its surface,

278. φαίνετ᾽ = φαίνεται, not φαίνετο
as Buttm. Lez.

282. For κνάνεαι Zenod. read ἡρώων,
feeling no doubt that blackness} is not
a physical attribute of an army march-
ing to war. The comparison with the
thunder-cloud is justified less by the
external appearance than by the moral
terror of ruthless onset produced by the
blackness of the approaching storm.
For πεφρικνῖαι Ar. in one edition had
βεβριθυῖαι.

286. For the anticipatory use of
see H. G. § 348. nd γάρ

288-291, see B 371-374.

299. ἔλασσεν, Didymus mentions an
old variant fepyev. The κακοί it is to be
presumed are a section of the πεζοί, of
whom the bestare keptasa reserve. There
does not seem to be any other allusion
to a formation in more than a single
line. The Schol. accordingly explains
that πρῶτα means ‘‘on the right wing,”
ἐξόπιθεν ‘‘on the left,” and says that
‘fone κακός is placed between two
ἀνδρεῖοι, not a very likely thing (ἐπὶ

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ (v.)

ὄφρα καὶ οὐκ ἐθέλων τις ἀναγκαίῃ πολεμίζοι.

133

800

e a \ a > 9 4 \ Ν > ,
ἱππεῦσιν μὲν PWT ἐπετέλλετο" TOUS yap ἀνωγειν
\ Cs > / \ ’ e

σφοὺς ἵππους ἐχέμεν μηδὲ κλονέεσθαι ὁμίλῳ:
“ μηδέ τις ἱπποσύνῃ τε καὶ ἠνορέηφι πεποιθὼς
οἷος πρόσθ᾽ ἄλλων μεμάτω Τρώεσσι μάχεσθαι,
μηδ᾽ dvaywpeitw: ἀλαπαδνότεροι γὰρ ἔσεσθε. 305
rs , > 3 AN > \ # > ἡ 4 a a >
ὃς δέ K ἀνὴρ ἀπὸ ὧν ὀχέων ἕτερ ἅρμαθ ἴκηται,
» 3 A 3 νλ͵. 4 Ἁ ) ef
ἔγχει ὀρεξάσθω, ἐπεὶ ἣ πολὺ φέρτερον οὕτως.
ὧδε καὶ οἱ πρότεροι πόλιας καὶ τείχε᾽ ἐπόρθεον,
τόνδε νόον καὶ θυμὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ἔχοντες."

ὧς ὁ γέρων ὦὥτρυνε πάλαι πολέμων ἐὺ εἰδώς. 810

\ \ \ / oa ? /
καὶ τὸν μὲν γήθησεν ἰδὼν κρείων Αγαμέμνων,
καί μιν φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηΐδα"
“ᾧ γέρον, εἴθ᾽, ὡς θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσι φίλοισιν,
ὧς τοι γούναθ᾽ ἕποιτο, βίη δέ τοι ἔμπεδος εἴη.
ἀλλά σε γῆρας τείρει ὁμοίιον: ὡς ὄφελέν τις 315
ἀνδρῶν ἄλλος ἔχειν, σὺ δὲ κουροτέροισι peteivar.

Ἁ > 5 ’ > ww / e ’ v4

τὸν δ᾽ ἡμείβετ ἔπειτα Γερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ'

“ ΤΑτρεΐδη, μάλα μέν τοι ἐγὼν ἐθέλοιμι καὶ αὐτὸς

γὰρ μετώπον τάσσει τὴν φάλαγγα, οὐ κατὰ
Bd8ous).

300. πολεμίζοι : many MSS. -fy, see on
263.

301. The μέν implies that some advice
to the foot-soldiers is to follow ; but this
never appears,

302. ἐχέμεν here evidently ‘‘to hold
in hand,” not ‘‘to drive,” as usual.
κλονέεσθαι, to be entangled.

303. This sudden change from oratio
obliqua to recta is very strange, the only
parallel in H. being Ψ 855, a very wea
authority. There seems to be something
wrong about the present passage, as
308-9 refer apparently to siege opera-
tions, and should be addressed rather
to the πεζοί than the ἱππῆες. The
whole e 297-310 is weak and out
of place, and looks like an inopportune
attempt to glorify Nestor, as in B 360-
368. Lines 304-5 are perhaps adapted
from P 357-359, where the same advice
is given to foot-soldiers.

306. ἀπὸ ὧν ὀχέων, 7c. from his own
chariot, standing in its proper place in
the ranks, he is at liberty to attack any-
one within the range of his spear. ἵκη-
ται, can reach an enemy’s chariot. The
expression of the thought is far from
clear.

308. of πρότεροι only here for the
usual πρότεροι ἄνθρωποι ; it looks like a
later use. The next line is weak and
tautological.

315. ὁμοίιον;: this form is elsewhere
always used of strife or battle, except
θάνατος y 236. Nauck would in every
case read dXolos. The sense of “common
to all” (which itself is not very appropri-
ate as a general epithet of war in spite of
ξυνὸς ᾿Ενυάλιος, Σ 309) is not supported
by any use of ὁμοῖος. Pind. Nem. x. 107,
which is quoted, is not in point, for
there πότμον ὁμοῖον obviously means “the
same fate” for the two brothers (like
ὁμοίην γαῖαν ἐρεῦσαι Z 329), and is ex-
plained by the following lines. There
is therefore an undoubted case against
duolios, which anyhow ought to be
separated in the lexicons from ὁμοῖος.
Indeed Aristonikos says that the γλωσ-
σογράφοι explained ὁμοίιον = τὸ κακόν.
But there is no obvious reason why it
should have displaced a word so clear
in meaning as ὀλοίιος. Christ conj. that
the right form may be ὀμέξιον, conn.
with Skt. amiva = aerumna, and ὠμός.

316. ἔχειν, sc. γῆρας.
318. εν τοι all good MSS. ; μέν κεν
vulg. For the opt. without κε cf. Η. 6.

§ 299 (2. It is concessive, “1 admit

184

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (ν.)

A > /
ὧς ἔμεν, ws ὅτε δῖον EpevOariwva κατέκταν.

ἀλλ᾽ οὔ πως ἅμα πάντα θεοὶ δόσαν ἀνθρώποισιν"

920

εἰ τότε κοῦρος ἔα, νῦν αὗτέ με γῆρας ὀπάζξει.
ἀλλὰ καὶ ὡς ἱππεῦσι μετέσσομαι ἠδὲ κελεύσω
βουλῇ καὶ μύθοισι" τὸ γὰρ γέρας ἐστὶ γερόντων.
αἰχμὰς δ᾽ αἰχμάσσουσι νεώτεροι, οἵ περ ἐμεῖο

ὁπλότεροι γεγάασι πεποίθασίν τε Bindu.”

325

as ἔφατ᾽, ᾿Ατρεΐδης δὲ παρῴχετο γηθόσυνος κῆρ.
φ 3 eX a A 4
εὗρ υἱὸν Πετεῶο Μενεσθῆα πλήξυιππον
e , } 3 >?) n 4 9 a
ἑσταότ : ἀμφὶ ὃ Αθηναῖοι, μήστωρες ἀντῆς"
> δ e / ς / , ) ,
αὐτὰρ ὁ πλησίον ἑστήκει πολύμητις Οδυσσεύς,

πὰρ δὲ Κεφαλλήνων ἀμφὶ στίχες οὐκ ἀλαπαδναὶ

330

Cd 9 7 ’ 4 4 A 9 nw
ἕστασαν" ov yap πώ σφιν ἀκούετο λαὸς ἀντῆς,

4
ἀλλὰ νέον συνορινόμεναι κίνυντο φάλαγγες
Τρώων ἱπποδάμων καὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν, οἱ δὲ μένοντες
Ψ φ 4 4 > “A Ν 3 \
ἕστασαν, ὁππότε πύργος Αχαιῶν ἄλλος ἐπελθὼν

that I could wish.” To the instances
quoted by Mr. Monro may be added K
557, O 45, ἡ 314, in all of which how-
ever, as in the present pas
introduced by a very slight alteration
of the text.

319. For Nestor’s story of the slaying
of Ereuthalion see H 136-156. The
next line was marked by Ar. with
‘‘obelos and asterisk,” as wrongly in-
serted from N 729, where in our texts
the reading is different.

321. αὖτε is here a conjunction, the
two clauses being co-ordinate, as εἰ clearly
does not express a condition, but retaius
~ something of its interjectional force,
calling up for consideration a certain
state of things, as in ὧς for, εἴ ποτ᾽ for γε
(v. Γ 180). It thus is almost ‘‘ Well, I
suppose I was a young man then; but
now,” etc. A 280, q¢.v., is precisely
similar. ὀπάζει, 80 Ar.: MSS. ἱκάνει. 4,
the length of the a is probably primitive,
as the word is never found with short a.
The form ἦα possibly depends on meta-
thesis of quantity. (Hartel, Hom. St.
p- 73; Curtius, Vb. i. 177.)

324. αἰχμάσσονσι, to wield the spear,
only here in H. The word is used in
a similar but not quite identical sense
in Soph. 4j. 97, Trach. 355, and Aesch.
Pers. 756; v. Lexica.

327. For the asyndeton cf. 89; and
for Menestheus B 552 sqq.

328. μήστωρες durfis, lit. devisers of

e, ke may be —

the battle-shout, usually applied to
individual heroes, N 93, 479, Π 759.
Cf. on μήστωρι φόβοιο E 272.

331. dxotero, the only case in H. of
the middle form in the present or imperf.
It is possible that this implies a con-
scious listening rather than a mere physi-
cal hearing; if they were not attending
to the battle-cry, there is more ground
for Agamemnon’s rebuke than if they had
not yet heard it. There seems to be a
similar distinction in many cases be-
tween ὁρῶ and ὁρῶμαι, though they are
often identical (cf. 205 above). Cf. i. G.
8

334. ὁππότε goes with μένοντες, ‘ wait-
ing till.” So after ποτιδέγμενοι Η 415,
etc. H. G. § 308 (2). These object
clauses appear to be essentially similar
to those with εἰ after verbs of seeking,
etc., for which see Τ' 450, 453; the
primitive train of thought being, “ await-
ing (with the thought in their minds)
‘at some time another column might
set upon the Trojans.’” πύ seems
to be precisely our word ‘‘ column” as
a metaphor of a military formation. Cf.
347. ‘The word does not recur in this
sense. Aristarchos strangely enough
wished to make Τρώων depend on πύργος
and ᾿Αχαιῶν on ὁρμ., ‘waiting till a
column of Trojans should attack the
Achaians,’’ because he thought that the
delay of the Athenians ought to be due
to their wish to see the Trojans put still

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ (ιν.

T 4 e 4 \ ew ᾿ /
ρώων ορμήσειε καὶ ἄρξειαν πολέμοιο.

τοὺς δὲ ἰδὼν νείκεσσεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων,
καί σφεας φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"

- 4

ὦ υἱὲ Πετεῶο διοτρεφέος βασιλῆος,

a ,
καὶ σὺ κακοῖσι δόλοισι κεκασμένε, κερδαλεόφρον,

τίπτε καταπτώσσοντες ἀφέστατε, μίμνετε δ᾽ ἄλλους ;

840

σφῶιν μέν τ᾽ ἐπέοικε μετὰ πρώτοισιν ἐόντας
ἑστάμεν ἠδὲ μάχης καυστείρης ἀντιβολῆσαι"
πρώτω yap καὶ δαιτὸς ἀκουάξεσθον ἐμεῖο,

e , A / 3 4 > 4
ὀππότε δαῖτα γέρουσιν ἐφοπλίζωμεν ᾿Αχαιοί.

ἔνθα φίλ᾽ ὀπταλέα κρέα ἔδμεναι ἠδὲ κύπελλα

345

οἴνου πινέμεναι μελιηδέος, ὄφρ᾽ ἐθέλητον"
νῦν δὲ φίλως χ᾽ ὁρόφτε, καὶ εἰ δέκα πύργοι ᾿Αχαιῶν
ὑμείων προπάροιθε μαχοίατο νηλέι χαλκῷ."
Ἁ > VM 9 6 / ION / , 93 4
τὸν δ᾽ ap ὑπόδρα ἰδὼν προσέφη πολύμητις ᾿Οδυσσεύς"

further in the wrong by beginning the

eneral engagement. On this ground
1e was inclined to prefer the variant
κέν τις ἐναντίον for πύργος ᾿Αχαιῶν, and
ἄρξειεν for -ειαν.

338. υἱέ, the lengthening of ε in voc.
is not uncommon; v. Hartel, Hom. St.
64, where it is suggested that it may be
due to the interjectional nature of the
voc., which admits of being dwelt upon
by the voice. But the ictus has prob-
ably at least an equal share. Cf. A 155,
E 359, ᾧ 474, and Alay Ψ 493.

339. κεκασμένε, cf. τ 395 (Αὐτόλυκος)
ὅς ἀνθρώπους ἐκέκαστο | κλεπτοσύνῃ θ᾽
ὅρκῳ τε.

841. +: here μέν seems to answer
to viv δέ in 847. The exact sense of re is
not so obvious ; it perhaps emphasizes
this clause as general, whereas viv δέ
takes a particular instance (H. G. § 332).
Observe ἐόντας in spite of the dat. σφῶιν,
as A 541, ra... ἐόντα : H. G. § 240.

342. καυστείρης recurs only in M
316; it is the feminine of "καυστήρ.
The grammarians wrongly accented καυ-
στειρῆς, and held that it came from
καυστειρός, ἃ supposed dialectical form
of καυστηρός.

343. The sense of this line is clear,
but the syntax hopeless. The gen. after
verbs of hearing expresses—‘‘(1) the
person from whom sound comes ; (2) the
person about whom something is heard ;
(3) the sownd heard,” H. G. § 151 d.
δαιτός cannot be bronght under any of
these heads. κέκλυτέ μεν μύθων is clearly

different, being a sort of ‘‘whole and
part” construction. The only possible
explanation is, ‘‘you hear me about a
banquet,” which is without analogy,
and only gives the required sense by
violence. This however is the explana-
tion of Ar., πρῶτοί μου ἀκούετε περὶ δαιτός.
It may be added that ‘‘to hear from a
person,” in the sense of receiving a
message, is a modern but not a Greek
idiom. Besides, ἀκονάζξεσθαι, in the two
other passages of Homer where it occurs
(ε 7, » 9) means ‘‘to listen to,” as we
might suppose from its form, which
suggests a frequentative sense. Hence
even Nauck’s trenchant conjecture, κα-
λέοντος for καὶ dards, does not entirely
meet the case. An additional difficulty
is that Menestheus, who even in this
scene is a κωφὸν πρόσωπον, never appears
among the γέροντες (see on B 53; and
for feasts given to them, A 259 and B
404 sqq.).

345. φίλα, se. ἐστί, as B 796. This
line and the next ἐν rots ὑπομνήμασιν
(commentaries of Ar.) οὐκ ἀθετοῦνται,
ἀπαιτιῶνται δὲ αὐτοὺς ol ἡμέτεροι (1.6.
modern taste) ὡς ἀπρεπῶς. .. ὀνειδίζον-
τος τοῦ ᾿Αγαμέμνονος, Schol. A; and see
Cobet’s amusing commentary, M. C. 231.
If they were omitted, the point of the
passage, the contrast of φίλα. . . φίλως,
would be lost.

347. The clause with εἰ is here the
object of dpdwre: this is not common in
Homer, but is analogous to the ὁππότε-
clause in 333. See Lange, EI, p. 473.

186

“«ῬΑτρεΐδη, ποῖόν σε ἔπος φύγεν ἕρκος ὀδόντων.
| Ύ

IAIAAO® Δ (0)

8560

πῶς δὴ φὴς πολέμοιο μεθιέμεν, ὁππότ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοὶ
Τρωσὶν ἐφ᾽ ἱπποδάμοισιν ἐγείρομεν ὀξὺν “Apna ;

ὄψεαι, ἣν ἐθέλῃσθα καὶ αἴ κέν τοι τὰ μεμήλῃ,

Τηλεμάχοιο φίλον πατέρα προμάχοισι μιγέντα

Τρώων ἱπποδάμων: σὺ δὲ ταῦτ᾽ ἀνεμώλια βάζεις."

355

\ 9 4 ’ὔ 4 9 tA
ὃ ς προσ κρείων νων,
τὸν δ᾽ ἐπιμειδήσας προσέφη κρείων ᾿Αγαμέ
Ὁ“ 4 3 n
ὧς γνῶ γχωομένοιο" πάλιν δ᾽ ὅ ye λάξετο μῦθον"
χώομ Ύ μ
’ὔ 4943 ΄΄Τἕὦ
“διογενὲς Λαερτιάδη, πολυμήχαν᾽ ᾿Οδυσσεῦ,
οὔτε σε νεικείω περιώσιον οὔτε κελεύω"

οἷδα γάρ, ὥς τοι θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσι φίλοισιν

960

bd / \ / ae > 3 ’
ἤπια δήνεα οἶδε" τὰ γὰρ φρονέεις, ἅ τ᾽ ἐγώ περ.
3 ν a > 9 , 9 Ν \ a
ἀλλ᾽ ἴθι, ταῦτα δ᾽ ὄπισθεν ἀρεσσομεθ', εἴ τι κακὸν νῦν
εἴρηται, τὰ δὲ πάντα θεοὶ μεταμώνια θεῖεν.᾽"

ὧς εἰπὼν τοὺς μὲν λίπεν αὐτοῦ, βῆ δὲ μετ᾽ ἄλλους.

εὗρε δὲ Τυδέος υἱὸν ὑπέρθυμον Διομήδεα

365

ς / 9 ΓΝ > Ψ λν a
éotaot ἔν θ᾽ ἵπποισι καὶ ἅρμασι κολλητοῖσιν"

\ / ee / P / e/
map δέ οἱ ἑστήκει Σθένελος Καπανήιος υἱός.

Ν
καὶ τὸν μὲν νείκεσσεν ἰδὼν κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων,
, ’

καί μιν φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηΐδα:

861. The punctuation given is men-
tioned by Nikanor, who prefers an alter-
native in which the note of interrogation
is put after μεθιέμεν, and a comma after
Apna. μεθιέμεν refers to Odysseus and
Menestheus in particular, while in éyelpo-
μεν Odysseus speaks as one of the army
at large, meaning ‘‘every case in which
we fight” (aor. subj.) It is unusual in
Homer to begin an entirely fresh sentence
of several lines in the middle of a line
(ξ 217 is the only case quoted) ; but still
the punctuation of Nikanor gives a more
pointed sense, and there is not much
to choose between the asyndeton before
ὁππότε and at the beginning of 353
(which recurs in I 359 as the continua-
tion of a long sentence).

354. For the phrase ‘‘father of Tele-
machos” see on B 260. Here it is
clearly impossible to give any appro-

riate reason for the introduction of
elemachos except as a title of honour.
Aristonikos mentions that Ar. noticed
this ‘‘ foreshadowing of the Odyssey ”’
as a {en that it was by the author of the
Tliad.

ὦ pot, Τυδέος vie δαΐφρονος ἱπποδάμοιο,

370

357. γνῶ with gen., as ¢ 36, y 109.
This is common in the participle of οἶδα in
the sense ‘‘ to be skilled in,” e.g. μάχης,
ἀλκῆς, etc., but rare in the finite verb.
Ψ 452 is possibly another case. See
Η. G. § 151 d. πάλιν Adfero, just our
idiom ‘‘ took back his words.” Cf. πάλιν
ἐρέε I 56. The phrase recurs ν 254 in a
slightly different sense (took back what
he was about to say).

361. ἥπια δήνεα οἶδε, 1.6. is well
disposed towards me, as II 78, εἴ μοι
κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων Fra εἰδείη. δήνεα,
counsels, apparently from dafwa:.

362. ἀρεσσόμεθα, atone for; but where
an object is expressed it is elsewhere
always a person, ‘‘conciliate.” Cf. the
act. ἂψ ἀρέσαι I 120, T 138.

363. μεταμώνια occurs elsewhere only
in Od. ta 98, etc.). The derivation is
quite uncertain.

366. ἵπποισιν here as often =chariot,
and goes with ἅρμασι by hendiadys. 419
shews that Diomedes is standing in the
car, not merely amid the horses and
chariots.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ (r1v.)

137

, , , 5.» 4 , ,
τί πτώσσεις, τί δ᾽ ὀπιπεύεις πολέμοιο γεφύρας;
οὐ μὲν Τυδέι y ὧδε φίλον πτωσκαζέμεν ἦεν,
ἀλλὰ πολὺ πρὸ φίλων ἑτάρων δηίοισι μάχεσθαι.
ὧς φάσαν, οἵ μιν ἴδοντο πονεύμενον" οὐ γὰρ ἐγώ γε
ἤντησ᾽ οὐδὲ ἴδον" περὶ δ᾽ ἄλλων φασὶ γενέσθαι. 875

\ \ v / > »" ,

ἡ TOL μὲν γὰρ ἄτερ πολέμου εἰσῆλθε Μυκήνας

nA vg 3 3 4 4 Ν 3 ’
ξεῖνος ἅμ᾽ ἀντιθέῳ Πολυνείκεϊ, λαὸν ἀγείρων,

“- Ῥ 3.4 ,ὔ) > ¢ \ \ / /
ot pa TOT ἐστρατοωνθ᾽ ἱερὰ πρὸς τείχεα Θήβης.

fee 4 / / \ 4 4

Kai pa μάλα λίσσοντο δόμεν κλειτοὺς ἐπικούρους"

> /
οἱ ὃ ἔθελον δόμεναι καὶ ἐπήνεον, ὡς ἐκέλενον"

880

ἀλλὰ Ζεὺς ἔτρεψε παραίσια σήματα φαίνων.
e 93 9 Φ w ION \ e n > 4

οἱ δ᾽ ἐπεὶ οὖν @yovTo ἰδὲ πρὸ ὁδοῦ ἐγένοντο,

) \ ° Of 4 ,
Ασωπὸν δ᾽ ἵκοντο βαθύσχοινον λεχεποίην,

Y] ᾽ @ 3? 9 ’ 3 n ray > ’ὔ

ἔνθ αὖτ ἀγγελίην ἐπὶ Τυδῆ στεῖλαν ᾿Αχαιοί.

αὐτὰρ ὁ βῆ, πολέας δὲ κιχήσατο Καδμείΐωνας

385

δαινυμένους κατὰ δῶμα Bins ’Ereoxdneins.
ἔνθ᾽ οὐδὲ ξεῖνός περ ἐὼν ἱππηλάτα Τυδεὺς

871. πολέμοιο γεφύρας : this phrase
recurs Θ 378, 553, A 160, fT 427. From
E 88-9 and O 357 (cf. ® 245) it appears
that γέφυρα implies a dam or cause-
way rather than what we should call a
bridge. It is explained by the Schol.
ras διόδους τῶν φαλάγγων, the lines of
open ground between the moving masses
of. men, who are perhaps likened to
flowing water. It is especially used of
the space between the hostile armies.

uw, ‘‘eye,” in a contemptuous
sense, implying hesitation to advance.

374. ὧς, so Ameis with two MSS., for
vulg. ws with comma after μάχεσθαι.
The regular use in Homer of ds ἔφη,
etc., is to refer back to a completed ex-
pression of opinion; there is no other
case of ws ἔφη = ashe said. πονεύμενον
in special sense of fighting, as πόνος, 456,
B 420 and often, of the toil of battle.

378. ot, Tydeus and Polyneikes ; the
change from the sing.'is abrupt. ἐστρα-
τόωντο (also Γ 187) strictly must mean,
‘‘were on a campaign against.” The
present is either στρατάεσθαι or orparé-
εσθαι: the latter is found in Aesch. Ag.
132, the former does not occur anywhere
else in Greek. For the form -éwvro from
an o-verb we may compare δηϊόωντο N
675, δηιόφειν ὃ 226, dpdwow « 108, which
all follow the analogy of stems in a-.
Cf. also H. G. 8 55 (7).

380. ol, phyestes and the people of
Mykenal. ἐκέλευον, Tydeus and Poly-
neikes,

381. ἔτρεψε, changed their minds.
παραίσια only here, ἐξαίσιος is more
common.

382. πρό is here an adv., and ὁδοῦ
a local genitive, lit. ‘‘forward on the
way.” Cf. on πρὸ φόβοιο P 667. For
λεχεποίην cf. B 697.

384. ἐπί, so MSS. and Ar., thus con-
necting it with the verb, and making
ἀγγελίην a masc. in apposition with
Τυδῆ, see note on Γ 206. Or we may take
ἀγγελίην as fem., ἃ cognate acc. with
ἐπίστειλαν, like ἐξεσίην ἐλθεῖν. Others
read ἔπι, and understand ἐπ᾽ ἀγγελίην =
‘*for an embassy.” Nauck reads Τυδῆ᾽
ἔστειλαν, omitting ἐπί, as Tvd7 seems to
be an Attic form. The following story
is repeated in E 802-808, where the
phrase used is ἤλυθε νόσφιν ᾿Αχαιῶν ἄγ-
γελος ἐς Θήβας. ᾿

387. ξεῖνος must here mean ‘‘a
stranger,” 1.6. virtually under the cir-
cumstances an enemy, whereas in 377
it means a friend. But the word never
acquired in Greek the connotation of
the Latin hostis, and in ordinary cases
to be a ξεῖνος in any sense was a reason
for expecting friendly treatment, not
treachery.

138

TAITAAO® A rv.)

τάρβει, μοῦνος ἐὼν πολέσιν μετὰ ΚΚαδμείοισιν,
ἀλλ᾽ 6 γ᾽ ἀεθλεύειν προκαλίξετο, πάντα δ᾽ ἐνίκα
)
ῥηιδίως" τοίη οἱ ἐπίρροθος ἦεν Αθήνη. 890
οἱ δὲ χολωσάμενοι Καδμεῖοι, κέντορες ἵππων,
A 3 , Ν , »
ἂψ ἀναερχομένῳ πυκινὸν λόχον εἷσαν ἄγοντες,
κούρους πεντήκοντα" δύω δ᾽ ἡγήτορες ἦσαν,
Μαίων Αἱμονίδης ἐπιείκελος ἀθανάτοισιν
’ -
υἱός τ᾿ Αὐτοφόνοιο μενεπτόλεμος ἸΤολυφόντης. 395
Τυδεὺς μὲν καὶ τοῖσιν ἀεικέα πότμον ἐφῆκεν"
, Μ > φ Σ΄. 4 > ἢ ,
πάντας ἔπεφν᾽, Eva δ᾽ οἷον ἵει οἰκόνδε νέεσθαι"
Μαίον᾽ ἄρα προέηκε, θεῶν τεράεσσι πιθήσας.
τοῖος ἔην Τυδεὺς Αὐτώλιος: ἀλλὰ τὸν υἱὸν
wn ?
γείνατο elo χέρεια μάχῃ" ἀγορῇ δέ τ᾽ ἀμείνων." 400
e , \ > ν / \ /
ὧς φάτο, τὸν δ᾽ οὔ τι προσέφη κρατερὸς Διομήδης,
4 a 3 \ 3 /
αἰδεσθεὶς βασιλῆος ἐνυπὴν αἰδοίοιο.
\ > en a ’ , Σ
τὸν ὃ υἱὸς Καπανῆος ἀμείψατο κυδαλίμοιο"
) a
“ "Arpeldn, μὴ ψεύδε᾽ ἐπιστάμενος σάφα εἰπεῖν.

390. ἐπίρροθος (here and Ψ 770 only
in H.) is, like the synonymous émrdp-
ροθος used in the parallel line E 808, a
word of obscure origin. Déderlein re-
fers it to ἐπιρρύζειν, used of hounding on
dogs. Eustath. ὁ μετὰ ῥόθον βοηθῶν.
Goebel compares among other words
ἐ-ρέθ-ω, which is plausible, but it is im-
possible to accept the whole of his ex-
planation, and the two words still re-
main, as he says, ‘‘ Schmerzenskinder

der Etymologie.”

" 392. ἀναερχομένῳ, so A and several
of the best MSS.: ἀνερχομένῳ caeteri ;
most editors write ἂψ ἄρ᾽ (Benth) or dy
οἱ (Barnes) ἀνερχ., the former on the
analogy of the similar line, Z 187 ; but
ἄρα has no sense here. For the hiatus
οὗ, ἐπιόψομαι I 167, καταΐσχεται « 122,
ἀποαίνυμαι Ν᾽ 262, ἐπιοσσομένω P 381.
These almost all occur in parts of the
line where hiatus is allowable, of which
the end of the first foot is one (v. on
B 87) (Ameis). πυκινόν, lit. dense, 1.6.
consisting of a large number, as in
wuxwal φάλαγγες, etc. This sense does
not suit ἃ 525, but that line is inter-
polated, εἶσαν ἄγοντες, ‘“ took and set,”
ἄγ. being pleonastic. εἶσαν, from tfw,
A 311.

394. The three names, Alyovldns, Av-
répovos, Πολυφόντης, are evidently meant
to have a murderous ring (Fasi). Malwy
is probably a traditional name, not one

invented for the purpose : according to
Statius he was an augur and priest of
Apollo, which would explain θεῶν repd-
εσσι (398).

399. For τόν, here used in a possessive
sense, Brugman would restore ὅν, I be-
lieve rightly. On this question how-
ever see H. G. § 261, 255, ad fin.

400. xépea, on this word see A 80.

It is here clearly a comparative. The
best MSS. follow Ar. in writing χέρεια
and xépecos, but χέρης, χέρηι. ίνων,

sc. ἐστί, so A with Ar.: ἀμείνω cael.
The reading of Ar. seems best, for dé
τε frequently introduces a clause added
paratactically, with a construction of
its own. Σ 106 is exactly parallel, ἐν
πολέμῳ᾽ ἀγορῇ δέ τ' dpelvovés εἰσι καὶ
ἄλλοι.

404. σάφα, if taken with εἰπεῖν, must
mean “truly ᾿᾿ (ψεύδε᾽ being then ψεύδεο),
but this is not the usual Homeric sense.
The word is always used with verbs of
knowing, except three times in Od. with
εἰπεῖν, always in the sense ‘‘giving a
clear, certain report about ody sseus.”’
The two senses are however nearly allied
(Paley quotes Soph. Trach. 387), and it
is on the whole better to translate
“truly” here than with Fasi to do
violence to the order by joining μὴ
ψεύδεα εἰπεῖν, ἐπιστάμενος σάφα (that
they are so). This expression is one of
the many peculiarities of the ἐπιπώλησις.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ (ιν.

139

e a , ry 4 , > 7 > 4
ἡμεις TOL TTATEPWY [LEY ἀμείνονες εὐχόμεθ εἰναι" 405
ς a \ / Ψ 4, e 4
ἡμεῖς καὶ Θήβης ἕδος εἴλομεν ἑπταπύλοιο,
’ -“"
παυρότερον λαὸν ἀγαγόνθ᾽ ὑπὸ τεῖχος ἄρειον,
/ ζω a
πειθόμενοι τεράεσσι θεῶν καὶ Ζηνὸς ἀρωγῇ"
κεῖνοι δὲ σφετέρῃσιν ἀτασθαλίῃσιν ὄλοντο.

τῷ ’ 4 θ᾽ € ’ὔ 4 θ “a >)
ω μὴ μοι πατέρας ποθ ομοίῃ ἐνθεο τιμῇ.

410

τὸν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπόδρα ἰδὼν προσέφη κρατερὸς Διομήδης"
“ rérta, σιωπῇ ἧσο, ἐμῷ δ᾽ ἐπιπείθεο μύθῳ.
οὐ γὰρ ἐγὼ νεμεσῶ ᾿Αγαμέμνονι ποιμένι λαῶν
ὀτρύνοντι μάχεσθαι ἐυκνήμιδας ᾿Αχαιούς"

τούτῳ μὲν γὰρ κῦδος ἅμ᾽ ἕψεται, εἴ κεν ᾿Αγαιοὶ..
φ μὲν γὰρ μ χ

415

Τρῶας δῃώσωσιν ἕλωσί τε Ἴλιον ipny,
7 * , ,ὔ A 4
τούτῳ ὃ αὖ μέγα πένθος Αχαιῶν δῃωθέντων.
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε δὴ καὶ νῶι μεδώμεθα θούριδος ἀλκῆς."
ἡ ῥα καὶ ἐξ ὀχέων σὺν τεύχεσιν ἦλτο χαμᾶξε"
δεινὸν δ᾽ ἔβραχε χαλκὸς ἐπὶ στήθεσσιν ἄνακτος 420
93 “ e / [4 lA 7
ὀρνυμένου" ὑπό κεν ταλασίφρονά περ δέος εἷλεν.
e x, WY 9 9 3 A J A 7
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἐν αἰγιαλῷ πολνηχέι κῦμα θαλάσσης
ὄρνυτ᾽ ἐπασσύτερον Ζεφύρου ὕπο κινήσαντος"

406. καί 18 expressed by the emphasis
in ‘‘ we did take,” 1.6. we did not merely
besiege. This is the only mention in
H. of the war of the Epigoni; that of
the ‘‘Seven” is rarely alluded to.

407. ἀγαγόνθ᾽, dual, as he is thinking
only of Diomedes and himself. ἄρειον is
taken by the Schol. as comparative, viz.
τοῦ ἐν Tpolag; for the sake of the anti-
thesis it should rather mean ‘‘a stronger
wall than our fathers found,” as though
Thebes had been strengthened in the
interval. Cf. Ο 736, ‘‘a stronger wall”
than that which is now being taken.
There is no Homeric instance of ἄρειος
= ᾿Αρήιος, and in any case that would
weaken the point of the line. Ar.
obelized 407-9 on the ground that if
the fathers were defeated by their own
madness and the sons conquered only
by obeying the gods, there is no ground
for concluding that the sons are better
warriors than the fathers were.

409. The ἀτασθαλίαι may beillustrated
from Aesch. Sept. 423 sqq., where it is said
of Kapaneus

θεοῦ re γὰρ θέλοντος ἐκπέρσειν πόλιν
καὶ μὴ θέλοντός φησι, K.T.A.

410. Observe the very rare use of μή

with aor. imper. : so Σ 134 μήπω κατα-

δύσεο, w 248 μή... ἔνθεο. Schol. A quotes
μὴ φεῦσον, ὦ Zed, Aristoph. Thesm. 870.
See on this H. G. § 328.

412. rérra, a dx. λεγ. which divided
the opinions of the ancient critics, some
taking it as a προσφώνησις φιλεταιρική,
others as an ἐπίρρημα σχετλιαστικόν. It
is probably like ἅττα (I 607, q.v.), a term
of affection, perhaps borrowed from the
language of infancy. ‘‘A friendly or
respectful address of youths to their
elders,” L. & S.; but there is no ground
for supposing Sthenelos to be older than
Diomedes. ἦσο, simply ‘‘continue,” as
often.

421. ὑπό, explained by Am. and La
R. of fear seizing the knees, as Γ 34, ὑπὸ
δὲ τρόμος ἔλλαβε γυῖα. But it is better
to translate, with Fasi, ‘‘thereat,’”’ as
though = under the influence of the
noise. This is common in composition,
c.g. ὑποτρέω, to tremble αὖ a thing; so
ὑπαὶ δέ re κόμπος ὁδόντων γίγνεται, A 417.
ταλασίφρονα, cf. Φόβος... ὅς 7’ ἐφόβησε
ταλάφρονά περ πολεμιστήν, N 300; and
for the introduction of ἃ supposed spec-
tator, A 539, etc.

422. κῦμα is used collectively, as is
shewn by ἐπασσύτερον (for which see A
383). This latter word contains the
point of comparison, v. 427.

140

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ rv.)

πόντῳ μέν τε πρῶτα κορύσσεται, αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα

χέρσῳ ῥηγνύμενον μεγάλα βρέμει, ἀμφὶ δέ τ’ ἄκρας 425
κυρτὸν ἰὸν κορυφοῦται, ἀποπτύει δ᾽ ἁλὸς ἄχνην'

ὧς τότ᾽ ἐπασσύτεραι Δαναῶν κίνυντο φάλαγγες

νωλεμέως πολεμόνδε.

κέλευε δὲ οἷσιν ἕκαστος

4
ἡγεμόνων" οἱ δ᾽ ἄλλοι ἀκὴν ἴσαν, οὐδέ κε φαίης
/
τόσσον λαὸν ἕπεσθαι ἔχοντ᾽ ἐν στήθεσιν αὐδήν, 480
A / A
συγῇ, δειδιότες σημάντορας" ἀμφὶ δὲ πᾶσιν
/
τεύχεα ποικίλ᾽ ἔλαμπε, TA εἱμένοι ἐστιχόωντο.
Τρῶες δ᾽, ὥς τ᾽ ὄιες πολυπάμονος ἀνδρὸς ἐν αὐλῇ
/ e / 3 / Ω LY
μυρίαι ἐστήκασιν ἀμελγόμεναι γάλα λευκὸν

ἀξηχὲς μεμακυῖΐαι, ἀκούουσαι ὄπα ἀρνῶν,

435

ὧς Τρώων ἀλαλητὸς ava στρατὸν εὐρὺν ὀρώρειν"
οὐ γὰρ πάντων ἦεν ὁμὸς θρόος οὐδ᾽ ἴα γῆρυς,

ἀλλὰ γλῶσσ᾽ ἐμέμικτο, πολύκλητοι δ᾽ ἔσαν ἄνδρες.
ὦρσε δὲ τοὺς μὲν “Apns, τοὺς δὲ γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη

Δειμός τ᾽ ἠδὲ Φόβος καὶ "Ἔρις ἄμοτον μεμαυῖα,

440

“A 3 ὃ “ / e 4
peos ἀνδροφόνοιο κασιγνήτη ἑτάρη Te,
ἥ τ᾽ ὀλίγη μὲν πρῶτα κορύσσεται, αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα

424, μέν τε, so A and one or two other
MSS., vulg. nev rd. But La R. remarks
that τὰ πρῶτα always means ‘ primum,
‘Cat the first,” 7.c. once for a

or δεύτερον it is always πρῶτα alone: cf.
442 below. The use of re in similes
is very common, v. H. G. § 332; La R.
uotes sixteen instances in books B-E
alone.
426. ἰόν, so Ar.: La R. ἐόν with MSS.,
but this is far less vigorous and pictur-

esque.
428. vod , @ word of uncertain
origin. L. Meyer derives from root ram,

to rest (ἠρέμα, etc.; v. Curt. Ht. no. 454);
but there is no instance of the r of this
root passing into ὦ in any cognate lan-
guage. Diintzer refers it to root dA, as
if from an adj. ὄλεμος, in sense ‘‘ not to
be destroyed,” imperishable; but this
hardly suits the sense, ‘‘ unceasingly.”
433. For the pointed contrast between
the silence of the Greeks and the clamour
of the Trojans cf. Γ 1.9. Τρῶες is not
followed by any verb, the sentence being
interrupted by the simile, and taken up
in an altered form in 436. We havea
similar case in ν 81-4, ἡ δ᾽, ὥς τ᾽... ὧς
ἄρα τῆς. πολυπάμονος, so A; all other
authorities give πολυπάμμονος, which

leg. A.
6, Z 489, etc.; when followed by ἔπειτα.

Hinrichs considers an Aeolic form, de-
rived from root pa (mwér-ma, etc.), for
πάτμων : -παμονος, he says, would be
Doric, and therefore out of place in H.
But πάομαι regularly has a in its deriva-
tives, πέπαμαι, etc.

435. ἀζηχής, according to Doderlein,
and Clemm in C. St. viii. 46, for ἀ-διηχής
‘‘very piercing,” of sound. Soin O 658,
P 741. But in o 3 and probably O 25
it means ‘‘incessant,” as though from
ἀ-διεχής. Déderlein thinks that the two
words have got confused.

437. Compare B 804. The origin of
the form ta (with masc. ἰῴ only Z 422) is
very doubtful ; it does not seem possible
to connect it with ula (for opla, σεμ-ια).
See Curt. Gr. Zt. no. 599 and p. 594.

438. πολύκλητοι, like the more com-
mon πολνηγερέες, called together from
many parts.

440. The three half-personified spirits
of battle must not be regarded as siding
with either party, but as arousing alike
τοὺς μέν and τοὺς δέ. Cf. A 73, N 299,
Ο 119, Σ 585, in none of which are they
actual persons in the war.

442. Cf. 424, and the well-known
imitation of the lines by Verg. Aen. iv.
173 sqq., especially ‘‘ Ingrediturque solo
et caput inter nubila condit.”’

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (ιν)

141

3 aA ? / 4 Ἁ 3 \ “
οὐρανῷ ἐστήριξε κάρη καὶ ἐπὶ χθονὶ βαίνει.
ἥ σφιν καὶ τότε νεῖκος ὁμοίιον ἔμβαλε μέσσῳ
ἐρχομένη καθ᾽ ὅμιλον, ὀφέλλουσα στόνον ἀνδρῶν. 445

enw Ψ 7, oe? 9 a Ψ ’ “
οἱ δ᾽ ὅτε δή ῥ᾽ ἐς χῶρον ἕνα ξυνιόντες ἵκοντο,

4 eo ν € 4 \ > , > 3 a

σύν ῥ᾽ ἔβαλον ῥινούς, σὺν δ᾽ ἔγχεα καὶ μένε᾽ ἀνδρῶν
[4 > A 3 ’ὔἢ 3 /
χαλκεοθωρήκων" ἀτὰρ ἀσπίδες ὀμφαλόεσσαι
ἔπληντ᾽ ἀλλήλῃσι, πολὺς δ᾽ ὀρυμαγδὸς ὀρώρειν.
ἔνθα δ᾽ ἅμ᾽ οἰμωγή τε καὶ εὐχωλὴ πέλεν ἀνδρῶν 460
9 4 \ 3 V4 e/ ᾿] 4 aA
ὀλλύντων τε Kal ὀλλυμένων, ῥέε δ᾽ αἴματι γαῖα.
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε χείμαρροι ποταμοὶ κατ᾽ ὄρεσφι ῥέοντες
3 4 4 ΝΜ a
ἐς μισγάγκειαν ξυμβάλλετον ὄβριμον ὕδωρ
κρουνῶν ἐκ μεγάλων κοίλης ἔντοσθε χαράδρης"
τῶν δέ τε τηλόσε δοῦπον ἐν οὔρεσιν ἔκλυε ποιμήν" 455
ὧς τῶν μισγομένων γένετο iayn τε πόνος τε.
πρῶτος δ᾽ ᾿Αντίλοχος Τρώων ἕλεν ἄνδρα κορυστὴν

3 \ 3 [4 ’ὔ 3 /
ἐσθλὸν ἐνὶ προμάχοισι, Θαλυσιάδην ᾿Εχέπωλον'

, eo ΜΝ a 4 7 e ,
τὸν ῥ᾽ ἔβαλε πρῶτος κόρυθος φάλον ἱπποδασείης,
4 \ ’ “A 4 > yy 9 9 f. ”
ἐν δὲ μετώπῳ πῆξε, πέρησε δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὀστέον εἴσω 460
αἰχμὴ χαλκείη" τὸν δὲ σκότος ὄσσε κάλυψεν,
ἤρυπε δ᾽, ὡς ὅτε πύργος, ἐνὶ κρατερῇ ὑσμίνῃ.
τὸν δὲ πεσόντα ποδῶν ἔλαβε κρείων ᾿Ελεφήνωρ

4

448. Notice the aor. ἐστήριξε and pres.
βαίνει side by side, of momentary and
continuous action as usual.

444, For ὁμοίιον see 315.

448. ὀμφαλόεσσαι, see on A 34. The
ἀσπίδες are merely a repetition of ῥινούς
above. .

449. trdnvro, “met,” from πλα- =
we\-, the only pres. forms being πελάξω
and πελάω ζεννι. Hom.) The perf.
κεπλημένος.8 found in μ 108.

450. Observe the chiasmus οἰμωγή...
εὐχωλή. .. ὀλλύντων . . . ὀλλυμένων.

452. ὄρεσφι, locative, with κατά as
with πρό, Τ' 3.

453, μισγάγκειαν, “watersmeet,” place
where two valleys (ἄγκεα) join their
streams (ἄπ. λεγ.).

454. κρονυνῶν ἐκ μεγάλων seems simply
to denote the great body of water ‘‘ fed
from mighty springs.” The χαράδρη
will be the ravine leading down to the
μισγάγκεια. The simile is imitated in
Verg. Aen. ii. 307, xii. 523.

455. τηλόσε, the use of the derminus
ad quem instead of a quo is regular in
cases like this ; the reaching to a distance
is regarded as a property of the power

of hearing, not of the sound, II 515
δύνασαι δὲ σὺ πάντοσ᾽ ἀκούειν, cf. A
21, πεύθετο γὰρ Κύπρονδε μέγα κλέος.

456. πόνος, Ar. for φόβος of MSS.,
because he held that φόβος in H. always
mean “ flight” not ‘‘fear,” and in the
present case flight has not yet begun on
either side. So Lehrs, Ar. p. 76.

457. Antilochos the son of Nestor has
not before been mentioned. ἕλεν, in
pregnant sense, as very often in 1].,
‘*slew”’; see note on A 328. κορυστήν,
in full armour, on the analogy of θωρηκ-
τής, ἀσπιστής, αἰχμητής (ontthis formation
see H. G. § 116, 2). In the compound
ἱπποκορυστής however the termination
-rns seems to have the usual transitive
force, ‘‘arrayer of chariots,” and Paley
suggests that the simple form may here
mean ‘‘an officer, one who marshals,
κορύσσει, his troops.”

459-461 = Z 9-11. πῆξε, he plunged
the spear—the active mpyvyu is not
intrans. in H. except in the perf.
πέπηγε. For φάλος see note on I 862,

462. On ὡς ὅτε without a finite verb
see B 394,

142

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ (ιν.

Χαλκωδοντιάδης, μεγαθύμων ἀρχὸς ᾿Αβάντων,

ἕλκε δ᾽ ὑπὲκ βελέων λελιημένος ὄφρα τάχιστα

465

τεύχεα συλήσειε" μίνυνθα δέ οἱ γένεθ᾽ ὁρμή"
νεκρὸν γὰρ ἐρύοντα ἰδὼν μεγάθυμος ᾿Αγήνωρ
πλευρά, τά οἱ κύψαντι παρ᾽ ἀσπίδος ἐξεφαάνθη,
οὔτησε ξυστῷ χαλκήρεϊ, λῦσε δὲ γυῖα.
ὧς τὸν μὲν λίπε θυμός, ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ δ᾽ ἔργον ἐτύχθη 470
ἀργαλέον Τρώων καὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν" οἱ δὲ λύκοι ὡς
ἀλλήλοις ἐπόρουσαν, ἀνὴρ δ᾽ ἄνδρ᾽ ἐδνοπάλιξεν.
ἔνθ᾽ ἔβαλ᾽ ᾿Ανθεμίωνος νἱὸν Τελαμώνιος Αἴας,
ἠίθεον θαλερὸν Σιμοείσιον, ὅν ποτε μήτηρ

Ἴδηθεν κατιοῦσα παρ᾽ ὄχθῃσιν Σιμόεντος

475

γείνατ᾽, ἐπεί pa τοκεῦσιν ἅμ᾽ ὅσπετο μῆλα ἰδέσθαι"
τούνεκώ μιν κάλεον Σιμοείσιον" οὐδὲ τοκεῦσιν
θρέπτρα φίλοις ἀπέδωκε, μινυνθάδιος δέ οἱ αἰὼν
ἔπλεθ᾽ ὑπ᾽ Αἴαντος μεγαθύμου δουρὶ δαμέντι.

πρῶτον γάρ μιν ἰόντα βάλε στῆθος παρὰ μαζὸν

480

δεξιόν, ἀντικρὺς δὲ δι’ ὥμου χάλκεον ἔγχος
ἦλθεν" ὁ δ᾽ ἐν κονίῃσι χαμαὶ πέσεν αἴγειρος ὥς,

ε΄,

ἥ ῥά τ᾽ ἐν εἱαμενῇ ἕλεος μεγάλοιο πεφύκῃ

464 = Β 541.

465. ὄφρα is perhaps to be taken with
λελιημένος, compare ΕἸ, 690 λελιημένος
ὄφρα τάχιστα ὥσαιτ᾽ ᾿Αργείους, cf. τ 367
ἀρώμενος εἶος ἵκοιο : cf. also Z 361, II 653.
In the second case however, as well as in
the present passage, it is possible to make
λελιημένος = eagerly (as Μ 106, Π 552,
βάν ῥ᾽ ἰθὺς Δαναῶν λελιημένοι), ὄφρα going
with the principal verb. Compare also
note on A 133, and on the other side
H. G. § 307.

467. yap, so best MSS., vulg. γάρ ῥ᾽,
which is at best a clumsy compound
(though it is found a few times) and not
required by either sense or metre; for
épvovra originally began with F, and the
caesura alone in this part of the line
would suffice to lengthen the short
syllable. The same omission should be
made in B 342, though with only one
MS. |

468. πλευρά, neut. only here, and prob-
ably A 437, elsewhere πλευραί. Cf. A
122, νεῦρα by νευρή (bowstring). παρ’

(Ses, were exposed beside his shield.

470. atrw, the body, as opposed to
the departed θυμός : see on A 4.

472. ἐδνοπάλιζεν, “ shook,” an obscure

word recurring only ξ 512, τὰ od pdxea
δνοπαλίξεις, apparently ‘‘thou shalt
flutter, flaunt thy rags,” al. ‘‘shalt
clothe thee.” Neither interpretation
throws much light on the present
passage. No convincing derivation has

en suggested ; perhaps it is connected
with γνόφαλλον (cf. δνόφος by γνόφος and
xvépas) in Alkman, frag. 34 = κνέφαλλον,
Aristoph. frag. 84, which are related to
κνάπτω, “wool torn off in carding cloth”
(Hayman on ἕ 5812). But the connexion
in sense is by no means obvious.

474, With Σιμοείσιος cf. Σάτνιος, a
contracted form for Σατνιοείσιος EH 443,
and Σκαμάνδριος Z 402, all proper names
of Trojans derived from rivers.

478. Cf. P 302. θρέπτρα, recompense
for rearing him: compare the πλόκαμος
"Ivdxw θρεπτήριος of Aesch. Cho. 6.

479. For tm’ Αἴαντος δουρί see Γ 436.

480. πρῶτον, here local, in the fore-
front.

483. εἰαμένῃ, lowland, apparently from
root ds, ἧς, to sit, for ἡσαμένη, cf. ἡμένῳ
ἐν χώρῳ, Theok. xiii. 40. (Curt. £¢. no.
568.) πεφύκῃ is Hermann’s conjecture
for πεφύκει of all MSS. ; the pluperf. is
entirely out of place in a simile, and of

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A tv.)

143

λείη, ἀτάρ TE οἱ ὄξοι ἐπ᾿ ἀκροτάτῃ Wepvaciy:
A ’ 9 ¢ A 3 \ 39 ᾽’ὔ
τὴν μέν θ᾽ ἁρματοπηγὸς ἀνὴρ αἴθωνι σιδήρῳ 485
ἐξέταμ᾽, ὄφρα ἴτυν κάμψῃ περικαλλέι δίφρῳ.
ἡ μέν T ἀζομένη κεῖται ποταμοῖο παρ᾽ ὄχθας.
τοῖον ἄρ᾽ ᾿Ανθεμίδην Σιμοείσιον ἐξενάριξεν

Αἴας διογενής.

τοῦ δ᾽ ΓΑντιφος αἰολοθώρηξ

Πριαμίδης καθ᾽ ὅμιλον ἀκόντισεν ὀξέι δουρί: 490
τοῦ μὲν ἅμαρθ'᾽, ὁ δὲ Λεῦκον ᾿Οδυσσέος ἐσθλὸν ἑταῖρον
/ . A / ς 7 > >» J
βεβλήκει βουβῶνα νέκυν ἑτέρωσ᾽ ἐρύοντα"
Ψ 3. 3 3 9 A \ “ eM /
ἤριπε δ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ αὐτῷ, νεκρὸς δέ οἱ ἔκπεσε χειρός.
τοῦ δ᾽ ᾿Οδυσεὺς μάλα θυμὸν ἀποκταμένοιο χολώθη,
βῆ δὲ διὰ προμάχων κεκορυθμένος αἴθοπι χαλκῴῷ,. 495
στῆ δὲ μάλ᾽ ἐγγὺς ἐών, καὶ ἀκόντισε δουρὶ φαεινῷ

ἀμφὶ ὃ παπτήνας.
ἀνδρὸς ἀκοντίσσαντος.

ὑπὸ δὲ Τρῶες κεκάδοντο
ὁ δ᾽ οὐχ ἅλιον βέλος ἧκεν,

ἀλλ᾽ νἱὸν Πριάμοιο νόθον βάλε Δημοκόωντα,
ὅς of ᾿Αβυδόθεν ἦλθε, παρ᾽ ἵππων ὠκειάων" 500
τόν ῥ᾽ ᾿Οδυσεὺς ἑτάροιο χολωσάμενος βάλε δουρὶ
κόρσην" ἡ δ᾽ ἑτέροιο διὰ κροτάφοιο πέρησεν

3 \ / \ \ / ΜΝ 7
αἰχμὴ χαλκείη" τὸν δὲ σκότος ὄσσε κάλυψεν,

᾽ ΝΥ 7 4 7 Ἁ ’; > » 3 9 aA
δούπησεν δὲ πεσών, ἀράβησε δὲ τεύχε ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ.

, > / / / vd
χώρησαν ὃ ὑπό τε πρόμαχοι καὶ φαίδιμος “Exrwp: 505

course the authority of MSS. as between
εἰ and gis ntl. La R. quotes a number
of instances where the perf. subj. has
been thus corrupted into the plup., P
435, II 633, A 477, a 316, o 133, x 469.
ἔλεος, cf. ρ 208, alyelpwy ὑδατοτρεφέων.

484. Mure quotes ‘‘the practice, still
common in Southern Europe, of trimming
up the stem of the poplar to within a
few feet of the top, which, left untouched,
preserves the appearance of a bushy tuft,”
so that the comparison is between this
tuft and the warrior’s plume.

485. The use of so soft and weak a
wood as poplar for the felloe of a wheel
is certainly curious. The wood is suited
to the purpose however by its flexibility
and elasticity (Buchholz, H. R. i. 2, 240).
Ameis suggests that the bronze tire
(ἐπίσσωτρον) would supply the requisite
hardness. Probably the Homeric car-
penter had not learned to bend tough
wood by the aid of steam, and was
therefore driven to the use of the weaker
kinds for purposes such as the pre-
sent.

489. αἰολοθώρηξ, like κορυθαίολος,
implies the quick Aeshing of the metallic
surface. The idea of flexibility or easy
motion (Buttm. Lexil. p. 66) does not
suit the solid plates of the Homeric
cuirass,

492. βεβλήκει, the plup. implies violent
hitting; it is an intensive imperfect, not
a pluperfect in our sense ; see Delbriick,
E. F. iv. 85. ¢, ‘‘to the other
side,” from Antiphos’ point of view.

497. κεκάδοντο from χάζομαι: the x
of the pres. is not organic, but merely
an affection of x produced by the s of
root skad (lit. to cut, sever oneself: cf.
Lat. cedo).

498. ἀνδρός is a causal genitive (cf.
τοῦ ἀποκταμένοιο 494).

500. trav: apparently Priam kept ἃ
stud-farm at Abydos. His horses were
of the famous breed of Tros, for which
see Εἰ 265-7, T 221-230. It would be
simpler to understand ‘‘ beside his
chariot,” like wap’ ἀσπίδος above (468 ;
so Mr. Monro); but the order of the
words is against this.

144

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ (ιν)

) a \ , v > 9 \ 7
Αργεῖοι δὲ μέγα ἴαχον, ἐρύσαντο δὲ νεκρούς,

ἔθυσαν δὲ πολὺ προτέρω.

νεμέσησε δ᾽ ᾿Απόλλων

Περγάμου ἐκκατιδών, Τρώεσσι δὲ κέκλετ᾽ ἀύσας-
ργαμ ρ

{{

ὄρνυσθ᾽, ἱππόδαμοι Τρῶες, μηδ᾽ εἴκετε χάρμης
᾿Αργείοις, ἐπεὶ οὔ σφι λίθος χρὼς οὐδὲ σίδηρος

\ 3 / ’ ,
χαλκὸν ἀνασχέσθαι ταμεσίχροα βαλλομένοισιν.
3 \ 5) ) \ , , 2 /
ov μὰν οὐδ ᾿Αχιλεὺς Θέτιδος πάις ἠυκόμοιο

ὦρσε Διὸς θυγάτηρ κυδίστη τριτογένεια,

ἐρχομένη καθ᾽ ὅμιλον, ὅθι μεθιέντας ἴδοιτο.

ἔνθ᾽ ᾿Αμαρυγκεΐδην Διώρεα μοῖρα πέδησεν"
χερμαδίῳ γὰρ βλῆτο παρὰ σφυρὸν ὀκριόεντι
κνήμην δεξιτερήν" βάλε δὲ Θρῃκῶν ἀγὸς ἀνδρῶν,

Πείροος ᾿Ιμβρασίδης, ὃς ἄρ᾽ Αἰνόθεν εἰληλούθειν"

3 / 2 9 , A ’ \
ἀμφοτέρω δὲ τένοντε καὶ ὀστέα Nadas ἀναιδὴς
ἄχρις ἀπηλοίησεν' ὁ δ᾽ ὕπτιος ἐν κονίῃσιν

4 ΝΜ “a μὲ 4
κάππεσεν, ἄμφω χεῖρε φίλοις ἑτάροισι πετάσσας,

θυμὸν ἀποπνείων.

ὅ10
4 2 > ON ’ ,, , 5)
μάρναται, ἀλλ ἐπὶ νηυσὶ χόλον θυμαλγέα πέσσει.
4 4% 9 A / A / °“9 ΑΝ > \
Os φάτ ἀπὸ πτόλιος δεινὸς θεός" αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχαιοὺς
515
520
ὁ δ᾽ ἐπέδραμεν, ὅς ῥ᾽ ἔβαλέν περ,
525

Πείροος, οὗτα δὲ δουρὶ παρ᾽ ὀμφαλόν" ἐκ δ᾽ ἄρα πᾶσαι

χύὕντο χαμαὶ χολάδες, τὸν δὲ σκότος ὄσσε κάλυψεν.
τὸν δὲ Θόας Αἰτωλὸς ἀπεσσύμενον βάλε δουρὶ

508. Πέργαμος, the citadel of Troy,
where was the temple of Apollo, E 446:
afterwards called τὸ Πέργαμον (cf. Ἴλιον
by Homer’s“IXcos) or τὰ Πέργαμα. The
tragedians use it in its primitive sense
as ἃ common name, ‘‘citadel”; it is
doubtless conn. with πύργος.

515. τριτογένεια, also O 39, X 183,
y 378: derived by the Greeks from a
river Triton, variously located in Boiotia
or Thessaly, or from the lake Tritonis in
Libya. All these words are no doubt
connected with a stem τριτο-, meaning
‘water, which appears in τρίτων,᾿ Auderpirn,
Skt. trita (Fick). Ameis suggests that
this may contain an allusion to the myth
that all the gods were children of Okeanos
and Tethys (= 201); Athene has no
special connexion with water. Another
derivation (Eustath.) from an alleged
Cretan word tpirw=head (7.e. born from
the head of Zeus) lacks all trustworthy
confirmation. (See note 10 in Butcher
and Lang’s Odyssey, p. 415.) The
original significance of the name is how-
ever not now to be discovered. Sce
note on ᾿Ατρυτώνη, B 157.

517. πέδησεν, ὑ. 6. prevented his escape ;
X 5, Ἕκτορα δ' αὐτοῦ μεῖναι ὁλοιὴ μοῖρα
πέδησεν.

521. révowre: Homer generally uses
this word in the dual, only twice in
plur., apparently from a belief that the
tendons always went in pairs. πάντα τὰ
τεταμένα νεῦρα révovras Ὅμηρος λέγει, Ar.
on T 478; cf. KX 896. ἀναιδής, relent-
less, i.e. stubborn; cf. N 189 (where
however there is no intimation of the
stone doing any harm to a human being),
and the famous description of the stone
of Sisyphos, \ 598. Aristotle (Rhet. iii.
11) mentions this as a case of the attri-
bution of human qualities to lifeless
objects.

522. ἄχρις recurs II 324, P 599, in
all cases in description of wounds (the
form ἄχρι as a preposition with gen.
σ 370 only). It must mean ‘‘ utterly,”
though this creates some difficulty in the
explanation of P 599, q.v.

524. ῥ᾽ evidently represents a lost F’
= é, him.

527. ἀπεσσύμενον, Ar., vulg. ἐπεσσ.
with most and best MSS. : the advance

X

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ (ιν.

145

στέρνον ὑπὲρ patoio, πάγη δ᾽ ἐν πνεύμονι χαλκός.
ἀγχίμολον δέ οἱ ἦλθε Θόας, ἐκ δ᾽ ὄβριμον ἔγχος
3 ’ ’ > ἢ \ / 3 4
ἐσπάσατο στέρνοιο, ἐρύσσατο δὲ ξίφος ὀξύ, 580

ao / ΄ , 2 δ᾽ ¥ θ / ,
τῷ ὅ ye γαστέρα τύψε μέσην, ἐκ δ᾽ αἴνυτο θυμόν.
τεύχεα δ᾽ οὐκ ἀπέδυσε' περίστησαν γὰρ ἑταῖροι
Θρήικες ἀκρόκομοι δολίχ᾽ ἔγχεα χερσὶν ἔχοντες,
οἵ ἑ μέγαν περ ἐόντα καὶ ἴφθιμον καὶ ἀγαυὸν
ὦσαν ἀπὸ σφείων" ὁ δὲ χασσάμενος πελεμίχθη. 535
Φ 4 > 9 / x, 93 , /
ὧς τώ γ᾽ ἐν κονίῃσι Tap ἀλλήλοισι τετάσθην,

e A “A e 3.9 A ’

ἡ τοι ὁ μὲν Θρῃκῶν, ὁ δ᾽ ᾿Επειῶν χαλκοχιτώνων
ἡγεμόνες" πολλοὶ δὲ περικτείνοντο καὶ ἄλλοι.

ἔνθα κεν οὐκέτι ἔργον ἀνὴρ ὀνόσαιτο μετελθών,
fi > ΜΝ \ 3? 4 ] ἤ A
ὅς τις ἔτ᾽ ἄβλητος Kai ἀνούτατος ὀξέι χαλκῷ 540
δινεύοι κατὰ μέσσον, ἄγοι δέ ἑ Παλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη

. EXOv 3 A 4 3 4 3 4

χειρὸς ἑλοῦσα, ἀτὰρ βελέων ἀπερύκοι epwny:
πολλοὶ γὰρ Τρώων καὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν ἤματι κείνῳ
πρηνέες ἐν κονίῃσι παρ᾽ ἀλλήλοισι τέταντο.

of Peiroos is completed in 524, so it is
more natural to suppose with Ar. that
he was now retreating. There was also
8 variant ἐπεσσύμενος.

583. ἀκρόκομοι, cf. Β 542 Αβαντες
ὄπιθεν κομόωντες, and note there. The
ὑψιχαῖται ἄνδρες of Pind. P. iv. 172 per-
haps mean the same thing.

535. πελεμίχθη, ‘‘staggered,” was
shaken by the attack, probably conn.
with pello, πάλλω.

539. For οὐκέτι there was a curious
variant of κέ τι; it is not quite clear
from the Scholia whether Ar. adopted
it or not. If so, he probably did it on
the analogy of ἄν κεν in N 127. The
repetition of κεν would be quite un-

omeric, and οὐκέτι gives a perfectly

sense, viz. ‘‘it had now come to
is, that none could make light,” as
might conceivably have happened before.

See 1 164 and note. μετελθών, entering
the fight.

540. ἄβλητος by missiles, dvobraros
by thrust, as usual.

542. ἑλοῦσα, ἀτάρ, so La R. with one

᾿ @ υ

MS.: A has ἑλοῦσ᾽, ἀτάρ, one ἑλοῦσα
αὐτάρ, and the majority ἑλοῦσ᾽ αὐτάρ.
But αὐτάρ elsewhere always has the first
syllable in the arsis ; and it is very com-
mon to find a hiatus before drdp. La
R. quotes © 503, A 732, Ψ 694, « 83,
@ 229, for the hiatus, and compares
E 287 (ἔτυχες ἀτάρ), E 485, for the
lengthening of a preceding short syllable.
All these cases occur after a stop in the
principal caesura, and there is therefore
no reason to suppose that ἀτάρ ever be-
gan with a consonant. ἐρωήν, the rush,
impetus ; cf. T 62.

543. Bentley and Heyne, followed by
Nauck and others, consider the last two
lines of the book as spurious. The words
ἤματι κείνῳ, in combination with the
plupf. réravro, certainly look as though
they belonged to the end, not to the
beginning of a day’s fighting, and ma
therefore have been a rhapsodist’s “tag,”
meant to wind up the end of a day’s
recitation, and omitted when A was im-
mediately followed by E.

146

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E αὐ

IAIAAO® E.

Διομήδους ἀριστεΐία.

ἔνθ᾽ αὖ Τυδείδῃ Διομήδεϊ Παλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη
δῶκε μένος καὶ θάρσος, iv’ ἔκδηλος μετὰ πᾶσιν
᾿Αργείοισι γένοιτο ἰδὲ κλέος ἐσθλὸν ἄροιτο.
δαῖέ οἱ ἐκ κόρυθός τε καὶ ἀσπίδος ἀκάματον πῦρ,

Ε

This book contains the first of the
ἀριστεῖαι, or victorious careers of indi-
vidual heroes. All others, whether
Greek or Trojan, are subordinated to
Diomedes, who is the central figure down
to the middle of the next book. Hence
Herodotos (ii. 116) quotes Z 289-292 as
occurring ἐν Διομήδεος ἀριστείῃ.

The book falls into three main parts:
(i.) 1-480, Diomedes makes havoc of the
Trojans, and though wounded by Pan-
daros returns to the fight, and wounds
Aphrodite by the help of Athene ; (ii.)
481-710, Ares and Apollo rally the
Trojans, and Diomedes has to retreat ;
Sarpedon kills Tlepolemos; (iii.) 711-
909, Hera and Athene come to help the
Greeks, and Athene and Diomedes wound
Ares, and drive him to Olympos.

The critical difficulties of this book
(with which we must include Z 1-311),
unlike those which have preceded it, are
internal rather than external. The most
serious of all is to be found in the speech
of Diomedes to Glaukos, where he speaks
of the danger of a mortal fighting against
a god (Z 128). This is quite unintelli-
gible in the mouth of a hero fresh from
victory over Aphrodite and Ares ; while
the very doubt as to whether Glaukos be
not a god is inconsistent with the faculty
bestowed on Diomedes in E 127-8 of
discerning gods from men. Again the

ein which Athene takes Ares out
of the battle (E 27-86) is most abruptly
introduced without connexion at the

beginning or end. The words of Athene
to Diomedes (E 124-182) evidently im-
ply that she means to leave the battle-

eld, and that Diomedes is to rely upon
himself ; yet in 290 she is there to guide
his dart, though in 418 we find her in
Olympos. There is therefore good ground
for the supposition that the whole in-
cident of the wounding of Aphrodite is
an addition to the original narrative.

This jis still more the case with the
wounding of Ares at the end of the book.
This seems like an attempt to outbid the
wounding of Aphrodite, and is accord-
ingly not free from traces of exaggera-
tion. The episode of the fight between
Sarpedon and Tlepolemos is most prob-
ably of much later origin than the
greater portion of the Iliad. See note
on B 652. With these exceptions how-
ever, and a few of smaller compass men-
tioned in the notes, there is no reason
to suppose that any part of the book is
to be ascribed to any period after the
bloom of Epic poetry, nor any difficulty
in supposing it to have been inserted
into the original plan of the poem by
the original author or an immediate
successor.

In fact the oldest part of the ἀριστεία
must in all probability have been the
earliest of such insertions between A and
A, and forms the necessary foundation
for the last part of Z, which is no doubt
contemporary with it. It is likely how-
ever that the introduction of the wound-
ing of the gods has dislocated the original
framework, as it is hardly possible to

Ἢ

LAIAAOS Ε (Ὁ

147

ἀστέρ᾽ ὀπωρινῷ ἐναλίγκιον, ὅς τε μάλιστα 5
λαμπρὸν παμφαίνῃσι λελουμένος ᾿Ωκεανοῖο"
τοῖόν οἱ πῦρ δαῖεν ἀπὸ κρατός τε καὶ ὦμων,
ὦρσε δέ μιν κατὰ μέσσον, ὅθι πλεῖστοι κλονέοντο.
ἦν δέ τις ἐν Τρώεσσι Δάρης ἀφνειὸς ἀμύμων,
ἱρεὺς Ηφαίστοιο" δύω δέ οἱ υἱέες ἤστην, 10
Φηγεὺς ᾿Ιδαῖός τε, μάχης ἐὺ εἰδότε πάσης"
τώ οἱ ἀποκρινθέντε ἐναντίω ὁρμηθήτην'
τὼ μὲν ah ἵπποιιν, ὁ δ᾽ ἀπὸ χθονὸς ὥρνυτο πεζός.
οἱ δ᾽ ὅτε δὴ σχεδὸν ἦσαν ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλοισιν ἰόντες,
Φηγεύς ῥα πρότερος προΐει δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος" 1ὅ
Τυδεΐδεω δ᾽ ὑπὲρ ὦμον ἀριστερὸν ἤλυθ᾽ ἀκωκὴ

ἔγχεος, οὐδ᾽ ἔβαλ᾽ αὐτόν.

ὁ δ᾽ ὕστερος ὦὥρνυτο χαλκῷ

Τυδεΐδης" τοῦ δ᾽ οὐχ ἅλιον βέλος ἔκφυγε χειρός,

leave a satisfactory continuous narrative
when these are omitted; even as the
book stands there are several points in
which the description lacks clearness.
The action is in the highest degree
rapid and varied. The numerous myths
and legends of the gods which are peculiar
to the book do not betray any other sign
of late origin; and the merit of scenes
like the wounding of Aphrodite and even
of Ares cannot be better exhibited than
by contrast with such a specimen of the
work of the decadence as the Θεομαχία
in Φ.
4, Saté of is added epexegetically to
δῶκε, and hence without a conjunction,
as ε 234, etc. The very old Ambrosian
MS. reads daie δέ οἱ ἐκ κόρυθος, which
may point to an older date δέ οἱ κόρ.
For the idea cf. Σ 206-214 and X 134-5.
5. This fine simile is essentially like
that of X 26-29, whence we see that the
star of summer is Seirios, ‘‘the dog of
Orion.” For ὀπωρινός, which hence
must mean the ‘‘ dog-days,” the time of
the heliacal rising of Seirios, rather
than what we cali autumn, cf. also Π
385, ᾧΦ 346, A 192 (τεθαλυῖα, as the
season of fruit). The Homeric division
of the year is into spring, early summer
(θέρος), late summer (ὀπώρη), and winter,
and corresponds with the fact that the
transition from the heat of summer to
the cold of winter is in Greece extremely
rapid. Hence there is good reason for
connecting the syllable ὁπ- with root ὁπ,
found in émrrés; it will mean ‘‘ the
ripening time,” in which sense the Lat.

coqgwo is alsoused. The scansion ὀπωρῖνός,
though invariable in H., is hard to ex-
plain. The suffixis perhaps to becompared
with -ewo- (ποθ-εινό-ς, etc., H. 6. § 118)
and -evvo- (ἀργ-εννό-ς, épeB-evvd-s) rather
than with the -wo- of φήγ-ινο-ς, eldp-wo-s ;
aud this supposition, it will be observed,
is supported by the difference of accent.
For the elision of - of the dat. cf. H. 6.
§ 376 (3).

6. λελουμένος, as Z 489, λοετρῶν ’ONxed-
voo. For the gen. cf. Z 508, etc. For
παμφαίνῃσι some MSS. give παμφαίνησι,
which is doubtless an older form of this
subjunctive. Some edd. have taken it
for an indic., but this is not possible, as
the non-thematic present is found only
with vowel-stems, as δάμνησι, 746. The
derived form παμφανόωσα proves nothing.

7. Schol. A on this line is interesting
as giving one of the few extant specimens
of the method of Zoilos, the famous
‘Ounpoudorié—‘* Zwitros ὁ ᾿Εφέσιος κατη-
γορεῖ τοῦ τόπου τούτου, καὶ μέμφεται τῴ
ποιητῇ ὅτι λίαν γελοίως πεποίηκεν ἐκ τῶν
ὥμων τοῦ Διομήδους καιόμενον wip* ἐκιν-
δύνευσε γὰρ ἂν καταφλεχθῆναι ὁ Hows.”
The strokes of the lash do not seem to
have been very formidable.

9. For this exordium cf. P 575.

10. Hephaistos, like Athene, though
represented as allied with the Greeks, is
worshipped in Troy. ἤστην, here only.

12. ἀποκρινθέντε, separating them-
selves from the throng. ol, for the dat.
after ἐναντίος cf. I 190, A 67, but it is
only here used of hostile meeting, in
which sense the gen. is commoner.

148

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (Ὁ

ἀλλ᾽ ἔβαλε στῆθος μεταμάξιον, ὦσε δ᾽ ad ἵππων.
Ἰδαῖος δ᾽ ἀπόρουσε λιπὼν περικαλλέα δίφρον, 20
2ῸΣν a 2 a ,
οὐδ ἔτλη περιβῆναι ἀδελφειοῦ κταμένοιο"
50Ὸ.Ν \ > , > A e / nw ,ὔ
οὐδὲ γὰρ οὐδέ κεν αὐτὸς ὑπέκφυγε κῆρα μέλαιναν,
ἀλλ᾽ “Ἥφαιστος ἔρυτο, σάωσε δὲ νυκτὶ καλύψας,
ὡς δή οἱ μὴ πάγχυ γέρων ἀκαχήμενος εἴη.
ἴππους δ᾽ ἐξελάσας μεγαθύμου Τυδέος υἱὸς 25
δῶκεν ἑταίροισιν κατάγειν κοίλας ἐπὶ νῆας.
Τρῶες δὲ μεγάθυμοι ἐπεὶ ἴδον υἷε Δάρητος
τὸν μὲν ἀλευάμενον, τὸν δὲ κτάμενον παρ᾽ ὄχεσφιν,
aA > ἢ / > \ “A ) 7
πᾶσιν ὀρίνθη θυμὸς" ἀτὰρ γλαυκῶπις Αθήνη
\ ς a> >» 2 , a ”
χειρὸς ἑλοῦσ᾽ ἐπέεσσι προσηύδα θοῦρον “Apna: 80
“Apes, “Apes βροτολοιγέ, μιαιφόνε, τευχεσιπλῆτα,
οὐκ ἂν δὴ Τρῶας μὲν ἐάσαιμεν καὶ ᾿Αχαιοὺς
4 2 e / ‘ \ a > ἡ“
μάρνασθ,, ὁπποτέροισι πατὴρ Ζεὺς κῦδος ὀρέξῃ;

19. μεταμάζιον = μετὰ τοῖς μαζοῖς, be-
tween the breasts. For similar cases,
where an adjective compounded with a
preposition and a substantive expresses
the same idea as a preposition governing
& case, We May compare peraddpmios (μετὰ
δόρπον) ὃ 194, μεταδήμιος, καταθύμιος,
ὑπωρόφιος,͵ ἐπομφάλιον (H 267), and others:
and for the special use of μετά, express-
ing “between” two or more things,
compare in later Greek μεταίχμιος, μετα-
κόσμιος, μετακύμιος, μεταπύργιον. The
word here (as in H 267) is rather a
neuter used as an adverb than an adjec-
tive agreeing with στῆθος.

20. ἀπόρουσε, either in order to escape,
when ov8é= ‘‘and ... not”; or to
defend his brother, when οὐδέ = “ but
... not” (so Schol. A). κατηγορεῖ καὶ
τούτον τοῦ τόπου ὁ Ζωΐλος, ὅτι λίαν, φησί,
γελοίως πεποίηκεν ὁ ποιητὴς τὸν ᾿Ιδαῖον
ἀπολιπόντα τοὺς ἵππους καὶ τὸ ἅρμα φεύ-
yew * ἠδύνατο γὰρ μᾶλλον ἐπὶ τοῖς ἵπποις.

21. For ἀδελφειοῦ Ahrens, no doubt
rightly, reads ἀδελφεόο ; this alteration
can always be made wherever ἀδελφειοῦ
occurs, and all other cases sre from ἀδελ-
φεός in Homer. ΝΞ

22. On the double οὐδέ Schol. A rightly
remarks, ἔστιν ἡ μία μὲν ἐπὶ τοῦ πράγματος,
θατέρα δὲ ἐπὶ τοῦ προσώπου: 1... the
second οὐδέ goes with αὐτός and contrasts
the two persons; the first contrasts the
two events (one real, the other hypo-
thetical). Cf. B 703, Z 130.

24. ol, ἐ.6. his old priest, their father.
ἀκαχήμενος, according to the traditional
explanation, is a perfect with ‘‘ Aeolic

accent”’; and so the infin. ἀκάχησθαι.
But it would seem preferable to regard
these forms as non-thematic presents
(H. G. § 19) of the e- stem dxaxe-, of
which we have a trace in the aor. ἀκάχησε.
There is a perf. of different formation in
ἀκηχέδαται P 637, dxnxeuévos Σ 29. The
reduplication in this verb extends through
all forms. ἀλάλησθαι is an analogous
case. Cf. La Roche, Hom. Teatkr. 182.

31. “Apes “Apes, an unmistakable in-
stance of the manner in which the ictus
alone is sufficient to lengthen a short
syllable. The name is found with long
a chiefly in the last foot, but occasion-
ally in the first (518, 594, A 441, etc.),
more rarely in the second (827, 829), and
fourth, Σ 264; in all cases in arsi.
Bekker, following Ixion, wrote the second
word dpés, taking it as the adj. of which
the compar. and superl. ἀρείων and
ἄριστος are familiar, but it cannot here be
separated from the proper name. It is
however remarkable that H. nowhere
else repeats the same word twice in
immediate succession, common though
the practice is in later poets ; a long list
of instances is given by Bekker, H. B.
194. The most similar phrases in H.
are αἰνόθεν αἰνῶς, οἰόθεν οἷος, and others
which will be found in the exhaustive
catalogue given by Bekker l.c. τειχεσὶι-
wr see Curt. Gr. Et. no. 367, where,
With πέλας and πλησίον, it is referred to
root zed, to beat, strike. Zenod. read
τειχεσιβλῆτα.

88. ἑπποτέροισι, ἱ.6. to see to which
party Zeus will give.

.

ΙΔΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v.)

149

νῶι δὲ yalwoperba, Διὸς δ᾽ ἀλεώμεθα μῆνιν."

? 3 A 4 3 4 a Μ

ὡς εὐποῦσα μάχης ἐξήγαγε θοῦρον "Apna. 35
τὸν μὲν ἔπειτα καθεῖσεν ἐπ᾽ ἠιόεντι Σικαμάνδρῳ,
Τρῶας δ᾽ ἔκλιναν Δαναοί" ἕλε δ᾽ ἄνδρα ἕκαστος

ἡγεμόνων.

πρῶτος δὲ ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων

ἀρχὸν ᾿Αλειζώνων, ᾿Οδίον μέγαν, ἔκβαλε δίφρου"

πρώτῳ γὰρ στρεφθέντι μεταφρένῳ ἐν δόρυ πῆξεν 40

ὥὦμων μεσσηγύς, διὰ δὲ στήθεσφιν ἔλασσεν.

[δούπησεν δὲ πεσών, ἀράβησε δὲ τεύχε᾽ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ.
᾿Ιδομενεὺς δ᾽ ἄρα Φαῖστον ἐνήρατο, Μήονος υἱὸν

Βώρου, ὃς ἐκ Τάρνης ἐριβώλακος εἰληλούθειν"

τὸν μὲν ἄρ᾽ ᾿Ιδομενεὺς δουρικλυτὸς ἔγχεϊ μακρῷ 46

νύξ᾽ ἵππων ἐπιβησόμενον κατὰ δεξιὸν ὧμον'
ἤριπε δ᾽ ἐξ ὀχέων, στυγερὸς δ᾽ ἄρα μιν σκότος εἷλεν.
τὸν μὲν ἄρ᾽ ᾿Ιδομενῆος ἐσύλευον θεράποντες"
υἱὸν δὲ Στροφίοιο Σκαμάνδριον, αἵμονα θήρης,
᾿Ατρεΐδης Μενέλαος ὅλ᾿ ἔγχεϊ ὀξυόεντι, 50
ἐσθλὸν θηρητῆρα" δίδαξε yap ἤλρτεμις αὐτὴ

86. ἠιόεντι, a word of doubtful signifi-
cation. Of the explanations proposed

rhaps the most plausible is that of

dbel (Zexil. i. 49), who derives it from
a root af, to make a noise (avew, dur},
etc.), through ἡ ι-ἡ (for ἀξ-ι-ἡ) = noise,
in the sense of the lowd-sounding river
(cf. Siwhes); whence also ἠιών = the
noisy sea-shore. des cannot come
from ἡκών both for phonetic reasons and
also because ἠιών is always used of the
shore of the sea, not of a river.

87. ἔκλιναν, as Lat. inclinare aciem.

40. π στρεφθέντι, ἱ.6. turning to
flee before all the others.

42, Omitted by A C Townl.

44, Τάρνη, πόλις Λυδίας ἡ viv Σάρδεις,
Schol. A. t ground there was for
this assertion we cannot say.

46. ὄμενον : on the question
whether this form is really a future see
H. G. § 41, where it is pointed out that
in some cases the forms in -σόμην are
used as imperfects ; while in § 244 it is
called a future. The latter better suits
W 379, diel γὰρ δίφρον ἐπιβησομένοισιν
: compare A 608, αἰεὶ βαλέοντι

If it means ‘‘as he was about
to mount,” it is one of the few cases in
H. where the fut. part. is used otherwise
than predicatively with a verb of motion.

See H. G. § 244. The words ἤριπε ἐξ
ὀχέων do not afford any criterion, as
they might be used of one who, as about
to mount, had one foot in the chariot.

48. θεράποντες, here ‘‘retainers” in
the wider sense; generally each hero
has only one θεράπων, an immediate
personal attendant or ‘‘ squire,” who in
the case of Idomeneus is Meriones.

49, αἵμονα, a word of doubtful meaning
and derivation. Eur. Hec. 90 evidently
took it to mean ‘‘ bloody,” which will
not suit here (Aesch. Supp. 847 is hope-
lessly corrupt). It seems natural to
connect it with αἱμύλος, and translate
‘‘wily in the chase,” but no satisfactory
etymology of either word has been given.

50. ὀξυόεις : ὀξύς :: φαιδιμόεις : φαίδιμος.
According to Gobel (de Epith. Hom. in
«εἰς desinentibus) all forms in -es are
derived from substantives, and thus
these two words must come from the
neuter of the adj. used substantively :
ὀξνυόεις = furnished with an ὀξύ, te. sharp
point: φαιδιμόεις = endued with φαίδιμα,
ἴ.6. gleaming armour. One old deriva-
tion was from ὀξύη, ‘‘made of beech-
wood,” but the termination -ecs never
indicates material; and the spears of
Homer are always made, not of beech,
but of ash (but see Eur. Her. 727, τεύχη
κόμιζε, χειρὶ δ᾽ ἔνθες ὀξύην).

150

TAIAAO2 E (v.)

βάλλειν ἄγρια πάντα, Ta Te τρέφει οὔρεσεν ὕλη.

ἀλλ᾽ οὔ οἱ τότε γε ypaiop "Ἄρτεμις ἰοχέαιρα,

οὐδὲ ἑκηβολίαι, ἧσιν τὸ πρίν γε κέκαστο"

ἀλλά μιν ᾿Ατρεΐδης δουρικλειτὸς Μενέλαος 55
πρόσθεν ev φεύγοντα μετάφρενον οὔτασε δουρὶ

[ὥμων μεσσηγύς, διὰ δὲ στήθεσφιν ἔλασσεν.

ἤριπε δὲ πρηνής, ἀράβησε δὲ τεύχε᾽ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ.

Μηριόνης δὲ Φέρεκλον ἐνήρατο, Τέκτονος υἱὸν
“Αρμονίδεω, ὃς χερσὶν ἐπίστατο δαίδαλα πάντα 60
tevyew ἔξοχα γάρ μιν ἐφίλατο ἸΙ]αλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη"
ὃς καὶ ᾿Αλεξάνδρῳ τεκτήνατο νῆας ἐίσας
ἀρχεκάκους, αἱ πᾶσι κακὸν Τρώεσσι γένοντο
of τ᾽ αὐτῷ, ἐπεὶ οὔ τι θεῶν ἐκ θέσφατα ἤδη.
τὸν μὲν Μηριόνης, ὅτε δὴ κατέμαρπτε διώκων, 65
βεβλήκει γλουτὸν κάτα δεξιόν" ἡ δὲ διαπρὸ
ἀντικρὺς κατὰ κύστιν ὑπ᾽ ὀστέον ἤλυθ᾽ ἀκωκή.
γνὺξ δ᾽ ἔριπ᾽ οἰμώξας, θάνατος δέ μιν ἀμφεκάλυψεν.

Πήδαιον δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔπεφνε Μέγης, ᾿Αντήνορος υἱόν,
ὅς ῥα νόθος μὲν ἔην, πύκα δ᾽ ἔτρεφε δῖα Θεανώ, 70

53. Zenod. here had the remarkable
reading χραῖσμεν θανάτοιο πέλωρα, which
he can hardly have invented; for a
somewhat similar use of πέλωρα we

ight compare B 321, δεινὰ πέλωρα
θεῶν, «dire. portents, ” and as the word
in H. is always used of living creatures
it may be paralleled by κῆρες θανάτοιο, B
302. It is a serious question if this is
not a case where “ faciliori lectioni prae-
stat difficilior.”

57. Omitted (or supplied by a later
hand) in the best MSS.

59. Ἰέκτονος seems to be a proper
name derived from its owner’s calling,
like Tuylos H 220, Δαίδαλος, Βουκολίων
Z 22, Φήμιος Tepmiddns the minstrel, x
330. So the name of the father “Apywy
means the joiner. In 6 114 we have the
patronymic Texrovléns. ὅς in 60 and 62
no doubt refers to the principal person,
Phereklos; so that the craft is repre-
sented as hereditary in three generations.

60. δαίδαλα, always a subst. in H.,
the adj. being δαιδάλεος.

63. Herodotos was obviously thinking
of this line when he said of the ships
which the Athenians sent at the request
of Aristagoras to help the Ionians against
the Persians, αὗται al νῆες ἀρχὴ κακῶν
ἐγένοντο Ἕλλησί τε καὶ βαρβάροισι, v. 97.

64. Schol. A, ἀθετεῖται, ὅτι οὐχ ὑγιῶς
ἐξενήνοχεν, at πᾶσι κακὸν Τρώεσσι γένοντο
ἑαυτῷ τε. ἔδει γὰρ αὐτῷ τε. ἡ δὲ of ὀρθο-
τονεῖται νῦν διὰ τὴν ἀρχήν. This scholion
contains two different views: the first—
down to αὐτῷ re—is that of Aristonikos
and Ar., that οἱ standing at the begin-
ning of the line must be orthotone and
therefore reflexive ; but that the reflexive
sense is inadmissible here, because the
subject of the clause is νῆες ; hence the
line must be spurious. The second
opinion is probably that of Herodianus,
that the οἱ is really anaphoric, not reflex-
ive (= αὐτῷ, not éavrw), but that it is
orthotone because it stands at the begin
ning of the line (διὰ τὴν ἀρχήν). e
latter view is taken by La Roche (H. U.
141). It is however possible to take of
αὐτῷ as reflexive = sibi ipsi, t.e. to
Phereklos, who is the subject of the
principal sentence though not of the
relative clause. This view is that taken
in H. G. § 253, φιν. Schol. A says,
᾿Ἑλλάνικός φησι χρησμὸν δοθῆναι rots Tpw-
σὶν ἀπέχεσθαι μὲν ναυτιλίας, “γεωργίᾳ δὲ
προσέχειν, μὴ τῇ θαλάσσῃ χρώμενοι ἀπολέ-
σωσιν ἑαντούς τε καὶ τὴν πόλιν. Observe
that θεῶν ἐκ goes closely with θέσφατα.

70. eave, see Z 298, A 224. Paley
compares Eur. Andr. 224, καὶ μαστὸν

IAIAAOS E (v.)

151

ἶσα φίλοισι τέκεσσι, χαριζομένη πόσεϊ ᾧ.

τὸν μὲν Φυλείΐδης δουρικλυτὸς ἐγγύθεν ἐλθὼν

βεβλήκει κεφαλῆς κατὰ ἰνίον ὀξέι δουρί"

ἀντικρὺς δ᾽ av ὀδόντας ὑπὸ γλῶσσαν τάμε χαλκός.

ἤριπε δ᾽ ἐν κονίῃ, ψυχρὸν δ᾽ ὅλε χαλκὸν ὀδοῦσιν. 75
Εὐρύπυλος δ᾽ ᾿Εναιμονίδης “ὕὙψήνορα δῖον,

υἱὸν ὑπερθύμου Δολοπίονος, ὅς pa Σκαμάνδρου

ἀρητὴρ ἐτέτυκτο, θεὸς δ᾽ ὡς τίετο δήμῳ,

τὸν μὲν ἄρ᾽ Εὐρύπυλος ᾿Βναίμονος ἀγλαὸς υἱὸς

πρόσθεν ἔθεν φεύγοντα μεταδρομάδην ἔλασ᾽ ὧμον 80

φασγάνῳ ἀΐξας, ἀπὸ δ᾽ ἔξεσε χεῖρα βαρεῖαν.

αἱματόεσσα δὲ χεὶρ πεδίῳ πέσε" τὸν δὲ Kat ὄσσε

ἔλλαβε πορφύρεος θάνατος καὶ μοῖρα κραταιή.
ὧς οἱ μὲν πονέοντο κατὰ κρατερὴν ὑσμίνην'

Τυδείδην δ᾽ οὐκ ἂν γνοίης ποτέροισι μετείη, 85

ne μετὰ Τρώεσσιν ὁμιλέοι ἧ μετ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοῖς.

θῦνε γὰρ ἂμ πεδίον ποταμῷ πλήθοντι ἐοικὼς

χειμάρρῳ, ὅς T ὦκα ῥέων ἐκέδασσε γεφύρας"

τὸν δ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ἄρ τε γέφυραι ἐεργμέναι ἰσχανόωσιν,

οὔτ᾽ ἄρα ἕρκεα ἴσχει ἀλωάων ἐριθηλέων 90

ἐλθόντ’ ἐξαπίνης, ὅτ᾽ ἐπιβρίσῃ Διὸς ὄμβρος"

ἤδη πολλάκις νόθοισι σοῖς ἐπέσχον, ἵνα σοι
μηδὲν ἐνδοίην πικρόν.

78. ἱνίον, the great tendon at the back
of the neck which holds the head up-
right; 2 495. The blow was thus given
from behind.

74, ὑπὸ τάμε, cut away at the root.

77. ὅς, Dolopion, not Hypsenor ; for
the priests do not appear ever to fight in
H. ἀρητήρ, cf. 131 for the worship
paid to the river-god Skamandros.

81. χεῖρα = arm, as often.

88. πορφύρεος, dark; used of what
we call the “cold” colours, from blue to
violet. Cf. T 418, νεφέλη δέ μιν dudexd-
λυψε κυανέη. Thus the metaphor may
be taken from the approach of a thunder-
cloud.

85. οὐκ ἂν γνοίης, cf. Γ 220.

88. χειμάρρῳ, explained by Ameis to
mean ‘flowing from snow,” 1.6. at the
melting of the snow on the mountains.
For ἐκέδασσε Naber and Nauck conj.
ἐκέασσε, which certainly seems more in
place, though the former may be used of
a stream carrying away the fragments of
the causeways.

89. depypévar, (so MSS.) ‘“‘ fenced
close,” drawn so as to make a fence to
the stream. The γέφυραι are evidently
here embankments along the sides of the
torrents ; and this, not ‘‘ bridge,’’ seems
to be the regular meaning of the word
in H. This is Fasi’s explanation, and it
is sufficiently defended, perhaps, by II
481, φρένες Epxara dud’ ἀδινὸν κῆρ, the
midriff forms a fence about the heart.
Compare also Vergil, Aen. ii. 497 ‘‘op-
positas evicit gurgite moles (spumeus
amnis’’). Most editors have adopted Ar.’s
reading ἑερμέναι, which is explained
either ‘‘joined together in long lines,”’
or ‘‘bound” in the sense of πυκινῶς
dpapuia. Neither of these is very satis-
factory ; εἴρω always means ‘‘ to connect
together by a rope or string” (cf. o 460,
σ 296 ὅρμον χρύσεον, ἠλέκτροισιν ἐερμένον,
‘strung with amber beads”), and the
transition from this to the sense required
for the text is not very simple. There
is still another alternative, to read éépy-
μεναι (with at least one MS., the Codex
Mori, though this is of no importance),
as an infin. ; ‘‘the dams do not hold it
back, so as to keep it within bounds.”

162

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Ε (v.)

πολλὰ δ᾽ ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἔργα κατήριπε κάλ᾽ αἰζηῶν.
ὧς ὑπὸ Τυδεΐδῃ πυκιναὶ κλονέοντο φάλαγγες
Τρώων, οὐδ᾽ ἄρα μιν μίμνον πολέες περ ἐόντες.
τὸν δ᾽ ὡς οὖν ἐνόησε Λυκάονος ἀγλαὸς υἱὸς 95
θύνοντ᾽ ἂμ πεδίον πρὸ ev κλονέοντα φάλαγγας,
aly’ ἐπὶ Τυδείδῃ ἐτιταίνετο καμπύλα τόξα,
καὶ Bar ἐπαΐσσοντα, τυχὼν κατὰ δεξιὸν ὧμον,
θώρηκος γύαλον" διὰ δ᾽ ἔπτατο πικρὸς ὀιστός,

ἀντικρὺς δὲ διέσχε, παλάσσετο δ᾽ αἵματι θώρηξ.

100

ΟΡ ΟΣ» \ ΝΜ / 2 \ «
τῷ ὃ ἐπὶ μακρὸν ἄυσε Λυκάονος ἀγλαὸς υἱός"
“ ὄρνυσθε, Τρῶες μεγάθυμοι, κέντορες ἵππων"

, \ ΝΜ κι 2), Ψ
βέβληται γὰρ ἄριστος Αχαιῶν, οὐδέ & φημι

fp » / Ν lA > 3 /
δήθ ἀνσχήσεσθαι κρατερὸν βέλος, εἰ ἐτεόν με

ὦρσεν ἄναξ Διὸς υἱὸς ἀπορνύμενον Λυκίηθεν."

105

ὧς par εὐχόμενος: τὸν δ᾽ οὐ βέλος ὠκὺ δάμασσεν,
3 > 9 / / > o 4
ἀλλ ἀναχωρήσας πρὸσθ ἵπποιιν καὶ ὄχεσφιν
ἔστη, καὶ Σθένελον προσέφη Καπανήιον υἱόν"
“ ὄρσο, πέπον Καπανηιάδη, καταβήσεο δίφρου,

Μ > Ν 9 9 \ 9 f 99
ὄφρα μοι ἐξ wpoto ἐρύσσῃς πικρὸν ὀιστόν.

110

ὧς ἄρ᾽ ἔφη, Σθένελος δὲ καθ᾽ ἵππων ἄλτο χαμᾶζε,
πὰρ δὲ στὰς βέλος ὠκὺ διαμπερὲς ἐξέρυσ᾽ ὦμου"
αἷμα δ᾽ ἀνηκόντιζε διὰ στρεπτοῖο χιτῶνος.

92. ἔργα, agricultural works, especially
tilled fislde ee B 751.

95. Avuxdovos vids, Pandaros, see A
89, etc.

100. διέσχε, held on its way through,
ef. N 519, δι’ ὥμου δ᾽ ὄβριμον ἔγχος ἔσχε.

105. Δυκίηθεν, see Β 824, A 103, 119.
The occurrence of the name Lykia on
the Hellespont side by side with the
more famous country in the S., is one of
numerous cases where the same tribe
name is found in widely separated dis-
tricts; the presence of Gauls in Asia
Minor is an instance where we happen
to know the explanation. The only
strange thing here is that the Trojan
Lykians disappear at the end of the
episode of Pandaros (296) to be succeeded
by those of Sarpedon in 471, without
any note of the change, unless it be in
479, τηλοῦ yap Λυκίη Ξάνθῳ ἐπὶ δινήεντι,
which may be meant to distinguish the
two countries. It 18 possible, as Giseke
has supposed, that the only Lykians of
the original tale of Troy were those of
Pandaros, and that the occurrence of the

name gave an opportunity for the intro-
duction of famous heroes like Sarpedon
and Glaukos; but the supposition is
incapable of proof.

109. πέπον is here evidently not a
term of reproach (v. B 235), but merely
a form of courteous address. Cf. Z 55,
I 252. KaraBfcreo, cf. 46.

112, διαμπερές, right through the
wound, in order not to have to pull the
barbs backwards; the shaft of the arrow
is of course cut off. Cf. A 213 for the
opposite process; the barbs not bein
buried in the flesh the arrow is pulle
out backwards. It is not clear whether
Sthenelos took off the back-plate of the
θώρηξ, or whether, as is perhaps more
probable, the back and front plates did
not exactly correspond, so that an arrow
piercing the front of the cuirass might
yet not meet the back-plate.

113. στρεπτοῖο χιτῶνος ; in the Jour-
nal of Hell. Studies, iv. p. 81, I have
endeavoured to show that this means
a pleated doublet; zc. a sort of shirt
made thick, like a Highlander’s kilt, in

ἋἋ

LAIAAOS Ε (v.)

153

δὴ τότ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽ ἠρᾶτο βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης"

[71

an 9 / Ἁ ᾽ 93 ’ὔ
κλῦθί μοι, αὐγιόχοιο Διὸς τέκος, ATPUTWVN,

115

εἴ ποτέ μοι καὶ πατρὶ φίλα φρονέουσα παρέστης
δηίῳ ἐν πολέμῳ, νῦν αὖτ᾽ ἐμὲ φῖλαι, ᾿Αθήνη"

δὸς δέ τέ μ᾽ ἄνδρα ἑλεῖν καὶ ἐς ὁρμὴν ἔγχεος ἐλθεῖν,
ὅς μ᾽ ἔβαλε φθάμενος καὶ ἐπεύχεται, οὐδέ μέ φησιν

δηρὸν ἔτ᾽ ὄψεσθαι λαμπρὸν φάος ἠελίοιο."

120

ὧς ἔφατ᾽ εὐχόμενος, τοῦ δ᾽ ἔκλυε Παλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη,
γυῖα δ᾽ ἔθηκεν ἐλαφρά, πόδας καὶ χεῖρας ὕπερθεν'
ἀγχοῦ δ᾽ ἱσταμένη ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
“ θαρσῶν νῦν, Διόμηδες, ἐπὶ Τρώεσσι μάχεσθαι:

ἐν γάρ τοι στήθεσσι μένος πατρώιον ἧκα

125

#7 3 ’ e , 4
ἄτρομον, οἷον ἔχεσκε σακέσπαλος ἱππότα Τυδεύς"
ἀχλὺν δ᾽ αὖ τοι ἀπ᾿ ὀφθαλμῶν ἕλον, ἣ πρὶν ἐπῆεν,
w > 2. , > \ Ν 20. A

ὄφρ᾽ ἐὺ γιγνώσκῃς ἠμὲν θεὸν ἠδὲ καὶ ἄνδρα.

τῷ νῦν, αἴ κε θεὸς πειρώμενος ἐνθάδ᾽ ἴκηται,

order to save the skin from the hard
metal θώρηξ. It is quite natural that
the spirting up of the blood through
this, and not through the hole in the
breastplate, should be mentioned, though
of course both are meant; for the χιτιύν
would be the first obstacle that would
tend to stop the stream, and also the
most effective, as it would act as a sort
of bandage. Hence it is mentioned to
show the violence of the bleeding which
passed even through this. According to
the old interpreters orperrés meant
either ‘‘woven’’—a sense which can-
not be got out of the word or its use—or
else, and this was apparently the view
of Aristarchos, a “coat of mail,” chain
or scale armour; but this is untenable,
as not only is such armour not mentioned
in H. at all, but in this passage the
ύαλον implies the very opposite, a
cuirass made of solid plates of metal.
The latter objection is also fatal to
Ameis-Hentze’s theory, that it was a
shoulder-piece of leather covered with
pieces of metal, if indeed such a shoulder-
piece could be called χιτών at all. Cf.
also ᾧ $1.

115. pot, so best MSS., and in a few
other passages, K 278, etc.: La R. peu
on the analogy of A 37, etc. But the
ethic dat. may be defended by 2 335
ἔκλυες @ x’ ἐθέλησθα, Π 516 ἀκούειν ἀνέρι
κηδομένῳ, and in Theog. 4, 13, Solon
13, 2: all cases of a god hearkening to
prayer. ἀτρυτώνη, B 157.

116. μοι and πατρί of course go to-
gether, ‘‘my father,” in contrast to the
emphatic ἐμέ.

117. φῖλαι : this middle aor. is only
used of the love shown to mortals by
gods, see 61, Καὶ 280, Υ 304. There were
variants φίλαι and φίλε᾽, but the text is
clearly better.

118. δὸς δέ τέ pw appears to be the
reading of all MSS. : but Schol. A
mentions a variant apparently accepted
by Herodianus (and possibly also Ar.,
v. Schol. A on O 119), τόνδε τέ vw’. This
is accepted by Fisi and Am.-H. on the
ground that δός is a gloss to explain the
construction of the acc. and infin., which
is sufficiently supported by B 413.
ἑλεῖν (‘to kill” as usual) is put first
by a slight ‘‘ prothysteron”’: cf. A 251,
τράφεν ἠδ᾽ ἐγένοντο. The change of sub-
ject in ἐλθεῖν is rather violent: hence van
Herwerden thinks, plausibly enough, that
the original form a the line was és ὁρμήν
F’ (ae. é) ἔγχεος.

126. σακέσπαλος is proparoxytone
though the verbal element of the com-
pound is employed in a transitive sense :
the converse is the case with μιαιφόνος.

128. The subj. γιγνώσκῃς is undoubt-
edly right after ἕλον, because the object
of the past action is still future: H. G.
§ 298, 2. The MS. authority, which in
such a question is of little weight, is in
favour of γιγνώσκοις.

129. πειρώμενος, making trial of thee,
220, ete.

1δ4

μή τι σύ γ᾽ ἀθανάτοισι θεοῖς ἀντικρὺ μάχεσθαι

ἼΛΙΑΔΟΣ Ε (v.)

130

τοῖς ἄλλοις" ἀτὰρ εἴ κε Διὸς θυγάτηρ ᾿Αφροδίτη

ἔλθῃσ᾽ ἐς πόλεμον, τήν γ᾽ οὐτάμεν ὀξέι χαλκῷ."
ἡ μὲν ἄρ᾽ ὧς εἰποῦσ᾽ ἀπέβη γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη,

Τυδεΐδης δ᾽ ἐξαῦτις ἰὼν προμάχοισιν ἐμίχθη"

καὶ πρίν περ θυμῷ μεμαὼς Τρώεσσι μάχεσθαι,

135

\ , ) lA σ΄ ’
δὴ τότε μιν τρὶς τόσσον ἕλεν μένος, ὥς τε λέοντα,
a ᾽
ὅν ῥά τε ποιμὴν ἀγρῷ ἐπ εἰροπόκοις ὀίεσσιν
4 lA > IV A e / δὲ ὃ 4 -
χραύσῃ μὲν τ αὐλῆς ὑπεράλμενον, οὐὸὲ δαμάσσῃ
n δὴ /
τοῦ μέν Te σθένος ὧρσεν, ἔπειτα δέ T οὐ προσαμύνει,

ἀλλὰ κατὰ σταθμοὺς δύεται, τὰ δ᾽ ἐρῆμα φοβεῖται"

140

? κι ἐ 4
αἱ μέν T ἀγχιστῖναι ἐπ᾿ ἀλλήλῃσι KéyvVTAL,

180. ἀντικρύ is found with the last
syllable short only here and 819, and
may be counted among the linguistic
peculiarities of the passages dealing with
the wounding of the gods.

132. For οὐτάμεν ( present infin.) Zenod.
read οὐτάσαι, the aor. infin.

135. μεμαώς, a nominativus pendens,
the construction being changed in the
following line, cf. Z 510. καί is here
probably not ‘‘and,” but is to be
taken closely with πέρ, as elsewhere
when the two words occur together ; the
line being thus added asyndetically in
explanation of 134. For cal... περ at
the beginning of a sentence see v 271,
kal χαλεπόν wep ἐόντα δεχώμεθα μῦθον,
᾿Αχαιοί. In all other instances καί wep
follows the principal verb. Hence many
edd. place the comma after ἐμίχθη, and
the colon after μάχεσθαι, so that μεμαώς
agrees with Τυδεΐδης in 134. But this
gives an entirely false antithesis ; Dio-
medes does not return to the battle
although, but because, he was eager before.

137. ἀγρῷ, 7.e. away from the habita-
tions of men.

138. xpatoy, conn. with yxpa(F)w, ε
396, II 352, 369. The exact relations
of the word are doubtful, but it is per-
haps allied to Skt. gharsh, which implies
ἃ root ghar, to prick, tear, scratch,
whence χαράσσω, xnpaués, and others;
a discussion of the family by Prof. Post-

ate will be found in Amer. Journal of
hil. iii, p. 335, where however this
word is not. mentioned. Ahrens (Beitr.
zur Gr. und Lat. Etym. i. 7) would
separate χραύω from ἔχραε altogether,
and explains it to mean “struck,’ com-
paring Herod. vi. 75, évéxpavey és τὸ

and Hesych.
toy’ καταξύσῃ, πλήξῃ. αὐλῆς here

πρόσωπον τὸ σκῆπτρον,

Χραύ
= the wall of the steading ; from 140 it

would seem that the stalls are regarded
as arranged, with the shepherds’ huts,
around a courtyard: cf. Σ 589, from
which it is clear that such a “sheep-
station’ must have been rather exten-
sive.

140. As the line stands τά must be
the subject, ‘‘they (the sheep) are put
to flight, being left alone.” The change
from the fem. dlecow to the neuter, and
then immediately back to the fem. al, is
however very harsh, far more so than in
the passages which are quoted as parallel :
II 353 μήλων... al re, A 244 xtra... .
aiyas ὁμοῦ καὶ &s, τά οἱ ἄσπετα ποιμαί-
vovro, ᾧ 167 τῷ δ᾽ ἑτέρῳ. . . ἣ δέ. Ἡ.
moreover elsewhere uses ἐρῆμος (this is
the traditional Epic accentuation) only
of places. If we neglected the canon of
Ar., that φοβεῖσθαι means fugere not
timere, we might translate ‘‘the desert
places are afraid’ at the sound of the
onset, but this is not a Homeric thought.
Others (e.g. Doderlein) make theshepherd
subject of φοβεῖται, ‘‘he flies from the
open places,” 1.6. the courtyard; but
this sense of ἐρῆμος is unnatural, and the
construction of φοβεῖσθαι is hardly sup-
ported by the only other passage in
which it 1s used of flying from a pursuer,
X 250, οὔ σ᾽ ἔτι, Πηλέος νἱέ, φοβήσομαι.

141. ἀγχιστῖναι, elsewhere only with
ἔπιπτον (P 361, x 118, w 181, 449), are
thrown down in heaps. The MSS.
read ἀγχηστῖναι perhaps on the analogy
of προμνηστῖναι, ἃ 233, but the word is
evidently a secondary formation from
ἄγχιστος.

Ne

IAIAAOS E (v,)

155

αὐτὰρ ὁ ἐμμεμαὼς βαθέης ἐξάλλεται αὐλῆς"
. ὧς μεμαὼς Τρώεσσι pityn κρατερὸς Διομήδης.
ὄνθ᾽ ἕλεν ᾿Αστύνοον καὶ ὙὝπείρονα ποιμένα λαῶν,

τὸν μὲν ὑπὲρ μαζοῖο βαλὼν χαλκήρεϊ δουρί,

148

τὸν δ᾽ ἕτερον ξίφεϊ μεγάλῳ κληῖδα παρ᾽ ὦμον
TARE, ἀπὸ δ᾽ αὐχένος ὦμον ἐέργαθεν ἠδ᾽ ἀπὸ νώτου.
\ \ ” > ¢ aw s \ 4

τοὺς μὲν ἔασ᾽, ὁ δ᾽ ΓΛβαντα μετῴχετο καὶ lodvcdop,
υἱέας Εὐρυδάμαντος ὀνειροπόλοιο γέροντος,
τοῖς οὐκ ἐρχομένοις ὁ γέρων ἐκρίνατ᾽ ὀνείρους, 150
ἀλλά σφεας κρατερὸς Διομήδης ἐξενάριξεν.
βῆ δὲ μετὰ Ἐάνθον τε Θόωνά τε Φαίνοπος vie,
ἄμφω τηλυγέτω, ὁ δ᾽ ἐτείρετο γήραϊ λυγρῷ,

en 3 ? , > ΚΓ 3 4 7
υἱὸν δ᾽ οὐ τέκετ᾽ ἄλλον ἐπὶ κτεάτεσσι λιπέσθαι.

ἔνθ᾽ ὅ γε τοὺς ἐνάριζξε, φίλον δ᾽ ἐξαίνυτο θυμὸν

155

ἀμφοτέρω, πατέρι δὲ γόον καὶ κήδεα λυγρὰ
λεῖπ᾽, ἐπεὶ οὐ ζώοντε μάχης ἐκνοστήσαντε
δέξατο" χηρωσταὶ δὲ διὰ κτῆσιν δατέοντο.

142, ἐμμεμαώς answers to μεμαώς in
135: the lion, like Diomedes, is only
the more aroused by the wound, cf. P
735. Bentley, feeling some difficulty
in the conjunction of ἐμμεμαώς with the
retreat implied in ἐξάλλεται, conj. ἐμμα-
wéws, cf. 886; but the inconsistency,
which is not perhaps very serious, lies
in the word ἐξάλλεται, as the simile
depends entirely on μεμαώς. βαθέης:
we should use the converse ‘‘high,” as
ε 239, βαθείης ἔνδοθεν αὐλῆς.

147. πλῆξε, a change from the parti-
cipial construction, as I' 80. ἐέργαθεν,
so A 437.

150. This line is susceptible of two
different interpretations: (a) ‘‘the old
man interpreted no dreams for them
when they were coming (to Troy),” 1.6.
had he foreseen their fate he would have
kept them from the war; (b) ‘‘they
came not back for the old man to
interpret dreams for them.” Though
the second has found defenders, yet
there can be little doubt that the first
is preferable. The use of ἐρχόμενος is
exactly the same as in 198; and the
sense is quite what is wanted, though
the next line is added in a way which is
not usual in Homer, as we should have
expected to find it explicitly stated, ‘‘if
he had they would not have been killed.”
But in the second alternative the mention

of the discerning of dreams seems quite
otiose, unless we are prepared to suppose
that the old man thought that a specimen
of his peculiar skill would be the best
welcome for his returning sons. A third
possibility is given by the Schol. A,
‘*their father prophesied to them that
they would not come back.” But even
if such a construction of the participle
could be admitted it would still remain
a fatal objection that we should want a
future, not a present.

153. τηλυγέτω, see Γ 175; it is obvious
here that the word cannot mean ‘only
child.”

158. Cf. Hes. Theog. 606, ἀποφθιμένον
δὲ διὰ κτῆσιν δατέονται ynpworal. The
general meaning of the word χηρωσταί
is sufficiently evident from the context,
“inheritors of the bereaved,” 1.6. the
next-of-kin, of μακρόθεν συγγενεῖς
(Hesych.). The form of the word how-
ever is not so easily explicable; it
should have an active sense, perhaps
originally ‘‘those who divided up the
estate of the bereaved” for distribution
among the tribe at large. But we have
no evidence whether in Homeric days
the reversion of property (ze. chattels,
not land) belonged to the family or the
tribe; nor does the word itself recur,
except in the two passages named, and
in Qu. Smyrnaeus.

156

LAIAAOS E (v.)

ἔνθ᾽ vias Πριάμοιο δύω λάβε Δαρδανίδαο
εἰν ἑνὶ δίφρῳ ἐόντας, Eyéupova τε Χρομίον τε. 160
ὡς δὲ λέων ἐν βουσὶ θορὼν ἐξ αὐχένα ἄξῃ
πόρτιος ἠὲ βοός, ξύλοχον κάτα βοσκομενάων,
ὧς τοὺς ἀμφοτέρους ἐξ ἵππων Τυδέος υἱὸς
βῆσε κακῶς ἀέκοντας, ἔπειτα δὲ τεύχε᾽ ἐσύλα"

ἵππους δ᾽ οἷς ἑτάροισι δίδου μετὰ νῆας ἐλαύνειν.

165

τὸν δ᾽ ἴδεν Αἰνείας ἀλαπάξζοντα στίχας ἀνδρῶν,
βῆ δ᾽ ἴμεν ἄν τε μάχην καὶ ἀνὰ κλόνον ἐγχειάων
Πάνδαρον ἀντίθεον διζήμενος, εἴ που ἐφεύροι.
εὗρε Λυκάονος υἱὸν ἀμύμονά τε κρατερόν τε,
στῆ δὲ πρόσθ᾽ αὐτοῖο ἔπος τέ μιν ἀντίον ηὔδα" 170
“ Tlavdape, ποῦ τοι τόξον ἰδὲ πτερόεντες ὀιστοὶ
καὶ κλέος ; ᾧ οὔ τίς τοι ἐρίζεται ἐνθάδε γ᾽ ἀνήρ,
οὐδέ τις ἐν Λυκίῃ σέο γ᾽ εὔχεται εἶναι ἀμείνων.
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε τῷδ᾽ ἔφες ἀνδρὶ βέλος, Avi χεῖρας ἀνασχών,
ὅς τις ὅδε κρατέει καὶ δὴ κακὰ πολλὰ ἔοργεν 175
Τρῶας, ἐπεὶ πολλῶν τε καὶ ἐσθλῶν γούνατ᾽ ἔλυσεν"
εἰ μή τις θεός ἐστι κοτεσσάμενος Τρώεσσιν,
ἱρῶν μηνίσας, χαλεπὴ δὲ θεοῦ ἔπι μῆνις."
τὸν δ᾽ αὗτε προσέειπε Λυκάονος ἀγλαὸς υἱός"

“ Αἰνεία, Τρώων βουληφόρε χαλκοχιτώνων,

180

162. For ἠέ Bentley conj. ἠδέ, on the

ound that the point of the simile lies
in the double slaughter, and hence the
plural βοσκομενάων, which must be

artitive if we read ἠέ, ‘‘from a herd
feeding.” Zenod. read βουκόλον for
réptvos, which is not plausible.

164. κακῶς seems to go closely with
ἀέκοντας, as 698 κακῶς κεκαφηότα θυμόν,
B 266 κακῶς ὑπερηνορέοντες.

168-9. See A 88-9.

170. ηὔδα, only here with double
accus., which is however often found
with προσηύδα and προσέειπε. We have
Ἑρμείαν ἀντίον ηὔδα, € 28.

171. ποῦ τοι τόξον, οὗ, Ο 440, ποῦ νύ
τοι lod; in the next line ᾧ may refer
either to τόξον or to κλέος in the sense
of ‘‘ famous skill.”

175. ὅδε, predicative = here: cf. T 117
Αἰνείας ὅδ᾽ ἔβη, a 185 νηῦς δέ μοι ἥδ᾽
ἕστηκεν.

177. εἰ μή, “1 suppose it is not a
god,” i.e. provided it be not a god.

178. ἱρῶν μηνίσας, like ef τ᾽ dp’ 8 +’

εὐχωλῆς ἐπιμέμφεται εἴ θ' ἑκατόμβης, A 65,
g.v. The exact connexion of the clause
χαλεπὴ... μῆνις is not clear: it may
mean ‘‘the wrath of a god weighs heavy
upon men,” or it may go with the pre-
ceding, ‘‘and the wrath of the be
heavy upon us.” The former will give
a reason why, if this enemy be a god,
it is not well to provoke him further,
the latter will explain why a god should
condescend to such slaughter. But
Ameis-Hentze read, with Ar., ἐπιμῆνις,
taking ἐπι- to indicate wrath aimed in a

articular direction ; on the ground that
in all other cases where ἔπι = ἔπεστι it
is used of the actual presence of some-
thing with a distinct relation to some
person. This is a strong argument
against taking the clause as a general
reflexion ; but it leaves untouched the
alternative of taking it closely with
the preceding εἰ- clause, and perhaps
this is the most probable explanation,
as ἐπιμῆνις is a compound which can
hardly be supported by analogy.

defy *

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v,)

157

Τυδεΐδῃ μιν ἐγώ γε δαΐφρονι πάντα ἐίσκω,

2 / , 3 , / /

ἀσπίδι γιγνώσκων αὐλώπιδί τε τρυφαλείῃ,

4 3 3 / U 3 3 ΦΩ), 4 / 9
ἵππους τ᾽ εἰσορόων" σάφα δ᾽ οὐκ οἶδ᾽, εἰ θεός ἐστιν.
εἰ δ᾽ ὅ γ᾽ ἀνήρ, ὅν φημι, δαΐφρων Τυδέος υἱός,

οὐχ ὅ γ᾽ ἄνευθε θεοῦ τάδε μαίνεται, ἀλλά τις ἄγχι

185

ἕστηκ᾽ ἀθανάτων νεφέλῃ eidupévos ὦμους,

ὃς τούτου βέλος ὠκὺ κιχήμενον ἔτραπεν ἄλλῃ.
ἤδη γάρ οἱ ἐφῆκα βέλος, καί μιν βάλον ὧμον
δεξιόν, ἀντικρὺς διὰ θώρηκος γυάλοιο,

καί μιν ἐγώ γ᾽ ἐφάμην ᾿Αιδωνῆι προϊάψειν,

190

ἔμπης δ᾽ οὐκ ἐδάμασσα" θεός νύ τίς ἐστι κοτήεις.
ἵπποι δ᾽ οὐ παρέασι καὶ ἅρματα, τῶν κ᾽ ἐπιβαίην"
ἀλλά που ἐν μεγάροισι Λυκάονος ἕνδεκα δίφροι
καλοὶ πρωτοπαγεῖς νεοτευχέες, ἀμφὶ δὲ πέπλοι

182. There is no distinct trace in H. of
the devices borne on shields which play
so prominent a part in the Septem of
Aeschylus, and are frequently repre-
sented on vase-paintings ; nor of course
can the mention of the helmet be taken
to indicate anything like the mediaeval
crest. But every chieftain would be
sure to adopt some peculiarity in the
shape of his shield and helmet, in order to
be fnown by his men when his face was
concealed. Cf. A 526, ed δέ μιν ἔγνων,
εὐρὺ γὰρ ἀμφ᾽ ὥμοισιν ἔχει σάκος. For
atAGms and τ ea, see J. H.S. iv. p.
297-8. The former word seems to indicate
the helmet with an αὐλός (breathing-hole)
in the front. ΑΒ to τρυφάλεια, its exact
signification can hardly be determined.
It may possibly be another form of
τετράφαλος, from τετρυ- = quadru-, the
first syllable being dropped as in τράπεζα
for τετράπεζα. If the explanation of the
φάλος given in the paper above quoted
is accepted, it will hardly be possible to
derive the first syllable from τρὺ- to
pierce ; which is indeed sufficiently im-
probable on account of the quantity of
the νυν. Others again take it to medn
“with three φάλοι,᾽ as if τριφάλεια, but
we should then have to assume a very
improbable mistake in the tradition, as
Tpt- never becomes τρυ- in compounds.

188. εἰ θεός ἐστιν, we say ‘‘if he is
not a god”; the words imply a slight
disposition to accept the affirmative.
Cf. ris δ᾽ old’ ef κέ ποτέ σφι Blas ἀπο-
τίσεται ἐλθών, y 216. Ar. needlessly
athetized the line, on the ground that
Pandaros has really no doubt. But the

very next words obviously imply at
least a rhetorical uncertainty.

187. (ἡ διπλῇ περιεστιγμένη) ὅτι Ζηνό-
δοτος ἠθέτηκεν αὐτόν. οὐ γὰρ ἐτράπετο
ἄλλῃ τὸ βέλος, ἀλλ᾽’ ἔτυχεν αὐτοῦ. οὐ
λέγει δὲ ὅτι καθόλου ἀπέτυχεν, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι
ἐπὶ καίριον τόπον φερόμενον παρέτρεψεν.
But this explanation seems forced, and
most edd. agree with Zenod. in reject-
ing the line. Nor is it a satisfactory
resource to take ἔτραπεν ἄλλῃ as =
brought to naught ; such a derived sense
of ἄλλος is rather Attic than Homeric,
and is not sufficiently supported by A
120. For the gen. τούτου, ‘‘away from
him,” we may compare πάλιν τράπεθ᾽
υἷος ἑοῖο, Σ 138. Ktxfpevov, just as it
was reaching him.

190. ᾿Αιδωνῆι προϊάψειν, as “Ard: προΐ-
avev, Α 8. The form occurs again only
T 61; it is not Pindaric, but appears
rather to be a word of the tragedians,
as Mr. Paley says. This line may he-
long to the interpolations of which this
speech seems to have suffered several.

194. mpwromayeis, generally explained
**joined together for the first time,” ὦ. 6.
newly made. Cf. 2 267. In @ 35 we
have νῆα πρωτόπλοον, which is also trans-
lated ‘‘making her first voyage.” But
this is a doubtful compliment to a ship ;
the alternative, ‘‘a first-rate sailor,” suits
the context better, and so here ‘‘ of first-
rate build,” primarie compacti (Doder!.),
avoids the awkward tautology with veo-
τευχέες Which made Zenod. athetize the
line. Unfortunately neither the simple
πρῶτος nor any of its compounds seems
to involve the pregnant meaning of

158

πέπτανται" παρὰ δέ σφιν ἑκάστῳ δίζυγες ἵπποι

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Ε (v.)

195

ἑστᾶσι κρῖ λευκὸν ἐρεπτόμενοι καὶ ὀλύρας.

ἢ μέν μοι μάλα πολλὰ γέρων αἰχμητὰ Λυκάων
ἐρχομένῳ ἐπέτελλε δόμοις ἔνι ποιητοῖσιν'
ἵπποισίν μ᾽ ἐκέλενε καὶ ἅρμασιν ἐμβεβαῶτα

ἀρχεύειν Τρώεσσι κατὰ κρατερὰς ὑσμίνας"

200

ἀλλ᾽ ἐγὼ οὐ πιθόμην, ἧ τ᾽’ ἂν πολὺ κέρδιον ἦεν,

ἵππων φειδόμενος, μή μοι δενοίατο φορβῆς

ἀνδρῶν εἰλομένων, εἰωθότες ἔδμεναι ἄδην.

ὧς λίπον, αὐτὰρ πεζὸς ἐς Ἴλιον εἰλήλουθα,

τόξοισιν πίσυνος" τὰ δέ μ᾽ οὐκ ἄρ᾽ ἔμελλον ὀνήσειν. 205
ἤδη yap δοιοῖσιν ἀριστήεσσιν ἐφῆκα,

Τυδεΐδῃ τε καὶ ᾿Ατρεΐδῃ, ἐκ δ᾽ ἀμφοτέροιιν

ἀτρεκὲς αἷμ᾽ ἔσσενα βαλών, ἤγειρα δὲ μᾶλλον.

τῷ ῥα κακῇ αἴσῃ ἀπὸ πασσάλου ἀγκύλα τόξα

ἤματι τῷ ἑλόμην, ὅτε Ἴλιον εἰς ἐρατεινὴν 210
ἡγεόμην Τρώεσσι, φέρων χάριν “Ἕκτορι δίῳ.

εἰ δέ κε νοστήσω καὶ ἐσόψομαι ὀφθαλμοῖσιν

primarius ; so that we have to acquiesce
in the ordinary explanation. The same
ambiguity is found in πρωτόπλους, Eur.
Hel. 1531. (Compounds of πρῶτος are
very uncommon in classical Greek.) _

195. For the practice of coverin
chariots with cloths, when not in use, cf.
B777.

200. For the name Τρῶες as belongin
to the people of Pandaros see B 826, an
for the dat. B 345.

202. For the crowding within the city
walls compare 2 286-7.

203. ἄδην only here with a, though
we have ἀδήσειε, ἀδηκότες, etc. This
may probably be an instance of the power
of the ictus alone to lengthen a syllable.
Hence the old variant ἄδδην. Al. ἄδην.

208. arpexés: this simple form recurs
in H. only w 245, οὔτ &p δεκὰς ἀτρεκὲς
οὔτε δύ᾽ οἷαι, where it is an adverb; the
form ἀτρεκέως is of course familiar. The
original meaning of the word is not
certain ; if it be conn. with τρέπω (Curt.
Gr. Et. no. 633) and mean ‘‘directly,”’
‘‘not swerving from the straight line,”
it can here hardly be an epithet of αἷμα.
On the other hand it cannot be taken
with βαλών, which is too far off, and
does not require an adv. to qualify it, as
of itself it implies ‘‘ hitting the mark.”
(ὅτι τρώσας, καὶ οὐ ῥίψας ἁπλῶς τὸ βέλος.)

We must therefore take it with foceva,
“Ἱ truly, surely, brought forth blood.”
So Schol. B, ἀντὶ τοῦ ἀτρεκέως εἶδον
αὐτὸ, οὐκ ἠπάτημαι. But 206-8, which
contain a feeble repetition of 188-191,
are almost certainly interpolated for the
sake of the allusion to the Ὁρκίων ovy-
Xvors, an episode which is evidently un-
known to the author of this book, who
otherwise could not have failed to allude
to it again (see introduction to A).

209. κακῇ αἴσῃ, A 418. ἀπὸ wac-
σάλον, cf. ¢ 53, Penelope ἔνθεν dpeta-
μένη ἀπὸ πασσάλου αἴνντο τόξον.

212-216 are to be compared with απ
99-103, where 214 is not only repeated,
but stands also in exactly the same
position, as an apodosis with two pro-
tases, one Preceding, the other follow-
ing. The former (εἴ xe with fut. indic.)
makes an assumption, ‘‘I assume that
I shall return.” The second, εἰ with
opt., is concessive, ‘‘ admitting I did not
burn my bow.” There is no “attrac-
tion” of the mood to that of the wish,
though we might have equally had the
second condition stated as an assum
tion, not as a concession, cf. B 259 (q.v.),
μηκέτι. . . εἴην, el wh... δύσω. See
Lange, EI, p. 461. Some take νοστήσω
and ἐσόψομαι as aor. subjunctives, re-
ferring, for another instance of an aor.

μ

εἶ

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (Ὁ

189

πατρίδ᾽ ἐμὴν ἄλοχόν τε καὶ ὑψερεφὲς μέγα δῶμα,
> 7 ΣΝ > 2 9 ¥ ~ / , , / ,
QUTUK ἔπειτ ἀπ᾿ ἐμεῖο κάρη τάμοι ἀλλοτριος φώς,

εἰ μὴ ἐγὼ τάδε τόξα φαεινῷ ἐν πυρὶ θείην

215

4 9 4 4 3 a39
χερσὶ διακλάσσας" ἀνεμώλια yap μοι ὀπηδεῖ.
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ Αἰνείας Τρώων ἀγὸς ἀντίον ηὔδα"
“μὴ δὴ οὕτως ἀγόρευε" πάρος δ᾽ οὐκ ἔσσεται ἄλλως,
’ 3. 523 Ἁ ΩΣ 3 A Φ ὶ Ν
πρίν γ᾽ ἐπὶ νὼ τῷδ᾽ ἀνδρὶ σὺν ἵπποισιν καὶ ὄχεσφιν

ἀντιβίην ἔλθόντε σὺν ἔντεσι πειρηθῆναι.

220

ἀλλ᾽ ἄγ᾽ ἐμῶν ὀχέων ἐπιβήσεο, ὄφρα ἴδηαι,

οἷοι Τρώιοι ἵπποι, ἐπιστάμενοι πεδίοιο

κρανυπνὰ μάλ᾽ ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα διωκέμεν ἠδὲ φέβεσθαι"
τὼ καὶ νῶι πόλινδε σαώσετον, εἴ περ ἂν. αὖτε

Ζεὺς ἐπὶ Τυδεΐδῃ Διομήδεϊ κῦδος ὀρέξῃ.

225

ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε νῦν μάστιγα καὶ ἡνία cvyadoevtTa

δέξαι, ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἵππων ἐπιβήσομαι, ὄφρα μάχωμαι"

ἠὲ σὺ τόνδε δέδεξο, μελήσουσιν δ᾽ ἐμοὶ ἵπποι."
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπε Λυκάονος ἀγλαὸς υἱός"

-
“ Αἰνεία, σὺ μὲν αὐτὸς ἔχ᾽ ἡνία καὶ Tew ἵππω"

280

μᾶλλον ὑφ᾽ ἡνιόχῳ εἰωθότι καμπύλον ἅρμα
οἴσετον, εἴ περ ἂν αὗτε φεβώμεθα Τυδέος υἱόν"
μὴ τὼ μὲν δείσαντε ματήσετον, οὐδ᾽ ἐθέλητον
ἐκφερέμεν πολέμοιο, τεὸν φθόγγον ποθέοντε,

νῶι δ᾽ ἐπαΐξας μεγαθύμου Τυδέος υἱὸς

235

4
αὐτώ Te κτείνῃ καὶ ἐλάσσῃ μώνυχας ἵππους.

form ὠψόμην, to Ὦ 704, where ὄψεσθε is
rather more natural if it be taken as aor.
imper. than as fut. ind. ἀλλότριος : a
foreigner is of course an inferior, and
therefore defeat from such is the deepest
degradation.

218. οὐκ ἔσσεται ἄλλως, no change
will be made, nothing will be effected,
till, ete. ἄλλως has the connotation
“better” in θ 176, and ν 211, and ef.
also A 391. The euphemism by which
ἄλλως = κακῶς is not Homeric.

222. Tpéror, the breed of Tros. Cf.
265, T 230, A 597, Ψ 291, 377.

227. ἐπιβήσομαι is the reading of
Zenod.: Ar. followed by best MSS. ἀπο-
βήσομαι, οἷον τῆς τῶν ἵππων φροντίδος,
which cannot be right. Ar. no doubt
felt a difficulty from the fact that he
supposed Ainelas to be already on the
chariot; but 239 shows that this is not the
case. The only question is which of the
two shall drive and which be παραβάτης,

not whether either shall fight on foot ;
and in fact Pandaros does attack from
the chariot, see 294. Aineias is at the
moment on foot, with his chariot as
usual in close attendance. There is no
antithesis between ἡνία δέξαι and ἵππων
ἐπιβήσομαι, δέ meaning only ‘‘and.”
230. ἔχε goes with both ἡνία and
ἵππους by a slight zeugma, hold the reins
and drive the horses. Compare the
difference in the sense of δέξαι = take,
and δέδεξο = await the attack, above.
232. φεβώμεθα, flee from, cf. 223.
283. ματήσετον, grow wild, ‘lose
their heads” as we say: cf. Π 474. In
510 it means ‘lost no time.” Com-
pare also Aesch. Sept. 37, P. V. 57.
236. μώνυχας, a word of doubtful
origin. It is commonly explained as =
μονῶνυξ, ‘‘with single, undivided hoof,”
formed like κελαινεφής for κελαι(νο)-
vepns, ἁρμα(το)τροχιή, and some later
words. Ameis (Anhang to o 46) objects,

160

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v.)

᾿ἀλλὰ σύ γ᾽ αὐτὸς ἔλαυνε TE ἅρματα Kai Tew ἵππω,
τόνδε δ᾽ ἐγὼν ἐπιόντα δεδέξομαι ὀξέι δουρί."
ὧς ἄρα φωνήσαντες ἐς ἅρματα ποικίλα βάντες

ἐμμεμαῶτ᾽ ἐπὶ Τυδεΐδῃ ἔχον ὠκέας ἵππους.

240

τοὺς δὲ ἴδε Σθένελος Καπανήιος ἀγλαὸς υἱός,
αἶψα δὲ Τυδείδην ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
“ Tudeldn Διόμηδες, ἐμῷ κεχαρισμένε θυμῷ,
ἄνδρ᾽ ὁρόω κρατερὼ ἐπὶ σοὶ μεμαῶτε μάχεσθαι,

’
iv’ ἀπέλεθρον ἔχοντας" ὁ μὲν τόξων ἐὺ εἰδώς,

245

Πάνδαρος, vids δ᾽ atte Λυκάονος εὔχεται εἶναι"
Αἰνείας δ᾽ vids μεγαλήτορος ᾿Αγχίσαο

εὔχεται ἐκγεγάμεν, μήτηρ δέ οἵ ἐστ᾽ ᾿Αφροδίτη.
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε δὴ χαζώμεθ᾽ ἐφ᾽ ἵππων, μηδέ μοι οὕτως

θῦνε διὰ προμάχων, μή πως φίλον ἦτορ ὀλέσσῃς."

250

τὸν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπόδρα ἰδὼν προσέφη κρατερὸς Διομήδης"
ΤΙ ’ 3. 9 ’ 2 3 \ 3 4 4, Μ

μή τι φόβονδ᾽ ayopev’, ἐπεὶ οὐδέ σε πεισέμεν οἴω"
οὐ γάρ μοι γενναῖον ἀλυσκάξοντι μάχεσθαι

among other reasons, that Homer has no
compounds of μόνος, which appears only
in the form μοῦνος ; that μοῦνος is nota
synonym of εἷς in Homer ; that the later
form μονῶνυξ is found only in scientific
descriptions, not as a poetical epithet ;
that it is used in Homer as an epithet of
individual horses, whereas the single
hoof is common to all; nor is it a pe
culiarity of horses. He therefore prefers
to derive it from MAQ, μεμαότας ὄνυχας
ἔχων, and urges that it is only used of
high-bred horses, otherwise described as
fleet, and only when they are in action,
or kept at rest against their will.

247. Cf. πατρὸς δ᾽ ἐξ ἀγαθοῦ γένος
εὔχεται ἔμμεναι υἱὸς, φ 335, for the use of
» ἐκγεγάμεν.

249. δοκεῖ Znvddoros τοῦτον καὶ τὸν
ἑξῆς ἠθετηκέναι, Ariston.; an important
remark, as it shows that the later Aris-
tarchean school knew Zenodotos only at
second hand. ἐφ᾽ ἵππων, ὅτι ᾿Αττικῶς
ἐξενήνοχεν ἀντὶ τοῦ ὡς ἐπὶ τοὺς ἵππους (in
the direction of the chariot), ἐδίά. For
the Attic use compare ἐπ᾽ οἴκου = home-
wards, ἡ ἐπὶ Βαβυλῶνος ὁδός, Xen. Cyr.
5, 3, 45, etc. It occurs also in H., e.g.
E 700, [ 5. But it is hardly possible
that this should be the sense here, for
we cannot suppose that Sthenelos, whose
function is that of charioteer, can have
left the horses so far as to advise Diomedes
to retreat in their direction. We must

therefore take it in the ordinary sense,

“retreat upon the chariot” (as Q 356),

which seems especially to have been used
for this very purpose, as the Homeric hero
had a decided preference for doing his
serious fighting on foot, and keeps his
chariot at hand as a resource in case of
need ; compare M 84-5.

252. φόβονδ᾽ ἀγόρενε: for this pregnant
use we may compare II 697, φύγαδ᾽
ἐμνώοντο. It is easily derived from the
literal sense which we have in Θ 139,
φόβονδ᾽ Exe μώννχας ἵππους, and may be
compared with such phrases as εἰπεῖν,
μυθεῖσθαι els ἀγαθά, I 102, Ψ 805; thus
it means ‘‘say nothing in the direction
of, tending to, flight.” φόβος is of
course an exaggeration, as Sthenelos
merely meant him to fight in the
throng, not among the mpdpayo. So
ἀλυσκάζοντι and καταπτώσσειν are
invidious names for retirement to the
ὅμιλος, where an individual was protected
by numbers. So Idomeneus says, N
262, οὐ γὰρ dlw ἀνδρῶν δυσμενέων ἑκὰς
ἱστάμενος πολεμίζειν. οὐδέ σε, so La R,
with Ptol. Ask.: Herod. οὐδὲ σέ, ποῖ even
thee. But it is more Homeric to take
οὐδέ with the whole clause, ‘‘ for neither
wilt thou persuade me.”

253. γενναῖον, a dw. Aey. in Homer ;
nor does he use γέννα or γεννάω:
σημειοῦνταί τινες ὅτι οὕτως εἴρηται ἐγγενές,
πάτριον, Schol. A. It is practically

», Ὁ

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v.)

161.

2Q\ 4 wv / ΝΜ) / 3
οὐδὲ καταπτώσσειν" ἔτι μοι μένος ἔμπεδον ἐστιν"

ὀκνείω δ᾽ ἵππων ἐπιβαινέμεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ αὔτως

255

ἀντίον εἶμ᾽ αὐτῶν" τρεῖν μ᾽ οὐκ ἐᾷ Παλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη.
lA 3 3 LA 9 9 , 3 / “4

τούτω δ᾽ οὐ πάλιν αὗτις ἀποίσετον ὠκέες ἵπποι

ἄμφω ἀφ᾽ ἡμείων, εἴ γ᾽ οὖν ἕτερός γε φύγῃσιν.

ἄλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω, σὺ δ᾽ ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῇσιν"

αἴ κέν μοι πολύβουλος ᾿Αθήνη κῦδος ὀρέξῃ

260

ἀμφοτέρω κτεῖναι, σὺ δὲ τούσδε μὲν ὠκέας ἵππους
αὐτοῦ ἐρυκακέειν, ἐξ ἄντυγος ἡνία τείνας,

Αἰνείαο δ᾽ ἐπάϊξαι μεμνημένος ἵππων,

ἐκ δ᾽ ἐλάσαι Τρώων per ἐυκνήμιδας ᾿Αχαιούς.

τῆς γάρ τοι γενεῆς, ἧς Τρωί περ εὐρύοπα Ζεὺς

265

Sax” υἷος ποινὴν Γανυμήδεος, οὕνεκ᾽ ἄριστοι
ἵππων, ὅσσοι ἔασιν ὑπ᾽ ἠῶ τ᾽ ἠέλιόν Te:
τῆς γενεῆς ἔκλεψεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγχίσης,

indifferent whether we explain the word
thus, ‘‘it is not in my blood,” or in the
later sense ‘‘it is not honourable for me
to shirk”; this sense is immediately
derived from the former, as with our
word ‘‘high-bred,” worthy of a man of
family. o a chieftain whatever is
hereds is honourable as a matter of
course. τὸ yervaidy ἐστι τὸ μὴ ἐξιστά-
μενον ἐκ τῆς αὑτοῦ φύσεως, Aristot. H. A.
i, 1. 82.

256. ἐᾷ scanned as one syllable does
not look at all like an early form for
édec (synizesis in this verb is found else-
where only K 344, ¢ 233), nor perhaps
does τρεῖν. Herodianus read &a (imperf.
‘‘forbade me’’) and so A. Ahrens
conj. rpelew (τρεέμεν, Nauck) μ᾽ οὐκ εἴα
᾿Αθήνη, Menrad τρεῖν μ' οὐκ ἑάει γὰρ
᾿Αθήνη. The distich may be interpolated,
‘6 255-258 spurii?’’ Nauck.

258. For the double ye cf. Π 30, μὴ
ἐμέ γ᾽ οὖν οὗτός γε λάβοι χόλος. 287-8
and X 266 are doubtful cases. Schol.
A (Didymos) remarks, οὕτως γοῦν διὰ τοῦ
Ὕ ᾿Αρίσταρχος : this perhaps indicates
the existence of a variant εἴ κ᾽ οὖν, as
in 260, which is at least unobjectionable,

trhaps preferable, and is conjectured

y Nauck, after Akers.

261. τούσδε, pointing to his own
horses, which must therefore be close at
hand ; an additional argument in favour
of the explanation adopted in 249.

262. It is not uncommon in vase-
pictures of a chariot about to start to
see the reins fastened to the front of the

M

ἄντυξ or rail which ran round the front
of the car and formed a handle behind by
which the riderscould mount. This again
seems clearly to shew that Sthenelos at
the moment is in the car and holding
the reins.

263. The construction is probabl
ἐπᾶϊξαι, μεμν. ἵππων Aly., dart forward,
thinking only of the horses. ἐπαΐσσειν
is generally used thus absolutely. But
it sometimes takes the dat. (κ 322, ξ 281,
Ψ 64 ἢ) and acc. (M 308, H 240); and
may also take the gen., like other verbs
expressing ‘“‘aiming at,” cf. N 687,
ἐπαΐσσοντα νεῶν ; H. G. § 151 6. pep-
ynuévos may then go with ἵππων, “make
straight for Aineias, thinking only of
the horses”; or perhaps it is added
independently, ‘‘ make straight, without
forgetting, for the horses of Aineias.”
For this use of μεμνημένος compare T 153.
But this does not suit 1. 328.

265. ἧς, an ablatival gen., expressing
the source, as Z 211, ταύτης τοι γενεῆς τε
καὶ αἵματος εὔχομαι εἶναι, and τῆς γενεῆς
ἔκλεψε, below. The attraction ἧς for
ἣν assumed by some is not Homeric,
Hesiodic, or Pindaric. Bekker (H. B.
ii. 12), instead of supplying εἰσίν after
γενεῆς takes it with ἔκλεψε in 268,
regarding γενεῆς there as a mere re-
sumption after the parenthetical ἧς. . .
ἠέλιόν τε, and putting a comma at the
end of 267. e would also read ἣν for
ἧς, but this seems needless.

266. οὕνεκα, “because.” For Ganymede
see T 231-5.

162

IAIAAOZ E (v.)

λάθρῃ Λαομέδοντος ὑποσχὼν θήλεας ἵππους"

τῶν οἱ ὃξ ἐγένοντο ἐνὶ μεγάροισι γενέθλη"

270

τοὺς μὲν τέσσαρας αὐτὸς ἔχων ἀτίταλλ᾽ ἐπὶ φάτνῃ,
a 4
τὼ δὲ δύ᾽ Αἰνείᾳ δῶκεν, μήστωρι φόβοιο.
’
εἰ τούτω κε λάβοιμεν, ἀροίμεθά κε κλέος ἐσθλόν."
Φ e Ἁ A \ > 4 9 4
ὡς Ol μὲν τοιαῦτα πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἀγορεῦον,

τὼ δὲ τάχ᾽ ἐγγύθεν ἦλθον ἐλαύνοντ᾽ ὠκέας ἵππους.

275

\ ’ 4 3 \ es
τὸν πρότερος προσέειπε Λυκάονος ἀγλαὸς υἱός"
“ καρτερόθυμε δαΐφρον ἀγανοῦ Τυδέος υἱέ,
4φ A > 3 3 A 4 \ ? 4
ἡ μάλα o ov βέλος ὠκὺ δαμάσσατο, πικρὸς ὀιστός"
νῦν abr’ ἐγχείῃ πειρήσομαι, αἴ κε τύχωμι.᾽

ἢ pa καὶ ἀμπεπαλὼν προΐει δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος,

280

καὶ βάλε Τυδεΐδαο κατ᾽ ἀσπίδα" τῆς δὲ διαπρὸ

αἰχμὴ χαλκείη πταμένη θώρηκι πελάσθη.

τῷ δ᾽ ἐπὶ μακρὸν ἄυσε Λυκάονος ἀγλαὸς υἱός"

“ βέβληαι κενεῶνα διαμπερές, οὐδέ σ᾽ ὀίω

δηρὸν ἔτ᾽ ἀνσχήσεσθαι" ἐμοὶ δὲ μέγ᾽ εὖχος ἔδωκας." 285

269. λάθρῃ Δαομέδοντος, 272. θήλεας,
as θῆλυς ἐέρση ε 467, “Hon θῆλυς ἐοῦσα
T 97. Others read θηλέας for θηλείας,
with the Doric a of the acc. plur. fem. ;
but this is not an epic form.

270. γενέθλη a stock, stud.

272. Ar, and all MSS. but
one of the second class ; but the variant

ἤστωρι has been accepted by Bekker,
ouck. Christ, and others; it was read
by Plato, Lach. 191 B; καὶ αὐτὸν τὸν
Αἰνείαν κατὰ τοῦτ᾽ ἐνεκωμίασε, κατὰ τὴν
τοῦ φόβον ἐπιστήμην, καὶ εἶπεν αὐτὸν εἶναι
μήστωρα φόβοιο. There can be no doubt
that Homeric usage is on the same side,
for μήστωρ φόβοιο is always used of heroes
(Z 97, 278, M 39, Ψ 16, ef. μήστωρ ἀυτῆς
N 93, etc.), except in the el passage
© 108, where even the Mis. authority 18
divided. Indeed the application of such
a phrase to horses is in the highest degree
exaggerated and un-Homeric: it is hard
to conceive what can have induced
Aristarchos to accept it. The nearest
Homeric analogy is in the late passage
B 767, φόβον “Apnos φορεούσας, of the
horses of Eumelos,

273. For xe (here and Θ 196) most edd.
(including Nauck and Christ) follow
Bekker in his conj. ye; but L. Lange,
EI, p. 188 (494), has shown that this is
wrong, by a comparison of I 141, 283,
μ 345. See Η. 6. § 313.

274. On this line see note on 421.

278. Schol. A mixes up in his note
two interpretations, according to one of
whieh we should read ἢ as a particle of
asseveration; the other would take 4
ἀντὶ τοῦ el. Though the former view is
doubtless right, yet it may be said that
the parataxis of the two clauses shews
exactly how the use of ef with the
indicative arose, to express a concession
made unconditionally.

279. τύχωμι A, cael. τύχοιμι. There
is no case of ef κεν with opt. used in
what Lange has named ‘‘subsecutive”
clauses—those, that is, which we translate
by ‘‘to see if,” ‘‘to try whether,” etc.
The ont. in these always expresses 8
wish felt by the speaker (see on I’ 450,
453), and xe is not compatible with a
wish. It is therefore better to accept
the reading of A, and explain it as
arising from an assumption, ‘‘in which
case (xe) I suppose I shall hit you.”
See L. Lange, EI, p. 199 (505) and 80
(386). Cf. Φ 225, T 70, where κεν with
the subj. only is found. See also H 248.

281. For τῆς δέ La R. suggests (and
Nauck and Christ adopt) ἡ δέ, comparing
E 66, H 260, T 276. This is no doubt
right, as ἡ δέ would be likely to be
changed, in order to avoid the (perfectly
normal) hiatus in the bucolic diaeresis.

IAIAAOS Ε (9

168

τὸν δ᾽ οὐ ταρβήσας προσέφη κρατερὸς Διομήδης"
oo” >) 2 \ 3 \ ar > of
ἤμβροτες, οὐδ ἔτυχες" ἀτὰρ ov μὲν σφῶί γ ὀίω
πρίν γ᾽ ἀποπαύσεσθαι, πρίν γ᾽ ἢ ἕτερόν γε πεσόντα
Ψ Ν 4 332
αἵματος σαι "Apna ταλαύρινον πολεμιστήν.

ὧς φάμενος προέηκε: βέλος δ᾽ ἴθυνεν ᾿Αθήνη

290

ῥῖνα παρ᾽ ὀφθαλμόν, λευκοὺς δ᾽ ἐπέρησεν ὀδόντας.

τοῦ δ᾽ ἀπὸ μὲν γλῶσσαν πρυμνὴν τάμε χαλκὸς ἀτειρής,
3 \ > 9 4 , 3 a

αἰχμὴ δ᾽ ἐξελύθη παρὰ νείατον ἀνθερεῶνα.

Ν » 3 > 7s > » ’, 3... ») aA

ἤριπε δ᾽ ἐξ ὀχέων, ἀράβησε δὲ τεύχε ἐπ᾿ αὐτῷ

/ /
αἰόλα παμφανόωντα, παρέτρεσσαν δέ οἱ ἵπποι

295

ὠκύποδες τοῦ δ᾽ αὖθι λύθη ψυχή τε μένος Te.
Αἰνείας δ᾽ ἀπόρουσε σὺν ἀσπίδι δουρί τε μακρῷ,

δείσας, μή πώς οἱ ἐρυσαίατο νεκρὸν ᾿Αχαιοί.

ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ αὐτῷ βαῖνε λέων ὡς ἀλκὶ πεποιθώς,

πρόσθε δέ οἱ δόρυ τ᾽ ἔσχε καὶ ἀσπίδα πάντοσ᾽ ἐίσην,

800

᾿ , t 4 “A ᾽ 3 4
TOV κτάμεναι μεμαώς, OS TIS τοῦ y ἀντίος ἔλθοι,

288. This is the only case in Homer
of πρίν with infin. after a negative clause.
Bekker, offended by the fourfold repeti-
tion of ye, wrote πρὶν ἀποπ., πρὶν #. As
πρίν seems to be contracted from πρόιον,
a compar. of πρό, it may well have been
long by nature originally. Though it has
been pointed out that πρίν has a special
affinity for γε, the combination occurring
nearly thirty times in Homer, yet Z 465
(Ὁ), Ο 74, a 210, ὃ 255, 7 196, 5 289 are
the only es where γε is not elided ;
this very small proportion and the pre-
ponderance of passages in the Odyssey
are in favour of Bekker’s view. See
Hartel, H. S. 109, La Roche, H. U. 256.
πρίν is found in the thesis of the third
foot without γ᾽ Z 81, I 403, etc. The
MSS. are divided between ἀποπαύσεσθαι
and «σασθαι, the majority giving the
aor.: A has a with ε above. On this
question compare I’ 112, and H. 6. ὃ
238

289. For ταλαύρινος see note on H 239.
291. The course of the dart has given
great trouble to critics ancient and
modern. Some thought that the dart
being miraculously guided need not
ursue a natural course; others, that
andaros was leaning forward to see the
effect of his shot ; others, that the plain
was not level, and that the chariots ran
on the lower ground while the footmen
fought from the heights (!). None of
them seem to have hit on the absurdly

simple explanation that Pandaros may
have attempted to ‘‘ duck,” bending his
head forward a moment too late. The
result would obviously be what Homer
describes.

293. ἐξελύθη, A and other MSS. with
Ar., who explained τῆς ὁρμῆς ἐπαύσατο,
which the word cannot mean: caet. with
Zenod. ἐξεσύθη, ‘issued forth.” But
there can be little doubt that Ahrens
and Christ are right in restoring ἐξέλυθε
= ἐξῆλθες. (The form with ἐ for ἡ is
not elsewhere found, but has very likely
been sometimes suppressed in favour of
the more familiar ἦλθον.) This is an
interesting, because evidently accidental,

roof that in the oldest form of the

pic poems the ictus sufficed to lengthen
a short syllable without the aid of the ν
ἐφελκυστικόν, and justifies Fick in omit-
ting the ν except where it is required to
prevent hiatus.

295. παρέτρεσσαν, swerved aside. For
the canon of Ar. that in H. τρεῖν means
“* fugere, non timere,” see Lehrs, Ar. 77
sqq. Hence Aineias leaps down, because
his horses are running away.

300. of of course goes with δόρυ, ‘‘ his
spear,” not with πρόσθε, which takes
the genitive.

301. τοῦ ¥ ἀντίος, cf. P 8; the ex-
pression is very strange, and might easily

e emended ἕο ἀντίος, the hiatus being
normal in the bucolic diaeresis, As it
stands, τοῦ must mean ‘‘the dead man.”

164

σμερδαλέα ἰάχων.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v.)

ὁ δὲ χερμάδιον λάβε χειρὶ

Τυδεΐδης, μέγα ἔργον, ὃ οὐ δύο γ᾽ ἄνδρε φέροιεν,
οἷοι νῦν βροτοί εἰσ᾽- ὁ δέ μιν ῥέα madre καὶ οἷος"

τῷ βάλεν Αἰνείαο κατ᾽ ἰσχίον, ἔνθα τε μηρὸς

305

ἰσχίῳ ἐνστρέφεται, κοτύλην δέ τέ μιν καλέουσιν"
θλάσσε δέ οἱ κοτύλην, πρὸς δ᾽ ἄμφω ῥῆξε τένοντε"

aoe δ᾽ ἀπὸ ῥινὸν τρηχὺς λίθος.

αὐτὰρ ὅ γ᾽ ἥρως

ἔστη γνὺξ ἐριπὼν καὶ ἐρείσατο χειρὶ παχείῃ

γαίης" ἀμφὶ δὲ ὄσσε κελαινὴ νὺξ ἐκάλυψεν.

810

καί νύ κεν ἔνθ᾽ ἀπόλοιτο ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν Αἰνείας,
εἰ μὴ ἄρ᾽ ὀξὺ νόησε Διὸς θυγάτηρ ᾿Αφροδίτη,

, ¢ e » 3 , /
μήτηρ, ἣἧ μιν ὑπ Αγχίσῃ τέκε βουκολέοντι"
δ > eX [δὶ 3 ,ὔ , ,
ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἑὸν φίλον υἱὸν ἐχεύατο πήχεε λευκώ,
πρόσθε δέ οἱ πέπλοιο φαεινοῦ πτύγμα κάλυψεν, 315
Ψ ΝΜ ΄ ’ “ ,
ἕρκος ἔμεν βελέων, μή tis Δαναῶν ταχυπώλων

Ἁ 3 la \ 3 Ἁ
χαλκὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσι βαλὼν ἐκ θυμὸν ἕλοιτο.
ἡ μὲν ἑὸν φίλον υἱὸν ὑπεξέφερεν πολέμοιο"

οὐδ᾽ vids Καπανῆος ἐλήθετο συνθεσιάων
τάων, ἃς ἐπέτελλε βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης, 820
ἀλλ᾽ ὅ γε τοὺς μὲν ἑοὺς ἠρύκακε μώνυχας ἵππους

/ 9 Ἁ 3 ” ef
νόσφιν ἀπὸ φλοίσβου, ἐξ ἄντυγος ἡνία τείνας,
Αἰνείαο δ᾽ ἐπαΐξας καλλίτριχας ἵππους

808. μέγα ἔργον, “a great feat,” added
parenthetically, ‘“‘in apposition to the
sentence,” as it is usually called, though
it really forms part of the complement
of the verb λάβε. We may compare A
294, way ἔργον ὑποείξομαι, and similar
usages which will be found in H. G. §
136, 2-4. There is nothing in Homeric
usage to justify us in taking ἔργον in
apposition with χερμάδιον, as though =a
great thing ; or in comparing such Herod-
otean usages as μέγα χρῆμα ὑός.
povev: for this ‘‘ concessive ” or potential
opt. without ἄν see H. G. 8 804, where
reference is made to the similar use in
a principal clause, ῥεῖα θεός γ᾽ ἐθέλων καὶ
τηλόθεν ἄνδρα σαώσαι.

804. οἷοι νῦν βροτοί εἰσι, compare A
272. The phrase occurs four times in
the Iliad, but not in the Odyssey.

306. κοτύλη, the acetabulum of Roman
and modern anatomy ; the socket, suffi-
ciently like a shallow cup, by which the
head of the femur is articulated to the
pelvis. Compare the use of κοτυληδών
of the cuttle-fish’s suckers in ε 433 (also
of the acetabulum in Ar. Vesp. 1495).

309. ἐρείσατο, propped himself up.

310. γαίης, the local or rather ‘‘ quasi-
partitive ” gen., H. 6. 8 151 a. For ἀμφὶ
δὲ dace van Herwerden and Nauck conj.
ἀμφὶ δέ F’ ὄσσε, which is undoubtedly
right, as the hiatus in this place is not
permissible. Eustathius mentions the
reading δέ οἱ Ecce, which looks as though
some echo of the truth had survived
even to his day.

811. ἀπόλοιτο, for the ἀπώλετο of
later Greek ; so 388, P70. The optative
simply puts an imaginary case, without
implying that it is past, present, or
future: this information is sufficiently
given by the context. Cf. Delbriick,

. F. i. 211.

313. τέκε, conceived: cf. B 714, 820.

314. éxevaro, cf. π 214, ἀμφιχυθεὶς
πατέρ᾽ ἐσθλόν.

315. κάλυψεν, put as ἃ covering: 80
P 132, X 313. .

320. For the position οὗ τάων cf. 332
and β 119. For συνθεσιάων, ‘‘agree-
ment,’”’ cf. B 339, πῇ δὴ συνθεσίαι ;

828. See note on 263,

IAIAAOS E (v,)

165

ἐξέλασε Τρώων per ἐυκνήμιδας ᾿Αχαιούς,
δῶκε δὲ Δηνπύλῳ ἑτάρῳ φιλῳ, ὃν περὶ πάσης 825
Tiev ὁμηλικίης, ὅτι οἱ φρεσὶν ἄρτια ἤδη,

νηυσὶν ἔπι γλαφυρῇσιν ἐλαυνέμεν.

αὐτὰρ ὅ γ᾽ ἥρως

ὧν ἵππων ἐπιβὰς ἔλαβ᾽ ἡνία συγαλόεντα,
alypa δὲ Τυδεΐδην μέθεπε κρατερώνυχας ἵππους

ἐμμεμαώς.

ὁ δὲ Κύπριν ἐπῴχετο νηλέι χαλκῷ, 880

, ¢ > ν 4 / 3 4

γυγνώσκων ὅ τ᾽ ἄναλκις ἔην θεός, οὐδὲ θεάων
τάων, αἵ T ἀνδρῶν πόλεμον κάτα κοιρανέουσιν,

vw > w >? , ” ? ΄
οὔτ ἄρ Αθηναίη οὔτε πτολίπορθος Ἐνυώ.
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δή ῥ᾽ ἐκίχανε πολὺν καθ᾽ ὅμιλον ὀπάζων,
ἔνθ᾽ ἐπορεξάμενος μεγαθύμου Τυδέος υἱὸς 335
ἄκρην οὔτασε χεῖρα μετάλμενος ὀξέι δουρὶ
ἀβληχρήν" εἶθαρ δὲ δόρυ χροὸς ἀντετόρησεν

ἀμβροσίου διὰ πέπλου, ὅν οἱ χάριτες κάμον αὐταί,

826. For the phrase ἄρτια ἤδη cf. II
72, εἴ μοι κρείων ᾿ΑὙγαμέμνων Fria εἰδείη.
ἄρτιος seems to be the opposite of ἀν .-
dpo-cos, and to mean ‘‘ friendly,” agree-
ing with his wishes. But in = 92, 6 240,
ἄρτια βάζειν means ‘‘to speak suitably,
to the point,” and so it might be here ;
of would then be an ethic dative, ‘ be-
cause he found him have apt knowledge.”
But this is a less Homeric use of εἰδέναι.

827. For the dat. instead of the acc.
after verbs of motion cf. the common

hrase ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλοισιν ἰόντες, and others.

. 6. § 198 ad fin.

329. μέθεπεν with a double accus. only
here: in II 724 we have Πατρόκλῳ ἔφεπε
κρατ. ἵππους. The word ἕπειν, from its
pri sense ‘‘handle,” came to be
used often of ‘‘ handling” or managing
a team of horses. Butit is not necessary
to follow von Christ in reading μέθ᾽ ἔπε :
the constr. ‘‘drove the horses after T.”
may be fully justified by such common
_ constructions as μετιέναι τινα and the
like. Hence we have in Θ 126 ἡνίοχον
μέθεπε θρασύν, “‘drove in quest of a
charioteer,” where the direct object ἵππους
is omitted in Greek as in English. It
is quite needless to follow Nauck who
conjectures Τυδεΐδῃ ἔπεχε: while the
reading of Zenod., xparepwvtxeo’ ἵπποις,
is doubtful on account of the late form
ἵπποις for ἵπποισι at the end of a line.

330. The name Κύπρις is used only in
this episode (422, 458, 60, 883), and the

rian worship of Aphrodite is not
elsewhere alluded to in the Iliad. It

appears however in the probably late
passage θ 362, which in several respects
may be compared with the adventures
of the gods recorded in the present book.

332. Compare E 824, μάχην ἄνα κοιρα-
véovra, and I’ 241 μάχην ἀνδρῶν, 6 183
ἀνδρῶν πτολέμους, from which it is clear
that ἀνδρῶν here is gen. after πόλεμον,
not after κοιρανέουσιν.

334. ὀπάζων, cf. Θ 341 ds Ἕκτωρ Grate
κάρη κομόωντας ᾿Αχαιούς, and P 462. The
word seems to be closely conn. with
érew (compare the use of ἐφέπειν); and
means ‘‘ pressing hard.” It recurs in
this sense in the metaphorical phrase
γῆρας ὀπάζει, A 321, Θ 108: else it
is always causal, ‘‘to cause to attend
upon,” z.e. to attach to.

337. Two sheets of A are lost here,
including 387-635. ἀβληχρήν, conn.
with ἀμαλός and μαλακός, cf. βλάξ,
Herodianus on © 178 mentions a form
βληχρός in the same sense. ἀντετόρησεν
may be either ἀν-τετόρησεν or ἀντ-ετόρη-
σεν, Probably the former. The redupli-
cated reropety is given by Hesych., and
dyrt- seems to have no particular force
here. Cf. ἀμ-πεπαλών, and see Καὶ 267.

338. The very rare neglect of the F of
Fou led Heyne to conj. 8 for ὅν, though
πέπλον as neuter is not found in H., nor
indeed anywhere except in the form
πέπλα in very late authors. Another
easy correction, made by Nauck and
others, is αἱ for of. But in a fragment
of the Kypria we find εἵματα μὲν χροὶ
toro τά ol Χάριτές τε καὶ “Qpar ποίησαν,

166

\ Ψ “
πρυμνὸν ὕπερ θέναρος.

LAIAAOS Ε (.)

ῥέε δ᾽ ἄμβροτον αἷμα θεοῖο,
ἰχώρ, οἷός πέρ τε ῥέει μακάρεσσι θεοῖσιν"

840

“ ᾽ ᾽

οὐ γὰρ σῖτον ἔδουσ᾽, οὐ πίνουσ αἴθοπα οἶνον"

Pd /
Tovvek avaipoves εἰσι καὶ ἀθάνατοι καλέονται.
e ‘\ / 3.» 3 \ @ 4 ee
ἡ δὲ μέγα ἰάχουσα ἀπὸ ἕο κάββαλεν viov:

4 “a ᾽ ’

καὶ τὸν μὲν μετὰ χερσὶν ἐρύσατο Φοῖβος Απόλλων

κυανέῃ νεφέλῃ, μή τις Δαναῶν ταχυπώλων

345

χαλκὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσι βαλὼν ἐκ θυμὸν ἕλοιτο"

τῇ δ᾽ ἐπὶ μακρὸν duce βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης"

“ εἶκε, Διὸς θύγατερ, πολέμου καὶ δηιοτῆτος"

ἢ οὐχ ἅλις, ὅττι γυναῖκας ἀνάλκιδας ἠπεροπεύεις ;

᾽
εἰ δὲ σύ γ᾽ ἐς πόλεμον πωλήσεαι,

3
τέσ ὀίω 850

ῥιγήσειν πόλεμόν γε, καὶ εἴ χ᾽ ἑτέρωθι πύθηαι."
ὧς ἔφαθ᾽, ἡ δ᾽ ἀλύουσ᾽ ἀπεβήσετο, τείρετο δ᾽ αἰνῶς.
\ \ ν "4 ς a / ” »> ε
τὴν μὲν ἄρ Ἶρις ἑλοῦσα ποδήνεμος ἔξαγ ὁμίλου
3 ᾽᾿ 2 4 4 δὲ /
ἀχθομένην ὀδύνῃσι, pedaiveto δὲ χρόα καλόν.

φ ” 4 9 9% 9 \ @ κ᾿ "A
EUPEV ἔπειτα μάχης ET ἀριστερά ὕουρον Apna

and this is certainly the more Homeric
construction, cf. & 178, ἀμβρόσιον ἑανὸν
ἔσαθ᾽, ὃν οἱ ᾿Αθήνη ἔξυσ᾽ ἀσκήσασα, This
line is perhaps the only one in the
Iliad, therefore, in which there is no
easy emendation which will restore the F
to of. The line is superfluous, and as we
should not expect the garment to cover
the πρυμνὸν θέναρος, it may well be in-
terpolated.

339. πρυμνὸν θέναρος must be
the same as χεῖρ᾽ ἐπὶ καρπῷ, 458. θέναρ
appears to mean ‘‘ the palm of the hand,”
νυ. Curt. Gr. Et. no. 312, and L. and S.
πρυμνόν is only here used as ἃ substan-
tive, the ‘‘ root of the palm.”

340-2 appear to be a very poor inter-

olation. ἰχώρ is mentioned again only
in 416 in an anomalous form. It is used
by Aesch. Ag. 1480 in the sense of
“blood” simply: in later writers it
means the serum of the animal juices of
all sorts, including blood. Thus the
appropriation of it to the divine blood,
which is not adopted by any later poets,
seems due to a mistaken attempt to
reconcile 416 with 339 by this interpola-
tion. 342 is quite meaningless and
absurd ; and with it 341 must be con-
demned.

344. ἐρύσατο, best MSS. : ἐρύσσατο,
Buttm. Lexil. 308 (¢.v.). This is one
of the ambiguous cases which may be
referred either to Feptw, to draw, or

355

(σ)ερύομαι, to preserve ; but it belongs
more naturally to the latter. See A 216.
350. The two clauses beginning with
el are evidently not co-ordinate or even
consistent. The train of thought is, ‘if
you mean to frequent (cf. A 490) the
attle-field, you will (be taught to)
dread the battle if you so much as hear
the sound of it anywhere”; which is
uite natural, and does not involve any
iscontinuity of idea. πυθέσθαι is prob-
ably used of direct hearing, not in the
sense of ‘‘hearing battle talked about,”
cf. O 379 ἐπύθοντο κτύπον, 224 μάχης
ἐπύθοντο.

354. μελαίνετο, ἱ.6. was stained by the
μέλαν αἷμα.

355. ἐπ’ ἀριστερά: it seems most
natural to suppose that the Greek poet
always looks at the battle from the
Greek side. The left would then mean
the part of the battle most distant from
the Skamander, on the right bank of
which the fighting must, according to
the actual eography, have taken 6.
But this will be inconsistent with. 36,
where Ares is left beside Skamander.
But it has been shown by Hercher that
it is impossible to reconcile Homer's geo-
graphical statements either with them-
selves or with the reality. The Skaman-
der in particular is an arbitrary quantity,
sometimes treated as running trans-
versely between the city and the ships,

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Ε (Ὁ

167

ἥμενον, ἠέρι δ᾽ ἔγχος ἐκέκλιτο καὶ rayé ἵππω"
ἡ δὲ γνὺξ ἐρυποῦσα κασιγνήτοιο φίλοιο
πολλὰ λισσομένη χρυσάμπυκας ἤτεεν ἵππους"
“ φίλε κασίγνητε, κόμισαί τέ με, δὸς δέ μοι ἵππους,
ὄφρ᾽ ἐς "᾽ολυμπον ἵκωμαι, ἵν᾿ ἀθανάτων ἕδος ἐστίν. 860
λίην ἄχθομαι ἕλκος, ὅ με βροτὸς οὕτασεν ἀνήρ,
Τυδεΐδης, ὃς νῦν γε καὶ ἂν Διὶ πατρὶ μάχοιτο."
ὧς φάτο, τῇ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ “Apns δῶκε χρυσάμπυκας ἵππους.
ἡ δ᾽ ἐς δίφρον ἔβαινεν ἀκηχεμένη φίλον ἧτορ,
πὰρ δέ οἱ Ἶρις ἔβαινε καὶ ἡνία λάξετο χερσίν, 365
μάστιξεν δ᾽ ἐλάαν, τὼ δ᾽ οὐκ ἀέκοντε πετέσθην.
αἶψα δ᾽ ἔπειθ᾽ ἵκοντο θεῶν ἕδος, αἰπὺν "Ολυμπον"
ἔνθ᾽ ἵππους ἔστησε ποδήνεμος ὠκέα Ἶρις
λύσασ᾽ ἐξ ὀχέων, παρὰ δ᾽ ἀμβρόσιον βάλεν εἶδαρ"
ἡ δ᾽ ἐν γούνασι πῖπτε Διώνης δῖ᾽ ᾿Αφροδίτη, 370
μητρὸς ἑῆς" ἡ δ᾽ ἀγκὰς ἐλάξετο θυγατέρα ἦν,
χειρί τέ μιν κατέρεξεν, ἔπος τ᾽ ἔφατ᾽ ἔκ τ᾽ ὀνόμαξεν"
“rls νύ σε τοιάδ᾽ ἔρεξε, φίλον τέκος, Οὐρανιώνων
μαψιδίως, ὡς εἴ τι κακὸν ῥέζουσαν ἐνωπῇ ;”

sometimes as lying alongside the field,
and often forgotten altogether (Hom.
Au/fsitze, pp. 50 sqg.; ci. Ribbeck in
Rhein. Mus. 35, 610).

356. “ἐκέκλιτο vitiosum,” Nauck, per-
haps rightly: for in the first place the
idea of a spear leaning upon mist is
quite un-Homeric ; and in the second it
can only apply to ἵππω by a violent
ΖΘ for which support can hardly
be found in Γ 327, ἵπποι depolrodes καὶ
ποικίλα τεὐχε ἔκειτο (see note).

857. κασιγνήτοιο is of course to be
taken with ἵππους, not with jreev, which
would require an accusative. Atocopévy:
this verb always lengthens a preceding
vowel in the Iliad (except II 46, 47),
apparently because it once n with
another consonant, probably y, of which
however no trace has remained; the
cognate languages afford no information.
Cf. note on A 15.

359. δός τέ, Barnes and most follow-
ing edd. with one MS. only: caet. δὸς
δέ. The collocation of re and δέ is not
very rare in H.: a very similar instance
is Q 480, αὐτόν re ῥῦσαι, πέμψον δέ με
σύν γε θεοῖσιν ; so also Ψ 178, π 482,
and (according to best MSS.) π 140;
and Q 368, οὔτε... δέ. This seems
sufficient defence for the traditional

reading here. The δέ makes the second
clause more emphatic, because it is
contrasted, instead of being co-ordi-
nated, with the first; there is a slight
anacoluthon, but vigour of expression is
gained (see Hentze, Anh. ad loc.).

361. ἕλκος, the accus. of a subst. is
found only here with ἄχθομαι, but we
have a neut. pronoun in Z 523, I 77;
and the accusative of a participle N
352. We might compare also E 757, οὐ
νεμεσίζῃ “App τάδε καρτερὰ ἔργα. Per-
haps however in this case it is to be
regarded rather as an accusative of the
part affected. See H. G. §§ 136-7.

370. Dione appears only here in Homer:
she is named incidentally, among other
daughters of Okeanos and Tethys, in
Hesiod, Theog. 353, and as present at
the childbearing of Leto, Hym. <Apol.
93. Her cult seems to have been Thes-
protian and connected with that of Zeus
at Dodona. The name itself is probably
connected with Lat. Diana, and in form-
ation it resembles Διώνυσος.

374. ἐνωπῇ only here (and Φ 510?);
it evidently means ‘‘openly,” in the
sight of all. Schol. B mentions a variant
ἐνιπῇ, which can hardly be right, per-
haps he means ἐνωπί, which is: given by
another Schol.

168

τὴν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα φιλομμειδὴς ᾿Αφροδίτη"

IAIAAOS E (v)

375

“ otra με Τυδέος vids ὑπέρθυμος Διομήδης,
οὕνεκ᾽ ἐγὼ φίλον νἱὸν ὑπεξέφερον πολέμοιο
Αἰνείαν, ὃς ἐμοὶ πάντων πολὺ φίλτατός ἐστιν.
οὐ γὰρ ἔτι Τρώων καὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν φύλοπις αἰνή,

ἀλλ᾽ ἤδη Δαναοί γε καὶ ἀθανάτοισι μάχονται.᾽"

380

τὴν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα Διώνη δῖα θεάων"
“ χέτλαθι, τέκνον ἐμόν, καὶ ἀνάσχεο κηδομένη περ"
πολλοὶ γὰρ δὴ τλῆμεν ᾿Ολύμπια δώματ᾽ ἔχοντες
ἐξ ἀνδρῶν, χαλέπ᾽ ἄνγε᾽ ἐπ᾿ ἀλλήλοισι τιθέντες.

τλῆ μὲν "Apns, ὅτε μιν Ὦτος κρατερός τ᾽ ᾿Εφιάλτης,

385

παῖδες ᾿Αλωῆος, δῆσαν κρατερῷ ἐνὶ δεσμῷ"
χαλκέῳ δ᾽ ἐν κεράμῳ δέδετο τρισκαίδεκα μῆνας.
καί νύ κεν ἔνθ᾽ ἀπόλοιτο Αρης τος πολέμοιο,
εἰ μὴ μητρυιὴ περικαλλὴς ᾿Ηερίβοια

ἝἙρμέᾳ ἐξήγγειλεν" ὁ δ᾽ ἐξέκλεψεν "Apna

990

ἤδη τειρόμενον, χαλεπὸς δέ ἑ δεσμὸς ἐδάμνα.
τλῆ δ᾽ “Ἥρη, ὅτε μιν κρατερὸς πάις ᾿Αμφιτρύωνος
δεξιτερὸν κατὰ μαξὸν ὀιστῷ τρυγλώχινι

888. The sense is the same as 873.
τλῆμεν, with the usual punctuation after
ἐξ ἀνδρῶν, is here used absolutely ; but
this is hardly to be paralleled in H., the
expression τλῆτε, φίλοι, B 299, being
rather different. It would perhaps be
better, as suggested’ by Heyne, to take
ἄλγεα as the object of τλῆμεν as well as
of ἐπιτιθέντες, For the use of the latter
verb cf. B 39. Fulda (Unters. iiber die
Sprache der Hom. Ged. 224) says that
ἄλγος was original'y used of mental pain
only, and that the three passages in
which it is used of bodily pain (here,
895, B 721) are of late origin. He might
have added A 582.

385. For the legend of Otos and
Ephialtes, the youthful giants who piled
Pelion upon Ossa, see ἃ 308 sqg. The
traditional explanation makes them a
personification of the triumph of agri-
cultural pursuits ("AAwed’s from ἀλωή)
over warlike passions. τοὺς ᾿Αλωείδας
φασὶ καταπαῦσαι τὸν πόλεμον καὶ τὰς és
αὐτὸν παρασκευὰς, καὶ ἐν εἰρήνῃ ποιῆσαι
βιοτεύειν τοὺς ἀνθρώπους, Schol. Ὁ on A
308. Other legends, as well as some
tedious moralising by Porphyrios, will be
found in Schol. B here.

387. The κέραμος reminds us of the
enormous jars, quite large enough to

hold ἃ man comfortably, found by Dr.
Schliemann at Hissarlik 866 the illus-
trations to Ilios, pp. 38, 378, 589.
These jars are of course of earthenware.
The epithet χάλκεος is added in accord-
ance with the usual practice of describ-
ing the utensils of the gods as made of
the more valuable metals, while men
used baser materials: cf. 724 sqgq.
Eurystheus, according to the legend, of
which representations on archaic vases
are not uncommon, lived in a brazen
κέραμος sunk in the ground, for fear of
Herakles.

388. For the construction see 311.

389. μητρνιή, of the sons of Aloeus,
apparently: but according to others, of
Hermes. But it is evidently meant that
the step-mother does what she can to
thwart her step-sons. Their mother is
called Iphimedeia in ἃ 305.

391. dpva, rather ἐδάμνη, as Nauck
suggests, from δάμνημι (893). Cf. how-
ever ηὔδα, which, as Fick has remarked,
is an analogous form from adénu (Aecol. ἢ
αὔδαμι), not a contracted imperfect.

393-400 seem to belong to the legend
of the campaign of Herakles inst
Pylos, which recurs, but without the
divine elements, in A 690, where the
Schol. says, ᾿Ηρακλῆς παρεγένετο els Πύλον

IAIAAOS E (v.)

169

βεβλήκει" τότε καί μιν ἀνήκεστον λάβεν ἄλγος.

a 2.2 “
τλῆ δ Αἰδης ἐν τοῖσι πελώριος ὠκὺν ὀιστόν,

395

εὖτέ μιν ωὑτὸς ἀνήρ, vids Διὸς αἰγιόχοιο,

ἐν Πύλῳ ἐν νεκύεσσι βαλὼν ὀδύνῃσιν ἔδωκεν.
αὐτὰρ ὁ βῆ πρὸς δῶμα Διὸς καὶ μακρὸν ᾽Ολυμπον
Kip ἀχέων, ὀδύνῃσι πεπαρμένος, αὐτὰρ ὀιστὸς

ὦμῳ ἔνι στιβαρῷ ἠλήλατο, κῆδε δὲ θυμόν.

400

τῷ δ᾽ ἐπὶ Ἰ]αιήων ὀδυνήφατα φάρμακα πάσσων
ἠκέσατ᾽" οὐ μὲν γάρ τι καταθνητός γε τέτυκτο.
σχέτλιος, ὀβριμοεργός, ὃς οὐκ ὄθετ᾽ αἴσυλα ῥέζων,
ὃς τόξοισιν ἔκηδε θεούς, οἱ "ολυμπον ἔχουσιν.

σοὶ δ᾽ ἐπὶ τοῦτον ἀνῆκε θεὰ γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη"

405

νήπιος, οὐδὲ TO οἷδε κατὰ φρένα Τυδέος υἱός,

χρήζων καθαρσίων, οἱ δὲ Πύλιοι ἀποκλεί-
σαντες τὰς πύλας οὐκ εἰσεδέξαντο αὐτόν ἐφ᾽
w ὁργισθεὶς ὁ ἥρως ἐπόρθησε Πύλον.
συνεμάχουν δὲ τῷ μὲν Νηλεῖ τρεῖς θεοὶ,
Ποσειδῶν Ἥρα ᾿Αιδωνεὺς, τῷ δὲ Ἡρακλεῖ
δύω ᾿Αθηνᾶ καὶ Ζεύς. According to
Hesiod, Scut. Her. 359-367, Ares was
among the victims on the same occasion :

ἤδη μέν τέ E φημι καὶ ἄλλοτε πειρηθῆναι
ἔγχεος ἡμετέρου, ὅθ᾽ ὑπὲρ Πύλου ἡμαθόεντος
ἀντίος ἔστη ἐμεῖο, μάχης ἅμοτον μενεαίνων.
So also Pind. Ol. ix. 29-35, where Herakles
ἀμφὶ Πύλον σταθεὶς ἤρειδε ἸΤοσειδᾶν,
ἤρειδεν δέ μιν ἀργυρέῳ τόξῳ πελεμίξζων
Φοῖβος, οὐδ᾽ ᾿Αίδας ἀκινήταν ἔχε ῥαβδόν.
(Cf. Apollod. 2, 7, 3, and Pausanias,
vi. 25, 3). The legend no doubt belongs
to the journey to Hades, to recover
Alkestis or to bring back Kerberos.
There was clearly some primitive idea
that Pylos was the gate of the under-
world; a special cultus of Hades there
is mentioned by Pausanias, l.c., as
being founded on the gratitude of the
Pylians for his alliance with them
i Herakles on this occasion.
is is probably the explanation of
the statement made by Schol. V that
Aristarchos took πύλῳ in 397 to be
another form of πύλῃ, meaning simply
‘‘in the gate of hell” (for which idea
compare 646, I 312, and the epithet
πυλάρτης applied to Hades). But seein
that the legend was so definitely localize
at Pylos, it is much more likely that
Aristarchos explained the name Πύλος to
mean ‘‘the gate of hell,” and was mis-
understood by his followers, than that

he assumed a synonym of πύλη which is
not found elsewhere in Greek (H. uses
only the plural πύλαι). ἐν νεκύεσσι
would most naturally mean ‘‘in the
country of the dead,” and this would
agree with such a double sense of Πύλῳ,
but there is no strong reason why it
should not be the same as ἐν γνεκάδεσσι,
886. In any case it can hardly go with
βαλών, which means ‘“‘hitting him” ;
for there is no Homeric analogy for
trang/ating it ‘‘casting him among the
ea 37

401. ΤΠαιήων is only mentioned again
by Homer in 899 and 6 232, where he is the
progenitor of the race of physicians, see

olon, fr. 18, 57, and Pindar, P. iv. 270,
ἐσσὶ δ' ἰατὴρ ἐπικαιρότατος, Παιὰν δέ σοι
τιμᾷ φάος. He is apparently not identical
with Apollo, who in Homer has no
healing function (cf. however Π 514-529).
So Schol. on ὃ 232, διαφέρει ὁ Παιήων
᾿Απόλλωνος ws kal ‘Halodos μαρτυρεῖ, ‘el
μὴ ᾿Απολλὼν Φοῖβος ὑπὲκ θανάτοιο σαώσαι,
ἢ καὶ Παιήων, ὅς ἁπάντων φάρμακα older.”

403-4. These lines, or at all events the
second, can hardly be in place here,
though the nominative in an exclama-
tion is quite regular; »v. A 231 and
νήπιος just below. But in all such cases
the adj. immediately follows the mention
of the person referred to, whereas here
Herakles has not been mentioned since
397. Christ is therefore perhaps right
in putting them (in brackets) before 398.
For ὀβριμοεργός Ar. seems to have read
αἰσυλοεργός, Which does not go well with
the αἴσυλα immediately following.

170

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v,)

a 4~ 3 , ἃ 3 4 /

ὅττι par ov δηναιὸς, ὃς ἀθανάτοισι μάχηται,

οὐδέ τί μιν παῖδες ποτὶ γούνασι παππάζουσιν
/ > » , 3. «a a

ἐλθόντ᾽ ἐκ πολέμοιο καὶ αἰνῆς δηιοτῆτος.

τῶ νῦν Τυδείδης, εἰ καὶ μάλα καρτερός ἐστιν,

410

φραζέσθω, μή τίς οἱ ἀμείνων σεῖο μάχηται,

μὴ δὴν Αἰγιάλεια περίφρων ᾿Αδρηστίνη

ἐξ ὕπνου γοόωσα φίλους οἰκῆας ἐγείρῃ,
κουρίδιον ποθέουσα πόσιν, τὸν ἄριστον ᾿Αχαιῶν,

ἰφθίμη ἄλοχος Διομήδεος ἱπποδάμοιο."

415

@ e 3 ’ 3 > 9 A \ 3 /

ἢ pa καὶ ἀμφοτέρῃσιν ἀπ᾽ ἰχῶ χειρὸς ὀμόργνυ"
. Ν / OQ / \ , “
ἄλθετο χείρ, ὀδύναι δὲ κατηπιόωντο βαρεῖαι.
αἱ δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ εἰσορόωσαι ᾿Αθηναίη τε καὶ “Ἥρη
κερτομίοις ἐπέεσσι Δία Κρονίδην ἐρέθιξον.

τοῖσι δὲ μύθων ἦρχε θεὰ γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη"

420

“ Ζεῦ πάτερ, ἦ ῥά τί μοι κεχολώσεαι, ὅττι κεν εἴπω;
> A

ἢ para δή τινα Κύπρις Ayauddov ἀνιεῖσα

Τρωσὶν ἅμα σπέσθαι, τοὺς νῦν ἔκπαγλα φίλησεν,

407. Cf. Z 130. μάλα goes with the
whole clause, “ofa surety.’ Cf. B 241.

408. παππάζουσιν, so Nausikaa calls
her father πάππα, ¢ 573; compare also
μ 42, and for the addition of the parti-
ciple in the next line the similar Z 480.

412. Aigialeia, wife of Diomedes, was
the youngest daughter of Adrestos, and
aunt of her husband ; for Tydeus had

married her elder sister Deipyle, see = ᾿

121. Soin A 226 Iphidamas 18 married
to his maternal aunt. This seems to
shew that relationship through the
mother only ceased to be recognized in
Greece at an early date; though Mr.
M‘Lennan thought that traces of it
existed till historic times, and that the
change to the recognition of paternal
kinship is recorded in the trial scene in
the Eumenides. If this be the case, it
must have been a peculiar instance of
survival in Attica. It may be said
generally that in Homer the idea of
kinship is almost the same as our own,
though relationship through the mother
is not quite so close as with us. δήν
must go with γοόωσα, ‘‘with long
lament” ; but this is not very appropri-
ate. Perhaps the original reading was
δή F’, lamenting him.

412. For the feminine patronymic
᾿Αδρηστίνη cf. I 557 Εὐηνίνη, & 319
᾿Ακρισιώνη.

415. This line seems to be an inter-

polation, and out of place, like 403-4
above. If it is to be accepted at all it
evidently ought to come after 412. For
ἰφθίμη cf. A 3: as used of women it is
an Odyssean word, except T 116.

416. MSS. are divided between ἰχῶ,
ἰχώρ, and lydp. As the word is masculine
in 340 and elsewhere in Greek, the first
form is preferable, on the analogy—not
very close, however — of ἱδρῶ (A 621).
For χειρός Zen. read χερσίν. Barnes
conj. ἀμφοτέρῃσ᾽ ἰχῶρ' ἀπὸ χειρὸς.

418. The return of Athene from the
battle-field to Olympus has not been
mentioned: see 510. The ‘taunt ”—
which almost descends, it must be ad-
mitted, to the level of ‘‘chaff’”—looks
like a conscious allusion to A 7-12.
For 421 cf. Ε 762,a158 ’

423. The MSS. are divided between
dua σπέσθαι and ἅμ᾽ ἑσπέσθαι: the latter
would be a reduplicated aor. for σε-σπέ-
σθαι, and to this the breathing of
ἑσπόμην would seem to point. So we
have ἕσπωνται μ 349, ἑσποίμην τ 579,
φΦ 77, ἑσπέσθω Μ 350, 863; but σπεῖο K
285, σπέσθαι here and ὃ 38 with a var.
lect., x 324 all MSS. ; ἑσπόμενος M 395,
N 570, K 246. Of these we may observe
that the initial e is in no case needed,
being always preceded by an elision ; in
K 285, x 324, it cannot be inserted.
Bekker and Nauck are therefore probabl
right in reading ἅμα σπέσθαι here, an

IAIAAOS E (v.)

171

a 7 ᾽ , 4 /
τῶν τινα καρρέζουσα ᾿Αχαιιάδων ἐνπέπλων
πρὸς χρυσέῃ περόνῃ καταμύξατο χεῖρα ἁραιήν.᾽ 425
ὧς φάτο, μείδησεν δὲ πατὴρ ἀνδρῶν τε θεῶν Te,
fe 4, / / 3 7
Kai ῥα καλεσσάμενος προσέφη χρυσέην Adgpodirny:
“οὔ τοι, τέκνον ἐμόν, δέδοται πολεμήια ἔργα,
ἀλλὰ σύ γ᾽ ἱμερόεντα μετέρχεο ἔργα γάμοιο,
ταῦτα δ᾽ “Apne θοῷ καὶ ᾿Αθήνῃ πάντα μελήσει." 480
Φ e [οὶ \ 2 / 3 /
ὡς οἱ μὲν τοιαῦτα πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἀγόρευον,
Αἰνείᾳ δ᾽ ἐπόρουσε βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης,
’ Cd e ᾽ ‘ e “Ὁ 3 ’
γυγνώσκων, Ο οἱ AUTOS ὑπείρεχε χείρας ᾿Απολλων"
9 9494 Ψ 9 4“, 3 3 Ἁ ΑἉ Ψ Ψ 9 7 A
ἀλλ᾽ 6 γ᾽ ἄρ᾽ οὐδὲ θεὸν μέγαν Alero, ἵετο δ᾽ αἰεὶ
Αἰνείαν κτεῖναι καὶ ἀπὸ κλυτὰ τεύχεα δῦσαι. 435
τρὶς μὲν ἔπειτ᾽ ἐπόρουσε κατακτάμεναι μενεαίνων,
τρὶς δέ οἱ ἐστυφέλιξε φαεινὴν ἀσπίδ᾽ ᾿Απόλλων.
3 Iw A \ 4 4. 9
GAX ὅτε δὴ τὸ τέταρτον ἐπέσσυτο δαίμονι ἶσος,
δεινὰ δ᾽ ὁμοκλήσας προσέφη ἑκάεργος ᾿Απόλλων"
“φράζεο, Τυδεΐδη, καὶ χάζεο, μηδὲ θεοῖσιν 440
σ᾽ ἔθελε φρονέειν, ἐπεὶ οὔ ποτε φῦλον ὁμοῖον
ἀθανάτων τε θεῶν χαμαὶ ἐρχομένων τ᾽ ἀνθρώπων."
ὧς φάτο, Τυδεΐδης δ᾽ ἀνεχάζετο τυτθὸν ὀπίσσω,

analogous forms in all the other passages.
It is significant that in Hym. Hom.
xxix. 12 two MSS. give 7’ ἔσπεσθε, not
θ᾽. So we have μετασπόμενος, and in
the compounds the later Greek MSS.
always give the shorter forms, ém-
σπέσθαι, etc. (see Hayman on ὃ 38).
τοὺς νῦν ἔκπαγλα φίλησεν, cf. Γ' 415.

424. τῶν τινα takes up τινα ᾿Αχαιιάδων
above. Fiisi has remarked that the
speech seems to shew something of the
freedom of familiar conversation.

425. apathy Ar., ἀραιήν vulgo. The
word must once have begun with a con-
sonant, probably F, on account of the
hiatus here and = 411, T 37; the two
other places where it occurs, II 161, κ 90,

ve nothing. No plausible etymology

as been suggested. The soft breathing
probably arose from the idea that the
word meant destructive, and came from
ἀρή or palw ; but this is not tenable,

481. This line appears to be a ‘‘tag”
by which a return is often made from
an interpolation to the original narrative.
It is especially common after scenes in
Olympus of doubtful authenticity: H
464, © 212, Σ 368, ᾧ 514. It occurs

oe ao a wre

also E 274, N 81, II 101, and sixteen
times in the Odyssey. (So La Roche.)
It is clear that 432 originally followed
352. The myths, of which the interven-
ing lines are full, are almost totally dis-
tinct from those of other parts of Homer,
and the quasi-comic scene in Olympus
is nearly allied to others where we have
good reasons for suspecting a later hand.

everal peculiarities of diction have also
been pointed out in the notes.

436 sqqg. Cf. Π 784-786, which seem
to be modelled on this passage ; so also
Π 703-707.

440. The very marked assonance is
curiously overlooked by Bekker in the
very full list of similar phenomena given
in H. B. i. 185-1965,

441. For toa φρονέειν compare A 187,
ἶσον ἐμοὶ φάσθαι.

442, χαμαὶ ἐρχομένων go closely
together in the sense of ἐπιχθονίων,
hence the position of re: so 2 250 βοὴν
ἀγαθόν re. Compare also phrases like
ΓἌρηι xrduevos, which are commonly
written as a single word. For the
thought cf. P 447, ὅσσα re γαῖαν ἐπὶ
wavelet re kal ἕρπει.

172

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (Ὁ

μῆνιν ἀλενάμενος ἑκατηβόλου ᾿Απόλλωνος.

Αἰνείαν δ᾽ ἀπάτερθεν ὁμίλον θῆκεν ᾿Απόλλων

445

Περγάμῳ εἰν ἱερῇ, ὅθι of νηός ye τέτυκτο.

ἢ τοι τὸν Λητώ τε καὶ ἔάρτεμις ἰοχέαιρα

2 4 2Q/ 3 / 4 /

ἐν μεγάλῳ ἀδύτῳ ἀκέοντό τε κύδαινὸν τε"
αὐτὰρ ὁ εἴδωλον τεῦξ᾽ ἀργυρότοξος ᾿Απόλλων

αὐτῷ τ᾽ Αἰνείᾳ ἴκελον καὶ τεύχεσι τοῖον"

450

ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ εἰδώλῳ Τρῶες καὶ δῖοι ᾿Αχαιοὶ

δήουν ἀλλήλων ἀμφὶ στήθεσσι βοείας,

ἀσπίδας εὐκύκλους λαισήιά τε πτερόεντα.

δὴ τότε θοῦρον “Apna προσηύδα Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων"

“*A ves, "Apes βροτολοιγέ, μιαιφόνε, τειχεσιπλῆτα,

455

οὐκ ἂν δὴ τόνδ᾽ ἄνδρα μάχης ἐρύσαιο μετελθών,
Τυδεΐδην, ὃς νῦν γε καὶ ἂν Act πατρὶ μάχοιτο ;
Κύπριδα μὲν πρῶτα σχεδὸν οὔτασε χεῖρ᾽ ἐπὶ καρπῷ,
αὐτὰρ ἔπειτ᾽ αὐτῷ μοι ἐπέσσυτο δαίμονι loos.”

ὧς εἰπὼν αὐτὸς μὲν ἐφέζετο Περγάμῳ ἄκρῃ,

460

Τρφὰς δὲ στίχας οὖλος “Apns ὥτρυνε μετελθὼν
εἰδόμενος ᾿Ακάμαντι θοῷ, ἡγήτορι Θρῃκῶν.
vidoe δὲ Πριάμοιο διοτρεφέεσσι κέλευεν"

446. The ye here seems quite out of
place, and was no doubt inserted into
the original νηὸς ἐτέτυκτο from ignorance
of the fact that the ictus was sufficient
to lengthen a short syllable. Apollo, as
often, shares a temple with his mother
and sister.

448. It is remarkable that the word
ἄδντον occurs only here and in 512,
nor is there any other trace in Homer
of a holy place ‘‘ not to be approached ’’
by the profane. κύδαινον, they not only
healed him, but made him even more
glorious than before. This is worthy of
gods when they tend a favourite. Com-

are T 33, ἔσται χρὼς ἔμπεδος ἢ καὶ ἀρείων.

t is not necessary to adopt Herwerden’s
conj. κήδευον or κήδαινον (Hesych. κηδαίνει,
μεριμνᾷ).

449, The mention of the ‘‘ wraith” is
not like Homer, nor does it appear on
other occasions when a hero is snatched
away bya god. It plays no further part
in the action, nor does there seem to be
the least surprise shown at the reappear
ance of the original Aineias in the field,
1.514. Thus 449-453 are probably inter-

olated ; the last two lines come bodily

om M 425-6.

452. βοείας is the genus, ἀσπίδας and
λαισήϊα the species, as both are made
of hides. The epithet εὔκυκλος seems
to refer to the concentric circles of the
wooden framework which formed the
foundation of the shield. λαισήια were
probably aprons of leather, with the

air left on (λάσιος), which hung down
from the lowest part of the shield in
order to protect the legs from arrows.
See a discussion at length in J. H. 8.
iv. pp. 285-288.

453. πτερόεντα, fluttering. The epithet
is elsewhere applied only to arrows and
ἔπεα. The old explanation that it meant
κοῦφα, ἐλαφρά, and that λαισήια were
therefore a lighter sort of buckler, is
quite untenable.

455 = 31, which is also followed by

᾿ οὐκ ἂν δή.

461. Ἰρῳψάς, so La Roche: al. Τρῶας,
but this form could not be a fem. adj.
The variant Τρώων which is found ‘n
MSS. of the second class is evidently a
gloss, to explain that Tpwds is an adj.

ee Cobet, M. C. 337.

462. Ares, the god of the Thracians,
naturally assumes the form of a Thracian
chief: see N 301.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v.)

coc Φ

ὦ υἱεῖς ἸΙριάμοιο διοτρεφέος βασιλῆος,

ἐς τί ἔτι κτείνεσθαι ἐάσετε λαὸν ᾿Αχαιοῖς ;

ἢ εἰς ὅ κεν ἀμφὶ πύλῃς ἐυποιήτῃσι μάχωνται ;
κεῖται ἀνήρ, ὅν τ᾽ ἶσον ἐτίομεν “Ἕκτορι δίῳ,
Αἰνείας υἱὸς μεγαλήτορος ᾿Αγχίσαο"

3 > οι
ἀλλ ἄγετ᾽ ἐκ φλοίσβοιο σαώσομεν ἐσθλὸν ἑταῖρον.

Φ 3 \ Ν 4 Ν ef
ὡς εἰπὼν ὦτρυνε μένος Kal θυμὸν ἑκάστου.
ἔνθ᾽ αὖ Σαρπηδὼν μάλα νείκεσεν “Ἕκτορα δῖον"
cf a
““Exrop, πῇ δή τοι μένος οἴχεται, ὃ πρὶν ἔχεσκες ;
a yw a , tes 299 9 4
φῆς που ἄτερ λαῶν πόλιν ἑξέμεν 75 ἐπικούρων

173

465

οἷος, σὺν γαμβροῖσι κασυγνήτοισί τε σοῖσιν"

τῶν νῦν οὔ τιν᾽ ἐγὼ ἰδέειν δύναμ᾽ οὐδὲ νοῆσαι, 475
ἀλλὰ καταπτώσσουσι, κύνες ὡς ἀμφὶ λέοντα"

ἡμεῖς δὲ μαχόμεσθ᾽, οἵ πέρ τ᾽ ἐπίκουροι ἔνειμεν.

καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼν ἐπίκουρος ἐὼν μάλα τηλόθεν ἵἴκω"

τηλοῦ yap Λυκίη, Ἐξάνθῳ ἔπι δινήεντι"

ἔνθ᾽ ἄλοχόν τε φίλην ἔλιπον καὶ νήπιον υἱόν, 480
κὰδ δὲ κτήματα πολλά, τά T ἔλδεται, ὅς κ᾿ ἐπιδευής"

3 Φ / 3 4 4 δ >» \

ἀλλὰ καὶ ὧς Λυκίους ὀτρύνω καὶ μέμον᾽ αὐτὸς

3 ‘ / 9 ΝΜ , 3 4 a

ἀνδρὶ μαχήσασθαι" ἀτὰρ ov τί μοι ἐνθάδε τοῖον,

οἷόν κ᾽ ἠὲ φέροιεν ᾿Αχαιοὶ ἤ κεν ἄγοιεν.

τύνη δ᾽ ἕστηκας, ἀτὰρ οὐδ᾽ ἄλλοισι κελεύεις 485
λαοῖσιν μενέμεν καὶ ἀμυνέμεναι ὥρεσσιν"

μή πως, ὡς ἀψῖσι λίνου ἁλόντε πανάγρου,

465. For the dat. after κτείνεσθαι we
may compare the similar construction
after δάμνασθαι (Θ 244), ὑποκλονέεσθαι,
ᾧ 556, ete.

466. ἐνποιήτοισι Ar., -τῃσι Zenod. The
testimony of the MSS. is divided, but is
rather in favour of the reading of Zen. ;
and in II 636 we have ἐυποιητάων,
while in y 434 the MSS. all give ἐυποίη-
τον. It is apparently not possible to
introduce uniformity into the practice
of the Epic language in this respect.

471. Phis is the fret entry in the story
(excepting of course in the Catalogue B
876) of Sarpedon and his southern
Lykians, who henceforth supplant the
Lykians of Pandaros. See note on 105.

478. MSS. are divided between fs
and dys; Ar. read the former which he
explained to be the imperf. = ἐφῆσθα,
while gys is the present, according to
the tradition.

477. δέ, so five MSS. and Schol. A on

B 131: the vulg. δ᾽ αὖ is merely a
needless attempt to help the metre.

478. ἵκω, so Bekk. and La R., MSS.
ἥκω; but the old tradition is unanimous
in favour of the form with ¢; v. La R.
Textk. p. 288. ἥκω has crept into the
vulgate in three other passages, Z 406,
ν 325, 0 329, but with little MS. authority.

481. κὰδ δέ, as though κατέλιπον had

receded. Precisely similar cases will

e found in I 268, H 168, Ψ 755. Sar-

don means of course that he has left

is wealth, forgetful of the protection
which it would need against the raids of
his needy neighbours.

484, Observe the effect of the “ bucolic
diaeresis ’.in preserving the length of the
last syllable of *Axavol before a vowel.

487. The use of the dual here is hard
to explain, unless it refer to the wives
mentioned in the preceding line, and
mean ‘‘ caught in pairs, man and wife” ;
which seems highly improbable (so

174

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Ε (v.)

3 4 ’ Φ 4 4
ἀνδράσι δυσμενέεσσιν ἕλωρ καὶ κύρμα γένησθε:
οἱ δὲ τάχ᾽ ἐκπέρσουσ᾽ ἐὺ ναιομένην πόλιν ὑμήν.

σοὶ δὲ χρὴ τάδε πάντα μέλειν νύκτας τε καὶ ἦμαρ,

490

3 ‘\ / a > 4
apxous λισσομένῳ τηλεκλειτῶν ἐπικούρων
5». ἢ \ > 9 4 3 4. 33
νωλεμέως ἐχέμεν, κρατερὴν δ᾽ ἀποθέσθαι ἐνυπήν.
ὧς φάτο Σαρπηδών, Saxe δὲ φρένας “Εκτορι μῦθος.
> / > 9 > \ 4 4 . a
αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἐξ ὀχέων σὺν τεύχεσιν ἄλτο Yapate,

πάλλων δ᾽ ὀξέα δοῦρε κατὰ στρατὸν ᾧχετο πάντῃ

Schol. Β ὑμεῖς καὶ αἱ γυναῖκες, see H. 6.
8170). Others make it = σὺ καὶ ὁ λαός :
others explain it as ἃ relic of the primi-
tive origin of the plural from the dual, of
which however the traces in Homer are
doubtful, see note on A 567. Mr. Monro
suggests that a line alluding to the
absence of Paris may have dropped out,
so that ἁλόντε may mean ‘‘you and
Paris.” But there is no single case in
Homer where the loss of a line can be
assumed with reasonable probability ;
the tradition was wonderfully tenacious
of all it had got, as well as acquisitive
of new matter. Again the length of the
ain βαλόντε is almost without analogy ;
it is true we have éd\wy in Attic, but that
is simply a case of double augment, like
ἑώρων. We find however ἁλῶναι with a
in Hipponax, 77. 74, 1. Knos (de Dig.
Ῥ 75) suggests that the longa may be

ue to the preceding F as in d-ayés ἃ
575, οὐλαμός for βολαμός, andj perhaps
ἐάγη, see on Γ' 367. But in all these
cases the long vowel is in arsi, which
makes a great difference. Bentley's
conjecture, λίνον πανάγροιο βαλόντες, re-
moves both difficulties ; but there is no
trace of a tradition to support it, nor
any obvious reason why it should have
been altered to the text; and there is
no other case in Homer of a short vowel
before yp, though it might be argued
that the analogy of Sp and 8p would
justify this. Dnfortunately, owing to
the lacuna in A, we have no evidence
as to the Alexandrian view of the
passage. Tryphiodoros however seems
to have read it as it stands, for he writes
(674) ἀλλ᾽ of μὲν δέδμηντο λίνῳ θανάτοιο
πανάγρῳ (J. A. Ρ.). It may be observed
that the emendation λίνοιο for λίνου,
though it removes the difficulty of the
quantity, introduces what is equally
objectionable, an un-Homeric rhythm.
H. 6. § 367 (2).

Fishing with a net is mentioned again
only in the simile in x 383 sqgq., nor

495

does fishing with an angle, which is
several times mentioned in the Odyssey
(ὃ 368, μα 251, 332) occur in the Iliad,
except in Q2 80. This all seemsin favour
of supposing that at all events the lines
487-9, if not the whole speech of Sarpe-
don, do not belong to the oldest part of
the Iliad. It cannot perhaps be proved,
but it will I believe be felt that the
periphrase λίνον πάναγρον does not sound
ike a genuine Homeric name for a net ;
it is very different from the simple δίκ-
τυον πολύωπον of x 385, and reminds us
rather of the Hesiodic style, in which
periphrases are so common; or even of
the tragedians. Compare Aesch. Cho.
507, τὸν ἐκ βυθοῦ κλωστῆρα σώζοντες
λίνου: and of the net cast over Troy,
Agam. 357-361, στεγανὸν δίκτυον. ..
μέγα δουλείας γάγγαμον, ἄτης παναλώτου.
The word ἁψίς is ἄπ. λεγ. in’: Homer, and,
in the sense of mesh, in all Greek till we
come to Oppian.

489. ἐκπέρσονσ᾽, al. -wo’, but the
reversion to the principal construction is
more Epic.

492. ἐνιπή is here, as always, reproof
as felt by him to whom it is addressed,
cf. A 402, & 104, « 448. Hector is
urged to ‘‘ put away, remove from him-
self,” the reproach which is laid upon
him by the allies. The expression is
the converse of μῶμον ἀνάψαι B 86,
ἐλεγχείην ἀναθήσει X 100. It is there-
fore quite needless to follow Nauck
in reading ὑποδέχθαι, ‘‘accept their
rebuke.” The MSS. vary between χαλε-
πήν and κρατερήν : the latter is given by
the best. Paley compares Hes. Opp.
762, φήμη--- ἀργαλέη φέρειν χαλεπὴ δ᾽ ἀπο-
θέσθαι, which shews the evident origin
of the variation. The interpretation of
the Schol., that Hector is u “‘to give
up the habit of severe rebuke” towards
his allies, is on every ground untenable.

495. δοῦρε, so Bekker for δοῦρα of
MSS. ; no doubt rightly; cf. Τ' 18, A
43, etc.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E ()

4 , / Μ \ 4 9 “
ὀτρύνων μαχέσασθαι, ἔγειρε δὲ φύλοπιν αἰνήν.
eo / \ 2 / » , a
οἱ ὃ ἐλελίχθησαν καὶ ἐναντίοι ἔσταν Ayaov:

᾽ ΄σ΄

᾿Αργεῖοι δ᾽ ὑπέμειναν ἀολλέες οὐδὲ φόβηθεν.
ε > + Ν / e \ » 9 \
ὡς ὃ ἄνεμος ἄχνας φορέει ἱερὰς κατ adwas

ἀνδρῶν λικμώντων, ὅτε τε ξανθὴ Δημήτηρ

’
κρίνῃ ἐπευγομένων ἀνέμων καρπόν τε καὶ ἄχνας"
ea ς , 3 ’ 4 ,»ΥΣ
αἱ δ᾽ ὑπολευκαίνονται ἀχυρμιαί: ὧς Tor Αχαιοὶ
a / 4 ee e δὴ 2 A
λευκοὶ ὕπερθε γένοντο κονισάλῳ, ὅν pa du αὐτῶν
3 " > , 3 ’ , as
οὐρανὸν ἐς πολύχαλκον ἐπέπληγον πόδες ἵππων,

A > 4 e \ δ ν ς a
dap ἐπιμισγομένων: ὑπὸ δ᾽ ἔστρεφον ἡνιοχῆες"
οἱ δὲ μένος χειρῶν ἰθὺς φέρον.

θοῦρος “Apns ἐκάλυψε μάχῃ Τρώεσσιν ἀρήγων,
πάντοσ᾽ ἐποιχόμενος, τοῦ δ᾽ ἐκραίαινεν ἐφετμὰς
Φοίβου ᾿Απόλλωνος χρυσαύρου, ὅς μιν ἀνώγειν

Τρωσὶν θυμὸν ἐγεῖραι, ἐπεὶ ἴδε Παλλάδ᾽ ᾿Αθήνην

οἰχομένην" ἡ γάρ ῥα πέλεν Δαναοῖσιν ἀρηγών.

499. ἱεράς, consecrated to Demeter:
cf. A 681, ἀλφίτου ἱεροῦ ἀκτήν. ἀλωή,
here and N 588, T 496, “threshing floor,”
generally ‘‘orchard.” But the former
meaning seems to be the oldest, cf. ἀλέω,
ἀλοάω, ἅλως, and many kindred forms
from root FeA, which will be found in
Curt. Gr. Ht. no. 527. The question
whether the right form is ἀλωή or ἀλῳφή
is doubtful ; we have a similar variation
between ἀλοάω and ἀλοιάω, but the « in
any case does not seem. to be primitive,
and it is therefore best to follow the
MSS. in reading dAwds, though La
Roche prefers d\wds, on the strength of
the tradition of the grammarians. For
another elaborate simile taken from the

rocess of winnowing cf. N 588 sqq. It
is not clear whether the wind used is
created by a fan, or whether they took
advantage of the natural wind ; but the
probability seems in favour of the former,
so that ἐπειγομένων will be a passive.

508. & αὐτῶν, through the men (as
op to the horses), 1.6. the πρόμαχοι
fighting in front of their chariots.

504. πολύχαλκον, as γ 2; cf. χάλκεος
P 425, ocdhpeos, ο 329. For the thematic
pluperfect érém\nyov cf. H. G. § 27.

505. ἔπιμ ων seems to apply to
the whole of the combatants, not to ἵτ-
πων, as generally thought. ὑπέστρεφον,
kept wheeling about, as the line of
πρόμαχοι on whom they attended swayed
backwards and forwards. Cf. 581.

506. For μένος χειρῶν ἰθὺς φέρον we

175
500
505
ἀμφὶ δὲ νύκτα
510
may compare ow ῥ᾽ ἔβαλον. . . péve’

ἀνδρῶν A 447, and ἔριδα προφέρονται
Γ΄.

δ07. may go either with the
precede χα the “to owing words. The
rhythm and the analogy of A 52] are in
favour of the second eiternative, while
Π 567 speaks for the first, and the
omission of the object around which the
darkness is cast produces a rather bare
effect. Perhaps μάχῃ may be regarded
as performing a double function, going
both with ἐκάλυψε and ἀρήγων.

508. For the ἐφετμαί in question see
455.

509. The epithet xpvodopos recurs only
in O 256, and has caused some surprise,
since the sword is not the weapon of
Phoebus. So in the Hymn. Cer. 4 even
Demeter is called χρυσάορος, and accord-
ing to the Schol. on O 256, Πίνδαρος
χρυσάορα ᾿Ορφέα φησίν. Hence some
of the old grammarians explained ἄορ
as having meant originally ‘‘imple-
ment,” ὅπλον, in the widest sense, to
include both the winnowing- fan of
Demeter and the lyre of Apollo. But
there is no trace in Homer of such a
wide meaning of the word dop, which is
probably the same as ensis (for n-sor ;

chrader, S. und U. p. 315). We can only
say that this seems to be one of the
archaic epithets of gods, of which we
cannot understand the full significance.

511. olxopévny, somewhere between
290 and 418: see note on the latter

176

IAIAAOS Ε (v,)

αὐτὸς δ᾽ Aivetav μάλα πίονος ἐξ ἀδύτοιο
ἧκε, καὶ ἐν στήθεσσι μένος βάλε ποιμένι λαῶν.
Αἰνείας δ᾽ ἑτάροισι μεθίστατο" τοὶ δὲ χάρησαν,
ὡς εἶδον ζωόν τε καὶ ἀρτεμέα προσιόντα 515
καὶ μένος ἐσθλὸν ἔχοντα" μετάλλησάν γε μὲν οὔ TL
οὐ γὰρ ἔα πόνος ἄλλος, ὃν ἀργυρότοξος ἔγειρεν
"A Ν "E > νΝ a
pns te βροτολουγὸς “Epis τ ἄμοτον pepavia.

τοὺς δ᾽ Αἴαντε δύω καὶ ᾿Οδυσσεὺς καὶ Διομήδης

ὥτρυνον Δαναοὺς πολεμιζέμεν" οἱ δὲ καὶ αὐτοὶ 520
3 / 4 ς 3 3

οὔτε βίας Τρώων ὑπεδείδισαν οὔτε twxas,

ἀλλ᾽ ἔμενον νεφέλῃσιν ἐοικότες, ἅς τε Κρονίων

νηνεμίης ἔστησεν ἐπ᾽ ἀκροπόλοισιν ὄρεσσιν

ἀτρέμας, ὄφρ᾽ εὕδῃσει μένος Βορέαο καὶ ἄλλων

ζαχρειῶν ἀνέμων, οἵ τε νέφεα σκιόεντα
XP μων,

525

πνοιῇσιν λιγυρῇσι διασκιδνᾶσιν ἀέντες"

ὧς Δαναοὶ Τρῶας μένον ἔμπεδον οὐδὲ φέβοντο.

3 > 2» 2 Ψ 3 , ,
Ατρεΐδης δ᾽ av’ ὅμιλον ἐφοίτα πολλὰ κελεύων'
“ὦ φίλοι, ἀνέρες ἔστε καὶ ἄλκιμον ἦτορ ἕλεσθε,

ἀλλήλους τ᾽ αἰδεῖσθε κατὰ κρατερὰς ὑσμίνας.

530

αἰδομένων ἀνδρῶν πλέονες σόοι ἠὲ πέφανται,

line. But the lines 508-511 are almost
certainly an interpolation, as was shewn
by M. Haupt, for they are not all
consistent with the content of 455-459,
to which they refer. Besides in 461-470
Ares has been doing precisely what he
is now said to have been bidden to do.
The repetition of ἀρήγων in the form
ἀρηγών is clumsy, and αὐτός 512 is not
clear; it seems to have supplanted an
original Φοῖβος.

516-518 look like an interpolation to
explain what some prosaic rhapsode
seems to have felt as a tack of historical
probability. πόνος ἄλλος is not a

omeric phrase: we can only explain
it to mean ‘‘toil of different sort,” ὁ. 6.
war as opposed to curiosity. Heyne has
remarked that for ἄλλος we should rather
expect an epithet such as alts. dpyv-
ρότοξος is not elsewhere used as a sub-
stantive, but we may compare γλαυκῶπις
Θ 373, etc., ἠριγένεια x 197. The last
half of 518 is from A 440. It may
further be observed that “Epis in the
other passages where she is mentioned
(A 440, A 3, 73, T 48) always appears in
the introduction to a fight, never casually,
as here, in the course of it.

521. ἰωκάς, apparently conn. with
διώκω: Curtius explained it as passing
through the form δ᾽ώκω, and losing the
δ; but in the last edition of his Gr. Et.
he appears to have abandoned this. Cf.
E 740, A 601. for th '

523. γνηνεμίης : for this genitive ὁ
time see Ἦ 6. 8 150. We. may
compare the use of the gen. with ἐπί in
Attic.

525. ζ1αχρειῶν, MSS.: the original
form must have been ζαχρεέων. Ahrens
(Beitr. i. 4) derives the word as faxpéF ns
from χείρ (stem xepF), applied properly
to warriors, ‘‘strong-handed”’; and then
by metaphor to wind and horses (N 684),
“strong” simply. This seems more
natural than the ordinary derivation
from χραύω, ἔχραον (on which see 138).

529. ἄλκιμον ἦτορ ἕλεσθε only here:
but οὗ ἄλκιμον ἦτορ ἔχων, Π 209, 264.
The phrase has a superficial resemblance
to our ‘‘take heart.’ In the repetition
of these lines O 561-564 we have αἰδῶ
θέσθ᾽ ἑνὶ θυμῷ. For the Homeric con-
ception of αἰδώς see Nagelsbach, Hom.
Theol. 323. Most MSS. give δ᾽ after
αἰδομένων, but Ar. omitted it, and it is
not necessary.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (vy)

177

φευγόντων δ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ἂρ κλέος ὄρνυται οὔτε τις ἀλκή."
ἢ καὶ ἀκόντισε δουρὶ θοῶς, βάλε δὲ πρόμον ἄνδρα,
Αἰνείω ἕταρον μεγαθύμου, Δηικόωντα
Περγασίδην, ὃν Τρῶες ὁμῶς Πριάμοιο τέκεσσιν 535
tiov, ἐπεὶ θοὸς ἔσκε μετὰ πρώτοισι μάχεσθαι.
τόν ῥα κατ᾽ ἀσπίδα δουρὶ βάλε κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων"
ἡ δ᾽ οὐκ ἔγχος ἔρυτο, διαπρὸ δὲ εἴσατο χαλκός,
νειαίρῃ δ᾽ ἐν γαστρὶ διὰ ζωστῆρος ἔλασσεν.
δούπησεν δὲ πεσών, ἀράβησε δὲ τεύχε᾽ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ. 540
ἔνθ᾽ αὖτ᾽ Αἰνείας Δαναῶν ἕλεν ἄνδρας ἀρίστους,
υἷε Διοκλῆος Κρήθωνά τε ᾿Ορσίλοχόν τε,
τῶν ῥα πατὴρ μὲν ἔναιεν ἐυκτιμένῃ ἐνὶ Φηρῇ
ἀφνειὸς βιότοιο, γένος δ᾽ ἦν ἐκ ποταμοῖο
᾿Αλφειοῦ, ὅς τ᾽ εὐρὺ ῥέει Πυλίων διὰ γαίης, 545
ὃς réxer Ὀρσίλοχον πολέεσσ᾽ ἄνδρεσσιν avaxta:
Ὀρσίλοχος δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔτικτε Διοκλῆα μεγάθυμον,
ἐκ δὲ Διοκλῆος διδυμάονε παῖδε γενέσθην,
Κρήθων ᾿Ορσίλοχός τε, μάχης ἐὺ εἰδότε πάσης.
τὼ μὲν ἄρ᾽ ἡβήσαντε μελαινάων ἐπὶ νηῶν 550
Ἴλιον εἰς ἐύπωλον ἅμ᾽ ᾿Ἀργείοισιν ἑπέσθην,
τιμὴν ᾿Ατρεΐδῃς ᾿Αγαμέμνονι καὶ Μενελάῳ
ἀρνυμένω" τὼ δ᾽ αὖθι τέλος θανάτοιο κάλυψεν.
οἴω τώ γε λέοντε δύω ὄρεος κορυφῇσιν

538. See on Δ 188.

539. vealpy, only in this phrase, conn.
with véaros, νειόθι, in the sense ‘‘ lowest”
(root i, which is found in Skt. in the
sense ‘‘down”’). The ordinary deriva-
tion from Ȣ(F)os is untenable; as the
local sense of νέος is not to be established
from a few casual uses of Lat. novissimus,
when it does not occur in all Greek, much
less in Homer. véaros it is true is used
occasionally in Attic Greek = vewraros,
but this is likely enough to happen, as
ἃ word in universal use is always apt to
attract to itself sporadic archaic forms
which resemble it. Thus Curtius’ objec-
tions to Fick’s and Ebel’s explanation
(Gr. Et. no. 431) seem quite inadequate.
For the fem. suffix -eipa cf. ἰοχέαιρα,
πίειρα. SAT , and therefore also
through the lower part, or ζῶμα, of the
θώρηξ. See on A 187.

543. Φηρῇ, also in plur. Φηραί, in
Messenia; see I 151, y 488, ο 186: it is
the modern Kalamata.

N

553. ω, cf. note on A 159.

554. οἵω τώ ye as it stands must be
for rw γε, οἵω, by a violent hyperbaton,
the phrase being thus an anticipation of
τοίω τώ in 559; or else it must mean
‘feven as they, were two lions bred.”
Neither alternative is agreeable, the
second perhaps being the worst, as there
is no case in H. where a simile is thus
introduced as a direct statement, the
relation of the thing illustrated and
the instance illustrating it being re-
versed. ““θῆρεῖ᾽ Nauck, for τώ ye; but
then the corruption is inexplicable.
The same may be said of Heyne’s οἴω τ᾽
αὖτε, and Forstemann’s τὼ οἵω re. οἵω
αἴθωνε conj. Diintzer, when the synizesis
might explain the corruption but is itself
unparalleled. The evil is probably past
remedy, τώ γε representing some adjec-
tive which was thrust out because it was
onintelligible and forgotten. As to the
dual Schol. B mentions the legend that
two lion’s cubs were always born at one

178

ἐτραφέτην ὑπὸ μητρὶ βαθείης τάρφεσιν ὕλης"

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Ε (ἡ)

555

τὼ μὲν dp ἁρπάζοντε Boas καὶ ἴφια μῆλα
\ 3 ’ , 3 ν᾿
σταθμοὺς ἀνθρώπων κεραΐζετον, ὄφρα καὶ αὐτὼ
ἀνδρῶν ἐν παλάμῃσιν κατέκταθεν ὀξέι χαλκῷ.
\ ὁ. 3" 3 / “4
τοίω τὼ χείρεσσιν ὑπ᾽ Αἰνείαο δαμέντε

/ a
καππεσέτην ἐλάτῃσιν ἐοικότες ὑψηλῇσιν.

560

τὼ δὲ πεσόντ᾽ ἐλέησεν apnidiros Μενέλαος,
βῆ δὲ διὰ προμάχων κεκορυθμένος αἴθοπι χαλκῷ,
σείων ἐγχείην" τοῦ δ᾽ ὥτρυνεν μένος ἴΑρης,
τὰ φρονέων, ἵνα χερσὶν ὑπ᾽ Αἰνείαο Sapeln. —

τὸν δ᾽ ἴδεν ᾿Αντίλοχος μεγαθύμου Νέστορος υἱός,

565

βῆ δὲ διὰ προμάχων" περὶ γὰρ Sie ποιμένι λαῶν,
μή τι πάθοι, μέγα δέ σφας ἀποσφήλειε πόνοιο.
τὼ μὲν δὴ χεῖράς τε καὶ ἔγχεα ὀξυόεντα

ἀντίον ἀλλήλων ἐχέτην μεμαῶτε μάχεσθαι,

᾿Αντίλοχος δὲ μάλ᾽ ἄγχι παρίστατο ποιμένι λαῶν.

570

Αἰνείας δ᾽ οὐ μεῖνε, θοός περ ἐὼν πολεμιστής,
ὡς εἶδεν δύο φῶτε παρ᾽ ἀλλήλοισι μένοντε.

e > » \ φ \ Ν \ 3 a)
ot δ᾽ ἐπεὶ οὖν νεκροὺς ἔρυσαν μετὰ λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν,
τὼ μὲν ἄρα δειλὼ βαλέτην ἐν χερσὶν ἑταίρων,

αὐτὼ δὲ στρεφθέντε μετὰ πρώτοισι μαχέσθην.

575

ἔνθα ἸΠυλαιμένεα ἑλέτην ἀτάλαντον “Apni,

birth, and that the lioness never had
more.

555. For the intransitive use of ἔτρα-
dov cf. B 661.

556. ἴφια : this adjective occurs only
in the phrase ἴφια μῆλα. The nom. may
be ξίφιος or Figus: if the latter, Fig: may
be a neuter used adverbially rather than
a case of Fis = vis. But this last view
is supported by the analogy of ἶφι xrdpe-
vos to “Apne (Sat) xrduevos. It might be
supposed that gia was formed by a
mistake from ἶφι, wrongly supposed to
bea neuter; but this is highly improbable
in view of the fact that the adj. occurs
only in a single stereotyped phrase, which
therefore presumably is a part of the origi-
nal furniture of Epic poetry. The whole
question is however difficult; see Curtius,
Gr. Et. no. 592.

567. ἀ eve, ἀποτυχεῖν ποιήσειεν,
Schol. B. For the word cf. y 820, ovrwa
πρῶτον ἀποσφήλωσιν ἄελλαι és πέλαγος
μέγα τοῖον : and for the thought Δ 172.
πάθοι, two MSS.: caet. πάθῃ. The former
is preferable though not perhaps abso-

lutely necessary : see H. G. § 298. ς
is found only, here, elsewhere one
Ahrens conj. σφε.

574. δειλώ : for this phrase, which is
not so much an expression of a sense of

thos on the poet's part as a euphemism
or ‘‘dead” (so Déderlein), cf. Ψ 65, « 65,
with X 76.

576. ἑλέτην, in accordance with Ho-
meric usage, can only mean “slew.”
In N 658 this same Pylaimenes is alive,
and weeping at the bier of his son.
This inconsistency has caused infinite
searching of heart to critics for hundreds
of years, and is one of the founda-
tion-stones of Lachmann’s ‘‘ Kleinlieder-
jager”’ school: even Christ is tly
exercised by it. (He thinks that F658.
9 may have been an epilogue added to
furnish a fitting close to N 330-655 when
recited as a separate poem, and subse-
quently adopted into the [liad on account
of their intrinsic beauty.) Butit is really
just such a slip as might be made even

y ἃ poet who wrote; in works which
must at first have been recorded as well

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v,)

ἀρχὸν Παφλαγόνων μεγαθύμων ἀσπιστάων"
τὸν μὲν ἄρ᾽ ‘Atpeldns δουρικλειτὸς Μενέλαος
ἑσταότ᾽ ἔγχεϊ νύξε, κατὰ κληῖδα τυχήσας"

᾿Αντίλοχος δὲ Μύδωνα Bad’ ἡνίοχον θεράποντα,

ὅ80

ἐσθλὸν ᾿Ατυμνιάδην, ὁ δ᾽ ὑπέστρεφε μώνυχας ἵππους,

χερμαδίῳ ἀγκῶνα τυχὼν μέσον" ἐκ δ᾽ ἄρα χειρῶν

ἡνία λεύκ᾽ ἐλέφαντι χαμαὶ πέσον ἐν κονίῃσιν.

᾿Αντίλοχος δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐπαΐξας ξίφει ἤλασε κόρσην,

αὐτὰρ ὅ γ᾽ ἀσθμαίνων évepyéos ἔκπεσε δίφρου 585

κύμβαχος ἐν κονίῃσιν ἐπὶ βρεχμόν τε καὶ ὦμους.

δηθὰ μάλ᾽ ἑστήκει, τύχε γὰρ ἀμάθοιο βαθείης,

ὄφρ᾽ ἵππω πλήξαντε χαμαὶ βάλον ἐν κονίῃσιν,

τοὺς ἵμασ᾽ ᾿Αντίλοχος, μετὰ δὲ στρατὸν ἤλασ᾽ ᾿Αχαιῶν.
τοὺς δ᾽ “Ἕκτωρ ἐνόησε κατὰ στίχας, ὦρτο δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ αὐτοὺς

κεκληγώς" ἅμα δὲ Τρώων εἵποντο φάλαγγες 591

xaptepal> ἦρχε δ᾽ dpa σφιν “Apns καὶ πότνι᾽ "Evua,

as conceived by the brain alone, it is
only strange that more such errors are
not found. Zenod. seems to have written
the name Κυλαιμένης in N.

581. The charioteer was following
close behind his master, and seeing him
slain was beginning to turn for flight.

582. τυχεῖν takes the genitive: hence
ἀγκῶνα must be construed with βάλε
above, τυχών being used absolutely,
**not missing him.” See H. G. § 151 c.

583. ἐλέφαντι : for the use of ivory in
adorning harness see A 141.

586. κύμβαχος and Bpexuds are ἅπαξ
λεγόμενα in Homer. e former recurs
however in the sense of ‘‘helmet” in O
536. Diintzer connects the two by
explaining the adj. here to mean ‘‘in
ἃ curve,’ and the substantive ‘‘the
curved,” i.e. vaulted part of the helmet ;
cf. xtrrw. The Gramm. quote a doubt-
fal κύβη = the head, whence also κυβιστᾶν
II 795, Σ 605. Instead of βρεχμός the

forms Bpeyabs, βρέγμα, Bpéxua, are found

in later Greek. .

587. The manner in which Mydon
falls is not very obvious. The most
robable event would be that he would

out of the back of the car; for in
any other direction the rail and frame-

work of the car would support him.

He might then lie with his feet still in
the car, and his head and shoulders upon
the ground. But then it is hard to see
how the horses could be said to kick

him; and the Homeric chariot was
hardly large enough to hold the whole
of the legs and part of the trunk of a
man in a reclining position. It would
seem therefore that he was standing
sideways in the car, so as to look at his
enemy while he wheeled; and when
wounded fell backwards over the side of
the car, his knees hooking over the
ἄντυξ. The ‘‘soft sand” explains why
the car was brought for a while to a
standstill ; it would be absurd to sup-
pose, as some commentators have done,
that his head dug a hole in the sand
so as to keep him fixed. xe ἀμάθοιο
is the reading of several MSS.: vulg.
γάρ ῥ᾽, ἃ mere attempt to improve
the metre, which was good enough be-
fore. γὰρ ψαμάθοιο is another conj.
with the same object. In 589 Bekker
reads τοὺς δ᾽, but the MSS. give τούς
only, which must be the relative, though
this does not sound quite like Homer.
Nauck is perhaps right in marking the
line ‘‘spurius?” especially as the next
begins with the same word.

592-3 again look like an interpolation.
For ’Evv see 333, the only other
passage where she is named. κυδοιμός
seems to be another personification, as
in 2 585, Hes. Scut. Her. 156, Ar. Pax
255; compare ᾿Αλκή and ᾿Ιωκή E 740,
and perhaps vga I 2. ἔχουσα then
means “having as her attendant.” But
comparing A 4, Ἔριδα. . . πολέμοιο

180

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v,)

ἡ μὲν ἔχουσα κυδοιμὸν ἀναιδέα δηιοτῆτος,

ἼΑρης δ᾽ ἐν παλάμῃσι πελώριον ἔγχος ἐνώμα,

φοίτα δ᾽ ἄλλοτε μὲν πρόσθ᾽ “Extopos, ἄλλοτ᾽ ὄπισθεν. 595
τὸν δὲ ἰδὼν ῥίγησε βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης.

ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἀνὴρ ἀπάλαμνος, ἰὼν πολέος πεδίοιο,

στήῃ ἐπ᾽’ ὠκυρόῳ ποταμῷ ἅλαδε προρέοντι,

ἀφρῷ μορμύροντα ἰδών, ἀνά τ᾽ ἔδραμ᾽ ὀπίσσω,

ὡς τότε Τυδεΐδης ἀνεχάξετο, εἶπέ τε λαῷ"

600

“ὦ φίλοι, οἷον δὴ θαυμάξομεν “Exropa δῖον
αἰχμητήν τ᾽ ἔμεναι καὶ θαρσαλέον πολεμιστήν"
τῷ δ᾽ αἰεὶ πάρα εἷς γε θεῶν, ὃς λοιγὸν ἀμύνει:"

\ A e 4 a Ν Lal 3 \ 5» ,
καὶ viv ot πάρα κεῖνος “Apns βροτῷ ἀνδρὶ ἐοικώς.

ἀλλὰ πρὸς Τρῶας τετραμμένοι αἰὲν ὀπίσσω

605

εἴκετε, μηδὲ θεοῖς μενεαινέμεν ἶφι μάχεσθαι."

ὡς ἄρ᾽ ἔφη, Τρῶες δὲ μάλα σχεδὸν ἤλυθον αὐτῶν.
ἔνθ᾽ "Exrwp δύο φῶτε κατέκτανεν εἰδότε χάρμης,
εἰν ἑνὶ δίφρῳ ἐόντε, Μενέσθην ᾿Αγχίαλόν τε.

τὼ δὲ πεσόντ᾽ ἐλέησε μέγας Τελαμώνιος Alas:

610

στῆ δὲ μάλ᾽ ἐγγὺς ἰὼν καὶ ἀκόντισε δουρὶ φαεινῷ,
καὶ βάλεν Αμφιον Σελάγου υἱόν, ὅς ῥ᾽ ἐνὶ Παισῷ
ναῖε πολυκτήμων πολυλήιος, ἀλλά ἑ μοῖρα

hy’ ἐπικουρήσοντα μετὰ Πρίαμόν τε καὶ υἷας.

τόν ῥα κατὰ ζωστῆρα βάλεν Τελαμώνιος Αἴας,

615

νειαίρῃ δ᾽ ἐν γαστρὶ πάγη δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος,

δούπησεν δὲ πεσών.

ὁ δ᾽ ἐπέδραμε φαίδιμος Αἴας

τεύχεα συλήσων" Τρῶες δ᾽ ἐπὶ δούρατ᾽ ἔχευαν

τέρας μετὰ χερσὶν ἔχουσαν, it is quite
possible that κυδοιμός may be an attri-
ute of Enyo, which she is regarded as
carrying in her hand. The epithet
ἀναιδής, which is sometimes applied to
inanimate objects, decides nothing.

597. ἀπάλαμνος, which occurs only
here, may very likely mean, as suggested
by Autenrieth, ‘‘ unable to swim,” sine

Imis. It is generally understood to
be ‘‘ shiftless,’”’ without resource.

601. olov, neuter, used as an exclama-
tion, ‘‘ how,” 1.6. how wrongly. θαυμά-
ἴομεν is probably an imperfect.

603. πάρα els: the hiatus here can
hardly be right; van Herw. conj. wdp’
dp’ els, Bentley πάρα ris ye, Nauck wdp’
ἕεις, a form which is found in Hesiod,
Theog. 145 (a suspected passage however),
and would support Benfey’s comparison

with Skt. évana rather than Curtius’
derivation from root sam (see Gr. Ft.
599).

604. κεῖνος, ‘‘there”; Τ' 391, cf. E
175, K 341, 477.

606. MSS. μενεαινέμεν, Ahrens and
Heyne pevealvere Figx. Nauck con-
jectures θεῴ for θεοῖς, on his principle
that the shorter form of the dat. plur.
is to be expelled from Homer.

612. Παισῴῷ, this would seem to be
the same as ᾿Απαισός in B 828. Of
course we might read ἐν ᾿Απαισῷ here.
But the shorter form is supported not
only by the MSS., but by Strabo as
well as Herod. and the Et. Magn. For
614 compare B 834: it is evident that
the composer of the lines in B had this

before him, though there Amphios
18 called son of Merops.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (ἡ)

181

ὀξέα παμφανόωντα" σάκος δ᾽ ἀνεδέξατο πολλά.
αὐτὰρ ὁ λὰξ προσβὰς ἐκ νεκροῦ χάλκεον ἔγχος 620
ἐσπάσατ᾽ - οὐδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔτ᾽ ἄλλα δυνήσατο τεύχεα καλὰ

ΝΜ 3 4 2 \ 4
ὦμοιιν ἀφελέσθαι" ἐπεύγετο yap βελέεσσιν.
δεῖσε δ᾽ ὅ γ᾽ ἀμφίβασιν κρατερὴν Τρώων ἀγερώχων,
οἱ πολλοί τε καὶ ἐσθλοὶ ἐφέστασαν ἔγχε᾽ ἔχοντες,
οἵ € μέγαν περ ἐόντα καὶ ἴφθιμον καὶ ἀγανὸν 625
ὦσαν ἀπὸ σφείων' ὁ δὲ yaoodpevos πελεμίχθη.

ὧς οἱ μὲν πονέοντο κατὰ κρατερὴν ὑσμίνην'᾽

Τληπόλεμον δ᾽ “Ἡρακλείδην ἠύν τε μέγαν τε
ὦρσεν ἐπ᾽ ἀντιθέῳ Σαρπηδόνι μοῖρα κραταιή.
οἱ δ᾽ ὅτε δὴ σχεδὸν ἦσαν ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλοισιν ἰόντες, 680

e/ > e / \ /
υἱός θ᾽ viwvos τε Atos νεφεληγερέταο,

Q / 4 Ἁ al Μ
τὸν καὶ Τληπόλεμος πρότερος πρὸς μῦθον ἔειπεν"
“Σαρπῆδον, Λυκίων βουληφόρε, τίς τοι ἀνάγκη

4 > ses 97 4 3 7 4

πτώσσειν ἐνθάδ᾽ ἐόντι μάχης ἀδαήμονι φωτί;
ψευδόμενοι δέ σέ φασι Διὸς γόνον αἰγιόχοιο 635
εἶναι, ἐπεὶ πολλὸν κείνων ἐπιδεύεαι ἀνδρῶν,
ot Διὸς ἐξεγένοντο ἐπὶ προτέρων ἀνθρώπων'
ἀλλοῖόν τινά φασι βίην Ἡρακληείην

} 7623. ἀμφίβασις, only here (but cf.
πρόβασις β 75). It clearly means the de-
fence of the fallen body by the Trojans:
cf. the use of the verb in A 37, ε 198,
E 299, @ 477, P 4, etc. Déderlein is
therefore wrong in taking it to mean
“the feared to be surrounded by the
Trojans.”

625-6 = A 534-5, q.v.

627. We now come to an episode
(627-698) which is doubtless a later
addition, probably by the same hand
to which we owe the insertion of the
Rhodians in the Catalogue ; see note on
B 655. Not only can the passsage be cut
out here without being missed, but it is
not alluded to in any way whatever in
any other part of the Iliad. Von Christ
seems to regard it as having furnished a
model for the fight of Patroklos and
Sarpedon in II, but the connexion is in
any case not close, and the converse
might equally be the case, as 674 evi-
dently assumes the later story. The
treatment of the subject is excellent, and
shows that the composition must at least
date from an age when Epic poetry was
still in its bloom.

632. It has been pointed out by Ameis

that this is the only passage where the
apodosis to the formal 630 contains a καί.
636. From this line on A is again
written by the first hand (see on 337).
638. ἀλλ᾽ οἷον MSS. with Ar. and
Aristophanes: ἀλλ᾽ οἷον (?) Nikias and
Parmenio: ἀλλοῖον Tyrannio, followed
by Bekker, Nauck, and Christ. The
first reading may be taken in two
ways: (1) exclamative, ‘‘but what a
man do they say was H.!” (2) ‘But
(those sons of Zeus were) such as.” (2)
involves an awkward ellipse, and in (1)
the presence of ἀλλά is hardly consistent
with the sense assumed. οἷος when used
exclamatively always begins a clause,
e.g. 601, a 32, etc., and in the phrases
ὦ πόποι. .. οἷον ἔειπες H 455, cf. O
286, etc. In ὃ 242, X 519, where ἀλλ᾽
οἷον begins a line, it is evidently sub-
ordinate to a preceding verb (though it
is no doubt true that this subordinate
use originally grew out of a primitive
parataxis where olos was an exclamation).
rhus ἀλλοῖον seems to be decidedly the
best reading. The objections of Ameis,
(a) that ἀλλοῖός τις are not elsewhere
found together, (Ὁ) that ἀλλοῖος is not
elsewhere in H. used of purely mental

182

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v,)

᾽ ,ὔ
εἶναι, ἐμὸν πατέρα θρασυμέμνονα θυμολέοντα,

ὅς ποτε δεῦρ᾽ ἐλθὼν ἕνεχ᾽ ἵππων Λαομέδοντος

640

ἕξ οἴῃς σὺν νηυσὶ καὶ ἀνδράσι παυροτέροισιν
Ἰλώου ἐξαλάπαξε πόλιν, χήρωσε δ᾽ ἀγυιάς"

σοὶ δὲ κακὸς μὲν θυμός, ἀποφθινύθουσι δὲ λαοί.
οὐδέ τί σε Τρώεσσιν ὀίομαι ἄλκαρ ἔσεσθαι

ἐλθόντ᾽ ἐκ Λυκίης, οὐδ᾽ εἰ μάλα καρτερός ἐσσι,

645

ἀλλ᾽ ὑπ᾽ ἐμοὶ δμηθέντα πύλας ᾿Αίδαο περήσειν.᾽"

τὸν δ᾽ αὖ Σαρπηδὼν Λυκίων ἀγὸς ἀντίον ηὔδα"
“Τληπόλεμ᾽, ἢ τοι κεῖνος ἀπώλεσεν Ἴλιον ἱρὴν
ἀνέρος ἀφραδίῃσιν ἀγανοῦ Λαομέδοντος,

ὅς ῥά μιν εὖ ἔρξαντα κακῷ ἠνίπαπε μύθῳ,

650

οὐδ᾽ ἀπέδωχ᾽ ἵππους, ὧν εἵνεκα τηλόθεν ἦλθεν.
σοὶ δ᾽ ἐγὼ ἐνθάδε φημὶ φόνον καὶ κῆρα μέλαιναν
ἐξ ἐμέθεν τεύξεσθαι, ἐμῷ δ᾽ ὑπὸ δουρὶ δαμέντα
εὖχος ἐμοὶ δώσειν, ψυχὴν δ᾽ “Ards κλυτοπώλῳ.᾽

ὧς φάτο Σαρπηδών, ὁ δ᾽ ἀνέσχετο μείλινον ἔγχος

ualities, are only weak special pleading.
The latter indeed is hardly true in the
case of 7 265. Finally it is urged that
ἀλλοῖόν τινα is too weak an expression in
this speech. The question is one which,
in the almost equal balance of authorities,
must be left to each reader to decide for
himself. Of course in a case like this
MS. authority has no independent value.
For the masculine adj. with βίην cf. A
690, etc. (H. G. § 166, 1).

639. θρασυμέμνονα, here and A 267
only, probably to be referred rather to
μένος (μέμονα) than μένειν. Cf. *Aya-
μέμνων.

641. For the legend that Herakles
had saved Hesione, the daughter of
Laomedon, from a sea-monster, and had
then destroyed the city because defrauded
of his recompense, the famous mares of
the stock of Tros, cf. f 145. For otys
σύν one good MS. reads οἴῃσιν, whic
is to be preferred as giving the longer
form of the dative. ith 646 compare
Ψ 71.

653. τεύξεσθαι, in passive signification,
as θάνατος καὶ μοῖρα τέτυκται, Τ' 101:
τάχα τῇδε τετεύξεται αἰπὺς ὄλεθρος, Μ
345, and many similar instances. Ameis-
Hentze strangely deny the possibility of
the use of τεύξεσθαι in this way, and say
that it must be from τυγχάνειν ; but the
only analogy which can be quoted is far

655

from close: A 684, ξ 231, τύχε (τύγχανε)
πολλά. But the question is one of com-
paratively small importance, as τεύχω
and τυγχάνω are simply different forms
of the same verb, the intrans, forms
Eruxov ἐτύχησα reréxnxa being said to
‘‘come from ” one present, the transitive
ἔτευξα revéw, and the passive τετεύξομαι,
τέτνγμαι from the other. The present
phrase shews exactly where the point of
contact between the two lies.

654. The epithet κλυτόπωλος may
perhaps mean only that Hades, like an
earthly king, has splendid horses as a
sign of regal magnificence. But as it
is used of no other god it is possible
that it indicates the connexion of the
horse with the under-world. There is
no other trace in Homer of such an
idea ; but the of death is commonly
associated with the horse in Etruscan
art, and the modern Greek death-god
Charos is always in the popular imagi-
nation. conceived as riding. So too the
horse always has his place in the story of
the rape of Persephone. For the bearing
of this on the vexed question of the sig-
nificance of the horse in sepulchral
monuments see Prof. P. Gardner's paper
in J. H. 8. v. 114. It is probable that
we have here a trace of tthe religious

ideas, not of the Greeks strictly ing,
ut of the earlier non-Aryan ulation
whom they subdued. por

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v,)

183

Τληπόλεμος" καὶ τῶν μὲν ἁμαρτῇ Sovpata μακρὰ
ἐκ χειρῶν ἤιξαν' ὁ μὲν βάλεν αὐχένα μέσσον
Σαρπηδών, αἰχμὴ δὲ διαμπερὲς FAO ἀλεγεινή,
τὸν δὲ κατ᾽ ὀφθαλμῶν ἐρεβεννὴ νὺξ ἐκάλυψεν"
Τληπόλεμος δ᾽ ἄρα μηρὸν ἀριστερὸν ἔγχεϊ μακρῷ 660
βεβλήκειν, αἰχμὴ δὲ διέσσντο μαιμώωσα,
ὀστέῳ ἐγχριμφθεῖσα, πατὴρ δ᾽ ἔτι λουγὸν ἄμυνεν.
οἱ μὲν ἄρ᾽ ἀντίθεον Σαρπηδόνα δῖοι ἑταῖροι
ἐξέφερον πολέμοιο" βάρυνε δέ μιν δόρυ μακρὸν

ἑλκόμενον" τὸ μὲν οὔ τις ἐπεφράσατ᾽ οὐδὲ νόησεν,

665

μηροῦ ἐξερύσαι δόρυ μείλινον, ὄφρ᾽ ἐπιβαίη,
σπευδόντων" τοῖον γὰρ ἔχον πόνον ἀμφιέποντες.
Τληπόλεμον δ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἐυκνήμιδες ᾿Αχαιοὴὶ
ἐξέφερον πολέμοιο" νόησε δὲ δῖος ᾿Οδυσσεὺς

τλήμονα θυμὸν ἔχων, μαίμησε δέ οἱ φίλον ἧτορ'

670

μερμήριξε δ᾽ ἔπειτα κατὰ φρένα καὶ κατὰ θυμόν,

ἢ προτέρω Διὸς υἱὸν ἐρυγδούποιο διώκοι,

ἢ ὅ γε τῶν πλεόνων Λυκίων ἀπὸ θυμὸν ἕλοιτο.

οὐδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ᾿Οδυσσῆει μεγαλήτορι μόρσιμον ἦεν

ἴφθιμον Διὸς υἱὸν ἀποκτάμεν ὀξέι χαλκῷ" 675
τῷ pa κατὰ πληθὺν Λυκίων τράπε θυμὸν ᾿Αθήνη.

ἔνθ᾽ ὅ γε Κοίρανον εἷλεν ᾿Αλάστορά te Χρομίον τε
“Arxavdpov θ᾽ “Αλιόν τε Νοήμονά τε Πρύτανίν τε.

καί νύ κ᾽ ἔτι πλέονας Λυκίων κτάνε δῖος ᾿Οδυσσεύς,

εἰ μὴ ἄρ᾽ ὀξὺ νόησε μέγας κορυθαίολος “Ἑκτωρ.

656. ἁμαρτῇ MSS., ἁμαρτή Ατ., who
held it to be syncopated from ἁμαρτήδην.
This is of course wrong, but very prob-
ably the omission of the « may Se 8
genuine tradition of the fact jthat the
adverb was originally not a dative but
an instrumental. e accent should
then be ἁμαρτῆ.

661. μαιμώωσα : for this personifica-
tion of the spear cf. λιλαιόμενα A 574,
O 317, and A 126.

662. ἔτι, like 674 a hint of the future
death of Sarpedon at the hands of
Patroklos. ἐγχριμφθεῖσα, grazing: the
word is always used of close contact in
Homer: κ 516, Ψ 334, 338, N 146,
P 405, 418, H 272. For a full discussion
of this and cognate verbs see Ahrens,
Beitrdge, p. 12 sqq.

666. ἐπιβαίη, stand on his feet, cf.
μ 434, οὔτε στηρίξαι ποσὶν ἔμπεδον οὔτ᾽

680

ἐπιβῆνα. The phrase however is a
curious one, and Nauck and others are
perhaps right in rejecting the line as a
gloss.

667. ἀμφιέποντες, dealing with him,
lit. ‘‘handling him”; they had too
much to do with the work of carrying
and protecting him.

670. μαίμησε here evidently indicates
violent rushing, as 661: cf. Θ 418,
μαίνεται Frop.

673. τῶν πλεόνων Avxlwv, see Η. G.
§ 264, ‘‘the article marks contrast, but
not definition, or should take the lives of
more Lykians instead. Here of πλέονες
does not mean ‘the greater number’
but ‘a@ greater number,’ in contrast to
the person mentioned.”

678. This line is taken verbatim by
Vergil, den. ix. 767; Ovid, Met. xiii.
258.

184

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v.)

βῆ δὲ διὰ προμάχων κεκορυθμένος αἴθοπι χαλκῷ
δεῖμα φέρων Δαναοῖσι" χάρη δ᾽ ἄρα οἱ προσιόντι
Σαρπηδὼν Διὸς υἱός, ἔπος δ᾽ ὀλοφυδνὸν ἔειπεν"
“ Πριαμίδη, μὴ δή με ὅλωρ Δαναοῖσιν ἐάσῃς
κεῖσθαι, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπάμυνον" ἔπειτά με καὶ λίποι αἰὼν 685
ἐν πόλει ὑμετέρῃ, ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἄρ᾽ ἔμελλον ἐγώ γε
νοστήσας οἰκόνδε φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν
εὐφρανέειν ἄλοχόν τε φίλην καὶ νήπιον υἱόν."

ὧς φάτο, τὸν δ᾽ οὔ τι προσέφη κορυθαίολος “Ἑκτωρ,
ἀλλὰ παρήιξεν λελιημένος ὄφρα τάχιστα 690
ὦὥσαιτ᾽ ᾿Αργείους, πολέων δ᾽ ἀπὸ θυμὸν ἕλοιτο.
οἱ μὲν ἄρ᾽ ἀντίθεον Σαρπηδόνα δῖοι ἑταῖροι
εἶσαν ὑπ᾽ αἰγιόχοιο Διὸς περικαλλέι φηγῷ"
ἐκ δ᾽ dpa οἱ μηροῦ δόρυ μείλινον aoe Ovpate

ἴφθιμος ἸΤελάγων, ὅς οἱ φίλος ἣεν ἑταῖρος"

695

τὸν δ᾽ ἔλιπε ψυχή, κατὰ δ᾽ ὀφθαλμῶν κέχυτ᾽ ἀχλύς.

αὗτις δ᾽ ἐμπνύθη, περὶ δὲ πνοιὴ Βορέαο

ξώγρει ἐπιπνείουσα κακῶς κεκαφηότα θυμόν.
᾿Αργεῖοι δ᾽ ὑπ᾽ “Apne καὶ “Ἕκτορι χαλκοκορυστῇ

wv A / Ud 9 δι
οὔτε ποτὲ προτρέποντο μελαινάων ἐπὶ νηῶν

700

ΝΜ > 3 / 4 3 3 oN 3 ’
οὔτε TOT ἀντεφέροντο μάχῃ, GAN αἱὲν ὀπίσσω
4 θ᾽ e 3 40 a T , Ν
χάξονθ᾽, ὡς ἐπύθοντο μετὰ Τρώεσσιν “Apna.
Ν A [4 7 ow 3 4
ἔνθα τίνα πρῶτον, τίνα δ᾽ ὕστατον ἐξενάριξαν

683. On account of βέπος Bentley
interchanged Διὸς υἱὸς and προσιόντι.
But the violation of the digamma may
be due to the later origin of the episode.
For the constr. χάρη oi, see H. G. § 145,
note 4.

685. κεῖσθαι, the long a in thesi is
excused by the strong diaeresis at the
end of the first foot. Cf. A 39, B 209,
etc. H. G. § 380.

690. For the construction of λελιη-
μένος see note on A 465.

693. φηγῷ : this can hardly be the
same as the oak which formed a land-
mark close to the Skaian gate (Z 237,
H 22, 60, I 354, A 170, Φ 549), as there
is no hint that the fighting is near the
walls. Any oak was equally sacred to
Zeus. οί 408

694. θύραζε simply = out, as I ,
@ 422, ε Pn, ote It can hardly be
meant that the spear is thrust éhrough
like the arrow in 112.

697. ἐμπνύνθη, La ΒΕ. ; it appears from

Schol. A on X 475 that this was the
reading of Ar.; MSS. ἀμπνύνθη, but
this word is properly used of a panting
warrior recovering his breath, A 327,
X 222, etc., ἐμπνύνθη, of one who has
fainted ‘‘coming to.” See La R., H. T.
190. Van Herwerden has pointed out
that the correct form must be -πνύθη, as
there is no trace of a » in any other
form. The Townl. gives ἀμπνύσθη: A
has ἀμπνύθη with v added above.
Hesych. ἐμπνύθη, ἐν ἑαυτῷ ἐγένετο, καὶ
ἐφρόνησεν.

698. ζώγρει perhaps here from {wi
and dryelpew (or ἐγείρειν), and thus a
different verb from the commoner
ζωγρεῖν = to take prisoner (ζωός- ἀγρεῖν).
θυμόν is object of xexagnéra, as is clear
from ε 468, μή με. . . Sandon κεκαφηότα
θυμόν. Compare X 467, ἀπὸ ψυχὴν éxd-
πυσσε. The verb means “having
breathed out”; cf. Hesych. κέκηφε,
τέθνηκε, and κεκαφηότα, ἐκπεπνευκότα.
Curtius, Gr. Et. no. 36, and p. 511.

LAIAAOS E (v,)

185

Ἕκτωρ τε Πριάμοιο πάις καὶ χάλκεος “Apne ;

ἀντίθεον Τεύθραντ᾽, ἐπὶ δὲ πλήξιππον ᾿Ορέστην,

705

Τρῆχόν τ’ αἰχμητὴν Αἰτώλιον Οἰνόμαόν τε,
Οἰνοπίδην θ᾽ “Ελενον καὶ ᾽Ορέσβιον αἰολομίτρην,
“ > > τ , ’ ,

ὅς ῥ᾽ ἐν "Ὕλῃ ναίεσκε μέγα πλούτοιο μεμηλώς,
λίμνῃ κεκλιμένος Κηφισίδι" πὰρ δέ οἱ ἄλλοι

ναῖον Βοιωτοί, μάλα πίονα δῆμον ἔχοντες.

710

“
τοὺς δ᾽ ὡς οὖν ἐνόησε θεὰ λευκώλενος “Hpn,
᾿Αργείους ὀλέκοντας ἐνὶ κρατερῇ ὑσμίνῃ,
3 4399 ’ 4 4 4
αὐτίκ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίην ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
, ,
“ὦ πόποι, αἰγιόχοιο Διὸς τέκος, ἀτρυτώνη,

ἢ ῥ᾽ ἅλιον τὸν μῦθον ὑπέστημεν Μενελάῳ,

715

Ἴλιον ἐκπέρσαντ᾽ ἐυτείχεον ἀπονέεσθαι,
εἰ οὕτω μαίνεσθαι ἐάσομεν οὗλον "Apna
ὕτω μα μ ρηα.
A 4, a~ 99
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε δὴ Kal νῶι μεδώμεθα θούριδος ἀλκῆς.

707. αἰολομίτρην, having a sparkling
μίτρη, or metal waist-band, which was
visible below the thorax. See note on
A 137. Butmann, Zexil. p. 66, explains
it to mean ‘‘with flexible uirpn,” which
he takes to be a band worn under the
ἕξωστήρ and invisible ; but, as Ar. rightly
observed, ‘‘Homer does not make
epithets ἀπὸ τῶν ἀφανῶν, and this
interpretation is therefore untenable.
αἰόλος is regularly used of the glancing
of light on metallic surfaces, as in
κορυθαίολος, αἰολοθώρης. The θώρηξ
being made of two solid plates of metal
could certainly not be called in any
sense flexible.

708. "YAq with v also H 221, but ὃ in
B 600: Zenod. Ὕδῃ, but the name of
the Boeotian town was certainly Hyle:
a Lydian Ὕδη is mentioned in T 385.
μεμηλώς with gen. only here and N 297,
469. The use may be classed with those
mentioned in H. G. ὃ 151, c, d. So
Aesch. Sept. 178, μέλεσθέ θ᾽ ἱερῶν δημέων.

709. κεκλιμένος, ‘“‘on the shore of,”
cf. Ο 740 πόντῳ κεκλιμένοι, Π 68 ῥηγμῖνι
θαλάσσης κεκλίατα. The word seems
properly to be used of land sloping to the
water's edge, ὃ 608, ν 235, ἀκτὴ κεῖθ᾽ ἁλὶ
κεκλιμένη. The Kephisian lake seems to
be the Copais as in Pind. P. xii. 27;
see Pausan. ix. 38, 5.

710. δῆμον here evidently has the
purely local sense, ‘‘territory”: for
which see on B 547.

711. The following section, down to

the end of the book, is rejected by the
school of Lachmann, following Haupt.
The most serious objection to it seems to
be that the long and pompous description
of the equipment of the two goddesses is
out of proportion to the effect they pro-
duce on the battle-field, and that the
wounding of Ares, which does not seem
to be contemplated in 130-2, is an
exaggerated attempt to outbid the
wounding of Aphrodite. 753-4 seem
also to be borrowed, not very appropri-
ately, from A 498-9, and, as von Christ
has remarked, 791 from N 107. So also
719-721 = © 381-3, 733-737 = Θ 384-
388, 745-752 = Θ 389-396. It can
hardly be said positively that either
passage is older than the other, so far
as the evidence of borrowing goes; but
the general character of © would lead us
to believe that the lines are originally in
place here. Again 711-712 = H 17-18,
713 = A 69, 714 = B 157, 716 = B 113,
738 = B 45, 748 = A 41, 769 Ξ: Θ 46,
775-6 = 368-9, 782-3 = H 256-7, 787 =
Θ 228. This is certainly a suspicious
proportion of borrowed lines ; but on
the other hand the style of the passage
is spirited, and does not shew any weak-
ness of imagination.

715. For the use of the cognate accu-
sative with ὑποστῆναι cf. B 286, κ 483;
and see H. G. § 136 (3). τόν is here
demonstrative, ‘‘that.”” We donot hear
elsewhere of any such promise made by
the goddesses to Menelaos.

186

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v,)

ὧς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησε θεὰ γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη.

e > , Ul
ἡ μὲν ἐποιχομένη χρυσάμπυκας ἔντυεν ἵππους

"Hon πρέσβα θεά, θυγάτηρ μεγάλοιο Κρόνοιο'
“Ἥβη δ᾽ aud’ ὀχέεσσι θοῶς βάλε καμπύλα κύκλα,
χάλκεα ὀκτάκνημα, σιδηρέῳ ἄξονι ἀμφίς.

τῶν ἣ τοι χρυσέη ἴτυς ἄφθιτος, αὐτὰρ ὕπερθεν

, > os ν» / A 90 ἢ
χάλκε᾽ ἐπίσσωτρα προσαρηρότα, θαῦμα ἰδέσθαι"

725

πλῆμναι δ᾽ ἀργύρου εἰσὶ περίδρομοι ἀμφοτέρωθεν.

δίφρος δὲ χρυσέοισι καὶ ἀργυρέοισιν ἱμᾶσιν

ἐντέταται, δοιαὶ δὲ περίδρομοι ἄντυγές εἰσιν.

τοῦ δ᾽ ἐξ ἀργύρεος ῥυμὸς πέλεν' αὐτὰρ ἐπ᾽ ἄκρῳ

δῆσε χρύσειον καλὸν ζυγόν, ἐν δὲ λέπαδνα 730

722. For a general account of the
Homeric chariot see Helbig, H. E. pp.
88-110. The body of the car was very
light, and when not in use was taken to
pieces and put upon a stand ; see © 441,
ἅρματα δ᾽ ἂμ βωμοῖσι τίθει, κατὰ Xtra
πετάσσας. Hence the first thing to be
done in making it ready was to put
on the wheels, as is done here. For
ὀχέεσσι most MSS. read ὀχέεσῴφι, one
ὄχεσφι, which is permaps right.

723. χάλκεα, so MSS. ; Bentley conj.
χάλκει᾽, but the hiatus is legitimate after
the first foot. The usual number of spokes
in the early Greek monuments, as well
as in the Assyrian and Egyptian, is six
or four; but eight are found in the
archaic sarcophagus from Klazomenae

ublished in the J. H. 8. vol. iv.
n any case, as Eust. remarks, the
largest number possible would be attri-
buted to the divine chariot, which has
all the parts made of metal which in the
human car were of wood, even straps of
old and silver instead of leather. For
trus (felloe) = Lat. vitus, see Curtius,
Gr. Et. no. 593 ; and cf. A 486.

725. ἐπίσσωτρον, ‘‘ tire,” from σῶτρον,
another name for the felloe, according
to Pollux: cf. ἐύσσωτρος Ὦ 578: the der.
is uncertain.

726. πλήμνη, “nave,” Gr. Et. no.
366, where Pictet’s explanation “le plein
de la roue” is accepted. περίδρομος is
used here in a slightly different sense
from 728, though we can translate both
by ‘‘running round.” Here it evidently
means ‘‘rotating,” while in 728 it
means ‘‘ surrounding” ; B 812 gives yet
a third meaning. Hesych. περίδρομοι "
περιφερεῖς, στρογγύλοι, no doubt applies
to 726, but does not give so good a

sense. ἀμφοτέρωθεν, on both sides of
the car. .

727. δίφρος, here in the narrower
sense of the platform of the car on
which the riders stood. (Hence the
breastwork which surrounded it in front
and at both sides is called ἐπιδιῴριάς, Καὶ
475. ὄχεα, which is always used in the
plural, implies the whole complex body
of the chariot, including axle, pole, etc.).
This platform is composed of straps
strained tight, and interwoven, which
formed a springy surface such as would
save the charioteer from the jolting of
rough ground. This device is known to
have been employed in tian chariots,
and gives a simple explanation of the
phrase ἐντέταται which has puzzled
commentators (cf. also K 263, τ 577,
y 201 ἐν δ᾽ ἐτάνυσσ᾽ ἱμάντα βοός, to form
a springy bed). See Wilkinson, Ancient
Egyptians, i. p. 227, J. H. S. v. 192.

728. Soul, apparently because the
ἄντυξ ran symmetrically round the car,
forming a handle behind on both sides.
There is no reason to sup that there
were two rails one above the other.

729. πέλεν : the transition from the
descriptive to the narrative tense is
made one step earlier than we should
have expecte . Hence Bentley conj.
πέλει. But, as Hentze has remarked, the
imperfect is justified by the fact that the
pole was not an immovable part of the
chariot, but was put in when the chariot
was made ready ; so that the word really
belongs to the narration, not to the
description. πέλεν is not simply =
ἦν, but means “‘ stood ont.”

730. Sore: for the details of the process
by which the yoke was attached to the
pole see 2 265-280, and a full discussion

IAIAAOS E (v,) 187

Kan ἔβαλε χρύσει᾽" ὑπὸ δὲ ζυγὸν ἤγαγεν “Ἥρη
ἵππους ὠκύποδας, μεμαυϊ᾽ ἔριδος καὶ ἀυτῆς.
3 3 / , ἣ 9 /
αὐτὰρ ᾿Αθηναίη κούρη Διὸς αἰγιόχοιο
πέπλον μὲν κατέχευεν ἑανὸν πατρὸς ἐπ᾽ οὔδει

rg e?> > δ ’ 4
ποικίλον, ὅν ῥ᾽ αὐτὴ ποιήσατο Kal κάμε χερσίν"

735

ἡ δὲ χιτῶν᾽ ἐνδῦσα Διὸς νεφεληγερέταο
τεύχεσιν ἐς πόλεμον θωρήσσετο δακρυόεντα.
ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὦμοισιν Barer αἰγίδα θυσανόεσσαν
δεινήν, ἣν πέρι μὲν πάντῃ φόβος ἐστεφάνωται,

ἐν δ᾽ ἔρις, ἐν δ᾽ ἀλκή, ἐν δὲ κρνόεσσα ἰωκή,

740

ἐν δέ τε Γοργείη κεφαλὴ δεινοῖο πελώρου

δεινή τε σμερδνή τε, Διὸς τέρας αἰγιόχοιο.

κρατὶ δ᾽ ἐπ᾿ ἀμφίφαλον κυνέην θέτο τετραφάληρον
χρυσείην, ἑκατὸν πολίων πρυλέεσσ᾽ apapviav.

οὗ the question in J. H. 8S. vol. v. The
usual explanation will be found in Auten-
rieth, 8.v. ζυγόν. λέπαδνα, broad leather
breastbands by which the horses were
attached to the yoke. Traces seem only
to have been used for the σειραφόρος.

734. ἑανόν, ‘‘pliant,” as elsewhere
when it is used as an adj. witha: it is
not to be confused with the substantive
βε(σ)ᾶνός (Τ' 385, etc.) ‘‘ garment,” and
should perhaps be written ἐανός, as it
may be derived from édw, in the sense of
‘*vielding.” (See Buttmann, Levil. s.v.).

736. The xurév I take to be the orper-
τὸς χιτών, a stout Preated doublet de-
signed to shield the body from the pres-
sure of the γύαλα (see on E 113). ence
the adjective ἑανός is fitly used to con-
trast with this martial garb the soft
robe which Athene wears; and there is
no need to follow Ar. in joining Διός
with τεύχεσιν instead of χιτῶνα. It may
be mentioned that Zenod. rejected 734-
736 here, holding them to be borrowed
from © 385-7, while Ar. maintained the
converse.

788. On the aegis cf. B 448. It is
conceived by Homer as a shield of the
ordinary sort, made of metal, as is clear
from O 309, where it is said to have
been made by Hephaistos the yadxeds.
The later idea of a goatskin seems to
have arisen from a false etymology, com-
bined perhaps with the influence of
some non-Hellenic cult such as is de-
scribed by Herodotus, iv. 189. The
word ἰστοφάνωται is used in the descrip-
tion of Agamemnon’s shield, A 36,
where the Gorgoneion is the object in

question. It is hard to say exactly
what it means here, as if there was an
actual allegorical representation of Φόβος
it can hardly have extended all round
the rim; neither can it have been a
central ornament, for that position must
have been occupied by the Gorgoneion.
It is probable therefore that Homer meant
only vaguely to express that Rout fol-
lowed wherever the shield was turned.
But even so we must admit a curious dis-
crepancy with A 36, where an actual
representation is undoubtedly meant.
The Gorgoneion itself was probably in
its origin a device meant to terrify the
enemy, like the hideous faces which
Chinese warriors carry on their shields,
From this it came in more civilised times
to be regarded merely as an ἀποτρόπαιον
or charm to avert the evil eye and other
dangers. The expression Διὸς τέρας
implies this further stage.

743, ἀμφίφαλον with φάλοι (or φάλα,
as the gender is uncertain) on both sides.
I have endeavoured to shew (J. H. S. iv.
p. 294) that the φάλοι were metallic
projections, survivals of the horns which
formed an ornament of the helmet of
the primitive peoples of the coasts of the
Mediterranean. terpadéAnpos is a word
of doubtful meaning; it may perhaps
mean ‘‘ having four ornaments affixed to
the @d\o,” such as are depicted in
J. H. 5. Zc. fig. 15. The word ἀμφί-
g@ados does not exclude the possibility
of four φάλοι : it only means that they
were placed at the sides of the helmet,
not, as was often the case, in front.

744, The exact meaning of this line

188

ἐς δ᾽ ὄχεα φλόγεα ποσὶ βήσετο, λάζετο δ᾽ ἔγχος

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v.)

745

\ f / a 4 , 3 n
βριθὺ μέγα στιβαρόν, τῷ δάμνησι στίχας ἀνδρῶν
ἡρώων, τοῖσίν τε κοτέσσεται ὀβριμοπάτρη.
ef \ 4 A 3 ᾿ Ἀν» ΚΦ

Hpn δὲ μάστιγι θοῶς ἐπεμαίετ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἵππους"
> ἢ \ 4 4 9 a ἃ Ν ®
αὐτόμαται δὲ πύλαι μύκον οὐρανοῦ, ἃς ἔχον “Opat,

Lad > / / > δ᾿ Ww /
τῆς ἐπιτέτραπται μέγας οὐρανὸς Οὔλυμπος Te,

750

ἠμὲν ἀνακλῖναι πυκινὸν νέφος ἠδ᾽ ἐπιθεῖναι.
τῇ pa δι᾿ αὐτάων κεντρηνεκέας ἔχον ἵππους.
εὗρον δὲ Κρονίωνα θεῶν ἄτερ ἥμενον ἄλλων

is not clear. ἀραρνῖαν has been ex-
lained ‘‘ fitting the warriors of a hun-

red cities,” 1.6. big enough for a hun-
dred armies to wear. But this is too
absurdly grotesque for Homer. The
alternative is to make it = ‘‘ fitted with,”
ὦ.6. adorned with representations of the
warriors of a hundred cities; that is
perhaps with a battle-scene between two
armies and their allies on a vast and
supernatural scale. So a battle-scene
was depicted by Pheidias on the shield
of his Athene Parthenos; but then it
as a Gigantomachia in which Athene
took a prominent part; nothing of the
sort is indicated here, nor does ἀραρυῖα
seem a likely word to express the metallic
adornment of the Homeric age, which
consisted of inlaid work. With the ζώνη
ἑκατὸν θυσάνοις ἀραρυῖα & 181, the πόλις
πύργοις ἀραρυῖα O 737, and the ἀπήνη
ὑπερτερίῃ ἀραρυῖα ¢ 70, the case is evi-
dently different, though they shew that
ἀραρυῖα can mean ‘‘ provided with.”
πρυλέες is itself a word of doubtful origin
and meaning: it recurs A 49, M 77, O
517, Φ 90, and may mean either ‘“‘foot-
men,” as opposed to ἱππῆες, or ‘‘ cham-
pions.” It is possibly connected with
mpvhs, the Cretan word for the war-
dance, and may therefore have once
meant champions who danced in front
of the army to provoke the enemy.
Hermann and others have seen a further
allusion to the hundred cities of Crete ;
and the line may therefore be one of the
passages which seem to have a special
connexion with that island. See on 2
590.

745. φλόγεα : this adj. recurs only in
the parallel © 389: it probably means
‘sparkling like fire” with the bright
metal. Homeric gods do not go, like
the Semitic, with flames of fire about
them.

746. δάμνησι, so most MSS.: A δάμ-

νῃσι with Ar.: but the subjunctive is
out of place in a direct statement as to
the use of the spear; in other words we
have here a particular statement, although
the present implies iteration, not a gene-
ral statement as in a simile, or as in the
next line, where the subj. κοτέσσεται
implies ‘‘ with wzhomsoever she is wroth.”

749. Observe the freedom a the
imagery by which the gate, tho sal
to be a cload in 751, is made to creak.

750. ἐπιτέτραπται, so MSS.: ἐπιτετ-
ράφαται Bergk, from Athenaeus (iv.
134); but the singular is quite defensible,
as οὐρανός and Οὔλυμπος if not identical
are at least closely connected. For the
construction of the following infin. see
H. G. § 234 (1).

752. κεντρηνεκέας, only here and in
the identical passage in 0. It seems to
come from ἐνεγκεῖν, ‘“‘enduring the
goad.” It is a question as to what this
κέντρον really was. It would naturally
mean a sharp- pointed rod, such as is
used by the charioteer represented in
the Burgon amphora. But a compari-
son of Ψ 430 and Ψ 582 seems to shew
that it was identical with the ἱμάσθλη,
which can be nothing but a leathern
thong. Whether this thong had a sharp
point at the’end or not it is beyond our
power to say. Cf. also A 391, Καδμεῖοι,
kévropes ἵππων.

753-4 = A 498-9. The mention of
the ἀκροτάτη κορυφή seems out of place
here, as the goddesses are on their wa
to earth. It almost looks as thoug
there were a confusion between heaven
and Olympus in 749-50; but as Aris-
tarchos carefully pointed out, Homer
always means the actual mountain when
he speaks of Olympus, not any aerial
dwelling of the gods, at least in the Iliad.
Ar. exp ained ἀκροτάτη as = ἄκρη, ‘‘ very
high,” which is most unnatural.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v.)

189

ἀκροτάτῃ κορυφῇ πολυδειράδος Οὐλύμποιο"
ἔνθ᾽ ἵππους στήσασα θεὰ λευκώλενος “Hpn 755
Ζῆν᾽ ὕπατον Κρονίδην ἐξείρετο καὶ mpocéectrev:
“ Ζεῦ πάτερ, οὐ νεμεσίξζῃ “Apes τάδε καρτερὰ ἔργα;
ὁσσάτιόν τε καὶ οἷον ἀπώλεσε λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν
μάψ, ἀτὰρ οὐ κατὰ κόσμον, ἐμοὶ δ᾽ ἄχος, οἱ δὲ ἕκηλοι
τέρπονται Κύπρις τε καὶ ἀργυρότοξος ᾿Απόλλων 760
ἄφρονα τοῦτον ἀνέντες, ὃς οὔ τινα olde θέμιστα.
Ζεῦ πάτερ, ἣ ῥά τί μοι κεχολώσεαι, αἴ Kev “Apna
λυγρῶς πεπληγυῖα μάχης ἐξαποδίωμαι ;”

τὴν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη νεφεληγερέτα Ζεύς:
“ἄγρει μάν οἱ ἔπορσον ᾿Αθηναίην ἀγελείην, 766
ἥ ἡ μάλιστ᾽ εἴωθε κακῇς ὀδύνῃσι πελάζξειν.᾽"

ὧς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησε θεὰ λευκώλενος “Ἥρη,
μάστιξεν δ᾽ ἵππους" τὼ δ᾽ οὐκ ἀέκοντε πετέσθην
μεσσηγὺς γαίης τε καὶ οὐρανοῦ ἀστερόεντος.
ὅσσον δ᾽ ἠεροειδὲς ἀνὴρ ἴδεν ὀφθαλμοῖσιν 770
ἥμενος ἐν σκοπιῇ λεύσσων ἐπὶ οἴνοπα πόντον,
τόσσον ἐπιθρώσκουσι θεῶν ὑψηχέες ἵπποι.
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ Τροίην ἷξον ποταμώ τε ῥέοντε,
ἦχι ῥοὰς Σιμόεις συμβάλλετον ἠδὲ Σκάμανδρος,

757. κ ἕ so most and best
MSS. : to Honda Schol. A and Apoll.
Lex. For the constr. of the acc. H. G.
§ 136 (13). For “Ape the best MSS. give
“Apy, but this is not a form of the Ho-
meric declension of the name.

758. ὁσσάτιον, only here: the later
Epics have τοσσάτιον. Cf. μεσσάτιος in
Callimachos, and ὑστάτιος by ὕστατος.

759. ἐμοὶ δ᾽ ἄχος, either an accus. in
apposition with the sentence, or, perhaps
more simply, we may supply ἔστι. ἕκη-
λοι, ironical.

765. ἄγρει seems to be a stronger word
than ἄγε, though the two are probably
connected: see Curt. Gr. Ft. 117.
Others refer it to alpéw. It is used only
in the imperative; the plur. is found
only in v 149.

770. ἠεροειδές, an ἊΝ almost con-
fined to the Od., especially as an epithet
of the sea; sometimes of ἄντρον or σπέος,
and once of πέτρη μ 233, where it clearly
means ‘‘the rock so distant as to be
like mist.” When used of the sea it
seems to express the vague colour of the
distant water, which the haze of distance

almost melts into the semblance of the
sky. So here ‘‘so far as a man sees in
the haze of distance,” 1.6. up to the
utmost limit of human vision. As to
construction, the neuter seems to be used
attributively, agreeing with ὅσσον, and
the accus. expresses extension.

772. ὑψηχέες, compare Vergil’s fremit
alte. Nauck and van Herwerden how-
ever would read ὑψαύχενες, on account
of the digamma of ξηχή : this is possibly
indicated as a variant by Hesych., ἀπὸ
τοῦ els ὕψος ἔχειν τοὺς τραχήλους, οἷον
ὑψαύχενες ; Suidas ὑψηχής ὁ ὑψαύχην.
Two MSS. give ὑψαυχέες, one ὑψηυχέες.
The word recurs in Ψ 27, but without
these variants.

774. The only other places where
Simoeis and Scamander are distinguished
are Z 4, M 22, 6 307. Of these the two
latter are almost certainly of late origin,
while in the first what is probably the
old reading omits all mention of Simoeis.
There is therefore very strong reason for
supposing that there was only one river
named in the original legend ; Simoeis
may possibly, as Hercher thinks, be

190

ἔνθ᾽ ἵππους ἔστησε θεὰ λευκώλενος “Ἥρη,

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v,)

775

, > 9» 3 / > γ \ ΝΜ
λύσασ᾽ ἐξ ὀχέων, περὶ δ᾽ ἠέρα πουλὺν ἔχευεν"
- > 9» / ἤ >. / /
τοῖσιν δ᾽ ἀμβροσίην Σιμόεις ἀνέτειλε νέμεσθαι.
\ \ 4 4 4 ΝΜ 32. @ A
τὼ δὲ βάτην τρήρωσι πελειάσιν ἴθμαθ᾽ ὁμοῖαι,
ἀνδράσιν ᾿Αργείοισιν ἀλεξέμεναι μεμαυΐαι.

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δή ῥ᾽ ἵκανον, ὅθι πλεῖστοι καὶ ἄριστοι

780

ἕστασαν, ἀμφὶ βίην Διομήδεος ἱπποδάμοιο
εἰλόμενοι, λείουσιν ἐοικότες ὠμοφάγοισιν

ἢ συσὶ κάπροισιν, τῶν τε σθένος οὐκ ἀλαπαδνόν,
ἔνθα στᾶσ᾽ ἤυσε θεὰ λευκώλενος “Ἥρη,

Στέντορι εἰσαμένη μεγαλήτορι χαλκεοφώνῳ,

A / 3 , > w ΝΥ ,

ὃς τόσον αὐδήσασχ᾽, ὅσον ἄλλοι πεντήκοντα"

te 207. » a , 9 ἢ 4 : ,
αἰδώς, ᾿Αργεῖοι, κάκ᾽ ἐλέγχεα, εἶδος ἀγητοί"

another name of the Scamander pre-
served by tradition. If the two are dif-
ferent, the only stream which can be
identified with the Simoeis is apparently
the pitiful brook of the Dumbrek-Su,
which runs from E. to W. on the N.
side of Hissarlik, and does not join the
Mendere at all. It entirely ceases to run
in summer (Schliemann). On the σχῆμα
᾿Αλκμανικόν, by which the plural (or, as
here, dual) verb goes with the first of two
nominatives, instead of following both,
Aristonikos remarks τούτῳ τῷ ἔθει πε-
πλεόνακε καὶ ᾿Αλκμάν" διὸ καὶ καλεῖται
᾿Αλκμανικὸν, οὐχ ὅτι αὐτὸς πρῶτος ἐχρήσατο
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι τῷ τοιούτῳ ἔθει πεπλεόνακεν.
He quotes other instances from T 138,
x 613, & 216.

776. πουλύν is of course a feminine,
as in πουλὺν ἐφ᾽ ὑγρήν K 27: so ἡδύς μ
369, and θῆλυς generally. ἀήρ is never
masculine "e H. Η. G. 8116, 4.

777. On see note on B 19.

778. All tee ae ai δέ, but τὼ δέ is
found quoted three times by Scholiasts
(Soph. £7. 977, O. C. 1676, Eur. Ale.
902): there can be little doubt there-
fore that this rare feminine form is the
original, and was excluded because un-
familiar. So in Θ 378, 455 we have
feminine duals identical in form with
- masculine: and also Hes. Opp. 198-
9. The word ἴθματα does not seem to
recur (before Callimachos) except in
Hymn. Apoll, 114 βὰν δὲ (Iris and Eilei-
thyia) ποσὶ τρήρωσι πελειάσιν ἴθμαθ᾽ ὁμοῖαι,
which is the passage quoted by Aristo-
phanes, Av. 575, "Ipw δέ γ᾽ “Ὅμηρος ἔφασκ᾽
ἱκέλην εἶναι τρήρωνι weXely. There is
perhaps a touch of the humour which is

so often associated with the gods of
Homer, in the vivid comparison of the
short and quick yet would-be stately
steps of the two goddesses to the strut-
ting of a Pigeon, so unlike a hero μακρὰ
βιβάς. (Mr. Monro takes tara to
mean the flight of doves.)

785. Stentor is never named again by
Homer, and there seems to have been
no consistent tradition about him. Some
called him a Greek herald; Schol. A
says τινὲς αὐτὸν Opaxd φασιν, Ἑρμῇ δὲ
περὶ μεγαλοφωνίας ἐρίσαντα ἀναιρεθῆναι,
αὐτὸν δὲ εὑρεῖν καὶ τὴν διὰ κόχλου γρα-
giv (sic: Schol. Β μηχανήν, the de-
vice of the speaking-trumpet: this is
the rationalising explanation). τινὲς
δὲ ᾿Αρκάδα φασὶν εἶναι τὸν Zrévropa,
καὶ ἐν τῷ καταλόγῳ πλάττουσι περὶ αὑτοῦ
στίχους. ἔν τισι δὲ οὐκ ἦν ὁ στίχος (sc.
786) διὰ τὴν ὑπερβολήν. Bopp and
Bergk may be right in explaining the
name as originally meaning “‘Thunderer,”
from root stan, for which see Curt. Gr.
Et. no. 220 (Skt. stanajaté = it thunders).
χαλκεόφωνος is not elsewhere found ; but
compare B 490, Σ 222 ὅπα χάλκεον.
The Stentorian voice was proverbial in
the time of Aristotle; see the well-
known passage in the Pol. 4, 7, 11.
For other instances of the superhuman
power of gods see 859, & 148.

787. For ἐλέγχεα (ἐλεγχέες one MS.,
Ar. κακελεγχέες) see note on A 242.
αἰδώς is a nominative used interjection-
ally, apparently as a sort of imperative,
αἰδὼς ἔστω ὑμῖν and equivalent to αἰδῶ
θέσθ᾽ ἐνὶ θναῷ, O 561, 661. The regular
meaning of the word is of course ‘‘sense
of honour,” ‘recognition of the just

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (Ὁ

191

ὄφρα μὲν ἐς πόλεμον πωλέσκετο δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς,

»Qs A Ν / 4
οὐδέ ποτε Τρῶες πρὸ πυλάων Δαρδανιάων
οἴχνεσκον" κείνου γὰρ ἐδείδισαν ὄβριμον ἔγχος" 790

“ /
viv δὲ ἑκὰς πόλιος κοίλῃς ἐπὶ νηυσὶ μάχονται."

ὧς εὐποῦσ᾽ ὥτρυνε μένος καὶ θυμὸν ἑκάστου.
Τυδεΐδῃ δ᾽ ἐπόρουσε θεὰ γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη"
4

εὗρε δὲ τὸν ye ἄνακτα παρ᾽ ἵπποισιν καὶ ὄχεσφιν

ἕλκος ἀναψύχοντα, τό μιν βάλε Πάνδαρος ἰῷ.

795

ἱδρὼς yap μιν ἔτειρεν ὑπὸ πλατέος τέλαμῶνος
ἀσπίδος εὐκύκλον": τῷ τείρετο, κάμνε δὲ χεῖρα,

ἂν δ᾽ ἴσχων τελαμῶνα κελαινεφὲς αἷμ᾽ ἀπομόργνυ.
ἱππείου δὲ θεὰ ξυγοῦ ἥψατο φώνησέν τε"

“ἢ ὀλέγον οἷ παῖδα ἐοικότα γείνατο Τυδεύς.

800

Τυδεύς τοι μικρὸς μὲν ἔην δέμας, ἀλλὰ μαχητής"
καί ῥ᾽ ὅτε πέρ μιν ἐγὼ πολεμίξειν οὐκ εἴασκον

rebukes of men”; it is not used in the
sense of ‘‘disgrace”’ like αἶσχος or alc-
χύνη, either in Homer or later Greek.
The phrase recurs in Θ 228, N 95, Ο 502,
II 422; and in a slightly varying form
P 386 αἰδὼς μὲν viv ἥδε γ᾽. . . Ἴλιον
εἰσαναβῆναι, where we must take it to
mean ‘‘ this is a thing to arouse a feeling
of rebuke,” just as we say ‘‘it is a shame
to do so and so,” meaning a thing to be

ashamed of. εἶδος dynrol, like εἶδος
ἄριστε, I’ 89 (there was a variant ἄριστοι
here).

789. Aristarchos held that the Dar-
danian gate was the same as the Skaian.
Of course the question is insoluble ; but
see note on B 809. The name recurs
again in X 194,

791. The best MSS. give νῦν δὲ ἑκὰς,
a few of the inferior viv δ᾽ ἕκαθεν. Of
course the former is right, as éxas had F.
But from a scholion by Didymus on N
107 it appears that Zenod. and Aristoph.
read νῦν δὲ éxds, Aristarchos viv δ᾽ éxa-
θεν : a clear proof that Aristarchos did
not always know what was the best
tradition, or else deliberately rejected it
from preconceived notions. he ex-
pression κοίλῃς ἐπὶ νηυσί is not appropri-
ate here, as it is in N 107, where the
Greeks have actually been driven back
to the camp. Either therefore the line
must be borrowed here, or a mistaken
reminiscence must have caused some
corruption.

798. ε, ‘‘sprang to his side,”
cf. y 843 ὕπνος ér., and P 481 App’ ἐπο-

povoas. Elsewhere it always indicates
a hostile onslaught.

795. It might have been supposed
that Athene had healed the wound in
122, but there is no explicit inconsistency
between that passage and the present.
See Π 528; when a god miraculously
heals a wound we are told so at length.
Many critics however have made this
supposed ‘‘ contradiction” a fulcrum for
breaking up this book. For the double
acc. after βάλε cf. 361, Θ 405, 2 421, and
H. 6. § 135.

796. The wound is in the right
shoulder (98) through the top of the
γύαλον, and just where the broad strap
by which the shield was held crossed
the shoulder, which it would seem there-
fore the plates of the cuirass did not
quite cover. The shield, as we should
expect, hung at the left side.

797. τῷ may be either τελαμῶνι or
ἱδρῶτι. It is not perfectly clear how he
could get at the wound to wipe it with-
out taking off the orperrds χιτών.

802. There is considerable doubt as to
the punctuation of this passage. Fasi
takes 805 as a parenthesis. imilarly
Mr. Monro regards it as epexegetic of the
preceding. Ameis less probably takes
καί p Ore περ. . . ἐκπαιφάσσειν as a
general protasis, which is superseded and
forgotten in favour of the special case
introduced by the second protasis, ὅτε re
. . . Καδμεΐωνας. For the story see
A 384 sqq.

192

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v,)

οὐδ᾽ ἐκπαιφάσσειν, ὅτε τ᾽ ἤλυθε νόσφιν ᾿Αχαιῶν
wv 3 / , \
ἄγγελος ἐς Θήβας πολέας μετὰ Καδμείωνας ----
δαίνυσθαί μιν ἄνωγον ἐνὶ μεγάροισιν ἕκηλον---- 805
αὐτὰρ ὁ θυμὸν ἔχων ὃν καρτερόν, ὡς TO πάρος περ,

, / , 27 9 /
κούρους Καδμείων προκαλίζετο, πάντα δ᾽ ἐνίκα
[ῥηιδίως τοίη οἱ ἐγὼν ἐπιτάρροθος ja].
σοὶ δ᾽ ἦ τοι μὲν ἐγὼ παρά θ᾽ ἵσταμαι ἠδὲ φυλάσσω,

, / ᾽ 4
καί σε προφρονέως κέλομαι Τρώεσσι μάχεσθαι: 810
9 4 a 4 4 A 4
ἀλλά σευ ἢ κάματος πολυάιξ γυῖα δέδυκεν,
ἤ νύ σέ που δέος ἴσχει ἀκήριον" οὐ σύ γ᾽ ἔπειτα
Τυδέος ἔκγονός ἐσσι δαΐφρονος Οἰνεΐδαο.᾽

τὴν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη κρατερὸς Διομήδης"
cc , θ ὰ θύ Δ \ 3 .

γιγνώσκω σε, θεὰ θύγατερ Διὸς αἰγιόχοιο 815
τῷ τοι προφρονέως ἐρέω ἔπος οὐδ᾽ ἐπικεύσω.
οὔτε τί με δέος ἴσχει ἀκήριον οὔτε τις ὄκνος,
ἀλλ᾽ ἔτι σέων μέμνημαι ἐφετμέων, ἃς ἐπέτειλας"
οὔ μ᾽ εἴας μακάρεσσι θεοῖς ἀντικρὺ μάχεσθαι

τοῖς ἄλλοις" ἀτὰρ εἴ κε Διὸς θυγάτηρ ᾿Αφροδίτη

’ nm”
ἔλθῃσ᾽ ἐς πόλεμον, THY γ᾽ οὐτάμεν ὀξέι χαλκῷ.

4 a > ἢ > 9 / 7O\ \ »
τούνεκα νῦν αὐτὸς τ ἀναχάζομαι ἠδὲ Kal ἄλλους
9 > μ, 3 [ή > , 4
Apyelous ἐκέλευσα ἀλήμεναι ἐνθάδε πάντας"
γιγνώσκω γὰρ “Apna μάχην ἀνὰ κοιρανέοντα.᾽"

τὸν δ᾽ ἡμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα θεὰ γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη"

“ Tydeldn Διόμηδες, ἐμῷ κεχαρισμένε θυμῷ,
μήτε σύ γ᾽ “Apna τό γε δείδιθι μήτε τιν᾽ ἄλλον

808. νόσφιν ᾿Αχαιῶν is the same as
μοῦνος ἐών in A 388. ἐκπαιφάσσειν,
make display, see B 450.

808. According to Aristonikos this
line was inserted here by Zenod. from A
390 (and E 828), but omitted by Ar. on
the just ground that Athene is here
emphasizing her restraint, not her sup-
port, of Tydeus ; the interpolation de-
stroys the effect of the following line.

811. πολνάιξ, see A 165. As the ε
is long by nature (-dtxos) the ordinary
accent πολυᾶιξ is wrong. Cf. however
κῆρυξ : some of the old grammarians held
that « and v were never long by nature
before é.

818. σέων Ar., σῶν best MSS. Ar.
admitted the contracted form only after
a vowel.

819. ἀντικρύ, see 130.

820

825

824. in local sense, ‘the
battle-field.” πόλεμος is never used in

this way. ἀνά should be ἄνα, as it
immediately follows its case; but Ar.
refused to be consistent, on the ground
that the word would thus be liable to
confusion with the vocative of ἄναξ
and the imperatival ἄνα = arise. In A
230 he wrote διὰ, not δία, for a similar
reason. The whole theory of accentua-
tion is full of irregularities, which in many
cases no doubt represented a genuine
usage, but were a subject of helpless
groping after principles among the Alex-
andrian grammarians.

827. τό ye, for that matter: cf. p 401,
μήτε τι pntép’ ἐμὴν ἄζευ τό ye, μήτε τιν᾽
ἄλλον. But it looks almost as if the line
were a reminiscence of = 342, μήτε θεῶν τό
γε δείδιθι μήτε rw’ ἀνδρῶν ὄψεσθαι, where
the τό is probably governed by ὄψεσθαι.

IAIAAOS E (νυ)

193

ἀθανάτων" τοίη τοι ἐγὼν emiTadppobos εἰμι.
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγ᾽ ἐπ᾽ “Apne πρώτῳ ἔχε μώνυχας ἵππους,
τύψον δὲ σχεδίην μηδ᾽ ἅξεο θοῦρον “Apna 880
τοῦτον μαινόμενον, τυκτὸν κακόν, ἀλλοπρόσαλλον, -
ὃς πρώην μὲν ἐμοί τε καὶ “Ἥρῃ oredr’ ἀγορεύων
Τρωσὶ μαχήσεσθαι, ἀτὰρ ᾿Αργείοισιν ἀρήξειν,
νῦν δὲ μετὰ Τρώεσσιν ὁμιλεῖ, τῶν δὲ λέλασται.᾽"
as φαμένη Σθένελον μὲν ἀφ᾽ ἵππων ace χαμάξε, 835
χειρὶ πάλιν ἐρύσασ᾽" ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐμμαπέως ἀπόρουσεν. ᾿
ἡ δ᾽ ἐς δίφρον ἔβαινε παραὶ Διομήδεα δῖον
ἐμμεμαυῖα θεά" μέγα δ᾽ ἔβραχε φήγινος ἄξων
βριθοσύνῃ" δεινὴν γὰρ ἄγεν θεὸν ἄνδρα τ᾽ ἄριστον.
λάζετο δὲ μάστιγα καὶ ἡνία Παλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη" 840
αὐτίκ᾽ ἐπ᾽ “Apne πρώτῳ ἔχε μώνυχας ἵππους.
ἢ τοι ὁ μὲν Περίφαντα πελώριον ἐξενάριξεν,
Αὐτωλῶν by” ἄριστον, ᾿Οχησίου ἀγλαὸν υἱόν"
τὸν μὲν ἴΑρης ἐνάριζε μιαιφόνος" αὐτὰρ ᾿Αθήνη
δρν᾽ ΓΑιδος κυνέην, μή μιν ἴδοι ὄβριμος “Apne. 845

828. ἔπι , & word of quite
uncertain origin; apparently identical
in sense with ἐπίρροθος in A 390, though
an etymological connexion is hardly
possible. See note there. :

831. ἀλλοπρόσαλλον, ‘‘double-faced,”
one thing to one person, another to
another. This treachery of Ares is again
alluded to in ® 413, οὔνεκ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοὺς κάλ-
λιπες, αὐτὰρ Tpwoly ὑπερφιάλοισιν ἀμύνεις,
but no other trace of it occurs in Homer.
ruxréy is another ἅπαξ λεγόμενον in this
sense: it apparently means “ finished,
wrought out,” .6. complete: cf. rervy-
μένον = well wrought, Ψ 741: so τυκ-
τῇσι βόεσσιν, well wrought, M 105, and
in the sense of ‘‘ artificially made” ρ 206,
ὃ 627.

832. πρώην, see B 303. στεῦτο,
‘*pledged himself,” see Curt. Gr. ΕἸ.
no. 228.

833. μαχήσεσθαι, several MSS. give
-σασθαι in spite of the following future ;
which shews how little authority the
codices have in a question of this sort.

834. τῶν δέ may be masc., sc. ᾿Αχαιῶν ;
but perhaps it is rather more Homeric
to take it as neuter, ‘‘ those promises.”

838-9. ἀθετοῦνται στίχοι δύο, ὅτι οὐκ
ἀναγκαῖοι καὶ γελοῖοι, καί τι ἐναντίον ἔχον -
τες. τί γάρ, εἰ χείριστοι ἦσαν ταῖς ψυχαῖς,
εὐειδεῖς δὲ καὶ εὔσαρκοι; 1.6. the fact that

Ο

Diomedes and the goddess were ἄριστοι
does not involve their being heavier.
But the couplet is quite in the spirit
of the whole passage, which seems ex-
pressly to exaggerate the physical quali-
ties of the gods, 4.0. 785, 860. We may
compare Aen. vi. 413, ‘“‘gemuit sub pondere
cymba Sutilis” (of Charon’s boat). For
φήγινος there was an old variant πήδινος,
ound in Eustath., Hesych., and Ht. Mag.,
and said to mean some kind of wood.
For this word reference may be made to
the article πηδός in Liddell and Scott.
For ἄνδρα τ᾽ in 839 Ar. read ἄνδρα δ᾽.
His idea apparently was that re put the
goddess and the hero too much on an
equality.

841. In A and C 846 is inserted after
this line, in the former with the note
ἐν ἄλλοις ὁ στίχος μετὰ τέσσαρας στίχους
κεῖται. It will be observed that the
change makes little difference. ἐξενάρι-
ἴεν and ἐνάριζεν (844) are the reading of
Ar. with the best MSS., ‘‘ was despoil-
ing’ : others (probably Zenod.) ἐξενάριξεν,
“(δα slain.” There is no other case in
Homer of a god in person actually slay-
ing and despoiling a hero.

845. » A Sos kuvén, the “Tarnkappe” or
‘*Nebelkappe” of northern mythology,
not elsewhere mentioned in H. It is
alluded to however in the (pseudo-)

194

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v,)

ὡς δὲ ἴδε βροτολουγὸς “Apns Διομήδεα δῖον,

ἢ τοι ὁ μὲν Περίφαντα πελώριον αὐτόθ᾽ ἔασεν
κεῖσθαι, ὅθι πρῶτον κτείνων ἐξαίννυτο θυμόν,
αὐτὰρ ὁ βῆ ῥ᾽ ἰθὺς Διομήδεος ἱπποδάμοιο.

οἱ δ᾽ ὅτε δὴ σχεδὸν ἦσαν ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλοισιν ἰόντες,

8580

πρόσθεν “Apns ὠρέξαθ᾽ ὑπὲρ ζυγὸν ἡνία θ᾽ ἵππων
ἔγχεϊ χαλκείῳ, μεμαὼς ἀπὸ θυμὸν ἑλέσθαι:

καὶ τό γε χειρὶ λαβοῦσα θεὰ γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη
ὧσεν ὑπὲρ δίφροιο ἐτώσιον ἀνχθῆναι.

δεύτερος αὖθ᾽ ὡρμᾶτο βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης

855

ἔγχεϊ χαλκείῳ" ἐπέρεισε δὲ Παλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη
νείατον ἐς κενεῶνα, ὅθι ζωννύσκετο pitpny:
τῇ ῥά μιν οὗτα τυχών, διὰ δὲ χρόα καλὸν ἔδαψεν,

ἐκ δὲ δόρυ σπάσεν αὖτις.

ὁ δ᾽ ἔβραχε χάλκεος “Apns,

ὅσσον τ᾽ ἐννεάχιλοι ἐπίαχον ἢ δεκάχιελοι

860

> ἢ 3 / Ν Ud ¥
ἀνέρες ἐν πολέμῳ, ἔριδα Evydryovres “Apnos.

δ > #7 " ς \ / 3 4 af
τοὺς δ᾽ ap ὑπὸ τρόμος εἷλεν ᾿Αχαιούς τε Tpads τε
δείσαντας" τόσον ἔβραχ᾽ “Apns τος πολέμοιο.

Ψ > ) 3 \ / 9\
οἴη δ᾽ ἐκ νεφέων ἐρεβεννὴ φαίνεται ἀὴρ

4 “A > / 4 3 A
καύματος ἐξ ἀνέμοιο δυσαέος ὀρνυμένοιο,

Hesiodean Scutum Her. 227, and in
Aristoph. Ach. 390 ; Plato, Rep. x. 612 B.
It appears too in the legend of Perseus in
Pherekydes, and is a piece of the very
oldest folklore. The name ‘Aléns here
evidently preserves something of its
original sense, the Invisible (’AFlédns).
It 1s of course not necessary to suppose
that the poet conceives Athene as liter-
ally putting on a cap; he only employs
the traditional —almost proverbial—way
of saying that she makes herself invisible
to Ares,

848. This line is perhaps interpolated
by a rhapsode who read ἐξενάριξεν in 842,
and thought that an infinitive was re-
quired after facev. This idea led to
another unmistakable interpolation, 2
558.

851. ζυγόν, of Diomedes’ chariot:
Ares is clearly on foot (he has lent his
chariot to Aphrodite, 363).

852. & ιν, so A and other MSS.:
vulg. ὀλέσσαι, but this by Homeric usage
could only mean to louse his own life.

854. ὑπέρ, so A: caet. ὑπ’ ἐκ, which
appears to be accepted by almost all
edd., though no approximately satisfac-
tory explanation has been given of the

865

word, which can only mean “from
under.’’ Athene of course is on, not
under, the chariot ; and to suppose that
she could direct the shaft from a place
where she was not herself is to make her
very unlike a Homeric deity. With the
reading of A there is no difficulty what-
ever, and the authority of this MS. is
as great as that of the consensus of all
the rest, so that there need be no hesi-
tation in adopting it. It is strange that
neither Nauck nor von Christ so much
as mentions the existence of the variant.

857. ὅτι κατὰ τὰ κοῖλα μέρη ἐζώννυντο
τὴν μίτραν ᾿ καί ἐστι διδασκαλικὸς ὁ τόπος
(1.6. ‘*this is the locus classicus’’). For
the nature of the μέτρη see on A 187.
For μίτρην of MSS. Ar. read μέτρῃ ;
both cases appear to be equally Homeric:
see = 181, K bn

860. This hyperbolical distich recurs
in = 148-9. Ar. is said to have read
-xethoe for -χίλοι, ‘with nine lips” (ἢ)
For the last half of 861 compare B 381,
= 448, T 2765.

865. καύματος ἔξ, after hot weather :
so Schol. It is hardly possible to get
any good sense if we join ἐξ with ἀνέμοιο.
It is not easy to say what the phenome-

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v,)

195

τοῖος Τυδεΐδῃ Διομήδεϊ χάλκεος “Apns

φαίνεθ᾽ ὁμοῦ νεφέεσσιν ἰὼν εἰς οὐρανὸν εὐρύν.

καρπαλίμως δ᾽ ἵκανε θεῶν ἕδος, αἰπὺν "Ολυμπον,

πὰρ δὲ Av Κρονίωνι καθέζετο θυμὸν ἀχεύων,

δεῖξεν δ᾽ ἄμβροτον αἷμα καταρρέον ἐξ ὠτειλῆς, 870
καί ῥ᾽ ὀλοφυρόμενος ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"

“ Ζεῦ πάτερ, οὐ νεμεσίξῃ ὁρῶν τάδε καρτερὰ ἔργα ;

αἰεί τοι ῥίγιστα θεοὶ τετληότες εἰμὲν

ἀλλήλων ἰότητι, χάριν ἄνδρεσσι φέροντες.

σοὶ πάντες μαχόμεσθα' σὺ γὰρ τέκες ἄφρονα κούρην,

87ὅ

οὐλομένην, BT αἰὲν ἀήσυλα ἔργα μέμηλεν.

ἄλλοι μὲν γὰρ πάντες, ὅσοι θεοί cio’ ἐν ᾿Ολύμπῳ,
σοί τ᾽ ἐπιπείθονται καὶ δεδμήμεσθα ἕκαστος"
ταύτην δ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ἔπεϊ προτιβάλλεαι οὔτε τι ἔργῳ,

ἀλλ᾽ ἀνίης, ἐπεὶ αὐτὸς ἐγείναο παῖδ᾽ ἀΐδηλον" —

880

ἣ νῦν Τυδέος νἱὸν ὑπερφίαλον Διομήδεα

μαργαίνειν ἀνέηκεν ἐπ᾽ ἀθανάτοισι, θεοῖσιν.

Κύπριδα μὲν πρῶτον σχεδὸν οὔτασε χεῖρ᾽ ἐπὶ καρπῷ,
αὐτὰρ ἔπειτ᾽ αὐτῷ μοι ἐπέσσυτο δαίμονι ἶσος"

ἀλλά μ᾽ ὑπήνεικαν ταχέες πόδες" ἧ τέ κε δηρὸν

885

3 al ὔ 3 > A ,
QUTOU πήματ ἔπασχον ἐν αἰνῇσιν νεκάδεσσιν,

non meant may be; perhaps a whirl-
wind of dust raised by the Scirocco.
Others take it to be a thunder-cloud
‘* standing out to the eye from the other
clouds.” (ἢ

874. χάριν ἅ t, so La Β.: the
best MSS. follow Ar. in reading χάριν δ᾽,
but the particle appears to be merely an
insertion to assist the metre. Bekker
rejects this line and the preceding, not
without reason, as they are quite wide
of the aim of the rest of the speech. So
also Kochly and Nauck.

876. ἀήσυλα, so MSS.: but there is
little doubt, as Clemm has shewn, that
the word, which is not found elsewhere, is
only an itacistic mistake for ἀξίέσυλα,
iniqua, from Ficos; hence the commoner
contracted form αἴσυλος.

878. δεδμήμεσθα, are subject to you,
I 183, \ 622. For the change of person
cf. H 160, P 250. ;

879. προτιβάλλεοαι apparently means
‘fattack,” ‘‘make an onslaught.” There
is no other case in Homer of such a use,
nor does the middle voice of this com-
pound seem to recur in Greek literature,

until the late Epic poets. Mr. Monro
explains ‘‘ dost give heed to,” comparing
ἐπιβαλλόμενος Z 68, and βάλλεσθαι ἐνὶ
θυμῷ, μετὰ φρεσίν.

880. For ἀνίης most MSS. give ἀνίεις,
Schol. A on & 131 ἀνιεῖς. The second
form can hardly be right, the first is in
accordance with the analogy of ἀνίησι,
the latter is supported by μεθιεῖ Καὶ 121,
τιθεῖ N 782, a 192. In a point where
the authority of MSS. is πὺξ it seems
better to take the more archaic form, as
it has respectable authority; as it is
very probable that forms of the so-called
‘* Aeolic” conjugation have constantly
been altered to suit the later conjugation
of contracted verbs. αὐτός is explained
by Schol. Β μόνος, 7.¢. without the inter-
vention of a mother. There is no trace in
H. however of the birth of Athene from
the head of Zeus; and the word here need
mean no more than ‘‘thou thyself” didst
beget (emphatically) ; σὺ réxes above (875)
isalsoambiguous. ἀΐδηλον, destructive,
aswip,B455. (Welckerexplains “secretly
born,” as withouta mother. But see 897.)

886. νεκάδεσσιν, ἀπ. λεγόμενον. CF.

196

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (v,)

ἤ Ke Cos ἀμενηνὸς Ea χαλκοῖο τυπῆῇσεν."
τὸν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπόδρα ἰδὼν προσέφη νεφεληγερέτα Ζεύς"
“μή τί μοι, ἀχλλοπρόσαλλε, παρεζόμενος μινύριξε.

ἔχθιστος δέ μοί ἐσσι θεῶν, οἱ "ολυμπον ἔχουσιν"

890

αἰεὶ γάρ τοι ἔρις τε φίλη πόλεμοί τε μάχαι τε.
μητρός τοι μένος ἐστὶν ἀάσχετον, οὐκ ἐπιεικτόν,
Ἥρης" τὴν μὲν ἐγὼ σπουδῇ δάμνημ᾽ ἐπέεσσιν"
τῷ σ᾽ ὀίω κείνης τάδε πάσχειν ἐννεσίῃσιν.

ἀλλ᾽ οὐ μάν σ᾽ ἔτι δηρὸν ἀνέξομαι ἄνγε᾽ ἔχοντα"

895

ἐκ γὰρ ἐμεῦ γένος ἐσσί, ἐμοὶ δέ σε γείνατο μήτηρ.

εἰ δέ τευ ἐξ ἄλλου γε θεῶν γένευ ὧδ᾽ ἀίδηλος,

καί κεν δὴ πάλαι ἦσθα ἐνέρτερος Οὐρανιώνων."
ὧς φάτο, καὶ ἸΠαιήον᾽ ἀνώγειν ἰήσασθαι.

τῷ δ᾽ ἐπὶ ΠΠαιήων ὀδυνήφατα φάρμακα πάσσεν.

900

Ο 118 κεῖσθαι ὁμοῦ νεκύεσσι μεθ᾽ αἵματι
καὶ κονίῃσιν, and II 661 ἐν νεκύων ἀγύρει :
see also note on 397. Ares, being im-
mortal, seems a little confused between
his two alternatives; the contrast to
{us (another dm. Aey.) should of course
be ἔθανον ; this being impossible he has
to substitute the rather weak expression
of the text.

887. ἀμενηνός, only here in 1]. : it
occurs several times in Od. in the phrase
νεκύων ἀμενηνὰ κάρηνα and once (τ 562)
of dreams. It appears to be conn.
with pévos, but the formation is not
clear.

891. See note on A 177.

892. ddo xerov: the formation of this
word, which recurs only in 2 708, is
hardly explicable. According to Bekker
it is for ἀν-ανάσχετος, through the stage
dv-a(v)oxeros, the second » being lost
before the o, and the first then having
to follow suit, that the word might not
be confused with dvd-cxeros in the
opposite sense. If so, it is probably a
late and wrong reading, for which
dvdoxerov ought to be substituted here
(so Wackernagel): mere possibilities of
confusion do not set aside the ordinary
laws of linguistic formation. According
to another view we have a case of ‘‘ Epic
diectasis” for ἄσχετος. This is not
impossible in a. p which may
possibly be of late origin, and contem-
poraneous with the formation on false
analogy of dpdgs for dpdes through the
stage ὁρᾷς.

893. σπουδῇ, as B 99, etc.

894. ἐννεσίῃσιν, for ἐνεσ. (ἐνίημι) ;
the lengthening of the first syllable may
be due to the ictus alone ; or possibly to
a reminiscence of j, év-jeo-(y, though the
latter alternative is the less probable.

898. For ἦσθα the best MSS. give
ἦσθας, an impossible form, invented for
the supposed benefit of the metre. The
form οἷσθας however seems to be well
attested in Eur. Jon. 999. For
Zenod. read évépraros. The two last
words of the line apparently mean
‘‘lower than the sons of Uranos,” t.€.
the Titanes imprisoned in Tartaros, as in
O 225, οἵπερ évéprepol εἰσι θεοὶ, Κρόνον
ἀμφὶς ἐόντες. This however is quite
unlike the Homeric use of the word
Οὐρανίωνες, and may be another mark of
later date ; the Titan myths, like those
relating to Kronos, seem only to have
become part of the acknowledged belief
of the Greek nation at large in post-
Homeric times. If we take Οὐρανίωνες
in its usual sense, we must translate
either ‘‘lower than the heavenly gods,”
or “ἸΟῪ among (partitive gen.) the
heavenly gods”: either of which inter-
pretations makes the passage intolerably
weak. For the threat itself compare
© 13-16: and for the Titanes Θ 479,
= 279, Hesiod, Theog. 720.

900. See 401-2. Here the best MSS.
read πάσσεν or ἔπασσεν, and either omit
901 or give a note to say that it was
sometimes omitted; only those of the
second class giving πάσσων, which is
necessary if 901 is read. The note in
Schol. A (Didymus!) ἰακῶς φάρμακα

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ E (νυ)

197

[ἠκέσατ᾽" οὐ μὲν yap τι καταθνητός γε τέτυκτο.
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ὀπὸς γάλα λευκὸν ἐπειγόμενος συνέπηξεν
ὑγρὸν ἐόν, μάλα δ᾽ ὦκα περιτρέφεται κυκόωντι,
Os ἄρα καρπαλίμως ἰήσατο θοῦρον “Apna.
τὸν δ᾽ Ἥβη λοῦσεν, χαρίεντα δὲ εἵματα ἕσσεν" 905
πὰρ δὲ Awd Κρονίωνι καθέζετο κύὐδεϊ γαίων.
αἱ δ᾽ αὗτις πρὸς δῶμα Διὸς μεγάλοιο νέομτο,
Ἤρη τ᾽ ᾿Αργείη καὶ ᾿Αλαλκομενηὶς ᾿Αθήνη,
παύσασαι βροτολοιγὸν “Apny ἀνδροκτασιάων.

πάσσεν (t.e. not φάρμακ᾽ ἕπασσεν : the
omission of the augment is always re-
garded as an Ionic peculiarity) shews
that Ar. also omitted 901.

902. ὀπός, fig-juice used to curdle
milk for making cheese: another material
for the same purpose in classical times
was mya or τάμισος, rennet,” which
is still employed. εἰγόμενος might
quite well be taken as a nee “ being
stirred” ; but the common Homeric use
of the participle is rather in favour of
taking it as a mid., ‘‘makes haste to
curdle” (cf. Z 388, ἐπειγομένη ἀφικάνει,
etc.) ; the point of the simile lies in the
speed of the process, so that the repetition
of the same idea in μάλ᾽ ὦκα in the next
line is excusable. il

903. ιτρέφεται, ‘‘curdles,” 80
Ἡρτοάίδησα, ap. Eust., Apoll. Lez. ;
MSS. περιστρέφεται, which 1s obviously
inferior, cf. € 477 σακέεσσι περιτρέφετο
κρύσταλλος, where also, as La R. remarks,
six MSS. give περιστρέφετο, though it is
meaningless. Soc 246, ἥμισν μὲν θρέψας
λευκοῖο γάλακτος. The idea evidently is

that Paieon miraculously turned the

᾿ flowing blood to sound and solid flesh.

905. On this line Ar. remarked ὅτι
παρθενικὸν τὸ λούειν (it is always the
maidens who give the bath): οὐκ οἶδεν
dpa ὑφ᾽ Ἡρακλέους αὐτὴν γεγαμημένην,
ws ἐν τοῖς ἠθετημένοις ἐν ᾿Οδυσσείᾳ (viz.
λ 608) : a characteristic specimen of the
great critic’s acumen, though the argu-
ment is not in itself convincing to a
chorizont.

906. This line was marked by Ar.
with ‘‘asterisk and obelos,” the former
implying that it occurs elsewhere (viz.
A 405, where see note), the latter that
it is wrongly inserted here. The reason
for the latter decision is that κύδεϊ γαίων
is out of place on an occasion where
Ares has so little to be proud of.

909. “Apnyv is the reading of nearly all
codices, and of Herodianus, who also
preferred “App to “Ape in 757: but it
only occurs here, so that the one MS.
(Cant.) which gives “Apn’ is not improb-
ably right.

198

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Z (v1)

IAIAAO® Ζ.

"Exsepos καὶ ᾿Ανδρομάχης ὁμιλία.

Τρώων δ᾽ οἰώθη. καὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν φύλοπις αἰνή ᾿ .
πολλὰ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθ᾽ ἴθυσε μάχη πεδίοιο,
ἀλλήλων ἐθυνομένων χαλκήρεα δοῦρα,
μεσσηγὺς ποταμοῖο Σκαμάνδρου καὶ στομαλίμνης.

Ζ

The sixth book with its immortal
scenes between Diomedes and Glaukos,
and Hector and Andromache, forms with
the preceding tale of war and carnage a
contrast which places it in the front rank
of all poetry. But, as we so often find
in the find, supreme beauty of individual

ts is not inconsistent with grave diffi-
culties as to their relation to one another,
and to the story at large.

There is a natural division of the book
between lines 311 and 312, where it is
not improbable that the repeated ὡς may
indicate a break in recitation. The two
parts however are closely connected, as
the second continues the account of
Hector’s visit to the city, which begins
in the first. The quotation by Herodotos
of lines 289-292 as being ἐν Διομήδεος
ἀριστείῃ indicates that there was origin-
ally no distinct break between E and
the first section of Z. But, as has
already been mentioned, this single
rhapsody contains one of the most
glaring inconsistencies in the Homeric

oems ; Diomedes in E has power given

im to know god from man, and wounds
Ares and Aphrodite, while in Z he doubts
whether Glaukos be not a god, and
declines to lift his spear against him if
he be. Such an anomaly cannot be
accounted for unless by the assumption
that the two episodes of the wounding
of the gods are 8 rater addition to the
original ἀριστεία. e contrary assump-
tion, that the Glaukos story is the later

addition, is entirely opposed to all prob-
ability ; we can understand that the
superhuman victories should be added
to that part of the tale which presents
only the common powers of the hero,
but not that they should be totally for-
gotten if they belonged to the plot from
the first.

The episode of Glaukos and Diomedes
has however incurred suspicion, on
account of a curious scholion of Aris-
tonikos, ἡ διπλῇ ὅτι μετατιθέασί τινες
ἀλλαχόσε ταύτην τὴν σύστασιν. Unfor-
tunately he does not tell us to what

lace these unknown authorities trans-
erred the scene, and modern critics
have in vain endeavoured to find one as
suitable as the present. The proud
words of Diomedes in 127 must come
after the beginning of his ἀριστεία, and
therefore no mere alteration of place
will do away with the contradiction
between the following words and his
supernatural vision and achievements
in E; so that there can be no gain from
any attempt to find a fresh connexion.

he allusion to the worship of Dionysos
in 130-141 is probably a mark of later
origin in that passage, which can how-
ever be cut out without injury to the
context. With this exception there is
nothing to be said against the claim
of the episode to rank as a portion of
the original Διομήδους ἀριστεία, which it
leads to a fitting end by contrasting the
romantic chivalry of the two heroes—like
that of Saladin and Coeur-de-Lion—with
the carnage of the book before.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Ζ (v1)

Αἴας δὲ πρῶτος Τελαμώνιος, ἕρκος ᾿Αχαιῶν, δ

199

Τρώων ῥῆξε φάλαγγα, φόως δ᾽ ἑτάροισιν ἔθηκεν,
ΝΜ ’ A 2 / lA
ἄνδρα βαλών, ὃς ἄριστος évt Θρήκεσσι τέτυκτο,
υἱὸν ᾿Ευσσώρου ᾿Ακάμαντ᾽ ἠύν τε μέγαν τε.

It has further been objected with some
force to the introduction of the book
(1-72) that it does not suit what follows;
for Diomedes here again sinks into the
background, slaying only two enemies,
no more than fall to so insignificant a
hero as Euryalos; 80, that the words of
Helenos in 97-101 are quite out of place
at this particular moment. It is prob-
able therefore that these 72 lines belong
to the episode of the wounding of Ares,
and are designed to lead the way back
to the orginal Diomedeia which is
resumed in 1, 73.

Doubt has also been thrown upon the
episode of Hector’s visit to Paris (313-
368). It has apparent reference through-
out to the end of the third book; yet
none of the allusions exactly suit (see
particularly 337 compared with Γ 428-
436). The words χόλον τόνδε in 326 are
hard to explain, and would be more
natural if they followed a scene in which
Paris had actually left the battle-field in
resentment at some outbreak of anger on
the part of the Trojans. It is therefore
possible that the duel in I, which we

ave already seen reason to suppose a
later addition to this part of the Iliad,
may have suppyanted such an episode ;
but the proof of this is certainly not
very strong. In any case the scene with
Paris forms a most effective companion
and contrast. to that with Andromache,
which is (with the exception of a few
lines, 433-438) above suspicion.

1, οἰώθη, was left to itself by the
departure of the gods, after the events
of the last book. Cf. A 401.

2. πεδίοιο, ‘‘along the plain,” as
usual: not a partitive gen. after ἔνθα.
ἰθύειν is the regular word for “charging,”
A 507, A 552, etc., the parallel form
ἰθύνειν being used for the transitive.
The mid. ἰθύνεσθαι recurs only ε 270,
x 8. ἰθυνομένων is gen. abs., the subject
being easily supplied from the first line :
ἀλλήλων is doubtless the gen. usual after
verbs of aiming (H. 6. § 151 c), and is
not in agreement with the participle.
Cf. N 499.

4. The ordinary reading of this line is
μεσσηγὺς Σιμόεντος ἰδὲ Ξάνθοιο po-
άων. But Aristonikos says (ἡ διπλῇ) ὅτι

/

ἐν rots ἀρχαίοις ἐγέγραπτο “ μεσσηγὺς πο-
ταμοῖο Σκαμάνδρου καὶ στομαλίμνης "" διὸ
καὶ ἐν τοῖς ὑπομνήμασι φέρεται. ὕστερον
δὲ περιπεσὼν ἔγραψε ““ μεσσηγὺς Σιμόεντος
ἰδὲ Ξάνθοιο podwy.” τοῖς γὰρ περὶ τοῦ
ναυστάθμου τόποις ἡ γραφὴ συμφέρει, πρὸς
ods μάχονται (‘‘ 80. hi versus illa lectione
retenta” Lehrs). Further Schol. BLV
say πρότερον ἐγέγραπτο “ μεσσηγὺς ποτα-
μοῖο Σκαμάνδρου καὶ στομαλίμνης " ὕσ-
τερον δὲ ᾿Αρίσταρχος ταύτην τὴν λέξιν (86.
the present vulgate) εὑρὼν ἐπέκρινεν.
Xaipis δὲ γράφει ““ μεσσηγὺς ποταμοῖο
Σκαμάνδρου καὶ Σιμόεντος." Various
emendations of the scholion of Aris-
tonikos have been proposed ; ¢.g. Lehrs
conj. ἐν rots ᾿Αρισταρχείοις for ἐν τοῖς
ἀρχαίοις : Sengebusch ἐν τῇ προτέρᾳ τῶν
᾿Δρισταρχείων. But there is no reason
to go beyond their plain sense; viz.
that Ar. found the reading of our text in
his ‘‘ancient” authorities—what these
were we cannot say—and adopted it in
his first edition and his ‘‘notes”; but
that he subsequently found the reading
of the present vulgate—again we do not
know in what authorities—and adopted
it in his second edition as being more
in accordance with the Homeric topo-
graphy of the camp, on which, as we
know, he wrote a special dissertation.
The στομαλίμνη or “estuary” is not
elsewhere mentioned. The name itself
is very unlikely to have been invented,
but very likely to have been supplanted
by the more familiar Σιμόεντος. It ap-
pears moreover that the old tradition
was so strongly in favour of our text
that Ar. had difficulty in finding support
for the variant which he preferred on
other grounds. These grounds however
have lost their weight to us, especiall

since Hercher has shewn that in all
probability the Simoeis was, if known at
all to the original legend, only another
name for the Skamandros. The two are
distinguished only in E 774 (q.v.), M 22,
ᾧ 307 ; and all these passages are reason-
ably suspected on other grounds of later
origin. (The only other places in which
the name Simeios occurs are E 777, A
475, T 53; cf. A 477, 488). Every
argument therefore points to the adop-
tion of the older reading of Aristarchos.

200

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Z (v1)

τόν ῥ᾽ ἔβαλε πρῶτος κόρυθος φάλον ἱπποδασείης,
ἐν δὲ μετώπῳ πῆξε, πέρησε δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὀστέον εἴσω 10
αἰχμὴ χαλκείη" τὸν δὲ σκότος ὄσσε κάλυψεν.

ἴΑξυλον δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔπεφνε βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης
Τευθρανίδην, ὃς ἔναιεν ἐυκτιμένῃ ἐν ᾿Αρίσβῃ
ἀφνειὸς βιότοιο, φίλος δ᾽ ἦν ἀνθρώποισιν" .
πάντας yap φιλέεσκεν ὁδῷ ἔπι οἰκία ναίων. 15
ἀλλά οἱ οὔ τις TOY γε TOT ἤρκεσε λυγρὸν ὄλεθρον
πρόσθεν ὑπαντιάσας, ἀλλ᾽ ἄμφω θυμὸν ἀπηύρα,
αὐτὸν καὶ θεράποντα Καλήσιον, ὅς pa τόθ᾽ ἵππων
ἔσκεν ὑφηνίοχος" τὼ δ᾽ ἄμφω γαῖαν ἐδύτην.

Δρῆσον δ᾽ Ἑὐρύαλος καὶ ᾿Οφέλτιον ἐξενάριξεν" 20
βῆ δὲ μετ᾽’ Αἴσηπον καὶ Πήδασον, οὕς ποτε νύμφη ;
νηὶς ᾿Αβαρβαρέη τέκ᾽ ἀμύμονι Βουκολίωνι.

Βουκολίων δ᾽ ἦν υἱὸς ἀγανοῦ Λαομέδοντος

πρεσβύτατος γενεῇ, σκότιον δέ ἑ γείνατο μήτηρ᾽

ποιμαίνων δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ὄεσσι μίγη φιλότητι καὶ εὐνῇ, 25
ἡ δ᾽ ὑποκυσαμένη Sidupdove γείνατο παῖδε.

καὶ μὲν τῶν ὑπέλυσε μένος καὶ φαίδιμα γυῖα

Μηκιστηιάδης καὶ ἀπ᾽ ὦμων τεύχε᾽ ἐσύλα.

᾿Αστύαλον δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔπεφνε μενεπτόλεμος Πολυποίτης"
Πιδύτην δ᾽ ᾿Οδυσεὺς Περκώσιον ἐξενάριξεν 80
ἔγχεϊ χαλκείῳ, Τεῦκρος δ᾽ ᾿Αρετάονα δῖον.

᾿Αντίλοχος δ᾽ ἼΑβληρον ἐνήρατο δουρὶ φαεινῷ

Νεστορίδης, "Ελατον δὲ ἄναξ: ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων"

ναῖε δὲ Σατνιόεντος ἐυρρείταο παρ᾽ ὄχθας

στ vy probably means a marshy
coteny: trot Ἢ the Skamandros, but of
some adjacent stream such as is now
formed by the Diimbrek-su, which it has
been proposed by Schliemann to identify
with the Simoeis.

6. φόως, salvation, as Θ 282, A 797,
II 95. For this Akamas see B 844.

9. φάλον, see on Γ' 362.

14. βιότοιο, cf. E 544.

15. φιλέεσκεν, used to entertain]; cf.
I’ 207, and χρὴ ξεῖνον παρεόντα φιλεῖν, ο 74.

17. πρόσθεν ὑπαντιάσας, standing be-
fore him to meet his enemy.

19. ὑφ᾽ ἡνίοχος is the reading of all
the best MSS., cf. λαοὶ δ᾽ ὑπ᾽ ὀλίζονες
ἦσαν, Σ 519. But the vulg. ὑφηνίοχος,
a word not found elsewhere, is sufficiently
defended by the analogy of ὑποδμώς,
5 386, ὑποδρηστήρ o 330; and it avoids

the awkwardness of the detached ὑπό.
γαῖαν ἐδύτην, the realm of the dead
being under ground. Cf. 411, w 106.
Schol. B explains it ὅτι γῆν ταφέντες
ἐνεδύσαντο, which is obviously inappro-
priate, as there is no burying in question
at all.

24. σκότιον, by a secret amour = rap-
θένιος, IT 180. Cf. Aen, ix. 546, furtim.
μίγη sc. Bukolion. .

34. vate δέ,38ο MSS. with Ar. : Zenod.
ὃς ναῖε, acc. to Ariston., who accuses him
of making a false quantity. On N 172
the same difference is noted, and the
same accusation made, but the text of
the Schol. gives vde. Now vdw from
root nas to dwell (Curt. no. 482) would
be just as possible by the side of valu,
as is ydw to flow (from root sue, Curt.
no. 448) by the side of ναίω ε 222 in the

IAIAAO® Z (vt)

Πήδασον αἰπεινήν.

201

Φύλακον δ᾽ ἕλε Λήυτος ἥρως 35

φεύγοντ᾽ - Evpumundos δὲ Μελάνθιον ἐξενάριξεν.
"Αδρηστον δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔπειτα βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Μενέλαος
ζωὸν ἕλ᾽- ἵππω yap οἱ ἀτυζομένω πεδίοιο
ὄξῳ ἔνε βλαφθέντε μυρικίνῳ, ἀγκύλον ἅρμα
᾿ ἄξαντ᾽ ἐν πρώτῳ ῥυμῷ αὐτὼ μὲν ἐβήτην 40
πρὸς πόλιν, ἧ περ οἱ ἄλλοι ἀτυζόμενοι φοβέοντο,
αὐτὸς δ᾽ ἐκ δίφροιο παρὰ τροχὸν ἐξεκυλίσθη

πρηνὴς ἐν Kovinow ἐπὶ στόμα.

πὰρ δέ οἱ ἔστη

᾿Ατρεΐδης Μενέλαος ἔχων δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος"

"Αδρηστος δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔπειτα λαβὼν ἐλλίσσετο γούνων" 45

““ξώγρει, ᾿Ατρέος υἱέ, σὺ δ᾽ ἄξια δέξαι ἄποινα.

πολλὰ δ᾽ ἐν ἀφνειοῦ πατρὸς κειμήλια κεῖται,

χαλκός τε χρυσός τε πολύκμητός τε σίδηρος"

τῶν κέν τοι χαρίσαιτο πατὴρ ἀπερείσι᾽ ἄποινα,

εἴ κεν ἐμὲ Cwov πεπύθοιτ᾽ ἐπὶ νηυσὶν ᾿Αχαιῶν." 50
ὧς φάτο, τῷ δ᾽ ἄρα θυμὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ἔπειθεν.

καὶ δή μιν τάχ᾽ ἔμελλε θοὰς ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν

δώσειν ᾧ θεράποντι καταξέμεν: ἀλλ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνων

ἀντίος ἦλθε θέων, καὶ ὁμοκλήσας ἔπος ηὔδα"

same sense. It is therefore possible
that Zenodotos may have found and
discussed an old reading ὅς vde, but pro-
posed to write ὃς vate on the analo

of ἔμπαιος, οἷος (~~), etc. ; and that the
Scholiasts have jumbled up his remarks
into the form in which we have them.

35. For this Πήδασος in the Troad cf.
ᾧ 87, T 92. Strabo calls it a city of the
Leleges opposite Lesbos, and another
legend identifies it with Adramyttium.
A town of the same name in Messene is
mentioned in I 152, and there was a
Πήδασα near Halikarnassos.

38. ἀτυζομένω πεδίοιο as Σ 7.

39. βλαφθέντε, entangled, cf. H 271.
ἀγκύλον, like καμπύλον E 281, is only
once used of the chariot. It doubtless
indicates the curved form of the front.

40. ἐν πρώτῳ ῥυμῷ probably means the
end of the pole where the yoke was
fastened, also called ἄκρος, E 729; cf.
Π 371, Q 272.

45. γούνων with λαβών, as A 407.

46-50 = A 131-5, and οὗ, Καὶ 378-381.

46. ζώγρει, take me alive. In E 698
the meaning is quite different. The last

syllable remains long because of the
pause at the end of the first foot.

47. ἐν πατρός sc. δώματι, Z 378, Ὡ 309,
482, etc.

48. πολύκμητοφ, implements wrought
with much labour. The working of
iron was of course a difficult matter in
early days, especially as by primitive
methods of smelting it would be obtained
not in the pure malleable condition, but
combined with a certain amount of
carbon, making it more like steel or cast-
iron, hard and brittle.

51. ἔπειθε, endeavoured to persuade
(observe the different sense of the aor.
in 61). So best MSS.: vulg. ὄρινε,
which is less appropriate; for, as La
R. points out, the appeal is not to Mene-
laos’ emotions, but to his reason. The
line recurs several times, always with
ὄρινε (B 142, T 896, A 208, A 804, N
468, p 150).

53. καταξέμεν is of course aor. not
fut. ; see I’ 105.

54. ἀντίος, so Ar.: Zen. ἀντίον. In
other es Ar. seems to have pre-
ferred the adverbial, Zen. the adjectival
form. There is little or no ground of
choice (La R., Textkr. p. 198).

202

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Ζ (v1)

“ ᾧ πέπον, ὦ Μενέλαε, τί ἢ δὲ σὺ κήδεαι οὕτως 55

ἀνδρῶν ; ἢἣ σοὶ ἄριστα πεποίηται κατὰ οἶκον

πρὸς Τρώων ; τῶν μή τις ὑπεκφύγοι αἰπὺν ὄλεθρον

χεῖράς θ᾽ ἡμετέρας, μηδ᾽ ὅν τινα γαστέρι μήτηρ

κοῦρον ἐόντα φέροι, μηδ᾽ ὃς φύγοι, ἀλλ᾽ ἅμα πάντες

Ἰλίου ἐξαπολοίατ᾽ ἀκήδεστοι καὶ ἄφαντοι." 60
ὧς εἰπὼν παρέπεισεν ἀδελφειοῦ φρένας ἥρως,

αἴσιμα παρευπών" ὁ δ᾽ ἀπὸ ἔθεν ὥσατο χειρὶ

ἥρω᾽ "Αδρηστον.

τὸν δὲ κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων

οὗτα κατὰ λαπάρην" ὁ δ᾽ ἀνετράπετ᾽, ᾿Ατρεΐδης δὲ

λὰξ ἐν στήθεσι βὰς ἐξέσπασε μείλινον ἔγχος. 65
Νέστωρ δ᾽ ᾿Αργείοισιν ἐκέκλετο μακρὸν aicas:

“ὦ φίλοι ἥρωες Δαναοί, θεράποντες “Apnos,

μή τις νῦν ἐνάρων ἐπιβαλλόμενος μετόπισθεν

μιμνέτω, ὥς κεν πλεῖστα φέρων ἐπὶ νῆας ἵκηται,

ἀλλ᾽ ἄνδρας κτείνωμεν'" ἔπειτα δὲ καὶ τὰ ἕκηλοι 70

νεκροὺς ἂμ πεδίον συλήσετε τεθνηῶτας."
ὧς εἰπὼν ὥτρυνε μένος καὶ θυμὸν ἑκάστου.

ἔνθα κεν αὗτε Τρῶες ἀρηιφίλων ὑπ᾽ ᾿Αχαιῶν

Ἴλιον εἰσανέβησαν ἀναλκείῃσι δαμέντες,

εἰ μὴ ἄρ᾽ Αἰνείᾳ τε xab"Exrope εἶπε παραστὰς 75

57. The note of interrogation after
Τρώων is not in the vulg., but it is shewn
to be Aristarchean by the remark of
Herodian that the ἢ is διαπορητικός, in-
terrogative. On the whole it is more
Homeric to have two consecutive ques-
tions in a case like this than a question
followed by an indignant exclamation :
= 265, O 245, w 424, p 376 (Hentze).
ἄριστα is not an adv. but subject to
πεποίηται : for the impersonal ποιεῖταί
τινι κακῶς is not Homeric.

59. φέροι opt. by attraction, as usual
in sentences expressing a wish. The
use of κοῦρος to signify ‘‘babe”’ is quite
unique; it elsewhere connotes rather a
man in the prime of life. Déd. thinks
it means ‘‘of noble blood,” but this
weakens the sentiment quite intolerably.
If, as we should suppose, it means ‘‘ male
child,” we must regard the opt. as ex-

ressing ἃ hope, not a command; un-
ess Agamemnon’s fury makes him quite
unreasoning.

61. πὶ εἰσεν, so MSS.: La R. need-
lessly reads ἔτρεψεν supported by the
mention of it as a variant in two MSS.

(AO).
120, N 788, ete.

παραπείθω is the usual word, H
ἀδελφειοῦ, for ἀδελφεόο,
see Εἰ 21.

62. αἴσιμα : there are very few cases
in the poems of a moral judgment of the
poet upon the acts of his characters.
Against the present one we may set the
κακὰ φρεσὶ μήσατο ἔργα of the human
sacrifice in Ψ 176.

68. ἐπιβαλλόμενος, “throwing himself
upon” the spoil, half in a physical, half
in a metaphorical sense. For the gen.
Ameis compares x 310, ᾿Οδυσῆος ἐπεσσύ-
μενος. The word occurs in later Greek,
e.g. Aristot. Pol. 1, 9, 16, rod εὖ ζῆν ἐπιβ.,
with the purely mental sense, ‘‘ desire
eagerly’’; like ἐπέσσνται A 173.

71. συλήσετε, a potential fut., with
double acc. like all similar verbs. Zenod.
read Τρώων au πεδίον συλήσομεν ἔντεα
νεκρῶν : on what authority of course we
cannot say.

73-4 = P 319-820. ὑπό, see I 61.
Schol. B for once shews a touch of
humour: ““λίαν olde τὸ τῆς εἱμαρμένης ὁ
ποιητής.᾽" |

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Z (v1)

203

Πριαμίδης "EXevos, οἰωνοπόλων by’ ἄριστος"
ἐς Aé ’ “ἘΠ 3 ΝΜ 4
ἱνεία τε καὶ “Exrop, ἔπεὶ πόνος ὕμμι μάλιστα
Τρώων καὶ Λυκίων ἐγκέκλιται, οὕνεκ᾽ ἄριστοι
πᾶσαν ἐπ᾽ ἰθύν ἐστε μάχεσθαί τε φρονέειν τε,
OTHT αὐτοῦ, καὶ λαὸν ἐρυκάκετε πρὸ πυλάων 80
πάντῃ ἐποιχόμενοι, πρὶν αὖτ᾽ ἐν χερσὶ γυναικῶν
φεύγοντας πεσέειν, δηίοισι δὲ χάρμα γενέσθαι.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεί κε φάλαγγας ἐποτρύνητον ἁπάσας,
ἡμεῖς μὲν Δαναοῖσι μαχησόμεθ᾽ αὖθι μένοντες,
καὶ μάλα τειρόμενοί wep: ἀναγκαίη γὰρ ἐπείγει" 85
“KR 3 ὰ \ 4 / > Δ >
KTop, ἀτὰρ σὺ πόλινδε μετέρχεο, εἰπὲ δ᾽ ἔπειτα
μητέρι σῇ καὶ ἐμῇ" ἡ δὲ ξυνάγουσα γεραιὰς
νηὸν ᾿Αθηναίης γλαυκώπιδος ἐν πόλει ἄκρῃ,
Ν a 4 ς a ἢ»
οἴξασα κληΐῖδι θύρας ἱεροῖο δόμοιο,
πέπλον, ὅς οἱ δοκέει χαριέστατος ἠδὲ μέγιστος 90
4 > lA e \ > A
εἶναι évl μεγάρῳ καί οἱ πολὺ φίλτατος αὐτῇ,
θεῖναι ᾿Αθηναίης ἐπὶ γούνασιν ἠυκόμοιο,

76. οἰωνοπόλων Sy” ἄριστος (υ. A 69)
so MSS.: but the Schol. A (Didymus)
says that Ammonius alleged as the read-
ing of Aristarchos μάντις τ᾽ οἰωνοπόλος
re, and adds ἔργον δὲ rd σαφὲς εἰπεῖν" διὸ
διχῶς (1.6. this is to be recorded as a
variant of Aristarchos).

79. ἰθύν, cf. ὃ 434, οἷσι μάλιστα werol-
Gea πᾶσαν ἐπ᾽ ἰθύν, for every enterprise,
lit. ‘‘ going.”

82. πεσέειν implies tumultuous rout ;
compare the frequent but sometimes
ambiguous phrase ἐν νηυσὶ πεσέεσθαι,
where the confused rush to the ships
seems to be sometimes that of the victors,
sometimes of the vanquished: B 175
(q.v.), I 285, A 311, M 107, P 639.
χερσὶ γυναικῶν, ironical of course.

83. ἐπεί xe with aor. subj. = fr.
ecactus, as A 191, Ψ 10, σ 150.

86. ἀτὰρ σύ, for the order cf. 429, π

130.

88. νηόν, sc. to the temple. Cf. ὅσοι
κεκλήατο βουλήν, Καὶ 195.

90. ὅς all MSS. and Herodian: most
edd. write 8 on account of the F of For,
and there can be little doubt that this is
right. Nearly all the other cases of ol
for ἔοι can be set right by slight altera-
tion, but see note on E 338. The men-
tion of the peplos cirries our thoughts
to the Panathenaic festival at Athens.
But the idea of propitiating divinities
by clothing their images with costly robes

is not only one of the most natural and
universal of primitive cults, but survives
in full force to the present day in many
parts even of Western Europe. It was
particularly appropriate to the goddess
who presided over feminine handiwork,
including weaving, cf. E 735. It is
therefore quite futile to seek for Athenian
inspiration in the present passage.
Compare Pausan. iii. 16, 2, ὑφαίνουσι δὲ
κατὰ Eros al γυναῖκες τῷ ᾿Απόλλωνι χιτῶνα
τῷ ἐν ᾿Αμύκλαις, and v. 16, 2, διὰ πέμπτου
δὲ ὑφαίνουσιν ἔτους τῇ Ἥρᾳ πέπλον al
ἑκκαίδεκα γυναῖκες (in Olympia).

The appeal to Athene is made not
because she is the special] guardian of
Troy, but because she is recognized as
the protector and strength of Diomedes ;
only through her can his valour be
abated. The title of ἐρυσίπτολις (805)
is general. In virtue of her warlike
nature she is the guardian of citadels,
where her temple stands.

92, The words ἐπὶ γούνασι seem to
imply a seated image; that is, a rude
wooden ξόανον such as survived in many
Greek temples to historic times. Later
legend connected such an image, the
Palladium, with the fate of Troy. In
view of the objection that such Palladia
were always standing, not sitting, figures,
Schol. B after explaining ἐπί as = παρά,
which is obviously wrong, quotes the
authority of Strabo —who says that

204

LAIAAOS Ζ (v1)

καί οἱ ὑποσχέσθαι δυοκαίδεκα βοῦς ἐνὶ νηῷ
ἤνις ἠκέστας ἱερευσέμεν, αἴ κ᾽ ἔλεήσῃ
ἄστυ τε καὶ Τρώων ἀλόχους καὶ νήπια τέκνα, 95
ai κεν Τυδέος υἱὸν ἀπόσχῃ ᾽Ιλίου ἱρῆς,
ἄγριον αἰχμητήν, κρατερὸν μήστωρα φόβοιο,
ὃν δὴ ἐγὼ κάρτιστον ᾿Αχαιῶν φημὶ γενέσθαι.
οὐδ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆά ποθ᾽ ὧδέ γ᾽ ἐδείδιμεν, ὄνχαμον ἀνδρῶν,

ὅν πέρ φασι θεᾶς ἐξέμμεναι" ἀλλ᾽ ὅδε λίην

100

μαίνεται, οὐδέ τίς οἱ δύναται μένος ἰσοφαρίζειν.᾽"
ὧς ἔφαθ᾽, “Ἑκτωρ δ᾽ οὔ τι κασιγνήτῳ ἀπίθησεν.
> > 2 > ἢ \ ’ a
αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἐξ ὀχέων σὺν τεύχεσιν ἄλτο yapate,
lA > Ἀφ. na A \ Μ a,
πάλλων δ᾽ ὀξέα δοῦρα κατὰ στρατὸν ᾧχετο πάντῃ

ὀτρύνων μαχέσασθαι, ἔγειρε δὲ φύλοπιν αἰνήν.

105

οἱ δ᾽ ἐλελίχθησαν καὶ ἐναντίοι ἔσταν ᾿Αχαιῶν"
᾿Αργεῖοι δ᾽ ὑπεχώρησαν, λῆξαν δὲ φόνοιο,

φὰν δέ rw’ ἀθανάτων ἐξ οὐρανοῦ ἀστερόεντος
Τρωσὶν ἀλεξήσοντα κατελθέμεν: ὧς ἐλέλεχθεν.

“Ἕκτωρ δὲ Τρώεσσιν ἐκέκλετο μακρὸν ἀύσας"

110

“ Τρῶες ὑπέρθυμοι τηλεκλειτοί τ᾽ ἐπίκουροι,
ἀνέρες ἔστε, φίλοι, μνήσασθε δὲ θούριδος ἀλκῆς,

!

ancient sitting images of Athene were
found in Phokaia, Massalia, Rome, Chios,
and several other places. Mr. Ramsay
has found such archaic sitting figures in
Phrygia (J. H. S. iii. 48), θεῖναι : the
only instance in H. of the infin. for
imper. in the 3d person with its subject
in the nom. (ἡ, 87): as they are so
distant from one another, it may be
questioned if we ought not to assume an
anacoluthon ; 1.6. that when the poet
began with ἡ he was thinking of con-
tinuing with θέτω. See note on I' 285.
94. #vis according to the old expl.
from vos (émavrés), ‘‘one year old.”
It is now referred by Gobel, followed by
Ameis, to a root dy ‘to shine,” cf. ἤνοψ,
but the existence of such a root is doubt-
ful. Diintzer derives from ἄνω, as if =
perfect, τέλειος, The word occurs only
in this connexion (cf. y 382), so that the
question cannot be solved. ἠἠκέστας,
not having felt the goad. The ἡ must
represent an original ἄ- lengthened as in
ἀθάνατος, ἠγάθεος (see A 252), etc., by
the ictus. The word occurs only here.
96. For at κεν Ar. read ὥς κεν, just as
in τ 83 he read ἤν πως for μή πως, where
it was preceded by another μή πως. As

Hentze on τ 83 points out, he seems to
have done this in both cases in order to
bring the second clause into logical
subordination, sacrificing the vigorous
but less formal parataxis given by the
repetition of the particles.

101. For οὐδέ τίς of and ἰσοφαρίζειν
most edd. now read οὔ ris of and ἀντιφερί-
few after Bentley on account of the double
neglect of the digamma. It must how-
ever be confessed that the former change
at all events is not entirely satisfactory.

104. For δοῦρα we should have ex-
pected δοῦρε, which Bekker gives against
all MSS. : cf. A 43. Two is the regular
number for the Homeric warrior : it is
strange that a schol. of Porphyrios on
Γ 379 quotes this very line as evidence
of the fact.

109. ds ἐλέλιχθεν ἀντὶ τοῦ οὕτως
ἐλέλιχθεν, Nikanor. Cf. 166 οἷον ἄκου-
σεν, and note on Δ 157. There is no
reason for taking ὡς in a temporal or
causal sense. ιχθεν and ἐλελίχθησαν
above should, as elsewhere, be éFeA: see
on A 530.

112. Zenod. read this line ἀνέρες ἔστε
Bool καὶ ἀμύνετον ἄστεϊ λώβην. It certainly

_seems more probable that this should

ΊΛΙΑΔΟΣ Z (v1)

ὄφρ᾽ ἂν ἐγὼ βήω προτὶ ἤϊλιον ἠδὲ γέρουσιν

εἴπω βουλευτῇσι καὶ ἡμετέρῃς ἀλόχοισιν

δαίμοσιν ἀρήσασθαι, ὑποσχέσθαι δ᾽ ἑκατόμβας." 11ὅ
ὧς ἄρα φωνήσας ἀπέβη κορυθαίολος “Extap:

ἀμφὶ δέ μιν σφυρὰ τύπτε καὶ αὐχένα δέρμα κελαινόν,

Μ 4 / 3 3 /

ἄντυξ ἣ πυμάτη θέεν ἀσπίδος ὀμφαλοέσσης.
Γλαῦκος δ᾽ [Ἱππολόχοιο πάις καὶ Τυδέος υἱὸς

ἐς μέσον ἀμφοτέρων συνίτην μεμαῶτε μάχεσθαι. 120

οἱ δ᾽ ὅτε δὴ σχεδὸν ἦσαν ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλοισιν ἰόντες,

τὸν πρότερος προσέειπε βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης"

“ris δὲ σύ ἐσσι, φέριστε, καταθνητῶν ἀνθρώπων ;

οὐ μὲν γάρ ποτ᾽ ὄπωπα μάχῃ ἔνι κυδιανείρῃ

τὸ πρίν" ἀτὰρ μὲν νῦν γε πολὺ προβέβηκας ἁπάντων 125

σῷ θάρσει, ὅ τ᾽ ἐμὸν δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος ἔμεινας.

δυστήνων δέ τε παῖδες ἐμῷ μένει ἀντιόωσιν.

3 ? U 9 > “A 4
εἰ δέ τις ἀθανάτων γε κατ᾽ οὐρανοῦ εἰλήλουθας,
οὐκ ἂν ἐγώ γε θεοῖσιν ἐπουρανίοισι μαχοίμην.
3 ? 4 eN Ἁ 4
οὐδὲ yap οὐδὲ Δρύαντος υἱὸς κρατερὸς Λυκόοργος 180

δὴν ἦν, ὅς ῥα θεοῖσιν ἐπουρανίοισιν ἔριζεν,

ν ’ 4
ὅς ποτε μαινομένοιο Διωνύσοιο τιθήνας

have been altered into the regular formula
than vice versa. Of course for ἀμύνετον
we must read dutvere. This will have
been changed, in order to avoid the
apparent hiatus, by those who believed
that the dual could be used for the plural.
For θοός used in this way cf. Π 422.

114. The word BovAevrfs does not
recur in Homer, but the βουλή was an
integral part of the heroic polity. The
members of it are usually called γέροντες

(υ. on B 53, A 259), and in the case of

the Trojans δημογέροντες, Γ᾿ 149, cf. X
119. They are however not mentioned
in the sequel.

117. For the construction of the
Homeric shield see J. H. 8, iv. 268.
The hides of which the body was formed
were turned up at the outer edge of the
_ shield to form a rim, and so prevent any

friction against the edge of the metal
facing. This rim is the dyrvgé Hector
walks with his shield hanging—probably
at his back—by the τελαμών. TH
does not imply, as some have thought,
that there was more than one ἄντυξ, any
more than πρῶτος ῥυμός (40) implies more
than one pole.

120. ἀμφοτέρων, the two armies. But

A gives ἀμφοτέρω, and all the Alex-
andrian critics seem to have read ἰόντε
in the next line.

124. The omission of the object is
rather awkward: hence van Herwerden
and Nauck insert σ᾽ after μάχῃ.

130. The legend said that the contest
arose when Dionysos was bringing to
Europe the orgiastic mysteries of Phrygia.
Lykurgos was king of the Edones, see
Soph. Ant. 955. Pausanias (vii. 18, 3)
mentions a similar legend as current at
Patrae (Διόνυσον ἐνταῦθα ἐπιβουλευθέντα
ὑπὸ Τιτάνων ἐς παντοῖον ἀφικέσθαι κίν-
δυνον). Both are evidently reminiscences
of opposition offered to the introduction
of a new and foreign worship. For
οὐδὲ γὰρ οὐδὲ cf. B 703, Ε 22. MSS. are
divided between the forms Λυκόοργος and
-epyos: the latter seems more correct,
but the balance of evidence is in favour
of the former. So in the oracle in Herod.
iL 65.

131. δήν = δηναιός, E 407: for the use
of εἰμί with adverbs v. A 416.

132. τιθήνας : this title recals the
maenads of later Dionysos-worship. It
appears to have had a peculiar mystic
significance, from the words of Soph. O.

206

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Ζ (vr)

a > 9 4 4 e > ow ry
σεῦε κατ᾽ ἠγάθεον Νυσήιον" ai δ᾽ ἅμα πᾶσαι
θύσθλα χαμαὶ κατέχευαν, ὑπ᾽ ἀνδροφόνοιο Λυκούργον

θεινόμεναι βουπλῆγι: Διώνυσος δὲ φοβηθεὶς

185

δύσεθ᾽ ἁλὸς κατὰ κῦμα, Θέτις δ᾽ ὑπεδέξατο κόλπῳ
δειδιότα" κρατερὸς γὰρ ἔχε τρόμος ἀνδρὸς ὁμοκλῇ.
[δ Ν > 307 eC a 4
τῷ μὲν ἔπειτ᾽ ὀδύσαντο θεοὶ ῥεῖα ζώοντες,
καί μιν τυφλὸν ἔθηκε Κρόνου πάις" οὐδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔτι δὴν

3 2 ld 3 / a A
ἦν, ἐπεὶ ἀθανάτοισιν ἀπήχθετο πᾶσι θεοῖσιν.

140

οὐδ᾽ ἂν ἐγὼ μακάρεσσι θεοῖς ἐθέλοιμι μάχεσθαι.

εἰ δέ τίς ἐσσι βροτῶν, οἱ ἀρούρης καρπὸν ἔδουσιν,

ἄσσον ἴθ᾽, ὥς κεν θᾶσσον ὀλέθρου πείραθ᾽ ἵκηαι."
τὸν δ᾽ αὖθ᾽ Ἵππολόχοιο προσηύδα φαίδιμος υἱός"

“ Τυδεΐδη μεγάθυμε, τί ἢ γενεὴν ἐρεείνεις ;

145

οἵη περ φύλλων γενεή, τοίη δὲ καὶ ἀνδρῶν.
φύλλα τὰ μέν τ᾽ ἄνεμος χαμάδις χέει, ἄλλα δέ θ᾽ ὕλη
τηλεθόωσα φύει, ἔαρος δ᾽ ἐπυγίγνεται ὥρη"
ὧς ἀνδρῶν γενεὴ ἡ μὲν φύει, ἡ δ᾽ ἀπολήγει.

C. 1050, ποτνίαι σεμνὰ τιθηνοῦνται τέλη
θνατοῖσιν. The maenads typified the
nymphs who nursed Dionysos at his
birth: Hymn. Hom. xxvi. The word
μαινάς occurs once in H., in a simile—X
460. Dionysos is mentioned again in
the Iliad in & 325, and in the Od. A
825, cf. w 74; all probably passages of
later origin. It is therefore not im-
probable that 130-141 are an interpola-
tion; to this conclusion the virtual re-
petition of 129 in 141 strongly points.
138. Νυσήιον : the sacred mountain
of Nysa was an integral part of the
Dionysos legend, and was no doubt
brought into etymological connexion with
the name of the god. It can hardly have
been a real mountain, as the usual tradi-
tion placed it in India, while here it is in
Thrace, where the name was given toa
district in Helikon. Schol. A moreover
mentions several other sites, including an
island in the Nile (as Hymn. Hom. xxxiv.
9), so that Nysa evidently went where-
ever the cultus was localised. θύσθλα
is another word whose exact meanin
can hardly be ascertained. It woul
naturally mean the thyrsi, but the
Scholia explains it of various other ob-
jects of mystic significance: οἱ μὲν τοὺς
κλάδους, of δὲ ἀμπέλους, οἱ δὲ τοὺς θύρσους,
τούτεστι τὰς Baxxixds δράκας, & ἐστι
Διονυσιακὰ μυστήρια" ἔνιοι δὲ πάντα κοινῶς

τὰ πρὸς τὴν τελετήν. (This sense of δράξ

is not mentioned by L. and 3.) The
same may be said of βουπλήξ, which
does not again occur in Homer, and is
explained either as ‘‘ ox-goad,” or ‘‘ pole-
axe,” in which sense later writers use it.
It may possibly have some mystical con-
nexion with ταῦρος as a name of Dionysos.

136. The line is evidently modelled
on Σ 398. For φοβηθείς above Zenod.
read χολωθείς, which is obviously less
appropriate.

138. θεοὶ ῥεῖα ζώοντες, an Odyssean
phrase ; ὃ 805, ε 122, τυφλός is a word
of later Greek: ἀλαός is the Homeric
word.

148. πείρατα, a doubtful expression :
either ‘‘the uttermost bounds,” like
τέλος θανάτοιο: or ‘‘the bonds,” lit.
ropes (cf. u 51, 162). See on H 402.

146. τοίη δέ, with δέ in apodost, is the
reading of Ar. and the best MSS.

148. δέ here= when. For ὥρη A
gives ὥρῃ, which was the reading of
Aristophanes. The subject will of course
then be φύλλα, ““ they succeed in spring-
time.” Aristoph. also read τηλεθόωντα.

149. φύει seems to be intrans., though
there is no other instance of such a use
in Homer, and it appears specially harsh
after the transitive in the preceding line.
Moschos and Theokritos both use φύοντε
as intrans., perhaps in imitation of this
passage. It is of course possible to
translate ‘‘brings forth children,” but

Ἂ

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Z (vt)

εἰ δ᾽ ἐθέλεις, καὶ ταῦτα δαήμεναι, ὄφρ᾽ ἐὺ εἰδῇς

207

180

ἡμετέρην γενεήν" πολλοὶ δέ μιν ἄνδρες ἴσασιν'
ἔστι πόλις ᾿Εφύρη μυχῷ "Αργεος ἱπποβότοιο,
ἔνθα δὲ Σίσυφος ἔσκεν, ὃ κέρδιστος γένετ᾽ ἀνδρῶν,
Σίσυφος Αἰολίδης" ὁ δ᾽ ἄρα Τλαῦκον τέκεθ᾽ υἱόν,

αὐτὰρ Γλαῦκος ἔτικτεν ἀμύμονα Βελλεροφόντην.

τῷ δὲ θεοὶ κάλλος τε καὶ ἠνορέην ἐρατεινὴν
ὦπασαν᾽" αὐτάρ οἱ IIpotros κακὰ μήσατο θυμῷ,
ὅς ῥ᾽ ἐκ δήμου ἔλασσεν, ἐπεὶ πολὺ φέρτερος ἦεν,
᾿Αργείων" Ζεὺς γάρ οἱ ὑπὸ σκήπτρῳ ἐδάμασσεν.

a \ / b / Ἦν
τῷ δὲ γυνὴ Προίτου ἐπεμήνατο, δῖ᾽ “Avresa,

160

κρυπταδίῃ φιλότητι μυγήμεναι" ἀλλὰ τὸν οὔ τι
πεῖθ᾽ ἀγαθὰ φρονέοντα, δαΐφρονα Βελλεροφόντην.

this to a certain extent destroys the
symmetry of the comparison. In any
case the idea is the same: ‘‘one genera-
tion is in full vigour while another is
dying out.” The reading of Alexio, ἡμέν
. . . ἠδέ, hardly deserves consideration.

150. δαήμεναι, infin. for imper., with
the punctuation of the text, which is
that of Nikanor. It is perhaps better to
leave out the comma after ἐθέλεις, and

phrase ‘‘but suppose you wish to
foarn this also.” The assumption of an
omitted apodosis is unnecessary. Fora
similar ambiguity cf. 487, ο 78.

151. This line looks as though it were
merely added. to supply an object to
εἰδῇς. The neglect of the F of Ficac: is
suspicious, and Nauck is probably right
in bracketing it.

152. Ar. pointed out that Homer uses
the old name ᾿Εφύρη in the mouth of
the hero, though in his own person he
says Κόρινθος (B 570, N 664). μνχῷ
“Apyeos, 1.6. in the corner of the Pelo-
ponnese. So y 263. For this sense of
Apyos v. B 287, Γ' 75, etc.

153. κέρδιστος, craftiest, as » 291,
κερδαλέος.

155. It will be observed that the act.
and mid. of rixrw are applied indiffer-
ently to the father ; so also of the mother,
e.g. Β 728 and 742.

157. According to the legend given
by the Schol., Bellerophon, who was
originally called ‘Imwévoos, got his name
from slaying one BéAdepos, a prince in
Corinth. Being exiled for blood-guilti-
ness he came to Argos (or Tiryns) to
seek purification from King Proitos.
But this of course is not Homeric, the

idea of purification for blood being alto-
gether later.

158-9. These lines appear to anticipate
the sequel, the ‘‘ driving from the land”
meaning the errand to Lykia. The
object of ἐδάμασσε may be either 'Ap-
γείους or Βελλεροφόντην, 1.6. either “ Zeus
had made P. ki of Argos,” or ‘‘ Zeus
had brought Bellerophon under the

wer of P.” by making him an exile
leg. on account of homicide) from his
own country. The latter alternative
gives the more vigorous sense, and the
variant pw for oi, which is found in
several MSS., thus, though only a gloss,
appears to be a correct one. Perhaps
the old reading was ὁ δάμασσε (or F
ἐδάμασσε). ᾿Αργείων is gen. after δήμου :
for φέρτερος in this phrase is always used
absolutely, and φέρτερος ᾿Αργείων in the
sense of ‘‘ prince over the Argives” would
be quite un-Homeric: it means that
Proitos was in a position of power over
Bellerophon.

160. Αντεια, called Σθενέβοια in the
later legend. Sta is used also of Kly-
taimnestra, in a purely formal sense im-
plying no moral approval, γ 266: cf. Γ
352

162. ἀγαθά here only in Homer ap-
proaches our word ‘‘ good” in the moral
sense. Even here the idea seems to be
‘“‘being of an excellently wise disposi-
tion,” φρεσὶ γὰρ κέχρητ ἀγαθῇσι: for
ἀγαθός in Homer regularly implies “ that
which is good of its kind. ”'s the idea of
an absolute standard of moral virtue,
which is connoted by our phrases, ‘‘a
good man,” ‘‘a good deed,” and the
like, is later than Homer.

ba Js

- es , a --οὐ COE

a on 4 “". ᾿Ξ πα ὦ δ- 3.5: = OOD TF".
Pg Oa ge ete τα £e+ 00. :
-- oo - σ΄ “ΠῚ | . ws. (Δ fort”
~ -O eo ge” og ee od See ee - = 2

i i a προΠΕυ͵ mr Pare ~
“.“ 1, 5° “τῷ| πα πὶ eT στ.

» oo —_
aan et Aw Ft Pe ee ee eee

Ζ2Ζ:., 5, “: OL 1

i at oe LY)

La, Se τὸ

= Bi Irs *

‘. “ ιάς, ~
. “΄, “ ΄ . "ΠΣ
, » o aA
, ‘
ay Ζ a ey “ “, ΄ "
“π΄ ee cr. τὸν γ
“oo, f ae ΄ rook »
te ° oe 4 ,". 22:5 ~
a, od , ." oe » oe,
“΄ 432.» Gomera Υ̓ τ»
fee eae λων. Φ-«-.- a a 2
"-. “ΨΦ νυ κε 1 tae = ° v .4“ 1.
τὴ, 2.449. a "΄ a a ἐν a ar at «
. 7 “ 42 δ ικλον ne Le
8p) Agha κ΄ OS OD Te gta
‘oe este " tet a -.. ee 7
| “ὖᾷϑῷὃ .2 4 Ὁ Τχ πὰ
ν, αν 7 Sei 9. 4" “uf, “te @ s
2 A dl 211 τ τῶν wy 40
ene εὔῇ 227.“ a " ΄" ? Pa dots oe Σ᾽ Ad
or . 14 oe ‘fs’ Jeena yt "as ha 27

Se | ee ee ee A φ4“ aos, ᾿ “τόμ

+147
Pr τε ' ee 27, "δ ἃ fac... | ees
ἌΣ ΣΝ ry 4 , ᾽ζ “ὃ τ΄ν»΄
4 μὰ 0 ne Ve titel wth 82d Sear se
9} αν Weel te ce tages PAS WAZ:

te, 4° @
epee bale af mene thr foe tite a eBerra
in 6}

mo tee egene wl [“““ ce,

fy epee , in Κ, 47% a aT

'μ peed ater, pA pqenes Vipin,
dete de creat [ἡ μι} {4, i bieresestetite ἃ
{ἘΞ}, beeetende Aye: uf WiITing
bepereined gy clint we ἀμ Μ] εὐ pest, at the
radieod nba TH head; © αν} με of
Gb ee fede ageae 4 ΜΗ ΝΗ} uf COMIN Ἂν
pire ἀμ contador families Stern Ania
AV 14. Perl γεν ΜΗ μα΄ fe have
poe tah Che κα θα af n wylinbary in
Avda Mine opulle Tndopendent of the

Ι. ""

LL τὰ Τὸν να "ὁ τασασαπεγα 7
“Ὁ τ τὸν τ τ Ὡς OF LO
Pot er or ee Te oes :ῃυῳἮἝὀ ὠ κζἠ1{ἧζ-
nS ΖΞ τ ieee Oda
we LE DP Ee πο ῖξτ--
tne τ τ ODOT eee πρὶ -
Joo tee ΣᾺ LW τ πὶ ας τ: τὸ :
Tes πὰ eee ee
eu? Le VS ets lie 'πὶ
-π σ᾿ τω 2 2 ὭΣ. τ: Ξ OS a

Dole STI Tie ΤΣ πτπὸῖῆσ πὸ : Ξ-
ΤΣ CRSUR AD a ἃ ὭΞ Smee tem
πιὰ στ lee Ee em τὸῊ Omar

. τα Ξ Deak “AMOS
of mer Σ Ξ-

jc Qe OT (ΠῚ st olen
Sacer” Ἐ ΩΣ Tire WU sie, imal aed
wes

(7 pve κ΄. 3 et τ ba,
vet Deiaaet IW Lie acer gem
ats 28 8 ates Wl (ὃ τ χ 5 χ s,
ie ot To ee Poe ταῖς. ἐστ JS
TICS. Tit ΤΡ τ τὸ :

--
23m

SA74 τῷ»
bob get ow Lair lsistems word

τε ὠνῆμαρ, 125. veewlar ecm
ΣΙ ΣΤ ἀθῚΣ Bocer. ἸΏΣΞΗΣ Ἐς Feary as
ΤΕΣ ἐπ τεσ: -
sett if κα cut tefore Ἐπ ΣῈ bis
eas Wh 22 ποθ ῖδὶ condition οὗ
κτλ Δ in Jars when τ Was an even
race that a tan might be an enemy,
wy, that 22 enquiry itself πα be a
rack of suspicion. 80 yr ally ask of
Alxinoss Odysseus is ne not hi y asked
hia name till the ᾿ y OF Nis sojourn
(9 550), and even gmpler questions are
oven 6 first day till he

im 08
not pu to ἐδ κά (7 238).

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Z (Ὁ) 909

καὶ τότε μιν ἐρέεινε καὶ ἤτεε σῆμα ἰδέσθαι,

ὅττι ῥά οἱ γαμβροῖο πάρα IIpolroto φέροιτο.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ δὴ σῆμα κακὸν παρεδέξατο γαμβροῦ,
πρῶτον μέν ῥα Χίμαιραν ἀμαιμακέτην ἐκέλευσεν

πεφνέμεν.

ἡ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔην θεῖον γένος οὐδ᾽ ἀνθρώπων,

180

πρόσθε λέων, ὄπιθεν δὲ δράκων, μέσση δὲ χίμαιρα,
δεινὸν ἀποπνείουσα πυρὸς μένος αἰθομένοιο.

καὶ τὴν μὲν κατέπεφνε θεῶν τεράεσσι πιθήσας"
δεύτερον αὖ Σολύμοισι μαχήσατο κυδαλίμοισιν"

καρτίστην δὴ τήν γε μάχην φάτο δύμεναι ἀνδρῶν.

185

\ / φ / . 3 4 3 ’
τὸ τρίτον av κατέπεφνεν Apalovas ἀντιανείρας.
a ’
τῷ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἀνερχομένῳ πυκινὸν δόλον ἄλλον ὕφαινεν"
κρίνας ἐκ Λυκίης εὐρείης φῶτας ἀρίστους
’ 3 ww 4 > 4
εἷσε λόχον" τοὶ δ᾽ ov τι πάλιν οἰκόνδε νέοντο"

πάντας γὰρ κατέπεφνεν ἀμύμων Βελλεροφόντης.

190

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ γίγνωσκε θεοῦ γόνον ἠὺν ἐόντα,
3 A , a , ef
αὐτοῦ μιν κατέρυκε, δίδου δ᾽ ὅ ye θυγατέρα jy,

176. σῆμα is slightly different from
the σήματα of 168, and signifies the
tessera hospitalis as a whole, apart from
the marks which determined its signifi-
cance. tro: the use of the middle
is unusual, but clearly means ‘‘ brought
for his own behoof.” To take it asa pass.
would be entirely un-Homeric.

179. ἀμαιμάκετος is one of the many
obscure epithets of Homer: cf. II 328.
It is used again of the mast of a ship in
a storm, ξ 311. The old interpretation
was ἄμαχος. It is better referred to
μαιμάσσω (from pax, a secondary form of
μα-} in the sense ‘‘ furious,’’ ‘‘ raging.”

180. θεῖον γένος, according to the
legend in Hesiod the offspring of Typhon
and Echidna.

181. This line is remarkable as being
the only case where Homer formall
recognizes the mixed monsters whic

lay such a prominent part in later

reek mythology. Even here he makes
no mention of the winged horse Pegasos,
who is an integral portion of the legend
in Pindar (Ol. xiii.), unless a reference
to him be found in θεῶν τεράτεσσι, which
may mean anything (cf. A 398). It is
therefore highly probable that 181-2 are
an interpolation from Hesiod (Theog.
323-4).

184. Σολύμοισι, cf. ¢ 283, Herod, i.
178, identifies them with the Milyai, the
original inhabitants of Lykia: according

P

to Strabo (i. 12, 10) and Pliny (H. N. v.
27) this would seem to have been the
general name for the Semitic inhabitants
of Southern Asia Minor, the Milyai,
Kabali, and Pisidians being subordinate
divisions. It is a natural inference from
the passage in the Odyssey that they had
been driven to the mountains by the
invading Lykians (who, acc. to Herod.,
came from Crete), and were in a state
of chronic feud with them.

186. For the Amazons see I’ 189.

187-190. These lines have rather the
appearance of an interpolation imitated
from A 392 sqq., a which may
have suggested itself at this point to
some rhapsode’s mind owing to the
recurrence there of the phrase θεῶν
τεράεσσι πιθήσας in 183. πυκινὸν δόλον
looks like a reminiscence of πυκινὸν λόχον
in A, where the adjective is used in a
different sense. ndeed A _ actually
reads λόχον here (corrected in margin).
The object of Iobates was to avoid him-
self ki ing Bellerophon, his guest.

191. γίγνωσκε, began to perceive.
θεοῦ γόνον, because according to the
legend (which Pindar follows, Ol. xiii.
69) he was in reality the son of Poseidon.

192. δίδου, offered: the imperf. is
somewhat more picturesque than the
following δῶκε, as it brings before us in
connexion with γίγνωσκε above the
gradual opening of the king’s eyes,

210

IAIAAO® Ζ (v1)

δῶκε δέ of τιμῆς βασιληΐδος ἥμισυ πάσης"
καὶ μέν οἱ Λύκιοι τέμενος τάμον ἔξοχον ἄλλων,

καλὸν φυταλιῆς καὶ ἀρούρης, ὄφρα νέμοιτο.

195

ἡ δ᾽ ἔτεκε τρία τέκνα δαΐφρονι Βελλεροφόντῃ,
᾿σανδρόν τε καὶ ᾿ἱππόλοχον καὶ Λαοδάμειαν"
Λαοδαμείῃ μὲν παρελέξατο μητίετα Ζεύς,

ἡ δ᾽ ἔτεκ᾽ ἀντίθεον Σαρπηδόνα χαλκοκορυστήν.

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ καὶ κεῖνος ἀπήχθετο πᾶσι θεοῖσιν,

200

} τοι ὁ Kam πεδίον τὸ ᾿Αλήιον οἷος ἀλᾶτο
ὃν θυμὸν κατέδων, πάτον ἀνθρώπων ἀλεείνων,
Ἴσανδρον δέ οἱ υἱὸν “Apns ὦτος πολέμοιο

Z Σολύμοισι κατέκτανε κυδαλίμοισιν
μαρνάμενον μο μοιίσιν,

τὴν δὲ χολωσαμένη χρυσήνιος Αρτεμις ἔκτα.

Ἱππόλοχος δ᾽ ἔμ᾽ ἔτικτε, καὶ ἐκ τοῦ φημὶ γενέσθαι"

whereas δῶκε merely states a fact. With
198 cf. I 616.

194. τέμενος, a grant of public land,
apparently in gratitude for his services
against the Solymoi. Cf. I 578, T 184.

195. ὄφρα νέμοιτο, so most MSS. ;
but A and others have πυροφόροιο as M
314, where the line recurs.

199. Arist. remarked that the Homeric
genealogy of Sarpedon differs from that
afterwards current (e.g. Herod. i. 173),
according to which Minos and Sarpedon
were sons of Europa.

200-2. These lines interrupt the narra-
tion, and Kochly considers them inter-
polated, though there is no obvious
reason why they should have been
inserted here. καί seems to indicate
that they belong to another context, for
it is not in relation with anything else.
Mr. Monro takes it to be “ even he, whom
they had formerly loved and protected.”
Ameis’s explanation, ‘‘ Bellerophon like
Lykurgos,”’ (140) is too far-fetched, and
Porphyrios’ ‘‘like his children” is open
to the obvious and fatal objection that
the anger of the gods against his children
does not precede but follows. Again, as
the passage stands, τὴν δέ in 205 is too
far separated from its antecedent in 198.
If 200-202 followed 205 there would be
no further difficulty.

201. ᾿Αλήιον, cf. οἱ στρατηγοὶ... . ἀπί-
κοντο τῆς Κιλικίης ἐς τὸ ᾿Αλήιον πεδίον,
Herod. vi. 95. The poet evidently means
to hint an ctymology in the word ἀλᾶτο.
The use of the article is not like Homer :
Bentley conj. τότ᾽.

202. ὃν θυμὸν κατέδων, cf. ει 75 θυμὸν

ἔδοντες, and 2.129 σὴν ἔδεαι κραδίην, where
Schol. A says, Πυθαγόρας παραινεῖ καρδίαν
μὴ ἐσθίειν. There was evidently some
legend of the madness of Bellerophon,
but we know nothing of it from other
sources, cf. Pind. Ol. xiii. 180, διασιγάσο-
μαι 5 αὐτῷ μόρον. Madness has always
been considered a direct infliction of
heaven: so ine 411, when the Kyklopes
think that Polyphemos is mad, they
say γνοῦσόν γ᾽ οὔ πως ἔστι Διὸς μεγάλου
ἀλέασθαι. πάτον ἀνθρώπων, cf. θεῶν
ἀπόεικε κελεύθου, Τ' 406. iy h

205. χρυσήνιος is used only here of
Artemis, 6 285 of Ares (in Soph. O. C.
694 of Aphrodite, and of Hades in
Pindar, according to Pausanias, ix. 28, 4).
Gobel (Lexil. ii. 32) objects to the deri-
vation from ἡνία on the ground that
neither Artemis nor Ares (exc. E 356) is
ever represented by Homer as driving a
chariot. He therefore refers the word
to root αν, to shine, and explains it as
‘‘gold-gleaming”; and in this he is
followed by Ameis-Hentze. But the
existence of root ay in this sense is
very doubtful (cf. ἦνις, Z 94); it is better
to abide by the old interpretation, and
admit that here, as in so many divine
epithets, the exact significance isdoubtful.
κλυτόπωλος as applied to Hades is a very
similar case: see Ε 654. For Artemis
as the bringer of sudden death to women
cf. 428, T 59, A 172, 197, ete. The
Lykian system of descent was through
the mother (Herod. i. 173); hence
Sarpedon as son of the daughter inherits
the xingdom, not Glaukos.

206. δ᾽ &’, so Bekk. and La R.:

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Z (v1)

211

πέμπε δέ μ᾽ ἐς Τροίην, καί μοι μάλα πόλλ᾽ ἐπέτελλεν
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν καὶ ὑπείροχον ἔμμεναι ἄλλων,
μηδὲ γένος πατέρων αἰσχυνέμεν, of μέγ᾽ ἄριστοι
ἔν τ᾽ ᾿Εφύρῃ ἐγένοντο καὶ ἐν Λυκίῃ εὐρείῃ. 210
ταύτης τοι γενεῆς τε καὶ αἵματος εὔχομαι εἶναι."
ὧς φάτο, γήθησεν δὲ βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης.
ἔγχος μὲν κατέπηξεν ἐνὶ χθονὶ πουλυβοτείρῃ,
αὐτὰρ ὁ μειλιχίοισι προσηύδα ποιμένα λαῶν"
“ἣ ῥά νύ μοι ξεῖνος πατρώιός ἐσσι παλαιός" 215
Οἰνεὺς γάρ ποτε δῖος ἀμύμονα Βελλεροφόντην
ξείνισ᾽ ἐνὶ μεγάροισιν ἐείκοσιν ἥματ᾽ ἐρύξας.
οἱ δὲ καὶ ἀλλήλοισι πόρον ξεινήια καλά'
Οἰνεὺς μὲν ζωστῆρα δίδου φοίνικι φαεινόν,
Βελλεροφόντης δὲ χρύσεον δέπας ἀμφικύπελλον, . 220
καί μιν ἐγὼ κατέλειπον ἰὼν ἐν δώμασ᾽ ἐμοῖσιν.
Τυδέα δ᾽ οὐ μέμνημαι, ἐπεί μ᾽ ἔτι τυτθὸν ἐόντα
κάλλιφ᾽, ὅτ᾽ ἐν Θήβῃσιν ἀπώλετο λαὸς ᾿Αχαιῶν.
τῶ νῦν σοὶ μὲν ἐγὼ ξεῖνος φίλος "Αργεῖ μέσσῳ
εἰμΐ, σὺ & ἐν Λυκίῃ, ὅτε κεν τῶν δῆμον ἵκωμαι. 295
ἔγχεα δ᾽ ἀλλήλων ἀλεώμεθα καὶ Se’ ὁμίλου"
πολλοὶ μὲν γὰρ ἐμοὶ Τρῶες κλειτοί τ᾽ ἐπίκουροι

MSS. δέ μ᾽, which is obviously wrong,
as the orthotone form must be used when
an opposition between different persons
is indicated, as here.

208. This famous line recurs in A 784.

211. The lineage of Glaukos was no
doubt an important tenet among the
Asiatic Ionians, some of whom, accord-
ing to Herod. i. 147, had taken his
descendants to be their kings.

213. For the ἐπί of jall MSS. Bekk.
conj. évi, according to the regular Homeric
use, A 378, etc. ; La R. compares Ψ 876
for this use of ἐπί, but that passage is un-
doubtedly spurious.

216. The legend was that Oineus
brought up his grandson Diomedes after
the early death of Tydeus before Thebes
(v. A 378, 409). He is mentioned also
B 641, and in connexion with the story
of Meleager I 535.

219. On staining with purple (crimson)
cf. A 141. The material of the belt is
of course leather.

220. ἀμφικύπελλον, A 584.

221. μιν, neut., cf. « 212 (p 268).
The line of course means “1 still preserve
it as an heirloom.”

222. Τυδέα : this use of the acc. with
μέμνημαι is very unusual in H.: cf. I
527 (τόδε ἔργον), ὦ 122 (τάδε πάντα),
and perhaps Ψ 361 (Ar. δρόμους, MSS.
δρόμου), where the analogy is far from
complete. Heyne suggests that there
may be a pause after Τυδέα, ‘‘as for T.”’
Diomedes means to explain how the
friendship of Bellerophon with Oineus
can be called πατρώιος.

225. τῶν, sc. of the Lykians, a rather
obscure relation. Perhaps the original
reading was ὅν, ‘‘thine,” which Ar.
would not allow to be used of any person
but the third (A 393).

226. The MSS. are equally divided
between ἔγχεα and ἔγχεσι: A has the
former in the text, with the latter written
above it. It seems that Zenod. read
ἔγχεσι δ᾽ ἀλλήλους, Ar. ἔγχεσι δ᾽ ἀλλήλων,
explaining ἀλεώμεθα by φειδώμεθα to
account for its governing a genitive.
But there is no trace of such a con-
struction in H., though the verb is
common enough; we are therefore bound
to acquiesce in the reading of the text.
δι’ ὁμίλου, in the throng as well as on an
occasion like the present ἐν προμάχοισι.

212

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Ζ (v1)

κτείνειν, ὅν κε θεός γε πόρῃ καὶ ποσσὶ κιχείω,
πολλοὶ δ᾽ αὖ σοὶ ᾿Αχαιοὶ ἐναιρέμεν, ὅν κε δύνηαι.

τεύχεα δ᾽ ἀλλήλοις ἐπαμείψομεν, ὄφρα καὶ οἵδε

230

γνῶσιν, ὅτι ξεῖνοι πατρώιοι εὐχόμεθ᾽ εἶναι."

Φ ” 4 > >/

as apa φωνήσαντε καθ᾽ ἵππων attavte
χεῖράς T ἀλλήλων λαβέτην Kal πιστώσαντο.
ἔνθ᾽ αὖτε Γλαύκῳ Κρονίδης φρένας ἐξέλετο Ζεύς,

ὃς πρὸς Τυδείδην Διομήδεα τεύχε᾽ ἄμειβεν

235

χρύσεα χαλκείων, ἑκατόμβοι᾽ ἐννεαβοίων.

Ἕκτωρ δ᾽ ὡς Σκαιάς τε πύλας καὶ φηγὸν ἵκανεν,
ἀμφ᾽ ἄρα μιν Τρώων ἄλοχοι θέον ἠδὲ θύγατρες
εἰρόμεναι παῖδάς τε κασιγνήτους τε ἔτας τε

, e > ν “a wv 3 4
καὶ πόσιας" ὁ δ᾽ ἔπειτα θεοῖς εὔχεσθαι ἀνώγειν

240

πάσας ἑξείης" πολλῇσι δὲ κήδε᾽ ἐφῆπτο.
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ Πριάμοιο δόμον περικαλλέ᾽ ἵκανεν,

228. θεός γε, so best MSS.: Bekker
reads re from inferior sources, But the
two ideas are not to be divided: the
thought really is, ‘‘whom god permits
me to catch.” The ye emphasizes the
touch of modesty, which is consistent
with 129.

233. Cf. 286, B 341, for the clasping
of hands in token of a pledge.

236. For prices calculated in oxen, as
a mere measure of value, cf. a 431, B
449, Ψ 705.

This almost burlesque ending to one of
the most delightful episodes in Homer has

tly exercised critics. Nothing else
in the Iliad or Odyssey can be compared
with it, unless it be the evident satis-
faction with which κερδοσύνη is regarded
(e.g. ν 291 sgg.). On the other hand
generosity between ξεῖνοι is repeatedly
spoken of in terms which shew that the
oet fully entered into the chivalrous
iberality of the heroic age. There is
no ground whatever for rejecting these
three lines as some have wished to do.
They were Homeric in the eyes of Plato
(Symp. 219 A) and Aristotle (Eth. N. v.
9, 7), nor have we any reason for believ-
ing that before that time it was possible
to treat the Homeric poems with ob-
vious levity. We seem therefore to
have an outbreak of conscious and
deliberate humour, which is only so far
isolated that it appears among men and
not, as elsewhere, among the gods.

237. For the oak-tree at the Skaian

gate cf. I 354, A 170, H 22, ᾧ 549.

The two former passages do not exhibit
the variant πύργον for φηγόν, which is
given here by A and other MSS. : it is
therefore best to acquiesce in the text.

239. εἰ ι παῖδας, sc. “about their
sons,” the so-called schema Homericum ;
so K 416, Q 390.

241. For κήδε ἐφῆπτο see Β 15. &-
εἴης does not seem very appropriate ;
hence the old variant, πᾶσι μάλ᾽ for
πάσας, mentioned by Aristonikos. Diint-
zer on this ground rejects the line. The
athetesis might, with Paley, be extended
to 240; the couplet was possibly added
by a rhapsode who considered that the
husbands ought to be named among the
objects of anxiety.

242-250. This is one of the
loci classici on the heroic house: a
subject on which reference may be made
to Prof. Gardner's paper in J. H. S. iii.
264-282, and to the elaborate and on the
whole satisfactory discussion in Buch-
holz, Hom. Realten, ii. pt. 2, pp. 86-
137: the latter is chiefly founded on the
dissertation of Protodikos, de aedibus
Homeri, Leipz. 1877. These are now
supplemented, and in some important
points superseded, by the evidence of Dr.

chliemann’s last excavations, published
in his Ziryns (1886). For the αἴθουσαι
see note on I 472. The position of the
sixty-two θάλαμοι is not easy to explain.
Of the twelve which belonged to the
married daughters, as they are described
as ἔνδοθεν αὐλῆς, it seems to be reasonable
to suppose that they were additions to

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Z (vr)

213

A 4, a
ξεστῆς αἰθούσῃσι τετυγμένον, αὐτὰρ ἐν αὐτῷ

4 > , “ ’
πεντήκοντ᾽ ἔνεσαν θάλαμοι ξἕξεστοῖο λίθοιο,

πλησίον ἀλλήλων δεδμημένοι" ἔνθα δὲ παῖδες

245

κοιμῶντο Πριάμοιο παρὰ μνηστῆῇς ἀλόχοισιν'
κουράων δ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἐναντίοι ἔνδοθεν αὐλῆς
δώδεκ᾽ ἔσαν τέγεοι θάλαμοι ἕξεστοῖο λίθοιο,
πλησίον ἀλλήλων δεδμημένοι" ἔνθα δὲ γαμβροὶ

κοιμῶντο ἸΠριάμοιο παρ᾽ αἰδοίῃς ἀλόχοισιν.

250

ἔνθα οἱ ἠπιόδωρος ἐναντίη ἤλυθε μήτηρ
Λαοδίκην ἐσάγουσα, θυγατρῶν εἶδος ἀρίστην'

the house, built along one wall of the
courtyard, and thus allowing for the
expansion of the family. ne such
appears to have been found at Tiryns in
what Dr. Schliemann calls “the court of
the women’s apartments,” though it is
more probably a separate house. Dr.
Dorpfeld writes ( Tiryns, p. 239): “ Aroom
was built in, which was entered from the
east colonnade. Although its walls are
of the same rubble masonry as the walls
of the palace, and its floor is covered
with a well-smoothed lime concrete, yet
this room must be a later addition, be-
cause it disfigures the court, and shuts up
part of the east colonnade. But it must
also have been built before the destruc-
tion of the citadel.” With regard to
the fifty chambers of the sons the case
is not quite so clear; ἐν αὐτῷ seems to
imply that they were a part of the
original buildings of the house, probably
in the πρόδομος (like the θάλαμος of
Phoinix, I 472), and therefore ‘‘ over
against” those in the αὐλή. τέγεος,
which does not recur in Greek, is ex-
plained by the Scholiasts as trepwos, as
though ‘‘built on the roof.” But this
is hardly likely in the case of chambers
ἔνδοθεν αὐλῆς, where there was no roof.
More probably it means ‘‘ provided with
roofs” to sleep upon, according to the
custom of eastern countries ; this would
imply that they were on a scale of
proper magnificence. This is also in-
dicated by the number fifty, which no
doubt would distinguish the scale of
heroic royalty from that which was
possible for οἷοι viv βροτοί εἰσιν.

It has been suggested that the Trojans
were in the stage of domestic economy
which is known as the “common house”
systein, where a “joint undivided family”
is kept together as a single unit, at
least so long as a common ancestor is

alive. Such a family, however, regularly
includes only the sons and unmarried
daughters ; so that we can see a reason
why the sons here are in the house,
while the married daughters, perhaps
bya special favour, are only accommodated
with lodgings outside the actual δόμος.

In 245 and 249 MSS. vary between
mAnolorandwAnolov. Both are Homeric,
but the latter Tas the evidence of the
similar passages, 115, ξ 14, in its favour.
A in both cases gives πλησίον with ε
written over the ». In 246-250 there is
a similar variation between wap αἰδοί
and παρὰ pynorys: but the evidence 18
in favour of the latter in 246 and the
former in 250 (where Didymos says that
it was the reading of Ar.).

251. ἠπιόδωρος, the explanation of
Apoll. . seems to be right: ἥπια καὶ
προσηνῆ δωρουμένη κατὰ τὴν παιδοτροφίαν,
cf. ἥπια φάρμακα, and ἠπιοδώρου Ἰζύπριδος,
Stesich. fr. 35, 2 (Bergk, p. 985).

252. Λαοδίκην ἰσάγοισα can only
mean ‘‘ bringing in Laodike” with her ;
but there is no significance in such a
description, and the pointless mention
of a κωφὸν πρόσωπον has naturally given
great offence to commentators. More-
over without this line it would be more
natural to suppose that his mother came
out of the house to meet him. Hence
Ar. wrote és ἄγουσα, and: explained πρὸς
Λαοδίκην πορευομένη, comparing els ᾿Αγα-
μέμνονα Ἡ 312 for els used with a person.
But for the intrans. use of ἄγειν he
seems to have brought no authority,
nor is any to be found in Homer, except
the very doubtful ἐξαγαγόντες in H 336.
Many critics consider the line an inter-
polation meant to refer back to Γ 124;
where however it is not Laodike herself,
but Iris in her likeness, who is in the
house of Paris, and therefore (v. 317) out-
side that of Priam.

214

LAIAAO® Z (v1)

a ,
ἔν τ᾽ ἄρα ot φῦ χειρί, ἔπος τ᾽ ἔφατ᾽ ἔκ τ᾽ ὀνόμαζεν"
“τέκνον, τίπτε λιπὼν πόλεμον θρασὺν εἰλήλουθας ;

ἢ μάλα δὴ τείρουσι δυσώνυμοι υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν

255

μαρνάμενοι περὶ ἄστυ, σὲ δ᾽ ἐνθάδε θυμὸς ἀνῆκεν
ἐλθόντ’ ἐξ ἄκρης πόλιος Διὶ χεῖρας ἀνασχεῖν.
ἀλλὰ μέν᾽, ὄφρα κέ τοι μελιηδέα οἶνον ἐνείκω,
ὡς σπείσῃς Διὶ πατρὶ καὶ ἄλλοις ἀθανάτοισιν

nn ΝΜ > A 9 ’
πρῶτον, ἔπειτα δὲ καὐτὸς ὀνήσεαι, αἴ κε πίησθα.

260

ἀνδρὶ δὲ κεκμηῶτι μένος μέγα οἶνος ἀέξει,
ὡς τύνη κέκμηκας ἀμύνων σοῖσιν ἔτῃσιν."

τὴν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα μέγας κορυθαίολος “Exrwp:
“μή μοι οἶνον ἄειρε μελίφρονα, πότνια μῆτερ,

μή μ᾽ ἀπογνιώσῃς μένεος, ἀλκῆς Te λάθωμαι"

265

χερσὶ δ᾽ ἀνίπτοισιν Act λείβειν αἴθοπα οἶνον
ἅξζομαι" οὐδέ πῃ ἔστι κελαινεφέι Κρονίωνι
αἵματι καὶ λύθρῳ πεπαλαγμένον εὐχετάασθαι.
ἀλλὰ σὺ μὲν πρὸς νηὸν ᾿Αθηναίης ἀγελείης

255. Hekabe answers her own question.
Some have taken this and the next line
interrogatively, but ἢ μάλα is never used
in this way: it always expresses a strong
asseveration. Svodvupor, cf. Penelope’s
κακοΐλιον οὐκ ὀνομαστήν τ 260, and M
116 μοῖρα δυσώνυμος.

257. Of course ἐλθόντα goes with
ἐνθάδε, and ἐξ ἄκρης πόλιος with dva-
σχεῖν. For the temples on the citadel see
E 446: the existence of one to Zeus
there perhaps follows from X 172, The
prayer is actually made to Athene, for
the reason given in the note to 90, and
explained by Hector in 277.

258. ὄφρα ke... ἐνείκω, a frst. exactum,
“8111 have brought.” H. G. § 287.

260. MSS. vary between δὲ καὐτός, δὲ
κ᾽ αὐτός, and δέ x’ (xe) αὐτός. La Roche
discusses the question of crasis in Homer,
Hom. Unters. pp. 283-7, and decides in
favour of the first. Crasis in Homer is
established, as far as the Alexandrian
text is concerned, by οὑμός Θ 360,
ωὑτός E 396, ὥριστος τἄλλα οὕνεκα τοὔνεκα,
etc. ; and though κε in the present passage
is possible, yet καί gives a better sense.
In N 734, y 255, ¢ 282, καί alone seems
to be admissible. Cf. also χ᾽ ἡμεῖς B
238. It is not improbable that in all
these cases however the a is really
elided, as not unfrequently in verbal
forms: so we find σ᾽ and μ᾽ for go and

μοι. . The instances are then reduced to
a very small number: for ὥριστος the
metre always allows ὁ ἄριστος, for wiréds
we may read αὐτός or οὗτος, for οὑμός ὁ
ἐμός, or better, as Nauck has suggested,
duds. See Η. 6. § 377.

261. μέγα is probably an adverb =
μεγάλως, rather than a proleptic use of

the adj. = ὥστε μέγα εἶναι. Cf. p 489,
μέγα πένθος ἄεξεν.
202. ‘‘Spurius?” Nauck. The line

is certainly rather flat in this place; and
τύνη elsewhere is always the first word
in the line.

265. The vulg. puts a comma before
and a δ᾽ after μένεος against overwhelm-
ing authority, including that of Ar. and
Plato (μὴ λίαν, ὦ δαιμόνιε, ἀκριβολογοῦ,
μή μ’ ἀπογυιώσῃς μένεος, Crat. 415 A).
In Χ 282 however μένεος ἀλκῆς τε must
go together. Hector was on the level of
the present day in his appreciation of
the disadvantage of stimulants durin
severe fatigue. The simple yudéw is u
in the literal sense ‘‘to lame” in Θ 402,
and the metaphorical ‘‘to weaken” by
Hippokrates. The appropriateness of
the expression here is obvious.

266. ἀνύπτοισιν, so Ar. and all MSS.
but one, which follows Zenod. in readin
dvirryow. Cf. E 466, where Ar. re
ἑυποιητοῖσιν, Zen. ἐνποιητῇσιν.

ὼς

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Ζ (v1)

» \ ’ > 4
ἔρχεο σὺν θνέεσσιν, ἀολλίσσασα yepatas:

215

270

3 Ψ ’ / > /
πεπλον δ᾽, ὅς Tis TOL χαριέστατος ἠδὲ μέγιστος
v 3 4 \ 3 A
ἔστιν ἐνὶ μεγάρῳ καί τοι πολὺ φίλτατος αὐτῇ,

Ἁ 3 2. δ ’ > 4
tov θὲς ᾿Αθηναίης ἐπὶ γούνασιν ἠυκόμοιο,

J e ¢ ’ ’ [οὶ 9 Ἂ

καί οἱ ὑποσχέσθαι δυοκαίδεκα βοῦς ἐνὶ νηῷ
»)Ἤ > f/f e / ¥ 3 4
ἥνις ἠκέστας ἱερευσέμεν, αἴ K ἐλεήσῃ 275
ἄστυ τε καὶ Τρώων ἀλόχους καὶ νήπια τέκνα,

ΝΜ / ΕΝ 3 “ 3 ec a
αἴ κεν Τυδέος υἱὸν ἀπόσχῃ Ἰλίου ἱρῆς,
ἄγριον αἰχμητήν, κρατερὸν μήστωρα φόβοιο.
ἀλλὰ σὺ μὲν πρὸς νηὸν ᾿Αθηναίης ἀγελείης

ἔρχεν, ἐγὼ δὲ Πάριν μετελεύσομαι, ὄφρα καλέσσω,

280

αἴ κ᾽ ἐθέλῃσ᾽ εἰπόντος ἀκουέμεν' ws δέ οἱ αὖθι
γαῖα χάνοι" μέγα γάρ μιν ᾿Ολύμπιος ἔτρεφε πῆμα
Τρωσί τε καὶ Ἰριάμῳ μεγαλήτορι roto τε παισίν.

εἰ κεῖνόν γε ἴδοιμι κατελθόντ᾽ “Ardos εἴσω,
φαίην κεν φίλον ἧτορ ὀιζύος ἐκλελαθέσθαι.᾽"

270. θύεα, apparently “burnt-offerings ”
in the general sense: Homer makes no
mention of incense properly so called,
nor would that suit the compound
θυοσκόος. (It is however possible that
in © 172 ἐλαίῳ τό ῥά οἱ τεθνωμένον. ἦεν
a scented oil may be meant.) The word
recurs I 499, o 261, in the latter case as
a correlative to θύοντα. Cf. Lehrs. Ar.
Ρ. 83, and the commentators on e 60.

271-278. See 90-97.

281. ὥς κέ οἱ, all MSS.: but κε is
absolutely inconsistent with the direct
expression of a wish. The words can
only mean ‘‘In that (or some) case the
earth would swallow him up.” The use
of πῶς ἄν in later Greek (πῶς xe, o 195)
to express a wish is entirely different ;
for there the speaker represents himself
as asking ‘‘in what case would a thin
happen?” His desire that it shoul
happen follows only from the anxiety
with which he seeks for its conditions,
and hence depends entirely on the in-
terrogative form of the sentence. In
short xe necessarily implies some con-
ditioning circumstances, whereas a wish
necessarily excludes them (see Lange,
EI, p. 183). It seems therefore inevitable
that we should read δέ with Bekker. A
similar question arises on o 545, where ef
xe apparently expresses a wish, but Lange
shews that it is really a conditional pro-
tasis: EI pp. 192-4 (particularly note 16),
and H. G. § 800, where this instance

285

might have been mentioned. For yata
χάνοι cf. A 182. αὖθι, on the spot, E
296, etc.

284. "AwWos εἴσω, sc. δόμον : for εἴσω
in the I}. always takes the acc. after it ;
and 'Aldns is a person, not a place, cf. A 3.

285. There are three realings of this
line: (1) that of the text, which is not
given by any MS., but was the reading
of Zenod. ; (2) φρέν᾽ ἄτερ που, instead of
φίλον ἦτορ, A and Aristarchos ; (3) φρέν᾽
dréprov, vulg. with all MSS. but A.
Of these (3) construes, but the form drep-
wos is barbarous. Heyne has remarked
that it is not found in the Lexica of
Apoll. and Hesych. The Homeric form
is ἀτερπής. (2) was explained by Aris-
tarchos as follows :--- δόξαιμι ἂν ἐκλελῆσθαι
τῆς κακοπαθείας καὶ χωρὶς αὐτῆς γεγονέναι"
ἔνιοι δὲ ἀγνοήσαντες γράφουσιν ἀτέρπου,
i.e. “1 should deem that (being) apart
(πον 3) from lamentation I had forgotten
it in my heart.” But for the authority
of Ar. such an elucidation would prob-
ably not have been listened to for a
moment. It can hardly be called Greek,
much less Homeric. The only resource
is to adopt the reading (1): it is quite
impossible tosay whether Zenod.invented
it or found it in old sources; but his
authority is surely enough to give it the
precedence over nonsense, however well
attested. At the same time we must
admit that there remains the problem
how the other reading came into exist-

216

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Z (v1)

ὧς ἔφαθ᾽, ἡ δὲ μολοῦσα ποτὶ μέγαρ᾽ ἀμφιπόλοισιν
κέκλετο" ταὶ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἀόλλισσαν κατὰ ἄστυ γεραιάς.

αὐτὴ δ᾽ ἐς θάλαμον κατεβήσετο κηώεντα,
ἔνθ᾽ ἔσαν οἱ πέπλοι παμποίκιλοι, ἔργα γυναικῶν

Σιδονίων, τὰς αὐτὸς ᾿Αλέξανδρος θεοειδὴς

290

ἤγαγε Σιδονίηθεν, ἐπιπλὼς εὐρέα πόντον,

\ «ὦ ς , > » > /
τὴν ὁδὸν, ἣν ᾿Ελένην περ ἀνήγαγεν εὐπατέρειαν.
τῶν ἕν᾽ ἀειραμένη “Ἑκάβη φέρε δῶρον ᾿Αθήνῃ,
ὃς κάλλιστος ἔην ποικίλμασιν ἠδὲ μέγιστος,

ἀστὴρ δ᾽ ὡς ἀπέλαμπεν" ἔκειτο δὲ νείατος ἄλλων.

295

βῆ δ᾽ ἰέναι, πολλαὶ δὲ μετεσσεύοντο γεραιαί.
αἱ δ᾽ ὅτε νηὸν ἵκανον ᾿Αθήνης ἐν πόλει ἄκρῃ,

τῇσι θύρας ὦιξε Θεανὼ καλλιπάρῃος,

Κισσηίς, ἄλοχος ᾿Αντήνορος ἱπποδάμοιο"

τὴν γὰρ Τρῶες ἔθηκαν ᾿Αθηναίης ἱέρειαν.

900

αἱ δ᾽ ὀλολυγῇ πᾶσαι ᾿Αθήνῃ χεῖρας ἀνέσχον"
ἡ δ᾽ ἄρα πέπλον ἑλοῦσα Θεανὼ καλλιπάρῃος
θῆκεν ᾿Αθηναίης ἐπὶ γούνασιν ἠυκόμοιο,
εὐχομένη δ᾽ ἠρᾶτο Διὸς κούρῃ μεγάλοιο"

“ πότνι᾽ ᾿Αθηναίη, ῥυσίπτολι, δῖα θεάων,

ence—and of this no satisfactory solution
has been given.

288. κατεβήσετο, 1.6. from the ὑπερῴον
on the first floor, where the women
worked, to the θάλαμος or treasure-cham-
ber on the ground-floor at the back of the
house (see the plan in Buchholz, Realien).
288 = 0 99, 289 = 0 105, 293-5 = o 106-8,
with small variations. One of the edi-
tions of Ar. had also the variant ἡ δ᾽ els
οἶκον ἰοῦσα παρίστατο φωριαμοῖσιν from o
104: but Hekabe is already in the οἶκος.
κηώεντα, Γ 382.

289. This line as given in the MSS.
twice neglects the F. Bentley with one
MS. con). παμποίκιλα for -o. For ἔνθ᾽
ἔσαν oi (Ar. ἔσάν, to shew that οἱ was not
the article) Heyne proposes ἔνθα δ᾽ ἔσαν,
Nauck ἔνθα τ᾽ ἔσαν, Paley ἔνθ᾽ ἣν of after
Hes. Theog. 321, τῆς δ᾽ ἣν τρεῖς κεφαλαί.
Compare o 105, where Ameis takes οἱ for
the article.

The lines 289-92 are quoted by
Herodotos, ii. 116, together with 5 227-
230, 351-2, as evidence that Homer
followed the old tradition of the journey
of Paris and Helen to Egypt related in
1138-115, and was therefore not the author
of the Kypria, which brought the fugi-

305

tives to Troy on the third day from
Sparta. He quotes the lines as being
ἐν Διομήδεος ἀριστείῃ, a title now con-
fined to E, but perfectly appropriate to
the present p as down to 310
Diomedes is still the chief terror of the
Trojans. The reading of the MSS. of
Herodotos agrees exactly with the vul-
gate: but we could not expect to find
them an independent authority.

290. For τὰς Welcker conj. τούς, which
gives a much more likely sense. The
change may naturally be accounted for
by the neighbourhood of the fem. sub-
stantive.

292, τὴν ὁδόν, as ¢ 165, H. G. § 136,
1. ἀνήγαγε, properly ‘‘took away to
sea,’ cf. I'48; and cf. κατελθεῖν, to return
home.

295. velaros ἄλλων : for this idiomatic
use of the superl. see A 505, wxupopwraros
ἄλλων : and for velaros, A 381, I 153.

298. For this Theano cf. E 70, A
224. From 300 it would appear that
her post was as much a civic as a religious
appointment.

303 = 92, 308-310 = 93-95.

305. ἐρνυσίπτολι, MSS.: ἄμεινον δὲ
ῥυσίπτολι, Schol. A. We have ἐρυ-

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Ζ (v1)

217

aEov δὴ ἔγχος Διομήδεος, ἠδὲ καὶ αὐτὸν
πρηνέα δὸς πεσέειν Σκαιῶν προπάροιθε πυλάων,
ὄφρα τοι αὐτίκα νῦν δυοκαίδεκα βοῦς ἐνὶ νηῷ
ἤνις ἤἠκέστας ἱερεύσομεν, αἴ κ᾽ ἐλεήσῃς
Ν ’, 95 7 / , 35
ἄστυ τε καὶ Τρώων ἀλόχους καὶ νήπια τέκνα. 810
ὧς ἔφατ᾽ εὐχομένη, ἀνένευε δὲ Παλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη.

as αἱ μέν ῥ᾽ εὔχοντο Διὸς κούρῃ μεγάλοιο,
“Ἕκτωρ δὲ πρὸς δώματ᾽ ᾿Αλεξάνδροιο βεβήκειν

4 5 2. AN ΝΜ \ Σ ’ “A / > wm
καλά, Ta ῥ᾽ αὐτὸς ἔτευξε σὺν ἀνδράσιν, οἱ τότ᾽ ἄριστοι
ἦσαν ἐνὶ Tpoin ἐριβώλακι τέκτονες ἄνδρες" 315
οἵ ot ἐποίησαν θάλαμον καὶ δῶμα καὶ αὐλὴν
3 , lA a 3 ΄ wv
ἐγγύθι τε Upidpovo καὶ “Exropos ἐν πόλει ἄκρῃ.
ἔνθ᾽ “Ἕκτωρ εἰσῆλθε διίφιλος, ἐν δ᾽ ἄρα χειρὶ
” vw 9 ¢ , , 7 \
ἔγχος ἔχ᾽ ἑνδεκάπηχυ" πάροιθε δὲ λάμπετο δουρὸς
3 \ 4 4 /

αἰχμὴ χαλκείη, περὶ δὲ χρύσεος θέε πόρκης. 820

σάρματες Ο 354, II 370, but that is from
Feptw to draw, a distinct verb from ῥύομαι,
ἐρύομαι to protect (see on A 216), which
has v in the sigmatic forms with but few
exceptions. ῥυσίπτολις occurs in Aesch.
Septem, 129. 306-7 are imitated by
Vergil, Aen. xi. 483.

311. ἀθετεῖται ὅτι πρὸς οὐδὲν τὸ ém-
φώνημα (concluding remark) καὶ οὐκ
εἰθισμένον " κατὰ μὲν γὰρ τὸ ἐναντίον ὁ
“Ζεὺς ἐπιβεβαιοῖ κατανεύων (ἱ. 6. apparently
it contradicts the promise of Zeus in A).
καὶ ἑξῆς δ᾽ ἐπιλεγομένου ““ ὧς al μέν ῥ᾽
εὔχοντο᾽᾽ σαφῶς γίνεται περισσὸς ὁ στίχος"
γελοία δὲ καὶ ἡ ἀνανεύουσα ᾿Αθηνᾶ, Schol.
A (Aristonikos?). It is hard to believe
that such remarks come from Ar., who
can hardly have forgotten the fact that
ἀνανεύειν 18 repeatedly used metaphoric-
ally by Homer to signify a refusal. The
line it is true may be spared, and the ws
at the beginning of two consecutive lines
is certainly a stumbling-block (but cf.
P 424. Bekker and Nauck content
themselves with rejecting the line; but
the real explanation seems to be that
suggested by Bergk and developed by
Christ, that 311 is the ending of the
Διυμήδεος ἀριστεία, and 312 the first line
of a new rhapsody: cf. X 515, Ψ 1.
With 311 compare IT 250, and still more
B 419, I 302, which shew that the
ἐπιφώνημα is not unusual as the Schol.
says.

312. The imperf. followed by the

plup. shews that what follows happens
contemporaneously with the preceding.

316. It looks at first sight as though
δῶμα here meant only the great hall as
opposed to the sleeping-rooms. But the
word is of general signification, and
includes the women’s apartments in X
442, p 541, o 314 (see Buchh. ii. 2, 129).
It is more reasonable to regard it as mean-
ing the building as opposed to the αὐλή,
and thus including the θάλαμος as a part.
The latter is particularly named because
it is the scene of the following incident.

319. It is impossible to say whether
we ought to read ἔχ᾽ ἑνδεκάπηχν with
MSS., or ἔχεν δεκάπηχν with some of the
old commentators. Either length seems
unwieldy to us, but in O 678 Aias ‘uses
a pike of twice the length, and Xenophon
(Anab. iv. 7) incidentally mentions that
the spears of the Chalybes were 15 cubits
long. See J. H. S. iv. p. 299, where
also will be found some remarks as to
the πόρκης. The old explanation of
this is no doubt correct, ὁ xplxos ὁ συνέ-
χων τὸν σίδηρον πρὸς τὸ ξύλον τοῦ δόρατος.
Dr. Schliemann found αὖ Hissarlik spear-
heads with flat bases and holes for nails,
by which they were fastened into a slit
in the shaft. This necessarily implies
the use of some sort'of ferrule to prevent
the wood from splitting, probably a
“‘lashing” of wire. πάροιθε, ‘‘ before
him” as he went: cf. T 437, ἐμὸν βέλος
ὀξὺ πάροιθεν.

218

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Z (vt)

τὸν δ᾽ εὗρ᾽ ἐν θαλάμῳ περικαλλέα τεύχε᾽ ἕποντα,
ἀσπίδα καὶ θώρηκα, καὶ ἀγκύλα TOE’ ἁφόωντα:
᾿Αργείη δ᾽ “Ελένη per’ ἄρα δμωῇσι γυναιξὶν
ἧστο καὶ ἀμφιπόλοισι περικλυτὰ ἔργα κέλευεν.

ἃ > of ’ IQ A 3 na 4 /
TOV ὃ Exrwp VELKECTOEV ἰδὼν αισχροις ETTEECOOLY*

“ δαιμόνι᾽, οὐ μὲν καλὰ χόλον τόνδ᾽ ἔνθεο θυμῷ.
λαοὶ μὲν φθινύθουσι περὶ πτόλιν αἰπύ τε τεῖχος
μαρνάμενοι" σέο δ᾽ εἵνεκ᾽ ἀντή τε πτόλεμός τε
ἄστυ τόδ᾽ ἀμφιδέδηε" σὺ δ᾽ ἂν μαχέσαιο καὶ ἄλλῳ,

321. ἕποντα, ““ handling.”
sak, which appears in Greek as ἐπ, is
apparently a derived form of sa ‘‘to-
gether”; whence comes the sense of
“laying hand to” a thing, and in the
middle voice ‘‘joining oneself to” a
person, 7.€. accompanying. ἅπτω is pro-

bly also a parallel formation from sam,
the longer form of sa, and shews clearly
the connexion of the ideas of joining and
touching. The simple rw occurs only
here; the compounds have acquired
more or less metaphorical senses, which
may nearly all be brought under the
cognate ideas of treating or managing.
The aor. is, with very few exceptions,
only found in ἐπισπεῖν μόρσιμον Fuap
and similar phrases; where it has the
- sense of joining, 1.6. reaching, an end (cf.
French towcher ἃ sa fin). (See a full
discussion of the verb in Journal of
Phil. vol. xiv. p. 231 sqg.) Owing to the
ordinary view that ἀμφέπειν περιέπειν,
etc., mean ‘‘to busy oneself about” a
thing, critics have found a needless diffi-
culty in the absence of the preposition
here ; Bekker has even conjectured περὶ
κάλλιμα for περικαλλέα. Curiously enough,
the next line is the only place where the
simple a¢ay is found, though the com-
pound ἀμφαφᾶν is common in Homer, and
ἐπαφᾷν is Attic. Both verbs are closely
connected in sense as in origin; the
‘‘dandy” Paris is turning over and
admiring his fine armour with the same
affection which Odysseus shews to his
old bow, τόξον ἐνώμα, πάντῃ ἀναστρωφῶν,
¢@ 393; in 7 586 τόξον ἀμφαφόωντας
means ‘‘handling” the bow with the
intention of using it.

322. The comina after θώρηκα is ap-
proved by Nikanor, and is undoubtedly
right: the two participles need a con-
junction, as they are obviously co-or-
dinate, © 204 being an isolated and
harsh exception. It is not necessary
to do more than mention the curious

The root

variant τόξα φόωντα which is found in Ὁ
and explained by Schol. LV to mean
‘‘making bright.”

324. The constr. κελεύειν τινί τι is
elsewhere found in H. only where the
accus. is a neuter pronoun, ¢g. p 193,
τά ye δὴ νοέοντι κελεύεις. The simple
dat. of the person is however common
enough, and the addition of the acc. to
express the content of the verb is quite
in accordance with the use of that case.

326. οὐ... καλὰ, see H. G. § 186
and compare of τι ψεῦδος ἐμὰς ἄτας xaré-
λεξας I 115. The mention of the χόλος
has caused critics a good deal of trouble,
as Paris’ absence from battle would seem
to be sufficiently accounted for by his
defeat at the hands of Menelaos. It
seems best to suppose therefore that
Hector speaks ironically, in suggesting
that Paris has some. cause of offence
against the Trojans: though Paris him-
self seems to take the remark seriously
(335), and the irony is perhaps almost
too veiled for the Epic style. There is
a possible alternative, to take χόλον as
meaning “the anger of the Trojans
against you,” such as is exemplified in
Γ ὅθ, 454, of which we should suppose
Paris to be conscious. This suits the
answer of Paris in 335 better, as γέμεσις
is commonly used of the indignation
shewn by others; 4.9. β 186 νέμεσις δέ
μοι ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἔσσεται, χ 40 ἀνθρώπων
νέμεσις, cf. N 122 ἐν φρεσὶ θέσθε ἕκαστος
αἰδῶ καὶ νέμεσιν. On the other hand it
leaves τόνδε without its proper deictic
force ; we should be led to suppose that
some particular manifestation of Trojan
resentment was immediately present to
Hector and Paris, but this is not the case.
The phrases κότον ἔνθετο θυμῷ ir 102,
and μὴ χόλον ἔνθεο θυμῷ w 248, are also
strongly in favour of the interpretation
first given.

329. μαχέσαιο, fall out with, as E 875,
I 32, etc.

TAIAAO® Z (v1)

Ψ / 4 Μ a 4
ὃν τινά που μεθιέντα ἴδοις στυγεροῦ πολέμοιο.

219

990

ἀλλ᾽ ἄνα, μὴ τάχα ἄστυ πυρὸς δηίοιο θέρηται.᾽"

- τὸν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπεν ᾿Αλέξανδρος θεοειδής"
“"Extop, ἐπεί με κατ᾽ αἶσαν ἐνείκεσας οὐδ᾽ ὑπὲρ αἶσαν,
τούνεκά τοι ἐρέω" σὺ δὲ σύνθεο καί μευ ἄκουσον.

Ν 9. Ν᾿ a / f QA ’
οὔ τοι ἐγὼ Τρώων τόσσον χόλῳ οὐδὲ νεμέσσι

335

ἥμην ἐν θαλάμῳ, ἔθελον δ᾽ ἄχεϊ mpotparréc Oat.
νῦν δέ με παρειποῦσ᾽ ἄλοχος μαλακοῖς ἐπέεσσιν
σ > 9 , A ’ Φ 3 “A
ὥρμησ᾽ ἐς πόλεμον, δοκέει δέ μοι ὧδε Kal αὐτῷ
λώιον ἔσσεσθαι" νίκη δ᾽ ἐπαμείβεται ἄνδρας.

3 > ww le) 3 > 4 7 4
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε viv ἐπίμεινον, apna τεύχεα δύω"

940

ἢ ἴθ᾽, ἐγὼ δὲ μέτειμι, κιχήσεσθαι δέ σ᾽ ὀίω."

ὧς φάτο, τὸν δ᾽ οὔ τι προσέφη κορυθαίολος “Extwp:
τὸν δ᾽ “Ἑλένη μύθοισι προσηύδα μειλιχίοισιν'
“ δᾶερ ἐμεῖο, κυνὸς κακομηχάνου ὀκρυοέσσης,

[4 xy > ΚΝ an Ψ [οὶ / /
OS μα ὄφελ ἤματι τῷ, OTE με πρῶτον τέκε μήτηρ,

345

οἴχεσθαι προφέρουσα κακὴ ἀνέμοιο θύελλα

εἰς ὄρος ἢ εἰς κῦμα πολυφλοίσβοιο θαλάσσης,
ἔνθα με κῦμ᾽ ἀπόερσε πάρος τάδε ἔργα γενέσθαι.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ τάδε γ᾽ ὧδε θεοὶ κακὰ τεκμήραντο,

Ν
ἀνδρὸς ἔπειτ᾽ ὥφελλον ἀμείνονος εἶναι ἄκοιτις,

350

ds ἤδη νέμεσίν Te καὶ αἴσχεα πόλλ᾽ ἀνθρώπων.
a 3 WeO3#oU”ASN “ , wv # 3 vw > 9 /
τούτῳ δ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ap νῦν φρένες ἔμπεδοι οὔτ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὀπίσσω

330. ὅν τινα, so Ar. ; MSS. εἴ τινα.

331. πυρὸς θέρηται, as A 667, and in
a different sense p 23. For the use of
the gen. cf. H. G. 8 151 «.

333 = I 59.

334. Cf. A 76. σύνθεο = mark my
words, as T 84, o 318, π 259, p 1538.

.336. προτραπέσθαι, to yield myself up
to anguish (at my defeat); an isolated
use of the word.

337. This is apparently a reference to
I’ 432, but the application is not very
exact.

339. ἐπαμείβεται ἄνδρας, shifts over
the warriors, 1.6. goes first to one, then
to another. For this use of ἀμείβεσθαι
cf. O 684 θρῴσκων ἄλλοτ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἄλλον ἀμεί-
βεται, a 375 ἀμειβόμενοι κατὰ οἴκους.
For the sentiment οὗ, Γ 440, = 809.

344. For κακομηχάνον ὀκρνοέσσης,
Curtius, (Zé. no. 75) after Payne Knight,
would read κακομηχάνοο xpvoécons, right-
ly. ὀκρυόεσσα is a vox nihili recurring
only in I 64, which admits of the same

correction. For xpvéets in this metaphor-
ical sense cf. E 740, I 2, and we may
perhaps compare ῥιγεδανὴ “EXévn T 325.

346. Compare v 61-82, where the
ἅρπυιαι, the personified storm-winds, carry
off the daughters of Pandareos. So also
a 241,

348. ἀπόερσε, swept away ; prob. root
vars of Lat. verr-ere: cf. also ® 283,
329, and Curtius, Ht. no. 497 ὁ, δέ. vi.
266 sqg. For this use of the indic. of
the past tense to express a supposition,
by a sort of attraction to the mood of
the principal verb dere, see H. G. 8
325, where it is well explained. The
other instances in H. are 350 below, a
218, 6 178.

349. τεκμαίρομαι, to ordain as a final
decision, as 7 317, cf. H 30, 70, κ 563,
A 112, uw 189. ;

351. ἤδη, indic. as 348. νέμεσις here
evidently means ‘‘the righteous indig-
nation felt by men.” For aloxen =
reproaches, see 524, I' 242.

220

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Z (τὴ

ἔσσονται" τῶ καί μιν ἐπαυρήσεσθαι ὀίω.
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε νῦν εἴσελθε καὶ ἕξεο τῷδ᾽ ἐπὶ δίφρῳ,

δᾶερ, ἐπεί σε μάλιστα πόνος φρένας ἀμφιβέβηκεν
6 > 93 a \ , 3 lA Cg > » bo
εἵνεκ᾽ ἐμεῖο κυνὸς καὶ ᾿Αλεξάνδρου ἕνεκ᾽ ἀρχῆς,

355

9 A A A / @ Λ 3 ’
οἷσιν ἐπὶ Ζεὺς θῆκε κακὸν μόρον, ὡς καὶ ὀπίσσω
> ’ 4, : 9 9 ’ 33
ἀνθρώποισι πελώμεθ᾽ ἀοίδιμοι ἐσσομένοισιν.
τὴν δ᾽ ἡμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα μέγας κορυθαίολος “Ἑικτωρ"

“μή με κάθιζ᾽, “EXévn, φιλέουσά περ" οὐδέ με πείσεις"

960

Ν 4 Ἁ > / ν > 4 4
ἤδη yap μοι θυμὸς ἐπέσσυται, ὄφρ᾽ ἐπαμύνω
¢ “ /
Τρώεσσ᾽, of μέγ᾽ ἐμεῖο ποθὴν ἀπεόντος ἔχουσιν.

a“ 4
ἀλλὰ σύ γ᾽ ὄρνυθι τοῦτον, ἐπευγέσθω δὲ καὶ αὐτὸς,
@ μ᾿ > f 4 4
ὥς κεν ἔμ᾽ ἔντοσθεν πόλιος καταμάρψη ἐόντα.

καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼν olxovde ἐλεύσομαι, ὄφρα ἴδωμαι

οἰκῆας ἄλοχόν τε φίλην καὶ νήπιον υἱόν"
οὐ γάρ τ᾽ οἶδ᾽, ἢ ἔτι σφιν ὑπότροπος ἵξομαι αὖτις,
ἢ ἤδη μ᾽ ὑπὸ χερσὶ θεοὶ δαμόωσιν ᾿Αχαιῶν."

ὧς ἄρα φωνήσας ἀπέβη κορυθαίολος “Ἑϊκτωρ.

αἶψα δ᾽ ἔπειθ᾽ ἵκανε δόμους ἐὺ ναιετάοντας,

370

οὐδ᾽ εὗρ᾽ ᾿Ανδρομάχην λευκώλενον ἐν μεγάροισιν,
ἀλλ᾽ ἥ γε ξὺν παιδὶ καὶ ἀμφιπόλῳ ἐνυπέπλῳ
πύργῳ ἐφεστήκει γοόωσά τε μυρομένη τε.
Ἕκτωρ δ᾽ ὡς οὐκ ἔνδον ἀμύμονα τέτμεν ἄκοιτιν,

ἔστη ἐπ᾽ οὐδὸν ἰών, μετὰ δέ ὃδμωῇσιν ἔειπεν"

375

“ εἰ δ᾽ ἄγε μοι, Suwai, νημερτέα μυθήσασθε:
πῇ ἔβη ᾿Ανδρομάχη λευκώλενος ἐκ μεγάροιο ;
né πῃ ἐς γαλόων ἢ εἰνατέρων ἐνπέπλων,

ἢ ἐς ᾿Αθηναίης ἐξοίχεται, ἔνθα περ ἄλλαι

353. ἐπαυρήσεσθαι, reap the fruits:
v. A 410.

356. ἀρχῆς, so Zenod. and one MS. ;
- the rest with Ar. having drys. See note
on Γ 100.

358. ἀοίδιμοι,͵ cf. θ 579-580, ἵνα Foe καὶ
ἐσσομένοισιν ἀοιδὴ, and w 200, of Klytaim-
nestra, στυγερὴ 5€7 ἀοιδή ἔσσετ᾽ én’ ἀν-
θρώπους. Paley quotes also Theokr. xii.
11, ἐπεσσομένοις δὲ γενοίμεθα πᾶσιν ἀοιδά.
The phrase ἐσσομένοισιν ἀοιδή occurs also
Theog. 251, in a good sense, in which
signification the adj., a ἅπαξ λεγόμενον
in H, occurs often in later Greek.

361. For this use of ὄφρα where we
should rather have expected the infin.
(as I 398, 42) cf. A 133, A 465, E 690.
It is hardly likely that éwréooura: is used
without the object expressed (in A 173

φεύγειν is to be supplied), in which case
ὄφρα might indicate a purpose.

365. The best MSS. give οἴκόνδ᾽ ἐσε-
λεύσομαι, but some six or seven either
read olxkévde ἐλεύσομαι or have variants
pointing directly at it. There can there-
ore be little doubt that La R. is right
in adopting it in the text after Ahrens ;
the vulg. is obviously an attempt to
avoid the hiatus, which in the principal
caesura is quite legitimate.

376. εἰ δ᾽ ἄγε, used in addressing
several persons and followed by plural,
as B 331, 437, Θ 18, Γ 441, ete. So in
Attic, Aesch. Pers. 140, Eum. 307, etc.

378. γαλόων, elvarépwv, her husband’s
sisters or his brothers’ wives, glores and
canitrices.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Ζ (vr)

22]

Τρωαὶ ἐυπλόκαμοι δεινὴν θεὸν ἱλάσκονται ;” 380
τὸν δ᾽ air’ ὀτρηρὴ ταμίη πρὸς μῦθον ἔειπεν"

“"Exrop, ἐπεὶ μάλ᾽ ἄνωγας ἀληθέα μυθήσασθαι,

οὔτε πῃ ἐς γαλόων οὔτ᾽ εἰνατέρων ἐνπέπλων

οὔτ᾽ ἐς ᾿Αθηναίης ἐξοίχεται, ἔνθα περ ἄλλαι

Τρωαὶ ἐνπλόκαμοι δεινὴν θεὸν ἱλάσκονται, ες 88

ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ πύργον ἔβη μέγαν ᾽Ιλίου, οὕνεκ᾽ ἄκουσεν

τείρεσθαι Τρῶας, μέγα δὲ κράτος εἶναι ᾿Αχαιῶν.

ἡ μὲν δὴ πρὸς τεῖχος ἐπειγομένη ἀφικάνει

μαινομένῃ ἐικυῖα" φέρει δ᾽ ἅμα παῖδα τιθήνη."

ἢ ῥα γυνὴ ταμίη, ὁ δ᾽ ἀπέσσυτο δώματος “Extwp

390

\ > AN egy Φ 2 »» 4
τὴν αὐτὴν ὁδὸν avTis ἐυκτιμένας κατ᾽ ἀγνιάς.
φ iA 6 / / Ν
εὖτε πύλας ἵκανε διερχόμενος μέγα ἄστυ,
> / a NM >
καιάς, TH ap ἔμελλε διεξίμεναι πεδίονδε,
ἔνθ᾽ ἄλοχος πολύδωρος ἐναντίη ἦλθε θέουσα

᾿Ανδρομάχη, θυγάτηρ μεγαλήτορος ᾿Ηετίωνος,

99ῦ

Ἠετίων, ὃς ἔναιεν ὑπὸ Πλάκῳ ὑληέσσῃ,

Θήβῃ ὑποπλακίῃ, Κιλίκεσσ᾽ ἄνδρεσσιν ἀνάσσων"
τοῦ περ δὴ θυγάτηρ ἔχεθ᾽ “Ἑκτορι χαλκοκορυστῇ.
ἥ οἱ ἔπειτ᾽ ἤντησ᾽, ἅμα δ᾽ ἀμφίπολος κίεν αὐτῇ

888. ἀφικάνει, apparently in perf.
sense: cf. & 43, ξ 159, ν 328.

389. μαινομένῃ, cf. X 460, also of
Andromache, μαινάδι ἴση.

390. ἢ pa with the subject expressed
as here is rare ; the only other cases are
y 337, x 292, X 77. In the second
clause after ἢ ῥα καί however the subject
is not uncommon, ¢g. A 528 (Ameis-
Hentze, app. on σ᾽ 356).

392. εὖτε is used asyndetically as
always when the clause which it intro-
duces stands first in the sentence; see
Ameis and Merry on γ 9.

393. τῇ ἄρ᾽, so MSS. (except a few
which give τῇ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽): the vulg. τῇ γάρ
is merely a device to avoid the hiatus.

394. πολύδωρος, Hesych. πολλὰ λα-
βοῦσα δῶρα, πολύφερνος, πολύεδνος, and
Schol. A πολλὰ ἕδνα παρὰ τοῦ ἀνδρὸς
λαβοῦσα. But the ἕδνα were given not
to the bride, but to her father. The
δῶρα however may indicate the gifts
which human nature would prompt the
suitor to offer when, as in Homeric days,
woman had begun to assert her inde-
pendence, and the ἕδνα were no more
than a relic of the already extinct custom

of the actual purchase of wives. But it
does not seem quite natural to describe
a wife as ‘“‘having had many wedding-

resents made to her.” Others compare
it with #riddwpos (251 above) in the
sense of ‘‘generous,” ‘‘open- handed,”
which is preferable.

396. ᾿Ηετίων seems to be attracted to
the case of the following relative; see
H. G. 8 271, where % 75, 371, K 416 are
quoted: Bekker, H. B. i. 314, adds
others, ¢.g. 874, 122. Thus Bentley’s
"Herlwvos ὃ ναῖε is not necessary. A
similar case of epanalepsis in a different
case is to be found in a 50-51—

νήσῳ ἐν ἀμφιρύτῃ, ὅθι τ᾽ ὀμφαλός ἐστι
θαλάσσης,
νῆσος δενδρήεσσα, θεὰ δ᾽ ἐν δώματα ναίει.

The site of Thebe is fixed by the later
name Θήβης πεδίον, given to the plain of
Adramyttion, Herod. vii. 42, etc. For
᾿Ηετίων cf. also A 366, Ψ 827, X 479.

398. ἔχεθ᾽ “Exropt: this use of the
dative (which is not mentioned in H. G.
§ 143) is analogous to the dat. after
δαμάζειν, etc. (cf. I 301). For ἔχειν =
have to wife, cf. Γ' 123,

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Ζ (v1)

223

ἀλλ᾽ apa pw κατέκηε σὺν ἔντεσι δαιδαλέοισιν
ἠδ᾽ ἐπὶ σῆμ᾽ ἔχεεν" περὶ δὲ πτελέας ἐφύτευσαν

͵ 3 ᾽ὔ a Ἁ 3 f
νύμφαι ὀρεστιάδες, κοῦραι Διὸς αἰγιόχοιο.

420

οἱ δέ μοι ἑπτὰ κασίγνητοι ἔσαν ἐν μεγάροισιν,
οἱ μὲν πάντες ἰῷ κίον ἤματι ἔΔιδος εἴσω"
A / 4 ~ 3 \
πάντας yap κατέπεφνε ποδάρκης δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
/ a
βουσὶν ἐπ᾽ εἰλιπόδεσσι καὶ ἀργεννῇς ὀίεσσιν.

μητέρα δ᾽, ἣ βασίλευεν ὑπὸ Πλάκῳ ὑληέσσῃ,

425

τὴν ἐπεὶ ἂρ δεῦρ᾽ yay ἅμ᾽ ἄλλοισι κτεάτεσσιν,
ἂψ ὅ γε τὴν ἀπέλυσε λαβὼν ἀπερείσι᾽ ἄποινα,

\ x 94 4 ας. ΚΝ 3 “
πατρὸς δ᾽ ἐν μεγάροισι Bar’ "Ἄρτεμις ἰοχέαιρα.
Ἕκτορ, ἀτὰρ σύ μοί ἐσσι πατὴρ καὶ πότνια μήτηρ

ἠδὲ κασίγνητος, σὺ δέ μοι θαλερὸς παρακοίτης"

480

ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε νῦν ἐλέαιρε καὶ αὐτοῦ μίμν᾽ ἐπὶ πύργῳ,
μὴ παῖδ᾽ ὀρφανικὸν θήῃς χήρην τε γυναῖκα"
λαὸν δὲ στῆσον παρ᾽ ἐρινεόν, ἔνθα μάλιστα

418. It was a universal custom among
the primitive Aryan nations to bury a
warrior’s arms with his dead body ; it is
needless to refer to more than the excava-
tions at Mykenai, where an extraordinary
quantity of swords was found in the
graves with the dead. So Elpenor prays,
λ 74, ἀλλά με κακκῆαι σὺν τεύχεσιν ἅσσα
μοι ἔστιν : see αὶ 13. It is noteworthy
that armour is not mentioned in any of
the three full descriptions of a funeral
(WY 165-177, Q 785-804, ὦ 63-84; in the
case of Achilles his armour was of course
given to be adjudged by the Greek
captains, w 85). But the idea that the
departed warrior needed his arms in the
next world belongs rather to the time
when the body was buried than when,
as among Homeric and later Greeks, it
was destroyed by burning. Thus the
casual mention of arms and burning
together, here and in A, seems to indicate
an irrational survival among newer cus-
toms of an older practice, which in the
time of Thucydides had actually come
to be considered Karian, 7.e. barbarian.
The same is the case with the burning
of garments as a funeral rite (X 512).

421. οἵ... of, a good instance of
the parataxis of co-ordinate clauses by
which the relative was developed from
the demonstrative.

422. ἰῷ, masc. here only: the fem. ἴα
occurs frequently. The origin of the
forms is doubtful ; ἰῷ will be formed by

false analogy if ἴα comes from pla, but
this is very doubtful. The fem. ἴα is
also found in an Aeolic inscription (Col-
litz, 214, 12), and is given by the tradi-
tion in Sappho (/r. 69), but there is no
other trace of the masc.

428. Ban “Aprenis, cf. 205.

429-432. For imitations of these fam-
ous lines, see (besides Soph. 47. 514,
already referred to) Eur. Hel. 278 ; Ovid,
Her. iti. 51; Ter. Andria, i. 5, 60.

433-439 were athetized by Ar. on the
grounds (1) that it is not fitting that
Andromache should act like a rival com-
mander (ἀντιστρατηγεῖν) to Hector; (2)
that it is not true that the wall is repre-
sented as specially accessible at this spot ;
nor are the enemy now near the walls.
A modern reader will probably feel with
more force the objection that we are
presented with an anticlimax after the
noble outburst of the preceding lines.
But perhaps this is not a more valid
criticism than the reasons of Ar. There
was ἃ legend—which of course may have
grown out of these words—that when
Apollo and Poseidon built the walls of
Troy the mortal Aiakos helped them at
this point of the circuit ; see Pind. Ol.
viii. 31-46, where Apollo says to Aiakos,
Πέργαμος ἀμφὶ reais, ἥρως, χερὸς ἐργασίαις
ἁλίσκεται. This is the θεοπρόπιον re-
ferred to in 438. For the ἐρινεός as a
landmark v. A 167, X 145: it stood in
the plain outside the.wall, so that this

Uri watulen

΄“

.
td

See
2, pot.

224

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Ζ (v1)

ἀμβατός ἐστι πόλις καὶ ἐπίδρομον ἔπλετο τεῖχος"

τρὶς γὰρ τῇ γ᾽ ἐλθόντες ἐπειρήσανθ᾽ οἱ ἄριστοι

435

ἀμφ᾽ Αἴαντε δύω καὶ ἀγακλυτὸν ᾿Ιδομενῆα
ἠδ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδας καὶ Τυδέος ἄλκιμον υἱόν"
Ww 4 v θ ’ 9A ὃ ,

ἤ πού τίς σφιν ἔνισπε θεοπροπίων ἐὺ εἰδώς,
ἤ νυ καὶ αὐτῶν θυμὸς ἐποτρύνει καὶ ἀνώγει.᾽"

τὴν δ᾽ αὗτε προσέειπε μέγας κορυθαίολος “Exrap:

440

“ἢ καὶ ἐμοὶ τάδε πάντα μέλει, γύναι" ἀλλὰ μάλ᾽ αἰνῶς
αἰδέομαι Τρῶας καὶ Τρῳάδας ἑλκεσιπέπλους,
\ A ’ 3 ’ /
al κε κακὸς ὃς νόσφιν ἀλυσκάξω πολέμοιο"
οὐδέ με θυμὸς ἄνωγεν, ἐπεὶ μάθον ἔμμεναι ἐσθλὸς

αἰεὶ καὶ πρώτοισι μετὰ Τρώεσσι μάχεσθαι,

445

ἀρνύμενος πατρός Te μέγα κλέος ἠδ᾽ ἐμὸν αὐτοῦ.
εὖ γὰρ ἐγὼ τόδε οἷδα κατὰ φρένα καὶ κατὰ θυμόν'
ἔσσεται ἧμαρ, ὅτ᾽ ἄν ποτ᾽ ὀλώλῃ Ἴλιος ἱρὴ

καὶ ἸΙρίαμος καὶ λαὸς ἐυμμελίω Πριάμοιο.

/
ἀλλ᾽ οὔ μοι Τρώων τόσσον μέλει ἄχγος ὀπίσσω,

450

οὔτ᾽ αὐτῆς “Εκάβης οὔτε ἸΤριάμοιο ἄνακτος

4 4 “ ’ ΝΣ) \
οὔτε κασιγνήτων, οἵ κεν πολέες τε καὶ ἐσθλοὶ
᾿ἐν κονίῃσι πέσοιεν ὑπ᾽ ἀνδράσι δυσμενέεσσιν,
ὅσσον σεῦ, ὅτε κέν τις ᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων

“ ΝΜ 4 2 4

δακρυόδεσσαν ἄγηται, ἐλεύθερον ἦμαρ ἀπούρας. 455
καί κεν ἐν ἴἼΑργει ἐοῦσα πρὸς ἄλλης ἱστὸν ὑφαίνοις,
καί κεν ὕδωρ φορέοις Μεσσηΐδος ἢ “Trrepeins

line seems inconsistent with the preced-
ing αὐτοῦ μίμν᾽ ἐπὶ πύργῳ, an argument
for the interpolation of the passage.

435. Of course τρίς must refer to the
period before the opening of the Iliad :
this is not in itself an objection to the
genuineness of the passage, cf. I 352
‘sqq. We should however have expected
Achilles to be named among the leaders.

442. So X 105, under similar circum-
stances. ἑλκεσιπέπλους : for the form of
the compound see H. Ὁ. 8 124 c, 126, 2.

444, οὐδὲ. . . ἄνωγεν, litotes, like οὐκ
ἐᾶν, *‘ forbids.”

446. Hector’s only object is honour,
as he despairs of final success. dpvt-

os, A 159.

447-9 = A 163-5, q.v.

453. The opt. πέσοιεν throws into the
background, as a mere imagination, the
fate of all but Andromache, which by
the subj. ἄγηται is emphasized as a fact
vividly foreseen. ὑφαίνοις and dopéors

again present less vividly the secondary
consequences. For the two latter forms
a few MSS. give ὑφαίνῃς and φορέῃς,
which Bekker has adopted, needlessly.

455. H. uses ἐλεύθερος only in this
phrase (II 831, Υ 193) and κρητῆρα
ἐλεύθερον, inf. 528. Cf. δούλιον Fuap,
463, and many phrases in which ἦμαρ is
used to express a state.

456. πρὸς ἄλλης, at the bidding of
another woman. For this use cf. A 239
(H. G. § 208).

457. Ἔν Oepdavy δὲ κρήνην τὴν Μεσ-
σηίδα ἰδὼν olda, Pausan. iii. 20,1. (Ther-
apne was in Lakonia.) According to B
734 Ὑπέρεια was a fountain in Thessaly.
Cf. Pind. P. iv. 125, ἐγγὺς μὲν Φέρης
κράναν ‘Trepyda λιπών. Déderlein has
well observed that Ar indicates
Agamemnon, Messeis Menelaos, and
Hypereia Achilles, as the probable pos-
sessors of Andromache. Aristarchus re-
marked that owing to these words of

226

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Z (vz)

/ 3 ’ 3
Kai ποτέ τις εἴποι “ πατρὸς γ᾽ ὅδε πολλὸν ἀμείνων

3 ’)» 3 Ll 4 > /
ἐκ πολέμου ἀνιόντα" φέροι δ᾽ ἔναρα βροτόεντα

480

κτείνας δήιον ἄνδρα, χαρείη δὲ φρένα μήτηρ."
ὡς εἰπὼν ἀλόχοιο φίλης ἐν χερσὶν ἔθηκεν

παῖδ᾽ ἑόν" ἡ δ᾽ ἄρα μιν κηώδεϊ δέξατο κόλπῳ

δακρυόεν γελάσασα" πόσις δ᾽ ἐλέησε νοήσας,

χειρί τέ μιν κατέρεξεν, ἔπος τ᾽ ἔφατ᾽ ἔκ τ᾽ ὀνόμαζεν"

485

“ δαιμονίη, μή μοί τι λίην axaylfeo θυμῷ"
3 / 4 > e¢ \ 9 > A\ “A ὃ “7 .
οὐ γάρ τίς μα ὑπέρ αἷσαν ἀνὴρ᾽ Διδι προϊάψει
μοῖραν δ᾽ οὔ τινά φημι πεφυγμένον ἔμμεναι ἀνδρῶν,
οὐ κακόν, οὐδὲ μὲν ἐσθλόν, ἐπὴν τὰ πρῶτα γένηται.
ὴ η

> 3 > 3. “ὦ A 3 > A ” ’
ἀλλ᾽ εἰς οἶκον ἰοῦσα τὰ σ᾽ αὐτῆς ἔργα κόμιξε,

490

’ 4
ἱστὸν T ἠλακάτην τε, Kal ἀμφιπόλοισι κέλευε
3᾽ 3 4 / > Ν 4
ἔργον ἐποίχεσθαι" πόλεμος δ᾽ ἄνδρεσσι μελήσει

βίην ἀγαθόν τε, but the line would be
improved by the omission of the particle
re altogether.

479. For εἴποι MSS. give εἴπῃσι, but
the former is doubtless the right reading,
for several reasons. (1.) The Schol. A
(Nikanor) on the line runs τὸ ἑξῆς, ‘‘ καί
ποτέ τις εἴποι ἐκ πολέμου dvidvra”: there-
fore εἴποι must have been the reading of
Ar. The same words are quoted in the
Schol. on N 352, and oz is written over
potin A. (2.) Out of 120 passages where
πατρός occurs in H. the a is nowhere
else short. (3.) The confident predic-
tion expressed by the subj. (cf. 459) is
quite out of place among the optatives
of the prayer. The mistake no doubt
arose from a reminiscence of 459. y’
ὅδε is also the reading of Ar., and
clearly superior to δ᾽ ὅγε, which is given
by all MSS.

480. ἀνιόντα appears to be governed
by εἴποι in the sense ‘‘say of him as he
returns”; but this construction seems
to be quite unique. The possible alter-
native is to translate ‘‘say to him”;
though this is hardly sufficiently sup-
ported by the passages quoted, M 60
(210, N 725), P 237, 334, 651, T 875, Ψ
91. In all of these εἶπε stands immedi-
ately with its object. We may however
compare 7 334, πολλοὶ δὲ μιν ἐσθλὸν
ἔειπον : from which we may explain the
clause here ““πατρὸς. . . duelvwy” as
ἃ sort of object-clause expressing the
content of the verb like ἐσθλόν. So we
have ἐὺ εἰπεῖν τινα, to speak well of a
person, a 302. These lines cannot fail

to recall the famous prayer in Soph. 447).
550—

ὦ παῖ, γένοιο πατρὸς εὐτυχέστερος,
τὰ δ᾽ ἄλλ᾽ ὅμοιος, καὶ γένοι᾽ ἂν οὐ κακός.

487. ὑπὲρ αἶσαν, see Β 155. “Arde
προιάψει, Α 8.

488. For the use of the middle perfect
participle see X 219, « 455; in a 18
πεφυγμένος fev ἀέθλων the gen. implies
escape from troubles in which the sufferer
was actually involved ; the accus. implies
successful avoidance (v. Nitzsch on a 18).
For the periphrastic perf. cf. πεφυλαγ-
μέρος εἶναι Ψ 343, and in the active E
873.

489. τὰ πρῶτα, once for all, see A 235.

490-3 recur with slight variations in
a 356-9, ὁ 350-3 ; and for the last line
and a half cf. also T 137, \ 352-3. The
present context is that which they suit

est (v. Scholia on a 356), and if there
has been any copying it is from here.
τὰ σ᾽ αὐτῆς, so edd. with one MS. (cae.
cavrijs), in accordance with the canon of
Arist. that the compound reflexive pro-
nouns are not foundin H. The elision
of the a of od is however not very natural,
and it is possible that the MSS. here are
right and the canon wrong ; v. La Roche,
Hom. Unt. Ῥ 139, according to whom
we must read αὑτὸν μέν (not αὐτόν μων»)
in 6 244. Nauck conj. τέ᾽ αὐτῆς.

492. ἐποίχεσθαι, properly of weaving
only: cf. A 31. But the word came to
be used vaguely, of ‘‘ going about” one’s
work as we say. Cf. » 34 δόρπον ἐποί-
χεσθαι, p 227, o 363 ἔργον.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Z (νι)

A 3 \ A / 9 ’ 3 4 3}

πᾶσιν, ἐμοὶ δὲ μάλιστα, τοὶ Ἰλίῳ ἐγγεγάασιν.
ὧς ἄρα φωνήσας κόρυθ᾽ εἵλετο φαίδιμος “Extwp

ἵππουριν" ἄλοχος δὲ φίλη οἰκόνδε βεβήκειν 495
> 4 . \ A / 4
ἐντροπαλιξομένη θαλερὸν κατὰ δάκρυ χέουσα.

4 > ww 7° 4 ba 4
αἶψα δ᾽ ἔπειθ᾽ ἵκανε δόμους ἐὺ ναιετάοντας
“Ἕκτορος ἀνδροφόνοιο, κυχήσατο δ᾽ ἔνδοθι πολλὰς
ἀμφιπόλους, τῇσιν δὲ γόον πάσῃσιν ἐνῶρσεν.
αἱ μὲν ἔτι ξωὸν γόον “Ἕκτορα ᾧ ἐνὶ οἴκῳ" ὅ00

> 4 ” 9 e / 4 ’
οὐ γὰρ μὲν ET ἔφαντο ὑποτροπον ἐκ πολέμοιο
ἵξεσθαι προφυγόντα μένος καὶ χεῖρας ᾿Αχαιῶν.

οὐδὲ Πάρις δήθυνεν ἐν ὑψηλοῖσι δόμοισιν,

3 9 “ > 9 , ’ a“
ἀλλ᾿ ὅ γ᾽ ἐπεὶ κατέδυ κλυτὰ τεύχεα ποικίλα χαλκῷ,
σεύατ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽ ἀνὰ ἄστυ, ποσὶ κραιπνοῖσι πεποιθώς. 505
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε τις στατὸς ἵππος, ἀκοστήσας ἐπὶ φάτνῃ,
δεσμὸν ἀπορρήξας θείῃ πεδίοιο κροαίνων,
εἰωθὼς λούεσθαι ἐυρρεῖος ποταμοῖο,
κυδιόων" ὑψοῦ δὲ κάρη ἔχει, ἀμφὶ δὲ χαῖται
ὦμοις ἀίσσονται" ὁ δ᾽ ἀγλαΐηφι πεποιθώς, 510
es e fe) 4 4 > wv N 4
ῥίμφα ἑ γοῦνα φέρει μετά τ᾽ ἤθεα καὶ νομὸν ἵππων"

493. For πᾶσιν ἐμοὶ δὲ μάλιστα
Bekker, followed by Nauck, conj. πᾶσι,
μάλιστα δ᾽ ἐμοί, which is probably right ;
as it not only admits the F of Fidly, but
brings the phrase. into agreement with
the similar passages, X 422, a 359, A
353, φ 358, Ψ 61.

500. γόον, an anomalous form, ‘‘ per-
haps an aor. from the noun γόος ; so
possibly ὅπλεσθαι to get ready, from
ὅπλον, and θέρμετο grew warm, from
θερμός," H. G. § 32. (Add κτύπε by
xruréw, Θ 75.) Cf. also the pf. part.
πεφυζότες, from φύζα, and other possible
instances, 7b. 8 26, 5. Others regard it
as a mistaken form for γόων (γοάω) which
occurs x 567. Fick (Hom. Od. p. 2)
reads γόαν, comparing yéAav in a lyric
fragment (Bergk, jr. adesp. 77).

505. With this and the following lines
compare X 21-28, and for the whole
famous simile, Verg. den. xi. 492-
497.

506. orards, ‘‘stalled,” cf. the word
sta-bulum. ἀκοστήσας: Hesych, ἀκοστή᾽"
κριθὴ παρὰ Κυπρίοις. Schol. A, κυρίως
δὲ πᾶσαι αἱ τροφαὶ ἀκοσταὶ καλοῦνται
παρὰ Θεσσαλοῖς. <A variant ἀγοστήσας
was explained to mean ‘‘ befouled,” from
an imaginary ἀγοστός = ῥύπος. The
former explanation must be accepted,

though the word dxoor is not known
elsewhere.

507. Cf. X 28, θέῃσι τιταινόμενος πε-
δίοι. On the form θείω οἵ. Curtius,
Verb. i. 804, Gr. Εἰ. p. 577. It would
be better to write θεύω for 6éFw in
Homer, as a proto-Epic form, on the
analogy of the Aeolic πνεύω, and the fut.
θεύσεσθαι.

510. ὁ δέ, ἃ nominativus pendens. For
similar anacolutha compare B 353, E
135, a 275.

511. ἤθεα, haunts: so the word is
used in — 411 of the sties in which the
swine sleep, and frequently for “ dwell-
ing-places” by Herodotos (v. 15, etc.)
von.dy, pasturage.

he swing of the dactylic verse has
been universally recognized as harmoniz-
ing with the horse’s gallop, like Vergil’s

**Quadrupedante putrem sonitu quatit
ungula campum.”

The effect depends not only on the
rhythm, but partly on the nasal con-
sonants and the p. It is dangerous to
lay too great stress however on the
rhythm: Mr. Nicholson has pointed out
that the passage which in all Homer
shews the largest consecutive number of
purely dactylic lines (five) occurs in the

228

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Ζ (στ)

ὡς υἱὸς ἸΙριάμοιο Ἰ]άρις κατὰ Ἰ]εργάμον ἄκρης,
4 [4 > 3 / 9 ,
τεύχεσι παμφαίνων ὥς T ἠλέκτωρ, ἐβεβήκειν

“ “ \ ’ ,
καγχαλόων, ταχέες δὲ πόδες φέρον.
“Ἕκτορα δῖον ἔτετμεν ἀδελφεόν, εὖτ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔμελλεν

αἶψα δ᾽ ἔπειτα
515

- στρέψεσθ' ἐκ χώρης, ὅθε ἣ odpufe γυναικί.
τὸν πρότερος προσέειπεν ᾿Αλέξανδρος θεοειδής"
ες 3 a3 @ [4 , 3 4 a
ἠθεῖ, ἡ μάλα δή σε Kal ἐσσύμενον κατερύκω
δηθύνων, οὐδ᾽ ἦλθον ἐναίσιμον, ὡς ἐκέλευες."

τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη κορυθαίολος “Extwp:

520

66 ὃ 4 3 3 Ψ , > 4 A ? f Ν
αιμὸνι᾽, οὐκ ἄν τίς τοι ἀνήρ, ὃς ἐναίσιμος εἴη,
, ΝΜ “
ἔργον ἀτιμήσειε μάχης, ἐπεὶ ἄλκιμός ἐσσι"

a \ 3 Ν “A
ἀλλὰ ἑκὼν μεθιεῖς τε καὶ οὐκ ἐθέλεις" τὸ δ᾽ ἐμὸν KAP
Ld 3 nw am ie \ / ” > 9 4
ἄχνυται ἐν θυμῷ, ὅθ᾽ ὑπὲρ σέθεν αἴσχε᾽ ἀκούω

\ Tod ΔΝ \ , “ a
προς LP@WV, Ob exovot πολὺν TOVOY ELVEKA σεῖο.

525

GAN ἴομεν": τὰ δ᾽ ὄπισθεν ἀρεσσόμεθ᾽, αἴ κέ ποθι Ζεὺς
δώῃ ἐπουρανίοισε θεοῖς αἰευγενέτῃσιν

κρητῆρα στήσασθαι ἐλεύθερον ἐν μεγάροισιν,

ἐκ Τροίης ἐλάσαντας ἐυκνήμιδας ᾿Αχαιούς.᾽"

description of Patroklos’ funeral! (Ψ
166-170. )

513. ἠλέκτωρ the Shiner, z.e. the sun
(Curt. At. no. 24; Skt. ark’-as = sun) ;
so T 398, ὥς τ’ ἠλέκτωρ ‘Treplwy. Mr.
Gladstone’s explanation, that the word
is another form of ἀλεκτρυών, has not
found followers.

514. καγχαλόων must mean ‘“‘laugh-
ing with self-satisfaction”; so K 565,
y 1,59. But in Τ' 43 it means ‘‘scoff-
ing” (in later Grk. καχάζξω: Lat.
cachinnus).

516. ὀάριζε, cf. X 127.

518. 4 δή: Paris exaggerates an
imaginary accusation by way of ‘‘ fishing
for a compliment” ; a most vivid touch,
which is partly lost if we put a note of
interrogation at the end (cf. Schol. A,
τὸ ἦ πευστικῶς Kal ἠθικῶς).

519. ἐναίσιμος both here and in 521
can be expressed by the Lat. iustus (here
iusto tempore). The connecting link is
the idea of ‘‘ proper measure ” ; cf. ὑπὲρ
αἶσαν, 333, etc.

522. ἔργον, what you effect in battle:
ef. A 470, 539.

523. τὸ is of course not the article,
but the accusative representing the fol-
lowing object-clause. On the expression

ἐν θυμῷ Hentze remarks that it virtu-
ally means ‘‘ my heart within me.” The

Homeric man half personifies his own
thoughts as something distinct from
him ; hence such phrases as tly poe ταῦτα
φίλος διελέξατο θυμός ; εἶπε πρὸς ὃν peya-
λήτορα θυμόν : compare the expression
in the Psalms, “1 commune with my
heart.” It is therefore wrong to com-
pare more or less rhetorical phrases like
‘‘in my heart of hearts.”

524. ἀκούω must here be subjunctive,
as A 80, etc. 86’ of course is ὅτε, not
ὅτι.

526. τὰ δέ, ‘‘the rest,” 7.e. the hard
words he has had to speak to Paris, now
and previously. ἀρεσσόμεθα, I will make
up for: exactly as A 362.

528. στήσασθαι, set up as the centre
of a banquet where the freeing of Troy
should be celebrated by libations to the
gods. Cf. I 202, κρητῆρα καθίστα. For
the middle Paley compares Theokr. vii.
150, κρητῆρ᾽ Ἡρακλῆ. γέρων ἐστάσατο
Χείρων.

529. ἐλάσαντας, we should have ex-

ected the dative: but the ‘‘accus. cum
infin.” construction has begun even in
H. to exercise the attractive power which
afterwards became so extensive (H. G.
§ 237-241), aided in this particular case
by the obvious ambiguity which would
arise from the vicinity of the other
dative θεοῖς.

IAIAAOS H (vr)

229

IAIAAO® H.

“Ἕκτορος καὶ Αἴαντος μονομαχία.

Φ

νεκρῶν ἀναίρεσις.

ὧς εἰπὼν πυλέων ἐξέσσυτο φαίδιμος “Ἑίκτωρ,

τῷ δ᾽ ἅμ᾽ ᾿Αλέξανδρος xl ἀδελφεός" ἐν δ᾽ ἄρα θυμῷ
ἀμφότεροι μέμασαν πολεμίξειν ἠδὲ μάχεσθαι.
ὡς δὲ θεὸς ναύτῃσιν ἐελδομένοισιν ἔδωκεν

Η

The seventh book falls naturally into
the two parts indicated by the Greek
title. After a short introduction, which
really belongs to the preceding book
(1-16), the single combat of Alias and
Hector occupies more than half the rest
(17-312), and is then followed by a dis-
tinct section which relates the burnin
of the dead and the building of the wall
round the Greek camp. The two parts
must be treated separately, as each has
its own difficulties.

The first part may be fairly counted
among the best pieces of the Iliad. The
casting of the lots is a highly spirited
and picturesque scene, and the dialogue
between Hector and Aias is admirably
characteristic of the two heroes; it is
only in the words of Menelaos (see note
on 98) that we find anything at variance
with the general tone of the epos. It is
hardly likely that any doubts would
have been suggested as to the genuine-
ness of this part but for the existence
of Book 111. But if we take it in con-
nexion with that book, the inconsist-
ency of the two is striking. It is in it-
self somewhat surprising that two duels
should be fought on the same day;
but when we remember the very remark-
able manner in which the first had
ended, by an unpardonable violation of
a truce made with all possible solemnities,
and then find that the second is entered
upon by the two parties without apology
or reproach, the difficulty is one which

can hardly be explained. Nor can it be
smoothed over by the excuse of artistic
propriety ; for no canon of art will justify
what we have before us; a duel which
is proposed as a decisive ordeal, designed
to finish the war, is succeeded at the
distance of a few hours by another which
is a mere trial of prowess, entered upon
ἐξ ἔριδος, as is expressly declared. This
surely approaches near to the limits of
an anticlimax. And the sense of incon-
sistency with the third book is infinitely
heightened by the fact that we do find
in our text a brief allusion in Hector’s
words, 69-72, to the violation of the
oaths. If this discreditable incident had
been absolutely ignored, it might have
been possible to explain the fact by say-
ing that the third book, though in the
chronological sequence only a few hours
distant, is, in fact, to a hearer sepa-
rated by a much longer interval, so that
the whole of the first episode might have
been considered to have served its pur-
pose and been forgotten. Hector’s almost
cynical allusion seems as if designed to
exclude this possibility, and to bring
the incongruity into the most glaring
ight.

ἴῃ any case then we must undoubtedly
begin by cutting out these lines, while
at the same time it may be remarked
that there isin the MSS. what may be
a valuable hint to shew that they were
not originally to be found here; for in
line 73 the reading of all the MSS. is
ὑμῖν μὲν γάρ, for which editors have
accepted the reading of Aristarchos, ὑμῖν

230 IAIAAOS H (vin)

οὖρον, ἐπεί Ke κάμωσιν ἐνυξέστῃς ἐλάτῃσιν 5

/ , 4 > \ - ,

πόντον ἐλαύνοντες, καμάτῳ δ᾽ ὑπὸ γυῖα λέλυνται,

Φ ¥ \ / > , ’

ὧς ἄρα τὼ Τρώεσσιν ἐελδομένοισι φανήτην.

i 4 3 ¢ ͵ e ‘ en 9 ’ φ
ἔνθ᾽ ἑλέτην ὁ μὲν υἱὸν ᾿Αρηιθόοιο ἄνακτος,

δ᾽ ἐν γὰρ.

It hardly needs pointing out
that the δέ is required only if 69-72
stand in the text, while if they be cut
out the speech runs on quite naturally
with the μὲν γάρ in 73.

With this omission once made there
ceases to be any reason for supposing the
author of this episode to have had any
knowledge of I and A; and we have a
rational ground for holding that we have
here the oldest form of the duel incident,
subsequently developed into that be-
tween Menelaos and Paris. It is possible,
as Christ has suggested, that these two
forms of the same idea may have been
used at first as alternative passages, the
one longer and the other shorter, of
which either one, but not both, could
be used in making up an Iliad for the
purposes of recitation. In any case to
a hearer they are separated as they stand
by a sufficiently long interval to make
their inconsistency the less obvious ; but
to hold that they were composed in their
present form for their present places in
a poem conceived from the first as a
whole, is hardly within the bounds of
reason.

We now pass to the second part of the
book, lines 313-482, where the difficulties
are of a yet more serious nature. Con-
troversy has long raged round the build-
ing of the wall by the Greeks in the
tenth year of the siege; Thucydides
pointed out the inherent improbability
of such a delay, and the words of = 31-32
seem to imply that the wall was built
when the ships were first drawn up on
the land. The fact seems to be that as
the wall is not mentioned in the earlier
battles, which are all fought out in the
open plain, while it is an important ele-
ment in the part of the story to which we
are now coming, it seemed to some rhap-
sode that a specific account of the way
in which it was introduced into the story
was required, and that he chose this
place for interpolating it ; possibly using,
as I have suggested on line 340, a piece
of older poetry in which the building was
described, but at an earlier period of the
siege. It has been argued that, though
the wall may, according to the tradition,
have been built at the time of the first

landing, yet it might with poetical pro-
priety be brought in at this point of a
poem which designs to give a complete
picture of the siege in the space of a few
weeks ; just as Priam may thus be de-
fended for not knowing by sight the
Greek heroes before the Teichoscopy (see
introduction to ἢ). But if tical
propriety is to be made the standard, we
should look for some more obvious
motive for the selection of this point for
the first building. The Greeks have met
with no reverses sufficient to demand a
further defence ; and if it be replied that
the absence of Achilles would be enough
to make them anxious as to their posi-
tion, it is strange that there should be
no allusion to such a feeling in the
speech of Nestor, from which it could
hardly be absent if the poet had it in
his mind. Further, the whole descrip-
tion of the building is very hurried and
even obscure, little resembling the style
in which an event of importance to the
future of the story is generally told. On
the other hand there are passages against
which in themselves no serious objection
can be raised ; the burying of the dead,
the Trojan assembly, and the description
of the primitive market with which the
book ends. I see no reason why these
should not all be pieces of the original
story, not very artistically joined to-
gether by passages which are chiefly
made up of lines from other parts of the
Homeric poems, and contain a good
many obvious interpolations, including
a long one which was unanimously con-
demned by the judgment of antiquity
(442-464). Hence arises an obscurity
in the chronological sequence of the
days which can hardly be paralleled in
Homer.

1. πυλέων, Bentley conj. πόλεως or pa
πυλέων, as the gen. plur. fem. in -εων
is almost always counted as a single
syllable. The only exceptions appear to
be M 340 καὶ πυλέων and ¢ 191 ἐκτὸς
θυρέων. (He should however have rather
suggested πύλιος, as πόλεως is not found
in H. except as a variant in one or two
passages, A 168, T 52.)

5. There is the same variation in the
MSS. here between ἐπεί xe xduwow and

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ H (vit)

231

"Αρνῃ ναιετάοντα Μενέσθιον, ὃν κορυνήτης
γείνατ᾽ ᾿Αρηίθοος καὶ Φυλομέδουσα βοῶπις" 10
Ἕκτωρ δ᾽ ᾿Ηιονῆα βάλ᾽ ἔγχεϊ ὀξυόεντι

» 439 e \ a 9 4 ἴον A
auxev ὑπὸ στεφάνης ευχάλκου, λῦσε δὲ γυία.
Γλαῦκος δ᾽ Ἱππολόχοιο πάις, Λυκίων ἀγὸς ἀνδρῶν,
Ἰφίνοον βάλε δουρὶ κατὰ κρατερὴν ὑσμίνην

, “ ’ , ἢ , .
Δεξιάδην, ἵππων ἐπιάλμενον ὠκειάων, 1ὅ
ὦμον" ὁ δ᾽ ἐξ ἵππων χαμάδις πέσε, λύντο δὲ γυῖα.
τοὺς δ᾽ ὡς οὖν ἐνόησε θεὰ γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη,

᾿Αργείους ὀλέκοντας ἐνὶ κρατερῇ ὑσμίνῃ,
βῆ ῥα κατ᾽ Οὐλύμποιο καρήνων ἀίξασα

Ἴλιον εἰς ἱερήν.

τῇ δ᾽ ἀντίος ὥρνυτ᾽ ᾿Απόλλων 20

Περγάμου ἐκκατιδών, Τρώεσσι δὲ βούλετο νίκην.
ἀλλήλοισι δὲ τώ γε συναντέσθην παρὰ φηγῷ"
‘ / , wv Α 2. 3 ’
τὴν πρότερος προσέειπεν ἄναξ Διὸς υἱὸς ᾿Απολλων"
“ τίπτε σὺ δὴ αὖ μεμαυῖα, Διὸς θύγατερ μεγάλοιο,
ἦλθες ἀπ᾽ Οὐλύμποιο, μέγας δέ σε θυμὸς ἀνῆκεν; 25
ἢ ἵνα δὴ Δαναοῖσι μάχης ἑτεραλκέα νίκην

ἐπεὶ κεκάμωσιν asin Α 168. Aristarchos
seems to have preferred the former, as
Ariston. says ἔν τισι γράφεται ἐπῆν ἐὰν
δὲ οὕτως ἔχῃ, προενεκτέον ὑφ᾽ ἕν, κεκάμωσι,
ὡς λελάχωσι.

6. πόντον ἐλαύνοντες, here only for
the frequent phrase (in Od.) ἅλα τύπτον-
res. Schol. A mentions a variant épéc-
σ "0 F h 1 ]

9. For the title κορυνήτης see line
138, and for the difficulties involved in
the legend, 149.

10. βοῶπις is used of a mortal as in T
144, where see the note.

12. στεφάνη seems to be merely one
of the numerous synonyms for the helmet:
see Καὶ 30, ἐπὶ στεφάνην κεφαλῆφιν ἀείρας
θήκατο χαλκείην. It can hardly mean
any special part, as here it covers the
neck, while in A 96 it goes over the fore-
head. There is no archaeological evidence
of anything that can be called the “brim”
of the helmet. For λῦσε Ar. read λύντο,
as in 16.

15. érvéApevov, compare E 46; the
aor. part. here is ἃ reason against regard-
ing ἐπιβησόμενον there as a future; it
can only mean, ‘‘just mounted” on his
chariot.

17. The Argives appear to be routed
after their success in E with very little
trouble; but this is no doubt in order

to avoid the monotony of fighting. The
ἀριστεία of Diomedes, having been fully
developed, is now dropped. The turning
of the battle—which here has no great
effect upon the story—is told in a con-
densed form ; 17-18 = E 711-12, 19 = B
167, 21 = A 508.

22. φηγῷ, the oak tree near the Skaian
gate, see on E 693.

25. θυμὸς ἀνῆκεν : this phrase, which
is peculiar to the Iliad, occurs only here
and & 395 without an infinitive expressing
the aim. The passage in ᾧ seems to be
a reminiscence of the present lines.

26. The epithet ἑτεραλκής occurs only
with νέκη, except in O 738, where we
have ἑτεραλκέα δῆμον. The idea in all
cases seems to be ‘‘a victory giving
might to the other side,” z.e. turning the
tide of battle, ὅταν οἱ νικῶντες νικῶνται, ἣ
ὅταν οἱ πρώην νικηθέντες νικήσωσιν, Schol.
A; in O the δῆμος is a reserve to change
the tide of war. It is easy to see how
from this meaning is derived the use of
érepadxys in later Greek (Herod.) in the
sense of anceps pugna, a battle where the
tide keeps turning. This however cannot
be deduced from either of the alternatives
which have been proposed—(1) “decisive”
victory, giving might to one only of the
two parties; (2) victory ‘‘of other
strength,” 1.6. won by divine interfer-

282

IAIAAOZ H (vu)

δῷς, ἐπεὶ οὔ τε Τρῶας ἀπολλυμένους ἐλεαίρεις.
ἀλλ᾽ εἴ μοί τι πίθοιο, τό κεν πολὺ κέρδιον εἴη"
νῦν μὲν παύσωμεν πόλεμον καὶ δηιοτῆτα
σήμερον" ὕστερον αὖτε μαχήσοντ᾽, εἰς ὅ κε τέκμωρ 80
Ἰλώου εὕρωσιν, ἐπεὶ ὧς φίλον ἔπλετο θυμῷ
4 a > , / 4 » 93
ὑμῖν ἀθανάτῃσι, διαπραθέειν τόδε ἄστυ.
τὸν δ᾽ αὗτε προσέειπε θεὰ γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη"
“ὧδ᾽ ἔστω, ἑκάεργε" τὰ γὰρ φρονέουσα καὶ αὐτὴ
ἤλθον ἀπ᾿ Οὐλύμποιο μετὰ Τρῶας καὶ ᾿Αχαιούς. 35
3 > ν A / ’ , > ”~ 39
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε, TAS μέμονας πόλεμον καταπαυσέμεν ἀνδρῶν ;
τὴν δ᾽ αὗτε προσέειπεν ἄναξ Διὸς υἱὸς ᾿Απόλλων"
“"Exropos ὄρσωμεν κρατερὸν μένος ἱπποδάμοιο,
ἤν τινά που Δαναῶν προκαλέσσεται οἰόθεν οἷος

ence (Mr. Monro; in O 788 ‘‘a people
to gain fresh help from”). We may
compare for the sense of ἕτερος in com-
position Ζεὺς ἑτερορρεπής, Aesch. Supp.
408 ; érepbppowos = “ambiguous, uneven,”
and the only other compound of ἕτερος
in Homer (in a rather, late passage, how-
ever) ἑτερήμερος, ‘‘ changing from day to
day,” λ 303. Compare also Aesch. Pers.
950.

28. This line is a simple but good
instance of the way in which the condi-
tional sentence has been formed from two
originally independent paratactic clauses.
The optative in what we now call the
‘‘ protasis’”’ has its original meaning of a
wish ; the apodosis 15: added to shew the
result of the wish, with κεν to refer back,
‘‘in that case.” Thus the line really
means ‘‘ Ah would that thou mightest
hearken to me! Then it would far
better ’’ (L. Lange, EI, p. 52); and we
might even put a colon instead of a
comma alter πίθοιο. ; h A

30. τέκμωρ, properly a thing estab-
lished ; hence Ἢ Ν A 526, the deter-
mination, settling of a resolve; or, as
here, a fixed goal, a limit of destiny.
This is illustrated by 1. 70 below, ‘‘ Zeus
settles an appointed time, against which
you are to take Troy or yourselves be
vanquished.” Hence, as Buttmann re-
marks, comes the later sense of ‘‘ foretell-
ing by a sign”; for one who foretells
an event by personal divine knowledge,
like Kirke (« 563, ἃ 111), ‘‘ appoints,”
‘*destines” it to mortals; toa god the
two are identical. In N 20 Poseidon
ἵκετο τέκμωρ, Alyds, ὑ.6. “the goal which
he had set for his journey ” ; II 472 τοῖο

εὕρετο τέκμωρ, “‘attained the end at
which he aimed.” The only question
which can arise on the present

is whether τέκμωρ means ‘‘the limit set
by fate for Ilios,” or ‘‘ the goal set for
themselves by the Greeks with regard to
Ilios.” Ameis, on the analogy of II 472,
accepts the latter interpretation. There
however the verb is εὕρετο in the middle,
which makes some difference (v. however
ὃ 374), while here it is in the active ;
and the similarity of 1. 70 seems decisive
in favour of the former: “let them fight
on” (the fut. gives the sense ‘‘for all I
care’’) ‘‘till they find out by experience
the limit set by fate for Ilios.” So I
48, 418.

32. For ἀθανάτῃσι Aristophanes read
ἀμφοτέρῃσι, Zenod. ἀθανάτοισι.

36. For μέμονα with fut. infin. cf. B
544, o 522, etc. The pres. and aor. infini-
tives are however rather more common.

39. οἰόθεν οἷος, which recurs 1. 226, is,
with αἰνόθεν αἰνῶς, 97, a phrase peculiar
to this book, and hard to explain. Of
αἰνόθεν αἰνῶς we can only say that it is a
case of emphasis produced by the familiar
resource of reduplication, as in μέγας
μεγαλωστί, ὄψιμον ὀψιτέλεστον : no one
has succeeded in explaining why the
local suffix -6ev, with its very definite
signification, should be used for the
purpose. In οἰόθεν οἷος the meaning
seems to be ‘‘man to man,” and the
repetition will then have a ground
beyond mere emphasis. Bentley sug-
gested οἷον, Doderlein οἵῳ (with payé-
σασθαι); and either of these would make
the phrase a little more intelligible.
The closest analogy is perhaps to be

TAIAAO® H vir.)

233

3 / , / > > A A
ἀντίβιον μαχέσασθαι ἐν αἰνῇ δηιοτῆτι:" 40
e δέ 2 9 , , 3.
οἱ δέ K ἀγασσάμενοι χαλκοκνήμιδες ᾿Αχαιοὶ
οἷον ἐπόρσειαν πολεμίζειν “Extope dip.”
ὧς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησε θεὰ γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη.
τῶν δ᾽ “Ἕλενος, Πριάμοιο φίλος παῖς, σύνθετο θυμῷ
βουλήν, ἥ ῥα θεοῖσιν ἐφήνδανε μητιόωσιν. 45
“ de “9 Ary > OA ’ Ν A ΝΜ
στῆ δὲ παρ “Extop ἰὼν καί piv πρὸς μῦθον ἔειπεν"
“Ἕκτορ υἱὲ Πριάμοιο, Διὲ μῆτιν ἀτάλαντε,

φ 7
ἦ ῥά νύ μοί τι πίθοιο ;

κασίγνητος δέ τοί εἰμι"

ἄλλους μὲν κάθισον Τρῶας καὶ πάντας ᾿Αχαιούς,

3 \ Ἁ 4 3 “A [τὰ wv
αὐτὸς δὲ προκάλεσσαι ᾿Αχαιῶν ὅς τις ἄριστος 50
ἀντίβιον μαχέσασθαι ἐν αἰνῇ δηιοτῆτι:"
οὐ γάρ πώ τοι μοῖρα θανεῖν καὶ πότμον ἐπισπεῖν.
ὧς γὰρ ἐγὼν ὄπ᾽ ἄκουσα θεῶν αἰευγενετάων."

ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, “Ἑκτωρ δ᾽ aire χάρη μέγα μῦθον ἀκούσας,
es 9» “ ἮΝ ’ > 7 ’

καί ῥ᾽ ἐς μέσσον ἰὼν Τρώων ἀνέεργε φάλαγγας, 55

‘ Α i¢ [4 x ς 4 a
μέσσου δουρὸς ἑλών" τοὶ δ᾽ ἱδρύνθησαν ἅπαντες.
κὰδ δ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνων εἷσεν ἐυκνήμιδας ᾿Αχαιούς.
κὰδ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίη τε καὶ ἀργυρότοξος ᾿Απόλλων
ἑξζέσθην ὄρνισιν ἐοικότες αἰγυπιοῖσιν
φηγῷ ἐφ᾽ ὑψηλῇ πατρὸς Διὸς αἰγιόχοιο, 60

found in αὐτὸς ἀφ᾽ αὑτοῦ, αὐτὸς καθ᾽
αὑτόν. Phrases like ἄλλοθεν ἄλλος, Β
75, have only a superficial resemblance,
as in them each word has its distinct
and separate meaning. -

41. ἀγασσάμενοι, either “admiring”
his chivalry, or ‘‘jealous” of their
honour (ef. Ψ 639 ἀγασσάμενοι περὶ νίκης
—a doubtful line however), “grudging”
him the advantage. Observe the change
of mood in ἐπόρσειαν, these two lines
being added independently, and express-
ing the remoter result.

44, θυμῴ, i.c. not by the outer ear,
but by his power as a soothsayer, Z 76.

48. For a wish expressed by the
(potential) optative in a question cf.
A 93. The clausg is virtually a protasis
of which the apodosis is here the imper.
κάθισον, as in A τλαίης κεν (L. Lange,
EI, p. 75).

53. This line was athetized by Ar. on
the ground that Helenos had understood
the counsel of the gods only διὰ τῆς
μαντικῆς. This is a frivolous objection ;
prophets have always been accustomed
themselves to describe the divine ad-

monitions as a voice speaking to them,
even when the outer world gives a
different name to the communication.
The previous line, though not rejected
by Ar., is open to far graver objection.
For it corresponds to nothing in the
words of Athene or Apollo above, and
seems quite inconsistent with Hector’s
words in 77, to say nothing of his
behaviour in 216.

54-6 =I 76-8. The joy of Hector is
rather less appropriate here than in I.

59. There can be no doubt that the
gods are supposed by the poet to take
the forms of birds. Some have under-
stood ἐοικότες to mean “after the manner,”
not ‘‘ in the likeness,” of birds; a trans-
lation which might be supported by B
337. But there is certainly no gain of
dignity in supposing the gods to sit in
human form at the top of a high tree.
A similar transformation of Athene into
a swallow takes place in x 240. The
explanation of one Scholiast, ὡς ἐφίζει
ὄρνεον φυτῷ, οὕτω καὶ αὐτοὶ ῥαδίως éxa-
θέσθησαν, is hardly likely to gain much
acceptance.

284

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ H (νπ.)

ἀνδράσι τερπόμενοι" τῶν δὲ στίχες εἵατο πυκναί,

ἀσπίσι καὶ κορύθεσσι καὶ ἔγχεσι πεφρικυῖαι.

οἵη δὲ Ζεφύροιο ἐχεύατο πόντον ἔπι φρὶξ

ὀρνυμένοιο νέον, μελάνει δέ τε πόντος ὑπ᾽ αὐτῆς,

τοῖαι ἄρα στίχες εἴατ᾽ ᾿Αχαιῶν τε Τρώων τε 65
ἐν πεδίῳ. “Extwp δὲ μετ᾽ ἀμφοτέροισιν ἔειπεν"

“ κέκλυτέ μευ, Τρῶες καὶ ἐυκνήμιδες ᾿Αχαιοί,

ὄφρ᾽ εἴπω, τά με θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσι κελεύει.

ὅρκια μὲν Kpovidns ὑψίξυγος οὐκ ἐτέλεσσεν,

ἀλλὰ κακὰ φρονέων τεκμαίρεται ἀμφοτέροισιν, 70
εἰς ὅ κεν ἢ ὑμεῖς Τροίην ἐύπυργον ἕλητε,

ἢ αὐτοὶ παρὰ νηνσὶ δαμείετε ποντοπόροισιν.

ὑμῖν μὲν γὰρ ἔασιν ἀριστῆες Παναχαιῶν"

τῶν νῦν ὅν τινα θυμὸς ἐμοὶ μαχέσασθαι ἀνώγει,

δεῦρ᾽ ἴτω ἐκ πάντων πρόμος ἔμμεναι “Ἑϊκτορι δίῳ. 75

63. φρίξ, lit. ‘‘shudder,” the ripple
before a rising wind. Cf. φρίξ μέλαινα
ὃ 402, Φ 126, and for the gen. Ζεφύροιο,
ὑπὸ φρικὸς Bopéw Ψ 692.

64. Aristarchos read πόντον ὑπ᾽ αὐτῇ,
taking μελάνει as transitive. There was
another reading πόντος ὑπ᾽ αὐτὸν (sc.
Ζέφυρον). The reading of the text seems
to be eclectic, but it is strongly sup-
ported by μ 406, ἤχλυσε δὲ πόντος ὑπ᾽
αὐτῆς. Ar. was no doubt led to read
πόντον by the fact that verbs in -dyw
and -alyw are almost always transitive
in Homer. We have however in T 42
κυδάνω intr. by the side of the trans. use
in = 73, and so ἱζάνω is intrans. except
in Ψ 258. Curtius (Vb. i. 265) remarks
moreover that μελάνω appears to be
formed as a denominative from the
noun-stem μελαν-, in which case the
analogy of verbs where -av- is a forma-
tive of the present stem would not hold:
but it may come directly from the root ;
cf. μολ-ύνω by μόλος, which are doubt-
less connected (#é. no. 551).

69-72. These lines, which must refer
to the violation of the truce in A, are
rejected by a large proportion of critics,
and seem intolerable in the present place
(see the introduction to this book).
For the meaning of τεκμαίρεται εἰς ὅ
xe, see on 1. 30. Itis not at all necessary
to supply κακά after τεκμαίρεται : the
object of the verb, as there indicated,
is the whole relative clause εἰς ὅ κε, etc.,
‘* appoints us a limit, viz. until.”

72. The MSS all give Sapelere. Some

have taken this to be an opt., but there
is no analogy whatever for such a form.
The best attested form of the subj. is
δαμήετε, which is restored by Bekker
and La Roche. A full statement of the
general question between εἰ and ἡ is
given by Mr. Monro, H. G. p. 316, App.

. Christ however holds that the forms
with e really represent an old sub-
junctive in -w, analogous to the Doric
and Sanskrit futures κρυψίω bhétsjami
(Rhein. Mus. xxxvi. 28). He has how-
ever to alter the MS. reading in many
passages where it gives ἡ before ε and 7.
In the conflict of traditional testimony
it can only be said that his view is
sufficiently probable to justify us in
retaining the MS. reading here. See on
efy in 340.

73. The MSS. give μέν, for which Ar.
read δ᾽ ἐν. There can be little doubt
that μέν was the original reading, only
changed to δ᾽ ἐν after the interpolation
of 69-72.

74. For viv ὅν twa Didymus mentions
a variant εἰ καί τινα. ἀνώγει, so MSS.;
La Roche reads ἀνώγῃ: he points out
that the use of the subjunctive is invari-
able after os τις, where used, as here,
to express a supposition: A 230, N 234
and often (except apparently 8 114). In
such a point the MS. reading is of no
authority.

75. The Alexandrian critics took of-
fence at Hector applying to himself the
epithet δῖος. It will however be felt
by any one who is in sympathy with the

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Η (ἢ) 235

Φ \ ’ ‘\ > ΨΝ > 9 \ / ΝΜ
ὧδε δὲ μυθέομαι, Ζεὺς δ᾽ ἄμμ᾽ ἐπὶ μάρτυρος ἔστω:
εἰ μέν κεν ἐμὲ κεῖνος ἔλῃ ταναήκεϊ χαλκῷ,
/ 7 3 n
τεύχεα συλήσας φερέτω κοίλας ἐπὶ νῆας,
΄“ \ oY 7 > 9 \ / 4 /
σῶμα δὲ οἴκαδ᾽ ἐμὸν δόμεναι πάλιν, ὄφρα πυρός με
Τρῶες καὶ Τρώων ἄλοχοι λελάχωσι θανόντα. 80
εἰ δέ κ᾽ ἐγὼ τὸν Edo, δώῃ δέ μοι εὖχος ᾿Απόλλων,
4 , Ν Ν e \
τεύχεα συλήσας οἴσω προτὶ ἵλιον ἱρὴν
“ Ν 9 4 e Ul
καὶ κρεμόω προτὶ νηὸν ᾿Απόλλωνος ἑκάτοιο,
Ν ’ 2. δ fe} 3 3 7
τὸν δὲ νέκυν ἐπὶ νῆας ἐυσσέλμους ἀποδώσω,
δ e 4 ᾽ U 9
ὄφρα ἑ ταρχύσωσι κάρη κομόωντες ᾽Αχαιοὶ 85
A 4 / e 4 3 ae ‘
σῆμά τέ οἱ Yevwow ἐπὶ πλατεῖ “Ελλησπόντῳ"
καί ποτέ τις εἴπῃσι καὶ ὀψυγόνων ἀνθρώπων,
νηὶ πολυκλήιδι πλέων ἐπὶ οἴνοπα πόντον"
ς« 3 \ \ 4 ΄΄ι ᾽ [οἱ
ἀνδρὸς μὲν Tobe σῆμα πάλαι κατατεθνηῶτος,
Ψ > , 4 / {4 >
ὅν ποτ᾽ ἀριστεύοντα κατέκτανε φαίδιμος “Ἑκτωρ. 90
φ 7 > 9 \ > 9 N 4 3 > 3 -“" 9
ὧς ποτέ τις ἐρέει" τὸ δ᾽ ἐμὸν κλέος οὔ ποτ᾽ ὀλεῖται.
o ν ἢ eon y , > A > 7 , A
as ἔφαθ᾽, ot δ᾽ dpa πάντες ἀκὴν ἐγένοντο σιωπῆ᾽
αἴδεσθεν μὲν ἀνήνασθαι, δεῖσαν δ᾽ ὑποδέχθαι.
ὀψὲ δὲ δὴ Μενέλαος ἀνίστατο καὶ μετέειπεν

heroic age that this is no more than a
somewhat naive touch of self-conscious-
ness such as is quite characteristic of
Hector. δῖος indeed is in Homer little
more than an epithet of ordinary courtesy.
Hentze however remarks that the only
other instance in Homer where a speaker
alluding to himself by his own name
adds a laudatory epithet is in Θ 22,
where Zeus calls himself Ζῆν᾽ ὕπατον
μήστωρα. We may compare Vergil’s
‘*Sum pius Aeneas.”

76. ἐπὶ , so A, as two words:
cf. B 302 for the form μάρτυρος. The
other MSS. give ἐπιμάρτυρος, which may
be defended by the analogy of ἐπιβού-
κολος, ὑφηνίοχος, etc.: see Z 19. The
sense is the same in either case.

79. δόμεναι : for the infin. used for the
imper. of the third person see on I’ 285,
2 92; H. 6. § 241.

85. ταρχύσωσι, cf. II 456, 674. The
word is connected with τάριχος, and
probably with τέρσειν, torreo (Curtius,
ἰδ p. 729), and must therefore mean
something more than simple burying.
Helbig (Hom. Epos, pp. 42, 43) suggests
with great probability that it alludes to
some process of partial mummification,
such as seems to have been used on the
bodies found at Mykenai; most likely

by the use of honey as a preservative.
This was known in Babylon in early
times, and was used when Agesilaos the
Spartan king died in Egypt. The
custom of placing pots of honey on the
bier (see Ψ 170) may be a relic of this
forgotten usage.

87. For καί ποτέ τις εἴπῃσι followed
by ὥς ποτέ τις ἐρέει cf. Z 459. The dif-
ference between subj. and future is only
that the former expresses a confident
assurance in the speaker’s mind, con-
nected with the suppositions he has been
making ; while the future simply makes
an assertion independently of the man-
ner in which the speaker regards it as
connected with himself. It is well
known that there are several ancient
grave-mounds on the shore of the Hel-
lespont (examined by Dr. Schliemann,
see his Jlios) ; these no doubt suggested
the speech of Hector.

94. ὀψὲ δὲ δή is the regular com-
plement of the formal line 92 in books
H-I, where the two go together six
times; and so twice in the Odyssey
(η 155, ν 321), but not elsewhere in
Homer. Indeed the word ὀψέ occurs
eighteen times in these three books and
the Odyssey, against three times in the
rest of the {liad (once each in A, P, Φ).

226

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ H (vn.)

νείκει ὀνειδίζων, μέγα δὲ στεναχίξετο θυμῷ" 9ὅ
o ” ’ ἊΝ ’ / > » 99 ,

ὦ μοι, ἀπειλητῆρες, ᾿Αχαιίδες, οὐκέτ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοί"

\ ‘ , 7 ΣΝ > ἢ 3. A

ἢ μὲν δὴ λώβη τάδε γ᾽ ἔσσεται αἰνόθεν αἰνῶς,
εἰ μή τις Δαναῶν νῦν “Exropos ἀντίος εἶσιν.
᾽ > ¢ a \ ΄ Ψ a ,
ἀλλ᾽ ὑμεῖς μὲν πάντες ὕδωρ καὶ γαῖα γένοισθε,

Ψ 9 @ 3 4 3 \ ΝΜ
ἥμενοι αὖθι ἕκαστοι ἀκήριοι, ἀκλεὲς αὔτως"

100

τῷδε δ᾽ ἐγὼν αὐτὸς θωρήξομαι" αὐτὰρ ὕπερθεν

νίκης πείρατ᾽ ἔχονται ἐν ἀθανάτοισι θεοῖσιν."
φ ΝΜ ᾽ ’ὔ 4 0
ὡς ἄρα φωνήσας κατεδύσετο τεύχεα καλά.

ἔνθα κέ τοι, Μενέλαε, φάνη βιότοιο τελευτὴ

“Ἕκτορος ἐν παλάμῃσιν, ἐπεὶ πολὺ φέρτερος ἦεν,

105

εἰ μὴ ἀναΐξαντες ἕλον βασιλῆες ᾿Αχαιῶν"
αὐτός τ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδης εὐρὺ κρείων ᾽Αγαμέμνων

95. For νείκει ὀνειδίζων there was ἃ
variant, perhaps conjectural but very
plausible, velke’, which Didymus men-
tions as occurring in “some of the notes”’
(ἔν τισι τῶν ὑπομνημάτων) of Aristarchos.
It will stand for velxee, added asyndetic-
ally as a continuation of μετέειπεν. (For
these ‘‘notes,” which were regarded as
of inferior authority to the συγγράμματα
or dissertations, see Ludwich, p. 24.)

96. See B 235. This quotation from
Thersites intensifies the singular contrast
between the whole of the present address
and the tone of courteous regret which is
elsewhere so characteristic of the attitude
of Menelaos towards the Greeks. For
alvd@ev αἰνῶς see on line 39.

99. The line is a curse, ‘‘May you
rot away to the elements of which you
were made.” The legend that man was
formed out of water and clay is very
common ; e.g. in Hesiod, Opp. 61, when
Zeus creates Pandora, he commands
Hephaistos γαῖαν ὕδει φύρειν : and the
same idea occurs in the lines quoted by
Schol. A from Xenophanes, which are
to be read
πάντες yap γαίης τε καὶ ὕδατος ἐκγενόμεσθα"
ἐκ γαίης γὰρ πάντα, καὶ εἰς γῆν πάντα

τελευτᾷ.

1100. ἀκλεές,ρ neuter, adverbially.
Others write ἀκλέες, nom. plur. by
hyphaeresis for ἀκλεέες, which perhaps
has sufficient analogy to support it. See
H. G. § 105, 4; Buttmann, Zexil. 296.

101. τῷδε, dative as with μάχεσθαι,
ete.

102. πείρατα : it is hard to say whether

in this and similar phrases the word has
an abstract sense, “the issues of battle,”
or a physical, ‘‘the rope-ends” (see μ
51, 162); the contending armies being
regarded as puppets pulled this way and
that by the powers above, who thus
become ‘‘wire-pullers” in the most
modern sense. The latter explanation,
which was adopted by Ar. (Schol. N 359),
though at variance with the general
Homeric conception of the gods, who do
not usually need such grossly corporeal
means of influence, seems to be indicated
by phrases like κατ᾽ ἶσα μάχην ἐτάνυσσε
Κρονίων A 336, εἰ δὲ θεός περ ἴσον τείνειεν
πολέμου τέλος T 10], ἔριδα κρατερὴν érd-
vuoce Κρονίων II 662, αἰνοτάτην ἔριδα
πτολέμοιο τάνυσσαν Ξ 389: as well as in
the very difficult lines

τοὶ δ᾽ ἔριδος κρατερῆς καὶ ὁμοιίου πολέμοιο
πεῖραρ ἑπαλλάξαντες ἐπ᾽ ἀμφοτέροισι τάνυσ-
σαν,

N 358-9. ὁ may perhaps compare the
symbolical action of the Ephesians, when
they connected the temple of their goddess
by a rope with the city walls to enable
her to help the defenders (Herod. i. 26),
and of Polykrates who dedicated Rheneia
to Apollo by binding it to Delos with a
chain. The phrases in question are
therefore perhaps to be regarded as con-
ventional survivals from a more primitive
stage of religious belief which did not
die out till a later period from the region
of popular superstition.

104. βιότοιο τελευτή, γράφεται καὶ
θανάτοιο τελευτή, Did. (Vergil’s “ mortis
metae,” Aen. xi. 546).

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ H (v11.)

237

δεξιτερῆς ἕλε χειρός, ἔπος τ᾽ par’ ἔκ τ᾽ ovopatev-
“ ἀφραίνεις, Μενέλαε διοτρεφές, οὐδέ τί σε χρὴ
’ 3 4 > \ \ 4 / /
ταύτης ἀφροσύνης" ava δὲ σχέο κηδόμενός περ, 110
μηδ᾽ ἔθελ᾽ ἐξ ἔριδος σεῦ ἀμείνονι φωτὶ μάχεσθαι,
“Ἕκτορι ἸΠριαμίδῃ, τόν τε στυγέουσι καὶ ἄλλοι.
2 9 A 4 Ul 54 /
καὶ δ᾽ ᾿Αχιλεὺς τούτῳ γε μάχῃ ἔνε κυδιανείρῃ
Ν > 9 a Ψ , ! \ 3 ,
ἔἐρριγ ἀντιβολῆσαι, ὃ περ σέο πολλὸν ἀμείνων.
ἀλλὰ σὺ μὲν νῦν ἵζευ ἰὼν μετὰ ἔθνος ἑταίρων, 115
4 4 ΜΝ 9 [ἐ 9 [4
τούτῳ δὲ προμον ἄλλον ἀναστήσουσιν ᾿Αχαιοί.
ΝΜ > , > 3 3 4 ΝΜ >, 9 4
εἴ περ ἀδειής τ᾽ ἐστὶ καὶ εἰ μόθου ἔστ᾽ ἀκόρητος,
φημί μιν ἀσπασίως γόνυ κάμψειν, αἴ κε φύγῃησιν
δηίου ἐκ πολέμοιο καὶ αἰνῆς δηιοτῆτος.᾽
ὡς εἰπὼν παρέπεισεν ἀδελφειοῦ φρένας ἥρως, 120

αἴσιμα παρευπών" ὁ δ᾽ ἐπείθετο.

τοῦ μὲν ἔπειτα

γηθόσυνοι θεράποντες ἀπ᾽ ὥμων τεύχε᾽ ἕλοντο"

Νέστωρ δ᾽ ᾿Αργείοισιν ἀνίστατο καὶ μετέειπεν"

“ & πόποι, ἣ μέγα πένθος ᾿Αχαιίδα γαῖαν ἱκάνει"

ἢ κε μέγ᾽ οἰμώξειε γέρων ἱππηλάτα Πηλεύς, 125
ἐσθλὸς Μυρμιδόνων βουληφόρος ἠδ᾽ ἀγορητής,

ὅς ποτέ μ᾽ εἰρόμενος μέγ᾽ ἐγήθεεν ᾧ ἐνὶ οἴκῳ,

108. For δεξιτερῆς . .. χειρός Bentley
would read δεξιτερὴν χεῖρα, on account οὗ
Féros: cf. & 137, Ὡ 671, a 121, etc.

109. This use of xph with the gen. is
elsewhere confined to the Odyssey. The
form regularly used in this construction
in the Iliad is xpew. For ἀνὰ δ᾽ ἴσχεο
Herodianus and apparently Ar. read ἀνὰ
δὲ oxéo or ay δὲ σχέο.

111. ἐξ ἔριδος, ‘virtually ‘to fight a
match,’” lit. to fight a battle arising
from mere rivalry: cf. ὃ 343 ἐξ ἔριδος
Φιλομηλεΐδῃ ἐπάλαισεν ἀναστάς, A 8 ἔριδι
ξυνέηκε μάχεσθαι.

113-14. We have no incident in the
Iliad to which these lines can refer ;
indeed they contradict I 352. They
can only be explained as a rhetorical
exaggeration used at the moment for a
special purpose. Ar. appears, accordin
to Didymos, to have read τοῦτόν ye an
ἀντιμολῆσαι, and to have suggested ὃ καὶ
μέγα φέρτατός ἐστιν in place of ὅ περ σέο
πολλὸν ἀμείνων, which he considered rude
to Menelaos,

117. The short α of ἀδειής is against
the usage of the Homeric poems, which
have retained the original δὲ of δέος
and its compounds. As an emendation

Ahrens has suggested εἴ πέρ τ’ ἀδβειὴς
καὶ del: others have preferred to regard
117-119 as an interpolation, the last
couplet being made up of reminiscences
of T 72-3 and E 409. The repetition
Snlov . . . δηιοτῆτος occurs only here
and 174; it is especially disagreeable in
view of the fact that dmorjs regularly
means the general engagement, not a
single combat. Seeon 1) 206. For γόνν
κάμπτειν ‘‘to take rest,” cf. also e 453.
The phrase is common in tragedy.

120. See on Ζ 61.

125. When Gelon demanded the
command ‘of the Greek army from the
embassy who had come to ask his help
against the Persians, Syagros the Spartan
envoy replied ““ κε μέγ᾽ οἰμώξειεν ὁ Πελο-
πίδης ᾿Αγαμέμνων, πυθόμενος Σπαρτιήτας
τὴν ἡγεμονίην ἀπαραιρῆσθαι ὑπὸ Γέλωνός
τε καὶ Συρηκοσίων. Thisis evidently an
adaptation of the present line, and is an
interesting proof of the date to which
the consciousness survived that a short
vowel, at least before a liquid, could be
lengthened by the ictus alone. For the
visit of Nestor to Peleus, when enlisting
the Greek army, see A 765 sqq.

127. Zenod. appears to have read ὅς

238

IAIAAO® H vit.)

/

πάντων ᾿Αργείων ἐρέων γενεήν τε τόκον TE.
τοὺς νῦν εἰ πτώσσοντας ὑφ᾽ “Extope πάντας ἀκούσαι,
πολλά κεν ἀθανάτοισι φίλας ἀνὰ χεῖρας ἀείραι 130
θυμὸν ἀπὸ μελέων δῦναι δόμον “Atdos εἴσω.
ai γάρ, Zed τε πάτερ καὶ ᾿Αθηναίη καὶ Απολλον,
ς a » ς Ψ 35.» 3 9 ’ 4 ,
nB@p, ὡς ὅτ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ὠκυρόῳ Κελάδοντι μάχοντο
3 4 II 4 "A ao 4 ’
ἀγρόμενοι ΤΠὐλιοί τε καὶ ᾿Αρκάδες ἐγχεσίμωροει,
Devas πὰρ τείχεσσιν, ᾿Ιαρδάνον ἀμφὶ ῥέεθρα. 135

a 3.9 , / 4 > ἢ] ,
τοῖσι δ᾽ ᾿Ἐρευθαλίων πρόμος ἵστατο, ἰσόθεος φώς,
τεύχε᾽ ἔχων ὦμοισιν ᾿Αρηιθόοιο ἄνακτος,

4

δίου ᾿Αρηιθόου, τὸν ἐπίκλησιν κορυνήτην
ἄνδρες κίκλησκον καλλίζωνοί τε γυναῖκες,

Ψ > ν 5» > 4 4 a
οὕνεκ᾽ ap ov τόξοισι μαχέσκετο δουρί τε μακρῷ,

140

ἀλλὰ σιδηρείῃ κορύνῃ ῥήγνυσκε φάλαγγας.
\ “ 3᾽ ἢ 4
tov Λυκόοργος ἔπεφνε δόλῳ, ov τι κράτεΐ γε,
aA 2? e le 77? M3 3 4 ev
στεινωπῷ ἐν οδῷ, ὅθ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ov κορύνη οἱ ὄλεθρον

ποτε μειρόμενος μεγάλ᾽ ἔστενε, taking
μειρόμενος as “" Ὀοΐηρ parted from his
son.” But, as Didymos points out, such
a sense of μείρεσθαι is not Homeric.
The reading, if admissible, would have
the advantage of avoiding the awkward
repetition of elpdmevos . . . ἐρέων, but
would lose the essential contrast between
oludtece and ἐγήθεε (see Ludwich, i. 275;
Aristonikos on I 616).

128. τόκον, ‘‘ birth,” ὦ 6. parentage:
apparently a more special term than
γενεή, family. The word recurs in this
phrase again in O 141, o 175, and in
voth it may have the same meaning,
though there is a possible alternative,
‘‘offspring.” This does not suit the
present passage, though the Scholiasts
put it forward (πατέρα καὶ παῖδα, Schol.
A), and it was the prevalent meaning in
later Greek (e.g. Οἰδίπον τόκος, Aesch.
Sept. 372, 407). The only remaining
instances of the word in Homer are T
119, P 5, both times in the physical
sense of ‘‘childbearing.” Cf. T 203,
ἵἴδμεν δ᾽ ἀλλήλων γενεήν, ἴδμεν τε τοκῆας.

129, This is the only case in Homer
of the construction of ἀκούειν with acc.
ind participle, so common in later Greek.
πεύθομαι is used in the same way only in
5 732.

130. In his “corrected commentaries”
(ἐν τοῖς ἐξητασμένοις, see Ludwich i. 19,
Lehrs p. 22) Ar. read βαρείας χεῖρας,
‘hands heavy with age.”

135. This passage can hardly be re-
conciled with geographical facts. ded
is no doubt the same as Peai (o 297) in
Elis ; but there is nothing known of a
Keladon or Iardanos anywhere near that
town, nor, it would seem, are there any
rivers that could correspond. Strabo
wrote ᾿Ακίδοντι for Κελάδοντι, Xdas for
Peis. Pausanias, v. 5, 9, identifies
the Iardanos with the Akidas, on the
authority of ‘‘a certain Ephesian.” Ar.
took κελάδοντι as an attribute of the
Iardanos. The authorities and their
various elucidations will be found in
Ebeling’s Lexicon, 8.0. Κελάδων ; it is
clear that nothing short of the excision
of 135 as copied from y 292 with a re-
miniscence of o 297 (Christ), or a general
assertion of an interpolator’s incapacity
(Kochly), will obviate the inconsistency.
The cicerones of Olympia identified one
of the scenes on the chest of Kypselos
with this battle (Paus. v. 18, 6).

142. This Lykurgos is included in the
list of early Arkadian kings given by
Pausanias (viii. 4, 10), who further
mentions the ‘‘ narrow way” which was
pointed out as the scene of the death of
Areithoos, and was even adorned with
his tomb (viii. 11, 4). This is no doubt
however founded upon the Epic, rather
than upon genuine local tradition. The
στεινωπὸς ὁδός evidently implies a pass
so narrow as not to allow the κορυνήτης
room to swing his club.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ H (πὴ

239

χραῖσμε σιδηρείη" πρὶν yap Λυκόοργος ὑποφθὰς

Η , , ewe ” > »
δουρὶ μέσον περόνησεν, ὁ δ᾽ ὕπτιος οὔδει épeiaOn:

145

τεύχεα δ᾽ ἐξενάριξε, τά οἱ πόρε χάλκεος “Apne.
\ \ \ > A ” / ἣ a Ν
καὶ τὰ μὲν αὐτὸς ἔπειτα φόρει μετὰ μῶλον “Apnos:
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ Λυκόοργος ἐνὶ μεγάροισιν ἐγήρα,
a >, 9 / 4 a .
δῶκε δ᾽ ᾿Ερευθαλίωνι φίλῳ θεράποντι φορῆναι.
“Ὁ: 3
τοῦ ὅ γε Tevye ἔχων προκαλίξετο πάντας ἀρίστους" 150
e Ἁ jm? 9 \ 9 3 / +4
οἱ δὲ μάλ᾽ ἐτρόμεον καὶ ἐδείδισαν οὐδέ τις ἔτλη"
ἀλλ᾽ ἐμὲ θυμὸς ἀνῆκε πολυτλήμων πολεμίζειν
θάρσει ᾧ, γενεῇ δὲ νεώτατος ἔσκον ἁπάντων.
\ f δ.» , “ , 4 "AG ’ὔ
καὶ μαχόμην οἱ ἐγώ, δῶκεν δέ μοι εὖχος ᾿Αθήνη.

\ A / 4 4 ἢ
τὸν δὴ μήκιστον καὶ κάρτιστον κτάνον ἄνδρα" 15

et

\ a ” [4 wv Ν
πολλὸς γάρ τις ἔκειτο παρήορος ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα.
εἴθ᾽ ὡς ἡβώοιμι, βίη δέ μοι ἔμπεδος εἴη"
“ 4 3? 3 7 7 / d
τῶ κε τάχ᾽ ἀντήσειε μάχης κορυθαίολος “Extwp.
ὑμέων δ᾽ οἵ περ ἔασιν ἀριστῆες Παναχαιῶν,
οὐδ᾽ οἱ προφρονέως μέμαθ᾽ “Extopos ἀντίον ἐλθεῖν." 100

149. It is clear that if the now aged
Nestor took the armour in question in
his early youth (153) from the man who
had it from Lykurgos in Ais old age,
the Areithoos from whom Lykurgos took
it cannot by any reasonable chronology
have left a son young enough to be
fighting in the tenth year of the siege of
Troy ; yet in 1. 10 this would seem to be
implied. Moreover the Areithoos of 1. 8
livedin Arnein Boeotia, whereas Areithoos
here seems to be an Arkadian. The
only way in which the two passages can
be brought into harmony is by sup osing
that ὅν in 1]. 9 refers to “King Areithoos"
of the line above, so that ‘‘ Areithoos
the Mace-man” had a son, “King Arei-
thoos,” who, we must suppose, migrated
from Arkadia to Boeotia; and that
Menesthios is grandson of Areithoos I.
and son of Areithoos II. This explana-
tion is however very forced, and leads
rather to the conclusion that the author
of the present passage was as vague
about his legendary history as about his
geography. We shall elsewhere (A 670)
see reasons for believing that a speech
by Nestor about his youthful prowess
offered a convenient opportunity for
later interpolation.

153. ᾧ, 1.6. in my hardihood: see A
393. This is obviously better than the
two ways in which w can be taken to be

the pronoun of the third person: (1) to
fight against his bravery; (2) in the
courage of ww, viz. of my spirit. No
parallel can be adduced for either of
these ; for (1) the nearest is the use of
Bin in the sense of ‘‘a strong man,”’ for
(2) the use of the quasi-personal epithet
μεγαλήτωρ with θυμός. Zenod. is said to
have read θάρσει ἐμῷ, but to judge from
his usual practice this is probably a mis-
take, and means that he explained θάρσει
@ to mean θάρσει ἐμῷ.

156. παρήορος seems to inean “ sprawl-
ing,” having passed through the sense
of ‘‘dangling loosely” from that of
‘*hung on at the side,” which we have
in the case of the trace-horse. Cf. Aesch.
Prom. 363, ἀχρεῖον καὶ παράορον δέμας.
So in Ψ 603 it means ““]0086, uncon-
trolled,” in mind. For πολλός in the
sense of ‘‘ big” cf. A 307, Ψ 245, Σ 493,
etc.: μέγας καὶ πολλὸς é-yéveo, Herod. 7,
14; πολλὴ μὲν ἐν βροτοῖσι. . . Κύπρις,
Eur. Hippol. 1, cf. 443; and often.
The combination πολλός τις is common
in Herod., but is not elsewhere found in
Homer.

160. With this use of of of the second

erson cf. T 324, ὁ δέ. .. πολεμίζω.
he use does not seem natural to us,
and is made even less so by ἔασιν in the
revious line, where we should have
ooked for ἐστέ.

240

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ H (vit)

ὡς νείκεσσ᾽ ὁ γέρων, οἱ δ᾽ ἐννέα πάντες ἀνέσταν.
4 ‘ [οὶ Q ἢ 3 ΄“ ? A
ὦρτο πολὺ πρῶτος μὲν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων,
τῷ δ᾽ ἐπὶ Τυδείδης ὦρτο κρατερὸς Διομήδης,

σε x 9 3 Μ) le) 3 , > /
τοῖσι δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ Αἴαντες θοῦριν ἐπιειμένοι ἀλκήν,

τοῖσι δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ᾿Ιδομενεὺς καὶ ὀπάων ᾿Ιδομενῆος

165

Μηριόνης, ἀτάλαντος ᾿Ενναλίῳ ἀνδρεϊφόντῃ,

τοῖσι δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ Εὐρύπυλος, Evaipovos ἀγλαὸς υἱός,
ἂν δὲ Θόας ᾿Ανδραιμονίδης καὶ δῖος ᾿Οδυσσεύς"
πάντες ἄρ᾽ οἵ γ᾽ ἔθελον πολεμίζειν “Ἕκτορι δίῳ.

“a 3 4 , 4 e ’ A
τοῖς δ᾽ αὗτις μετέειπε Γερήνιος ἵπποτα Neotwp:

170

“ κλήρῳ νῦν πεπάλασθε διαμπερές, ὅς κε λάχῃσιν"
φ Ἁ ὃ} 3 7 3 4 ὃ 3 UA
οὗτος yap δὴ ὀνήσει ἐυκνήμιδας ᾿Αχαιούς,
93 3 Ἁ A \ 4 ᾽ ΝΜ ’
καὶ δ᾽ αὐτὸς ὃν θυμὸν ὀνήσεται, αἴ κε φύγησιν
/ 2 4 3. A A 43
δηίου ἐκ πολέμοιο καὶ αἰνῆς δηιοτῆτος.

ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δὲ κλῆρον ἐσημήναντο ἕκαστος,

175

ἐν δ᾽ ἔβαλον κυνέῃ ᾿Αγαμέμνονος ᾿Ατρεΐδαο.
9 9 ’ὔ’ lal Ἁ lal > ,

λαοὶ δ᾽ ἠρήσαντο, θεοῖσι δὲ χεῖρας ἀνέσχον"

4 : ν ΝΣ ’ \ > 7

ὧδε δέ τις εἴπεσκεν ἰδὼν εἰς οὐρανὸν εὐρύν"

“ Ζεῦ πάτερ, ἣ Αἴαντα λαχεῖν ἢ Τυδέος υἱὸν

A

ἢ αὐτὸν βασιλῆα πολυχρύσοιο Μυκήνης."

180

ds ἄρ᾽ ἔφαν, πάλλεν δὲ Γερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ,
ἐκ δ᾽ ἔθορε κλῆρος κυνέης, ὃν ἄρ᾽ ἤθελον αὐτοί,

Αἴαντος.

κῆρυξ δὲ φέρων av’ ὅμιλον ἁπάντῃ

δεῖξ᾽ ἐνδέξια πᾶσιν ἀριστήεσσιν ᾿Αχαιῶν"

3 ’ 4 4
οἱ δ᾽ οὐ γιγνώσκοντες aTTnYNVavTO ἕκαστος.

185

171. The form πεπάλασθε (and πεπα-
λάσθαι in ¢ 331) can hardly be right.
If they are derived from παλάσσω to
scatter, sprinkle, the form should be
πεπάλαχθε, which was read by some here,
but expressly repudiated by Aristarchos.
There is no other instance of the use of
παλάσσομαι to mean ‘‘ drawing lots” ;
whereas πάλλομαι does occur in that
sense (O 191, 2 400), and has a redup-
licated aor. ἀμπεπαλώ. We should
therefore read πεπάλεσθε here and πεπα-
λέσθαι in « with Doderlein and Nauck ;
unless indeed we are prepared to follow
Ahrens in regarding the text-form as an
aorist with an a- stem, on the analogy
of εἶπα, ἤνεικα, which certainly seems
insufficient. ὅς κε Adxyow looks like
the use of 8s to introduce an indirect ques-
tion. But this is against all the history
and use of the pronoun: the sentence

really means, not ‘‘draw lots to see
who shall be chosen,” but ‘‘ draw lots
(for one man), and he shall be chosen.”
Practically of course the meaning is the
same, as the idea of a question is in-
herent in the drawing of lots; but
theoretically the distinction must be
carefully observed. Cf. B 365 (Delbriick,
Etym. Forsch. i. 41).

177. See I 318: the same variant
θεοῖς, ἰδέ occurs here also.

179. On the form of the prayer see B
413, Γ 285.
_ 184. ἐνδέξια, A 597. Some have seen
in the use of the word an allusion to the
sacred nature of an appeal by lot; but
it may be no more than a graphic touch.
It is evident that the marking in 175
did not imply any writing, as no one
understands any mark but his own.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ H (σπ)

24)

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ τὸν ἵκανε φέρων av’ ὅμιλον ἁπάντῃ,

ὅς μιν ἐπιγράψας κυνέῃ βάλε, φαίδιμος Αἴας,

ἢ τοι ὑπέσχεθε χεῖρ᾽, ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔμβαλεν ἄγχι παραστάς,
γνῶ δὲ κλήρου σῆμα ἰδών, γήθησε δὲ θυμῷ.

τὸν μὲν πὰρ πόδ᾽ ἐὸν χαμάδις βάλε φώνησέν τε"

190

“ ᾧ φίλοι, ἢ τοι κλῆρος ἐμός, χαίρω δὲ καὶ αὐτὸς
θυμῷ, ἐπεὶ δοκέω νικησέμεν “Exropa δῖον.

ἀλλ᾽ ἄγετ᾽, ὄφρ᾽ ἂν ἐγὼ πολεμήια τεύχεα δύω,
Topp’ ὑμεῖς εὔχεσθε Avi Κρονίωνι ἄνακτι

a 348 € VA \ asf 4
συγῇ ἐφ᾽ ὑμείων, ἵνα μὴ Τρῶές ye πύθωνται,

195

ἠὲ Kal ἀμφαδίην, ἐπεὶ ov τινα δείδιμεν ἔμπης"
ov γάρ τίς με βίῃ γε ἑκὼν ἀέκοντα δίηται,

οὐδέ τι ἰδρείῃ, ἐπεὶ οὐδ᾽ ἐμὲ νήιδά γ᾽ οὕτως
ἔλπομαι ἐν Σαλαμῖνι γενέσθαι τε τραφέμεν Te.”

as ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ εὔχοντο Διὶ Kpoviwve ἄνακτι"

200

ὧδε δέ τις εἴπεσκεν ἰδὼν εἰς οὐρανὸν εὐρύν'

“ Ζεῦ πάτερ, Ἴδηθεν μεδέων, κύδιστε μέγιστε,
δὸς νίκην Αἴαντι καὶ ἀγλαὸν εὖχος ἀρέσθαι"

εἰ δὲ καὶ “Ἑκτορά περ φιλέεις καὶ κήδεαι αὐτοῦ,

ἴσην ἀμφοτέροισι βίην καὶ κῦδος ὅπασσον."

ὧς ἄρ᾽ ἔφαν, Αἴας δὲ κορύσσετο νώροπι χαλκῷ.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ δὴ πάντα περὶ χροὶ ἕσσατο τεὔχεα,

186-9. Observe the rapid changes of
subject in these lines: txave, the herald ;
βάλε and ὑπέσχεσθε, Aias ; ἔμβαλεν, the

erald ; γνῶ, Alas.

192. δοκέω, to think, with infin.,
seems to occur only here in Homer; but
σ 382 shews the transitional stage, ‘‘ to
seem to oneself.’’ δύω in the next line
is of course an aorist.

195. ἐφ᾽ tpelov, as T 255 ἐπ᾽ αὐτόφιν
elaro σιγῆ. The idea seems to be, ‘‘ Do
not let the Trojans hear your words, lest
they may endeavour to counteract your

etitions by prayers of their own” ; this
he immediately revokes by the xal in
196, virtually = ‘‘nay.” There was a
widely-spread primitive idea that every
local or national god could be approached
only by a particular form of words, which
was therefore carefully concealed from an
enemy. Thus the title by which the
god of Rome was to be addressed was
concealed, as a state-secret of the highest
importance. 195-199 were athetized by
Zenod., Aristophanes, and Ar. on the
ground that ‘‘ they are not consistent in

R

the character of Aias, and that he raises
objections to himself (ἀνθυποφέρει ἑαυτῷ)
absurdly’; a judgment which does not
commend itself.

197. For ἑκών Ar. read ἑλών: but
ἑκών and ἀέκων are sometimes joined
more from a desire to emphasizing the
second than in strict logic ; the phrase
indeed may fairly be compared to αἰνόθεν
αἰνῶς and οἰόθεν οἷος. The collocation
recurs in a somewhat different sense, A
43: cf. οὐκ ἐθέλων ἐθελούσῃ, ε 155, and
y 272, Aesch. P. V. 19, etc., for some-
what similar reduplications. For the
subj. δίηται cf. the instances in H. G.
8 276 a.

198. ἱδρείῃ as Π 359, ἱδρείῃ πολέμοιο.
Aristophanes seems to have read οὐδὲ
μὲν 16. The best MSS. give οὐδέ 7’
ἀιδρεῃς οὕτως, Doderlein conj. αὔτως,
which is certainly more Homeric, ‘‘a
mere dolt.”

199. For τραφέμεν, intrans., B 661.
ἔλπομαι, ironical, precisely as we say
“1 hope I am not so stupid.”

207. For τεύχεα the MSS. give τεύχη

242

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ H vit)

σεύατ᾽ ἔπειθ᾽ οἷός τε πελώριος ἔρχεται “Apns,
ΦΨ 3 ’ > 9 4 Φ ’
ὅς τ᾽ εἶσιν πολεμόνδε μετ᾽ ἀνέρας, οὕς τε Κρονίων

θυμοβόρου ἔριδος μένεϊ ξυνέηκε μάχεσθαι"

210

τοῖος ἄρ᾽ Αἴας ὦρτο πελώριος, ὅρκος ᾿Αχαιῶν,
μειδιόων βλοσυροῖσι προσώπασι, νέρθε δὲ ποσσὶν
ἤιε μακρὰ βιβάς, κραδάων δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος.
τὸν δὲ καὶ ᾿Αργεῖοι μὲν ἐγήθεον εἰσορόωντες,

Τρῶας δὲ τρόμος αἰνὸς ὑπήλυθε γυῖα ἕκαστον,

215

"Extopl τ᾽ αὐτῷ θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσι πάτασσεν"
3 > ΝΜ μη e 90.» 92 A
ἀλλ᾽ οὔ πως ἔτι εἶχεν ὑποτρέσαι οὐδ᾽ ἀναδῦναι
ἂψ' λαῶν ἐς ὅμιλον, ἐπεὶ προκαλέσσατο χάρμῃ.
Αἴας δ᾽ ἐγγύθεν ἦλθε φέρων σάκος ἠύτε πύργον,

χάλκεον ἑπταβόειον, ὅ οἱ Τυχίος κάμε τεύχων,

220

σκυτοτόμων by” ἄριστος, "TAn ἔνε οἰκία ναίων"
Φ ες 5» 4 3} ς t

ὅς οἱ ἐποίησεν σάκος αἰόλον ἑπταβόειον

ταύρων ζατρεφέων, ἐπὶ δ᾽ ὄγδοον ἤλασε χαλκόν.
τὸ πρόσθε στέρνοιο φέρων Τελαμώνιος Αἴας

(A has ea written over 7). Elsewhere
they vary between the two forms, but
ea is most in accordance with the tradi-
tion. (La Roche, H. U. 14, 6.)
212. Broovpotor, ‘‘fierce,” a sort of
on with μειδιόων, like δακρυόεν
γελάσασα, Z 484. Curtius and others
explain βλοσυρός as ““ big, burly,” deriv-
ing it directly from Κβλαθ = vardh to
grow, cf. βλωθρός “‘tall” (Gr. Et. no.
658). But ‘‘fierce” is the universal
meaning of the word elsewhere in Homer
(O 608, A 36) and Hesiod (Scut. Her.
147, 175, 250), and generally in later
Greek. Plato however uses it to mean
“burly,” “bluff.” In προσώπασι Fick
would see a relic of a genuine Aeolism,
πρὸς ὅππασι: but ‘‘smiling at his eyes”
would be a strange expression, and Fick
does not suggest any other interpreta-

tion. προσώπατα occurs σ 192. νέρθε,
as opposed to the face. So we have
πόδες καὶ χεῖρες ὕπερθεν.

214. μέν, so Ar.: MSS. μέγ᾽. There

is little to choose between the two.

219. The ‘‘ tower-like”’ shield of Aias
is his constant attribute: it is the
favourite type of the coins of his island
of Salamis, and his son Eurysakes is
named from it. Cf. A 526. The de-
scription, ἠύτε πύργος, seems to suggest
that, instead of being round or oval, it
was oblong, like the scutum of the Roman
legionary. This shape was not known

in classical Greece, but it is attested for
the prae-Dorian times by the representa-
tions of warriors on the archaic intaglios
found by Dr. Schliemann at Mycenae
(see J. H. 8. iv. 283).

220. χάλκεον ὁπταβόειον, explained in
223. The seven layers of hide were
probably fastened on to a wooden frame ;
the layer of metal was nailed on the top
of them. Observe the obvious allusion
in Tuxlos ... τεύχων, and cf. Τέκτων
‘Apuovléns E 59; and for the use of
κάμε, B 101.

221. “YAq, in Boeotia, B 500, where
the first syllable is long (in arst), E 708.
It has been suggested that this may be
the town of the same name in Cyprus ;
but Homer never shews such knowledge
of distant countries as would be implied
in his naming a mere artificer in Cyprus.
Kinyras, the only rian he mentions
by name, was, as we know, a legendary
and semi-divine character there (A 20);
so that the breastplate which he gives
to Agamemnon is another matter.

222. αἰόλον, ‘‘sparkling” with the
light upon the metal surface. This is
the only tenable meaning of the word ;
Buttmann’s explanation “ὁ easily moved ”
(Zexil. p. 65) is in the last resource based
upon a mistaken notion as to the plrpy
(see Εἰ 707). ‘‘ Agile” is the last epithet
to be applied to this shield of Aias,

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ H (vu)

στῆ pa μάλ᾽ “Ἕκτορος ἐγγύς, ἀπειλήσας δὲ προσηύδα"

243

225

“Ἕκτορ, νῦν μὲν δὴ σάφα εἴσεαι οἰόθεν οἷος,
οἷοι καὶ Δαναοῖσιν ἀριστῆες μετέασιν,

καὶ pet ᾿Αχιλλῆα ῥηξήνορα θυμολέοντα.
ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν ἐν νήεσσι κορωνίσι ποντοπόροισιν

a 3... 3 / / a
κεῖτ᾽ ἀπομηνίσας ᾿Αγαμέμνονι ποιμένι λαῶν"

280

ς “a ᾽ 9 A ζω A A 3 4
ἡμεῖς δ᾽ εἰμὲν τοῖοι, of ἂν σέθεν ἀντιάσαιμεν,

καὶ πολέες.

ἀλλ᾽ ἄρχε μάχης ἠδὲ πτολέμοιο.

τὸν δ᾽ αὗτε προσέειπε μέγας κορυθαίολος "Extap:
“Αἶαν διογενὲς Τελαμώνιε, κοίρανε λαῶν,

μή τί μευ ἠύτε παιδὸς ἀφαυροῦ πειρήτιζε

235

ἠὲ γυναικός, ἣ οὐκ oldev πολεμήια ἔργα"
αὐτὰρ ἐγὼν ἐὺ olda μάχας τ᾽ ἀνδροκτασίας τε"
οἶδ᾽ ἐπὶ δεξιά, οἶδ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἀριστερὰ νωμῆσαι βῶν
ἀξαλέην, τό μοί ἐστι ταλαύρινον πολεμίζειν"

220. οἰόθεν οἷος, ‘‘man to man” (as
39), by experience in single combat ; an
ironical repetition of Hector’s own words.

230. ἀπομηνίσας, giving his wrath
full vent ; see on B 772.

231. τοῖοι of, cf. P 164; the of is
epexegetic of τοῖοι, not correlative ; we
might have had τοῖοι ἀντιάσαι, as in B
60. Heyne and others would reject 229-
232, with little reason. Indeed the last
line is evidently alluded to in 235.

235. The usual course in a single com-
bat was to draw lots for the first cast;
see I’ 324-5. Aias, in telling Hector to
begin, assumes a certain superiority, as
though condescending to give his enemy
every advantage, as in the old story,
‘*Messieurs les Anglais, tirez les pre-
miers.” Similarly in ὦ 440 Poseidon,
as the older and wiser, tells Apollo to
take the first shot. This is why Hector
feels himself treated like a child. πειρή;
τιζε, 1.6. try if you can frighten me: cf.
Tf 200.

238. The form Bév is unique. It has
been supposed to be a contraction for
Boelnv, but this is quite incredible, and
is not supported by the analogy of
βώσαντι in M 337. It is the accusative
of Bots, which is twice used to mean ‘‘a
shield’ simply (τυκτῇσι βοεσσί M 105,
βόας adas M 137). The exact form of
the word is however doubtful. There
was a variant Bo for βόα, but as the
Homeric form must have been βόβα this
does not deserve much consideration.
Aristophanes read βοῦν. We have how-

ever some (very slight) testimony indicat-
ing that βῶς was « form in actual use, in
Hesych., βῶν᾽ ἀσπίδα, ᾿Αργεῖοι: and Pris-
cian, vi. 69, “et Aeolis et Doris βῶς dicunt
pro Bous,” cf."Lat. 66s, and Aeol. ὧν for οὖν.

inrichs (Hom. ΕἸ. ᾿ 98) thinks that
βῶν may represent BoF-v, but J. Schmidt

as pointed out that it may be a very
ancient form answering exactly to the
Skt. gdm, acc. of gaus. (see H. G. § 97).

239. The sense of ταλαύρινον and the
construction of τό both admit of doubt,
and hence several alternative explana-
tions of this line have been offered. The
common solution (that of Aristarchos) is
that rd is the relative agreeing in sense
with βῶν, as though σάκος had been used
instead: just as we have τό following
αἰχμή in A 238; cf. also 167, μ 74.
Then ταλαύρινον will mean “οὗ tough
hide,” from rada(F)os enduring, and the
translation will be ‘‘ which is a sturdy
weapon for me to fight with.” The title
of Ares, ταλαύρινος πολεμιστής (E 289,
etc.) will then mean ‘‘the warrior with
shield of sturdy hide.” This is possible
in itself; but as the adjective recurs
only in these phrases, it is hardly possible
here to separte vad. from πολεμέζειν. If
these two then be joined, we may take
τό either as an acc., ‘‘therefore it is in
my power,” or 88 a nominative repre-
senting the whole of the preceding sen-
tence, ‘‘that is to me.” With the last
alternative again we may either take
ταλαύρινος in the sense given above,
‘that is to me (in my eyes) to fight as

244

οἷδα δ᾽ ἐπαΐξαι μόθον ἵππων ὠκειάων,

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Η (vit)

οἶδα δ᾽ ἐνὶ σταδίῃ δηίῳ μέλπεσθαι “Apne.

ἀλλ᾽ οὐ γάρ σ᾽ ἐθέλω βαλέειν τοιοῦτον ἐόντα

λάθρῃ ὀπυιπεύσας, GAN ἀμφαδόν, αἴ κε τύχωμι.᾽"
ἢ pa καὶ ἀμπεπαλὼν προΐει δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος,

καὶ βάλεν Αἴαντος δεινὸν σάκος ἑπταβόειον

lo
oon
Loi

3 ’ f A ΝΜ 9 3 3 “A
ἀκρότατον κατὰ χαλκόν, ὃς ὄγδοος ἦεν ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ.

δξ δὲ διὰ πτύχας ἦλθε δαΐξων χαλκὸς ἀτειρής,

ἐν τῇ δ᾽ ἑβδομάτῃ ῥινῷ σχέτο.

δεύτερος αὗτε

Αἴας διογενὴς προΐει δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος,

καὶ βάλε Ἰϊριαμίδαο κατ᾽ ἀσπίδα πάντοσ᾽ ἐίσην.

διὰ μὲν ἀσπίδος ἦλθε φαεινῆς ὄβριμον ἔγχος,
καὶ διὰ θώρηκος πολυδαιδάλον ἠρήρειστο"
ἀντικρὺς δὲ παραὶ λαπάρην διάμησε χιτῶνα
ἔγχος" ὁ δ᾽ ἐκλίνθη καὶ ἀλεύατο κῆρα μέλαιναν.

τὼ δ᾽ ἐκσπασσαμένω Sorex’ ἔγχεα χερσὶν ἅμ᾽ ἄμφω

255

σύν ῥ᾽ ἔπεσον λείουσιν ἐοικότες ὠμοφάγοισιν

ἢ συσὶ κάπροισιν, τῶν τε σθένος οὐκ ἀλαπαδνόν.

Πριαμίδης μὲν ἔπειτα μέσον σάκος οὔτασε δουρί,
90») ν “ 3 4 , e 3 4

οὐδ᾽ ἔρρηξεν χαλκὸς, ἀνεγνάμφθη δέ οἱ αἰχμή"

a warrior with shield of sturdy hide”
or we may derive the adjective directly
from root r(a)Aa, and divide it ταλα-
Fpwo-s, “shield-bearing” ; “that i is what
I call fighting as a shield- “bearer.” And
this appears to be the best explanation
(so Hentze). It still remains a question
whether ταλαύρινον is masculine, in a
construction of accusative with infin., or
a neuter used adverbially. The phrase
“ταλαύρινος πολεμιστής appears to be in
favour of the former alternative.

240. ἐπαΐξαι, to charge, as ἐπαΐξασκε
κατὰ μόθον Σ 159, “Ἕκτορ ἐπαΐσσων Ψ 64.
Fighting in the ‘chariot is here opposed
to σταδίη, battle on foot.

241. μέλπεσθαι, to dance the war-
dance to Ares. So when Meriones
‘*dodges” to avoid a spear, Aineias
calls him an ὀρχηστής, II 617. The
allusion is evidently to the primitive
war-dances in which all savage peo les
delight, the warriors goin throu
whole battle - scene dumb - show.
Hector means, ‘‘ I can * dance the war-
dance not only i in mimicry at a feast of
Ares, but in grim reality on the battle-
field.”” The custom, as we know, sur-
vived till historical times in Grecce,
under the name of πυρρίχη.

242. Hector breaks off, that he may
not be suspected of talking only to gain
time and spy out a weak spot. As
Hentze remarks, οὐ γὰρ. . . τύχωμε is
really a parenthesis between ἀλλά and.
the act of throwing, which forms a
practical ‘‘ principal sentence.” Cf. Φ
487-489.

244. A large pat of the description of
the fight is told in the same words as
the duel between Paris and Menelaos:
244 -- Γ 355, 250-4 = T' 356-360, 256-
πῇ E 782-3, 259 = T 348, 264-5 = ᾧ
403-4.

247. διά, in the sense of
through and out of,” regularly takes the the
gen. (sce H. G. 8 216); here, where the
idea ‘‘out of” is not in place, it has the
acc.

255. ἐκσπασσαμένω, i.e. out of the
shields in which they were fixed. Some
of the old critics seem to have held that
ἔγχεα must here mean ξίφη, in order to
give the participle its usual meanin
**drawing” a sword. It was probably
on this ground that Zenod. rejected 258.
257 (and p robably 258).

259. The reading of the MSS. here,
as in I’ 348 (q. v.), is χαλκόν.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ H (νη

Αἴας δ᾽ ἀσπίδα νύξεν ἐπάλμενος, ἡ δὲ διαπρὸ 260
ἤλυθεν ἐγχείη, στυφέλιξε δέ μιν μεμαῶτα,
τμήδην δ᾽ αὐχέν᾽ ἐπῆλθε, μέλαν δ᾽ ἀνεκήκιεν αἷμα.
ἀλλ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ὧς ἀπέληγε μάχης κορυθαίολος “Εἰκτωρ,
ἀλλ᾽ ἀναχασσάμενος λίθον εἵλετο χειρὶ παχείῃ
κείμενον ἐν πεδίῳ μέλανα, τρηχύν τε μέγαν τε" 265
τῷ βάλεν Αἴαντος δεινὸν σάκος ἑπταβόειον
μέσσον ἐπομφάλιον, περιήχησεν δ᾽ ἄρα χαλκός.
δεύτερος αὗτ᾽ Αἴας πολὺ μείζονα λᾶαν ἀείρας
He’ ἐπιδινήσας, ἐπέρεισε δὲ iv’ ἀπέλεθρον,
εἴσω δ᾽ ἀσπίδ᾽ ἔαξε βαλὼν μυλοειδέι πέτρῳ, 270
βλάψε δέ οἱ φίλα γούναθ᾽" ὁ δ᾽ ὕπτιος ἐξετανύσθη
ἀσπίδ᾽ ἐνιχριμφθείς" τὸν δ᾽ aly ὥρθωσεν ᾿Απόλλων.
καί νύ κε δὴ ξιφέεσσ᾽ αὐτοσχεδὸν οὐτάζοντο,
εἰ μὴ κήρυκες, Διὸς ἄγγελοι ἠδὲ καὶ ἀνδρῶν,
ἦλθον, ὁ μὲν Τρώων, ὁ δ᾽ ᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων, 275
Ταλθύβιός te καὶ ᾽Ιδαῖος, πεπνυμένω ἄμφω.
μέσσῳ δ᾽ ἀμφοτέρων σκῆπτρα σχέθον, εἶπέ τε μῦθον
κῆρυξ ᾽Ιδαῖος, πεπνυμένα μήδεα εἰδώς"
“μηκέτι, παῖδε φίλω, πολεμίζετε μηδὲ μάχεσθον"
ἀμφοτέρω γὰρ σφῶι φιλεῖ νεφεληγερέτα Ζεύς, 280
ἄμφω δ᾽ αἰχμητά" τὸ γε δὴ καὶ ἴδμεν ἅπαντες.
νὺξ δ᾽ ἤδη τελέθει" ἀγαθὸν καὶ νυκτὶ πιθέσθαι."

τὸν 8 ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη Τελαμώνιος Alas:
““Ἰδαῖ᾽, “Ἕκτορα ταῦτα κελεύετε μυθήσασθαι"
αὐτὸς γὰρ χάρμῃ προκαλέσσατο πάντας ἀρίστους" 285
ἀρχέτω" αὐτὰρ ἐγὼ μάλα πείσομαι, 7 περ ἂν οὗτος.

τὸν δ᾽ αὗτε προσέειπε μέγας κορυθαίολος “Εἰκτωρ-
“Αἶαν, ἐπεί τοι δῶκε θεὸς μέγεθός τε βίην τε

267. ἐπομφάλιον, ἐπὶ τῷ ὀμφαλῷ. See
note on μεταμάζιον, Εἰ 19.

269. tv’ ἀπέλεθρον, see E 245. ἐπέ-
ρεισε, E 856. Here it seems to mean
‘pressed into the spear immeasurable
strength.”

270. μνλοειδέι, like the upper stone
of the ancient quern or handmill, such
as is turned by the maids in 7 104, etc.
So μυλάκεσσι, M 161.

272. don ἐνιχριμφθείς, so Ar. :
MSS. ἀσπίδι ἐγχριμφθείς. This word
seems to mean ‘‘ pressed into” his shield
by the force of the blow, which drives
the shield hard upon him. Apollo is

watching the fight from the oak-tree,
}. 60.

273. οὐτάζοντο, the imperf. means
‘they would have been for wounding
each other.”

275. Observe the ‘‘chiastic” arrange-
ment, Τρώων ----᾿ Αχαιῶν, Ταλθύβιος ---
᾿Ιδαῖος.

277. σχέθον, Bentley σχέθε, on account
of the F of Fetwe. So also Christ.

286. +f wep ἂν οὗτος, supply ἄρξῃ.

288. The combat has Peon ἐξ ἔριδος
only, a mere trial of skill. Thus Hector
means, ‘‘Since you have proved your-
self a match for me, we need go no

946

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ H (vit)

καὶ πινυτήν, περὶ δ᾽ ἔγχει ᾿Αχαιῶν péptaros ἐσσε,

νῦν μὲν παυσώμεσθα μάχης καὶ δηιοτῆτος 290
σήμερον" ὕστερον αὗτε μαχησόμεθ᾽, εἰς ὅ κε δαίμων

ἄμμε διακρίνῃ, δώῃ δ᾽ ἑτέροισί γε νίκην"

νὺξ δ᾽ ἤδη τελέθει" ἀγαθὸν καὶ νυκτὶ πιθέσθαι"

ὡς σύ τ’ ἐνφρήνῃς πάντας παρὰ νηυσὶν ᾿Αχαιούς,

, , ” ς / “ ”
σους TE μάλιστα ETAS Kat ETALPOUG, οὐ TOL EaTLY*

295

αὐτὰρ ἐγὼ κατὰ ἄστυ μέγα Πριάμοιο ἄνακτος
Τρῶας ἐυφρανέω καὶ Τρῳάδας ἑλκεσιπέπλους,
αἴ τέ μοι εὐχόμεναι θεῖον δύσονται ἀγῶνα.
δῶρα δ᾽ ἄγ᾽ ἀλλήλοισι περικλυτὰ δώομεν ἄμφω,

ὄφρα τις ὧδ᾽ εἴπῃσιν ᾿Αχαιῶν τε Τρώων τε"

800

“ἠμὲν ἐμαρνάσθην ἔριδος πέρι θυμοβόροιο,
ἠδ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ἐν φιλότητι διέτμαγεν ἀρθμήσαντε.᾽ ”
ὧς ἄρα φωνήσας δῶκε ξίφος ἀργυρόηλον
σὺν κολεῷ τε φέρων καὶ ἐντμήτῳ τελαμῶνι"
Αἴας δὲ ζωστῆρα δίδου φοίνικι φαεινόν. 805
τὼ δὲ διακρινθέντε ὁ μὲν μετὰ λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν

ἤι᾽, ὁ δ᾽ ἐς Τρώων ὅμαδον κίε.

τοὶ δὲ χάρησαν,

e / 3 / /
ὡς εἶδον ζωὸν τε καὶ ἀρτεμέα προσιόντα,
Αἴαντος προφυγόντα μένος καὶ χεῖρας ἀάπτους"

further.” This chivalrous acknowledg-
ment of an enemy’s prowess is rare in
Homer, and recalls rather the stories of
mediaeval knighthood.

289. περί, ‘‘ exceedingly.”

291-2 are no doubt interpolated here
from 377-8, where they are quite in
place. ἑτέροισι evidently implies a
general combat between the two armies,
and is not consistent with the single
combat, which is never put forward as
intended to have any decisive result
upon the course of the war. Nor is
there, either before or afterwards, an
suggestion that the duel is to be renewed.
293 also was justly athetized by Aris-
tarchos, as a weak repetition from 282.
The speech runs quite smoothly when
the three lines are omitted.

294. ὧς σύ re, as though a second
clause with καὶ ἐγώ subordinate to ws
were to be added ; instead of which we
have in 296 an independent sentence
with the fut. in place of the subj.

295. Athetized by Ar. on the ground
that by the special reference to ἔται (cf.
Z 239) and ἑταῖροι it unduly limits the
more general πάντας ᾿Αχαιούς.

298. μοι seems to be a dativus ethicus
belonging to the whole sentence, ‘‘on
my account.” εὐχόμεναι, with thanks-
givings ; so εὐχωλαί, » 357. θεῖον

yova, the holy assemblage of wor-
shippers. Some take εὐχόμεναί μοι to-
gether, and understand it of quasi-divine
honours paid to Hector, who θεὸς ὥς
tlero δήμῳ: but it is surely not allow-
able to press a rhetorical expression into
its literal sense in the very place where
mention of the θεῖος ἀγών makes such a
meaning obviously impious. There was
a variant θύονται for δύσονται, apparently
in the sense ‘‘do sacrifice to the as-
sembled gods,” But such a construction
is quite Impossible; though θεῖος ἀγών
certainly has this sense in Σ 376.

302. ἀρθμήσαντε ‘‘reconciled,” only
here ; cf. ἄρθμιοι, w 427.

305. δίδου, by the side of δῶκε, marks
the second gift as simultaneous with the
first ; see H. G. § 71, 1. According to
the later legends, both these gifts proved
ill-omened to the recipients, Hector be-
ing dragged behind the chariot of Achilles
by the belt of Aias, who in turn slew
himself with the sword of Hector; for

TAIAAOZ H (vit)

, eo @ ΝΜ 2 la / 4
καὶ p γον προτὶ ἄστυ, ἀελπττέοντες σοον εἰναι.

810

Αἴαντ᾽ αὖθ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἐυκνήμιδες ᾿Αχαιοὶ
εἰς ᾿Αγαμέμνονα δῖον ἄγον, κεχαρηότα νίκῃ.

οἱ δ᾽ ὅτε δὴ κλισίῃσιν ἐν ᾿Ατρεΐδαο γένοντο,
τοῖσι δὲ βοῦν ἱέρευσεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων
ἄρσενα πενταέτηρον ὑπερμενέι Κρονίωνι. 815
τὸν δέρον ἀμφί θ᾽ ἕπον, καί μιν διέχεναν ἅπαντα,
μίστυλλόν τ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐπισταμένως πεῖράν τ᾽ ὀβελοῖσιν,
ὦὥπτησάν τε περιφραδέως ἐρύσαντό τε πάντα.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ παύσαντο πόνου τετύκοντό τε δαῖτα,

δαίνυντ᾽, οὐδέ τι θυμὸς ἐδεύετο δαιτὸς ἐίσης.

320

νώτοισιν δ᾽ Αἴαντα διηνεκέεσσι yéparpev

ἥρως ᾿Ατρεΐδης, εὐρὺ κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων.

αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ πόσιος καὶ ἐδητύος ἐξ ἔρον ἕντο,

τοῖς ὁ γέρων πάμπρωτος ὑφαίνειν ἤρχετο μῆτιν

Νέστωρ, οὗ καὶ πρόσθεν ἀρίστη φαίνετο βουλή" 325
ὅ σφιν ἐὺ φρονέων ἀγορήσατο καὶ μετέειπεν"

“ ᾿Ατρεΐδη τε καὶ ἄλλοι ἀριστῆες Παναχαιῶν,

πολλοὶ γὰρ τεθνᾶσι κάρη κομόωντες ᾿Αχαιοί,

τῶν νῦν αἷμα κελαινὸν ἐύρροον ἀμφὶ Σκάμανδρον

ἐσκέδασ᾽ ὀξὺς “Apns, ψυχαὶ δ᾽ ᾿Αιδόσδε κατῆλθον"

330

Ὁ“ \ , A vy 3%} FY A “ > A
τῶ σε χρὴ πόλεμον μὲν ἅμ᾽ ἠοῖ παῦσαι ᾿Αχαιῶν,
αὐτοὶ δ᾽ ἀγρόμενοι κυκλήσομεν ἐνθάδε νεκροὺς

,
βουσὶ καὶ ἡμιόνοισιν: ἀτὰρ κατακήομεν αὐτοὺς

\ 9 A “a Ψ 9
[τυτθὸν ἀποπρὸ νεῶν, ὥς K

ἐχθρῶν ἄδωρα δῶρα, κοὐκ ὀνήσιμα: see
Soph. .47. 1029.

310. ἀελπτέοντεξς, still despairing of
his safety, not yet able to believe that
he was indeed alive.

313. With this line begins the second
and probably later part of the book ; see
introduction. A large portion of it con-
sists of lines which are found in other
parts of the Iliad, and, in two or three
cases, in the Odyssey. 313 =I 669,
314-5 = B 402-3, 316 = τ 421, 317-
320 = A 465-8, 321 = ξ 437, 8322 =A
102, 323 = A 469, 323-6 = I 92-5, 326
= A 73.

316. ἀμφὶ ἕπον, handled, ‘‘ treated”
it, t.e. cut off the superfluous parts, in
order to make it ready for roasting.
διέχεναν, divided into joints ; μίστυλλον,
cut into slices.

321. So Herodotos enumerates among
the privileges of the Spartan kings (vi.

ὀστέα παισὶν ἕκαστος

56), τῶν θυομένων ἁπάντων τὰ δέρματά τε
καὶ τὰ νῶτα λαμβάνειν σφεας. Cf. Verg.
Aen. viii. 183, ‘‘ vescitur Aeneas .. .
perpetui tergo bovis.”’

332, κυκλήσομεν on the analogy of
κατακήομεν must be aor. subj.; ‘‘let us
wheel hither,” 2.6. bring on waggons.
The use of oxen to draw waggons occurs
in Homer only here and in 2782, They
are yoked to the plough, K 352, N

03.

334-5 were athetized by Ar. on the suf-
ficient ground that the making of a τύμ-
Bos ἄκριτος was inconsistent with taking
home the bones: a practice which we do
not elsewhere find in the Homeric age,
though it is alluded to by Aesch. 4g.
435-444. The use of ἕκαστος too is
strange ; the natural meaning would be,
‘“‘that every man may carry his own
bones back.” As it stands, we must
take it to mean ‘‘that every man may

248

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ H vir)

οἴκαδ᾽ ayn, ὅτ᾽ ἂν αὗτε νεώμεθα πατρίδα γαῖαν. 385
4 > 9 \ Φ ’ὔ 2 4

τύμβον δ᾽ ἀμφὶ πυρὴν ἕνα χεύομεν ἐξαγαγόντες

ἄκριτον ἐκ πεδίου" ποτὶ δ᾽ αὐτὸν δείμομεν ὦκα
’ ς 4 ζω 2 ξ΄

πύργους ὑψηλούς, εἷλαρ νηῶν τε καὶ αὐτῶν,

ἐν δ᾽ αὐτοῖσι πύλας ποιήσομεν εὖ ἀραρυίας,

ὄφρα δι’ αὐτάων ἱππηλασίη ὁδὸς εἴη"

910

ἔκτοσθεν δὲ βαθεῖαν ὀρύξομεν ἐγγύθι τάφρον,
C4 > δ \ 3 LA 3 3 A
ἥ x ἵππους καὶ λαὸν ἐρυκάκοι ἀμφὶς ἐοῦσα,

take somebody’s bones back to the
children of their owner.”

336. ἐξαγαγόντες, a difficult expres-
sion. Ar. explained it ‘‘ marching out,”
a sense in which the word occurs in Xen.
and later Greek; for the Homeric use
he compared ἐσάγουσα (Z 252), explained
to mean ‘‘entering in,” but this is not
satisfactory. ἐξάγειν is used by Thuc. in
the sense of ‘‘extending” the circuit of
a circumvallation (i. 93, ὁ περίβολος
ἐξήχθη), and though the word is more
naturally used of ‘“‘drawing” ἃ line of
walls than of “raising” a mound, still
this is the most plausible explanation.
Others again explain ‘‘ bringing earth
from the plain.” It would be most
natural to understand ‘‘ bringing the
corpses out of the plain,” but this has
already been mentioned in 382. |

337. ἄκριτον, one for all alike. The
idea seems to have been to combine
utility with piety by making the burial
mound serve as part of the circuit of
the walls. The mound is however never
mentioned afterwards as part of the
works of defence.

339. πύλας does not necessarily mean
more than one gate, in which sense Ar.
took it. But it is probable that the
poet regarded the wall as having several
gates ; see note on M 120.

340. dy MSS.: efy G. Hermann.
There is a certain case of this form of
the subj. in pereiw Ψ 47, and possible
cases in I 245, Σ 88, o 448 (for ἔλθῃ),
p 586. The following remarks may be
made upon the point :—(1) The form ef
would necessarily imply a subj. termina-
tion -ww, such as is postulated by Christ,
v.on 1. 72. ἔ(σ)ῃ could never give efy, or
(which La Roche would require) 47;
there is no analogy with the vocalic
stems θη- orn- and the like. (2) If a
form ely existed, it would be almost
certain to be corrupted into the ordinary
εἴη. (3) The use of the opt. after a
principal tense is far commoner than we

should expect. But the instances com-
monly piven require important limita-
tion. p 243 ws ἔλθοι after an imper-
ative expresses a wish, and here the opt.
is in place. In A 344 the reading is
wrong. In p 250 we may read ἄλφῃ.
In no other case do we find the pure opt.
in final sentences after principal tenses,
and the opt. with ἄν and κεν, though
not uncommon, is entirely confined to
the Odyssey. (See Weber, Entwickelungs-
gesch, der Absichtssitze, pp. 48-45.) These
considerations seem decisive in favour
of the subj. here, if Christ’s suggestion
can be accepted, and on this etymologists
have yet to decide. If not, the only re-
source is either to suppose that in 439,
where the opt. is in place, we have a
piece of older poetry, which has been
worked into the story by composing
Nestor’s speech out of it, while leaving
one refractory word in the original form ;
or else to consider efy as a false archaism
on the mistaken analogy of θείῃ and
similar subjunctives. It is curious that
another question between ἡ and ἢ) arises
in the same line, as there was a variant
ἱππηλασίῃ (Schol. B), where the word
was taken as a substantive—a reading
which deserves consideration. For the
ordinary reading, where it is an adj.,
compare ἱππήλατος, ὃ 607.

342. He... ἐρνκάκοι : here, in the
relative sentence with xe, the opt. is
quite in order; see the numerous in-
stances in H. G. §§ 304-306. dycls
ἐοῦσα appears to mean ‘‘ surrounding
the camp’; but this sense of surround-
ing completely properly belongs only to
περί: ἀμφέ and ἀμφίς mean properly
‘fon both sides”; then they come to
signify ‘‘on different sides,” and so can
be used to indicate surrounding, not by
8 continuous line, but by individual
points—a distinction corresponding to
that between wmher and herum in
German. The δεσμοὶ ἀμφὶς ἔχοντες in 0
340 seem however to shew that ἀμφίς

TAIAAO® H (νπὴ

249

μή ποτ᾽ ἐπιβρίσῃ πόλεμος Τρώων ἀγερώχων."
ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα πάντες ἐπήνησαν βασιλῆες.
Τρώων air’ ἀγορὴ γένετ᾽ ᾿Ιλίου ἐν πόλει ἄκρῃ, 345
δεινὴ Terpnyvia, παρὰ IIpuapoto θύρῃσιν.
τοῖσιν δ᾽ ᾿Αντήνωρ πεπνυμένος ἦρχ᾽ ἀγορεύειν"

[7]

κέκλυτέ μευ, Τρῶες καὶ Δάρδανοι ἠδ᾽ ἐπίκουροι,

ὄφρ᾽ εἴπω, τά με θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσι κελεύει.
᾿ δεῦτ᾽ ἄγετ᾽, ᾿Αργείην “Exévny καὶ κτήμαθ᾽ ἅμ᾽ αὐτῇ 800
δώομεν ᾿Ατρεΐδησιν ἄγειν" νῦν δ᾽ ὅρκια πιστὰ
ψευσάμενοι μαχόμεσθα:" τῶ οὔ νύ τι κέρδιον ἡμῖν
[ἔλπομαι ἐκτελέεσθαι, ἵνα μὴ ῥέξομεν ὧδε.
id > φ 93 Α > κν > & A 3 9 ’
ἢ τοι ὅ γ᾽ ὧς εἰπὼν Kat ap ἕξετο, τοῖσι δ᾽ ἀνέστη
δῖος ᾿Αλέξανδρος, ᾿Ελένης πόσις ἠυκόμοιο, 355
ὅς μιν ἀμειβόμενος ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
ἐξ "A n A \ 9 7 3 9 ὶ ίλα a > 9 4,
ντῆνορ, σὺ μὲν οὐκέτ ἐμοὶ φίλα ταῦτ᾽ ὠγορεύεις"»
ΝΜ [οὶ 3 [4 Ὁ A
οἶσθα καὶ ἄλλον μῦθον ἀμείνονα τοῦδε νοῆσαι.
εἰ δ᾽ ἐτεὸν δὴ τοῦτον ἀπὸ σπουδῆς ἀγορεύεις,
ἐξ ἄρα δή τοι ἔπειτα θεοὶ φρένας ὥλεσαν αὐτοί. 860
αὐτὰρ ἐγὼ Τρώεσσι μεθ᾽ ἱπποδάμοις ἀγορεύσω.
ἀντικρὺς δ᾽ ἀπόφημι, γυναῖκα μὲν οὐκ ἀποδώσω,
ὔ 3 Φ 93 93 f 93 wv e 4 A
κτήματα δ᾽, ὅσσ᾽ ἀγόμην ἐξ “Apyeos ἡμέτερον δῶ,
πάντ᾽ ἐθέλω δόμεναι καὶ ἔτ᾽ οἴκοθεν ἄλλ᾽ ἐπιθεῖναι."
[τ > @ 3 \ > #79 @ “ > 9 ἢ
ἡ τοι ὅ γ᾽ ws εἰπὼν κατ᾽ ap eto, τοῖσι 8 ἀνέστη 365
Δαρδανίδης Πρίαμος, θεόφιν μήστωρ ἀτάλαντος,
ὅ σφιν ἐὺ φρονέων ἀγορήσατο καὶ μετέειπεν'

came ultimately to be identical with
περί, though perhaps only at a late date.
I do not find any other instance however
in Homer. In IT 115 ἀμφίς is clearl

‘on both sides” of each heap, not “all
uround.” Perhaps therefore we ought
to take it to mean here ‘‘apart from ”
the wall; the trench is generally con-
ceived as being some distance away from
the wall itself, and ἐγγύθι shews at all
events that they were not to be in im-
mediate contact, like the modern moat
with a rampart.

Half of the following passage (344-
405) is made up of lines found in other
parts of the Iliad.

346. τετρηχνῖα, see on B 95; and for
the assembly at the gates of Priam’s
palace, B 788.

352. ψευσάμενοι is not elsewhere found
in H. with an accusative. Hence some

take ὅρκια to be an ‘‘accus. of relation,”
‘‘having been false in the matter of
the oath.”

353. This line was evidently added in
order to supply a verb to the phrase of
νύ τι κέρδιον ἡμῖν, which does not need
one. The clause ἵνα ph ῥέξομεν ὧδε
cannot be translated so as to make good
sense: it looks as though it were meant
for ‘‘unless we do thus.” But for such
a sense the Greek language affords no
support. Aristarchos, while obelizing
the line, read ἵν᾿ ἂν for ἵνα, which does
not help matters.

357. φίλα, pleasing (not ‘‘ friendly ”’).

362. ἀπόφημι, to declare outright :
ef. I 422,

363. “Apyeos, here in the general sense
of the Peloponnesos: Helen of course
had been brought from Sparta. οἴκοθεν,
from my own store.

250

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ H (vr) ©

“ κέκλυτέ μευ, Τρῶες καὶ Δάρδανοι ἠδ᾽ ἐπίκουροε,

ὄφρ᾽ εἴπω, τά με θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσι κελεύει.

νῦν μὲν δόρπον ἕλεσθε κατὰ πτόλιν, ὡς τὸ πάρος ππερ, 810
καὶ φυλακῆς μνήσασθε καὶ ἐγρήγορθε ἕκαστος"

ἠῶθεν δ᾽ “datos ἴτω κοίλας ἐπὶ νῆας

εὐἰπέμεν ᾿Ατρεΐδῃς ᾿Αγαμέμνονι καὶ Μενελάῳ

μῦθον ᾿Αλεξάνδροιο, τοῦ εἵνεκα νεῖκος ὄρωρεν"

καὶ δὲ τόδ᾽ εἰπέμεναι πυκινὸν ἔπος, αἴ κ᾽ ἐθέλωσιν 87

on

παύσασθαι πολέμοιο δυσηχέος, εἰς 6 κε νεκροὺς
κήομεν" ὕστερον αὗτε μαχησόμεθ᾽, εἰς ὅ κε δαίμων
ἄμμε διακρίνῃ, δώῃ δ᾽ ἑτέροισί γε νίκην.᾽"
ὧς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα τοῦ μάλα μὲν κλύον ἠδὲ πίθοντο,

[δόρπον ἔπειθ᾽ εἵλοντο κατὰ στρατὸν ἐν τέλέεσσιν.

380

. ἠῶθεν δ᾽ "datos ἔβη κοίλας ἐπὶ νῆας.
A 3 @ ? > 9 A 4 4, Ν
τοὺς δ᾽ εὗρ᾽ εἰν ἀγορῇ Δαναούς, θεράποντας Ἄρηος,
νηὶ πάρα πρυμνῇ ᾿Αγαμέμνονος" αὐτὰρ ὁ τοῖσιν
στὰς ἐν μέσσοισιν μετεφώνεεν ἠπύτα κῆρυξ᾽

“ ᾿Ατρεΐδη τε καὶ ἄλλοι ἀριστῆες Παναχαιῶν,

385

ἠνώγει Tipiawos τε καὶ ἄλλοι Τρῶες ayavol
3 4 Ν 4 wv eg /
εὐπέμεν, αἴ κέ περ ὕμμι φίλον Kal ἡδὺ γένοιτο,
“A IA ΄ ἴον Ψ a“ ΝΜ
μῦθον ᾿Αλεξάνδροιο, τοῦ εἵνεκα νεῖκος ὄρωρεν"
κτήματα μέν, ὅσ᾽ ᾿Αλέξανδρος κοίλῃς ἐνὶ νηυσὶν

ἠγάγετο Τροίηνδ᾽ ----ὧὡς πρὶν ὠφελλ᾽ ἀπολέσθαι-----,

390

πάντ᾽ ἐθέλει δόμεναι καὶ ἔτ᾽ οἴκοθεν GAN ἐπιθεῖναι,
κουριδίην δ᾽ ἄλοχον Μενελάου κυδαλίμοιο

Μ , 4 Ἁ al f
οὔ φησιν δώσειν" ἦ μὴν Τρῶές ye κέλονται.

368-9 are omitted by A.

371. There seems to be no reason for
this advice here: the line is probably
interpolated, owing to the similarity of
the preceding line, from 2 299, where
it is appropriate, as the Trojans are
camping in the plain near the Greek
camp.

375. ἔπος, ‘‘ proposal,” which however
is expressed not in a direct form, but
politely as a supposition; as though
‘‘make to them this proposition; we
suppose they will be willing,” etc. It is
not necessary to supply any apodosis to
αἴ κε. εἰπέμεναι represents the 3d person
imperative, see on 79.

380. Wronglyinterpolated from Σ 298 ;
here the phrase κατὰ orp. ἐν τελέεσσιν is
quite inappropriate ; cf. 371. The best

SS. omit it in the text.

381. ἠῶθεν, next day; the Trojan
assembly must, like the Greek council,
have been held late at night. The Greek
assembly, it may be presumed, is being
held to carry into effect the decision of
the preceding council. But the want of
clearness in marking the passage of the
night is quite unlike the real Epic style.

383. According to A 806 it was the
ship of Odysseus, not of Agamemnon,
which marked the place of assembly.

387. de... γένοιτο is not part of
the message, but apparently a courteous
introduction by ᾿ aios himself; Mr.
Monro compares ‘‘an it please you.”

393. 4 μήν, virtually ‘‘although ”:
this clause shews how such a con-
junctional sense may arise in simple
particles introducing a tactic clause,
where the concessive quality is given only

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ H (vir)

251

\ La σι
καὶ δὲ Tod’ ἠνώγεον εἰπεῖν ἔπος, αἴ κ᾽ ἐθέλητε

παύσασθαι πολέμοιο δυσηχέος, εἰς ὅ κε νεκροὺς

395

κήομεν" ὕστερον αὖτε μαχησόμεθ᾽, εἰς ὅ κε δαίμων
ἄμμε διακρίνῃ, δώῃ δ᾽ ἑτέροισί γε νίκην."

ὧς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα πάντες ἀκὴν ἐγένοντο σιωπῇ.
ὀψὲ δὲ δὴ μετέειπε βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης"

“ μήτ᾽ ἄρ τις νῦν κτήματ᾽ ᾿Αλεξάνδροιο δεχέσθω

400

μήθ᾽ “Ελένην" γνωτὸν δέ, καὶ ὃς μάλα νήπιός ἐστιν,
ὡς ἤδη Τρώεσσιν ὀλέθρου πείρατ᾽ ἐφῆπται."
Φφ w# » e > Ψ LA ? / + A
ὡς ἔφαθ', οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα πάντες ἐπίαχον vies ᾿Αχαιῶν,
μῦθον ἀγασσάμενοι Διομήδεος ἱπποδάμοιο.

καὶ τότ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ᾿Ιδαῖον προσέφη κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων'

40ὅ

“Ἰ,δαῖ᾽, ἣ τοι μῦθον ᾿Αχαιῶν αὐτὸς ἀκούεις,

ὥς τοι ὑποκρίνονται" ἐμοὶ δ᾽ ἐπιανδάνει οὕτως.

ἀμφὶ δὲ νεκροῖσιν κατακαιέμεν οὔ τι μεγαίρω"
4 4

ov yap τις φειδὼ νεκύων κατατεθνηώτων

, 3 3 4 4 \ φ
γίγνετ᾽, ἐπεί κε θάνωσι, πυρὸς μειλισσέμεν ὦκα.

410

ὅρκια δὲ Ζεὺς ἴστω, ἐρίγδουπος πόσις “Ἥρης.
ὧς εἰπὼν τὸ σκῆπτρον ἀνέσχεθε πᾶσι θεοῖσιν,

ἄψορρον δ᾽ ᾽Ιδαῖος ἔβη προτὶ Ἴλιον ἱρήν.

οἱ δ᾽ gar’ εἶν ἀγορῇ Τρῶες καὶ Δαρδανίωνες

by the context.
to be regarded as the leader of a

rty. Cf. I 149, 454. For p

SS. read μιν.

394. ἠνώγεον, so MSS. : Spitzner and
most subsequent edd. read qwwye(v). In
form it must be the imperf. of a second-

present ἀνωγέω (like yeywréw by the
side of yéywva), of which however there
is no further evidence. Bentley’s ἤνωγον
(as I 578, etc.) is therefore preferable, as
an aorist; see note on A 313, and for
another view H. G. § 27. It may be
observed that the change to the 3d plur.
is natural, in order to shew that the
subject is not the same as that of οὔ
φησιν.

400. ᾿Αλεξάνδροιο, gen.
‘*from A.”: cf. A 596.

402. ὀλέθρον πείρατα, ‘‘issues of de-
struction”: though the metaphor of the
end of a rope is suggested by ἐφῆπται.
See 102, B 15.

408. There is a slight pause after
vexpotorty, ‘‘as concerning the dead.”

409. The sense seems to be “‘ there is

Τρῶες, Antenor seems
pular
some

ablative

no grudging concerning dead corpses, as
to giving them the consolation of fire
speedily.” The last clause would in
Attic be introduced by μὴ ov. Mr.
Monro (H. G. § 234 jin.) regards the
infin. as ‘‘equivalent in sense to the
genitive depending on a noun”; ‘‘there

is no grudging about the appeasing.”
It seems simpler to regard it as a case

‘of epexegesis, where the original dative

sense of the infin. is still felt, ‘‘for the
appeasing by fire.” For οὐ φειδώ with
gen. compare X 243-4, μηδέ τι δούρων ἔστω
φειδωχή. πυρός, as in πυρὸς λελαχεῖν,
πρῆσαι (Β 415, g.v.), ete.

411. ὅρκια, the oath of truce. It is
not clear why Idaios lifts his sceptre to
all the gods, when only Zeus, the presid-
ing deity of oaths, is named : see K 328,
where the sceptre is again used as the
instrument of the oath as in A 234.

412. τό as the article with σκῆπτρον
looks like a later use. Mr. Pratt (in
MS.) su ts 8.

414. Aapdavlwves only here and Θ
154; it is of course a patronymic; cf.
ules ᾿Αχαιῶν.

252

IAIAAO® H vu.)

πάντες ὁμηγερέες, ποτιδέγμενοι ὁππότ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔλθοι 415
3 aA e > wo 4 3 ’ 3 4
Ἰδαῖος" ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἦλθε καὶ ἀγγελίην ἀπέευπεν

στὰς ἐν μέσσοισιν.

τοὶ δ᾽ ὡπλίζοντο μάλ᾽ ὦκα,

ἀμφότερον, νέκυάς τ᾽ ἀγέμεν, ἕτεροι δὲ μεθ᾽ ὕλην.
᾿Αργεῖοι δ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἐνσσέλμων ἀπὸ νηῶν
3 4, , > 9 A ΦΨ \ θ᾽ a
ὠτρύνοντο νέκυς τ᾽ ἀγέμεν, ἕτεροι δὲ μεθ᾽ ὕλην. 420
ἠέλιος μὲν ἔπειτα νέον προσέβαλλεν ἀρούρας,
ἐξ ἀκαλαρρείταο βαθυρρόου ᾽Ωκεανοῖο
οὐρανὸν εἰσανιών" οἱ & ἤντεον ἀλλήλοισιν.
ἔνθα διαγνῶναι χαλεπῶς ἦν ἄνδρα ἕκαστον"
ἀλλ᾽ ὕδατι νίζοντες ἄπο βρότον αἱματόεντα, 425
δάκρυα θερμὰ χέοντες, ἀμαξάων ἐπάειραν.
οὐδ᾽ εἴα κλαίειν Πρίαμος μέγας" οἱ δὲ σιωπῇ
νεκροὺς πυρκαϊῆς ἐπενήνεον ἀχνύμενοι κῆρ,
ἐν δὲ πυρὶ πρήσαντες ἔβαν προτὶ Ἴλιον ἱρήν.
ὧς δ᾽ αὔτως ἑτέρωθεν ἐυκνήμιδες ᾿Αχαιοὶ 480
νεκροὺς πυρκαϊῆς ἐπενήνεον ἀχνύμενοι κῆρ,
3 Ἁ \ / ” , 3 “
ἐν δὲ πυρὶ πρήσαντες ἔβαν κοίλας ἐπὶ νῆας.
᾽ wi? Ψ 2.» ν) > 9 4 4
ἦμος δ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ap πω ἠώς, ἔτι δ᾽ ἀμφιλύκη νύξ,

415. ποτιδέγμενοι : Cobet (M. C. 360)
vonj. ποτιδέχμενοι, which is accepted by
Christ. See B 794.

416. ἀπέειπεν, ‘‘declared,” as I 309,
431, Ψ 361, and elsewhere ; cf. ἀπόφημι
in 362. In A 515 and other places it
means ‘‘ refuse.”

418. There is a slight change of con-
struction in ἕτεροι δὲ μεθ’ ὕλην, as
though another ἕτεροι had introduced
the preceding clause.

420. ὠτρύνοντο vékus, so Ar.: MSS.
ὥτρυνον véxvas, but the active ὀτρύνειν
is always transitive. νέκυς, acc. pl. as
w 417: see Η. 6. § 100 for other instances.
But the line is judged spurious by van
Herwerden, Christ, and Nauck ; no doubt
rightly.

421-2 = 7 433-4. It may be observed
that the lines appear to have been
adopted in the Odyssey from this
passage, not vice versa; as the omission
there of the clause οὐρανὸν εἰσανιών makes
the second line very awkward.

423. #vreov can hardly be a correct
form ; we should rather read ἤνταον.

424. χαλεπῶς fv: for the use of the
adverb instead of the adj. with elul see
Η. G. § 162, 4, a. ἀλλά in the next
line means ‘‘but yet by washing them

they could discern; andso,” etc. There
is no reason to limit the shedding of
tears to the Trojans, as some have done.
Priam forbids them to cry aloud, which
was the habit of a non-Greek people,
see (2 721: hence the silence of the
Greeks does not need mention.

428. drevfveov only here, and παρενή-
veo in Od. Itisareduplicated intensive
of véw, vnéw. For the long syllable
Curtius (Vb. ii. 153, 390) com
δαι-δάλλ-ω, κω-κύ-ω, etc. Bekker how-
ever conj. ἐπενήεον, which is probably
right.

431-2 can hardly be considered genuine
if 420 is to be condemned. Nauck and
Christ however raise no objection to this
couplet.

433. In the compound ἀμφιλύκη ἀμφί
seems to give the idea of doubtfulness,
hesitation between two sides, just as in
our ‘‘ twilight,” where twi- ‘‘is used in
the sense rather of ‘double’ or “ half.’
The ideas of double and half are liable to
confusion ; ef. A.S. twedn, doubt, from
the hovering between two opinions,”
Skeat, Dict. s.v. This sense is common
in later Greek compounds, ἀμφίλογος,
ἀμφιηγνοεῖν, etc., but there is no other
instance in Homer. With this line

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Η (vir)

253

τῆμος ap ἀμφὶ πυρὴν κριτὸς ἔγρετο λαὸς ᾿Αχαιῶν,

’ > 9 > > \ [τὰ / > /
τύμβον δ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ αὐτὴν ἕνα ποίεον ἐξαγαγόντες

435

ΝΜ 3 δί \ δ᾽ 3 \ a £5
ἄκριτον ἐκ πεδίου, ποτὶ δ᾽ αὐτὸν τεῖχος ἔδειμαν
πύργους θ᾽ ὑψηλούς, εἶλαρ νηῶν τε καὶ αὐτῶν.
ἐν δ᾽ αὐτοῖσι πύλας ἐνεποίεον εὖ ἀραρυίας,
” 9 3 4 e ’ fan ρ ρ
ὄφρα δι’ αὐτάων ἱππηλασίη ὁδὸς εἴη"
ἔκτοσθεν δὲ βαθεῖαν ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ τάφρον ὄρυξαν 440
εὐρεῖαν μεγάλην, ἐν δὲ σκόλοπας κατέπηξαν.
OS οἱ μὲν πονέοντο κάρη κομόωντες ᾿Αχαιοί:"
ἢ Κομο x
e A
ot δὲ θεοὶ πὰρ Ζηνὶ καθήμενοι ἀστεροπητ
7 poTrntTy
a“ ” b “a
θηεῦντο μέγα ἔργον ᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων.
τοῖσι δὲ μύθων ἦρχε Ποσειδάων ἐνοσίχθων" 445
“ Ζεῦ πάτερ, ἣ pa tis ἐστι βροτῶν ἐπ᾽ ἀπείρονα γαῖαν,
ὅς τις ἔτ᾽ ἀθανάτοισι νόον καὶ μῆτιν ἐνίψει ;
μη ;
e Ἁ ’ >
οὐχ ὁράᾳς, ὅτι δὴ adte κάρη κομόωντες ᾿Αχαιοὶ
τεῖχος ἐτειχίσσαντο νεῶν ὕπερ, ἀμφὶ δὲ τάφρον
4 x x ’ ve e ’ p
ἤλασαν, οὐδὲ θεοῖσι δόσαν κλειτὰς ἑκατόμβας ; 450
τοῦ δ᾽ ἦ τοι κλέος ἔσται, ὅσον τ᾽ ἐπικίδναται ἠώς"
τοῦ δ᾽ ἐπιλήσονται, τὸ ἐγὼ καὶ Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων
ἥρῳ Λαομέδοντι πολίσσαμεν ἀθλήσαντε.᾽"
τὸν δὲ μέγ᾽ ὀχθήσας προσέφη νεφεληγερέτα Ζεύς"

another day must begin, but the mention
of the night is even more imperatively
demanded here than in 381.

434. ἔγρετο MSS., was awaked or
aroused (éyelpw) ; ἤγρετο La Roche and
others, from dyelpw, ‘‘ gathered”; and
this is perhaps preferable. The same
question arises on 22 789.

435-440 = 336-341.

443-464 were rejected as an interpola-
tion by Zenod., Aristophanes, and Aris-
tarchos, on the ground that the same
question arises in the beginning of M
with no allusion to this passage. In
this they are followed by most editors ;
and if we accept M 1-34 as genuine there
can be no doubt that their judgment is
right. If however that passage be re-
jected, as seems to be necessary, there is
no decisive argument against the episode
here; though it is a suspicious fact
that out of the twenty-two fines the fol-
lowing appear more or less in other
places: 443 =A 1, 445-6 = E 420-1,
449-50 = M 5-6, 454 =A 517, 455 = ©
201, 460 = B 140, 462 = M 31, 464 =E
274, etc.; or nearly half.

445. Poseidon is not generally found
in Olympos unless specially summoned,
ef. fT 13-14.

447. ἐνίψει, will declare his intentions
to the gods in order to ask their appro-
bation. This fut. of évéww recurs only in
8 137,148. For the: from root cew see
Curt. Et. p. 467, no. 632; the correctness
of tle form is shewn by the use in Pindar
of évirrw, which is apparently a later
deduction from the Homeric word.

451. ὅσην sc. γῆν, so Ar. and A, with
the Ambrosian palimpsest : ὅσον is the
reading of Zenod. and the vulgate. So
also 458.

452. τὸ ἐγώ, so Ar.: A and other
MSS. τότ᾽ ἐγώ. The hiatus is harsh
immediately after the main caesura,

453. See © 446 (where Poseidon alone
builds the wall), Pind. O. viii. 31: the
story seems to be later than the older
parts of the Iliad (cf. however Z 438).

θλήσαντε, so best MSS. (Ar. -caytes),
with much toil ; cf. O 30, the only other
Instance in H. πολίσσαμεν, ‘ built,”
cf. πεπόλιστο T 217. For ἥρῳ most
MSS. read ἥρωϊ as a dactyl. So @ 483.

254

LAIAAO® H (v1)

“ & πόποι, ἐννοσίγαι᾽ εὐρυσθενές, οἷον ἔειπες. 455
ἄλλος κέν τις τοῦτο θεῶν δείσειε νόημα,
ὃς σέο πολλὸν ἀφαυρότερος χεῖράς τε μένος τε"
σὸν δ᾽ % τοι κλέος ἔσται, ὅσον 7 ἐπικίδναται ἠώς.
ἄγρει μάν, ὅτ᾽ ἂν αὖτε κάρη κομόωντες ᾿Αχαιοὶ
οἴχωνται σὺν νηυσὶ φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν, 460
τεῖχος ἀναρρήξας τὸ μὲν εἰς ἅλα πᾶν καταχεῦαε,
αὗτις δ᾽ ἠιόνα μεγάλην ψαμάθοισι καλύψαι,
ὥς κέν τοι μέγα τεῖχος ἀμαλδύνηται ᾿Αχαιῶν."
ὡς οἱ μὲν τοιαῦτα πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἀγόρενον'
δύσετο δ᾽ ἠέλιος, τετέλεστο δὲ ἔργον ᾿Αχαιῶν, 465
βουφόνεον δὲ κατὰ κλισίας καὶ δόρπον ἕλοντο.
νῆες δ᾽ ἐκ Λήμνοιο παρέστασαν οἶνον ἄγουσαι
πολλαί, τὰς προέηκεν ᾿Ιησονίδης ᾿Εύνηος,
τόν ῥ᾽ ἔτεχ᾽ Ὑψιπύλη ὑπ᾽ Ἰήσονι ποιμένι λαῶν.

χωρὶς δ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδῃς ᾿Αγαμέμνονι καὶ Μενελάῳ

470

δῶκεν ᾿Ιησονίδης ἀγέμεν μέθυ, χίλια μέτρα.

ἔνθεν ἄρ᾽ οἰνίζξοντο κάρη κομόωντες ᾿Αχαιοί,

ἄλλοι μὲν χαλκῷ, ἄλλοι δ᾽ αἴθωνι σιδήρῳ,

ἄλλοι δὲ ῥινοῖς, ἄλλοι δ᾽ αὐτῇσι βόεσσιν,

ἄλλοι δ᾽ ἀνδραπόδεσσι" τίθεντο δὲ δαῖτα θάλειαν. 475
παννύχιοι μὲν ἔπειτα κάρη κομόωντες ᾿Αχαιοὶ

δαίνυντο, Τρῶες δὲ κατὰ πτόλιν ἠδ᾽ ἐπίκουροι"

παννύχιος δέ σφιν κακὰ μήδετο μητίετα Ζεὺς

463. ἀμαλδύνηται : this verb recurs
only in the same connexion M 18, 32.
Curtius (Zé. p. 230, no. 255, δ) connects
it with βραδύς, Skt. mrdu-s for mardus,
Ksl. mladi, tender.

464. For this line as a sign of inter-
polation see E 431.

467. waptoracay, so MSS.: Bentley,
followed by Cobet (M. C. p. 296), read
παρέσταν, and the use of the aorist,
‘“‘arrived”’ then and there, not ‘‘had
come,” gives additional point to the
narrative, besides saving the F of Fotvos.

468. This is one of the few allusions
in Homer to the legend of the Argonauts.
The others are in ® 40, Ψ 746, and μ
69-72. Lemnos is mentioned also in B
722, © 230. The Minyan colony there
seems to be regarded as preserving a
friendly neutrality towards the Greeks.
In I 72 the supply of wine is said to
come from Thrace.

470. χωρίς, specially.

471. μέτρα, as Ψ 268, 8 355, implying
some recognized quantity.

472. ἕνθεν ἄρ᾽, ἔνθ᾽ ἄρα, Cobet (M. C.
296), to save the digamma.

474, αὐτῇσι, “whole” or “live,” as
opposed to the hides,

475. Rejected by Zenod., Aristoph.,
and Ar., on the ground that ἀνδράποδον is
a later word, unknown to Homer. The
heteroclite dat. ἀνδραπόδεσσι does not
recur in Greek: it seems to su t the
derivation from ἀνδρὸς πούς, which is
however very doubtful. Zenod. dvdpa-
πόδοισι. Ar. also objected to the (fifth)
repetition of ἄλλοι.

478. There is no reason for confining
σφιν to the Greeks alone; Zeus gives
both sides alike ominous warning of the
coming battles.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ H (vm) 255

σμερδαλέα κτυπέων. τοὺς δὲ χλωρὸν δέος ἥρειν,

οἶνον δ᾽ ἐκ δεπάων χαμάδις χέον, οὐδέ τις ἔτλη — 480
πρὶν πιέειν, πρὶν λεῖψαι ὑπερμενέι Κρονίωνι.

κοιμήσαντ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔπειτα καὶ ὕπνου δῶρον ἕλοντο.

481. For πρὶν πιέειν Ar. read πιέμεναι. sisting in sleep.” Ovid. translates by
482. See I 713, 7 427. δῶρον seems ‘‘carpebant munera somni,” Fastt, iil.
to mean ‘‘the gift (of the gods) con- 185.

ΙΔΙΆΔΟΣ Θ᾽ ει,

ΙΔΙΑΆΔΟΣ Θ.

κόλος μάχη.

᾽ A A / > / “- > 3 4
Has μὲν κροκόπεπλος ἐκίδνατο πᾶσαν ἐπ᾽ αἷαν,
Ζεὺς δὲ θεῶν ἀγορὴν ποιήσατο τερπικέραυνος
ἀκροτάτῃ κορυφῇ πολυδειράδος Οὐλύμποιο.

3 ‘ “ 3 > 4 4 > 6 A 4 @
αὐτὸς δέ σφ᾽ ἀγόρευε, θεοὶ δ᾽ ὑπὸ πάντες ἄκουον"

Θ

The plan of this book is simple. Zeus,
in accordance with the promise given to
Thetis in Book 1., forbids the gods to
take any part in the war, in order that
the Trojans may gain the upper hand.
The Greeks are accordingly defeated, by
means of a divine panic; and after a
short rally, in which the archery of
Teukros plays a chief part, are again
driven back to the ships. Hera and
Athene, attempting to go to their assist-
ance, are stopped by command of Zeus,
and Hector and the Trojans, flushed
with success, bivouac on the plain, in
full hopes of capturing the Greek camp
next day. The narrative is clear and
consistent with itself; the chief diffi-
culties with regard to the book consist
in the question of its position in the
scheme of the poem as a whole.

Grote held that © was a part of the
original ‘‘ Achilleis,” and followed im-
mediately on A, the intervening books be-
ing an interpolated ‘‘ Ilias... There can
be no doubt that the beginning of the
book stands in close relation with the end
of A; and the idea that the prohibition
to the gods shoul: follow the promise to
Thetis is probably correct. ut there
is a great objection to the supposition
that the book as a whole occupied a
place in any original scheme of an Iliad.
Chis lies in the fact that so large a
number of lines is found in other pass-
ages as to give to considerable portions
all the appearance of centos made up

from other books previously existing.
This is ially noticeable in the
transition from the opening scene in
Olympos to the actual fighting ; see note
on line 28. From 28 to 72 every line,
except 33-37 and half of 51, occurs else-
where ; and in the rest of the book,
excluding repetitions of m and
other lines within the book itself, no
less than 203 lines out of 461 occur else-
where in the Iliad and Odyssey. It
may be added that the sudden changes
in the fortune of war, without adequate
cause in the defeat of individual Greek
heroes, are hardly worthy of the best
Epic economy.

There is a sufficient motive for the
interpolation of this book in the desire
to fit Book 1x., which, as we shall see,
is almost undoubtedly of later origin,
into its place in the story; for it pre-
supposes a defeat of the Greeks.

ere, as elsewhere in passages of prob-
ably later origin, there are ibly
fragments of old poetry worked in ; this
is perhaps the case with the dporela of
Teukros, which is quite in the Homeric
spirit, and contains very few lines which
reappear anywhere else. From 266 to
329 there are only ten lines which recur
outside this book, and of these several
are quite formal. Christ thinks that
the opening passage, 1-27, is alyo older
than the rest. his is possible, but
these lines do not fit in between A and
A in their present form.

In spite of this apparent want of
originality in the composition of the

ΙΔΙΆΑΔΟΣ Θ vuttr.)

66

, 4 4 \ ~ ’ ’
κέκλυτέ μευ, πάντες τε θεοὶ πᾶσαί τε θέαιναι,
Ww 3 » 4 \ > \ / 4
[opp εἴπω, Ta pe θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσι κελεύει.
“ 9 4 Ἁ ’ “ Ν
μήτε τις οὖν θήλεια θεὸς τὸ γε μήτε τις ἄρσην
4, g > N » 3 > @ Ul
πειράτω διακέρσαι ἐμὸν ἔπος, ἀλλ᾽ ἅμα πάντες
3 a 9 ΝΜ 4 4 lA Μ
αἰνεῖτ᾽, ὄφρα τάχιστα τελευτήσω τάδε ἔργα.
ἃ 3 3 \ 3 U “A 324 ἢ ,
ὃν δ᾽ av ἐγὼν ἀπάνευθε θεῶν ἐθέλοντα νοήσω
’ >A ’ 9 7ὕ a nw
ἐλθοντ᾽ ἢ Τρώεσσιν ἀρηγέμεν ἢ Δαναοῖσιν,
’
πληγεὶς οὐ κατὰ κόσμον ἐλεύσεται Οὐλυμπόνδε:
») μ \ ev 3 T a 3 /
ἢ μιν ἔλων piirw ἐς Laptapov ἠερόεντα,
a ,
τῆλε μάλ᾽, yt βάθιστον ὑπὸ χθονὸς ἐστι βέρεθρον,
μι / / , \ 4 3 ’
ἔνθα σιδήρειαί τε πύλαι καὶ χάλκεος οὐδός,
ΝΜ 7 9 / id 3 / 3 > » \ 4
τόσσον évepO ᾿Αίδεω, ὅσον οὐρανὸς ἐστ᾽ ἀπὸ γαίης"
᾽ a“
γνώσετ᾽ ἔπειθ᾽, ὅσον εἰμὶ θεῶν κάρτιστος ἁπάντων.

257

10

15

εἰ δ᾽ ἄγε πειρήσασθε, θεοί, iva εἴδετε πάντες,
σειρὴν χρυσείην ἐξ οὐρανόθεν κρεμάσαντες"

book, it has undoubtedly great spirit
and movement. If such a fancy may
-be permitted, one might almost say that
it is such a work as might be expected
from the author of Book Ix.; one who
was a rhetorician of the highest order
rather than an Epic poet in the proper
sense, trusting for effect rather to his
speeches than his narrative, and depend-
ing to a certain extent upon intimate
familiarity with the older poetry in order
to produce so much of a story as was
necessary to form a basis for his own
splendid work. In any case we must
not ascribe to him several passages of
some length which, on any theory of the
origin of the book, can hardly be con-
sidered as anything but poor interpola-
tions ; see 28-40, 184-212, 524-541.

1. This line was placed by Zenodotos
after 52.

4. ὑπό, simply ‘‘thereat.” It does
not necessarily imply the idea of sub-
jection, but is commonly used of any
phenomenon following in connexion
with another.

5. θέαιναι, a form which recurs, only
in this particular phrase, in Θ 20, @ 341.

6 is omitted by the two best MSS.,

7. For θεός Aristophanes read θεῶν.
τό ye anticipates διακέρσαι, ‘‘ this, namel
to thwart.” For the verb cf. O 46
μάχης ἐπὶ μήδεα κείρει δαιμών, and ἐνικλᾶν
Θ 408.

12. πληγείς, sc. with lightning, as
455, 0 17. For οὐ κατὰ κόσμον cf. B

5

214 and 264. Οὐλυμπόνδε, ic. far away
from the battlefield, cf. 456.

13. The following passage seems to
have been in the mind of the author of
Hesiod’s Theogony, where we find several
similar lines: thus Theog. 720, Τάρταρος
ἠερόεις is τόσσον ἔνερθ᾽ ὑπὸ γῆς ὅσον
οὐρανός ἐστ᾽ ἀπὸ γαίης : 726, τὸν περὶ
χάλκεον ἕρκος ἐλήλαται : 782, πύλας δ᾽
ἐπέθηκε ἸΠοσειδῶν χαλκείας : 811, ἔνθα δὲ
μαρμάρεαι τε πύλαι καὶ χάλκεος οὐδός.

14, The βέρεθρον reminds us of the
famous βάραθρον at Athens. The word is
used again of the cave of Skylla in μ 94.

18. I have followed -Nikanor (with
L. Lange and Doderlein) in putting a
comma after πάντες and a colon at the
end of the next line, so that κρεμάσαν-
res goes closely with πειρήσασθε, ‘‘ fasten
a rope, and try me.” With the ordinary
punctuation, in which there is a colon
after πάντες and no stop after κρεμάσαν-
res, it is necessary to assume a rather
harsh change of construction, ‘‘ the
participle being regarded as half inde-

endent, and the imperative being added
in 20 as though another finite verb had
preceded.” (So Ameis. )

19. It is curious that this line, which
evidently alludes to a mere trial of
strength by pulling at a rope, ἑλκυ-
στίνδα, should have been made the base
of all sorts of mystical interpretations
and esoteric myths from the earliest
times. Thus in Plato we find, Theaet.
153 c, τὴν χρυσῆν ceipay ws οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἣ
τὸν ἥλιον “Ὅμηρος λέγει. Eur. Or. 982,

258

IAIAAOS Θ (vir)

9 a
πάντες ὃ ἐξάπτεσθε θεοὶ πᾶσαί τε θέαιναι" 20
’ 4
ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἂν ἐρύσαιτ᾽ ἐξ οὐρανόθεν πεδίονδε
Ζῆν᾽ ὕπατον μήστωρ᾽, οὐδ᾽ εἰ μάλα πολλὰ κάμοιτε.
᾽ > κ' \ , > AN , 24 2 > 9
arr ὅτε δὴ καὶ ἐγὼ πρόφρων ἐθέλοιμι ἐρύσσαι,
> A / 2 93 δ > A 4
αὐτῇ κεν γαίῃ ἐρύσαιμ αὐτῇ τε θαλάσσῃ"
\ 4 ΝΜ Ἁ ef 3 7
σειρὴν μέν κεν ἔπειτα περὶ ῥίον Οὐλύμποιο 25
᾽
δησαίμην, τὰ δέ κ αὗτε μετήορα πάντα γένοιτο.
, > NA ’ > \ re) / > ~~ 9 535 , 39
τόσσον ἐγὼ περί τ εἰμὶ θεῶν περί T εἴμ᾽ ἀνθρώπων.
Φ Μ 3 e 7 4 3 \ > 7 “A
as ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ apa πάντες ἀκὴν ἐγένοντο σιωπῇ
A “ ,
μῦθον ἀγασσάμενοι" μάλα yap κρατερῶς ἀγόρευσεν.
ὀψὲ δὲ δὴ μετέειπε θεὰ γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη" 80
/
“ὦ πάτερ ἡμέτερε Κρονίδη, trate κρειόντων,
a /
ev vu καὶ ἡμεῖς ἴδμεν, ὅ τοι σθένος οὐκ ἐπιεικτόν"
᾽ lel
ἀλλ᾽ ἔμπης Δαναῶν ὀλοφυρόμεθ᾽ αἰχμητάων,
οἵ κεν δὴ κακὸν οἶτον ἀναπλήσαντες ὄλωνται.
S
ἀλλ᾽ ἦ τοι πολέμου μὲν ἀφεξομεθ᾽, ὡς σὺ κελεύεις, 88
\ >] / e , 3 Ψ ? 4
βουλὴν δ᾽ ᾿Αργείοις ὑποθησόμεθ᾽, ἧ τις ὀνήσει,
[ὡς μὴ πάντες ὄλωνται ὀδυσσαμένοιο τεοῖο.᾽
\ 2 9» VA 4 / 4
τὴν δ᾽ ἐπιμειδήσας προσέφη νεφεληγερέτα Ζεύς"

τὰν οὐρανοῦ μέσον χθονός τε τεταμέναν
αἰωρήμασι πέτραν ἁλύσεσι χρυσέαισι. The
neo-Platonists took up the idea, and from
them it was handed on to the Alchemists
of the middle ages, in whose mystical
cosmogony the awrea catena Homeri
signified the whole chain of existences up
to the quinta essentia universalis. The
rope is here of gold simply because it is
divine.

23. Ameis points out that the 8%
shews that ὅτε is here strictly temporal,
and not merely conditional; ‘‘as soon
as I determined to pull.” For ἐθέλοιμι
Aristarchos read ἐθέλωμι, which is perhaps
less appropriate, as the case is pure
imaginary ; see note on A 549. ap
φρων, in good earnest.

24. For the use of the ‘‘comitative”
dative with αὐτός see H. G. § 144. The
object of ἐρύσαιμι is ““ you.”

25. The exact idea of this line is un-
certain. It may mean that Zeus is in
heaven, holding one end of the rope,
and that he fastens the other end to
Olympos as a part of the earth. This
seems to have been the view of Aristar-
chos. The alternative is to suppose
that for the moment the poet forgets
that Olympos is part of the earth, and
conceives Zeus as fastening to a peak of

it his own end of the rope, and so leaving
earth and sea suspended. This seems
more natural, but contradicts the canon
of Aristarchos, that in Homer Olympos
is always the mountain in Macedonia,
not another name for the sky. Lehrs,
Arist. p. 168.

28. The following passage, down to
40, was athetized by Aristarchos, on the

unds that it is wholly composed of
ines from other places, and that it
entirely destroys the effect of the master-
ful words of Zeus. Few will be dis
to doubt the validity of these reasons
for condemnation. 31 is the same asa
45, etc., 82-37 = 463-468, 39-40 =X
183-185. The lines seem to have been
added by some one who thought that
excuse was needed for the moral support
so freely given to the Greeks by Athene,
K 507, A 438, O 668, P 552, etc.

32. ἐπιεικτόν, cf. E 892, and for οἶτον
ἀναπλῆσαι A 170.

37. teoto is a quite impossible form,
recurring only in the equally spurious
line 468. Rohde and others have pro-
posed to read τεεῖο for σεῖο, which may
be defended on the analogy of τεός
(reFés) for σός : v. Η. G. ὃ 98. Zenod.
omitted the line altogether.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ © (vittz.)

259

“ θάρσει, τριτογένεια, φίλον τέκος" οὔ νύ τι θυμῷ
πρόφρονι μυθέομαι, ἐθέλω δέ τοι. ἤπιος εἶναι." 40
Φ 3 \ e¢. 89 ¥ , S > of
ὡς εἰπὼν ὑπ᾽ ὄχεσφι τιτύσκετο χαλκόποδ᾽ ἵππω
ὠκυπέτα, χρυσέῃσιν ἐθείρῃσιν κομόωντε,
\ 3 > \ ” 4 > 6 4
χρυσὸν δ᾽ αὐτὸς ἔδυνε περὶ χροΐ, γέντο δ᾽ ἱμάσθλην
χρυσείην ἐύτυκτον, ἑοῦ δ᾽ ἐπεβήσετο δίφρου.
μάστιξεν δ᾽ ἐλάαν" τὼ δ᾽ οὐκ ἀέκοντε πετέσθην 45
μεσσηγὺς γαίης τε καὶ οὐρανοῦ ἀστερόεντος.
Ἴδην δ᾽ ἵκανεν πολυπίδακα, μητέρα θηρῶν,
lA ΝΜ ’ e , 4 ’
Γάργαρον" ἔνθα δέ οἱ τέμενος βωμός τε θυήεις.
ἔνθ᾽ ἵππους ἔστησε πατὴρ ἀνδρῶν τε θεῶν τε
λύσας ἐξ ὀχέων, κατὰ δ᾽ ἠέρα πουλὺν ἔχευεν" 50
3 Ἁ > » A / 4 oe /
αὐτὸς δ᾽ ἐν κορυφῇσι καθέζετο κύδεϊ γαίων,
εἰσορόων Τρώων τε πόλιν καὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν.
e ΔΝ aA 4 / ? .’
οἱ δ᾽ apa δεῖπνον ἕλοντο κάρη κομόωντες ᾿Αχαιοὶ
εν 3 \ ᾽ > “A ’
ῥίμφα κατὰ κλισίας, ἀπὸ δ᾽ αὐτοῦ θωρήσσοντο.
Τρῶες δ᾽ αὖθ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἀνὰ πτόλιν ὡπλίξοντο, 55
παυρότεροι, μέμασαν δὲ καὶ ὧς ὑσμῖνι μάχεσθαι,
a 4 a
χρειοῖ ἀναγκαίῃ, πρὸ Te παίδων Kal πρὸ γυναικῶν.
a“ > 9 / 4 3 ἘΝ S
πᾶσαι δ᾽ ὠίγνυντο πύλαι, ἐκ δ᾽ ἔσσυτο λαός,
“ 39 64 al . A > 9 \ 3 4
πεζοί θ᾽ ἱππῆές τε" πολὺς δ᾽ ὀρυμαγδὸς ὀρώρειν.
e 27 @ 4, ee? 9 ων / Ψ
οἱ δ᾽ ὅτε δή p ἐς χῶρον ἕνα ξυνιόντες ἵκοντο, 60
4 eo νΝ ς«. UA A > ν 4 >» 3 A
σύν ῥ᾽ ἔβαλον ῥινούς, σὺν δ᾽ ἔγχεα καὶ μένε᾽ ἀνδρῶν
χαλκεοθωρήκων" ἀτὰρ ἀσπίδες ὀμφαλόεσσαι

89. τριτογένεια, see A515. πρόφρονι
θυμῷ, ‘‘in full earnest,” which entirely
contradicts the former speech of Zeus.

43. χρυσόν, his panoply, made, like
other divine gear, of the noblest metal.
Cf. E 729, etc. γέντο, a rather difficult
form. According to Fick it is for yév@ro
from root gandh, ghand, of χανδ-άνειν,
pre-hend-o, etc. It recurs in N 241, Σ
476. According to Hesychius however
the word is Cyprian and the root is yeu:
γέννον Κύπριοι καὶ λαβὲ καὶ κάθιζε : ἀπό-
γεμε ἄφελκε and ὕγγεμος συλλαβή, where
vv is the known Cyprian form for σύν.
The ordinary theory that it represents
ἕλετο, ν standing for A as in Dor. ἦνθε
for ἦλθε, is untenable, as there is no
certain analogy for the representation of
F by y, even if ἑλεῖν was ever βελεῖν,
which is very doubtful.

47. Gargaros seems to be regarded as
a part of Ida, cf. & 292. According to
Kallimachos the peaks of Ida were Gar-

garos, Lektos, and Phalakre. For the
expression μητέρα θηρῶν cf. B 696, I 479,
A 222.

49-50 = E 775-6, except that here the
best MSS. give κατὰ for περί.

51. κύδεϊ γαίων, see A 405, E 906.

53. The δεῖπνον is here, as in A 86
(q.v.), in anticipation of a long day's
fighting, taken before the start from
the camp.

55. It may be noticed that ὁπλίζεσθαι
in Homer means ‘‘to prepare” in a
general way, cf. H 417, etc. The use of
the verb as identical with θωρήσσεσθαι
seems to be a later specialisation ; be-
sides the present passage it occurs in
Homer only in w 495, the latest part of
all the poems. So the use of ὅπλα to
mean armour occurs only in K 254, 272,
Σ 614, T 21.

57. χρειοῖ, cf. A341. 58-9 = B 809
810, g.v.; 60-65 = A 446-51.

260

TAIAAO® Θ (vit)

ἔπληντ᾽ ἀλλήλῃσι, πολὺς δ᾽ ὀρυμαγδὸς ὀρώρειν.

¥ > @w 9 9 4 A 3 \ y 3 A

ἔνθα δ᾽ ἅμ᾽ οἰμωγή τε Kai εὐχωλὴ πέλεν ἀνδρῶν

ὀλλύντων τε καὶ ὀλλυμένων, ῥέε δ᾽ αἵματι γαῖα. 65
ὄφρα μὲν ἠὼς ἦν καὶ ἀέξετο ἱερὸν ἦμαρ,

τόφρα μάλ᾽ ἀμφοτέρων βέλε᾽ ἥπτετο, πῖπτε δὲ λαός -

4 » 3 4 > \ 3 4

ἦμος δ᾽ ἠέλιος μέσον οὐρανὸν ἀμφιβεβήκειν,

καὶ τότε δὴ χρύσεια πατὴρ ἐτίταινε τάλαντα,

᾽ > > ἡ 4 n 4 4

ἐν δ᾽ ἐτίθει δύο κῆρε τανηλεγέος θανάτοιο, 70

Τρώων θ᾽ ἱπποδάμων καὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων"

ἕλκε δὲ μέσσα λαβών" ῥέπε δ᾽ αἴσιμον ἧμαρ ᾿Αχαιῶν.

αἱ μὲν ᾿Αχαιῶν κῆρες ἐπὶ χθονὶ πουλυβοτείρῃ

Cw , \ \ > Ἁ 3 A v

ἑζέσθην, Τρώων δὲ πρὸς οὐρανὸν εὐρὺν ἄερθεν.

αὐτὸς δ᾽ ἐξ Ἴδης μεγάλ᾽ ἔκτυπε, δαιόμενον δὲ

“}
ar

ἧκε σέλας μετὰ λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν' of δὲ ἰδόντες
θάμβησαν, καὶ πάντας ὑπὸ χλωρὸν δέος εἷλεν.
» 3 ᾽ Ἀν.» \ A ’ Μ 3 /
ἔνθ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ᾿Ιδομενεὺς τλῆ μίμνειν οὔτ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνων,
Υ hd ” / 4 ΝΜ
οὔτε δύ᾽ Αἴαντες μενέτην, θεράποντες "Αρηος"
Νέστωρ οἷος ἔμιμνε Γερήνιος, οὖρος ᾿Αχαιῶν, 80
ΜΝ e / 3 > ὦ 3 / Ἁ A IA
OU TL ἑκών, ἀλλ᾽ ἵππος ἐτείρετο, TOV βάλεν ἰῷ

θ6. ἱερὸν Apap, so κνέφας ἱερόν A 194,
οἷς, The epithet expresses the natural
feeling of man towards phenomena which
he sees to be beyond his own power, and
which he instinctively tends to worship
as actual superior beings.

68. ἀμφιβεβήκειν, stood with both
feet upon the midst of heaven, as a
warrior stands with both feet over a
fallen comrade. Cf. 6 400, and in a
inetaphorical sense Z 355.

69. ἐτίταινε, drew out at full length,
so as to leave the scale-pans clear ;
ἕλκε (72), lifted off the ground. The
exact relation which this balancing of
futes, and the general power of destiny,
bear to the omnipotence of Zeus, is a
question which has greatly exercised
the minds of students. It is perhaps
enough to say that such problems would
have been perfectly unintelligible to thie
men of Homer's time; in a primitive
state of thought man does not seek for
a rational consistency in his abstract
ideas. Such conceptions of fate and of
supreme divinity as he has, have in all
probability been evolved in his mind by
two quite different processes, and he sees
no necessity to reconcile them. The
appeal to the scales recurs in the same

words in X 209-210, when the death of
Hector is at hand. In that passage it
seems to be much more in place, as the
fates are really fatal; whereas here the
only result of the ordeal is a temporary
repulse of the Greeks, which before long
is decisively reversed. τανηλεγέος occurs
also in the parallel line X 210, and often
in the Odyssey, always in the same phrase.
The oldest derivation seems to be the
best, παρατεταμένην ἔχοντος τὴν ἀλγηδόνα,
Hesych., ‘‘bringing long woe,’”’ from
ravads and ἄλγος. See Merry on β
100.

73. This couplet was athetized by
Aristarchos, and seems quite indefens-
ible. The dual ἑἐζέσθην must be meant
to stand for the plural; there is no
reason why Zeus should have taken two
fates for each side. Matters are not
mended by the alternative ἔξεσθεν men-
tioned by Schol. A (Didymos?) The
lines seem to be a gloss on 72.

75. A free use of thunder and light-
ning is characteristic of this book ; see
133, 170, 405.

81. Aristarchos, ‘‘in some of the
commentaries,” read ἐδάμνατο, which
seems rather more appropriate to the
effect of an immediately fatal wound.

TAIAAOS Θ (vi)

261

δῖος ᾿Αλέξανδρος, ᾿Ελένης πόσις ἠυκόμοιο,

ἄκρην κὰκ κορυφήν, ὅθι τε πρῶται τρίχες ἵππων

κρανίῳ ἐμπεφύασι, μάλιστα δὲ καίριόν ἐστιν.

ἀλγήσας δ᾽ ἀνέπαλτο, βέλος δ᾽ εἰς ἐγκέφαλον δῦ, 85
\ > tf > + / \ a

σὺν δ᾽ ἵππους ἐτάραξε κυλινδόμενος περὶ χαλκῷ.

ὄφρ᾽ ὁ γέρων ἵπποιο παρηορίας ἀπέταμνεν

φασγάνῳ ἀίσσων, Topp’ “Ἕκτορος ὠκέες ἵπποι

@ > > 3 \ \ e /

ἦλθον ἀν᾽ ἰωχμὸν θρασὺν ἡνίοχον φορέοντες

“Ἕκτορα.

/ / ” » ¢ 4 3 \ \ ΝΜ)
καί νύ κεν ἔνθ᾽ ὁ γέρων ἀπὸ θυμὸν ὄλεσσεν, 90

εἰ μὴ ἄρ᾽ ὀξὺ νόησε βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης.
σμερδαλέον δ᾽ ἐβόησεν ἐποτρύνων ᾿Οδυσῆα"
“διογενὲς Λαερτιάδη, πολυμήχαν᾽ ᾿Οδυσσεῦ,
πῇ φεύγεις μετὰ νῶτα βαλών, κακὸς ὡς ἐν ὁμίλῳ ;
μή τίς τοι φεύγοντι μεταφρένῳ ἐν δόρυ πήξῃη. 95
ἀλλὰ μέν᾽, ὄφρα γέροντος ἀπώσομεν ἄγριον avdpa.”
ὧς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἐσάκουσε πολύτλας δῖος ᾿Οδυσσεύς,
ἀλλὰ παρήιξεν κοίλας ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν.
Τυδεΐδης δ᾽ αὐτός περ ἐὼν προμάχοισιν ἐμίχθη,

vov see on A 185.

86. περὶ χαλκῷ, a bold phrase, “writh-
ing about the point of the arrow.”
Similar expressions occur in N 441,
570, ® 577, Y 30, A 424, μ 395; but in
all of these the victim is pierced through
the middle of the body, which makes
the expression more natural.

87. The παρήορος or extra trace-horse
is mentioned by Homer only here and
in II 152, cf. ὃ 590 τρεῖς ἵππους καὶ
δίφρον.

89. ἡνίοχον is here used in the general
sense of rider in the chariot, not as dis-
tinguishing the driver from the παρα-
Barns: so in T 401 ἡνιοχῆα means the
fighter. From 121 we see that as a
matter of fact Hector is not conceived as
driving his own chariot. So also P 427.
It may be noticed that θρασύς is an epi-
thet peculiarly appropriated to Hector:
it is used eight times of him in Homer,
and only four times of all other heroes
together.

94. μετὰ νῶτα βαλών, generally
rendered ‘‘ turning thy back,” a strange
use. It is perhaps allowable to under-
stand the shield as the direct object of
βαλών, ‘throwing thy shield behind thy
back,” as we know was actually done in
retreat, e.g. by Aias in A 545, ὄπιθεν δὲ
σάκος βάλεν ἑπταβόειον. The taunt in

84. For κα

95 thus gains in sarcastic bitterness,
‘take very good care of your back.”
Such an expression as μετὰ νῶτα βαλεῖν
describing a well-known manceuvre might
easily pass into a technical phrase in
which it was needless to name the shield.
In X 283 however the words of 1. 95 are
used merely to express the inherent dis-
grace of a wound in the back; cf. also
N 289.

97. It was debated by the old critics
whether ἐσάκουσε meant that Odysseus
did not hearken, or only that he did not
hear what was said. The former was the
view of Aristarchos, but the latter is
supported by the fact that Homer never
represents any of the leading Greek
heroes as a downright coward. The com-
pound does not recur in H., and both
senses are found in Trag. The fact that
the flight here is caused by the act of
Zeus would hardly exonerate Odysseus
under the circumstances, as Diomedes
is able to resist the panic for a while
under the action of a special incentive.

99. αὐτός, ἰ.4. μόνος, as B 233, N 729.
The phrase προμάχοισιν ἐμίχθη seems
out of place here, as it is regularly used of
a hero who comes forward from the rear
to take his place among the champions
of his own side; but now there are no
Greek πρόμαχοι at all, as all have fied.

262

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Θ (vmIL).

στῆ δὲ πρόσθ᾽ ἵππων Νηληιάδαο γέροντος, 100
καί μιν φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"

“ὦ γέρον, ἦ μάλα δή σε νέοι τείρουσι μαχηταΐ,

σὴ δὲ βίη λέλυται, χαλεπὸν δέ σε γῆρας ὀπάξει"

ἠπεδανὸς δέ νύ τοι θεράπων, βραδέες δέ τοι ἵπποι"

ἀλλ᾽ ἄγ᾽ ἐμῶν ὀχέων ἐπιβήσεο, ὄφρα ἴδηαι 105
οἷοι Τρώιοι ἵπποι, ἐπιστάμενοι πεδίοιο

κρανπνὰ par ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα διωκέμεν ἠδὲ φέβεσθαε,

3 9 3 /
οὕς ποτ᾽ am Αἰνείαν ἕλόμην,

μήστωρα φόβοιο.

τούτω μὲν θεράποντε κομείτων, τώδε δὲ νῶι
Τρωσὶν ἐφ᾽ ἱπποδάμοις ἰθύνομεν, ὄφρα καὶ “Ἑκτωρ 110
εἴσεται, εἰ καὶ ἐμὸν Sopu μαίνεται ἐν παλάμῃσιν."

ὡς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησε Γερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ.
Νεστορέας μὲν ἔπειθ᾽ ἵππους θεράποντε κομείτην,
ἴφθιμος Σθένελός τε καὶ Εὐρυμέδων ἀγαπήνωρ᾽

τὼ δ᾽ εἰς ἀμφοτέρω Διομήδεος ἅρματα βήτην.

115

4
Νέστωρ δ᾽ ἐν χείρεσσι λάβ᾽ ἡνία σιγαλόεντα,

’ > of 4 > ὦ v 4
μάστιξεν δ᾽ ἵππους" τάχα δ᾽ “Exropos ayye γένοντο.
τοῦ δ᾽ ἰθὺς μεμαῶτος ἀκόντισε Τυδέος υἱός"

δ a ’ eo? 9 / ¢e > e 7 ΄,
καὶ τοῦ μέν ῥ᾽ ἀφάμαρτεν, ὁ δ᾽ ἡνίοχον θεράποντα,

υἱὸν ὑπερθύμου Θηβαίου ᾿Ηνιοπῆα,

120

ἵππων ἡνί ἔχοντα βάλε στῆθος παρὰ μαζόν.

Ν > 9 9. ,“ ¢€ , / ew

ἤριπε δ᾽ ἐξ ὀχέων, ὑπερώησαν δέ οἱ ἵπποι

ὠκύποδες" τοῦ δ᾽ αὖθι λύθη ψυχή τε μένος τε.

oR 3 > δ v 4 2 ς ;
κτορα δ᾽ αἰνὸν ἄχος πύκασε φρένας ἡνιόχοιο"

108. γῆρας ὀπάζει, as A 321. Here 88
elsewhere the MSS. vary between ὀπάζει
ἐπείγει and ἱκάνει.

104. For the horses of Nestor, which
seem to have been as famous for their
slowness as those of Diomedes for their
speed, see Ψ 309.

105-107. See E 221-223; and for the
phrase ηἰἥστωρα or μήστωρε φόβοιο, E
272. ere, as there, MS. evidence is
in favour of the latter reading, though
the consensus is not universal.

108 was athetized by Aristarchos, ac-
cording to Aristonikos, on the following
grounds:—&rt ἄτοπον προστιθέναι τὴν ἱστο-
ρίαν τῷ εἰδότι καὶ ὁ καιρὸς δεῖται συντομίας"
καὶ ὅτι τὸ ποτέ χρονικὴν ἔχει ἔμφασιν,
τῆς ἀφαιρέσεως γεγονυίας τῇ πρὸ ταύτης
ἡμέρᾳ. These arguments hardly seem
sufficient.

109. As usual τούτω is used of the
more distant, τώδε of the nearer to the

speaker, of two objects. θεράπο
Eurymedon (A 620) and Sthenelos.

111. For the use of the future instead
of the subj. in final clauses see H. G. §
326, 3. For εἰ, which has by far the
best MS. authority, most editors read
%. But this use of 4 to introduce a de-
pendent interrogation is not well sup-
ported. See H. G. § 338, note.

114. ἴφθιμος, so two of the best MSS.,
AD; the rest give ἴῴφθιμο. Cf. Ψ 511,
ἴφθιμος Σθένελος.

116. Here and in 187 the MSS. vary
between σιγαλόεντα and ᾧφοινικ
For the latter cf. A 141 and ψ 201,
which shew that the art of staining
leather purple was well known.

122. ὑπερώησαν, ‘‘ swerved aside
thereat,” on missing the guiding hand ;
as WV 433 (ἵπποι) ἠρώησαν éxloow. For
the verb épwéw see on B 179.

124, πύκασε, ‘‘covered up,” veiled

TAIAAOZ © (vit)

τὸν μὲν ἔπειτ᾽ εἴασε, Kal ἀχνύμενός περ ἑταίρου,
al €
κεῖσθαι, ὁ δ᾽ ἡνίοχον μέθεπε θρασύν.

263

125
οὐδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔτι δὴν

ἴππω δενέσθην σημάντορος" αἶψα γὰρ εὗρεν
᾿Ιφιτίδην ᾿Αρχεπτόλεμον θρασύν, ὅν ῥα τόθ᾽ ἵππων
ὠκυπόδων ἐπέβησε, δίδου δέ οἱ ἡνία χερσίν.

ΝΜ \ v Α 3 / 4 /
ἔνθα κε λουγὸς ἔην καὶ ἀμήχανα ἔργα γένοντο,

180

καί νύ κε σήκασθεν κατὰ Ἴλιον ἠύτε ἄρνες,

εἰ μὴ ἄρ᾽ ὀξὺ νόησε πατὴρ ἀνδρῶν τε θεῶν τε.

βροντήσας δ᾽ ἄρα δεινὸν ἀφῆκ᾽ ἀργῆτα κεραυνόν,
\ \ / > Ψ 7 A

κὰδ Se προσθ' ἵππων Διομήδεος ἧκε χαμᾶζε"

δεινὴ δὲ φλὸξ ὦρτο θεείου καιομένοιο,

185

τὼ δ᾽ ἵππω δείσαντε καταπτήτην ὑπ᾽ ὄχεσφιν.
Νέστορα δ᾽ ἐκ χειρῶν φύγον ἡνία συγαλόεντα"
δεῖσε δ᾽ ὅ γ᾽ ἐν θυμῷ, Διομήδεα δὲ προσέειπεν"
“Τυδεΐδη, ἄγε δὴ αὖτε φόβονδ᾽ ἔχε μώνυχας ἵππους.

A
ἡ οὐ γιγνώσκεις, 6 τοι ἐκ Διὸς οὐχ ἔπετ᾽ ἀλκή ;

140

νῦν μὲν γὰρ τούτῳ Κρονίδης Ζεὺς κῦδος ὁπάζξει,
σήμερον" ὕστερον αὗτε καὶ ἡμῖν, αἴ κ᾽ ἐθέλῃσιν,
δώσει" ἀνὴρ δέ κεν οὔ τι Διὸς νόον εἰρύσσαιτο,

his mind; in this metaphorical sense
only in the present phrase, which recurs
also in 316 and P 83. Cf. Epos φρένας
ἀμφεκάλυψεν Τ' 442, ete.

126. μέθεπεν, ‘‘drove in quest of”;
the construction is the same as in E 329,
Τυδεΐδην μέθεπεν κρατερώνυχας ἵππους,
the direct object ἵππους being omitted
here, as continually with ἔχειν when
meaning ‘‘to drive.” ἐφέπειν is used
in a similar way, II 724, 732, 2 326.
That the idea of ‘‘handling” horses
(see note on Z 321) passes naturally into
that of ‘‘driving” them is shewn—if
proof be needed—by the special applica-
tion of the word ménage (our manage)
from manus. The common explanationg,
‘‘to follow with the eyes, to seek or
strive after” (L. and S.), or ‘‘ busied
himself about,” or simply ‘‘ went after,”
cannot be derived from the other uses
of the root ἐπ, which never means
simply ‘‘to go.” Much less does ἕπομαι
mean “to follow at a distance”: it always
is used of accompanying, and the middle
is kept quite distinct in use from the
active.

130. ἀμήχανα, fatal, irremediable, lit.
‘‘admitting of no μῆχος ᾿" to evade them,
see I 249.

131. Cf. Z 78. Schol. V says that

this line was continued ἔν τισι τῶν
παλαιῶν by the following :—

Τρῶες ὑπ᾽ ᾿Αργείων, ἔλιπον δέ κεν “Exropa
δῖον
χαλκῷ δῃωθέντα, δάμασσε δέ μιν Διομήδης.

The sudden turn in the battle is quite
out of proportion to what has gone
before ; there is no indication of any
general rally on the Greek side, and the
idea that Diomedes could unaided have
caused a general rout of the enemy seems
to be a mere outbidding of his exploits
in the fifth book, even where he has
divine assistance. These objections could
to some extent be evaded by supposing
131 to be an interpolation.

135. For the smell of sulphur accom-
panying a lightning flash see & 415.

186. For the form καταπτήτην see B
312.

139. φόβονδ᾽ ἔχε, lit. ‘‘drive towards
flight.” Cf. E 252 φόβονδ᾽ dydpeve, and
wedlovd’ ἔχον I 263.

141. ὀπάζει is of course the transitive
form of ἕπεται above, ‘‘ makes to accom-

any.”

143. εἰρύσσαιτο, a singular use of
this verb, obviously different from that
in A 216, where it means ‘‘ to obey, ob-
serve.” It appears to be rather analogous

264

ΙΛΊΙΑΔΟΣ Θ (v1)

οὐδέ μάλ᾽ ἴφθιμος, ἐπεὶ ἦ πολὺ φέρτερός ἐστιν.᾽ἢ
τὸν δ᾽ ἡμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης " 145
“ val δὴ ταῦτά ye πάντα, γέρον, κατὰ μοῖραν ἔειπες"
ἀλλὰ τόδ᾽ αἰνὸν ἄχος κραδίην καὶ θυμὸν ἱκάνει"
Ἕκτωρ γάρ ποτε φήσει ἐνὶ Τρώεσσ᾽ ἀγορεύων"
“Τυδεΐδης ὑπ᾽ ἐμεῖο φοβεύμενος ἵκετο νῆας.
ὧς ποτ᾽ ἀπειλήσει" τότε μοι χάνοι εὐρεῖα χθών." 150
τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα Γερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ"
“ὦ μοι, Τυδέος υἱὲ δαΐφρονος, οἷον ἔειπες.
εἴ περ γάρ σ᾽ “Extwp γε κακὸν καὶ ἀνάλκιδα φήσει,
ἀλλ᾽ οὐ πείσονται Τρῶες καὶ Δαρδανίωνες
καὶ Τρώων ἄλοχοι μεγαθύμων ἀσπιστάων, 155
τάων ἐν κονίῃσι βάλες θαλεροὺς παρακοίτας."
as ἄρα φωνήσας φύγαδ᾽ ἔτραπε μώνυχαξ ἵππους
αὖτις av ἰωχμόν: ἐπὶ δὲ Τρῶές τε καὶ “Extwp
ἠχῇ θεσπεσίῃ βέλεα στονόεντα χέοντο.
τῷ δ᾽ ἐπὶ μακρὸν ἄυσε μέγας κορυθαίολος “Εἰκτωρ" 160
“ Τυδεΐδη, περὶ μέν σε τίον Δαναοὶ ταχύπωλοι
ἕδρῃ τε κρέασίν τε ἰδὲ πλείοις δεπάεσσιν'
νῦν δέ σ᾽ ἀτιμήσουσι" γυναικὸς ἄρ᾽ ἀντὶ τέτυξο..
ἔρρε, κακὴ γλήνη, ἐπεὶ οὐκ εἴξαντος ἐμεῖο

to Β 859, ἐρύσσατο κῆρα, warded off fate,
meaning here, ‘‘no man can defend him-
self from the designs of Zeus.” But the
other forms in el- always mean either
‘‘observe”’ in the sense of obeying, or
‘‘guard, protect,” as II 542, Υ 93, X
303, etc. In π 463 elpvarac means
‘*watch ” in a hostile sense. The same
divergence of meaning is seen in the use
of φυλάσσω and φυλάσσομαι, by which
the Scholiasts explain the present word.

147. It is most natural to take τόδε
as agreeing with ἄχος, ‘this is the sore
grief.” It is however possible to under-
stand it as an accusative anticipating
the content of the following clause, ‘ It
is in respect of this that great grief
comes upon me, namely, that,” etc. For
this use of the pronoun cf. τό ye E 827,
and τὸ δέ Z 523.

148. The future φήσει is found only
here and in 153.

150. ἀπειλήσει, here in the primitive
sense, ‘‘ declare loudly,” cf. ¥ 863, 872,
and @ 383 ἀπείλησας βητάρμονας εἶναι
ἀρίστου. The word is possibly con-
nected with ἠπύω, but this is doubtful.
For the last half of the line see A 182.

153. εἴ wep φήσει admits Diomedes’
view of Hector’s action as right, ‘‘ though
Hector will indeed say.”

157. φύγαδ᾽ ἔτραπε, like φόβον»δ᾽ ἔχε
above (139).

161. Hector loses no time in justifying
the opinion of Nestor and Diomedes.
For the chief seat and other marks of
distinction see A 260, H 321, M 310,
with the notes on those passages.

163. dpa with τέτυξο, ‘‘ you are after
all,” as often. ἀντί, lit. in the place of
ἃ woman, 1.6. no better than one. It
may also mean ‘‘as good as,” 1.6. no
worse than, I 116, Φ 75, 6 546 ; it merely
indicates equality.

164. γλήνη, ‘‘ plaything,” doll, pup-
pet. The word recurs in & 494, « 390,
in the sense of the pupil of the eye (so
also Soph. O. T. 1277); and the cognate
yAjvea is found in Q 192, meaning
trinkets (compare rplyAnvos = 183,
‘‘with three drops,”’ of earrings ; Helbig,
H. E. 185). The word seems to come
from the root yaa directly, and to mean
‘‘something bright.” In the present
passage it has been taken to mean
‘* girl” by a process the inverse of that

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Θ (vu1)

265

πύργων ἡμετέρων ἐπιβήσεαι, οὐδὲ γυναῖκας 165
ἄξεις ἐν νήεσσι" πάρος τοι δαίμονα δώσω."
ὧς φάτο, Τυδεΐδης δὲ διάνδιχα μερμήριξεν,
ἵππους τε στρέψαι καὶ ἐναντίβιον μαχέσασθαι.
τρὶς μὲν μερμήριξε κατὰ φρένα καὶ κατὰ θυμόν,
τρὶς δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἀπ᾽ ᾿Ιδαίων ὀρέων κτύπε μητίετα Ζεὺς 170
σῆμα τιθεὶς Τρώεσσι, μάχης ἑτεραλκέα νίκην.
Ἕκτωρ δὲ Τρώεσσιν ἐκέκλετο μακρὸν ἀύσας"
“Τρῶες καὶ Λύκιοι καὶ Δάρδανοι ἀγχιμαχηταί,
ἀνέρες ἔστε, φίλοι, μνήσασθε δὲ θούριδος ἀλκῆς"

͵ > Ψ , , ’ .-
γυγνώσκω δ᾽, ὅτι μοι πρόφρων κατένευσε Κρονίων 17

er

νίκην καὶ μέγα ᾿κῦδος, ἀτὰρ Δαναοῖσί ye πῆμα᾽

νήπιοι, οἱ ἄρα δὴ τάδε τείχεα μηχανόωντο

3 / 3 3 “ 3 3 e oN > 9

ἀβλήχρ᾽ οὐδενόσωρα" τὰ δ᾽ ov μένος ἁμὸν ἐρύξει"

tf es , e ’ 3 4

ἵπποι δὲ ῥέα τάφρον ὑπερθορέονται ὀρυκτήν.

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε κεν δὴ νηυσὶν ἔπι γλαφυρῇσι γένωμαι, 180
μνημοσύνη τις ἔπειτα πυρὸς δηίοιο γενέσθω,

ὡς πυρὶ νῆας ἐνιπρήσω, κτείνω δὲ καὶ αὐτοὺς

[Αργείους παρὰ νηυσίν, ἀτυξομένους ὑπὸ Katou.”

by which κόρη comes to mean the pupil
of the eye. But it implies no more
than ‘‘ you pretty toy.” οὐκ of course
goes with ἐπιβήσεαι, not with εἴξαντος.

166. δαίμονα δώσω, “1 will deal thee
fate,” a strange expression, not elsewhere
found. Cf. δόμεν θάνατον I 571, and
the phrase δαίμονος aloa. Zenod. read
πότμον ἐφήσω, a more likely phrase.
Aristarchos and Aristophanes athetized
164-166, partly on account of this, partly
because they considered the lines ‘‘ poor
and unsuited to the characters of the
speakers.” Against this may be set
Bergk’s remark that the speech of Hector
without these lines is very weak and
jejune.

167. διάνδιχα μερμήριξεν, followed by
the statement of only one of the alter-
natives which present themselves, is
exuctly paralleled by our colloquial
*“had hak xm turn his horses
and to fight.” See on A 189, where the
same phrase is found.

171. For the phrase μάχης ἑτεραλκέα
νίκην see H 26. According to Nikanor,
the comma inust be put after Τρώεσσιν,
as is always printed, ἐὰν γὰρ συνάπτωμεν,
σολοικοφανὲς γίνεται. 7.6. he objects to
taking σῆμα as an accusative in apposi-
tion with the preceding line, ‘‘ by way

. of a sign,” and joining τιθεὶς ér. νίκην

Τρώεσσιν, ‘appointing for the Trojans a
turning of the tide of battle.” This
construction is perhaps possible, though
not very Homeric; it may have been
suggested by the fact that the common

hrase is σήματα φαίνων, or the like.

here is no difficulty in taking both νίκην
and σῆμα with τιθείς by a slight zeugma.

177. For ot Dion. Sidon. read of’,
which is .pleasing in itself, and agrees
With the habit of making a decided
pause after νήπιος used interjectionally,
instead of connecting it closely with
what follows. We have however νήπιοι
of in O 104 and a 8, so that the question
is doubtful. μηχανάασθαι is elsewhere
always followed iby an adj. in the neuter
plural, not by a substantive.

178. &BAfxp, E 337. οὐδενόσωρα,
“not worth a thought”; ἅπαξ λεγόμενον
in Greek till Oppian. Déderl. takes it
to mean ‘‘recking of nothing,” impious,
which may be right. Hes. explains
ovdevds φυλακτικά, guarding nothing.
For the almost unique composition of
the word see H. 6. § 124 e.

181. μνημοσύνη γενέσθω, a sort of
periphrastic passive to μέμνημαι; cf.
φειδὼ γίγνεται, H 409.

183 is omitted by all the best MSS. ;

ΙΔΙΑΔΟΣ Θ (νππ.)

269

wv eo δ ’ Μ) 4

7 ῥ᾽ ἐν μεσσάτῳ ἔσκε, γεγωνέμεν dudotépwce:
3 \

[ἡμὲν ἐπ᾿ Αἴαντος κλισίας Τελαμωνιάδαο

nd ἐπ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλῆος, τοί ῥ᾽ ἔσχατα νῆας ἐίσας

225

εἴρυσαν, ἠνορέῃ πίσυνοι καὶ κάρτεϊ χειρῶν"
ἤυσεν δὲ διαπρύσιον Δαναοῖσι γεγωνώς"

“ αἰδώς, ᾿Αργεῖοι, κάκ᾽ ἐλέγχεα, εἶδος ἀγητοί:
πῇ ἔβαν εὐχωλαί, ὅτε δὴ φάμεν εἶναι ἄριστοι,

A e 49 9 4 7 2 4
as oot ἐν Λήμνῳ Keveavyées ἠγοράασθε,

230

ἔσθοντες κρέα πολλὰ βοῶν ὀρθοκραιράων,
πίνοντες κρητῆρας ἐπιστεφέας οἴνοιο,

Τρώων ἄνθ᾽ ἑκατὸν τε διηκοσίων τε ἕκαστος
στήσεσθ᾽ ἐν πολέμῳ" νῦν δ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ἑνὸς ἄξιοί εἶμεν

“Ἕκτορος, ὃς τά nas ἐ ’ i κηλέ
pos, ὃς τάχα νῆας ἐνιπρήσει πυρὶ κηλέῳ.

Ζεῦ πάτερ, ἡ ῥά tw ἤδη ὑπερμενέων βασιλήων
τῇδ᾽ ἄτῃ ἄασας καί μιν μέγα κῦδος ἀπηύρας ;

3 / / \ / \
ov μὲν δή ποτέ φημι τεὸν περικαλλέα βωμὸν

228. μεσσάτῳ, only here and A 6.
γεγωνέμεν οὐ ψιλῶς ἐστι φωνεῖν, ἀλλ’
ἀκουστὸν φθέγγεσθαι, Schol. A, rightly.
222-226 = A 5-9; the last :three lines
are omitted here by the best MSS. 227
= A 275, 228 = E 787.

229. εὐχωλαί, ‘‘ boastings,” not in a
bad sense, which is only given by xeveav-
xées. For the phrase πῇ ἔβαν cf. E 472,
2 201. The following relative clause is
evidently imperfect, as there is a verb
wanting either after ds or ὁπότ᾽ according
as we punctuate. If we put a comma
after Λήμνῳ, we must assume an ellipse
of ἦτε, as in our idiomatic ‘you boasted
when in Lemnos.” It iscommon enough
for the substantive verb to be omitted
in relative clauses (H. G. § 271), and an
instance after a temporal adverb will be
found in κ 176, ὄφρ᾽ ἐν νηὶ θοῇ βρῶσίς τε
πόσις τε: but here the omission is harsh,
because the subject of the verb is not
expressed. Hence some join ὁπότε with
ἠγοράασθε, and hold that there is an
anacoluthon, the verb governing ds being
forgotten after the interposed relative
clause. Christ thinks that the confused
construction indicates an interpolation
by a cyclic poet from a narrative in the
Kypria, which may from the abstract we
possess have given some such story of a
feast on the journey to Troy. But this
is hardly probable. There 18 an evident
allusion to the famous wines of Lemnos ;
see H 467.

231 was athetized by Aristarchos on
the ground that beef does not tend to
make men boastful.

232. For ἐπιστεφέας see A 470.

284, στήσεσθαι, with ἀντί, apparently
“πο weigh” as much as (see on
163); ἄξιοι being also used in this
literal meaning. So Schol. B. Schol.
A explains ἄνθ᾽ as ἄντα, hardly so
well, on the question- begging ground
that if it is for ἀντί it would have no
accent.

235. Athetized by Aristarchos and
Aristoph. on the ground that it quite
spoils the rhetorical effect of the reproach ;
Agamemnon ought to say ‘‘we are no
match even for the weakest Trojan.” It
has all the appearance of a gloss. Aris-
tarchos wou d have preferred to read
"Exropos @ δὴ κῦδος ᾽Ολύμπιος αὐτὸς ὀπάζει,
but we are not told if this is a conjecture
or not.

237. This throwing of the blame upon
the dry of Zeus is a favourite resource of
Agamemnon ; see T 91, etc. The form
Gacas is in accordance with the best
analogy, but the best MSS. read ὅσας.
If we retain the trisyllable form we must
read -τῇ a- as one syllable by synizesis,
as the forms in aa never have both short,
though one or other of the two is often
so. The contracted form is supported
by doe X 61, ἄσατο T 95.

268

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Θ (vir)

πλῆθεν ὁμῶς ἵππων τε καὶ ἀνδρῶν ἀσπιστάων

εἰλομένων" εἴλει δὲ θοῷ ἀτάλαντος "Apne 215
Ἕκτωρ Πριαμίδης, ὅτε οἱ Ζεὺς κῦδος ἔδωκεν.

καί νύ κ᾽ ἐνέπρησεν πυρὶ κηλέῳ νῆας ἐΐσας,

εἰ μὴ ἐπὶ φρεσὶ θῆκ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνονι πότνια “Ἥρη

αὐτῷ ποιπνύσαντι θοῶς ὀτρῦναι ᾿Αχαιούς.

βῆ δ᾽ ἰέναι παρά τε κλισίας καὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν

Ig

πορφύρεον μέγα φᾶρος ἔχων ἐν χειρὶ παχείῃ,
στῆ δ᾽ ἐπ’ ᾿δυσσῆος μεγακήτεϊ νηὶ μελαίνῃ,

the camp, as in Μ 333, πάπτηνεν δ᾽ ἀνὰ
πύργον ᾿Αχαιῶν, though in this sense the
plural is most common. The real diffi-
culty lies in the two prepositions ἀπό
and ἐκ. The latter should mean “start-
ing from,” and therefore imply a space
bounded on one side by the ships. But
how could any space hounded by ships
and foss be ἀπὸ πύργου when the wall is
between them? If we could understand
πύργος as indicating some point of the
wall, as for instance the ‘‘ common

ave” at one end (H 337), ἀπό might
indicate the portion of the space between
ships and wall remote from this end ;
but there is no reason why one end only
of the camp should be specified. The
only other interpretation consistent with
the words is, I think, that which joins
ἀπό with the verb, and takes πύργον
τάφρος together, ‘‘ all that the moat of
the wall encloses from (i.e. up to) the
ships.” This is consistent and intel-
ligible, but the order of the words is
very harsh. The explanation which is
gencrally approved is that of La Roche,
according to which ἐκ means ‘‘ outside
the ships,” and the space indicated is
that between the wall and the moat, the
Greeks not being actually driven inside
the wall in this day’s fighting at all.
But this use of ἐκ for ἐκτός can hardly
be supported ; it has to mean here “in a
Space separated from’’ the ships ; whereas
the use of ἐκ, unlike that of ἀπό, always
implies one of two things, either motion
out of a space, or position in a space
“ὁ starting from,” and therefore in con-
tinuous connexion with, a limit; both
of which senses have to be excluded here.
In other words, to give the required
meaning we ought to have ἀπὸ νηῶν ἐκ
πύργου. Of the passages quoted by La
Roche for the use of é« the only one
which has a real similarity to the sense he

pom

wants is © 130, where ἐκ βελέων means

‘*out of range.” But analogy shews that
this phrase means a space measured from
the margin of the range of darts. It
may further be urged that 217 and 220-
222 shew that no stress can be meant to
lie on the fact that the Greeks are not
yet driven within the wall ; rather the
are at the very last line of defence whi
can save the ships. Although in many
passages the moat and the wall are
regarded as two lines with a considerable
space between them, 6.9. Σ 215, yet this
is one of the points in which the poem
shews decided unsteadiness of conception
of the actual scene of conflict. The
choice therefore seems to lie between the
two explanations first given, unless we
are prepared to adopt the reading of
Zenodotos, or to make such a change as
that suggested by Mr. Monro, ἐπὶ πύργῳ
τάφρος, ‘‘the wall with its moat.”

221. It is not quite clear whether
Agamemnon holds the mantle in his
hands in order to be the freer, like
Odysseus in B 183, or to call attention
to what he is doing ; perhaps both ideas
may be intended. It may be noticed
that purple docs not seem to be a dis-
tinctively royal colour in Homer, see
6 84, ὃ 115, ete.

222. μεγακήτεϊ, “with mighty hollow,”
capacious; so Φ 22, “with mighty maw,”
and of the sea ‘‘ with mighty deeps,” Ὑ
158. Jordan proposes to derive the
word from the ordinary sense of κῆτος,
‘“monster,” explaining πόντος
‘‘teeming with great monsters,” an
μεγακ. νηΐ as ‘‘ with a great monster ” at
the prow ; for it was a common practice,
as we see from the early vase-paintings,
to make the prow of the ship in the form
of a huge animal's snout, like a pig's,
and to paint a great eye upon it (see B
637). But it is probable that the project-
ing ‘‘ram” was not a part of the oldest
Greek ship ; see Helbig, H. E. p. 56.

270

IAIAAOZ Θ (τι)

νηὶ πολυκλήιδι παρελθέμεν ἐνθάδε ἔρρων,

ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ πᾶσι βοῶν δημὸν καὶ μηρί᾽ ἔκηα, 240
ἱέμενος Τροίην ἐντείχεον ἐξαλαπάξαι.

ἀλλά, Ζεῦ, τόδε πέρ μοι ἐπικρήηνον ἐέλδωρ"

αὐτοὺς δή περ ἔασον ὑπεκφυγέειν καὶ ἀλύξαι,

μηδ᾽ οὕτω Τρώεσσιν ἔα δάμνασθαι ᾿Αχαιούς.

7. 699

ὧς φάτο, τὸν δὲ πατὴρ ὀλοφύρατο δάκρυ χέοντα, 945
νεῦσε δέ οἱ λαὸν σόον ἔμμεναι οὐδ᾽ ἀπολέσθαι.
αὐτίκα δ᾽ αἰετὸν ἧκε, τελειότατον πετεηνῶν,
Ἁ *w > 9 Ἢ 4 4 [4
νεβρὸν ἔχοντ᾽ ὀνύχεσσι, τέκος ἐλάφοιο ταχείης "
πὰρ δὲ Διὸς βωμῷ περικαλλέι κάββαλε νεβρόν,
ἔνθα πανομφαίῳ Ζηνὶ ῥέζξεσκον ᾿Αχαιοί. 250
οἱ δ᾽ ὡς οὖν εἴδονθ᾽, ὅ τ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐκ Διὸς ἤλυθεν ὄρνις,
μᾶλλον ἐπὶ Τρώεσσι θόρον, μνήσαντο δὲ χάρμης.
ΝΜ 3 Ν ὔ “ A 97
ἔνθ᾽ οὔ τις πρότερος Δαναῶν πολλῶν περ ἐόντων
φ ’ / 3 4 4
εὔξατο Τυδεΐδαο πάρος σχέμεν ὠκέας ἵππους
’ % » ’ \ » ’ 4
τάφρου τ᾽ ἐξελάσαι καὶ ἐναντίβιον μαχέσασθαι, 255
ἀλλὰ πολὺ πρῶτος Τρώων ἕλεν ἄνδρα κορυστήν,

Φραδμονίδην ᾿Αγέλαον.

e \ 4 > of
O μεν φύγαδ ETPATTEV ἐτγτους"

τῷ δὲ μεταστρεφθέντι μεταφρένῳ ἐν δόρυ πῆξεν

ὦμων μεσσηγύς, διὰ δὲ στήθεσφιν ἔλασσεν.

ἤριπε δ᾽ ἐξ ὀχέων, ἀράβησε δὲ tevye ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ. 260
τὸν δὲ pet ᾿Ατρεΐδαι ᾿Αγαμέμνων καὶ Μενέλαος,

239. The derivation and original sense
of ἔρρειν are obscure. In Homer, as in
Attic Greek, the verb is always used
where the sense of going in misfortune,
under a curse, and the like, is appro-

riate, if not necessary. Mr. Ridgewa

fowever has remarked (Journ. Phil. xi.
p. 82) that it seems to be used in an
Elean inscription (Collitz, 1153) in the
simple sense ‘‘to go, have recourse to,”
but the reading there is very doubtful.
Cf. = 421, I 364. The sense ‘‘on my
ill-omened journey hither” is obviously
appropriate here.

243. αὐτούς, 1.6. even if we fail of our
purpose let us at least save our lives.

246. ἀπολέσθαι MSS., ἀπολεῖσθαι Ar.,
which is adopted by Naber and Christ
on the analogy of «¢ 496, μα 230. But
the best reading in the former passage
is ὀλέσθαι not ὀλεῖσθαι : while in the
latter φανεῖσθαι represents a future φα-
. νεῖται in the speaker’s mind, which is not
the case here. |

247. τελειότατον, ἐπιτελεστικώτατον
Schol., most sure to bring fulfilment.

250. πανομφαίῳ, t.c. to whom belong
all omens by sounds or voices, such as
Odysseus asks from Zeus in v 100, φήμην
τίς μοι φάσθω. The epithet only occurs
here, and is certainly not very appropri-
ate to the particular omen.

254. εὔξατο, could boast that he had
driven his horses in front of Tydeides
This is the only case in Homer of πάρος
with the genitive. It takes up πὶ
in the preceding line. La R. however
prefers to connect Τυδεῖδαο with πρότερος,
and πάρος with σχέμεν, to drive right
onwards, a use for which there seems to
be no analogy whatever. . in
Attic would require ὥστε. μαχέσασθαι,
aor., to take up the fight. ῶ
Tydeides, by a rather awkward change
of subject.

258-260. E 40-42, etc.

261. τὸν δὲ per’, sc. ἦλθον.
H 164-167.

262-265 =
t is curious that Odysseus

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Θ (vir)

271

A > 3 Y ¥ “ 3 4 3 4
τοῖσι δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ Αἴαντες θοῦριν ἐπιειμένοι ἀλκὴν,
A 3,3 ss 9 9 A 3 4 3 »“"ἄἃΕ
τοῖσι δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ᾿Ιδομενεὺς καὶ ὀπάων ᾿Ιδομενῆος
Μηριόνης, ἀτάλαντος ᾿Ενναλίῳ ἀνδρεϊφόντῃ,

τοῖσι δ᾽ ἐπ’ Εὐρύπυλος ᾿Εναίμονος ἀγλαὸς υἱός.

to
Oe
On

Τεῦκρος δ᾽ εἴνατος ἦλθε παλίντονα τόξα τιταίνων,

lo) ν᾽ @ ? Ν 4 oo ,
στῆ δ᾽ ap ὑπ᾽ Αἴαντος σάκεϊ Τελαμωνιάδαο.
ΝΜ 3 ΝΜ A e / 4 3 \ 4 8 φΦ
ἔνθ᾽ Αἴας μὲν ὑπεξέφερεν σάκος" αὐτὰρ ὅ γ᾽ ἥρως
παπτήνας, ἐπεὶ ἄρ τιν᾽ ὀιστεύσας ἐν ὁμίλῳ
βεβλήκειν, ὁ μὲν αὖθι πεσὼν ἀπὸ θυμὸν ὄλεσσεν, 270
αὐτὰρ ὁ αὗτις ἰών, πάις ὡς ὑπὸ μητέρα, δύσκεν

3 3 e / . 4, o 4 “

εἰς Αἴανθ᾽: ὁ δέ μιὺ σάκεϊ κρύπτασκε φαεινῷ.

ἔνθα τίνα πρῶτον Τρώων ἕλε Τεῦκρος ἀμύμων ;
᾿Ὀρσίλοχον μὲν πρῶτα καὶ “Oppevov ἠδ᾽ ᾿Οφελέστην

Δαίτορά τε Χρομίον τε καὶ ἀντίθεον Λυκοφόντην

to
bee |
Or

καὶ Πολναιμονίδην ᾿Αμοπάονα καὶ Μελάνιππον.
[πάντας ἐπασσυτέρους πέλασε χθονὶ πουλυβοτείρῃ.

VN 3QN 4 ΝΜ 3 ce) b v4
τὸν δὲ ἰδὼν γήθησεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων
τόξου ἄπο κρατεροῦ Τρώων ὀλέκοντα φάλαγγας"

A de b 9 Ἁ 3A / \ ἴον Μ
στῆ δὲ παρ᾽ αὐτὸν ἰὼν Kai μιν πρὸς μῦθον ἔειπεν' 280
“Τεῦκρε, φίλη κεφαλή, Τελαμώνιε, κοίρανε λαῶν,

, ᾽ 4 Ν / , a ’
Barn οὕτως, αἴ κέν te φόως Δαναοῖσι γένηαι

, a a Ψ » Ν »

πατρί τε σῷ Τελαμῶνι, ὅ σ᾽ ἔτρεφε τυτθὸν ἐόντα
καί σε νόθον περ ἐόντα κομίσσατο ᾧ ἐνὶ οἴκῳ"

is not named here. Of all the heroes
repeated from the preceding book the
greater Aias is the only one who does
anything at all.

266. παλίντονα probably alludes to
the form of the ‘‘Scythian” bow, with
a double curve, ‘‘bent back” in the
middle to form a handle. Or it may
mean simply ‘‘elastic,” springing back
when bent.

267. This mode of fighting is char-
acteristically oriental. In the Assyrian
sculptures, especially in sieges, we often
find a warrior with a large shield and
spear accompanied by an archer who
crouches down and shoots from under
the shield. The same practice is also
found, though rarely, on the old Greek
vases.

270. βεβλήκει, so best MSS.; Ar.
βεβλήκοι, a very doubtful form (see H. G.
§ 83), and not necessary. With the
next clause the construction changes, so
that ἥρως in 268 is left as a nominativus
pendens.

277 is omitted by the best MSS. It
is from M 194, Π 418.

279. ἄπο, as 2 605 πέφνεν ἀπ᾽ dpyu-
ρέοιο βιοῖο.

281. φίλη κεφαλή, cf. Ψ 94, Σ 82,
114, O 39, and the allusion in Plato,
Phaedr. 264 A, Φαῖδρε φίλη κεφαλή.

282. φόως, which generally means
‘*gafety, succour,” here, by a slight
zeugma, includes the idea of ‘‘ glory”
to the father.

284. Athetized by Aristarchos and
Aristophanes, and entirely rejected by
Zenodotos, on the ground that the men-
tion of Teukros’ origin is out of place,
and is of a nature rather to displease
than to encourage. kop to, ‘‘ took
up,” is a slight hysteron proteron with
τρέφε. According to the common tradi-
tion, Teukros was the son of Telamon
by Hesione, daughter of Laomedon, who
had been captured by Herakles when he
took Troy, and given to Telamon:
whence the namne Teukros. But he is
repeatedly called the κασίγνητος of Aias

FAIAAOS © (var)

Tov καὶ τηλοθ᾽ ἐόντα ἐυκλείης ἐπίβησον. 985
Ἁ ᾽ 9 ‘\ 9 ΄ ° A ’ Ψ
σοὶ δ᾽ ἐγὼ ἐξερέω, ὡς καὶ τετελεσμένον ἔσται"
Ψ ᾽ 4 9 > , \ 9 s
ai κέν μοι δώῃ Ζεύς τ᾽ αἰγίοχος καὶ ᾿Αθήνη
Ἴλιον ἐξαλαπάξαι, ἐνκτίμενον πτολίεθρον,
πρώτῳ τοι pet ἐμὲ πρεσβήιον ἐν χερὶ θήσω,

a , > »" ’ Lad » aA Ψ
ἢ τρίποδ᾽ ne δύω ἵππους αὑτοῖσιν ὄχεσφιν

δ

ἽΝ a 9 Cd ᾽ e Ἁ ‘ 9 ’ὔ 93
ἠὲ γυναῖχ᾽, ἥ κέν τοι ὁμὸν λέχος εἰσαναβαίνοι.
τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσεφώνεε Τεῦκρος ἀμύμων"
“Ατρεΐδη κύδιστε, τί με σπεύδοντα καὶ αὐτὸν
ὀτρύνεις ; οὐ μέν τοι, ὅση δύναμίς γε πάρεστιν,
παύομαι, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξ οὗ προτὶ Ἴλιον ὠσάμεθ᾽ αὐτούς, 995
ἐκ τοῦ δὴ τόξοισι Sedeypévos ἄνδρας ἐναίρω.
ὀκτὼ δὴ προέηκα τανυγλώχινας ὀιστούς,
πάντες δ᾽ ἐν χροὶ πῆχθεν ἀρηιθόων aifnar-
δι 3 3 ’ Ul 4, A 33
τοῦτον δ᾽ ov δύναμαι βαλέειν κύνα λυσσητῆρα.
ἢ ῥα καὶ ἄλλον ὀιστὸν ἀπὸ νευρῆφιν ἴαλλεν 800
"Rh 2 , , δέ eo θ ,
κτορος ἀντικρύς, βαλέειν ὃὲ ἑ teTo θυμος.
“A ‘ e? 3 ’ e ᾽ ᾽ 4 ’
καὶ τοῦ μέν ῥ᾽ ἀφάμαρθ᾽, ὁ δ᾽ ἀμύμονα Τοργυθέωνα,
eN oN 4 XN fo 4 3 “ὦ
υἱὸν ἐὺν Πριάμοιο, κατὰ στῆθος βάλεν ἰῷ'
‘ eo 3 ’ ’ 3 ’ 4 4,
tov ῥ᾽ ἐξ Αἰσύμηθεν ὀπνιομένη τέκε μήτηρ
καλὴ Καστιάνειρα, δέμας ἐικυῖα θεῇσιν. 305
4 82. ἃ e ’ [4 ’ Ψ > 9. 4
μήκων δ᾽ ὡς ἑτέρωσε κάρη βάλεν, ἥ T ἐνὶ κήπῳ,
καρπῷ βριθομένη νοτίῃσί τε εἰαρινῇσιν"
ὧς ἑτέρωσ᾽ ἤμυσε κάρη πήληκι βαρυνθέν.

‘see M 371, κασ. καὶ ὅπατρος), a word
which is commonly used of brothers
uterine (see ἃ 257, 2 47), so that
Aristarchos seems to have thought that
the legend of Hesione was not known
to Homer and that Teukros was regarded
as a legitimate son. But Polydoros is
the κασίγνητος of Hector (T 419), though
by a different mother (Φ 91). The
mother of Aias was Eériboia.

285. ἐπίβησον, cf. B 234, y 13, 52,
x 421.

289. πρεσβήιον, here only in the
sense of ‘‘ prize to the first man,” (see
note on πρέσβα, A 59); a form recalling
the later πρωτεῖον, δευτερεῖον, etc.

290. ἵππω Zenod. and Aristoph. ; the
reading is perhaps to be preferred to ἵπ-
πους of Aristarchos and all MSS. but one
(Townl.), which would be likely to be
introduced in order to avoid the hiatus.

291. εἰσαναβαίνοι : for the opt. after
the future cf. H 342.

296. δεδεγμένος, Herodianus δεδεχ-
μένος. See on A 107.

297. τανυγλώχινας, with ‘‘thin,” or
perhaps “straight,” barbs ; see on Γ 228.

299. The comparison of Hector to a
mad dog or man is rather favourite ; see
I 239, 305.

304. ἐξ Αἰσύμηθεν (or Αἰσύμνηθεν, as
Zenod., Aristoph., and Aristarchos wrote)
of course goes with ὀπυιομένη, ““ taken
as a Wife from A.”

305. Athenaeus, xiv. 682 F, quotes
this line in the form καλὴ Κασσιέπεια,
θεοῖς δέμας elorxvia.

306. ἥ τ᾽ ἐνὶ κήπῳ, sc. ἐστίν. This is
the simple explanation ; though Lehrs
considers it weak, and prefers to supply
κάρη βάλλει from the preceding clause,
comparing II 406, where ἕλκει has to be
supplied after ws ὅτε ris φώς. This
famous simile is imitated by Vergil, Aen.
ix. 436, ‘‘ Lassove papavera collo Demi-
sere caput, pluvia cum forte gravantur.”

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Θ (vu)

273

Τεῦκρος δ᾽ ἄλλον ὀιστὸν ἀπὸ νευρῆφιν ἴαλλεν
“Ἕκτορος ἀντικρύς, βαλέειν δέ ἑ ἵετο θυμός. 810
ἀλλ᾽ 6 γε καὶ τόθ᾽ ἅμαρτε" παρέσφηλεν γὰρ ᾿Απόλλων'
ἀλλ᾽ ᾿Αρχεπτόλεμον, θρασὺν “Exropos ἡνιοχῆα,
ἱέμενον πολεμόνδε βάλε στῆθος παρὰ μαζόν'
ἤριπε δ᾽ ἐξ ὀχέων, ὑπερώησαν δέ οἱ ἵπποι
ὠκύποδες" τοῦ δ᾽ αὖθι λύθη ψυχή τε μένος τε. 816
“ Exropa δ᾽ αἰνὸν ἄχος πύκασε φρένας ἡνιόχοιο"
τὸν μὲν ἔπειτ᾽ εἴασε καὶ ἀχνύμενός περ ἑταίρου,
Κεβριόνην δ᾽ ἐκέλευσεν ἀδελφεὸν ἐγγὺς ἐόντα
ἵππων ἡνί᾽ ἑλεῖν" ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ οὐκ ἀπίθησεν ἀκούσας.
αὐτὸς δ᾽ ἐκ δίφροιο χαμαὶ θόρε παμφανόωντος , 820
σμερδαλέα ἰάχων" ὁ δὲ χερμάδιον λάβε χειρί,
βῆ δ᾽ ἰθὺς Τεύκρου, βαλέειν δέ ἑ θυμὸς ἀνώγειν.
ἢ τοι ὁ μὲν φαρέτρης ἐξείλετο πικρὸν ὀιστόν,
θῆκε δ᾽ ἐπὶ νευρῇ᾽" τὸν δ᾽ αὖ κορυθαίολος “Exrwp

3 4 > 4 Ψ \ 3 ’
αὐερύοντα παρ᾽ ὧμον, ὅθι κληὶς ἀποέργει

325

αὐχένα Te στῆθός τε, μάλιστα δὲ καίριόν ἐστιν,
τῇ ῥ᾽ ἐπὶ of μεμαῶτα βάλεν λίθῳ ὀκριόεντι,
ῥῆξε δέ οἱ νευρήν" νάρκησε δὲ χεὶρ ἐπὶ καρπῷ,
στῆ δὲ γνὺξ ἐ ἐριπών, τόξον δέ οἱ ἔκπεσε χειρός.
Αἴας δ᾽ οὐκ ἀμέλησε κασιγνήτοιο πεσόντος, 330
ἀλλὰ θέων περίβη καί οἱ σάκος ἀμφεκάλυψεν.
τὸν μὲν ἔπειθ᾽ ὑποδύντε δύω ἐρίηρες ἑταῖροι,
Μηκιστεὺς ᾿Εἰχίοιο πάις καὶ δῖος ᾿Αλάστωρ,
νῆας ἔπι γλαφυρὰς φερέτην βαρέα στενάχοντα.
ἂψ δ᾽ αὗτις Τρώεσσιν ᾿Ολύμπιος ἐν μένος ᾧρσεν' 835

312. For Archeptolemos see 128, and
for 313-317 see 121-125.

318. 48 v, sc. of Hector, as he
was a natural son of Priam, Π 738.

321. ὁ δέ, as often, introduces a fresh
act of the subject of the preceding clause ;
e.g. 302 above.

323. φαρέτρης, the second syllable is
elsewhere always long. ἐξείλετο, in
sense a pluperfect.

325. αὐερύοντα, see A 459. The word
recurs in a similar sense M 261. παρ᾽
ὦμον naturally goes with it in the sense
“drawing the bow back to the shoulder,”
but the following clause shews that
it has to be taken also with βάλεν.
ἀποέργει, cf. X 324, 7 KAnides ἀπ᾿ ὥμων

T

αὐχέν' ἔχουσιν, λαυκανίην, ἵνα τε ψυχῆς
ὥκιστος ὄλεθρος. The expression is hardly
so exact here, as the collar bone cannot be
said to hold asunder neck and breast in
the same way as it holds apart neck and
shoulders ; still the meaning is clear.

326. For καίριον, or, as I should prefer
to read, κήριον, see A 185.

328. νευρήν, according to the use of
the word in Homer, must mean ‘‘ bow-
string,” but the breaking of this seems
such a subordinate matter that we should
rather have expected νεῦρον, the sinew
of the arm ; cf. O 469.

332. ὑποδύντε, « getting under him”
to bear him off, as P 717. 331-334 =
N 420-423.

274

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ © (πὶ)

οἱ δ᾽ ἰθὺς τάφροιο βαθείης ὦσαν ᾿Αχαιούς,
“Ἕκτωρ δ᾽ ἐν πρώτοισι κίε σθένεϊ βλεμεαίνων.
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε τίς τε κύων συὸς ἀγρίου ἠὲ λέοντος
ἅπτηται κατόπισθε, ποσὶν ταχέεσσι διώκων,

ἤ ὔ
ἰσχία τε γλουτούς τε, ἑλισσόμενόν τε δοκεύεε,

e WT ” / , ’ ,
as “Ἕκτωρ wale κάρη κομόωντας Αχαιούς,

9A ? ἃ 2 a e
αἰὲν ἀποκτείνων τὸν ὀπίστατον" οἱ δὲ φέβοντο.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ διά τε σκόλοπας καὶ τάφρον ἔβησαν
φεύγοντες, πολλοὶ δὲ δάμεν Τρώων ὑπὸ χερσέν,

οἱ μὲν δὴ παρὰ νηυσὶν ἐρητύοντο μένοντες,

ἀλλήλοισί τε κεκλόμενοι καὶ πᾶσι θεοῖσιν

χεῖρας ἀνίσχοντες μεγάλ᾽ εὐχετόωντο ἕκαστος"
Ἕκτωρ δ᾽ ἀμφιπεριστρώφα καλλίτριχας ἵππους
Γοργοῦς ὄμματ᾽ ἔχων ἠὲ βροτολουγοῦ "Αρηος.

τοὺς δὲ ἰδοῦσ᾽ ἐλέησε θεὰ λευκώλενος “Ἥρη,

ala δ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίην ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
ce 4 > U \ 4 > “A

ὦ πόποι, αἰγιόχοιο Διὸς τέκος, οὐκέτι νῶι
ὀλλυμένων Δαναῶν κεκαδησόμεθ᾽ ὑστάτιόν περ ;
οἵ κεν δὴ κακὸν οἶτον ἀναπλήσαντες ὅλωνται

ἀνδρὸς ἑνὸς ῥιπῇ" ὁ δὲ μαίνεται οὐκέτ᾽ ἀνεκτῶς

“Ἕκτωρ Πριαμίδης, καὶ δὴ κακὰ πολλὰ ἔοργεν.᾽"
τὴν δ᾽ αὗτε προσέειπε θεὰ γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη"

840. ἰσχία, accus. of the part affected ;
ἄπτομαι does not take a direct accusative
in Homer. Soxeba: this change from
subjunctive to indicative is very rare
after the simple re, though common after
δέ re: hence Nauck is perhaps right in
reading δοκεύῃ. In such a matter the
tradition is of little importance. The
verb means ‘‘ watches for him as he
keeps turning round.”

341. ὥπαζε, pressed hard upon, cf.
γῆρας ὀπάζει, and see E 334. The use
of the cognate ἐφέπειν may also be com-
pared.

345. The wall is not mentioned here,
and seems to be included in the phrase
σκόλοπας καὶ τάφρον. See on 213.

347. For εὐχετόωντο the more regular
construction after re καί would a
particip'e co-ordinate with κεκλόμενοι.

f. T 80.

348. There is no mention of Hector
having again mounted his chariot since
320. This is one of the points in which
the poems often shew a certain want of

clearness. The idea is that it was the
practice of each warrior to be accom-
panied by his chariot close at hand, and
to mount or descend from time to time,
according to the convenience of the
moment,

349. For ὄμματα Aristarchos read
ofuara, ““τὰς ὁδοὺς καὶ τὰ ἤματα,"
which is far less appropriate here than

in the other passage where the word
occurs, ® 252. n fact to Homer
Gorgon was probably nothing more than
a face. See A 36, and cf. κυνὸς ὄμματ᾽
ἔχων A 225. For ἠέ, which was read
Zenod. and probably by Aristarchos,
MSS. have ἠδέ, which can hardly be right.
353. κεκαδησόμεθα, from κήδομαι, cf.
φΦ 153 κεκαδήσει, causal but in a rather
different sense. (See Curtius, ΣῈ, no.
284.) It must not be confused with

$45

κεκάδοντο, from root skad, A 497, A 334. -

τιόν wep, a8 we should say ‘‘ even
at this eleventh hour.”
854. See 34.
355. ῥιπή, rash, furious onset.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Θ (v111.)

275

“ καὶ λίην οὗτός γε μένος θυμόν τ᾽ ὀλέσειεν

χερσὶν ὑπ᾽ ᾿Αργείων φθίμενος ἐν πατρίδι γαίῃ"

ἀλλὰ πατὴρ οὑμὸς φρεσὶ μαίνεται οὐκ ἀγαθῇσιν, 860
σχέτλιος, αἰὲν ἀλιτρός, ἐμῶν μενέων ἀπερωεύς'

οὐδέ τι τῶν μέμνηται, ὅ οἱ μάλα πολλάκις υἱὸν

τειρόμενον σώεσκον ὑπ᾽ Εὐρυσθῆος ἀέθλων.

7) τοι ὁ μὲν κλαίεσκε πρὸς οὐρανόν, αὐτὰρ ἐμὲ Ζεὺς

τῷ ἐπαλεξήσουσαν ἀπ᾽ οὐρανόθεν προΐαλλεν. 86δ᾽
εἰ γὰρ ἐγὼ τάδε ἤδε᾽ ἐνὶ φρεσὶ πευκαλίμῃσιν,

evTé μιν εἰς ᾿Αίδαο πυλάρταο προύπεμψεν

ἐξ ἐρέβευς ἄξοντα κύνα στυγεροῦ ᾿Αἰδαο,

οὐκ ἂν ὑπεξέφυγε Στυγὸς ὕδατος αἰπὰ ῥέεθρα.

νῦν δ᾽ ἐμὲ μὲν στυγέει, Θέτιδος δ᾽ ἐξήνυσε βουλάς, 870
ἥ οἱ γούνατ᾽ ἔκυσσε καὶ ἔλλαβε χειρὶ γενείου

λισσομένη τιμῆσαι ᾿Αχιλλῆα πτολίπορθον.

ἔσται μάν, ὅτ᾽ ἂν αὗτε φίλην γλαυκώπιδα εἴπῃ.

ἀλλὰ σὺ μὲν νῦν νῶιν ἐπέντυε μώνυχας ἵππους,

ὄφρ᾽ ἂν ἐγὼ καταδῦσα Διὸς δόμον αἰγιόχοιο 876
τεύχεσιν ἐς πόλεμον θωρήξομαι, ὄφρα ἴδωμαι,

ἢ νῶι Πριάμοιο πάις κορυθαίολος “Extwp

γηθήσει προφανέντε ἀνὰ πτολέμοιο γεφύρας,

358. ὀλέσειεν, a proper opt., “1 wish
he might lose.” e ordinary phrase
θυμὸν ὀλέσσαι is enlarged by μένος, ap-
parently with a consciousness of its ety-
mological connexion with μαίνεται in
355, which is again alluded to in the
μαίνεται of 360. On the other hand
there can be no such allusion in μενέων
ἀπερωεύς, 361.

363. Eurystheus is mentioned by name
again in T 188, O 639; cf. also the late
passage X 621. The twelve labours are
not mentioned, and it is doubtful if they
formed a part of the Herakles legend as
it existed in Homeric times.

367. For the journey of Herakles to
Hades to bring up Kerberos (who is not
named in Homer), see on E 397. He is
first mentioned by name, as wevrnxovra-
κέφαλος, in Hesiod, Theog. 311. πυλάρ-
rao, ‘‘warder of the gate” of the prison-
house of the dead. σπρούπεμψεν, sc.
Eurystheus.

369. alia, headlong, perhaps in allu-
sion to the cataract formed by the ter-
restrial Styx in Arkadia, which by its wild
surroundings typified the river of hell.

371-2 were athetized by Zenod. and
Arist. as superfluous here. See A 512.

373. ἔσται ὅτ᾽ ἄν, the day shall come
when he will call me his darling. See
A 164, 2 448.

375. Observe the change in sense
which is proceeding with ὄφρα: here it
is used in the primitive meaning, ‘‘ un-
til I shall have armed myself” ; while in
the next line it has the derived sense,
‘*in order that.”

378. προφανέντε is given only by A,
with Aristarchos. ost MSS. read
-elgas, with Zenod., but this shortening
of the -as of the fem. acc. plural is a
Doric peculiarity, not admissible in the
Epic dialect. One MS., D, has -εἰσα,
which might be allowable. But see
πληγέντε, used of the same pair of god-
desses in 455. The masculine form of
dual is commonly used by women speak-
ing of themselves in Attic. The parti-
cipial construction is unique after γηθεῖν,
but is found after ἤχθετο N 352. Cf.
also rls ἂν τάδε γηθήσειεν 177, and H. G.
§ 245. πτολέμοιο γεφύρας, see A 371.

276

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Θ (vz)

ἧ τις καὶ Τρώων κορέει κύνας ἠδ᾽ οἰωνοὺς
δημῷ καὶ σάρκεσσι πεσὼν ἐπὶ νηυσὶν ᾿Αχαιῶν. 88)
ὧς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησε θεὰ λευκώλενος "Hn.
ἡ μὲν ἐποιχομένη χρυσάμπυκας ἔντυεν ἵππους
Ἥρη πρέσβα θεά, θυγάτηρ μεγάλοιο Κρόνοιο,
αὐτὰρ ᾿Αθηναίη, κούρη Διὸς αἰγιόχοιο,
πέπλον μὲν κατέχευεν ἑανὸν πατρὸς ἐπ᾽ οὔδει, 885
ποικίλον, ὅν ῥ' αὐτὴ ποιήσατο καὶ κάμε χερσέν,
ἡ δὲ χιτῶν᾽ ἐνδῦσα Διὸς νεφεληγερέταο
τεύχεσιν ἐς πόλεμον θωρήσσετο δακρυόεντα.
ἐς δ᾽ ὄχεα φλόγεα ποσὶ βήσετο, λάζετο δ᾽ ἔγχος
βριθὺ μέγα στιβαρόν, τῷ δάμνησι στίχας ἀνδρῶν 890
ἡρώων, τοῖσίν τε κοτέσσεται ὀβριμοπάτρη.
Ἥρη δὲ μάστυγι θοῶς ἐπεμαίετ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἵππους"
αὐτόμαται δὲ πύλαι μύκον οὐρανοῦ, ἃς ἔχον Ὥραι,
τῇς ἐπιτέτραπται μέγας οὐρανὸς Οὔλυμπός τε,
ἠμὲν ἀνακλῖναι πυκινὸν νέφος ἠδ᾽ ἐπιθεῖναι. 895
τῇ ῥα δι’ αὐτάων κεντρηνεκέας ἔχον ἵππους.
Ζεὺς δὲ πατὴρ Ἴδηθεν ἐπεὶ ἴδε, χώσατ᾽ ἄρ᾽ αἰνῶς,
Ἶριν δ᾽ ὥτρυνε χρυσόπτερον ἀγγελέουσαν"
“ βάσκ᾽ ἴθι, Ἶρι ταχεῖα, πάλιν τρέπε μηδ᾽ ἔα ἄντην
ἔρχεσθ᾽" οὐ γὰρ καλὰ συνοισόμεθα πτολεμόνδε. 400
ὧδε γὰρ ἐξερέω, τὸ δὲ καὶ τετελεσμένον ἔσται"
γυιώσω μέν σφωιν ὑφ᾽ ἅρμασιν ὠκέας ἵππους,
αὐτὰς δ᾽ ἐκ δίφρου βαλέω κατά θ᾽ ἅρματα ἄξω:
οὐδέ κεν ἐς δεκάτους περιτελλομένους ἐνιαυτοὺς
ἔλκε᾽ ἀπαλθήσεσθον, ἅ κεν μάρπτῃσι κεραυνός" 405

381-3 = Ε 719-721, 384-388 = E 788-
737, 389-396 = E 745-752. 385-387
were athetized here by Aristarchos and
Aristoph., and omitted by Zenod. as be-
ing out of place, because all these pre-
parations lead to nothing, and Zeus is
wearing his own panoply, see 43. So
also were 390-391, as inappropriately
repeated from the fifth book.

398. This is the only mention in
Homer of a winged deity ; the concep-
tion seems to have been introduced from
the East in post-Homeric times. See
Langbehn, Die Fitigelgestalten in der alt.
Gr. Kunst.

400. οὐ καλὰ συνοισόμεθα, it will not
be well for us to fight ; cf. 2 326, od μὲν
καλὰ χόλον τόνδ᾽ ἔνθεο θυμῷ.

402. Observe σῴωιν here in the third
person, σφῶιν in the second in 416 ; see
A 8

404. ἐς δεκάτους évavrots seems to be
a confusion between ἐς δέκα ἐνιαυτούς and
ἐς δέκατον ἐνιαυτόν. Paley compares
Aesch. Sept. 118, where πύλαις ἑβδόμαις
seems to stand for ἑπτὰ πύλαις.

405. ἕλκεα is no doubt here the accus-
ative, ‘‘shall they be healed of the
wounds.” If we take ἕλκεα as the sub-
ject, the use of the dual to mean ‘‘the
wounds of the two” is very harsh.
Aristarchos however seems to have under-
stood it in this way, as he read in one
of his. editions ἀπαλθήσονται, which
Didymos prefers. So also Hippokrates,
who uses so many Epic expressions, says

LAIAAOS Θ (vit)

277

ὄφρ᾽ εἰδῇ γλαυκῶπις, ὅτ᾽ ἂν ᾧ πατρὶ μάχηται.
“H δ᾽ » , Or A

pn ὃ οὔ τι τόσον νεμεσίζομαι οὐδὲ χολοῦμαι"

2 ,ὕ ” 3 a “ ν 39

αἰεὶ γάρ μοι ἔωθεν ἐνικλῶν, ὅττι κεν εἴπω.

ὧς ἔφατ᾽, ὦρτο δὲ Ἶρις ἀελλόπος ἀγγελέουσα,
[Bn δὲ κατ᾽ ᾿Ιδαίων ὀρέων ἐς μακρὸν "Ολυμπον]Ἴ. 410
πρώτῃσιν δὲ πύλῃσι πολυπτύχου Οὐλύμποιο
3 ’ὔ / \ > ΧΝ re)
ἀντομένη κατέρυκε, Διὸς δέ σφ᾽ ἔννεπε μῦθον"

“πῇ μέματον;

τί σφῶιν ἐνὶ φρεσὶ μαίνεται ἧτορ;

οὐκ ἐάᾳ Κρονίδης ἐ ἔμεν ᾿Αργεί
a Κρονίδης ἐπαμυνέμεν ᾿Αργείοισιν.
ὧδε γὰρ ἠπείλησε Κρόνου πάις, ἡ τελέει περ, 416
γυιώσειν μὲν σφῶιν ὑφ᾽ ἅρμασιν ὠκέας ἵππους,
3 >» 4 4 4 3. Φ Ψ
αὐτὰς δ᾽ ἐκ δίφρου βαλέειν κατά θ᾽ ἅρματα ἄξειν"
οὐδέ κεν ἐς δεκάτους περιτελλομένους ἐνιαυτοὺς
[4 > 9 4 bud 4 ,
EdXxe ἀπαλθήσεσθον, & κεν μάρπτῃσι κεραυνὸς,
ὄφρ᾽ εἰδῇς, γλαυκῶπι, ὅτ᾽ ἂν σῷ πατρὶ μάχηαι. 420
“H δ᾽ ww / ί QA ~
pn δ᾽ οὔ τι τόσον νεμεσίζεται οὐδὲ yodovTat:
9 , ew 3 ”~ Ψ ΝΜ
αἰεὶ γάρ οἱ ἔωθεν ἐνικλᾶν, ὅττι κεν εἴπῃ.
3 4 3 3 4 4 3 / 3 5 ,
ἀλλὰ σύ γ᾽ αἰνοτάτη, κύον ἀδεές, εἰ ἐτεόν γε
7 Ἁ WwW 4 w 2A 39
τολμήσεις Διὸς ἄντα πελώριον ἔγχος ἀεῖραι.
ς \ ν᾿ > Φ 3 a 9 A , 9 4
ἡ μὲν ἄρ᾽ ὧς εἰποῦσ᾽ ἀπέβη πόδας ὠκέα Ἶρις, 425
3 \ 3 , ad \ fe) 4
αὐτὰρ ᾿Αθηναίην “Hpn πρὸς μῦθον ἔειπεν"

ἐπὴν τὸ ἕλκος ἀλθαίνητα. But the use
of the accusative to express the remoter
object is quite Greek and simple, and is
undoubtedly found in the next phrase,
& κεν σι, where the construction
is the same as in ἕλκος τό μιν βάλε Πάν-
dapos ἰῷ E 795. The sense is ‘‘ the
wounds which the thunderbolt shall
make by fastening upon them.” There
is no other similar use of μάρπτω in
Homer.

406. εἰδῇ ὅτ᾽ ἂν μάχηται, in our
idiom ‘‘that she may know what it is
to fight” with her father. For this
pregnant use of εἰδέναι, to find the mean-
ing of a thing, cf. A 185, H 226.

407. Compare Z 335. ἐνικλᾶν, liter-
ally to break off, 1.6. thwart, like da-
κέρσαι in 1. 8. ὅττι κεν εἴπω, so Aris-
tarchos ; MSS. ὅττι νοήσω.

410. For δὲ κατ᾽ Aristarchos read δ᾽
ἐξ, and for ἐς ἐπί, on the ground that
the prepositions xard and és are only ap-

ropriate when used of a journey from

lympus to the lower earth, not of a
passage from one mountain-top to an-
other, ax’ ἴσον ἐπ᾿ ἴσον. But the whole

line is of doubtful authenticity ; two of
the best MSS., AC, omit it in the text,
and have it supplied by a second hand.

411. πρώτῃσιν, at the entrance to the
gate, from which the goddesses are just
issuing.

415. ἡ, so Aristarchos ; MSS. εἰ, which
does not make good sense.

419. Observe the return to the oratio
recta ; the construction of κεν with an
infin. in oratio obliqua is found only
once in Homer, see on I 684.

420-424 were athetized by Aristarchos,
not without good reason, ‘as they are
quite unsuited to the character of Iris,
who always appears as ἃ mere messenger.
Of course the case against 423-4 is much
stronger than against the first three lines.
The last couplet is quite in the spirit of
the unmannerly rudeness of the gods in
the Theomachy in 9, and in sharp con-
trast with the courteous tone of Iris in
O 200-4.

428. alvordrn, sc. ἐσσί. This was the
reading of Aristarchos, but it appears
that there was a variant σοί (sc. γεμεσί-
ζεται) for σύ γ᾽.

278

IAIAAOS Θ (vit)

“ὦ πόποι, αἰγιόχοιο Διὸς τέκος, οὐκέτ᾽ ἐγώ γε
νῶι ἐῶ Διὸς ἄντα βροτῶν ἕνεκα πτολεμίξεεν.
τῶν ἄλλος μὲν ἀποφθίσθω, ἄλλος δὲ βιώτω,
ὅς κε τύχῃ" κεῖνος δὲ τὰ ἃ φρονέων ἐνὶ θυμῷ 430
Τρωσί τε καὶ Δαναοῖσι δικαζέτω, ὡς ἐπιεικές."

ὧς ἄρα φωνήσασα πάλιν τρέπε μώνυχας ἵππους.
τῇσιν δ᾽ Ὧραι μὲν λῦσαν καλλίτριχας ἵππους,
καὶ τοὺς μὲν κατέδησαν én’ ἀμβροσίῃσι κάπησιν,
ἅρματα δ᾽ ἔκλιναν πρὸς ἐνώπια παμφανόωντα" 435
αὐταὶ δὲ χρυσέοισιν ἐπὶ κλισμοῖσι καθῖζον
μέγδ᾽ ἄλλοισι θεοῖσι φίλον τετιημέναι ἧτορ.

Ζεὺς δὲ πατὴρ ἤἸδηθεν ἐύτροχον ἅρμα καὶ ἵππους
Οὐλυμπόνδε δίωκε, θεῶν δ᾽ ἐξίκετο θώκους.
τῷ δὲ καὶ ἵππους μὲν λῦσε κλυτὸς ἐννοσίγαιος, 440
ἅρματα δ᾽ ἂμ βωμοῖσι τίθει, κατὰ Nita πετάσσας"

431. δικαζέτω, let him decide for them,
as A 542. &, contemptuously, ‘‘ those
lans of his.” Cf. M 280. The com-
ination of the possessive ὅς with the
article is not common, occurring only
eight times in the Iliad and six in the
Odyssey.

433. For the position of the Horae as
servants of the gods cf. 393 above. It
is clear that when Poseidon performs a
similar office for Zeus in 440 we cannot
conclude that it is in virtue of his func-
tions in later Greek mythology as ἵππιος,
for the Horae never possessed such an
attribute. But Poseidon stands to his
elder brother in the honourable position
of θεράπων or squire for the moment;
though it is strange that he should be
upon Olympos without warning, see H
445.

435. ἐνώπια, a much disputed word,
which recurs only in 6 42, x 121, and N
261. The usual view is that these were
the side walls of the entrance, which
must then be regarded as a short pass-
age from the street into the αὐλή, But
such a passage, though found by Dr.
Schliemann at Tiryns, would be a very
inconvenient place for a chariot, whic
would block up the approach from the
street. The explanation of Protodikos
(De Aed. Hom.: Lips. 1877) and others
seems therefore preferable, viz. that it
means the part of the front wall of the
μέγαρον, at the sides of the main door
leading into it from the αὐλή, which
faced the person who entered from the

street. This suits the in x, and
it would be under the protection of the
colonnade, αἴθουσα, which ran along the

front of the μέγαρον, so that a chariot
placed here would be screened from the

wet. παμφανόωντα, either as being of
polished stone, or, according to Helbig,
aced with polished τ cf. θύραι

φαειναί = 169; and ‘see ¢ 43.

441. βωμοῖσι, commonly taken to
mean a stand on which the movable
upper part of the chariot was placed
when taken off the wheel- ; but
rather, as such a construction would
seriously interfere with the strength of
a chariot, a stand on which the pole was
placed to keep it horizontal when not in
use. The mule-car seems to have had a
movable box on the top (ὑπερτερίη or
πείρινθος Q 190, ᾧ 70); but this is no
proof of the existence of any such
arrangement in the case of the war-
chariot, where it would be not only use-
less, but prejudicial. βωμός is used
again to mean the base of a statue in ἢ
100, but these two appear to be the only

assages in classical Greek where the word
18 used of anything but an altar. There
were variants ἀμβωμοῖσι, ἀμβώνεσσι, both
of which seem to have been taken to mean
‘on the steps” of the palace. For the
custom of covering up ἃ chariot with a
cloth when not in use cf. B 777, E 194.
It is impossible to say whether Afra,
which is found besides only in the dative
λιτί, is ἃ masculine singular or neuter
plural.

ΙΛΔΙΑΔΟΣ Θ (vim1.)

279

αὐτὸς δὲ χρύσειον ἐπὶ θρόνον εὐρύοπα Ζεὺς
ἕζετο, τῷ δ᾽ ὑπὸ ποσσὶ μέγας πελεμίζετ᾽ "ολυμπος.
αἱ δ᾽ οἷαι Διὸς ἀμφὶς ᾿Αθηναίη τε καὶ “Ἥρη

ἥσθην, οὐδέ τί μιν προσεφώνεον οὐδ᾽ épéovto:

445

αὐτὰρ ὁ ἔγνω jouw ἐνὶ φρεσὶ φώνησέν τε"
“τίφθ᾽ οὕτω τετίησθον, ᾿Αθηναίη τε καὶ “Ἥρη;
οὐ μέν θην κάμετόν γε μάχῃ ἔνι κυδιανείρῃ
ὀλλῦσαι Τρῶας, τοῖσιν κότον αἰνὸν ἔθεσθε.

/ “
πάντως, οἷον ἐμόν ye μένος καὶ χεῖρες ἄαπτοι,

450

οὐκ ἄν με τρέψειαν, ὅσοι θεοί cia’ ἐν ᾿Ολύμπῳ᾽
σφῶιν δὲ πρίν περ τρόμος ἔλλαβε φαίδιμα γυῖα,
πρὶν πόλεμόν τ᾽ ἰδέειν πολέμοιό τε μέρμερα ἔργα.
ὧδε γὰρ ἐξερέω, τὸ δέ κεν τετελεσμένον ἦεν"

οὐκ ἂν ἐφ᾽ ὑμετέρων ὀχέων, πληγέντε κεραυνῷ,

455

ap és "Ὄλυμπον ἵκεσθον, iv’ ἀθανάτων ὅδος ἐστίν."
ὧς ἔφαθ᾽" αἱ δ᾽ ἐπέμυξαν ᾿Αθηναίη τε καὶ “Ἥρη,

πλησίαι αἴ γ᾽ ἥσθην, κακὰ δὲ Τρώεσσι μεδέσθην.

ἦ τοι ᾿Αθηναίη ἀκέων hv οὐδέ τι εἶπεν,

σκυξομένη Διὶ πατρί, χόλος δέ μιν ἄγριος ἥρειν'"

460

Ἥρῃ δ᾽ οὐκ ἔχαδε στῆθος χόλον, ἀλλὰ προσηύδα"
“ αἰνότατε Κρονίδη, ποῖον τὸν μῦθον ἔειπες.

φ e a a / b) 9 /
ev vu Kal ἡμεῖς ἴδμεν, & τοι σθένος οὐκ ἀλαπαδνὸν'
5 > ν “A 9 / > 3 4
ἀλλ᾽ ἔμπης Δαναῶν ὀλοφυρόμεθ᾽ αἰχμητάων,

Ἁ
οἵ κεν δὴ κακὸν οἶτον ἀναπλήσαντες ὄλωνται.

465

[ἀλλ᾽ ἦ τοι πολέμου μὲν ἀφεξόμεθ᾽, εἰ σὺ κελεύεις,
βουλὴν δ᾽ ᾿Αργείοις ὑποθησόμεθ᾽, ἥ τις ὀνήσει,
ὡς μὴ πάντες ὅλωνται ὀδυσσαμένοιο τεοῖο.] "

τὴν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη νεφεληγερέτα Ζεύς"

444, ἀμφίς, apart from; as & 352, x
267. Aristarchos however, less appro-
priately, took it to mean ‘‘on either side
of Zeus,” as sitting in the two places of
honour. This leaves olat without any
particular force, and 458 evidently means
that they were sulking apart from all
the rest.

448. For κάμετον Zenodotos here read
the Attic form καμέτην. On these dual
forms see H. G. §5. It is to be presumed
that he also read ἵκεσθε for ἵκεσθον with
two of our MSS. in 456, where Elmsley
conj. ἵκησθον ; cf. Curtius, Vb. i. 80.
In the next line Aristarchos read τοῖον
for τοῖσιν, a variant which, as Didymos

remarks, ἔχει τινα ἔμφασιν, though we
should rather have expected οἷον.

452. σφῦῶιν, an unusual instance of
the dative where we should have ex-
pected the accusative.

455. οὐκ ἄν, 1.5. ‘‘otherwise.” The
yap in the preceding clause, in which
this one is anticipated by the word ὧδε,
expresses this, without the need of sup-
plying any further ellipse beyond that
which is implied in this very common
use of ydp. For the use of wAnyévre of
females see 378 above, and Hes. Opp.
199, quoted by Schol., προλιπόντ᾽ ἀν θρώ-
πους αἰδὼς καὶ νέμεσις.

457-468 = A 20-25, © 82-87, ¢.v. 4θ6-
468 are omitted here by all good MSS.

280

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ © (vuL)

᾿ “ἠοῦς δὴ καὶ μᾶλλον ὑπερμενέα Kpovlwva 470
ὄψεαι, al κ᾿ ἐθέλῃσθα, βοῶπις πότνια “Ἥρη,
ὀλλύντ᾽ ᾿Αργείων πουλὺν στρατὸν αἰχμητάων"
οὐ γὰρ πρὶν πολέμου ἀποπαύσεται ὄβριμος “Exrap,
πρὶν ὄρθαι παρὰ ναῦφι ποδώκεα Πηλεΐωνα
ἤματι τῷ, ὅτ᾽ ἂν οἱ μὲν ἐπὶ πρύμνῃσι μάχωνταε, 45.
στείνει ἐν αἰνοτάτῳ, περὶ Πατρόκλοιο θανόντος.

ὧς γὰρ θέσφατόν ἐστι.

σέθεν δ᾽ ἐγὼ οὐκ ἀλεγίξω

χωομένης, οὐδ᾽ εἴ κε τὰ νείατα πείραθ᾽ ἵκηαε
γαίης καὶ πόντοιο, ἵν᾽ ᾿Ιαπετός τε Κρόνος τε
ἥμενοι οὔτ᾽ αὐγῇς “Ὑπερίονος ᾿Ηελίοιο 480
τέρποντ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ἀνέμοισι, βαθὺς δέ τε Τάρταρος ἀμφές-
οὐδ᾽ ἢν ἔνθ᾽ ἀφίκηαι ἀλωμένη, οὔ σεν ἐγώ γε
σκυζομένης ἀλέγω, ἐπεὶ οὐ σέο κύντερον ἄλλο.
ὡς φάτο, τὸν δ᾽ οὔ τι προσέφη λευκώλενος “Ἥρη.
ἐν δ᾽ ἔπεσ᾽ ᾽᾿Ωκεανῷ λαμπρὸν φάος ἠελίοιο 485
ὅλκον νύκτα μέλαιναν ἐπὶ ζείδωρον ἄρουραν.
Τρωσὶν μέν ῥ᾽ ἀέκουσιν ἔδυ φάος, αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχαεοῖς
ἀσπασίη τρίλλιστος ἐπήλυθε νὺξ ἐρεβεννή.

470. For ἠοῦς Zenod. read das, which
was rejected by Aristarchos as not being
Homeric; it has however all the appear-
ance of a genuine word of the old Achaian
or proto-Epic dialect, representing ἄξας :
cf. Aeol. &Fws or adws. It can hardly
have been invented by Zenod., and it is
with hesitation that I have not inserted
it into the text. But the second a has
no exact analogy in Greek, though it
appears to correspond to the Skt. ush-a,
“early”; cf. Curtius, Zt. no. 613.

471. For the phrase ὄψεαι al κ᾽ ἐθέ-
λῃσθα cf. A 353, ete.

475-476 were athetized by Aristarchos,
on the grounds that ἤματι τῷ ought not
to be used of an event which is to happen
on the next day; that Achilles comes
to the battle over Patroklos not ἐπὶ πρύ-
μνῃσι, but at the trench outside the ships ;
that στεῖνος means a narrow place, not
‘‘a strait” in the metaphorical sense (on
this see O 426); and finally, that the
exact definition of the time is superflu-
ous. None of these grounds except the
first seems to be of weight. fpart τῷ
is only used of the future here and in
X 359.

479. Tapetos is named only here in
Homer, while Kronos appears only as
the father of Zeus except in three pass-

ages, = 208, 274,0 225. According to
the later legend both were members of
the Titan dynasty. This is not distinctly
brought out anywhere in Homer, though
it is implied in a comparison of this
passage and = 279 with ΚΦ 204. See
also note on E 898. The whole question
of these dynasties before Zeus, as they
are presented in Homer, is too vague to
admit of a certain solution; when we
come to Hesiod we find that Greek be-
lief has passed into quite another stage,
that of harmonizing the incoherent
and inconsistent legends handed down,
probably from sources differing by wide
istances both of race and place. For
Tartaros see line 13. The meaning of
Zeus may be either ‘‘ You may banish
yourself for ever, and I should not be
sorry to lose you,” or ‘‘ You may try and
raise a revolt in Tartaros, and I should
not be afraid of your efforts.” The word
ἀλωμένη rather points to the former.
κύντερον (483), see Καὶ 503, A 159.

485. The narrative is now taken up
from 849.

486. ἕλκον, a bold but vivid meta-
phor, darkness bein ed as a
mantle or cloth which is over
the earth by the departing sun.

488. rpQAtoros: the only other case

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Θ (sit)

281

Τρώων adr’ ἀγορὴν ποιήσατο φαίδιμος “Exrap,

νόσφι νεῶν ἀγαγών, ποταμῷ ἔπι δινήεντι, 490
ἐν καθαρῷ, ὅθι δὴ νεκύων διεφαίνετο χῶρος.
3 [κά > 9 7 x δ ’ ἴων wv
ἐξ ἵππων δ᾽ ἀποβάντες ἐπὶ χθόνα μῦθον ἄκουον,

/ eo ὦ > ἢ» / 2 > ov
τὸν p Exrwp ἀγόρευε διίφιλος" ἐν δ᾽ apa χειρὶ
3 ” 9 e@ ’ 4 \ 4 \
ἔγχος ἔχ᾽ ἑνδεκάπηχνυ" πάροιθε δὲ λάμπετο δουρὸς

3 \ / A ’ / 4
αἰχμὴ χαλκείη, περὶ δὲ χρύσεος θέε πόρκης" 495
τῷ ὅ γ᾽ ἐρεισάμενος ἔπεα Τρώεσσι μετηύδα"
“ κέκλυτέ μευ, Τρῶες καὶ Δάρδανοι ἠδ᾽ ἐπίκουροι"

“ 3 ὔ af > 9 A Ul 3 ‘
νῦν ἐφάμην vias T ὀλέσας Kal πάντας ᾿Αχαιοὺς
aap ἀπονοστήσειν προτὶ ϊλιον ἠνεμόεσσαν"
ἀλλὰ πρὶν κνέφας ἦλθε, τὸ νῦν ἐσάωσε μάλιστα 500
᾿Αργείους καὶ νῆας ἐπὶ ῥηγμῖνι θαλάσσης.
ἀλλ᾽ 7 τοι νῦν μὲν πειθώμεθα νυκτὶ μελαίνῃ
Sopra τ᾽ ἐφοπλισόμεσθα" ἀτὰρ καλλίτριχας ἵππους
λύσαθ᾽ ὑπὲξ ὀχέων, παρὰ δέ σφισι βάλλετ᾽ ἐδωδήν'
ἐκ πόλιος δ᾽ ἄξεσθε Boas καὶ ἴφια μῆλα 505
καρπαλίμως, οἶνον δὲ μελίφρονα oivilerbe
σῖτόν T ἐκ μεγάρων, ἐπὶ δὲ ξύλα πολλὰ λέγεσθε,
ὥς κεν παννύχιοι μέσφ᾽ ἠοῦς ἠριγενείης
καίωμεν πυρὰ πολλά, σέλας δ᾽ εἰς οὐρανὸν ἵκῃ"

/ \ 4 4 4 3 υ
μή πως καὶ διὰ νύκτα κάρη κομόωντες ᾿Αχαιοὶ 510
φεύγειν ὁρμήσωνται ἐπ᾽ εὐρέα vata θαλάσσης"

\ 9 A 3 a 4
μὴ μὰν ἀσπουδί ye νεῶν ἐπιβαῖεν ἕκηλοι,

in Homer of this intensive use of τρι- in
composition is τρισμάκαρες ε 306, ¢ 154.
Cf. in later Greek τρίδουλος, and numer-
ous compounds with τρις.

491. ἐν καθαρῷ, in a vacant space, as
Ψ 61. Cf. ἐν περιφαινομένῳ, ε 476.
The whole line recurs in Καὶ 199. Aris-
tarchos concluded that there had been
no burying of the dead, and _ that
therefore the passage in H describing it
was not genuine, or rather had been
already forgotten, ὅτι οὐκέτι γέγονε νεκρῶν
ἀναίρεσι. The following passage, down
to 503, is chiefly composed of lines
which occur elsewhere ; 493-5 = Z 318-
320, 496 = B 109, 497 = T 456, 499 =
M 115, 502-3 = I 65-6, 510 = K 101,
B 828,

501. For ἐπὶ ῥηγμῖνι θαλάσσης Zenod.
read ἐπεὶ Διὸς ἐτράπετο φρήν, as in K 45.
The objection of Aristarchos, ov xara
Διὸς προαίρεσιν νὺξ ἐγένετο, does not
seem valid; Hector may well assume

that Zeus has done for the sake of the
Greeks what we are told that Here did
in Σ 239-242. For 502 cf. H 282.

503. For ἐφοπλισόμεσθα Zenod. read
ἐφοπλίζεσθον" συγχεῖ δὲ τὸ Suxdy, as Aris-
tonikos remarks (see on. A 567). It is
however possible that this may represent
an old {variant ἐφοπλίζεσθε, altered for
the sake of avoiding the hiatus,

505. ἄξεσθε, so Aristarchos; MSS.
ἄξασθε, but the epic form of the aorist is
that with the thematic vowel, not the a-
stem. See H. 6. § 41, Γ 108, ete.

506. οἰνίζεσθε, see H 472.

508. μέσφα, only here in Homer.
It is a word which only reappears in the
Alexandrian Epics.

512. ἐπιβαῖεν, Bentley ἐπιβῶσιν, to
conform to the preceding μὴ ὁρμήσωνται
and the following πέσσῃ of MSS. It is
however possible to take the opt. as ex-
pressing a prayer or urgent wish, a
rhetorical figure which gives both force

282

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ © (vu)

ἀλλ᾽ ὥς τις τούτων γε βέλος Kal οἴκοθι πέσσοε,

βλήμενος ἢ ἰῷ ἢ ἔγχεϊ ὀξυόεντι

νηὸς ἐπιθρώσκων, ἵνα τις στυγέῃσι καὶ ἄλλος 515

Τρωσὶν ἐφ᾽ ἱπποδάμοισι φέρειν πολύδακρυν “Apna.

κήρυκες δ᾽ ἀνὰ ἄστυ διίφιλοι ἀγγελλόντων

παῖδας πρωθήβας πολιοκροτάφους τε γέροντας

λέξασθαι περὶ ἄστυ θεοδμήτων ἐπὶ πύργων"

θηλύτεραι δὲ γυναῖκες ἐνὶ μεγάροισιν ἑκάστη 520
_ πῦρ μέγα καιόντων'" φυλακὴ δέ τις ἔμπεδος ἔστω,

μὴ λόχος εἰσέλθῃσι πόλιν λαῶν ἀπεόντων.

ὧδ᾽ ἔστω, Τρῶες μεγαλήτορες, ὡς ἀγορεύω"

μῦθος δ᾽, ὃς μὲν νῦν ὑγιής, εἰρημένος ἔστω,

τὸν δ᾽ ἠοῦς Τρώεσσι μεθ᾽ ἱπποδάμοις ἀγορεύσω. 585

ἔλπομαι εὐχόμενος Διί τ᾽ ἄλλοισίν τε θεοῖσιν

and variety after the hortative μή πως
ὁρμήσωνται. But this necessitates reading
πέσσοι for πέσσῃ with Aristophanes.
ὡς then becomes the expression of a
wish, like εἴθε, asin Σ 107, X 286, etc.
(See however Delbriick, S. F. i. p. 60.)
For a wish in the opt. followed by the
subj. after ἵνα (515) compare o 202.

os πέσσειν, to nurse ἃ wound, accord-
ing to Aristarchos; and so & 439, βέλος
εἴρηκε τὸ τρῶμα ὁμωνύμως τῷ τιτρώσκοντι.
This however is hardly necessary; we
may take it to mean ‘‘brood over the
weapon which maimed him,’ as in the
phrase κήδεα πέσσειν Ὦ 617, 639; and
see note on B 237.

519. λέξασθαι, root Aex, to bivouac.
θεοδμήτων πύργων, cf. H 452. θηλύτεραι
γυναῖκες, a phrase which occurs several
times in the Odyssey, but not again in
the Iliad; see Merry on A 386. There
is no trace of the word meaning anything
else than female, and the redundance of
the epithet seems to be a genuine instance
of Epic naiveté. The comparative form
merely indicates opposition to the male
sex ; see H. G. 8 122. Schol. A may be
compared for a different and curious
explanation.

523. It has been almost universally
recognized that the concluding portion
of this speech of Hector contains con-
siderable interpolations. Aristarchos
athetized 524-5, and 528 (this was
omitted altogether by Zenodotos), and
held that 535-537 and 538-541 were a
double recension, repeating the same
thought twice over (the recurrence of

αὔριον, 535 and 538, being icularly
displeasing). 540, which is found in the
parallel passage, N 827, he seems not to
ave read here at all. Of the two r-
censions he preferred the second, a3
being more boastful, and therefore more
in accordance with the character of
Hector, while Zenodotos omitted the
former (535-7) altogether. Against in-
dividual lines many objections can be
raised. The use of ὑγιής is unique in
Homer, and the sense “‘ profitable” is
unlike the Epic style ; the same may be
said of the phrase ἡμέας
αὐτούς. Again in 541 ἡμέρη ὅδε must
mean, not ‘‘this present day,” as it
should, but ‘‘the day of which I am
speaking,” to-morrow. 527 is not con-
sonant with Hector’s intention, which is
not to drive the Greeks away, but to
prevent their escape. Hentze rejects
524-529, and 538-541, with which
omissions the is freed from all
the difficulties. I prefer to follow Ar.
however in the rejection of 585-7. ὃς
μὲν viv ὑγιής, that which is profitable
for the moment, for to-day ; while τὸν
δ᾽ ἠοῦς apparently means ‘‘that con-
cerning the morrow I will now announce.”
This is not a very Homeric use of the
article, but it makes better sense than
to join ἠοῦς with the verb, “another
announcement I will make to-morrow.”
526. ἕλπομαι εὐχόμενος, so Zenod.
Aristarchos εὔχομαι ἐλπόμενος, which
violates the digamma of ξέλπομαι. This
however is not of much importance in a
doubtful passage; and, as Mr. Monro

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Θ (v111.)

288

ἐξελάαν ἐνθένδε κύνας κηρεσσιφορήτους,
[οὺς κῆρες φορέουσι μελαινάων ἐπὶ νηῶν].
ἀλλ᾽ ἢ τοι ἐπὶ νυκτὶ φυλάξομεν ἡμέας αὐτούς,
πρῶι δ᾽ ὑπηοῖοι σὺν τεύχεσι θωρηχθέντες 580
νηυσὶν ἔπι γλαφυρῇσιν ἐγείρομεν ὀξὺν “Apna.
4 ΝΜ / > ἐ ἃ ,
εἴσομαι, ἤ KE μ᾽ ὁ Τυδεΐδης κρατερὸς Διομήδης
πὰρ νηῶν πρὸς τεῖχος ἀπώσεται, ἦ κεν ἐγὼ τὸν
χαλκῷ δῃώσας ἔναρα βροτόεντα φέρωμαι.
bd 3 \ >» » \N ΝΜ)
αὔριον ἣν ἀρετὴν διαείσεται, εἴ κ᾿ ἐμὸν ἔγχος 535
μείνῃ ἐπερχόμενον' ἀλλ᾽ ἐν πρώτοισιν, ὀίω,
κείσεται οὐτηθείς, πολέες δ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ αὐτὸν ἑταῖροι,

bd ? 4 9 Ν᾿
ἠελίου ἀνιόντος ἐς αὔριον.

εἰ γὰρ ἐγὼν ὧς

εἴην ἀθάνατος καὶ ἀγήρως ἤματα πάντα,
[τιοίμην δ᾽, ὡς τίετ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίη wat ᾿Απόλλω»,] 540
ὡς νῦν ἡμέρη ἦδε κακὸν φέρει ᾿Αργείοισιν.᾽"
ὧς “Extwp ἀγόρεν᾽, ἐπὶ δὲ Τρῶες κελάδησαν.
οἱ δ᾽ ἵππους μὲν ἔλυσαν ὑπὸ ζυγοῦ ἱδρώοντας,
δῆσαν δ᾽ ἱμάντεσσι παρ᾽ ἅρμασιν οἷσιν ἕκαστος"
ἐκ πόλιος δ᾽ ἄξοντο Boas καὶ ἴφια μῆλα 545
καρπαλίμως, οἶνον δὲ μελίφρονα οἰνίζοντο
σῖτόν τ᾽ ἐκ μεγάρων, ἐπὶ δὲ ξύλα πολλὰ λέγοντο.
[ἔρδον δ᾽ ἀθανάτοισι τεληέσσας ἑκατόμβας,]
κνίσην δ᾽ ἐκ πεδίον ἄνεμοι φέρον οὐρανὸν εἴσω
[ἡδεῖαν τῆς δ᾽ οὔ τι θεοὶ μάκαρες δατέοντο, 580
οὐδ᾽ ἔθελον: μάλα γάρ σφιν ἀπήχθετο Ἴλιος ἱρὴ
καὶ Πρίαμος καὶ λαὸς ἐυμμελίω Πριάμοιο.

remarks, we might read εὔχομ᾽ ἐξελπό-
μενος. Still it is better to adhere to
that tradition which on the face of it is
the more archaic.

527. xn ous: on the analogy
of B 302, 834, this should mean “hurried
away from life by fate,” and might well
be used proleptically, ‘‘doomed to
death.” The following line however,
which was not read by Zenodotos, gives
a much less effective sense, and has all
the appearance of a gloss. But the mere
development of the idea of the compound
is not in itself un-Homeric; Mr. Monro
compares I 124 ἀθλοφόρους, of ἀέθλια
ποσσὶ φέροντο, and a 299.

529. ἡμέας αὐτούς, ‘‘our position”
(Mr. Monro), but the phrase is a curious
one. For ἐπὶ νυκτί cf. N 234, etc.

535. For this line see H. G. § 294.

διαείσεται has two objects, both ἀρετήν
and the object clause ef xe x.7.4. “He
shall learn (the value of) his courage,
whether he will be able to abide my
ear.”
538. εἰ yap... ὡς νῦν : for this form
of wish, where a thing is vividly depicted
as certain by opposing it to an imaginary
event which is obviously impossible, or
vice versa, see Σ 464, « 523, ο 156, and
particularly N 825. The use of ἡμέρη
ἥδε, which is inappropriate here, betrays
that these lines are a reminiscence of
the latter passage.
545. ἄξοντο, see on 505; MSS. ἄξαντο.
548 and 550-552 are not found in the
MSS. ; they were first introduced by
Barnes from the (pseudo ?) Platonic dia-
logue, Alcib. ii. 149 Ὁ. 548 seems in
place ; the word κνίσῃ in the sense of smoke

284

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Θ (σι)

οἱ δὲ μέγα φρονέοντες ἐπὶ πτολέμοιο γεφύρας
Ψ 4, \ ’ / 4
εἵατο παννύχιοι, πυρὰ δέ σφισι καίετο πολλά.

ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἐν οὐρανῷ ἄστρα φαεινὴν ἀμφὶ σελήνην

555

> » / a > / 3 /
φαίνετ᾽ ἀριπρεπέα, ὅτε T ἔπλετο νήνεμος αἰθήρ"
[ἔκ τ᾽ ἔφανεν πᾶσαι σκοπιαὶ καὶ πρώονες ἄκροι

4 3 / > Ww > @ f ΝΜ 3 /
καὶ νάπαι" οὐρανόθεν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπερράγη ἄσπετος αἰθήρ,]
πάντα δὲ εἴδεται ἄστρα, γέγηθε δέ τε φρένα ποιμήν"

τόσσα μεσηγὺ νεῶν ἠδὲ Ξάνθοιο ῥοάων

560

Τρώων καιόντων πυρὰ φαίνετο ᾿Ἰλιόθι πρό.

/ > ΜΝ > » δί ὰ 7 ὰ δὲ e 7
χίλι ap ἐν πεὸίῳ πυρὰ καίετο, TAP OE ἑκάστῳ
εἴατο πεντήκοντα σέλαι πυρὸς αἰθομένοιο.

“4 a \ bd / ? 4
ἵπποι δὲ κρῖ λευκὸν ἐρεπτόμενοι Kal ὀλύρας,

ς / > ΜΝ 97 b a ,
ἑσταότες Tap ὄχεσφιν, ἐύθρονον “Ha μίμνον.

from roast meat is prevailingly, though
not solely, used of the savour of sacrifices,
so that the specific mention of the heca-
tombs is what we should expect. The
last three lines however can hardly be

enuine, as the statement that Ilios was

ateful to the gods is quite at variance
with the whole spirit of the Dliad, which
always says that the city was destroyed
much against the will of a large number
of the gods, and in spite of the piety of
the inhabitants.

553. The expression ἐπὶ πτολέμοιο ye-
φύρας (al. γεφύρῃ) is strange, as the

hrase is elsewhere always used when a

attle is actually going on, whereas here
it must mean the place where battles
were accustomed to be fought. The
preposition ἔπί also is unique in this
connexion ; elsewhere it is always ἀνά,
which Bekker and Christ read here,
from the Schol. on I 88.

555. For φαεινὴν Eustath. records a
variant φάει νῆν, understood to mean
‘fin light about the new (νέην) moon” ;
a worthy pendant to the opinion that da
στήτην in A 6 meant ‘‘ for a woman.”

557-8 were athetized by Aristarchos
and Aristophanes, and omitted by Zeno-
dotos, as being wrongly introduced from
II 299-300. There can be little doubt
that this judgment is right, fine though

565

the lines are in themselves; as the
strong phrase ὑπερράγη is far more ap-
propriate in the latter passage, where
the clouds are represented as being actu-
ally ‘‘ burst open from above” by a gust
of wind, than here where the air is still.
So also the aorist ἔφανεν implies a sudden
glimpse through clouds. Here too the
peaks and points are less in place than
where the mountain to which they belong
has been already mentioned. It is pos-
sible that the interpolation here may
have displaced a different passage, as the
repetition of ἄστρα in 559 immediately
after 555 is rather harsh. If not, we
must assume that a later poet was using
up old materials with little skill.

559. δὲ εἴδεται, so Aristarchos, accord-
ing to Schol. V, and one MS. ; vulg. δέ
τ᾽ εἴδεται.

560. For τόσσα there was a variant
ὧς τά, because some critics thought that
the comparison ought not to be with the
number of the stars, when the compara-
tively small number of a thousand immedi-
ately follows, but with their brightness.

561. ᾿Ιλιόθι πρό, see on Γ 3.

563. σέλαι, not σέλᾳ, is the traditional
spelling, on the ground that the iota
subscript cannot stand under a short
vowel. For πὰρ δέ there seems to have
been a variant ἐν δέ.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I rx.)

285

IAIAAO® I.

πρεσβεία πρὸς ᾿Αχιλλέα.

λιταί.

ὡς οἱ μὲν Τρῶες φυλακὰς ἔχον: αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχαιοὺς
θεσπεσίη ἔχε φύξα, φόβου κρυόεντος ἑταίρη,

t 2. 5 ,΄ ‘s - "
πένθει δ᾽ ἀτλήτῳ βεβολήατο πάντες ἄριστοι.
ὡς δ᾽ ἄνεμοι δύο πόντον ὀρίνετον ἰχθυόεντα,

I.

The position of the ninth book in the
economy of the Iliad is a point of
cardinal importance in the Homeric ques-
tion. As has been already stated in the
general introduction, I do not find it

ssible to believe that the book was
included in the original draft of the
poem. The chief arguments for this

elief have been stated by Grote in a
masterly manner; and though some of
them have been weakened by later
criticisms (reference may be made parti-
cularly to Bergk, Hentze and Mr. Monro)
yet their general force is unshaken. The
principal of them is the inconsistency
of the whole idea of the offered repara-
tion with the words of Achilles in II 49-
100. The whole tone of that speech
excludes the idea that the restoration of
Briseis had already been offered. This
inconsistency is glaring in the case of a
phrase like II 72 ef μοι κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων
Fria εἰδείη, 85-6 ws ἂν... οἱ περικαλ-
λέα κούρην ἂψ ἀπονάσσωσιν, ποτὶ δ᾽ ἀγ-
Aad δῶρα πόρωσιν, and hardly less with
words like those of II 60-61 ἀλλὰ τὰ
μὲν προτετύχθαι ἐάσομεν, οὐδ᾽ Apa πως ἣν
ἀσπερχὲς κεχολῶσθαι ἐνὶ φρεσίν. Com-
pare again A 609-610 νῦν ὀίω περὶ γούνατ᾽
ἐμὰ στήσεσθαι ᾿Αχαιοὺς λισσομένους, which
are meaningless in the mouth of a man
to whom humble supplication on behalf
of the Achaians has been made only
a few hours before. That the passages
in A and II both belong to the oldest
portion of the Iliad is to my mind

beyond question. In the face of these
facts, the mention of the embassy in =
448 and T 141, which may with equal
confidence be pronounced later accre-
tions, is of insignificant weight.

The conclusion as to the later origin
of the book is also borne out by its
language and contents, though much
less decisively than is the case with K,
Wand. For the language, Mr. Monro
has pointed out the following instances
in which I agrees with K, Ψ, and Q, and
the Odyssey, rather than the rest of the
Iliad (see H. G. index, Iliad, charac-
teristics of particular books); the perf.
in -xa from verbs in -éw (τεθαρσήκασι) ;
ἐπί with acc. of extension over; ἑνί for
μετά = among, with persons, and with
abstract words (this is very characteristic
of the present book, see 143, 285, 319,
378, 491); ἐκ = in consequence of ; the
use of the article in 342; ἄν with the
first person of the opt., 417; ὥς τε with
infin., 42 ; δεῖ for χρή, 337 ; ἄν with the
infin., 684. We may add μετά with acc.
= among, 54. The geography too is
later than that of the Tied, as is shewn
by the mention of Egypt, and Pytho with
its temple of Apollo (382, 405), and
perhaps the extended use of the word
Ἑλλάς (447, 478). The mention of εὐφη-
μῆσαι (171) as the accompaniment of a
religious rite is apparently an approxi-
mation to the later custom, and does not
recur in Homer. The legend of the
choice of Achilles between two destinies
(410) is apparently inconsistent with the
first book.

286

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣῚ ᾳχ)

Βορέης καὶ Ζέφυρος, τώ τε Θρήκηθεν ἄητον, 5
ἐλθόντ᾽ ἐξαπίνης" ἄμυδις δέ τε κῦμα κελαινὸν
κορθύεται, πολλὸν δὲ παρὲξ ἅλα φῦκος ἔχενεν'
ὧς ἐδαΐζετο θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ᾿Αχαιῶν.
᾿Ατρεΐδης δ᾽ ἄχεϊ μεγάλῳ βεβολημένος ἧτορ
φοίτα κηρύκεσσι λυγυφθόγγοισι κελεύων 10
κλήδην εἰς ἀγορὴν κικλήσκειν ἄνδρα ἕκαστον,
μηδὲ βοᾶν" αὐτὸς δὲ μετὰ πρώτοισι πονεῖτο.
ἷξον δ᾽ εἰν ἀγορῇ τετιηότες" ἂν δ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνων
ἵστατο δάκρυ χέων ὥς τε κρήνη μελάνυδρος,

Further, we must take into considera-
tion the fact that the fate of the ninth
book is bound up with that of the eighth.
Now it is precisely that part of © which
describes the defeat of the Greeks and

repares the way for I, which we have
found to be largely a cento from other

rts of the poems, to be full of obvious
interpolations, and to fall consistently
below the level of the best narrative of
the Iliad. In questions of style every
scholar must train his own perceptions
and judge for himself; for my own part
I feel without doubt that the author of
I, though a magnificent rhetorician—
perhaps no finer speech than that of
Achilles was ever written—cannot be
the same who composed either the first,
the sixth, or the eleventh books of the
Tliad.

However we may judge of the book
as a whole, we must still admit the prob-
ability that it has suffered at least one
large interpolation, the episode of Phoinix,
which is discussed in the note to 168;
there are numerous difficulties and in-
consistencies in the long story which he
tells ; and even this seems little adapted
to its end, as the punishment which
falls upon Meleager is not so condign as
to produce a great effect upon Achilles.
It has also been suggested with great
force that the appointment of the sen-
tinels in 66-68, 80-88, which can be cut
out without loss, is an interpolation
designed merely to prepare the way for
K, where the visit to the outposts is
essential to the story. We never find
tactical advice put into the mouth of
Nestor without at the same time having
other grounds to suspect an interpolation
(see on B 362, A 303, H 337). With
these exceptions the book is fairly free
from spurious passages.

2. vita, Panic the handmaid οὗ chill

Repulse. φύξα (φυγ-)α) and φόβος both
originally meant ‘‘ flight,” and in H.
the latter is almost confined to this
sense: while the former has partly, as
here, developed the idea of terror (ἡ μετὰ
δειλίας φυγή) which in φόβος ultimately
became dominant. Cf. πεφυζότες, ᾧ 6.
Kpvdes, lit. numbing, freezing; see Z
344,

3. βεβολήατο and βεβολημένος (1. 9
and κ 247) are the forms always used
of mental wounds, according to Ar. Zen.
however read βεβλ. in all cases.

5. The poet evidently speaks as an
inhabitant of Asia Minor or one of the
islands near. This is not proved merely
by his making the N. and W. winds
blow from Thrace (see Mr. Monro in
Journ. Phil. xiii. 288), but by his saying
that they drive the seaweed up along
the shore. The idea seems to be that
of a sudden ‘‘chopping” squall, which
the poet regards as two winds blowing
at the same time. Βορέης, spondee as
in Ψ 195. We may regard the first’
syllable as lengthened by the ictus (as
τό pa II 228) and -eys as one syllable by
synizesis : or, 88 Curtius thinks, the word
may have been pronounced Bépjns (Et.
p- 609). Most edd. read Boppjjs, though
there is no variation in the MSS. in
either @.

6. κελαινόν, proleptic, ‘‘so as to be-
come dark.”

7. κορθύεται, rises into crests, cf. xo-
ρύσσεται A 424. πάρεξ ἅλα, casts out
along the shore.

11. κλήδην, ἐξονομακλήδην Χ 415, ete.,
giving a special invitation to each, and
not proclaiming the assembly by shout-
ing lest the enemy should hear in the
stillness of the night.

12. πονεῖτο, sc. κικλήσκειν : he took
his share of the work in the summoning.

14. The simile is clearly that of the

IAIAAOZ I ax.)

287

Hh τε κατ᾽ αἰγίλυπος πέτρης δνοφερὸν χέει ὕδωρ" 15
2 e \ , . Μ 4.» ,
ὧς ὁ βαρὺ στενάχων ἔπε᾽ ᾿Αργείοισι μετηύδα"
“@ φίλοι, ᾿Αργείων ἡγήτορες ἠδὲ μέδοντες,
Ζεύς με μέγα Κρονίδης ἄτῃ ἐνέδησε βαρείῃ,
σχέτλιος, ὃς τότε μέν μοι ὑπέσχετο καὶ κατένευσεν
Ἴλιον ἐκπέρσαντ᾽ ἐυτείχεον ἀπονέεσθαι, 20
a \ \ > sf: / , /
νῦν δὲ κακὴν ἀπάτην βουλεύσατο, καί με κελεύει
δυσκλέα “Apryos ἱκέσθαι, ἐπεὶ πολὺν ὥλεσα λαόν,
οὕτω που Διὶ μέλλει ὑπερμενέι φίλον εἶναι,
ὃς δὴ πολλάων πολίων κατέλυσε κάρηνα
ϑ98ωῳ wv Ul Le) 4 9 ‘ ,
ἠδ᾽ ἔτι καὶ λύσει" τοῦ yap κράτος ἐστὶ μέγιστον. 25
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγεθ᾽, ὡς ἂν ἐγὼ εἴπω, πειθώμεθα πάντες"
φεύγωμεν σὺν νηυσὶ φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν"
οὐ γὰρ ἔτι Τροίην αἱρήσομεν εὐρυάγυιαν."
ὧς ἔφαθ᾽ - οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα πάντες ἀκὴν ἐγένοντο σιωπῇ.
δὴν δ᾽ ἄνεῳ ἦσαν τετιηότες υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν" 80
ὀψὲ δὲ δὴ μετέειπε βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης"
“᾿Ατρεΐδη, σοὶ πρῶτα μαχήσομαι ἀφραδέοντι,
ἣ θέμις ἐστίν, ἄναξ, ἀγορῇ" σὺ δὲ μή τι χολωθῆς.
ἀλκὴν μέν μοι πρῶτον ὀνείδισας ἐν Δαναοῖσιν,

small but incessant trickling of a spring
which opens on the face of a precipice,
and streaks it with dark lines (of lichen,
etc. ), where the water, itself looking black,
flows down—a very common phenomenon
in limestone countries. μελάνυδρος is
commonly explained of the dark colour
of deep water. But a deep well just at
the top of a precipice can hardly have
been a familiar phenomenon.

15. αἰγίλιπος : Gobel derives from
alyls and λιπ- (of λε-λιμ-μένος, etc.) to
love, explaining ‘‘the haunt of storms,”
This may perhaps be accepted for want
of a better. The old explanation was,
‘‘so steep as to be deserted even by

oats”! It recurs only N68 and Π 4.
enod. omitted 15-16, and for ὥς re xp.
per, read μετὰ δ᾽ ᾿Αργείοισιν ἔειπεν.

17-25. See B 110-118. The first line
does not seem appropriate to a speech
in the ἀγορή, where the whole army is
assem bled.

19. τότε, so Ar.: MSS. πρίν, as B
112.

23-25 were athetized by Ar., as un-
suitable to a general who is raising a
siege. But here, as in B, they really
add to the bitterness of the dry. Zen.

omitted 23-31 altogether, substituting
ἤτοι ὅ γ᾽ ὧς εἰπὼν xar dp ἕζετο θυμὸν
ἀχεύων. | τοῖσι δ᾽ ἀνιστάμενος μετέφη κρα-
τερὸς Διομήδης.

26-28 = B 139-141.

30. ἄνεῳ (so best MSS. and Schol. A,
not ἄνεω) may always be a nom. plur.
masc. except y 93, where it is used of
one woman. Probably this passage in-
duced Arist. to write dvew and re
the word as an adv. like ἄκην. θ
word is for dv-aFo-s, voiceless: root ἀξ
of adw, dur}: Lat. ov-are (Curt. Et. no.
588 δ). τετιηότες is explanatory, “ silent
for grief.”

31. Observe the characteristic modesty
of Diomedes. He will not speak till he
is sure that no one else wishes to do so ;
H 399, I 696, K 218.

32. σοὶ πρῶτα implies that he regards
all the others as guilty in a less degree
of the same cowardice. μαχήσομαι, of
verbal strife, as B 377, Z 329.

33. θέμις ἐστίν, the ἀγορή being the
place where freedom of speech was what
we should call ‘‘ privileged.”

34 alludes to A 370. ἀλκήν has the
emphatic place in rhetorical antithesis
with ἀλκήν in 39; “1 was my valour

288

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I (1x.)

φὰς ἔμεν ἀπτόλεμον καὶ ἀνάλκιδα" ταῦτα δὲ πάντα 35
ἴσασ᾽ ᾿Αργείων ἠμὲν νέοι nde γέροντες"
, a
σοὶ δὲ διάνδιχα δῶκε Κρόνου πάις ἀγκυλομήτεω:
σκήπτρῳ μέν τοι δῶκε τετιμῆσθαι περὶ πάντων,
2 \ 3 Ν᾽ “~ μή 4 3 7
ἀλκὴν δ᾽ οὔ τοι δῶκεν, ὅ τε κράτος ἐστὶ μέγιστον.
δαιμόνι᾽, οὕτω που μάλα ἔλπεαι υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶν 40
3 / > + A 9 / e 3 4
ἀπτολέμους τ᾽ ἔμεναι καὶ ἀνάλκιδας, ὡς ἀγορεύεις;
εἰ δέ τοι αὐτῷ θυμὸς ἐπέσσυται ὥς τε νέεσθαι,
Μ 4 ἐὰ a , wv f
ἔρχεο" πάρ τοι ὁδός, νῆες δέ τοι ἄγχι θαλάσσης
[ἑστᾶσ᾽, αἵ τοι ἕποντο Μυκήνηθεν μάλα πολλαί.
ἀλλ᾽ ἄλλοι μενέουσι κάρη κομόωντες ᾿Αχαιοί, ᾿ 45

εἰς ὅ κέ περ Τροίην διαπέρσομεν.

εἶ δὲ καὶ αὐτοὶ

) \ / 2 a
φευγόντων σὺν νηυσὶ φίλην és πατρίδα γαῖαν"
A 3 9 AN / 4 / 3 3 Ψ
νῶι δ᾽, ἐγὼ Σθένελός τε, μαχησόμεθ᾽, εἰς ὅ κε τέκμωρ
3 7 Ψ \ A 4 39
Γλίου εὕρωμεν: σὺν yap θεῷ εἰλήλουθμεν.
ὧς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα πάντες ἐπίαχον υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν, 50
μῦθον ἀγασσάμενοι Διομήδεος ἱπποδάμοιο.
τοῖσι δ᾽ ἀνιστάμενος μετεφώνεεν ἱππότα Νέστωρ'
“Τυδεΐδη, πέρι μὲν πολέμῳ ἔνε καρτερός ἐσσι,
καὶ βουλῇ μετὰ πάντας ὁμήλικας ἔπλευ ἄριστος"
ΝΜ Ἁ wn 4 ἢ Ψ 3 ’
οὔ τίς τοι τὸν μῦθον ὀνόσσεται, ὅσσοι ᾿Αχαιοί, δὅ
οὐδὲ πάλιν ἐρέει" ἀτὰρ οὐ τέλος ἵκεο μύθων.

thou didst make light οὗ. . . and it is
valour that Zeus denies thee.” But as
so often the thought grows as it is being
uttered, and a fresh antithesis to ἀλκήν
is given by σκήπτρῳ μέν in 38. πρῶτον,
you began by blaming my valour (so
now you cannot complain of my retort).

37. διάνδιχα, ‘‘endows thee only by
halves.”

39. ὅ re, attracted to the gender of
κράτος : ‘‘valour which is the greatest
sovereignty.” Cf. ἢ θέμις ἐστί, etc.

40. See A 561 for δαιμόνιε (‘‘ verblen-
deter,” Ameis). treat is often used
meaning simply ‘‘to suppose,” e.g. II
281, P 404.

42. ὥς re goes with érécoura; we
should expect the simple infin. Cf. p
21, the only other case in H. of ὥς τε in
the sense ‘‘so that” with infin., instead
of as an adverb of comparison. Here
Lehrs would read ἀπονέεσθαι (Ar. 157).

44, Rejected by Arist. as interpolated
merely to supply a verb, which is not
required, in the last clause of 43. It is
omitted by the first hand of Townl.

46. εἰ δέ, ‘‘ay! even let them fly
themselves,” etc.. εἰ here has its original
force of an exclamatory ‘‘adhibitive”
particle, and is correctly used with the
imper. as in εἰ δ᾽ ἄγε (so Lange, and
apparently Aristarchos). There is no
need to supply any ellipse.

47. Diomedes bitterly repeats Aga-
memnon’s words, 1. 27. Σ

48. τέκμωρ, see A 526, and notes on
H 30 and 70.

49. εἰλήλονθμεν refers of course to all
the Achaians.

51. This is the invariable result of a
speech by Diomedes: H 404, 1. 711, etc.

54. μετὰ πάντας ὁμήλικας must mean
‘‘among all of thine own age,” or there
is no sense in the passage ; compare the
very similar r 419. See also note on B
143. The peculiarity of these three pass-
ages is that there is no verb of motion,
such as regularly precedes μετά in this
sense ; H. G. § 195. Nauck conj. κατά.

55. ὀνόσσεται, make light of. Cf.
2 439.

56. πάλιν ἐρέειν, to contradict ; see A

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I (tx.)

289

4 \ \ / 3 7 > \ / Ἁ 4 Μ
ἡ μὴν καὶ νέος ἐσσί, ἐμὸς δέ κε καὶ πάις εἴης
e / A 3 \ / 4
ὁπλότατος γενεῆφιν' ἀτὰρ πεπνυμένα Balers
᾿Αργείων βασιλῆας, ἐπεὶ κατὰ μοῖραν ἔειπες.
2 ΜΡ. » a a / bd 4
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγ᾽ ἐγών, ὃς σεῖο γεραίτερος εὔχομαι εἶναι, 60
3 “ 4 7 3 / , /
ἐξείπω καὶ πάντα διίξομαι" οὐδέ κέ Tis μοι
A 9
μῦθον ἀτιμήσει, οὐδὲ κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων.
’ ΄-“"
ἀφρήτωρ ἀθέμιστος ἀνέστιὸός ἐστιν ἐκεῖνος,
ὃς πολέμου ἔραται ἐπιδημίου ὀκρνόεντος.
ἀλλ᾽ ἢ τοι νῦν μὲν πειθώμεθα νυκτὶ μελαίνῃ 65
, / fol ( °
δόρπα τ᾽ ἐφοπλισόμεσθα: φυλακτῆρες δὲ ἕκαστοι
, , ? ‘\ ’ 2
λεξάσθων παρὰ τάφρον ὀρυκτὴν τείχεος ἐκτός,
κούροισιν μὲν ταῦτ᾽ ἐπιτέλλομαι" αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα,
"A {δ \ ὲ ΝΜ . \ A B x 7 3
τρεΐδη, σὺ μὲν ἄρχε' σὺ γὰρ βασιλεύτατὸός ἐσσι,
A / ” /
δαίνυ δαῖτα γέρουσιν" ἔοικέ τοι, οὔ ToL ἀεικές, 70
πλεῖαί τοι οἴνου κλισίαι, τὸν νῆες ᾿Αχαιῶν
/
npatiat Θρήκηθεν ἐπ᾽ εὐρέα πόντον ἄγουσιν"

357. τέλος, you have not proceeded to
the full issue of your words, 1.6. you
overthrew Agamemnon’s proposal, but
did not offer anything practical in its
lace.

P 57. εἴης κεν, potential opt., as far as
years go, you might be my son, my
youngest born. 4 μὴν καὶ, cf. B 291,
‘yet I must admit that you are young,”
an apology for the slight depreciation
contained in the preceding clause. (Mr.
Monro explains it as ‘‘‘and yet you are
but young,’ serving to heighten the
qualified praise of the preceding sen-
tence.” e regards the clause ἀτὰρ ov
. . » μύθων as subordinate and parenthet-
ical; whereas it really bears the whole
emphasis, being thrown into strong con-
trast with what follows in 60 sqq.).

58. For βάζειν with double acc. , mean-
ing ‘‘to speak words to a person,” cf.
II 207. But the line is generally re-
jected by modern critics, after Bekker,
as weakly tautological, and arising from
a double reading ἀτὰρ πεπνυμένα βάζεις
and ἐπεὶ κατὰ μοῖραν ἔειπες.

61. ἐξείπτω is used as simply equivalent
to a future. Cf. A 262, x 418, ἐξ im-
plies “fully,” as opposed to οὐ τέλος ἵκεο.

63-4. These lines seem to point, in a
vague way, at the conduct of Agamem-
non in making strife with Achilles.
ἐπιδημίου is of course the emphatic word.
Nestor only hints at what he will after-
wards develop. However, the lines do

U

not seem very well in place here; they
look like a favourite ‘‘ gnomic” couplet,
such as would naturally lend itself to in-
terpolation. The meaning is ‘‘ banished
from tribe and law and home”; ie.
unworthy to share any of the relations
which formed the base of primitive
Aryan society, the clan, household wor-
ship, typified by the fire on the hearth,
and community of θέμιστες or traditional
law administered by the kings.

64. éxpudevros, the κρυόεντος of 1. 2;
but here, as in Z 344 (g.v.), we ought to
read ἐπιδημίοο κρνόεντος, the wrong
form being perhaps due to the false
analogy of dxpides (so Curtius, ΕἾ. no.
77).

65. See H 282. 7

66. ἕκαστοι, severally, each at his
own post. Arist. read φυλακτῆρας, when
λεξάσθων will = let each chief choose
(Aey-). The text must mean ‘‘let them
lie down, bivouac” (λεχ-) τείχεος ἐκτός
implies that the moat is at some distance
from the wall.

68. κοῦροι, the young men opposed to
γέρουσιν, 70. See note on A 114.

69. ov μὲν ἄρχε, ‘‘take thou the lead”
(the ‘‘initiative” in modern phrase)
‘*for thou art the most royal of us.”
Cf. 1. 392. A dinner was the usual
means of consultation between the chiefs ;
eg. in Od., 7 189, » 8, etc.; and com-
pare γερούσιον οἶνον, A 259, 343.

72. ἡμάτιαι, daily. Gladstone thinks

290

TAJAAOZ I

(IX.)

πᾶσά Tou ἔσθ᾽ ὑποδεξίη, πολέεσσι δ᾽ ἀνάσσεις.

πολλῶν δ᾽ ἀγρομένων τῷ πείσεαι, ὅς κεν ἀρίστην

βουλὴν βουλεύσῃ: μάλα δὲ χρεὼ πάντας ᾿Αχαιοὺς 75
ἐσθλῆς Kal πυκινῆς, ὅτι δήιοι ἐγγύθι νηῶν

καίουσιν πυρὰ πολλά" τίς ἂν τάδε γηθήσειεν;

νὺξ

HO ἠὲ διαρραίσει στρατὸν ἠὲ σαώσει.᾽"

ὧς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα τοῦ μάλα μὲν κλύον ἠδὲ πίθοντο"
ἐκ δὲ φυλακτῆρες σὺν τεύχεσιν ἐσσεύοντο 80
ἀμφί τε Νεστορίδην Θρασυμήδεα ποιμένα λαῶν
ἠδ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ᾿Ασκάλαφον καὶ ᾿Ιάλμενον υἷας “Apnos,
ἀμφί τε Μηριόνην ᾿Αφαρῆά τε Δηίπυρόν τε,
ἠδ᾽ ἀμφὶ Κρείοντος υἱὸν Λυκομήδεα δῖον.
ἕπτ᾽ ἔσαν ἡγεμόνες φυλάκων, ἑκατὸν δὲ ἑκάστῳ 85
κοῦροι ἅμα στεῖχον δολίχ᾽ ἔγχεα χερσὶν ἔχοντες"
κὰδ δὲ μέσον τάφρον καὶ τείχεος ἷξον ἰόντες"
ἔνθα δὲ πῦρ κήαντο, τίθεντο δὲ δόρπα ἕκαστος.
᾿Ατρεΐδης δὲ γέροντας ἀολλέας ἦγεν ᾿Αχαιῶν
ἐς κλισίην, παρὰ δέ σφι τίθει μενοεικέα δαῖτα" 90
οἱ δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ὀνείαθ᾽ ἑτοῖμα προκείμενα χεῖρας ἴαλλον.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ πόσιος καὶ ἐδητύος ἐξ ἔρον ἕντο,
τοῖς ὁ γέρων πάμπρωτος ὑφαίνειν ἤρχετο μῆτιν
Νέστωρ, οὗ καὶ πρόσθεν ἀρίστη φαίνετο βουλή"
ὅ σφιν ἐὺ φρονέων ἀγορήσατο καὶ μετέενπεν — 95
“᾿Ατρεΐδη κύδιστε, ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγάμεμνον,
ἐν σοὶ μὲν λήξω, σέο δ᾽ ἄρξομαι, οὕνεκα πολλῶν

that these remarks οὗ Nestor’s allude to
Achilles’ taunts of avarice against Aga-
memnon in A, For the wine ships cf.
H 467.

73. ‘‘Itis for thee to offer all hospital.
ity, seeing thou art lord of many men.
For the long ¢ in ὑποδεξίη cf. driutyor, ν
142 : ὑπεροπλίῃσι A 205, etc., and note
on A 697. A gives ὑποδεξείη, which is
perhaps right, though there is probably
no other instance of this suffix, unless in
ἑξείης, which is no doubt a genitive.

74, 7.6. ‘Sin the multitude of coun-
sellors there is safety.”

75. χρεώ with accus. and gen., as Κα
43, A 606. We may supply γίγνεται, as
5 634, or ἐστίν, as 323; but the original
construction of the acc. is shewn b
189, ὅτε με χρειὼ τόσον tka. See a 80
Eurip. Hee. 976, rls χρεία σ᾽ ἐμοῦ (Merry
and Ἢ on a 124).

Τῇ. τάδε γηθήσειεν, “ Who can rejoice at
this?” a sort of cognate accus. common
in Attic, especially with personal parti-
οἱ ial constructions, ἤσθην εὐλογοῦντά σε,

ike to hear you praise. So © 378.
or μή μοι τόδε χώεο, € 215.

87. The moat is here unmistakably
represented as being at a considerable
distance in front of the wall, and inde-
pendent of it. See on H 342.

89. ἀολλέας : Arist. read ἀριστέας, a
form used by Pindar ; but only ἀριστῆας
is found in H.

94. καὶ πρόσθεν, ‘‘of old,” not with
any particular reterence.

97. μέν... δέ, virtually ‘‘as I shall
end with ‘thee, so will ib begin with
thee.’’ In other words, Nestor begins
his speech in the usual style of an appeal
to a god; because a king is the represent-
ative of Zeus, So “A te principium, tibi

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I (1x.)

λαῶν ἐσσὶ ἄναξ καί τοι Ζεὺς ἐγγνάλιξεν
σκῆπτρόν τ᾽ ἠδὲ θέμιστας, iva σφίσι βουλεύῃσθα.

» \ , Y 7 3 Ὁ» »7 [οἷ
τῶ σε χρὴ πέρι μὲν φάσθαι ἔπος ἠδ᾽ ἐπακοῦσαι,

fol Α \ Mm ve > ΝἩἈΠἸ \ > ,
κρηῆναι δὲ Kal ἄλλῳ, ὅτ᾽ ἄν τινα θυμὸς ἀνώγῃ

2 a ? > / / > Φ μή »
εἰπεῖν εἰς ἀγαθὸν" σέο δ᾽ ἕξεται, ὅττι κεν ἄρχῃ.

> \ > AN > ἢ Ψ a 4 Ν
αὐτὰρ ἐγὼν ἐρέω, ὥς μοι δοκεῖ εἶναι ἄριστα.

2 4 / ¥ > ’ “ /
ov γάρ τις νόον ἄλλος ἀμείνονα τοῦδε νοήσει,

οἷον ἐγὼ νοέω, ἡμὲν πάλαι ἠδ᾽ ἔτι καὶ νῦν,

3 » nA e / / 4
ἐξ ἔτι τοῦ, ὅτε, Stoyevés, Βρισηΐδα κούρην
χωομένου ᾿Αχιλῆος ἔβης κλισίηθεν ἀπούρας

" > e Ff / /
ov τι καθ᾽ ἡμέτερον γε voov.

πόλλ᾽ ἀπεμυθεόμην" σὺ δὲ σῷ μεγαλήτορι θυμῷ

εἴξας ἄνδρα φέριστον, ὃν ἀθάνατοί περ ἔτισαν,

ἠτίμησας: ἑλὼν γὰρ ἔχεις γέρας. ἀλλ᾽ ἔτι καὶ νῦν
φραζώμεσθ᾽, ὥς κέν μιν ἀρεσσάμενοι πεπίθωμεν
δώροισίν τ᾽ ἀγανοῖσιν ἔπεσσί τε μειλιχίοισιν."
3 4 ’ Μ > A 3 ,
τὸν δ᾽ αὗτε προσέειπεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων"

““ ὦ γέρον, οὔ τι ψεῦδος ἐμὰς ἄτας κατέλεξας,

desinet,” Verg. οὶ. viii. 11. He seems
anxious to prove that he wishes to
address Agamemnon in his official capa-
city, not as a private friend, so he begins
in this formal way.

99. See A 238, B 206. θέμιστες,
‘‘ dooms,” a primitive form of our ‘‘com-
mon law”; a recognized body of prin-
ciples and customs which had grown
up in practice, and on which the simple
litigation of an early age could be settled.
They were handed down traditionally in
the governing families till they had at-
tained a fixed form, and hence were
regarded as definite things which Zeus
entrusted to kings to protect from harm.
The σκῆπτρον indicates the right, prob-
ably, of political action, the ‘‘execu-
tive’’ as opposed to the ‘‘ judicial”
function. Hence the use of the sceptre
to delegate the right of speaking in
the ἀγορή. σφίσι, for the λαοί. For
βονλεύῃσθα after aor., see A 158.

100. περί, ‘‘more than others shouldest
thou s . thy thought and hearken,
yea and fulfil even another man’s advice
(as well as thine own) whenever any
man’s mind bids him speak for good
(for els ἀγαθόν cf. A 789, Ψ 305); for
whatever any doth begin will hinge on
thee”; 1.6. do not be prejudiced against ’

291

100

105
μάλα γάρ τοι ἐγώ γε

110

115

any advice because it is given by other
people—the credit of carrying it out will
revert to you. Cf. ἃ 346, ᾿Αλκινόον δ᾽ ἐκ
τοῦδ᾽ ἔχεται ἔργον τε ἔπος τε.

106. ἐξ ἔτι τοῦ ὅτε, ever since the time
when. The best MSS. and Scholia read

eveds (agreeing with ‘AxAjos): but
this can hardly be right.

107. xwopévov, in spite of his wrath.
"Ax. is genitive after κλισίηθεν. ἔβης
ἀπούρας, much as we should say ‘‘ you
went and took’’; though Agamemnon
did not literally go himself, but only in
the person of his representatives, the
heralds. See A 328, 356, T 89.

109. ἀπεμνθεόμην, ‘‘dissuaded,” A
254 sqq. . ἐπεμυθεόμην.

110. ἀθάνατοί περ, the very immortals.
ἔτισαν, sc. by permitting the defeat of
the Achaians at his request. Observe
the strong contrast into which ἔτισαν
and ἠτίμησας are brought by their posi-
tion.

115. οὐ ψεῦδος is in a sort of predica-
tive apposition with ἄτας. Cf. θανατόν
νύ τοι Spxe ἔταμνον A 155, ταῦτα. ..
ἀληθείην κατέλεξα ἡ 297. ‘Thou speak-
est of my infatuation (so as to be)
not a falsehood,” #.¢e. thou truly relatest.
For Agamemnon’s ἄτη see 1. 18, and for
ἀασάμην T 91, A 340.

292

9 a 3 (1. 3 AN > ’
ἀασάμην, οὐδ᾽ αὐτὸς ἀναίνομαι.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣῚ (tx.)

ἀντί νυ πολλῶν

λαῶν ἐστὶν ἀνήρ, ὅν τε Ζεὺς κῆρι φιλήσῃ, -

e A A ” / \ \ 3 A
ὡς viv τοῦτον ἔτισε, δάμασσε δὲ λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν.
ἀλλ᾽ ἐπεὶ ἀασάμην φρεσὶ λευγαλέῃσι πιθήσας,

ἂψ ἐθέλω ἀρέσαι δόμεναί τ᾽ ἀπερείσι’ ἄποινα.

120

eon >’ 9 7 \ a’? » i
ὑμῖν δ᾽ ἐν πάντεσσι περικλυτὰ Sap ὀνομήνω,
ἕπτ᾽ ἀπύρους τρίποδας, δέκα δὲ χρυσοῖο τάλαντα,
αἴθωνας δὲ λέβητας ἐείκοσι, δώδεκα δ᾽ ἵππους

\ 3 , A 7 wv ν
πηγοὺς ἀθλοφόρους, οἱ ἀέθλια ποσσὶν ἄροντο.

Ν 3 ᾽ 3 > / φ LA
OV κεν AANLOS εἴη ἀνήρ, @ τοσσα γένοιτο,

125

οὐδέ κεν ἀκτήμων ἐριτίμοιο χρυσοῖο,

ὅσσα μοι ἠνείκαντο ἀέθλια μώνυχες ἵπποι.

δώσω δ᾽ ἑπτὰ γυναῖκας ἀμύμονα ἔργα ἰδυίας,
Λεσβίδας, ἅς, ὅτε Λέσβον ἐυκτιμένην ἕλεν αὐτός,

ἐξελόμην, αἱ κάλλει ἐνίκων φῦλα γυναικῶν "-

180

\ / e 4 \ > / 9 9 4
Tas μέν οἱ δώσω, μετὰ δ᾽ ἔσσεται, ἣν TOT ἀπηύρων,
κούρη Βρισῆος" ἐπὶ δὲ μέγαν ὅρκον ὀμοῦμαι͵

116. ἀντί, as good as, worth, many
hosts. See on Θ 163.

119. λευγαλέῃσι, “sorry,” “wretched,”
a term of contempt (cf. β 61, Aevyadéor τ᾽
ἐσόμεσθα καὶ οὐ δεδαηκότες ἀλκήν) : lit.
“ὁ lamentable,” λυγ-ρός, Lug-eo.

After 119 there was, according to
Athenaeus and Eust., in the edition of
one Dioskurides a line ἢ οἴνῳ μεθύων, ἢ
μ᾽ ἔβλαψαν θεοὶ αὐτοί; as also in the
parallel passage T 137. It is obviously
an intolerable interpolation.

120. ἅψ, retro, retracing my steps.
ἀρέσαι, to conciliate, satisfy him, as 112.

122. ἄπυρος was explained (1) not
meant for use, but only for ornament,
ἀναθεματικός as opposed to ἐμπυριβήτης,
Ψ 702; (2) new, not yet discoloured by
being put upon the fire. See Ψ 267 and
270, where the ἔτι (λευκὸν ἔτ᾽ αὕτως) seems
decisive in favour of the second explana-
tion. For the value of the. talent of
gold cf. Ψ 262-269, where two are
worth less than a λέβης.

124. πηγούς, strong, lit. compact, so
ε 388 κύματι πηγῷ, and πηγεσίμαλλος T
197.

125. ‘‘Not without booty would that
man be, and not unpossessed of precious
gold, that owned as much as my strong-
footed horses won me in prizes,” J.e.
the mere prizes I have won in races
would form a considerable fortune for
any man. Mr. Ridgeway has shewn

(J. H.S. vi. 828) that ἀλήϊιος comes from
Anls, and has nothing to do with Amor,
which means ‘crop’ or standing corn,
not corn-land ; several property in land
is confined in the Iliad to the τέμενος
βασιλήιον, while there are indications that
the ‘‘common-field”’ system still pre-
vailed (see on M 422), ἀλήιος and
ἀκτήμων, like πολυκτήμων πολυλήιος in E
613, are evidently to be explained from
ληιστοὶ μὲν γάρ re βόες. .. ὶ δὲ
τρίποδες in I 406 ; they represent the two
primitive methods of acquiring wealth,
plunder and trade, which in Homeric
times flourished with equal rights.

128. ἀμύμονα, so best MSS.: Ar. ap-
parently ἀμύμονας (so Did., whose autho-
rity outweighs the contrary statement of
Aristonikos). ἔργ᾽ εἰδνίας MSS., though
one or two have preserved a relic of the
better tradition in ἔργα εἰδυίας.

129, αὐτός, Achilles, who was himself
their captor: Ag. will not name him
(τοῦτον, 118; οἱ, 131; μιν, 142).

130. ἐξελόμην, chose as my γέρας ἐξαι-
perév. In this book the chief seems to
appoftion the γέρας to himself, whereas
in A it is the gift of the army ; see 330-
3 compared with A 162, 299. The im-
perf. ἐνίκων refers back to the time of
the choice.

131. μετά, with them, {.6. in addition.
See T 245.

132. κούρη, so Arist., MSS. κούρην,

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I rx.)

293

μή ποτε τῆς εὐνῆς ἐπιβήμεναι ἠδὲ μυγῆναι,

aA “4 3 [4 7 9 “A 3 Ἁ “

ἣ θέμις ἀνθρώπων πέλει, ἀνδρῶν ἠδὲ γυναικῶν.

ταῦτα μὲν αὐτίκα πάντα παρέσσεται" εἰ δέ κεν αὗτε 135

” t , \ , » 9 , ,

ἄστυ μέγα ἸἹΠριάμοιο θεοὶ δώωσ᾽ ἀλαπάξαι,

νῆα ἅλις χρυσοῦ καὶ χαλκοῦ νηησάσθω

εἰσελθών, ὅτε κεν δατεώμεθα ληίδ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοί,.

Τρωιάδας δὲ γυναῖκας ἐείκοσιν αὐτὸς ἑλέσθω,

αἴ κε μετ᾽ ᾿Αργείην ᾿“Ελένην κάλλισται ἔωσιν," 140
3 ’ Ν @ > 9 , 4 3 4,

εἰ δέ κεν “Apyos ἱκοίμεθ᾽ ᾿Αχαιικὸν, οὖθαρ ἀρούρης,

γαμβρός κέν μοι ἔοι" τίσω δέ μιν ἶσον ᾿Ορέστῃ,

ὅς μοι τηλύγετος τρέφεται θαλίῃ ἔνι πολλῇ.

τρεῖς δέ μοι εἰσὶ θύγατρες ἐνὶ μεγάρῳ ἐυπήκτῳ,

Χρυσόθεμις καὶ Λαοδίκη καὶ ᾿Ιφιάνασσα" 145
, (4 > 39f/ > lA 3 7

τάων ἦν κ᾽ ἐθέλῃσι, φίλην ἀνάεδνον ἀγέσθω

πρὸς οἶκον Ἰ]ηλῆος" ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἐπὶ μείλια δώσω

πολλὰ μάλ᾽, ὅσσ᾽ οὔ πώ τις ἑῇ ἐπέδωκε θυγατρί...

e \ 7 e ’ 3\ / Ul

ἑπτὰ δέ οἱ δώσω ἐὺ ναιόμενα πτολίεθρα,

which might be explained by attraction
to ἥν, or as a return to the original form
of the sentence, τὰς δώσω.

133. τῆς, of her: genitive after εὐνῆς,
So T 176.

134. This line is divided by the comma
after πέλει into two equal halves; a
rhythm for which there is no complete

arallel, for in A 154 the elision perhaps
helps to bridge the gap. Cf. A 53, and
notice the difference produced by the
slight change in 1]. 276.

135. αὐτίκα, at the moment; adre,
hereafter.

137. ἅλις, adverbial ; it does not take
a gen. afteritin H.: 860 Φ319, χρυσοῦ
is gen. after νηησάσθω, which has the
construction of verbs of ‘‘ filling with”
anything, which is regarded as taking
from a source.

138. εἰσελθών, having burst in (taken
the city by assault). But Bekker puts
the comma after νηησάσθω, and translates
‘‘entering (into the council) when we
divide the spoil,’’ 1.6. so as to have his
own way in the division.

139. αὐτός, i.c. like the commander-
in-chief, as opposed to the assignment
by lot to the rest of the army.

141. εἴ κεν with opt. of a remote possi-
bility, see A 60. οὖθαρ ἀρούρης (only
here and 283), Vergil’s ‘‘uber agri,
ubere glebae,” Aen. i. 581, iii. 164, ete. :

‘*the udder of the soil,” τὸ τρόφιμον τῆς
γῆς, Sch. B.

143. τηλύγετος, see on 1175. This is
the only mention of Orestes in the Iliad.

145. Λαοδίκη and ᾿Ιφιάνασσα seem to
answer to Electra and Iphigenia of the
tragedians. The legend of the sacrifice
in Aulis is evidently unknown to Homer.

146. φίλην : here the original sense,
‘‘own,” is very well marked. See A 167.
ἀνάεδνον (for the form see Curtius, £t.5
Ῥ. 579), without paying the usual ἕδνα,
or presents made by the bridegroom
to the parents of the bride (a relic of
the universal primitive custom by which
—when the bride is not seized by force
from her home—she is bought, see A 243,
11178; and cf. 2 593), From the ἕδνα
we must distinguish the presents given
to the bride by her parents, which seem
to be signified by the μείλια of 147; but it
is not certain whether this is the techni-
cal name, or merely a general expression
used here with a special significance,
**peace-offerings’’ meant to appease
Achilles, Agamemnon offers not only
to remit the usual price to be paid by
the bridegroom, but actually to give in
addition (ἐπὶ... . δώσω) a large dowry
to the bride—as was done by Altes in
his desire to secure the marriage between
his daughter and Priam, X 51. See
Cobet, M. C. p. 289 sgq.

294

Καρδαμύλην ᾿Ἑνόπην τε καὶ ᾿Ιρὴν ποιήεσσαν,

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I (χ.)

150

@npds te ζαθέας ἠδ᾽ “AvOcrav βαθύλειμον,

καλήν τ᾽ Αἴπειαν καὶ Πήδασον ἀμπελόεσσαν..
πᾶσαι δ᾽ ἐγγὺς ἁλός, νέαται Πύλου ἡμαθόεντος -
? > ν / , A
ἐν δ᾽ ἄνδρες ναίουσι πολύρρηνες πολυβοῦται,

A fee ’ \ A VA
ot κέ ἑ δωτίνησι θεὸν ὡς τιμήσουσιν -

155

7 ee Ν ᾽ \ / /
Kai of ὑπὸ σκήπτρῳ λιπαρὰς τελέουσι θέμιστας...
a , , e / , /
ταῦτά κέ Ol τελέσαιμι μεταλλήξαντι χολοιο.
δμηθήτω ---- ᾿Αίδης τοι ἀμείλιχος ἠδ᾽ ἀδάμαστος"
τούνεκα καί τε βροτοῖσι θεῶν ἔχθιστος ἁπάντων ----

e / μή ’ / ?
καί μοι ὑποστήτω, ὅσσον βασιλεύτερος εἰμι

160

ἠδ᾽ ὅσσον γενεῇ προγενέστερος εὔχομαι elvat.”
\ > 9 ’ > ΨῬν VA e 4 /
τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα Γερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ"
“Ατρεΐδη κύδιστε, ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγάμεμνον,
A \ > f/f 3 9 a? A ΝΜ
δῶρα μὲν οὐκέτ᾽ ὀνοστὰ διδοῖς ᾿Αχιλῆν ἄνακτι"

στ᾿ 3, 7
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγετε, κλητοὺς ὀτρύνομεν, οἵ κε τάχιστα

165

ἔλθωσ᾽ ἐς κλισίην Ἰ]ηληιάδεω ᾿Αχιλῆος.
εἰ δ᾽ ἄγε, τοὺς ἂν ἐγὼν ἐπιόψομαι, οἱ δὲ πιθέσθων.,

150. These are Messenian cities be-
longing to Lakedaimon, not to Mykenai.
Agamemnon perhaps disposes only of
the overlordship; or they may have
been family property, though in his
brother’s territory. But from the men-
tion of Pylos it would seem that they
should belong to Nestor. None of them
is named in the catalogue.

153. νέαται (for which Apollonius
read κέαται), explained by Arist. as =
valovra, ‘‘are inhabited,” as if from a
perf. "νεῖμαι which does not exist. The
word is usually explained as superl.
of vé(F)os, mnovissimae in the sense
‘‘furthest,”’ like vedrn A 712, but see
on A 381.

155. δωτῖναι, free gifts (perhaps not
unlike the ‘‘ benevolences” of English
history). κε goes with fut. indic. be-
cause the event spoken of is regarded as
contingent upon Achilles’ acceptance.

156. λιπαρὰς τελέουσι θέμιστας, “ will
fulfil his pleasant ordinances.” For this
use of λιπαρός cf. γῆρας λιπαρόν in Od.,
a happy old age, A 136, ὃ 210, etc.
Perhaps λιπαράς should be taken pre-
dicatively, ‘‘will bring his ordinances
to prosperous fulfilment,” ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ βασι-
λευόμενοι εἰρηνικῶς βιώσονται, Schol. A.
Others explain ‘‘will pay rich dues”

λιπαροὺς φόρους τελέσουσιν : but it seems
impossible to reconcile this with the
very definite Homeric use of θέμιστες.

158. δμηθήτω (Zen. and Aristoph.
καμφθήτω), ‘let him be overcome.
Hades I ween yields neither to prayer
nor violence” (μόνος θεῶν yap θάνατος οὐ
δώρων ἐρᾷ, Aesch. fr. Niobe), ‘‘ for which
very cause he is most hateful to men of
all gods.” The τε in 159 is gnomic or
generalizing.

160. See 69, A 279.

161. γενεῇ, in age: = γενεῆφιν, 58.

164. οὐκέτι, no longer, 1.6. your pre-
sents have passed the point at which
they could be lightly esteemed (Ameis).
But Nestor is really looking back to a
time when Agamemnon was offering, not
insufficient presents, but nothing at all.
The expression he uses is very courteous,
but shews which way his thoughts are
running.

167. ἐπιόψομαι (fut. or perhaps rather
aor. subj., see on E 212), ‘‘ whomsoever
I choose, let them be persuaded to go.”
The step by which ἐφορᾶν gets the mean-
ing of selection is that of passing in
review, inspecting, a number of things ;
see B 294 τάων (νηῶν) ἐπιόψομαι ἥ τις
ἀρίστη, so we say ‘‘to look out” a thing.
τοὺς ἄν = οὖς ἄν, with δέ in apodosi.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I (tx.)

295

Φοῖνιξ μὲν πρώτιστα διίφιλος ἡγησάσθω,
3 \ » > 4 7 \ al 3 4
αὐτὰρ ἔπειτ᾽ Αἴας τε μέγας καὶ dios ᾿Οδυσσεύς"
κηρύκων δ᾽ Ὀδίος τε καὶ Εὐρυβάτης ἅμ᾽ ἑπέσθων. 170
4 ‘ \ Ψ 3 A ’ li
φέρτε δὲ χερσὶν ὕδωρ, ἐυφημῆσαί τε κέλεσθε,
ὄφρα Διὶ Κρονίδῃ ἀρησόμεθ᾽, αἴ κ᾽ ἐλεήσῃ."
φ , a π΄ κ΄ ς / a ”
ὧς φάτο, τοῖσι δὲ πᾶσιν éadota μῦθον ἔειπεν.
αὐτίκα κήρυκες μὲν ὕδωρ ἐπὶ χεῖρας ἔχευαν,
κοῦροι δὲ κρητῆρας ἐπεστέψαντο ποτοῖο, 175
νώμησαν δ᾽ dpa πᾶσιν ἐπαρξάμενοι δεπάεσσιν.
> A 3 a 4 / y @ Ν ’
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ σπεῖσάν τε πίον θ᾽, ὅσον ἤθελε θυμός,
- A » 9 , 3 , ᾽ 7
ὡρμῶντ᾽ ἐκ κλισίης ᾿Αγαμέμνονος ᾿Ατρεΐδαο.
τοῖσι δὲ πόλλ᾽ ἐπέτελλε Γερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ,
δενδίλλων ἐς ἕκαστον, ᾿Οδυσσῆι δὲ μάλιστα, 180
πειρᾶν, ὡς πεπίθοιεν ἀμύμονα IInrelwva.
τὼ δὲ βάτην παρὰ θῖνα πολυφλοίσβοιο θαλάσσης,
πολλὰ μάλ᾽ εὐχομένω γαιηόχῳ ἐννοσυγαίῳ

168. There is very grave reason for
suspecting, with Bergk (Gr. Lit. 595),
that the whole episode of Phoinix is an
interpolation. He is a quite subordinate
character who has not been mentioned
before, and he has no business to be

resent at a meeting of the royal council.

foreover we find the dual used of the
envoys in 182, 192-8, evidently a trace
of the original form of the passage. Ar.
assumed that Phoinix was not one of the
ambassadors, but was sent on first to
prepare Achilles for their coming after-
wards (ἔπειτα). But after reading all
this into Homer we have gained nothing,
for Achilles is surprised after all by the
entrance of the envoys (193). Phoinix
is entirely ignored from 168 to 432, ex-
cept that he is a κωφὸν πρόσωπον in 228,
where Odysseus seems to treat him with
singularly little respect. However he
cannot be cut clean out; three lines have
been slightly altered to introduce him
(169, 223, 621), though it is hardly worth
while speculating as to their original
forin. Numerous difficult and confused
passages in his speech will be pointed out
in the notes. her ἡ ͵

171. ηἡμῆσαι, either favete linguis,
or αν words of good omen.” The
idea does not again occur in H.

173. ἑαδότα (Fe-Fad-, σξαδ- of ἁνδ-
ἀνω), grateful, pleasing. So o 422.

175. See A 470-1. Here, as always,
the drinking is quite separate from the

eating, and has a distinctly religious
character.

180. δενδίλλων, acc. to Curtius and
Fick a nasalized reduplication from dap-,
dpa- to look (ὑπό-δρα, and Spa-x- of Spdx-
wy, etc.). It will then mean, looking
rapidly (‘‘ winking ᾽) to each, to enforce

his advice, διανεύων τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς,
Sch. A. ἕκαστον must either include

Phoinix, in which case the line, which
is parenthetical, should be rejected, or
else be = ἑκάτερον.

181. πειρᾶν, after ἐπέτελλε, and ep-
exegetic of πολλά.

182. τὼ δέ: for the dual see note on
168.

183. Poseidon is both chief patron of
the Achaian cause, and lord of the
element by which they are walking.
ἐννοσίγαιος, for ἐν-ἔοσι-γαιος, root ἔοθ
of ᾿ὠθέω, Skt. vadh to smite; so ἐν-
([Ὡοσι-χθων : eithér because’ Poseidon is
the lord of earthquakes, or simply be-
cause the waves of the sea are for ever

beating the land. γαιήοχος, perhaps
originally ‘‘ supporting’ the earth,” re-
It has

garded as floating in the sea.
en proposed to take it as meaning
‘rejoicing in chariots.” But in that
case the ἡ could not be explained, and
the close connexion with ἐννοσίγαιος for-
bids ; for it is much more likely that a
somewhat tautological expression should
be used than that the stem ya should
be habitually used in two adjacent words

296

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I crx.)

ῥηιδίως πεπιθεῖν μεγάλας φρένας Αἰακίδαο.

Μυρμιδόνων δ᾽ ἐπί τε κλισίας καὶ νῆας ἱκέσθην,

185

τὸν δ᾽ εὗρον φρένα τερπόμενον φόρμιγγι λυγείῃ,
καλῇ δαιδαλέῃ, ἐπὶ δ᾽ ἀργύρεον ζυγὸν ἦεν"

τὴν ἄρετ᾽ ἐξ ἐνάρων, πόλιν ᾿ΗΠετίωνος ὀλέσσας"
τῇ ὅ γε θυμὸν ἔτερπεν, ἄειδε δ᾽ ἄρα κλέα ἀνδρῶν᾽

4 A
Πάτροκλος δέ οἱ οἷος ἐναντίος ἧστο σιωπῇ,

190

δέγμενος Αἰακίδην, ὁπότε λήξειεν ἀείδων.
τὼ δὲ βάτην προτέρω, ἡγεῖτο δὲ δῖος ᾿Οδυσσεύς,
A \ / ᾽ 3 a Ἁ > 93 / 9 Ἁ
στὰν δὲ πρόσθ' αὐτοῖο’ ταφὼν δ᾽ ἀνόρουσεν ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
7 A \ / ‘\ [ὦ ” ,
αὐτῇ σὺν φορμιγγι, λιπὼν ἕδος, ἔνθα θάασσεν.

ὧς δ᾽ αὔτως Πάτροκλος, ἐπεὶ ἴδε φῶτας, ἀνέστη.

195°

τὼ καὶ δεικνύμενος προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς"
“ χαίρετον' ἦ φίλοι ἄνδρες ἱκάνετον, ἦ τι μάλα χρεώ,͵

in two quite different senses. However
we must remember that with epithets
of gods we are on especially doubtful

ound, as we can never be sure that the

reeks attached any very definite mean-
ing to hieratic words whose sense may
even to them have been lost in antiquity.

184. μεγάλας, proud; so μεγαλήτορι,
109.

186. This is the only case in the Iliad
where we find music mentioned. The
exigencies of war may, perhaps account
for the fact that the Iliad knows nothing
of the dodol, who are so prominent in
Od ;

187. ‘The cross-bar thereon was of
silver.” The ζυγόν was the bar, joining
the two horns of the lyre, to which the
strings were fastened by the pegs (κόλ-
domes, φ 407). .

188. ἄρετο, had- won (see on A 159).
The ‘‘ city of Eetion”” was Thebe, whence
Briseis had come.

189. κλέα, fames, 1.6. famous deeds.
The word seems to be for κλέεα, cf.
H. G. § 105, 4.

191. Cobet reads δέχμενος, a syncopated
present for δεχόμενος, which is given as
ἃ variant in the margin of A, and is prob-
ably right. Sé€ypevos, if an aor. form
should mean ‘‘having received,” not
‘‘waiting,” but it is possibly a perfect
(see A107). Αἰακίδην : the obj. is taken
proleptically from the relative clause.

192. προτέρω, forward; an adverb,
the compar. of πρόσω as Ψ 526, not a

ual.

194. αὐτῇ σὺν φ.: the σύν is generally

omitted in this construction of αὐτός
with the dat.; but cf. M 112, & 498, ν
118. H.G. § 144, note,

196. δεικνύμενος, welcoming. We
find δειδέχαται, -ro, Seldexro (A 4, I 224,
671, X 435, ἡ 72) δεικανάομαι O 86, o
111, w 410, δειδίσκομαι (for δει-δίκ-σκ-ομαι)
(y 41, o 121, v 197), all in this sense.
They seem used specially of pledging
with a cup, apparently from the idea of
pointing at the person in whose honour
the draught is taken ; though this idea
is absent here.

197. This disjointed sentence is very
natural in Achilles’ great surprise, and
it is probably useless to attempt to pro-
duce from it one connected logical whole.
Two thoughts spring to his lips; first,
sincere pleasure at a visit from his friends
—from whom perhaps he has been sepa-
rated for a fortnight ; and next, gratified
pride at what he sees is the object of
their visit—a confession of their sore
need for him (4 τι μάλα xped). This
latter he checks, with his native courtesy,
the instant he has uttered it, and
returns directly to his first expression,
which he puts in a still stronger form,
with a half excuse (oxv{opév@ περ) for
his unpatriotic satisfaction at the dis-
asters of the army. ‘‘ Welcome: surely
ye are dear friends that are here—the
need must be very sore—ay, ye are the
dearest to me of all the Achaians even in
my anger.” It is possible however to
take 4 τι μάλα χρεώ as meaning “1 had
sore need of such a visit from my dearest
friends,”

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I cs.)

297

“ Ld 3 A h » 3 99
οἱ μοι σκυζομένῳ περ Ἀχαιῶν φιλτατοί ἐστον.
Φ Ν [έ ’ ΝΜ A 3 U4

ὧς apa φωνήσας προτέρω aye δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς,

> 94 A / / /
εἷσεν δ᾽ ἐν κλισμοῖσι τάπησί Te πορφυρέοισιν"

200

αἶψα δὲ Πάτροκλον προσεφώνεεν ἐγγὺς ἐόντα'
»} ; \ a , e7 ἢ
μείζονα δὴ κρητῆρα, Μενοιτίου υἱέ, καθίστα,
ζωρότερον δὲ κέραιε, δέπας δ᾽ ἔντυνον ἑκάστῳ"
e Ν , » 2 an e / 4 39
ot yap φίλτατοι ἄνδρες ἐμῷ ὑπέασι μελάθρῳ.

—~ ὡς φάτο, Πάτροκλος δὲ φίλῳ ἐπεπείθεθ᾽ ἑταίρῳ.

20ὅ

> A is a / / 3 Σ΄ A
αὐτὰρ 0 γε κρεῖον μέγα κάββαλεν ἐν πυρὸς αὐγῇ,

2

εν

εν

> “A ” > \ / > ἢ
δ᾽ ἄρα νῶτον ἔθηκ᾽ ὄιος καὶ πίονος airyos,
δὲ συὸς σιάλοιο ῥάχιν τεθαλυῖαν ἀλοιφῇ.

τῷ δ᾽ ἔχεν Αὐτομέδων, τάμνεν δ᾽ ἄρα δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς,

καὶ τὰ μὲν εὖ μίστυλλε καὶ ἀμφ᾽ ὀβελοῖσιν ἔπειρεν,

210

πῦρ δὲ Μενοιτιάδης δαῖεν μέγα, ἰσόθεος φώς.

3 \ 4 A “~ > 4 Ἁ » 3 4
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ κατὰ πῦρ ἐκάη καὶ φλοξ ἐμαράνθη,
3 Ἁ / 4 \ 4 4, 7
ἀνθρακιὴν στορέσας ὀβελοὺς ἐφύπερθε τάνυσσεν,
πάσσε δ᾽ ἁλὸς θείοιο, κρατευτάων ἐπαείρας.

> \ b foe? ν 3 a ”
αὐτὰρ ἐπεί ῥ᾽ ὥπτησε Kal εἰν ἐλεοῖσιν ἔχευεν,

215

a ’
Πάτροκλος μὲν σῖτον ἑλὼν ἐπένειμε τραπέζῃ

καλοῖς ἐν κανέοισιν, ἀτὰρ κρέα νεῖμεν ᾿Αχιλλεύς.

αὐτὸς δ᾽ ἀντίον ἷζεν ᾽Οδυσσῆος θείοιο
τοίχου τοῦ ἑτέροιο, θεοῖσι δὲ θῦσαι ἀνώγειν

202. καθίστα, set upon the table.

203. ζωρότερον, generally explained as
Martial translates it, ‘‘ misceri iussit ami-
cis Largius Aeacides vividiusque merum,”’
viii. 6, 11, as if from ζῆν. It is perhaps
better to refer it to tec-, to boil; it will
then mean fervidius,thotter, stronger wine
(Dod., cf. Curt. no. 567). The merit of
the wine given by Maron to Odysseus
lies in its strength (¢ 209).

204. of = οὗτοι. For μέλαθρον, used of
a hut in the camp, see on 2 643.

206. κρεῖον, 7.¢. a meat-block for chop-

ipg and carving, as appears from 209.
iy πυρὸς αὐγῇ, no doubt the only light
in the hut, for it is now night.

208. σίαλος in this connexion is acc.
to Curt. (Zt. p. 717) a diminutive of σῦς,
and not related to σίαλον = fat. We
can however only translate ‘‘a fat hog.”
τεθαλυῖαν ἀλ., ‘‘rich with fat, lard.’
Cf. the use of θαλεῖα.

209. τῷ, held the meat for him.
τάμνειν is to carve (into joints); μιστύλ-
Ae, to slice into smaller pieces.

; 212. κατὰ... ἐκάη, our own idiom,

tak αἱ eal alla

‘*burnt down”: only the hot embers
(ἀνθρακιή) are used for roasting, the
meat being placed directly over them.

214. ἁλός is the ‘‘quasi-partitive”
gen. usual where anything taken from
a larger mass is employed: so πρῆσαι
πυρός B 415, λελουμένος ᾿᾽Ωκεανοῖο E 6.
Η. 6. § 151, 6. θείοιο, perhaps because
it was used on account of its purifying
quality, to render sacrifices fit for the
gods. No such usage is mentioned in
Homer (salt is indeed only mentione
again in 123, p 455, y 270), but it is
familiar to us from Jewish ritual. κρα-
τευτάων, ‘‘dogs,” rests on each side of
the fire on which to lay the ends of the
spits. Dod. derives from xépas, suppos-
ing them to have been of the shape X ;
Diintzer from xparevew, to master, 7.¢.
to hold fast. For ἐπαείρας Arist. read
ἀπαείρας, but the genitive may be local,
as τοίχου 219, and so H 426,

215. ἐλεοῖσι, ‘‘chargers”’ of wood to
serve as dishes, see ¢ 432.

219. τοίχον τοῦ érépovo, by the oppo-
site wall of the hut (so Q 598), in order

298

IAIAAO® I (x,)

Πάτροκλον ὃν ἑταῖρον" ὁ δ᾽ ἐν πυρὶ βάλλε θυηλάς. 220
οἱ δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ὀνείαθ᾽ ἑτοῖμα προκείμενα χεῖρας ἴαλλον.

αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ πόσιος καὶ ἐδητύος ἐξ ἔρον ἕντο,

νεῦσ᾽ Αἴας Φοίνικι" νόησε δὲ δῖος ᾿Οδυσσεύς,

πλησάμενος δ᾽ οἴνοιο δέπας δείδεκτ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆα"

“χαῖρ᾽, ᾿Αχιλεῦ" δαιτὸς μὲν ἐίσης οὐκ ἐπιδευεῖς

ἠμὲν ἐνὶ κλισίῃ ᾿Αγαμέμνονος ᾿Ατρεΐδαο,

ἠδὲ καὶ ἐνθάδε νῦν" πάρα γὰρ μενοεικέα πολλὰ
δαίνυσθ᾽ - ἀλλ᾽ οὐ δαιτὸς ἐπηράτου ἔργα μέμηλεν,
ἀλλὰ λίην μέγα πῆμα, διοτρεφές, εἰσορόωντες

δείδιμεν: ἐν δοιῇ δὲ σαωσέμεν ἢ ἀπολέσθαι

290

ol 3 LA 3 4 4 3 7
νῆας ἐυσσέλμους, εἰ μὴ σύ γε δύσεαι ἀλκήν.
ἐγγὺς γὰρ νηῶν καὶ τείχεος αὗλιν ἔθεντο
Τρῶες ὑπέρθυμοι τηλεκλειτοί T ἐπίκουροι,
, \ \ \ ’ 2 ν "
κηάμενοι πυρὰ πολλὰ κατὰ στρατόν, οὐδ᾽ ἔτι φασὶν

σχήσεσθ', ἀλλ᾽ ἐν νηυσὶ μελαίνῃσιν πεσέεσθαι. ᾿

235

Ζεὺς δέ σφι Κρονίδης ἐνδέξια σήματα φαίνων͵ ὁ

to watch his guests’ wants. The genitive
is local, like πεδίοιο, ete.; H. 6. § 149, 2.

220. θνηλάς, generally explained as a
portion of the meat dedicated by way of
ἀπαρχαί to the gods. Perhaps it may be
incense, but see note on Z 270.

222. This line is merely formal, for
the envoys had just supped with Aga-
memnon. For this reason, we are told,
Aristarchos would have preferred to read
ἂψ ἐπάσαντο for ἐξ ἔρον ἕντο, but re-
tained the MS. reading ὑπὸ περίττης
εὐλαβείας, fortunately for Homer’s repu-
tation and his own.

223. νεῦσε, made a sign to Phoinix to
begin. But Odysseus anticipates him.

224. SeBexro, pledged ; see |. 196 and
A 4.

225. émBevels, sc. ἐσμέν, or perhaps
rather εἰσίν, ‘men are not,” as in φασίν,
‘‘men say” (Mr. Monro). Schol. A and
Eust. mention variants eluéy and ἦμεν

for ἡμέν in the next line. Arist. read
ἐπιδεύει, thou lackest not.
227. ἠδὲ καί, ‘even as.” J.e. it is

not for food we have come. πάρα =
πάρεστι, ‘there is abundance, to our
heart’s desire, to feast on” (δαίνυσθαι,
epexeg. infin.).

229. πῆμα, accus. after εἰσορ., δείδιμεν
being added without an object.

230. ἐν Soup, ‘‘we are in doubt whether
we shall save our ships, or whether they
are lost.’’ For the constr. compare Καὶ

178. For σαωσέμεν (cf. 1. 681) Bekker
ingeniously conjectured σόας ἔμεν (cf.
© 246, A 117), but the correction is not
absolutely necessary ; the sudden change
of voice and subject being quite in the
Homeric style. If we read σαωσέμεν, it
is a “mixed” aor. = σαῶσαι, rather than
future. δοιή (ἀπ. Aey.) = doubt, for δἔιή
(ἄνα = two, cf. du-bius, Germ. Zwei-fel).

231. δύσεαι ἀλκήν, clothe thyself in
might ; cf. ἐπιειμένοι ἀλκήν H 164, ete.

232. αὖλιν ἔθεντο, made their bivouac.
Hence the later αὐλίζεσθαι, a regular
military term.

235. ‘‘ And deem that we shall hold
out no longer, but fall (back) upon our
black ships”; or ‘‘that they will no
longer be withheld, but will assault,”
etc. The phrase occurs several times,
and generally with the same ambiguity.
But B 175, A 311, M 107, are strongly
in favour of the first interpretation ;
while here the absence of any mention
of any subject (such as ἡμᾶς or Δαναούς)
seems to require the second. Hence
Christ thinks the lines are wrongly
adopted from M. ἐμπεσεῖν is a strong
word, meaning a violent retreat, rather
than ‘‘ perishing among,” Z 82.

236. Cf. ἀστράπτων ἐπιδέξι᾽ ἐναίσιμα
σήματα φαίνων, B 353. 236 and 237
rhyme ; an accident of which the Greeks
do not seem to have been particularly
conscious.

IAIAAOS I (1x.)

299

ἀστράπτει" “Exrwp δὲ μέγα σθένεϊ βλεμεαίνων
΄ “9 / , ,ὔ 5.) ,

μαίνεται ἐκπάγλως, πίσυνος Διί, οὐδέ τι τίει

> / Q\ , \ fe ’ 4

ἀνέρας οὐδὲ θεούς" κρατερὴ δέ ἑ λύσσα δέδυκεν.

3 A \ , 4 IA nw

ἀρᾶται δὲ τάχιστα φανήμεναι ἠῶ Stav: 240
a nA /

στεῦται γὰρ νηῶν ἀποκόψειν ἄκρα KopupBa

αὐτάς T ἐμπρήσειν μαλεροῦ πυρός, αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχαιοὺς

Ἁ nm 3 Ἁ A
δῃώσειν παρὰ τῇσιν ὀρινομένους ὑπὸ καπνοῦ,

ταῦτ᾽ αἰνῶς δείδοικα κατὰ φρένα, μή οἱ ἀπειλὰς
ἐκτελέσωσι θεοί, ἡμῖν δὲ δὴ αἴσιμον εἴη 245
,
φθίσθαι ἐνὶ Τροίῃ, ἑκὰς “Apyeos ἱπποβότοιο.
? > Ww 3 “4 Ul \ 3 , 3 A
ἀλλ᾽ ava, εἰ μέμονάς ye Kal ὀψέ περ υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶν
τειρομένους ἐρύεσθαι ὑπὸ Τρώων ὀρυμαγδοῦ.
3 “Ὁ ’ > Ψ » 3 / a
αὐτῷ τοι μετοπισθ᾽ ἄχος ἔσσεται, οὐδέ TL μῆχος.
ε , a Μ > Ν e A 2 \ \ \
ῥεχθέντος κακοῦ ἔστ᾽ ἄκος εὑρεῖν". ἀλλὰ πολὺ πρὶν 250
, Φ a 2 / “ON
φράζευ, ὅπως Δαναοῖσιν ἀλεξήσεις κακὸν ἦμαρ.
= / Φ \ / \ 2 , \
ὦ πέπον, ἦ μὲν TOL γε πατὴρ ἐπετέλλετο [[ηλεὺς

ΝΜ A e > 9 / > A A
ἤματι τῷ, ὅτε σ᾽ ἐκ Φθίης ᾿Αγαμέμνονε πέμπεν "

«ἣν

“τέκνον ἐμόν, κάρτος μὲν ᾿Αθηναίη τε καὶ “Hon

δώσουσ᾽, αἴ κ᾽ ἐθέλωσι, σὺ δὲ μεγαλήτορα θυμὸν 255
ἴσχειν ἐν στήθεσσι" φιλοφροσύνη yap ἀμείνων".
ληγέμεναι δ᾽ ἔριδος κακομηχάνου, ὄφρα σε μᾶλλον

241. στεῦται, has set himself, see Σ
191. κόρυμβα, apparently the same as
the &dpdacrov (aplustria), O 717: the
tall ornamental projection in which the
stem of the ship (drawn up landwards)
ran up. See the illustrations in Helbig,
H. E. p. 56. The idea seems to be that
Hector will carry these off as trophies,

242. πυρός, see 1. 214 and B 415.
Arist. ἐμπλήσειν. padepod, devouring,
in Il. only. Perhaps conn. with μάλα,
mel-ior, in the sense of strong; or μαλ-
άσσω, ἀ-μαλ-δύνω, in the sense of melting.

243. ὀρινομένους, roused up, driven
about; like a wasp’s nest when it is
smoked. Cf. © 183.

244. ταῦτα refers to the following
(μή οἱ. . . ἱπποβότοιο).

245. εἴη, the opt. of the remoter con-
sequence, as frequently. Bekk. writes
ely, perhaps rightly; for this form see on
H 340.

248. épver Oar (future? see H 36), to
protect ; it has nothing to do with ‘‘draw-
Ing away,” though the two words ap-
proach near one another in phrases like
this. See A 216. ὑπό, (from) before
the onslaught of the Trojans.

249. ‘‘ Nor is there any device (μηχανή,
means) to find the remedy, whence once
the harm is done.” It is indifferent
whether we take ῥεχθ. κακοῦ as gen.
absolute or as governed by ἄκος. There
is perhaps a play on words in ἄχος, ἄκος.
Bekk. takes ἔστ᾽ to be for ἔσται, which
makes more prominent the especial re-
ference to the irretrievable character of
the disaster if once the Greek camp is
stormed.

252. ὦ πέπον, ‘‘gentle sir” (‘‘hypo-
coristic’’): it is twice used in a con-
temptuous sense, ‘‘ fools,” ‘‘ weaklings,”
B 235, N 120. Prof. Bloomfield has
shewn that the Homeric word has prob-
ably nothing to do with πέπων = ripe
(Skt. pakvd), but is more likely conn.
with paka, ‘‘ young, simple, foolish”
(Am. Jour. Phil. vi. 48).

253. Odysseus went with Nestor to beg
the assistance of Achilles: see A 765 sqq.,
where Nestor quotes a different charge
of Peleus to his son, alév ἀριστεύειν καὶ
ὑπείροχον ἔμμεναι ἄλλων.

256. ‘‘Curb thy proud soul in thy
breast, for gentle-mindedness is better.’

257. Anysevat, not strictly ‘abstain

900

ἹΛΙΑΔΟΣῚ ᾳχΧ.)

/ > 3 [4 3 \ “ LNB , 3
tina ᾿Αργείων ἠμὲν νέοι ἠδὲ γέροντες,
. ν; a 1 er y7 5. \) ¥ \oa
ὧς ἐπέτελλ᾽ ὁ γέρων, σὺ δὲ λήθεαι. ἀλλ᾽’ ἔτι καὶ νῦν
93
παύε᾽, ἔα δὲ χόλον θυμαληγέαγ σοὶ δ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνων 260
A / A
ἄξια δῶρα δίδωσι μεταλλήξαντι χόλοιο. (ta Ar als
3 \ A lA Ψ 4 \ , 4 ͵
εἰ δὲ σὺ μέν μευ ἄκουσον, ἐγὼ δέ κέ τοι καταλέξω,
ὅσσα τοι ἐν κλισίῃσιν ὑπέσχετο δῶρ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνων,
ἕπτ᾽ ἀπύρους τρίποδας, δέκα δὲ χρυσοῖο τάλαντα,
αἴθωνας δὲ λέβητας ἐείκοσι, δώδεκα δ᾽. ἵππους 265
πηγοὺς ἀθλοφόρους, of ἀέθλια ποσσὶν apovTo.
οὔ κεν ἀλήιος εἴη ἀνήρ, ᾧ τόσσα γένοιτο,
οὐδέ κεν ἀκτήμων ἐριτίμοιο χρυσοῖο,
ΦΨ 35.» 4 ¢/ of \ 3
ὅσσ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνονος ἵπποι ἀέθλια ποσσὶν ἄροντο.
, 2 e \ a 2 4 ΝΜ 3 ’
δώσει δ᾽ ἑπτὰ γυναῖκας ἀμύμονα ἔργα ἰδυίας, 270
/
Λεσβίδας, ἅς, ὅτε Λέσβον ἐυκτιμένην Eres avros,
ἐξέλεθ᾽, αἱ τότε κάλλει ἐνίκων φῦλα γυναικῶν"
τὰς μέν τοι δώσει, μετὰ δ᾽ ἔσσεται, ἣν ToT ἀπηύρα,
κούρη Βρισῆος" ἐπὶ δὲ μέγαν ὅρκον ὀμεῖται
μή ποτε τῆς εὐνῆς ἐπιβήμεναι ἠδὲ μυγῆναι, 275
ἣ θέμις ἐστίν, ἄναξ, ἤ τ᾽ ἀνδρῶν ἤ τε γυναικῶν.
ταῦτα μὲν αὐτίκα πάντα παρέσσεται" εἰ δέ κεν αὖτε
ἄστυ μέγα Πριάμοιο θεοὶ δώωσ᾽ ἀλαπάξαι,
νῆα ἅλις χρυσοῦ καὶ χαλκοῦ νηήσασθαι
εἰσελθών, ὅτε κεν δατεώμεθα Anis’ ᾿Αχαιοί, 280
", \ “aA > 7 > \ ey 2
Tpwiddas δὲ γυναῖκας ἐείκοσιν αὐτὸς ἑλέσθαι,
ai κε μετ᾽ ᾿Αργείην ᾿Ελένην κάλλισται ἔωσιν.
εἰ δέ κεν "Apyos ἱκοίμεθ᾽ ᾿Αχαιικόν, οὖθαρ ἀρούρης,
/ / ew / / 4 3 /
γαμβρός κέν οἱ ἔοις" τίσει δέ σε ἶσον ᾿Ορέστῃ,
ὅς οἱ τηλύγετος τρέφεται θαλίῃ ἔνι πολλῇ. 285
τρεῖς δέ οἱ εἰσὶ θύγατρες evil μεγάρῳ ἐυπήκτῳ,
Χρυσόθεμις καὶ Λαοδίκη καὶ ᾿Ιφιάνασσα"
4 eo > 9 ¢ h. 3 4 »
τάων ἦν « ἐθέλῃσθα, φίλην ἀνάεδνον ἄγεσθαι,
Ἁ 44 κ΄" φς 3 > 9
πρὸς οἶκον 1]ηλῆος" ὁ δ᾽ abr ἐπὶ μείλια δώσει
3 oO , Ν , en 9 » s
πολλὰ μάλ᾽, ὅσσ᾽ οὔ πώ TIS ἑῇ ἐπέδωκε θυγατρί. 290
ς \ / , oN / 7
ἑπτὰ δέ τοι δώσει ἐὺ ναιόμενα πτολίεθρα,
/
Καρδαμύλην ᾿Ἑνόπην τε καὶ ᾿Ιρὴν ποιήεσσαν,

from,” but ‘‘ cease from,” a quarrel when 262. εἰ δέ with imperative, ‘come
you have been drawn into it (as you now,” asl, 46.
assuredly will be at times). 264-299 = 122-157 mutatis mutandis.

Compare especially 276 with 184 for the

261. ἄξια, equivalent to the insult. improvement in the rhythm.

eA

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣῚ (rx.)

301

Φηράς te ζαθέας ἠδ᾽ "Ανθειαν βαθύλειμον,
καλήν τ᾽ Αἴπειαν καὶ Πήδασον ἀμπελόεσσαν.

πᾶσαι δ᾽ ἐγγὺς ἁλός, νέαται vou ἡμαθόεντος"

295

ἐν δ᾽ ἄνδρες ναίουσι πολύρρηνες πολυβοῦται,
/ /
οἵ κέ σε δωτίνῃσι θεὸν ὡς τιμήσουσιν
\ /
καί TOL ὑπὸ σκήπτρῳ λιπαρὰς τελέουσι θέμιστας.
a , , /, / /
ταῦτά KE TOL τελέσειε μεταλλήξαντι χολοιο.

εἰ δέ τοι ᾿Ατρεΐδης μὲν ἀπήχθετο κηρόθι μᾶλλον,

800

αὐτὸς καὶ τοῦ δῶρα, σὺ δ᾽ ἄλλους περ Ἰ]αναχαιοὺς
τειρομένους ἐλέαιρε κατὰ στρατόν, οἵ σε θεὸν ὡς
/ 3 ’ μ Ul “ ἴω "4
τίσουσ᾽" ἦ yap κέ σφι μάλα μέγα κῦδος ἄροιο.
νῦν γάρ χ᾽ “Ἑκτορ᾽ ἕλοις, ἐπεὶ ἂν μάλα τοι σχεδὸν ἔλθοι

Ud v 3 4 3 ΝΜ 4 e a
λύσσαν ἔχων ὀλοήν, ἐπεὶ οὔ τινά φησιν ὁμοῖον

80ὅ

οἷ ἔμεναι Δαναῶν, ods ἐνθάδε νῆες ἔνεικαν.᾽ 70]

τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς:
“διογενὲς Λαερτιάδη, πολυμήχαν᾽ ᾿Οδυσσεῦ,
χρὴ μὲν δὴ τὸν μῦθον ἀπηλεγέως ἀποειπεῖν,

Kd ὃ} / XY ἐς , ”
ἢ περ δὴ φρονέω TE καὶ WS τετελεσμένον ἔσται,

310

ὡς μή μοι τρύζητε παρήμενοι ἄλλοθεν ἄλλος.
ἐχθρὸς γάρ μοι κεῖνος ὁμῶς ᾿Αίδαο πύλῃσιν,

ὅς χ᾽ ἕτερον μὲν κεύθῃ ἐνὶ φρεσίν, ἄλλο δὲ εἴπη.
αὐτὰρ ἐγὼν ἐρέω, ὥς μοι δοκεῖ εἶναι ἄριστα“

οὔτ᾽ ἐμέ γ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδην ᾿Αγαμέμνονα πεισέμεν οἴω

315

οὔτ᾽ ἄλλους Δαναούς, ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἄρα τις χάρις ἦεν
, > > 9 , \ 2.» -
μώρνασθαι δηίοισιν ἐπ᾽ ἀνδράσι νωλεμὲς αἰεί,

800. μᾶλλον, 1.6. too much for that.
Observe the μέν in protasis answered by
δέ in apodosis. This is really a case of
the ‘‘paratactic” construction of con-
ditional sentences out of which the
‘‘hypotactic” sprang, εἰ still retaining
its interjectional force ; lit. ‘‘come (put
the case) : Agamemnon it is true (μέν)
is too hateful to thee, but still have pity
on the other Achaians” (Lange).

303. σφιν ἄροιο, win in their eyes.
The dat. seems to be locative in sense:
lit. ‘‘among them,” X 217.

304. Hector in his sober senses had
hitherto shunned a conflict with Achilles.
See 352-5. Thus λύσσαν ἔχων is signi-
ficant.

309. ἀπηλεγέως : the old derivation
from ἀλέγω seems right, ‘‘ without re-
spect of persons” (or regard for con-
sequences), ἀποειπεῖν, speak outright,

cf. drounvicas, B 772. It generally
means ‘‘to forbid” or ‘‘ deny.”

311. ‘‘ That ye may not sit and coax
me from this side and that.” τρύζητε
seems to be used properly of the “cooing”
of doves (τρυγών).

312. This line recurs 156 in a sadly ©
undignified context. ‘‘The gates of
death”? mean the dreaded’ entrance into
the world of shadows (see λ 491).

313. ἕτερον is answered by ἄλλο, cf. 1.
472-3. The line is of course not aimed
directly at Odysseus, but is rather an
excuse for the freedom with which
Achilles means to speak: κεῖνος is
opposed to the emphatic ἐγώ (314).

316. Δαναούς, sc. ἐμὲ πεισέμεν (ἐμέ
being the object in both clauses). a
eee etc., ‘‘since it seems there
are to be no thanks for battling against
the foemen ever without respite.”

902

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I (1x.)

ἴση μοῖρα μένοντι, Kal εἰ μάλα τις πολεμίζξοι"
2 \ 3A a 9 Ἁ \ 3 \ 32 ’
ἐν δὲ in τιμῇ ἠμὲν κακὸς ἠδὲ καὶ ἐσθλὸς"

κάτθαν᾽ ὁμῶς ὅ τ᾽ ἀεργὸς ἀνὴρ ὅ τε πολλὰ ἐοργώς.

320

Σιν ’ [4 3 \ 4 3 a
οὐδέ τί μοι περίκειται, ἐπεὶ πάθον ἄνγεα θυμῷ
δ 9 A \ , , / “
αἰὲν ἐμὴν ψυχὴν παραβαλλομενος πολεμίζειν.
ὡς δ᾽ ὄρνις ἀπτῆσι νεοσσοῖσι προφέρῃσιν
᾽ὔ 3 3 ’ Ul a 9° e , > fal
μάστακ᾽, ἐπεί κε λάβησι, κακῶς δ᾽ apa οἱ πέλει αὐτῇ,

ν᾽ A \ \ 4 ἢ / Μ
ὡς καὶ ἐγὼ πολλὰς μὲν ἀύπνους νύκτας ἴαυον,

325

ἤματα δ᾽ αἱματόεντα διέπρησσον πολεμίζων,
ἀνδράσι μαρνάμενος ὀάρων ἕνεκα σφετεράων.
δώδεκα δὴ σὺν νηυσὶ πόλεις ἀλάπαξ᾽ ἀνθρώπων,
πεζὸς δ᾽ ἕνδεκά φημι κατὰ Τροίην ἐρίβωλον"

A
τάων ἐκ πασέων κειμήλια πολλὰ Kal ἐσθλὰ

330

“ ,
ἐξελόμην, καὶ πάντα φέρων ᾿Αγαμέμνονι δόσκον

318. ‘‘A man hath the like share
whether he stay behind or fight his
hardest.” μένοντι (= εἰ μένοι) alludes
to Agamemnon (see 1. 332). From 316
to 333 the leading thought is that Aga-
memnon has taken the spoils while
leaving all the work to Achilles, like
A 163-171.

819. ἰῇ, the sane. This was appar-
ently the original meaning (Skt. ἔνα,
whence Fla by the not unusual metathesis
of F), that of ‘‘one” being developed
later.

320. This line has all the appearance
of an interpolation of the Hesiodean age,
when “‘ gnomic” poetry was fashionable.
It has a specious resemblance to the pre-
ceding lines, but isno more thana pointless
generality here, terribly weakening the
speech, Achilles has no thought for any-
thing but the conduct of Agamemnon,
with which this commonplace has no-
thing whatever to do. Hence most edd.
bracket it, Bekker condemning the pre-
ceding couplet also. 0 45 is a very
similar instance of gnomic interpolation.

321. ‘‘Nor doth there remain to me
any profit because I suffered tribulation
of soul, ever staking my life to fight.”
περίκειται, lit. nothing is laid up for me
in excess (of others).

322. παραβαλλόμενος, like παρθέμενος
B 237, Ὑ 74, of the stake set down by the
combatants to strive for. Tho idea of
risking remained always attached to the
verb, see note on A 6.

323. “Even as a hen-bird bringeth
her unfledged chicks whatever morsel she

may find—and it goes hard with herself
—even so have 1 passed many a sleepless
night.” κακῶς... αὐτῇ must be taken
independently as a parenthesis, as the
verb is in the indic. instead of the subj.

325. ἴανον, as always, of “passing the
night”’ or bivouacking, noé of ‘sleeping.
See Curtius, Vb. ii. p. 367, where it and
its aor. deca are referred to root vas, to
dwell, after L. Meyer.

327. ‘‘ Fighting the foemen for their
dames’ sake”: an obscure expression.
ὀάρων seems to refer to Helen, and the
plural is used by a rhetorical exaggera-
tion, while ράων contemptuously
ignores the fact that Helen belonged to
the Greeks. (There is little force in re-
ferring édpwy to the captives, Briseis,
Chryseis, etc.). Dod. would translate
‘‘fighting for husbands on behalf of
their wives,” where ὀάρων will again
refer to Helen. But ἀνδράσι never
means ‘‘husbands” in Homer; and μάρ-
νασθαι with dat. is so common in the
sense of ‘‘fighting against” that it is
impossible to take the construction here
asa ‘‘dat. commodi.” Christ reads pap-
vapévots with the Aldine edition, ‘‘ war-
ring against men fighting for their wives”
(i.e. homes).

329. φημί: supply ἀλαπάξαι (the paren-
thetical use is not Homeric). Six cities
are named as having been taken by
Achilles: Thebe (A 366), Lyrnessos (B
691, T 296), Pedasos (Y 91), Tenedos
(A 625), Lesbos (I 129), Skyros (I 668).
See note on A 125.

331. ἐξελόμην here seems to mean

IAIAAOS I (rx.)

303

᾿Ατρεΐδῃ" ὁ δ᾽ ὄπισθε μένων παρὰ νηυσὶ θοῇσιν
4
A 4 > νΝ

δεξάμενος διὰ παῦρα δασάσκετο, πολλὰ δ᾽ ἔχεσκεν"
ἄλλα δ᾽ ἀριστήεσσι δίδου γέρα καὶ βασιλεῦσιν"

A \ Μ A 3 “ > Σ \ , 3 A
TOLOL μεν ἔμπεδα KELTAL, ἐμεὺυ δ᾽ ἀπὸ μουνου Ἀχαιῶν 335
A 3 ¥ > ΜΝ , A ,
εἴλετ᾽, ἔχει δ᾽ ἄλοχον θυμαρέα" τῇ παριαύων

τερπέσθω. τί δὲ δεῖ πολεμιξέμεναι Τρώεσσιν

᾿Αργείους; τί δὲ λαὸν ἀνήγαγεν ἐνθάδ᾽ ἀγείρας

᾿Ατρεΐδης; ἢἣ οὐχ “Ἑλένης ἕνεκ᾽ ἠυκόμοιο;

ἢ μοῦνοι φιλέουσ᾽ ἀλόχους μερόπων ἀνθρώπων 840
᾿Ατρεΐδαι; ἐπεὶ ὅς τις ἀνὴρ ἀγαθὸς καὶ ἐχέφρων,

τὴν αὐτοῦ φιλέει καὶ κήδεται, ὡς καὶ ἐγὼ τὴν
ἐκ θυμοῦ φίλεον, δουρικτητήν περ ἐοῦσαν.
νῦν δ᾽, ἐπεὶ ἐκ χειρῶν γέρας εἵλετο καί μ᾽ ἀπάτησεν,
“ Ul .Ν 40. ἡ 3 4 /
μή μευ πειράτω “ἐὺ εἰδότος" οὐδέ με πείσει. 846
ἀλλ᾽, ᾿δυσεῦ, σὺν σοί τε καὶ ἄλλοισιν βασιλεῦσιν
/ , 3 Ζ “ le)
φραξέσθω νήεσσιν ἀλεξέμεναι δήιον πῦρ.
“ a
ἢ μὲν δὴ μάλα πολλὰ πονήσατο νόσφιν ἐμεῖο,
\ \ A ΜΝ \ » 4 > 5» 3 a
καὶ δὴ τεῖχος ἔδειμε Kal ἤλασε τάφρον ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ
3 “Ὁ / 3 \ / 4
Eupelay μεγάλην, ἐν δὲ σκόλοπας κατέπηξεν",.» 350
ἀλλ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ὧς δύναται σθένος “Exropos ἀνδροφόνοιο

ἴσχειν.

ὄφρα δ᾽ ἐγὼ μετ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοῖσιν πολέμιξον,

2 324 ἡ ᾽ὔ > Ἁ / > 4 e
οὐκ ἐθέλεσκε μάχην ἀπὸ τείχεος ὀρνύμεν “Ἑϊκτωρ,
ἀλλ᾽ ὅσον ἐς Σκαιάς τε πύλας καὶ φηγὸν ἵκανεν"

‘‘took from the cities,” not as usual
‘‘chose as a γέρας étaperdv,” the men-
tion of which comes afterwards (334).
The attribution to the king of the right
to divide the spoil, instead of to the army
at large, seems to be a peculiarity of this
book ; see A 162, II ὅδ, compared with
367 below.

333. διά with δασάσκετο, ‘‘the smaller
part he divided, but the greater he kept.”

334. For ἄλλα Bekk. conj. ἅσσα, in-
geniously but needlessly. πολλά is so
much the uppermost idea in the speaker’s
mind that he naturally passes to his
next theme, παῦρα, as though he had
not just mentioned it: in fact he has
introduced it in 333 merely as a foil to
the πολλά, and not for its own sake.
There does not seem to be any particular
distinction between ἀριστῆες and βασι-

336. ἄλοχον, an expression used merely
invidiae caussa; for he contemplates
marrying a Thessalian maiden, 395 sqq.
Compare however T 298.

337. δεῖ in this sense only here in
Homer ; elsewhere always χρή.

339. 4 οὐκ, ironical; ‘‘ was it not for
Helen’s sake,” 7.e were we brought
hither on account of a stolen wife by
one that is himself a wife-stealer ?

342. τὴν αὐτοῦ, sc. ἄλοχον. A very
rare use of the articlein H. Cf. Ψ 348,
376, x 221. αὐτοῦ would be αὑτοῦ in
later Greek, and so Ptolemy of Askalon
read here ; but the compound reflexive
pronouns are not known to H. We
ought probably therefore to read {vw for

τήν.

345. ἐὺ εἰδότος, ‘‘let him not tempt
me, now that I know him well.”

349. Aristarchos read ἤλασεν ἔκτοθι
τάφρον, which best suits the usual repre-
sentation of the moat as separated from
the wall.

354. φηγόν, a well-known landmark
near the gate; E 693, Z 237, A 170,
H 22, etc. Cf. the épweds in X 145, etc.
ὅσον, so much and no more; cf. the use
of τόσον, A 130, Ψ 327.

304

ἔνθα ποτ᾽ οἷον ἔμιμνε, μόγις δέ μευ ἔκφυγεν ὁρμήν.

TAIAAO® I (ιχ.)

355

νῦν δ᾽, ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἐθέλω πολεμιζέμεν “Exrops δίῳ,
ΝΜ 939-99. \ ε a nw
αὔριον ipa Διὶ ῥέξας καὶ πᾶσι θεοῖσιν,
/ 9N\ a 3 \ a ,
νηήσας ἐὺ νῆας, ἐπὴν ἅλαδε προερύσσω,
ὄψεαι, ἢν ἐθέλῃσθα καὶ αἴ κέν τοι τὰ μεμήλῃ,͵

ἣρι μάλ᾽ Ἑλλήσποντον ἐπ᾽ ἰχθυόεντα πλεούσας

960

νῆας ἐμάς, ἐν δ᾽ ἄνδρας ἐρεσσέμεναι μεμαῶτας:"
3 4 3 ᾿ , Ἁ 3° [4
εἰ δέ κεν εὐπλοΐην dwn κλυτὸς ἐννοσίγαιος,
” , / > ἢ ¢.
ἤματί Ke τριτάτῳ Φθίην ἐρίβωλον ἱκοίμην.
ἔστι δέ μοι μάλα πολλά, τὰ κάλλιπον ἐνθάδε ἔρρων -

ἄλλον δ᾽ ἐνθένδε χρυσὸν καὶ χαλκὸν ἐρυθρὸν

ἠδὲ γυναῖκας ἐνζώνους πολιόν τε σίδηρον

ν » , ΄ , a »
ἄξομαι, ἅσσ᾽ ἔλαχόν γε" γέρας δέ μοι, ὅς περ ἔδωκεν,
αὗτις ἐφυβρίζων ἕλετο κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων

᾿Ατρεΐδης.

a 4 > 93 / e 3 XX
τῷ πάντ᾽ ἀγορευέμεν, WS ἐπιτέλλω,
/
ἀμφαδόν, ὄφρα καὶ ἄλλοι ἐπισκύξωνται ᾿Αχαιοί,

870

εἴ τινά που Δαναῶν ἔτι ἔλπεται ἐξαπατήσειν,

oN 3 [4 > 4
αἰὲν ἀναιδείην ἐπιειμένος.

ΣῸ A ? /
οὐδ᾽ ἂν ἐμοί ye

/ , , oN 3 4 30. /
τετλαίη κύνεός περ ἐὼν εἰς ὦπα ἰδέσθαι"
οὐδέ τί οἱ βουλὰς συμφράσσομαι, οὐδὲ μὲν ἔργον"

855. οἷον seems to be for οἷος οἷον
(Déd.), ‘‘man to man.” (οἷον is not
used by Homer as an adv. = ἅπαξ.)

358. wyfhoas νῆας (a play on the
sound 3), see 1. 137.

359 = A 353. ὄψεαι, a complete ana-
coluthon, natural enough in Achilles’
excited mood instead of εἶμε or πλεύσομαι.
The Hellespont seems to include the N.E.
portion of the Aegaean sea.

363. So in y 180 the voyage from
Tenedos to Argos takes four days. Paley
quotes Theocr. xiii. 29, where three days
are spent in going from Phthia to the
Hellespont.

364. ἐνθάδε ἔρρων, on my mad journey
hither. See note on Θ 239.

365. ἄλλον, other than what I have
at home. ἐρυθρόν, only here epithet of
χαλκός (elsewhere aldoy ἦνοψ or va@poy) ;
it possibly indicates that the metal was
copper, not bronze, though little stress
can be laid on Homeric indication of
colour. See Gladstone, Juv. Mundi, p.
530; Buchh., Hom. Real. ii. 321. But
bronze seems to have received the name
of copper in almost all early stages of
civilization, Semitic and Egyptian as
well as Indo-European (Schrader, p. 272).

Dr. Schliemann’s discoveries at Mycenae
and Hissarlik prove the existence of the
metal and the alloy side by side ; so that
we may conclude that χαλκός covers both.

366. πολιός : the natural colour of iron
is light gray, as is seen in the fracture.

367. The portion assigned him by lot,
in common with the rest of the anny, is
bitterly contrasted with the -yépas he
received as commander. ὅς περ ἔδωκεν,
see on 331. .

369. Observe the bitter emphasis with
which Achilles repeatedly forces the
name ᾿Ατρεΐδης into the most emphatic
place, 1. 332, 888, 341, in significant
contrast with Agamemnon’s reluctance
to name Achilles.

370. ἐπισκύζωνται, frown upon him.
The next line is somewhat loosely added ;
“(1 wish them to look upon him with
disfavour), in case he may be expecting
to outwit some other Danaan.”

372. ἀναιδείην ἐπιειμένος, com
‘*he clothed himself with cursing like
as with a raiment,” and A 149.

373. κύνεός περ ἐών, even though he
have the shamelessness of a dog; cf.
κυνὸς ὄμματ᾽ ἔχων, A 225.

374. οὐδὲ μὲν ἔργον, no, nor any deed :

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I as,

2 \ 4 ? 2 4 \ » 50.) A »μ 3 4

ἐκ γὰρ δή μ᾽ ἀπάτησε καὶ ἤλιτεν" οὐδ᾽ ἂν ἔτ᾽ αὗτις
2 ’ > 9 “ Ψ 7 e
ἐξαπάφοιτ᾽ ἐπέεσσιν" ἅλις δέ ol.

305

379
ἀλλὰ ἕκηλος

3 A 4 4 e 4 “ἤ / 4
ἐρρέτω" ἐκ γάρ ev φρένας εΐἴλετο μητίετα Ζεύς.
ἐχθρὰ δέ μοι τοῦ δῶρα, τίω δέ μιν ἐν καρὸς αἴσῃ.
οὐδ᾽ εἴ μοι δεκάκις τε καὶ εἰκοσάκις τόσα δοίη,

ὅσσα τέ οἱ νῦν ἔστι, καὶ εἴ ποθεν ἄλλα γένοιτο,

380

209 ὦ 3 9 3 \ , 40.) of ,
οὐδ᾽ ὅσ᾽ ἐς ᾿Ορχομενὸν ποτινίσσεται, οὐδ᾽ ὅσα Θήβας.
a“ “i a
Αἰγυπτίας, ὅθι πλεῖστα δόμοις ἐν κτήματα κεῖται,
“ )ς ’ 3 ᾽ > 9.9 @ “
ai θ᾽ ἑκατομπυλοί εἰσι, διηκόσιοι δ᾽ av’ ἑκάστας
ἀνέρες ἐξοιχνεῦσι σὺν ἵπποισιν καὶ ὄχεσφιν:

390. ” / , Ὁ ra 4° / /
οὐδ᾽ εἴ μοι Toca δοίη, ὅσα ψάμαθος TE KOVLS TE,

385

οὐδέ Kev ws ἔτι θυμὸν ἐμὸν treicer ᾿Αγαμέμνων,

πρίν γ᾽ ἀπὸ πᾶσαν ἐμοὶ δόμεναι Ovparyéa λώβην. 1)...
κούρην δ᾽ ov γαμέω ᾿Αγαμέμνονος ᾿Ατρεΐδαο, "

οὐδ᾽ εἰ χρυσείῃ ᾿Αφροδίτῃ κάλλος ἐρίζοι,

ἔργα δ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίῃ γλαυκώπιδε ἰσοφαρίζοι,

390

οὐδέ μιν ὧς γαμέω" ὁ δ᾽ ᾿Αχαιῶν ἄλλον ἑλέσθω,

we must supply συμπρήξω instead of
συμφράσσομαι (zeugma).

375. ἤλιτεν, sinned against me: pe
belongs to both verbs, as ἀλιταίνω regu-
larly takes an accus. in H.; T 265, ῶ
570, ε 108, ὃ 378, ete.

376. ἅλις δέ οἱ, i.e. let him be content
with that he has already done.

‘‘let him go unhindered to his fate,” or
‘‘out of my way,” contemptuously, as
we say ‘‘ about his business.”

378. ἐν καρὸς αἴσῃ, I hold him not
worth a hair. καρός (which does not
occur again) seems to be from κείρω, in
the sense of a “cutting,” ‘‘ chip.”
αἶσα = ““ proper measure,” see on A 418.
(xapés was explained by the ancients as
gen. of xp, death, or of Kdp, a Carian—
Κᾶρες Καππάδοκες Κίλικες, τρία κάππα
xdxiora—but then the shortening of the
ais inexplicable. Another reading was
ἔγκαρος, explained φθειρός !).

379. For the construction of this sen-
tence compare x 61 sqgqg. These are the
only two passages where οὐδ᾽ εἰ begins a
sentence: elsewhere it always takes up
ἃ preceding negative clause. The apo-
dosis begins with 1. 386.

381. Orchomenos in Boeotia, B 511,
was the city of the Minyae (A 284), who
were famed for their treasure and for the
house in which, according to tradition,
it was kept (see Pausan. ix. 36; Grote,

x

i. ch. vi. ; and Schliemann in J. H. 5.
ii, 122-163). A mentions a variant
*Epxopevéy here, which is perhaps right,
as it is the form invariably found in the
local inscriptions. See B 511.—This is
the only mention of Egypt in the Iliad.
The passage seems to allude to the height
of Theban glory under the two first kings
of the 2ond dynasty, about 930-900 B.c..
If so, we have a terminus a quo for this -
book. The next line recurs in 6 127.

382. Αἰγυπτίας, trisyllable bysynizesis,
cf. ἹΙστίαιαν B 537.

383-4 look like an _ interpolation ;
they are a terribly frigid interruption to
Achilles’ fury (Heyne). ἑκάστας : supply
πύλας from éxaréumrvdos. H. does not
use the singular πύλη. ἀνά is distribu-
tive, 200 fo each.

386. πείσει MSS. ; most edd. since
Wolf read πείσει. The future is more
positive and therefore perhaps more
suited to Achilles’ frame of mind (La
R.); but the parallel passage x 63, οὐδέ
κεν ὧς λήξαιμι, is in favour of the opt.
(see note on 379). The -e of the opt.
termination -ee is very rarely elided.

387. ἀποδόμεναι λώβην, a condensed
expression for ‘‘ pays me the price of the
insult” (in humiliation, not presents).

388. See 146. yapéo, future. It is
indifferent whether we put a colon or a
comma after ᾿Ατρείδαο.

906

TATAAO® I (1x.)

᾿ , /
ὅς τις οἷ τ᾽ ἐπέοικε Kal ὃς βασιλεύτερός ἐστιν,
A \ / , ¥ > of
ἣν yap δή με cower θεοὶ καὶ οἴκαδ᾽ ἵκωμαι,

κι .
Πηλεύς θήν μοι ἔπειτα γυναῖκά γε μάσσεται αὐτός.

πολλαὶ ᾿Αχαιίδες εἰσὶν av “Ελλάδα τε Φθίην τε,

395

κοῦραι ἀριστήων, οἵ Te πτολίεθρα ῥύονται"

τάων ἣν κ᾽ ἐθέλωμι, φίλην ποιήσομ᾽ ἄκοιτιν.

ἔνθα δέ μοι μάλα πολλὸν ἐπέσσυτο θυμὸς ἀγήνωρ
γήμαντι μνηστὴν ἄλοχον, ἐικυῖαν ἄκοιτιν,

κτήμασι τέρπεσθαι, τὰ γέρων ἐκτήσατο Πηλεύς,

400

οὐ γὰρ ἐμοὶ ψυχῆς ἀντάξιον οὐδ᾽ ὅσα φασὶν
Ἴλιον ἐκτῆσθαι, ἐὺ ναιόμενον πτολίεθρον,
Ν > 5» > ἢ Ἁ δλ 0 a ta 7A [ον
τὸ πρὶν ἐπ᾽ εἰρήνης, πρὶν ἐλθεῖν υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶν,
9503) of / ON ? , 3 \ 42
οὐδ᾽ ὅσα λάινος οὐδὸς ἀφήτορος ἐντὸς ἐέργει,

Φοίβου ᾿Απόλλωνος, Πυθοῖ ἔνι πετρηέσσῃ.

405

ληιστοὶ μὲν γάρ τε βόες καὶ ἴφια μῆλα,

\ ’ 4 \ ,
κτητοὶ δὲ τρίποδές Te Kal ἵππων ξανθὰ κάρηνα"
3 \ \ \ 4 a ΝΜ “ \
ἀνδρὸς δὲ ψυχὴ πάλιν ἐλθεῖν οὔτε λεϊστὴ
οὔθ᾽ ἑλετή, ἐπεὶ ἄρ κεν ἀμείψεται ἕρκος ὀδόντων

μήτηρ γάρ τέ μέ φησι, θεὰ Θέτις ἀργυρόπεζα,
«

410

392. Bitterly ironical; ‘‘one that
suits his rank and is more royal than I.”
For comparatives which have a substan-
tive to represent the positive, see H. G.
§ 122.

398. σόωσι, see on |. 424.

394. γαμέσσεται MSS. ; Aristarchos
γε μάσσεται, where the ye means ‘“‘a
wife, as far as that is concerned” with
the emphasis of contempt: εται,
will seek me out (udoua) This sense
is not elsewhere found ; but γαμέσσεται
would be equally unique, the mid. being
elsewhere always used of the bridegroom,
and the rhythm of the text is far better
than that of MSS., which has the objec-
tionable trochaic caesura in the fourth
foot.

395. “Ελλάδα, in the restricted Ho-
meric sense, a district of Thessaly. B
683, etc. But see on 447.

396. ῥύονται, protect, defend their

citadels, as semi-independent chiefs. ‘

From σρυ- = cepf, A 216. The ὕ is
short, as K 259.

397. ἐθέλωμι, so Aristarchos; MSS.
ἐθέλοιμι. The unfamiliar form of the
subj. in -μὲ was generally corrupted by
copyists ; see on A 549.

398. ἐπέσσυτο, was set upon marrying,

i.e. before sailing for Troy. vr
al. γήμαντα. Both would be Hoenn” °

401. ἀντάξιον is used like a substan-
tive, ‘‘an equivalent ”; representing the
whole of the next two clauses.

402. ἐκτῆσθαι (Attic xexr.), perf. infin.
here used to represent the plpf.; the
direct constr. would be ὅσα Ἴλιος Exryro,
‘fused to possess.” For the wealth of
Troy see Σ 288, ἢ 543.

404. ἀφήτωρ, the archer, ἑκηβόλος.
Pytho, the later Delphi, is named B 519,
λ 581, and the oracle of Apollo there
6 80 (Adwov οὐδόν) For the wealth
which accumulated in temples see B 549,
Θ 2038, γ 274, μ 346.

406. ληιστοί, to be gained by forays
in war; κτητοί, by peaceful meany barter
or gifts. See on 125,

407. For the pleonastic use of κάρηνα
(as we talk of so many ‘‘ head of oxen,”
though not of horses), cf. Ψ 260, βοῶν
{pOtua κάρηνα.

λ aan πάλιν ἐλθεῖν, se. ὥστε π. ἐλθ.

εἱστή, a curious by-form of ληιστή,
which Diintzer would read here, with
short 7, as we sometimes have δήϊος
(7. Cf. Attic λεία.

409. ἑλετή, a general word, of acquir-
ing by any means; here answering to
κτητοί above,

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I (rx)

307

διχθαδίας κῆρας φερέμεν θανάτοιο τέλοσδε.
3 “ 3 4 “ 4 / 3 /
εἰ μέν K αὖθι μένων Τρώων πόλιν ἀμφιμάχωμαι,.
” / , > A f » ”
WAETO μέν μοι νόστος, ἀτὰρ κλέος ἄφθιτον EcTaY
3 4 ¥ > ὦ“ / 3 / a
εἰ δέ κεν οἴκαδ᾽ ἵκωμι φίλην és πατρίδα γαῖαν,

ὥὦλετό μοι κλέος ἐσθλόν, ἐπὶ δηρὸν δέ μοι αἰὼν

415

[ἔσσεται, οὐδέ κέ μ᾽ ὦκα τέλος θανάτοιο κυχείη.}
καὶ δ᾽ ἂν τοῖς ἄλλοισιν ἐγὼ παραμυθησαίμην
οἴκαδ᾽ ἀποπλείειν, ἐπεὶ οὐκέτι δήετε τέκμωρ

fol \
Ἰλίου αἰπεινῆς" μάλα yap θεν εὐρύοπα Ζεὺς

χεῖρα ἑὴν ὑπερέσχε, τεθαρσήκασι δὲ λαοί.

420

ἀλλ᾽ ὑμεῖς μὲν ἰόντες ἀριστήεσσιν ᾿Αχαιῶν

ἀγγελίην ἀπόφασθε ---- τὸ γὰρ γέρας ἐστὶ γερόντων ----,
ὄφρ᾽ ἄλλην φράξωνται ἐνὶ φρεσὶ μῆτιν ἀμείνω,

ἥ κέ σφιν νῆάς τε σόῃ καὶ λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν

νηυσὶν ἔπι γλαφυρῇς, ἐπεὶ οὔ σφισιν ἥδε γ᾽ ἑτοίμη,

425

ἣν νῦν ἐφράσσαντο, ἐμεῦ ἀπομηνίσαντος.
Φοῖνιξ δ᾽ αὖθι παρ᾽ ἄμμε μένων κατακοιμηθήτω,

411. 7.6. there are two fated ways by
which I may pass through life ; one (μέν,
412) short and glorious, the other (δέ,
414) long and unhonoured. We do not
elsewhere find that Achilles has such a
choice in his power; in A 352 he claims
that since his life must be short it ought
to be glorious as well.

412. ἀμφιμάχωμαι with accus. in local
sense, as Z 461, II 73, 2 208: also with
gen. O 391, II 496, Σ 20; and dat. Il
526, 565.

413. Xero, aor., perhaps as referring
to the moment of choice: ‘‘from that
moment my return is forbidden me.”

414. ἵκωμι, so A, all other MSS. ἵκω-
μαι, Which is not improbably a relic of
the original reading ἵκωμαι éhv, where
ἐήν = mine own, see on A 393 (Brugman).
If ἵκωμι is an aor. the active voice is
unparalleled, and if it is a present the ε
should be long. The objection to Brug-
man’s reading is obviously that δὴν would
have been changed not to φίλην but to
ἐμήν (which Bentley actually conjectured).

416. Athetized by Ar. and expunged
by Zen., as a weak tautology, interpolated
from the supposed necessity of giving a
verb to the last clause of 415—a frequent
source of interpolation.

418, Shere, a future with present form,
see Χ 431 Beloua. ‘Ye will never find ”
(as τέκμωρ ᾽Ιλίου εὕρωσιν, H 31).

422. ‘‘ Declare openly my answer, for

so to do is the privilege of counsellors,”
sc. to speak openly. ἀπόφασθε, like
ἀποειπεῖν 309.

424, ody, the reading of most MSS.,
with odys in 681, and σόωσι 393, is
defended by Mangold in Curt. Stud. vi.
199, and Bekker, H. B. i. 49. The
question is however one of great difficulty.
A reads σόω here, but σόῃς in 681, where,
according to the Scholia, Ar. gave at
different times cows and cags. e have
the stem ow- in σώοντες « 480, σώεσκον
© 368, and σώζξω in ε 490; but all the
other Homeric forms are from the non-
thematic σάωμι, which would form σαώῃς
(cags) in the 2d pers. subj., as Ar. read
in 681, and σάωσι for the 3d plur. as
Apio read in 393, but would require
cawy for the 3d sing. If we are to read
ody and ods they can only be explained
as optatives from the thematic forms
σαό-οι, σαό-οις, with interchange of quan-
tity from the contracted forms σώοι,
owos, but for this there is no sufficient
analogy.

425. ἑτοίμη (conn. by Curt. Et. 526
with éreos, ἔτυμος, Skt. sat-vas in sense
‘‘really existing,” ¢.c. present, at hand)
seems here to mean ‘‘ brought to reality,”
ἴ.6. successful, as we say ‘‘realized.” &
53, θ 384.

426. Ie. the plan of sending this
embassy tome. ἀπομηνίσαντος : for the
force of ἀπο- see on B 772.

908

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I (tx,)

4 3 4 / 3 γι ov
ὄφρα μοι ἐν νήεσσι φίλην ἐς πατρίδ᾽ ἕπηται

of A 24! > “ 3 ΨΝ / Ν 33
αὔριον, ἣν ἐθέλῃσιν: ἀνάγκῃ δ᾽ οὔ τί μιν ἄξω.

Φ Ν 3 e > 0 7 3 \ > ἢ ΄

ως ἔφαθ , οἱ ὃ ἄρα TAVTES ἀκὴν ἔγενοντο σιωπῇ 480
μῦθον ἀγασσάμενοι" μάλα γὰρ κρατερῶς ἀπέευπεν.
ὀψὲ δὲ δὴ μετέειπε γέρων ἱππηλάτα Φοῖνιξ
δάκρυ᾽ ἀναπρήσας" περὶ yap dle νηυσὶν ᾿Αχαιῶν --

— σ΄
“eb μὲν δὴ νόστον γε μετὰ φρεσί, φαίδιμ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεῦ,

7 γ0) / > » ᾿ a ᾿ ν
βάλλεαι, οὐδέ τι πάμπαν ἀμύνειν νηυσὶ θοῇσιν 435
πῦρ ἐθέλεις ἀίδηλον, ἐπεὶ χόλος ἔμπεσε θυμῷ,

lo δ > » \ “ , μ 9
πῶς ἂν ἔπειτ᾽ ἀπὸ σεῖο, φίλον τέκος, αὖθι λιποίμην

4 , 9 , ς / \*
οἷος; σοὶ δέ μ᾽ ἔπεμπε γέρων ἱππηλάτα 11ηλεὺς

bd

ἤματι τῷ, ὅτε σ᾽ ἐκ Φθίης ᾿Αγαμέμνονι πέμπεν

’
νήπιον, οὔ πω εἰδόθ᾽ ὁμοιίον πολέμοιο 440
8.) 5» / A > ν 3 , 4
οὐδ᾽ ἀγορέων, iva τ᾽ ἄνδρες ἀρυπρεπέες τελέθουσιν"
τούνεκά με προέηκε, διδασκέμεναι τάδε πάντα,
μύθων τε ῥητῆρ᾽ ἔμεναι πρηκτῆρά τε ἔργων.
ς ww 9 3 N A , 3 434
ὡς ἂν ἔπειτ᾽ ἀπὸ σεῖο, φίλον τέκος, οὐκ ἐθέλοιμι
\
λείπεσθ᾽, οὐδ᾽ εἴ κέν μοι ὑποσταίη θεὸς αὐτὸς 445
γῆρας ἀποξύσας θήσειν νέον ἡβώοντα,
οἷον ὅτε πρῶτον λίπον Ελλάδα καλλιγύναικα,
φεύγων νείκεα πατρὸς ᾿Αμύντορος ᾿Ορμενίδαο,

431. ἀπέειπεν here may mean either
‘*spoke out” as 309, or ‘‘refused their
offers” as generally.

433. ἀναπρήσας, ‘‘making his tears
well up”: see note on A 481.

434. μετὰ φρεσὶ βάλλεαι, art pondering
over, is to be distinguished from ἐνὲ φρεσὶ
βάλλεσθαι, to lay to heart, 6.0. A 297.

436. ἀίδηλον, ‘‘ making invisible,”
destroying. See on B 318.

_ 437. λιποίμην in passive sense, as
often. ἀπὸ σεῖο, far from thee.

438. ἔπεμπε = πόμπον ἔδωκε, made me
thy companion, ‘‘escort.” Paley and
Diintzer would read gol δ᾽ dy’ ἔπεμπε,
which seems better.

440. dporlov, ‘‘levelling”: see note
on A 315.
441, The te is gnomic. Compare

ἀγορὴν κυδιάνειραν, A 490.

444. Repeated from 437, ἄν going
with the verb, as there, and not with
ὡς, which virtually = wherefore (lit. in
which way, or rather, in that way), like
the later ὥστε.

446. γῆρας ἀποξύσας, having stripped
off my old age from me. The metaphor

is no doubt that of smoothing away the
wrinkles, For this idea as implied in
γῆρας compare its curious use by Aristotle
to mean ‘‘the cast skin of a serpent,”
Skt. garajus (Curt. Et. no. 180).

447. An attempt to reconcile the
different statements in Homer about
Amyntor lands us in hopeless confusion.
In K 266 we have an ᾿Αμύντωρ 'Oppevldns
in Eleon, and in B 500 we find Eleon in
Boeotia; but here Amyntor’s kingdom
is Ἑλλάς. But according to the ar
Homeric usage, Ἑλλάς is part of the
kingdom of Peleus. We must assume
therefore (1) that Ἑλλάς is here used in
a wide sense, to include all N. Thessaly,
where we find ’Opyémov (B 734) ; Eury-
pylos, who came thence, was according to
the legend grandson of Ormenos, his
father Euaimon being Amyntor’s brother.
(2) The discrepancy with K can only be
reconciled by assuming the existence of
another Eleon or another Amyntor.
Demetrius of Skepsis read here ᾽Ορμένιον
πολύμηλον, according to Strabo and Eu-
stath., instead of ‘EAAdda καλλιγύναικα,
but this looks like a mere conjecture.

TAIAAO® I (1x)

309

ὅς μοι παλλακίδος περιχώσατο καλλικόμοιο,

\ > Av “ 3 , > +
τὴν αὐτὸς φιλέεσκεν, ἀτιμάζεσκε ὃ ἄκοιτιν,Ἠ —

460

, 3 9 4 e > 2\ > \ / 4
μητέρ᾽ ἐμήν" ἡ δ᾽ αἰὲν ἐμὲ λισσέσκετο γούνων
παλλακίδι προμιγῆναι, iv’ ἐχθήρειε γέροντα.
nw / v \ > 9 NX 3 3 9
τῇ πιθόμην καὶ ἔρεξα" πατὴρ δ᾽ ἐμὸς αὐτίκ᾽ ὀισθεὶς
“ 3 A
πολλὰ κατηρᾶτο, στυγερὰς δ᾽ ἐπεκέκλετ᾽ Ἐρινῦς,
, 4 > A / en
μή ποτε γούνασιν οἷσιν ἐφέσσεσθαι φίλον νιὸν 455
> 3 / A \ > > / 3 /
ἐξ ἐμέθεν γεγαῶτα" θεοὶ δ᾽ ἐτέλειον ἐπαράς,
/
Ζεύς te καταχθόνιος καὶ ἐπαινὴ Περσεφόνεια.
\ 9 AN , ' ,ὕ 5“. a
[τὸν μὲν ἐγὼ βούλευσα κατακτάμεν ὀξέι χαλκῷ"
2 4 3 ’ὔ “ / Ψ eo ov \ a
ἀλλά τις ἀθανάτων παῦσεν χόλον, ὅς p ἐνὶ θυμῷ

δήμου θῆκε φάτιν καὶ ὀνείδεα πόλλ᾽ ἀνθρώπων,

460

ὡς μὴ πατροφόνος μετ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοῖσιν καλεοίμην.

449, παλλακίδος, on account of his
concubine: this causal genitive is com-
mon after χώεσθαι and similar verbs, and
is here particularly natural in connexion
with περί.

451. γούνων is frequently thus used
with verbs of praying: it is a pregnant
construction, and we must supply λαβών
or the like from Aooécxero. See note
on A 500.

452. προμιγῆναι : the force of the pre-
position is not quite certain. Perhaps
it means ‘‘in preference to,” ‘‘ taking
the advantage of” my father.

453. We are told by Eustathius that
an Alexandrian Bowdler, one Aristode-
mos, emended this passage into τῇ οὐ
πιθόμην, οὐδ᾽ Epta!l ὀισθείς, suspecting,
cf. A 561.

454. The Erinyes appear here in their
proper function, as upholders of the
moral order, and especially as guardians
of parental rights. But though the
Erinyes are appealed to, Hades and
Persephone carry out the curse; while
below, 569 and 571, the exact converse
occurs, Asin the latter case the ’ pws
is distinctly spoken of as a person, not
a curse in the abstract, it seems difficult
not to identify it with the nether gods,
so that Hades and Persephone would be
themselves the ’Epwves in so far as they
were acting to maintain the right order
of things.

455. ἐφέσσεσθαι (from ἐδ, sad, root of
ἕξω), transitive, as w 443, that he might
never seat upon his knees any dear son
begotten of me; ζ.6. he prayed that 1
might be for ever childless. οἷσιν per-
haps however means ‘‘ mine,” which

ives a far more natural sense: A 393.

idymus mentions a variant ἐμοῖσι,
which may be only an explanation of
this.

457. éraw occurs only as an epithet
of Persephone, and only in this book
and x and A of Od. It is explained
either = αἰνή, terrible; or, 7 alvos
ἔπεστι, ‘‘highly praised,” as Pers. is
also called dyav} and ἁγνή. But the
former seems decidedly preferable. The
Scholia mention a variant, or rather

loss, ἐπ᾿ αὐτῷ, which suggested to

uttm. the correction én’ a vip where
ἐπί will be an adv., ‘‘ besides” ; but this
is very weak.

458-461 are not found in any MS.,
and were first introduced by Wolf from
Plut. (de Aud. Poetis, 8), who expressly
says, ὁ μὲν οὖν ᾿Αρίσταρχος ἐξεῖλε ταῦτα
τὰ ἔπη φοβηθείς ---Βῃοοκοὶ, that is, at
the terrible crime with which Phoinix
charges himself. La R. however points
out that the expurgation cannot be due
to Aristarchos, inasmuch as our MSS.
represent the vulgate of the Alexandrian
period, and not the Aristarchean recen-
sion of it; so that they must have dis-
appeared previously. The connexion is,
to say the least, not damaged by their
absence. The sentiment of the lines is
too thoroughly Homeric, however, especi-
ally in the reference to public opinion
as the ultimate /moral sanction, to let
us believe that they were invented by
Plutarch, or even in, much less after,
the Alexandrian period.

460. Cf. Z 351, νέμεσίν τε καὶ αἴσχεα
πόλλ᾽ ἀνθρώπων.

461. ὡς μή is epexegetic of the previ-

310

ἹΛΙΑΔΟΣΊ (1x,)

ἔνθ᾽ ἐμοὶ οὐκέτι πάμπαν ἐρητύετ᾽ ἐν φρεσὶ θυμὸς

πατρὸς χωομένοιο κατὰ μέγαρα στρωφᾶσθαι.

ἢ μὲν πολλὰ ἔται καὶ ἀνεψιοὶ ἀμφὶς ἐόντες

αὐτοῦ λισσόμενοι κατερήτυον ἐν μεγάροισιν, 465
πολλὰ δὲ ἴφια μῆλα καὶ εἰλίποδας ἕλικας βοῦς

ἔσφαζον, πολλοὶ δὲ σύες θαλέθοντες ἀλοιφῇ

εὑόμενοι τανύοντο διὰ φλογὸς ᾿Ηφαίστοιο,

πολλὸν δ᾽ ἐκ κεράμων μέθυ πίνετο τοῖο γέροντος.

a ’ - .
εἰνάνυχες δέ μοι ἀμφ᾽ αὐτῷ παρὰ νύκτας ἴανον" ΄. --

470

of μὲν ἀμειβόμενοι φυλακὰς ἔχον, οὐδέ ποτ᾽ ἔσβη

πῦρ, ἕτερον μὲν ὑπ᾽ αἰθούσῃ evepKéos αὐλῆς,

ἄλλο δ᾽ ἐνὶ προδόμῳ, πρόσθεν θαλάμοιο θυράων.

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ δεκάτη μοι ἐπήλυθε νὺξ ἐρεβεννή,

καὶ τότ᾽ ἐγὼ θαλάμοιο θύρας πυκινῶς ἀραρυίας 475
ῥήξας ἐξῆλθον, καὶ ὑπέρθορον ἑρκίον αὐλῆς

ous line, and goes with ἐνὲ θυμῷ θῆκεν,
“ἐς gave me the thought, ‘let me not be
called.’"’ So Hentze, and cf. Γ 453.

464. A μέν is the later καίτοι, lit.
‘*true, that they kept me.”

465. αὐτοῦ, there where I was: with
κατερήτνον.

466. εἰλίποδας must mean volventes
pedes, t.e. expressing the fact that ‘‘ each
foot as it is set forward describes a
segment of a circle” (Merry on a 92).
ἕλικας was generally taken by the
ancients to mean “black” (see A 98).
Ameis would refer it to root σελ-, ‘‘ shin-

ing, sleek” (see note ibid.), which 18.

not improbable. The most usual ex-
planation is that which must have been
accepted by the author of the Hyman.
Merc.—not a bad authority in such a
matter—fdas .. . xepdeoow ἑλικτάς, 1.6.
with ‘‘crumpled,” twisted horns. This
best suits the sense of the root βελικ-,
but the omission of any explicit mention
of horns is as strange as if we should
speak of a ‘‘ crumpled cow.”

468. ‘‘ Were stretched to singe in the
flame of Hephaistos.” τανύοντο, sc. on
long spits, see 1. 213. ebdpevor (root us,
to burn), in order to burn off the bristles
and prepare them for cutting up. For
φλόξ He. cf. w 71, P 88, B 426.
Phoinix’ friends endeavour by these
festivities to distract him from his
thought of flight.

470. tavov, like soldiers on watch ;
see on 325. παρά goes with the verb;

it is not used by Homer as a preposition
in temporal sense (‘‘ by nights,” Paley).
elvavuxes should be an adverb, formed,
but not correctly, on the analogy of
elvderes, where the -es is part of the noun
stem ἐτεσ- (ἔτεος = fregos). It is how-
ever possible to make it a nom. pl., on
the analogy of τριταῖος ἦλθεν, etc., where
the adjective however is regularly used
to express a point, not duration, of time.
αὐτῷ, my person, expressing the close-
ness of the watch.

472. The Homeric house had two
αἴθουσαι or colonnades ; one in front of
the μέγαρον, the other, facing it, along
the wall which divided the αὐλή or court-
yard from the street. The latter is here
meant by αἰθούσῃ αὐλῆς ; it is possible
indeed that it may have run round more
than one side of the αὐλή. The former
appears to have been a vestibule leading
to the μέγαρον, but not extending the
whole width of the latter; at the sides
were small chambers, in one of which
it would seem that Phoinix slept. The
whole of this structure, chambers and
αἴθουσα together, no doubt formed the
mpédouos. Hence we find that visitors
regularly have a bed made up for them
ὑπ΄ αἰθούσῃ, and are also found sleeping in
the πρόδομος, see 2 643 compared with
673, and ὃ 296 with 802. Reference
should be made to Schliemann’s Tiryns,
pp. 201-236, and plan ii., which appears
to settle this disputed question beyond

oubt.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I (x)

311

peta, λαθὼν φύλακάς τ᾽ ἄνδρας Suwds τε γυναῖκας.
φεῦγον ἔπειτ᾽ ἀπάνευθε δι᾽ “Ελλάδος εὐρυχόροιο,
Φθίην δ᾽ ἐξικόμην ἐριβώλακα, μητέρα μήλων,

ἐς Πηλῆα ἄναχθ᾽" ὁ δέ με πρόφρων ὑπέδεκτο,

480

δὴ A
καί με φίλησ', ws εἴ τε πατὴρ ὃν παῖδα φιλήσῃ
μοῦνον τηλύγετον πολλοῖσιν ἐπὶ κτεάτεσσιν,
/
καί μ᾽ ἀφνειὸν ἔθηκε, πολὺν δέ μοι ὥπασε λαόν'
“ 3 4 \ o , ) 7
ναῖον ὃ ἐσχατιὴν Φθίης Δολόπεσσιν ἀνάσσων.

καί σε τοσοῦτον ἔθηκα, θεοῖς ἐπιείκελ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεῦ,

485

ἐκ θυμοῦ φιλέων, ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἐθέλεσκες ἅμ᾽ ἄλλῳ

οὔτ᾽ ἐς δαῖτ᾽ ἰέναι οὔτ᾽ ἐν μεγάροισι πάσασθαι,

πρίν γ᾽ ὅτε δή σ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἐμοῖσιν ἐγὼ γούνεσσι καθίσσας
ὄψου T ἄσαιμι προταμὼν καὶ οἶνον ἐπισχών.

πολλάκι μοι κατέδευσας ἐπὶ στήθεσσι χιτῶνα

490

” 3 ᾽ 3 / 2 “A
οἴνου ἀποβλύξων ἐν νηπιέη ἀλεγεινῇ.
ὧς ἐπὶ σοὶ μάλα πολλὰ πάθον καὶ πολλὰ μόγησα,
’ 5 3 / ? ,
τὰ φρονέων, ὅ μοι οὔ τι θεοὶ γόνον ἐξετέλειον
ἐξ ἐμεῦ" ἀλλὰ σὲ παῖδα, θεοῖς ἐπιείκελ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεῦ,

, vA [4 > » / \ 3 ’
ποιεύμην, LWA μοὶ ΠΟΤ᾽ ἀεικέα λοίγον ἀμύνῃς.

495

ἀλλ᾽, ᾿Αχιλεῦ, δάμασον θυμὸν μέγαν" οὐδέ τί σε χρὴ
νηλεὲς ἦτορ ἔχειν" στρεπτοὶ δέ τε καὶ θεοὶ αὐτοί,

477. ῥεῖα, διὰ τὸ τῆς νεότητος ἄνθος,
Schol. But perhaps there should be no
comma after peta, that we might join
ῥεῖα λαθών. :

480. ἐς, into the house of. So Ψ 36,
etc.

482. τηλύγετον, see 1. 143. The force
of the word here is given by Merry (δ
11): ‘‘a father’s increasing fondness for
an only son is described: he is the heir
of (ἐπί) large possessions, and the father’s
love for him grows as the chance of
having other sons diminishes ; the eld-
est being already in early manhood.”

485. τοσοῦτον ἔθηκα, lit. ‘‘ made thee
as great (as thou now art),” 1.6. reared
thee to manhood. This is inconsistent
with the legend of Achilles’ education
by Cheiron (A 831), and seems therefore
a sign that the Phoinix-episode is an
independent composition, not given by
the legend.

487. Offended at the idea of an infant
in arms going to a banquet, Diintzer
conj. ἐθέλεσκον for -es in 486, “1 would
not accompany a friend to the feast.”
This however does not suit the emphatic

ἐγώ in 488, though the line in other
respects follows more naturally. As the
text stands, we must consider πρίν γ᾽
ὅτε δή, «.7.X., as substituted for the ἢ
ἐμοί which would naturally follow ἅμ᾽
mss μώ hee the fi

489. π ν, cutting thee the first
morsel. ἐπισχών, Χ 88.494, ** holding
to thy lips.” Compare the very similar
passage, w 442-4,

491. otvov, partitive gen., lit. ‘‘spirt-
ing out some of the wine.” ἀλεγεινῇ,
troublesome, irksome helplessness.

493. τά is answered by ὅ = ὅτι, “‘re-
flecting on this (namely), that the gods
were not minded (imperf.) to bring into
being any offspring of mine own ;” see
455.

495. ποιεύμην, “1 strove to make thee
(imperf.) as mine own son.” ἀμύνῃς,
subj. instead of opt., because the wish
still remains in force and should indeed
be now in course of fulfilment. See A
559, B 4.

497. orperrol, capable of being bent
by prayer ; Ο 203, στρεπταὶ μέν re φρένες
ἐσθλῶν. Cf. 158.

912

TAIAAO® I (1x)

τῶν περ καὶ μείζων ἀρετὴ τιμή τε Bin τε"
καὶ μὲν τοὺς θυέεσσι καὶ εὐχωλῇς ἀγανῇσιν

a a ?
λοιβῇ τε κνίσῃ TE παρατρωπῶσ᾽ ἄνθρωποι

δ00

“ eo , ς “ 4 lA
λισσόμενοι, ὅτε κέν τις ὑπερβήῃ Kal ἁμάρτῃ:

“ ’ 3 Α a
καὶ yap τε λιταί εἰσι Atos κοῦραι μεγάλοιο,

a δὴ
“oral τε ῥυσαί τε παραβλῶπές T ὀφθαλμώ,
/ A

ai ῥά τε καὶ μετόπισθ᾽ ἄτης ἀλέγουσι κιοῦσαι.

ς > Ν /, \ 2) / φ ,
ἡ δ᾽ ἄτη σθεναρή τε. καὶ ἀρτίπος, οὕνεκα πάσας

- 505

πολλὸν ὑπεκπροθέει, φθάνει δέ τε πᾶσαν ἐπ᾽ aiav ͵
>]
βλάπτουσ ἀνθρώπους" αἱ δ᾽ ἐξακέονται ὀπίσσω.
ὃς μέν τ᾽ αἰδέσεται κούρας Διὸς ἄσσον ἰούσας,
\ > + > ν 3 Ἅ
τὸν δὲ μέγ ὦνησαν καί τ ἔκλυον εὐξαμένοιο"

ἃ oo 9 » , a 93 ,
os δέ K AVNVYTAL Καὶ TE στέρεως α΄, ΟΕΙΤΉ,

498. ἀρετή, majesty, supremacy in the
widest sense. Homer seems never to
use the word for moral excellence.

499. καὶ μὲν τούς, yet even them
prayers can bend (how much more
should prayers move weak men 1)

502-12. This remarkable passage is
unique in Homer, where nothing else
resembling an allegory occurs. It has
been proposed to regard the Acrai here
not as an allegory, but as a personifica-
tion; the primitive mind is always in
the habit of regarding all forces, moral
as well as intellectual, as sentient and
active persons. This is undoubtedly the
case with “Ary, who is personified in T
91, 188, and elsewhere ; and even with
ἔπεα πτερόεντα, which are conceived as
winged beings flying like birds from
man to man. But in the present case
personification has passed into con-
scious allegory; at least the epithets in
503 seem to be susceptible of no other
explanation. The passage falls into
two parts— 502-507 give the position of
the offender; he is surprised by the
sudden coming of “Ary, who makes him
sin; sin is followed oy the Acral, who in
this connexion virtually mean penitence,
prayers for forgiveness. 508-512 refer
to the person injured, and the responsi-
bility thrown upon him by his enemy’s
request for pardon. If he hearkens to
the suppliant, the ‘‘quality of mercy
blesseth him that gives”; if he denies
roughly, the prayers refused become a
curse to hii.

502. The re is gnomic, as so often.
Διὸς κοῦραι, because Zeus is the god of

510

suppliants ; and also, perhaps, to explain
their power over the other gods (497-501).

503. The epithets are transferred from
the attitude of the penitent to his
prayers. χωλαί, Decause of his reluct-
ance to go to as rdon (pede Poena
claudo, generally quoted here, is quite
different): pveral, from his face wrinkled
with the mental struggle: mapa
ὀφθαλμώ, because he “fares not look in
the face him whom he has wronged.

504. καί belongs to the whole clause,
and gives an additional touch to the
picture. ἀλέγουσι is best taken closely
With κιοῦσαι, ‘‘make it their business
to go after Ate.” The construction is
thus analogous to that of φθάνειν, etc.,
wy the participle (so Nagelsbach on B

505. J.e. man is swift to sin, but slow
to repent; the wrong act is done and
over long before any thought of penitence
has time to arise in the mind.

506. ὑπεκπροθέει, lit. runs forward out
from among them all. For φθάνει with
long a see Φ 262.

508. αἰδέσεται, subjunctive. ἄσσον
ἰούσας, when offered by the repentant
offender.

509. It is not of course quite exact to
say that Prayers hear a man’s prayers :
what is meant is that they, as representa-
tives of the heavenly powers, ensure a
man’s prayers being heard. ovo,
the regular Homeric phrase; so most
MSS. Cf. A 381, ete. Aristarchos read
evxopévoro, which is unusual in this
sense; the pres. part. regularly means
‘* boasting.”

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I (1x)

313

λίσσονται δ᾽ ἄρα ταί ye Δία Kpoviwva κιοῦσαι

τῷ ἄτην ἅμ᾽ ἕπεσθαι, ἵνα βχλαφθεὶς ἀποτίσῃ.

ἀλλ᾽, ᾿Αχιλεῦ, πόρε καὶ σὺ Διὸς κούρῃσιν ἕπεσθαι
, Φ > Κ' > , / 3 θλῶ

τιμήν, YT ἄλλων περ ἐπυγνάμπτει voov ἐσθλῶν.

εἰ μὲν yap μὴ δῶρα φέροι, τὰ δ᾽ ὄπισθ᾽ ὀνομάξοι

515

᾿Ατρεΐδης, ἀλλ᾽ αἰὲν ἐπιζαφελῶς χαλεπαίνοι,

οὐκ ἂν ἐγώ γέ σε μῆνιν ἀπορρίψαντα κελοίμην
᾿Αργείοισιν ἀμυνέμεναι, χατέουσί περ ἔμπης"

νῦν δ᾽ ἅμα τ᾽ αὐτίκα πολλὰ διδοῖ, τὰ δ᾽ ὄπισθεν ὑπέστη,

ἄνδρας δὲ λίσσεσθαι ἐπιπροέηκεν ἀρίστους

δ20

κρινάμενος κατὰ λαὸν ᾿Αχαιικόν, οἵ τε σοὶ αὐτῷ
φίλτατοι ᾿Αργείων" τῶν μὴ σύ γε μῦθον ἐλέγξῃς
μηδὲ πόδας" πρὶν δ᾽ οὔ τι νεμεσσητὸν κεχολῶσθαι.

512. τῷ is emphatic, that Ate may
come upon him, as before upon the man
who had wronged him. This is exactly
illustrated by the case of Achilles. He
suffers Ate (i.e. puts himself in the wrong)
by refusing Agamemnon’s humiliation,
and pays the penalty in the death of
Patroklos.

513. Lit. ‘‘ provide thou that honour
may attend upon the prayers” (of Aga-
memnon). The respect due to the divine
quality of repentance, rather than the
mere prayer for forgiveness, is here made
the motive which influences men to re-
lent, as indeed it really is. Phoinix
says, ‘‘admit into thy soul that reverence
which bends the minds even of the best.”
Others translate, ‘‘ grant to the request
of these Acral that honour (sc. Againem-
non’s honourable gifts) may be bestowed
on thee.” But this is not the natural
connexion of the words (as no gol is
expressed): it does not suit the drift of
the allegory, and leaves no force in the
emphatic antithesis καὶ σύ. . . ἄλλων
περ; and the purely abstract sense of
τιμή is not so serious a consideration as
it would be in an older portion of the
poems.

515. yap implies ‘‘you may do so
without disgrace.” ‘‘ For if Atreides were
not offering thee gifts and promising thee
more hereafter” (7.¢. in 185 sqqg.)... ,
‘‘ 7 would not be the one to bid thee,”’
etc. Agamemnon’s liberal offerings not
only guarantee his sincerity, but would
make Achilles’ change of attitude honour-
able by their publicity.

516. ἐπιζαφελῶς is referred by Ameis,

Diintzer, etc., to root φελ- to swell, of
ὀ-φέλ-λω, etc.: the ta = διά being in-
tensive, see 525 ἐπιζάφελος χόλος ,=
‘‘ very swelling anger.” The word occurs
elsewhere only £330, ἐπιξαφελῶς μενέαινεν.
519. διδοῖ, offers, like διδοῖς, 1. 164.
520. This is yet another proof of the
sincerity of Agamemnon’s penitence.
522. éyéps, dishonour, bring to
shame ; so ¢ 424, and the subst. ἔλεγχος
= disgrace. This sense is purely Homeric.
523. πόδας, i.¢. their journey hither.
This however seems much rather a
Tragic than an Epic use ; 6.9. σὺν πατρὸς
μολὼν ποδί, Eur. Hipp. 661. Cf. ‘‘ How
beautiful are the feet of them that
preach.” There are many reasons for
suspecting the following passage to have
been tampered with; and this use of
πόδες may indicate the first line of the
interpolation (so Paley). The whole
episode of Meleager is very confused in
detail, though it may be greatly simpli-
fied by leaving out two passages, and
only a disproportionately small part of
it has any bearing upon Phoinix argu-
ment—namely, the fact that Meleager’s
Ate was turned upon himself in that he
had to run the risks of war without
receiving the reward (597-599). It un-
doubtedly looks as though a quite dis-
tinct Epic ballad, most interesting in
itself, had been not very skilfully grafted
into this already long speech on account
of a general similarity between the
relations of Achilles to Agamemnon and
Meleager to Althaia; and then 597-599
had been added to give a plausible con-
nexion with the argument.

314

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣῚ (1x)

οὕτω καὶ τῶν πρόσθεν ἐπευθόμεθα κλέα ἀνδρῶν

7
ἡρώων, ὅτε κέν τιν᾽ ἐπιζάφελος χόλος ἵκοι"

δωρητοί τ᾽’ ἐπέλοντο πταράρρητοί τ᾽ ἐπέεσσιν.

’
μέμνημαι τόδε ἔργον ἐγὼ πάλαι, οὔ τι νέον γε,
e » 9 >, fC »" > ἡ 4 /
ὡς ἦν' ἐν δ᾽ ὑμῖν ἐρέω πάντεσσι φίλοισιν.
Κουρῆτές τ᾽ ἐμάχοντο καὶ Αἰτωλοὶ μενεχάρμαι

ἀμφὶ πόλιν Καλυδῶνα καὶ ἀλλήλους ἐνάριξον,

δ80

Αἰτωλοὶ μὲν ἀμυνόμενοι Καλυδῶνος ἐραννῆς,
Κουρῆτες δὲ διαπραθέειν μεμαῶτες “Apne.

καὶ γὰρ τοῖσι κακὸν χρυσόθρονος ΓΑρτεμις ὦρσεν
χωσαμένη, ὅ οἱ οὔ τι θαλύσια γουνῷ ἀλωῆς

Οἰνεὺς ῥέξ᾽, ἄλλοι δὲ θεοὶ δαίνυνθ᾽ ἑκατόμβας"

585

οἴῃ δ᾽ οὐκ ἔρρεξε Διὸς κούρῃ μεγάλοιο"
ἢ λάθετ᾽ ἢ οὐκ ἐνόησεν: ἀάσατο δὲ μέγα θυμῷ.
ἡ δὲ χολωσαμένη δῖον γένος ἰοχέαιρα

524. τῶν πρόσθεν is in apposition with
ἀνδρῶν ἡρώων. For κλέα cf. 189 and B
486. οὕτω, i.c. we have heard of such
conduct on the part of heroes of the old
time.

525. This is the only case in H. of
ὅτε κέν with the opt. It is however
sufficiently defended by the use of the
opt. after ef κεν.

526. ‘‘They were to be won over by
gifts and persuasion.” δωρητός is az.
Aey. in H.: παράρρητος recurs only N
726 in the sense of ‘‘ persuasive.”

527. v with accus. as Z 222.
It is πῖον see why Phoinix should
adopt the confidential tone of 528.

529. Oineus the Aitolian, king of
Kalydon, married Althaia, daughter of
Thestios, king of the Kuretes. The two
tribes combined to slay the wild boar
that ravaged Kalydon, but fell out over
the division of the spoils, which Meleager
wished to assign as ἀριστεῖα to Atalanta ;
but the sons of Thestios, indignant, had
taken it from her, for which Meleager
slew them, and was therefore cursed by
his mother Althaia, their sister. It will
be scen that the story as given in the
text is only very partially told, although
533-549 and 557-564 (or rather 572) are
inserted, to the damage of the connexion,
to explain the circumstances out of which
the quarrel had arisen. In any case the
story must be read continuously thus:
529-532, 550-556, 573-599. It will be
observed that the fire-brand with which
Meleager’s life was bound up is incon-

sistent with the present legend: nor is
Atalanta mentioned.

531. Kadvdévos (a sort of ‘ causal”
gen.) after ἀμύνεσθαι, as M 155, 179, N
700. For the Aitolians see B 688-644.
The Kuretes are said to be a tribe who
first inhabited Aitolia side by side with
the Aitolians proper, but were afterwards
expelled by them and inhabited Akar-
nania. They no not appear in the Cata-
logue. For the name cf.T 193. It may
however be distinct from the substantive
xoupyres, and be related to the Italic
Curetes, ‘‘spearmen,” as Paley suggests.

533. τοῖσι, sc. the Aitolians. The
story suddenly goes back to the ovum,
and καὶ yap = “for it must be known.”

534. θαλύσια, the harvest feast when
the first fruits were offered to the
in gratitude for the abundance (θάλλω)
of nature. ‘youve (v. Σ 57), on the
fat of the Wen land. "yowss is enoralle
considered to be for γον -ος, a derived
form of γόνυ, ‘‘knee,” in the sense of
‘the hill” or ‘‘swell” of the garden ;
that is, the part most exposed to the
sun, and therefore the most fertile.
But Hesych. explains γονίμῳ τόπῳ, as if
from γεν- to produce, and this seems
more reasonable.

536. Διὸς κούρῃ of Artemis, ¢ 151:
elsewhere it almost always means Athene
when used by itself. οὐκ ἐνόησεν,
‘‘ neglected,” deliberately.

538. δῖον γένος, “bright” or ‘‘ noble
offspring,’’ whatever that may mean ; it
is an equally strange expression whether

LAIAAOS I (χ)

315

Φ »Μ , A ” 3 /
ὠρσεν ETL, χλούνην σῦν ἄγριον ἀργιόδοντα,

ὃς κακὰ πόλλ᾽ ἔρδεσκεν ἔθων Οἰνῆος ἀλωήν"

540

πολλὰ δ᾽ ὅ γε προθέλυμνα χαμαὶ Bare δένδρεα μακρὰ
αὐτῇσιν ῥίξησι καὶ αὐτοῖς ἄνθεσι μήλων.

τὸν δ᾽ υἱὸς Οἰνῆος ἀπέκτεινεν Μελέαγρος,

πολλέων ἐκ πολίων θηρήτορας ἄνδρας ἀγείρας

4 3 4 4 4 A
καὶ κύνας" οὐ μὲν yap κε δάμη παύροισι βροτοῖσιν"

545

τόσσος ἔην, πολλοὺς δὲ πυρῆς ἐπέβησ᾽ ἀλεγεινῆς.
ἡ δ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ αὐτῷ θῆκε πολὺν κέλαδον καὶ ἀυτήν,
ἀμφὶ συὸς κεφαλῇ καὶ δέρματι λαχνήεντι,
Κουρήτων τε μεσηγὺ καὶ Αἰτωλῶν μεγαθύμων.

ὄφρα μὲν οὖν Μελέαγρος ἀρηίφιλος πολέμιζεν,

δδ0

τόφρα δὲ ἹΚουρήτεσσι κακῶς ἦν, οὐδὲ δύναντο
τείχεος ἔκτοσθεν μίμνειν πολέες περ ἐόντες"

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ Μελέαγρον ἔδυ χόλος, ὅς τε καὶ ἄλλων
οἰδάνει ἐν στήθεσσι νόον πύκα περ φρονεόντων,

ἦ τοι ὁ μητρὶ φίλῃ ᾿Αλθαίῃ χωόμενος κῆρ

555

κεῖτο παρὰ μνηστῇ ἀλόχῳ, καλῇ Κλεοπάτρῃ,
κούρῃ Μαρπήσσης καλλισφύρου Evnvivns

it be taken to mean Artemis or the boar.
But Diintzer conjectures θεῖον γένος,
which is used of the Chimaira, Z 180,
and this under the circumstances seems
the best resource, though it is hard to
see why the change can have been made.

539. χλούνην, an obscure word. Apol-
lon. derived from χλόη and εὐνάξεσθαι,
‘‘dwelling in the grass,” 1.6. wild.
Others explained ‘‘entire” as opposed
to castrated, and therefore more savage.
But this is probably mere guess work.
After ἄγριον Aristotle (Hist. An. vi. 28)
continues the quotation οὐδὲ ἐῴκει | θηρί
γε σιτοφάγῳ ἀλλὰ ply ὑλήεντι, which is
apparently a confusion with «191, due to
his quoting, as usual, from memory, and
cannot claim to be considered a variant.

540. wy, ‘suo more,” like II 260
ἐριδμαίνωσιν ἔθοντες.

541. προθέλυμνα, “by the roots,” lit.
from the foundations onwards, like πρόρρι-
fos. So K 15; and cf. τετραθέλυμνος, of
a shield, with four layers of hide as
foundation. In N 130, q.v., προθέλυμνος
seems to mean “ with the base forward,”
1.6. firmly set upon the ground.

542, ἄνθεσι μήλων, either “fruit-
blossom,” or “ blooming fruits”: a peri-
phrasis like ἄνθεα ποίης, « 449 (so Ameis).

546. ἐπέβησε, ‘‘ brought to the pyre,”

just as we say ‘‘ brought to the grave.”

So πυρῆς ἐπιβάντα, A 99.

547. “She brought to pass great noise
and battle-cry over his body,” as to the
disposal of the spoils.

550. We now suddenly return to the
war which arose out of the quarrel, in
continuation of 532.

552. τείχεος ἔκτοσθεν seems to imply
that the Kuretes, so far from besieging
Kalydon, were themselves at first shut
up in their walls, and could not meet
Meleager in the open plain. This is a
clear allusion to the position of the
Trojans so long as Achilles fought, and
emphasizes the parallel between him and
Meleager. But we are left to supply a
great deal more than is usually left un-
expressed in Epic poetry.

553. ἔδυ χόλος (T 16, X 94), on account
of his mother’s curse, as is explained
later on, 566.

_ 554. οἰδάνει, makes toswell. Cf. 646.
555. 4 rou, “then,” begins the apodosis.
556. κεῖτο, began to lie idle at home.

ὅτε above shews that this must be the

meaning (Z 178, etc.) ; but the writer of

565 evi ently took it to mean ‘“‘lay in
557. From here to 564 we have a

digression which grievously interferes

ee Peele Βα ἡ, = ' 5."
= -

=m (we Tee 7 =e SS ὦπα
_ eo. aon _* -

we™ 2

Se lee

we ee ee Oak ΄ς-

316 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I (1x.)

Ἴδεώ θ᾽, ὃς κάρτιστος ἐπιχθονίων γένετ᾽ ἀνδρῶν

τῶν τότε, καί ῥα ἄνακτος ἐναντίον εἵλετο τόξον

Φοίβου ᾿Απόλλωνος καλλισφύρου εἵνεκα νύμφης" δ60

τὴν δὲ τότ᾽ ἐν μεγάροισι πατὴρ καὶ πότνια μήτηρ

? / 4 b , Ψ > Ν 3 > A

Αλκυόνην καλέεσκον ἐπώνυμον, οὕνεκ᾽ ap αὐτῆς

μήτηρ ἀλκυόνος πολυπενθέος οἶτον ἔχουσα

Krai’, ὅτε μιν ἑκάεργος ἀνήρπασε Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων.

τῇ ὅ γε παρκατέλεκτο χόλον θυμαλγέα πέσσων, 565

ἐξ ἀρέων μητρὸς κεχολωμένος, ἥ pa θεοῖσιν

πόλλ᾽ ἀχέουσ᾽ ἠρᾶτο κασυγνήτοιο φόνοιο,

πολλὰ δὲ καὶ γαῖαν ποχλυφόρβην χερσὶν ἀλοία

κικλήσκουσ᾽ ᾿Αίδην καὶ ἐπαινὴν Περσεφόνειαν,

πρόχνυ καθεζομένη, δεύοντο δὲ δάκρυσι κόλποι, 570
\ 4 ’ A >’ 9 a 9 \

παιδὶ δόμεν θάνατον" τῆς δ᾽ ἠεροφοῖτις ᾿Εἰρινὺς

ἔκλυεν ἐξ ᾿Ἐρέβεσφιν, ἀμείλιχον ἧτορ ἔχουσα.

τῶν δὲ τάχ᾽ ἀμφὶ πύλας ὅμαδος καὶ δοῦπος ὀρώρειν

᾽ 4 Ν \ / ,
πύργων βαλλομένων" τὸν δὲ λίσσοντο γέροντες

with the narrative and savours strongly
of the genealogical poetry of the Hesiodean
age.

Idas the son of Aphareus had carried
off Marpessa from her father Euenos
(Εὐηνίνη is a patronymic), but Apollo
wished to carry her off from Idas; so
the two came to fighting until Zeus
separated them, and bade Marpessa
choose which of them she would have.
And Marpessa chose Idas, the mortal, for
fear the god should prove unfaithful.

562. They called her (sc. Kleopatra)
Alkyone because her mother (Marpessa)
wept in the fashion (i.e. with the plaint-
ive voice) of the Halcyon (kingfisher :
the female when separated from the male
is said to utter continually a mournful
cry). The legend of Alkyone and Keyx,
which sprang from the same source, is of
course not referred to here. οἶτον ἔχουσα,
lit. having the fortune of the kingfisher.
But this is all very strange and confused
in expression. αὐτῆς, which should be
emphatic, especially in its prominent posi-
tion at the end of the line, is used in the
weakest possible sense, ‘‘ her mother”;
a use which can hardly be paralleled in
Homer, ἐν μεγάροισι seems to be a purely
otiose addition.

564. For κλαῖ᾽ ὅτε Ar. read κλαῖεν, 8,
which is perhaps right.

565. The next eight lines seem in-
tended to lead back from the digression
to the main story while supplying some
details which Phoinix had omitted.
πέσσων, ‘‘digesting,” brooding over.
Cf. A 81.

567. πολλά goes with ἠρᾶτο, φόνοιο
as ‘‘causal” gen. with ἀχέονσα. For
κασιγνήτοιο (Arist.) others read κασι-
γνητοῖο, as adj. ‘‘ fraternal slaughter ”;
for acc. to the legend Althaia had several
brothers killed.

568. ἀλοία, she beat the ground with
her hands, to call the attention of
the gods below. So Hera appealing to
Tata and the Τιτῆνες, ἵμασε χθόνα χειρὶ
παχείῃ, Hymn. Apoll, ii. 162.

569. See on 457.

570. πρόχνυ, lit. ‘‘ knee - forward ”
(Paley), 1.6. on her knees. x for y of
γόνυ seems due to the immediately fol-
lowing liquid, cf. φροῦδος, πάχνη. For
apo cf. πρόρριζος, προθέλυμνος, and see
® 460. (This appeal to Erinys has
no apparent result except to deprive
Meleager of the offered gifts.) The line
is parenthetical.

571. For δόμεν θάνατον cf. δαίμονα
δώσω, Θ 166. ἀἠεροφοῖτις, walking in
darkness : here and T 87 only.

573. τῶν δέ, the Aitolians: we suddenly
return to the main incident, the siege of
Kalydon.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I (χ)

Αἰτωλῶν, πέμπον δὲ θεῶν ἱερῆας ἀρίστους, 575
A a / a
ἐξελθεῖν καὶ ἀμῦναι, ὑποσχόμενοι μέγα δῶρον"
e ’ , “A A
ὁππόθι πιότατον πεδίον Καλυδῶνος ἐραννῆς,
v # , \ e 4
ἔνθα μιν ἤνωγον τέμενος περικαλλὲς ἑλέσθαι
,
πεντηκοντόγυον, TO μὲν ἥμισυ οἰνοπέδοιο,
ἥμισυ δὲ ψιλὴν ἄροσιν πεδίοιο ταμέσθαι. 580
πολλὰ δέ μιν λιτάνευε γέρων ἱππηλάτα Oiveus,
οὐδοῦ ἐπεμβεβαὼς ὑψηρεφέος θαλάμοιο
᾽
σείων κολλητὰς σανίδας, γουνούμενος υἱόν'
/ 4
πολλὰ δὲ τὸν γε κασίγνηται Kal πότνια μήτηρ
» e A ’ a
ἐλλίσσονθ᾽" ὁ δὲ μᾶλλον avaiveto: πολλὰ ὃ ἑταῖροι, 585
an / / Φ e ἊΝ
οἵ οἱ κεδνότατοι καὶ φίλτατον ἦσαν ἁπάντων"
» 3 A \ 4
ἀλλ οὐδ᾽ ὧς τοῦ θυμὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ἔπειθον,
2 Ἁ δ 4
πρίν y ὅτε δὴ θάλαμος πύκ ἐβάλλετο, Tol δ᾽ ἐπὶ πύργων
βαῖνον Κουρῆτες καὶ ἐνέπρηθον μέγα ἄστυ.
4
καὶ τότε δὴ Μελέαγρον ἐύζωνος παράκοιτις 590
λίσσετ᾽ ὀδυρομένη, καί οἱ κατέλεξεν ἅπαντα
3 lo
κήδε᾽ ὅσ᾽ ἀνθρώποισι πέλει, τῶν ἄστυ ἁλώῃ"
, le)
ἄνδρας μὲν κτείνουσι, πόλιν δέ τε πῦρ ἀμαθύνει,
’ s > ν ΝΜ 4 a
τέκνα δέ τ ἄλλοι ἄγουσι βαθυζώνους τε γυναῖκας.
a > 9 , \ 3 4 \
τοῦ δ wpiveto θυμὸς ἀκούοντος κακὰ ἔργα, 595
a 9f δ δ΄ ν 2. 997 - /
βῆ δ᾽ ἰέναι, χροὶ δ᾽ ἔντε᾽ ἐδύσετο παμφανόωντα.
a 4
ὧς ὁ μὲν Αἰτωλοῖσιν ἀπήμυνεν κακὸν ἦμαρ
A n > A
εἴξας ᾧ θυμῷ’ τῷ δ᾽ οὐκέτι δῶρα τέλεσσαν

575. What have the ‘‘ best priests "
to do with the matter? It is not a
religious question. The line looks like
an interpolation for the sake of introduc-
ing the explanatory but needless word
Αἰτωλῶν.

578. τέμενος, ἃ ‘‘severalty” taken
from the public land. Cf. Σ 550, Z 194,
M 318; and for πεντηκοντόγνον, K 351.

580. ταμέσθαι is added pleonastically,
repeating ἑλέσθαι. ψιλὴν ἄροσιν, 1.6.
arable land unencumbered by trees. So
ἄροσις λείη, ι 184.

582. Standing on the threshold of the
chamber where his son had locked him-
self in, and shaking the doors in his
endeavour to force an entrance.

583. youvotpevos is here of course only
metaphorical, ‘‘ beseeching.”

584. κασίγνηται, so Aristarchos. Al.
κασίγνητοι, in support of which Schol.
A quotes B 641 to shew that Meleager
had several brothers.

586. xedvéraro, here ‘‘dearest,” the
primitive sense of root καδ- of κῆδ-ος, etc.,
to care; cf. κηδεσταί. Curt. Et. no. 284.

588. Until at last the missiles reached
even to hisown chamber. πρίν γ᾽ ὅτε δή,
as 488, M 437, and several times in Od.

589. βαῖνον, were beginning to climb.
ἐνέπρηθον, were trying to fire the city.

593. ἀμαθύνει, ἄμαθον ποιεῖ, lays in
ashes. This passage (592-4) is quoted
with slight variations by Aristotle, Rhet.
i. 7.

594. For τ᾽ ἄλλοι Zenod. read δῇοι.

595. κακὰ ἔργα, all this sad story
(especially no doubt the fate of the
captive women).

598. εἴξας ᾧ θυμῷ, yielding to his own
feelings (on hearing this appeal, and not
to the Aral of his mother, who had
offended him). In this lies the point of
the story. Meleager now has to pay for
his stubbornness (512) inasmuch as he
has to yield his point without the gifts

318

IAIAAO® I (1x,)

\ ’ \ »
πολλά τε καὶ χαρίεντα, κακὸν ὃ ἤμυνε καὶ αὔτως.

a) /
ἀλλὰ σὺ μή τοι ταῦτα νόει φρεσί, μηδέ σε δαίμων

ἐνταῦθα τρέψειε, φίλος: κάκιον δέ κεν εἴη
νηυσὶν καιομένῃσιν ἀμυνέμεν: ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ δώροις
ἔρχεο" ἶσον γάρ σε θεῷ τίσουσιν ᾿Αχαιοί:

εἰ δέ κ᾽ ἄτερ δώρων πόλεμον φθισήνορα δύῃς,

᾽ wn w ͵ ’ 2
οὐκέθ᾽ ὁμῶς τιμῇς ἔσεαι, πόλεμον περ ἀλαλκών.

605

τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχελλεύς-"
» a ν ΄, t ae, ,

Doivé, ἄττα γεραιέ, διοτρεφές, ov TL με ταύτης
χρεὼ τιμῆς" φρονέω δὲ τετιμῆσθαι Διὸς αἴσῃ,
ἥ μ᾽ ἕξει παρὰ νηυσὶ κορωνίσιν, εἰς ὅ κ᾿ ἀυτμὴ

ἐν στήθεσσι μένῃ καί μοι φίλα γούνατ᾽ ὀρώρῃ.

610

ἄλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω, σὺ δ᾽ ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῇσιν"
μή μοι σύγχει θυμὸν ὀδυρόμενος καὶ ἀχεύων,

᾿Ατρεΐδῃ ἥρωι φέρων χάριν" οὐδέ τί σε χρὴ

which would have made his relenting
honourable. (The context forbids us to
take ῳ θυμῷ in the natural sense of “ his
wrath”: Paley suggests οὗ θυμοῦ.)

599. καὶ αὕτως, even so, without
recompense. Phoinix means of course
that Achilles’ fate will be exactly the
same if he persists in his refusal, 604-5.

601. Phoinix seems to understand that
Achilles’ threat of returning home was
not seriously meant: as is clearly the
case from 650. ἐνταῦθα, thither, in that
direction. The word occurs here only
in H.: ἐνταυθοῖ is found once in Il. (Φ
122) and twice in Od.

602. ἐπὶ δώροις, ‘‘in consideration of
these presents,” so best MSS. Aristar-
chos, for some unknown reason, read
ἐπὶ δώρων, which he (or rather Didymus)
explained as = μετὰ δώρων: but this
seems quite untenable; the preposition
with gen. could only be taken temporally,
‘fin tite day of gifts,” while gifts are to
be had. But as the gifts are in 515
plainly made the motive why Achilles
should relent, the text seems preferable.
The short form of the dative (δώροις for
δώροισι), though rare, is not indefensible
(see Introduction).

603. Compare E 78, etc., for the
hyperbolical expression.

605. τιμῇς, apparently = honourable,
as Σ 475; contracted from τιμήεις, a very
late form ; cf. τεχνῆσσαι, ἡ 110. It does
not seem possible to take it as genitive
of τιμή.

607. ἄττα, a primitive word for father,
no doubt formed from the early efforts
of childish lips, like our ‘‘ dada.” It is
found in this identical form in Latin,
Skt. (atta in fem.), and Gothic; and
slightly altered in old Bulgarian, Alba-
nian, and Erse, ¢.e.in every main branch
of the Aryan family. ‘‘Attam pro
reverentia seni cuilibet dicimus, quasi
eum avi nomine appellemus,” Paul. £pit.
12. See Curt. £é. no. 207. So P 561
and several times in Od., where it is
always used by Telemachos to Eumaios.

608. For χρεώ with accus. and gen.
see 1. 75. αἴσῃ, ‘by the justice (true
measure, see A 418) of Zeus, which shall
ever be over me by the beaked ships so
long as my breath is in my body.” ἕξει
με means ‘‘will never leave me”; cf.
the frequent use of θάμβος, χόλος, ὕπνος
ἔχει. At the same time we get a more
natural sense, though with some violence
to the order of the words, if we refer 4
to τιμῆς, making φρονέω. . . αἴσῃ a
parenthesis cf. κλέος ἔχει, P 143. So

chol. ΒΥ. These words of Achilles
seem to indicate that his determination
to depart is a mere piece of rhetoric.

612. ovyxe, ‘‘ confound,” our collo-
quial ‘“‘do not upset me.” Achilles
acknowledges the effect which Phoinix’
speech has had upon him. The text
(given by all MSS.) seems to be a com-
promise between évl στήθεσσιν ἀχεύων,
read by Ar., and the ὀδυρόμενος κινυρίζων
of Zenod.

613. φέρων χάριν, out of complaisance

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I (1x.)

τὸν φιλέειν, iva μή μοι ἀπέχθηαι φιλέοντι.

“ \ ’ \ / ev » 9 A /
καλόν τοι σὺν ἐμοὶ τὸν κήδειν, ὅς K ἐμὲ κήδη.

4 3 \ / \ o f A
ἶσον ἐμοὶ βασίλευε καὶ ἥμισυ peipeo τιμῆς"
φ »ἦ ’ \ ’ > _/ ,ὕ /
οὗτοι δ᾽ ἀγγελέουσι, σὺ δ᾽ αὐτοθι λέξεο μίμνων
εὐνῇ ἔνι μαλακῇ" ἅμα & ἠοῖ φαινομένηφιν
, » wv , > od) ς 7 > 4 / 3)
φρασσόμεθ᾽, ἤ κε νεώμεθ ἐφ ἡμέτερ, ἧ κε μένωμεν.

3 , lo) al
7 καὶ Πατρόκλῳ 6 y ἐπ᾽ ὀφρύσι νεῦσε σιωπῇ

Φοίνικι στορέσαι πυκινὸν λέχος, ὄφρα τάχιστα

3 / , ’
ἐκ κλισίης νόστοιο μεδοίατο.

ἀντίθεος Τελαμωνιάδης μετὰ μῦθον ἔειπεν"
“διογενὲς Λαερτιάδη, πολυμήχαν᾽ ᾿Οδυσσεῦ,

ΝΜ 3 / / 4 \
ἴομεν" ov yap μοι δοκέει μύθοιο τελευτὴ

τῇδέ γ᾽ ὁδῷ κρανέεσθαι' ἀπαγγεῖλαι δὲ τάχιστα
χρὴ μῦθον Δαναοῖσι, καὶ οὐκ ἀγαθόν περ ἐόντα,

a /
of που viv ἕαται ποτιδέγμενοι.

ἄγριον ἐν στήθεσσι θέτο μεγαλήτορα θυμόν,

, > \ 4 , e 4
OVETALOS, οὐδὲ μετατρέπεται φίλοτητος ἐταίρων
χ

319
615
620
τοῖσι δ᾽ dp Αἴας
625
αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
690

τῆς, ἡ μιν παρὰ νηυσὶν ἐτίομεν ἔξοχον ἄλλων,
νηλής" καὶ μέν τίς τε κασιγνήτοιο φονῆος
\ aA ¢ \ 950.) δι
ποινὴν ἢ οὗ παιδὸς ἐδέξατο τεθνηῶτος"
9 ee) ε \ 3 4 , 3 aA / > 9 ,
καί p ὁ μὲν ἐν δήμῳ μένει αὐτοῦ, πολλ᾽ ἀποτίσας,

to A. SoE 211, 874: and cf. ἦρα φέρειν,
A 672.

616. This verse is expunged as mean-
ingless by almost all recent editors
(Heyne, Bekker, Dod., Ameis, Diintzer,
Fasi, and Christ). But it is possible to
explain it as a hyperbolical expression
meant to be taken in irony rather than
earnest: ‘‘ask what you will, even the
half of my kingdom (but do not expect
me to change my mind)”: only for the
last clause he substitutes ‘‘ these shall
take my message,” 1.6.1 do not recall it.
μείρομαι does not occur again: but it
would be a legitimate present of ἔμμορε,
for μερ-7-ομαι. ἥμισυν must be taken as
neut. acc. used adverbially, ‘‘share my
honour to the half.”

617. λέξεο, 1.6. λεχ-σ-εσο, from the
“mixed” aor. ἐλεξόμην of "λέχομαι, like
ἐδυσόμην. The imper. of the 2d (syn-
copated) aor. (Aéxro) would be λέξο
(λεχσο), like δέξο, T 10. So we have
both ὄρσεο and ὄρσο.

620. ἐπινεῦσε ὀφρύσι, he nodded (with)
his head ἕο P. in silence... for Phoinix.
Observe the four consecutive datives:

instrumental, jussive, modal, and “com-
modi.” ἐπινεῦσε, because he wishes to
give a silent hint for departure to the
envoys.

625. μύθοιο τελευτή, the fulfilment of
our errand. μῦθος is “a charge imposed,”
as A 25.

632. τις, a man in general. Cf. 02 46.
dovijos, so only A with Arist.: al]
other MSS. φόνοιο, κασιγ. being perhaps
taken as an adj. (see 1. 567); it would
then be accented κασιγνητοῖο. But the
text is preferable. Cf. 2 335. ‘‘He
accepts blood-money from the slayer of
his brother or of his dead son.” Perhaps
it is more natural however to make
παιδός genit. after ποινήν, by a slight
change of construction, ‘‘ compensation
for his dead son.” For the taking of
blood-money see Z 498.

634. The homicide, in consideration of
this payment, is allowed to stay at home
in peace, instead of having to fly into
exile. This clear indication of a moral
pressure upon the relatives of a murdered
man to receive compensation instead of
following up the blood feud is the first

320

a fo) 39 , , \ \ 9. »
τοῦ δέ τ ἐρητύεται κραδίη καὶ θυμὸς ἀγήνωρ

ποινὴν δεξαμένῳ.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I (ix)

θυμὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσι θεοὶ θέσαν εἵνεκα κούρης

ΝΜ
οἴης.

685
3 ’ 7
σοὶ ὃ ἄλληκτον τε κακὸν τε
a , e \ / ” > >» »ἢ
νῦν δέ τοι ἑπτὰ παρίσχομεν ἔξοχ ἀρίστας
᾽ a ᾽ ’
ἄλλα τε πόλλ᾽ ἐπὶ τῇσι" σὺ δ᾽ ἴλαον ἔνθεο θυμόν,

640

αἴδεσσαι δὲ μέλαθρον: ὑπωρόφιοι δέ τοί εἶμεν

πληθύος ἐκ Δαναῶν, μέμαμεν δέ τοι ἔξοχον ἄλλων

/ o> \ μ Φ ? /)
κήδιστοί T ἔμεναι καὶ φίλτατοι, ὅσσοι ᾿Αχαιοί.

τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιελλεύς"
“Αἶαν διογενὲς Τελαμώνιε, κοίρανε λαῶν,

4 \ \ > ἡ /
πάντα τί μοι κατὰ θυμὸν ἐείσαο μυθήσασθαι"

645

ἀλλά μοι οἰδάνεται κραδίη χόλῳ, ὁππότ᾽ ἐκείνων
/ [2 > > »ὕ > » , ΝΜ

μνήσομαι, ὥς μα ἀσύφηλον ἐν ᾿Αργείοισιν ἔρεξεν

᾿Ατρεΐδης ὡς εἴ τιν᾽ ἀτίμητον μετανάστην.

ἀλλ᾽ ὑμεῖς ἔρχεσθε καὶ ἀγγελίην ἀπόφασθε"

οὐ γὰρ πρὶν πολέμοιο μεδήσομαι αἱματόεντος,

650

πρίν γ᾽ viov Πριάμοιο δαΐφρονος, “Extopa δῖον,
Μυρμιδόνων ἐπί τε κλισίας καὶ νῆας ἱκέσθαι
κτείνοντ᾽ ᾿Αργείους, κατά τε σμῦξαι πυρὶ νῆας.
ἀμφὶ δέ τοι τῇ ἐμῇ κλισίῃ καὶ νηὶ μελαίνῃ

“KR \ A 7 7 θ -39 2]
KTOpa Kat PELAWTA μαχῆς σχῆσεσ at Οἰῶ.

655

step by which society attains to a crimi-
nal law.

636. δεξαμένῳ, so best MSS. for -ou of
vulgate. The change of case is natural
and Homeric. Cf. & 139, Καὶ 187, T
413.

637. θυμόν, here ‘‘anger.” κούρης
otys, ‘‘just one single girl.” Aias’
numerical argument is well suited to
the not over-subtle quality of his
character.

639. ἵλαον, placable. ἔνθεο is ex-
plained by 629, and θέσαν 637.

640. αθρον, z.c. the obligation of
hospitality incurred by our reception
under your roof.

641. πληθύος ἐκ A., we are selected
from the host of the Danaans, and there-
fore claim respect as representatives of
the whole body of the army. For wAn-
θύος Zenod. read ἀθρόοι.

642. ὅσσοι ᾿Αχαιοί (supply εἰσί) goes
closely with ἄλλων, ‘‘ chiefest of all other
Achaians that there are.” So 1. 55.

645. ‘‘Thou seemest to speak every
word almost after mine own soul.”
Achilles refers to the latter part of
Aias’ speech. The τι modifies the sen-

tence like our colloquial ‘‘ pretty much
as I could wish.” MSS. give ἐείσω:
but H. uses the open form in -ao where
possible, and Ar. iwrote ἐείσαο “ἔν τισι
Τῶν ὑπομνημάτων ” (Did. ).

647. μνήσομαι, aor. subj. ἀσύφηλον
(also 2 767), a difficult word apparently
meaning ‘‘rash”; as ἃ neut. accus.
‘‘did me rash wrong.” Diintzer refers
to the same root as σιφλός (v. & 142) =
injurious (4 intens. ).

648. μετανάστην, a settler from
abroad, ‘‘outlander”; with the same
contemptuous connotation as the Athen-
ian μέτοικος. See Π ὅθ. ἀτίμητον, per-
haps ‘‘ without any τιμή " or blood-price
attached to his life, ὑ.6. one who may be
killed with impunity.

650. Achilles has apparently by this
time abandoned his Vea of returning
home, though Odysseus in 682 reports
only the original threat. This difficulty
was a popular ἀπορία in the Alexandrian
schools, and is not solved by expunging
the present passage ; see 601, 619.

653. κατὰ σμῦξαι, see X 411, ““ burn
down.” There appears to have been a
reading φλέξαι also recognized by Ar.

ΛΙΑΔΟΣῚ (rx.)

92]

᾽ ‘
ὧς ἔφαθ', ot δὲ ἕκαστος ἑλὼν δέπας ἀμφικύπελλον
σπείσαντες παρὰ νῆας ἴσαν πάλιν: ἦρχε δ᾽ ᾿Οδυσσεύς.
, > e 7 Oy a
Πάτροκλος δ ἑτάροισιν. ἰδὲ δμωῇσι κέλευσεν
’ ’
Φοίνικι στορέσαι πυκινὸν λέχος ὅττι τάχιστα.

e > » , , “ e >
αἱ δ᾽ ἐπιπειθόμεναι στόρεσαν λέχος, ὡς ἐκέλευσεν,

660

,᾿, » en ἢ / Ν Ν
κώεά τε ῥῆγός τε λίνοιό τε λεπτὸν ἄωτον.
Μ 9 ¢ , , aA A
ἔνθ᾽ ὁ γέρων κατέλεκτο Kal ἠῶ δῖαν ἔμιμνεν.
αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς εὗδε μυχῷ κλισίης ἐυπήκτου"
τῷ δ᾽ ἄρα παρκατέλ 7, τὴν Λεσβόθεν ἣ
? ρ ρκατέλεκτο γυνή, τὴν Λεσβόθεν Frey,

Φόρβαντος θυγάτηρ Διομήδη καλλιπάρῃος.

665

Πάτροκλος δ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἐλέξατο' πὰρ δ᾽ ἄρα καὶ τῷ

Ἶφις ἐύξωνος, τήν οἱ πόρε δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεὺς

Σκῦρον ἑλὼν αἰπεῖαν, ᾿Εννυῆος πτολίεθρον.
οἱ δ᾽ ὅτε δὴ κλισίῃσιν ἐν ᾿Ατρεΐδαο γένοντο,

τοὺς μὲν ἄρα χρυσέοισι κυπέλλοις υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν 670

δειδέχατ᾽ ἄλλοθεν ἄλλος ἀνασταδόν, ἔκ τ᾽ ἐρέοντο'

πρῶτος δ᾽ ἐξερέεινεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν Ayapéuvov:

“elm ἄγε μ᾽, ὦ πολύαιν᾽ ᾿Οδυσεῦ, μέγα κῦδος ᾿Αχαιῶν,

ἤ ῥ᾽ ἐθέλει νήεσσιν ἀλεξέμεναι δήιον πῦρ,

ἢ ἀπέειπε, χόλος δ᾽ ἔτ᾽ ἔχει μεγαλήτορα θυμόν ;" 675
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπε πολύτλας δῖος ᾿Οδυσσεύς"

“ ᾿Ατρεΐδη κύδιστε, ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγάμεμνον,

κεῖνός γ᾽ οὐκ ἐθέλει σβέσσαι χόλον, ἀλλ᾽ ἔτι μᾶλλον

πιμπλάνεται μένεος, σὲ δ᾽ ἀναίνεται ἠδὲ σὰ δῶρα.

αὐτόν σε φράζεσθαι ἐν ᾿Αργείοισιν ἄνωγεν, 680

657. παρὰ νῆας, along the line of
ships. The libation seems to mark the
close of the meal, at which they were
still sitting, at least nominally. So 712.
Cf. γ 334, ὄφρα σπείσαντες κοίτοιο μεδώ-
μεθα. In one οὗ Aristarchos’ editions,
Didymos says, he read λείψαντες, which
was found in many ancient copies.

660. For ὡς ἐκέλευσε Zenod. read
éyxovéovoat, a word specially used in
this connexion. See Q 648.

661. ‘‘ Fleeces and coverlet and fine
flock of linen.” Cf. 0 646. ἄωτον is
rightly explained by Buttm. Zezil. as
meaning ‘‘floccus,” the flocculent knap
on woven cloths. It seems to come
from aF to blow; ‘‘that which is easily
blown about,” with reduplication, for
aF-oF-ros. Similarly dwreiv, ‘to sleep-’
comes from the same reduplicated ΤΟΥΤῚ
of dF in the sense of ‘‘ heavy breathing”
(Clemm in C. Stud. ii. 54).

Y

668. Σκῦρον is said by the Scholia to
be a city of Phrygia (one of those alluded
to in 329), not the island of that name
—for which see T 326.

671. δειδέχατο, see 196. ἄλλοθεν ἄλ-
os Gvacraddy, rising each in his own
place.

673. μ᾽, t.e. μοι. See on A 170, Ψ
579, etc. πολύαινος is an epithet used
only of Odysseus: K 544, A 430, μ 184.
It means ‘‘much praised,” illustrious.
Buttm. however, ZLezil. p. 60, says
‘*alvos is only a speech full of meaning
or cunningly imagined,” and quotes ~
508 where it is used ‘‘of the short and
pithy narrative of Odysseus.” He would
then understand it to mean “full of
pregnant utterances.”

678. μᾶλλον, all the more, ὦ. 6. our
errand only exasperated him.

680. αὐτόν, “for yourself,” alone with-
out his help.

322

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I (1x)

Ψ al / \ 9 a
ὅππως Kev vas τε cons Kal λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν'
ΣΝ 32. 2 , g 2 »» 4
αὐτὸς δ᾽ ἠπείλησεν ἅμ ἠοῖ φαινομένηφιν
νῆας ἐυσσέλμους Grad ἑλκέμεν ἀμφιελίσσας.
καὶ δ᾽ ἂν τοῖς ἄλλοισιν ἔφη παραμυθήσασθαι
οἴκαδ᾽ ἀποπλείειν, ἐπεὶ οὐκέτι δήετε τέκμωρ 685
Ἰλίου αἰπεινῆς" μάλα yap θεν εὐρύοπα Ζεὺς
χεῖρα ἑὴν ὑπερέσχε, τεθαρσήκασι δὲ λαοί.
φ ΝΜ 3. Α δ 79. 3 lA Ψ
ὧς ἔφατ᾽" εἰσὶ καὶ οἵδε τάδ᾽ εἰπέμεν, οἵ μοι ἕποντο,
Αἴας καὶ κήρυκε δύω, πεπνυμένω ἄμφω.
Φοῖνιξ δ᾽ αὖθ᾽ ὁ γέρων κατελέξατο" ὧς γὰρ ἀνώγειν, 690
” e 9» , , 3 IS?”
ὄφρα οἱ ἐν νήεσσι φίλην ἐς πατρίδ᾽ ἕπηται
ΝΜ a 54 ἢ 9 4, > ΝΜ Ν 22

αὔριον, ἣν ἐθέλῃσιν" ἀνάγκῃ. δ᾽ οὔ τί μιν ἄξει.

φ ΜΝ , eo wv ΄ > \ > » δι

ὧς ἔφαθ,, οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα πάντες ἀκὴν ἐγένοντο σιωττῇ
[μῦθον ἀγασσάμενοι" μάλα γὰρ κρατερῶς ἀγόρευσεν.
δὴν δ᾽ ἄνεῳ ἦσαν τετιηότες υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν' 695
ὀψὲ δὲ δὴ μετέειπε βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης"
“ ᾿Ατρεΐδη κύδιστε, ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγάμεμνον,
μὴ ὄφελες λίσσεσθαι ἀμύμονα Πηλεΐωνα,
μυρία δῶρα διδούς" ὁ δ᾽ ἀγήνωρ ἐστὶ καὶ ἄλλως"
νῦν αὖ μιν πολὺ μᾶλλον ἀγηνορίῃσιν ἐνῆκας. 700
ἀλλ᾽ ἦ τοι κεῖνον μὲν ἐάσομεν, ἢ κεν ἴησιν
ἤ κε μένῃ" τότε δ᾽ αὗτε μαχήσεται, ὁππότε κέν μεν
θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ἀνώγῃ καὶ θεὸς ὄρσῃ.
3 ΧΝ 3 ς 3 A 4 ’ὔ 4
ἀλλ᾽ aye’, ὡς ἂν ἐγὼ εἴπω, πειθώμεθα πάντες"

681. σόῃς, so best MSS.: Aristarchos
seems to have hesitated here between
cogs and gags. See note on 424. -

684 is 417 turned into oratio obliqua,
thus giving the only instance in H. of
ἄν (as X 110 is the only instance of xe)
with infin.

688. εἰσὶ καὶ οἵδε τάδ᾽ εἰπέμεν, of,
κιτ.λ., ‘‘my companions are here to con-
firm this.” This use of the infin. is
exactly like that in T 140 (q.v.), δῶρα δ᾽
ἐγὼν ὅδε πολλὰ παρασχέμεν.

690. αὖθι, there, in the tent.

691. ἕπηται, subj. after a historical
tense, of an event that is still future ; as
A 158, 559.

Aristarchos obelized 688-692 as un-
usual (νεώτεροι) in sentiment and prosy
in composition. It is sufficient however
to condemn the three last, which are
evidently added after the interpolation
of the Phoinix episode.

694. Rejected by Ar. and Aristoph.,

and omitted altogether by Zenod., as
interpolated from 431. Indeed several
MSS. read ἀπέειπεν here also, though
it gives no sense.

695-6 = 30-31. See note there.

698. μή (so MSS.: Ar. pnd’; but
for the hiatus cf. P 686, 2 19) goes
closely with λίσσεσθαι both in sense
and construction.

699. καὶ ἄλλως, ‘Sat the best of
times,” in colloquial English. See YT
99. <A variant καὶ αὕτως is given in the
margin of A,

700. ‘‘ Thou hast the more set him on
haughtiness.” For this use of ἐνέημι,
‘*to involve” a man in anything, see
K 89 Ζεὺς ἐνέηκε πόνοισι, and o 198 ὁμο-
φροσύνῃσιν évjce. So yp 18 ἐπιβῆσαι:
and for the plur. of the abstract noun
A 205, K 122.

701. ἐάσομεν, we will leave him to go
his own way : followed by 4. . . 4 with
subj. as αὶ 183.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ I ᾳχ) 323

a \ , / , ® -
νῦν μὲν κοιμήσασθε τεταρπόμενοι φίλον ἦτορ 705
σίτου Kal οἴνοιο" τὸ yap μένος ἐστὶ καὶ ἀλκή"
αὐτὰρ ἐπεί κε φανῇ καλὴ ῥοδοδάκτυλος ᾿Ηώς,
καρπαλίμως πρὸ νεῶν ἐχέμεν λαόν τε καὶ ἵππους
ὀτρύνων, καὶ δ᾽ αὐτὸς ἐνὶ πρώτοισι μάχεσθαι."

ὧς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα πάντες ἐπήνησαν βασιλῆες, 710
μῦθον ἀγασσάμενοι Διομήδεος ἱπποδάμοιο.
/ ‘\ / μὴ Ψ
καὶ τότε δὴ σπείσαντες ἔβαν κλισίηνδε ἕκαστος,
Μ 4 (4 a
ἔνθα δὲ κοιμήσαντο καὶ ὕπνου δῶρον ἕλοντο.

705. τεταρπόμενοι, redupl. aor. with 708. ἐχέμεν, for imper.: “array.”
the sense of ‘‘sating,” as always.

924

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (x.)

IAIAAO® K.

Δολώνεια.

ἄλλοι μὲν παρὰ νηυσὶν ἀριστῆες Παναχαιῶν
εὗδον παννύχιοι, μαλακῷ δεδμημένοι ὕπνῳ"
ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ᾿Ατρεΐδην ᾿Αγαμέμνονα ποιμένα λαῶν
ὕπνος ἔχε γλυκερός, πολλὰ φρεσὶν ὁρμαίνοντα.

K

Φασὶ δὲ οἱ παλαιοὶ τὴν ῥαψωδίαν ταύτην
ὑφ᾽ Ὁμήρου ἰδίᾳ τετάχθαι καὶ μὴ ἔγκατα-
λεγῆναι τοῖς μέρεσι τῆς Ἰλιάδος, ὑπὸ δὲ
Πεισιστράτου τετάχθαι εἰς τὴν ποίησιν.
These noteworthy words of Eustathios,
which are repeated with a few variations
by the Victorian scholiast, would be of
more value if we knew who the παλαιοί
in question were. As it stands we can
only say that it shews at least this:
that some ancient critics perceived the
fact that the Doloneia stands as an
episode by itself, an excrescence upon the
Iliad, forming no part of the original
plot. The connexion with the name of
Peisistratos can hardly be more than a
conjecture, as the story of the part played
by that statesman in the formation of
the Iliad is apparently of quite late
origin—later than the days of Aristar-
chos—and as a piece of serious history is
now generally discredited.

That the book forms no essential part
of the story of the [liad is obvious at
once. There is no allusion to it in any
form whatever in any of the subsequent
books, even in places where such a men-
tion would seem inevitable. For instance,
in the races in Ψ the horses which
Diomedes took from Aineias play a pro-
minent part, but there is no mention of
the much-lauded pair which the same
hero here takes from Rhesos. Moreover
the events récorded are crowded into the
latter part of a night which began in ©
and has been already occupied by all

the events related in I, the agora, the
council, the Embassy, the report of the
envoys to the counell and several feasts.
But the peculiarities of the book are
far more significant than any mere nega-
tive evidence. It is almost the onl
part of the Homeric poems of whic
we can say that the style is distinctly
mannered. There is throughout a dis-
tinct effort to produce effect by contrasts,
such for instance as that between the way
in which Nestor speaks of Menelaos and
that hero’s occupation at the moment;
between the promise of Hector to give
the horses of Achilles to Dolon and
the loss through Dolon of the horses of
Rhesos; between the exaggerated de-
spondency at the beginning and hasty
exultation at the end of the story. The
result is that we have a series of vivid
and effective pictures at the expense of
the harmony and symmetrical repose of
the Epic style. The motives of the story
are much confused; Agamemnon pro-
poses to wake Nestor in order to devise
some plan with him (19), but only does
so in order to get him to visit the out-
posts. Then the other chiefs, who would
not be needed for such a purpose, are
summoned in order to introduce the very
un-Homeric meeting of the βουλή in the
open plain. The author takes a quite
peculiar delight in the detailed descrip-
tion of dress and weapons; in order to
be able to give a detailed account of the
arming of the two spies, Odysseus is
made to start with nothing but a shield
(149. This and similar scenes swell

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (x)

325

e > wv 5» 9 , ’ “ 3 ’
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἂν ἀστράπτῃ πόσις “Ἥρης ἠυκόμοιο, δ
τεύχων ἢ πολὺν ὄμβρον ἀθέσφατον ἠὲ χάλαξαν
/
ἢ νιφετόν, ὅτε πέρ τε χιὼν ἐπάλυνεν ἀρούρας,
ἠέ ποθι πτολέμοιο μέγα στόμα πευκεδανοῖο,
as πυκίν᾽ ἐν στήθεσσιν ἀνεστενάχιζ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνων
, 3 / a e / 3 ,

νειόθεν ἐκ xpadlns, τρομέοντο δέ οἱ φρένες ἐντός. 10
ἢ τοι ὅτ᾽ ἐς πεδίον τὸ Τρωικὸν ἀθρήσειεν,
θαύμαξζεν πυρὰ πολλά, τὰ καίετο ᾿Ιλιόθι πρό,

> A > 9 \ σ , » 9» ,
αὐλῶν συρίγγων τ᾽ ἐνοπὴν ὅμαδον τ᾽ ἀνθρώπων'

the exordium to a length quite out of
proportion to the real story of the book,
the expedition of Odysseus and Diomedes.
Many other peculiarities and difficulties
are mentioned in the notes.

The linguistic evidence points strongly
in the same direction. The book abounds
not only in curious ἅπαξ λεγόμενα, but
in unusual and involved forms of ex-
pression. Such are the idea of ‘‘ tearing
out the hair to Zeus” (16), the curious
phrase in 142, πολέμοιο στόμα in 8, ὅμιλος
in the sense of ‘‘ assembly,” αὐδήσαντος
in 47, ἐπιβωσόμεθα or ἐπιδωσόμεθα in
463, and many others. The cases of ap-
proximation to later Greek are also very
numerous. The pronoun ὁ is continu-
ally used as a fully developed article ;
we find numerous “ perfects in -xa from
derivative verbs, βεβίηκεν, παρῴχωκεν,
ἀδηκότες ; the aor. θήκατο (for ἔθετο) ;
the 3 sing. pres. μεθιεῖ (121); the 2
fut. pass. μεγήσεσθαι (the only instance
of the tense in Homer); the form νῦν
(105) in the sense of ‘now’” (Mr.
Monro). Still more significant are the
pseudo-archaic forms παραφθαίησι (346),
κράτεσφι (156), and probably σφίσιν =
ὑμῖν (398), with several other possible
eases, Other words again are elsewhere
found in the Odyssey, but not in the
Iliad ; δόσις, φῆμις, δόξα, δαίτη (= dals),
ἀωτέω, τοΐσδεσσι, and others. In short
the attentive student of the Iliad can
hardly fail to perceive that in this book
he has passed into an entirely different
atmosphere of thought and language.

We must therefore recognize in this
most individual episode a poem of later
origin than any other part of the Iliad,
coinposed it is true for its present place,
but only superficially harmonized with
what precedes.

1. for the introductory lines compare
B 1-2, and see also Q 677 sqq.,07. The
appropriateness of the lines here is some-

what impaired by 1. 26 below; while
παννύχιοι hardly agrees with the end of
I, where the princes are sitting up till
late: hence Schol. V explains it, οὐ δί᾽
ὅλης τῆς νυκτὸς, ἀλλὰ τὸ πλεῖστον μέρος
τῆς νυκτός. Cf. A 472. Παναχαιῶν, B
404.

5. Hera is only here called ἠύκομος.
The point of the simile is shewn by 9
to lie in mvxwwé, but it is somewhat
exaggerated. L. 8 may indicate that
thunder without rain or snow was re-
garded as an omen of the first order,
portending nothing less than war ; com-
pare the well-known case of Horace, C.
1, 84,

7. ἐπάλννεν is of course aor. It would
seem that we must understand πολύν
and ἀθέσφατον to apply also to νιφετόν,
or else the picture of a snowstorm
merely ‘‘sprinkling” the fields appears
ἃ very insignificant phenomenon com-
pared to those which precede and follow
it.

8. ποθι evidently serves to introduce
ἃ contrast in kind to what has gone
before. For the phrase πτολέμοιο στόμα
compare T 818, Υ 359. The origin of
the metaphor is perhaps a comparison
of the two lines of battle to the jaw of a
wild beast, crushing what comes in be-
tween them. But the feeling of this
origin has evidently died out and left
a mere phrase.

10. νειόθεν, cf. Z 295, I 153, Φ 317.
For tpopéovro Zenod. read φοβέοντο,
which was disapproved by Aristarchos
on the ground that φοβέεσθαι in Homer
means ‘‘ to flee,’’ not ‘‘ to fear.”

11. The poet does not seem to have a
very vivid picture of the situation, as
Agamemnon is lying in bed in his hut,
with a high wall between him and the

ain.

P 12. ᾿Ιλιόθι πρό, see on Γ ὃ.
18. The asyndeton is very harsh:

326

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (x)

αὐτὰρ ὅτ᾽ ἐς νῆάς τε ἴδοι καὶ λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν,
πολλὰς ἐκ κεφαλῆς προθελύμνους ἕλκετο χαίτας 15
ὑψόθ᾽ ἐόντι Διί, μέγα δ᾽ ἔστενε κυδάλιμον κῆρ.
ὃ , ς \ \ 5. » ’ 4
ἥδε δέ ot κατὰ θυμὸν ἀρίστη φαίνετο βουλή,
Νέστορ᾽ ἔπι πρῶτον Νηλήιον ἐλθέμεν ἀνδρῶν,
εἴ τινά οἱ σὺν μῆτιν ἀμύμονα τεκτήναιτο,
Ψ ᾽ ’ lad a VA
ἥ τις ἀλεξίκακος πᾶσιν Δαναοῖσι γένοιτο. 20
9 Ἁ ἮΝ / Ὁ
ὀρθωθεὶς δ᾽ ἔνδυνε περὶ στήθεσσι χιτῶνα,
ποσσὶ δ᾽ ὑπὸ λιπαροῖσιν ἐδήσατο καλὰ πέδιλα,
ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἔπειτα δαφοινὸν ἑέσσατο δέρμα λέοντος
ΝΜ 4 / δ > ww
αἴθωνος μεγάλοιο ποδηνεκές, εἵλετο δ᾽ ἔγχος.
φ 3 w , 4 / OA A > ”
ὧς δ᾽ αὔτως Μενέλαον ἔχε τρόμος, οὐδὲ yap αὐτῷ 25
ὕπνος ἐπὶ βλεφάροισιν ἐφίζανε, μή τι πάθοιεν
᾿Αργεῖοι, tol δὴ ἔθεν εἵνεκα πουλὺν ἐφ᾽ ὑγρὴν
A 2 / / ‘ ε ,
ἤλυθον ἐς Τροίην πόλεμον θρασὺν ὁρμαίνοντες.
, \ a / > \ 4
παρδαλέῃ μὲν πρῶτα μετάφρενον εὐρὺ κάλυψεν
ποικίλῃ, αὐτὰρ ἐπὶ στεφάνην κεφαλῆφιν ἀείρας 80
θήκατο χαλκείην, δόρυ δ᾽ εἵλετο χειρὶ παχείῃ.
a ΟΣ »¥ > / a 2 / ὔ ΄
βὴ δ᾽ ἴμεν ἀνστήσων ὃν ἀδελφεόν, ὃς μέγα πάντων
9 ΝΜ Ν x7 A /
Αργείων ἤνασσε, θεὸς δ᾽ ὡς τίετο δήμῳ.
\ 3 @ > 9» > Ww ’ Μ
τὸν δ᾽ εὗρ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ὦμοισι τιθήμενον ἔντεα καλὰ

hence Diintzer and Nauck would reject
the line. σύριγγες are not mentioned
elsewhere in Homer ; they are evidently
meant to give a barbarian colouring to the
Trojan night. αὐλοί recur in Z 495 only.

15. προθελύμνους, cf. I 541. Here
again the poet shews a tendency to ex-
aggeration.

16. ἔστενε, acc. to Fulda, here shews
a trace of its primitive meaning, ‘*made
his heart full to bursting.” The dat. Διί
seems to be an extension of the phrase
Ail χεῖρας ἀνασχεῖν.

19. εἰ, in the hope that ; the line be-
ing a ‘wish, originally independent,
brought into a hypotactic position. It
is ambiguous whether the original wish
was el τεκτήναιτο μῆτιν σὺν ἐμοί, or εἰ
τεκτηναίμην σύν οἱ μῆτιν. In the former
case we ought according to analogy to
read ol, the pronoun being reflexive, not
anaphoric. In the following line also
γένοιτο seems to have been a proper
opt., originally paratactic, JI would
that such a one might prove.’

23. It will be observed as a peculiarity
of this book that the poet delights in

detailed description of dress and armour;
cf. 29, 134, etc. Compare also B 42.

25. The reading of A and one or two
MSS., αὖ τῷ for αὐτῷ, is worth notice.
Conversely, in B 681 some MSS. read
αὐτοὺς for αὖ τούς.

26. μή, for fear lest ; in directly
derived from the sense of the pure o
tive, “‘imay it not be that they s
It is to be taken in connexion wiih
τρόμος, ovdé ... ἐφίζανε being paren-
thetical.

27. For πουλύν as fem. cf. δ 709,
and for ὑγρήν as a subst. & 308, τραφερήν
τε καὶ ὑγρήν.

80. στεφάνην, see H 12.

81. θήκατο, the οἱ only form of the mid.
aor. in -xa- Which is found in HL; it
recurs = 187.

32. péyaas A 78. For the next line
cf. E 78.

34. τιθήμενον, here only: but cf. Ψ
83, 247, τιθήμενα. These forms ‘‘are
probably due to the analogy of the non-
thematic contracted verbs,” H. G. § 20
(cf. 8 16). Or possibly advantage was
taken of the lengthening power of the

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (x,) 327
νηὶ πάρα πρυμνῇ" τῷ δ᾽ ἀσπάσιος γένετ᾽ EXOdv. ᾿ 35

τὸν πρότερος προσέειπε βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Μενέλαος"

“ τίφθ᾽ οὕτως, ἠθεῖε, κορύσσεαι;
ὀτρυνέεις Τρώεσσιν ἐπίσκοπον ;

ἢ τιν᾽ ἑταίρων
ἀλλὰ μάλ᾽ αἰνῶς

δείδω, μὴ οὔ τίς τοι ὑπόσχηται τόδε ἔργον,
ἄνδρας δυσμενέας σκοπιαζέμεν οἷος ἐπελθὼν 40
νύκτα δι’ ἀμβροσίην" μάλα τις θρασυκάρδιος ἔσται.᾽"
τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων"
““ χρεὼ βουλῆς ἐμὲ καὶ σέ, διοτρεφὲς ὦ Μενέλαε,
/ 4 > 9 ᾽ ,
κερδαλέης, Tis Kev ἐρύσσεται ἠδὲ σαώσει
᾿Αργείους καὶ νῆας, ἐπεὶ Διὸς ἐτράπετο φρήν. 45
“Ἑκτορέοις dpa μᾶλλον ἐπὶ φρένα θῆχ᾽ ἱεροῖσιν'
3 4 30. ἡ 980.) ν 3 /
οὐ yap πω ἰδόμην οὐδ᾽ ἔκλυον αὐδήσαντος
»᾿ > ὦ 4 , > 9 3 /
ἄνδρ᾽ ἕνα τοσσάδε μέρμερ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἤματι unricacbat,
ὅσσ᾽ “Extwp ἔρρεξε διίφιλος υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶν,
αὔτως, οὔτε θεᾶς υἱὸς φίλος οὔτε θεοῖο. δ0

ictus to introduce forms which otherwise
could not be used in the hexameter.

37. ἠθεῖε, a word of address specially
used between brothers; Z 518, 229,
239, and see also Ψ 94, ξ 147 ἀλλά py
ἠθεῖον καλέω καὶ νόσφιν ἐόντα. Aris-
tonikos calls it ἃ προσφώνησις νέου πρὸς
πρεσβύτερον.

38. érpuvéas, so Ar.: MSS. ὀτρύνεις.
ἐπίσκοπον, so Ar. and MSS.: there was
ἃ variant ἔπι σκοπόν, which Doderlein
and others have preferred. Both σκοπός
(x 396) and ἐπίσκοπος (X 255, Q 729, 6
163) are used in the sense of “overseer.”
It is quite possible to take Τρώεσσι
without a preposition as a sort of dat.
ethicus, though the construction with
ἔπι seems more natural. Again, while
σκοπός is the regular word for ‘‘spy” or
outpost (B 792, etc.), the addition of
ἐπι ἴῃ composition gives more force, as
implying one who goes to spy out the
foe, rather than a passive outpost; the
form may be compared with ὑφηνίοχος
beside the commoner ἡνίοχος (2 19). In
this equally balanced uncertainty, which
recurs in 1]. 342, we follow the best MS.
tradition.

40. The pres. inf. after verbs of pro-
mising is excessively rare (cf. however
Θ 246, I 683. In T 85 we should prob-
ably read πολεμίξειν for -lfew). But here
the construction is made easier by the
fact that the infin. is epexegetic of ἔργον,

though in N 366 we have ὑπέσχετο δὲ
μέγα ἔργον... ἀπωσέμεν.

44, ἐρύσσεται, fut., as T 811, Φ 176.
Others however take it as aor. subj., the
fut. act. being ἐρύω, as in A 454. In
that case oa should be written for
σαώσει, or the change of constr. will be
harsh

46. Did. mentions a variant which
seems to have been recognized by Aris-
tarchos, εἶχ᾽ lepotow, which has in its
favour the fact that it would be changed
to 07x’ on account of the supposed need
to avoid the hiatus (legitimate in the
bucolic diaeresis), but not vice versa.
Neither ἐπέχειν nor ἐπιτιθέναι φρένα re-
curs in Homer.

47. αὐδήσαντος, by word of mouth ;
whereas by the usual Homeric practice
it should mean, ‘‘I never heard any one
speaking,” see II 76, γ 337, ὃ 505, « 497.
In the Tragedians however αὐδᾶσθαι
means ‘‘to be noised abroad ” (e.g. Soph.
O. T. 731), which is correlative to the
present use.

48. ἐπὶ ἤματι, in a day’s space, as β
284 ἐπ᾽ quart πάντας ὀλέσθαι, μ 105, and
ἐπὶ νυκτὶ 8 529. Ar. ἐν quart, followed
bya few MSS. There is no antithesis be-
tween μητίσασθαι and ἔρρεξε : this would
require an οὐδέ in the former sentence,
and practically in Homeric language μη-
τίσασθαι implies ῥέξαι, like μήσατο in 52.

50. αὕτως, “just as he is,” without
extraneous aid.

928

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (x)

ἔργα δ᾽ ἔρεξ', ὅσα φημὶ μελησέμεν ᾿Αργείοισιν

δηθά τε καὶ δολιχόν' τόσα γὰρ κακὰ μήσατ' ᾿Αχαιούς.
ἀλλ᾽ ἴθι νῦν, Αἴαντα καὶ ᾿Ιδομενῆα κάλεσσον

ῥίμφα θέων παρὰ νῆας" ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἐπὶ Νέστορα δῖον

εἶμι, καὶ ὀτρυνέω ἀνστήμεναι, αἴ κ᾽ ἐθέλῃσιν 55
ἐλθεῖν ἐς φυλάκων ἱερὸν τέλος ἠδ᾽ ἐπιτεῖλαι.

κείνου γάρ κε μάλιστα πιθοίατο" τοῖο γὰρ υἱὸς

σημαίνει φυλάκεσσι καὶ ᾿Ιδομενῆος ὁπάων

Μηριόνης" τοῖσιν γὰρ ἐπετράπομέν γε μάλιστα."
τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Μενέλαος" 60
““ πῶς γάρ μοι μύθῳ ἐπιτέλλεαι ἠδὲ κελεύεις ;
αὖθι μένω μετὰ τοῖσι δεδεγμένος, εἰς ὅ κεν ἔλθῃς,
ἦε θέω μετὰ σ᾽ αὗτις, ἐπὴν ἐὺ τοῖς ἐπιτείλω ; ἢ"
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων"
“αὖθι μένειν, μή πως ἀβροτάξομεν ἀλλήλοιιν 65
ἐρχομένω" πολλαὶ yap ἀνὰ στρατόν εἶσι κέλευθοι.
φθέγγεο δ᾽, ἧ κεν ἴῃσθα, καὶ ἐγρήγορθαι ἄνωχθι,

51-52. Athetized by Aristarchos and
Aristophanes as tautological, not with-
out some reason.

53. Didymos says that Ar. read Αἴαντε,
but Telephos (a later and inferior wit-
ness however) denies this. In any case
only the greater Aias is actually sum-
moned. He and Idomeneuswere stationed
at the extremity of the camp: see 112.

56. In the absence of any evidence
that sentinels were invested with a sacred
character, or were regarded as being
under divine protection, it seems neces-
sary here to recur to the primary mean-
ing of ἱερός, ‘‘strong.” See note on A
366, and compare 22 681 ἱεροὺς πυλα-
wpots, ὦ 81 ᾿Αργείων ἱερὸς στρατός.
τέλος in the sense of ‘‘a band” recurs
in 470, and also in the phrase κατὰ
στρατὸν ἐν τελέεσσιν H 380, A 730, Σ
298, and occasionally in later Greek,
see Lexx. It is not clear why or what
orders are to be given to the sentinels,
who have been appointed only a few
hours, I 80; nor as a matter of fact are
any given in the sequel.

57. κείνον, so all the best MSS.; a
few give κείνῳ, which is evidently a
change to the more familiar construc-
tion. So in a 414 the right reading is
probably ἀγγελίης (not -ys) πείθομαι (v.
Fisi), and in Herod. i. 126, ἐμέο πεί-
θεσθαι. The old vulg. πυθοίατο is with-

out authority. For σημαίνειν with dat.
= to command, see A 289.

61. γάρ here expresses surprise, “‘ why,
how dost thou.” But it seems clear
that we require a simple continuative
particle, and Cobet’s conjecture (see
A 8) is probably right, “* how then dost
thou instruct me.” The asyndeton in
the next line is thus natural, as it
merely continues this question ; but if
we read γὰρ, and thus refer the question
to what precedes instead of what follows,
the sudden transition in 62 is very harsh.
μύθῳ is not elsewhere found with ἐπιτέλ-
λεσθαι, and seems superfluous.

62. αὖθι, sc. at the outposts, as ap-
pears from Agamemnon’s answer and
the sequel. μετὰ τοῖσι, sc. the sentinels.
δεδεγμένος, cf. Δ 107, Θ 296; generally
δεδεγμένος ὁππότε. This perfect always
means ‘‘ await.”

65. ἀβροτάξομεν stands to ἀμβροτεῖν
much as ἀβρότη to ἀμβρόσιος (see notes
on B 19, 651), the nasal having disa
peared after generating the 8. The
suffix -d{w however is very peculiar, and
should imply a noun-stem *d8pérn =
ἁμαρτία. Possibly this may point to an
old interpretation of νὺξ ἀβρότη as ‘‘ the
bewildering night,” which would suit the
passage where the phrase occurs (& 78).

67. ἐγρήγορθαι, the ‘‘ Acolic” accent
is traditional, and vouched for by He-
rodianus,

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (x)

329

/ 3 n 3 4 ΝΜ 4
πατρόθεν ἐκ γενεῆς ὀνομάξων ἄνδρα ἕκαστον,
πάντας κυδαίνων: μηδὲ μεγαλίζεο θυμῷ,
ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτοί περ πονεώμεθα" ὧδέ που ἄμμι 70
Ζεὺς ἐπὶ γεινομένοισιν ἵει κακότητα βαρεῖαν."
ὧς εἰπὼν ἀπέπεμπεν ἀδελφεὸν εὖ ἐπιτείλας.
3 ς a (4 379 / / ”
αὐτὰρ ὁ βῆ ῥ᾽ ἰέναι μετὰ Νέστορα ποιμένα λαῶν'
> φ , [4
τὸν δ᾽ εὗρεν παρά τε κλισίῃ καὶ νηὶ μελαίνῃ
εὐνῇ ἔνι μαλακῇ" παρὰ δ᾽ ἔντεα ποικίλ᾽ ἔκειτο, 75
ἀσπὶς καὶ δύο δοῦρε φαεινή τε τρυφάλεια"
\ \ A Φ ee ἐ N
πὰρ δὲ ζωστὴρ κεῖτο παναίολος, ᾧ ῥ᾽ ὁ γεραιὸς
, 3 Ψ 9 > , , , 7
ζώννυθ᾽, ὅτ᾽ ἐς πόλεμον φθισήνορα θωρήσσοιτο
λαὸν ἄγων, ἐπεὶ οὐ μὲν ἐπέτρεπε γήραϊ λυγρῷ.
3 \ > vy 9 3 9 A \ 3 ΄
ὀρθωθεὶς ὃ ap ἐπ ἄγκωνος, κεφαλὴν ἐπαείρας, 80
3 ’ 3 7
Ατρεΐδην προσέειπε καὶ ἐξερεείνετο μύθῳ"
“τίς δ᾽ οὗτος κατὰ νῆας ἀνὰ στρατὸν ἔρχεαι οἷος
νύκτα δι᾽ ὀρφναίην, ὅτε θ᾽ εὕδουσι βροτοὶ ἄλλοι;
ἠέ τιν᾽ οὐρήων διζήμενος ἤ τιν᾽ ἑταίρων;
φθέγγεο, μηδ᾽ ἀκέων ἐπ᾽ ἔμ᾽ ἔρχεο" τίπτε δέ σε χρεώ; 85
\ > 9 / > » ΝΜ 3 “Ὁ > /
τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν Ayapépuvor:
“ ὦ Νέστορ Νηληιάδη, μέγα κῦδος ᾿Αχαιῶν,
7 b 3 , \ \ 4
γνώσεαι Atpeldnv ᾿Αγαμέμνονα, τὸν περὶ πάντων
Ζεὺς ἐνέηκε πόνοισι διαμπερές, εἰς ὅ κ᾿’ ἀὐτμὴ
3 4 / , , 2 9 ᾽
ἐν στήθεσσι μένῃ Kat μοι φίλα γούνατ᾽ ὀρώρῃ. 90
͵ ΦΩ͂Σ 9 Ν 29 ¢ “
πλάζομαι ὧδ᾽, ἐπεὶ οὔ μοι ἐπ᾽ ὄμμασιν ἥδυμος ὕπνος

68. πατρόθεν ἐκ γενεῆς go together in
a single phrase, ‘‘ by his father’s, that
is, his family name.” This is actually
done in every case, see 87, 144, 159.

69. κυδαίνων seems to mean ‘‘ using
the full complimentary title,” such as
διογενές, μέγα κῦδος ᾿Αχαιῶν, etc. peya-
λίζο, do not be fastidious.

0. ὧδε, in such a way, to such an
extent, Zeus brought woe upon us at
our birth. yevopevourty (not γιγν- or
yw-) is the reading of the best MSS.

74. παρά: it would seem that Nestor,
like Odysseus, 1. 151, is sleeping outside
his hut, perhaps ὑπ᾽ αἰθούσῃ, as Q 644,
where the construction of a ‘‘soft bed ”
is described.

77. Yworhp, A 134.
the θώρηξ among the pieces of armour
named is curious.

79. ἐπέτρεπε, did not yield to; this
intrans. use occurs only here in Homer,

The omission of

cf. μὴ πάντα ἡλικίῃ καὶ θυμῷ ἐπίτρεπε,
Herod. iii. 36; Plato Legg. 802 B.

84, This line was athetized by Aris-
tarchos on account of the word odpets,
which he took to mean φύλαξ, a longer
form of οὖρος, guardian. So also Fasi,
Diintzer, and others, comparing πομπεύς
by πομπός, dporeds by Aporos. But
this is hardly tenable; οὐρεύς in the
sense of ‘‘mule” is too common a word
to admit of homonyms which might lead
to ambiguity. And there is something
peculiarly graphic in the idea of the
suddenly awakened sleeper asking the
intruder if he wants to find a friend or
a strayed mule—of which there were
many in the Greek camp, A 50, Ψ 111.
Schwartz has compared Ren. Anab, ii.
2, 20, where a night alarm occurs owing
to an ass straying among some armour.

88. γνώσεαι, “you shall know,” 8
mild imper.; as we say ‘‘you must
know.”

330

IAIAAOE K (x)

ἱξάνει, ἀλλὰ μέλει πόλεμος Kal κήδε" ᾿Αχαιῶν.
αἰνῶς γὰρ Δαναῶν περιδείδια, οὐδέ μοι ἧτορ
ἔμπεδον, ἀλλ᾽ ἀλαλύκτημαι, κραδίη δέ μοι ἔξω
στηθέων ἐκθρώσκει, τρομέει δ᾽ ὑπὸ φαίδιμα γυῖα. 95
ἀλλ᾽ εἴ τι Spaivess, ἐπεὶ οὐδὲ σέ γ᾽ ὕπνος ἱκάνει,
δεῦρ᾽ ἐς τοὺς φύλακας καταβήομεν, ὄφρα ἴδωμεν"
μὴ τοὶ μὲν καμάτῳ ἀδηκότες ἠδὲ καὶ ὕπνῳ
κοιμήσωνται, ἀτὰρ φυλακῆς ἐπὶ πάγχυ λάθωνται"
δυσμενέες δ᾽ ἄνδρες σχεδὸν εἵἴαται, οὐδέ τι ἴδμεν" 100
μή πως καὶ διὰ νύκτα μενοινήσωσι μάχεσθαι."

τὸν δ᾽ ἠἡμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα Γερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ"
“᾿Ατρεΐδη κύδιστε, ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγάμεμνον,
οὔ θην “Ἕκτορι πάντα νοήματα μητίετα Ζεὺς
ἐκτελέει, ὅσα πού νυν ἐέλπεται" ἀλλά μιν οἴω 105
κήδεσι μοχθήσειν καὶ πλείοσιν, εἴ κεν ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
ἐκ χόλου ἀργαλέοιο μεταστρέψῃ φίλον ἦτορ.
σοὶ δὲ μάλ᾽ Abou ἐγώ: ποτὶ δ᾽ αὖ καὶ ἐγείρομεν ἄλλους,
ἠμὲν Τυδείδην δουρικλυτὸν ἠδ᾽ ᾿Οδυσῆα

ἠδ᾽’ Αἴαντα ταχὺν καὶ Φυλέος ἄλκιμον υἱόν.

110

ἀλλ᾽ εἴ τις καὶ τούσδε μετοιχόμενος καλέσειεν,
3 , , ’ Ν \? a Ν
ἀντίθεόν τ Αἴαντα καὶ ᾿Ιδομενῆα ἄνακτα"

“Ὁ “Ὁ »
τῶν γὰρ νῆες ἔασιν ἑκαστάτω οὐδὲ μάλ᾽ ἐγγύς.
ἀλλὰ φίλον περ ἐόντα καὶ αἰδοῖον Μενέλαον

98. περιδείδια must be read in one
word, or the caesura disappears ; the best
MSS. however give πέρι δείδια, and this
Herodianus preferred here and in P 240,
where he takes the same view, dvacrper-
τέον τὴν πρόθεσιν ; in N 52 the preposi-
tion must go with the verb.

94. ἀλαλύκτημαι, ἄπαξ λεγόμενον, from
*dduxréw, standing to ἀλύω in the same
relation as ὑλακτέω to tAdw. We have
ἀλυκτάζω in Herod., ἀλύσσω in X 70.

96. Spalves, again ἄπ. Aecy., from
dpdw, here apparently in a desiderative
sense.

98. ἀδηκότες, so also 312, 399, 471;
else only in μ 281, and ἀδήσειεν a 134.
The.verb seems to be a secondary form
from ἄδην = σα-δῆην (root sa of sa-tur,
etc.), and thus to mean ‘‘satiated.”
ὕπνῳ, sleepiness. But Zen. put a comma
after ἀδηκότες, instead of at the end of
the line, and read ἡδέι for ἠδὲ καί.

100. The punctuation of this line is
doubtful. The colon is generally put at

εἴαται, and the comma at ἴδμεν, but
the real connexion of μή is not with
ἴδμεν, but with the whole thought of the
receding three lines; it is ly corre-
ative with μή in 98, and neither depends
upon ἴδωμεν. Rather both are almost in-
dependent sentences, though we have to
translate by ‘‘lest” ; μὴ with the subj.,
as Lange says (EI, p. 432), puts aside
an expectation. (For a somewhat dif-
ferent view see H. G. § 281.) The force
of the aorist μενοι must be ‘‘ lest
a desire come upon them.”

105. πού νυν ἐέλπεται. so the best MSS,
(though most accent viv); those of the
second class give wou viv ἔλπεται. For
the enclitic νυν = viv, now, cf. Ψ 485.
The text undoubtedly gives the best
caesura.

110. Φυλέος vidv, Meges, B 627.
111. εἰ with optative expresses a wish,

as often; cf. 222, IT 559, Q2 74, etc.
There is no ellipse to be supplied.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (x.)

331

/ Ν / 7 950) >» /
νεικέσω, εἴ πέρ μοι νεμεσήσεαι, οὐδ᾽ ἐπικεύσω, 11ὅ
b]
ὡς εὕδει, σοὶ δ᾽ οἴῳ ἐπέτρεψεν πονέεσθαι.
νῦν ὄφελεν κατὰ πάντας ἀριστῆας πονέεσθαι
’ 3 ’ 9?
λισσόμενος" χρειὼ γὰρ ἱκάνεται οὐκέτ᾽ ἀνεκτός.
\ ’ 4 / Μ 2 a δ ,
τὸν δ᾽ αὗτε προσέειπεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν Αγαμέμνων"
Ld
“ὦ γέρον, ἄλλοτε μέν σε Kal αἰτιάασθαι ἄνωγα" 120
πολλάκι γὰρ μεθιεῖ τε καὶ οὐκ ἐθέλει πονέεσθαι,
vo ¥ vo» 9 , ,
οὔτ᾽ ὄκνῳ εἴκων οὔτ᾽ ἀφραδίῃσι νόοιο,
9 > 9 , bf 3 ’ 4.3 A ’ ς ,
GAN ἐμέ T εἰσορόων καὶ ἐμὴν ποτιδέγμενος ὁρμήν.
A / >
νῦν δ᾽ ἐμέο πρότερος μάλ᾽ ἐπέγρετο Kal μοι ἐπέστη"
Ν Ν > N / / A \ A
TOV μὲν ἔγω προέηκα καλήμεναι, OVS συ μεταλλᾳς. 12ὅ
3 >» / \ / \ ’
ἀλλ᾽ ἴομεν" κείνους δὲ κιχησόμεθα πρὸ πυλάων
3 >>
ἐν φυλάκεσσ᾽' iva yap σφιν ἐπέφραδον ἠγερέθεσθαι.
\ > 2 / >” / ς , /
τὸν ὃ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα Γερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ"
» /
“οὕτως οὔ Tis οἱ νεμεσήσεται οὐδ ἀπιθήσει
, Α ί [τ , > ) ὔ ὶ Σ ἢ 2) 130
ργείων, ὅτε κέν τιν᾽ ἐποτρύνῃ Kal ἀνώγῃ.
/ wn
ὧς εἰπὼν évduve περὶ στήθεσσι χιτῶνα,
bf A
ποσσὶ δ᾽ ὑπὸ λιπαροῖσιν ἐδήσατο καλὰ πέδιλα,
3 \ > ΜΝ a / /
ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄρα χλαῖναν περονήσατο φοινικόεσσαν,
“Ὁ 3 “ wv > 9 ὔ 4
διπλῆν ἐκταδίην, ovrAn δ᾽ ἐπενήνοθε λάχνη.
᾽ A
εἵλετο δ᾽ ἄλκιμον ἔγχος, ἀκαχμένον ὀξέι χαλκῷ, 135
fe! 2 “~ b [οἱ
βῆ δ᾽ ἰέναι κατὰ νῆας Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων.
A ΝΜ > » A \ A 4 4
πρῶτον ἔπειτ Οδυσῆα Διὶ μῆτιν ἀτάλαντον
3 fod 3 4 4 e , f
ἐξ ὕπνου ἀνέγειρε Γερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ

115. εἴ περ, so Ar., al. εἰ καί. The
sense is the same, cf. A 55.
116. ὡς εὕδει = ὅτι οὕτως. This sense

comes from the subordination of an
originally paratactic exclamation, “ How
he sleeps!” (and so indeed Nikanor
thinks it might be taken here, καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸ
ἀναγνωστέον τὸ ““ ὡς eter” ἐν θαυμασμῷ᾽
ἢ τοῖς ἄνω συναπτέον).

120. For σε Nauck conj. é; else we
must supply αὐτόν after αἰτιάασθαι.

124. in for ἐμεῖο occurs only here
in H. It is however a genuine form
occurring in Ionic prose, and is a tran-
sitional stage towards ἐμεῦ, correspond-
ing to the genitive in -oo between -oo
and -ov. ἐπέστη, came to me.

127. As the text stands tva must be
demonstrative, ‘‘ there”; a use of which
there is no other example in Greek. In
order therefore to introduce the sense
‘‘where,” Bekker conj. 7’ &p, Hermann

wep, Barnes φυλάκεσσιν, ἵνα σῴιν, while
Hentze thinks γὰρ here may be for γ᾽ ἄρ.
Possibly however the demonstrative use
may be defended by the close connexion
of the demonstrative and relative stems ;
in order to mean where tva must have
passed through a stage when it meant
**there.” The commentators compare ὃ
yap γέρας ἐστὶ θανόντων Ψ 9, for τὸ γάρ.

ἐρέθεσθαι, so the editions of Aristar-
chos, rightly. Our MSS. give ἠγερέεσ-
θαι. Zenod. read μιν for σφιν.

188. φοινικόεσσαν is to be read as
two spondees with synizesis. For the
nature of the archaic περόνη see Helbig,
p. 144; and for ἐκταδίη p. 135, where
the word is explained to mean ‘‘ smooth,
capable of being put on without a fold.”
See note on τανύπεπλος, I’ 228.

134. ἐπενήνοθε, see B 219, whence the
phrase seems to have been imitated, not
very successfully.

ose

eee - oes ἀδο.

- 7."

wees αν
~ oe

ar eld si ee

ae oe aes ee ee

—=+
es =

OS se he hy SE τς

=F, « *-

332 IAIAAOE K (x)

φθεγξάμενος" τὸν δ᾽ αἶψα περὶ φρένας HAVO’ ian,
ἐκ δ᾽ ἦλθε κλισίης καί σφεας πρὸς μῦθον ἔειπεν" 14
“χίφθ᾽ οὕτω κατὰ νῆας ἀνὰ στρατὸν οἷοι ἀλᾶσθε
νύκτα δι᾿ ἀμβροσίην; ὅτι δὴ χρειὼ τόσον ἵκει;

τὸν δ᾽ ἡμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα Γερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ"
“ διογενὲς Λαερτιάδη, πολυμήχαν᾽ ᾿Οδυσσεῦ,
μὴ νεμέσα' τοῖον γὰρ ἄχος βεβίηκεν ᾿Αχαιούς" 14
ἀλλ᾽ Ere, ὄφρα καὶ ἄλλον ἐγείρομεν, ὅν τ᾽ ἐπέοικεν
βουλὰς βουλεύειν, ἢ φευγέμεν ἠὲ μάχεσθαι."

ὧς φάθ᾽, ὁ δὲ κλισίηνδε κιὼν πολύμητις ᾿Οδυσσεὺς"
ποικίλον ἀμφ᾽ ὥὦμοισι σάκος θέτο, βῆ δὲ μετ᾽ αὐτούς.
βὰν δ᾽ ἐπὶ Τυδεΐδην Διομήδεα" τὸν δὲ κίχανον 15
ἐκτὸς ἀπὸ κλισίης σὺν τεύχεσιν" ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἑταῖροι
εὗδον, ὑπὸ κρασὶν δ᾽ ἔχον ἀσπίδας" ἔγχεα δέ σφιν
ὄρθ᾽ ἐπὶ σαυρωτῆρος ἐλήλατο, τῆλε δὲ χαλκὸς
Adu’ ὥς τε στεροπὴ πατρὸς Διός" αὐτὰρ ὅδ᾽ γ᾽ ἥρως
εὗδ᾽, ὑπὸ δ᾽ ἔστρωτο ῥινὸν βοὸς ἀγραύλοιο, 15
αὐτὰρ ὑπὸ κράτεσφι τάπης τετάνυστο φαεινός.

139. The idea of a sound coming round
ἃ person is not uncommon in Homer, cf.
B 41 θείη δέ μιν dudéxur’ ὀμφή, τ 444
(x 6) τὸν. . . περὶ κτύπος ἦλθε ποδοῖν,
and p 261 περὶ δέ σφεας ἤλυθ᾽ ἰωή. For
the φρένες as the organ in which sleep is
situated cf. = 164, τῷ δ᾽ ὕπνον. . . χεύῃ
ἐπὶ βλεφάροισιν ἰδὲ φρεσίν (Fulda). lof,
860 Δ 276.

142. It is doubtful whether there
should be a note of interrogation, or
only a comma, after ἀμβροσίην. In the
former case we must understand ‘“‘ is it
because so great need has come ?” or else
we must read ὅ τι, and take it to be an
indirect, virtually equivalent to a direct,
question, owing to an ellipse of the words
‘*tell me,” which is not possible. So
Schol. A, “ἀντὶ τοῦ τί δὴ χρειὼ τόσον
ἵκει," comparing a 171, ὁπποίης τ᾽ ἐπὶ
νηὸς ἀφίκεο, where however κατάλεξον has
preceded at an interval of only one line.
f we put a comma after ἀμβροσίην we
may assume a curious inversion of ex-
pression, instead of ‘‘what need has
come on you that you wander”; but
this (La Roche’s) explanation is very
harsh. Or again we may read 8 τι and
explain it as an accusative of relation,
‘*on what account do you thus wander,
in respect of which need has so much
come?’’ So Mr. Monro, comparing A

82, rl. . . τόσσα κακὰ ῥέζουσιν, ὅ τ᾽ de
περχὲς μενεαίνεις : our choice seems to li
between the first and the last of thes
alternatives. For ἀμβροσίη as an epithe
of night see B 19.

146. Se’, so Ar. and Townl.; th
rest give &rev.

147. This line is almost undoubtedl
spurious, interpolated from 327, with th
intention of supplying an infin. to ἐπι
oxey, which does not need one. Th
question of fighting or flying is not on
which has to be discussed at all now ; |
has already been settled in the Agor
at the beginning, and the council at th
end, of the preceding book. (So va
Herwerden and Hentze. )

151. ἐκτὸς ἀπό seem to go togethe
and to mean simply ‘‘outside.” Th
modern Greek idiom happens to be pre
cisely the same, ἔξω ἀπὸ τὸ σπίτι =
‘* outside the house.”

153. σανρωτήρ, the spike at the but
end of the spear—not elsewhere namec
See J. H. S. iv. p. 801. Aristophane
read σαυρωτῆρας.

155. ὑπέστρωτο ῥινόν, like περικεῖσθε
τελαμῶνα, ξίφος, etc., in Herod., an
ἐπιειμένος ἀλκήν.

156. κράτεσφι, a form which can onl
be explained as an artificial coi ο
the false analogy of στήθεσφι and th

Ν \ 3 ’ , e / /
Tov παρστὰς aveyeipe L'epnvios ἕππότα Νέστωρ,
λὰξ ποδὶ κινήσας, ὥτρυνέ te νείκεσέ τ᾽ ἄντην'

i 4

f τ’ [ ’ [τ 9 a
ὄρσεο, Τυδέος υἱέ: τί πάννυχον ὕπνον ἀωτεῖς ;
3 3 e -“΄ 3 la) /
οὐκ ales, ὡς Τρῶες ἐπὶ θρωσμῷ πεδίοιο

“ bd A 3 [4 > ow A > ἢ 99
εἴαται ἄγχι νεῶν, ὀλίγος δ᾽ ἔτι χῶρος ἐρύκει;

καί μιν φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
4
“ σχέτλιός ἐσσι, γεραιέ' σὺ μὲν πόνου οὔ ποτε λήγεις.

οὔ νυ καὶ ἄλλοι ἔασι νεώτεροι υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν,

6, Ν Ψ 3 ᾽ὔ
οἵ κεν ἔπειτα ἕκαστον ἐγείρειαν βασιλήων

4 /
πάντῃ ἐποιχόμενοι;

\ ᾽ 4 , , e / /
τὸν δ᾽ αὗτε προσέειπε Γερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ'
ce \ [ον 4 4 ’ a ΝΜ
ναὶ δὴ ταῦτά γε πάντα, φίλος, κατὰ μοῖραν ἔειπες.

εἰσὶν μέν μοι παῖδες ἀμύμονες, εἰσὶ δὲ λαοὶ

καὶ πολέες, τῶν κέν τις ἐποιχόμενος καλέσειεν'
ἀλλὰ μάλα μεγάλη χρειὼ βεβίηκεν ᾿Αχαιούς"
νῦν γὰρ δὴ πάντεσσιν ἐπὶ ξυροῦ ἵσταται ἀκμῆς,
ἢ μάλα λυγρὸς ὄλεθρος ᾿Αχαιοῖς ἠὲ βιῶναι.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (x.) 333
160

ὧς φάθ᾽, ὁ δ᾽ ἐξ ὕπνοιο μάλα κραυπνῶς ἀνόρουσεν,
165

A > 93 4 4 4 499
σὺ δ᾽ ἀμήχανός ἐσσι, γεραιέ.

170
178

ἀλλ᾽ ἴθι νῦν, Αἴαντα ταχὺν καὶ Φυλέος υἱὸν

like: there is no stem xparec-. κρασίν
in 152, though it does not recur in
Homer, is sufficiently defended by the
common κρατί.

159. MSS. are divided between ὄρσεο
and &ypeo, but the best give the former.
Ar. also varied. ἀωτεῖς, only here and
x 548. The word seems to be formed
from the root aF to breathe, through a
stage dF-oF-ros, and thus means ‘‘to
breathe heavily,” perhaps even ‘‘ to
snore.” See I 661.

160. The θρωσμὸς πεδίοιο is a locality
which is mentioned again in T 3, A
56; see the note on the latter pass-

age.

ered. σχέτλιος, ‘‘hard,” here in the
physical sense, full of endurance, and
80 μὶ 279, σχέτλιός els, ᾿Οδυσεῦ, πέρι τοι
μένος, οὐδέ τι γυῖα κάμνεις. Hence the
derived sense ““ hard of heart,” full of
resistance to entreaty.

166. ἔπειτα, ‘‘then” or ‘‘ therefore,”
1.6. because they are younger. There is
no exactly similar use of the adverb in
Homer. .

167. ἀμήχανος, not to be dealt with,
‘“‘unmanageable”; a half playful re-
proach from a younger to an elder man.

178, The proverbial expression is a

common one in Greek, occurring in Herod.
vi. 11, Theognis 557, Simonides 99 ; cf.
Soph. Ant. 996 φρόνει βεβὼς αὖ viv ἐπὶ
ξυροῦ τύχης, and perhaps Aesch. Cho.
883. Neither ἀκμή nor ξυρόν recurs in
Homer, nor is the practice of shaving
mentioned. This however is not an
argument against the antiquity of this
passage, as razors of very high antiquity

ave been found among remains of the
bronze period in Italy, and perhaps
Greece ; the Homeric heroes probably
shaved the upper lip (Helbig, p. 171
sqq.). In fact the ἧκε. kshurd = ξυρόν
shews that the practice may even date
from Indo-European days (cf. Schrader,
S. und U. p. 58).

174. For the use of the infinitive here
ef. I 280 ; ἵσταται is really an impersonal
verb, and the substantive ὄλεθρος is not
added in a very strict construction.
Logically, the idea is ‘‘ the state of all is
on the razor’s edge (balancing) between
destruction and safety.” But the juxta-

osition of ὄλεθρος and βιῶναι is a curious
instance of the process by which the
infin. in later Greek came to be used as a
noun, and might well have been quoted
in the instructive remarks on this point
in Η. 6. § 284.

334

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (x.)

ἄνστησον, σὺ γάρ ἐσσι νεώτερος, εἴ μ᾽ ἐλεαίρεις."

ὧς φάθ᾽, ὁ δ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ὥμοισιν ἑέσσατο δέρμα λέοντος
αἴθωνος μεγάλοιο ποδηνεκές, εἵλετο δ᾽ ἔγχος.

A > 9, A > ν 3 4 bd

βῆ δ᾽ ἰέναι, τοὺς δ᾽ ἔνθεν ἀναστήσας ἄγεν ἥρως.

οἱ δ᾽ ὅτε δὴ φυλάκεσσιν ἐν ἀγρομένοισιν ἔμεχθεν, 180

3 \ [νὰ 4 e , 4
οὐδὲ μὲν εὕδοντας φυλάκων ἡγήτορας εὗρον,
ἀλλ᾽ ἐγρηγορτὶ σὺν τεύχεσιν εἵατο πάντες.
ὡς δὲ κύνες περὶ μῆλα δυσωρήσονται ἐν αὐλῇ
θηρὸς ἀκούσαντες κρατερόφρονος, ὅς τε καθ᾽ ὕλην
ἔρχηται δι’ ὄρεσφι" πολὺς δ᾽ ὀρυμαγδὸς ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ 185
ἀνδρῶν ἠδὲ κυνῶν, ἀπό τέ σφισιν ὕπνος ὄλωλεν"
Φφ A Ψ fod > \ 4 4 ΄
ὧς τῶν ἥδυμος ὕπνος ἀπὸ βλεφάροιιν ὀλώλειν
νύκτα φυλασσομένοισι κακήν" πεδίονδε γὰρ αἰεὶ
7 δ] ς 4, 9 9 , 3. ἢ 4 ἢ

τετράφαθ, ommot ἐπὶ Τρώων ἀίοιεν ἰοντων.

Ἁ ε / 4 ION 4 / a
tous 8 ὁ γέρων γήθησεν ἰδὼν θάρσυνέ τε μύθῳ 190
[καί σφεας φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα ]"
“οὕτω νῦν, φίλα τέκνα, φυλάσσετε' μηδέ τιν᾽ ὕπνος
αἱρείτω, μὴ χάρμα γενώμεθα δυσμενέεσσιν."

φ 3 Ἁ 4 / > wi 37

ὧς εἰπὼν τάφροιο διέσσυτο" Tol ὃ ἅμ ἕποντο
᾿Αργείων βασιλῆες, ὅσοι κεκλήατο βουλήν. 196

179. τούς, sc. Aias and Meges: ἔνθεν,
from their huts.

180. See I 209, of which this line is
not a very happy reminiscence ; as there
it alludes to an assembly to which the
Trojans were called, whereas in the case
of the sentinels there is nothing of the
sort. οὐδέ, an unusual form of the
common δέ in apodost.

183. δυσωρήσονται, so all MSS.; almost
all edd. however give δυσωρήσωσιν, from
Apoll. Zex., on the ground that the
form in -σονται cannot stand in a simile,
being a future. It would of course be
easy to emend -cwvra, but it is a ques-
tion if this is necessary ; the rule which
our texts follow, that the long vowel in
subjunctive forms is written whenever
the metre admits it even in non-thematic
tenses (H. G. § 80), looks like an at-
tempt to reduce the Homeric forms as
far as possible to the analogy of later
Greek. Analogy would certainly lead
us to suppose that the short forms of
the aor. subj. in -ομεν, -ere, etc., implied
vowels short by nature even where they
were long by position. I have therefore
followed Christ here in restoring the MS.
reading, though not in the other passages

where the vulg. -cwvra: is supported by
nearly all MSS., Θ 511, Καὶ 99, M 168,
N 745, P 134. The verb itself seems to
come from ὥρα, and to mean ‘‘ kee in-
ful watch.” The use of the middle may
be supported by forms like εὐλαβεῖσθαι,
εὐθηνεῖσθαι, εὐωχεῖσθαι, etc., though the
act. is certainly more usual.

188. φνλασσομένοισι : for the chan
of case after τῶν 866 H. G. § 248 (4); it
is perhaps made easier by σῴισιν in 186.

189. ππότε, not ‘‘ whenever,” for the
Trojans are not attacking; but like
εἴ wore B 97, ὅτε — 522, ‘‘ against the
time when they should hear,’’ 1.6.
ing to hear, this idea being implied in
the preceding words. The full phrase
δέγμενος ὁππότε occurs B 794, etc., cf.
A 334. ἐπί may go either with dfocer or
ἰόντων, but better with the last; éwatw
does not occur in Homer.

191. Omitted in the best MSS., AD
Townl.

194. The sentinels are in the
between wall and moat, I 87. They
now go out into the open plain.

195. βονλήν, acc. of the terminus ad
quem, only here with καλεῖν, and rarely
with any verbs except those which im-

IAIAAOS K (x)

335

τοῖς δ᾽ ἅμα Μηριόνης καὶ Νέστορος ἀγλαὸς vids
ἤισαν" αὐτοὶ γὰρ κάλεον συμμητιάασθαι.
΄ὔ >» , 2 \ e /
τάφρον δ᾽ ἐκδιαβάντες ὀρυκτὴν ἑδριόωντο
> a a \ 4 , fa)
ἐν καθαρῷ, ὅθι δὴ νεκύων διεφαίνετο χῶρος

πιπτόντων, ὅθεν adtis ἀπετράπετ᾽ ὄβριμος “Extwp

200

ὀλλὺς ᾿Αργείους, ὅτε δὴ περὶ νὺξ ἐκάλυψεν"
ἔνθα καθεζόμενοι ἔπε᾽ ἀλλήλοισι πίφαυσκον.
΄σ΄ , , e ’ ,
τοῖσι δὲ μύθων ἦρχε Γερήνιος ἱππότα Neotwp:
“ὦ φίλοι, οὐκ ἂν δή τις ἀνὴρ πεπίθοιθ᾽ ἑῷ αὐτοῦ

θυμῷ τολμήεντι μετὰ Τρῶας μεγαθύμους

205

ἐλθεῖν, εἴ τινά που δηίων ὅλοι ἐσχατόωντα,
ΝΜ 4 fol 9 4 4,
ἤ τινά που καὶ φῆμιν ἐνὶ Τρώεσσι πύθοιτο,
ἅσσα τε μητιόωσι μετὰ σφίσιν, ἢ μεμάασιν
bd / \ 3 / ’
αὖθι μένειν παρὰ νηυσὶν ἀπόπροθεν, he πόλινδε
ἂψ ἀναχωρήσουσιν, ἐπεὶ δαμάσαντό γ᾽ ᾿Αχαιούς; 210
ἴω / 4 ’ 2 e 4
ταῦτά Te πάντα πύθοιτο, Kal ary εἰς ἡμέας ἔλθοι

ply reaching a point (Η. 6. § 140, 8).
Cf. Z 87, ξυνάγουσα γεραιὰς νηόν. For
the regular members of the βουλή see
B 53.

199. See Θ 491, where the line is
used of quite another place, νόσφι νεῶν.

200. πιπτόντων is hardly to be ex-
plained ; it could only mean that men
were still falling. Christ conjectures
πεπτεότων, Renner τεθνεώτων.

204. There is considerable doubt as
to the punctuation of the whole of this
speech of Nestor’s, the note of interroga-
tion having been variously put after
ἐλθεῖν (206), ᾿Αχαιούς (210), and ἀσκηθής
(212). That adopted in the text is
Hentze’s. The true explanation is
mainly due to Lange (EI, p. 381). In
206 ef goes immediately with ἐλθεῖν, to
go ‘‘in the hope that”; and ἕλοι and
πύθοιτο are co-ordinate. Then ἅσσα is
explanatory of φῆμιν, as expressing the
contents of the supposed rumour, and is
again divided into the two alternatives
h—he. The optatives in 211 resume
that after οὐκ ἂν in 204; in form they
are a wish, in reality they are only a
suggestion in form of a hope, ‘I should
like him to find out’’—a shade of mean-
ing which we express by ‘‘he might.”
If we read xe for re with some MSS.
(v. note on 211), the expression would be
more confident, ‘‘he would”; but this
is better reserved till 212, where κεν
indicates a result which in that case is
asserted to follow upon the assumed

condition, being virtually equivalent to
the future ἔσσεται. e may in fact
regard the clause μέγα κέν. . . εἴη as
an apodosis to the sentence ταῦτα. ..
ἀσκηθής, which in effect, though not in
form, is a protasis. This weakening of
the simple optative from a wish to a
supposition 18 indeed, as Lange has
shewn, the origin of the conditional
protasis; the εἰ is only a sign of the
manner in which the optative is used,
not, in its origin, an indispensable factor
in the expression of a condition. A
similar use of the opt. to express a con-
dition, followed by an apodosis with κεν,
occurs in α 265, the difference being that
there the opt. resumes a wish introduced
by εἰ (255): here the wish is put in the
form of a question with οὐκ ἄν. So also
σ 368-370, where however the apodosis
is postponed till 375. (So in the main
Hentze. )

207. ἐν recurs only in Od. The
Schol A. ilustrates it by a well-known
story: Λακεδαιμονίων βουλευομένων ποῖον
χῶρον ἐπιτειχίσουσι τῆς ᾿Αττικῆς, ᾿Αλκι-
βιάδης συνεβούλευσε πέμπειν εἰς ᾿Αθήνας
κατασκόπους, οἵτινες παραγενόμενοι ἤκουσαν
αὐτῶν τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων διαλεγομένων ὅτι τὴν
Δεκέλειαν μέλλουσιν ἐπιτειχίζξειν οἱ πολέ-
μιοι᾿ καὶ οὕτως Λακεδαιμόνιοι ἐπετείχισαν
τὴν Δεκέλειαν.

209. ἀπόπροθεν, 1.6. from the city
the ellipse is filled up by πόλινδε immedi-
ately succeeding.

211. The MS. evidence is fairly divided

336

IAIAAOE K (x)

2 ’ / / ee 4
ἀσκηθής" μέγα κέν οἱ ὑπουράνιον κλέος εἴη

, > » 9 , e / 3 ’
πάντας ἐπ᾽. ἀνθρώπους" καί οἱ δόσις ἔσσεται ἐσ θλή"
ὅσσοι γὰρ νήεσσιν ἐπικρατέουσιν ἄριστοι,

A , ew ὄ ὃ 4 /
τῶν πάντων οἱ ἕκαστος ὄιν δώσουσι μέλαιναν 215

A / A a“
θῆλυν ὑπόρρηνον" τῇ μὲν KTépas οὐδὲν ὁμοῖον"

ON > 3 “4 \ , 3»
αἰεὶ δ᾽ ἐν δαίτῃσι καὶ εἴλαπίνῃσι παρέσται.

Φ ” θ᾽ e δ᾽ ΝΜ ’ 2 A > » σι

as ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ ὃ ἄρα πάντες ἀκὴν ἐγένοντο σεωπῇ.

A \ / \ 3 \ A
τοῖσι δὲ καὶ μετέειπε βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης"
““ Νέστορ, ἔμ᾽ ὀτρύνει κραδίη καὶ θυμὸς ἀγήνωρ 990
ἀνδρῶν δυσμενέων δῦναι στρατὸν ἐγγὺς ἐόντων,

3
Τρώων". ἀλλ᾽ εἴ τίς μοι ἀνὴρ ἅμ᾽ ἕποιτο καὶ ἄλλος"
μᾶλλον θαλπωρὴ καὶ θαρσαλεώτερον ἔσται.
᾽ “A
σύν τε δύ᾽ ἐρχομένω, καί Te πρὸ ὁ TOD ἐνόησεν,
“A ᾽

ὅππως κέρδος ἔῃ" μοῦνος δ᾽ εἴ πέρ τε νοήσῃ, 295
ἀλλά τέ οἱ βράσσων τε νόος λεπτὴ δέ TE μῆτις.᾽

between κε and te; the former is given
by C and D, the latter by the rest, A
having κ written over the τ Nikanor
in Schol. A also reads re, the argument
in favour of which has already been
given. The clause being a resumption
of what precedes, τε goes with καί, and
means ‘‘ both.”

212. ὑπουράνιον, ἰ.6. over all the
earth, virtually identical with πάντας ἐπ᾽
ἀνθρώπους.

214. The phrase νήεσσιν ἐπικρατέουσιν
is unusual; the line looks almost like
an adaptation from a 245, νήσοισιν being
changed into νήεσσιν.

215. πάντων, as we should say ‘‘with-
out exception”; but the phrase is a
rather awkward one, and so is ἕκαστος
immediately followed by the plural.
The omission of the F of ἕκαστος too is
very rare. In 216 τῇ. . . ὅμοιον is an
obvious exaggeration, as a dozen ewes
with their lambs would be of very little
value. As for the promised standing
invitation, it may be noticed that all the
chiefs who are present, with the excep-
tion of Meriones and Thrasymachos,
already share of right in the feasts of the
γέροντες : cf. B 53, 4259. These numer-
ous objections seem to indicate that 214
(or acc. to Nauck 213) -217 are an inter-
polation—perhaps from the time when
the democratic σίτησις ἐν πρυτανείῳ had
become a familiar institution as a reward
for public service.

222. As Nikanor remarks, we may
put either a comma or a colon at the

end of this line; it is impossible to say
whether the clause ef . . . ἕποιτο is 8
wish or a regular conditional protasis.
This is a very illustration of the
way in which the conditional sentence
has been developed from the parataxis
of a wish and the expected result.

224-6. The recurrence of τε in these
three lines is remarkable ; it seems to be
an instance of the primitive use in which
it was simply a mark that the two clauses
in which ve. . . re occur are correlative,
from which the use as a conjunction
strictly speaking has been developed.
Thus εἴ περ, the condition, is correlative
to the apodosis which is stated tac-
tically by ἀλλά, while in the other two
clauses containing re... re the co
ordination in pairs is obvious. The
connexion of this use with the gnomic
re (almost = ro) is not clear; the two
are possibly quite distinct. The gnomic
ve would of course be in place in such a
sentence as the present, but it is not used
in pairs. ἐρχομένω, a nom. pendens, like
Γ 211, ἄμφω 3° ἑζομένω, yepapwrepos ho
᾿Οδυσσεύς. The old vulgate ἐρχομένων,
evidently a correction, is found only in
one or two inferior MSS. πρὸ & τοῦ:
for this order of words cf. E 219, ἐπὶ rq
τῷδ᾽ dvdpl. The meaning is of course
that sometimes one, sometimes the other,
is quickest to mark.

226. βράσσων : apparently this must
be the comp. of βραχύς, for Bpax juw
(Curt. £¢.5 p. 672), though the adj. is
not found elsewhere in 4 The sense

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (x)

337

ὧς ἔφαθ᾽, of δ᾽ ἔθελον Διομήδεϊ πολλοὶ ἕπεσθαι"
ἠθελέτην Αἴαντε δύω, θεράποντες ἔΑρηος,
ἤθελε Μηριόνης, μάλα δ᾽ ἤθελε Νέστορος υἱός,
ἤθελε δ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδης δουρικλειτὸς Μενέλαος, 230
ἤθελε δ᾽ ὁ τλήμων ᾿Οδυσεὺς καταδῦναι ὅμιλον
Τρώων" αἰεὶ γάρ οἱ ἐνὶ φρεσὶ θυμὸς ἐτόλμα.
τοῖσι δὲ καὶ μετέειπεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων᾽
“Τυδεΐδη Διόμηδες, ἐμῷ κεχαρισμένε θυμῷ,
τὸν μὲν δὴ ἕταρόν γ᾽ αἱρήσεαι, ὅν κ᾽ ἐθέλῃσθα, 235
φαινομένων Tov ἄριστον, ἐπεὶ μεμάασί ye πολλοί.
μηδὲ σύ γ᾽ αἰδόμενος σῇσι φρεσὶ τὸν μὲν ἀρείω
καλλείπειν, σὺ δὲ χείρον᾽ ὀπάσσεαι αἰδοῖ εἴκων,
ἐς γενεὴν ὁρόων, pnd εἰ βασιλεύτερός dot.”

ὧς ἔφατ᾽, ἔδεισεν δὲ περὶ ξανθῷ Μενελάφ. 240
τοῖς δ᾽ αὗτις μετέειπε βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης"
“ εἰ μὲν δὴ ἕταρόν γε κελεύετέ μ᾽ αὐτὸν ἑλέσθαι,
πῶς ἂν ἔπειτ᾽ ᾿Οδυσῆος ἐγὼ θείοιο λαθοίμην,
οὗ πέρι μὲν πρόφρων κραδίη καὶ θυμὸς ἀγήνωρ
ἐν πάντεσσι πόνοισι, φιλεῖ δέ ἑ Παλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη. 245
τούτου γε σπομένοιο καὶ ἐκ πυρὸς αἰθομένοιο
ἄμφω νοστήσαιμεν, ἐπεὶ περίοιδε νοῆσαι."

will be, ‘‘his mind does not reach so
far,” he is ‘‘shorter of sight’ as we
should say. It has generally been
referred to βραδύς, which gives a better
sense, as quickness of perception is the
point in 224; but Bpadjw could only
make βράζων. It was probably the
knowledge of this which led Aristarchos
to the strange idea that βράσσων is a
participle meaning “confused,” ‘‘ per
turbed,” ταρασσόμενος. λεπτή, only here
and 590 (the same phrase) in a meta-
phorical sense. It probably means
‘*flimsy,”’ wavering, as in the phrase
φρένες ἠερέθονται 1' 108.

231. τλήμων, cf. 498, E 670, Φ 480,
the only instances in Homer, all in the
sense of ‘‘enduring.” The use of the
article 6 seems to be post-Homeric.

235. αἱρήσεαι, “1 expect you to
choose,” which may be taken either as a

rmission or as a modified imperative.

f. 2 11.

286. φαινομένων, a curious use which
must mean “as they present themselves.”
Hence Doderlein conj. φαινόμενον, to
which Paech has added τοι for τόν. But

Z

the later use of the article is common in
this book.

237. al&dpevos, from a feeling of
respect ; as ¢ 329, aldero γάρ ῥα warpoxa-
σίγνητον.

238. σὺ δέ, repeated to enforce the
opposition of clauses, not of persons.
This is common enough when the pro-
noun has not been expressed before, but
is very rare in cases like this where an
emphatic σύ ye precedes. ὀπάσσααι,
aor. subj., as regularly after μή; some
have taken it as a ‘‘jussive” future, but
this does not seem in place here.

240. Omitted by Zenod. and athetized
by Ar. as superfluous. It clearly gives
the meaning which is meant to lurk in
the preceding line; and it is more in
the Epic style that this should be openly
expressed than left to be understood.
Thus if it be rejected 239 should probably
go with it; Agamemnon’s remarks are
then quite general in their application.

246. σπομένοιο, so Ptol. Ask.: MSS.
ἑσπομένοιο. On this question see note on
E 423.

247. νοστήσαιμεν without ἄν, another

998

IAIAAO® K (Ὁ

τὸν δ᾽ αὗτε προσέειπε πολύτλας δῖος ᾿Οδυσσεύς-
“Τυδεΐδη, μήτ᾽ ἄρ με μάλ᾽ aivee μήτε τι νείκει"
εἰδόσι γάρ τοι ταῦτα μετ᾽ ᾿Αργείοις ἀγορεύεις. 250
ἀλλ᾽ ἴομεν: μάλα yap νὺξ ἄνεται, ἐγγύθι δ᾽ ἠώς,
ἄστρα δὲ δὴ προβέβηκε, παρῴχωκεν δὲ πλέων νὺξ
[τῶν δύο μοιράων, τριτάτη δ᾽ ἔτι μοῖρα λέλειπται).
ὧς εἰπόνθ᾽ ὅπλοισιν ἔνι δεινοῖσιν ἐδύτην.
Τυδεΐδῃ μὲν δῶκε μενεπτόλεμος Θρασυμήδης 255
φάσγανον ἄμφηκες, τὸ δ᾽ ἑὸν παρὰ νηὶ λέλειπτο,
καὶ σάκος" ἀμφὶ δέ οἱ κυνέην κεφαλῆφιν ἔθηκεν
ταυρείην, ἄφαλόν τε καὶ ἄλλοφον, ἧ τε καταῖτυξ
κέκληται, ῥύεται δὲ κάρη θαλερῶν αἰζηῶν.
Μηριόνης δ᾽ ᾿Οδυσῆι δίδου βιὸν ἠδὲ φαρέτρην 260
καὶ ξίφος, ἀμφὶ δέ οἱ κυνέην κεφαλῆφιν ἔθηκεν
ῥινοῦ ποιητήν" πολέσιν δ᾽ ἔντοσθεν ἱμᾶσιν
ἐντέτατο στερεῶς, ἔκτοσθε δὲ λευκοὶ ὀδόντες

case where the strict sense of the opt. is
becoming weakened: it is just on the
borderland between ‘‘I wish we may
return” and ‘‘I hope, expect we shall
return.” H. 6. § 299 αὶ

249. μήτε τι νείκει is superfluous ac-
cording to our ideas: we can express it
by saying ‘‘there is no more need of
praise than of blame”; or perhaps there
may be a thought of divine ‘‘ nemesis,”
‘*do not praise me over much, even as I
hope you will not defame me.” It is
really an instance of the tendency which
we find in Latin as well as in Greek to
emphasize a word by means of its con-
trary ; as in phrases like fas nefasque,
etc., where the second member is often
superfluous.

252. The MSS. all give παρῴχηκεί(ν),
and a majority πλέω for πλέων. Accord-
ing to Didymus, Ar. read παρῴχωκεν.
There is considerable variation between
olxwxa and ᾧχωκα in other passages
(Aesch. Pers. 13, Soph. Aiax 896, and
in Herodotus); but there is no good
authority for the form ofxnxa till quite
late (Polyb.). The next line was omitted
by Zenod. and athetized by Ar. The
construction is hardly to be explained.
Hentze understands it to mean ‘‘ the
greater part of the night, consisting of
two watches” ; but this is too artificial,
and the use of the gen. can hardly be
supported. The obvious sense ‘‘ more
than the two first watches have passed,

and the third remains,” seems to be a
contradiction in terms; but perhaps this
is more apparent than real, for λέλειπται
need not mean more than ‘‘the third
watch is still with us.” For the three-
fold division of the night cf. yu 312,
ἦμος δὲ τρίχα νυκτὸς Env, μετὰ δ᾽ ἄστρα
βεβήκει. The Schol. compares the three-
fold division of the day ® 111, ἔσσεται
ἢ ἠὼς ἢ δείλη ἢ μέσον ἦμαρ. δύο is in-
declinable in Homer, but the only other
instances of its use, except in nom. or
acc., are x 515 (gen.), N 407 (dat.).

254. ὅπλα = armour only occurs four
times in H.: 272, Σ 614, T 21; elsewhere
it means no more than “tools.”

256. τὸ ἐόν seems to be a late use of
the article; while ἐόν is used in its
primitive sense, his own (Brugman, Prob.
p- 98).

258. ταυρείην with κυνέην secms to be
a contradiction in terms, if κυνέη means
‘‘a helmet of dogskin " (cf. 335), though
such a phrase can easily be justified (τ.
A 598). It is very likely however that
it really comes from root κυ, to be
hollow, which occurs with numerous
suffixes ; -na- occurring in Skt., though
not in Greek (see Curt. Et. no. 79).
V.J. H. 8. iv. p. 298. ἄφαλον, with-
out knobs or projections: v. on I 362.
karairv€, a word of uncertain derivation,
known only from the present line.

263. to should mean ‘was
stretched tight.” In this case the

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (sx,)

339

> / en 4 »Μ») ” »Μ
ἀργιόδοντος ὑὸς θαμέες ἔχον ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα
φ \ 3 “ / > 9 \ > /
εὖ καὶ ἐπισταμένως, μέσσῃ δ᾽ ἐνὶ πῖλος ἀρήρειν. 265
, es > 9 > A » 7 3 ,
τὴν ῥά ποτ ἐξ EXedvos Αμύντορος Ορμενίδαο
Ig 3 > ἢ \ / 3 /
ἐξέλετ᾽ Αὐτόλυκος πυκινὸν δόμον ἀντιτορήσας,
Σκάνδειαν δ᾽ ἄρα δῶκε Κυθηρίῳ ᾿Αμφιδάμαντι-"
᾿Αμφιδάμας δὲ Μόλῳ δῶκε ξεινήιον εἶναι,
9 A e , ~ φΦ A
αὐτὰρ ὁ Μηριόνῃ δῶκεν ᾧ παιδὶ φορῆναι" 270
A a ν» a 4 4 3 n
δὴ tor Ὀδυσσῆος πύκασεν κάρη ἀμφιτεθεῖσα.
Ν »> 9 2 a ΝΜ A 40.
τὼ ὃ ἐπεὶ οὖν ὅπλοισιν ἔνε δεινοῖσιν ἐδύτην,
, e>? o/ 4 A δ] 3 ’ Ul 9
βάν ῥ᾽ ἰέναι, λιπέτην δὲ κατ αὐτόθι πάντας ἀρίστους.

τοῖσι δὲ δεξιὸν ἧκεν ἐρωδιὸν ἐγγὺς ὁδοῖο

΄

Παλλὰς ᾿Αθηναίη' τοὶ δ᾽ οὐκ ἴδον ὀφθαλμοῖσιν 275
νύκτα δι’ ὀρφναίην, ἀλλὰ κλάγξαντος ἄκουσαν.
χαῖρε δὲ τῷ ὄρνιθ᾽ ᾿Οδυσεύς, ἠρᾶτο δ᾽ ᾿Αθήνῃ:
‘ce ΨΥ, » \ ἢ vy _f >
κλῦθί μευ, αὐγιόχοιο Διὸς τέκος, ἥ TE μοι αἰεὶ
ἐν πάντεσσι πόνοισι παρίστασαι, οὐδέ σε λήθω
κινύμενος, νῦν αὗτε μάλιστά με φῖλαι, ᾿Αθήνη, 280

thongs could not have been ‘‘ inside”
the hollow, z.e. next the head. Possibly
it is meant that there was a leather ca

πῖλος, inside all (é» μέσσῃ), woun

round for the sake of strength with
thongs; while outside these again came
an outer covering of boar’s tusks. The
ἱμάντες are then ἔντοσθεν because they
form the middle one of three layers.
The tusks may possibly be a relic of the
origin of the helmet from the wild beast’s
head, a form which is very commonly
found in primitive headgear (J. H. S.
iv. 294).

264. ἔχον, “clasped” the cap, sur-
rounded it.

265. From this passage came the tra-
dition in pictorial art by which Odysseus
always wore the close-fittmg cap called
πιλίον, or πῖλος.

266. ᾿Βλεών in Boiotia is mentioned
in B 500. Ptolemy of Askalon read
Ἑλεῶνος, ἃ town in Thessaly, distinct
from the Boiotian; but this is probably
a mere figment, invented in order that
the Amyntor here named might be iden-
tified with the father of Phoinix, I 447,
where see the note. Autolykos was the
maternal grandfather of Odysseus, see
λ 85, τ 395; he was an arch-thief, ἀνθρώ-
mous ἐκέκαστο κλεπτοσύνῃ θ᾽ ὅρκῳ τε.
Hence in the later legends he was made
the son of Hermes.

267. ἀντιτορήσας, so Hymn. Merc.
178, μέγαν δόμον ἀντιτορήσων. The force
of the preposition is not clear, and
Doderlein (Gloss. ὃ 672) is perhaps right
in reading ἀντετορήσας, from the redupli-
cated aor, ἀν- τετορῆσαι. The real form
will then have been forgotten at the
time of the composition of the hymn.

268. Σκάνδειαν, acc. of the terminus
ad quem, cf. 195 κεκλήατο βουλήν. Ar.
read Σκάἀνδειάνδ᾽, as H 79 σῶμα δὲ οἴκαδ᾽
ἐμὸν δόμεναι πάλιν, ο 867 Σάμηνδε δόσαν.

269. For Molos, the brother οὗ Ido-
meneus, cf. N 249.

273. It is doubtful if we should read
κατ᾽ αὐτόθι as one word or astwo. The
preposition in tmesis rarely stands after
its verb: see however B 699. In 201,
φΦ 90 κατ᾽ αὐτόθι λεῖπεν, λιπόντε, where
the verb follows, it seems most natural
to take it with κατά. Herodianus held
that even if κατά belonged to the verb it
could not here suffer anastrophe, because
of the intervention of the word δέ.

275. There is a curious variant here,
attributed to one Zopyros, a naturalist,
πελλόν (vray) for Παλλάς.

278-80. Cf. E 115-7 and ν 300-1.
κινύμενοφς, apparently ‘‘no movement of
mine escapes thee.” But this is hardly
a Homeric view of the gods, whose om-
niscience does not extend to details un-
less their attention is called.

340

LAIAAOS K (x)

δὸς δὲ πάλιν ἐπὶ νῆας ἐυκλεῖας ἀφικέσθαι,
er / ΝΜ Ψ , f° 35
ῥέξαντας μέγα ἔργον, ὅ κε Τρώεσσι μελήσει.
δεύτερος αὖτ᾽ ἠρᾶτο βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης "
6c / A 3 ~ \ / 3 v4
κέκλυθι νῦν καὶ ἐμεῖο, Διὸς τέκος, ἀτρυτώνη"
al ς ef e > 4 /
σπεῖόο μοι, ws ὅτε πατρὶ ἅμ ἔσπεο Τυδέι δίῳ 285
ἐς Θήβας, ὅτε τε πρὸ ᾿Αχαιῶν ἄγγελος ἤειν.
τοὺς δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐπ᾽’ ᾿Ασωπῷ λίπε χαλκοχίτωνας ᾿Αχαιούς,
αὐτὰρ ὁ μειλίχιον μῦθον φέρε Καδμείοισιν
~ 3 9 A ? A / ἢ ’ὔ 3
κεῖσ᾽" ἀτὰρ ap ἀπιὼν μάλα μέρμερα μήσατο ἔργα
σὺν σοί, δῖα θεά, ὅτε οἱ πρόφρασσα παρέστης. 290
Φ “A 5324 ἢ ’ ’ 4
ὧς νῦν μοι ἐθέλουσα παρίσταο Kai με φύλασσε"
\ 3 = > A ε A 9 [4
σοὶ δ᾽ αὖ ἐγὼ ῥέξω βοῦν ἧνιν εὐρυμέτωπον,
ἀδμήτην, ἣν οὔ πω ὑπὸ ζυγὸν ἤγαγεν ἀνήρ'
τήν ToL ἐγὼ ῥέξω χρυσὸν κέρασιν περιχεύας."
ὧς ἔφαν εὐχόμενοι, τῶν δ᾽ ἔκλυε Παλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη. 295
e > 9 3 / XN 4 4
οἱ δ᾽ ἐπεὶ ἠρήσαντο Διὸς κούρῃ μεγάλοιο,
βάν ῥ᾽ ἴμεν ὥς τε λέοντε δύω διὰ νύκτα μέλαιναν,
ἂμ φόνον, ἂν véxvas, διά τ᾽ ἔντεα καὶ μέλαν αἷμα.
IQ A > a > 9 ἡ > ὦἡ
οὐδὲ μὲν οὐδὲ Τρῶας ἀγήνορας εἴασ᾽ “Extrwp
εὕδειν, ἀλλ᾽ ἄμυδις κικλήσκετο πάντας ἀρίστους, 800
cid Ν ς / 3 ,ὔ
ὅσσοι ἔσαν Τρώων ἡγήτορες ἠδὲ μέδοντες"
τοὺς ὅ γε συγκαλέσας πυκινὴν ἠρτύνετο βουλήν'
“ris κέν μοι τόδε ἔργον ὑποσχόμενος τελέσειεν

δώρῳ ἔπι μεγάλῳ;

μισθὸς δέ οἱ ἄρκιος ἔσται"

δώσω γὰρ δίφρον τε δύω τ᾽ ἐριαύχενας ἵππους, 805

281. ἐνκλεῖας, for ἐυκλεέας, is of course

not an epithet of νῆας, but part of the
redicate. The last syllable is lengthened
y the ictus.

285. σπεῖο, a form which Curtius (Vb.
li. 47) gives up as indefensible, and only
created by false analogy ; only σπέο can
be right. It is however possible that
we may have here a bold case of length-
ening by the ictus. ὅτε here, as else-
where in the phrase ws ὅτε, originally
was an indefinite adverb, ‘on a time,”
‘fat some time.” The usual method of
explaining ws 8re as involving an ellipse
would land us here in the absurd taut-
ology ‘‘accompany me as thou didst
accompany when thou didst accompany
my father.” For this famous expedition
of Tydeus see A 396, E 803, etc.

289. μέρμερα ἔργα, the slaying of the
men in ambush, A 396. The emphatic
position of the quite insignificant Keto’

produces a curious weakness in the effect
of the line.

291. παρίσταο, so Ar., Zen., and ai
πλείους, as μάρναο Ο 475; MSS. wapic-
taco, which is more usual. H. G. § 5.
Zenod. also read πόρε κῦδος for με φύλασσε.

292-4 = y 382-4, to which place only
they probably belonged originally. The
tools for gilding the horns of the sacrifice
are there described (482-438). See Hel-
big, H. E. p. 181, who points out that
the process probably consisted in beating
gold into thin leaves and laying these
round the horns—not in anything like
casting the gold. Cf. also ¢ 232.

299. dao’, so the best MSS.: the
majority give εἴασεν, but the α is always
long in this form. Nauck. conj. efae,
which is possible ; Christ ἔασεν ἀγήνορας
Ἕκτωρ, which is not, on account of the
rhythm.

304. ἄρκιος, assured: see on B 398,

IAIAAO® K (x,)

34]

"“, Μ »» “Ὁ > a’ \ ᾽ A
ot Kev ἄριστοι ἔωσι θοῇς ἐπὶ νηυσὶν ᾿Αχαιῶν,
ef “ 3 > A a Ν
ὅς τίς κε τλαίη, of τ᾽ αὐτῷ κῦδος ἄροιτο,
νηῶν ὠκυπόρων σχεδὸν ἐλθέμεν ἔκ τε πυθέσθαι,
ἠὲ φυλάσσονται νῆες θοαὶ ὡς τὸ πάρος περ,

ἢ ἤδη χείρεσσιν ὑφ᾽ ἡμετέρῃσι δαμέντες

310

φύξιν βουλεύουσι μετὰ σφίσιν, οὐδ᾽ ἐθέλουσιν
’ 4 4 3 4 9 a 3}
νύκτα φυλασσέμεναι, καμάτῳ ἀδηκότες aive.
φ Ν > e > Ν 4 3 A > ἢ nA
ὧς épal, οἱ δ᾽ apa πάντες ἀκὴν ἐγένοντο σιωπῇ.
,
ἣν δέ τις ἐν Τρώεσσι Δόλων ᾿Ευμήδεος vids

κήρυκος θείοιο, πολύχρυσος πολύχαλκος"

81ὅ

ὃς δή τοι εἶδος μὲν ἔην κακός, ἀλλὰ ποδώκης"
αὐτὰρ ὁ μοῦνος ἔην μετὰ πέντε κασυγνήτῃσιν.
ὅς pa τότε Τρωσίν τε καὶ “Ἕκτορι μῦθον ἔειπεν"
co Υ(Γ; μ »»ἢ ’ / \ \ 3 4
Exrop, ἔμ᾽ ὀτρύνει κραδίη καὶ θυμὸς ἀγήνωρ

νηῶν ὠκυπόρων σχεδὸν ἐλθέμεν ἔκ τε πυθέσθαι.

820

? > Ν \ A 3 4
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε μοι TO σκῆπτρον ἀνάσχεο, καί μοι ὄμοσσον
ἢ μὲν τοὺς ἵππους τε καὶ ἅρματα ποικίλα χαλκῷ
δωσέμεν, of φορέουσιν ἀμύμονα Πηλεΐωνα.

> 9 A 5 ῳ \ μὴ 2Q? » A ,
σοὶ δ᾽ ἐγὼ οὐχ ἅλιος σκοπὸς ἔσσομαι οὐδ᾽ ἀπὸ δόξης"

τόφρα γὰρ ἐς στρατὸν εἶμι διαμπερές, ὄφρ᾽ ἂν ἵκωμαι

325

νῇ ᾿Αγαμεμνονέην, ὅθι που μέλλουσιν ἄριστοι
βουλὰς βουλεύειν, ἢ φευγέμεν ἠὲ μάχεσθαι."

ὧς φάθ᾽, ὁ δ᾽ ἐν χερσὶ σκῆπτρον λάβε καί οἱ ὄμοσσεν"
Fran oy Zer > f 9 5 , 7]

ἴστω νῦν Ζεὺς αὐτός, ἐρίγδουπος πόσις “Ἥρης,

\ aC 2 AN > , ΝΜ
μὴ μὲν τοῖς πποισιν ἀνὴρ ἔποχήσεται ἄλλος

990

Τρώων, ἀλλὰ σέ φημι διαμπερές ἀγλαϊεῖσθαι.᾽"

and cf. σ 358. It is equally possible
however to understand the word here to
mean ‘‘sufficient,” ‘‘ample”; and in
this way the later imitative Epic poets
seem to have taken it.

306. ἄριστοι ἕωσι, so Ar. followed by
only two or three inferior MSS.: caet.
ἀριστεύωσι. Zenod. read αὐτοὺς of φορέ-
ovow ἀμύμονα Πηλείωνα, Aristoph. καλοὺς
of mop. ἀμ. II. ; see 828.

307. of τ᾽ αὐτῷ κῦδος ἄροιτο is of
course parenthetical.

311. φύξιν, a word peculiar to this
book ; see 398, 447.

312. νύκτα as a temporal accus. only
occurs in H. in this book of the Iliad
(188, 399) and in the Odyssey. ἀδηκότες,
cf. 98.

314. For this introduction of a new

character cf. E 9. κήρυκος θείοιο, as
holding a sacred office, v. A 334, A 192.

817. μοῦνος, an only son. Zenod.
read κασιγνήτοισιν, understanding it
to mean the only survivor among five
brethren.

321. Cf. H 412. Dolon offers to
Hector the staff which he is holding as
the speaker ‘‘ in possession of the house.”
See 328. Thus τό mean ‘‘this,” not
‘‘ thine.”

324. ἅλιος σκοπός, the phrase ἀλαο-
σκοπίην (or ddads σκοπίην) ἔχειν (see 515),
suggests that ἀλαός may be the right
reading here. «ἀπὸ δόξης, far from what

you expect. The phrase recurs only in
λ 344. Cf. ἀπὸ γνώμης, θυμοῦ (A 562),

etc.
380. This line seems almost like an

942

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (x)

A 4
ὧς φάτο καί ῥ᾽ ἐπίορκον ἐπώμοσε, τὸν δ᾽ ὀρόθυνεν.
᾽ ’
αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ὦμοισιν ἐβάλλετο καμπύλα τόξα,
Ψ > e \ a ,
ἕσσατο ὃ ἔκτοσθεν ῥινὸν πολιοῖο λύκοιο,

κρατὶ δ᾽ ἐπὶ κτιδέην κυνέην, ὅλε δ᾽ ὀξὺν ἄκοντα,

βῆ δ᾽ ἰέναι προτὶ νῆας ἀπὸ στρατοῦ" οὐδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔμελλεν
ἐλθὼν ἐκ νηῶν ayy “Εἰκτορι μῦθον ἀποίσειν.
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δή ῥ᾽ ἵππων τε καὶ ἀνδρῶν κάλλιφ᾽ ὅμιλον,
βῆ ῥ᾽ av ὁδὸν μεμαώς" τὸν δὲ φράσατο προσιόντα
διογενὴς ᾿Οδυσεύς, Διομήδεα δὲ προσέειπεν" 340
“οὗτός τις, Διόμηδες, ἀπὸ στρατοῦ ἔρχεται ἀνήρ,
οὐκ οἶδ᾽, ἢ νήεσσιν ἐπίσκοπος ἡμετέρῃσιν,
ἡ τινὰ συλήσων νεκύων κατατεθνηώτων.
ἀλλ᾽ ἐῶμέν μιν πρῶτα παρεξελθεῖν πεδίοιο
τυτθόν' ἔπειτα δέ κ᾽ αὐτὸν ἐπαΐξαντες ἕλοιμεν 845
καρπαλίμως" εἰ δ᾽ ἄμμε παραφθαίῃσι πόδεσσιν,
αἰεί μιν ἐπὶ νῆας ἀπὸ στρατόφι προτιειλεῖν
ἔγχει ἐπαΐσσων, μή πως προτὶ ἄστυ ἀλύξῃ.᾽"

ὧς ἄρα φωνήσαντε παρὲξ ὁδοῦ ἐν νεκύεσσιν
κλινθήτην' ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὦκα παρέδραμεν ἀφραδίῃσεν. 350
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δή ῥ᾽ ἀπέην, ὅσσον τ᾽ ἐπὶ οὖρα πέλονται

intentional irony, in view of Hector’s

coming fate. For the construction of
μή with the indic. in an oath cf. Ο 41,
ἴστω νῦν. .. μὴ δι᾽ ἐμὴν lérnra Ποσει-

δάων ἐνοσίχθων πημαίνει Τρῶας. H. 6.
ἃ 358.

332, ἐπώμοσε, so Ar., AD: most MSS.
ἀπώμοσε. The ém- seems to mean
‘‘added a false oath” to his previous
asseveration.

335. The «rls or ἱκτίς appears to have
been an animal of the class of stoats or
martens. Cf. on 258.

338. Aristarchos noted that elsewhere
in the Iliad ὅμιλος means only ‘‘the
battle throng,” the sense of ‘‘ assembly ”
being peculiar to the Odyssey.

341. οὗτός tis, so Ar. an
MSS. rot.

342. ἐπίσκοπος, cf. 38.

344, παρεξελθεῖν πεδίοιο, ‘‘ to pass by
us out into the plain.” On account
of the scansion Christ proposes ἀλλά
Γ᾽ ἑῶμεν.

346. παραφθαίησι, a strange form,
possibly a sham archaism (so Curtins,
Vb. 158); the a points to an opt. form,
the “σι to a subj. It looks as thongh

al πλείους,

the poet thonght that the -σε, which is
so often found in the subj., was an
arbitrary affix which might be appended
also to the opt. La Roche and others
write -φθήῃσι, without MS. authority, ex-
cept that A gives -φθαίῃσι. J. Schmidt
takes this as a subj. of a lost present
*pbalw for φθάνω; while Christ sees
in the -ἰ- another instance of the sub-
junctive stem in -ja-, for which see H
72, 340. It may be noticed that in 368
the two best MSS., AD, read ¢6aiy,
though the subj. is not in place there.

349. φωνήσαντε is curious, as Odys-
seus only has spoken. Didymos com-
pares the similar instance © 298 ὡς
εἰπόντε after a speech from one only.
There seems to be a sort of attraction to
the number of the principal verb. There
was a variant in the editions ‘‘of Aris-
tophanes and others,” ὧς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ dxi-
Onoe βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης" | ἐλθόντες δ'
ἑκάτερθε παρὲξ ὁδοῦ κ.τ.λ.

901, This phrase must be compared
with 6 124, ὅσσον 7’ ἐν νειῷ οὖρον πέλει
ἡμιόνοιιν, τόσσον ὑπεκπροθέων κιτιᾺ. AD
ingenious explanation is given by Mr.
Ridgeway in J. H. 8. vol. vi. He shews

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (x)

343

e / e , A 4 3
ἡμιόνων, αἱ γάρ τε βοῶν προφερέστεραί εἰσιν
ἑλκέμεναι νειοῖο βαθείης πηκτὸν ἄροτρον,

9 9 A
τὼ μὲν ἐπεδραμέτην, ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔστη δοῦπον ἀκούσας"

ἔλπετο γὰρ κατὰ θυμὸν ἀποστρέψοντας ἑταίρους

3955

ἐκ Τρώων ἰέναι, πάλιν “Extopos ὀτρύναντος.
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δή ῥ᾽ ἄπεσαν δουρηνεκὲς ἢ καὶ ἔλασσον,
a .“ἷ wv \ \ 4 > > 2
γνῶ ῥ᾽ ἄνδρας Snlous, λαιψηρὰ δὲ γούνατ ἐνώμα
φευγέμεναι" τοὶ δ᾽ αἶψα διώκειν ὁρμήθησαν.

ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε καρχαρόδοντε δύω κύνε εἰδότε θήρης

860

ἢ κεμάδ᾽ ἠὲ λαγωὸν ἐπείγετον ἐμμενὲς αἰεὶ
a > > ς / > ε μ / ,
@pov av ὑλήενθ᾽, ὁ δέ τε προθέῃσι μεμηκώς,
ὧς τὸν Τυδείδης ἠδ᾽ ὁ πτολίπορθος ᾿Οδυσσεὺς

that the length of a furrow was com-
monly a fixed and recognized standard
of length, as with us it is the furlong
(furrow-long); it probably formed the
length of each man’s share in the com-
mon field. Now the unit of area was
a day’s work of plough (γύης), as the
German Morgen and Gallic journel, ‘‘a
day’s work,” denote the patches in the
common fields. If mules ploughed more
swiftly than oxen, but with the same
length of furrow, then in a day’s work
they would plough a wider piece of land.
The width which they would thus cover
(πλέθρον) is expressed by the distance
between the οὖρα or side limits (whilst
τέλσον = end-limit, ‘‘ headland”); and
the οὖρον of mules will form an ab-
solute standard of distance, as we see
that it does in θ 124. We may also
compare Ψ 431 δίσκου οὖρα, 523 dicxoupa.
οὖρα is generally considered a heteroclite
lur. of οὖρος = ὅρος, but so far as the
omeric evidence goes the old form of
the singular may have been οὖρον, as
Mr. Ridgeway remarks. ἐπί goes with
ὅσσον : the accent, according to the rule,
is not thrown back, because re intervenes.
Cf. B 616 and note.
353. veoto gen. of movement within
a space, like πεδίοιο, etc. κτόν, acc.
to Hesiod, Opp. 433, means the plough
made of several parts, opposed to the
αὐτόγνον where the body was composed
of a single suitably shaped piece of
wood. Hesiod advises that one of each
sort should be kept in case of accident.
355. ἔλπετο does not in itself imply
that Dolon hoped that he was to be
fetched back; though this is probably
meant, from the whole description of his
cowardly nature. ἔλπομαι is often simply

?

‘“‘to expect,” ‘‘fancy,” even of things
which are dreaded ; 6.0. II 281.

356. But for the rhythm it would be
more natural to join ἰέναι with πάλιν.
And so Nikanor takes it. But the divi-
sion of the line into two equal halves is
hardly tolerable.

357. Sovpnvexés, as we talk of a spear
“ carrying’ ἃ certain distance (ἀπ. λεγ.).

361. érelyerov would seem from the
following προθέῃσι to be meant for a
subjunctive. If so, it isa false archaism,
as the subj. with a short vowel is only
found in non-thematic tenses: H. G. §
82, n, and Curtius, Vd. ii. 73. But as
both indic. and subj. are used in similes,
it does not seem necessary here to as-
sume that both verbs are in the same
mood. The rule is however for the sub-
junctive to come first, and the indica-
tive to follow after the δέ re.

362. ὑλήενθ᾽ ὁ δέ τε, ὁ ““ τέ" σύνδεσμος
οὐκ ἣν ἐν τοῖς 'Αριστάρχου, Did. It is
not certain what τὰ ᾿Αριστάρχου means ;
it cannot be the editions, which are
always called αἱ "Apor.: probably there-
fore it means the ὑπομνήματα, which
were regarded as of inferior authority. In
some of these Ar. must then have read
ὑλήεντα, ὁ δὲ, which is not improbably
better, as the hiatus may have been re-
moved by conjecture. Still the addi-
tion of a clause to a simile by δέ re is so
habitual that it is better to retain the MS.
reading. Paech’s conjecture (approved
by Curtius) ὑλήεντα, 8 re, though it would
fully explain the subjunctive, 1s not quite
like Homer ; N 62, p 518, which he quotes,
are not in point, as the relatives there
refer to the main subject of the simile,
not to a subordinate action, as here.

363. The use of the article ὁ is not

944

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (x)

λαοῦ ἀποτμήξαντε διώκετον ἐμμενὲς αἰεί.
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ τάχ᾽ ἔμελλε μυγήσεσθαι φυλάκεσσεν 35
φεύγων és νῆας, τότε δὴ μένος EwBar ᾿Αθήνη
Τυδεΐδῃ, ἵνα μή τις ᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων
φθαίη ἐπευξάμενος βαλέειν, ὁ δὲ δεύτερος ἔλθοι. ᾿
δουρὶ δ᾽ ἐπαΐσσων προσέφη κρατερὸς Διομήδης"
“ ἠὲ μέν᾽, ἠέ σε δουρὶ κιχήσομαι, οὐδέ σέ φημι 870
δηρὸν ἐμῆς ἀπὸ χειρὸς ἀλύξειν αἰπὺν ὄλεθρον."
ἢ ῥα καὶ ἔγχος ἀφῆκεν, ἑκὼν δ᾽ ἡμάρτανε φωτός.
δεξιτερὸν δ᾽ ὑπὲρ ὦμον ἐύξον δουρὸς ἀκωκὴ
ἐν γαίῃ ἐπάγη" ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔστη τάρβησέν τε
βαμβαίνων, ἄραβος δὲ διὰ στόμα γίγνετ᾽ ὀδόντων, 875

χλωρὸς ὑπαὶ δείους.

A > 59 ἢ 4
τὼ δ᾽ ἀσθμαίνοντε κιχήτην,

χειρῶν δ᾽ ἁψάσθην" ὁ δὲ δακρύσας ἔπος ηὔδα"
ες a a 3 9 Ν > A > \ λ 4 ; é a ὄνδ
ὠγρεῖτ᾽, αὐτὰρ ἐγὼν ἐμὲ λύσομαι" ἔστι γὰρ ἔνδον
χαλκός τε χρυσός τε πολύκμητός τε σίδηρος"
τῶν κ᾽ ὕμμιν χαρίσαιτο πατὴρ ἀπερείσι᾽ ἄποινα, 380
Ν 9 A Ἁ ’ὔ’ > 9 3 n 39
εἴ κεν ἐμὲ ζωὸν πεπύθοιτ᾽ ἐπὶ νηυσὶν ᾿Αχαιῶν.
τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πολύμητις ᾿Οδυσσεύς"
“ θάρσει, μηδέ τί τοι θάνατος καταθύμιος ἔστω"
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε μοι τόδε εἰπὲ καὶ ἀτρεκέως κατάλεξον"
πῇ δὴ οὕτως ἐπὶ νῆας ἀπὸ στρατοῦ ἔρχεαι οἷος 385
νύκτα δι’ ὀρφναίην, ὅτε θ᾽ εὕδουσι βροτοὶ ἄλλοε;
ἢ τινα συλήσων νεκύων κατατεθνηώτων;
ἢ σ᾽ “Ἕκτωρ προέηκε διασκοπιᾶσθαι ἕκαστα

νῆας ἔπι γλαφυράς;

9 > \ b a A 39
ἡ σ᾽ αὐτὸν θυμὸς ἀνῆκεν;

Homeric; but cf. B 278. It is easy
enough to read ἠδέ for ἠδ᾽ ὁ, but it is
doubtful if, in this book, the change
should be made.

364. διώκετον : on this form of the
3d pers. dual in a historical tense see
Η. G. 5 ad fin.; Curtius, Vb. 1.75. The
only other instances are N 346, Σ 583;
ef. N 301.

365. μιγήσεσθαι, the only instance of
the 2d future pass. in Homer.

368. For Sevrepos = too late, cf. X 207,
where the phrase is far more suitable:
there Achilles is chasing Hector in sight
of all the Greeks: here, in the night,
away from the camp, there is little fear
of Diomedes being anticipated.

375. βαμβαίνων, either ‘staggering ”
from βα-ν (βαίνω) like παμφαίνω from

gay ; or ‘‘stammering,” uttering inar-
ticulate sounds, an onomatopoetic word
like βάρβαρος, balbus. Both interpreta-
tions were recognized in antiquity, and
there is no ground but the taste of the
individual for deciding between them.
In late Greek the word is used to mean
‘‘stammering” only; 6.9. Bion, Jd. 4,
9, βαμβαίνει por γλῶσσα.
ὀδόντων is parenthetical.

378-81. Z 48-50.
383. καταθύμιος, ‘‘present to thy
spirit,” as P 201; cf. 02152, μηδέ τί ol

θάνατος μελέτω φρεσίν.

384. This is an Odyssean line (forty-
five times), recurring twice again in this
book, and twice in Q, but not elsewhere
in the Iliad.

387 was athetized here by Ar.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (Ὁ)

345

τὸν δ᾽ ἡμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα Δόλων, ὑπὸ δ᾽ ἔτρεμε γυῖα: 890
“ A ’ 9 Ν \ / Ν a
πολλῇσίν μ᾽ ἄτῃσι παρὲκ νόον ἤγαγεν “Exrwp,
ὅς μοι Πηλεΐωνος ἀγαυοῦ μώνυχας ἵππους
δωσέμεναι κατένευσε καὶ ἅρματα ποικίλα χαλκῷ,
3 ΄ / 9 of A A 4 f
ἠνώγει δέ μ᾽ ἰόντα θοὴν διὰ νύκτα μέλαιναν
ἀνδρῶν δυσμενέων σχεδὸν ἐλθέμεν ἔκ τε πυθέσθαι, 395
ἠὲ φυλάσσονται νῆες θοαί, ws τὸ πάρος περ,
” es e / ’ὔ
ἢ ἤδη χείρεσσιν ὑφ᾽ ἡμετέρῃσι δαμέντες
φύξιν βουλεύοιτε μετὰ σφίσιν, οὐδ᾽ ἐθέλοιτε
νύκτα φυλασσέμεναι, καμάτῳ ἀδηκότες αἰνῷ."
τὸν δ᾽ ἐπιμειδήσας προσέφη πολύμητις ᾿Οδυσσεύς" 400

891. ἄτῃσιν is so far peculiar here
that it is used of ‘‘blinding,” decep-
tion, of a purely human origin; ἄτας
ἔφη ras ἐπὶ κακῷ ὑποσχέσεις, Schol. B.
In every other instance it conveys
the idea of some divine or mysterious
blindness. For ἤγαγεν Aristoph. read
ἤπαφεν.

394. θοήν as an epithet of night is not
very easy to explain. To an inhabitant
of a northern climate the twilight of the
south of Europe seems comparatively
short ; but we can hardly suppose, as
some have done, that the Aryan immigra-
tion, if it came from the North, was
sufficiently rapid to allow of such a con-
trast being felt: nor should we @ priori
have supposed that even in Greece dark-
ness was felt as absolutely swift, either in
approach or in duration. Nitzsch refers
it to the sense ‘‘sharp,” and understands
‘*the keen night air.”

398. βουλεύοιτε . . . ἐθέλοιτε ACDH,
βουλεύουσι... ἐθέλουσι GLMori, C
(man. sec.) and A as a variant. καὶ
γραπτέον οὕτως (sc. -ουσι) καὶ ἀθετητέον
τοὺς τρεῖς στίχους (897-9) εἴ τι χρὴ πισ-
τεύειν ᾿Αμμωνίῳψ τῷ διαδεξαμένῳ τὴν
σχολὴν (the successor of Aristarchos
in the School at Alexandria)... καὶ
παρὰ ᾿Αριστοφάνει δὲ ἠθετοῦντο, Didymos.
ὅτι οὕτως γραπτέον “" βουλεύουσι" καὶ
“« ἐθέλουσι.᾽ τὸ γὰρ “σφίσιν " ἐν τῷ
περὶ τινών ἐστι λόγῳ (sc. belongs to the
third person), ἀντὶ τοῦ αὐτοῖς, ᾧ ἀκόλουθα
δεῖ εἶναι τὰ ῥήματα, Ariston. Other
later scholia quote statements that
that there was no explanation to be
found in the ὑπομνήματα of Ar. of the
obelos which he put against these lines.
Ammonios is further stated to have said

that Aristarchos first marked the lines
with orcynal—apparently a sign of hesi-
tation—and afterwards obelized them.
The question is an important one not
only from the light which it throws on
the tradition of the Aristarchean school,

- but from its bearing on the whole problem

of the use of the prononimal stem sva for
other persons than the third. Fora full
discussion reference must be made to
Brugman’s Ein Problem der Homerischen
Textkritik. The following facts seem
certain in spite of the doubt as to Ar.’s
final opinion :—(1) That tradition, exem-
plified in the practice of Apoll. Rhod.
and others, held that the derivatives of
the stem sva were not restricted to the
3d person. (2) That Aristarchos strongly
held that they were. (3) That in this
passage the κοινή, represented by our

est MSS., read βουλεύοιτε, ἐθέλοιτε. (4)
That Ar. wished to read βουλεύουσι,
ἐθέλουσι, but hesitated about making the
change. The obvious inference is that
the tradition in this case was so unani-
mous that he did not dare to alter the
reading. Now, as Brugman has shewn
that the use of sva for all persons is
inherited from the oldest stage of the
language, it is not impossible to retain
the traditional reading here in spite of
Ar., and understand σφίσιν as = ὑμῖν.
But it must be remembered that else-
where we have no instance of this use of
the reflexive personal pronoun in Homer:
in the oldest Epic language the “free ”
use of sva is confined to the possessive ὅς.
It seems therefore that we have here a
false archaism, the first instance of the
extension to the personal pronoun of
that use of ὅς which was an accepted—
and genuine—note of antiquity.

946

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (x)

“«ἣ ῥά νύ τοι μεγάλων δώρων ἐπεμαίετο θυμός,
ἵππων Αἰακίδαο δαΐφρονος" οἱ δ᾽ ἀλεγεινοὶ
3 lA “A A 80» 5» 7
ἀνδράσι γε θνητοῖσι δαμήμεναι ἠδ᾽ ὀχέεσθαι,
ἄλλῳ γ᾽ ἢ ᾿Αχιλῆι, τὸν ἀθανάτη τέκε μήτηρ.
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε μοι τόδε εἰπὲ καὶ ἀτρεκέως κατάλεξον" 405
A A a \ / cd / ”
ποῦ viv δεῦρο κιὼν λίπες “Exropa ποιμένα λαῶν;
ποῦ δέ οἱ ἔντεα κεῖται ἀρήια, ποῦ δέ οἱ ἵπποι;
πῶς δαὶ τῶν ἄλλων Τρώων φυλακαί τε καὶ εὐναί;
ἅσσα τε μητιόωσι μετὰ σφίσιν, ἢ μεμάασιν
αὖθι μένειν παρὰ νηυσὶν ἀπόπροθεν, he πόλινδε 410
ἂψ ἀναχωρήσουσιν, ἐπεὶ δαμάσαντό γ᾽ ᾿Αχαιούς.᾽
Ἁ ν᾿ φ 4 , 3 4 e7
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπε Δόλων ᾿Ευμήδεος υἱός"
““τουγὰρ ἐγώ τοι ταῦτα μάλ᾽ ἀτρεκέως καταλέξω.
"Rh \ \ a a , 3 ί
KTWP μὲν μετὰ τοῖσιν, ὅσοι βουληφοροε εἰσίν,
βουλὰς βουλεύει θείον παρὰ σήματι Ἴλου, 415
νόσφιν ἀπὸ φλοίσβον" φυλακὰς δ᾽ ἃς εἴρεαι, ἥρως,
wv 4 e/ \ 9Q\ ,
οὔ τις κεκριμένη ῥύεται στρατὸν οὐδὲ φυλάσσει.
ὅσσαι μὲν Τρώων πυρὸς ἐσχάραι, οἷσιν ἀνάγκη,
οἱ δ᾽ ἐγρηγόρθασι φυλασσέμεναί τε κέλονται
ἀλλήλοις" ἀτὰρ αὗτε πολύκλητοι ἐπίκουροι 420
εὕδουσι" Τρωσὶν γὰρ ἐπιτραπέουσι φυλάσσειν"
3 4 “A \ 6 3 “ 99
ov yap σφιν παῖδες σχεδὸν εἴαται οὐδὲ γυναῖκες.
\ > 9 , / 7 9 ,
τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πολύμητις Odvaceds:

. 408, δαί, Ar. with A and others:
some give δ᾽ al, which is perhaps pre-
ferable. There is no other case in H. of
two articles coming together; but in
this late book such a consideration is of
less weight. δαί 18 also unknown to H.
except in the two equally late passages,
a 225, w 299. The latter instance is
very similar to the present, as δαί there,
as here, only adds another question to
those already asked, and thus loses the
tone of surprise which it possesses in
Attic. Nauck would read 6 αὖ, which
is certainly more natural.

409-411 were athetized by Ar. as
wrongly introduced from 208-210; his
chief argument being that while Dolon
answers the other questions he takes no
notice of this. ἅσσα also makes a very
awkward change from the direct to the
dependent question.

415. For Ilos see Ὁ 232, and for his
tomb A 166, 372, Ὡ 349. It is useless
to attempt to define its position beyond

noting that it was somewhere in the
middle of the plain (μέσσον κὰπ' πεδίον).

416. φυλακάς, the antecedent attracted
to the relative—a very rare use in H.
Cf. Vergil’s ‘‘ Urbem quam statuo vestra
est.” The other instances are enumerated
in H. G. § 271.

418. ἐσχάραι, elsewhere an Odyssean
word. Itisin H. a synonym of ἑστία,
and seems here to mean ‘‘hearths’”’ in
the sense of ‘‘families”; the whole
clause ὅσσαι. . . ἐσχάραι is thus pre-
cisely identical with the phrase ἐφέστιοι
ὅσσοι ἔασι in B 125. The use of ἐσχάρα
does not encourage us to understand it
of watch-fires. It may possibly allude
to a primitive way of raising an army by
a levy of a man from every ‘‘ hearth”;
so that in counting the numbers ἐσχ
would be equivalent to ‘‘ soldiers,’’ and
thus be κατὰ σύνεσιν the antecedent to
οἷσιν. The @ in ἔγρη is anoma-
lous. In the only other forms of this
perf. ἐγρήγορθε and ἐγρήγορθαι it is part
of the termination.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (x,)

ce

εὕδουσ᾽ ἡ ἀπάνευθε ;

947

πῶς γὰρ νῦν, Τρώεσσι μεμυγμένοι ἱπποδάμοισιν
δίειπέ μοι, ὄφρα δαείω.᾽"

425

τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα Δόλων ᾿Ευμήδεος υἱός"

{{

τουγὰρ ἐγὼ καὶ ταῦτα μάλ᾽ ἀτρεκέως καταλέξω.

πρὸς μὲν ἁλὸς Κᾶρες καὶ Ἰ]αίονες ἀγκυλότοξοι
καὶ Λέλεγες καὶ Καύκωνες δῖοί τε Πελασγοί,

πρὸς Θύμβρης δ᾽ ἔλαχον Λύκιοι Μυσοί τ᾽ ἀγέρωχοι

480

’ e / \ / ς ’
καὶ Φρύγες ἱππόδαμοι καὶ Mnoves ἱπποκορυσταί.
ἀλλὰ τί ἣ ἐμὲ ταῦτα διεξερέεσθε ἕκαστα;

3 \ \ V4 , an a
εἰ yap δὴ μέματον Τρώων καταδῦναι ὅμιλον,
Θρήικες οἵδ᾽ ἀπάνευθε νεήλυδες, ἔσχατοι ἄλλων,

ἐν δέ σφιν Ῥῆσος βασιλεύς, πάις ᾿Ηιονῆος"

435

τοῦ δὴ καλλίστους ἵππους ἴδον ἠδὲ μεγίστους"
λευκότεροι χιόνος, θείειν δ᾽ ἀνέμοισιν ὁμοῖοι.
ἅρμα δέ οἱ χρυσῷ τε καὶ ἀργύρῳ εὖ ἤσκηται'
7 ’ 4 a PANDA
τεύχεα δὲ χρύσεια πελώρια, θαῦμα ἰδέσθαι,

2 n
ἤλυθ ἔχων" τὰ μὲν οὔ τι καταθνητοῖσιν ἔοικεν

440

ἄνδρεσσιν φορέειν, ἀλλ᾽ ἀθανάτοισι θεοῖσιν.
“ 4
ἀλλ᾽ ἐμὲ μὲν νῦν νηυσὶ πελάσσετον ὠκυπόροισιν,
3 / ΄ 3 > 7 , a
ἠέ pe δήσαντες λίπετ᾽ αὐτόθι νηλέι δεσμῷ,
4 fo) 3 a
ὄφρα κεν ἔλθητον καὶ πειρηθῆτον ἐμεῖο,

Ξ3Ν 3 4 ¥ 9 Φ aA 3 43%
ἠὲ κατ᾽ αἶσαν ἔειπον ἐν ὑμῖν he καὶ οὐκί.

445

τὸν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπόδρα ἰδὼν προσέφη κρατερὸς Διομήδης"
“ μὴ δή μοι φύξιν γε, Δόλων, ἐμβάλλεο θυμῷ,

428. This is ἃ tolerably complete list
of the races which, in the tradition
known to us from post- Homeric times,
forined the primitive population of the
mainland of Greece and the coasts of
Asia Minor. The Leleges and Kankones
do not occur in the Catalogue, but are
named elsewhere in H., 6.0. T 96, 329,
as inhabitants of the countries bordering
on the Troad. Thymbra, a well-known
town on the Skamander, is not mentioned
again in H.

435. According to Apollodoros, Rhesos
was the son of the river Strymon and a
Muse ; which means no doubt that he
was a local divinity, like Kinyras of
Cyprus, who appears in Homer as a
king and contemporary of Agamemnon.
Possibly ’Hioveds may be the Strymon,
which is not elsewhere mentioned in H.

437. λευκότεροι, probably a nominative
of exclamation like 547: H. G. § 163.

439. πελώρια, ‘‘prodigious”; the epi-
thet is applied even to heroes who are
not in the first rank (e.g. E 842), and
implies only the belief in the greater
stature of the heroic age as compared
with οἷοι viv βροτοί εἰσιν.

442, πελάσσετον may be a future used
as a sort of imperative, ‘‘ you are to take
me”; Dolon assumes that his captors
have undertaken to spare him. Others
(Ameis, Fasi, etc.) regard it as an imper.
of the mixed aorist, with Curt. Vd. ii.
283 ; while Nauck conj. reddooare (one
MS. giving -carov) which would prob-
ably be altered in order to avoid the
hiatus, though this is quite allowable
in the bucolic diaeresis.

447. Quite needless difficulties have
been raised about the knowledge of
Dolon’s name which Diomedes and Odys-
seus possess here and in 478. An Epic
poet is not a realist, like a modern
novelist.

348

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (x)

ἐσθλά περ ayyeiras, ἐπεὶ ἵκεο χεῖρας ἐς ἁμάς.
εἰ μὲν γάρ κέ σε νῦν ἀπολύσομεν ἠὲ μεθῶμεν,
ἢ τε καὶ ὕστερον εἶσθα θοὰς ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν 450
ne διοπτεύσων ἢ ἐναντίβιον πολεμίξων"
εἰ δέ κ᾿ ἐμῇῆς ὑπὸ χερσὶ δαμεὶς ἀπὸ θυμὸν ὀλέσσῃς,
οὐκέτ᾽ ἔπειτα σὺ πῆμά ποτ᾽ ἔσσεαι ᾿Αργείοισιν.᾽
ἣ, καὶ ὁ μέν μιν ἔμελλε γενείου χειρὶ παχείῃ
ἁψάμενος λίσσεσθαι, ὁ δ᾽ αὐχένα μέσσον ἔλασσεν 455
φασγάνῳ ἀΐξας, ἀπὸ δ᾽ ἄμφω κέρσε τένοντε"
φθεγγομένου δ᾽ ἄρα τοῦ γε κάρη κονίῃσιν ἐμέχθη.
τοῦ δ᾽ ἀπὸ μὲν κτιδέην κυνέην κεφαλῆφιν ἕλοντο
καὶ λυκέην καὶ τόξα παλίντονα καὶ δόρυ μακρόν"
καὶ τά γ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίῃ ληίτιδι δῖος ᾽Οδυσσεὺς 400
ὑψόσ᾽ ἀνέσχεθε χειρὶ καὶ εὐχόμενος ἔπος ηὔδα"
“ χαῖρε, θεά, τοίσδεσσι" σὲ γὰρ πρώτην ἐν Ολύμπῳ
πάντων ἀθανάτων ἐπιβωσόμεθ᾽ " ἀλλὰ καὶ αὗτις
πέμψον ἐπὶ Θρῃκῶν ἀνδρῶν ἵππους τε καὶ εὐνάς.
ὧς ἄρ᾽ ἐφώνησεν, καὶ ἀπὸ ἔθεν ὑψόσ᾽ ἀείρας 465
θῆκεν ava μυρίκην" δέελον δ᾽ ἐπὶ σῆμά τ᾽ ἔθηκεν,

448. ἁμάς, “mine”? or “ours”? Cf.
Z 414.

450. ἢ τε introduces the apodosis.
On the form εἶσθα (also τ 69, ν 179) cf.
Curt. Vb. i. 50.

455. For this treatment of a would-be
suppliant cf. Agamemnon's conduct to
Adrestos, Z 37-65, and the sons of Anti-
machos, A 180-147. The révovre are
evidently the two strong bands of muscle
which run up the back of the neck, the
ἱνίον of E 73.

457. λέγουσι γάρ τινες (sc. that a head
can continue to speak while being cut
off) ἐπαγόμενοι καὶ τὸν Ὅμηρον, ws διὰ
τοῦτο ποιήσαντος “φθεγγομένη δ᾽ ἄρα
τοῦ γε Kdpy,” ἀλλ᾽ οὐ φθεγγομένου, Aris-
totle, de Part. Anim. iii. 10. This curious
variant is also preserved in one MS.,
though of course it is impossible, as
κάρη iy never fem. ¢@eyyopévov seems
to mean ‘‘in the midst of his death-
shriek,” as in x 329, where the line re-
curs, the victim is not speaking or at-
tempting to speak. But in II 508
φθογγὴ is used of a dying man’s articu-
late words.

460. ληίτιδι, only here ; else ἀγελείη.

462. τοίσδεσσι only here in II., five
times in Od. It is an obscure form.
τώνδεων in Alkai. fr. 126 is perhaps only

an imitation. Hinrichs (4eol. 115)
thinks that -δεσσι may come from * δείς
= (6) δεῖνα (ἢ. Nauck conj. τοῖσινδε,
but he ought then to explain the origin
of the form before us.

463. ἐπιβωσόμεθ᾽, so nearly all MSS.
This form occurs twice in Od. (a 878, β
143), but in the sense ‘‘to call the
to help,” while here it must: mean ‘call
upon in thanksgiving.” Ar. read ém-
δωσόμεθ᾽, ““ ἵν᾽ ἦ δώροις τιμήσομεν,᾽ which
is hardly possible. In Χ 254 ἐπιδόσθαι
means to take the as witnesses,
which does not suit thi - Rib-
beck has suggested ἐπιβωσάμεθ᾽, which
certainly gives the best sense. The
contraction βωσ- for βοησ- is common in
Herodotos.

466. Avery obscure line. δέελον does
not occur again in Greek, except in the
gloss of Hesych. déedos* δεσμός, ἅμμα.
The word looks like an older uncon-
tracted form of δῆλος (which occurs only
once in H., v 333) for δήελος, cf. εὐ-
deledos 8 167. But if it is an adj. agree-
ing with σῆμα, the position of re is hardly
to be explained. Christ and others join
δέ re, but for this there is no sufficient
analogy. Bentley conj. δέελον δέ re ofp’
ἐπέθηκεν, but there is no reason why
this should have been corrupted. Mr.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (x)

349

συμμάρψας δόνακας μυρίκης τ᾽ ἐριθηλέας ὄζους,
\ 10 9 2.7 θ \ \ 4 /
μὴ λάθοι αὖτις ἰόντε θοὴν διὰ νύκτα μέλαιναν.
\ \ Ul / 4 > wv \ ,
τὼ δὲ βάτην προτέρω διά τ᾽ ἔντεα καὶ μέλαν αἷμα,
αἶψα δ᾽ ἐπὶ Θρῃκῶν ἀνδρῶν τέλος ἷξον ἰόντες. 470
ee 4 , 3 “ ” /
ot δ᾽ εὗδον καμάτῳ ἀδηκότες, ἔντεα δέ σφιν
A 4 3 ἴω A , 9 A /
Kaha Tap αὑτοισι χθονὶ κέκλιτο, εὖ KATA κόσμον,
τριστουχί' παρὰ δὲ σφιν ἑκάστῳ δίζυγες ἵπποι.
€ ) >, 9% ’ 4φ 3 3 aA 3 9 vA Ψ
Ῥῆσος δ᾽ ἐν μέσῳ εὗδε, παρ᾽ αὐτῷ δ᾽ ὠκέες ἵπποι
9 3 4 ’ ςφιι κ᾿ ’ =
ἐξ ἐπιδιφριάδος πυμάτης ἱμᾶσι δέδεντο. 475
τὸν δ᾽ ᾿Οδυσεὺς προπάροιθεν ἰδὼν Διομήδεϊ δεῖξεν"

ἤὔ ’ ,
οὗτος τοι, Διόμηδες, ἀνήρ, οὗτοι δέ τοι ἵπποι,

ods νῶιν πίφαυσκε Δόλων, ὃν ἐπέφνομεν ἡμεῖς.
3 > » ‘ ΄ \ ὦ 2 , ‘
ἀλλ᾿ ἄγε δὴ πρόφερε κρατερὸν μένος" οὐδέ Ti σε χρὴ

\ / 3
ἑστάμεναι μέλεον σὺν τεύχεσιν, ἀλλὰ λύ ἵππους"

480

ἠὲ σύ γ᾽ ἄνδρας ἔναιρε, μελήσουσιν δ᾽ ἐμοὶ ἵπποι."

ὧς φάτο, τῷ δ᾽ ἔμπνευσε μένος γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη,
κτεῖνε & ἐπιστροφάδην' τῶν δὲ στόνος ὥρνυτ᾽ ἀεικὴς
ἄορι θεινομένων, ἐρνθαίνετο δ᾽ αἵματι γαῖα.

ὡς δὲ λέων μήλοισιν ἀσημάντοισιν ἐπελθών,

485

Ν A 5,7 \ / 4 ,
αὐγέσιν ἢ OLEDOL, KAKA φρονέων ενορουσ,

Monro thinks we may read σῆμα ἔθηκεν,
but the hiatus in this place is quite in-
tolerable. Of the three cases which he
cites, ε 135 is hardly in point, for there
we should read ἠδέ F’ ἔφασκον θήσειν
ἀθάνατον. The other two are in w, the
latest part of all the Homeric poems:
in ὦ 209 we might easily read ἠδ᾽
tavov, in 480 Bekker and Nauck read ax’
ἀφικέσθαι. It is therefore best to follow
Hesychius, with Diintzer, and under-
stand “he put up a bundle and a mark,”
a hendiadys for ‘‘a mark consisting in
a bundle.” It will stand for deF-edos :
the lengthened form of the root de is
found in δεύω, cf. the fut. δεήσει (v.
Curtius, Ht. no. 264).

475. The ἐπιδιφριάς is not elsewhere
mentioned. It is perhaps the name
for the post which stood upright in the
front of the ancient chariot, both Greek
and Assyrian, and served partly as a
support to the driver, partly, as [ have
shewn (J. H. S. v. 190), as the point of
attachment of the ζνγόδεσμον (see 2 274).
πυμάτης may then mean ‘‘the bottom,”
the portion of the ‘‘post” to which
horses would most naturally be tethered.

Possibly however the ἐπιδιῴφριάς may
mean no more than the breastwork of
the δίφρος, the reins being tied as usual
to the ἄντυξ which formed part of it.
For ἐξ there is an old variant ἕξ.

476. (ἡ διπλῇ) ὅτι καὶ ἐν ᾿Ιλιάδι viv τὸ
προπάροιθεν ἐπὶ χρόνον τέταχεν, πρόσθεν
ἣ ἰδεῖν τὸν Διομήδη, οὐχ ὡς οἱ χωρίζοντες
ἐν ’Odvacela μόνον, ἐν ᾿Ιλιάδι δὲ τοπικῶς.
Ariston. This is one of the most inter-
esting of the few recorded arguments of
the Chorizontes which we possess. As
a matter of fact there are other passages
in the Iliad in which προπάροιθε is ap-
parently used in a temporal, not a local
sense: A 734, X 197.

478. πίφανσκε: the long εἰ occurs only
here in thes.

479. πρόφερε, put forth ; cf. ἔριδα προ-
φέρονται Τ' 7, and ¢ 92.

480. μέλεον, idle, useless. II 336.
These two lines are closely paraphrased
in the Rhesos, 622-3—

Διόμηδες, ἣ σὺ κτεῖνε Θρήκιον λεών,
ἢ μοὶ πάρες γε σοὶ δὲ χρὴ πώλους μέλειν.

485. ἀσημάντοισιν, unguarded ; com-
pare σημάντωρ = shepherd, O 325.

350

IAIAAOS K (x)

ὧς μὲν Θρήικας ἄνδρας ἐπῴχετο Τυδέος υἱός,

ὄφρα δυώδεκ᾽ ἔπεφνεν: ἀτὰρ πολύμητις Οδυσσεύς,

ὅν τινα Τυδεΐδης dope πλήξειε παραστάς,

τὸν δ᾽ ᾿Οδυσεὺς μετόπισθε λαβὼν ποδὸς ἐξερύσασκεν, 19
τὰ φρονέων κατὰ θυμόν, ὅπως καλλίτριχες ἵπποι

ῥεῖα διέλθοιεν μηδὲ τρομεοίατο θυμῷ

νεκροῖς ἀμβαίνοντες" ἀήθεσσον γὰρ ἔτ᾽ αὐτῶν.

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ βασιλῆα κιχήσατο Τυδέος υἱός,

τὸν τρισκαιδέκατον μελιηδέα θυμὸν ἀπηύρα 495
ἀσθμαίνοντα" κακὸν γὰρ ὄναρ κεφαλῆφιν ἐπέστη

[τὴν νύκτ᾽ OivelSao πάις, διὰ μῆτιν ᾿Αθήνης.]

τόφρα δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὁ τλήμων ᾿Οδυσεὺς λύε μώνυχας ἵππους,

σὺν δ᾽ ἤειρεν ἱμᾶσι καὶ ἐξήλαυνεν ὁμίλου

τόξῳ ἐπιπλήσσων, ἐπεὶ οὐ μάστιγα φαεινὴν 500
ποικίλου ἐκ δίφροιο νοήσατο χερσὶν ἑλέσθαι.

ῥοίζησεν δ᾽ ἄρα πιφαύσκων Διομήδεϊ δίῳ"

487. ἔπῴχετο, attacked, used especi-
ally of a god, cf. A 50, 383, 2 759, ete.,
as we use ‘‘to visit,” with almost the
same connotation; cf. E 330, O 279,
where, as here, heroes attack with a
special inspiration of divine courage and
strength. The word is not used any-
where of a merely human assault.

489. For the construction of this
couplet cf. B 188-9. Did. mentions a
variant πλήξασκε.

493. For apBalvovres, Cobet conj. ἐμ-
βαίνοντες (M. C. p. 351), not without
reason: cf. λὰξ ἐν στήθεσι Bas Z 65, etc.
ἀήθεσσον, not only ἅπαξ λεγόμενον, but
the only instance of a verb in -eajw
making -eoow instead of -ecw (Curt. Vo.
i. 368). From the Schol. on E 231 it
appears that there was a variant αὐτόν
(sc. ᾽Οδυσῆα), but this use of the acc. is
not defensible. αὐτῶν is quite ambign-
ous: it may mean either ‘‘ they were not
used to corpses,” having only just
reached the seat of war; or ‘‘ they were
not used to Odysseus and Diomedes” as
charioteers, cf. E 231; or again it might
mean ‘‘Q, and ἢ. had no experience of
the horses.” In any case the use of
αὐτῶν in the weak sense, ‘‘them,” is
suspicious ; Hoogvliet con}. ἀήθεσσον yap
ἀντῆς.

496. The idea secins to be that Rhesos
is breathing heavily under the influence
of an ominous dream which has actually

appeared to him, but fails to save him.
But κακὸν ὄναρ was taken to mean in
irony Diomedes, not an actual dream, by
some rhapsode, who, in order to explain
his idea, interpolated the next line. Thi
was accordingly athetized by Ar. and
omitted by Zen. and Aristophanes, with
justice. The acc. τὴν νύκτα is wrong,
for the sense required is not ‘‘all night
through,” but ‘‘in the night.” It
been remarked also that Homer is true
to nature in making those only appear
in dreams who are known to the sleeper,
which would not be the case here.
Οἰνεΐδης is Tydeus, E 818.

499. ἤειρεν, cf. Ο 680 πίσυρας συναεί-
ρεται ἵππους (vulg. συναγείρεται, but see
Cobet, M. C. p. 326, and the scholion of
Porphyrios there quoted), and the forms
παρήορος, ξυνωρίς, etc., which prove the
existence of delpw = to join, though it is
probably distinct from delpw to raise. It
would seem to be a by-form of efpw, and
both must come from a root oFep, though
εἴρω shews no trace of the F. (The views
of Curtius in ΕἸ. δ no, 518, and Vb. i. 117,
seem to be contradictory and unsatis-
factory. Sittl’s conj. ap. Christ, σὺν δ᾽
ἱμασὶν ἔ(βγ)ειρεν, does not account for the
other forms.)

501. Odysseus, like another islander,
Aias, never fights from a chariot, and
hence, perhaps, forgets the whip.

502. ῥοίζησεν, cf. ει 816 πολλῇ ῥοίζῳ,
and II 861. πιφαύσκων, as a signal.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (ἡ)

351

> A e , , ee , »
αὐτὰρ ὁ μερμήριξε μένων, ὅ τι κύντατον ἔρδοιυ,
ἢ ὅ γε δίφρον ἑλών, ὅθι ποικίλα τεύχε᾽ ἔκειτο,

e a » 4 aA 63 / e / 9 9 ἢ
ῥυμοῦ ἐξερύοι ἢ ἐκφέροι ὑψοσ᾽ ἀείρας,

δ0ὅ

ἡ ἔτι τῶν πλεόνων Θρῃκῶν ἀπὸ θυμὸν ἕλοιτο.
εἶος ὁ ταῦθ᾽ ὥρμαινε κατὰ φρένα, τόφρα δ᾽ ᾿Αθήνη
ἐγγύθεν ἱσταμένη προσέφη Διομήδεα δῖον"
“νόστου δὴ μνῆσαι, μεγαθύμου Τυδέος υἱέ,

νῆας ἔπι γλαφυράς, μὴ καὶ πεφοβημένος ἔλθης,

510

4 4 [οἱ 3 ’ Ἁ ¥ 33
μή πού τις καὶ Τρῶας ἐγείρῃσιν θεὸς ἄλλος.
ὧς φάθ᾽, ὁ δὲ ξυνέηκε θεᾶς ὄπα φωνησάσης,
καρπαλίμως δ᾽ ἵππων ἐπεβήσετο" κόψε δ᾽ ᾿Οδυσσεὺς
’ > > ἡ \ > δ a , a
τόξῳ, τοὶ δ᾽ ἐπέτοντο θοὰς ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν.

οὐδ᾽ ἀλαὸς σκοπιὴν εἶχ᾽ ἀργυρότοξος ᾿Απόλλων,

515

ὡς 18 ᾿Αθηναίην μετὰ Τυδέος viov &rovear:
a / 4 / \ rd

τῇ κοτέων Τρώων κατεδύσετο πουλὺν ὅμιλον,

Φ Ν σι e /

ὦρσεν δὲ Θρῃκῶν βουληφορον “Ἱπποκόωντα,

‘Pyoou ἀνεψιὸν ἐσθλόν.

e 2 9 Ψ 9 4

ὁ δ᾽ ἐξ ὕπνου ἀνορούσας,
e ” [οἱ ν» A af? 9 / 4

ὡς ide χῶρον ἐρῆμον, ὅθ᾽ ἕστασαν ὠκέες ἵπποι,

δ20

bid > 2 9 3 / a
ἄνδρας τ᾽ ἀσπαίροντας ἐν ἀργαλέῃσι φονῇσιν,
ὠμωξέν τ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔπειτα φίλον 7 ὀνόμηνεν ἑταῖρον.
ω 7 Μ 4 \
Τρώων δὲ κλαγγή τε καὶ ἄσπετος ὦρτο κυδοιμὸς

ὅ04. H... ἤἥ..... ἢ, the (indirect)
question is only double, not treble: the
second % being subordinate to the first,
i.e. ἐξερύοι and ἐκῴφέροι are only two
variations of the main alternative given
by δίφρον ἑλών. For another instance of
the lightness of the Homeric chariot see
Θ 441, though there the wheels are pos-
sibly separated from the car, which can-
not be the case here.

506. τῶν is an ‘‘article of contrast,
more Thracians instead,’’ Mr. Monro, cf.
H. G. § 260.

510. πεφοβη ‘fin full flight,” in
accordance with the usual Homeric use
of the word. The second ph (511)
implies fear, and is not so closely con-
nected with νόστον μνῆσαι as the first
μή, which is virtually final. Cf. H. G.
278 (Ὁ). Thedistinction is however only
one of the closeness of the connexion of
thought: the two uses are originally
identical. In any case Naber'’s con].
ἣν που (as τ 83) is quite needless.

513. ἵππων, sc. chariot. Of the two
alternatives in 505-6, the second is for-
bidden, and it is not necessary to say
more fully that the first is taken. There

is no need whatever to assume that the
two ride on horseback ; such a practice
is known to Homer (0 679, ε 371), but is
mentioned only in similes, and never
attributed to any hero; the expressions
in the following lines (527-8, 541) are
those regularly used of riding in a
chariot. Besides, the plural ἵππων
would be very awkward if used οὗ a
single hero riding: it could only mean
‘*one of the horses.”

515. This line recurs in N 10, & 188,
6 285. ἀλαὸς σκοπιὴν is the reading
of A and Ar.: the rest of the MSS. give
ἀλαοσκοπίην, Zen. read ἀλαὸν σκοπιήν.
It must be admitted that the phrase is
almost comically inappropriate here.
516. μεθέπονσαν, keeping in hand,
managing, directing; a sense derived
immediately trom thatof handling, which
seems to be the original signification of
€rew in Greek (see on Z 321). The
active does not seem ever to mean ‘‘ac-
company,” which is the only use of the
mid le in H.; see Journ. Phil. xiv.
237.

521. For φονῇσι, ‘‘ carnage,” ‘‘ gore,”
cf. O 633, and αἰνῇσιν νεκάδεσσι E 886.

952

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (x)

θυνόντων ἄμυδις" θηεῦντο δὲ μέρμερα ἔργα,

ὅσσ᾽ ἄνδρες ῥέξαντες ἔβαν κοίλας ἐπὶ νῆας. 55
οἱ δ᾽ ὅτε δή ῥ᾽ ἵκανον, ὅθι σκοπὸν “Ἕκτορος ἔκταν,

ἔνθ᾽ ᾿Οδυσεὺς μὲν ἔρυξε διίφώλος ὠκέας ἵππους,

Τυδείδης δὲ χαμᾶξε θορὼν ἔναρα βροτόεντα

ἐν χείρεσσ᾽ ᾿Οδυσῆνι τίθει, ἐπεβήσετο δ᾽ ἵππων.

μάστιξεν δ᾽ ἵππους, τὼ δ᾽ οὐκ ἀέκοντε πετέσθην 530

[νῆας ἔπι γλαφυράς" τῇ γὰρ φίλον ἔπλετο Oup@.]

Νέστωρ δὲ πρῶτος κτύπον ἄιε φώνησέν τε"

“ὦ φίλοι, ᾿Αργείων ἡγήτορες ἠδὲ μέδοντες,

’ ν > ἢ
ψεύσομαι ἡ ἔτυμον ἐρέω;

κέλεται δέ με θυμός.

ἵππων μ᾽ ὠκυπόδων ἀμφὶ κτύπος οὔατα βάλλει" 535
ai yap δὴ ᾿Οδυσεύς τε καὶ ὁ κρατερὸς Διομήδης

eo) ΜΝ b] 4 / 4

ὧδ᾽ ἄφαρ ἐκ Τρώων ἐλασαίατο μώνυχας ἵππους.

ἀλλ᾽ αἰνῶς δείδοικα κατὰ φρένα, μή τι πάθωσιν

3 / ev e \ ’ 9 .
Ἀργείων οἱ ἄριστοι ὑπὸ Τρώων ὀρυμαγδοῦ.

a 99

οὔ πω πᾶν εἴρητο ἔπος, ὅτ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἤλυθον αὐτοί. 540

’ «5 e \ / 2 / /
καί ῥ᾽ οἱ μὲν κατέβησαν ἐπὶ χθόνα, τοὶ δὲ χαρέντες

a ? 4 ΝΜ 4 /
δεξιῇ ἠσπάζοντο ἔπεσσί τε μειλιχίοισιν.
[οἱ > 53 / 4 e / ,

πρῶτος δ᾽ ἐξερέεινε Γερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ"
bb vw 9 ΜΝ 3 9 ’ 3." 3 A 4 ce) 93 “

εἴπ᾽ ἄγε μ᾽, ὦ πολύαιν᾽ ᾿Οδυσεῦ, μέγα κῦδος ᾿Αχαιῶν,

ὅππως τούσδ᾽ ἵππους λάβετον' καταδύντες ὅμιλον 545
Τρώων; 7 τίς σφωε πόρεν θεὸς ἀντιβολήσας ;

7 A 3 / 3 3 ,
αἰνῶς ἀκτίνεσσιν EOLKOTES ἠελίοιο.
3
αἰεὶ μὲν Τρώεσσ᾽ ἐπιμίσγομαι, οὐδέ τί φημι
\
μιμνάζειν παρὰ νηυσί, γέρων περ ἐὼν πολεμιστής"
3 3 v / “ ν 9ῸΝ 4
ἀλλ᾽ οὔ πω τοίους ἵππους ἴδον οὐδὲ νόησα. 550
3 , >» > 27 Ld ‘\ 3 4
ἀλλά τιν᾽ typ ὀίω δόμεναι θεὸν ἀντιάσαντα"

531. This line is omitted by the best
MSS. (AC Townl.): it is a very inappro-
priate interpolation from A 520, for there
is no reason why the Thracian horses
should be pleased to go to the Greek
camp.

534 = 6 140; Zen. omitted it here.
ΟΥ̓ course it means ‘‘shall I be wrong or
right in what I am about to say ?”

537. ὧδε, ‘‘hither.” This sense of
ὧδε in H. was denied by Ar. (see Lehrs,
Ar. 70, 379), but is much more natural
than the alternative, “thus” (as I hope).
Cf. M 346. @éacalaro, the middle is
chiefly used of driving home spoil (A
674, 682, v 51, ὃ 637). It thus adds a

distinct idea to that which would be

᾿ given by ἐλάσειαν.

538. μετὰ φρεσί and ὦ were
read by Ar. for the κατὰ φρένα and ol
ἄριστοι of MSS.

540. For the phrase in this line cf. π
11, 351

544. πολύαινε, see on I 673: and for
λάβετον in the next line © 448. Zen.
AaBérny, and in 546 opi, against the
rule of Ar. that the orthotone form be-
longs only to the second person, as in
552.

547. The nom. ἐοικότες is interjec-
tional, see 437 and H. G. § 163.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ K (x.)

353

ἀμφοτέρω yap σφῶι φιλεῖ νεφεληγερέτα Ζεὺς
κούρη T αἰγιόχοιο Διός, γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη."
τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πολύμητις ᾿Οδυσσεύς"

“ ὦ Νέστορ Νηληιάδη, μέγα κῦδος ᾿Αχαιῶν,

555

peta θεός γ᾽ ἐθέλων καὶ ἀμείνονας, né περ οἵδε, -
“, , > > VN 4 A / 4
ἵππους δωρήσαιτ᾽, ἐπεὶ ἣ πολὺ φέρτεροί εἰσιν.

4 3 tf / 4 9 [4

ἵπποι δ᾽ οἶδε, γεραιέ, νεήλυδες, ods ἐρεείνεις,
Θρηίκιοι" . τὸν δέ σφιν ἄνακτ᾽ ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης

Μ > «Ὁ lA / 4, 3 ’ὔὕ
ἔκτανε, πὰρ δ᾽ ἑτάρους δυοκαίδεκα πάντας ἀρίστους.

560

\ / \ δ 3 , a
Tov τρισκαιδέκατον σκοπὸν εἵλομεν ἐγγύθι νηῶν,
a A
τὸν pa διοπτῆρα στρατοῦ ἔμμεναι ἡμετέροιο
a 4 ὶ Μ T a 3 35
Extwp τε προέηκε καὶ ἄλλοι Τρῶες ἀγαυοί.
Φ > Ἁ 4 4 4 4
ὧς εἰπὼν τάφροιο διήλασε μώνυχας ἵππους

καγχαλόων" ἅμα δ᾽ ἄλλοι ἴσαν χαίροντες ᾿Αχαιοί.

δθὅ

οἱ δ᾽ ὅτε Τυδεΐδεω κλισίην ἐύτυκτον ἵκοντο,
ἵππους μὲν κατέδησαν ἐντμήτοισιν ἱμᾶσιν
4 3 > e (ig 4 4
φάτνῃ ἐφ᾽ ἱππείῃ, ὅθε περ Διομήδεος ἵπποι
Φ 3 ’ὔ’ / \ v
ἕστασαν ὠκύποδες μελιηδέα πυρὸν ἔδοντες,

νηὶ δ᾽ ἐνὶ πρυμνῇ ἔναρα βροτόεντα Δόλωνος

570

θῆκ᾽ ᾿Οδυσεύς, ὄφρ᾽ ἱρὸν ἑτοιμασσαίατ᾽ ᾿Αθήνῃ.
αὐτοὶ δ᾽ ἱδρῶ πολλὸν ἀπενίζοντο θαλάσσῃ
ἐσβάντες, κνήμας τε ἰδὲ λόφον ἀμφί τε μηρούς.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεί σφιν κῦμα θαλάσσης ἱδρῶ πολλὸν

νίψεν ἀπὸ χρωτὸς καὶ ἀνέψυχθεν φίλον ἧτορ,

556. Cf. ῥεῖα θεός γ᾽ ἐθέλων καὶ τηλόθεν

ἄνδρα σαώσαι y 231. Cf. H. 6. 8 299 α
ἐπεὶ 4 πολὺ φέρτεροί εἶσιν recurs in x
289, and is there appropriate; here

there is nothing with which the gods
are to be compared. ἠέ περ οἵδε, sc.
εἰσίν, an unusual construction instead of
τούσδε.

561. τρισκαιδέκατον follows δυοκαίδεκα
in natural sequence, though Rhesos, who
has been already mentioned, is the
thirteenth. The variant τετρακαιδ. of
which Aristonikos speaks, is evidently
a mere conjecture to evade this small
difficulty.

568. Διομήδεος, because Odysseus has
no steeds ; see on 500.

571. ὄφρα, until. They were perhaps .

laid aside as a sort of pledge to the
oddess of the performance of the vow
in 292. It is not clear whether the
arms themselves are to be consecrated,

2A

575

though 460 may imply this; in that case
it would seem that the dedication was
to accompany the solemn sacrifice. But
such a practice seems to be later than
the Homeric poems, to which the idea
of ‘‘trophies” properly so called is un-
known.

572. Cf. A 621 for the practice of
washing off sweat in sea-water. There
was probably in Homeric times, as in
the present day, a prevalent idea that
‘* sea-water never gives a cold,” however
hot one goes in: but that it is necessary
to be cool before taking a fresh-water
bath. Hence the proper precaution
is taken before the luxury of the dod-
juvOos. The lengthening of the e of
ἀπενίζοντο is due to the ictus, aided
perhaps by the analogy of other words
where initial » represents an older sn
(υός, νιφάς, etc.), which is not the case

ere.

354

LAIAAOS K (x)

ἔς ῥ᾽ ἀσαμίνθους βάντες ἐνξέστας λούσαντο.
τὼ δὲ λοεσσαμένω καὶ ἀλειψαμένω Ar’ ἐλαέῳ
δείπνῳ ἐφιζανέτην, ἀπὸ δὲ κρητῆρος ᾿Αθήνῃ
πλείου ἀφυσσόμενοι λεῖβον μελιηδέα οἶνον.

576. The ἀσάμινθος does not rea

in the Iliad, an ae of
acamp-equipage. This couplet is purely
Odyssean, v. ὃ 48, p 87, £ 96.

577. λίπ᾽, the full form is never found ;
it is probably an old instrum. λίπα for
λίπεσα (cf. σάφα for σάφεσα) ; ‘‘an ad-
verb related to λιπαρός, as κάρτα to καρ-
repos, λίγα to λιγυρός, etc., meaning
‘richly,’ ‘ thickly’ ” (Mr. Monro).

hardly formed part of

578. It has been remarked that ths
is the third δεῖχνον which Odysseus hu
enjoyed during the course of this ov
night ; see 190, 221. Ar. suggests thi
it 18 a breakfast rather than a supper.

579. Cf. Τ' 295. Here, as there, Ar.
(with A) justly preferred the present
participle to the ἀφυσσάμενοι of the
majority of MSS.

ΙΔΊΑΔΟΣ A (σι)

355

IAIAAO® A,

3 / 3 ,
Ἀγαμέμνονος ἀριστεία.

"Has δ᾽ ἐκ λεχέων παρ᾽ ἀγαυοῦ Τιθωνοῖο
ὥρνυθ᾽, iv ἀθανάτοισι φόως φέροι ἠδὲ βροτοῖσιν"
Ζεὺς δ᾽ “Epiéa προΐαλλε θοὰς ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν
ἀργαλέην, πολέμοιο τέρας μετὰ χερσὶν ἔχουσαν.

A

The story of the main part of this
book is, on almost any theory of the
composition of the Iliad, an integral
part of the original plot. The defeat of
the Greeks, followed by the first sign of
relenting in Achilles, forms the turning
point of the tale of the Mims, and is
the foundation of the dramatic interest
of the poem.

On the theory adopted in the intro-
ductions to the preceding books, A will
immediately follow the dream-scene in
B. It is clear that the first few lines
will not fit on exactly to any point of B ;
and it is indeed possible, or even prob-
able, that the exact juncture may have
been lost in the long interpolation, or
rather series of interpolations, to which
the preceding nine books belong. It is
possible however that 1. 17 may im-
mediately follow Agamemnon’s waking
in B 41. Another and preferable sug-
gestion (Fick’s) is that the array of
the Greek army in B may be part of
the original poem, B 443 taking the
place of B 51 by the change of a single
word. We shall then have to join A to
B 483. Now A 56 is excellently suited
for this purpose, as is shewn in the note
to that passage. B 477-483 seem ex-
pressly designed to introduce the ἀριστεία
of Agamemnon which forms the first
part of A and gives its name to the
whole book.

After 56 the narrative proceeds with-
out flagging or offence of any sort till

near the end of the book, if we except
one or two passages of trifling compass
which can easily be omitted (see notes
on 78, 498, 522).

In Nestor’s speech to Patroklos, how-
ever, we find a long passage (665-762)
which is one of the clearest cases of in-
terpolation in the Iliad. It is singularly
out of place at the moment when Patro-
klos has refused even to sit down, owing
to the urgency of his mission; and it
has no apparent connexion whatever with
the message which Nestor is so anxious
to send to Achilles. It is moreover full
of ;words and expressions elsewhere
peculiar to the Odyssey, and in one
passage seems to shew clear evidence of
a knowledge of the Catalogue. We need
not therefore hesitate to class it among
the additions designed to glorify Nestor,
which so often disfigure the old man’s
speeches.

With regard to the closing scene of
the book, that between Patroklos and
Eurypylos, the case is not quite so clear.
It is generally held by the more advanced
critics that this is merely designed to
account for the long interval before the
return of Patroklos to Achilles, which
was involved in the interpolation of the
four books (M-O) containing the τειχο-
paxla. This is ible; but as in the
original poem there must have been
some retxouaxla (or rather ἐπὶ ναυσὶ
μάχη, as the wall may be a later inter-
polation), a slight delay on the part
of Patroklos may still have been needed.
There are no great linguistic difficulties

356

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (st)

στῆ δ᾽ én’ ᾿Οδυσσῆος peyaxnret νηὶ μελαίνῃ), 5
ἥ ῥ᾽ ἐν μεσσάτῳ ἔσκε γεγωνέμεν ἀμφοτέρωσε,
ἡμὲν ἐπ᾿ Αἴαντος κλισίας Τελαμωνιάδαο
nd ἐπ’ ᾿Αχιλλῆος, τοί ῥ᾽ ἔσχατα νῆας ἐΐσας
εἴρυσαν, ἠνορέῃ πίσυνοι καὶ κάρτεϊ χειρῶν"
ἔνθα στᾶσ᾽ ἤυσε θεὰ μέγα τε δεινόν τε lo
ὄρθι᾽, ᾿Αχαιοῖσιν δὲ μέγα σθένος ἔμβαλ᾽ ἑκάστῳ
καρδίῃ, ἄλληκτον πολεμίξειν ἠδὲ μάχεσθαι.
[τοῖσι δ᾽ ἄφαρ πόλεμος γλυκίων γένετ᾽ ἠὲ νέεσθαι
ἐν νηυσὶ γλαφυρῇσι φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν.]
᾿Ατρεΐδης δ᾽ ἐβόησεν ἰδὲ ξώννυσθαι ἄνωγεν 15
᾿Αργείους" ἐν δ᾽ αὐτὸς ἐδύσετο νώροπα χαλκόν.
κνημῖδας μὲν πρῶτα περὶ κνήμῃσιν ἔθηκεν
καλάς, ἀργυρέοισιν ἐπισφυρίοις ἀραρυίας"
δεύτερον αὖ θώρηκα περὶ στήθεσσιν ἔδυνεν,

τόν ποτέ οἱ Κινύρης δῶκε ξεινήιον εἶναι.

&

πεύθετο yap Κύπρονδε μέγα κλέος, οὕνεκ᾽ ᾿Αχαεοὶ

to convince us of the late origin of the
vassage ; aud as to the mere lingering of
Patro los on his way back to Achilles
it is at least not inconsistent with the
character of the ‘“‘ kindly” hero that he
should think the assistance which he
could give to his wounded friend more
material than the loss of a few minutes
in delivering his message. As the I}iad
now stands, that he should stay with
Eurypylos during the whole of a long
aud varied battle without endeavouring
to arouse Achilles, as he hopes to do suc-
cessfully, is indeed a serious blemish in
the plot. But, as we shall see, the
Teichomachy was once in all probability
of short compass, and nothing therefore
compels us to eject this scene from the
oldest form of the Μίῆνις poem.

1-2 = ¢ 1-2. Tithonos is mentioned
again in Tf 237 as brother of Priam, but
there is no mention in Homer of the
legend of his eternal youth, which first
appears in Hymn. Ven. 219-239.

4, What the πολέμοιο τέρας, which
Eris holds in her liands, may be, we
cannot say. The rainbow is called a
τέρας in 1. 28 and P 548; but when
Homer personifies this it is in the form
of the goddess Iris, not of a thing which
can be held in the hand. Others ex-
plain it as the thunderbolt, comparing
K 8. A more likely object is the aegis
of Zeus, sec E 742.

5-9 = © 222-6, where they are better
in place than here.

11. ὄρθια, the war-cry, comes in awk-
wardly after μέγα re δεινόν τε, and is an
Attic rather than an Epic use. It is
found in Hymn. Cer. 20, and (in the
singular) twice in Pindar; otherwise it
seems to be almost confined to Attic.
Observe the F of Fexdorw neglected.
The rest of the line and 12 = = 151-2.

13-14 = B 453-4; they are clearly out
of place here, where there is no question
of returning home at 411, Aristophanes
and Aristarchos obelized, and Zenodotos
entirely omitted, the couplet.

16. See B 578; 17-19 = I 330-2.

20. Kinyras was a legendary hero of
Cyprus, the ancestor of the priestly caste
of the Kinyradae ; originally he was no
doubt a local (Phoenician ἢ) deity. He
was said to have introduced the worshi
of Aphrodite into Paphos, and was fam
for his wealth (see Pindar, N. viii. 18°.

21. Ἐ ύπρονδε, a pregnant expression,
the idea of sound coming to a place bein
involved in its being heard there. C
τηλόσε ἕκλνεν, A 455.

οὕνεκα, ‘‘that,” expressing the con-
tent of the fame he heard. This use is
not found again in the Iliad, but ef. ε
216, ἡ 300, and several other passages
in Od. We can only give it the primitive
meaning ‘‘ because” (as 54, A 11, ete.',
if with Christ we join it with δῶκε in the

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (x1)

357

és Τροίην νήεσσιν ἀναπλεύσεσθαι ἔμελλον"

/ 4 e \ ΝΜ / el
τούνεκά οἱ τὸν ἔδωκε χαριζόμενος βασιλῆι.
τοῦ δ᾽ ἢ τοι δέκα οἶμοι ἔσαν μέλανος κυάνοιο,
δώδεκα δὲ χρυσοῖο καὶ εἴκοσι κασσιτέροιο" 25
κυάνεοι δὲ δράκοντες ὀρωρέχατο προτὶ δειρὴν
τρεῖς ἑκάτερθ᾽, ἴρισσιν ἐοικότες, ἅς τε Κρονίων
ἐν νέφεϊ στήριξε τέρας μερόπων ἀνθρώπων.
ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὦμοισιν βάλετο ξίφος" ἐν δέ οἱ ἧλοι

4 4 3 \ 4φ
χρύσειοι πάμφαινον, ἀτὰρ περὶ κουλεὸν ἦεν . 80
ἀργύρεον, χρυσέοισιν ἀορτήρεσσιν ἀρηρός.

4 ἂν δ᾽ der’ ἀμφιβρότην πολυδαίδαλον ἀσπίδα θοῦριν,
/ / \ 4 4 ,

καλήν, ἣν πέρι μὲν κύκλοι δέκα χάλκεοι Hoar,
9 4 e 6° \ 4 3 7
ἐν δέ οἱ ὀμφαλοὶ ἦσαν ἐείκοσι κασσιτέροιο
λευκοί, ἐν δὲ μέσοισιν ἔην μέλανος κυάνοιο. 35

preceding line, putting a comma after
εἶναι and taking wev@ero . . . κλέος as
a parenthesis.

22. ἀναπλεύσεσθαι, dva- implies ‘‘ out
to sea,” as ἀνήγαγεν Z 292.

24. The breastplate of Agamemnon is
a piece of inlaid work like the swords
found by Dr. Schliemann at Mykenai.
It is explained at length by Helbig,
H. E, 282-3. He shews that breastplate
and backplate of the cuirass have each
twenty-one stripes (olor) of inlaid metal,
gold and kyanos coming alternately,
and being separated by stripes of tin or
white metal, thus—gtktgtkt, where
g = gold, ¢ = tin, K = kyanos. Assum-
ing the outer stripe on each side to be
of gold, this naturally gives the number
required. On front and back (ἑκάτερθε)
there were further added three snakes
coiling upwards ; a favourite decoration
of archaic times. κύανος was _ first
shewn by Lepsius to be ultramarine
(lapis lazuli), or rather an imitation of it
by glass stained blue with compounds of
copper. For this artificial imitation the
island of Cyprus, the home of copper,
was famous. See Helbig, H. E. 79 ff.
Since the publication of Helbig’s book
the theory of Lepsius has received a
striking confirmation from Dr. Schlie-
mann’s discovery at Tiryns of a frieze
ornamented with this blue glass, the
very θριγκὸς κυάνοιο of ἡ 87. μέλανος
can mean no more than ‘‘ dark.”

27. The likeness of the snakes to rain-
bows must lie in their curved shapes
rather than in any similarity of colour.

28. See 4, P 548. The genitive ἀνθρώ-
πὼν is curious, as we should have ex-
pected a dative ; but cf. ἀνθρώπων ταμίης
πολέμοιο, A 84. It seems to he a sort
of ablatival use, “from the side of men,”
i.e. in their eyes. See H. G. § 147.

29. ἧλοι, nails by which the blade was
fastened to the handle: Helbig, H. E.
238-9. Compare ἀργυρόηλον, B 45.

31. The ἀορτήρ (else only in Od.) is
identical with the τελαμών, the baldrick
or strap by which the-sword was hung
over the shoulder. χρυσέοισιν, because
the hero must have everything of the
most precious substance, even where
ordinary men use leather. See on E 723.

32. θοῦριν is to our ideas a curious
epithet for so passive a piece of armour
as the shield. But it was here that, to
a Greek, the ‘‘ point of honour” lay ; so
that the shield might be taken to per-
sonify the martial fury of its bearer.
See J. H. S. iv. 282.

33. The κύκλοι are probably the con-
centric circles inside the shield, formin
with the ῥάβδοι (M 297) a framewor
like a spider’s web on which the hides
(not here named) were fastened (J. H. S.
iv. 286). These too are of metal, though
for meaner mortals they would doubtless
be of wood.

34. The twenty ὀμφαλοί of white
metal are to be regarded as running
round the edge of the shield, and form-
ing the heads of the nails by which the
metal face of the shield is fastened to
the hides beneath (ἰδία, 289).

35. ἔην, there was one. For the

358

τῇ δ᾽ ἐπὶ μὲν Γοργὼ βλοσυρῶπις ἐστεφάνωτο

δεινὸν δερκομένη, περὶ δὲ Δεῖμός τε Φόβος τε.

τῆς δ᾽ ἐξ ἀργύρεος τελαμὼν ἦν: αὐτὰρ ἐπ᾿ αὐτοῦ

κυάνεος ἐλέλεκτο δράκων, κεφαλαὶ δέ οἱ ἧσαν

τρεῖς ἀμφιστρεφέες, ἑνὸς αὐχένος ἐκπεφυυΐῖαι. 40
κρατὶ δ᾽ ἐπ᾿ ἀμφίφαλον κυνέην θέτο τετραφάληρον
ἴππουριν" δεινὸν δὲ λόφος καθύπερθεν ἔνευεν.

εἵλετο δ᾽ ἄλκιμα δοῦρε δύω, κεκορυθμένα χαλκῷ,

ὀξέα" τῆλε δὲ χαλκὸς ἀπ᾽ αὐτόφιν οὐρανὸν εἴσω

λάμπ᾽.

ἐπὶ δ᾽ ἐγδούπησαν ᾿Αθηναίη τε καὶ “Ἥρη, 45

τιμῶσαι βασιλῆα πολυχρύσοιο Μυκήνης.
ἡνιόχῳ μὲν ἔπειτα ἑῷ ἐπέτελλεν ἕκαστος
ἵππους εὖ κατὰ κόσμον ἐρυκέμεν αὖθ᾽ ἐπὶ τάφρῳ,
αὐτοὶ δὲ πρυλέες σὺν τεύχεσι θωρηχθέντες
ῥώοντ᾽" ἄσβεστος δὲ βοὴ γένετ᾽ ἠῶθι πρό. 50
φθὰν δὲ μέγ᾽ ἱππήων ἐπὶ τάφρῳ κοσμηθέντες,

central boss see Helbig, Η. Ε. 226. It
seems most natural to suppose that the
Gorgon’s head was in some way painted
upon this, as otherwise the two would
interfere with one another. In that case
we ought to have τῷ for τῇ in the next
line. The last syllable of λευκοί re-
mains long in spite of the following
vowel, because the diaeresis at the
end of the first foot. The bucolic
diaeresis seems equally to explain the
lengthening of the last syllable of βλοσυ-
ρῶπις in the next line: see E 484, and
ἣνῖν, y 382. Perhaps we should read
λευκοῖ᾽ for λευκοῖο.

36. For the word ἐστεφάνωτο compare
E 739-741 and Σ 485, ra relpea πάντα τά
τ᾽ οὐρανὸς ἐστεφάνωται.

37. Pausanias, in his description of
the chest of Kypselos (v. 19, 4), shews us
how the Greeks of the seventh century
conceived the personified Φόβος on this
very shield; the scene represented is
the fight of Agamemnon and Koon over
Iphidamas (see below, 248-260): Φόβος
δὲ ἐπὶ τοῦ ᾿Αγαμέμνονος τῇ ἀσπίδι ἔπεστιν,
ἔχων τὴν κεφαλὴν λέοντος. ἐπιγράμματα
δὲ ὑπὲρ μὲν τοῦ ᾿Ιφιδάμαντος νεκροῦ,

᾿Ιφιδάμας οὗτός γε, Κόων περιμάρναται

αὐτοῦ.
τοῦ ᾿Αγαμέμνονος δὲ ἐπὶ τῇ ἀσπίδι,

οὗτος μὲν Φόβος ἐστὶ βροτῶν, ὁ δ᾽ ἔχων

᾿Αγαμέμνων.

39. ἐλέλικτο, 1.64. ξεξέλικτο (see A 530,

etc.) ‘‘twined.” A baldrick of silver
with a glass decoration is clearly derived
from the imagination, not from daily life.

40. ἀμφιστρεφέες seems to mean that
the two heads at the sides are twisted
symmetrically about the third in the
middle.

50. ῥώοντο, moved nimbly; so =
411, κνῆμαι pwovro ἁραιαί. πρό,
before an ace οὐ ὧδ morning ; cf.
οὐρανόθι πρό Τ' 8. e ἄσβεστος is
a marked departure from the Tene
conception of the silent march of the
Greek (I' 8, A 429).

51. φθάν, here only, cf. ord», 216.
ἱππτήων here = charioteers, which is not
the usual sense of the word. The gen.
is one of comparison, due to the idea
“before” in φθάνειν. So φθάνειν ἥ, Ψ
444, How in this line is to be
reconciled with ὀλίγον in the next it is
hard to see. The passage from 47 to 55
looks much like the work of the military
but unskilful diaskeuast who appears so
often to have put untimely tactical

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (xz)

ἱππῆες δ᾽ ὀλίγον μετεκίαθον.

359

ἐν δὲ κυδοιμὸν

@pae κακὸν Κρονίδης, κατὰ δ᾽ ὑψόθεν ἧκεν ἐέρσας

αἵματι μυδαλέας ἐξ αἰθέρος, οὕνεκ᾽ ἔμελλεν

πολλὰς ἰφθίμους κεφαλὰς “Ads προϊάψειν. 55
Τρῶες δ᾽ αὖθ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἐπὶ θρωσμῷ πεδίοιο,

“Ἑκτορά τ᾽ ἀμφὶ μέγαν καὶ ἀμύμονα Πουλυδάμαντα

Αἰνείαν θ᾽, ὃς Τρωσὶ θεὸς ὡς τίετο δήμῳ,

τρεῖς τ᾽ ᾿Αντηνορίδας, Πόλυβον καὶ ᾿Αγήνορα δῖον

ἠίθεόν τ’ ᾿Ακάμαντ᾽, ἐπιείκελον ἀθανάτοισιν. 60

“Ἕκτωρ δ᾽ ἐν πρώτοισι φέρ᾽ ἀσπίδα πάντοσ᾽ ἐίσην.

οἷος δ᾽ ἐκ νεφέων ἀναφαίνεται οὔλιος ἀστὴρ

‘ — φαμφαίνων, τοτὲ δ᾽ αὗτις ἔδυ νέφεα σκιόεντα,
ὧς “Ἕκτωρ ὁτὲ μέν τε μετὰ πρώτοισι φάνεσκεν,
ἄλλοτε δ᾽ ἐν πυμάτοισι κελεύων" πᾶς δ᾽ ἄρα χαλκῷ 65

instruction in the mouth of Nestor.
(See on A 303, etc.) 55 = A 3, so that
four out of these nine lines may be bor-
rowed.

54. A blood-red rain occasionally
occurs among the portents of the Roman
annals,

56. With this line at last we seem to
be again in the original stream of the
oldest part of the poem; it describes
the first array of the Trojans for battle
after the retirement of Achilles. The
phrase Opwopds πεδίοιο thus gains in
significance; it means the point where
the plain springs or rises to the hills;
7.e. the foot of the hill on which Troy is
built. This evidently must be the place
where the army is set in order for battle.
But when © had been interpolated, and
the Trojans were bivouacking ἄγχι νεῶν,
the sense of the phrase was lost. Hence
the still later rhapsodists to whom we
owe Καὶ 160 and Tf 8—the only repetitions
of the phrase—took it to mean “‘ rising
ground in the plain,” somewhere near the
camp. But this is not like Homer; where
he has to speak of a locality in the plain,
he gives it a specific name, ‘‘the tomb
of Ilos,’”’ ‘‘the mound called Batieia,”
or at least ‘‘the oak.” But here there
is nothing whatever to specify the locality
unless it be taken to mean ‘‘the margin
of the plain.” We might as well suppose,
if we found such a phrase as πεδίοιο
πείρατα, that it meant “ the end (of some-
thing) in the plain.” Τρῶες, in the course
of the long clause following, is left with-
out a verb; but we can easily supply
κόσμηθεν, ὡπλίζοντο, or the like, from the

eneral sense of the preceding passage.

his is still easier if we suppose wit
Fick that B 444, of μὲν ἐκήρυσσον, rol δ᾽
tryelpovro μάλ᾽ ὦκα, originally preceded at
the distance of only a few lines. Fried-
lander has conjectured αὖ κόσμηθεν for
αὖθ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν, but this is at least un-
necessary.

58. Both Τρωσί and δήμῳ seem to be
used in a locative sense, ‘‘among the
Trojans in their land.” For the hyper-
bolical θεὸς ὥς see E 78.

62. οὕλιος = deadly, a by-form of
οὖλος not recurring in Homer. We find
however οὔλιος “Apys twice in the Scut.
Heraclis, and so Pindar (QO. ix. 76,
xiii, 23, P. xii. 8), and Soph. 4j. 933.
The deadly star must be Seirios, see
X 80, κακὸν δέ re σῆμα τέτυκται, καί re
φέρει πολλὸν πυρετὸν δειλοῖσι βροτοῖσι.
The comparison of Hector to Seirios
may imply therefore both brightness
and terror; though it may be ‘observed
that the season when ‘‘the dog-star
brings fever” is when it rises with the
sun and is therefore invisible, It was
perhaps this which gave rise to a curious
variant mentioned by Aristonikos, adios,
ὅ ἐστιν ἑσπέριος, πρὸς ὃν αὐλίζεται τὰ ζφα.
He quotes Kallimachos, αὕλιος ὃς δυθμὴν
εἶσι μετ᾽ ἠελίου, and so Apoll. Rhod. iv.
1628, ἀνὰ δ᾽ ἤλυθεν ἀστὴρ αὕλιος, ὅς τ᾽
ἀνέπαυσεν ὀιζυροὺς ἀροτῆρας. Cf. also
ἐπιφάτνιος᾽ ὁ ἑωσφόρος ἀστήρ, Hesych.
It has even been proposed to translate
οὕλιος as = οὖλος in the sense ‘‘ hairy,”
i.e. ἃ comet ; but this would require an
epithet implying length of hair, whereas
οὗλος signifies curliness.

960

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (x1.)

λάμφ᾽ ὥς Te στεροπὴ πατρὸς Διὸς αἰγιόχοιο.
οἱ δ᾽, ὥς τ᾽ ἀμητῆρες ἐναντίοι ἀλλήλοισιν
ὄγμον ἐλαύνωσιν, ἀνδρὸς μάκαρος κατ᾽ ἄρουραν,
πυρῶν ἢ κριθέων" τὰ δὲ δράγματα ταρφέα πίπτει"
ὧς Τρῶες καὶ ᾿Αχαιοὶ ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλοισι θορόντες 70
δήουν, οὐδ᾽ ἕτεροι μνώοντ᾽ ὀλοοῖο φόβοιο.
ἴσας δ᾽ ὑσμίνη κεφαλὰς ἔχεν, οἱ δὲ λύκοι ὡς

θῦνον.

ΝΜ »ν > 4, > ,
Epis δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔχαιρε πολύστονος εἰσορόωσα"

οἴη γάρ pa θεῶν παρετύγχανε μαρναμένοισειν,

en ν Ν , 2 ΠῚ .
οἱ δ᾽ ἄλλοι οὔ σφιν πάρεσαν θεοί, ἀλλὰ ἕκηλοι 75
οἷσιν ἐνὶ μεγάροισι καθείατο, ἧχι ἑκάστῳ
δώματα καλὰ τέτυκτο κατὰ πτύχας Οὐλύμποιο.
[πάντες δ᾽ ἠτιόωντο κελαινεφέα Κρονίωνα,
οὕνεκ᾽ ἄρα Τρώεσσιν ἐβούλετο κῦδος ὀρέξαι.
τῶν μὲν ἄρ᾽ οὐκ ἀλέγιζε πατήρ' ὁ δὲ νόσφι λιασθεὶς δ0
τῶν ἄλλων ἀπάνευθε καθέζετο κύὐδεϊ γαίων,
εἰσορόων Τρώων τε πόλιν καὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν

a , > Ul > 9 ’
χαλκοῦ τε στεροπήν, ὀλλύντας T ὀλλυμένους τε.
ὄφρα μὲν ἠὼς ἦν καὶ ἀέξετο ἱερὸν ἦμαρ,

67. The idea evidently is that the
reapers start at the two ends of a field
and meet in the middle.

68. ἐλαύνειν is used as often of carry-
ing out long things in a line, as with
τεῖχος, τάφρον, ἕρκος, etc. Compare the
picture of the reapers in Σ 550-560.
μάκαρος, a 217 ws δὴ ἐγώ γ᾽ ὄφελον
μάκαρός νύ τευ ἔμμεναι vids ἀνέρος,
‘‘wealthy,” or rather ‘powerful, ex-
alted,” if, as Curtius thinks, it is conn.
with μακρός (Et. no. 90, p. 161). It
indicates a chieftain who has a réuevos
of his own apart from the common field,
and cultivates it by means of hired
labourers. The word is almost always
applied to gods; in the few other pass-

es where 1t is used of men it indicates
the very height of human happiness
(Γ 182, 2 377, § 158, A 483, € 306).

69. κριθέων, MSS, κριθῶν, but accord-
ing to the tradition the contracted form
of these fem. genitives is written only
when preceded by a vowel. The gen.
goes with Sypov.

72. The idea seems to be that the
contest holds the heads of both parties
on a level, does not suffer either to go
down before the other. Anmeis thinks
that the ὑσμίνη is personified as a two-

headed monster, but this is hardly likely.
MSS. all read ὑσμίνῃ and ἔχον, but the
text, which is the reading of Ar., is
clearly preferable, as οἱ would be
awkward if there were no change of
subject.

75-7. Lachmann rejected these lines,
and other critics after him have con-
demned the three preceding as well, on
the ground that they are inconsistent
with the action of Here and Athene in
45. But the objection should rather be
made to 45-6, which, as we have seen,
are unusual in expression and thought.

76. olow, so Brugman with three
MSS. and a variant in A, vulg. σφοῖσιν.
The possessive ὅς = own, and can be
used with any person. See note on A
393.

78-83 were athetized by Aristophanes
and Ar., and omitted by Zenod., ὅτι
ψεῦδος : of course the divine allies of
Troy would not blame Zeus for giving
their side victory, so that πάντες cannot
be right. Besides it seems that Zeus
is still in Olympos, whence the battle-
field is invisible; he goes to Ida to
look on only in 1. 188,

84-5 = © 66-7. μάλα goes with
ἥπτετο, ‘‘ hit amain.”

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (x1.)

361

τόφρα μάλ᾽ ἀμφοτέρων Bére ἥπτετο, πῖπτε δὲ λαός" 8ὅ
ἦμος δὲ δρυτόμος περ ἀνὴρ ὡπλίσσατο δεῖπνον

οὔρεος ἐν βήσσησιν, ἐπεί tT ἐκορέσσατο χεῖρας

τάμνων δένδρεα μακρά, ἅδος τέ μιν ἵκετο θυμόν,

σίτου τε γλυκεροῖο περὶ φρένας ἵμερος αἱρεῖ,

τῆμος σφῇ ἀρετῇ Δαναοὶ ῥήξαντο φάλαγγας, 90

/ e » \ ,
KEKNOMEVOL εταροίσυ KATA στίχας.

ἐν δ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνων

πρῶτος ὄρουσ᾽, ἕλε δ᾽ ἄνδρα Βιήνορα ποιμένα λαῶν,
αὐτόν, ἔπειτα δ᾽ ἑταῖρον ᾽Οιλῆα πλήξιππον.
ᾶ4 Φ > 4 [4 / 3 ’ὔ, 5 4
ἢ τοι ὅ γ᾽ ἐξ ἵππων κατεπάλμενος ἀντίος ἔστη"
Α 3. AN A 4 2 , A
τὸν δ᾽ ἰθὺς μεμαῶτα μετώπιον ὀξέι δουρὶ 95
4 ye? ION 4 4 e 4 4
yok’, οὐδὲ στεφάνη δόρυ οἱ σχέθε χαλκοβάρεια,
ἀλλὰ δι᾿ αὐτῆς ἦλθε καὶ ὀστέου, ἐγκέφαλος δὲ
ἔνδον ἅπας πεπάλακτο" δάμασσε δέ μιν μεμαῶτα.
\ \ \ a ” 9 a9 ;
καὶ τοὺς μὲν λίπεν αὖθι ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων
, 3 4 > » 4
στήθεσι παμφαίνοντας, ἐπεὶ κλυτὰ τεύχε ἀπηύρα" 100
αὐτὰρ ὁ βῆ Ἶσόν τε καὶ Αντιφον ἐξεναρίξων,

86. wep must go with ἦμος. For
δεῖπνον Zenod. read δόρπον, which, as
Ar. pointed out, meant the meal when
the day's work was over, whereas δεῖπνον
is the morning meal, commonly taken
before a battle, B 381, T 171. So in
« 811 the Kyklops takes his δεῖπνον be-
fore driving the sheep to pasture. It
may thus indicate a time considerably
before noon ; a woodman who only took
two full meals a day would hardly wait
so long before being tired. ἀέξετο indi-
cates the early morning, while the day
rapidly and sensibly grows hotter.
Hence we may suppose the hour indi-
cated to be about nine or ten. We reach
noon only in II 777.

88. ἅδος occurs only here; for the a

compare ἄδην N 315, T 423, etc., with

note on E 203 (the tradition as to the
breathing is inconsistent). Thus there
is no reason to read pdxp’, ddos (or ἄδδος)
with Christ and others.

94, ὅ ye, Oileus. κατεπάλμενος, leap-
ing down from the chariot against Aga-
meimnon.

96. στεφάνη, see on H 12.

98. πεπάλακτο, was spattered over the
inside of the helmet. Apollonios rejected
this line, reading ἐγκέφαλόνδε in the
preceding.

100. All MSS. and Ar. read περίδυσε
χιτῶνας : but as it is impossible to make

sense of this, I have adopted the ancient
variant κλυτὰ τεύχε᾽ ἀπηύρα mentioned
by Aristonikos as occurring ‘‘in some
copies.” στήθεσι παμφαίνοντας is no
doubt an ironical allusion to the com-
mon phrase τεύχεσι παμῴ., and forms a
sort of oxymoron, “ brilliant with—bare
breasts."" (So Schneidewin.) Ar. how-
ever took παμῴ. with χιτῶνας, and ex-
plained ‘‘ where he had stripped off the
coats of mail glittering on their breasts.”’
For this sense of χιτών we might com-
pare χαλκοχίτωνες, and see B 416, N 439.

ut the order of words is not Homeric.
Besides περίδυσε cannot possibly mean
‘‘stripped off,” if it has anything to
do with the ordinary verb δύω to put
on. The compound does not recur till
quite late writers (Appianus, Josephus,
Athenaeus), whose use of it is evidently
founded on the present passage. Povel-
sen has been bold enough to give the
proper meaning to the verb, and explain
that Agamemnon puts on the armour of
the dead men, in order to carry it away
conveniently! περίδυσε must, it would
seem, represent a corruption of some for-
gotten word, now hopelessly lost.

101. Ba Ἶσον, so Zenod.; Ar. and
MSS. βῆ ῥ᾽ “Icov: but the name is no
doubt connected with the adj. Ficos, so
that Zenod. has preserved the older
tradition. There was a variant Βήρισον
(with ἐξενάριξεν ὃ).

362

TATAAOS A (x1)

ule δύω Πριάμοιο, νόθον καὶ γνήσιον, ἄμφω
εἰν ἑνὶ δίφρῳ ἐόντε" ὁ μὲν νόθος ἡνιόχενεν,
ἼΑντιφος αὖ παρέβασκε περικλυτός" ὥ ποτ᾽ ᾿Αχελλεὺς
Ἴδης ἐν κνημοῖσι δίδη μόσχοισι λύγοισιν, 105
ποιμαίνοντ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ὄεσσι λαβών, καὶ ἔλυσεν ἀποίνων.
δὴ τότε γ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδης εὐρὺ κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων.
τὸν μὲν ὑπὲρ μαζοῖο κατὰ στῆθος βάλε δουρί,
Αντιφον αὖ παρὰ οὖς ἔλασε ξίφει, ἐκ δ᾽ ἔβαλ᾽ ἕππων.
σπερχόμενος δ᾽ ἀπὸ Toi ἐσύλα τεύχεα καλά, 110
γιγνώσκων" καὶ γάρ ode πάρος παρὰ νηυσὶ θοῆσιν
εἶδεν, ὅτ᾽ ἐξ Ἴδης ἄγαγεν πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς.
ὡς δὲ λέων ἐλάφοιο ταχείης νήπια τέκνα
ῥηιδίως συνέαξε λαβὼν κρατεροῖσιν ὀδοῦσιν,
ἐλθὼν εἰς εὐνήν, ἁπαλόν τέ σφ᾽ ἧτορ ἀπηύρα" 115
ἡ δ᾽ εἴ πέρ Te τύχῃσι μάλα σχεδόν, οὐ δύναταί σφιν
χραισμεῖν" αὐτὴν γάρ μιν ὑπὸ τρόμος αἰνὸς ἱκάνει"
καρπαλίμως δ᾽ ἤιξε διὰ δρυμὰ πυκνὰ καὶ ὕλην
σπεύδουσ᾽, ἱδρώουσα, κραταιοῦ θηρὸς ὑφ᾽ ὁρμῆς"
ὡς ἄρα τοῖς οὔ τις δύνατο χραισμῆσαι ὄλεθρον 120
Τρώων, ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτοὶ ὑπ᾽ ᾿Αργείοισε φέβοντο.

αὐτὰρ ὁ Πείσανδρόν τε καὶ “Ἱππόλοχον μενεχάρμην,
υἱέας ᾿Αντιμάχοιο δαΐφρονος, ὅς ῥα μάλιστα,
χρυσὸν ᾿Αλεξάνδροιο δεδεγμένος, ἀγλαὰ δῶρα,
οὐκ εἴασχ᾽ “EXévnv δόμεναι ξανθῷ Μενελάῳ, 195
τοῦ περ δὴ δύο παῖδε λάβε κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων

108. ἐόντε, so Aristophanes; Ar. and
MSS. ἐόντας. The hiatus is normal in
this place, but will account for the read-
ing ἐόντας, while the other would not be
likely to be introduced if not original.

104. αὖ, here a conjunction, ‘‘ but,”
answering μέν : 145, P 478, etc. παρέ-
Pace, was παραβάτης, the fighting man

eside the charioteer. For ὦ Zen. read
Sv, so that he must also have read é for
σφε in 111.

105. §6n, from δίδημι, an old form of
δέω, so διδέντων, μι 54. μόσχοισι ap-
pears to be an adj. = young, afterwards
specialized as a substantive, “the young”
of the cow = calf, or of plants = young
shoot. But we might take it as a sub-
stantive in apposition with λύγοισι,
‘‘with young shoots, even willow
withies ” ; cf. σῦς κάπρος, etc.

106. ἀποίνων, gen. of price, H. G. §
153.

109. αὖ as 104. παρὰ ots: the hiatus
can hardly be right. Curtius suggests
wap bas (6Fas), Fick παραὶ οὗας ἔλασσέ
τε, ἔκ τ ἔβαλ᾽ ἵππων, on the ground that
ovas is the Homeric form.

111. γιγνώσκων, ‘‘ recognizing them,”
explained by what follows’

115. ἧτορ, ‘‘ breath,” see B 490. σφ᾽
of course is σῴε, accus. as 111.

120. χραισμῆσαι has the construction
of ἀμύνειν, cf. A 567.

123. μάλιστα goes with οὐκ εἴασκε,
chiefly dissuaded ; 124 being a paren-
thesis.

124, SeSeypévos, according to the
Homeric use, must mean “* expecting,”
not ‘‘ having received.” Cf. A 107, ete.

126. δύο παῖδε resumes the main con-
struction from 122 after the parenthesis.

IAIAAOS A (x1) 363
εἰν ἑνὶ δίφρῳ ἐόντε, ὁμοῦ δ᾽ ἔχον ὠκέας ἵππους"
ἐκ γάρ odeas χειρῶν φύγον ἡνία συγαλόεντα,
τὼ δὲ κυκηθήτην. ὁ δ᾽ ἐναντίον ὦρτο λέων ὡς
᾿Ατρεΐδης" τὼ δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ἐκ δίφρου γουναζέσθην' 180

“ξώγρει, ᾿Ατρέος υἱέ, σὺ δ᾽ ἄξια δέξαι ἄποινα"
πολλὰ δ᾽ ἐν ᾿Αντιμάχοιο δόμοις κειμήλια κεῖται,
χαλκός τε χρυσός τε πολύκμητός τε σίδηρος"
τῶν κέν τοι χαρίσαιτο πατὴρ ἀπερείσι᾽' ἄποινα,
εἰ νῶι ζωοὺς πεπύθοιτ᾽ ἐπὶ νηυσὶν ᾿Αχαιῶν." 135
Φ , 4 / A
ὧς τώ γε κλαίοντε προσαυδήτην βασιλῆα
’ 3 / 3 > wv 9
μειλιχίοις ἐπέεσσιν" ἀμείλικτον δ᾽ ὄπ᾽ ἄκουσαν"
“ εἰ μὲν δὴ ᾿Αντιμάχοιο δαΐφρονος υἱέες ἐστόν,
ὅς ποτ᾽ ἐνὶ Τρώων ἀγορῇ Μενέλαον ἄνωγεν,
ἀγγελίην ἐλθόντα σὺν ἀντιθέῳ ᾿Οδυσὴῆι, 140
αὖθι κατακτεῖναι μηδ᾽ ἐξέμεν ap ἐς ᾿Αχαιούς,
A“ \ \ φ Ν 3 ’ ᾿ 39
νῦν μὲν δὴ οὗ πατρὸς ἀεικέα τίσετε λώβην.
ἢ καὶ Πείσανδρον μὲν ἀφ᾽ ἵππων aoe χαμᾶζε
δουρὶ βαλὼν πρὸς στῆθος" ὁ δ᾽ ὕπτιος οὔδει ἐρείσθη.

127. ὁμοῦ δ᾽ ἔχον seems to mean
‘‘they were both trying to drive,” 1.6.
the charioteer had lost command of the
horses and the παραβάτης was trying to
help him get them under control, as
is explained by the γάρ in 128. So
Schol. A. odeas then really means only
one of them, sc. the charioteer who had
lost the reins; but the poet is engaged
with the picture of the moment in which
both are equally concerned, and does
not care to express accurately what has
gone before. (Others take ὁμοῦ ἔχον to
mean ‘‘they were accustomed to drive
both at once,” and then γάρ 128 must
explain λάβε. But apart from the diffi-
culties of such a proceeding, it is hard
to see why they should go out to battle
at all if neither of them meant to fight.)

129. τὼ δέ, the horses.

130. γουναζέσθην naturally means no
more than ‘‘besought,” and does not
indicate an attitude which could not
have been ible in the diminutive
car of the Homeric heroes. Cf. γουνού-
μενος, I 583. With the ordinary read-
ing ᾿Ατρείδης we have a purely spondaic
rhythm, cf. ¢ 15, ο 334, Ψ 221. The
grammarians called such a line dwdexa-
σύλλαβος.ς. Nauck however has corrected
the last two instances by the introduc-
tion of open vowels for diphthongs.

131-135 = Z 46-50. In 182 δόμοις,
in spite of the rarity of the short form
of the dat. plural, is preferable to πατρός, ᾿
the reading of Zenod., as there is no
other case in H. of the a remaining short
before 7p in any of the forms of πατήρ.
There was also a variant ἐν ἀφνειοῦ
πατρός here as in Z.

137. Cf. Φ 98. The contrast of course
is between ἀ-μείλικ-τον and μειλιχ-ίοις,
‘they spake him gently, but heard un-
gentle answer.”

138. Salppoves, Zenod. xaxddpovos,
and so also above, 123.

139. Μενέλαον is of course accus. after
Κατακτεινραι.

140. ἀγγελίην ἐλθόντα, when he came
on an embassy. See note on I’ 206, and
compare ἐξεσίην ἐλθόντι Ὦ 235.

141. ἐξέμεν (ἰ.6. ἐξέμεν 2 aor. infin. of
ἐξίημι), not to let him go.

142. τοῦ πατρός Aristarchos; but
Zenod. read οὗ πατρός, ‘‘your father,”
which is certainly right. See A 393.
Another old variant, σφοῦ, is, as Brug-
man remarks, an attempt either to
mend the metre, or more probably to
‘**correct”’ at least the number, if not
the person, of the pronoun.

144, For οὔδει épelo Gy (lit. ‘‘ was sup-
ported by,” 4. lay upon the earth),
Arist. read οὖδας peace, pressed the

964

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (x1)

Ἱππόλοχος δ᾽ ἀπόρουσε' τὸν αὖ χαμαὶ ἐξενάριξεν, 145
χεῖρας ἀπὸ ξίφεϊ τμήξας ἀπό τ᾿ αὐχένα κόψας,

ὅλμον δ᾽ ὡς ἔσσευε κυλίνδεσθαι Se’ ὁμίλου.

τοὺς μὲν ἔασ᾽, ὁ δ᾽, ὅθι πλεῖσται κλονέοντο φάλαγγες,

τῇ ῥ᾽ ἐνόρουσ᾽, ἅμα δ᾽ ἄλλοι ἐυκνήμιδες ᾿Αχαεοί,

πεζοὶ μὲν πεζοὺς ὄλεκον φεύγοντας ἀνάγκῃ, 150
ἱππεῖς δ᾽ ἱππῆας, ὑπὸ δέ σφισιν ὦρτο κονίη

ἐκ πεδίου, τὴν ὧρσαν ἐρίγδουποι πόδες ἵππων,

χαλκῷ δηιόωντες.

ἀτὰρ κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων

αἰὲν ἀποκτείνων emer, ᾿Αργείοισι κελεύων.

ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε πῦρ ἀίδηλον ἐν ἀξύλῳ ἐμπέσῃ ὕλῃ" 155
πάντῃ τ᾽ εἰλυφόων ἄνεμος φέρει, οἱ δέ Te θάμνοι

πρόρριζοι πίπτουσιν ἐπειγόμενοι πυρὸς ὁρμῇ"

ὡς ἄρ᾽ ὑπ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδῃ ᾿Αγαμέμνονι πῖπτε κάρηνα

Τρώων φευγόντων, πολλοὶ δ᾽ ἐριαύχενες ἵπποι

κείν᾽ ὄχεα κροτάλιζον ἀνὰ πτολέμοιο γεφύρας, 160
ἡνιόχους ποθέοντες ἀμύμονας" οἱ δ᾽ ἐπὶ γαίῃ

κείατο γύπεσσιν πολὺ φίλτεροι ἢ ἀλόχοισιν.

Ἕκτορα δ᾽ ἐκ βελέων ὕπαγε Ζεὺς ἔκ τε κονίης

ἔκ T ἀνδροκτασίης ἔκ θ᾽ αἵματος ἔκ τε κυδοιμοῦ"

earth: which may be supported by N
131, II 215 ἀσπὶς dp’ ἀσπίδ᾽ ἔρειδε.

145. ἀπόρουσε, leapt down, to escape.
τὸν αὖ, but him, see 104. χαμαί, op-
posed to the death of his brother on the
chariot.

147. Compare ἧκε δέ μιν σφαιρηδὸν
ἑλίξασθαι N 204, στρομβὸν δ᾽ ὡς ἔσσευε
= 418. ὅλμος is explained by Schol. as
κοῖλος λίθος εἰς ὃν κόπτουσιν ὄσπρια (pulse)
καὶ ἄλλα τινά, 1.6. ἃ mortar. The head-
less and armless trunk he ‘‘sent rolling”
with a kick, like a round block of stone.

150-154 are very suspicious lines. We
must regard ὑπό... ἵππων as 8 paren-
thesis, and join δηιόωντες with ἱππεῖς
instead of πόδες, which is very awkward.
The rhythm of 154, where the line is
equally divided by a stop, is un-Homeric,
the only parallel being 1 134. The form
ἱππεῖς 15 not Epic, but Attic, and there
is no analogy to it in Homer. Lehrs
has conjectured ἱππῆες δ᾽ ἱππῆας, ὑπό
σφισι δ᾽ ὦρτο, on the strength of one
MS. (Ὁ) which reads ἱππῆες, without
altering the remainder of the line: but
the change is doubtful, as there is no
visible cause for the corruption. ἐρί-
γδουπος is elsewhere used only of Zeus,

though ἐρίδουπος occurs in Q and Od.
as an epithet of the αἴθουσα, and in Tf 50,
x 515, of rivers. ;

155. Various explanations of ἄξυλος
are offered by the Scholia. (1) θρυώδης,
1.6. full of undergrowth only, with no
timber trees. (2) πολύξυλον, with “‘d-
intensive.” (3) ‘‘untimbered”’ in the
sense ἀφ᾽ ἧς οὐδεὶς ἐξυλίσατο, tncacduus.
The word is used by Herodotos in the
sense of ‘‘timberless,” and it is thus
clearly best to adopt (1); this gives
additional force to the word θάμνοι in
the next line.

157. ἐπειγόμενοι, cf. ᾧ 362, “ asaailed.”

158. κάρηνα, i.e. persons: a peri-
phrastic use. Cf. 309, and ᾧ 336.

160. κείν, 72¢ κενά, with accent
thrown back on account of the a
strophe. πτολέμοιο γεφύρας, see A 371.

162. Ironical, ‘‘ more delightful to the
vultures than to their own wives.”

163-4. This action of Zeus seems quite
out of place here, and inconsistent with
his message in 186 sqg. ὕπαγε is used
only here in the sense ἄγε ὑπ(ἐκ) βελέων.
The two lines seem to be an interpolation
intended to account for the absence of
Hector at this moment.

ΙΛΙΔΔΟΣ A (x1)

᾿Ατρεΐδης δ᾽ ἕπετο σφεδανὸν Δαναοῖσι κελεύων.

365

165

ot δὲ παρ᾽ “Idkou σῆμα παλαιοῦ Δαρδανίδαο,
μέσσον κὰπ πεδίον, παρ᾽ ἐρινεὸν ἐσσεύοντο
er 4 e \ N Ψ > > A
ἱέμενοι πόλιος" ὁ δὲ κεκληγὼς Emer αἰεὶ
᾿Ατρεΐδης, λύθρῳ δὲ παλάσσετο χεῖρας ἀάπτους.
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ Σκαιάς τε πύλας καὶ φηγὸν ἵκοντο, 170
ἔνθ᾽ ἄρα δὴ ἵσταντο καὶ ἀλλήλους ἀνέμιμνον,

6 δ᾽ » \ , δί 4 , Ψ
οἱ δ᾽ ἐτι Kap μέσσον πεδίον φοβέοντο βοες ὥς,
ἅς τε λέων ἐφόβησε μολὼν ἐν νυκτὸς ἀμονγῷ

A as » OAR 9 ἢ > \ νΝ
πάσας" τῇ δέ T ἰῇ ἀναφαίνεται αἰπὺς ὄλεθρος"
τῆς δ᾽ ἐξ αὐχέν᾽ ἔαξε λαβὼν κρατεροῖσιν ὀδοῦσιν 175

a w la 3 \ 4 ,

πρῶτον, ἔπειτα δέ θ᾽ αἷμα καὶ ἔγκατα πάντα λαφύσσει"
Φ \ 3 " wv 4 3 4
ὡς τοὺς Ατρεΐδης ἔφεπε κρείων ἀγαμέμνων

>] 3
αἰὲν ἀποκτείνων τὸν ὀπίστατον, οἱ δὲ φέβοντο'

\ a C4 ΝΜ Ρ
[πολλοὶ δὲ πρηνεῖς τε καὶ ὕπτιοι ἔκπεσον ἵππων
᾿Ατρεΐδεω ὑπὸ χερσί: περιπρὸ γὰρ ἔγχεϊ θῦεν.] 180
3 3 ὦ \ 4, 3 # e Ἁ / 9 4 A
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ τάχ᾽ ἔμελλεν ὑπὸ πτόλιν αἰπύ τε τεῖχος
/ A A

ἵξεσθαι, tore δή pa πατὴρ ἀνδρῶν τε θεῶν τε
Ἴδης ἐν κορυφῇσι καθέζετο πιδηέσσης,
οὐρανόθεν καταβάς" ἔχε δ᾽ ἀστεροπὴν μετὰ χερσίν.
Ἶριν δ᾽ ὥτρυνε χρυσόπτερον ἀγγελέουσαν" 185
“ βάσκ᾽ ἴθι, Ἶρι ταχεῖα, τὸν “Exrops μῦθον ἐνίσπες.
ῳ 3 a ’ e A "A ’ , λαῶ
ὄφρ᾽ ἂν μέν κεν ὁρᾷ ᾿Αγαμέμνονα ποιμένα λαῶν

166. οἱ 8é,the Trojans. For the tomb
of Ilos see K 415 ; for the fig-tree Z 433,
X 145; for the oak-tree (170) E 693.

168. ἱέμενοι with the gen. like verbs
of ‘‘desiring” and ‘‘aiming”: Ψ 371,
718, etc. ; H. G. § 151.

169. ἀάπτους, see on A 567.

172. of δέ, others, 1.6. stragglers, op-
posed to the main body.

173. ἀμολγῷ seems to mean ‘‘in the
depth of night.” (But see X 317.) The
derivation 1s still doubtful, in spite of
numerous conjectures. Perhaps the most
probable is Benfey’s : he connects it with
Slav. mraku, Norse myrks, our murky,
all in the sense of darkness. See Curt.
Et. p. 568. Others assume a noun * μολ-
és from the same root, in sense “cloud,”
and translate “in the cloudlessness of
the night,” ἐδ. on a cloudless night.
But this does not seem sufficiently general.
For Buttmann’s view see ζεῖ, 3.v.

174. τῇ ly, ef. Π 173, Ὁ 272, E 271,
ἡ μία v 110, and so the article is used
with other numerals almost as a demon-

strative, to single out a definite number
and contrast them with the larger mass.
H. G. § 260 ¢.

175-6 = P 63-4. 178 = Θ 842.

179-180 seem a very needless repeti-
tion of what has already been said several
times. πρηνεῖς for πρηνέες is a form
which does not occur again. Aristarchos
rightly athetized both, while Zenod.
altogether omitted 180 as being inter-
polated from Π 699.

188, πιδηέσσης, only here, = πολυπί-
δακος.

184. οὐρανόθεν, from the summit of
Olympos (which, though H. does not
identify it with οὐρανός, still, as a
mountain, reached into heaven). ἀστε-
por, a lengthened form of ἀστραπή
(cf. N 242, etc.), which seems specially
restricted to indicate the thunderbolt as
ἃ weapon, not as a flash.

186. τόν, this (which follows): a very
unusual use of the demonstrative 6.

187. av... κεν, so N 127, ῶ 487, and
several times in Od. 6.0. ε 361.

366 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (xt)

θύνοντ᾽ ἐν προμάχοισιν ἐναίροντα στίχας ἀνδρῶν,
τόφρ᾽ ἀναχωρείτω, τὸν δ᾽ ἄλλον λαὸν ἀνώχθω
μάρνασθαι δηίοισι κατὰ κρατερὴν ὑσμίνην" 190
αὐτὰρ ἐπεί κ᾽ ἢ δουρὶ τυπεὶς ἢ βλήμενος ἐῷ
3 “4 Ψ , e VA >
εἰς ἵππους ἅλεται, τότε οἱ κράτος eyyvarlEw
κτείνειν, εἰς ὅ κε νῆας ἐυσσέλμους ἀφίκηται
δύῃ τ᾽ ἠέλιος καὶ ἐπὶ κνέφας ἱερὸν ἔλθη."
ὧς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησε ποδήνεμος ὠκέα Ἶρες, 195
βῆ δὲ κατ᾽ ᾿Ιδαίων ὀρέων eis Ἴλιον ἱρήν.
εὗρ᾽ υἱὸν ἸΙριάμοιο δαΐφρονος, “Exropa δῖον,
e / oxy > “ἢ \o@ ~~
ἑσταότ᾽ ἔν θ᾽ ἵπποισι καὶ ἅρμασι κολλητοῖσεν"
2 a δ᾽ e / , , > s/s _ 4
ἀγχοῦ δ᾽ ἱσταμένη προσέφη πόδας ὠκέα “Ipes-
ες "BE eX II 4 A ὶ ” 3 ’
κτορ υἱὲ 1ἱριάμοιο, Act μῆτιν ἀτάλαντε, 200
’ \ ’ 4 l4
Ζεύς με πατὴρ προέηκε τεὶν τάδε μυθήσασθαι.
4 3 / ec oa 3 , / δι
ὄφρ᾽ ἂν μέν κεν ὁρᾷς ᾿Αγαμέμνονα ποιμένα λαῶν
θύνοντ᾽ ἐν προμάχοισιν ἐναίροντα στίχας ἀνδρῶν,
τόφρ᾽ ὑπόεικε μάχης, τὸν δ᾽ ἄλλον λαὸν ἄνωχθι
μάρνασθαι δηίοισι κατὰ κρατερὴν ὑσμίνην" 205
? > Π > ἃ A f 7A
αὐτὰρ ἐπεί κ᾽ ἢ δουρὶ τυπεὶς ἢ BAnpevos ἰῷ
9 A bid f / 3 ’
εἰς ἵππους ἅλεται, τότε τοι κράτος ἐγγυαλίξει
κτείνειν, εἰς ὅ κε νῆας ἐνσσέλμους ἀφίκηαι
δύῃ τ᾽ ἠέλιος καὶ ἐπὶ κνέφας ἱερὸν ἔλθη."
e \ vw > 4 3 a >? 3 / , : 3 ’ 4
ἡ μὲν ap ὧς εἰποῦσ᾽ ἀπέβη πόδας ὠκέα "Ipes, 210
“R δ᾽ 3 > 4 \ , a
κτωρ δ᾽ ἐξ ὀχέων σὺν τεύχεσιν ἄλτο χαμᾶξε,
, > DFH/ a) A Ἁ Ww a
πάλλων & ὀξέα δοῦρα κατὰ στρατὸν ὥχετο πάντῃ
4 , , Ww lA > ἢ
ὀτρύνων μαχέσασθαι, ἔγειρε δὲ φύλοπιν aivny.
e 3 / 3 , ” 3 ρι
οἱ & ἐλελίχθησαν καὶ ἐναντίοι ἔσταν ᾿Αχαιῶν,
᾿Αργεῖοι δ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἐκαρτύναντο φάλαγγας, 215
3 4, A 4, > 9 ’ 3 3.» ’
ἀρτύνθη δὲ μάχη, στὰὼν δ᾽ ἀντίοι. ἐν δ᾽. ᾿Αγαμέμνων
σ΄ Ww 3 ” A A ’ e 4
πρῶτος ὄρουσ᾽, ἔθελεν δὲ πολὺ προμάχεσθαι ἁπάντων.

189. ἀνώχθω, perf. imper.: we have
dvuryérw from the aor., β 195.

194, ἱερόν, perhaps in the primitive
sense ‘strong darkness,” cf. A 366; an
epithet suggested by the irresistible force
with which it drives away the day.

This promise is not fulfilled, for
Patroklos utterly routs the Trojans on
the same day. These two lines with
208-9 are probably interpolated from
P 454-5, where they are more in place,
for they are thereafter accomplished to
the letter.

200. υἱέ, see A 489 for the scansion.

201. τεῖν = σοί, a form which occurs
elsewhere only in Od. The form is
‘** Doric,” acc. to Schol. A‘: but this is of
course wrong. The ν seems to re t
the m of I. E. tu-bhyam (tt-bi), the .δλ.-
being dropped.

ee x nour,” mae mutandis.

4, σαν, read δὲ ξελίχθησαν
wheeled round. See A 530. *

216. μάχη seems to be used here in a
concrete sense, as in old English, of the
embattled hosts: ‘‘the battle was ranged
in order,” 2.6. the lines were re-formed.
Cf. M 48, O 808.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (xr)

367

» “a ἴω 3 4 , > ΝΜ
ἔσπετε νῦν μοι, μοῦσαι ᾿Ολύμπια δώματ᾽ ἔχουσαι,
ὅς τις δὴ πρῶτος ᾿Αγαμέμνονος ἀντίος ἦλθεν

“A 3 a 4 oA a“ 3 4
ἢ αὐτῶν Τρώων ἠὲ κλειτῶν ἐπικούρων.

220

᾿Ιφιδάμας ᾿Αντηνορίδης nus τε μέγας τε,

ὃς τράφη ἐν Θρήκῃ ἐριβώλακι, μητέρι μήλων"
Κισσῆς τόν γ᾽ ἔθρεψε δόμοις ἔνι τυτθὸν ἐόντα
μητροπάτωρ, ὃς ἔτικτε Θεανὼ καλλιπάρῃον"

αὐτὰρ ἐπεί ῥ᾽ ἥβης ἐρικυδέος ἵκετο μέτρον,

225

αὐτοῦ μιν κατέρυκε, δίδου δ᾽ & ye θυγατέρα ἦν'
γήμας δ᾽ ἐκ θαλάμοιο μετὰ κλέος ἵκετ᾽ ᾿Αχαιῶν
σὺν δυοκαίδεκα νηυσὶ κορωνίσιν, ai οἱ ἕποντο.
τὰς μὲν ἔπειτ᾽ ἐν ἸΠερκώτῃ λίπε νῆας éicas,

αὐτὰρ ὁ πεζὸς ἐὼν εἰς Ἴλιον εἰληλούθειν"

290

ὅς ῥα τότ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδεω ᾿Αγαμέμνονος ἀντίος ἦλθεν.
οἱ δ᾽ ὅτε δὴ σχεδὸν ἦσαν ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλοισιν ἰόντες,
᾿Ατρεΐδης μὲν ἅμαρτε, παραὶ δέ οἱ ἐτράπετ᾽ ἔγχος,
᾿Ιφιδάμας δὲ κατὰ ζώνην, θώρηκος ἔνερθεν,

νύξ᾽, ἐπὶ δ᾽ αὐτὸς ἔρεισε βαρείῃ χειρὶ πιθήσας"

235

οὐδ᾽ rope ζωστῆρα παναίολον, ἀλλὰ πολὺ πρὶν

218. This appeal to the Muses (cf. Β
484) fitly introduces what is really the
turning point of the poem. For now
begins, with the wounding of Agamem-
non, the disastrous rout of the Greeks
which prevails upon Achilles to relax his
anger and send Patroklos to the rescue.

219. ἀντίος, so most MSS., with
Zenod. and Aristophanes: Aristarchos
ἀντίον. The difference is immaterial.

221. The name is introduced asyndetic-
ally, just as in A 8.

222. For μήλων Zenod. read θηρῶν.

224. μητροπάτωρ : it will be seen that
Iphidamas thus married his maternal
aunt (as did Diomedes, E 412), the sister
of his mother Theano, the priestess of
Athene in Troy, and wife of Antenor
(Z 298).

225. ἐρικυδέος, because it gives a
youth the power of attaining martial
glory.

226. αὐτοῦ μιν κατέρυκε, his grand-
father tried (imperf.) to keep him at
home (lit. there where he was): δίδου,
gave him in marriage (for a consideration ;
see 243-5). The imperf. indicates that

δίδουν is subordinate, = ‘‘by giving” -

(see H. G. § 71).

227. ἐκ θαλάμοιο, straight from the
bridal chamber. μετὰ κλέος 'Ax., ‘after

the fame of the Achaians,” 1.6. he went
in the direction whence came the rumour
of their expedition, as though to find it
out. Cf. 1. 21, and N 364.

229. Perkote, a town on the Hellespont
in the N. of the Troad. As he came
from the E. of Thrace across the Propontis,
this would be the nearest point to Troy
that he could reach; for the Greeks
held the mouth of the Hellespont.

230. πεζὸς ἐών (al. ἰών), 1.6. by land.

233. Schol. A remarks that this is the
only instance in the Iliad of a single
combat where the warrior who has the
first cast and misses his shot still wins
in the end.

234. ζώνη seems here to mean the
waist of the cuirass = ζῶμα, A 187.
θώρηκος ἔνερθεν must then mean “in the
lower part of the b late,” ‘‘the
genitive being partitive, not ablatival.”’

ossibly however ζώνη might = ξωστήρ,
as it is always used of a woman’s girdle
except here, and B 479 where it means
the (human) waist. See Helbig, H. E.
p. 199.

235. αὐτὸς ἐπέρεισε, z.c. he threw the
weight of his whole body into the blow,
following up his heavy hand.

236. rope, this form only here:
see note on K 267.

368

IAIAAOS A (x1)

3 , 4 , “ A 3 4 a 3 ξ΄
ἀργύρῳ ἀντομένη μόλιβος ὡς ἐτράπετ" αἰχμή.
4 A 3 A 4 3 ’
καὶ τό γε χειρὶ λαβὼν εὐρὺ κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων
rd > 3 » \ 4 ’ 2 3 ν δ
ἕλκ᾽ ἐπὶ of μεμαὼς ὥς τε Ais, ἐκ δ᾽ ἄρα χειρὸς
σπάσσατο" τὸν δ᾽ ἄορι TARE αὐχένα, λῦσε δὲ γυῖα. 940
ὧς ὁ μὲν αὖθι πεσὼν κοιμήσατο χάλκεον ὕπνον
οἰκτρός, ἀπὸ μνηστῆς ἀλόχου, ἀστοῖσιν ἀρήγων,
κουριδίης, ἧς οὔ τι χάριν ἴδε, πολλὰ δ᾽ ἔδωκεν"
” > e \ eo) [ον Μ A > e@ ,
πρῶθ᾽ ἑκατὸν βοῦς δῶκεν, ἔπειτα δὲ yids ὑπέστη,
αἶγας ὁμοῦ καὶ ὄις, τά οἱ ἄσπετα ποιμαίνοντο. 245
δὴ τότε γ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδης ᾿Αγαμέμνων ἐξενάριξεν,
βῆ δὲ φέρων av’ ὅμιλον ᾿Αχαιῶν τεύχεα καλά.
\ > e 9 ) ἢ 5 / 3 ~
τὸν δ᾽ ὡς οὖν ἐνόησε Κόων ἀριδείκετος ἀνδρῶν,
\ 3 4 4 @sre 7
πρεσβυγενὴς ᾿Αντηνορίδης, κρατερόν ῥά é πένθος
ὀφθαλμοὺς ἐκάλυψε κασιγνήτοιο πεσόντος. 250
στῆ δ᾽ εὐρὰξ σὺν δουρὶ λαθὼν ᾿Αγαμέμνονα δῖον,
νύξε δέ μιν κατὰ χεῖρα μέσην, ἀγκῶνος ἔνερθεν,
ἀντικρὺς δὲ διέσχε φαεινοῦ δουρὸς ἀκωκή.
esr A > vw > ” 3 le) 2 ’
ῥίγησέν τ᾽ ap ἔπειτα ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων"
ἀλλ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ὧς ἀπέληγε μάχης ἠδὲ πτολέμοιο, 255
3 > 9 ἢ / ΝΜ 3 4
ἀλλ᾽ ἐπόρουσε Κόωνι ἔχων ἀνεμοτρεφὲς ἔγχος.

287. μόλιβος, lead, named only here:
but cf. μολυβδαίνη Ὁ 80—both times in
similes, not as actually in use, as though
the poet were aware that the metal was
unknown in the heroic age.

238. τό ye, as though ἔγχος or δόρυ,
instead of αἰχμή, had preceded. The
spear being thus caught, Ag. is able to
grasp it and drag it towards himself out
of Iphidamas’ hand. ὡς, furious as
a lion. Schol. A refers to the legend
that wounded lions attempt to tear the
spears from the huntsmen’s hands.

241. χάλκεον ὕπνον, as though the
sleep of death bound a man with bands
that he could not break: Vergil’s
‘¢ Ferreus somnus,” Aen. x. 745.

242, olxrpdés, an exclamation, like
νήπιος, oxérdtos. ἀπό, far away.
ἀστοῖσιν : he was a Trojan, as the son of
Antenor, though he had been brought
up in Thrace.

243, κονριδίης, see Α 114, χάριν, he
saw no return for the ἕδνα, or price he
had paid to the father for his bride.
This passage very clearly shews that
marriage was a bargain. See I 146.
Of course the gifts are not made to the
wife, marriage settlements being not

yet known. πολλὰ δέ, i.c. although he
had paid a large price.

244. πρῶτα, as an immediate pay-
ment; ἔπειτα, in instalments from the
increase of his herds. Observe χίλια in
neut. agreeing κατὰ σύνεσιν only with
βοῦς, alyas and &s, perhaps from the
general idea of μῆλα which covers all
See on E 140.

248. dpwWelkeros (except here and =
320 only in Od.), conspicuous, ““ exalted
ainong men.”’

249. π
brother of Iphidamas.

250. ὀφθαλμοὺς ἐκάλυψε, as though
grief threw a mist over his eyes; a
metaphor very naturally suggested by
rising tears, P 591, 22, etc. κασιγ.
πεσόντος, gel. after πένθος.

251. στῆ εὐράξ (O 541), he came up
(A 197) from the side. It looks as
though εὐράξ were a naval expression,
on the ‘‘ broadside.” For the form ef.
μουνάξ, θ. 371: the termination is per-
haps an instrumental form conn. with
«άκις of πολλάκις, etc.

252. χέρα, the forearm, as often.
253. διέσχε, passed right through.
E 100, ete.

256. dveporpepés, ‘‘a spear of grain

, therefore the elder

LAIAAOS A (x1)

369

® e 3 7 4 \ yw
ἢ τοι ὁ ᾿Ιφιδάμαντα κασίγνητον καὶ ὄπατρον
ἕλκε ποδὸς μεμαώς, Kal αύτει πάντας ἀρίστους"
Ἁ 1 ἡ b ] 4.4“ ἌΆ, ἷ Ἡὶ ἢ e 3 3 7 3 /
τὸν δ᾽ ἕλκοντ᾽ ay ὅμιλον ὑπ᾽ ἀσπίδος ὀμφαλοέσσης
οὔτησε ξυστῷ χαλκήρεϊ, λῦσε δὲ γυῖα" 260
an > > 3 9 4 lA 3 / 4
τοῖο δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ᾿Ιφιδάμαντι κάρη ἀπέκοψε παραστάς.
ἔνθ᾽ ᾿Αντήνορος υἷες ὑπ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδῃ βασιλῆι
3 “ 4 ’ Ν ΝΜ
πότμον ἀναπλήσαντες ἔδυν δόμον “Atdos εἴσω.
αὐτὰρ ὁ τῶν ἄλλων ἐπεπωλεῖτο στίχας ἀνδρῶν
»” > Ν ’ 4 4
ἔγχεϊ T ἄορί τε μεγάλοισί Te χερμαδίοισιν, 265
4 e > Ν Ἁ 3 ’ 9 3 A
ὄφρα ot αἷμ᾽ ἔτι θερμὸν ἀνήνοθεν ἐξ ὠτειλῆς.
> \ b] \ oe > VA 4, 4
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ τὸ μὲν ἕλκος ἐτέρσετο, παύσατο δ᾽ αἷμα,
ὀξεῖαι δ᾽ ὀδύναι δῦνον μένος ᾿Ατρεΐδαο.
e 33 vs 3 ’ » A 9 \ wn
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἂν ὠδίνουσαν ἔχῃ βέλος ὀξὺ γυναῖκα,
δριμύ, τό τε προϊεῖσι μογοστόκοι Ἐἰλείθυιαι, 270
Ἥρης θυγατέρες πικρὰς ὠδῖνας ἔχουσαι,
ὧς ὀξεῖ ὀδύναι δῦνον μένος ᾿Ατρεΐδαο.

storm-toughened on ἃ windy site,”
Tennyson. The idea was that the buffet-
ing of the winds strengthened the grain
of the wood.

257. ὅπατρον, son of the same father.
ὁ- is sa-, together ; just like d- δελφός,
‘‘of the same womb.” So ὄτριχας oléreas,
B 765. κασίγνητον is a general term
covering fraternity on either side, and
is specialized by the addition of ὅπατρον.

259. τόν, Koon: οὔτησε, sc. ’Aya-
μέμνων.

263. ἔδυν, plur. like ἔβαν, στάν (].
216), φθάν (51), etc.

. 264, ἐπεπωλεῖτο, ““ταηροὰ "1 hostile
sense. It is also used of a general re-
viewing his army, A 231, etc.

266. ‘‘So long as the hot blood still
gushed from the wound,” before painful
inflammation had set in. ἀν-ήνοθ-εν,
from ἀνά and ἀνεθ- = ἀνθ-, to sprout,
spring forth. Cf. on ἐπενήνοθε, B 219.
Curt. Zt. no. 304; Buttmann, Lez. p. 138.

267. érépoero, began (imperf.) to dry

up.
F568, δέ marks the apodosis.

269. βέλος ἔχη, metaphorically : “ fear
took hold upon them and pain as of a
woman in travail.” Compare also Θ 513
βέλος πέσσειν, in the sense of ‘‘ wound.”

270. μογοστόκοι ΒΕἰλείθνιαι, both
words of doubtful origin. The first is
generally derived from péyos, and ex-
plained ‘‘helping in painful labour.”
For the o compare θεόσ- δοτος, δικασ-

2B

πόλος. Fick however refers to the Skt.
root magh, to make great, to forward
(whence μῆχος, μέγας, etc.), and ex-
plains ‘‘ forwarding childbirth,” compar-
ing φερεσ-βιος. L. Meyer again (C. Stud.
v. 95) divides μογο- oréxos, and explains
‘* averting pain,” root stak to drive back,
to bring to a standstill (secondary of
sta). So Brugmann, C. St. ix. 270. If
so, the meaning of the word must have
been quite forgotten, as the function
of the Eileithyiae here is just the oppo-
site.

ElAcGurae (plur. here and T 119 only:
sing. II 187, T 103, r 188), according to
the old explanation ‘‘the comers,” 1. 6.
the goddesses that come in the hour of
need. Fiisi explains it as a personifica-
tion of “the woman’s time that is come,”
comparing ἦλθεν ἡ ὥρα αὐτῆς, John xvi.
21. Fick connects with ἐλεύθερος, to set
free; the goddesses that liberate from
pangs. The most probable derivation is
perhaps that from Fed, ἐλύω (= volvo),
as if = the Twisters, squeezers, a personi-
fication of the writhing pangs.

271. “Hpms, because she presides over
marriage. ἔχουσαι, ‘‘ having rule over.”

272. ὀξεῖ", 1.6. ὀξεῖαι, an elision which
nowhere else occurs. Bentley conj. ὀξεῖ᾽
ὀδύνη δῦνεν, but it is a question whether
this line should not be omitted, a comma
being put at the end of 268 and δ᾽ in
269 being omitted. See Cobet, M. C.
p. 375.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (xz)

és δίφρον δ᾽ ἀνόρουσε καὶ ἡνιόχῳ ἐπέτελλεν ᾿
νηυσὶν ἔπι γλαφυρῇσιν ἐλαυνέμεν: ἤχθετο γὰρ κῆρ.
“a 4
ἤυσεν δὲ διαπρύσιον Δαναοῖσι γεγωνώς" %5
“ὦ φίλοι, ᾿Αργείων ἡγήτορες ἠδὲ μέδοντες,
ὑμεῖς μὲν νῦν νηυσὶν ἀμύνετε ποντοπόροισιν
φύλοπιν ἀργαλέην, ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἐμὲ μητίετα Ζεὺς
, 3
εἴασε Τρώεσσι πανημέριον πολεμίζειν.
ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, ἡνίοχος δ᾽ ἵμασεν καλλίτριχας ἵππους 280
a ΝΜ λα. Ul δὴ δ᾽ 3 3» 4 0 e
νῆας ἔπι Ὑ φυράς, T@ ὃ οὐκ ἄξκοντε πετέσθην
ἄφρεον δὲ στήθεα, ῥαίνοντο δὲ νέρθε κονίῃ,
τειρόμενον βασιλῆα μάχης ἀπάνευθε φέροντες.
9
“Ἕκτωρ δ᾽ ὡς ἐνόησ ᾿Αγαμέμνονα νόσφι κιόντα,
Τρωσί τε καὶ Λυκίοισιν ἐκέκλετο μακρὸν ἀύσας" 985
“Τρῶες καὶ Λύκιοι καὶ Δάρδανοι ἀγχιμαχηταΐί,
ἀνέρες ἔστε, φίλοι, μνήσασθε δὲ θούριδος ἀλκῆς.
ἔχετ᾽ ἀνὴρ ὥ ἐμοὶ δὲ μέγ᾽ εὖχος ἔδωκεν
οἴχετ᾽ ἀνὴρ ὥριστος, ἐμοὶ δὲ μέγ᾽ εὖχος "
Ζεὺς Κρονίδης: ἀλλ᾽ ἰθὺς ἐλαύνετε μώνυχας ἵππους
ἰφθίμων Δαναῶν, iy’ ὑπέρτερον εὖχος ἄρησθε." 290
ὧς εἰπὼν ὦτρυνε μένος Kal θυμὸν ἑκάστου.
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε πού τις θηρητὴρ κύνας ἀργιόδοντας
σεύῃ ἐπ᾽ ἀγροτέρῳ συὶ καπρίῳ ἠὲ λέοντι,
as ἐπ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοῖσιν σεῦε Τρῶας μεγαθύμους
“Ἕκτωρ Πριαμίδης, βροτολοιγῷ ἶσος “Apne. 295
3 Ἁ 3. » “ / ? /
αὐτὸς δ᾽ ἐν πρώτοισι μέγα φρονέων ἐβεβήκειν,
᾽ δ᾽ ») > e ’ e ’ὔ z 3 NX:
ἐν δ᾽ ἔπεσ᾽ ὑσμίνῃ ὑπεραέι loos ἀέλλῃ,
4 / 3 / ’ 3. »
ἥ τε καθαλλομένη Loerdéa πόντον ὀρίνει.
Μ) θ ’ A ’ > oo 3 4
ἔνθα τίνα πρῶτον, τίνα δ᾽ ὕστατον ἐξενάριξεν

277. Observe how Agamemnon as
usual gives way to despondency at the
first reverse, and thinks only of danger
to the ships, although he has hitherto
been driving the Trojans right up to
their city. Cf. I 27, & 65-80.

282. ἄφρεον στήθεα (synizesis in both
words), their chests were covered with
foam. στήθεα is probably accus.

284, Hector recognizes the moment at
which Zeus has promised him victory
(191).

288. ὥριστος (= ὁ ἄριστος), cf. wirds
E 396. μέγα seems to be an adv., ‘‘has
granted me my desire éo the full.”

290. ὑπέρτερον scems to form part of
the predicate, “ that ye may obtain your
boast in victory,” or perhaps ‘‘ exalted

above the boast of the Greeks.” Οἱ
κῦδος ὑπέρτερον = glory of victory, M
437, 0491. But Ar. read ὑπέρτεροι.

292. πον is nowhere else used in this
way in a simile. ἀργιόδοντας is else-
where used only of boars.

297. ὑπεραέι, blowing from on high,
cf. ἀκραέι, ξ 253: an expression very
natural to men who were accustomed to
the sudden squalls which ‘‘ leap down”
upon coasting ships beneath the steep
shores of Thrace and the Greek islands.
Aristonikos mentions a variant ὑπὲρ
οὔρεος.

298. ἰοειδέα, blue (or rather perhaps
dark) like violets. The word occurs
elsewhere only in Od,

299. For the question, cf. II 692: it

ἼΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (x1)

“Ἕκτωρ Πριαμίδης, ὅτε οἱ Ζεὺς κῦδος ἔδωκεν;

371

900

᾿Ασαῖον μὲν πρῶτα καὶ Αὐτόνοον καὶ ᾿Οπέτην

καὶ Δόλοπα Κλυτίδην καὶ ᾿Οφέλτιον ἠδ᾽ ᾿Αγέλαον
Αἴσυμνόν τ᾽ ἾὮΩρόν τε καὶ ᾿Ἱππόνοον μενεχάρμην.
τοὺς ἄρ᾽ ὅ γ᾽ ἡγεμόνας Δαναῶν ἕλεν, αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα

πληθύν, ὡς ὁπότε νέφεα Ζέφυρος στυφελίξῃ

90ὅ

ἀργεστᾶο Νότοιο, βαθείῃ λαίλαπι τύπτων"
πολλὸν δὲ τρόφι κῦμα κυλίνδεται, ὑψόσε δ᾽ ἄχνη
σκίδναται ἐξ ἀνέμοιο πολυπλάγκτοιο ἰωῆς"

ὧς ἄρα πυκνὰ καρήαθ᾽ ὑφ᾽ “Ἕκτορι δάμνατο λαῶν.

ἔνθα κε λουγὸς ἔην καὶ ἀμήχανα ἔργα γένοντο,

910

καί νύ κεν ἐν νήεσσι πέσον φεύγοντες ᾿Αχαιοί,

εἰ μὴ Τυδεΐδῃ Διομήδεϊ κέκλετ᾽ ᾿Οδυσσεύς"

“Τυδεΐδη, τί παθόντε λελάσμεθα θούριδος ἀλκῆς ;

ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε δεῦρο, πέπον, παρ᾽ ἔμ᾽ ἵστασο" δὴ γὰρ ἔλεγχος

ἔσσεται, εἴ κεν νῆας ὅλῃ κορυθαίολος “Εἰκτωρ.᾽"

315

τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη κρατερὸς Διομήδης"
“ἢ τοι ἐγὼ μενέω καὶ τλήσομαι" ἀλλὰ μίνυνθα
ἡμέων ἔσσεται ἦδος, ἐπεὶ νεφεληγερέτα Ζεὺς
Τρωσὶν δὴ βόλεται δοῦναι κράτος ἠέ περ ἡμῖν."

ἡ καὶ Θυμβραῖον μὲν ad’ ἵππων ace χαμᾶζε

is a rhetorical figure analogous to the
apostrophe of 218, and indicates that
such a vast number were slain that it is
no easy matter to name them.

306. Nérovo is genit. after νέφεα, the
clouds brought by the south wind. Cf.
κύματα παντοίων ἀνέμων, B 397. ἀρ-
γεστᾶο, as Φ 884. From its use here
it may perhaps mean “ bringin bright
white clouds:” it can hardly be com-
pared with the albus notus of Horace
which deterget nubila caelo. τύπτων,
‘lashing them with dense hurricane.”
βαθείῃ perhaps means ‘“‘ far-extending,”
reaching from earth to sky. But Nauck
conj. βαρείῃ.

307. τρόφι, big; lit. nourished to full
size. So τροφόεντα O 621, + 290 (where
La ΒΕ. would read rpodéovro as if =
τρέφοντο) : compare Lat. altus from alo.
πολλόν is predicative, in multitudes.

308. πολύπλαγκτος occurs elsewhere
only in Od. of wanderers tossed about
from shore to shore. Here it may be
transitive, ‘‘scattering’’ ; the ‘‘ wander-
ing wind”’ is hardly a Homeric thought.
ἰωῆς, A276. καρήατα, like κάρηνα, 158.

320

310. This line gives an expanded form
of the idiomatic λοίγια ἔργα A 518, ete.

311. Cf. I 235: the phrase πέσον is
here clearly used of the fugitives, not of
the assailants.

313. τί παθόντε, ‘‘what has come
upon us that we have forgotten?” The
expression looks rather like an Atticism,
and seems to recur only in the probably
post-Homeric w 106.

314. πέπον, see I 252. yey
ἵστασο, come and stand by my side.

317. μίνυνθα, ‘only for a little while
will there be any profit of us,” 1.6. we
shall not be able to give any lasting
pleasure to our friends. (So Fisi, com-
paring Σ 80 ἀλλὰ τί μοι τῶν ἦδος, ἐπεί,
κιτιλ. So A 576, ete. ἦδος occurs only
in this phrase with ἐπεί.)

319. βόλεται (a 234, π 387), a form
occurring only here in Il. The root
βολ- is used to form the present stem
(just like Lat. vol-o) without the usual
strengthening (βούλομαι for βόλ-ν»-ομαι,
acc. to Curtius, Vd. i. 250). The verb
is followed by ἠέ because it expresses
preference: see A 117, y 282.

372

Soup) βαλὼν κατὰ μαζὸν ἀριστερόν, αὐτὰρ ᾿Οδυσσεὺς
ἀντίθεον θεράποντα Μολίονα τοῖο ἄνακτος.
τοὺς μὲν ἔπειτ᾽ εἴασαν, ἐπεὶ πολέμου ἀπέπαυσαν"
Ν > 3 » Ψ ἢ e Ψ lA
τὼ δ᾽ ἀν᾽ ὅμιλον ἰόντε κυδοίμεον, ws ὅτε Kam pw
ἐν κυσὶ θηρευτῇσι μέγα φρονέοντε πέσητον"
ὧς ὄλεκον Τρῶας πάλιν ὀρμένω" αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχαιοὶ
ἀσπασίως φεύγοντες ἀνέπνεον “Exropa δῖον.
ἔνθ᾽ ἑλέτην δίφρον τε καὶ ἀνέρε δήμου ἀρίστω,
υἷε δύω Μέροπος Ἰ]ερκωσίου, ὃς περὶ πάντων
Ν Ul OA A Μ
ἤδεε μαντοσύνας, οὐδὲ ods παῖδας ἔασκεν
3 , 4 \ e kA
στείχειν ἐς πόλεμον φθισήνορα' τὼ δέ οἱ οὔ Te
πειθέσθην: κῆρες γὰρ ἄγον μέλανος θανάτοιο.
τοὺς μὲν Τυδεΐδης δουρικλειτὸς Διομήδης
θυμοῦ καὶ ψυχῆς κεκαδὼν κλυτὰ Tevye ἀπηύρα,
Ἱππόδαμον δ᾽ ᾿Οδυσεὺς καὶ Ὑπείροχον ἐξενάριξεν.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (xt)

ΝΜ \? ΄ 27
ἔνθα σφιν κατὰ ἶσα μάχην ἐτάνυσσε Κρονίων
ἐξ Ἴδης καθορῶν" τοὶ δ᾽ ἀλλήλους ἐνάριζον.
ἢ τοι Τυδέος υἱὸς ᾿Αγάστροφον οὔτασε δουρὶ
Παιονίδην ἥρωα κατ᾽ ἰσχίον" οὐδέ οἱ ἵπποι
ἐγγὺς ἔσαν προφυγεῖν, ἀάσατο δὲ μέγα θυμῷ. 840
τοὺς μὲν γὰρ θεράπων ἀπάνευθ᾽ ἔχεν, αὐτὰρ ὁ πεζὸς
θῦνε διὰ προμάχων, εἵως φίλον ὥλεσε θυμόν.
“RH δ᾽ ΕΣ ΣᾺ, , \ 4 δ᾽ )» 3 iY
κτωρ ὃ ὀξὺ νοησε κατὰ στίχας, ὦρτο ὃ ἐπ αὐτοὺς
κεκληγώς" ἅμα δὲ Τρώων εἵποντο φάλαγγες.

322. τοῖο ἄνακτος, so Ὕ 388, ¢ 62:
of him, the lord. Compare τοῖο γέροντος
I 469, and H. 6. 8 261, 3 (1).

824. κυδοίμεον, made havoc of tz; the
word is transitive in O 136.

326. πάλιν ὀρμένω, charging back
(from flight). Aristarchos read παλινορ-
μένω in one word; and so A. Cf. A 59,
παλιμπλαγχθέντας.

327. The order of the words is dom.
ἀνέπνεον, φεύγ. “Exropa.

828. ἑλέτην is applied to δίφρον and
dvépe by a sort of zeugma: captured the
chariot and slew the warriors. The
latter is the regular use of aipéw in battle
scenes, the notion of catching, capturing
passing into that of overcuming, and
that again into slaying. δήμου ἀρίστω,
chiefs in their local community, Anaisos,
as we see from B 828-834 (δῆμον “Amat-
gov), where their names, Adrestos and
Amphios, are given, and 329-332 are re-
peated.

334. κεκαδών, having deprived them,
cf. xexadjoe, ᾧ 153: a word of doubtful
etymology. Curtius refers to κήδω, ‘to
hurt” (£¢. no. 284), but this does not
suit the sense. Like κεκάδοντο (A 497,
g.v.) it belongs to root skad to separate,
whence also χάζω, the 8 having in the
latter case produced aspiration of the ἢ,
while in the former it has simply dis-
appeared.

336. κατὰ toa μάχην ἐτάνυσσε, see
on H 102.

339. οὐδέ of ἵπποι, so Bentley, with
one MS.; caet. οὐ γάρ ol ἵπποι, while A
gives as a variant οὐδὲ γὰρ ἵπποι, which
may be right, but looks more like a com-
bination of the other two readings. The
F of Foe cannot be neglected.

340. ἀάσατο here indicates only ex-
treme folly, without connotation of
moral offence ; unless indeed it be im-
plied that his joining the πρόμαχοι was
an act of culpable presumption.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (xt)

τὸν δὲ ἰδὼν plynoe βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης,

373

345

αἶψα δ᾽ ᾿Οδυσσῆα προσεφώνεεν ἐγγὺς ἐόντα"

“yaw δὴ τόδε πῆμα κυλίνδεται, ὄβριμος “Extwp*

ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε δὴ στέωμεν καὶ ἀλεξώμεσθα μένοντες."
ἢ ῥα καὶ ἀμπεπαλὼν προΐει δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος,

καὶ βάλεν, οὐδ᾽ ἀφάμαρτε, τιτυσκόμενος κεφαλῆφιν,

350

ἄκρην κὰκ κόρυθα: πλάγχθη δ᾽ ἀπὸ χαλκόφι χαλκός,
οὐδ᾽ ἵκετο χρόα καλόν: ἐρύκακε γὰρ τρυφάλεια
τρίπτυχος αὐλῶπις, τήν οἱ πόρε Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων.
Ἕκτωρ δ᾽ ok’ ἀπέλεθρον ἀνέδραμε, μῖκτο δ᾽ "ὁμίλῳ.

στῆ δὲ γνὺξ ἐριπὼν καὶ ἐρείσατο χειρὶ παχείῃ

355

[yalns: ἀμφὶ δὲ ὄσσε κελαινὴ νὺξ ἐκάλυψεν].
ὄφρα δὲ Τυδεΐδης μετὰ δούρατος ᾧχετ᾽ ἐρωὴν
τῆλε διὰ προμάχων, ὅθι οἱ καταείσατο γαίης,
Topp “Ἑκτωρ ἄμπνυτο, καὶ arp ἐς δίφρον ὀρούσας

ἐξέλασ᾽ ἐς πληθὺν καὶ ἀλεύατο κῆρα μέλαιναν,

860

δουρὶ δ᾽ ἐπαΐσσων προσέφη κρατερὸς Διομήδης"

347. πῆμα, “18 bane;” 80 νέφος
is applied, by a sort of personification, to
Hector, P 243. κυλίνδεται, like a wave.

348. στέωμεν, by metathesis of quan-
tity for στήομεν. Possibly we should
read στάομεν, though the shortening of

the a is doubtful.

350. οὐδὲ. .. κεφαλῆφιν is paren-
thetical. κεφαλῆφιν appears to repre-
sent a genitive, the regular case after
verbs of aiming. So χαλκόφι in the next
line. Possibly however they may both
be locatives, 6.0. ἀπὸ χαλκόφι = “ from
on the bronze ;” there is no reason why,
in old Greek, this case may not have
been used with ἀπό, πρό, etc. All the
forms in -φι quoted under the heading
of ‘‘Ablative” in H. G. § 156, except
e 152 and N 700, have a locative sense,
the ablative notion being given by the
prepositions. Possibly therefore ali the
instances of this case-ending should be
reduced to the two headings of Instru-
mental and Locative, with the exception
of a few ‘‘false archaisms.” See H. G.
§ 158, note.

353. τρίπτυχος : perhaps, like the cap
in K 261, it is of leather, with a felt
lining inside, and the metal covering
without. αὐλῶπις, τρνφάλεια, see E 182.

354. ἀπέλεθρον, an unmeasured, i.e.
very great, distance ; as in &’ ἀπέλεθρον
ἔχοντας E 245, etc. There is a variant
in one MS. ὦκα πέλεθρον, and so Tzetzes

took the words. This is preferred by
Mr. Ridgeway (J. H. S. vi. 825) on the
ground that the πλέθρον is properly a
measure of distance ; and that it became
ἃ measure of area only in combination
with the unit “furrow-length” (see on
K 351), as representing the unit distance
between the οὖρα, t.e. the breadth of a
piece of ground which a team could
plough in a day’s work. This suits the
other passages (ᾧ 407, A 577) in which
πέλεθρον occurs; in both of these it is
better to take it as a measure of length
than as one of area. But this is not
sufficient to overthrow the best tradition
here, which is quite intelligible.

355-6 = E 309-10; the second line
was athetized by Ar. and Aristophanes,
and omitted by Zenod. on the ground
that the results are too serious for a
comparatively unsuccessful blow. Ar.
therefore in 359 evidently read ἄμπνντο,
‘‘recovered his breath,” not ἔμπνντο,
‘came back to his senses,” as La
supposes without authority (see on E
697).

357. μετὰ Sotparos ἐρωήν, ‘‘ after,”
z.e. in the direction of the flight of his
spear, to pick it up again.

358. xaracloaro, for the hiatus see A
188. ns, local, as in 356, had de-
scended on the ground. This is more
Homeric than the alternative of making
it a partitive gen. after ὅθι.

374

A »᾽
“ ἐξ αὖ νῦν ἔφυγες θάνατον, κύον" ἣ τέ TOL ἄγχε
A σι lA
ἦλθε κακόν" viv αὗτέ σ᾽ ἐρύσατο Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων,

φ
4

ἢ θήν σ᾽ éEaviw ye καὶ ὕστερον ἀντιβολήσας,
εἴ πού τις καὶ ἐμοί γε θεῶν ἐπιτάρροθός ἐστιν.
νῦν αὖ τοὺς ἄλλους ἐπιείσομαι, ὅν κε κιχείω.
ἡ καὶ ἸΠαιονίδην δουρικλυτὸν ἐξενάριξεν.
αὐτὰρ ᾿Αλέξανδρος, ᾿Ελένης πόσις ἠυκόμοιο,
Τυδεΐδῃ ἔπι τόξα τιταίνετο, ποιμένι λαῶν,
στήλῃ κεκλιμένος ἀνδροκμήτῳ ἐπὶ τύμβῳ
“Thou Δαρδανίδαο, παλαιοῦ δημογέροντος.
ἢ τοι ὁ μὲν θώρηκα ᾿Αγαστρόφου ἰφθίμοιο

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (xr)

a 4
ᾧ μέλλεις εὔχεσθαι ἰὼν és δοῦπον ἀκόντων.

Ν > 9» A 4 4 2 / > ΓΝ
alyut ἀπὸ στήθεσφι παναίολον ἀσπίδα τ᾽ ὥμων
καὶ κόρυθα βριαρήν: ὁ δὲ τόξον πῆχυν ἄνελκεν 818
καὶ βάλεν, οὐδ᾽ ἄρα μιν ἅλιον βέλος ἔκφυγε χειρός,
\ a 4 > 9 \ 3A
ταρσὸν δεξιτεροῖο ποδὸς" διὰ δ᾽ ἀμπερὲς ἰὸς

ἐν γαίῃ κατέπηκτο.

ὁ δὲ μάλα ἡδὺ γελάσσας

ἐκ λόχου ἀμπήδησε καὶ εὐχόμενος ἔπος ηὔδα"

“ βέβληαι, οὐδ᾽ ἅλιον βέλος ἔκφυγεν: ὡς ὄφελόν Toe 880
νείατον ἐς κενεῶνα βαλὼν ἐκ θυμὸν ἑλέσθαι"

οὕτω κεν καὶ Τρῶες ἀνέπνευσαν κακότητος,

οἵ τέ σε πεφρίκασι λέονθ᾽ ὡς μηκάδες αἶγες."

364. μέλλεις, ironical, ‘‘to whom no
doubt you pray.” See A 564.

365. ἐξανύω, future: exactly our
idiomatic ‘‘I will finish, despatch thee.”

366. ἔπιτάρροθος, champion. See E
828. 362-367 are also found verbatim in
Υ 449-454, where the violent language
of 362 seems more in keeping with the
uncontrollable passion of Achilles than
here with the always moderate temper of
Diomed.

368. ἐξενάριζεν, so Ar., “continued the
despoiling”’ of P., which task Hector
had interrupted, 343: cact. and Zenod.
ἐξενάριξεν, but the aor. is obviously less
suitable: his continued attention to the
corpse explains how Paris got his oppor-
tunity. So atvvro, 374, ‘‘ was in the
act of stripping off.”

372. For the tomb of Ilos see 166;
ἀνδροκμήτῳ, ‘‘ artificial,” distinguishes
the barrow from any accidental mounds
on the plain. δημογέροντος, ‘elder of
the community,” see Γ 149. [1108 is in
the direct royal line (fT 232) and is the

eponym of Ilios. The name thus indi-
cates the identity of royalty with the
patriarchate of the village community.

375. πῆχυν, see @ 419 τόν (deords) δ᾽
ἐπὶ πήχει ἑλὼν ἕλκεν νευρὴν γλυφίδας re,
from which it is clear that the word
indicates the (metallic?) handle into
which the two horns forming the bow
(A 105-1 are ns

376. οὐδὲ. . χειρός 15 parenthetical,
βάλεν going with ταρσόν. P

377. ταρσόν, apparent! the flat of
the foot (so only here and 388). Ine
219 ταρσοί are explained as hurdles or
wickerwork shelves, so called from rép-
σειν, because they are used for i
cheeses upon. Perhaps the foot was
thought to have some resemblance to
these..

380. βέβληαι, perhaps rather βέβλη᾽,
as the synizesis is violent. Others scan
βέβληαι as a dactyl, cf. ληϊστή or λεϊστή,
I 408.

381. velarov, nethermost, from root
mi = down ; see on νειαέρῃ, E 539.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (x1)

375

τὸν δ᾽ ov ταρβήσας προσέφη κρατερὸς Διομήδης"

“ A 4 A
“ rofota, λωβητήρ, κέραι ἀγλαέ, παρθενοπῖπα,

885

εἰ μὲν δὴ ἀντίβιον σὺν τεύχεσι πειρηθείης,

οὐκ ἄν τοι χραίσμῃσι βιὸς καὶ ταρφέες ἐοί-"

νῦν δέ μ᾽ ἐπυγράψας ταρσὸν ποδὸς εὔχεαι αὔτως.
οὐκ ἀλέγω, ὡς εἴ με γυνὴ βάλοι ἢ πάις ἄφρων"

κωφὸν γὰρ βέλος ἀνδρὸς ἀνάλκιδος οὐτιδανοῖο.

890

ἢ τ᾽ ἄλλως ὑπ᾽ ἐμεῖο, καὶ εἴ κ᾿ ὀλίγον περ ἐπαύρῃ,
ὀξὺ βέλος πέλεται, καὶ ἀκήριον αἶψα τίθησιν"

τοῦ δὲ γυναικὸς μέν τ᾽ ἀμφίδρυφοί εἰσι παρειαί,
παῖδες δ᾽ ὀρφανικοί" ὁ δέ θ᾽ αἵματι γαῖαν ἐρεύθων

πύθεται, οἰωνοὶ δὲ περὶ πλέες ἠὲ γυναῖκες."

395

ὧς φάτο, τοῦ δ᾽ ᾿Οδυσεὺς δουρικλυτὸς ἐγγύθεν ἐλθὼν
ἔστη πρόσθ᾽" ὁ δ᾽ ὄπισθε καθεζόμενος βέλος ὠκὺ
ἐκ ποδὸς ἕλκ᾽, ὀδύνη δὲ διὰ χροὸς ἦλθ᾽ ἀλεγεινή.

385. τοξότα, only here in H.; it is a
word of contempt (see on A 242) as
opposed to the hoplite who meets his
foe ἀντίβιον σὺν τεύχεσι. λωβητήρ, cf.
Β 275, Ὡ 239. κέραι, so A and apparently
Ar.: vulg. xépa. It is generally taken
to mean ‘‘ with the bow of horn”; but
Ar. explained it as a mode of dressing
the hair, els κέρατος τρόπον ἀνεπλέκοντο
ol ἀρχαῖοι. This interpretation, strange
though it may seem, is completely
established by Helbig, H. E. p. 165.
He gives a curious archaic illustration
of the spirally curled locks which received
this name. The old lexica shew that
this explanation was always generally
received. Cf. Schol. on w 81, οἱ νεώτεροι
κέρας τὴν συμπλοκὴν τῶν τριχῶν ὁμοίαν
κέρατι τὸν κεροπλάστην ἄειδε Τ᾽ λαῦκον,
"Apxfoxos. So Juvenal, xiii, 165,
‘‘madido torquentem cornua cirro.”
&yAaé thus receives its proper sense,
“fine, brilliant.” For Paris’ hair cf. T
55, ἥ re κόμη, τό τε εἶδος. For παρθενο-
πῖπα cf. ὀπιπεύσεις δὲ γυναῖκας τ 67, and
for the form of the verb Curtius, £7.
no. 627.

386. εἰ πειρηθείης is a wish rather
than a proper conditional protasis, ‘‘ I
wish that you would measure yourself—
in that day your bow and arrows shall
avail you naught.” The speaker thus
during the expression of thought changes
his attitude from mere wish to confident
expectation. Cf. I 54 οὐκ ἄν τοι χραίσμῃ
κίθαρις. . . ὅτ' ἐν κονίῃσι μιγείης, and
more nearly Καὶ 222 εἴ τίς μοι ἀνὴρ ay’

ἕποιτο καὶ ἄλλος. . . θαρσαλεώτερον
ἔσται. For ἄν or κεν with subj. as an
emphatic future cf. 431, and H. G. §
276 ὃ. Observe the singular xpalopyor
agreeing with the nearer only of two
subjects, A 255, I 327, etc.

389. οὐκ ἀλέγω, ὡς εἰ, I care as little
(lit. Iam heedless) as though a woman
were to hit me.

390. κωφόν has the primitive sense
“blunt,” from κόπτω, ob-tusus, lit.
‘*beaten back.” Cf. Soph. O. T. 290,
κωφὰ καὶ wadal’ ἔπη.

891. ἄλλως. .. ὀξὺ πέλεται, in a
very different way my spear proves its
sharpness. Delbriick (S. F. 1. p. 177,
181) has remarked that this line offers
the only instance in H. of εἴ xe with
subj. in a general sense (= whensoever) ;
in all the other cases it indicates a par-
ticular expected event.

392. With ὀξὺ βέλος πέλεται cf. T 99,
καὶ δ᾽ ἄλλως τοῦ γ᾽ ἰθὺ βέλος πέτετ', οὐδ᾽
ἀπολήγει. As ἰθύ there must form part
of the predicate, it is better to take ὀξύ
here in the same way, though πέλεται is
not merely = ἐστίν. Eust. reads πέτεται
here also. ἀκήριον, lifeless, as Φ 466 ;
in Od. it means unharmed. alba, so
MSS., Ar. ἄνδρα, which is much less

forcible.

393. ἀμφίδρυφοι, see B 700. ἐρεύθων,
so Σ 329.

395. Compare γύπεσσιν πολὺ φίλτεροι
ἢ ἀλόχοισιν, 162; and for the compara-
tive whées, B 129.

976

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (xt)

és δίφρον δ᾽ ἀνόρουσε καὶ ἡνιόχῳ ἐπέτελλεν

νηυσὶν ἔπι γλαφυρῇσιν ἐλαυνέμεν: ἤχθετο γὰρ κῆρ. 4
οἰώθη δ᾽ ᾿Οδυσεὺς δουρικλυτός, οὐδέ τις αὐτῷ

᾿Αργείων παρέμεινεν, ἐπεὶ φόβος ἔλλαβε πάντας"

ὀχθήσας δ᾽ ἄρα εἶπε πρὸς ὃν μεγαλήτορα θυμόν"

cco ») > » 4θ .
[2] μοι εγω, τι TaU@;

μέγα μὲν κακόν, αἴ κε φέβωμαι

πληθὺν ταρβήσας, τὸ δὲ ῥίγιον, αἴ κεν ἁλώω 405
μοῦνος" τοὺς δ᾽ ἄλλους Δαναοὺς ἐφόβησε Kpoviwv.
ἀλλὰ Th μοι ταῦτα φίλος διελέξατο θυμός ;
οἷδα γάρ, ὅττι κακοὶ μὲν ἀποίχονται πολέμοιο,
at 4 > 9» 4 ’ ΝΜ) A \ 4 \
ὃς δέ κ᾽ ἀριστεύῃσι μάχῃ ἔνι, τὸν δὲ μάλα χρεὼ
ἑστάμεναι κρατερῶς" ἤ τ᾽ EBAnT ἤ 7 ἔβαλ᾽ ἄλλον." 410
e af? Ὁ , f
elos ὁ ταῦθ᾽ ὥρμαινε κατὰ φρένα καὶ κατὰ θυμόν,
’ 2.) 4 ’ ΝΜ 3 4
τόφρα δ᾽ ἐπὶ Τρώων στίχες ἤλυθον ἀσπιστάων,
ἔλσαν δ᾽ ἐν μέσσοισι, μετὰ σφίσι πῆμα τιθέντες.
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε κάπριον ἀμφὶ κύνες θαλεροί τ᾽ αἰξηοὶ
’ ς 4% 4 ’ 2 t
σεύωνται" ὁ δέ τ᾽ εἶσι βαθείης ἐκ ξυλόχοιο . 41
θήγων λευκὸν ὀδόντα μετὰ γναμπτῇσι γένυσσιν,

399-400 = 273-4.

402. φόβος seems here to have made the
very easy transition from ‘‘ flight,” the
usual sense in H., to ‘‘ fear,” as 544, ete.

403. This verse occurs seven times in
Il. and four times in Od. (all ine). In
the whole of H. there are only nineteen
other passages where the F of Fés is
neglected, and eight of these can be
easily emended. Forty-five passages ab-
solutely require the F, and over 170
admit of it (Knés, p. 215). It seems
strange that this formula, which must
be an old one, should afford so large a
proportion of the violations. Bekker
emended Fetwe Feby (? βεῖπεν ἐόν for
(o)eF dv) ; but this is not justifiable in
face of the fact that there is in no
instance any variation of reading hinted
at. Fick thinks that ἐόν may be a
monosyllable by synizesis; but it is
very unlikely that the internal F should
have so completely disappeared at a
uite early date as to make this possible.
he few instances of diphthongs like
παῖς for maFis can hardly prove the case
for synizesis, a much rarer phenomenon.

404. τί πάθω, delib. subj.: this well
illustrates the close relationship between
the subjunctive and future.

408. ἀποίχονται seems to be a general
expression: cowards are off in a moment

r

(this being given by the perf. sense of
οἴχεσθαι), while a brave man proves his
courage by standing his un If we
take it as a special reference to the
Greeks, and to Diomed in particular,
the general sentiment of 409-10 comes
in rather awkwardly.

410. Rte... ἥτε 80 MSS. ; this is
generally explained as = εἴ re... ef
re, with a comma after κρατερῶς. But
in this case we ought to wortte εἰ (Lange,
EI, p. 5384). The text, with the colon,
is preferred by Nikanor; though the
sense is virtually the same, it is better
as representing the old parataxis.

413. ‘‘They penned him in their
midst, bringin a bane (cf. 347) among
themselves.” For τιθέντες Zenod. read
δὲ ἔλσαν, an expression which by no
means gains in force what it loses in
Homeric simplicity. Still it gives the
right sense ; Ar. wrongly understood it
to mean ‘‘ bringing destruction to Odys-
seus in their midst.”

414. κάπριον is governed by ἀμφί;
prepositions of more prosodiacal value
than two short syllables do not throw
the accent back when they follow their
noun, according to the traditional rule.
᾿ 415. σεύωνται, sc. ww, give chase to

im.

416. The ancient legend was that the

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ (x1)

3 \ / > oss e \ / 4 Φο 7,
ἀμφὶ δέ τ᾽ ἀίσσονται, ὑπαὶ δέ τε κόμπος ὀδόντων
’
γίγνεται" οἱ δὲ μένουσιν ἄφαρ δεινόν περ ἐόντα"
ὧς pa τότ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ᾿Οδυσῆα διίφιλον ἐσσεύοντο
Τρῶες" ὁ δὲ πρῶτον μὲν ἀμύμονα Δηιοπίτην 420
Ν = Ψ 3 ’ 9 ge/
οὔτασεν ὧμον ὕπερθεν ἐπάλμενος ὀξέι δουρί,
3 \ ” “ 3 3 4
αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα Qowva καὶ "Evvopoy ἐξενάριξεν.
Χερσιδάμαντα δ᾽ ἔπειτα, καθ᾽ ἵππων ἀίξαντα,
ὃ LA e 3" 93 ’ δὴ ’
ουρὶ κατὰ πρότμησιν ὑπ᾽ ἀσπίδος ὀμφαλοέσσης
’ ς > a ] ’ \ “ὦ 3 ”
νύξεν" ὁ δ᾽ ἐν κονίησι πεσὼν Ede γαῖαν ἀγοστῷ. 425
τοὺς μὲν ἔασ᾽, ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἽἹππασίδην Χάροπ᾽ οὔτασε δουρί,
αὐτοκασίγνητον ἐνηφενέος Σώκοιο.
A A /
τῷ δ᾽ ἐπαλεξήσων Σῶκος κίεν, ἰσόθεος φώς,
A \ mm? 9» \ 3 A A Ν
στῆ δὲ μάλ᾽ ἐγγὺς ἰὼν καί μιν πρὸς μῦθον ἔειπεν"
fe) 4
“@ ᾿Οδυσεῦ πολύαινε, δόλων At’ ἠδὲ πόνοιο, 480
4 A ra 4 7 €
σήμερον ἢ δοιοῖσιν ἐπεύξεαι “Ἱππασίδησιν,
τοιώδ᾽ ἄνδρε κατακτείνας καὶ τεύχε᾽ ἀπούρας,
,ἢ 3 na ¢€ \ 3 N \ 9 4 3
ἢ κεν ἐμῷ ὑπὸ δουρὶ τυπεὶς ἀπὸ θυμὸν ὀλέσσης.
ὧς εἰπὼν οὔτησε κατ᾽ ἀσπίδα πάντοσ᾽ ἐίσην'
διὰ μὲν ἀσπίδος ἦλθε φαεινῆς ὄβριμον ἔγχος, 435
καὶ διὰ θώρηκος πολυδαιδάλου ἠρήρειστο,
UA > 93 A fa) , ΝΜ 20. 9
πάντα δ᾽ ἀπὸ πλευρῶν χρόα ἔργαθεν, οὐδέ T ἔασεν

boar prepared for battle by whetting
his teeth upon smooth rocks.

417. tral, thereat, in the midst of all
this is heard the gnashing of his teeth.
Cf. 9 380, πολὺς ὑπὸ κόμπος ὀρώρει.

418, ἄφαρ, 1.6. ‘‘ without hesitation.”
Cf. Ν 814.

428, ἀίξαντα, so AD; cact. ἀίσσοντα.

424, πρότμησιν, so MSS.; Ar. seems
to have read wpérunorw, and there are
traces also of another variant πρότμητιν.
The first form seems preferable, the ab-
stract termination reminding us of τομή
in the sense of ‘‘stump,” A 235. The
word here evidently means the navel,
‘‘the cut place in front.”

425. ἀγοστῷ, a word which occurs only
a few times, always in this line in Homer
(N 508, & 452, P 315), and occasionally
in later poets (Theokr. 17, 129; Ap.
Rhod. 3, 120). Benfey refers it to root
a(n)g, to squeeze, so that it means “‘in
his grasp.” Ap. Rhodius seems to take
it for ‘‘the palm of the hand.”

427. εὐηφενέος, MSS. εὐηγενέος. The
correction comes from Didymos on ¥
81 εὐηγενέων' ἐν τῇ 'Ριανοῦ καὶ ᾿Αριστο-
φάνους εὐηφενέων διὰ τοῦ φ, εὖ τῷ ἀφένῳ

χρωμένων, ὡς Κλέαρχος ἐν ταῖς γλώτταις.
The reading of Rhianos is undoubtedly
preferaple, as the 7 of εὐηγενέος cannot
explained, while in εὐηφενέος it is a
regular lengthening of a, as in εὐήνωρ,
εὐήκης. The word Εὐηφένης also occurs
as a proper name upon an early Thasian
inscription, so that the form is sufficiently
attested. Cf. Curtius, £¢. no. 653.

430. πολύαινε, see I 673. dr’, for
dare, insatiate (d-ca-ros). Ar. used the
phrase as an argument against the chori-
zontes, as it is in the ‘Odyssey that the
cunning of Odysseus is described. Sokos
speaks in admiration, not in blame.

432. Ar. rejected this line on the
ground that Odysseus is too hard pressed
to think of despoiling the corpses. This
is very true; but Fick remarks that we
should read θυμὸν ἀπούρας, which was
altered on account of θυμόν in the next
line ; the older Epic style took no offence
at such iteration.

437. For χρόα (Zenod. and MSS.) Ar.
strangely read χροός, which he must
have understood to mean ‘‘stripped
everything off the flesh of his ribs.”

378

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (x1)

Παλλὰς ᾿Αθηναίη μιχθήμεναι ἔγκασι φωτός.

γνῶ δ᾽ ᾿Οδυσεύς, 6 οἱ οὔ τι βέλος κατὰ καίριον ἦλθεν,

ἂψ δ᾽ ἀναχωρήσας Σῶκον πρὸς μῦθον ἔειπεν" 40

“ἃ Sein’, ἣ μάλα δή σε κιχάνεται αἰπὺς ὄλεθρος.

ἣ τοι μὲν ἔμ᾽ ἔπαυσας ἐπὶ Τρώεσσι μάχεσθαι,

σοὶ δ᾽ ἐγὼ ἐνθάδε φημὶ φόνον καὶ κῆρα μέλαιναν

ἤματι τῷδ᾽ ἔσσεσθαι, ἐμῷ δ᾽ ὑπὸ δουρὶ δαμέντα

εὖχος ἐμοὶ δώσειν, ψυχὴν δ᾽ "Αιδὲ κλυτοπώλῳ." 445
ἢ, καὶ ὁ μὲν φύγαδ᾽ αὗτις ὑποστρέψας ἐβεβήκειν,

τῷ δὲ μεταστρεφθέντι μεταφρένῳ ἐν δόρυ πῆξεν

ὥμων μεσσηγύς, διὰ δὲ στήθεσφιν ἔλασσεν.

δούπησεν δὲ πεσών" ὁ δ᾽ ἐπεύξατο δῖος Οδυσσεύς"

“ὦ Σῶχ᾽, Ἵππάσου υἱὲ δαΐφρονος ἱπποδάμοιο, 450

φθῆ σε τέλος θανάτοιο κιχήμενον, οὐδ᾽ ὑπάλυξας.

& Seid’, οὐ μὲν σοί γε πατὴρ καὶ πότνια μήτηρ

ὄσσε καθαιρήσουσι θανόντι περ, ἀλλ᾽ οἰωνοὶ

ὠμησταὶ ἐρύουσι, περὶ πτερὰ πυκνὰ βαλόντες"

αὐτὰρ ἔμ᾽, εἴ κε θάνω, κτεριοῦσί γε δῖοι ᾿Αχαιοί. 455
ὧς εἰπὼν Σώκοιο δαΐφρονος ὄβριμον ἔγχος

439. αἱ ᾿Αριστάρχου οὕτως τέλος, καὶ
σχεδὸν ἅπασαι" ἔγνω ὅτι οὐ κατὰ καίριον
τέλος ἦλθεν ἡ πληγή, οὐκ εἰς καίριον τόπον
ἐτελεύτα. Ζηνόδοτος δὲ γράφει βέλος,
κακῶς" οὐ βέβληται δέ, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ χειρὸς
ἐπέπληγε᾽ λέγει δὲ τέλος τὸ τῆς ζωῆς.
Our MSS. agree with Zenodotos, with
the exception of A. There is no doubt
that βέλος gives the best sense, ‘‘the
dart lighted not on a fatal spot” (for
this, the regular use of καίριον, see note
on A 185, where the phrase is very
similar, οὐκ ἐν xatply ὀξὺ πάγη βέλος).
It seems that Ar. laid too much weight
on his canon that βέλος could never be
used of a weapon used with a thrust: it
is only natural that the word should be
applied generically to the spear, which
was sometimes cast and sometimes held
in the hand, without reference to the
particular case in question. What the
σχεδὸν ἅπασαι were which read τέλος
we cannot say, and their authority there-
fore is hardly to be set against the
vulgate. If we accept τέλος, we may
read either κατὰ καίριον, the spear “came
not to a fatal end” of its journey, or
κατακαίριον (with AD and others), ‘‘a
fatal end came not to him,” which seems
to be meant by the concluding words of
the scholion cited ; cf. the phrase τέλος

739

θανάτοιο, 451. Both of these are per-
haps possible, but decidedly less Homeric
in expression than the vulgate.

442. μέν, so all MSS. but D and
Eust. μέν ῥ᾽, The ῥ᾽ is a mere stop
gap, cf. H 77, T 248, where κέν 15
lengthened by the ictus.

445. See on E 654,

451. τέλος θανάτοιο, “‘the end of
(consisting in) death has been too quick
in catching you” (oe is governed by
κιχήμενον) Here also Zenod. read βέλος,
but he is not supported by our MSS.

452-5. Fick omits these four lines, re-
marking with force that they are quite
unsuited to the position of Odysseus,
who is surrounded by the victorious
Trojans. From his point of view they
are condemned by the Ionic form κτερι-
οῦσι in 455.

453. καθαιρήσουσι, draw down, close
thine eyes. SoA 426, w 296.

454. épvovor, future. πυκνά, either

a proleptic predicate, ‘‘so as to be
thick,” ἐδ. in dense flocks: or more
simply, ‘*thickly feathered,” a mere
epithet.
455. So Aristarchos: MSS. all give
ἐπεί xe θάνω, κτεριοῦσί pe The text is
clearly preferable, as bringing out the
required contrast σοί ye and ἐμέ.

᾿ς

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (x1)

379

ἔξω τε χροὸς ἕλκε καὶ ἀσπίδος ὀμφαλοέσσης"
4 e / > Ὁ fol 4
αἷμα δέ of σπασθέντος ἀνέσσυτο, κῆδε δὲ θυμον.
Τρῶες δὲ μεγάθυμοι ὅπως ἴδον αἷμ᾽ ᾿Οδυσῆος,
κεκλόμενοι καθ᾽ ὅμιλον ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ πάντες ἔβησαν. 460
» ,Φ > 3 2 4 φ > ©
αὐτὰρ 6 γ᾽ ἐξοπίσω aveyalero, ave δ᾽ ἑταίρους.
\ ΝΜ > ν Ψ \ 4 4
τρὶς μὲν ἔπειτ᾽ ἤυσεν, ὅσον κεφαλὴ χάδε φωτὸς,
τρὶς δ᾽ ἄιεν ἰάχοντος ἀρηίφιλος Μενέλαος.
4 > mw " Ν / 2 ‘ sf
αἷψα δ᾽ ap Αἴαντα προσεφώνεεν ἐγγὺς ἐοντα"
“ Alay διογενὲς Τελαμώνιε, κοίρανε λαῶν, 465
ἀμφί μ᾽ ᾿Οδυσσῆος ταλασίφρονος ἵκετ᾽ ἀντὴ
τῷ ἰκέλη, ὡς εἴ ἑ βιῴατο μοῦνον ἐόντα
Τρῶες ἀποτμήξαντες ἐνὶ κρατερῇ ὑσμίνῃ"
ἀλλ᾽ ἴομεν καθ᾽ ὅμιλον" ἀλεξέμεναι γὰρ ἄμεινον.
δείδω, μή τε πάθησιν ἐνὶ Τρώεσσι μονωθείς, 470
ἐσθλὸς ἐών, μεγάλη δὲ ποθὴ Δαναοῖσι γένηται."
φ 3 \ e \ @ 9 e > wv 9 & 9 / ’
ὧς εἰπὼν ὁ μὲν ἦρχ᾽, ὁ δ᾽ ἅμ᾽ ἕσπετο ἰσόθεος φώς.
εὗρον ἔπειτ᾽ ᾿Οδυσῆα διίφιλον: ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ αὐτὸν
Τρῶες ἕπον ὡς εἴ τε δαφοινοὶ θῶες ὄρεσφιν
ἀμφ᾽ ἔλαφον κεραὸν βεβλημένον, ὅν τ᾽ ἔβαλ᾽ ἀνὴρ 475
ἰῷ ἀπὸ νευρῆς" τὸν μέν τ᾽ ἤλυξε πόδεσσιν
4 ΝΜ) 3 \ 4 >’ 9 A
φεύγων, ὄφρ᾽ αἷμα λιαρὸν Kal youvar opwpn:
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ δὴ τόν γε δαμάσσεται ὠκὺς ὀιστός,
ὠμοφάγοι μιν θῶες ἐν οὔρεσι δαρδάπτουσιν
4 , ee A 3 “A -3 ἢ 7
ἐν νέμεϊ σκιερῷ" ἐπί τε λῖν ἤγαγε δαίμων 480
σίντην' θῶες μέν τε διέτρεσαν, αὐτὰρ ὁ δάπτει"

457. his own flesh, where Sokos’
spear still remained.

458. σπασθέντος, sc. ἔγχεος. A partic.
in gen. absolute occurs without its noun

rhaps only here and Σ 606. fide

θυμόν, compare ἤχθετο κῆρ also used
of purely physical pain, 274, 400, etc.

461. ate, so N 477, T 48, 51; else
only in aor. fuse. Root av of Lat. ov-
are, Curt. Εἰ. no. 588 ὃ.

462. ὅσον, lit. ‘‘as loud as the man’s
head could hold ;” Féasi compares the
French crier a pleine téte. φωτός virtu-
ally means ‘‘ his,” as in 438.

466. ter durh, so Ar.; MSS. ἵκετο

ων ή.
467. τῷ (neuter) represents by antici-
pation the following clause with ὡς εἶ.

o X 410, τῷ δὲ μάλιστ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔην ἐναλίγ-
κιον, ws εἰ, x.7.A. The construction is
well explained by L. Lange, EI, p. 437 ;

‘*a shout like the supposed case (that)
the Trojans might be pressing him hard.”

474. ἕπον, so La Roche for ἕπονθ᾽ of
MSS. The change is absolutely neces-
sary, as the act. dudéwew is always used
in this sense, and the middle never even
approaches it. The corruption is evi-
dently due to a mistaken wish to mend
the metre. The compound ἀμφέπειν
means to beset by surrounding, as ἐφέπειν
to drive by pursuit. So 483, and cf. y 118
elyderes γάρ σφιν κακὰ ῥάπτομεν ἀμφιέ-
ποντες, of the siege of Troy (Journ.
Phil. xiv. 239).

477. λιαρόν, sc. 7, with the same
sense as in 266, ‘‘while the blood flows
warm from the wound.”

478. δαμάσσεται, aor. subj., when the
arrow has had its full effect upon him.

481. § ν, scattered in terror.
ὅ, the lion begins to rend in his turn.

380

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (xz)

ὧς pa tor ἀμφ᾽ ᾿Οδυσῆα δαΐφρονα ποικελομήτην

Τρῶες ἕπον πολλοί τε καὶ ἄλκιμοι, αὐτὰρ ὅ γ᾽ ἥρως
ἀίσσων ᾧ ἔγχει ἀμύνετο νηλεὲς ἦμαρ'

Αἴας δ᾽ ἐγγύθεν ἦλθε φέρων σάκος ἠύτε πύργον, 485
στῆ δὲ παρέξ': Τρῶες δὲ διέτρεσαν ἄλλυδις ἄλλος.

ἢ τοι τὸν Μενέλαος ἀρήιος ἔξαγ᾽ ὁμίλου

χειρὸς ἔχων, εἴως θεράπων σχεδὸν ἤλασεν ἵππους"

Αἴας δὲ Τρώεσσιν ἐπάλμενος εἷλε Δόρυκλον

Πριαμίδην, νόθον υἱόν, ἔπειτα δὲ Ἰ]άνδοκον οὗτα, 490
οὗτα δὲ Λύσανδρον καὶ Πύρασον ἠδὲ Πυλάρτην.

ὡς δ᾽ ὁπότε πλήθων ποταμὸς πεδίονδε κάτεισιν

χειμάρρους κατ᾽ ὄρεσφιν, ὀπαζόμενος Διὸς ὄμβρῳ,

πολλὰς δὲ δρῦς ἀζαλέας, πολλὰς δέ τε πεύκας

ἐσφέρεται, πολλὸν δέ τ᾽ ἀφυσγετὸν εἰς ἅλα βάλλεε, 496
ὧς ἔφεπε κλονέων πεδίον τότε φαίδιμος Αἴας,

δαΐζων ἵππους τε καὶ ἀνέρας.
ρ

οὐδέ πω “Ἑκτωρ

4 9 3 ς 7 33. > 9 \ 4 tA
πεύθετ᾽, ἐπεί pa μάχης ἔπ ἀριστερὰ papvaTo πάσης,

482. ἀμφί. .. ἕπον, see 474.

486. στῆ παρέξ, stood forth beside
him. Cf. vijxe παρέξ € 439, swam along
the shore. But the phrase is unusual ;
Paley ingeniously conjectures παράξ, like
εὐράξ 251, g.v.

488. θεράπων, 1.6. of Menelaos. Odys-
seus, coming from mountainous Ithaka,
has no horse nor chariot.

490. υἱόν: we must understand Πριάμου
from Πριαμέδης, the expression being
rather tautological.

493. ὀπαζόμενος, driven on from be-
hind: from root oer, and used some-
what like a passive to ἐφέπειν. Cf. E
91, 334, Θ 341. χειμάρρους is here an
adjective ; cf. note on E 88.

494. ἀζαλέας, dead trees, either fallen
accidentally by the side, or felled and
left to dry.

495. ἐσφέρεται, draws into its current.
ἀφυσγετόν, dm. λεγ., probably ‘‘ drift
wood” or ‘‘mud.” The origin of the
word is obscure: perhaps ἀφύσσ-ειν and
ya-, ‘‘hauriendo natus.” (So Ebeling,
Lex. 8.v.).

496. Compare X 188, Ἕκτορα δ᾽ ἀσπερ-
χὲς κλονέων Eder’ ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς. The
peculiarity of the present line is that
ἐφέπειν has an inanimate object; it
seems that we must understand ‘‘ drove
the plain, making havoc,” πεδίον stand-
ing for the men and horses of which it
is full. So we have in ¢ 121 κυνηγέται

. » « κορυφὰς ὁρέων ἐφέποντες, just as we
speak of ‘‘driving a wood” when we
mean driving the game found there.
This use of ἐφέπειν seems to be derived
from the primitive sense of ‘‘ handling”
through the idea of driving horses; ef.
ὑσμίνης ἐφέποι στόμα T 359 (Journ. Phil.
xiv. 238).

497. δαΐζων has the a long only here:
hence Nauck conj. δηιόων.

498. The “left of the battle” can
hardly be said from a Greek point of
view here, as the river would then be on
the right. But in details such as this
it is useless to look for exact accuracy.
See E 355, N 765, P 116. There is how-
ever something awkward in the sudden
shifting of the centre of interest, as we
have been led to believe that the hottest
of the fight was about Aias, and are now
suddenly told that it was on the opposite
wing. Indeed the words of Kebriones in
523-530 directly contradict μάλιστα in
499. Most modern critics have there-
fore pronounced for the omission of 497-
503 at least, with more or less of the
context. The wounding of Machaon is
however an essential part of the original
story, and must be retained. ick,
omitting 489-503 (the first eight lines
with hardly sufficient reason), suggests
᾿Ατρεΐδης for ᾿Ιδομενεύς in 510,as Menelaos
has not left the field, but only entrusted
Odysseus to his θεράπων. is would

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (st)

ed

381

ὄχθας πὰρ ποταμοῖο Σκαμάνδρου, TH pa μάλιστα

3 ζω A , \ > 3 ,
ἀνδρῶν πῖπτε κάρηνα, Bon δ᾽ ἄσβεστος ὀρώρειν

500

Νέστορά τ᾽ ἀμφὶ μέγαν καὶ ἀρήιον ᾽Ἰδομενῆα.
“Ἕκτωρ μὲν μετὰ τοῖσιν ὁμίλει μέρμερα ῥέζων
ἔγχεϊ θ᾽ ἱπποσύνῃ τε, νέων δ᾽ ἀλάπαξε φάλαγγας"
οὐδ᾽ ἄν πω χάζοντο κελεύθου δῖοι ᾿Αχαιοί,

εἰ μὴ ᾿Αλέξανδρος, ‘EXévns πόσις ἠυκόμοιο,

δ0ὅ

παῦσεν ἀριστεύοντα Μαχάονα ποιμένα λαῶν
ἰῷ τριγλώχινι βαλὼν κατὰ δεξιὸν ὧμον.
“A , 3
τῷ ῥα περίδεισαν μένεα πνείοντες ᾿Αχαιοί,
4, , / / 54
μή πώς μιν πολέμοιο μετακλινθέντος ἕλοιεν.

αὐτίκα δ᾽ ᾿Ιδομενεὺς προσεφώνεε Νέστορα δῖον"

510

“ὦ Νέστορ Νηληιάδη, μέγα κῦδος ᾿Αχαιῶν,
ἄγρει, σῶν ὀχέων ἐπιβήσεο, πὰρ δὲ Μαχάων
βαινέτω, ἐς νῆας δὲ τάχιστ᾽ ἔχε μώνυχας ἵππους"
3 \ > \ “A 3 4 3

ἰητρὸς γὰρ ἀνὴρ πολλῶν ἀντάξιος ἄλλων

> 7 > 9 ’ > > » , 7 3}
ἰούς τ ἐκτάμνειν ἐπί T ἤπια φάρμακα πάσσειν.

δ1ὅ

ὧς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησε Γερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ.
> / + © > / > 4 \ 4
αὐτίκα δ᾽ ὧν ὀχέων ἐπεβήσετο, πὰρ δὲ Μαχάων
Baiv’, ᾿Ασκληπιοῦ vids ἀμύμονος ἰητῆρος"
4 3. ef \ 3 3 » ἢ 4
μάστιξεν δ᾽ ἵππους, τὼ δ᾽ οὐκ ἀέκοντε πετέσθην

νῆας ἔπι γλαφυράς" τῇ γὰρ φίλον ἔπλετο θυμῷ.

520

Κεβριόνης δὲ Τρῶας ὀρινομένους ἐνόησεν
“Ἕκτορι παρβεβαώς, καί μιν πρὸς μῦθον ἔειπεν"

remove all cause of offence ; 504 comes
much more naturally after the stubborn
resistance of Aias than after the account
of Hector’s ravages.

502. ὁμίλει is an oxymoron, for it
properly indicates friendly association’;
E 86, 834. So ὀαριστύς, ‘‘ dalliance,” is
used of war, N 291, P 228 (so Mr. Monro).

503. νέων, a curious expression; it
can hardly be meant to oppose the aged
Nestor and elderly (N 361, 485) Ido-
meneus to their more youthful soldiers.
Ar. read νεῶν, the battalions belonging to
the ships, which certainly is a desperate
resource.

506. It is not quite clear whether
παῦσεν and ἀριστεύοντα go closely to-
gether, ‘‘stopped from doing deeds of
valour,” or more loosely ‘‘ stopped (from
battle) while doing deeds of valour.”
In favour of the latter is the construc-
tion ἔπαυσας μάχεσθαι in 442, while the
former seems a natural correlative to

the construction of the middle with the
participle (X 502, etc.), though the act.
is not elsewhere used in this way.

509. μετακλινθέντος, apparently a
metaphor from a scale-beam. Cf. ἔκλινε
μάχην & 510, and the simple Τρῶας δ᾽
éxAwav Δαναοί E 37.

515. ἀθετεῖται, ὅτι οὐκ ἀναγκαία ἡ éé-
αρίθμησις᾽ μειοῖ γὰρ (it degrades the
leech) εἰ μόνον ἰοὺς ἐκτάμνειν καὶ φαρμα-
κεύειν οἷδεν. καὶ ᾿Αριστοφάνης προηθέτει"
Ζηνόδοτος δὲ οὐδὲ ἔγραφεν. This objec-
tion, though approved by most modern
edd., hardly seems sufficient to condemn
the line, which fairly represents the
primitive stage of Homeric medicine.

518. See note on B 729.

522. παρβεβαώς, ‘‘standing beside”
as charioteer, and clearly not in the
later sense of rapaBdrys, ‘‘fighter.” It
must be remarked that MHector’s ap-
proach seems to have no effect whatever
on the fight ; he is not mentioned again,

982

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (xr)

“"Exrop, νῶι μὲν ἐνθάδ᾽ outréopev Δαναοῖσεν

ἐσχατιῇ πολέμοιο δυσηχέος, οἱ δὲ δὴ ἄλλοι

Τρῶες ὀρίνονται ἐπιμίξ, ἵπποι τε καὶ αὐτοί. 525
Αἴας δὲ κλονέει Τελαμώνιος" εὖ δέ μιν ἔγνων"

εὐρὺ γὰρ ἀμφ᾽ ὦμοισιν ἔχει σάκος.

ἀλλὰ καὶ ἡμεῖς

κεῖσ’ ἵππους τε καὶ app’ ἰθύνομεν, ἔνθα μάλιστα

ἱππῆες πεζοί τε κακὴν ἔριδα προβαλόντες

ἀλλήλους ὀλέκουσι, βοὴ δ᾽ ἄσβεστος ὄρωρεν." 530
as dpa φωνήσας ἵμασεν καλλίτριχας ἵππους

μάστιγι λυιγυρῇ" τοὶ δὲ πληγῆς ἀίοντες

ῥίμφ᾽ ἔφερον θοὸν ἅρμα μετὰ Τρῶας καὶ ᾿Αχαιοὺς

στείβοντες νέκυάς τε καὶ ἀσπίδας" αἵματι δ᾽ ἄξων

νέρθεν ἅπας πεπάλακτο καὶ ἄντυγες at περὶ δίφρον, 535

ἃς ἄρ᾽ ἀφ᾽ ἱππείων ὁπλέων ῥαθάμυγγες ἔβαλλον

6 > 9 > 9 ,
ait aw ἐπισσώτρων.

ὁ δὲ ἵετο δῦναι ὅμιλον

ἀνδρόμεον ῥῆξαί τε μετάλμενος" ἐν δὲ κυδοιμὸν

ἧκε κακὸν Δαναοῖσι, μίνυνθα δὲ χάξετο δουρός.

αὐτὰρ ὁ τῶν ἄλλων ἐπεπωλεῖτο στίχας ἀνδρῶν 540
ἔγχεϊ τ᾽ adopt τε μεγάλοισί τε χερμαδίοισιν,

and the retreat of Aias is ascribed to
Zeus. Hence it is not without reason
that many critics reject the present pass-
age (521-543).

529. προβαλόντες, 4 curious expres-
sion with ἔριδα, but compare ἔριδα προ-
φέρονται I’ 7. The idea seems to be
‘‘throwing into the midst” between
the contending armies.

532. ἀίοντες, according to Curtius
(Et. no. 568), is here used in the primi-
tive meaning of root av, to perceive,
feel, without limitation to the sense of
hearing. But λιγυρῇ, ‘‘ whistling,” may
be more than a mere epith. ornans, and
mean that the very sound of the descend-
ing lash is enough for the high-spirited
horses.

535. αὖ περὶ δίφρον, sc. ἦσαν, see
H. 6. § 271; this is better than the
usual reading al, which implies a much
later use of the article. In 537 at re is
‘* those (others) thrown up by the tires.”

537. ὅμιλον ἀνδρόμεον, ‘the human
throng,” a curious phrase not elsewhere
found ; dvdpéueos is elsewhere applied
only to human flesh or blood.

539. μίνυνθα χάζετο Sovpds, another
strange expression, apparently ‘‘he re-
frained but a little while from the spear,”

i.e. he gave his spear but little rest.
Others understand ‘‘he drew away but
a short distance from the spear,” z.¢. he
never kept far from the enemy while
driving along the line, or according to
others again ‘‘he did not give way when
he had.thrown his spear, but followed
it up at once.” None of these explana-
tions is satisfactory. Ar. read
without any apparent gain.

540-543 seem clearly to be a late in-
terpolation, designed to harmonize the
obvious difficulty that after the pompous
description of Hector’s prowess the re-
treat of Aias is attributed to other
reasons. 643 is not given by any of
our MSS., and has been introduced into
the text from quotations only (Aristotle,
Rhet. ii. 9, and Plutarch). It is incon-
sistent with the promise of Zeus to
Hector, as well as with the next line,
and is moreover hardly to be translated ;
it should mean ‘‘ Zeus was wroth, when-
ever he fought with a better man,”
which does not make sense. Even if we
can get out of it the sense ‘‘Zeus was
indignant that he should fight,” the
reason for this emotion remains inexplic-
able. It may be added that 540-1 are a
repetition of 264-5; and so 533 = P 458,
534-7 = Υ 499-502.

ἼΊΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (xr)

383

Αἴαντος δ᾽ ἀλέεινε μάχην Τελαμωνιάδαο.
[Ζεὺς γάρ οἱ νεμεσᾶθ᾽, ὅτ᾽ ἀμείνονι φωτὶ μάχοιτο.
Ζεὺς δὲ πατὴρ Αἴανθ᾽ ὑψίζυγος ἐν φόβον ὦρσεν"

στῇ δὲ ταφών, ὄπιθεν δὲ σάκος βάλεν ἑπταβόειον,

545

e

τρέσσε δὲ παπτήνας ἐφ᾽ ὁμίλου, θηρὶ ἐοικώς,
4 ’ 4 ’ A 3 ’
ἐντροπαλιζόμενος, ὀλίγον γόνυ γουνὸς ἀμείβων.
e ᾽ Ν / A > A ,
ὡς δ᾽ αἴθωνα λέοντα βοῶν ἀπὸ μεσσαύλοιο

4 ' “
ἐσσεύαντο κύνες τε καὶ ἀνέρες ἀγροιῶται,

οἵ τέ μιν οὐκ εἰῶσι βοῶν ἐκ πῖαρ ἑλέσθαι

ὅδ0

/ ς La)
πάννυχοι ἐγρήσσοντες" ὁ δὲ κρειῶν ἐρατίζων
324 3 2 2 3 4 / \ ”
ἐθύει, ἀλλ᾽ οὔ τι πρήσσει" θαμέες yap ἄκοντες
ἀντίον ἀΐσσουσι θρασειάων ἀπὸ χειρῶν,
“ a /
καιόμεναί Te δεταί, τάς τε τρεῖ ἐσσύμενός TeEp-

ἠῶθεν δ᾽ ἀπονόσφιν ἔβη τετιηότι θυμῷ"

555

ὧς Αἴας ror ἀπὸ Τρώων τετιημένος ἦτορ

ἤιε, πόλλ᾽ ἀέκων" περὶ γὰρ δίε νηυσὶν ᾿Αχαιῶν.

e ) v7 > ν > aN 2 ’ A
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ὄνος παρ᾽ ἄρουραν ἰὼν ἐβιήσατο παῖδας

544. Αἴανθ᾽, sc. Αἴαντι. φόβον,
against the canon of Ar., seems here
clearly to mean ‘‘fear,” not ‘‘ flight,”
which begins only with rpéoce.

545. ὄπιθεν βάλεν, swung round so as
to hang (by the τελαμών) in such a way
as to protect his back while retreating.

546. τρέσσε as usual implies the actual
movement of flight, and is to be taken
with ἐφ᾽ ὁμίλον, in the direction of the
throng (of his friends). For this use of
ἐπί with gen. see I 5, Ψ 374, Η. G. §
200, 3. Aristoph. read δι᾽ ὁμίλου, through
the throng of the enemy. παπτήνας
indicates a searching look to find the
best course.

547. ‘Slowly changing knee for
knee;” 1.6. retreating slowly, pedetentim:
cf. ἐπὶ σκέλος ἀνάγειν in the same sense,
Arist. Av. 383, Eur. Ph. 1400.

548-557. This simile is repeated almost
verbatim in P 657-666. It is very ap-
propriate, and it is with little reason
that most editors, following Zenod., re-
ject it here. There is nothing to cause
offence in the immediate sequence of
two similes. The point lies in the re-
luctant retreat, τετιηότι θυμῷ, 555.

549. ἐσσεύαντο, so La R. and others
with G. Hermann for ἐσσεύοντο of MSS.,
which according to Didymos was Aris-
tarchos’ reading also. But this must
be an error; for in the same line in O
272, where the MSS. read ἐσσεύοντο,

Didymos distinctly says ’Aplorapyos διὰ
τοῦ a καὶ ἅπασαι The imperf. is en-
tirely out of place in a simile. For this
non-sigmatic Ist aor. in tran. sense see
P 463, T 148.

550. πῖαρ recurs again (besides P 659)
in ¢ 135, μάλα πῖαρ ὑπ᾽ οὖδας. It seems
decidedly more natural in the latter case
to take it as an adjective, than as a sub-
stantive with Buttmann. The form πῖαρ
with fem. πίειρα seems analogous to
μάκαρ, μάκαιρα. So Hesych. πῖαρ...
καὶ λιπαρόν, and Solon, 36, 21, πῖαρ ἐξέλ
γάλα, ‘‘rich cream.” (See F. G. Allin-
son in Amer. Journ. Philol. i. 458.)
The difficulty here, if we wish to under-
stand it as meaning ‘‘to pick out a fat
one from the kine,” is that the neuter
is very harsh immediately after βοῶν.
We may however compare the instances
given in the note on ἐρῆμα E 140.

552. lOve, charges ; see Z 2.

554. Seral, ‘‘ bundles” of twigs (δέω,
to bind). τρεῖ should be rpéee (so
Nauck), though the present scansion
might be defended by the bucolic
diaeresis, which occasionally prevents
shortening before a vowel.

558. The picture is that of an ass
being driven by boys along a high road,
and turning for a while into the stand-
ing crops (this is always the meaning of
λήιον) at the side; so Aias, though he
is obliged to retreat, takes his own time

984

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (xz)

νωθής, @ δὴ πολλὰ περὶ ῥόπαλ᾽ ἀμφὶς ἐάγῃ,

κείρει τ᾽ εἰσελθὼν βαθὺ λήιον" οἱ δέ τε παῖδες

4 ε 4 4 4 9 “
τύπτουσιν ῥοπάλοισι" Bin δέ τε νηπίη αὐτῶν"
σπουδῇ τ᾽ ἐξήλασσαν, ἐπεί T ἐκορέσσατο φορβῆς"
φ 4‘ > 3 Μ / ’ es
ὧς τότ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽ Αἴαντα μέγαν, Τελαμώνιον υἱόν,
a 3
Τρῶες ὑπέρθυμοι πολνηγερέες τ ἐπίκουροι
νύσσοντες ξυστοῖσι μέσον σάκος αἰὲν ὅποντο" 565
Alas δ᾽ ἄλλοτε μὲν μνησάσκετο θούριδος ἀλκῆς
αὗτις ὑποστρεφθείς, καὶ ἐρητύσασκε φάλαγγας
e
Τρώων ἱπποδάμων, ὁτὲ δὲ τρωπάσκετο φεύγειν.
πάντας δὲ προέεργε θοὰς ἐπὶ νῆας ὁδεύειν,
>A \ , ᾽ a a \ »
αὐτὸς δὲ Τρώων καὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν θῦνε μεσηγὺς 510
ἱστάμενος" τὰ δὲ δοῦρα θρασειάων ἀπὸ χειρῶν
» \ ἢ fie ’ὕ , ¥ /
ἄλλα μεν ἐν σάκεϊ μεγάλῳ Trayev ὄρμενα πρόσσω,
A \ 4 4 4 A 9 “~
πολλὰ δὲ καὶ μεσσηγύ, πάρος χρόα λευκὸν ἐπαυρεῖν,
’
ἐν γαίῃ ἵσταντο, λιλαιόμενα χροὸς σαι.
, >
τὸν δ᾽ ὡς οὖν ἐνόησ᾽ Evainovos ἀγλαὸς υἱὸς 575
Εὐρύπυλος πυκινοῖσι βιαζόμενον βελέεσσιν,
A 2
στῆ ῥα παρ᾽ αὐτὸν ἰὼν καὶ ἀκόντισε δουρὶ φαεινῷ,
καὶ βάλε Φαυσιάδην ᾿Απισάονα ποιμένα λαῶν
e \ ’ 4 > e@ A 4 9
ἧπαρ ὑπὸ πραπίδων, εἶθαρ δ᾽ ὑπὸ γούνατ᾽ ἔλυσεν"
4
Εὐρύπυλος δ᾽ ἐπόρουσε καὶ αἴνυτο τεύχε᾽ ἀπ’ ὦμων. 580
,
τὸν δ᾽ ὡς οὖν ἐνοησεν ᾿Αλέξανδρος θεοειδὴς
Tevye ἀπαινύμενον ᾿Απισάονος, αὐτίκα τόξον
3 A
ἕλκετ᾽ ἐπ᾿ Εὐρυπύλῳ, καί μιν βάλε μηρὸν ὀιστῷ

about it. ἐβιήσατο, is more than ἃ
match for, as we might say.

559. νωθής, apparently from vy- and
ὄθομαι, indifferent. ἐάγῃ, perf. subj.;
so Bekker for ἐάγη of MSS.; the aor. has
always a. The clause explains νωθής, he
is indifferent because he is accustomed
to more severe treatment than the boys
can administer. Thus δή = before now.
ἀμφίς, on both his sides.

561. νηπίη, childish, our colloquial
‘mere ὁ ild’s - play.” αὐτῶν seems
rather weak, though it may be thought
to emphasize the contrast between the
boys and stronger masters. But Hoog-
vliet’s suggestion αὔτως is very plausible.

562. σπουδῇ, with all their efforts,
hardly; cf. B99.

564. πολνηγερέες, so Ar., ἐκ πολλῶν
ἀγερθέντες. MSS. τηλεκλειτοί (or -κλητοί),
the usual epithet.

565. νύσσοντες governs both Αἴαντα
and σάκος by a sort of ‘‘ whole and ”
figure. ἕποντο, ‘‘hung on his heels,”
‘‘stuck to him,” as we say ; it means
more than is implied by our ‘* follow.”
(See Journ. Philol. xiv. 283.)

569. wpodepyev ὁδεύειν, prevented from
making their way. προ- implies ‘ be-
fore (1.6. from) himself.” Perhaps we
should write it πρό as an adverb, and
take it with ὁδεύειν, as in the phrase
πρὸ ὁδοῦ A 882.

573. μεσσηγύ, half way. ἐπαυρέῖν,
reach : cee 391, Ψ 340. y

574. For the personification of the
spear sec A 126, @ 70. Goat is here
intrans., ‘‘to have their fill” It is
more commonly causal, ‘‘ to sate.”

580. atvuro, began to strip (imperf. )

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (x1)

385

δεξιόν: ἐκλάσθη δὲ Sovak, ἐβάρυνε δὲ μηρόν.

ἂψ δ᾽ ἑτάρων εἰς ἔθνος ἐχάζετο κῆρ᾽ ἀλεείνων, 585
ἤυσεν δὲ διαπρύσιον Δαναοῖσι γεγωνώς"

“ ὦ φίλοι, ᾿Αργείων ἡγήτορες ἠδὲ μέδοντες,

στῆτ᾽ ἐλελιχθέντες καὶ ἀμύνετε νηλεὲς ἦμαρ

Αἴανθ᾽, ὃς βελέεσσι βιάζεται, οὐδέ ἕ φημι

φεύξεσθ᾽ ἐκ πολέμοιο δυσηχέος.

ἀλλὰ μάλ᾽ ἄντην 590

" . ) ,
ioracO ἀμφ᾽ Αἴαντα μέγαν, TeXapovioy viov.”
as par Ἐὐρύπυλος βεβλημένος" of δὲ παρ᾽ αὐτὸν
bd
πλησίοι ἔστησαν, σάκε᾽ ὦμοισι κλίναντες,

bd
Sovpat ἀνασχόμενοι.

τῶν δ᾽ ἀντίος ἤλυθεν Αἴας,

στῆ δὲ μεταστρεφθείς, ἐπεὶ ἵκετο ἔθνος ἑταίρων. 595
ὧς of μὲν μάρναντο δέμας πυρὸς αἰθομένοιο:

Νέστορα δ᾽ ἐκ πολέμοιο φέρον Νηλήιαι ἵπποι

ἱδρῶσαι, ἦγον δὲ Μαχάονα ποιμένα λαῶν.

τὸν δὲ ἰδὼν ἐνόησε ποδάρκης δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς"

ἑστήκει γὰρ ἐπὶ πρυμνῇ μεγακήτεϊ νηὶ 600

εἰσορόων πόνον αἰπὺν ἰῶκά τε δακρυόεσσαν.

αἷψα δ᾽ ἑταῖρον ἑὸν Πατροκλῆα προσέειπεν

φθεγξάμενος παρὰ νηός" ὁ δὲ κλισίηθεν ἀκούσας

584. δόναξ, the shaft of the arrow (so
only here). ἐβάρυνε must be used in a
metaphorical sense, ‘‘ made if painful to
move.”

585. ἐχάζετο, sc. Eurypylos. The
phrase is generally used of a warrior who

as just made a spear-cast, and immedi-
ately retires, being for the moment dis-
armed (see N 566, 596, 648, & 408).
Hence it has been proposed here to make
Paris the subject. But the mancuvre
is not required by the archer who shoots
from a distance.

588. στῆτ᾽ ἐλελιχθέντες, 1.6. στῆτε
βελιχθέντες, as usual.

589. Αἴανθ᾽ = Αἴαντι, as 544.

593. odxe’ ὥὦὥμοισι κλίναντες seems
to indicate some sort of rudimentary
phalanx or testudo, the shield being
perhaps set with its lower edge on the
ground, and the upper leaning against
the shoulder, while the spears are sloped
forwards. See X 4, and cf. N 180, dpdé-
avres δόρν δουρί, σάκος σάκεϊ προθελύμνῳ
(see J. H. 8. iv. 284).

594. ἀντίος, with his face towards his
friends.

596 = N 673, P 366, = 1. In these
passages only δέμας is used with a gen.

20

like the Attic δίκην or τρόπον, Lat.
instar, meaning ‘‘after the similitude
of fire.” The word is always however
an ‘‘accus. of reference,” except in σ
174 and perhaps « 240 (Zenod. πόδας) :
it means literally ‘‘in build,” in forma-
tion. Η. G. § 136, 2.

597. φέρον, imperf., ‘‘were in the
meantime carrying.” Νηλήιαι, of the
breed of Neleus, like Τρώιοι Εἰ 222. There
was a variant Νηλήιον.

599. ἰδὼν ἐνόησε, he saw (with the
bodily) and marked (with the inward
eye).

600. ἐπὶ πρυμνῇ vyl, zc. upon the
small deck at the stern, which was
turned inland and was high enough to
enable him to see over the wall. peya-
κήτεϊ, capacious: see on Θ 222.

601. ἰῶκα, flight: a metaplastic acc.
of ἑωκή, see on E 521, 740. Aristonikos
mentions the curious variant ἰῶ κατα-
daxpvdecoay, which appears to be un-
translatable.

603-7. It has been objected to these
lines (1) that προσέειπεν in 602 ought,
according to the regular Homeric prac-
tice, to be followed by the actual words
spoken. (2) That a speech of a single

386 LATAAO® A (x1)

Exporev ἶσος “Apni, κακοῦ δ᾽ ἄρα οἱ πέλεν ἀρχή.
τὸν πρότερος προσέειπε Μενοιτίου ἄλκεμος υἱός- δ:
“ τίπτε με κικλήσκεις, ᾿Αχιλεῦ; τί δέ σε χρεὼ ἐμεῖο; "
Α > 9 ’ ¢ Ld ? A) ἢ} a
τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχελλεύς"
“ δῖε Μενοιτιάδη, τῷ ἐμῷ κεχαρισμένε θυμῷ,
νῦν ὀίω περὶ γούνατ᾽ ἐμὰ στήσεσθαε ᾿Αχαεοὺς
λισσομένους" χρειὼ γὰρ ἱκάνεται οὐκέτ᾽ ἀνεκτός. 610
ἀλλ᾽ ἴθι νῦν, Πάτροκλε διίφιλε, Νέστορ᾽ Epeso,
ὅν τινα τοῦτον ἄγει βεβλημένον ἐκ πολέμοιο.
ἢ τοι μὲν τά γ᾽ ὄπισθε Μαχάονι πάντα ἔοικεν
τῷ ᾿Ασκληπιάδῃ, ἀτὰρ οὐκ ἴδον ὄμματα φωτός"
ἵπποι γάρ με παρήιξαν πρόσσω μεμαυῖαι." 615
ὧς φάτο, Πάτροκλος δὲ φίλῳ ἐπεπείθεθ᾽ ἑταίρῳ,
βῆ δὲ θέειν παρά τε κλισίας καὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαεῶν.
οἱ δ᾽ ὅτε δὴ κλισίην Νηληιάδεω ἀφίκοντο,
3 ’ «> » 4 9 A 4 ’
αὐτοὶ μέν ῥ᾽ ἀπέβησαν ἐπὶ χθόνα πουλυβότειραν,
[22 3 3 / 4 4 al V4
ἵππους δ᾽ Εὐρυμέδων θεράπων λύε τοῖο γέροντος 6
> ? 4 + ¢ A 3 ’ [4
ἐξ ὀχέων. τοὶ δ᾽ ἱδρῶ ἀπεψύχοντο χιτώνων
4 5 \ \ > ey J 3 Ψ
στάντε ποτὶ πνοιὴν παρὰ θῖν ἁλὸς" αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα
ἐς κλισίην ἐλθόντες ἐπὶ κλισμοῖσι καθῖζον.
τοῖσι δὲ τεῦχε κυκειῶ ἐνυνπλόκαμος “Ἑἰκαμήδη,
τὴν ἄρετ᾽ ἐκ Τενέδοιο γέρων, ὅτε πέρσεν ᾿Αχιλλεύς, 625
Ouyarép’ ᾿Αρσινόου μεγαλήτορος, ἦν οἱ ᾿Αχαιοὶ
ἔξελον, οὕνεκα βουλῇ ἀριστεύεσκεν ἁπάντων.

line like 606 is very rare ; this is indeed
the only instance in any book before
Σ. (8) That the allusion to coming
events in 604 is not Homeric. Though
these reasons are not convincing, yet
taken together they have some force.
(3) however is not exact, see E 662, etc.

606. For χρεώ as a short syllable see
I 75.
609. These words, on any fair system
of interpretation, are quite inconsistent
with the position of I in the story. See
the introduction to that book.

611. ἔρειο, apparently for épé-eo, from
the longer stem épe- found in épéovro Θ
445, ete. It should then be ἐρεῖο
(Curtius, Vb. ii. 47). Compare σπεῖο
K 285. Fick would prefer épeve (which
occurs in Hesych., and is explained
épevva), or Epevo = Epefo from the aor.
ἐρέσθαι (for ἐρξέσθαι).

618. οἱ, Nestor and Machaon.

622. This treatment seems somewhat

heroic for a wounded man, but probably
has some connexion with the idea of the
healthfulness of sea- water (see K 572).
Fasi quotes similar conduct on the part
of the heroes of the Nibelungen Lied.
οὕτως διὰ τοῦ τέ, ordyre, Didymos; te
δυικῶς, Schol. V. Je. Ar. wrote στάντε,
while others had στὰν δέ, which occurs
in one or two of our MSS. For θῖν(α)
we should rather have expected the dat.
Oly’ (for Awl).

624. κυκειῶ, a sort of stimulating
porridge; see Merry on x 234, where
Kirke prepares a similar one, only with
the addition of honey, which is not
mentioned here.

625. dpero, won, as ἃ prize, γέρας
ἐξαιρετόν, given to reward his pre-emi-
nence in council (627), no doubt on ac-
count of advice he had given relative to
the capture of the city. Observe @vya-
τέρα in apposition with the relative τήν,
instead of the more distant nominative.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ ΔΛ (x1.)

387

G4 A \ 3 Α 4

ἥ σφωιν πρῶτον μὲν ἐπιπροΐηλε τράπεζαν
, σι

καλὴν κυανοπεΐαν ἐύξοον, αὐτὰρ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῆς

χάλκειον κάνεον, ἐπὶ δὲ κρόμνον, ποτῷ ὄψον,

680

3 A
ἠδὲ μέλι χλωρόν, Tapa δ᾽ ἀλφίτου ἱεροῦ ἀκτήν,

\ / 4 a ΜΝ 4ῳ >»? e ,
map δὲ δέπας περικαλλές, ὃ οἴκοθεν ἦγ ὁ γεραιός,
χρυσείοις ἥλοισι πεπαρμένον" οὔατα δ᾽ αὐτοῦ

/ > ΚΝ ὃ ὶ δὲ 10 3 \ 4
τέσσαρ᾽ ἔσαν, δοιαὶ δὲ πελειάδες ἀμφὶς ἕκαστον

χρύσειαι νεμέθοντο, δύω δ᾽ ὑπὸ πυθμένες ἦσαν.

635

ov \ ’ 3 ’ ’
ἄλλος μὲν μογέων ἀποκινήσασκε τραπέζης.
A 47 / > ¢€ 7 > Ἀν»
πλεῖον ἐόν, Νέστωρ δ᾽ ὁ γέρων ἀμογητὶ ἄειρεν.
A \ aA “A
ἐν τῷ ῥά σφι κύκησε γυνὴ ἐικυῖα θεῇσιν
bf a
οἴνῳ Πραμνείῳ, ἐπὶ δ᾽ αἴγειον κνῆ τυρὸν

2
κνήστι χαλκείῃ, ἐπὶ ὃ ἄλφιτα λευκὰ πάλυνεν,

640

3 > a)
πινέμεναι δ᾽ ἐκέλευσεν, ἐπεί p ὥπλισσε KUKELO.

628. ἐπιπροΐηλε, moved forward to
them. ἰάλλω is apparently a redupli-
cated form from root ar to go, in causal
sense. Curt. £¢. no. 661.

629. κνανόπεζαν, with feet of cyanos
or blue glass ; see |. 24.

630. ἐπί, and on it (the κάνεον, platter)
an onion, as a relish for the drink.

631. ἀκτήν is generally explained as
meaning ‘‘ Hruised meal,” from root Fay
to break. We should however hardly
expect to find the F omitted in what
would naturally appear to be a very
primitive phrase. Other derivations
have been proposed, e.g. ac (Skt.) to eat
(Benf.), or ἀκ to be sharp, as though re-
ferring to the ears of corn (Hesiod actu-
ally uses it of standing crops; Merry
and R. on β 355).

632. Ar. varied in his editions be-
tween ἦγ᾽ and εἶχ᾽ ὁ yepacés. Nestor’s
cup was a favourite subject of discussion
among ancient commentators and archae-
ologists, of whose remarks Athenaeus
has preserved us extracts of more com-
pass than value. The account in the
text is quite intelligible with the aid of
the specimens of early cups from Mykenai
and Caere given in Helbig, H. E. pp.
272 ἢ. The πυθμένες were supports from
the base of the cup to the lower part
of the bowl, designed to strengthen the
central stem. The οὔατα are handles
at the side. In the cup found by Dr.
Schliemann (Afycenae, p. 237, no. 346,
Helbig. H. E. no. 116) we see not only
these πυθμένες, which are continued into

the handles above them, but we have

actually two πελειάδες as ornaments on
the top of the handles, with beaks pro-
jecting over the interior, as though they
were feeding. The poetical cup only
differs by its greater magnificence in
having four handles instead of two, and
two doves to each instead of one only.
These four handles, as remarked by Ar.,
whose explanation seems perfectly right,
are to be regarded as placed in two pairs,
one pair at each side, not at equal in-
tervals all round the cup. The chief
uncertainty is as to the ἦλοι, especially
as the material of the cup is not specified.
These may have been actually nsed to
fasten the parts of the cup together—
the πυθμένες of the Mykenaean cup are
thus fixed to the base—or they may
have been driven in as mere ornaments,
a device which is familiar in ancient
work of wood and clay, as well as of
metal (Helbig).

636-7. This couplet comes in very
strangely. So far from being represented
as of unusual physical strength, Nestor
is always lamenting his departed vigour.
The lines might weil be omitted.

639. ‘‘Pramnian wine” is said by the
Scholiast to have been named from a
mountain in Karia. It is mentioned by
Galen as ‘‘a black austere wine,” appa-
rently in a descriptive rather than a local
sense (see Merry on κ 234). κνῆ, a
genuine form of the ‘‘ Aeolic” conjuga-
tion (Fick). Ar. read xvée. For the
dative κνήστι for κνήστι-ι cf. Ψ 315, etc.

388

LAIAAO® A (xz)

τὼ δ᾽ ἐπεὶ οὖν πίνοντ᾽ ἀφέτην πολυκαγκέα δέψαν,

4 ’ Ἁ 3 Ui > /
μύθοισιν τέρποντο πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἐνέποντες,
Πάτροκλος δὲ θύρῃσιν ἐφίστατο, ἰσόθεος φώς.
τὸν δὲ ἰδὼν ὁ γεραιὸς ἀπὸ θρόνον ὦρτο φαεινοῦ, 645
3 > ιν Ν ey 2 \ a e , ΝΜ
ἐς δ᾽ ἄγε χειρὸς ἑλών, κατὰ ὃ ἑδριάασθαι ἄνωγεν.
Πάτροκλος δ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἀναίνετο εἶπέ τε μῦθον"
ες b Ψ 3 ’ / ϑδϑὼω

οὐχ ἕδος ἐστί, γεραιὲ διοτρεφές, οὐδέ με πείσεις.
αἰδοῖος νεμεσητός, ὅ με προέηκε πυθέσθαι,
ὅν τινα τοῦτον ἄγεις βεβλημένον: ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτὸς 650
γιγνώσκω, ὁρόω δὲ Μαχάονα ποιμένα λαῶν.
νῦν δὲ ἔπος ἐρέων πάλιν ἄγγελος εἶμ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆι.

= \ \ te \ / 3 a)
ev δὲ σὺ οἶσθα, γεραιὲ διοτρεφές, οἷος ἐκεῖνος,
δεινὸς ἀνήρ" τάχα κεν καὶ ἀναίτιον αἰτιόῳτο.᾽

τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα Τερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ' 655

“ / > ν > OQ) 2? \ 3 4 3 a

timte T ap ὧδ Αχιλεὺς ὀλοφύρεται υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶν,

ὅσσοι δὴ βέλεσιν βεβλήαται;

οὐδέ τι οἷδεν

πένθεος, ὅσσον ὄρωρε κατὰ στρατόν" οἱ γὰρ ἄρεστοι

ἐν νηυσὶν κέαται βεβλημένοι οὐτάμενοί τε.

βέβληται μὲν ὁ Τυδεΐδης κρατερὸς Διομήδης, 660
οὔτασται δ᾽ ᾿Οδυσεὺς δουρικλυτὸς ἠδ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνων "
[βέβληται δὲ καὶ Ἐὐρύπυλος κατὰ μηρὸν ὀιστῷ]"

τοῦτον δ᾽ ἄλλον ἐγὼ νέον ἤγαγον ἐκ πολέμοιο

i@ ἀπὸ νευρῆς βεβλημένον.

αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς

642. πολνυκαγκέα, parching, cf. κάγ-
xava ξύλα ᾧΦ 364. It appears to be a
nasalized reduplicated form of xa-, xaF-,
to burn (see:Curtius, δέ, vi. 335, vii.
204).

647. ἑτέρωθεν, from the opposite side
of the tent to that where the chairs
stood.

648. οὐχ ἕδος, ‘‘ There is no sitting for
me,” i.e. 1 have not time to sit down.
So Ψ 205.

649. νεμεσητός in this sense is unique,
and not easy to explain. The adjective
recurs only in the form νεμεσσητόν, a
thing worthy of νέμεσις, or indignation
(Τ᾽ 410, ete.). It seems to mean here
“capable of indignation”; for the form
Mr. Monro compares ἐπιεικτός = ‘‘ yield-
ing,” © 32, ἑρπετός “ creeping,” ἀτάρβητος
‘*fearless.”” The analogy of aldotos δεινός
re, I. 172, would lead us to translate
‘‘terrible”; but this is not sufficiently
supported by the use of νεμεσίζομαι in
one passage (a 263) in the sense of
‘‘ fearing the gods.”

654. δεινὸς ἀνήρ is to be taken closely
with οἷος, as in our idiom, “ὁ what a ter-
rible man he is.” It may be questioned,
however, if it would not be better to put
a colon after ἐκεῖνος, and take δεινὸς ἀνήρ
as an exclamatory nom.

657. ὅσσοι... βεβλήαται are con-
trasted with στρατόν, “why does he show
so much pity for the wounded and think
nothing of the army at large?”

658. aévOeos. For the genitive after
olde compare A 357, M 229, H. G. § 151
d. Itis not Homeric to regard πένθεος
as a partitive gen. after τι,

659. βεβλημένοι by missiles, o
by weapons held in the hand, as usual.

662. This line is om. by all the best
MSS., and is evidently interpolated from
II 27. Nestor knows nothing of the
wounding of Eurypylos, which happened
after he had left the field.

664. From αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεύς here to
the same words in 762 is almost beyond
a doubt an interpolated See
the introduction to the present book.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (x1)

389

ἐσθλὸς ἐὼν Δαναῶν οὐ κήδεται οὐδ᾽ ἐλεαίρει. 665
Φ ’ » Ψ \ A » ᾽

ἡ μένει εἰς ὅ κε δὴ νῆες θοαὶ ἄγχε θαλάσσης

᾿Αργείων ἀέκητι πυρὸς δηίοιο θέρωνται,

3 ὔ , »», ’
αὐτοί τε κτεινώμεθ ἐπισχερώ;

οὐ γὰρ ἐμὴ is

Μ > 4 4 WwW > \ ΄΄Ὥὦ 4
ἔσθ᾽, οἵη πάρος ἔσκεν ἐνὶ γναμπτοῖσι μέλεσσιν.

>
εἴθ᾽ ὧς ἡβώοιμι Bin τέ μοι ἔμπεδος εἴη, 670
e e 4/39 / ς oa al > /
ὡς oot ᾿Ηλείοισι καὶ ἡμῖν νεῖκος ἐτύχθη
ἀμφὶ βοηλασίῃ, ὅτ᾽ ἐγὼ κτάνον ᾿Ιτυμονῆα

/

ἐσθλὸν “Ὑπειροχίδην, ὃς ἐν "Ἤλιδι ναιετάασκεν,

/
ῥύσι᾽ ἐλαυνόμενος.

ὁ δ᾽ ἀμύνων ἧσι βόεσσιν

»ἭἬἬ > 2 4 3 n 3 Ἁ \ WwW
ἐβλητ᾽ ἐν πρώτοισιν ἐμῆς ἀπὸ χειρὸς ἄκοντι, 675
\ > ν ’ὔ 3 κι
κὰδ δ᾽ ἔπεσεν, λαοὶ δὲ περίτρεσαν ἀγροιῶται.
ληίδα δ᾽ ἐκ πεδίου συνελάσσαμεν ἤλιθα πολλήν,
πεντήκοντα βοῶν ἀγέλας, τόσα πώεα οἰῶν,
τόσσα συῶν συβόσια, τόσ᾽ αἰπόλια πλατέ᾽ αἰγῶν,
(/ A e \ 4
ἵππους δὲ ξανθὰς ἑκατὸν καὶ πεντήκοντα, 680
πάσας θηλείας, πολλῇσι δὲ πῶλοι ὑπῆσαν.
καὶ τὰ μὲν ἡἠλασάμεσθα ἸΠύλον Νηλήιον εἴσω
3 ’ὔ Ν ,ὔ \ / 4
ἐννύχιοι προτὶ ἄστυ" γεγήθει δὲ φρένα Νηλεύς,
[μὰ 4 4 / / /
οὕνεκά μοι τύχε πολλὰ νέῳ πολεμόνδε KLOVTL.
7 > , ῳΦ > FA 4
κήρυκες ὃ ἐλίγαινον ἅμ᾽ not φαινομένηφιν θ8ὅ
τοὺς ἴμεν, οἷσι χρεῖος ὀφείλετ᾽ ἐν "Ἤλιδι δίῃ"
e \ , ς 4 Ν
οἱ δὲ συναγρόμενοι ἸΤυλίων ἡγήτορες ἄνδρες
Saitpevov: πολέσιν γὰρ ᾿Ἑπτειοὶ χρεῖος ὄφειλον,
ὡς ἡμεῖς παῦροι κεκακωμένοι ἐν Πύλῳ ἦμεν.

667. πυρὸς θέρωνται, compare Z 331.4

668. ἐπισχερώ, ‘‘in order,” one after
the other. oxe- = (c)ex-, so that, with
the exception of the unexplained suffix
-pw, ἐπι-σχε-ρῷώ exactly = ἐφ .-εξ-ῆς.
ov yap implies the suppressed thought,
“7 can do nothing to help it.”

669. γναμπτοῖσι, flexible, lissome ;
else only in Od. and Q 359.

671. ᾿Ηλείοισι, elsewhere in H. always
called ’Exrecof (and so 688); cf. ν 275,
Ἤλιδα. . . ὅθι κρατέουσιν ‘Emel, and
B 619.

674. ἐλαυνόμενος goes with κτάνον.
ῥύσια does not recur in H.; it is used
in the sense usual in later Greek, ‘‘ re-
prisals,” property seized as a pledge for
reparation; Soph. O. C. 858, Aesch.
Supp. 412, etc. The deed which led to
reprisals is recounted farther on (698).

677. ἤλιθα, else a purely Odyssean

word, always followed by πολλή. It is
possibly conn. with ἅλις.

678-9 = — 100-1. The hiatus after
πώεα and the long ε of συβόσια are
metrical anomalies, of which the latter
may be explained by the ictus (two
good MSS., 1, Townl., read συβόσεια).
αἰπόλια πλατέα, wide-ranging flocks of
goats (for the word αἰπόλος see B 474).

684. τύχε πολλά, much success had
fallen to me. νέῳ, as a ‘“‘ young hand,”
with κιόντι.

686. The reading of Ar. seems to have
been ὠφείλετ᾽ instead of χρεῖος
ὀφείλετ᾽, but the MS. is confused between
the two.

688. Salrpevov, proceeded:to appor-
tion. The verb occurs elsewhere only in
Sie and always of carving meat (see

05).

689. ὡς = ὅτι οὕτως, “80 few were we

in Pylos through our disasters.”

990

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ ΔΛ (xz.)

ἐλθὼν γὰρ ἐκάκωσε βίη “Ἡρακληείη ᾿ 690
τῶν προτέρων ἐτέων, κατὰ δ᾽ ἔκταθεν, ὅσσοι ἄρεστοι.
δώδεκα γὰρ Νηλῆος ἀμύμονος υἱέες ἦμεν"

τῶν οἷος λυπόμην, οἱ δ᾽ ἄλλοι πάντες ὅλοντο.

ταῦθ᾽ ὑπερηφανέοντες ᾽Επειοὶ χαλκοχίτωνες,

ἡμέας ὑβρίζοντες, ἀτάσθαλα μηχανόωντο. 695
ἐκ δ᾽ ὁ γέρων ἀγέλην te βοῶν καὶ wav μέγ᾽ οἰῶν

εἵλετο, κρινάμενος τριηκόσι᾽ ἠδὲ νομῆας.

καὶ γὰρ τῷ χρεῖος μέγ᾽ ὀφείλετ᾽ ἐν "Ἤλιδι δίῃ,

τέσσαρες ἀθλοφόροι ἵπποι αὐτοῖσιν ὄχεσφιν,

ἐλθόντες μετ᾽ ἄεθλα" περὶ τρίποδος γὰρ ἔμελλον 700
θεύσεσθαι" τοὺς δ᾽ αὖθι ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν Αὐγείας

κάσχεθε, τὸν δ᾽ ἐλατῆρ᾽ ἀφίει ἀκαχήμενον ἵππων.

τῶν ὁ γέρων ἐπέων κεχολωμένος ἠδὲ καὶ ἔργων

ἐξέλετ᾽ ἄσπετα πολλά" τὰ δ᾽ ἄλλ᾽ ἐς δῆμον ἔδωκεν
[δαυτρεύειν, μή τίς οἱ ἀτεμβόμενος κίοι ἴσης. 705

690. ἐλθών, a construction ad sensum,
βίη Ἡρακληείη being = Ἡρακλῆς. Cf.
E 638, H. G. 8 196. For yap AD read
γάρ ῥ᾽, but see on A 467. For the legend
of the sacking of Pylos by Herakles see
on Εἰ 393.

691. τῶν προτέρων ἐτέων : for the geni-
tive see H. G. § 150.

694. ταῦτα adverbial, H. G. § 133.
ὑπερηφανέοντες, see Curtius Εἴ. no.
392, where it is explained as from the
adjectival stem ὑπερο- with “ Epic length-
ening” (cf. νεη-γενής, etc.), and φαίνω,
lit. ‘‘ shewing themselves lifted up.”

695. ὑβρίζοντες, else only in Od.
(seven times).

697. κρινάμενος, selecting ; the case is
not analogous to the ordinary division of
spoil, which is in the hands of the army,
not of the king, who is only given a
γέρας ἐξαιρετόν : here he is exacting pay-
ment for a debt. τριηκόσια: for the
anomalous long « compare ὑπεροπλίῃσι,
A 205; it is hard to explain in thesi.
Hartel suggests that it may be due to
the production of a y-sound after the ε.

699. From the mention of a single
charioteer in 702 (where, however, Naber
suggests τὼ δ᾽ ἐλατῆρ᾽ . . . ἀκαχημένω)
it would seem that a four-horse chariot
is meant; the pl. ὄχεα being regularly
used of a single chariot. For the very
rare mention of such a team in H. see
on Θ 185. The mention of ἄεθλα in
Elis naturally leads us to think of the

Olympian games. But we cannot argue
from this as to the date of the present
passage, for, as Mr. Monro has remarked,
the prize for the chariot-race instituted
there in Ol. 25 was not a tri but a
wreath of olive. The Olympian games
were according to the legend of fabulous
antiquity, the historical foundation being
only a re-establishment of the contests
begun by Herakles in honour of Jolaos.
It is therefore quite possible that even
this late passe may be earlier than the
Olympiads, at least so far as the evidence
of this line goes. Races on special occa-
sions, especially at funerals, are familiar
to Homer, X 164.

703. τῶν goes with ἐπέων and ἔργων,
“these things, words and deeds”; im-
plying apparently that an insulting
message had been sent back by the
charioteer. See B 629 for the wanton
violence of Augeias.

704. ἐξέλετο, chose for himself; in a
different sense from I 331. δῆμον, ap-
parently ‘‘the common stock”; see note
on A 231, B 547.

705. Interpolated from ¢ 42, as Zenod.
and <Ar. rightly judged. δαιτρεύειν
properly means ‘‘to be darpés,” or car-
ver at a feast. ἴσης, better αἴσης, fair
share; see A 418. Fick reads ἔσσης,
quoting Hesych. ἴσσασθαι" κληροῦσθαι,
Λέσβιοι. ἀτέμβεσθαι is a verb recurring
only in Ψ and Od.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (xt)

391

ἡμεῖς μὲν τὰ ἕκαστα διείπομεν, ἀμφί τε ἄστυ
ἔρδομεν ἱρὰ θεοῖς" οἱ δὲ τρίτῳ ἤματι πάντες
ἦλθον ὁμῶς αὐτοί τε πολεῖς καὶ μώνυχες ἵπποι,
πανσυδίῃ" μετὰ δέ σφι Μολίονε θωρήσσοντο

ad) > / “a
παῖδ᾽ ἔτ᾽ ἐόντ᾽, οὔ πω μάλα εἰδότε θούριδος ἀλκῆς.

710

ἔστι δέ τις Θρυόεσσα πόλις, αἰπεῖα κολώνη,
τηλοῦ ἐπ᾽ ᾿Αλφειῷ, νεάτη Πύλου ἠμαθόεντος"
τὴν ἀμφεστρατόωντο διαρραῖσαι μεμαῶτες.

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε πᾶν πεδίον μετεκίαθον, ἄμμι δ᾽ ᾿Αθήνη

ἄγγελος ἦλθε θέουσ᾽ an’ ᾽Ολύμπου θωρήσσεσθαι

715

3
ἔννυχος, οὐδ᾽ ἀέκοντα Πύλον κάτα λαὸν ἄγειρεν,

ἀλλὰ μάλ᾽ ἐσσυμένους πολεμίζειν.

οὐδέ με Νηλεὺς

εἴα θωρήσσεσθαι, ἀπέκρυψεν δέ μοι ἵππους".
οὐ γάρ πώ τί μ᾽ ἔφη ἴδμεν πολεμήια ἔργα.

706. διείπομεν, disposed, arranged,
from διέπω, not from εἰπεῖν (Journ. Phil.
xiv. 238).

707. ot δέ, the Epeians, who make
a raid to recover the booty taken
from them. Many commentators have
strangely fancied that this is the begin-
ning of the war in which the fight
already mentioned (671-6) was an inci-
dent. This leads to hopeless and need-
less confusion.

709. ModAlove, the same as the ’Axropl-
wre Kteatos and Eurytos, B 621; see
750 below. The Homeric poems and
Pindar (Ol. x. 26-38) know them only
as twin sons of Poseidon, and leaders of
the Epeians; they are named again in
Ψ 638. The two names ’Axroplwy and
MoXwy are both obscure. In form they
are of course patronymics, but they
cannot both be so in reality, for they
appear together in 750, and Homer
never uses two patronymics together.
The ordinary explanation is that Aktor
was their nominal father, as Herakles
is called son of Amphitryon, and that
MoNwy is a metronymic from their
mother Μολιόνη or Μολίνη (so Pausan. v.
2,2). The last assumption is impossible,
both because the form forbids it, and
because metronymics are unknown in
Greece. Others have proposed to derive
both Μολιόνη and Μολίων from a sup-
posed Médos, ancestor of the mother.
For this there is no ground. It may be
added that even Aktor (who, according
to the later legend, was brother of
Augeias) is not named in H.; the grand-

father of Patroklos (785) being of course
a different person. Later mythology
made of the two brethren a pair of
Siamese twins, διφυεῖς, with two heads
and four legs and arms, but only one
body (so Schol. A here and on Ψ 688,
and apparently as early as Ibykos; see
Jr. 16, Bergk, where they are called
ἐνίγυιοι). elcker ingeniously, but not
very probably, explained them as a per-
sonification of the two mill-stones (mola,
μύλη), and hence sons of Aktor ‘‘the
crusher.” Others have seen in the name
Μολίων an appellative meaning ‘‘the
warlike,” ὁ μετὰ μῶλον ἰών, and Hesych.
explains the word as μαχητής. So also
Eustath.

711. Θρνόεσσα πόλις, ‘‘Sedge-town,”
evidently the same as Θρύον ᾿Αλφειοῖο
πόλιν, B 592,

712. vedrn, ‘‘last,” lit. ‘‘ lowest,” see
I 153.

714. πεδίον μετεκίαθον, a stran
phrase, perhaps to be compared wit
ἔφεπεν κλονέων πεδίον, 496, ““ when they
had chased the plain,” ὦ. 6. every warrior
in it. This is not satisfactory, but
neither is the alternative, ‘‘when they
had passed over” the plain; for this
sense can hardly be got out of μετεκίαθον,
and the words are out of place and very
weak after the mention of the beginning
of the siege.

719. πολεμήια ἔργα, ‘‘ the operations
of war,” seem to be contrasted with the
foray against the country folk which con-
stituted all Nestor’s experience hitherto.

992

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (τὴ)

ἀλλὰ καὶ ὧς ἱππεῦσι μετέπρεπον ἡμετέροισιν, 720
καὶ πεζός περ ἐών, ἐπεὶ ὧς ἄγε νεῖκος ᾿Αθήνη.

ἔστι δέ τις ποταμὸς Μινυήιος εἰς ἅλα βάλλων

ἐγγύθεν ᾿Αρήνης, ὅθι μείναμεν ἠῶ δῖαν

ἱππῆες Πυλίων, τὰ δ᾽ ἐπέρρεεν ἔθνεα πεζῶν.

ἔνθεν πανσυδίῃ σὺν τεύχεσι θωρηχθέντες 725
ἔνδιοι ἱκόμεσθ᾽ ἱερὸν ῥόον ᾿Αλφειοῖο.

ἔνθα Διὶ ῥέξαντες ὑπερμενεῖ ἱερὰ καλά,

ταῦρον δ᾽ ᾿Αλφειῷ, ταῦρον δὲ Ἰ]οσειδάωνι,

αὐτὰρ ᾿Αθηναίῃ γλαυκώπιδι βοῦν ἀγελαίην,

δόρπον ἔπειθ᾽ ἑλόμεσθα κατὰ στρατὸν ἐν τελέεσσεν 780
καὶ κατεκοιμήθημεν ἐν ἔντεσιν οἷσιν ἕκαστος

ἀμφὶ ῥοὰς ποταμοῖο.

ἀτὰρ μεγάθυμοι ᾽Επειοὶ

ἀμφίσταντο δὴ ἄστυ διαῤῥαῖσαι μεμαῶτες.

ἀλλά σφι προπάροιθε φάνη μέγα ἔργον “Apnos:

εὖτε γὰρ ἠέλιος φαέθων ὑπερέσχεθε γαίης, 785
συμφερόμεσθα μάχῃ Διί τ᾽ εὐχόμενοι καὶ ᾿Αθήνῃ.

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ Πυλίων καὶ ᾿Ε'πειῶν ἔπλετο νεῖκος,

πρῶτος ἐγὼν ἕλον ἄνδρα, κόμισσα δὲ μώνυχας ἵππους,
Μούλιον αἰχμητήν" γαμβρὸς δ᾽ ἦν Αὐγείαο,

πρεσβυτάτην δὲ θύγατρ᾽ εἶχε ξανθὴν ᾿Αγαμήδην, 740
ἣ τόσα φάρμακα ἤδη, ὅσα τρέφει εὐρεῖα χθών.

τὸν μὲν ἐγὼ προσιόντα βάλον χαλκήρεϊ δουρί,

ἤριπε δ᾽ ἐν κονίῃσιν" ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἐς δίφρον ὀρούσας

στῆν ῥα μετὰ προμάχοισιν.

ἀτὰρ μεγάθυμοι ’Ezrevot

/
ἔτρεσαν ἄλλυδις ἄλλος, ἐπεὶ ἴδον ἄνδρα πεσόντα 745
>
ἡγεμόν᾽ ἱππήων, ὃς ἀριστεύεσκε μάχεσθαι.

722. βάλλων, ‘‘emptying,” a unique
in H., but imitated by Ap. Rhodius.

724. Gréppeev, ‘“‘flowed up” to us.
The best MSS. read ἑπέρρεον, but the
singular is to be preferred, on account
of the F of Fé@vea, which is nowhere
else neglected.

726. ἔνδιοι, at mid-day; see Merry
and R. on 6 450.

729. For ἀγελαίην Townl. has ἀγελείῃ,
a reading which is worth consideration.
In any case it would scem as though
ἀγελαίην contained an allusion to this
familiar name of Athene.

730 = H 380. Zenod. read δεῖπνον
for δόρπον.

733. On account of the F of Fdoru,
Bekker conj. ἀμφέσταν δή (cf. Σ 233),

Christ Fdcru δὴ ἀμφίσταντο. διαῤῥαῖσαι,
so AD, vulg. διαπραθέειν.

734. προπάροιθε, ‘‘ before that came
about.” See on K 476.

735. ἠέλιος φαέθων, an Odyssean phrase
(four times). ὑπερέσχεθε, stood above
theearth. Cf. I 210, » 93.

740. ᾿Αγαμήδην, apparently the Ho-
meric name of Medeia. At all events,
besides the resemblance of names, both
are granddaughters of the Sun (the father
of Augeias) and are famed for their skill
in drugs. Schol. A here gives a short
account of Medcia, ending οἰκήσασα δὲ
αὕτη τὴν πλησίον "Ἤλιδος ᾿Εφυραν πολυ-
φάρμακον ἐποίησεν ἐπονομασθῆναι. This
seems to be an attempt to bring the
two legends into connexion.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (x1)

αὐτὰρ ἐγὼν ἐπόρουσα κελαινῇ λαίλαπι ἶσος,

/ > 9 “ 4 > 9 \ Ψ
πεντήκοντα ὃ ἕλον δίφρους, δύο ὃ ἀμφὶς ἕκαστον
φῶτες ὀδὰξ ἕλον οὖδας ἐμῴ ὑπὸ δουρὶ δαμέντες.
καί νύ κεν ᾿Ακτορίωνε Μολίονε παῖδ᾽ ἀλάπαξα,
εἰ μή σφωε πατὴρ εὐρὺ κρείων ἐνοσίχθων
ἐκ πολέμου ἐσάωσε καλύψας ἠέρι πολλῇ.
ἔνθα Ζεὺς Πυλίοισι μέγα κράτος ἐγγνάλιξεν"

4 ς ἢ A , /
τόφρα yap οὖν ἑπόμεσθα διὰ σπιδέος πεδίοιο
κτείνοντές T αὐτοὺς ἀνά T ἔντεα καλὰ λέγοντες,
wv > 9 / 4 ,
ὄφρ᾽ ἐπὶ Βουπρασίου πολυπύρου βήσαμεν ἵππους
πέτρης T ᾿᾽Ωλενίης, καὶ ᾿Αλεισίου ἔνθα κολώνη
κέκληται, ὅθεν αὖτις ἀπέτραπε λαὸν ᾿Αθήνη.
Μ > ΜΝ 4 / 9 N 3
ἔνθ᾽ ἄνδρα κτείνας πύματον λίπον: αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχαιοὶ
dp ἀπὸ Βουπρασίοιο ἸΠὐλονδ᾽ ἔχον ὠκέας ἵππους,
᾽ 3 3 4 a \ / > 9 a
πάντες δ᾽ εὐχετόωντο θεῶν Διὶ Νέστορί τ᾽ ἀνδρῶν.

393

750

755

760

e » Ν .ν »» ’
ὧς ἔον, εἴ ποτ᾽ ἔον γε, μετ ἀνδράσιν.

αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς

σι [οὶ ,

οἷος τῆς ἀρετῆς ἀπονήσεται" ἢ TE μιν οἴω
πολλὰ μετακλαύσεσθαι, ἐπεί κ᾿ ἀπὸ λαὸς ὄληται.
ὦ πέπον, ἢ μὲν σοί γε Μενοίτιος ὧδ᾽ ἐπέτελλεν 765
A a” ae > 9 Φθ [4 "A , ,
ἤματι τῷ, ὅτε σ᾽ ἐκ Φθίης ᾿Αγαμέμνονι πέμπεν.

A \ 47 > Ν a 3 7
νῶι δὲ ἔνδον ἐόντες, ἐγὼ καὶ δῖος ᾿Οδυσσεύς,

748. ἀμφίς, one on each side οὗ each
chariot. Cf. 634, the only other case
where ἀμφίς precedes the acc. governed
by it. In both passages it has of course
supplanted an original ἀμφὶ βέκαστον.

750. ἀλάπαξα, only here of slaying
single men ; elsewhere always of destroy-
ing towns or embattled ranks.

751. εὐρὺ κρείων is elsewhere used
only of Agamemnon.

754. διὰ σπιδέος, so AC with Zenod. ;
δι’ domdéos Ar. and the other MSS.
The latter reading is explained to mean
either “round like a shield’ or “ covered
with shields” (thrown away by the
fugitives); both of which are absurd.
Hesych. explains omdéos to mean “wide.”
For speculations as to its etymology see
Curtius, 2. p. 713, Clemm in Curt. δέ,
viii. 116.

756. See B 615-7, from which it ap-
pears that Buprasion is a region, and
the hill of Aleision and the Olenian rock
localities on its boundaries. If how-
ever these are identical with the later
Alesiaion and Olenos, the poet is clearly
ignorant of the real geography ; as these
two places lay in the extreme S. and

extreme N.E. of Elis respectively. It
would seem therefore that he has merely
taken the names from the catalogue,
which must then be older than the
present episode.

757. ἔνθα κέκληται, sc. ‘‘ where is the
hill which is called the hill of A.;” a
pregnant expression hardly to be paral-
eled in H., but not unfamiliar in later
Greek (ἔνθα κλήζεται οὑμὸς Κιθαιρών, Soph.
O. Τ. 1452, etc.)

161. εὐχετόωντο, gave glory; see H
298.

762. ὧς tov εἴ ποτ᾽ Lov ye, see on I
180. αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεύς seems to be the
catchword from 664, with which we re-
enter the original stream of narrative.

763. τῆς, so all MSS.: but there can
be no doubt that the right reading is
hs, cf. P 25 ἧς ἤβης ἀπόνητο. οἷος ἀπο-
γήσεται, will have the profit to himself
—an expression immediately corrected ;
‘*(nay, no profit; on the contrary) he
will weep tears of penitence.” pera-
gives the idea of penitence through that
of ‘‘ after” as in μεταμελεῖσθαι, etc.

767. Aristophanes and Ar. athetized
from this line to 785, on the ground

994

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Δ (xt)

πάντα μάλ᾽ ἐν μεγάροις ἠκούομεν, ὡς ἐπέτελλεν.
Πηλῆος δ᾽ ἱκόμεσθα δόμους ἐὺ ναιετάοντας
λαὸν ἀγείροντες κατ᾽ ᾿Αχαιέδα πουλυβότειραν. 770
ἔνθα δ᾽ ἔπειθ᾽ ἥρωα Μενοίτιον εὕρομεν ἔνδον
ἠδὲ σέ, πὰρ δ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆα" γέρων δ᾽ ἱππηλάτα ἸΙηλεὺς
πίονα μηρί᾽ ἔκαιε βοὸς Aci τερπικεραύνῳ
3. α 2 μ »» Ν , Ν
αὐλῆς ἐν χόρτῳ, ἔχε δὲ χρύσειον ἄλεισον

> / e a
σπένδων αἴθοπα οἶνον ἐπ αἰθομένοις ἱεροῖσιν.

σφῶι μὲν ἀμφὶ βοὸς ἕπετον κρέα, νῶι δ᾽ ἔπειτα
στῆμεν ἐνὶ προθύροισι" ταφὼν δ᾽ ἀνόρουσεν ᾿Αχιλλεύς,
ἐς δ᾽ ἄγε χειρὸς ἑλών, κατὰ δ᾽ ἑδριάασθαι ἄνωγεν,

, / > 9 / cu ’ , 3 [4
ξείνιά T εὖ παρέθηκεν, ἅ τε ξείνοις θέμις ἐστίν.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ τάρπημεν ἐδητύος ἠδὲ ποτῆτος, 780
9 > N 0 4 4 > wv 9 ἔπ θ
ἥρχον ἔγω μύθοιο, κελεύων ὕμμ ἂμ ἐἔπεσθαι"
σφὼ δὲ μάλ᾽ ἠθέλετον, τὼ δ᾽ ἄμφω πόλλ᾽ ἐπέτελλον.

A \ e “ 3 / > 9 A
Πηλεὺς μὲν ᾧ παιδὶ γέρων ἐπέτελλ, Αχιλῆι
Ἁ

αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν καὶ ὑπείροχον ἔμμεναι ἄλλων"
σοὶ δ᾽ αὖθ᾽ ὧδ᾽ ἐπέτελλε Μενοίτιος ΓΑκτορος vids: 785
“ réxvov ἐμόν, γενεῇ μὲν ὑπέρτερός ἐστιν ᾿Αχιλλεύς,
πρεσβύτερος δὲ σύ ἐσσι" Bin δ᾽ ὅ γε πολλὸν ἀμείνων.

that the composition is prosaic; that
they are inconsistent with the charge of
Peleus to his son in I 254; that Peleus
here ws εἴδωλον σπένδει, leaving to his
son all the duties of hospitality. Still
more serious objections are that ὧδε in
765 is too far separated from the words
to which it refers in 786; and that
784 appears also in Z 208, the repetition
of such a line not being like Homer.
The athetesis thus is quite justified ;
though perhaps it ought not to include
767-8. νῶι δὲ ἔνδον, so all MSS. ; vulg.
νῶι δέ τ᾿. But the hiatus is not very
uncommon after the first foot ; see Knos,
de Dig. Hom. p. 47, and compare E
728.

770. πονλυβότειραν, so AD; the epi-
thet is elsewhere applied only to χθών.
The rest give the usual καλλιγύναικα.

771, The reason which made Menoi-
tios an inmate of Peleus’ house is given
in Ψ 85.

773. ἕκαιε, 80 Ar.; MSS. &xne, which is
obviouslyinferior. τερπικεραύνῳ, “hurler
of the thunderbolt,” from τερπ- = τρεπ-
by metathesis, root tark, Vergil’s ‘‘ qui
fulmina forget.” This explanation,
given by G. Meyer in Curtius S¢é. vii.

180, is far preferable to the ordinary
‘*rejoicing in the thunderbolt.” There
is no other instance in Homer of such a
‘‘subjective” epithet of a god ; ἐοχέαιρα,
which has been compared, is of course
from xéw, not χαίρω. Meyer further
points out that if τερπι- came from
réprw it should mean ‘‘making glad the
thunderbolt.” Cf. H. 6. 8 124 ὃ.

774. χόρτῳ, the enclosed space of the
court where stood the altar of Ζεὺς “Ep-
κειος. ἄλεισον, else only in 0 and Od. ;
the exact meaning of the word is un-
certain.

775. Doderlein is probably right in
taking ἐπί to mean ‘‘ with,” ‘‘in addi-
tion to”; as the practice was to pour
libations not on the altar, but on the

round.

776. ἀμφὶ Srerov, were ‘‘ treating,”
preparing for the meal. For this form
of the 2d person dual in historic tenses
see Η. G. § 5 ad fin., and note on © 448.
Zenod. read ἠθελέτην in 782, and there-
fore no doubt ἑπέτην here.

779. ξείνοις θέμις ἐστίν, sc. παραθεῖ-
ναι. Note the short form of the dat. pl.

786. γενεῇ here means ‘‘descent” as
son of a goddess, not “‘age” as in I 58.

TAIAAO® A (σι)

395

> \
ἀλλ᾿ εὖ οἱ φάσθαι πυκινὸν ἔπος ἠδ᾽ ὑποθέσθαι
e , 9
καί οἱ σημαίνειν" ὁ δὲ πείσεται εἰς ἀγαθόν περ.

ὧς ἐπέτελλ᾽ ὁ γέρων, σὺ δὲ λήθεαι. ἀλλ᾽ ἔτι καὶ νῦν

790

ταῦτ᾽ εἴποις ᾿Αχιλῆι δαΐφρονι, αἴ κε πίθηται.
7 ᾽ 40.) v ͵ e A / \ > +
tis δ᾽ 010, εἴ κέν οἱ σὺν δαίμονι θυμὸν opivats

παρειπών;

ἀγαθὴ δὲ παραίφασίς ἐστιν ἑταίρου.

εἰ δέ τινα φρεσὶν har θεοπροπίην ἀλεείνει

ld lA e \ \ > 4 , 4
καί τινά οἱ πὰρ Ζηνὸς ἐπέφραδε πότνια μήτηρ,

795

ἀλλὰ σέ περ προέτω, ἅμα δ᾽ ἄλλος λαὸς ἑπέσθω
Μυρμιδόνων, αἴ κέν τι φόως Δαναοῖσι γένηαι"
καί τοι τεύχεα καλὰ δότω πολεμόνδε φέρεσθαι,
αἴ κέ σε τῷ ἴσκοντες ἀπόσχωνται πολέμοιο

Τρῶες, ἀναπνεύσωσι δ᾽ ἀρήιοι υἷες ᾿Αγαιῶν
β 7 xX

800

/ 3. ἡ 4? 9 4 ,
τειρόμενοι" ὀλίγη δέ τ ἀνάπνευσις πολέμοιο.
a 3 “ , A
peta δέ κ᾽ ἀκμῆτες κεκμηότας ἄνδρας ἀυτῇ
ΝΜ aA 99
ὦσαισθε προτὶ ἄστυ νεῶν ἄπο Kal κλισιάων.
Φ 4 A > \ ») \ A Ν
as φάτο, τῷ ὃ ἄρα θυμὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ὄρινεν,

βῆ δὲ θέειν παρὰ νῆας ἐπ᾽ Αἰακίδην ᾿Αχιλῆα.

80ὅ

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ κατὰ νῆας ᾿Οδυσσῆος θείοιο
ἷξε θέων Πάτροκλος, ἵνα σφ᾽ ἀγορή τε θέμις τε

789. σημαίνειν, to give the word of
command, see A 289. This is hardly
consistent with Phoinix’ claim to the
same position in I 442. εἰς ἀγαθόν περ,
‘*for his own good,” as we say. Cf. I
102.

792. ὀρίναις : this form of aor. opt. is
very rare in the 2d and 3d sing.; ὃ 547
is the only other instance of the 2d.
G. Hermann and La R. conj. ὀρίνῃς,
comparing O 403, where Patroklos re-

eats the words of Nestor, using ὀρίνω.

ee however ~ 119, and L. Lange, EI,
507.

794-803 = II 36-45. Fick urges with
much force that the lines are interpolated
here; they lose all their grace in the
other passage if, instead of coming from
Patroklos’ own chivalrous thought, they
are merely repeated by rote like a lesson.

795. καί τινα, ‘‘and such a prophecy
has been declared to him,” a simple case
of parataxis where, in later Greek, an
explicative relative clause would rather
have been added.

799. ἴσκοντες only here (= Π 41) and
δ 279, else always éloxew; hence Ar.
read eloxovres, a very unlikely form, as
even Herodianus remarks. ἴσκω is ap-

parently for Flx-oxw, root Fix of ἔοικα,
ete. Γ 197.

801. repdpevor goes closely with dva-
avevowot, ‘‘may have pause from toil.”

802-3 were athetized by Ar. as being
more in place in II 44-5, where the Tro-
jans have been fighting a long battle at
the ships. But there is little reason for
selecting this couplet only for condem-
nation; it should keep company with
the preceding eight lines.

806. κατά, over against. The ships of
Odysseus were in the centre of the camp ;
see 1. 5. In H 383 the ἀγορή is held at
the ship of Agamemnon, a more likely
place.

807. θέμις, the giving of dooms. Cf.
¢ 112, τοῖσιν δ᾽ ofr’ ἀγοραὶ βουληφόροι
οὔτι θέμιστες. For the half local use we
may compare the Attic ψῆφος = the place
of voting, Eur. I. T. 945, πεσσοί, Med.
68, τυρός = cheese-market, and so on;
but there does not seem to be any close
analogy in H. For the common altar of
the camp see 6 249. ἥην, a form recur-
ring only in Od., and perhaps a mistake
for εν ; Curtius in S¢. i. ὁ 290-4, H. 6.
§ 12.

996

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (xr)

ν᾽ A \ , a 9 7 /
ἤην, τῇ δὴ Kat σφι θεῶν ἐτετεύχατο βωμοί,
ἔνθα οἱ Εὐρύπυλος βεβλημένος ἀντεβόλησεν,

διογενὴς ᾿Εναιμονίδης, κατὰ μηρὸν ὀιστῷ,

810

σκάξων ἐκ πολέμου" κατὰ δὲ νότιος ῥέεν ἱδρὼς
ὦμων καὶ κεφαλῆς, ἀπὸ δ᾽ ἕλκεος ἀργαλέοιο
/ 4 , \ ” 9
αἷμα μέλαν κελάρυξε, νόος ye μὲν ἔμπεδος ἦεν.
Ἁ \ 3QN Ν Ν e/
τὸν δὲ ἰδὼν ᾧκτειρε Μενοιτίου ἄλκιμος vi0s,

fe) 9 ’ v / 7
καί p ὀλοφυρόμενος ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"

815

“ ἃ δειλοί, Δαναῶν ἡγήτορες ἠδὲ μέδοντες,

ὡς ἄρ᾽ ἐμέλλετε τῆλε φίλων καὶ πατρίδος αἴης
ἄσειν ἐν Τροίῃ ταχέας κύνας ἀργέτι δημῷ.

ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε μοι τόδε εἰπέ, διοτρεφὲς Εὐρύπυλ᾽ ἥρως

we» , , a »9 ,
7) Pp ΕΤ Tou σχήσουσι πελωριον Exrop Ayatoi,

820

ἢ ἤδη φθίσονται ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ δουρὶ δαμέντες."
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ Εὐρύπυλος βεβλημένος ἀντίον ηὔδα"
“οὐκέτι, διογενὲς ΠΠατρόκλεις, ἄλκαρ ᾿Αχαιῶν
ΚΝ 3 > 9 / /
ἔσσεται, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν νηυσὶ peraivyow πεσέονται.

e \ A 4 sd 4 4 Ν
οἱ μὲν γὰρ δὴ πάντες, ὅσοι πάρος ἦσαν ἄριστοι,

825

3 ’ / > 4
ἐν νηυσὶν κέαται βεβλημένοι qurapevol τε

\ Ψ T 4 . -" δὲ θέ ΝΜ > 7
χερσὶν ὕπο Τρώων" τῶν δὲ σθένος ὄρννται αἰεί.
λλ᾽ > Av Ἧ \ 4 ΝΜ 3 ὶ σι
ἀλλ ἐμὲ μὲν σὺ σάωσον ἄγων ἐπὶ νῆα μέλαιναν,

‘a » » » 9 / > 5 ? a ») \
μηροῦ δ᾽ ἔκταμ ὀιστὸν, ἀπ᾿ αὐτοῦ δ᾽ αἷμα κελαινὸν

vit ὕδατι λιαρῷ, ἐπὶ δ᾽ ἤπια φάρμακα πάσσε

880

ἐσθλά, τά σε προτί φασιν ᾿Αχιλλῆος δεδιδάχθαι,
ὃν Χείρων ἐδίδαξε, δικαιότατος Κενταύρων.
ἰητροὶ μὲν γὰρ Ἰ]οδαλείριος ἠδὲ Μαχάων,

809. See 583 for the wounding of
Eurypylos.

813. ye μέν, ‘“‘however,” ‘‘still his
spirit was unshaken’’; so B 708, etc., in
later Greek γε μήν.

817. ὧς dpa, like οὕτω δή B 158, etc.;
“thus then ye were destined.” Or we
might take ws as a simple exclamation,
‘* how are ye destined !”’

818. for the more usual ἀργῆτι,
‘* white,” as Φ 127.

820. σχήσουσι, will sustain, resist
the attack of Hector; so M 166, but
σχήσεσθαι in P 639.

821. ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ δουρί, see on T’ 436.

823. ἄλκαρ, defence, cf. E 644. For
824 see on 311, I 235; the subject of
mecéovra seems to be ᾿Αχαιοί. Ar. how-
ever took it to be Τρῶες. 826 = 659.

831. προτί goes with ᾿Αχιλλῆος : the

insertion of the verb between preposition
and case is very unusual. For δεδιδάχθαι
Zenod. read δεδάασθαι (or -αάσθαι), as π
316. This looks much more like a
Homeric form, and perhaps should be
adopted in the text.

832. δικαιότατος means, in modern
phrase, ‘the most civilized,’’ most con-
versant with δίκη, the traditional order
of society. So the Cyclops in ¢ 175 is
ov δίκαιος as opposed to φιλόξεινοςς. The
Centaurs are wild animals, φῆρες, A 268.
For Cheiron cf. A 219, where he teaches
Asklepios.

833. ἰητροὶ μέν... τὸν μέν, an ana-
coluthon; ὁ μὲν κεῖται should have
followed, in order to be regular, as ὃ
δέ does in the second clause, 836. Cf.
I 356-61, B 353, for similar anacolutha.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ A (zt)

397

\ \ > ὶ λ ’ 2 er 4
Tov μὲν ἐνὶ κλισίῃσιν ὀΐομαι ἕλκος ἔχοντα
χρηίξοντα καὶ αὐτὸν ἀμύμονος ἰητῆρος 835
a e 3 >>
κεῖσθαι, ὁ δ᾽ ἐν πεδίῳ Τρώων μένει ὀξὺν “Apna.
\ δ᾽ 4 “ Μ / 4 e/
τὸν ὃ αὗτε προσέειπε Μενοιτίου ἄλκιμος υἱός"

ες a > wi>w , Μ
πῶς T ἄρ ἔοι τάδε ἔργα;

τί ῥέξομεν, Ἐὐρύπυλ᾽ ἥρως;

ἔρχομαι, ὄφρ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆι δαΐφρονι μῦθον ἐνίσπω,
ὃν Νέστωρ ἐπέτελλε Γερήνιος, οὖρος ᾿Αχαιῶν" 840
4 3 40.) a ’ , 33
GAN οὐδ ὡς περ σεῖο μεθήσω τειρομένοιο.
e \ / . \ Μ ’ A

ἡ καὶ ὑπὸ στέρνοιο λαβὼν aye ποιμένα λαῶν
3 / 4 VY 3 ON e 4 /
és κλισίην" θεράπων δὲ ἰδὼν ὑπέχενε βοείας.
ἔνθα μιν ἐκτανύσας ἐκ μηροῦ τάμνε μαχαίρῃ
ὀξὺ βέλος περιπευκές, aw αὐτοῦ δ᾽ αἷμα κελαινὸν 845
vit ὕδατι λιαρῷ, ἐπὶ δὲ pilav βάλε πικρὴν

A 3 4 Ψ e e 4

χερσὶ διατρίψας, ὀδυνήφατον, ἥ οἱ ἁπάσας
” > 9 4 \ \ > 9 4 ᾽
ἔσχ ὀδύνας" τὸ μὲν ἕλκος ἐτέρσετο, παύσατο δ᾽ αἷμα.

835. χρηΐζοντα, needing, else only in
Od. (three times).

838. πῶς τ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔοι, how can these
things be? For the potential opt. with-
out ἄν cf. A 318, Καὶ 247. ᾿ Zenod. read
ἔην. pone, prob. a dubitative subj.

841, μεθήσω, lit. “1 will refrain from
thee”; a curious expression. We have
μεθιέναι ἀλκῆς and πολέμοιο, but not else-
where a personal gen. Zenod. read σεῦ
ἀμελήσω, which Arist. regarded as less
poetical. wep is not elsewhere found
after οὐδ᾽ ds.

842. ὑπὸ στέρνοιο λαβών, z.¢. he put
his arm round his waist to support him
as he walked.

845. περιπευκές, very sharp, only
here, but cf. éxerevxés A 51. αὐτοῦ,
**it,” sc. μηροῦ.

846. ῥίζαν πικρήν, acc. to Schol. A
either the Achillea (‘‘ yarrow ’’) or Aris-
tolochia, both plants being used as ano-
dynes in Greek medicine.

847. ὀδυνήφατον, ‘‘pain-killing,” E
401.

398

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ M (x11)

IAIAAO® M.

Τειχομαχία.

ὡς ὁ μὲν ἐν κλισίησι Μενοιτίου ἄλκιμος υἱὸς
lar’ Εὐρύπυλον βεβλημένον" οἱ δὲ μάχοντο

᾿Αργεῖοι καὶ Τρῶες ὁμιλαδόν.

οὐδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔμελλεν

τάφρος ἔτι σχήσειν Δαναῶν καὶ τεῖχος ὕπερθεν

M

With this book we begin the history
of the battle at the wall, which continues
through N, =, and O. As has already
been intimated, the original poem must
have contained some account of an
attack upon the ships. Whether or no
the wall played a part in this it is now
not in our power to say; nor can we
with any plausibility enucleate the
original ἐπὶ νηυσὶ μάχη from the later
additions in which it is probably
embedded.

Like other portions of the Iliad which
appear to be additions to the original nar-
rative, M contains some noble speeches
and effective single scenes, combined
with difficulties in the connecting nar-
rative. Of the former, attention may

articularly be drawn to the words of
Rarpedon to Glaukos (310-28) and of
Hector to Polydamas (231-50), which
are among the passages of Homer which
have sunk deepest into the minds of

men. “

The difficulties begin with the exor-
dium. The account of the destruction
of the wall differs in several points from
the genuine Homeric style. The men-
tion of #ulde is quite unlike anything
in either Iliad or Odyssey, where the
heroes, though superior in strength to
οἷοι viv βροτοὶ εἰσίν, are after all only
men; demigods do not appear before
Hesiod. The emendation of line 23,
ἐν κονίῃ καὶ “Apne θοῶν, proposed by Axt
and accepted by Christ, is entirely arbi-

trary, and no explanation of the sup-
posed corruption is forthcoming. More-
over, the intimate local knowledge of
N.W. Asia is, as has been already
remarked, a sign of later origin. Be-
sides, the mention of a time later than
the war is not like anything else in the
Iliad; where such future events are
alluded to, they are put into the mouth
of a god as prophecies, and not related
by the poet in his own person. Hence
the whole passage (3-33) must be counted
among the later accretions to the poem.

The next stumbling-block is the de-
scription of the five-fold division of the
Trojan army (86-107). This is forgotten
immediately, and never influences the
story in any way; the ascription of all
the allies to a single division contradicts
the passages when they are spoken of
as more numerous than all the Trojans
(see B 1380). It would seem that we
have here a trace of the hand which has
so often interpolated into the speeches of
Nestor untimely displays of tactical
erudition. So again the episode of Asios
(110-174), though announced with pecu-
liar solemnity, leads to nothing what-
ever, and is simply left without an end-

ing.

The conservative Nitzsch has thrown
considerable doubt on the whole episode
of Sarpedon (290-429). From 437-8 it
would seem that Hector is meant, as
we should expect, to have the glory of
breaking through the fortification; yet
the first breach is made by Sarpedon,
who moreover in II 558 is described in

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ M (x11) 399
εὐρύ, TO ποιήσαντο νεῶν ὕπερ, ἀμφὶ δὲ τάφρον 5

ἤλασαν, οὐδὲ θεοῖσι δόσαν κλειτὰς ἑκατόμβας,
ὄφρα σφιν νῆάς τε θοὰς καὶ ληΐδα πολλὴν
ἐντὸς ἔχον ῥύοιτο" θεῶν δ᾽ ἀέκητι τέτυκτο
’ , \ ” \ , ” 9
ἀθανάτων" τὸ καὶ οὔ τι πολὺν χρόνον ἔμπεδον ἦεν.
ὄφρα μὲν “Ἕκτωρ ζωὸς ἔην καὶ μήνι᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς 10
καὶ ἸΙριάμοιο ἄνακτος ἀπόρθητος πόλις ἔπλεν,
’ \ , a 3 A ΝΜ
τόφρα δὲ καὶ μέγα τεῖχος ᾿Αχαιῶν ἔμπεδον ἦεν.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ κατὰ μὲν Τρώων θάνον ὅσσοι ἄριστοι,
πολλοὶ δ᾽ ᾿Αργείων οἱ μὲν δάμεν, οἱ δὲ λίποντο,
, 7 / A 3 a
πέρθετο δὲ ΤΙριάμοιο πόλις δεκάτῳ ἐνιαυτῷ, 15
᾿Αργεῖοι δ᾽ ἐν νηυσὶ φίλην és πατρίδ᾽ ἔβησαν,
δὴ τότε μητιόωντο Ποσειδάων καὶ ᾿Απόλλων
τεῖχος ἀμαλδῦναι ποταμῶν μένος εἰσαγαγόντες,

the very words here used of Hector, as
he ὅς πρῶτος ἐσήλατο τεῖχος ᾿Αχαιῶν.
Moreover both the beginning and the
end of the episode are awkward ; τότε
γε in 290 is out of place, as the actual
assault has not been delivered, and in
430 the Trojans suddenly take the place
of the Lykians as the attacking party,
without a word to explain the transition.

It has further been remarked with
some truth that the numerous similes,
though beautiful in themselves, are often
disproportionately elaborate, and lead
up to points which are almost in the
nature of an anticlimax. This is par-
ticularly the case with 41-50, but several
other instances may be noticed.

Among minor difficulties may further
be mentioned the obscurity which hangs
over the question of the gates in the
Greek wall. The narrative of the Iliad
never distinctly implies the existence of
more than one, the plural πύλαι bein
regularly used of a single gate 5 an
Aristarchos stoutly maintained that this
is the conception of the present book.
But the general course of the narrative
seems clearly to imply that the attack
of Asios is made at a different point from
that of Hector, and therefore that there
were at least two gates. We can only
leave the question in the doubt from
which we might have expected the poet
to relieve us.

3. ὁμιλαδόν, in throngs ; the battle is
no longer confined to the πρόμαχοι, but
all the masses of men on both sides are

engaged.

4. ὕπερθεν, as in the phrase πόδες καὶ
χεῖρες ὕπερθεν.

6. οὐδὲ δόσαν expresses paratactically
what we should render by ‘‘ without
giving”; it explains why the wall ovx
ἔμελλε σχήσειν. Compare with this the
similar thought in H 443-463.

12. ἔμπεδον Fev seems hardly con-
sistent with phrases like those of 399 or
O 361, ἔρειπε δὲ τεῖχος ᾿Αχαιῶν. Hence
Schol. A (Porphyrios) mentions an ex-

lanation which gave ἔμπεδον here the
iteral meaning ἐν πεδίῳ κείμενον καὶ μὴ
ἁλίπλοον. It has also been objected that
ὄφρα... pve ᾿Αχιλλεύς implies that
the poet of these lines had before him a
legend which gave a much longer dura-
tion of the μῆνις than the few days
ascribed to it by the Iliad, which would
be so short a life for the wall as to afford
no proper contrast with the picture of
its subsequent destruction. ut it is
clear that the μῆνις is mentioned as the
distinguishing mark of the period which
required the building of the wall; it is
the terminus a quo of the wall, just as
the sacking of Troy mentioned in the
next line is the terminus ad quem.

14. There is an evident change of
thought here ; the line begins as though
it were to be πολλοὶ δ᾽ ᾿Αργείων δάμεν,
and then, as in ὃ 495 πολλοὶ μὲν γὰρ τῶν
γε δάμεν, πολλοὶ δὲ Alrovro, the thought
of those who fell brings up that of the
large number who, unlike the Trojan
chiefs, survived.

18. ἀμαλδῦναι, see on H 463.

400

TAIAAOZ M (x11)

ὅσσοι ἀπ᾽ ᾿Ιδαίων ὀρέων ἅλαδε προρέουσιν,
Ῥῆσός θ᾽ “Ἑπτάπορός te Κάρησός τε Ῥοδίος τε 20
Γρήνικός τε καὶ Αἴσηπος δῖός τε Σκάμανδρος
καὶ Σιμόεις, ὅθι πολλὰ βοάγρια καὶ τρυφάλειαι
κάππεσον ἐν κονίῃσι καὶ ἡμιθέων γένος avdpav:
τῶν πάντων ὁμόσε στόματ᾽ ἔτραπε Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων,
4 na 2} σι δ ς ἢ @ > ΜΝ A
ἐννῆμαρ δ᾽ és τεῖχος tes ῥόον" ὗε δ᾽ ἄρα Ζεὺς 25
συνεχές, ὄφρα xe θᾶσσον ἁλίπλοα τείχεα θείη.
αὐτὸς δ᾽ ἐννοσίγαιος ἔχων χείρεσσι τρίαιναν
ἡγεῖτ᾽, ἐκ δ᾽ ἄρα πάντα θεμείλια κύμασι πέμπεν
φιτρῶν καὶ λάων, τὰ θέσαν μογέοντες ᾿Αχαιοί,
λεῖα δ᾽ ἐποίησεν παρ᾽ ἀγάρροον “Ἑλλήσποντον. 80
αὗτις δ᾽ ἠιόνα μεγάλην ψαμάθοισι κάλυψεν,

a ? / \ + eg ’
τεῖχος ἀμαλδύνας" ποταμοὺς δ᾽ ἔτρεψε νέεσθαι

\ e/ ’ Ψ 4
Kap ῥόον, ἧ περ πρόσθεν tev καλλίρροον ὕδωρ.

ὡς ἄρ᾽ ἔμελλον ὄπισθε ἸΤοσειδάων καὶ ᾿Απόλλων
θησέμεναι" τότε δ᾽ ἀμφὶ μάχη ἐνοπή τε δεδήειν 85
τεῖχος ἐύδμητον, κανάχιξε δὲ δούρατα πύργων

20. Compare Hesiod, Theog. 340-5,
where all these rivers, excepting Karesos,
are named among the offspring of
Okeanos and Tethys. Aisepos, Skaman-
dros, and Simoeis (v. E 774, Z 4) are
the only three which reappear in Homer.
The Granikos is of course famous, but
those named in 20 are quite unknown.

22. ὅθι applies only to the last two
named, βοάγρια (only here and π 296),
shields of ox-hide, like βοείη and βοῦς ;
lit. ‘‘the spoil of an ox” (ἄγρη). So
ἀνδράγρια & 509, warrior’s spoils. Cf.
Verg. Aen. v. 100, “ubi tot Simois cor-
repta sub undis Scuta virum galeasque
et fortia corpora volvit.”

23. ἡμιθέων, a word which is not only
ἅπαξ λεγόμενον in Homer, but is totally
inconsistent with his idea of the heroes,
who, though of divine descent and
stronger than men of his own day, are
yet no more than men. The word is
found in Hesiod, Opp. 160, ἀνδρῶν ἡρώων
θεῖον γένος, ot καλέονται ἡμίθεοι, in the
thoroughly un-Homeric passage about
the successive ages of mankind.

25. For ἐννῆμαρ Kallistratos read ὃν
δ᾽ pap, holding it wrong to suppose
that a god would require nine days to
destroy what men had built in one.
Hentze however shews good reasons for
supposing 25-6 to be an interpolation.

ἡγεῖτο then gives the picture of Poseidon
leading the procession of gathered rivers
against the wall ; whereas with the pre-
sent text it lacks significance. Besides
in H 452-3 a reason is given for the
alliance of Apollo and Poseidon in the
destruction, but there is no special
excuse for the interference of Zeus.

26. For the scansion of συνεχές as a
dactyl cf. « 74 (Ar. ouvvexés).

27. The trident as an attribute of

Poseidon occurs elsewhere only in the
Odyssey.
28. ἔκπεμπεν κύμασι, expelled along
the waves of the sea: the dat. is comi-
tative, as in 207, πέτετο πνοιῇς ἀνέμοιο.
H. G. § 144.

29. φιτρῶν and λάων, gen. of material
with θεμείλια.

30. λεῖα, apparently a sort of sub-
stantival use, ‘‘he made smoothness,”
made all smooth ; compare phrases like
οὐκέτι φυκτὰ πέλονται.

33. ev, sc. ἵεσαν, and so Pind. I. i.
25. There are variants, ty (le, as 25)
and ἴεν.

34. For ds ἄρ᾽ ἔμελλον Zenod. read
ὧς ἤμελλον, a form not elsewhere found
in Homer, and called ‘‘ barbarous” by
Ar., though it is sufficiently established
in later poets (from Theognis onwards).

36. Sovpara, beams, not spears, as Ar.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ M (χπ)

βαλλόμεν᾽".

40]

᾿Αργεῖοι δὲ Διὸς μάστιγι δαμέντες

νηυσὶν ἔπι γλαφυρῇσιν ἐελμένοι ἰσχανόωντο,
Ω͂ / \ 4 ’
Exropa δειδιότες, κρατερὸν μήστωρα φόβοιο"
αὐτὰρ ὅ γ᾽, ὡς τὸ πρόσθεν, ἐμάρνατο ἶσος ἀέλλῃ. 40
e 2 wv 95" Μ ’ . 9? 4 “
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἂν ἔν τε κύνεσσι καὶ ἀνδράσι θηρευτῇσιν
κάπριος ἠὲ λέων στρέφεται σθένεϊ βλεμεαίνων"
οἱ δέ τε πυργηδὸν σφέας αὐτοὺς ἀρτύναντες
ἀντίοι ἵστανται καὶ ἀκοντίζουσι θαμειὰς
αἰχμὰς ἐκ χειρῶν" τοῦ δ᾽ οὔ ποτε κυδάλιμον κῆρ 45
“A 3 A 4 ’ 4 wv
ταρβεῖ οὐδὲ φοβεῖται, aynvopin δέ μιν ἔκτα"
ταρφέα τε στρέφεται στίχας ἀνδρῶν πειρητίξων"
ὅππῃ τ᾽ ἰθύσῃ, τῇ τ᾽ εἴκουσι στίχες ἀνδρῶν"
ὧς “Ἕκτωρ ἀν᾽ ὅμιλον ἰὼν εἷλίσσεθ᾽, ἑταίρους

took it (ἐλλείπει ἡ ἐπί, ἵν᾽ ἢ κανάχιζε
δὲ δούρατα ὡς ἐπὶ πύργους βαλλόμενα,
Ariston., a quite untenable interpreta-
tion, based apparently on the use of the
simple gen. after verbs of aiming).

87. Cf. N 812, Διὸς μάστιγι κακῇ
ἐδάμημεν ᾿Αχαιοί. The metaphor ex-
presses the sway which Zeus wields over
the battle, driving the armies backward
and forward as a horse is driven by a
whip—an idea which is more usually
given by the metaphor of pulling wit
arope. So πληγεὶς Θεοῦ μάστιγι, Aesch.
Sept. 608; διπλῇ μάστιγι τὴν “Apns φιλεῖ,
Ag. 642, etc.

88. ἐελμένοι, some MSS. ἐεργμένοι.

89. μήστωρα φόβοιο, Δ 828.

40. For ἐμάρνατο Aristoph. read ἐμαί-
VETO,
41. ὅτ᾽ ἄν followed by the indic.
στρέφεται cannot be right; the old as-
sumption that it is a ‘‘subjunctive with
shortened vowel” is untenable, as the
short vowel occurs only where the in-
dicative is non-thematic ; see H. G. 8
82 ad fin.; Curtius, Vb. ii. 73. Paech
conj. ws δ᾽ ὁπότ᾽, Nauck. ἠύτε δ᾽, Mr.
Monro more ingeniously ws δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ évavra
(but the dative instead of the genitive is
then very strange).

43. πνργηδόν, in scrried ranks, cf. A
334.

44, ἀντίοι, so MSS., Ar. ἀντίον.

46. φοβεῖται must here mean ‘‘ fears,”
in spite of the canon of Ar. that in
Homer it always means ‘‘to flee’; cf. A
544. For the second half of the line cf.

2D

Z 407 δαιμόνιε, φθίσει σε τὸ σὸν μένος,
and II 758 ἑή τέ μιν ὥλεσεν ἀλκή.

47. πειρητίζων takes the acc. only
here; so that it seems very probable
that the line is a faulty adaptation of O
615, καί ῥ᾽ ἔθελεν ῥῆξαι στίχας ἀνδρῶν
πειρητίζων. This line and the next can
hardly be defended; the repetition of
στίχες ἀνδρῶν is very harsh, and the aor.
ἔκτα following the presents according to
the usual practice should mark the end
of the simile (II 753, M 305, P 112, 664,
A 555) (Hentze).

49. MSS. ἐλλίσσεθ᾽ or ἐλίσσεθ᾽, but
εἷλισσεθ᾽ or ἐελίσσεθ᾽ appears to have
been an ancient variant, as Nikanor says
τὸ ἐλίσσετο ἑκατέροις δύναται προσδίδοσ-
θαι, καὶ σημαίνει ἣ τὸ παρεκάλει παρὰ τὸ
λίσσεσθαι ἢ ἐστρέφετο παρὰ τὸ ἑλίσσω ῥῆμα.
He decides in favour of the former, on
account of the awkwardness of the pause
in the fifth foot if we have to join
ἑταίρους with ἐποτρύνων. But this is a
small evil compared with the intolerable
anticlimax of ἐλλίσσετο after so martial
a simile; the more so because, as Mr.
Monro has remarked, there is a precisely
similar rhythm in 44 θαμειὰς | αἰχμὰς ἐκ
χειρῶν, and 51 ἐπ᾽ ἀκρῷ | χείλει ἐφεσ-
taéres. Nauck and Christ read ἐ(ξ)ελίσ-
σεθ' ἑταίρων after Gerhard. εἱλίσσετο of
course gives the required parallel to the
repeated στρέφεται in 42 and 47. Cf.
467, κέκλετο δὲ Τρώεσσιν ἑλιξάμενος καθ᾽
ὅμιλον. Even so it must be admitted
that the simile leads us to expect a far
more direct attack by Hector than is
here described, and the whole passage
iy open to serious doubt.

402

τάφρον ἐποτρύνων διαβαινέμεν.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ M x11.)

οὐδέ οἱ ἵπποι 50

τόλμων ὠκύποδες, μάλα δὲ χρεμέτιζον ἐπ᾽ ἄκρῳ
/ 2 / » δ A ὃ δί ΄
χείλει ἐφεσταότες: ἀπὸ γὰρ δειδίσσετο τάφρος
εὐρεῖ᾽, οὔτ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπερθορέειν σχεδὸν οὔτε περῆσαι
ῥηιδίη" κρημνοὶ γὰρ ἐπηρεφέες περὶ πᾶσαν
ἕστασαν ἀμφοτέρωθεν, ὕπερθεν δὲ σκολόπεσσιν δδ
9 A
ὀξέσιν ἠρήρει, τοὺς ἵστασαν υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν
πυκνοὺς καὶ μεγάλους, δηίων ἀνδρῶν ἀλεωρήν.
ἔνθ᾽ οὔ κεν ῥέα ἵππος ἐύτροχον ἅρμα τιταίνων
3 / Ἁ Ν ’ὔ ? ’
ἐσβαίη, πεζοὶ δὲ μενοίνεον, εἰ τελέουσιν.
δὴ τότε Πουλυδάμας θρασὺν “Ἕκτορα εἶπε παραστάς: 60
“Ἕκτορ τ᾽ ἠδ᾽ ἄλλοι Τρώων ayol ἠδ᾽ ἐπικούρων,
ἀφραδέως διὰ τάφρον ἐλαύνομεν ὠκέας ἵππους.
ς \ fy? 3 ἢ ΄ , 2 » κ᾿
ἡ δὲ μάλ ἀργαλέη περάαν: σκόλοπες γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ
ὀξέες ἑστᾶσιν, ποτὶ δ᾽ αὐτοὺς τεῖχος ᾿Αχαιῶν.
ἔνθ᾽ οὔ πως ἔστιν καταβήμεναι οὐδὲ μάχεσθαι 65
ἱππεῦσι" στεῖνος yap, ὅθι τρώσεσθαι ὀίω.
> \ A \ f \ , ? 4
εἰ μὲν yap τοὺς πάγχυ κακὰ φρονέων ἀλαπάζξει

ὅ8. σχεδόν here is not very easy to
explain; Mr. Monro takes it to mean
‘‘right over,” ‘‘at a bound,” comparin
oxédtos and avrocxédios, ‘‘ immediate,
“ἐ off-hand.” Perhaps it may mean ‘‘in
order,” ‘‘in serried ranks,” lit. ‘‘hold-
ing on” to one another; one here or
there might cross, but only to be separ-
ated from the main body, and attacked
in detail. This is closer to the sense of
‘‘near,” which is elsewhere universal in
Homer. In this case it will go with
both verbs.

54. κρημνοὶ ἐπηρεφέες, overhanging
sides. περὶ πᾶσαν, round all the circuit
of the trench.

55. σκολόπεσσιν, stakes arranged
along the upper edge, so as to prevent
a jumper alighting, like the modern
abattis or chevaux de frise.

56. ἵστασαν, MSS. and Ar. ἔστασαν,
which is taken to be for ἔστησαν, but is
an impossible form. It occurs in other
passages, but in each case with the
variant ἵστασαν, which has rightly been
adopted by edd. (see y 182, also @ 435,
σ 307, B 525, Σ 346). For the imperf.
where we use the pluperf. see H. G. §
73; and also § 72,n.1. Nauck’s conj.
ἤραρον is needless.

59. For ἐσβαίη (get within the circuit)
Zen. and Aristoph. read καββαίη, which

is possible: see on 65. τελέουσιν, future
after historical tense, here only: cf. A
83, σὺ δὲ φράσαι ef με σαώσεις. pevolveov,
only here, the form is else always
μενοινάω. πεζοὶ is to be taken as part
of the predicate, as there is no sharp
distinction between horsemen and foot-
men in Homer; ‘‘they were pondering
i they should accomplish the passage on
oot.”

64. ποτὶ δ᾽ αὐτοὺς, ‘‘coming up to
them ;”" compare H 337. (So AD Schol.
V.: cael. περὶ δ᾽ αὐτούς, which is less
appropriate, though ποτί seems incon-
sistent with the space left between wall
and moat. )

65. Franke and Hentze reject this and
the following line, on the ground that
the difficulty lies not in the descent, but
in the ascent on the opposite side. But
for a chariot the descent of a κρημνὸς
ἐπηρεφής is as serious a matter as the
ascent. The idea seems to be, “‘ we can’t
even get into the trench with horses,
nor, even if we get across, can we fight
on the other side ; for the space between
the wall and the trench 18 a creivos,
too small for chariots.”

66. ἱππεῦσι, Zen. and Aristoph. lrajas.
τρώσεσθαι, ‘‘come to harm,” as in
Herod. τρῶμα = defeat.

67. τούς is the reading of Aristoph.

TAIAAOZ M (σῃ.)

403

᾽
Ζεὺς ὑψιβρεμέτης, Τρώεσσι δὲ ter ἀρήγειν,
> 4 ,) » > rs \ > 7s a /
ἢ τ ἂν ἐγώ γ ἐθέλοιμι Kal αὐτίκα τοῦτο γενέσθαι,
᾽ ᾽
νωνύμνους ἀπολέσθαι ἀπ᾽ “Apyeos ἐνθάδ᾽ ᾿Αχαιούς:" 70
3 / > ς 4 / \ /
εἰ δέ χ ὑποστρέψωσι, παλίωξις δὲ γένηται
ἐκ νηῶν καὶ τάφρῳ ἐνυπλήξωμεν ὀρυκτῇ,
> ss, » κνὶ ».»» )ὼ) ν 2 ,
οὐκέτ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽ ὀίω οὐδ᾽ ἄγγελον ἀπονέεσθαι
wv \ wv e , e 4.» ΄-
ἄψορρον προτὶ ἄστυ ἑλιχθέντων ὑπ᾽ ᾿Αχαιῶν.
᾽
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγεθ᾽, ὡς ἂν ἐγὼ εἴπω, πειθώμεθα πάντες. 75
ἵππους μὲν θεράποντες ἐρυκόντων ἐπὶ τάφρῳ,
2 / \ 4 4
αὐτοὶ δὲ πρυλέες σὺν τεύχεσι θωρηχθέντες
“ >]
Ἕκτορι πάντες ἑπώμεθ᾽ ἀολλέες" αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχαιοὶ
3 4 3 3 4 3 / [4 > 9 fo 33
οὐ μενέουσ᾽, εἰ δή σφιν ὀλέθρου πείρατ᾽ ἐφῆπται.
ὧς φάτο Ἰ]ουλυδάμας, ἅδε δ᾽ “Εκτορι μῦθος ἀπήμων, 80
> 7 > > ἡ \ , 4 a
αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἐξ ὀχέων σὺν τεύχεσιν ἄλτο χαμᾶζε.
A ?
οὐδὲ μὲν ἄλλοι Τρῶες ἐφ᾽ ἵππων ἠγερέθοντο,
ἀλλ᾽ ἀπὸ πάντες ὄρουσαν, ἐπεὶ ἴδον “Ἑκτορα δῖον.
e 4 \ 4 en 3 / 4
ἡνιόχῳ μὲν ἔπειτα ἑῷ ἐπέτελλεν ἕκαστος
“ 4 \ / 3 4 4ΔΟ 3_\ /
ἵππους ev κατὰ κόσμον ἐρυκέμεν αὖθ᾽ ἐπὶ τάφρῳ" 85
οἱ δὲ διαστάντες, σφέας αὐτοὺς ἀρτύναντες,
/
πένταχα κοσμηθέντες ἅμ᾽ ἡγεμόνεσσιν ἕποντο.
ε \ vy 2 of > \ 35 ’ 4
οἱ μὲν ἅμ᾽ ~Extop ἴσαν καὶ ἀμύμονι ἸΙουλυδάμαντι,
of πλεῖστοι καὶ ἄριστοι ἔσαν, μέμασαν δὲ μάλιστα
A ε 4 / > \ ,
τεῖχος ῥηξάμενοι κοίλῃς ἐπὶ νηνσὶ μάχεσθαι. 90

(Schol. A) or Aristarchos (Schol. V):
MSS. δή.

68. Yer’ yev, οὕτως πᾶσαι (i.¢. Ar.
and all the old editions), Did.: MSS.
(exc. L) βούλετ᾽.

69-70 are to be taken parenthetically,
the apodosis to εἰ μέν in 67 being under-
stood, or rather superseded; ‘‘if Zeus
means to destroy them—that is what I
wish to happen at once.” Obviously εἰ
μὲν does not express a condition of his
wishing the enemy destroyed. Cf. A
135-137.

71. ὑποστρέψωσι may be either in-
trans., ‘‘turn against us’’ (A 446), or
“turn us back.” παλίωξις for παλι-ίωξις,
and hence always with long ¢.

72. ἐνιπλήξωμεν, lit. “stumble upon,”
get entrapped Ly, like the birds in x
469 which ἔρκει ἐνιπλήξωσιν. So also O
344. This shews that in 65 he is think-
ing of a battle in the space between the
wall and trench.

74, ἑλιχθέντων, ‘rallied’; for the
order of words cf, B 334. There is no
ground for taking ἐλιχθέντων with some
to mean ‘‘turned back by the Greeks,”
contrary to the regular use of the word.

77. wpvdées, predicate, ‘‘on foot”:
see A 49.

79. welpar’ ἐφῆπται, H 102.

87. For ἕποντο there is a variant
ἕκαστος in A, ἕκαστοι in L; the latter
is mentioned by Nikanor. This of
course must be followed by a comma
instead of a full stop. This division of
the army into five vodies is quite for-
gotten in the following narrative; the
allies, who are here (101) made into a
single division, are elsewhere represented
as far outnumbering the Trojans. It is
probable therefore that 81-107 are an
interpolation.

90. For this line most MSS. of the
inferior class give τεῖχός τε ῥήξειν καὶ

ἐνιπρῆσαι πυρὶ νῆας (from 198).

404

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ M (x11)

καί σφιν Κεβριόνης τρίτος εἵπετο" πὰρ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὄχεσφιν
ἄλλον Κεβριόναο χερείονα κάλλιπεν “Extop.
τῶν δ᾽ ἑτέρων Πάρις ἦρχε καὶ ᾿Αλκάθοος καὶ ᾿Αγήνωρ,
τῶν δὲ τρίτων “ἔλενος καὶ Δηίφοβος θεοειδής,
υἷε δύω ἸΙριάμοιο" τρίτος δ᾽ ἣν “Actos ἥρως, 95
"Actos Ὑρτακίδης, ὃν ᾿Αρίσβηθεν φέρον ἵπποι
αἴθωνες μεγάλοι, ποταμοῦ ἄπο Σελλήεντος"
τῶν δὲ τετάρτων ἦρχεν ἐὺς πάις ᾿Αγχίσαο
Αἰνείας, ἅμα τῷ γε δύω ᾿Αντήνορος vie,
3 , ’ + 9 4 / 4. 40. ) ,
Αρχέλοχος τ ᾿Ακάμας τε, μαάχῆς Ev εἰδότε TAaCNS. 100
Σαρπηδὼν δ᾽ ἡγεῖτο ἀγακλειτῶν ἐπικούρων,
πρὸς δ᾽ ὅλετο Τ'λαῦκον καὶ ἀρήιον ᾿Αστεροπαῖον᾽"
οἱ γάρ οἱ εἴσαντο διακριδὸν εἶναι ἄριστοι
A wv 4 3 3 ’ e + ow Ἁ \ ,
τῶν ἄλλων μετά γ᾽ αὐτόν" ὁ δ᾽ ἔπρεπε καὶ διὰ πάντων.
οἱ δ᾽ ἐπεὶ ἀλλήλους ἄραρον τυκτῇσι βόεσσιν, 106
4 eo? 342λ A ’ ΟΣ ν 33 ν
βάν ῥ᾽ ἰθὺς Δαναῶν λελιημένοι, οὐδ᾽ ἔτ᾽ ἔφαντο
σχήσεσθ᾽, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν νηυσὶ μελαίνῃσιν πεσέεσθαι.
ἔνθ᾽ ἄλλοι Τρῶες τηλεκλειτοί τ᾽ ἐπίκουροι
βουλῇ Πουλυδάμαντος ἀμωμήτοιο πίθοντο"
ἀλλ᾽ οὐχ Ὑρτακίδης ἔθελ᾽ “Actos, ὄρχαμος ἀνδρῶν, 110
αὖθι λιπεῖν ἵππους τε καὶ ἡνίοχον θεράποντα,
3 A \ 3 a / 7 A
ἀλλὰ σὺν αὐτοῖσιν πέλασεν νήεσσι θοῇσιν,
4 0. ““} Ν ἣ e \ a 9 4
νήπιος, οὐδ ap ἐμελλε κακὰς ὑπὸ κῆρας ἀλύξας,
ἵπποισιν καὶ ὄχεσφιν ἀγαλλόμενος παρὰ νηῶν

91. Kebriones was chosen by Hector as
his charioteer in Θ 318. τρίτος : it will
be observed that each division has three
leaders named.

93. ἑτέρων, the second body, as H 420,
etc. With this enumeration compare
the catalogue of the Trojans, B 816-877 ;
the Dardanii there (819-823) seem to
compose the fourth division here. B
838-9 = M 96-7. The leaders of the
second division are not named in the
Catalogue.

101. ἡγεῖτο, so L for ἡγήσατ᾽ of all
other MSS. ; this is probably right, as
the preceding verbs have all been in the
imperf. ; the desire to avoid the legitimate
hiatus in the main caesura has frequently
led to corruptions of this sort, as Ahrens
has pointed out. The aor. would mean,
not ‘‘was in command of,” but ‘‘ put
himself at the head οἵ."

105. βόεσσιν, shields, see H 238.

This seems to indicate a rudimentary
sort of testudo, cf. 86.

106. For οὐδ᾽ ἔτ᾽ MSS. give οὐδέ τ’
(corrected by Barnes).

107. The subject of σχήσεσθαι is prob-
ably, from the use of ἔφαντο, Δαναούς ;
they fancied that the Greeks would no
longer hold their ground. But there is
an ambiguity as usual; it may mean
ΚΕ they thought they would no longer be
stopped, but would fall upon the ships.”
See note on I 235.

112. σὺν αὐτοῖσιν, not simply “ with
them,” but a form of the phrase avrois
τοῖς ἵπποις, ‘‘ horses and all.” His fate,
which is here alluded to, does not follow,
as we should expect, in this attack, which
leads to nothing in particular except the
withdrawal of Aias and Teukros from
Hector’s point of attack, but is postponed
till N 384.

ΙΔΊΑΔΟΣ M x11.)

ayy ἀπονοστήσειν προτὶ Ἴλιον ἠνεμόεσσαν" 115
πρόσθεν yap μιν μοῖρα δυσώνυμος ἀμφεκάλυψεν
ἔγχεϊ ᾿Ιδομενῆος, ἀγανοῦ Δευκαλίδαο.
a A δ)
εἴσατο γὰρ νηῶν ἐπ᾽ ἀριστερά, τῇ περ Αχαιοὶ
ἐκ πεδίου νίσσοντο σὺν ἵπποισιν καὶ ὄχεσφιν'
τῇ ῥ᾽ ἵππους τε καὶ ἅρμα διήλασεν, οὐδὲ πύλῃσιν 120
εὗρ᾽ ἐπικεκλιμένας σανίδας καὶ μακρὸν ὀχῆα,
ἀλλ᾽ ἀναπεπταμένας ἔχον ἀνέρες, εἴ tw’ ἑταίρων
ἐκ πολέμου φεύγοντα σαώσειαν μετὰ νῆας.
a 4᾽ 9 A 4 δ 4 > w 9 ww
τῇ ῥ᾽ ἰθὺς φρονέων ἵππους ἔχε, τοὶ δ᾽ ἅμ᾽ ἕποντο
δον , ” A 3 99 \
ὀξέα κεκλήγοντες" ἔφαντο yap οὐκέτ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοὺς 125
, 3 9 9. » N ’ “4
σχήσεσθ᾽, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν νηυσὶ μελαίνῃσιν πεσέεσθαι,
/ 3 \ 4 4> 9 ’ 4 9 /
νήπιοι, ἐν δὲ πύλῃσι δύ᾽ ἀνέρας εὗρον ἀρίστους,
e , 4 > 4
υἷας ὑπερθύμους Λαπιθάων αἰχμητάων,
‘ \ 4 \ 4
τὸν μὲν Πειριθοου υἷα κρατερὸν ἸΠολυποίτην,
τὸν δὲ Λεοντῆα βροτολουγῷ loov “Apne. 180
τὼ μὲν ἄρα προπάροιθε πυλάων ὑψηλάων
ἕστασαν ὡς ὅτε τε δρύες οὔρεσιν ὑψικάρηνοι,
αἵ τ᾽ ἄνεμον μίμνουσι καὶ ὑετὸν ἤματα πάντα,
pitnow μεγώλῃσι διηνεκέεσσ᾽ ἀραρυΐϊαι"
’
ὧς ἄρα τὼ χείρεσσι πεποιθότες ἠδὲ βίηφιν 135

116. δυσώνυμος, cf. Z 255 δυσώνυμοι
υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν, τ 571 de δὴ ἠὼς εἶσι δυσώ-
νυμος : ‘‘hardly to be named,” accursed.
ἀμφεκάλυψεν : the metaphor is given full
in Π 350 θανάτον νέφος ἀμφεκάλυψεν, cf.
417, E68. The idea is that of death
darkening the eyes like a cloud (see II
333).

117. Δευκαλίδαο, son of Deukalion,
the patronymic being formed from the
short form of the name; so ᾿Ανθεμίδης
A 488 = son of Anthemion, A 473.

118. μάχης ἐπ᾽ ἀριστερά, see A 498.

119. νίσσοντο may mean either “were
(now) going” or ‘‘were wont to go.”
The latter is preferable, as there is no
mention of an attack on any stragglers,
and εἰ with opt. in 122 perhaps implies
that there were none. There is of course
a causeway over the trench by which
Asios drives across (διήλασεν).

120. πύλῃσιν is here used of a single
gate. Ar. held that there was only one
gate in the whole wall, but this is hardly
consistent with 340 (q.v.) or the general
course of the narrative, which seems to
imply that Asios and Hector attacked at
different points. A comparison of N

312 and 679 shews that the gate which
Hector forces is in the middle of the
wall, not ἐπ᾽ ἀριστερά, as here. We
may therefore conclude, as the reason of
the case seems to demand, that the poet
looks upon the wall as having two gates
at least; though he does not need, for
the sake of the narrative, to speak of
more than one ata time. (175 would be
decisive if it were genuine. )

122. Cf. & 531, πεπταμένας ἐν χερσὶ
πύλας ἔχετ᾽, els 5 κε λαοὶ ἔλθωσι πρότι
ἄστυ πεφυζότες.

125. κεκλήγοντες, so most MSS. : Ar.
hesitated between this and κεκληγῶτες.
See H. G. § 26 (1), 27, and Curtius, Vb.
ii, 24, 180.

126. See 107. σχήσεσθαι, as P 639.

127. Zenod. and Aristoph. read ἀνέρε
... ἀρίστω, υἷε ὑπερθύμω, which can
hardly be right, as the hiatus in the
trochaic caesura of the first foot is very
rare and probably not permissible. The
name of the Lapithae occurs only here
(and 181) in the Iliad, though some of
their chiefs are named in A 263, q.v.
For Leonteus and Polypoites see B 740-
747.

406

TAIAAOZ Μ (x11)

μίμνον ἐπερχόμενον μέγαν ἔΑσιον οὐδὲ φέβοντο.

οἱ δ᾽ ἰθὺς πρὸς τεῖχος ἐύδμητον βόας αὔας

ὑψόσ᾽ ἀνασχόμενοι ἔκιον μεγάλῳ ἀλαλητῷ

“Acwov ἀμφὶ ἄνακτα καὶ ᾿Ιαμενὸν καὶ ᾿Ορέστην

᾿Ασιάδην τ᾽ ᾿Αδάμαντα Θόωνά τε Οἰνόμαόν τε. 140
οἱ δ᾽ ἧ τοι εἶος μὲν ἐυκνήμιδας ᾿Αχαιοὺς

ὄρνυον ἔνδον ἐόντες ἀμύνεσθαι περὶ νηῶν"

αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ δὴ τεῖχος ἐπεσσυμένους ἐνόησαν

Τρῶας, ἀτὰῤ Δαναῶν γένετο ἰαχή τε φόβος τε,

ἐκ δὲ τὼ ἀίξαντε πυλάων πρόσθε μαχέσθην 145
ἀγροτέροισι σύεσσιν ἐοικότε, τώ τ᾽ ἐν ὄρεσσιν

ἀνδρῶν ἠδὲ κυνῶν δέχαται κολοσυρτὸν ἰόντα,

δοχμώ τ᾽ ἀίσσοντε περὶ σφίσιν ἄγνυτον ὕλην,

πρυμνὴν ἐκτάμνοντες, ὑπαὶ δέ τε κόμπος ὀδόντων

γίγνεται, eis ὅ κέ τίς τε βαλὼν ἐκ θυμὸν ἕληται"

150

φ ζω ’ Ἁ 4 4 A
ὧς τῶν κόμπει χαλκὸς ἐπὶ στήθεσσι φαεινὸς
ΝΜ , lA \ A > /
ἄντην βαλλομένων" μάλα yap κρατερῶς ἐμάχοντο,
λαοῖσιν καθύπερθε πεποιθότες ἠδὲ βίηφιν.
οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα χερμαδίοισιν ἐνδμήτων ἀπὸ πύργων
4 3 “ A > 9 al ,
βάλλον, ἀμυνόμενοι σφῶν τ αὐτῶν Kal κλισιάων 155

νηῶν τ ὠκυπόρων.

νιφάδες δ᾽ ὡς πῖπτον ἔραξέ,

Ψ > ΓΝ 4 4 Ld /
ἅς τ᾽ ἄνεμος Cans, νέφεα σκιόεντα δονήσας,

‘\ , 2 δ /
ταρφειὰς κατέχευεν ἐπὶ χθονὶ πουλυβοτείρῃ"
* Ἂ A 4 ¢ / > \ 3 al
ὧς τῶν ἐκ χειρῶν βέλεα ῥέον, nuev ᾿Αχαιῶν

187. βόας atas, see on .βῶν ἀζαλέην,
H 238. For ἔἕκιον Zen. and Aristoph.
read κιέτην.

141. elog (MSS. efws as usual), for a
while. In this sense it is always fol-
lowed by μέν, Ν 143, O 277, P 130, β
148, y 126. In several of these passages
the more usual relws occurs as a variant,
and so (rijos) Nauck would read here.

142. ὄρνυον, ‘‘had been inciting”:
the narrative here reverts to the moment
Prececing the attack of Asios, when the

pithae are still on the walls. Hence
in 142 ἐόντες, the reading of Ar. and
best MSS., is clearly: preferable to the
variant ἐόντας.

147. δέχαται, an anomalous form, acc.
to Curtius a non-thematic present, cf.
ἔδ-μεναι and the participle δέχμενος, for
which there is some authority, as it is
given as a variant by A on I 191, and
Hesych., δέχμενος" προσδεχόμενος. Butt-
mann and others regard it as a perf.

with reduplication lost, as the sense of
‘fawaiting” generally belongs to the
reduplicated forms (with the exception
of δέγμενος). For other possible cases
of the loss of reduplication in the perfect
see Η. G. § 28 (5).

148. δοχμώ, cf. ‘“verris obliquum
meditantis ictum,” Hor. Carm. iii. 22, 7.

149. Cf. A 417.

151. Observe how a mere detail in the
original scheme of the simile is here
made the base of a fresh simile. Ameis
refers for similar ‘‘ double-sided’ com-
parisons to O 623 ἢ, N 795 7. κομπεῖν
occurs only here.

153. Zen. appears to have read λάοισιν
for λαοῖσιν, and to have explained it as
= λάεσσιν, ‘‘trusting to the stones
thrown from above.” Observe the use
of καθύπερθε uscd attributively with the
subst., where later Greek would require
the addition of a participle, οὖσιν or the

ike.

TAIAAO® M (x11)

407

ἠδὲ καὶ ἐκ Τρώων" κόρυθες δ᾽ aud’ αὖον avrevy 160
βαλλόμεναι μυλάκεσσι καὶ ἀσπίδες ὀμφαλόεσσαι.
fe ‘o> ν / ν ἃ / \ .
δή pa tot ᾧμωξέν τε Kal ὦ πεπλήγετο μηρὼ
ἾΑ e ’ Ἁ 3 / Μ ΝΜ
σιος Ὑρτακίδης, καὶ ἀλαστήσας ἔπος ηὔδα"
“ Ζεῦ πάτερ, 7) ῥά νυ καὶ σὺ φιλοψευδὴς ἐτέτυξο
/ fy? > > » > de / 4 ’ \
πάγχυ μάλ * ov yap ἐγώ γ᾽ ἐφάμην ἥρωας Αχαιοὺς 165
σχήσειν ἡμέτερόν γε μένος Kal χεῖρας ἀάπτους"
e 2 Ψ “A 4 9/ oN 4
οἱ 8, ὥς τε σφῆκες μέσον αἰόλοι ἠὲ μέλισσαι
οἰκία ποιήσωνται ὁδῷ ἔπι παιπαλοέσσῃ,
οὐδ᾽ ἀπολείπουσιν κοῖλον δόμον, ἀλλὰ μένοντες
ἄνδρας θηρητῆρας ἀμύνονται περὶ τέκνων, 170
* δ ᾽ 3 ps / Ν a> of
ὧς of γ᾽ οὐκ ἐθέλουσι πυλάων Kai δύ ἐόντε
χάσσασθαι, πρίν γ᾽ ἠὲ κατακτάμεν ἠὲ ἁλῶναι."
4 δ 3 3 Ἁ εν! / a > 9 4
ὧς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδὲ Διὸς πεῖθε φρένα ταῦτ᾽ ἀγορεύων"
“Ἕκτορι γάρ οἱ θυμὸς ἐβούλετο κῦδος ὀρέξαι.
[ἄλλοι δ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ἄλλῃσι μάχην ἐμάχοντο πύλῃσιν' 175
ἀργαλέον δέ pe ταῦτα θεὸν ὡς πάντ᾽ ἀγορεῦσαι.
πάντῃ γὰρ περὶ τεῖχος ὀρώρει θεσπιδαὲς πῦρ

160. ἠδὲ καὶ ἐκ Ἰρώων is ἃ curious way
of adding the alternative. ῥέον too isa
strange verb to use with βέλεα. Hence
doubts have been thrown on the lines.
αὖον ἀύτευν, cf. καρφαλέον ἄυσεν N 409,
‘‘fragor aridus,” Verg., and ‘‘sonus
aridus,” Lucretius.

161. βαλλόμεναι, so MSS. and Zenod.:
Ar. βαλλομένων. μνλάκεσσι, as large as
millstones, cf. μυλοειδέι πέτρῳ H 270.

163. ἀλαστήσας only here, O 21
ἠλάστεον δὲ Geol, and a 252 ἑπαλαστήσασα.
The explanation of the word depends
on that of ἄλαστος, which is generally
derived from λαθ, in the sense ‘‘ not to
be forgotten,” which suits wherever it is
an epithet of ἄχος or πένθος. But in X
261, “Exrop ἄλαστε, this does not suit, nor
is it easy to deduce the sense of the verb
from it (‘‘to feel things intolerable, lit.
not to be forgotten,” hence ‘‘to break
out in protest,’ as Mr. Monro and others
explain, is very artificial). It is prefer-
able therefore with some of the ancient
grammarians to derive ἄλαστος (or per-
haps rather ἀλαστός) from "ἀλάζω, a by-
form of dAd-oua with the sense of ἀλύω.
The adjective will then mean ‘‘ mad,”
“ὁ distraught,” and the verb ἀλαστέω ‘‘to
be distressed, at one’s wit’s end,”

164. The accusation seems to refer to

the promise in A 207 sqq.: cf. Θ 170-
182.

167. αἰόλοι, bright-coloured, varie-
gated. Others after Buttmann take it
to mean ‘‘ flexible,” from the thin waist
of the wasp: cf. T 404, πόδας αἰόλος ἵππος.
The same ambiguity arises in line 208
αἰόλον ὄφιν, X 509 αἰόλαι εὐλαί.

169. Observe the transition from the
subjunctive to the more graphic indica-
tive.

170. ἄνδρας may be taken either with
μένοντες, when for ἀμύνονται περί com-
pare 243, or better with ἀμύνονται.

175-181. These lines have been uni-
versally regarded as spurious since the
days of Zenodotos. 175 is adapted from
Ο 414. In 176 the introduction of the
poet’s personality is a mark of a late
origin, cf. B 484, 761, etc. In 177
τεῖχος is Violently separated from λάινον,
and the mention of fire is quite out of
place, as the Trojans have not yet reach-
ed the ships, and indeed only a few have
even crossed the trench. In 181 the

hrase συμβαλεῖν πόλεμον is unique.
achmann conjectures that these lines
may have taken the place of a passage
recounting the end of Asios’ attack,
which is at present forgotten while in a
very unfinished stage.

408

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ M (x11.)

λάινον" ᾿Αργεῖοι δέ, καὶ ἀχνύμενοί περ, ἀνάγκῃ

νηῶν ἠμύνοντο.

θεοὶ δ᾽ ἀκαχείατο θυμὸν
πάντες, ὅσοι Δαναοῖσι μάχης ἐπιτάρροθοι ἦσαν.

180

σὺν δ᾽ ἔβαλον Λαπίθαι πόλεμον καὶ δηιοτῆτα.
ἔνθ᾽ αὖ Πειριθόου υἱὸς κρατερὸς Πολυποίτης

δουρὶ βάλεν Δάμασον κυνέης διὰ χαλκοπαρήου"

οὐδ᾽ ἄρα χαλκείη κόρυς ἔσχεθεν, ἀλλὰ διαπρὸ

αἰχμὴ χαλκείη ῥῆξ᾽ ὀστέον, ἐγκέφαλος δὲ

185

μι a 4 , ) A

ἔνδον ἅπας πεπάλακτο" δάμασσε δέ μιν μεμαῶτα.
> A » 4 Ν 2 7

αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα [lvAwva καὶ “Oppevov ἐξενάριξεν"

υἱὸν δ᾽ ᾿Αντιμάχοιο Λεοντεὺς ὄζος “Apnos

e 4 , \ a 4
Ἱἱππόμαχον βάλε δουρὶ κατὰ ζωστῆρα τυχήσας.

αὗτις δ᾽ ἐκ κολεοῖο ἐρυσσάμενος ξίφος ὀξὺ

190

᾿Αντιφάτην μὲν πρῶτον, ἐπαΐξας δι᾿ ὁμίλου,
a 3 , ew wo Ν ? /
TARE αὐτοσχεδίην" ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὕπτιος οὔδει ἐρείσθη"
aA » t . ν 7) \ 3
αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα Μένωνα καὶ Ἰαμενὸν καὶ ‘Opéorny
/ 3 , \ /
πάντας ἐπασσυτέρους πέλασε χθονὶ πουλυβοτείρῃ.

> e \ > 7 > oF ¥# /
ὄφρ Ol TOUS ἐνάριξζον ἀπ €VvTEa μαρμαίροντα,

195

> a“
Topp, οἱ Πουλυδάμαντι καὶ “Εἰκτορι κοῦροι ἕποντο,
οἱ πλεῖστοι καὶ ἄριστοι ἔσαν, μέμασαν δὲ μάλιστα
ΠῚ 4 lol
τεῖχός Te ῥήξειν καὶ ἐνιπρήσειν πυρὶ νῆας,
we , 3 / \ 7
οἵ ῥ᾽ ἔτι μερμήριζον ἐφεσταότες παρὰ τάφρῳ.
ὄρνις γάρ σφιν ἐπῆλθε περησέμεναι μεμαῶσιν, 200
3 \ e / > » \ γ7
αἰετὸς ὑψιπέτης ἐπ᾿ ἀριστερὰ λαὸν ἐέργων,
, 4 / 3 4 ,
φοινήεντα δράκοντα φέρων ὀνύχεσσι πέλωρον
ζωὸν ἔτ᾽ ἀσπαίροντα" καὶ οὔ πω λήθετο χάρμης"
κόψε γὰρ αὐτὸν ἔχοντα κατὰ στῆθος παρὰ δειρὴν

178. It has been proposed to join
λάινον with wip and explain it of ‘‘ the
flame of battle carried on with stones.”
This is however even less possible than
to join λάινον with τεῖχος, however un-
natural the order of the words is, and
however feeble the adjective in the em-
phatic place.

186. See A 98.

189. For the {worhp see A132. τυχή-
᾿ was is to be taken, as elsewhere, wit
βάλε, ‘Shit his mark”: cf. A 106.

192. αὐτοσχεδίην, sc. πληγήν, as E
830 τύψον δὲ σχεδίην. οὔδει ἐρείσθη, Ar.
οὖδας ἔρεισεν, as A 144, g.v.

196. of is here the relative, and so in
the next line, which is added to describe
those here named; in 199 it is demon-
strative. Cf. 88-89.

199. μερμήριζον : the narrative reverts
to the pevolveor εἰ τελέουσιν of 59.

201. ἐέργων, ‘‘skirting the host on
his left,” 1.6. flying along the line in
front from right to ‘eft. For this sense
of éépyev cf. Herod. vii. 43, ἐπορεύετο
ἐνθεῦτεν ἐν ἀριστερῇ μὲν ἀπέργων Ῥοίτειον
πόλιν, and so vii. 109, etc. It is derived
from that of bounding, as B 845, etc.

202. dowhevra only here and 220;
cf. δαφοινός of a snake, B 308.

203. ἔτι seems to go with ζωόν, dowal-
povra explaining it. λήθετο, the snake.

204. It is not quite clear whether
αὐτόν is acc. after κόψε, and means him,
the eagle; or after ἔχοντα, the eagle
holding him (self, the snake). Perhaps
the passage originally was κόψε δέ Γ᾽
αὐτὸν ἔχοντα, struck him (F’ for é, the

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ M x11.) 409
ἰδνωθεὶς ὀπίσω" ὁ δ᾽ ἀπὸ ev ἧκε χαμᾶζε 205

>
ἀλγήσας ὀδύνῃσι, μέσῳ δ᾽ ἐνὶ κάββαλ᾽ ὁμίλῳ,
\ a
αὐτὸς δὲ κλάγξας πέτετο πνοιῇς ἀνέμοιο.
ry 3
Τρῶες δ᾽ ἐρρίγησαν, ὅπως ἴδον αἰόλον ὄφιν
κείμενον ἐν μέσσοισι, Διὸς τέρας αἰγιόχοιο.
\ , , \ Ὁ /
δὴ τότε Πουλυδάμας θρασὺν "Exropa εἶπε παραστάς" 210
“"Extop, ἀεὶ μέν πώς μοι ἐπιπλήσσεις ἀγορῇσιν
ἐσθλὰ φραζομένῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐδὲ μὲν οὐδὲ ἔοικεν
A 4 a
δῆμον ἐόντα παρὲξ ἀγορευέμεν, οὔτ᾽ ἐνὶ βουλῇ
» > 9 / \ \ ,ὕ oN as
οὔτε ToT ἐν πολέμῳ, σὸν δὲ κράτος αἰὲν ἀέξειν"
a @ > δ / [2 n 4 »
νῦν αὖτ ἐξερέω, ὥς μοι δοκεῖ εἶναι ἄριστα. 215
μὴ ἴομεν Δαναοῖσι μαχησόμενοι περὶ νηῶν.
φ \ 3 ’ 3.9 > 9 ,
ὧδε γὰρ ἐκτελέεσθαι ὀΐομαι, εἰ ἐτεόν γε
Τρωσὶν ὅδ᾽ ὄρνις ἦλθε περησέμεναι μεμαῶσιν
9 \ e ’ > » \ Ν }
[αἰετὸς ὑψιπέτης ἐπ᾿ ἀριστερὰ λαὸν ἐέργων, |
4 4 , 3 4 - ΄
φοινήεντα δράκοντα φέρων ὀνύχεσσι πέλωρον 220
3
ζωόν" ἄφαρ δ᾽ ἀφέηκε, πάρος φίλα οἰκί ἱκέσθαι,
οὐδ᾽ ἐτέλεσσε φέρων δόμεναι τεκέεσσιν ἑοῖσιν.

eagle) holding Aim (the snake). The
difficulty, if we take αὐτόν with κόψε, is
to see the exact force of the emphatic
pronoun; Mr. Monro holds that the
emphasis implies ‘‘struck at him in
return.” Herodianus read γάρ atroy,
holding that avros could be used in a
non-emphatic sense, and was then en-
clitic.

207. κλάγξας, the eagle’s cry, called
a yclp by Tennyson. For wétero Plato,
Lon 539 B, where this passage is quoted,
gives ἕπετο. πνοιῇ, a comitative dat. ;
see on κύμασι, 28. ἅμα mv. ἀνέμοιο is the
usual phrase.

208. αἰόλον, “glistening” or ‘‘wrig-
gling,” see on 167. ὄφιν occurs only here
in Homer. The lengthening of the first
syllable must be due to the ictus alone:
cf. gepupin, ἡ 119. Curtius (ΕἾ, p. 505)
thinks it is for ér-Fis, from ὁπ (ax) to
see, ‘‘the bright-eyed.” The same scan-
sion is found in the choliambic of
Hipponax (/r. 49, 6, Bergk), ἣν αὐτὸν
ὄφις τὠντικνήμιον δάκνῃ.

211. This exordium is very strange
after the speech of Polydamas in 80 sqq.,
where he gives advice such as Hector im-
mediately follows. He uses the same
tone again in speaking to Hector, N 726
ff. Fick boldly omits 211-215, a step
which, if it can be justified, removes the

difficulty ; but it makes a very abrupt
beginning to the speech, without the
usual form of address; ἃ peculiarity
which in A 293 is evidently meant to
have an effect of its own.

212. The repetition of the negative
gives a rhetorical emphasis; the second
οὐδέ going more especially with the verb,
cf. οὐδὲ ἔοικεν, A 119 and often: 6.0. ε
212, οὔ πως οὐδὲ é.

213. δῆμον in the sense of ‘‘one of
the vulgar” is a strange use, as the
tendency of δῆμος is so decidedly to ex-
press the total community as opposed
to any individual. Hence Bentley’s
conj. δήμου ἐόντα is probably right ; cf.
δήμου ἀνδρα B198. Horace’s ‘‘plebs eris,”
Ep. i. 1, 59, may be an imitation, but
proves nothing. παρέξ, ‘‘ wrongly”
(from Hector’s point of view—a touch
of irony). This sense is else only Odys-
sean: ὃ 348, p 139, Y 16; cf. ξ 168.

214. ἀέξειν, supply ἔοικε from 212.

217. εἰ here assuines as a fact, and
virtually = since.

218. ὄρνις ἦλθε, so Ar.; MSS. ὄρνις
ἐπῆλθε: but the shortening of the ¢ could
hardly be defended, cf. I 323.

219 is here omitted by the best MSS.

222. ἐτέλεσσε, completed his journey,
φέρων δόμεναι being taken together.
For this pregnant sense of τελέω cf. ἡ

410

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ M (x11)

ὧς ἡμεῖς, el πέρ Te πύλας Kal τεῖχος ᾿Αχαιῶν
ῥηξόμεθα σθένεϊ μεγάλῳ, εἴξωσι δ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοί,

. ’ fo) 4
οὐ κόσμῳ παρὰ ναῦφιν ἐλευσόμεθ᾽ αὐτὰ κέλευθα"

220

πολλοὺς γὰρ Τρώων καταλείψομεν, οὕς κεν ᾿Αχαιοὶ
χαλκῷ δῃώσωσιν, ἀμυνόμενοι περὶ νηῶν.

/ > / / ἃ 4 a
ὧδέ y ὑποκρίναιτο θεοπρόπος, ὃς σάφα θυμῷ

εἰδείη τεράων καί οἱ πειθοίατο λαοί.
τὸν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπόδρα ἰδὼν προσέφη κορυθαίολος “Exrap:

499

230

““ Πουλυδάμα, σὺ μὲν οὐκέτ᾽ ἐμοὶ φίλα ταῦτ᾽ ἀγορεύεις"
A A ᾽ f a A

οἶσθα καὶ ἄλλον μῦθον ἀμείνονα τοῦδε νοῆσαι.

εἰ δ᾽ ἐτεὸν δὴ τοῦτον ἀπὸ σπουδῆς ἀγορεύεις,

3 Ν 4 ” / v 3 /

ἐξ dpa δή τοι ἔπειτα θεοὶ φρένας ὥλεσαν αὐτοί,

ὃς κέλεαι Ζηνὸς μὲν ἐριγδούποιο λαθέσθαι

235

/ Ψ / > δ e ’ “

βουλέων, ἅς τέ μοι αὐτὸς ὑπέσχετο καὶ κατένευσεν"
> a
τύνη δ᾽ οἰωνοῖσι τανυπτερύγεσσι κελεύεις
[οὶ 5 2 > 95) 3 /

πείθεσθαι, τῶν ov τι μετατρέπομ οὐδ areyilo,
vy o> 93 Pps \ aA > os ,
εἴ t ἐπὶ δεξί ἴωσι πρὸς ἠῶ τ ἠέλιόν τε,

ν 3» 3 9» \ 7 \ ’ 9 ’
ει ΤΕΥ αρίστερᾶ TOL γε ἼΟΤΙ ζοφον NEpOEVTa.

240

ἡμεῖς δὲ μεγάλοιο Διὸς πειθώμεθα βουλῇ,

325, ἄτερ καμάτοιο τέλεσσαν ἤματι τῷ
αὐτῷ.

225. οὐ κόσμῳ, litotcs. αὐτὰ κέλευθα,
80 0 107 ἦρχε δὲ τῷ αὐτὴν ὁδόν, and so π
188; in 2 391 we have τὴν αὐτὴν ὁδόν.

227. δϑῃώσωσιν, so best MSS.; Bekker
with some inferior ones reads δῃώσουσιν.

229. For the gen. after οἶδα see H. G.
§ 151 d; and for the transition from the
rel. to the anaphoric οὗ compare A 79, etc.

231-234 = H 357-360.

236. For this promise see the note on
164.
237. Paley suggests that a note of
interrogation should be put after πεί-
θεσθαι, which gives more force to the
emphatic τύνη : ‘‘are you the one to
persuade me?”

239. It is not to be concluded from
this passage that the Homeric augur
necessarily looked towards the north.
The omens from birds in Homer come
casually, and are not sought for as by a
Roman ; and though a bird on the right
hand is lucky, it appears to be so even
when we must assume that the observer
is looking 8. (as in Καὶ 274). In this case
the Trojans happen to be looking N.,
and the bird, it seems, appears on their
right ; but the significance of the omen
is judged, not by its position, but by the

concomitant details, to be unfavourable ;
partly perhaps because it is flying to-
wards the unlucky quarter, the realm of
darkness. It would appear therefore
that the interpretation depended (1) on
the direction of the bird, to right or
left (cf. Ὡ 312, N 821, w 311; the appear-
ance of birds on the right is lucky also
in the Vedas, see Nagelsbach, H. T. p.
432); (2) on the direction in which it
was flying, to E. or W.; (8) on the ac-
companying circumstances. Of these
(2) occurs as significant only in this
passage, and it would seem that (3) in
ull cases gives the meaning if possible ;
the exceptions being cases like a flash
of lightning or a bird heard in the dark-
ness, which do not present any details
beyond the mere fact of their appear-
ance. It may be noticed that this in-
difference of Hector to omens is in the
spirit of the Homeric age; the art of
augury is little developed and has little
positive effect at any time. Signs en-
courage or discourage a resolution already
taken, but they never determine or pre-
vent any enterprise as they did in later
times. Indeed they are elsewhere lightly
spoken οἵ: ¢.g. β 181, ὄρνιθες δέ re πολλοὶ
ὑπ᾽ αὐγὰς ἠελίοιο φοιτῶσ᾽, οὐδέ τε πάντες
ἐναίσιμοι.

ΛΔΙΔΔΟΣ M (σχπ.)

411

A a “ 9 7 3 ,

ὃς πᾶσι θνητοῖσι καὶ ἀθανάτοισιν ἀνάσσει.

εἷς οἰωνὸς ἄριστος, ἀμύνεσθαι περὶ πάτρης.
\ , ’ a

τίπτε ov δείδοικας πόλεμον Kal δηιοτῆτα;

Ν / > » , ,ὔ
εἴ περ γάρ τ ἄλλοι γε περὶ κτεινώμεθα πάντες

245

νηυσὶν ἐπ᾽ ᾿Αργείων, σοὶ δ᾽ ov δέος ἔστ᾽ ἀπολέσθαι"
οὐ γάρ τοι κραδίη μενεδήιος οὐδὲ μαχήμων.

9 Ν \ A 3 Ul 3.9 3 ΜΝ
εἰ δὲ σὺ δηιοτῆτος ἀφέξεαι, ἠέ τιν᾽ ἄλλον
παρφάμενος ἐπέεσσιν ἀποτρέψεις πολέμοιο,

> . > 3 A © UN \ > A Ν 3... 2 3)
αὐτίκ ἐμῷ ὑπὸ δουρὶ τυπεὶς ἀπὸ θυμὸν ὀλέσσεις.

250

Φ # ’ ς 4 \ > wv >
ὧς apa φωνήσας ἡγήσατο, τοὶ δ᾽ ἅμ᾽ ἕποντο

ἠχῇ θεσπεσίῃ.

ἐπὶ δὲ Ζεὺς τερπικέραυνος

ὦρσεν ἀπ᾽ ᾿Ιδαίων ὀρέων ἀνέμοιο θύελλαν,
Ψ ©? AN A / , > \. 5 A
ἥ ῥ᾽ ἰθὺς νηῶν κονίην φέρεν" αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχαιῶν

θέλχγε νόον, Τρωσὶν δὲ καὶ “Exrops κῦδος ὄπαζεν.

255

τοῦ περ δὴ τεράεσσι πεποιθότες ἠδὲ Bindi
ῥήγνυσθαι μέγα τεῖχος ᾿Αχαιῶν πειρήτιζον.
κρόσσας μὲν πύργων Epvov, καὶ ἔρειπον ἐπάλξεις,
στήλας τε προβλῆτας ἐμόχλεον, ἃς ἄρ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοὶ

πρώτας ἐν γαίῃ θέσαν ἔμμεναι ἔχματα πύργων'

260

τὰς οἵ γ᾽ avépvov, ἔλποντο δὲ τεῖχος ᾿Αχαιῶν

245. περί, all around, in every direc-
tion.

250 = A 433. 244-250 were bracketed
by Bekker; a modern poet would cer-
tainly not have added them after the
fine climax in 243, but in matters such
as this modern taste is not decisive; a
modern poet would have closed the
Agamemnon with the murder. The
sudden change of thought with asyn-
deton in 244 is softened by the emphatic
ov, which takes up again the τύνη of
237, and the unjust and violent re-
proach is not inconsistent with the char-
acter of Hector.

255. Oye, befooled, bewitched. The
verb, which is much commoner in the
Od. than 1]., means ‘‘to charm” in
either a good sense (e.g. p 514) or a bad,
as here, N 435, etc. : cf. Q2 343.

258. κρόσσας was explained by Ar.
to mean ‘‘scaling ladders”; he then
had to make πύργων mean ‘‘ towards
the towers.” This is clearly impossible :
the word must indicate some part of the
fortification and be distinct from the
€rahéis, which we may presume to have
been a wooden breastwork. It is not

possible to give a closer explanation of
the word, which recurs in H. only in
444. Herodotos uses it once of thie
steps of the pyramids. It might seem
reasonable therefore to understand it
here of courses of masonry ; only that the
wall seems to have been no more than
an earthwork. In any case these courses
would hardly have been arranged so as
to form steps for an assailant, as would
follow, if this interpretation be right,
from 444. Others take it to mean a
single course of coping-stones on which
the breastwork was built ; others again
explain it of the battlements proper, (¢.
high pieces of the breastwork between
the embrasures ; but there is no other
indication of such construction. The
question is not elucidated by the adj.
προκρόσσας in = 35, nor has any con-
vincing derivation been proposed. σπύρ-
yov probably means no more than ‘‘ the
fortification’; see H 338. The στῆλαι
προβλῆτες are evidently posts, probably
of wood, fixed into the ground in order
to hold up the carth and give a steep
face to the ‘‘ profile” of the works, like
the modern ‘‘ revetment.”

261. avépvov, see on A 459. The

412

IAIAAOS M (πὴ

ῥήξειν. οὐδέ νύ πω Δαναοὶ χάζοντο κελεύθου,
ἀλλ᾽ οἵ γε ῥινοῖσι βοῶν φράξαντες ἐπάλξεις
, 32. 5 ϑ- “2 , eo, a af
βάλλον ἀπ᾽ αὐτάων Snious ὑπὸ τεῖχος ἰόντας.
’
ἀμφοτέρω δ᾽ Αἴαντε κελευτιόωντ᾽ ἐπὶ πύργων
πάντοσε φοιτήτην, μένος ὀτρύνοντες ᾿Αχαιών,

265

ἄλλον μειλιχίοις, ἄλλον στερεοῖς ἐπέεσσιν
velxeov, ὅν τινα πάγχυ μάχης μεθιέντα ἴδοιεν"

γι 5

ὦ φίλοι, ᾿Αργείων ὅς τ᾽ ἔξοχος ὅς τε μεσήεις

Ψ ’ 9 v 7 e A
ὅς τε χερειότερος, ἐπεὶ οὔ πω πάντες ὁμοῖοι 270
ἀνέρες ἐν πολέμῳ, νῦν ἔπλετο ἔργον ἅπασιν"

A 3 9 \ 4 4
καὶ δ᾽ αὐτοὶ trode που γυγνώσκετε.

μή τις ὀπίσσω

τετράφθω προτὶ νῆας ὁμοκλητῆρος ἀκούσας,
ἀλλὰ πρόσω ἵεσθε καὶ ἀλλήλοισι κέλεσθε,
αἴ κε Ζεὺς δώῃσιν ᾿Ολύμπιος ἀστεροπητὴς 275
νεῖκος ἀπωσαμένους Sniovs προτὶ ἄστυ diecOat.”
ὧς τώ γε προβοῶντε μάχην ὦτρυνον ᾿Αχαιῶν.

imperf. here and in the preceding lines
is of course conative.

262. κελεύθον, cf. I’ 406, θεῶν δ᾽ ἀπό-
exe κελεύθον. It seems to be identical
with our vernacular ‘‘to get out of the
way,’ 1.6. the place where men are going
up and down. Cf. A 504.

263. φράξαντες, stopping up the gaps
where the battlements had been broken
down. ῥινοῖσι βοῶν is generally taken
to mean ‘‘with shields,” but in this
sense ῥινός alone is the usual phrase (A
447, Θ 61), and the addition of βοῶν

rhaps indicates that they had whole

ides ready at hand for the purpose of
temporarily stopping breaches ; a simple
and effective device.

265. κελευτιόωντε recurs only in N
125: it is of the desiderative class,
though in sense ‘‘imitative rather than
desiderative,” ‘‘ playing the leader”’
(Curtius, V6. ii. 388). It is the only
instance of this formation in H.

268. velkeov for vecxéovres, a relapse
into the direct narrative form, as in 2
535-7, Θ 346, I 80. The line is how-
ever superfluous, and Nauck is perhaps
right in doubting its authenticity.

269. μεσήεις, ἅπαξ εἰρημένον. For
similar formations cf. ὀξυόεις, φαιδιμόεις.
Asarule adjectives in -es are only formed
from substantives. Perhaps therefore
we must assume here a form μέση used
as an abstract substantive, as if =
‘* middleness.”

270. ww = πως, see on I’ 306.

271. ἔπλετο : for this use of the aor.
see H. G. §§ 32, 78.

273. ὁμοκλητῆρος ἀκούσας, a phrase
which recurs in ¥ 452, and is more in-
telligible there. The word is regularly
used of one who urges on by loud re-
proof. If this is the sense here, the
participle must be entirely separated
from the negative, and we must under-
stand ‘‘let no man turn back, now that
he has heard one who urges him on.”
Otherwise it must mean ‘“‘let no man
turn because he hears a shouter,’’ viz.
the shout of the foe. The first alterna-
tive is more probable, though there is
mentioned in A a variant ἀκούων, which
would restrict us to the second.

274. πρόσω, so Mr. Monro with three
MSS. (LS Syr), L. Meyer and Christ ;
the rest give πρόσσω. But Mr. Monro
remarks that ἵεμαι in the sense of “ press-
ing forward” regularly has the ¢ lon
and is treated as though it began wit
a consonant, ¢.g. B 154, οἴκαδε ἱεμένων.

276. For νεῖκος in the sense of
“battle,” cf. A 444, ete, and νεῖκος
πολέμοιο N 271. It is strange that Ar.
should have read νῖκος, βούλεται “γὰρ
λέγεσθαι τῆς νίκης τὴν ἧτταν (i.e. he took
νῖκος = νίκην, in the sense of the enemy’s
victory).

277. προβοῶντε, cheering on; only
here. In ‘‘some of the ὑπομνήματα ᾽
Ar. read προβάοντε, marching forward ;

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Μ (x11)

413

a ’ C4 , / ’ \
τῶν δ᾽, ὥς τε vipades χιόνος πίπτωσι θαμειαὶ
᾽
ἤματι χειμερίῳ, ὅτε T ὦρετο μητίετα Ζεὺς

4 nw
νιφέμεν, ἀνθρώποισι πιφαυσκόμενος τὰ ἃ Kha’

280

᾽
κοιμήσας δ᾽ ἀνέμους χέει ἔμπεδον, ὄφρα καλύψῃ
ς a > » \ \ ’ δ ᾿
ὑψηλῶν ὀρέων κορυφὰς καὶ πρώονας ἄκρους
καὶ πεδία λωτεῦντα καὶ ἀνδρῶν πίονα ἔργα"

’ > a4) eC Ἁ “Ὁ a / 3 a
καί τ ἐφ ἁλὸς πολιῆς κέχυται λιμέσιν τε καὶ ἀκταῖς,
κῦμα δέ μιν προσπλάζον ἐρύκεται, ἄλλα τε πάντα 285

> ᾽
εἴλυται καθύπερθ᾽, ὅτ᾽ ἐπιβρίσῃ Διὸς ὄμβρος"
ὧς τῶν ἀμφοτέρωσε λίθοι πωτῶντο θαμειαί,
e A w >) 9 ἴω 4 ».Ά4 ’ 3 2 4
αἱ μὲν ap ἐς Τρῶας ai ὃ ἐκ Τρώων ἐς Αχαιούς,
βαλλομένων" τὸ δὲ τεῖχος ὕπερ πᾶν δοῦπος ὀρώρειν.

οὐδ᾽ ἄν πω τότε γε Τρῶες καὶ φαίδιμος “Εἰκτωρ

290

“ 3 7] ’ \ > A
τείχεος ἐρρήξαντο πύλας καὶ μακρὸν ὀχῆα,

3 ,»»ν» 9 [ΦῚ e\ , / \
εἰ μὴ ἄρ᾽ υἱὸν ἑὸν Σαρπηδόνα μητίετα Ζεὺς
ὦρσεν ἐπ᾽ ᾿Αργείοισι, λέονθ᾽ ὡς βουσὶν ἕλιξιν.

> » » , \ ’ > / > 5»,
αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἀσπίδα μὲν πρόσθ᾽ ἔσχετο πάντοσ᾽ ἐΐσην,
καλὴν χαλκείην ἐξήλατον, ἣν ἄρα χαλκεὺς 295

for which form see Curtius, V6. i. 213,
where προβῶντες is quoted from Kratinos
and ἐκβῶντες from the (Doric) treaty in
Thue. v. 77.

278. τῶν is taken up again and given
a construction in 287. For the simile

κῆλα, these his missiles.
κῆλον happens to be used only of divine
weapons. The clause seems to indicate
an extraordinary fall of snow.

281. For ἔμπεδον the variant ἄσπετον
in the Μασσαλιωτική is worth noticing.
In 288 the same edition had Awrotvra,
which is followed by Ar. : MSS. λωτεῦντα,
which must be a participle. Hesych.
λωτεῦντα, ἀνθοῦντα. Against Ar.’s read-
ing it must be observed that no adj. in
-decs in Homer is contracted into -ois.

284. ἀκταῖς : this form of the dat. pl.
is unique in the Iliad; θεαῖς in ε 119,
πάσαις x 471, are the only other cases in
H. Hence Nauck would reject 284-6.
It may be added that Friedlander would
reject 281-286 on the ground that the
simile is disproportionately long, and
that the description in these six lines
tends to weaken rather than to improve
the comparison. But the way in which
287 returns to the point of 278 seems to
invalidate this criticism ; and one could
not without reluctance condemn one of

the finest descriptive passages in ancient
poetry.

285. ἐρύκεται, stops it, keeps it off.
This use of the middle is found only
here. προσπλάζον, beating up against
it. Cf. A 351, B 132, & 269. The verb
is conn. with πληγή, not with πέλας.
For ἄλλα τε of MSS., Heyne followed
by most edd. reads ἄλλα δέ, which is a
little simpler but not necessary, as we
can take the clause κῦμα. . . ἐρύκεται
as parenthetical, so that re is co-ordinate
with (καί) τε in the preceding line.

287. πωτῶντο, so MSS.: the form is
found only here, and no doubt we ought
to read ποτάοντο, cf. ἀμφεποτᾶτο B 315,
ποτῶνται B 462. λίθοι fem. as 7 494, in
the same sense as masc.; in later Greek
the fem. is confined to precious stones.

289. βαλλομένων, a reciprocal middle,
‘fas they cast at one another,” here only
(so La Roche).

293. ἕλιξιν, see on I 466.

294. μέν, as thongh δύο δὲ δοῦρε (298)
were to follow; the construction is for-
gotten in the description of the shield.

295. ἐξήλατον (so Zen.), hammered
out, explained by ἤλασεν in the next
line, for which Zen. read ἐξέλασ᾽ : this
very probably is right (as in Herod. i.
50, 68), and has been altered to suit the
reading of Ar., ἐξήλατον, explained to

414

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ M (x11)

ἤλασεν, ἔντοσθεν δὲ βοείας pare θαμειὰς

χρυσείῃς ῥάβδοισι διηνεκέσιν περὶ κύκλον'

τὴν ἄρ᾽ ὅ γε πρόσθε σχόμενος, δύο δοῦρε τινάσσων
A eo ΜΝ ee lA 3 4 a b 9 A

βῆ ῥ᾽ ἴμεν ὥς τε λέων ὀρεσίτροφος, ὅς τ᾽ ἐπιδενὴς

δηρὸν ἔῃ κρειῶν" κέλεται δέ ἑ θυμὸς ἀγήνωρ

300

μήλων πειρήσοντα καὶ és πυκινὸν δόμον ἐλθεῖν"

εἴ περ γάρ χ᾽ εὕρῃσι «παρ᾽ αὐτόφι βώτορας ἄνδρας
σὺν κυσὶ καὶ δούρεσσε φυλάσσοντας περὶ μῆλα,
οὔ ῥά τ’ ἀπείρητος μέμονε σταθμοῖο δίεσθαι,

ἀλλ᾽ ὅ γ᾽ dp ἢ ἥρπαξε μετάλμενος ἠὲ καὶ αὐτὸς

305

Μ » 9 , na ? \ \ ὟΝ
ἔβλητ ἐν πρώτοισι θοῆς ἀπὸ χειρὸς ἄκοντι"
ha ς foo 9 / > , \ 2A
ὧς pa ToT ἀντίθεον Σαρπηδόνα θυμὸς ἀνῆκεν
/ 2 on 4 e/ 3 4
τείχος ἐπάϊξαι διά τε ῥήξασθαι ἐπάλξεις.
αὐτίκα δὲ Γλαῦκον προσέφη, παῖδ᾽ “Ἱππολόχοιο'

“ Τλαῦκε, τί ἢ δὴ vee τετιμήμεσθα μάλιστα

810

ἕδρῃ τε κρέασίν τε ἰδὲ πλείοις δεπάεσσιν
3 ’ 4 A \ ἃ 3 J
ἐν Λυκίῃ, πάντες δὲ θεοὺς ὡς εἰσορόωσιν;
\ / / 7 7 7
καὶ τέμενος νεμόμεσθα μέγα Ἐάνθοιο παρ᾽ ὄχθας,
\ A \ 23 4 /
καλὸν φυταλιῆς καὶ ἀρούρης πυροφοροιο.

τῶ νῦν χρὴ Λυκίοισι μέτα πρώτοισιν ἐόντας

315

φ 4 IQA 4 / 3 A
ἑστάμεν ἠδὲ μάχης καυστείρης ἀντιβολῆσαι,

mean ‘‘in six layers.” But this could
only mean ‘‘six-hammered.” Besides,
the Homeric shield has only one layer of
metal (see J. H. 83. iv. 288); whenever
more layers are mentioned, they are
always, as here, of leather (Ὑ 271-2 are
undoubtedly spurious).

297. The most probable explanation
of the ῥάβδοι is that of Grashof, accord-
ing to which the backing of the shield
consists of a framework of rods fastened
into a central boss (the reverse side of
the ὀμφαλός), and arranged radially all
round the circle of the shield. Upon
these the hides were sewn. The ῥάβδοι
here are golden, like the κανόνες in
Nestor’s shield (which are perhaps the
game ; cf. Θ 193), because the weapon is
something extraordinary ; in the com-
mon shield they were of course of wood.
(Helbig, H. E. p. 281, explains ῥάβδοισι
to mean geometrical ornaments on the
face; but he has to make the violent
assumption that a line has been lost
after 296. Others take the ῥάβδοι to be
pegs or nails driven through (διηνεκέσιν)
the leather ; but there is no reason why

in this case the ordinary ἤλοισιν should
not have been used.)

302. παρ᾽ αὐτόφι, sc. παρὰ τοῖς μήλοις.
Cf. ἐπ᾽ αὐτόφιν T 255.

304. ἀπείρητος, here in active sense,
‘‘without an effort,” cf. πειρήσοντα
above. δίεσθαι, to flee, intrans. only
here and Ψ 475, else always = to pursue.
It goes with σταθμοῖο, as o 8 ᾿Οδυσῆα
διώκετο οἷο δόμοιο.

306. This line seems to be wrongly
adapted from A 675, where ἐν πρώτοισι
has its regular meaning, ‘‘among the
foremost of his own side”; here it must
mean among the foremost of the enemy.
(So 299-301 come from ¢ 130-4.) It has
also been remarked that the very martial
simile is hardly suitably followed by the
‘‘almost elegiac” speech to Glaukos.
It is possible that the two ges be-
ginning αὐτίκα δέ (294-308, and 309-329)
are alternative readings; if not, the
former, which does not fit on to 330,
must be the interpolation.

311. See the notes on A 262, H 321,
© 162, and for 313-4 see on Z 194-5;
316 = A342. For τῷ in 315 see A 418.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ M x1.)

415

ὄφρα τις ὧδ᾽ εἴπῃ Λυκίων πύκα θωρηκτάων"
“οὐ μὰν ἀκλεέες Λυκίην κάτα κοιρανέουσιν
ς ’ a ἘΝῚ ) / fol
ἡμέτεροι βασιλῆες, ἐδουσι Te πίονα μῆλα
οἶνόν τ᾽ ἔξαιτον μελιηδέα" ἀλλ᾽ ἄρα καὶ ts 820
ἐσθλή, ἐπεὶ Λυκίοισι μέτα πρώτοισι μάχονται.
4 / 3 \ / \ / 4
ὦ πέπον, εἰ μὲν yap πόλεμον περὶ τόνδε φυγὸντε
32. N \ “ 3 , > » 4
αἰεὶ δὴ μέλλοιμεν ἀγήρω τ᾽ ἀθαμάτω τε
ἔσσεσθ᾽, οὔτε κεν αὐτὸς ἐνὶ πρώτοισι μαχοίμην
Ν \ f 4 ? 4
οὔτε KE σὲ στέλλοιμι μαχῆν ἐς κυδιάνειραν" 325
νῦν δ᾽ ἔμπης yap κῆρες ἐφεστᾶσιν θανάτοιο
/ 3 ΝΜ a \ +O) ς ,ὔ

μυρίαι, ἃς οὐκ ἔστι φυγεῖν βροτὸν οὐδ ὑπαλύξαι,
ἴομεν, ἠέ τῳ εὖχος ὀρέξομεν ἠέ τις ἡμῖν."

ὧς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδὲ Γλαῦκος ἀπετράπετ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησεν"
τὼ δ᾽ ἰθὺς βήτην Λυκίων μέγα ἔθνος ἄγοντε. 880

\ XY SQN «ἢ 3 ΕΝ -“ 7
τοὺς δὲ ἰδὼν ῥίγησ᾽ νἱὸς Πετεῶο Μενεσθεύς"
τοῦ γὰρ δὴ πρὸς πύργον ἴσαν κακότητα φέροντες.
πάπτηνεν δ᾽ ἀνὰ πύργον Αχαιῶν, εἴ τιν᾽ ἴδοιτο
ἡγεμόνων, ὅς τίς οἱ ἀρὴν ἑτάροισιν ἀμύναι"

318. The MSS. read ἀκληεῖς or ἀκλεεῖς.
Did. says οὕτως ‘‘ ἀκλεες " (sic) al ᾽Αρισ-
rdpxou καὶ al χαριέστεραι. Schol. Vict.
ἀκλειεῖς᾽ οὕτως. ἀκλεὲς δὲ ᾿Αρίσταρχος
κατὰ συγκοπήν, ὡς τὸ ““ δυσκλέα᾽" (Β 115).
ἀκλεές would be in accordance with the
rule observed in our present Homeric
texts (see H. 6. § 105, δ), but it does not
scan. Ludwich conjectures that the
reading of Ar. was οὐ μὰν ἀκλεές, οἵ
Λυκίην κιτιλ. I prefer to see in the fact
that Ar. read some form ending in -es,
not in -e’s, an indication that there
survived till his time a tradition of the
form ἀκλε(β)έες, which is certainly the
correct one, and have accordingly fol-
lowed Nauck in adopting it in the text.
The authority of Schol. V in such a
matter is nil.

820. With οἶνον supply πίνουσι (zeng-
ma). €fatrov, ‘‘choice,” else only Od.
(e.g. 8 307): the derivation is doubtful.
Compare the γερούσιον οἶνον of A 259.

324. Hentze puts a colon after ἔσσεσ-
θαι, thus taking εἰ μὲν. . . μέλλοιμεν
as a wish which has not passed into a
regular conditional protasis. The diffi-
culty of saying whether or no this is the
case well illustrates the transition by

which, as L. Lange has shewn, the 601}-

ditional sentence arises.
326. γάρ in this proleptic use, familiar

in later Greek, is virtually = ἐπεί, and
as νῦν δέ really goes with ἐφεστᾶσιν as
much as with ἴομεν, it is better not to
mark the clause ἔμπης. . . ὑπαλύξαι as
a parenthesis, though it is from this
parenthetic use that ydp obtains this
sense. ‘‘ But since, as it is (νῦν δέ), in
any case death impends,” etc. (See H. 6.
8 848, 2.)

331. For Menestheus see Β 552.

332. The repetition of πύργον in this
line and the next causes some difficulty,
as the sense must be slightly changed.
Hence Bekker, followed by several edd.,
reads τεῖχος in 333, without authority.
Others take πύργον ᾿Αχαιῶν to mean the
army of the A. ; but πύργος when used
of a body of men would seem to indicate
a formation of a limited number for
service in the field (A 334, 347) rather
than a host generally, even when defend-
ing a wall as here. It is therefore best
to take πύργον in both lines in the sense
of wall rather than tower ; and to under-
stand τοῦ πρὸς πύργον as nieaning ‘‘to
his part of the wall.” It is very seldom
clear that πύργος must mean ‘‘a tower”
(X 97, A 462, are the strongest cases),
while there are very many passages in
which it must mean ‘‘ wall,”’ or “‘ fortifi-
cation,” and not ‘‘ tower” alone.

334. ἀρήν, al. “Apny, an uncertainty

416

᾽ 4 > 4 ,
és δ᾽ ἐνόησ᾽ Αἴαντε δύω, πολέμου ἀκορήτω,

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ M x11.)

330

e 4 A , 7 / 47)
ἑσταότας, Tedxpov τε νέον κλισίηθεν ἰόντα,
3 , 2 3 Ww , ον , aA
ἐγγύθεν" ἀλλ᾽ οὔ πώς οἱ ἔην βώσαντι γεγωνεῖν"

’ ’ ‘
τόσσος γὰρ κτύπος Hev, ἀυτὴ ὃ οὐρανὸν ἧκεν,

/ “

βαλλομένων σακέων τε καὶ ἱπποκόμων τρυφαλειῶν

Ἁ ’ 4 \ 3 ’ \ 3 ? \
καὶ πυλέων" πάσας yap ἐπῴχετο, τοὶ δὲ KAT αὐτὰς

340

4 7 A / ς 9 A
ἱστάμενοι πειρῶντο Bin ῥήξαντες ἐσελθεῖν.
αἶψα δ᾽ ἐπ᾿ Αἴαντα προΐει κήρυκα Θοώτην"
“ἢ δῖε Θοῶ θέων Αἴ 1
ἔρχεο, dle Θοῶτα, θέων Atavta κάλεσσον,
9 , N A 4 > vy 3 ΨΜ e ,
ἀμφοτέρω μὲν μᾶλλον" ὃ γάρ K by’ ἄριστον ἁπάντων

εἴη, ἐπεὶ τάχα τῇδε τετεύξεται αἰπὺς ὄλεθρος"

945

ὧδε γὰρ ἔβρισαν Λυκίων ἀγοί, οἱ τὸ πάρος περ
ζαχρηεῖς τελέθουσι κατὰ κρατερὰς ὑσμίνας.

εἰ δέ σφιν καὶ κεῖθι πόνος καὶ νεῖκος ὄρωρεν,
ἀλλά περ οἷος ἴτω Τελαμώνιος ἄλκιμος Αἴας,

καί οἱ Τεῦκρος ἅμα σπέσθω τόξων ἐὺ εἰδώς."

which often arises. So in = 485, = 100,
Ar. read “Apew for ἀρῆς. In 8. 59 how-
ever ἀρήν is used of disaster not of a
warlike nature, so that it seems best to
adhere to the text.

336. This line evidently refers to ©
834, where Teukros is taken to his tent
after being wounded by Hector.

337. ἐγγύθεν, the station of the Tele-
monian Aias was next the Athenians,
B 558. βώσαντι : this contracted form
occurs only here, and hardly seems Epic.
G. Meyer however proposes to explain it
as for βοξ-σαντι, from a pres. *BéF-w.
γεγωνεῖν, to make himself heard, as
usual.

340. For the form πυλέων see H 1.
πᾶσαι and ἐπῴχατο are the readings of
A with Ar., πάσας and ἐπῴχετο of most
of the rest, with Zen. The latter seems
to require ἀυτή as the subject of the verb,
‘*the noise had reached all the gates,”
ef. 6 451. Ar. explained his reading to
mean ‘‘the whole gate had been shut”
(it will be remembered that he held that
there was only one gate in all the wall).
But if ἐπῴχατο be read it would seem to
come from ἐποίγω and this sense can
hardly be got out of it. It would be
better therefore to read ἐπώχατο, and
derive it from ἐπέχω on the not very
sufficient analogy of ὄχωκα (see B 218) ;
for the sense of ‘‘ holding close shut” cf.
the phrase ἐπέχειν τὰ ὦτα, τὸ στόμα.
But this is unsatisfactory ; it looks as

300

though Ar. had altered the reading, or
adopted a bad variant, in order to save
his theory of a single gate. Yet even
with his reading πᾶσαι must mean “all
the gates”; there is no point in saying
‘the whole gate.” See note on B 809.

342. For Αἴαντα in this line and the
next Zen. read Αἴαντε, which is found
also in Syr.

844. μὲν μᾶλλον, the μάλιστα μέν of
Attic prose; the compar. being here
used because there are only two alterna-
tives. & = τό, as Ψ 9, w 190.

346. ὧδε ἀντί τοῦ οὕτως, Ariston. It
was one of Aristarchos’ canons that ὧδε
always meant ‘‘ thus,” never ‘‘ here,” in
Homer. Zen. took it to be ‘‘ here,” as
he read κεῖσε in 359, and he is not im-
probably right, as it seems arbitrary to

eny to Homer a use so common in later
Greek, and so much more natural both
in this passage and 2 392.

347. faxpnets, cf. E 525, and for the
present after πάρος περ, indicating that
a state of affairs in the past still remains,
A 553.

350. ἀθετεῖται by Ar. and Aristoph.,
apparently merely on the ground that
no special summons was needed for
Teukros, who always shot from under
the shield of Aias. For the question
between dua σπέσθω or Gu’ ἑσπέσθω see
on E 423: The former is given here by
H Syr.

TAITAAO® M (x11)

4Φ ΜΝ

417

3 ὑδ᾽ Ν e σε 3 θ 9 4
ὡς fat, ovd apa ot κῆρυξ ἀπίθησεν ἀκούσας,
βῆ δὲ θέειν παρὰ τεῖχος ᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων,
”~ 9
στῆ δὲ παρ᾽ Αἰάντεσσι κιών, εἶθαρ δὲ προσηύδα"
“Αἴαντ᾽, ᾿Αργείων ἡγήτορε χαλκοχιτώνων,

ἠνώγει Πετεῶο διοτρεφέος φίλος υἱὸς

355

a> ΝΜ 4 / f 3 ,
Keio ἴμεν, ὄφρα πόνοιο μίνυνθά περ ἀντιάσητον,
9 ’ Ἁ “ ἃ [4 3 > ΝΜ e ’
ἀμφοτέρω μὲν μᾶλλον" ὃ γάρ K by ἄριστον ἁπάντων
v 3 4 - 4 3 A
εἴη, ἐπεὶ τάχα κεῖθι τετεύξεται αἰπὺς ὄλεθρος"
ὧδε γὰρ ἔβρισαν Λυκίων ἀγοί, of τὸ πάρος περ

. aA / \ e
Caypneis τελέθουσι κατὰ κρατερὰς ὑσμίνας.

860

εἰ δὲ καὶ ἐνθάδε περ πόλεμος καὶ νεῖκος ὄρωρεν,
ἀλλά περ οἷος ἴτω Τελαμώνιος ἄλκιμος Αἴας,
ς σι uf / ’ ΡᾺ 90 7 99
καί οἱ Τεῦκρος ἅμα σπέσθω τόξων ἐὺ εἰδώς.
ὡς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησε μέγας Τελαμώνιος Αἴας.

3 9? 4 v / VA
αὐτίκ᾽ ᾿᾽Οιλιάδην ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"

365

“ Alav, σφῶι μὲν αὖθι, σὺ καὶ κρατερὸς Λυκομήδης,
ἑσταότες Δαναοὺς ὀτρύνετον ἶφι μάχεσθαι"
αὐτὰρ ἐγὼ κεῖσ᾽ εἶμι καὶ ἀντιόω πολέμοιο.

} 3. 4 a 3 \ 9A δι 9 , 99
αἷψα δ᾽ ἐλεύσομαι αὗτις, ἐπὴν ἐὺ τοῖς ἐπαμύνω.

ὡς ἄρα φωνήσας ἀπέβη Τελαμώνιος Αἴας,

870

καί οἱ Τεῦκρος ἅμ᾽ ἦε κασίγνητος καὶ ὄπατρος"
τοῖς δ᾽ ἅμα Πανδίων Τεύκρου φέρε καμπύλα τόξα.
evte Μενεσθῆος μεγαθύμου πύργον ἵκοντο

τείχεος ἐντὸς ἰόντες, ἐπευγομένοισι δ᾽ ἵκοντο,

οἱ δ᾽ ἐπ᾿ ἐπάλξεις βαῖνον ἐρεμνῇ λαίλαπι ἴσοι,

375

ἴφθιμοι Λυκίων ἡγήτορες ἠδὲ μέδοντες"

\ > 9 4 li“ 3 ’ 4 3 9 “
σὺν δ᾽ ἐβάλοντο μάχεσθαι ἐναντίον, ὧρτο δ᾽ ἀντή.
Αἴας δὲ πρῶτος Τελαμώνιος ἄνδρα κατέκτα,

Σαρπήδοντος ἑταῖρον, ᾿Επικλῆα μεγάθυμον,

355. ἠνώγει, imperf. where we should
expect a present, cf. B 28 ἐκέλευσε.

365. For αὐτίκ᾽ ᾿Οιλιάδην Zen. read
αὐτίκ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ᾿Ιλιάδην, perhaps a reminiscence
of an older αὐτίκα ᾿Ιλιάδην, cf. B 527, N
203, 712, O 333, in all of which ᾿Ιλιάδης
is found as a variant; and compare
Ἰλιάδα, the probable reading in Pind.
O. ix. 112.

871. κασίγνητος καὶ ὅπατρος, son of
the same mother and father, as A 257.
κασίγνητος is elsewhere used in a more

eneral sense (c.g. O 545, II 456), but
ere the addition of ὅπατρος seceins to
shew that it means a brother uterine

28

(cf. T 293). In that case it is in con-
tradiction with Θ 284 (q.v.) Τεῦκρον,
μόθον περ ἐόντα. It is however perhaps
possible to take καὶ ὅπατρον epexegetic-
ally, ‘‘his brother, to wit the son of his
father.”

372. This line was athetized by Ar.
on the ground that Teukros did not need
any one to carry his bow for him (Schol. V).

374. For the dat. ἐπειγομένοισι cf.
H 7 (Townl. reads ἐελδομένοισι here also),
Η. Ὁ. §§ 143, 246. The apodosis begins
with the next line.

377. μάχεσθαι, as A ἃ, ἔριδι συνέηκε
μάχεσθαι.

4]8

TATAAOS Μ (x11)

μαρμάρῳ ὀκριόεντι βαλών, 6 pa τείχεος ἐντὸς 880
κεῖτο μέγας παρ᾽ ἔπαλξιν ὑπέρτατος" οὐδέ κέ μιν ῥέα
χείρεσσ᾽ ἀμφοτέρῃς ἔχοι ἀνήρ, οὐδὲ μάλ᾽ ἡβῶν,
οἷοι νῦν βροτοί cia’: ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑψόθεν ἔμβαλ᾽ ἀείρας,
θλάσσε δὲ τετράφαλον κυνέην, σὺν δ᾽ ὀστέ᾽ ἄραξεν
πάντ᾽ ἄμυδις κεφαλῆς" ὁ δὲ ἀρνευτῆρι ἐοικὼς 885
κάππεσ᾽ ἀφ᾽ ὑψηλοῦ πύργου, λίπε δ᾽ ὀστέα θυμός.
Τεῦκρος δὲ Γλαῦκον κρατερὸν παῖδ᾽ “Ἱππολόχοιο
ἰῷ ἐπεσσύμενον βάλε τείχεος ὑψηλοῖο,
ἡ ῥ᾽ ἴδε γυμνωθέντα βραχίονα, παῦσε δὲ χάρμης.
ἂψ' δ᾽ ἀπὸ τείχεος adto λαθών, ἵνα μή τις ᾿Αχαιῶν 390
βλήμενον ἀθρήσειε καὶ εὐχετόῳτ᾽ ἐπέεσσιν.
Σαρπήδοντει δ᾽ ἄχος γένετο Τλαύκου ἀπιόντος,
αὐτίκ᾽ ἐπεί τ᾽ ἐνόησεν" ὅμως δ᾽ οὐ λήθετο χάρμης,
ἀλλ᾽ ὅ γε Θεστορίδην ᾿Αλκμάονα δουρὶ τυχήσας
νύξ᾽, ἐκ δ᾽ ἔσπασεν ἔγχος" ὁ δ᾽ ἑσπόμενος πέσε δουρὶ 898
πρηνής, ἀμφὶ δέ οἱ βράχε τεύχεα ποικίλα χαλκῷ.
Σαρπηδὼν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔπαλξιν ἑλὼν χερσὶ στιβαρῇσιν
ἕλχ᾽, ἡ δ᾽ ἕσπετο πᾶσα διαμπερές, αὐτὰρ ὕπερθεν
τεῖχος ἐγυμνώθη, πολέεσσι δὲ θῆκε κέλευθον.

τὸν δ᾽ Αἴας καὶ Τεῦκρος ὁμαρτήσανθ᾽ ὁ μὲν ἰῷ 400

381. ὑπέρτατος, the top of a heap of
stones piled up by way of ammunition
against the breastwork.

382. For χείρεσσ᾽ ἀμφοτέρῃς, χειρί
γε τῇ ἑτέρῃ is mentioned by Did. as ἃ
reading of al xowérepa:, and is found
also in A (text) and five or six other
MSS. There is also a variant φέροι for
ἔχοι. Ar. remarked with justice that
the mention of one hand ἐκλύει τὴν ἰσχὺν
τοῦ Αἴαντος. For the disparagement of
men of the present day cf. E 304.

384. See E 748 for τετράφαλον.

385 = μα 413. For the comparison to
aman ‘‘taking a header” cf. II 742-750,
where the idea is worked out. Paley
quotes also Eur. Suppl. 692, és κρᾶτα
πρὸς γῆν ἐκκυβιστώντων Big, and Phoen.
1150. The common reading is ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽
ἀρνευτῆρι, but two MSS. (1, Syr, apavev-
tnpt) omit dp’; and as ἀρνευτήρ had F
(whether it is conn. with Lat. wri-nari
and Skt. vari, water, Curt. Zt. no. 510,
or, as others say, with ἀρν-ός, a ram, in
the sense of a tumbler ‘‘ butting like a
ram”), this appears to be the relic of a

genuine tradition, andis therefore adopted
in the text.

388. τείχεος seems to go with ἐπεσσύ-
evov, dashing at the wall (so also Π 511).
he genitives in 406, 420, do not justify

us in joining βάλε τείχεος, ‘shot from
(his position on) the wall.”

393. ὅμως, only here in Π]., the regular
Homeric word being ἔμπης. Lehrs conj.
ὁ δ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ὧς, which is the regular phrase,
and probably right. (A 565 is the only
other instance of ὅμως in H., and there
it is not quite certain. )

397. The ἔπαλξις is no doubt a breast-
work of planks ; it has been undermined,
so that when it is pulled down in one
place, it falls ‘‘all along” the wall
(διαμπερές) The nom. to θῆκε is τεῦχος :
the wall, by being stripped of the breast-
work, makes an opening—which however
is not passed as yet by any of the Trojans ;
they did not appropriate the passage
thus made (θέσθαι κέλευθον, 411, 418:
this is evidently the force of the middle).

400. ὁμαρτήσαντε, simultaneously.
For the ‘‘distributive apposition’ by

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ M (xm)

419

βεβλήκει τελαμῶνα περὶ στήθεσφι φαεινὸν
ἀσπίδος ἀμφιβρότης: ἀλλὰ Ζεὺς κῆρας ἄμυνεν
παιδὸς ἑοῦ, μὴ νηυσὶν ἔπι πρυμνῇσι δαμείη"
Αἴας δ᾽ ἀσπίδα νύξεν ἐπάλμενος, οὐδὲ διαπρὸ

ἤλυθεν ἐγχείη, στυφέλιξε δέ μιν μεμαῶτα.

405

’ 3. ΓΝ A bJ 4 80) of 4
χώρησεν δ᾽ ἄρα τυτθὸν ἐπάλξιος" οὐδ᾽ 6 γε πάμπαν
’ 3 > e \ 7 a 3. 9
χάζετ᾽, ἐπεί οἱ θυμὸς ἐέλπετο κῦδος ἀρέσθαι.
κέκλετο δ᾽ ἀντιθέοισιν ἑλιξάμενος Λυκίοισιν"
“ὦ Λύκιοι, τί τ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὧδε μεθίετε θούριδος ἀλκῆς;

ἀργαλέον δέ μοί ἐστι, καὶ ἰφθίμῳ περ ἐόντι,

410

μούνῳ ῥηξαμένῳ θέσθαι παρὰ νηυσὶ κέλευθον"

ἀλλ᾽ ἐφομαρτεῖτε: πλεόνων δέ τε ἔργον ἄμεινον."
ὧς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δὲ ἄνακτος ὑποδείσαντες ὁμοκλὴν

μᾶλλον ἐπέβρισαν βουληφόρον ἀμφὶ ἄνακτα.

᾿Αργεῖοι δ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἐκαρτύναντο φάλαγγας

415

/ ” “ / / Μ
τείχεος ἔντοσθεν" μέγα δέ σφισι φαίνετο ἔργον"
οὔτε γὰρ ἴφθιμοι Λύκιοι Δαναῶν ἐδύναντο

σὰ ς / \ ’
τεῖχος ῥηξάμενοι θέσθαι παρὰ νηυσὶ κέλευθον,
οὔτε ποτ᾽ αἰχμηταὶ Δαναοὶ Λυκίους ἐδύναντο

τείχεος dip ὥσασθαι, ἐπεὶ τὰ πρῶτα πέλασθεν.

420

ἀλλ᾽ ὥς T ἀμφ᾽ οὔροισι δύ᾽ ἀνέρε δηριάασθον,

which this dual is followed by two verbs
in the singular, compare H 306.

401. fxa: for the force of the
plupf. cf. 4.108. τελαμῶνα, the strap of
the shield, which crossed the chest
obliquely from the right shoulder.

so ADG, vulg. στήθεσσι, but

the rarer (locative) form is to be pre-
erred.

408. ν Ure πρυμνῇσι are the
emphatic words : his fate is to be killed
in the open plain.

404-5 = H 260-1. There is a variant
ἢ δέ for οὐδέ, found in some MSS. and
quoted by Did. as the κοινή.

407. For the aor. infin. after ἔλπομαι
ef.T 112. Some MSS. give ἐέλδετο, A
having 8 written over 7.

408 = II 421 (cf. M 467). These and
¢ 241 are the only passages in which
ἀντίθεος is the epithet of a nation.

411. θέσθαι κέλευθον, see 397.
γηνσί, we should rather have expected

παρὰ νῆα:.

412. For ἐφομαρτεῖτε most MSS. give
épopuapretroy: the dual for the plural is
doubtless the reading of Zenodotos. Cf.

Ψ 414 (note also 413 = Ψ 417). Ar.
real ἐφαμαρτεῖτε. δέ τοι is the reading
of the best MSS., but some give δέ τι,
and one δέ τ΄ We need not hesitate
therefore to adopt Bentley's δέ re, which
is evidently original.

416. σφισι would most naturally refer
to the Greeks, as the party last mentioned,
as in x 149, μέγα δ᾽ αὐτῷ φ. €.; but
what follows shews that we must under-
stand it of both parties, ‘‘a mighty task
was revealed to them, set before them’”’:
cf. A 734, ἀλλά σφιν... φάνη μέγα
ἔργον "Αρηος.

420, τὰ πρῶτα, ““οποθ,᾽ as A 6.

421. The simile is clear evidence of
the existence in Homeric times of the
‘*common-field” system of agriculture,
where the land of the community is
portioned out in temporary tenure from
time to time. For the οὖρα see Καὶ 351;
they are stones ( 405) marking off the
allotments, and are easily moveable by a
fraudulent neighbour (X 489). Such a
fraud could only be detected by re-
measurement, and it is over such a
dispute that the two men are engaged.

420

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ M (χη)

μέτρ᾽ ἐν χερσὶν ἔχοντες, ἐπιξύνῳ ἐν ἀρούρῃ,

ὥ τ᾽ ὀλίγῳ ἐνὶ χώρῳ ἐρίξητον περὶ ἴσης,

ὧς ἄρα τοὺς διέεργον ἐπάλξιες" οἱ δ᾽ ὑπὲρ αὐτέων

δήουν ἀλλήλων ἀμφὶ στήθεσσι βοείας, 425
ἀσπίδας εὐκύκλους λαισήιά τε πτερόεντα.

πολλοὶ δ᾽ οὐτάζοντο κατὰ χρόα νηλέι χαλκῷ,

ἠμὲν ὅτεῳ στρεφθέντι μετάφρενα γυμνωθείη

μαρναμένων, πολλοὶ δὲ διαμπερὲς ἀσπίδος αὐτῆς.

πάντῃ δὴ πύργοι καὶ ἐπάλξιες αἵματι φωτῶν

480

ἐρράδατ᾽ ἀμφοτέρωθεν ἀπὸ Τρώων καὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν.
ἀλλ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ὧς ἐδύναντο φόβον ποιῆσαι ᾿Αχαιῶν,
GAN ἔχον, ὥς τε τάλαντα γυνὴ χερνῆτις ἀληθής,
ἥ τε σταθμὸν ἔχουσα καὶ εἴριον ἀμφὶς ἀνέλκει

> + > ΨΦ 3 , νὴ Ν
ἰσάξουσ᾽, ἵνα παισὶν ἀεικέα μισθὸν ἄρηται"

435

ὧς μὲν τῶν ἐπὶ ἶσα μάχη τέτατο πτόλεμός τε,
πρίν y ὅτε δὴ Ζεὺς κῦδος ὑπέρτερον “ἙΕκτορι δῶκεν
Πριαμίδῃ, ὃς πρῶτος ἐσήλατο τεῖχος ᾿Αχαιῶν.
ἤυσεν δὲ διαπρύσιον Τρώεσσι γεγωνώς"

“ὄρνυσθ᾽, ἱππόδαμοι Τρῶες, ῥήγνυσθε δὲ τεῖχος

440

3 / Ν > » \ a»?
Ἀργείων καὶ νηυσὶν éviere θεσπιδαὲς πῦρ.

The point of the simile of course is that
the two parties stand close to one another
divided by the breastwork, as the two
neighbours are only divided by the stone
over which they are quarrelling. The
ἴση (see A 705) is the alloted space of
land. (See Mr. Ridgeway in J. H. 8S.
vi. on the Homeric Land System.)

425-6 = E 452-3.

433. ἔχον is used intransitively in the
first clause (as E 492, K 264, etc.) and
hence ἔχει must be understood transi-
tively in the second, by a sort of zeugma,
‘‘they held on, as a woman holds the
scales.” ἀληθής seems to be used here
in the primitive sense, “ not forgetting,”
1.6. careful, anxious about her task.
The adjective elsewhere is only used of
spoken works, To make it here =
‘*honest,”’ ‘‘ conscientious,” is to intro-
duce an entirely un-Homeric concep-
tion. The woman weighs the wool not
out of motives of conscientivusness, but
in order to make sure that by giving
full weight she will earn her pay. It
may be mentioned that Apollonios read
ἀλῆτις, beggar-woman, which however
is too harsh after χερνῆτις (which is ap-
parently from χείρ, a handworker).

434. ἀμφίς goes with ἔχουσα, holding
one on each side. σταθμόν = weight,
only here in Homer. ἀνέλκει as Θ 72.

435. We must not look upon the
μισθός as anything but payment in kind,
food and perhaps cloth for garments.
It is of course impossible to say what
the woman has been doing with the
wool she weighs, whether growing it on
sheep of her own, or, which is more
probable, putting it through some pro-
cess such as carding, dyeing, or spinning.
For ἀεικέα (miserable, meagre) Ar. read
dvecxéa, explaining ἔξω νείκους, τὸ ἴσον
αὐτοῖς ἀπονέμουσα, though elsewhere he
is said to have preferred dueudéa.

436. See A 336.

438. In II 558 the same expression is
used of Sarpedon. For the difficulty
therein involved see the introduction to
this book.

439 = © 227. Ar. strangely cnough
made Zeus the subject of ἤυσεν, on the
ground that Hector could not shout
loud enough for ali to hear him (442).
Zenod. must have taken the same view
if he is correctly reported to have read
ἐπεὶ θεοῦ ἔκλυον αὐδήν for the second
half of 444,

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ Μ (x11)

421]

Φ 49> 9 , e 9 w , Ν
ὡς hat ἐποτρύνων, οἱ δ᾽ οὔασι πάντες ἄκουον,

ἴθυσαν δ᾽ ἐπὶ τεῖχος ἀολλέες.

eV κ'
Ol μεν ETTELTA

κροσσάων ἐπέβαινον ἀκαχμένα δούρατ᾽ ἔχοντες,
“Ἕκτωρ δ᾽ ἁρπάξας λᾶαν φέρεν, ὅς pa πυλάων 446
ἑστήκει πρόσθε, πρυμνὸς παχύς, αὐτὰρ ὕπερθεν
ΩΝ » \ ᾽ » 47> 9 ff / » ἢ
ὀξὺς ἔην" τὸν ὃ οὔ κε δύ᾽ ἀνέρε δήμου ἀρίστω
ς , » > ΚΓ >?) w 3 /
ῥηιδίως ἐπ᾽ ἄμαξαν am ovdeos ὀχλίσσειαν,
δε / > 23 e A ς» ’ \ 9
οἷοι viv βροτοί cio + ὁ δέ μιν ῥέα πάλλε Kal οἷος.
[τόν of ἐλαφρὸν ἔθηκε Κρόνου πάις ἀγκυλομήτεω. 450
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε ποιμὴν ῥεῖα φέρει πόκον ἄρσενος οἰὸς
\ ς "ἡ" > ’ / » > ,
χειρὶ λαβὼν ἑτέρῃ, ὀλίγον τέ μιν ἄχθος ἐπείγει,
as “Ἕκτωρ ἰθὺς σανίδων φέρε λᾶαν ἀείρας,
ai ῥα πύλας εἴρυντο πύκα στιβαρῶς ἀραρυίας,
δικλίδας ὑψηλάς" δοιοὶ δ᾽ ἔντοσθεν ὀχῆες 455
9 2 [4 ’ Α \ > ,
εἶχον ἐπημοιβοί, μία δὲ κληὶς ἐπαρήρειν.
“~ mam? 9 A 97 2 Ul 4 [4
στῆ δὲ μάλ᾽ ἐγγὺς ἰών, καὶ ἐρεισάμενος βάλε μέσσας,
42 , ψ{ ,᾿΄.ε» / , ν
εὖ διαβάς, ἵνα μή οἱ ἀφαυρότερον βέλος εἴη,
ῥῆξε δ᾽ an’ ἀμφοτέρους θαιρούς" πέσε δὲ λίθος εἴσω
βριθοσύνῃ, μέγα δ᾽ ἀμφὶ πύλαι μύκον, οὐδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὀχῆες 460
ἐσχεθέτην, σανίδες δὲ διέτμαγεν ἄλλυδις ἄλλη

A e Ν e a
AaOS ὑπὸ ριπῆής.

442, οὔασι, pleonastic, like ὀφθαλ-
μοῖσιν ἰδεῖν, ἑκαλέσσατο φωνῇ (I. 161). It
is not necessary to suppose with Ameis
that it implies any emphasis, such as
hearing willingly.

446. πρυμνός, at the base. For this
adverbial use cf. μέσος, ἄκρος, πρῶτος, etc.
The use with a second adj. is however
rare ; with a participle it is not uncom-
mon (λαβρὸς ἐπαιγίζων, etc. ).

447. δήμον ἀρίστω, as A 328, ‘‘the
best of a whole community.”

448. ὀχλίσσειαν, as « 242. Four
MSS. (DG Mor. Bar.) give ὀχλήσειαν (cf.
ἐμόχλεον, 259); but Kallimachos and
Ap. Rhod. read -laceav. The deriva-
tion and connexion of the word with
ὄχλος or μόχλος are very obscure. If it
is conn. with vectis, the F is neglected.
ὀχλεῦνται, & 261, seems to be distinct.

450. Athetized by Ar. and Aristo-
phanes, and omitted by Zenod., as dimi-
nishing the greatness of the feat.

451. For the indic. instead of the
usual subj. after ὡς ὅτε cf. A 422. There
seems however to have been a variant

ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔσθορε φαίδιμος “Ἑκτωρ

φέρῃ from the note of Did. that Ar.
read it διὰ τοῦ ε,

454. πύκα goes with εἴρυντο, στιβαρῶς
with ἀραρυίας. For εἴρυντο cf. A 238.
The σανίδες seem here to mean literally
‘*the boards” of which the two doors
are made, as the epithets shew that
πύλαι cannot mean the opening as op-

osed to the two doors which close it.
n this sense however it is generally
found, e.g. 121, β 344 (where the epithet
δικλίδες, here belonging to πύλαι, is given
to σανίδες).

456. ἐπημοιβοί, apparently this means
‘crossing in the middle”; the κληίς
being a bar to hold them in their place.
A different arrangement is given in Q
453, where the door of Achilles’ hut is
held by a single ἐπιβλής, apparently
identical with the κληίς.

458. διαβάς, setting his legs well
apart. ἀφαυρός is else used only of
persons.

459. Oatpovs, hinges, projecting verti-
cal iron pegs at the top and bottom,
working in stone sockets.

422 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΣ M (x)

νυκτὶ θοῇ ἀτάλαντος ὑπώπια, λάμπε δὲ χαλκῷ
/ \ 4 Α͂ \ \ Ν
σμερδαλέῳ, τὸν ἕεστο περὶ χροΐ, δοιὰ δὲ χερσὶν
δοῦρ᾽ ἔχεν" οὔ κέν τίς μιν ἐρυκάκοι ἀντιβολήσας 465
νόσφι θεῶν, ὅτ᾽ ἐσᾶλτο πύλας" πυρὶ δ᾽ ὄσσε δεδήειν.
κέκλετο δὲ Τρώεσσιν ἑλιξάμενος καθ᾿ ὅμιλον
τεῖχος ὑπερβαίνειν" τοὶ δ᾽ ὀτρύνοντι πίθοντο.
> ’ > e Ἧ a ς , e \ 3 3 A
αὐτίκα δ᾽ οἱ μὲν τεῖχος ὑπέρβασαν, ot δὲ Kat αὐτὰς

ποιητὰς ἐσέχυντο πύλας.

Δαναοὶ δὲ φόβηθεν 470

νῆας ἀνὰ γλαφυράς, ὅμαδος δ᾽ ἀλίαστος ἐτύχθη.

468. ὑπώπια, here in the sense of
‘*face”’ generally ; the phrase is curious,
as it is in the brow, above the eyes, that
we are accustomed to see a dark expres-
sion.

465. ἐρνκάκοι, so MSS. ; Ar. ἐρύκακεν.

466. Hentze and others are inclined

to doubt the genuineness of this line, as
the addition of νόσφι θεῶν, and still more
of ὅτ᾽ ἐσᾶλτο πύλας, is very flat ; while
the last clause seems to contradict the
preceding simile, and may possibly be a
vague reminiscence of ὅσσα dedjew, B
93.
470. ποιητάς = ἐυποιήτας E 466, etc.

THE END OF VOL. I.

Printed by Ἀ. & R. Crark, Edinburgh.

CLASSICAL WORKS.

ARISTOTLE.—THE POLITICS. Edited, after SuSEMIML, by R. Ὁ.
Hicks, M.A., Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, 8vo.
[In the Press.

THE POLITICS. Translated by Rev. J. E. C. WELLDON, M.A.,
Fellow of King’s College, Cambridge, and Head Master of
Harrow School. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d.

THE RHETORIC. By the same Translator. [In the Press.

ATTIC ORATORS.—FROM ANTIPHON TO ISAEOS. By
R. C. Jess, M.A., LL.D., Professor of Greek in the University
of Glasgow. 2 vols. 8vo. 25s.

SELECTIONS FROM ANTIPHON, ANDOKIDES, LYSIAS,
ISOKRATES, and ISAEOS. Edited, with Notes, by Professor
JEBB, Being a companion volume to the preceding work.
8vo. 12s. 6d.

BABRIUS.—Edited, with Introductory Dissertations, Critical Notes,
Commentary, and Lexicon, by Rev. W. GUNION RUTHERFORD,
M.A., LL.D., Head Master of Westminster School. 8vo.
12s. 6d.

CICERO.—THE ACADEMICA. The Text revised and explained
by J. S. Rem, M.L., Litt.D., Fellow of Caius College, Cam-
bridge. 8vo. 15s.

THE ACADEMICS. Translated by J. 5. Rerp, M.L. Second
Edition. 8vo. 5s. 6d.

BURIPIDES.—MEDEA. Edited, with Introduction and Notes, by
A. W. VERRALL, M.A., Fellow and Lecturer of “Trinity College,
Cambridge. 8vo. 78. θά.

HERODOTUS.—BOOKS I-III. THE ANCIENT EMPIRES OF
THE EAST. Edited, with Notes, Introductions, and Appen-
dices, by A. H. SaAycE, Deputy-Professor of Comparative Phil-
ology, Oxford ; Honorary LL.D., Dublin. Demy 8vo. 16s.

CLASSICAL WORKS—Continued.

HOMBR.—ILIAD. BOOKS I, IX., XI, XVI.-XXIV. THE
STORY OF ACHILLES. Edited by the late J. H. Pratt,
M.A., and WALTER Lear, M.A., Fellows of Trinity College,
Cambridge. Second Edition. 6s. :

THE ILIAD. Translated into English Prose. By ANDREW.
Lanc, M.A., WALTER LEAF, M.A., and ERNEST Myers, M.A.
Second Edition. Crown 8vo. 12s. 6d.

THE ODYSSEY. Done into English by S. H. Butcuer, M.A.,
Professor of Greek in the University of Edinburgh, and
ANDREW LANG, M.A., late Fellow of Merton College, Oxford.
Fifth Edition, revised and corrected. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d.

HOMERIC DICTIONARY. For Use in Schools and Colleges.
Translated from the German of Dr. G. AUTENRIETH, with
Additions and Corrections, by R. P. Keser, Ph.D. With
numerous Illustrations. Third Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s.

PHRYNICHUS.—THE NEW PHRYNICHUS; being a Revised
Text of the Ecloga of the Grammarian Phrynichus. With
Introduction and Commentary by Rev. W. GUNION RUTHER-
FORD, M.A., LL.D., Head Master of Westminster School.
8vo. 18s.

PINDAR.—THE EXTANT ODES OF PINDAR. Translated into
English, with an Introduction and short Notes, by ERNEST
Myers, M.A, late Fellow of Wadham College, Oxford.
Second Edition. Crown 8vo. 5s.

THE OLYMPIAN AND PYTHIAN ODES. Edited, with an
Introductory Essay, Notes, and Indexes, by BasiIL GILDER-
SLEEVE, Professor of Greek in the Johns Hopkins University,
Baltimore. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.

PLATO.—PHA:DO. Edited, with Introduction, Notes, and Appen-
dices, by R. D. ARCHER-HIND, M.A., Fellow of Trinity College,
Cambridge. 8vo. 8s. 6d.

TACITUS.—THE ANNALS. Edited, with Introductions and Notes,

by G. O. HoLprooke, M.A., Professor of Latin in Trinity
College, Hartford, U.S.A. With Maps. 8vo. 16s.

THEOCRITUS, BION, and MOSCHUS.—Rendered into English

Prose with Introductory Essay by A. Lanc, M.A. Crown
8vo. 6s.

MACMILLAN AND CO., LONDON.

THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
GRADUATE LIBRARY