The Iliad;

Σ᾿.
nm

ees:
ἀ

THE LIBRARY
OF
THE UNIVERSITY
OF CALIFORNIA
LOS ANGELES

Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2008 with funding from
Microsoft Corporation

http://www.archive.org/details/iliadhom02home

͵
᾿
Π
᾿ ͵
-Ὁ >
7
τ
= h

pei Lr AD

EDITED, WITH APPARATUS CRITICUS, PROLEGOMENA
NOTES, AND APPENDICES

eee Ro RAE. lier. D.

SOMETIME FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE

VOL. i

BOOKS XIII-XXIV

SECOND EDITION

London
MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED

NEW YORK: THE MACMILLAN COMPANY

1902

All rights reserved

x
Pa)

=

cond Baition 1902
Second Ee

PA

ἴω ΄
| Μη! ( O

Vi
PREFACE

TuIs volume requires little preface beyond that which introduced
its predecessor. But attention may be called here to certain
systematic changes made in order to bring the accentuation
into closer harmony with the rules of the ancient prosodists.
Arbitrary though these rules seem, and freely as they are neglected
by modern editors, they are after all our final authority. In
obedience to them ὥς is now written in place of ὡς, except
in the phrases καὶ ὡς, οὐδ᾽ ὡς, while ἤτοι is preferred to ἢ τοι.
and ἔγωγε has supplanted ἐγώ ye. For similar reasons I have
returned to the vulgate νήδυμος in place of ἥδυμος.

In addition to Mr. Bayfield, whose help has been unfailing, |
have also to thank Mr. A. Pallis, who has kindly placed at my
disposal Ms. notes on N-II, prepared for the forthcoming part
of his most interesting translation of the J/iad into modern
vernacular Greek. The commentary will show the free use

which I have made of his kindness.

Oct. 4, 1902.

ν
= Et >
JIG uUi ὧν

ὌΝ
ἌΝ

ἣν

i

ey

a δ...

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ΤῸ THE APPENDICES

ae

. Gold intaglio from Mykene (Schuchh. fig. 281, p. 277) .
2. Diagram of peplos, after Studnicezka

. Hera’s dress (drawn by Mr. R. B. Botheras) 5 :

(2 and 8 are reproduced from Bayfield-Leaf /7iad vol. ii.)

4, 5. Diagrams of the shield of Achilles ᾿ . : : 603,

. Design from Etruscan vase, after Benndorf, in Reichel Hom. Waffen

(ed. 1), p. 134

. Coin of Knossos, after Head Hist. Nuwmoruin, p. 391

9,10. Diagrams to illustrate the harnessing of the chariot (repeated
from 150 ed.) .

13, 14. Diagrams to illustrate Reichel’s theory (Hom. Waffen, ed. 2,

pp. 129, 135) . Ξ ὃ : : : : 625, 62

. Do., do., from Das Joch des Homerischen Wagens in Jahreshefte des

Ost. Arch. Inst. ii. pp. 188 ff. .

16. Illustrations of the yoke, from Corinthian pinakes in Berlin (Reichel

H. W. p. 135)

. Assyrian harness (ibid. p. 138)
. Egyptian A : : ὃ
. Chariot, from the Francois Vase (ibid. p. 134)

. Ivory head from the graves in the lower town of Mykene (ibid. p. 103) .

PROLEGOMENA

I.—ANALYSIS OF THE JZIAD

THE reader will find in the Introductions to the several books a
detailed analysis of the J/iad, with the grounds for the con-
clusions arrived at. It is proposed here to summarise these
conclusions in a form which will give a general idea of the
growth of the poem as conceived by the editor, while avoiding
such a minute partition of different epochs as would convey a
false impression of confidence in the power of critical analysis
to assign every line to its own definite epoch. It is enough if
we can indicate the stages at which new episodes, or imitations
of older ones, were introduced into the ever-growing epos, without
concerning ourselves about the transitional passages composed
only to adapt them to a narrative whose continuity was often
only the result of a conscious literary recension.

Some of these episodes, early as well as late, remained sterile,
and have reached us much as they were first composed ; others,
like the Z/iad as a whole, have given birth to a fresh progeny,
till the entire poem assumes something of the aspect of a
genealogical tree. But in this important respect it differs; that
all generations were alive together, and subject to mutual
reactions like the parts of a living organism. The ancestors
must have been modified by their descendants in a manner
which may defy our powers of analysis; and until the final
literary redaction had come we cannot feel sure that any details
even of the oldest work were secure from the touch of the latest
poet.

If we confine ourselves too rigidly to details, such a con-
sideration will seem fatal to any critical analysis. It has in

VOL. II b

x THE ILIAD

fact wrecked every attempt to find a certain solvent that shall
automatically separate the old from the new, whether the test
is linguistic or historical. Many a method has been proposed,
which up to a certain point seemed irresistible; but there has
always been a residuum which returned to plague the inventor.
All points to the long period of time through which the
poetic growth continued; and it is only in reference to the
poems themselves, not as marking any stage in the history of
Greek culture, that we can speak of the “Homeric Age.” The
poems began when the digamma was a living sound, they lasted
till it had become for Ionia a dead convention. Vowels which
were open for the older poets had become diphthongs for the
new. ‘The first rhapsodies were born in the bronze age, in the
day of the ponderous Mykenaean shield—the last in the iron
age, when men armed themselves with breastplate and light
round buckler. The whole view of life and death, of divine and
human polity had changed. We meet with so many incon-
sistencies so closely interwoven that the tangle may well seem
beyond our powers to unravel.

But when we regard the Epos in large masses we see that
we can roughly range the inconsistent elements towards one
end or the other of a line of development both linguistic and
historical. The main division, that of Zliad and Odyssey, shows
a distinct advance along this line; and the distinction is still
more marked if we group with the Odyssey four books of the
Iliad whose Odyssean physiognomy is well marked. Taking
as our main guide the dissection of the motives of the plot as
shown in its episodes, we find that the marks of lateness, though
nowhere entirely absent, group themselves more numerously in
the later additions; and with this we must be content. The
erowth of the Ziad has been vital, not mechanical; and to a
vital organism we must be satisfied to apply an approximate
method, recognising that the subtlety of the phenomena evades
any mechanical criticism.

For all these reasons I no longer give a tabular analysis of
the Zliad, feeling that it offers a false appearance of rigidity and
accuracy. It seems better only to group together the principal
motives and episodes in the order which may be roughly assigned
for their entrance into the Epic community. They may best be -
classified in four main divisions :—

PROLEGOMENA xi

I.—WMenis. The Quarrel and the Dream; A and B 1-50.

The Aristeia of Agamemnon and Defeat of the Greeks—
A. This episode received accretions down to the latest
period, A 670—761 being distinctly Odyssean.

The Fight at the Ships and the Patrokleia—O 592-746
and II. This portion has been particularly fertile
in growth through all periods (Sarpedon, Euphorbos,
Change of Armour, Catalogue of the Myrmidons).

The Arming of Achilles, T 357-424.

[The Slaying of Polydoros and Lykaon? YT 381-end,
Φ 34—-155.]

The Slaying of Hector; [@ 540-end ?], X 1—404 with
but slight additions.

Il —First Expansions—

The Assembly in B 87—485—violently adapted and
expanded at a late period.

The review of the army and opening of the battle,
A 220-544, introducing

The Aristeia of Diomedes, E—Z. The original nucleus
is no doubt old, but has given birth to a long lineage,
of which much is late—Sarpedon and Tlepolemos, the
Wounding of Aphrodite, the Wounding of Ares, and
the story of Lykurgos. The visit of Hector to Troy
shews affinity with the Ransoming of Hector.

The Duel of Aias and Hector, H 1—312.

The Aristeia of Idomeneus, N 136-672. This knows
nothing of the Wall, but we may admit that it is
possibly as late as M, only representing the development
of the battle on the older lines.

The Fight over Patroklos in P probably contains old
material, but has been so worked over and expanded
that it belongs substantially to later stages.

I11.—Second Expansions—

The Battle at the Wall in M. This new conception
marks the third stage. It was probably at this point
that Sarpedon and his Lykians were first introduced.
The episodes in E and II where he reappears will
therefore belong to the later part of this period.

The Deceiving of Zeus, N 1-125, 795-837, ΚΞ,

ΧΙ THE ILIAD

O 1-366. For the opening of & see Introduction to
that book.

The Making of the Arms, >, T 1—

The Fight with the River, ® 136—3

The τς τ of Patroklos, Ψ 1—256.

The Duel of Menelaos and Paris, [, A 1-219, may
possibly belong to the previous stage, but is later
than the Duel of Aias and Hector, and is therefore
probably to be placed here.

The Theomachy, T 1—74, ® 305-513, is hard to date,
but is later than the Fight with the River, and if we
attribute it to this stage, it must come at the end
of it.

Latest Expansions—

The Embassy to Achilles, I. This itself has been con-
siderably expanded by the introduction of Phoinix, and
brought into the Jiiad by its prologue, the κόλος
μάχη in ©.

The Doloneia, K.

The Aeneid, T 79-352.

The Funeral Games, VY 257-897, including the later
expansion in 798—883.

The Ransoming of Hector, 0.

(The Reconcihation, T 40—5356, may belong to the pre-

ceding stage; if so, it has been later adapted to the

Embassy.)

04.

Ve

I. The Menis has already been outlined and characterised
in vol. 1.; but one noteworthy fact must be added to what is
there said. The interest of the story from beginning to end is
almost purely human. The gods provide a background or under-
plot, but their interference is such as becomes the rulers of the
world, not partisans in the battles. They nowhere take any
part in the fighting; indeed, they seldom appear at all on the
earthly stage. The intervention of Athene in the first book is
expressly confined to Achilles alone—“Of the rest no man
beheld her’”—as though to let us know that this is the way in
which the gods speak to the mind of man. Apollo invisible
stuns Patroklos, and Athene appears for a moment in order to
bring Hector to a stand before Achilles. In other words, the

PROLEGOMENA xiii

gods show themselves just so much as to let us know what are
the powers which control mankind from heaven; but none the less
it is purely human motive and human action which guide the plot.

In this the Menis is markedly different from the later
portions of the Zliad. Even in the Odyssey Athene is always at
hand, or Ino or Kirke, to give supernatural aid to Odysseus. But
in the Menis we are always among real men, and not in fairyland.

IJ.—Of the earlier expansions the most remarkable is un-
questionably the Aristeia of Diomedes. The addition of this, if
it is really as early as it seems, made the first rift in the unity
of the plot of the Jad. The feats of Achilles were over-
shadowed by those of Diomedes, and the perfect balance of the
story was gravely impaired. But it must not be forgotten that
we suffer far more from this than did the original hearers. To
them the Menis as a whole was perfectly familiar; it had not to
be sought out under the mass of material by which it is now
overlain. The Aristeia of Diomedes was a new poem, and though
it was incorporated with the MMenis, it was not liable to be
confused with it,as it is by us. The Menzs itself could still be
demanded intact from the bard. Thus the addition of Diomedes,
though it had the obvious intention of exalting him at the
expense of Achilles, was far less damaging to the unity of the
Menis than it now appears. And in its earlier stages it contained
none of the miraculous exploits which so far outbid Achilles
those where Diomedes encounters and conquers the great powers
of heaven, Aphrodite and Ares. These enter the story only at a
later period, and can certainly not be earlier than the second
expansions, when the gods of Olympos were treated with far
scanter respect than in older days.

If the Aristeia of Idomeneus is rightly referred to this early
period, it must mark a period of languor and decadence in
poetical power. But even if the groundwork of it is so early,
there must be a great deal of later work in it.

IlI.—The second expansions shew us a great renascence of
Epic poetry, combined with an entirely new attitude towards the
original story. The chief marks of this period are two—the
introduction of the gods as essential actors in the story; and of
the wall round the camp as a means of diversifying the battle
scenes. Both these conceptions are worked out with extra-
ordinary vigour and richness of imagination. The two great

χὶν THE ILIAD

poems of the Deceiving of Zeus and the Making of the Arms are
second to none, whether in conception or execution. It is
probable that we have them in something very like their original
form. They are clearly not so much expansions of the MJenis as
new and splendid poems only superficially added to it, compositions
due solely to the joy of beautiful creation.

The Duel of Paris and Menelaos bears the same stamp of
individual conception, and must I think be classed with them.
The reasons for regarding it as later than its doublet, the Duel of
Aias and Hector, are given in the introduction to H; we can
now add the treatment of Aphrodite at the end of T, which
is entirely in the spirit of the ᾿Απάτη. Whether we can place
the Theomachy (®) in the same class is a matter for individual
judgment; the free handling of things divine is there pushed
into the region of burlesque. But the Fight with the River in the
same book shews us, in the grandeur of its super-human elements,
the heights to which the conception of gods mingling with men
could raise heroic poetry.

IV.—tThe latest expansions are thoroughly in the spirit of
those which precede, and are only separated from them on
account of linguistic evidence, which definitely classes them with
the Odyssey rather than the rest of the Zliad. They contain
alike the height of rhetoric in the ninth book, and of pathos in
the twenty-fourth. They are a standing and eloquent reminder
that we must not regard lateness as any indication of inferiority.
On the other hand we may very often take inferiority as a sign
of lateness. For the combination of all these diverse elements
into a continuous whole involved the constant additions of
transitional passages which, from the very nature of the con-
ditions that called them into existence, could hardly be inspired
by the Muse. They were rather the work of the editor inspired
by the statesman, and honestly shew their origin. It is needless
to discuss them as a class—they deserve consideration only in
detail and in their proper places.

== Tan SCHOnU

The scholia on the Jiiad form a very large and _hetero-
geneous collection of comments, critical, explanatory, and
illustrative. Like the poems themselves they are the work of

PROLEGOMENA XV

many generations of students, and received additions certainly
from the first till the twelfth century a.v. The unwieldy
collection of Eustathios (about 1160 A.D.) may perhaps be taken
as closing the scholastic period—there is no evidence of fresh
material added since his day.

Two main sources of the scholia can easily be discerned.
There is first an epitome of the works of four scholars, Didymos,
Aristonikos, Nikanor and Herodianos. Secondly there are large
extracts from the ‘Ounpixa “ητήματα compiled by Porphyrios
the neo-Platonist '-about 260 A.D. But after making allowance
for these, there remains a large mass of anonymous notes,
dealing with grammar, exegesis, mythology, and literary questions,
and lying beyond our powers of investigation.

The ζητήματα of Porphyrios may be briefly dismissed. They
are the last representatives of the “problems” which were a
favourite exercise for critical ingenuity, at least as far back as
the time of Aristotle, among whose lost works was a book called
ἀπορήματα Ὁμηρικά. The idea of the ἀπόρημα was that a
eritic stated some objection or difficulty in the poems; and his
objection (ἔνστασις) called forth an explanation (λύσις). But
this debate gradually passed into a mere exercise of wits, and
pedants were accustomed to invent the flimsiest objections in
order to shew their ingenuity in refuting them. A specimen of
this futile exercise will be found in the note on I’ 313; and of
the results to which it led, in that on T 269-72. Porphyrios
gives us a Selection of his predecessors’ work from Aristotle down ;
his work is of interest as an important contribution to the
history of the earlier criticism, but is of little value for the
elucidation of the text.

The scholia of the “ quartet,’ Didymos, Aristonikos, Nikanor,
and Herodianos, are, however, of a very different order; it is to
them almost solely that we owe our knowledge of Aristarchos,
and indeed of sound Greek criticism. Fragments of them are
scattered through various collections of scholia. Of these Schol.
A, Schol. B, and Schol. T have been published by the Clarendon
Press. Schol. B is a primary authority for Porphyrios only—
it contains little else but what appears in a better form in A and
T. The remains of the Quartet are found mainly in these two;

1 This identification has been doubted, but without sufficient grounds. See
Schrader Porph. pp. 339-350.

xvl THE ILIAD

and far more abundantly in A. T has a certain amount of
independent extracts from the same source, and though it is on
the whole less accurate, it often serves to correct A, and is
invaluable in those portions of the Z/iad which A has lost. But
A still remains by far the most important authority for all these
critical notes.

Some important side-lights have recently been thrown upon
the question by the Genevese scholia, published by Prof. Nicole
(Schol. U), and the papyrus fragment bearing the name of
Ammonios, discovered by Messrs. Grenfell and Hunt. These
prove the existence of a much larger collection of Alexandrine
doctrine than that which we had learnt to know from Schol. A.
This was also based upon Aristarchos through Didymos and
Aristonikos ; but whether it came from the same epitome of
their works as A or was independently extracted by Ammonios
or another we cannot tell. It seems, however, that this collection
was the source of the statements as to Aristarchos and his
doctrine which are contained in Schol. T, Schol. U, and Eustathios,
but are not found in A. We have evidence of the full collection
only for one book, ®, nor can we say that. it ever included the
rest of the Jliad.'

There can be no question as to the source of the critical
scholia, for the scribe of A has fortunately told us in similar
words at the end of every book of the //iad. The following note
at the end of I’ may serve as a specimen :--παράκειται τὰ
᾿Αριστονίκου σημεῖα, καὶ τὰ Διδύμου περὶ τῆς ᾿Αρισταρχείου
διορθώσεως, τινὰ δὲ καὶ ἐκ τῆς ᾿Ιλιακῆς προσωιδίας Ηρωδιανοῦ
καὶ Νικάνορος περὶ στιγμῆς. Of the four authors named,
Nikanor and Herodianos are the latest; they lived under
Hadrian and Marcus Aurelius. Both were followers οὗ
Aristarchos, though not always well-informed. Nikanor’s
studies on punctuation earned him the uncomplimentary nickname
of Xtuypatias. They often have an important bearing on inter-
pretation. The notes of Herodianos on prosody—which in the
Greek sense included accentuation—are naturally of less critical
value, but contain much valuable information.

It is, however, in the excerpts from Aristonikos and Didymos,
who were contemporaries under Augustus, that the chief value

1 See Allen in C. 1. xiv. (1900) 14 ff., and Introduction to ®.

PROLEGOMENA xvii

of the scholia is found; for these profess to give us the direct
teaching of Aristarchos himself.

The great critic marked the lines of Homer upon which he
commented with various signs, of which only four are of importance
—the ὀβελός ( — ), the διπλῆ ( b— ), the διπλῆ περιεστιγμένη
( τ), and the ἀστερίσκος (*). Of these the first marked
lines which were “athetized” or condemned as spurious; the
second was a general mark of reference to notes on grammar,
Homeric usage, etc.; the διπλῆ περιεστιγμένη was aflixed to
passages where Aristarchos differed -from Zenodotos; the
ἀστερίσκος to those which recurred elsewhere in Homer. Where
Aristarchos regarded the repetition as faulty he also added the
ὀβελός (ἀστερίσκος σὺν ὀβελῶι). The work of Aristonikos περὶ
τῶν σημείων gave the notes of Aristarchos to which these marks
referred.

Didymos “on the recension of Aristarchos” addressed him-
self, with the colossal industry which earned him the name of
χαλκέντερος, to Aristarchos’ textual criticism as exhibited in
the readings of his recension of Homer. He naturally often
touches on the same matters as Aristonikos; where they differ,
there can be little doubt that Didymos is the safer guide.
Differences are neither few nor unimportant; for it seems that
by the end of the first century Bc. the tradition as to the
teaching of Aristarchos was already dying out. From the way
in which Didymos speaks it is clear that he had no trustworthy
copies of the two editions of the recension, often though he refers
to them. Indeed tradition must have soon grown unsafe, for
Ammonios, who succeeded Aristarchos, found it necessary to
write a special treatise to prove that there were not more (than
two) editions of the recension.’ Hence Didymos often enough
has to leave the reading of Aristarchos uncertain.

The works of the four are presented in the most condensed
form, in abstracts so brief as sometimes to be unintelligible, and
with no names attached. But in a large majority of cases the
contents are sufficient to enable us to assign the extracts without
hesitation, If they deal with punctuation, they belong to
Nikanor; if to prosody or accentuation, to Heriodanos. The

1 See note on Καὶ 398. ‘There is little τῆς ᾿Αρισταρχείου διορθώσεως, sc. τῶν δύο.
doubt that this is the meaning of the Lehrs dv. p. 23.
expression μὴ γεγονέναι πλείονας ἐκδόσεις

xvill THE ILIAD

excerpts from Aristonikos deal with some critical sign and
generally begin with the word ὅτι, before which we must
understand ἡ διπλῆ (or ὁ ὀβελός, ἀστερίσκος, or whatever is
the sign affixed in the text to the line in question) παράκειται,
the mark is affixed because, and the reason follows.?

The scholia of Didymos cannot always be recognised with
the same certainty, and the attribution of some of them has
been disputed. But most doubtful points have been cleared up
by Ludwich’s masterly discussion in the first volume of his
Aristarchs Homerische Textkritik aus den Fragmenten des Didymos
hergestellt und beurtheilt. This is itself based on Lehrs’ great
work de Aristarchi studiis Homericis, which first sifted and
explained the mass of material. It may be noted as a curious
fact that many of the most important scholha of Didymos seem
to have been added by a happy afterthought on the part of the
scribe of A; they are there 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,

As an illustration of the manner in which the scholia are
analysed, we may take those on B 160—7, which contain
excerpts from all the chief authorities except Porphyrios.

To 160—1—2 in the text are prefixed the ἀστερίσκος and
ὀβελός. Schol.: ἀπὸ τούτου ἕως τοῦ “ἐν Tpoint ἀπόλοντο,"
(162) ἀθετοῦνται στίχοι τρεῖς, καὶ ἀστερίσκοι παράκεινται,
ὅτι οἰκειότερον ἐν τῶι τῆς ᾿Αθηνᾶς λόγωι ἑξῆς εἰσὶ τεταγμένοι
(sc. 176), νῦν δὲ κυμικώτερον (κοινότερον Dind., ἀνοικειότερον
Lehrs) λέγονται. This is of course by Aristonikos.

161 has the διπλῆ (it should be the διπλῆ περιεστιγμένη)
as well as the ἀστερίσκος σὺν ὀβελῶ.. Schol.: ᾿Αργείην
‘Erévnv: ὅτι Znvodotos γράφει ““᾿Αργείην θ᾽ “Enrévnv” σὺν τῶι
συνδέσμωι, ὥστε εἶναι χωρὶς καύχημα, καὶ σὺν τούτωι τὴν
“Βλένην. οὐ λέγει δὲ οὕτως, ἀλλ᾽ αὐτὴν τὴν ᾿λένην καύχημα.
Aristonikos again, 67s explaining the διπλῆ περιεστιγμένη.
Notice the characteristically flat contradiction with which
Zenodotos is disposed of.

1 It is not quite safe to assume that have been collected and discussed by
every scholion beginning with ὅτι is by Friedlander (G6ttingen, 1853).
Aristonikos, for the later scholiasts some- 2 Leipzig, vol. i., 1884; vol. ii. (which
times used the word as a compendium [15 controversial and of less importance),
for σημειωτέον ὅτι, “note that,” ageneral 1885.
introduction to any remark they may have 8 Ist edition, 1833; 2nd, 1865; 3rd,
to make.—The fragments of Aristonikos 1882.

PROLEGOMENA xix

*TApyeinv:] ἡ Λακωνικὴ πέμπτον τῆς ὅλης Πελοποννήσου.
This is a specimen of the poorer sort of exegetic scholia. The ἢ
prefixed in Dindorf’s edition indicates that the scholion is “ inter-
marginal ’—not one of the main scholia but squeezed into the
narrow margin beside the text. The lemma ᾿Αργείην is added
by Dindorf without comment.

162 φίλης ἀπὸ πατρίδος αἴης: οὐκ ἀναστρεπτέον τὴν
πρόθεσιν (i.e. we are not to write ἄπο) ὡς Τυραννίων καὶ
Πτολεμαῖος: ὁπότε yap γενικῆι συντάττεται ἡ ἀπό, τηρεῖ τὸν
τόνον: “καὶ γάρ τίς θ᾽ ἕνα μῆνα μένων ἀπὸ ἧς ἀλόχοιο
(292). This deals with accentuation and is therefore from
Herodianos. It is, however, imperfectly extracted, as it omits
part of the doctrine of the anastrophe of prepositions. Hence
Lehrs adds from the completer schol. on > 64, after the words
ἡ ἀπό, μὴ μεταξὺ πιπτουσῶν λέξεων, Kal σημαίνει TO ἄπωθεν.
Tyrannio and Ptolemy of Askalon held that when ἀπὸ meant
“far from,” ἄπωθεν, it should always be accented ἄπο. Herodianos
controverts this view."

163 “otto “κατὰ λαὸν" συμφώνως εἶχον ἅπασαι---
Didymos, another intermarginal addition. “All the editions,”
ἅπασαι sc. ἐκδόσεις, had κατά: the variant implied is pera,
which still survives in a good many mss. It was probably
found in MSs. generally in Aristarchos’ time, but he preferred
the reading adopted by those of his predecessors who had pub-
lished more or less critical editions. Note the characteristically
Didymean οὕτω, which shews that his notes were adapted to the
Aristarchean text. The text of A, though largely brought into
harmony with Aristarchos, often differs, so that οὕτω frequently
indicates a reading which is not that of the text to which it is
appended.

164 has dotepicxos σὺν ὀβελῶι. Schol.: cots δ᾽ ἀγανοῖς"
χωρὶς τοῦ δ᾽ εἶχον αἱ χαριέσταται, σοῖς ἀγανοῖς" Kal ἡ
᾿Αριστοφάνους οὕτως εἶχεν. ἀγανοῖς δέ, ἄγαν προσηνέσι,
πράοις, ὑπάγεσθαι δυναμένοις" οὕτω γὰρ ἔδει μαλάσσειν τὸν
θυμὸν ζέοντα. ἀθετεῖται δὲ καὶ ἀστερίσκος παράκειται, ὅτι
καὶ οὗτος πρὸς ᾿Αθηνᾶς οἰκείως πρὸς ᾿Οδυσσέα λέγεται (SC.
180), καὶ ψεῦδος περιέχει νῦν. οὐ γὰρ ἡ ᾿Αθηνᾶ παρίσταται

e =)

ἑκάστωι, ἀλλ᾽ ὁ ᾿Οδυσσεύςς Here there are three hands. The

1 His doctrine is, however, far from clear ; see Lehrs Qu. Epicae, 94 ff.

"Ὅς THE ILIAD

first part, to οὕτως εἶχεν, is of course by Didymos; the third,
from ἀθετεῖται, by Aristonikos. The explanation of ἀγανοῖς
belongs to the exegetic class, and as we should expect, appears
in B in similar words. The same is the case with the inter-
marginal note which follows, *iAwTéov τὸ ayavos: τοιοῦτο γὰρ
TO α πρὸ τοῦ ἡ : ie. as we see from the fuller form in B, we
must not read, as some did, dyavos, for a never has the rough
breathing before y, except in ayvos. This may come from
Herodianos.

167 has the διπλῆ. Schol. “τελεία (a full stop) ἐπὶ τὸ
ἀΐξασα: ἀσύνδετον yap τὸ ἑξῆς πρὸς τὸ ἐπάνω --- Nikanor.
*6re ὄρος ὁ “Odvpmros—Aristonikos. The διπλῆ here marks a
Homeric usage, namely that Ὄλυμπος means the earthly
mountain, not as in later Greek a celestial abode of the gods.

111.---- ΤῊΝ MANUSCRIPTS

Since the appearance of the previous volume Mr. T. W.
Allen has published in the Classical Review (vol. xiii. 110, 334,
429; xiv. 290, 384; xv. 4, 241) a series of important papers,
which, among other valuable contributions to the history of the
text of the J/iad, exhibit a general view of the large number of Mss.
of the J/iad examined by him.’ The main result is this—that
though we can see traces of different archetypes in prae-Byzantine
days, yet for many centuries a process of assimilation has been
going on, due mainly, no doubt, to copying in the text of variants
added in the margin; so that by the tenth or eleventh century
almost all copies had been reduced to an approximately uniform
aspect, and it is now impossible to reconstruct the genealogies
of existing MSS. ‘There is only one well-marked family—that
which in Mr. Allen’s list is called 4, and in the present edition
is represented by the mss. P, Q, R, L, and Lips.

There are, however, several other groups, hardly distinct
enough to be called families, yet clearly descending from different
archetypes—archetypes written, that is, when the process of

1 Messrs. Monro and Allen’s text with
Apparatus Criticus appeared too late to
give me the advantage of consulting it
for this edition. I have, however, quoted
in inverted commas (‘‘ Vat. 17’) a few
interesting readings from Allen’s paper
in ©. 1. xiii. 113 f. The first volume of

Ludwich’s large critical edition came into
my hands only when these pages were
already in the press. It will of course
take a long time before this large mass
of new material can be adequately
analysed.

PROLEGOMENA ΧΧῚ

assimilation had already proceeded far. Several of these have
been mentioned in vol. i, pp. 26 ffi Of these G Mor Bar has
a certain importance, because G appears to have been taken as
the foundation of the editio princeps, and so became the progenitor
of the printed vulgate. It is curious that whereas the first
Aldine edition follows the princeps very closely, the second often
returns to the readings of G even when the
Demetrius Chalcondylas, had rightly abandoned them.

H Vrat. d are so closely connected that in all probability
the latter has been copied from the former. H stands alone in
showing decided affinity with one of the earliest texts, Pap. .

D and U are closely related, especially in the earlier books,
but show no very marked individuality. The same may be said
of S Cant, which, however, give a rather larger number of peculiar
readings.

A is unique, as showing a text which has apparently been
altered under the influence of Aristarchos. It is generally an
average vulgate; but here and there we find readings which in
all probability have been introduced in order to bring the text
into harmony with the scholia. Such a phenomenon is quite
isolated—but then the scholia too, in their fulness and learning,
are also an isolated phenomenon. It is noteworthy that T seems
to be next of kin to A, though at a considerable distance, in the
text as well as the scholia.

C calls for no special notice; it is the least distinguished
representative of the vulgate. But J has a strong claim to
regard as standing for a fairly distinct line of tradition. It is
the only member of its family as yet collated—it is young and
most carelessly written. But it has a considerable number of
remarkable variants; and it is further noteworthy because an
ancestor, lineal or collateral, was before Eustathios, who con-
tinually gives variants known from no other Ms. It is desirable
that other relations of J should be found and examined; in
the meantime we can only say that with a distinct individuality
the ms. shews some distant connexion with the next family.’

first editor,

1See Neumann, Zustathios als Besonderheiten unsern noch heute vor-

kritische Quelle fiir den Iliastext in
Jahrb. fiir class. Philologie 146 ff. He
knows of course nothing of J, but con-
cludes that ‘‘Eust. benutzte eine
Iliashandschrift, welche trotz mancher

handenen Handschriften mit Ausnahme
des Venetus A, namentlich aber den
codd. L G, im Wesentlichen glich.”
But Eust. clearly had more than one Ms.
before him.

XX THE ILIAD

It seems, however, that the J stock contains few members;
Allen appears to have found only two which are related to it
(ὦ £. xiii, p. 110 (ἡ). I suspect, however, that his “N 4” must

be added).
But the main interest of the mss. of the //iad centres in
Allen’s ‘hk’ family. Of the representatives which I have

collated, P evidently best preserves the pure tradition. R is
largely contaminated with the vulgate, and in parts seems to be
more nearly related to DU than to P; but it contains some
good peculiar readings which probably come from the family
ancestor. ) is so corrupt and so ignorantly written that it is
often difficult to say if an apparent variant is not merely a wild
blunder of the transcriber; but this cannot always be the
case, and it preserves no doubt many family readings which have
been lost by its relations. Probably the oldest extant member
of the group is Ven. 458, which I designate by X. This is
known to me only through Ludwich, who gives a number
of schola and variants in Homerica (Programm, Konigsberg,
SNe

The family is remarkable not only for the very large number
of independent readings which it presents, but for the large pro-
portion of them which are recognized in the Aristarchean scholia.
Allen in C. δ. xiv. 290 gives the following figures, which are
compiled from eight Italian Mss., but probably do not greatly
differ from those of P Q R—

Peculiar readings 221

of which there were adopted by

Aristarchos 44
Aristophanes if
Zenodotos i
Ancient but not Aristarchean 19
No ancient authority 150

It is quite clear, as Allen points out, that figures such as
these do not result from any deliberate recension of the text;
“the ancient readings vary in number from book to book, belong
to different and contrary sources, and in all cases are merely a
tithe of what we know from other authorities to have existed.’

1 See also Allen in C. R. xiv. 244.

PROLEGOMENA XX1il

The obvious explanation of the phenomena is that the family
descends from an ancient archetype, and has by some means been
kept free for a certain period from the levelling influences of
contamination. We know that Aristarchos formed an eclectic
text by comparison of various ancient Mss. and “ editions.” If by
some chance one of his MSs., or a copy of it, had lain hidden for
a few hundred years, and then suddenly been brought into the
bookselling trade as an archetype, say between the fifth and the
tenth cent. A.D., we should have precisely the phenomena presented
by the ‘i’ family. There is nothing improbable in such a
supposition. Habent sua fata libelli. An enterprising publisher
at the sale of an antiquarian library in Byzantium would solve
the whole problem ; and so would a hundred similar possibilities.
Mr. Allen correctly points out that the papyri shew no trace of
the existence of the family for the post-Aristarchean period, and
says that such a “disappearance and emergence would be an
unparalleled literary katavothra.” But it is no more wonderful
than the disappearance and emergence, say, of Tischendorf’s x,
which has had such deep influence on N.T. criticism. Of course
the fact would be incredible, if we supposed that a whole family
existed throughout, but when all turns on the existence of a
single archetype, there is little cause for surprise.

Mr. Allen tentatively suggests as an alternative explanation,
“the adscription and absorption of marginal readings ... I
suppose the ancestor of ἡ, a MS. of some not very ancient period,
certainly Byzantine, to have exhibited a vulgate text with a
copious selection of variants in the margin, variants not chosen
as preceding from one or another critic, but as alternatives
to the text.’ This seems to me to explain nothing, for it raises
the obvious question, whence came these variants? They are
obviously not conjectural; they do not belong to the common
stock of variants which we find in the text or margin of the
vulgate copies. Therefore they must have come from some
peculiar MS. or MSS., and we have again to ask as before how this
MS. or MSS. disappeared and emerged, having left no trace on the
papyri of the intermediate age.

CORRIGENDA ET ADDENDA

VOL. I

Page 11, note on A 97, line 11, for ‘p 548’ read “Φ 548,’ and modify the whole note
in accordance with the view taken on the latter passage.
3, noteon A117. The emendation ‘év παρενθέσει᾽ is certainly wrong. The
Greek for ‘in parenthesis’ is διὰ μέσου ; the Lexica give no better authority
for παρένθεσις in this sense than Quintilian and Eust., and I doubt if the
word ever occurs in the scholia. Certainly it is not common enough to be
expressed by a contraction such as ἐν πθει. Generally ἐν ἤθει is used by the
scholiasts to express any assumed or artificial tone, including both what we
6811 ‘purely rhetorical’ and ironical phrases. Here the words point out the
sarcasm conveyed by the statement of the obvious fact, ‘Of cowrse I would
rather see my folk safe than lost.’
,, 35, App. Crit. on A 453, ἠμὲν δὴ is ‘Spitzner’s’ conj., not ‘ Bekker’s.’
,, 69, note on B 278, line 4 from end, for ‘frequently’ read ‘four times’; see
note on ® 550.
,, 114, App. Crit. on B 848 ; this note requires expansion ; see note on Φ 154.
,, 114, App. Crit. on B 850, for ‘Schol. A 239’ read ‘ Porph. in Schol. B on Φ 158,
Schol. Q on A 239,’
,, 202, App. Crit. on E118, the scholion referred to as ‘corrupt’ appears to be
sound ; see Allen in C. &. xiv. p. 9561. The variant actually occurs in Pap. 7,
see App. F.
227, note on Εἰ 484, the statement as to ‘the effect of the bucolic diaeresis ’
must be corrected by reference to App. N, 20.
., 301, note on H 36, first line, for ‘indic.’ read ‘infin.’
5, 511; note on H i171, for. 5.5. Κ᾿ 1. 41 read “G7. ΝΡ
,, 865, App. Crit. on © 493-6, ‘om. Zen.’ should according to Ludwich (Phil.
Woch. 1901, col. 297) be ‘a6, Zen.,’ on the ground that περιγράφει, the word
here used, implies only athetesis, not omission. but the phrase καθόλου
περιγράφειν (Aristonikos on B 156, If 432) seems decisive in favour of the

latter.
,, 369. The latter part of the note on © 557-8 must be corrected by reference to
App. H.

,, 373, App. Crit., last line, for “ προσέφη᾽ read ‘ μετέφη."

,, 417. The note on λέξεο (I 617) must be corrected by reference to that on T 10.

., 520, App. Crit. on A 794-5, ‘om. Zen.’ The word is again περιγράφει, see
above. ᾿

VOL. ΤΙ

Page 117, App. Crit. on O 192, for ‘Schol. L’ read ‘Schol. A.’

,, 209, note on Π 779, for ‘779=258’ read ‘779= 58.’

., 516, note on Ψ 639-40. It is of course possible that the author of the couplet
intended πλήθει πρόσθε βαλόντε to mean winning by numerical superiority,
i.e. by taking advantage of the division of labour explained in the following
lines. All the artificial explanations given in the note are based on the
assumption, which appears to be justified, that πλῆθος means mudtitude,
not majority, and therefore cannot be applied to two persons.

χχὶν

Ν
INTRODUCTION

Wira this book begins a great retardation in the story of the Iliad. From
the beginning of N till we return to the Μῆνις near the end of O, the
action does not advance ; every step gained by either side is exactly counter-
balanced by a corresponding success on the other, so that things are brought
back to the point at which we start. From time to time the story becomes
confused and then again flows on clearly for a while. In order to dis-
entangle the original elements we must be guided by these passages of clear
narrative, regarding the intervals of cénfusion as the joints by which they
have been patched together.

Looking at the three books N = O together, we see that they contain two
main stories—the Aristeia of Idomeneus, and the Deceiving of Zeus. The
former occupies the bulk of N, while the latter includes the main part of =
and the first 366 lines of Ὁ.

The Aristeia of Idomeneus seems to be a work of the same class as the
Aristeia of Diomedes in Τὰ, and is composed for the special honour of Cretan
heroes. That it does not belong to the later strata of the Iliad is clear from
the fact that it altogether ignores the wall. Not only is there no mention
of any fortitication between 124 and 679, but in 385, and perhaps in 326,
chariots are introduced exactly as if the battle were in the open plain. The
episode was, in fact, designed for insertion into the retreat of the Greeks
as we left it at the end of A. Aias was there left covering the retirement ;
a poet, wishing to do honour to Idomeneus, conceived the idea of making
him sally forth from the camp and for a time stem the advance of the
Trojans. The Aristeia at one time joined the end of A to O 592, where we
suppose the Μίηνις to begin again.

Subsequently, when the idea of the Greek wall had been introduced with
the Teichomachy in M, an alternative poem was composed to fill the same
place. Here it was Poseidon who took the leading part in staying the
advance of Hector, and it was by the wiles of Hera that he was enabled to
escape the notice of Zeus in doing so. The two episodes could not stand
together, as they occupied the same space of time. When the final redaction
of the Iliad took place, the editor set to work to weld the two into a con-
tinuous narrative. This he did by breaking up the ᾿Απάτη into several
parts, among which the Aristeia was inserted almost whole, by the aid_ of
several transitional passages. Details will come most conveniently in the
Introduction to =; we shall here assume that to the ᾿Απάτη belong
N 1-125 and 795-837.

VOL. II B

2 IAIAAOC Ν (xim1)

Turning now to the intervening portion, we note first that 206-239 is
clearly an added passage designed to bring the Aristeia and the ᾿Απάτη into
connexion. It contains as we should expect many difficulties and obscurities ;
see notes on 207, 211, 237. After this meeting Poseidon disappears from
the scene except for the short recapitulation in 345-360, which is an equally
obvious addition ; he has nothing to do with the Aristeia. Doubts have
also been thrown on 266—294, but they cannot be regarded as fundamental ;
and till we reach 672 the narrative flows smoothly. The battle-scenes are
vigorous and varied, though they shew a marked peculiarity in the repeated
taunts of the victors and a fondness for the description of ghastly wounds.

But from 673 to 794 all is confusion. The account of the forces arrayed
in the centre is clearly post-Homeric, and shews marked signs of Attic
influence ; the effect produced by the Lokrian bowmen is not epic ; and the
scene between Hector and Polydamas is weak and inconsequent in the last
degree. The wall is again introduced in order to lead back to the ᾿Απάτη,
and it is likely that we have here a specimen of the work of the final
diaskeuast of the Iliad.

It is not easy, or indeed necessary, to speak with confidence of the
position occupied by 126-205. But it may be noted that when 206-239
has been cut out, the general effect is,rather that of the opening of a new
battle ; the words used have clearly no relation to the critical position
described at the end of M. It is probable, however, that the original
opening of the Aristeia has been suppressed in favour of the interview
between Poseidon and Idomeneus, and that some explanation was there
given of the reason why Idomeneus is unarmed and out of the battle.

In 1-125, regarded as part of the ᾿Απάτη, the only critical difficulty is
in the speech of Poseidon (95-124), with its strong evidence of double
recension, The gorgeous imagery of the opening is entirely in the spirit of
the ᾿Απάτη, and shews a clear tendency towards the ‘romanticism’ from
which the epic poets are as a rule notably averse.

=

IAIAAOC N

Mayu ἐπὶ ταῖς naucin.

’ 5 “- / \
Ζεὺς δ᾽ ἐπεὶ οὖν Τρῶάς te καὶ “Extopa νηυσὶ πέλασσε,

\ Yj \ a / bd / w&\

τοὺς μὲν ἔα παρὰ τῆισι πόνον τ ἐχέμεν καὶ ὀϊζὺν
/ Die N \ f / ” ,
νωλεμέως, αὐτὸς δὲ πάλιν τρέπεν ὄσσε φαεινώ,
Ἅ δ 9 . / rn , 3

νόσφιν ἐφ᾽ ἱπποπόλων Θρηικῶν καθορώμενος aiav

Μυσῶν τ᾽ ἀγχεμάχων καὶ ἀγαυῶν ᾿Ἱππημολγῶν

or

γλακτοφάγων, ᾿Αβίων τε, δικαιοτάτων ἀνθρώπων.

2. mapa: περὶ Zen. Aph. (Ar. διχῶς 2): τινὲς πρός Sch. T.
δ. ἀγχικάχων Η Vr. A.

Zen. 3. Tpanen ().
δικαιοτάτων T “Vat. 16” and ap. Did.

ἐχέμεν : ὀχέμεν (1)
6. T ἀβίων τε 1).

2. τοὺς μέν, both Greeks and Trojans.

3. πάλιν, away (cf. 427, Φ 415, Aisch.
Ag. 777 παλιντρόποις ὄμμασι etc. ), though
the general direction remains the same
(N.W.). Zeus is still on Ida, see A 182,
M 252; but it does not follow, as Por-
phyrios argues, that the Thracians meant
were the Asiatic branch of the Thracian
stock, the Bithynians. Similarly the
Mucoi are evidently not the Asiatic
tribe S. of the Propontis (B 858), but the
parent stock who had remained in the
old home, and were afterwards called
Μοισοί: οἱ Μυσοί, Θρᾶικες ὄντες Kal αὐτοί,
καὶ ods νῦν Μοισοὺς καλοῦσιν: ἀφ᾽ ὧν
ὡρμήθησαν καὶ οἱ νῦν μεταξὺ Λυδῶν καὶ
Φρυγῶν καὶ Τρώων οἰκοῦντες Μυσοί.
καὶ Ὅμηρον δὲ ὀρθῶς εἰκάζειν μοι δοκεῖ
Ποσειδώνιος τοὺς ἐν τῆι Εὐρώπηι Μυσοὺς
κατονομάζειν, Strabo vil. p. 295. For ἃ
similar tribal separation compare the
Αὐκιοι, note on E 105.

4. ἱπποπόλων, only here and = 427;
for the second part of the compound see
note on A 63. The epithet ἀγχεμάχων
seems to have caused trouble to the
ancients, as all these tribes were famed
for their peaceful habits; Strabo ex-
plains ὅτι ἀπόρθητοι καθὰ καὶ οἱ ἀγαθοὶ
πολεμισταί. The Ἵππημολγοί are evident-

ly the nomad Scythian tribes north of
the Danube, living on mares’ milk like
the modern Tartars on their kowmiss.
So the Massagetai are γαλακτοπόται,
Herod. i. 216. Information of these
distant tribes no doubt reached Greece
in the earliest times along the primeval
trade-route by which the amber of the
Baltic came to the Mediterranean. The
ἼΛβιοι, ‘most just of men,’ are perhaps
connected with the legend of the
᾿Αργιππαῖοι in Herodotos (iv. 23), who
τοῖσι περιοικέουσί εἰσι οἱ τὰς διαφορὰς
διαιρέοντες, abstaining from all war and
enjoying a sort of sanctity. (Similarly
of the Getai, iv. 93.) They may be the
same as the Γάβιοι mentioned by Aischy-
los in the Prom. Sol. fr. 184 (Dind.) :
ἔπειτα δ᾽ ἥξει δῆμον ἐνδικώτατον [βροτῶν]
ἁπάντων καὶ φιλοξενώτατον, Τ᾽ αβίους.
This makes it probable that ἴΑβιοι is
really a proper name, not an epithet
‘having no fixed subsistence,’ i.e.
nomads, as Nauck and others have taken
it, adding τ᾿ after δικαιοτάτων, a variant
alluded to by Nikanor and Did., but
not approved by Ar. Similarly some
of the old critics regarded ᾿Αγαυῶν as
a proper name, and ἱππημολγῶν as an
epithet.

4 IAIAAOC Ν (x11)

> / 3 > / ” / ” ΄
ἐς Τροίην δ᾽ οὐ πάμπαν ἔτι τρέπεν ὄσσε φαεινω"

>) \ e ’ ’ / 3 57 aA ΝΥ Ν
οὐ yap ὅ γ᾽ ἀθανάτων tw ἐέλπετο ὃν κατὰ θυμὸν

ἐλθόντ᾽ ἢ Τρώεσσιν ἀρηξέμεν ἢ Δαναοῖσιν.

»Ὸ») » \ “5 ἢ 5 ἐξ
οὐδ᾽ ἀλαοσκοπιὴν εἶχε κρείων ἐνοσίχθων" 10

\ \ e / τῷ / / /
καὶ yap ὁ θαυμάζων ἧστο πτόλεμόν τε μάχην TE

ὑψοῦ ἐπ᾽ ἀκροτάτης κορυφῆς Σάμου ὑληέσσης

Opnixins: ἔνθεν γὰρ ἐφαίνετο πᾶσα μὲν “Ldn,

φαίνετο δὲ ἸΤριάμοιο πόλις καὶ νῆες ᾿Αχαιῶν"

ἔνθ᾽ ap ὅ

γ᾽ ἐξ ἁλὸς ἕξζετ᾽ ἰών, ἐλέαιρε δ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοὺς 1ὅ

Ν / \ \ a 2 ie
Τρωσὶν δαμναμένους, Aut δὲ κράτερως ενεέμεσσα.

Se, > 3 7 / /
αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἐξ ὄρεος κατεβήσετο παιπαλόεντος

\ \ / / 2 By, \ \
κραυπνὰ ποσὶ προβιβάς-: τρέμε δ᾽ οὔρεα μακρὰ Kai

e/

VAN

\ ς >’ ’ IZ / Su
ποσσὶν ὑπ᾽ ἀθανάτοισι Τ]οσειδάωνος ἰόντος.

\ \ 5. Ὁ Ὁ 3. ΣΧ \ δὲ i “ ΄ -
τρις μὲν ὀρέξατ ἰὼν, TO O€ TETPATOV LKETO τέκμωρ. 20

Aiyas: ἔνθα δέ οἱ κλυτὰ δώματα βένθεσι λίμνης

7. τράπεν G. 8. Or’: ἔτ᾽ Aph.

|| Tina ἔλπετο Bar. Eust.: Tin’ ἔλπετο R.

9. ἀρηγέμεν CDPQRST Pap. ο, Harl. b, Par.acdefg: yp. καὶ ἀρήξειν A. 10.
ἀλαὸςοκοπιὴν A (the first ¢ added subsequently): Gaon σκοπιὴν Zen. ? see on

K 515. || Grauéunwn ()' (ENociyewn ()™),
12. ἀκροτάτη(ι) Kopu@A(i) PRT Ven. B:

others cdou (Did.).

supr.) GJQ. || παιπαλοέεςης L.

Vr. A. || τέκμαρ Lips.

13. rap: μὲν α. || φαίνετο PR.
18. After this Long. de subl. 9. 8 adds καὶ
κορυφαὶ Τρώων τε πόλις Kai νῆες ᾿Αχαιῶν (= 60).

11. ἧτο J. || πόλεμόν GJPQRT.
ἀκροτάτηις κορυφῆις Aph. || cauou:
17. κατεβήςατο (A

20. τέταρτον O'DGJQTU

8. ἐέλπετο, expected, see on Καὶ 355.
It is not clear that this assumes the pro-
hibition of interference given in the
opening of 6, and we can hardly base
on it any theory of the comparative date
of 8-Lon the one hand, and the Διὸς
ἀπάτη on the other.

12. Cduou Θρηϊκίης, Samothrace,
(Q 78), an island with a lofty central
peak, from which the Trojan plain is in
fact visible over the top of the inter-
vening island of Imbros. This unique
mark of personal knowledge of the dis-
trict is probably a sign of the compara-
tively late origin of the passage. This
view is confirmed by the tradition, if it
is to be believed, that Samothrace was
so called because colonized by Lonians
from Samos, as Schol. A relates on the
authority of Apollodoros. It is possible,
however, that Samos is a Semitic (Phoe-
nician) word, from the root sama, ‘‘ to
be high,” in whica case it would be
probable that the identity of name has
nothing to do with Greek colonization.
So also Strabo x p. 457 ἀπὸ τοῦ

σάμους καλεῖσθαι τὰ ὕψη. The variant
Σάου mentioned by Didymos was ex-
plained to mean the mountain Σαώκη in
the island. Compare the (Thracian ?)
Σάϊοι against whom Archilochos fought
(fr. 6) (Strabo ibid.). Samos itself is
not named in Homer.

20. For the superhuman strides of
Poseidon compare Εἰ 770-2 of the divine
horses; Pindar P. iii. 43. τέκμωρ, v.
Η 30.

21. Airdc may be either the town in
Achaia or that in Euboia, both of which
were noted for the worship of Poseidon
(8 203). Others have supposed that it
is a small island of that name between
Chios and Tenos, the existence of which
is by no means certain (cf. Hymn. Ap. 32).
In any case the difficulty which has
puzzled all critics remains the same ;
why does Poseidon go thither to get his
chariot? Whichever site we assume
to be meant, it will be farther from
Samothrace than Troy, his ultimate
goal. Hence most edd. have doubted
the authenticity of this passage, whose

IAIAAOC N (χι) 5

χρύσεα μαρμαίροντα τετεύχαται, ἄφθιτα αἰεί.
¥ gy 3 \ a. 2 i ΄ , ry,
ἔνθ᾽ ἐλθὼν ὑπ᾽ ὄχεσφι τιτύσκετο χαλκόποδ᾽ ἵππω
ὠκυπέτω, χρυσέηισιν ἐθείρηισιν κομόωντε,

\ ᾽ “eek ” \ A) , so δι, ἃ
χρυσὸν δ᾽ αὐτὸς ἔδυνε περὶ χροΐ, γέντο δ᾽ ἱμάσθλην 25
χρυσείην ἐύτυκτον, ἑοῦ δ᾽ ἐπεβήσετο δίφρου.

βῆ δ᾽ ἐλάαν
πάντοθεν ἐκ
γηθοσύνη δὲ

5 \ / ΕΣ » \ / > ΄ ΕῚ | ΄
ἐπὶ κύματ᾽: ἄταλλε δὲ KITE ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ
-“" ’
κευθμῶν, οὐδ᾽ ἠγνοίησεν ἄνακτα"
/ / \ \ /
θάλασσα διίστατο: τοὶ δὲ πέτοντο

ῥίμφα μάλ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ὑπένερθε διαίνετο χάλκεος ἄξων. 80
τὸν δ᾽ ἐς ᾿Αχαιῶν νῆας ἐύσκαρθμοι φέρον ἵπποι.

"» A / > \ / / /

ἔστι δέ TL σπέος εὐρὺ βαθείης βένθεσι λίμνης,

\ / NaS: /

μεσσηγὺς Tevédoio καὶ Ἴμβρου παιπαλοέσσης:
» τ fh » ΄ 5 ,
ἔνθ ἵππους ἔστησε Ἰ]οσειδάων ἐνοσίχθων
λύσας ἐξ ὀχέων, παρὰ δ᾽ ἀμβρόσιον βάλεν εἶδαρ 35

22. τετεύχατο () Vr. Ὀ".

25. €noune HU Vr. A.

26. ἐπεβήςατο (,).

27. αὐτῶι Harl. Ὁ (supr. οὔ), ἐν ἄλλωι A, τινὲς yp. ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶι, τῶι δίφρωι, Did.

(ap. Schol. T).
Ar. (A supr.) GR Par. d e.

28. πάντων EK KEUOMCONOON ().

κευθμῶνος PR. ἡγνοίηςαν

29. χωρὶς τοῦ « γραπτέον τὸ FHEOCUNH Ar. :

rHeocUNHI Aph. Herod. : rHedcun’(a), ἡ d€ Herodikos.

gorgeous but somewhat florid imagery
(27-29) is not like the oldest Epic style,
though it has a strong resemblance to
that of the Διὸς ἀπάτη : compare =
347 ff. for the essentially ‘romantic’
sympathy of nature with its lords. So
far as the difficulty of Aigai is concerned,
it evidently might be removed by the
excision of 11-16. In that case ὄρεος (17)
would mean Olympos, where Poseidon
was when we last heard of him (0 440),
and his descent to Aigai for his chariot
wherewith to cross the sea will be quite
in order. The name Alyai is evidently
connected with Alyatos and Aiyalwy asa
name of Poseidon ; see A 404. €nea δέ,
so MSS.; G. Hermann ἔνθα τε (with
Strabo only), followed by most edd., but
needlessly ; see Z 245, 249, © 48, etc.

22. Gpeita aici, on account of the
hiatus Bentley conj. ἄφθιτον as an adverb,
cf. νωλεμὲς αἰεί, Payne-Knight ἄφθιτά 7’,
but then the omission of the 7’ is left
unaccounted for. See = 4. Nauck
adopts the variant τετεύχατο, as ex-
plained by the tendency to abolish hiatus
in the bucolic diaeresis. But the pres.
is evidently the tense for the immortal
gods and their possessions.

23-26=0 41-44. The repetition of
the description has caused some offence ;
in view of the general character of 0 it

Joster,

would seem more probable that this is
the original passage, and has been bor-
rowed from.

27. ἄταλλε, gambolled, as Hes. Opp.
131 (with a), and Hymn. Merc. 400 (2) ;
later poets use it occasionally in the sense
rear (Homeric ἀτιτάλλω), e.g.
Soph. Ajax 559. Un’ αὐτοῦ, the gen.
is causal, by reason of his coming, as
140, Ξ'Ξ 285, 7 114 etc. The weakly-
attested variant αὐτῶι would be merely
local.

28. Keveudn, here only, the cases
being elsewhere always formed from a
nom. κευθμών. Ar. compared αὐλός-αὐλών.
ἡγνοίηςεν, Ar. ἠγνοίησαν : he held that
H. preferred the plural verb with neuter
plurals and evidently carried through
his theory in spite of the best tradition,
in ignorance of the F of Favaxra. Cf.
A 724,

29. rHeocUNH may be an adj. (82, H 122,
ε 269) or a substantive (® 390) ; so that
here, as in ἃ 540, a decision between
nom. and dat. isnot easy. The ascription
to nature of a distinctly human emotion
is unique in Homer, though similar
ideas may be found in = 392, T 362,
® 387, and in phrases like λιλαιόμενα
χροὸς Goa of spears. For the sea
making way compare = 66, 2 96. The
passage is imitated by Moschos, i. 115.

6 IAIAAOC N (xr)

ἔδμεναι: ἀμφὶ δὲ ποσσὶ πέδας ἔβαλε χρυσείας
>, 7 » A vv 3 vv 3 /
ἀρρήκτους ἀλύτους, ὄφρ᾽ ἔμπεδον αὖθι μένοιεν

νοστήσαντα ἄνακτα' ὁ δ᾽ ἐς στρατὸν ὦιχετ᾽ ᾿Αχαιῶν.
Τρῶες δὲ φλογὶ ἴσοι ἀολλέες ἠὲ θυέλληι

“ ,ὕὔ », a .“

Εκτορι ΤΤριαμίδη, ἄμοτον μεμαῶτες ἕποντο, 40

ἄβρομοι aviayou: ἔλποντο δὲ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν

as. \ 2 ΒΟΥ, / TALS
αἱρήσειν, KTEVEELV δὲ παρ αὐτόθι πάντας ἀρίστους.

ἀλλὰ ἸΠοσειδάων γαιήοχος ἐννοσίγαιος
Ν
᾿Αργείους ὦτρυνε, βαθείης ἐξ ἁλὸς ἐλθών,
, / rig / \ > / /
εἰσάμενος Κάλχαντι δέμας καὶ ἀτειρέα φωνήν. 45
Αἴαντε πρώτω προσέφη, μεμαῶτε καὶ αὐτώ:

39. He: ἠδὲ GJPQ Pap. 6, Vr. b ἃ.
42. κτανέειν J.
A: nap’ αὐτόφι (παραυτόφι) 2.
Pap. o. 44. ὄτρυνε R.

41. ἀνίαχοι R Mor. : anixor Pap. 6.

| παρ᾽ αὐτόθι (napautéer) CP!'TU Pap. 0, Harl. a, Lips. Vr. b ἃ
Gpicrouc: ᾿Αχαιούς A (yp. apicrouc) DPRT
46 om. Pap. o. || πρῶτον J. |

36. nédac, perhaps ‘ hobbles,’ fasten-
ing the forefeet together in such a way
as to prevent straying without entirely
stopping all movement.

‘#37 -- 0 275—borrowed of course in that
very late episode, as is shewn by αὖθι,
which in @ has no reference.

41, GBpouor αὐΐαχοι would at first
sight appear to mean without noise or
shouting (atvuay-=dv-FiFax-, aFFiFax-?
See Schulze Q. #. p. 65). But in Homer
the noise of the Trojans is always con-
trasted with the silence of the Greeks :
and if on entering into battle (B 810,
T 2, A 433-8) the Trojans were so
clamorous, it is impossible to suppose
that they became quiet when they were
forcing the wall in their career of victory.
Human nature too, to say nothing of
the comparison of the storms, seems to
insist that the words here must mean
noisy. And so Ar. took them, ἀντὶ τοῦ

ἄγαν βρομοῦντες καὶ ἄγαν ἰαχοῦντες.
The ἀ- should rather be copulative,
joining in noise and shout, as the

existence of an ‘d- intensivum’ is very
doubtful. Etymologically this explana-
tion (from sem-, sm-) seems unassailable ;
for similar cases see Schulze Q. Z. p. 495
ff., and note on ἄξυλος, A 155. But
it is hard to believe that such words
were not ambiguous to the Greeks them-
selves when the negative d- had driven
competitors out of the field. We can only
suppose that ἄβρομος and aviaxos were
in common enough use to overcome the

feeling that they were negative com-
pounds.—It will be noticed that the
variant dviaxo. has good support; it is
used also by Quintus (xiii. 70) but it is
impossible to say whether he took it to
mean si/ent or noisy (of sheep following
their shepherd from the pasture).

42. For αὐτόθι as against αὐτόφι see
note on M 302.

46. When we last heard of the Tela-
monian <Aias he was separated from
his Oilean namesake (M 366). Hence
Wackernagel has proposed to take Αἴαντε
here in the sense of Aias and his brother
Teukros, on the analogy of a well-estab-
lished Sanskrit use, by which two ideas
belonging to one another, though having
different names, can be expressed by the
name of one only in the dual (see
Delbriick Gr. ii. p. 137); for instance,
pitirau, ‘two fathers’ means ‘father
and mother,’ dhani, ‘two days’ means
‘day and night.’ Wackernagel appeals
especially to H 164, where it is said
that the Αἴαντες cast lots; whereas in
the sequel Αἴας is spoken of as though
there were no ambiguity of name ; hence
he argues that Αἴαντες must there also
mean Aias and Teukros. But this is of
course very uncertain. In many ways
the position of the leading heroes in this
book cannot be made to tally with the
statements of M, so that no great stress
can be laid upon the discrepancy. πρώτω
is here as often used in a clause added
asyndetically, as 91, 1215, 2710, y 36 ete.

tee τὰν στ eee

IAIAAOC Ν (χιπὴ 7

“Αἴαντε, σφὼ μέν τε σαώσετε λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν
ἀλκῆς μνησαμένω, μὴ δὲ κρυεροῖο φόβοιο.
= lal

ἄλληι μὲν yap ἔγωγ᾽ ov δείδια χεῖρας ἀάπτους
Τρώων, οἱ μέγα τεῖχος ὑπερκατέβησαν ὁμίλωι" 50
ἕξουσιν γὰρ πάντας ἐυκνήμιδες ᾿Αχαιοί:
τῆι δὲ δὴ αἰνότατον περιδείδια μή τι πάθωμεν,

» » e 6
ἧι ῥ᾽ ὅ γ᾽ ὁ λυσσώδης φλογὶ εἴκελος ἡγεμονεύει
“ Δ \ ” ᾽ > / 2. Ξ
Ἕκτωρ, ὃς Διὸς εὔχετ᾽ ἐρισθενέος πάϊς εἶναι.

σφῶϊν δ᾽ ὧδε θεῶν τις ἐνὶ εσὶ ποιήσειεν,
ρ ἢ

σι
σι

4 ya > id / a 4 > / Μ.
αὐτώ θ᾽ ἑστάμεναι κρατερῶς καὶ ἀνωγέμεν ἄλλους

lol / / -“
τῶ κε καὶ ἐσσύμενόν περ ἐρωήσαιτ᾽ ἀπὸ νηῶν
> / > , ? / >_\ > / ”
ὠκυπόρων, εἰ Kat μιν ᾿Ολύμπιος αὐτὸς ἐγείρει.
ἢ καὶ σκηπανίωι γαιήοχος ἐννοσίγαιος
f - -“
ἀμφοτέρω κεκοπὼς πλῆσεν μένεος κρατεροῖο, θ0

47. Te om. : κε DHJRT (περισσὸς ὁ κε T™) Pap. θ.

ςαώςατε R Lips. : ςαώ-

ceton [)(). 51. €=0ucIN: cxHcoucin Aph. || πάντες DPST: ἅπαντας ( Eust.

53. ὅ τ᾽ : ὅδ᾽ (A supr.) PQ. || ἀθανάτοιςι T (swpr. ἡγεμονεύει),
(A supr.) C Vr. bd. || ἐγείρη(ι) C (AT supr.).

58. εἴ KEN
60. κεκοφὼς SU (vp. κεκοπὼς)

Par. j (supr. mn) (PR apparently have Kexocrtooc, the ligatured cr being derived from
φ: n Ri supr.): κεκοφὼς and κεκοπὼς Ar. διχῶς : κεκοπὼν Antim. and Chia.

47, ςαώςετε, imper. of the sigmatic
aor. with thematic vowel, as is clearly
shewn by the following μή. For the
form cpm see on A 782; σῴφωϊ γε
Brandreth for σφὼ μέν τε.

48, uh δέ is the reading of the best
Mss. for the vulg. μηδέ, and seems to
have been the traditional form wherever
a negative command follows a positive.

51. €soucin, will hold at bay. In this
sense σχήσουσιν is the more usual form,
and so Aph. read here, comparing N 151.
But see T 27.

53. λυςςώδης, the favourite descrip-
tion of Hector; see on Θ 299. The
form however, if from λυσσοξείδης, is
not Homeric; Menrad conj. λυσσητήρ.
Wackernagel refers it to root ὀδ-,
reeking of madness. The use of the
article with the adjective seems to give
‘a hostile or contemptuous tone’ (‘that
madman’); H.G. § 261. 2, where other
instances are given.

54. This is of course a merely hyper-
bolical expression ; Hector never actually
lays claim to descent from Zeus, but he
is accused of acting as presumptuously
as though he would.

57. €pwricaite, here only transitive.
For the sense refrain see note on B 179,

and compare ἐμῶν μενέων ἀπερωεύς, Θ 361.
Von Christ conj. ἐσσύμενός περ ἐρωήσει (ε).
59. εκηπανίωι, the staff is the usual
symbol of magical powers, as with
Hermes (2 343), Kirke (x 238), Athene
(v 429, π΄ 172), to say nothing of Moses,
or even the modern conjuror. It has
been observed, however, that the use of
a material tool by the gods to effect their
purposes is elsewhere characteristic of
the later poems (Q and Od.) ; in E 122,
for instance, Athene produces the same
effect as Poseidon here without material
contact, but merely by the divine will.
60. κεκοπώς is formed direct from the
noun-stem, like πεφυζότες : H. G. § 26. 5.
The perfect form should denote a violent
stroke, as βεβλήκει is always used of
effective hitting; and this suits σ 336,
the only other use of the word in H., as
well as the action of Kirke in κ 238,
ῥάβδωι πεπληγυῖα, where her stroke is
hostile, but is less adapted to the present
passage, where the two heroes do not
seem to notice the blow at all. Perhaps
therefore the aor. κεκοπών, though not
found elsewhere, is to be preferred here.
(Monro, H. G. ὃ 27, accents this form
κεκόπων, taking it for a thematic perf.,
ef, κεκλήγοντες. The accent is said to

8 IAIAAOC Ν (x11)

γυῖα δ᾽ ἔθηκεν ἐλαφρά, πόδας καὶ χεῖρας ὕπερθεν.
αὐτὸς δ᾽, ὥς T ἴρηξ ὠκύπτερος ὦρτο πέτεσθαι.
ὅς ῥά T ἀπ᾽ αἰγίλιπος πέτρης περιμήκεος ἀρθεὶς

ς / / ΄ » ”

ορμήῆσην πεδίοιο διώκειν ὄρνεον ἄλλο,

ἃ > \ an Maw / > / -
ὡς ἀπὸ τῶν ἤϊξε Ἰ]οσειδάων ἐνοσίχθων. 65

τοῖιν ©

ἔγνω πρόσθεν ᾿Οἴλῆος ταχὺς Αἴας,

αἶψα δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ Αἴαντα προσέφη Τελαμώνιον υἱόν"
“Αἶαν, ἐπεί τις νῶϊ θεῶν οἱ ᾿Ολυμπον ἔχουσι

/ , \ /
μάντι εἰδόμενος κέλεται παρὰ νηυσὶ μάχεσθαι---

οὐδ᾽ 6 γε Κάλχας ἐστί, θεοπρόπος οἰωνιστής" 70

ἴχνια γὰρ μετόπισθε ποδῶν ἠδὲ κνημάων

ec vn ” 5) , > , \ /
_ pee εγνῶὼν ἀπιόντος" APlLyV@T Ol δὲ θεοί “πέρ.

64. ὁρμήςη(!) AHP?TU Lips. Vr. bd: ὁρμήςει Q.

69. κέλεται : καλέει ().

71. ἴχνια Ar. Q: yp. καὶ ἴϑματα, Ζηνόδοτος δὲ καὶ ᾿Αριστοφάνης ἴχματα Did.

be Aiolic.) The other variant κεκοφώς
is to be rejected, as aspiration in the
act. is entirely unknown to H. (H. G.
§ 24. 2). See also Delbriick ΟὟ, iv. p. 227.

61=H 122, Ὁ 772.

62. For the use of the aor. in similes
compare I’ 33-5; H. G. ὃ 78. 2. For
airitinoc see I 15. dpeeic, poising
himself aloft. The contracted form is
doubtful ; it recurs only ε 393, and P
724 (aipovras), q.v. Here Menrad pro-
poses περίμηκες ἀξερθείς, which is pos-
sibly right.

64. ὁρμήςηι, rushes, as A 335, X 194,
@ 265. Agar’s οἰμήσηι, swoops, is how-
ever more vigorous and appropriate ; see
X 139, 308 (J. P. xxv. 32). πεθίοιο
διώκειν go together, fo chase across the
plain. ἄλλο, of other sort, cf. Ὁ 22
ἰχθύες ἄλλοι.

66. Wackernagel, having taken Αἴαντε
in 46 to mean Aias and Teukros, has
of course to assume that this passage is
interpolated, or rather belongs to another
recension.

68. Nikanor, followed by some modern
edd., regards καὶ 0° ἐμοί (73) as the
apodosis to ἐπεί, the intervening lines
being parenthetical. This, however,
does not suit the use of καὶ dé. Others
put a comma after κέλεται, and took
μάχεσθαι as an imper. But it is better
to regard the apodosis as suppressed.
This is very common after ἐπεί: see
notes on Z 333, P 658.

69. μάντι representing μάντιϊ, is the
form most in accordance with analogy
(cf. κνήστι A 640, μήτι Ψ 315 etce.), and

it seems right to adopt it in place of the
μάντεϊογ μάντει of the vulg. Mss. are of
no authority on the point.

70. eeonponoc, see on A 85.

71. ἴχνια, only in this form ; in p 317
we have ἴχνεσι, from which van L. would
read ixvea in all places, though no other
case of ἔχνος is found, save as a variant
in 7 490, earlier than Hymn. Mere. 76.
The word evidently cannot have its
ordinary sense of footprints unless κνημάων
is added by a very violent zeugma.
Hence no doubt the variants ἴχματα
(mentioned also by Hesych. and explained
ἴχνια) and i@uara. For this see E 778;
the sense movements is satisfactory
enough. It has been proposed to find the
same primitive meaning in ἴχνια (as
from ἱκ-νεῖσθαι) but this is very doubt-
ful. Compare Virgil’s Et vera incessu
patuit dea. Mr. Lang calls attention to
the curious superstition that when spirits
assume human form they may be de-
tected by their feet and knees being
turned backwards (Gaidoz, in Mélusine
Vis 8: LZ):

72. pela may perhaps go with ἀπ-
ιόντος, of the easy movement of a god:
ef. peta μετεισάμενος, 90. But the order
of the words, and the following ἀρίγνωτοι,
are in favour of joining it with ἔγνων.
As to the ease with which gods are dis-
cerned, we must understand it to mean
that they can easily make themselves
known when they wish; throughout
Iliad and Odyssey a god can always
preserve his incognito when he so
desires.

=~

IAIAAOC Ν (χη) 9

καὶ δ᾽ ἐμοὶ αὐτῶι θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσι φίλοισι

μᾶλλον ἐφορμᾶται πολεμίζειν ἠδὲ μάχεσθαι,

μαιμώωσι δ᾽ ἔνερθε πόδες καὶ χεῖρες ὕπερθε." 75
\ ? > ’ / r , "
τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη ᾿Γελαμώνιος Αἴας:

“οὕτω νῦν καὶ ἐμοὶ περὶ δούρατι χεῖρες ἄαπτοι

μαιμῶσιν, καί μοι μένος ὥρορε, νέρθε δὲ ποσσὶν

ἔσσυμαι ἀμφοτέροισι: μενοινώω δὲ καὶ οἷος

ἽἝκτορι Uprapidne ἄμοτον μεμαῶτι μάχεσθαι." 80

ἃ ΄ A re \ > / > /

ὡς Ol μὲν τοιαῦτα πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἀγόρευον,

’ / / \ Μ lal
χάρμηι γηθόσυνοι τήν σφιν θεὸς ἔμβαλε θυμῶι:

, 5
τόφρα δὲ τοὺς ὄπιθεν γαιήοχος ὦρσεν ᾿Αχαιούς,

“Δδ \ \ a 5 / I 3
ot παρὰ νηυσὶ θοῆισιν ἀνέψυχον φίλον ἦτορ.

“- oir bf > / ΄ a ,
τῶν p ἅμα T ἀργαλέων καμάτωι φίλα γυΐα λέλυντο,

/ /
καί σφιν ἄχος κατὰ θυμὸν ἐγίνετο δερκομένοισι
Τρῶας, τοὶ μέγα τεῖχος ὑπερκατέβησαν ὁμίλωι:

\ “ 3 2 / (eee 5 ΄ ΄ a
TOUS οἵ γὙ εἰσορόωντες ὑπ᾽ ὀφρύσι δάκρυα λεῖβον'

3 \ ΝΜ / ΄ \ rn
ov yap ἔφαν φεύξεσθαι ὑπὲκ κακοῦ.
ῥεῖα μετεισάμενος κρατερὰς ὦτρυνε φάλαγγας. 90
r a ” a \ fas 5 /

Πεῦκρον ἔπι πρῶτον καὶ Anitov ἦλθε κελεύων
Πηνέλεών θ᾽ ἥρωω Θόαντά τε Δηΐπυρόν τε
/ r
Μηριόνην te καὶ ᾿Αντίλοχον, μήστωρας ἀυτῆς"
\
τοὺς ὅ γ᾽ ἐποτρύνων ἔπεα πτερόεντα Tpoanvoa:

iv
or

ἀλλ᾽ ἐνοσίχθων

77. NUN: OH Pap. o. || μοι Pap. o.

78. wualucocin ἐμοὶ G. | LOL: τοι J.

νέρθε πόϑεςειν A (Népee OE nocciN A"),
PQR (καὶ οἷος R™), yp. Vr. Ὁ.
GH Vr. b. 90. κρατερῶς H, 92.
Ὀηΐπυτον Vr. d.

73. Kai δέ evidently adds another
reason in confirmation of the conclu-
sion at which the son of Oileus has
arrived.

78. The contracted form mamdéci is
suspicious: hence Fick conj. μαιμώωσι,
μένος δέ μοι. The reading of G, μαιμώ-
wow, ἐμοί, is better, though the asynde-
ton is harsh. dpope, intrans. aor. as

. 0 539, τ 201; it is generally trans., as

B 146, etc. So ἤραρον is always trans.
except in II 214, 6 777.

82. On χάρμη see A 222. It is better
to suppose that the word is used here
incidentally with an allusion to its re-
semblance to χαίρω, than to attempt to
force the meaning of joy into all the
passages where it occurs. So Schol. T
χάρμηι, τῆι μάχηι: τὴν yap χαρὰν χάρμα

80 om.

οἷος : αὐτὸς
89. φεύξαςθαι
δηΐϊπυλόν Τ᾽:

79. μενοινάω Vr. |)”.
A 86. ἐγίγνετο L.
πηνέλεόν Aph. Par. e.

φησίν καὶ οὐκ ἂν ἐπήγαγε “ γηθύσυνοι᾽᾿ εἰ
τὴν χαρὰν ἐδήλου.

83. ὄπιθεν is to be taken with the verb
rather than with the article, as the com-
bination τοὺς ὄπιθεν would be a late one.
The sense of course comes to the same.

84. GNewuxon, were refreshing, cf. Καὶ
1518

90. ῥεῖα, see on 72; ῥεῖα μάλ᾽, ὥς τε
θεός, Τ' 381, etc. Compare, however, P
285 (with note) which is rather in favom
of joining peta with ὥτρυνε, as Heyne
and others have done. μετειςάμενος.
the F is neglected. see A 138; pet’ ἐπι-
Fisdpevos van L. But it looks as thoug]
confusion with root ἐ- go had already
taken place. So also P 285, 2 462.

91. For Leitos and Pene leos, the
leaders of the Boiotians, see B 494.

10 IAIAAOC Ν (xu)

εε ἐδ , > Ἔ - , " » 95
αἰδώς, ᾿Αργεῖοι, κοῦροι νέοι: ὕμμιν ἔγωγε 5
μαρναμένοισι πέποιθα σαωσέμεναι νέας amas:
» > e tal , , /
εἰ δ᾽ ὑμεῖς πολέμοιο μεθήσετε λευγαλέοιο,
a \ ν 3 ς \ ΄ -
νῦν δὴ εἴδεται ἦμαρ ὑπὸ Τρώεσσι δαμῆναι.
x , 3 , a LAN eee “- CUR
ὦ πόποι, ἣ μέγα θαῦμα τόδ᾽ ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ὁρῶμαι,
’ ἃ A 3 » / Mv
δεινόν, ὃ ov ποτ ΕὙω γε τελευτήσεσθαι ἐφασκον, 100
- » “Ὁδ Ν /
Τρῶας ἐφ᾽ ἡμετέρας ἰέναι νέας, of τὸ πάρος περ
cr 7 A ef
φυξακινῆις ἐλάφοισιν ἐοίκεσαν, ai τε καθ ὕλην
, , / > Me /
θώων παρδαλίων τε λύκων τ᾽ ἤϊα πέλονται

96. ςαωςάμεναι J.

102. puzaxinoic PQR™,
πορϑαλίων At (napda marg. ext.) DH}

103. παρϑαλίων Ar. 2:
(Note: Hi, La R.’s H’, indicates a

repetition of lines 89-154, which appear after 549 in H as well as in their proper

place. See Benicken Studien und Forschungen . . . ΝΞΟ

95-124. The composition of the follow-
ing speech of Poseidon has given rise to
considerable debate. Friedlinder was
the first to point out the strong evidence
of a double recension which it shews.
In the first place it is clearly not a mere
coincidence that the phrase ὦ πόποι (99)
occurs at the beginning of a speech forty-
seven times out of fifty-one, the only
other cases where it holds a later position
being = 49, ν 209, and perhaps P 171
(q.v.). Here the tone of indignant sur-
prise which belongs to the words is so
greatly emphasized by the rest of the
line (which recurs also in O 286, T 344,
® 54, 7 36) that a position anywhere but
in the first place quite spoils the rhe-
torical effect. The same may be said of
the opening words of 95. Again ‘7yeud-
vos κακότητι in 108, ‘by the fault of our
leader,’ follows very awkwardly after
μάχονται in 107, ‘the Trojans are fight-
ing.’ Hence Kéchly supposed with
much plausibility that 108 originally
followed immediately after 98. Again
114 seems to be addressed to men who
are actually fighting, 116 to those who
have given up all effort as in 84. Gener-
ally too it may be said that the whole
speech is so long and so tautological as
to be ill suited for its position. 115 is
clearly one of the passages which ignore
the ninth book, for it directly contradicts
the attitude there assumed by Achilles.
Various attempts of different degrees of
plausibility have been made to recon-
struct two or more speeches which have
been confused ; perhaps as reasonable a
solution as any may be found by assum-
ing that one original form consisted of
95— 98, 108-115, and another of 99-107,
116-124. Of these the former will then

. p. 895 note.)

evidently be the oldest, the latter an
alternative added after the interpolation
of the Presbeia, in order to avoid the
too glaring inconsistency with that book ;
and the present form is an unfortunate
result of an attempt to combine the two.

95. κοῦροι νέοι is by some regarded as
an expression of honour, ‘young men of
valour.” But the analogy of E 787
clearly shews that it must be a term of
contempt, ou boys,’ like παῖδες
veapoi in B 289. κοῦρος does not imply
noble birth or valour, and is used of
infants, e.g. Z 59.

96. ἑαωςέμεναι, aorist, ‘for saving’ ;
to take it as a future weakens the tone
of contempt.

98. efdera, viv ἀνεφάνη 7 ἡμέρα, Schol.
A. For this use of the verb ef. © 559
εἴδεται ἄστρα, and Ὡ 319 εἴσατο δέ σφιν
δεξιὸς ἀΐξας. In all other cases it has
the secondary sense ¢o seem, or to resemble.

100. On account of the hiatus P.
Knight and Heyne conj. μή for οὐ (the
statement, however, ‘adscriptum hoc erat
in Townl.’ has no foundation in fact).
But ov is the regular particle in relative
clauses with the indic. in H., B 302
being the only exception (H. G. ὃ 359 6).
Brandreth conj. 6 κ᾽ ov. On the form
Epackon as an exception to the rule that
iteratives in -cxw do not take the aug-
ment see H. G. 88. 69, 49. The only
other instance of it in the [Ziad i ieee 207,
but it occurs eleven times in Od. (The
rule is denied by van L. Ench. p. 362: but
elackev (-ov) which he quotes as an ex-
ception i probably for ἑάεσκεν.)

102. φυζΖακινῆις, a curious form found
here only. φύζα implies terrified flight,
panic, see I 2.

103. Cf. Horace’s Cervi luporum praeda

5
j
{
F
.

“>

IAIAAOC N (xii) 11

2 > ΄ὔ > ΄ 30.» » ,
αὔτως ἠλάσκουσαι ἀνάλκιδες, οὐδ᾽ ἔπι χάρμη:
ὡς Τρῶες τὸ πρίν γε μένος καὶ χεῖρας ᾿Αχαιῶν 105
/, > Ε] / > / 3 Ὁ .} ,
μίμνειν οὐκ ἐθέλεσκον ἐναντίον, οὐδ᾽ ἠβαιόν.
νῦν δὲ ἑκὰς πόλιος κοίληις ἐπὶ νηυσὶ μάχονται
ἡγεμόνος κακότητι μεθημοσύνηισί τε λαῶν,
οἱ κείνωι ἐρίσαντες ἀμυνέμεν οὐκ ἐθέλουσι
lad 5 / > A f Ss > ΄
νηῶν ὠκυπόρων, ἀλλὰ κτείνονται ἂν αὑτάς. 110
> ᾽ > \ \ ΄ eee A v / >
ἀλλ᾽ εἰ δὴ Kal πάμπαν ἐτήτυμον αἴτιός ἐστιν
[4 3 oa ὌΠ 4 / > /
ἥρως ᾿Ατρεΐδης εὐρὺ κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων,
οὕνεκ᾽ ἀπητίμησε ποδώκεα [Πηλεΐωνα,
ἡμέας γ᾽ οὔ πως ἔστι μεθιέμεναι πολέμοιο.
» -“ ΄ν -
ἀλλ᾽ ἀκεώμεθα θᾶσσον: ἀκεσταί τοι φρένες ἐσθλῶν. 115

104. χάρμηι ACTU: χάρμην H: χάρμης Bar.
113. οὕνεκα ἡτίμηςε G.
»ιεθειέμεν T! (5:97. ἵ over εἰ and αἵ over N ΤΊ):

δ᾽ ἕκαθεν Ar. 2.

107. δὲ ἑκὰς Zen. Aph. :
114. ὑμέας ἢ. οὕπω G.
μεθιέναι P: μεθηςέμεναι () Vr. A.

115. θᾶττον GQ. || Tol: τε Ar. (ἔν τισι τῶν ὑπομνημάτων) H.

rapacium. Kia is elsewhere peculiar to
Od., where, however, it seems always to
mean provision for a journey (except in
ε 368 where it means chaff). See M.
and R. on 8 289. The word occurs with
three scansions: — vu (Fa ε 266, 368, εἐ
212), —wvv fia ὃ 363, —— v here, 8 289,
410. The origin of the word and its
variations of quantity are unexplained
(ef. Schulze Q. £. p. 289 note). napdea-
Mion, the panther is mentioned again in
P 20, Φ 573, 6 457 ; its skin Γ 17, K 29.
In all places Mss. vary between παρὸ-
and zropé-. Acc. to some the latter was
Epic, the former Attic: others say πόρ-
δαλιν ἐπὶ τοῦ ζώιου, πάρδαλιν ἐπὶ τῆς δορᾶς :
others again (Apio) πόρδαλις μὲν ὁ ἄρρην,
πάρδαλις δὲ ἡ θήλεια. But these are
evidently mere grammarians’ figments.

104. οὐδ᾽ ἔπι ydpun, there is no fight
im them ; cf. οὐδ᾽ ἔπι φειδώ E 92, π 315.
Van L. objects that in the latter passages
the sense is there is no modesty to stop
them (as in ἔπι δέος A 515), which does
not suit here. Hence he reads ἔνι for ἔπι.
There is another alternative, ἐπὶ χάρμηι,
explained not with a view to fight: but
this is unsatisfactory.

107 =E 791, where see note.

108. ἡγεμόνος must mean Agamem-
non; though certainly, as the context
stands, we should expect ἡγεμόνων.
κακότητι may perhaps mean rather in-
coinpetence than wickedness; see B 368.
λαῶν is so general a word that it must
imply the host at large, not, as some

have understood, the Myrmidons alone.
It is perhaps by a politic stroke that
Poseidon pretends that the remissness of
the army is due only to their resentment
at the conduct of Agamemnon. This
attitude of the army agrees with that
portrayed in B, but we have had no sign
of it in the interval.

110. For the gen. after ἀμύνειν cf. O
731 Τρῶας ἄμυνε νεῶν, which clearly shews
the ablative sense of the case: so too
A 11, M 403. See also on Π 522, 2171.
We also find ἀμύνειν περί τινος, P 182,
but the dat. is the usual case with the
act., as the gen. is with the middle.

113. ἀπητίμηςε, this compound is
found here only; Nauck reads ἀπή-
τίμασσε as usual (see on A 11), after
ἀπητιμασμένη, Aisch. Hum. 95. The
composition with ἀπο- perhaps implies
extreme insult : see on ἀπομηνίσαντος, B
772, and cf. ἀπημελημένον, Herod. iii.
129. Brandreth’s conj. ἄρ᾽ ἠτίμησε is
not needed.

115. The obvious reference of this
line is to Achilles; lef us atone with
speed; the hearts of good men admit
atonement, ἀκεώμεθα means Zet us heal
the wound we have inflicted, and so
ἀκεςταί obtains its proper force. But
this is so inconsistent with the tenor
of the Presbeia that those who do not
admit the late origin of that book will

have us translate let us make good our
blunder (sc. μεθημοσύνη) ; the hearts of
brave men can be made good (or can make

13 IAIAAOC N (χπι)

ὑμεῖς δ᾽ οὐκέτι καλὰ μεθίετε θούριδος ἀλκῆς
πάντες ἄριστοι ἐόντες ἀνὰ στρατόν: οὐδ᾽ ἂν ἔγωγε
ἀνδρὶ μαχεσσαίμην, ὅς τις πολέμοιο μεθείη
λυγρὸς ἐών: ὑμῖν δὲ νεμεσσῶμαι περὶ κῆρι.
ὦ πέπονες, τάχα δή τι κακὸν ποιήσετε μεῖζον 120
τῆιδε μεθημοσύνηι' ἀλλ᾽ ἐν φρεσὶ θέσθε ἕκαστος
αἰδῶ καὶ νέμεσιν: δὴ γὰρ μέγα νεῖκος ὄρωρεν.
“ \ \ \ \ > \ /
Extwp δὴ παρὰ νηυσὶ βοὴν ἀγαθὸς πολεμίζει
καρτερός, ἔρρηξεν δὲ πύλας καὶ μακρὸν ὀχῆα."

ὥς pa κελευτιόων γαιήοχος ὦρσεν ᾿Αχαιούς.
ἀμφὶ δ᾽ dp Αἴαντας δοιοὺς ἵσταντο φάλαγγες

/ A ο΄. ΕΣ ” , / \

Kaptepal, as οὔτ᾽ av κεν “Apns ὀνόσαιτο μετελθὼν
» > e »
οὔτέ κ᾿ ᾿Αθηναίη λαοσσόος" οἱ yap ἄριστοι

125

118. χιεθείη Hii (supr.1e1) [15 ἢ : μεθϑείει ACT (swpr. ¥ over first εἰ) U: μεϑίει

GHJPQR Cant. Harl. a, Vr. b? A.
de Cant.
T. || ὥςεν Mor.
KEN G.

126. αἴαντε PR.

good’). It is true that this sense of
ἀκεῖσθαι may be defended ; e.g. in κ 69
Odysseus says to Aiolos, ἀλλ᾽ ἀκέσασθε,
φίλοι, repair my blunder (ἄτη,) and so
Herod. i. 167 ἀκέσασθαι τὴν ἁμαρτάδα.
But the difficulty of the adj. Gxectai is
then glaring. Its real meaning is suf-
ficiently proved by the analogous phrases,
στρεπταὶ μέν τε φρένες ἐσθλῶν O 203,
στρεπτοὶ δέ τε καὶ θεοὶ αὐτοί, I 497; ef.
I 514 νόον ἐσθλῶν, 526 δωρητοί 7’ ἐπέλοντο.
Bekker, Christ, Fiasi and others simply
regard the line as spurious, for which
there is no ground.

118. umayeccaiuHn, quarrel with; B
377, Z 329, 1 32. μεθείη is clearly the
right reading, the Ms. variations being
merely itacistic. The opt. is the regular
mood in a relative clause after another
opt. ; H. G.,§ 305 b. It was introduced
first by H. Etienne.

119. λυγρός, w poor creatwre, ‘sorry
wight’ ; so 237, σ 107.

120. ménonec, see note on B 235.
Friedlander regards 120-5 as a separate
speech. There is not much reason for
separating these lines from the pre-
ceding, except the rather tautological
harping on μεθημοσύνη.

122. For the force of αἰδῶ καὶ néuecin
compare νέμεσίν τε καὶ αἴσχεα πόλλ᾽
ἀνθρώπων, Z 351. So O 561 αἰδῶ θέσθ᾽
ἐνὶ θυμῶι. The force of Néuecic is shewn

119 om. Ct.
124. ἔρρηξεν OE: ὡς EppHze Bar.

121. eéceai GL. 123. OH:
125. τινὲς κελευθιόων, Sch.

127. οὔτ᾽ GN KEN: οὔτε ken S: οὐδέ

by B 136 νέμεσις δέ μοι ἐξ ἀνθρώπων
ἔσσεται, and x40. Theword is ‘objective,’
expressing the indignation felt by other
men. αἰδώς, on the other hand, is sub-
jective, the shame felt by the offender.
This is clear from the participle αἰδομένων
following αἰδῶ in Ὁ 563. The whole
phrase thus, unlike Z 351, expresses both
sides of the consequences of cowardice.
Cf. Schol. B τήν re κοινὴν αἰσχύνην καὶ
τὴν ἐξ ἄλλων προσγινομένην μέμψιν.

124. μακρὸν ὀχῆα, see M 121, 455-
60. The slight discrepancy with the
latter passage, where there are two ὀχῆες,
has been made much of by the school of
Lachmann, but is not worth notice.

125. κελευτιόων, see M 265.

127. The use of the two particles ἄν
KEN in immediate sequence is found also
in « 334; in the four other cases where
they occur in the same clause they are
separated at least by μέν (see on A 187).
Hence Brandreth suggested οὔτ᾽ dp κεν
here. The variant οὐδέ (οὔτε) κεν passes
the limits of permissibleictus lengthening.
6Nécaito μετελθών, A 539.

128. Aaoccdoc (from ov-, root of σεύω,
see on A 549), wrger of armies, is used
also of Apollo, fT 79, Amphiaraos, o 244,
and Ares, P 398. For the form οἵ,
δορυσσόος, Hes. Seuwt. 54, ete., and
ἱπποσόα of Artemis, Pind. 0. 111. 26,
ἱπποσύας ᾿Ιόλαος L. ν. (iv.) 32. In οἵ

IAIAAOC N (x11) 13

rn / -
κρινθέντες Τρῶάς τε καὶ “Extopa δῖον ἔμιμνον

φράξαντες δόρυ δουρί, σάκος σάκεϊ προθελύμνωι:"

> \ CS ee /Q> κ / pAb A She Dah
ἀσπὶς ἄρ᾽ ἀσπίδ᾽ ἔρειδε, κόρυς κόρυν, ἀνέρα δ᾽ ἀνήρ'
“ , val
ψαῦον δ᾽ ἱππόκομοι κόρυθες λαμπροῖσι φάλοισι
/ A \ 5 / > /
νευόντων: ὡς πυκνοὶ ἐφέστασαν ἀλληλοίσιν.

” \ 7 / » Ν lal
εγχεα δὲ πτυσσοντο θρασειάων απὸ χείρων

σειόμεν᾽. οἱ δ᾽ ἰθὺς φρόνεον, μέμασαν δὲ μάχεσθαι.

135

761 ο.
ἰϑύς, Sch. T. || φόρεον R.

130. ppdzante H. || mpoeéAuunoi Vr. A.
134, δὲ MTUCCONTO: 9° éntHcconTo L (P ὃ).

131. ἄρ᾽: δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ R: δ᾽ Plut. Mor.
135. τινὲς ςειόμενοι ὃ᾽

γὰρ ἄριστοι we seem to have a case of
the developed article ; but we may per-
haps take it in a weak deictic sense,
‘there stood the best picked men,’ or
read with Monro οἱ yap ἄριστοι (sc. ἦσαν).
130. προϑελύμνωι, acc. to the scholia
Ξ- ἀλλεπαλλήλωι, row upon row. This
explanation is most easily reconciled
with the use of the word in I 541, but
it is not entirely satisfactory, as we
should certainly expect σάκεσι for σάκεϊ.
In K 15 the word clearly seems =
πρόρριζος, so that no explanation suits
all three passages, and we may look for
another here. One alternative is to
take it (with Reichel H. W. p. 39) as
a general description of the shield, with
layer (of hide) over layer (πολυπτύχωι
Schol. Harl. a). This suits the use of
τετραθέλυμνος in O 479; but the context
seems to call for a special rather than
a general epithet. Such may be found
in the sense with base set forward, which
describes the characteristic attitude of
the Mykenaian warrior crouched under
his long shield resting on the ground
in front of him. The close formation
here indicated is rare in H., but is found
again in M 105, II 214 ff., whence 131-33
seem to be borrowed in order to bridge
the gap between the opening of the Διὸς
ἀπάτη and the Aristeia of Idomeneus.
132. ψαῦον, fouched with the project-
ing φάλοι (see App. B, vii. 2), those in
front when the men bent their heads.
134. ntUcconto, were folded ; how such
an expression can be used of spears
commentators have not been able to ex-
plain. The word and its derivatives in
H. have a very narrow range of mean-
ings, being used in the literal sense of
folding clothes, except πτύχες, which is
used of the layers of the shield, and the
‘folds’ of a furrowed hillside. From
this source commentators have en-

deavoured to deduce such meanings as
‘bent with the braudishing,’ or ‘ were
interlaced,’ or ‘were a confused mass’ ;
but no satisfactory explanation has been
given. The use of ϑραςειάων ἀπὸ
χειρῶν in A 571 would seem to imply
that the verb here has something to do
with the flight in the air of the spears
when actually hurled, and it is possible
that such a sense may be found in the
variant ἐπτήσσοντο. The root mra- (πτά-
μενος) may perhaps have developed a
secondary m7rnx- in the sense jly as we
know to have happeued in the sense
crouch (πτήσσ-ειν by ἐ-πτή-την), Whether
the two words are originally identical
(as Buttmann held) or no. Compare
also ἰλήκοι beside ἴληθι, and other cases
quoted in H. G. 8 22. 9 note. On the
other hand, this explanation does not
suit σειόμενα, which is used of spears
brandished in preparation for a cast :
we can hardly put the stop at the end of
134 and read σειόμενοι δ᾽ ἰθύς with Schol.
T, for this again does not suit the use
of σείεσθαι (cf. 8 199); ἐσσύμενοι would
be required. For δὲ πτύσσοντο Naber
conj. δ᾽ ἐσσεύοντο, Pallis δέ σφ᾽ ἔσσυντο.

135. ieUc φρόνεον, οἵ. M 124 τῆι ῥ᾽
ἰθὺς φρονέων ἵππους ἔχε, and the phrase
ἰθὺς μεμαώς. The preceding passage was,
according to the pseudo-Plutarchean
Life of Homer, chosen by the poet for
recitation in the contest in which he
defeated Hesiod ; which of course only
means that the ancients justly admired
it. * This is clear enough from imitations
in later poets, e.g. Tyrtaios fr. 11. 31
καὶ πόδα πὰρ ποδὶ θεὶς καὶ ἐπ᾽ ἀσπίδος
ἀσπίδ᾽ ἐρείσας, Eur. Her. 836 ποὺς
ἐπαλλαχθεὶς ποδί, ἀνὴρ δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἀνδρὶ στάς,
Virgil Aen. x. 361 haeret pede pes,
densusque viro vir, Furius Antias apud
Macrob. Sat. vi. 3. 5 pressatur pede pes,
mucro mucrone, viro vir.

14 IAIAAOC N (xu)

Τρῶες δὲ προύτυψαν ἀολλέες, ἦρχε δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ “Extwp
ἀντικρὺ μεμαώς, ὀλοοίτροχος ὡς ἀπὸ πέτρης,
ὅν τε κατὰ στεφάνης ποταμὸς χειμάρροος ὦσηι,
ῥήξας ἀσπέτωι ὄμβρωι ἀναιδέος ἔχματα πέτρης"

“ 2 fa)
ὕψι δ᾽ ἀναθρώισκων πέτεται, κτυπέει δέ θ᾽ ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ 140
2 . ’ Ἂ
ὕλη" ὁ δ᾽ ἀσφαλέως θέει ἔμπεδον, ὄφρ᾽ ἂν ἵκηται
> / / »
ἰσόπεδον" τότε δ᾽ οὔ τι κυλίνδεται ἐσσύμενός TEP:
ἃ oR “ \ > , / /
ὡς “Extwp elws μὲν ἀπείλει μέχρι θαλάσσης
Cues. ὃ ἈΝ vA fa} / \ a > lal
ῥέα διελεύσεσθαι κλισίας καὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν
/ > a
κτείνων: ἀλλ᾽ OTE δὴ πυκινῆις ἐνέκυρσε φάλαγξι, 145
a ξ 7 3 3 ᾿ . > 5 7, a 2) a
στῆ pa μάλ ἐγχριμφθείς. οἱ δ᾽ ἀντίοι vies ᾿Αχαιῶν
My. id
νύσσοντες ξίφεσίν τε Kal ἔγχεσιν ἀμφιγύοισιν
5 \ 7 -
ὦσαν ἀπὸ σφείων: ὁ δὲ χασσάμενος πελεμίχθη.
ἤυσεν δὲ διαπρύσιον Τρώεσσι γεγωνώς"
“Τρῶες καὶ Δύκιοι καὶ Δάρδανοι ἀγχιμαχηταί, 150

137. ὁλοότροχος CGH:

χείμαρρος GLOT Vr. A: yetuapoc P.
139. acxyérwo QU (supr. ἀσπέτω). || alyuata PQ: ὄχματα R.
141. ὄφρ᾽ GN: ὄφρα R: ἕως AP: εἵως C:

CLSU: ὕψει τ᾽ P. || αὐτῷ P,

ἕως ἂν Lips. (yp. ὄφρ᾽ AN) yp. Harl. a.

144. ῥέα διελεύςεεθαι Ar.: ῥεῖα διελεύςεςθαι I’: ῥεῖα
ῥεῖα O° ἐλεύςεςϑαι ὦ.
146. ἐγχριφϑεὶς ΗΠ Vr. b d A. || τοὶ R.
Pare. || 6 0€ ya&ccaTo πολλὸν éniccw Zen.

142. éccuuenwc ".
éXeUceceai Par. j:

150. augwalyHta Pap. 0.

6hodtpoxoc Bar. Mor.
|| ὥςει CJ (L supr.) Vr. Ὁ (supr. mi).

138. χειμάρρος Syr. :
140. ὕψι τ᾽
|| eicéken ἔλθηι Porphyr. on A 269.

145. nukinaic P. || énéxupe H.

148. noAeufyeh GH (R supr.)
149. τρώεςει : ϑαναοιςι Pap. θ.

136. προύτυψαν, intrans. of violent
forward motion; cf. προκρούειν, προ-
κόπτειν, προβάλλειν. So also w 319
δριμὺ μένος προύτυψε.

137. ὁλοοίτροχος recurs in an oracle
in Herod. v. 92. 2, and Theokr. 22.
49 ; and in the form ὁλοίτροχος, Herod.
vili. 52, Xen. Anab. iv. 2. 3. The word
is no doubt for FodoF-oirpoxos, from
Fe\-v, to roll, Lat. vol-v-. The -o-,
however, is not explained; we can hardly
compare ὁδοιπόρος, where it is clearly
the locative termination (#. G. ὃ 124 2).
Perhaps we ought to prefer the variant
édobrpoxos. The scholia generally refer
the word to 6dods, as though=running
destructively. .

138, στεφάνης occurs only here of the
brow of a hill. For the simile cf. Seut.
Her, 437-42.

139. anaidéoc, of the reckless wilful
course, see A 521; ἔχματα, M 260, Φ 259.

141. acpahéooc, without a check.

144, péa monosyllable, see note on
P 462. The vulg. ῥεῖα δ᾽ ἐλεύσεσθαι ivy

hopeless. Brandreth’s Fpea F’ is not
Homeric. Pallis conj. pet’ ἐπελεύσεσθαι,
comparing I 651 ἐπί τε κλισίας Kai νῆας
ἱκέσθαι κτείνοντα.

147. ἀμφιγύοιςιν, gencrally supposed
to mean ‘having a γυῖον at each end,’
i.e. the head at one end and the spike
(σαυρωτήρ) at the other. But it is not
explained how γυῖΐον, which is properly
used of the flexible extremities, hands
and feet, can be used of the point of a
spear, nor how the adjective can be
formed from it by dropping the «,
Others have explained it of the spear-
head only, as ‘having a curve on both
sides,’ i.e. being of what is known as
the ‘leaf-shape’; others again as two-
handed (wielded with both hands). But
it is quite possible that the word may
mean edastic, literally ‘ bending to either
side.” The existence of the root γυ-, to
bend, is abundantly proved ; cf. γυρός,
γύαλον, γύης, etc. For the use of the
wordin Soph. Z’rach. 505 see Jebb, ad loc.

148 = A 535.

=

IAIAAOC N (xt) 15

/ ’ ΕΣ Ν >, \ / , /
παρμένετ᾽: οὔ ToL δηρὸν ἐμὲ σχήσουσιν ᾿Αχαιοί,
καὶ μάλα πυργηδὸν σφέας αὐτοὺς ἀρτύναντες,

> ’ nA / ec » » >] > /

ἀλλ᾽, ὀΐω, χάσσονται ὑπ᾽ ἔγχεος, εἰ ἐτεόν με
a / 4

ὧρσε θεῶν ὥριστος, ἐρίγδουπος πόσις Ἥρης."

A > \ ” / \ \ ΄ /
ὡς εἰπὼν ὦτρυνε μένος καὶ θυμὸν ἑκάστου. 16:

σι

Δηΐφοβος δ᾽ ἐν τοῖσι μέγα φρονέων ἐβεβήκει
Πριαμίδης, πρόσθεν δ᾽ ἔχεν ἀσπίδα πάντοσ᾽ ἐΐσην,
lal \ \ \ ¢ / /
κοῦφα ποσὶ προβιβὰς καὶ ὑπασπίδια προποδίζων.
Μηριόνης δ᾽ αὐτοῖο τιτύσκετο δουρὶ φαεινῶι,
\ ΄ > Σ ΄ oy 8 of) , ΄, asf
καὶ βάλεν, οὐδ᾽ ἀφάμαρτε, κατ᾿ ἀσπίδα πάντοσ᾽ ἐΐσην 160

ταυρείην" τῆς δ᾽ οὔ τι διήλασεν, ἀλλὰ πολὺ πρὶν
ἐν καυλῶιν ἐάγη δολιχὸν δόρυ: Δηΐφοβος δὲ

> / / /f » \ Ψ a \ lal
ἀσπίδα ταυρείην σχέθ᾽ ἀπὸ ἕο, δεῖσε δὲ θυμῶι

151. οὔτι CGR.
Dt, || &cxyen GQ.
Pap. @.

158-60 om. H.

153. we: περ Hii Vr. ἃ.

159. αὐτοῖο: ἐν τοῖσι Ap. Lex. 153. 10.

154. Gpictoc H.

157 om.
158. ὑπ᾽ acnida GJPQR Lips.: unocnidia

161. δ᾽ om. Vr. A.

163. cxér’ AJPQR Harl. a: cxéro G. || ἀπαὶ L supr.

152. nuprHdon, see on A 334, M 43.

153. ὀΐω, Schol. BT prefer οἴωι, i.e.
ἐμοὶ μόνωι.

154. dpicroc, see on Z 260, A 288,
Here also Brandreth conj. ὃς ἄριστος.

158. Unacnidia = ὑπὸ τῆι ἀσπίδι, and
so 807, 11609. The word expresses the
characteristic Mykenaian attitude of
guard against attack. For the formation
cf. ὑπέρμορα, and the other instances of
adjectives equivalent to a preposition
governing a noun in H. G. § 127. 2.
The later ὑπασπίζειν and ὑπασπιστής
have a different meaning, and so has
the tragic use of the adj., as will be
seen on reference to the Lex. Notice
the marked alliteration of πὶ in 157-8,
as usual a mere accident. Κοῦφα seems to
indicate the trained hero who can move
with ease even beneath his ponderous
shield.

159. αὐτοῖο, in the weak sense: αὖ
toto Diintzer, ἄρα τοῖο Hoogvliet.

162. ἐν καυλῶι, P 607 ; for the use of
ἐν cf. Z 40 ἐν πρώτωι ῥυμῶι. καυλός is
explained by Schol. Β as τὸ καθιέμενον
els τὸ κοῖλον τοῦ δόρατος μέρος. ‘This
may mean either a tongue of metal form-
ing part of the head and let into the
wood of the spear, or the end of the
wooden spear-shaft fixed into a hollow
base of the point. There is no reason
why both these modes of attachment
may not have been in use simultaneously
in spears of different makes. The former

seems to be implied by the use of a
ferrule or πόρκης in Z 320, the latter
by the αὐλός of P 297 (see note there).
Here the former is probably intended.
So also the καυλός of a sword (II 338) is
the metal tongue running from the blade
between the wooden pieces which form
the handle ; see Helbig H. 1.3 335-8.
163. cxéee may be counted among the
forms which vary in sense between aor.
and imperf. The imperf. sense is evi-
dently required here, for the holding out
of the shield at arm’s length is sub-
ordinate to the previous action βάλεν,
and this relation is in the Epic language
expressed by the imperf. (H. G. ὃ 71).
On the other hand the aor. sense seems
best suited to A 219, and σχεθέειν Ψ 466,
ἀνσχεθέειν ε 320 look like aorist forms,
though even this is rendered doubtful
when we consider such stem-formations
as γηθέω by γηθόμενος, and ὀρέχθεον Ψ
30. Apart from these forms there is
little to decide ‘the question, whether
in H., Pindar (e.g. P. vi. 19), or Trag.,
except the accent, and here, of course,
we cannot trust to tradition, We must
therefore conclude that this is a really
indeterminate form, in which the usual
differentiation, whether into a definite
aor. or a definite imperf. was nevet
carried out (see particularly Curtius, Κ᾽ ὁ.
ii. 345-46). On the whole, however,
the tendency of classical writers was
to use it as aor. See Jebb on Soph.

16 IAIAAOC Ν (x1ir)

ἔγχος Μηριόναο δαΐφρονος: αὐτὰρ 6 γ᾽ ἥρως
ΕΝ e / > 54 > ΄ 4 2 > fal
aw ἑτάρων εἰς ἔθνος ἐχάζετο, χώσατο δ᾽ αἰνῶς 165
ἀμφότερον, νίκης Te Kal ἔγχεος ὃ ξυνέαξε.
βῆ δ᾽ ἰέναι παρά τε κλισίας καὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν
> / / Ἂν “ id / /
οἰσόμενος δόρυ μακρὸν ὅ οἱ κλισίηφι λέλευπτο.
οἱ δ᾽ ἄλλοι μάρναντο, βοὴ δ᾽ ἄσβεστος ὀρώρει.
Τεῦκρος δὲ πρῶτος Τελαμώνιος ἄνδρα κατέκτα, 170
A > / of. Mé es
μβριον αἰχμητήν, πολυΐππου Μέντορος υἱόν.
ναῖε δὲ Πήδαιον πρὶν ἐλθεῖν υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶν,
/ \ / / ” /
κούρην δὲ Τ]ριάμοιο νόθην ἔχε, Μηδεσικάστην"
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ Δαναῶν νέες ἤλυθον ἀμφιέλισσαι,
ἂψ' εἰς Ἴλιον ἦλθε, μετέπρεπε δὲ 'Γρώεσσι, 175
ναῖε δὲ πὰρ ἹΠριάμωι: ὁ δέ μιν τίεν ica τέκεσσι.
τόν ῥ᾽ υἱὸς Τελαμῶνος ὑπ᾽ οὔατος ἔγχεϊ μακρῶι
4 &) > [wed ” » ε > 3) ” / [2
vue, ἐκ δ᾽ ἔσπασεν ἔγχος" ὁ δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ἔπεσεν μελίη ὥς,
ἥ τ᾽ ὄρεος κορυφῆι ἕκαθεν περιφαινομένοιο
χαλκῶι ταμνομένη τέρενα χθονὶ φύλλα πελάσσηι" 180
ΩΝ / > \ / ὡ / / , rn
ὡς πέσεν, ἀμφὶ δέ οἱ βράχε τεύχεα ποικίλα χαλκῶι.
Τεῦκρος δ᾽ ὡρμήθη μεμαὼς ἀπὸ τεύχεα δῦσαι:"
“ ΕΣ Ὁ 7 Sys, \ a
Extwp δ᾽ ὁρμηθέντος ἀκόντισε δουρὶ pacar.

166. Ξυνέηξε Zen.: ΞυνἼεηκε Pap. ο. 168. ὅ : τινὲς ἅ,
112. ναῖε δὲ : ὃς ναῖε C: ὃς νάε
175. éc ().

179. κορυφῆι Ar.
περιτεμνομένη ἢ. |

165. aw 0° Syr.
ὡς ““κῆτος ἃ μυρία βόσκει᾽᾽ (μ 97) Sch. T.
Zen. || υἷας: νῆας J. 173. wHOekacicTHN P: uHdEcIKGTHN ( Lips.
177. TON O° Syr. Vr. A. 178. αὖτ᾽ : ἐν ἄλλωι aip’ A.

ACPQ: κορυφῆ(ι)ς Q. 180. τεμνομένη Lt) Syr.:

ul

neAdece: C: πελάεςοι J: πετάςςηι Vr. Al.

0.T. 651. ἀπὸ ἕο, the short syllable
before 6(F)eioe is very rare. Heyne and
Ahrens suggest εὖ, but the contracted
form is probably not Epic. The internal
F had apparently so far disappeared that
5F does not lengthen a preceding short
syll. in thesis: cf. 278 and H. G. ὃ 394.

166. νίκης, ves pro rei defectu, as A
65, etc.

172. nate θέ, ἡ διπλῆ (sc. περιεστιγμένη)
ὅτι ZAnvddoros γράφει ὃς νάε 1ήδαιον..
ἀγνοεῖ δὲ ὅτι “Ὅμηρος διακόπτει τὰς φρά-
σεις, ἵνα μὴ μακροπερίοδος γένηται. ἄλλως
τε καὶ κακόμετρον τὸ ἔπος ποιεῖ, An. See
note on Z 34. On Πήθϑαιον Schol. T
says ὑπὸ τὴν “Idnv πόλις πρὸς Θήβην, οἱ
δὲ πρὸς ἹΚαρίαν. τινὲς δὲ τὴν αὐτὴν τῶι
ΠΠηδάσωι.

178. Medesikaste was represented by
Polygnotos in the Capture of ‘Troy,
which he painted at Delphi (Paus. x.
25. 9):

176. πὰρ Πριάμωι, no doubt in one of
the θάλαμοι τέγεοι of Z 248, q.v.

177. ἔγχεϊ μακρῶι. Teukros is there-
fore represented here as a heavy-armed
warrior, whereas elsewhere he is an
archer, M 372, O 440, cf. 472, Θ 266,
etc.; while he is praised in both capaci-
ties in 314. For a somewhat similar
difficulty see note on B 528. These
small inconsistencies, which affect only
the picture which the poet has before his
eyes, are not sufficient to form a ground
for wide-reaching dissection of the poems.

179. ἕκαθεν περιφαινομένοιο go to-
gether; ‘visible all round from far,’
Cf. ε 476 ἐν περιφαινομένωι, in ὦ conspicu-
ous place. Nitzsch has remarked how
the favourite simile of a falling tree is
used with continual freshness of detail ;
e.g. A 482-7.

183. OpuHeéntoc, the usual gen. after
verbs of aiming. H. G. ὃ 151.

IAIAAOC Ν (xu) 17

ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν ἄντα ἰδὼν ἠλεύατο χάλκεον ἔγχος
τυτθόν, ὁ δ᾽ ᾿Αμφίμαχον Κτεάτου vi’ ᾿Ακτορίωνος 185
/ / / \ “ / ,
νισσόμενον πόλεμόνδε κατὰ στῆθος βάλε δουρί.
δούπησεν δὲ πεσών, ἀράβησε δὲ τεύχε᾽ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῶι.
ΜῈ 8 ΄ ‘0 / 0 / > -“
κτωρ ὡρμήθη κόρυθα κροτάφοις ἀραρυῖαν
κρατὸς ἀφαρπάξαι μεγαλήτορος ᾿Αμφιμάχοιο'
Αἴας δ᾽ ὁρμηθέντος ὀρέξατο δουρὶ φαεινῶι 190
“Ἕκτορος" ἀλλ᾽ οὔ πηι χρὼς εἴσατο, πᾶς δ᾽ ἄρα χαλκῶι
σμερδαλέωι κεκάλυφθ᾽- ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἀσπίδος ὀμφαλὸν οὗτα,

2 ,ὕ ,ὔ “ / « \ / ’ ? /
@oe δέ μιν σθένεϊ μεγάλωι: ὁ δὲ yaooaT ὀπίσσω
νεκρῶν ἀμφοτέρων, τοὺς δ᾽ ἐξείρυσσαν ᾿Αχαιοί'

185. υἱὸν T. 186. NICOMENON

NeiccOuenon (H sup.) ὦ.

ACJPTU Vr. d.:
187. ἀράβηςε: τινὲς ἀράϑηςε Sch. T. 190.

Neicouenon |) Syr.:

ὀρέξατο : ἀκόντιςε JPQS Harl. b, Par. abedfghj, yp. Harl. a, Lips., and τινὲς

Sch. T.
κεκάλυπτο DT’: κεκαλυπτί Pap. o.

191. οὕπω C. | χρὼς Zen.: χρόος or χροὸς Ατ. : χροὸς £2. 192.

185. For Amphimachos and his par-
entage see notes on B 621, A 709.

186. Of the various forms given by
the Mss. νισόμενον was regarded as a
future (Eust. ad loc.). νίσσεσθαι is
doubtless right, for w-vo-j-ecAa, root
ves, though νίσ-εσθαι may be defended
as=vi-vo-ecOat, ef. πί-πτ-ω.

190. épé=ato: the variant ἀκόντισε,
though well supported, would not suit
the canon of Ar. that οὖτα (192) is
used only of a weapon held in the
hand.

191. ὅτι διήιρηκε χρόος ἀντὶ τοῦ χρώς"
διὸ βαρυτονητέον. καὶ ὅτι τὸ εἴσατο νῦν
ἀντὶ τοῦ ἐφάνη, An. So also οὕτως αἱ
᾿Αριστάρχου χρόος ὡς λόγος: βούλεται δὲ
διηιρῆσθαι τὴν εὐθεῖαν. Znvidoros δὲ
γράφει χρὼς εἴσατο, Did. ὁ δὲ ᾿Ηρωδιανὸς
καὶ εὐθεῖαν καὶ γενικὴν δέχεται (regards
as possible) τὴν χροός, προκρίνει δὲ
τὴν γενικήν, Schol. T. A nom. χρόος is
eutirely without analogy, and we are
reduced to a choice between χρώς and
χροός. Inu favour of the latter is not
only the consensus of mss., but the
evident fact that Ar.’s authorities were
so strongly in the same direction that
he preferred the supposition of an un-
known form of the nom. to the easy
adoption of Zen.’s reading. On the
other hand arises the question whether
his authorities were competent witnesses
as to a primitive distinction between
oo andw. In the oldest alphabet both
would be given by O, and the distinction

VOL. II

can only go back to the transliteration
of the poems. The choice therefore
lies open to us. If we read xpods we
may take the gen. as dependent upon
εἴσατο, on the analogy of τυχεῖν and
other verbs of attaining. In x 89 we
have Ὀδυσῆος ἐείσατο, which is rather
different, coming under the category
of verbs of aiming. ἀλλήλων ἐφίκοντο,
N 613, and ὅθι οἱ καταείσατο γαίης, A 358,
are nearer. We should then have a
‘vague local’ gen., ‘reached not the
region of the flesh. It might seem
possible to join xpods as a partitive gen.
with πηι, but this use, though common
enough in later Greek, is hardly Homeric ;
see on Γ 400 and A 358 (ef., however,
a 425, 8 131, 6 639). It must further
be remembered that εἴσατο in the sense
reached had an initial F (see on A 138
and Ahrens Beitr. p. 95). These
difficulties and doubts are at once re-
moved if we adopt the Zenodotean χρώς,
and take εἴσατο, with Ar., in the sense
of ἐφάνη. La R. objects that we should
need an imperf., not an aor., as X 32
φαίνετο. But the difference between the
two is merely that the aor. means ‘the
flesh never shewed itself,’ the imperf.
‘was not visible.’

192. La R. suggests that the variant
of DT may represent an _ original
κεκάλυπτο, ὁ δ᾽ ἀσπίδος, ἄρ᾽ being inserted
to remove the hiatus. But writing
ἐκ πλήρους is not so rare in the Mss. as to
justify this conclusion.

18 IAIAAOC Ν (χιπ)

᾿Αμφίμαχον μὲν ἄρα Στιχίος δῖός τε Μενεσθεύς, 195
ἀρχοὶ ᾿Αθηναίων, κόμισαν μετὰ λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν,
Ἴμβριον αὖτ᾽ Αἴαντε, μεμαότε θούριδος ἀλκῆς.
ὥς τε δύ᾽ αἶγα λέοντε κυνῶν ὕπο καρχαροδόντων
ἁρπάξαντε φέρητον ἀνὰ ῥωπήϊα πυκνά,

ὑψοῦ ὑπὲρ γαίης μετὰ γαμφηλῆισιν ἔχοντε,

ὥς ῥα τὸν ὑψοῦ ἔχοντε δύω Αἴαντε κορυστὰ
τεύχεα συλήτην" κεφαλὴν δ᾽ ἁπαλῆς ἀπὸ δειρῆς
κόψεν ᾿Οἱλιάδης, κεχολωμένος ᾿Αμφιμάχοιο,

ἧκε δέ μιν σφαιρηδὸν ἑλιξάμενος δι’ ὁμίλου"
“Ἕκτορι δὲ προπάροιθε ποδῶν πέσεν ἐν κονίηισι. 205

200

na if
καὶ τότε δὴ περὶ κῆρι ἸΠοσειδάων ἐχολώθη
υἱωνοῖο πεσόντος ἐν αἰνῆι δηϊοτῆτι,
lol > 5. / fe \ nr ἮΝ “
βῆ δ᾽ ἰέναι παρά τε κλισίας καὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν
2 , ΠΣ / δὲ Ά ὃ ? 4
ὀτρυνέων Δαναούς, Τρώεσσι δὲ κήδε ἔτευχεν.
,
Ἰδομενεὺς δ᾽ ἄρα οἱ δουρικλυτὸς ἀντεβόλησεν,
ei /
ἐρχόμενος παρ᾽ ἑταίρου, 6 οἱ νέον ἐκ πολέμοιο

210

195. cTIxfoc: τινὲς cxedioc Sch. T.
198. aire Zen., Par. b supr.
ἔχοντο A. || Kopuctai PR.

ἄρ᾽ ἰλιάϑης Zen. 204. ἐλιξόμενος L.
κ[η]ϑεα τευχεῖν Pap. ο.

200. ἔχοντες PQR Syr. Cant.
202. 0 om. Q. || ἀπὸ : ὑπὸ Vr. Ὁ,

196. λαὸν : ἐν ἄλλωι μετὰ ἔθνος A.
201. apa Syr. ||
203. KOWEN
207. ενὶ κρατερῆι ὕεμίνηι Syr. 209.

197. seuadte ἀλκῆς, cf. Ρ 181 ἀλκῆς

μάλα περ μεμαῶτα (v. note), and E 732
μεμαυῖ᾽ ἔριδος καὶ ἀυτῆς. ἀλκή in this
connexion means deeds of prowess, cf.
Pind. NV. vii. 12 ταὶ μεγάλαι yap ἀλκαὶ
σκότον πολὺν ὕμνων ἔχοντι δεόμεναι.

198. The idea may be either that two
lions come upon a goat which has just
been run down by hounds, and snatch
it away from them, as in I’ 23; or that
they seize the goat from a herd protected
by the goatherd’s dogs. Schol. B objects
οὐ συμμαχοῦσιν ἀλλήλοις λέοντες, ἀλλὰ
τοῦ ἑνὸς ἁρπάσαντος συναρπάζει ὑπαντῶν
ὁ ἕτερος ἑκατέρου τὴν ἄγραν εἰς ἑαυτὸν
κατάγοντος. It was apparently for this
reason that Zen. read aiye, giving one
goat to each lion, but spoiling the
appropriateness of the simile. The
scholia quote from Aischylos (fr. 30)
εἷλκον δ᾽ ἄνω λυκηδόν, ὥστε διπλόοι λύκοι
νεβρὸν φέρουσιν ἀμφὶ μασχάλαις.

202. This savage practice is rare in
H. ; see & 496, 2 176.

204. ἐλιξάμενος, ‘with a swing of his
body,’ whirling himself round to throw
the more violently. Others take it to
mean ‘swinging the head’ in a circle ;

cf. ἐπιδινήσας, 1 378. On account of the
F of ξελίσσειν Heyne reads σφαιρηδὸν δέ
μιν ἧκε, comparing for the place of the
ady. βοτρυδὸν δὲ πέτονται, B89. Bentley
conj. σφαιρίνδα, Bekker σφαιρηδά (sug-
gested also by Heyne) on the insufficient
analogy of ἀποσταδά, ¢ 143, and other
adverbs in -δά, which are all derived
from verbs, not from nouns.

207. υἱωνοῖο, Amphimachos, son of
Kteatos, son of Poseidon ; see on A 709.
The allusion is unusually obscure, as
Poseidon was not named above (185).
Small difficulties of this sort abound in
this passage, which is no doubt a work
of the final redaction (see Introduction).

211. The mention of ‘a comrade’ in
general terms is unusual ; from the regu-
lar Homeric practice we should have ex-
pected to hear hisname. It is surprising
too to find Idomeneus, who in A 501 was
among the fore-fighters, and in M 117
was defending the wall, now unarmed ;
even if he were justified at such a
moment in withdrawing from the fight
to help a wounded friend, it is hardly to
be supposed that he would lay aside his
armour. -

IAIAAOC N (χιη) 19

᾽ / “ -

ἦλθε Kat ἰγνύην βεβλημένος ὀξέϊ χαλκῶι.
-“ e ᾽ -
τὸν μὲν ἑταῖροι ἔνεικαν, ὁ δ᾽ ἰητροῖς ἐπιτείλας
” \ ,
ἤϊεν ἐς κλισίην: ETL γὰρ πολέμοιο μενοίνα
ἀντιάαν. τὸν δὲ προσέφη κρείων ἐνοσίχθων,
> ‘ \ > ὃ / ? G /
εἰσάμενος φθογγὴν ᾿Ανδραίμονος vit Θόαντι,
ὃς πάσηι Πλευρῶνι καὶ αἰπεινῆι Καλυδῶνι
a ᾽
Αἰτωλοῖσιν ἄνασσε, θεὸς δ᾽ ὡς τίετο δήμωι:
μ

fal a / rn ‘

“Ἰδομενεῦ Κρητῶν βουληφόρε, ποῦ Tou ἀπειλαὶ

᾽ν

οἴχονται, τὰς Τρωσὶν ἀπείλεον υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν ; 220

ες
—_
an

\ , 9 > 3 \ a a > \ by ΄ ”
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ᾿Ιδομενεὺς Κρητῶν ἀγὸς ἀντίον ηὔδα"
/ » \ lal » δ Μ
“@ Θόαν, οὔ τις ἀνὴρ νῦν αἴτιος, ὅσσον ἔγωγε
γινώσκω: πάντες γὰρ ἐπιστάμεθα πτολεμίζειν.
, » / »
οὔτέ τινα δέος ἴσχει ἀκήριον οὔτέ τις ὄκνωι
" > / / / > / a Ξ
εἴκων ἀνδύεται πόλεμον κακὸν" ἀλλά που οὕτω 29
/ \ 3 “.
μέλλει δὴ φίλον εἶναι ὑπερμενέϊ Kpoviwr,
, > , Denia: ταν ἘΝ Ὁ, Δ» 5 ΄
νωνύμνους ἀπολέσθαι ἀπ᾽ “Apyeos ἐνθάδ᾽ ᾿Α χαιούς.
> \ / \ ΙΝ \ / 7... >
ἀλλὰ Θόαν, καὶ yap TO πάρος pevednios ἦσθα,
΄ \ , A
ὀτρύνεις δὲ Kal ἄλλον, ὅθι μεθιέντα ἴδηαι"

a lal ΓΕ ᾽ / , / \ e ΄ »”
τῶ νῦν μήτ᾽ ἀπόληγε κέλευε TE φωτὶ ἑκάστωι. 230
213. ἐνῆκαν Q (supr.’ over € and εἰ over A): ENHcaN P. 214. ἢϊεν : οἱ δὲ

ἣν Yen Sch. T. || ἐκ κλιείης DJQRS!, yp. P. 216. φθογγὴν : φωνὴν (iL.
218. After this line add. τῶι μιν ἐεισάμενος προςέφη κρείων ἐνοείχϑων LP HT
Cant. Lips.™: τῶι win ἐεισάμενος Enea πτερόεντα προςηύδα ΓΝ. 222. EON :
πέπον D. || νῦν γ᾽ Ar. [G]PR Par. g?: NON 0° Aph.? (Schol. T; see Ludw.).
223. τιγνώσοκω GLT. πολεμίζειν CDPRU Vr. A. 224. οὐδέ τινα Par. a: ἔν
τισι τῶν ἀντιγράφων διὰ τοῦ 6, οὐϑέ, Did. 225. anadverai DR Lips. Par. 1:
énovetai P: οὕτω διὰ τοῦ ν ἀνϑύεται ai ᾿Αριστάρχου (Sch. A): τινὲς δὲ γράφουσιν
ἀδϑύεται (Sch. T). (The reading of P confirms Lehrs’s conj. διὰ τοῦ a for διὰ τοῦ ν).

πτόλεμον G. || MOU: nw S. 227. νωνύμνους AHT Syr. Pap. 0: νωνύμους
Q. || ἐνθάδ᾽ ἀχαιούς: υἷας ἀχαιῶν A (7p. énodd’ ay.) R, yp. Harl. a. 229.
ὀτρύνοις T. || ὅθι : ὅ of T (yp. ὅτι): ὅτε A (yp. ὅθι) CJPQR Vr. A King’s
Harl. ἃ, Par. cd! οἱ g (supr. e1): de1 τε Lips. : yp. Stan Par. f.

πόνοιο Zen. | ἴδοιο TT. 230. TON R. || κέλευε δὲ H Syr. Pap. o.

214. It is indifferent whether Ido-
meneus is described as going to his
own hut, as in the text, or coming from _ taunt is general and not directed speci-
that of another, asin the variant. From ally at Idomeneus, except by implication.
the strange idea that the ἑταῖρος must 225. Gnodvera, withdraws
be Meriones—who is not wounded— _ H 217 ἀλλ᾽ οὔ πως ἔτι εἶχεν ὑποτρέσαι

ὅτις WESiHICI

219. ποῦ... οἴχονται, like 9 229
πῆι ἔβαν εὐχωλαί, and cf. T 83. The

Jrom, as

Déderlein and others have got into hope- οὐδ᾽ ἀναδῦναι, and « 377. For the use
less difficulties over a perfectly simple with acc. cf. A 496 ἀνεδύσετο κῦμα
passage. θαλάσσης. So also in Attic, to back out of:

216. For Thoas see B 638, A 527. Plato Theaet. 145c, Dem. 102. 12, Αἱ

Αἰτωλοῖειν and δήμωι in 218, as well as
the place-names which precede, seem to
be locative datives, ‘was king among
the Aitolians in all the country of
Pleuron and Kalydon.’ 77. G. § 145. Τα.

Ranae 860 ete.

227 =M 70.

228. ἦσθα, Bentley ἐσσί, which suits
the usual idiom (e.g. M 347) and the
following ὀτρύνεις.

20 IAIAAOC N (x11)

τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα ἸΠοσειδάων ἐνοσίχθων"

“cc? a \ a aes ” He
Ἰδομενεῦ, μὴ κεῖνος ἀνὴρ ἔτι νοστήσειεν
ἐκ Τροίης, ἀλλ᾽ αὖθι κυνῶν μέλπηθρα γένοιτο,

“ γε σου lal CoN / /
ὅς τις ἐπ᾿ ἤματι τῶιδε ἑκὼν μεθίηισι μάχεσθαι.
a fal \
GAN ἄγε τεύχεα δεῦρο λαβὼν ἴθι" ταῦτα δ᾽ ἅμα χρὴ 235
4 ΕΣ > ” / ΄ \ iP) ΕἾ
σπεύδειν, αἴ κ᾽ ὄφελός τι γενώμεθα καὶ δύ᾽ ἐόντε.

συμφερτὴ δ᾽ ἀρετὴ πέλει ἀνδρῶν καὶ μάλα λυγρῶν"

nw \ / > » an > /

voi δὲ καί κ᾽ ἀγαθοῖσιν ἐπισταίμεσθα
ἃ 2 \ e \ at ” \ ’
Qs εἰπὼν ὁ μὲν αὗτις ἔβη θεὸς ap

7 5.
μάχεσθαι.
πόνον ἀνδρῶν'

Ἰδομενεὺς δ᾽ ὅτε δὴ κλισίην ἐύτυκτον ἵκανε, 240
δύσετο τεύχεα καλὰ περὶ χροΐ, γέντο δὲ δοῦρε,

βῆ δ᾽ ἴμεν ἀστεροπῆι ἐναλίγκιος, ἥν τε Κρονίων

χειρὶ λαβὼν ἐτίναξεν ἀπ᾽ αἰγλήεντος ᾽Ολύμπου,

δεικνὺς σῆμα βροτοῖσιν: ἀρίζηλοι δέ οἱ avyat:

&s τοῦ χαλκὸς ἔλαμπε περὶ στήθεσσι θέοντος. 245
232. ἔτι: ἐκ 6. 234. ὅς κεν ( Pap. o. || μεθεηισὶ Syr. || ᾿Δρίσταρχος

»κεϑίησι πόνοιο Sch. 1.
cuugepTH δὲ βίη Zen. Aph.

236. ἐόντες G. || ϑύὀδντε R.
238. enictiuecea Syr.: émictaiueea H: énictauecea

237. ευνφερτὴ T. ||

A (yp. émictatuecea) DLTU Lips. Vr. A: ἐπιστάμεθα GPRS Harl. a: éneircoueea

Q. || ἐπιστάμεθα ntoheuizein J (spr. ai over & and cea over ea).

ἀμ: ἂν P Pap. o, Lips. Vr. Ὁ: ἐς R.
énahirrioc GR.
Pap. ο. || «τήϑεςφι G Vr. Ὁ".

244. ἀριζήλη O€ of αὐτὴ ().

239. aveic ©. ||
241. ducaTto P. 242. BA ῥ᾽ Vr. d. ||
245. ἔλαμπεν ἐνὶ Zen. Aph.

233. uéAnHepa, sport, only in this
connexion (P 255, = 179). Cf. ἑλώρια
A 4. Nauck conj. ἕλκηθρα, needlessly.

234. én’ ἤματι, K 48. μεθίηιςι, the
only instance in H. of the pres. subj. of ἴημι
(see H. G. § 81: προϊῆι Hymn. Ven. 152).
Hence some write μεθίησι (indic.). Wan
L. adopts μεθέηισι from Syr. The pres.
subj. is rarely found in any non-thematic
verb in H.; there appears not to be a
single instance from torn, τίθημι or
δίδωμι.

236. ὄφελος, a word which both in Η.
and Attic can almost always be trans-
lated by our idiomatic ‘good,’ and is
almost invariably found in combination
with a neuter pronoun, rarely with a
neuter adj. (see Lexx.). Here ὄφελός
7i=if perchance we may be any good, X
513 οὐδὲν σοί γ᾽ ὄφελος, no good to thee.
3ut from P 152 ὅς τοι πόλλ᾽ ὄφελος
γένετο we see that the appended adj.
or pronoun was originally an acc. of re-
lation, though in later Greek it evidently
came to be regarded as agreeing with the
noun. Cf. Θ 282 αἴ κέν τι φόως Δαναοῖσι

γένηαι, where τι is probably an 800., ‘in
any way.’

237. Literally there is a united prowess
(a prowess due to wnion) even of very
sorry warriors. For this pregnant
use of πέλει compare I’ 287 with note.
It might be thought possible to make
ἀνδρῶν part of the predicate in a quasi-
ablatival sense, ‘a valour of union
arises from, is produced by, even sorry
men, on the analogy of αἵματός εἰς
ἀγαθοῖο 6 611, cf. also Z 211, π 300;
but this use is rare in H. (see A. Θ΄
§ 148), and the assumption is unnecessary.
Ar. (ap. Nikanor) apparently explained
συμφορητή τις ἀνδρῶν ἀρετὴ καὶ τῶν
ἀσθενεστάτων, οἷον οὐ μόνον κατὰ ἕνα,
ἀλλὰ καὶ κατὰ πλῆθος ἔστι τις ἀρετὴ
νοουμένη, κἂν εἷς ἕκαστος ἀσθενὴς ἣι καθ᾽
αὑτόν, which is the same as that given
above. But ace. to Ap. Lex. he ex-
plained σφόδρα καὶ κακῶν ἀνδρῶν és
ταὐτὸν συνελθόντων γίνεταί τις ἀρετή.
This seems to indicate a reading συμῴερ-
τῶν, which would certainly make the
construction easier,

IAIAAOC N (x11) 21

Μηριόνης δ᾽ ἄρα οἱ θεράπων ἐὺς ἀντεβόλησεν
ἐγγὺς ἔτει κλισίης" μετὰ γὰρ δόρυ χάλκεον ἤιει
οἰσόμενος" τὸν δὲ προσέφη σθένος ᾿Ιδομενῆος"
ag Μηριόνη Μόλου υἱὲ πόδας ταχύ, φίλταθ᾽ ἑταίρων,
, τ / / \ \ - A
tint ἦλθες πόλεμόν τε λιπὼν Kal δηϊοτῆτα ; 250
ἣέ τι βέβληαι, βέλεος δέ σε τείρει ἀκωκή,

ἣέ τευ ἀγγελίης μετ᾽ ἔμ᾽ ἤλυθες ;

» / > 4
οὐδέ TOL αὐτὸς

ἧσθαι ἐνὶ κλισίηισι λιλαίομαι, ἀλλὰ μάχεσθαι."

\ ᾽ > / , > , "
τὸν δ᾽ αὖ Μηριόνης σρειγρυμένος ἀντίον ηὔδα: 254
“ ἔρχομαι, εἴ τί τοι ἔγχος ἐνὶ βλυσίηνσι λέλειπται, 256

οἰσόμενος: TO vu yap κατεάξαμεν, ὃ πρὶν ἔχεσκον,
ἀσπίδα Δηϊφόβοιο βαλὼν ὑπερηνορέοντος.;
’ “ v
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ᾿Ιδομενεὺς Κρητῶν ἀγὸς ἀντίον ηὔδα"

“δούρατα δ᾽,

’ > Ui ¢
ai κ᾽ ἐθέληισθα, καὶ ἕν καὶ εἴκοσι δήεις 560

246. θεράπων ἐὺς Ar. ©:

ἐὺς : ἐὸς Par. 6 supr. (glossed ὁ ἴϑιος).
ἐν LR Lips. |} κλιςίηι ἃ.
κλυτὸς ..

Ooupi κλυτὸς Zen.

254. πεπνυμένοοα:
254. After this add. C= D™GHJPRST™ (Rhosos) Harl. a, ἔν τισι T,

Aph.: ϑεραπωνεὺς others.
252. ΤΟΙ : TIGR: Tw Pap. o 253.
SoupikAuToc PR, yp. ϑουρυ-

Ἰδομενεῦ, Κρητῶν βουληφόρε χαλκοχιτώνων 255

(The paraphrast of P omits the line.)
κατεάξομεν Par. Ὁ.
C: δούρατα Vr. A (om. 9’).

256. κλιείηφι PR.
259. αὖτ᾽ : αὖ J.

251. κατεήξαμεν Zen. :
260. ϑούρατα τ᾽ Syr.: ϑούρατά τ᾽

249, According to the legend Molos
was a son of Deukalion, so that Ido-
meneus was the uncle of Meriones. Of
this relationship there is, however, no
trace in H. Molos is mentioned again
only in K 269.

252. ἀγγελίης, for the question whether
this is a nom. or genitive see note on I
206. Schol. A here is corrupt, and we
do not know whether Zen. took ἀγγελίης
as a causal gen., or, which is perhaps
more probable, read ἀγγελίην as in O 640.
There is no doubt that Bentley’s τιν᾽
ἀγγελίην gives the simplest sense, if only
there were support for it. τεὺ ἀγγελίην
(Buttmann) is equally good—here τεὺ
may be either masce. or neut., abowt any
one or anything. The same choice is
given if we read ἀγγελίης and take it
as nom. masce. ; if we make it gen. fem.
we have the third possibility of making
rev agree with it. But no sufficient
analogy for ἀγγελίης ἐλθεῖν Ξεέο come
about a message has ever been given.

253. ἧσθαι, sit idle, as A 134 ete.

256. Toi clearly means that Meriones
is going to the hut of Idomeneus, not to
his own, as would appear from 168 ; and

with this the answer of I. a the words
of 268 harmonize, as well as the use of εἰ.
Thischange of purpose, though a small de-
tail, is not quite like the usual E pic style.

257. The sudden change from plur.
to sing. has given much offence. Schol.
A quotes Eur. Ton 391 κωλυόμεσθα μὴ
μαθεῖν ἃ βούλομαι (and so 1250-51, 770.
904, ete.). He adds that some read
κατέαξα μέν, but the μέν is clearly out of
place. Bentley conj. κατέαξά μοι, which
is hardly more satisfactory, Naber κατέαξ᾽
ἐμόν. Schol. A also says πληθυντικῶι ἑνικὸν
ἐπήγαγεν Αἰολικῶς. In explanation of
this strange statement Thiersch would
read κατεαξάμεν, as a supposed Aiolic
form of the lst sing. κατεαξάμην, but he
has found no followers (see Curtius, ΚΓ}.
i. 87). Itis therefore necessary to accept
the text, though the instances in H. of
the Ist plur. for sing. are not common
(cf. O 224, κ 99, ν 358, π 442).

260. δ᾽ seems here to stand for δή
rather than 6é; οἵ. H. G. ὃ 350 and note
on A 340. But it is a question if we
should not rather read γ᾽: the particle
would be quite in place. Kai. . καί
are found again in correspondence only

92 IAIAAOC N (χιπ)

ce jp } > / \ > / /
€OTAOT ἐν κλισίην σρος ενωπία παμφανόωντα,

“ / /
Tpdia, τὰ κταμένων ἀποαίνυμαι.

> \ df,
OU yap οἰῶ

ἀνδρῶν δυσμενέων ἑκὰς ἱστάμενος πολεμίζειν"

τῷ μοι δούρατά τ᾽ ἔστι καὶ ἀσπίδες ὀμφαλόεσσαι

καὶ κόρυθες καὶ θώρηκες λαμπρὸν yavowrTes.” 265
τὸν δ᾽ αὖ Μηριόνης πεπνυμένος ἀντίον ηὔδα"

“καί τοι ἐμοὶ παρά τε κλισίηι καὶ νηὶ μελαίνηι

πόλλ᾽ ἔναρα Τρώων: ἀλλ᾽ οὐ σχεδόν ἐστιν ἑλέσθαι.

οὐδὲ γὰρ οὐδ᾽ ἐμέ φημι λελασμένον ἔμμεναι ἀλκῆς,

ἀλλὰ μετὰ πρώτοισι μάχην ἀνὰ κυδιάνειραν 270

/ nr ’ jp 7
ἵσταμαι, ὁππότε νεῖκος ορώρηται πολέμοιο.
nr lal /
ἄλλόν πού τινα μᾶλλον ᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων
7] / \ \ ” > \ ΜΝ ”
λήθω μαρνάμενος, σὲ δὲ ἴδμεναι αὐτὸν οἴω.
Ν 3 Bi) 5 \ la > XN 5 / "ὃ
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ᾿Ιδομενεὺς Κρητῶν ἀγὸς ἀντίον ηὔδα"

53 al / \ a / in
“010 ἀρετὴν οἷος ἐσσι; τί σε χρὴ ταῦτα λέγεσθαι ; 275

261. KAicinci Harl. a.
πτολεμίΖειν J Pap. o.
χαλκοχιτώνων. 261. ἐμοὶ : ἐμῆ Ῥ:

262. ἀποέννυται Vr. b.
266. After this D™ adds Ἰϑομενεῦ Κρητῶν βουληφόρε

263. ἱστάμενοι L Pap. o. ||

in 636 and 2641 in H. The meaning
evidently is ‘not only one,’ as you say
(τι, 256), ‘but twenty.’ For εἴκοσι as
a hyperbolical expression for a large
number cf. X 349, μ 78, « 241.

261. ἐνώπια, see on 8435. The huts

in the Greek camp are as usual spoken of

in the same terms as permanent houses.

262. Gnoainuuar, 7 am wont to take.
The verb varies between this form (also
in w 419, — 309, p 322) and ἀπαίνυμαι
(A 582, O 595, P 85) like dzroaipeo A 275
by the commoner ἀφαιρεῖσθαι. There is
no ground for assuming an initial F.
οὐ rap ὀΐω may be taken as a modest
expression, ‘I do not think that I stand
far off when I fight’; and this is to
some extent supported by Meriones’ use
of the word φημί below (269). But it is
more Homeric to understand ‘I have no
mind, I do not care to stand far off’; as in
A170, 296, 0180 ἐν πρώτοισιν ὀΐω ἔμμεναι.

265. See App. B, iii. 8 c.

266-94 is a passage which has aroused
general suspicion, so inappropriate does
this verbose vaingloriousness seem at so
critical ἃ moment. Beyond this general
‘subjective’ difficulty, however, there
is no serious cause of offence, if we ex-
cept 268, which is very strange, as we
should have supposed that Meriones and
Idomeneus, so closely connected in every
way, must have had huts near together.

There are a few linguistic difficulties,
see notes on 278, 285, to which Fick
adds the scansion of οἷος 275, πονεύμενος
an Ionic form 288, and λέγεσθαι, λεγώμεθα
in the sense of ‘talk,’ which recurs only
in passages which he regards as late.
νηπύτιος (292) too has late associations.
There is, however, no strong reason for
athetizing it, unless we cut out the
whole scene between Meriones and
Idomeneus ; the more so as the very
vivid and vigorous passage 276-87 does
not look like the work of an interpolator.

267. The use of παρά is curious; hence
Dod. conj. πάρα τ᾽ ἐν, van L. better map’
evi. We might simply write πάρα and
take κλισίης by itself as a locative dat. ;
but the position of re seems to require
that παρά should be taken closely with
the following substantive, as A 329. Itis
possible that the common phrase παρὰ νηΐ
hasattracted κλισίηι by asort of hendiadys,
meaning ‘in my hut beside my ship.’

269, οὐδὲ γὰρ οὐδέ, E 22; for the
periphrastic perf. λελασμένον ἔμμεναι
cf. on Z 488.

271. ὁρώρηται, a subj. of the thematic
perf. ὀρώρεται τ 3877, 524 (H. G. § 27 fin.).
Brandreth and van L. read ὀρώρηισι
πτολέμοιο, the active form being the
more usual.

275. The scansion of οἷος as Uv recurs

>>

in Σ 105, ἡ 312, v 89; ef. ἔμπαιος as a

IAIAAOC N (χιπ) 23

a \ »
εἰ yap νῦν Tapa νηυσὶ λεγοίμεθα πάντες ἄριστοι

ἐς λόχον, ἔνθα μάλιστ᾽ ἀρετὴ διαείδεται ἀνδρῶν,

ἔνθ᾽ 6 τε δειλὸς ἀνήρ, ὅς T ἄλκιμος, ἐξεφαάνθη"
a Ν / a / Ν A ”
TOU μὲν γάρ TE κακοῦ τρέπεται χρὼς ἄλλυδις ἄλληι,

> / e » / Φ > Δ ’ ΕῚ \ /
οὐδέ οἱ ἀτρέμας ἧσθαι ἐρητύετ᾽ ἐν φρεσὶ θυμός, 280

ἀλλὰ μετοκλάζει καὶ ἐπ᾿ ἀμφοτέρους πόδας ἵζει,

5 , / £ / / / /
ἐν δέ TE οἱ κραδίη μεγάλα στέρνοισι πατάσσει

fol du y's Yo δέ / > 560 ν
Κὴρας OLOMEVML, TATAYOS € TE YLVET OOOVTMY

a > > a Ve ET | , \ vf ,
τοῦ δ᾽ ἀγαθοῦ οὔτ ἂρ τρέπεται χρὼς οὔτε τι λίην

ταρβεῖ, ἐπειδὰν πρῶτον ἐσίζηται λόχον ἀνδρῶν, 285

= re) \ / / > Δ. a

ἀρᾶται δὲ τάχιστα μιγήμεναι ἐν δαὶ λυγρῆι---
/ / a

οὐδὲ κεν ἔνθα τεόν γε μένος Kal χεῖρας ὄνοιτο.

εἴ περ γάρ κε βλεῖο πονεύμενος ἠὲ τυπείης,

276. εἰ rap δὴ H: εἰ δὴ γὰρ Vr. ἃ.
261. 32: ὥς τ᾽ Ap. Lex. 56. 31: Ene” Lips.
ὀϊομένου H supr. || O€ Te: δὲ PT. || γίγνετ᾽ L.
287. TEON γε Ar. 2: τεόν Te PQR Harl.
288. rap καὶ H (supr. ε) L (P!? ce app. in ras.) Pap. o, Vr. b.

ἂν T. 286. τάχιςτα: μάλιετα U.
b, Par. Ὁ} (1) ἃ g.
βλῆο C Harl. a.

278. ὅς T: ST G: ὅ τε Et. Mag.
279. ἄλληι: ἄλλως G. 283.
284. λίαν R. 285. énei

dactyl, v 379, and note on I 408 (7. G.
§ 384, van L. Ench. § 17). déreceai, to
tell over, talk about, as 292, B 435. In
the next line it is of course passive, ‘if
we were being fo/d off.’ The apodosis to
276 is postponed till 287 by the unusually
long parenthesis, 279-86.

278. This verse has all the appearance
of a gloss on the preceding—a correct
one, but terribly flat. Ahrens took
offence at re remaining short before
δειλός (δειλός) and proposed ἔνθα δειλύς,
Christ ἔνθ᾽ ὃς δειλός, Monro ἔνθ᾽ ὅς τε
δειλός (omitting ἀνήρ). This is, however,
unnecessary in so suspicious a verse ; see
also note on 163. Elsewhere in H. δειλός
always means miserable (Att. δείλαιος),
not cowardly as here.

279. χρώς, the outward appearance of
the flesh, complexion ; cf. = 164, P 733,
φ 412, π 182 καί τοι χρὼς οὐκέθ᾽ Gmotos, X
529 ὠχρήσαντα χρόα κάλλιμον. ἄλλυθϑις
ἄλληι, ‘all sorts of colours.’ Pallis
suggests ἄλλυδις ἄλλου, ‘each man a
different colour.’ But ἄλλυδις ἄλλης is
a fixed phrase, not to be too closely
pushed ; cf. ε 369, « 458, \ 385.

281. μετοκλάζει: μετακαθίζει ἐπ᾿ ἀμφο-
τέρους πόδας - ὀκλὰξ γάρ ἐστι τὸ ἐπὶ γόνυ,
Sch. A. Gugorépouc evidently means
‘first one and then the other.’

283. ὀϊομένωι, boding, dwelling on
thoughts of death in all its forms (κῆρας

plur.). This is the only case in J7. of a
direct ace. after ὀΐομαι, though it is often
found in Od. (e.g. v 224, 349).

285. The simultaneous contraction and
shortening of ταρβεῖ is intolerable, and
ἐπειϑάν is a late (Attic) form, found
nowhere else in H. All edd. correct
it: ἐπειδή Brandreth, ἐπεί κεν Bekker
(Thiersch’s ἐπὴν δή is as bad as ἐπειδάν)
set one error right ; while ταρβέει, εἴ κε
Menrad (ὁππότε Agar) corrects both.
πρῶτον, elsewhere always πρῶτα or τὰ
πρῶτα after ἐπεί, in the sense ‘when
once’; see on A 235. For the whole
situation compare Odysseus’ description
of ‘Neoptolemos in the λόχος of the
wooden horse, ἃ 523 ff Monro points
out that in place of the pres. ἐσίζηται
we ought to have the aor. ἐσέζηται, when
he has once taken his seat. (ἑζόμην,
ἑζόμενος are always aorist, from the re-
duplicated stem σε-σδ- ; no present stem
é¢- exists, &feac x 378 should be ἕζεο.
See, however, Delbriick Gr. iv. p. 96 and
Veitch Gr. Verbs, s.v. καθέζομαι.)

287. ὄνοιτο, sc. τις, but the omission
of the word is curious; hence Bentley
conj. οὐδέ τις ἔνθα, to which Axt has
added τεόν xe. This, however, is hardly
necessary. Cf. X 199. οὔ κέ τις ἔνθα
van L.

288. βλεῖο, opt. of the aor. ἐ-βλή-μην :
Cobet’s βλῆιο is wrong. βλε- is the weak

94 IAIAAOC N (xu)

οὔ κεν ἐν αὐχέν ὄπισθε πέσοι βέλος οὐδ᾽ ἐνὶ νώτωι,

ἀλλά κεν ἢ στέρνων ἢ νηδύος ἀντιάσειε 290

πρόσσω ἱεμένοιο μετὰ προμάχων ὀαριστύν.

ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε μηκέτι ταῦτα λεγώμεθα νηπύτιοι ὡς

ἑσταότες, μή πού τις ὑπερφιάλως νεμεσήσηι"

ἀλλὰ σύ γε κλισίηνδε κιὼν ἕλευ ὄβριμον ἔγχος."
ὡς φάτο, Μηριόνης δὲ Cows ἀτάλαντος "Αρηϊ 295

καρπαλίμως κλισίηθεν ἀνείλετο χάλκεον ἔγχος,

βῆ δὲ μετ᾽ Ἰδομενῆα μέγα πτολέμοιο μεμηλώς.

οἷος δὲ βροτολοιγὸς "Ἄρης πόλεμόνδε μέτεισι,

τῶι δὲ Φόβος φίλος υἱὸς ἅμα κρατερὸς καὶ ἀταρβὴς

ἕσπετο, ὅς T ἐφόβησε ταλάφρονά περ πολεμιστήν"

τὼ μὲν ἄρ᾽ ἐκ Θρήικης ᾿φύρους μέτα θωρήσσεσθον

ἠὲ μετὰ Φλεγύας μεγαλήτορας" οὐδ᾽ ἄρα τώ γε

900

ἔκλυον ἀμφοτέρων, ἑτέροισι δὲ κῦδος ἔδωκαν"

289. οὔ KEN H and αἱ κοιναί (Did.): οὐκ ἂν Ar. Q. || πέςηι G. || EN . . ἐνὶ:
én’. - ἐπὶ Stob. Flor. 7. 14. 290. στέρνοιο G Cant. 294. ὄμβριμον CHP.
297. πολέμοιο G Lips. 298. μέτεισι Ar. Ὡ : others κάτεισι 299. ἅμαι ἢ.
300. ὧς τ᾿ R. 801. ἐκ ϑρήικης ἐφύρους: εἷς ἐφύρους πόλεμον Paus.

ibe 50. ὩΣ 303. ἀμφοτέροις LL: ἀμφοτέροιειν P: ἀμφοτέρω ()R.

form of βλη-, but the opt. is here formed
with -ἰ- instead of the regular -τη- of the
sing. (βλείης is quoted from Epicharmos).
The subj. is βλήεται, p 472. πονεύμενοςκ,
in stress of war, O 447, etc. εἴ πέρ ke
with opt. here has been doubted, and
Thiersch proposed καί force. But Lange
has shewn (EI p.503) that κε aloneis right.

291. éapictUN, probably an oxymoron
(A 502), but see on X 126.

292—=T 244; and see on B 485. The
word νηπύτιοι is elsewhere peculiar to T
and ®; see on T 200.

293. ὑπερφιάλως, excessively: the adv.
seems not to convey the idea of proud
or overbearing, see Σ 300.

297. μεμηλώς, like πλούτοιο μεμηλώς
E 708 (see note there).

299. For the personification of Φόβος
ef. A 440, O 119.

300. ταλάφρονα, here only for the
usual ταλασίφρων.

301. The transition from the simile
to this descriptive passage, which has
nothing to do with the comparison,
produces a somewhat harsh effect, especi-
ally as the pres. ewprcceceon again
gives way to the aor. of simile in 303.
(In any case θωρήσσεσθον cannot be an
imperf., as some have thought, for that

tense has no place in a simile, though
the form alone is not decisive, H. G. § 5,
note 1.) There seems therefore not to
be any reference to a particular mytho-
logical event, as we should suppose ; the
idea must be that in the perpetual wars
of two neighbouring tribes on the
Thracian borders, Ares often goes to
battle, taking now one side, now the
other. μετά does not appear to imply
hostility, but means only to join ; but it
may of course be taken in the sense go
in pursuit of. In that case Ares will
be conceived as accompanying his own
Thracians in raids on their southern
neighbours. , According to Strabo ix.
442 the Ephyroi inhabited the later
Krannon in Thessaly ; while the Phlegyes
(or Phlegyai) came from Gyrtone. The
latter were a race of brigands who
captured Thebes, and were ultimately
destroyed by Apollo for sacrilegiously
assaulting Delphi (Pherekydes in Schol.
A. See also Hymn. Ap. 278, Pausanias
ix. 36, and Schol. Pind. P. x. 55.) The
Thracian connexions of Ares (Gradivuwin
patrem, Geticis qui praesidet arvis Virg.
Aen, 111. 35) reappear in H. only in the
late passage θ 361, and are possibly taken
from post-Homeric mythology.

IAIAAOC N (xu) 25
“-“ / ν. ἦ \ ’ \ > “-
τοῖοι Μηριόνης τε καὶ ᾿Ιδομενεὺς ἀγοὶ ἀνδρῶν
Ἂ / ᾿ a
ἤϊσαν ἐς πόλεμον κεκορυθμένοι αἴθοπι χαλκῶι. 305
\ / , \ r »
τὸν καὶ Μηριόνης πρότερος πρὸς μῦθον ἔειπε"
ες (ὃ “ ’ x / ro “
Δευκαλίδη, πῆι τ᾽ ἂρ μέμονας καταδῦναι ὅμιλον ;
/ \ lal \
ἢ ἐπὶ δεξιόφιν παντὸς στρατοῦ, ἢ ava μέσσους,
5, age eee ? , 2 \ ” ΝΜ “
ἢ ἐπ᾽ ἀριστερόφιν; ἐπεὶ οὔ ποθι ἔλπομαι οὕτω
fe / ’
δεύεσθαι πολέμοιο κάρη κομόωντας Axatovs.” 310
Ν ’ Cee ee | \ lal > \ > , ANI
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ᾿Ιδομενεὺς Κρητῶν ἀγὸς ἀντίον ηὔδα:
“νηυσὶ μὲν ἐν μέσσηισιν ἀμύνειν εἰσὶ καὶ ἄλλοι,
» , 4 fal / > Δ ” 3 ΄σ
Αἴαντές τε δύω Τεῦκρός θ᾽, ὃς ἄριστος ᾿Αχαιῶν
χ
΄ » \ \ \ b] / ΄ /
τοξοσύνηι, ἀγαθὸς δὲ Kal ἐν σταδίηι ὑσμίνηι"
“ἤ [τ / \ ? ΄ / =
οἵ μιν ἅδην ἐλόωσι Kal ἐσσύμενον πολέμοιο, 315
306. πρότερον S. 309. οὔ ποθι: τινὲς οὔ πού Te (sic) Sch. T. οὕτως
[CS] Pap. o. 315. €Adoua Par. g*: €dcouci, adcwci, see below. || πολεμίζειν
Zen.

307. AeuxaAidn, son of Deukalion ;
see note on M 117.

308. éni goes with the locative, as
elsewhere, αὐ the right; the later ἐπὶ
δεξιᾶς.

309. ἔλπομαι, 7 suppose, K 355. Τὸ
is possible, but less Epic, to translate
‘I hope they are nowhere else as hard
pressed as I know them to be on the
left.” οὕτω naturally means so much as
on the left. Monro prefers to take it
with a vague reference: ‘I do not think
the Greeks are anywhere so weak as to
be especially in need of help’ (as in our
colloquial “are nowhere so very much in
need of help”). But this would be a
reason not for going to the left, but for
keeping out of the fight altogether. The
(Greek) left is always represented as the
scene of hot conflict; see A 498, ete.
There is no case in the J/iad where
fighting on the right is mentioned.

810. Seveceat πολέμοιο, fo full short
of the war, is exactly our “‘to be un-
equal to the contest.”” For this use of
δεύεσθαι compare P 142 μάχης ἄρα
πολλὸν ἐδεύεο, Ψ 670 ἢ οὐχ ἅλις ὅττι
μάχης ἐπιδεύομαι ; ᾧ 185 πολλὸν δὲ βίης
ἐπιδευέες ἦσαν. But Ὁ 385 οὐ μὲν γάρ τι
μάχης ἐπεδεύετ᾽ ᾿Αχαιῶν is different.

312. ἀμύνειν eici as 814, I 688, ete.

315. The other passages which bear
upon this line are ε 290 ἀλλ᾽ ἔτι μέν μίν
φημι ἅδην ἐλάαν κακότητος, T 423 οὐ
λήξω πρὶν Τρῶας ἅδην ἐλάσαι πολέμοιο.
It seems clear therefore that πολέμοιο
here goes with ἅδην ἑλόωςι, not as might
appear at first sight with €ccUueNon ;

although in 6 733 καὶ ἐσσύμενός περ ὁδοῖο
the part. evidently goes with the gen. ;
ef. also A 717 μάλ᾽ ἐσσυμένους πολεμίζειν,
and 6 416. Against these must be set
a large majority of cases where ἐσσύμενος
is used absolutely (e.g. 787), so that we
need not hesitate to assume the same
use here. Fora similar ambiguity com-
pare Q 404 ἴσχειν ἐσσυμένους πολέμου, N
630 σχήσεσθε Kal ἐσσύμενοί περ “Apnos.
Nikanor gives both alternatives, ἤτοι
συναπτέον ἐσσύμενον πολέμοιο, ἀντὶ τοῦ
ὡρμημένον εἰς τὸν πόλεμον, ἢ τὸ ἑξῆς
ἐστὶν ἑλόωσι πολέμοιο, καθὸ διασταλήσεται
(διαστολή is a slight division, less than
a stop, to shew that two words are
not taken together) βραχὺ τὸ ἐσσύμενον
ἀπὸ τοῦ πολέμοιο. Ar. rightly declared
for the latter alternative, as appears
from An., ἔστι δὲ τὸ ἄδην ἐλόωσιν ἀντὶ
τοῦ κορεσθῆναι αὐτὸν ποιήσουσι τοῦ πολέ-
μου καίπερ προθυμίαν ἔχοντα : while Zen.
read πολεμίζειν, which must be taken
with ἐσσύμενον. There is more diffi-
culty on the phrase ἅδην ἐλάαν itself.
Didymos remarks upon it κατ᾽ ἔνια τῶν
ὑπομνημάτων “οἵ μιν ἄδην éacovow” 6
ἐστι κορέσουσιν: καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ ἸΤοσειδῶνος
(sc. ε 290) “ἀλλ᾽ ἔτι μέν μίν φημι ἄδην
ἐλάαν κακότητος ᾿ διὰ τῶν δύο aa παρέ-
κειτο “édav.”” For this verb ἑάαν fo sate
there is no other evidence (see on T 402),
nor are we justified in adopting it, as it
is not linguistically explicable nor can
we estimate the authority on which Ar.
was inclined to read it. Indeed the
mention of the ὑπομνήματα, which seem
to have been mere notes, not deliberately

26 IAIAAOC N (x11)

“Ἕκτορα Πριαμίδην, εἰ καὶ μάλα καρτερός ἐστιν.

αἰπύ οἱ ἐσσεῖται, μάλα περ μεμαῶτι μάχεσθαι,

κείνων νικήσαντι μένος καὶ χεῖρας ἀάπτους

νῆας ἐνιπρῆσαι, ὅτε μὴ αὐτός γε Κρονίων

ἐμβάλοι αἰθόμενον δαλὸν νήεσσι θοῆισιν. 820
ἀνδρὶ δέ κ᾽ οὐκ εἴξειε μέγας Τελαμώνιος Αἴας,

ὃς θνητός T εἴη καὶ ἔδοι Δημήτερος ἀκτήν,

χαλκῶι τε ῥηκτὸς μεγάλοισί τε χερμαδίοισιν.

οὐδ᾽ ἂν ᾿Αχιλλῆϊ ῥηξήνορι χωρήσειεν

316 om. ACDtTt (added twice in marg., by Rhosos and another) Pap. o. || εἰ καὶ

Vr. Ὁ: καὶ εἰ Q.

318. κείνω Par. οἷν Pap. o (this is doubtless the variant impled

in κείνων: οὕτως πληθυντικῶς αἱ ᾿Αριστάρχου, Did.). || ἀέπτους Aph. (‘‘ Ar.” Ms.,

but see on A 567 and Ludwich here).
ἐμβάλη J.

published opinions, makes it probable
that the verb was no more than a
conjectural suggestion based on a wrong

interpretation of ἕωμεν in T 402, ἄσουσι
would, however, be defensible. Schol.

T gives yet another variant, οἱ δὲ ἀάσωσι
διὰ τὸ ἄσην ἐμποιεῖν, but this may be a
mere error for ἑάσουσι, and has in any
case no advantage over it. We must
then accept and explain the text as
it stands. The question arises whether
πολέμοιο is a gen. after ἅδην or not.
Some have taken it as a local gen., ‘to
chase him to his heart’s content through
the battle.’ But this local use of the
gen. is very limited (see H. G. § 149),
and is nowhere else used except with
words which have a purely local sense
(πεδίοιο, etc.). It would seem then that
we must take it as a gen. after ἅδην.
But here again Homeric analogies fail
us. ἅδην occurs, beyond the phrases
already quoted, only in E 203 in H.;
and the similar ἅλις never takes a gen.
(see on Φ 319), common though the con-
struction is in later Greek. On the
other hand, it would seem that the con-
sciousness of ἅδην as originally an accus.
can never have been quite lost, ef.
ἄδην εἶχον κτείνοντες Herod. ix. 39, ἄδην
ἔλειξεν αἵματος Agam. 828, It is there-
fore best to admit this use here, and
regard ἅδην as a substantival adverb
‘governing’ πολέμοιο, ‘in a way to sate
him with war.’ Some have even pro-
posed to take it as a real substantive,
the ace. expressing the terminus ad quem,

‘drive him into satiety of war,’ for

which Heyne well compares Tyrtaios,
11. 10 ὦ νέοι, ἀμφοτέρων δ᾽ ἐς κύρον

319. OTe: ὅτι Lips. j| re: ΤΕ Η. 820.

jAdoare. But this use of the ace. in H.
is not sufficiently elastic for such a con-
clusion (cf. H. G. § 140. 4, note). It
seems impossible to attain a completely
satisfactory explanation of the phrase ;
and the variation of reading quoted
from Ar. may possibly indicate that
ἐλάσαι represents some lost verb which
we cannot now discover. With respect
to the breathing, ἄδην or ἅδην, it may be
remarked that the best Mss. give the
former with very few exceptions. Ar.
however preferred the rough breathing,
which is the more correct if, as seems
probable, the root of the word is sa,
to sate.

316. Though this line is omitted by
five important Mss. and is of a familiar
type of interpolation, a couple of ex-
planatory words plus padding, it can
ul be spared. The omission of Hector’s
name would be very strange, as he has
never been mentioned since 205. εἰ καί
is certainly right for the unmetrical καὶ
εἰ of all known mss. but one, and had
already been conj. by Bentley on the
analogy of E 410.

317. αἰπύ, only here in the meta-
phorical sense dificult. Cf. however
the phrase αἰπὺς πόνος A 601. ἐξσςεῖται,
also B 393, τ 302: HA. ΟΘ΄. ὃ 64. ‘The
only similar fut. in H. is πεσέονται.
Brandreth conj. αἰπύ κέ Fou ἔσεται.

318. χεῖρας ἀάπτους, A 567.

319. ὅτε wH, unless: = 248, Π 227,
mw 197, ~ 185. Cf. also ὅτε without μή
=in case, €189, Χ 875, ν 391. The tem-
poral and purely conditional categories
lie very close together, as conversely εἰ
is often=when.

IAIAAOC N (χιπ) 27

” ? > / \ > Μ » “;. δ
ἔν γ᾽ αὐτοσταδίηι' ποσὶ δ᾽ οὔ πως ἔστιν ἐρίζειν. 325

nw > eo Les} > Les » lal "» ,
νῶϊν δ᾽ ὧδ᾽ én’ ἀριστέρ᾽ ἔχε στρατοῦ, ὄφρα τάχιστα
εἴδομεν ἠέ τωι εὖχος ὀρέξομεν HE τις ἡμῖν."

ὡς φάτο, Μηριόνης δὲ Bod. ἀτάλαντος "Δρηϊ

9 > τὰν ” > > , \ \ 2 > ,
PX ὑμέν, ὄφρ ἀφίκοντο κατα στρατον 7). μιν ανωγει.

’ an » >’
οἱ δ᾽ ὡς ᾿Ιδομενῆα ἴδον φλογὶ εἴκελον ἀλκήν, 330

> Ν \ / \ » 7
αὐτὸν καὶ θεράποντα, σὺν ἔντεσι δαιδαλέοισι,

/ 5 ἮΝ Je ἡ > a / »
κεκλόμενοι καθ᾽ ὅμιλον ἐπ᾽ αὐτῶι πάντες ἔβησαν.

cal ’ ε \ “ lal \ a
τῶν δ᾽ ὁμὸν ἵστατο νεῖκος ἐπὶ πρυμνῆισι véecow.

ς 2 > \ , ΄ , »
ὡς δ᾽ ὅθ᾽ ὑπὸ λιγέων ἀνέμων σπέρχωσιν ἄελλαι

ΝΜ lal “ / / > \ /
ἤματι τῶι OTE TE πλείστη κόνις ἀμφὶ κελεύθους,

i)
co
σι

οἵ T ἄμυδις κονίης μεγάλην ἱστᾶσιν ὀμίχλην,

ὡς ἄρα τῶν ὁμόσ᾽ ἦλθε μάχη, μέμασαν δ᾽ ἐνὶ θυμῶι
ἀλλήλους καθ᾽ ὅμιλον ἐναιρέμεν ὀξέϊ χαλκῶι.

ἔφριξεν δὲ μάχη φθισίμβροτος ἐγχείηισι

μακρῆις ἃς εἶχον ταμεσίχροας: ὄσσε δ᾽ ἄμερδεν 340
αὐγὴ χαλκείη κορύθων ἄπο λαμπομενάων

325. Γ᾽ : τ᾿ GR: 0’ H. || οὕπω G.

329. ἀφίκοιτο PR Harl. ἃ (p. ras. ?) Lips.

326. νῶϊ U. 327. Tic: Kat Pap. o.
331. δαιδαλέοιςι : uapuaipontac H,

ἐν ἄλλωι CUNENTECL Uapuaipontac A. || εὺν τεύχεει Aeurahéoici Lips. (yp. daida-

λέοιςι, ὃ κρεῖττον).
πλεῖστον ()}.
βροτος (11,1...

333. ὁμὸν : τινὲς ὁμόςε Sch. T.
337. dudc Ὁ), (supr. on) P.
341. KopUewn δ᾽ J. || ἄπο : uno Pap. o.

334. ὑπαὶ L. 335.

338. ἀναιρέμεν J. 339. geici-

325. aUTocTadiHi, ἅπαξ λεγόμενον, ‘in
standing, stationary’ fight, in holding
his ground, as opposed to chasing a
flying foe (ποσί). Cf. αὐτοσχεδίηι O 510,
and cradin 314, ete.

326. νῶϊν, a very strange expression.
It appears that Meriones and Idomeneus
are suddenly regarded as being in a
chariot, of which we have heard nothing
before ; νῶϊν must be an ethical dative,
and ἔχε mean drive: ‘As for us, drive
to the left.’ But this use of the dat.
can hardly be paralleled. For ἔχειν
without an object=¢o drive, οἵ, IL 378,
W 422, etc. There is no clear instance
of its use in the sense go (on foot),
unless such can be inferred from the in-
trans. use of ἔσχεν (520) ‘held its way.’
This also leaves νῶϊν unexplained. de
may be local, this way (see on K 537),
but the usual sense, as we are doing, is
equally appropriate.

332. For αὐτῶι Bentley conj. αὐτώ,
which is plan-ible though not necessary,
as ἐπί with dat. is very common after
verbs of motion (ZH. G. ὃ 198 fin.), and

Meriones has been relegated to a sub-
ordinate place by the preceding line.

333. ὁμόν, evidently predicate (ef.
ὁμόσ᾽ ἦλθε in 337), lit. grew common.
But the phrase is unique and perhaps
the variant ὁμόσ᾽ should be read here
also.

334. cnépxoocin, the act. seems to
recur (till quite late times) only in 4
283, Hymn. Hom. xxxiii. 7, always in
this phrase, and in the compound ἐπι-
omépxew Ψ 430, ε 304, χ 451. The mid.
is, of course, common in H. and later.

336. of τ᾽: van L. reads οἱ δ᾽, sug-
gested by Heyne.

839. Cf. ἔγχεσι meppixviac A 282, and
Virgil’s ferreus hastis Horret ager.

340. For the place of the adj. ταμεεί-
xpoac in the rel. clause compare 406,
and note on © 172 τό ῥά of τεθυωμένον
fev. Guepoen, blinded, as 0 64 ὀφθαλμῶν
μὲν ἄμερσε. The word is perhaps dis-
tinct from ἀμέρσαι IL 53, though the
sense take away will suit this passage.
Cf. however τ 18 ἔντεα. . τὰ καπνὸς
ἀμέρδει, dulls.

28 IAIAAOC N (x11)

θωρήκων τε νεοσμήκτων σακέων τε φαεινῶν
ἐρχομένων ἄμυδις. μάλα κε θρασυκάρδιος εἴη
ὃς τότε γηθήσειεν ἰδὼν πόνον οὐδ᾽ ἀκάχοιτο.
- \
τὼ δ᾽ ἀμφὶς ppovéovte δύω Κρόνου vie κραταιὼ 345
> / (~ / ’ la BA /
ἀνδράσιν ἡρώεσσιν ἐτεύχετον ἄλγεα λυγρά.
Ζεὺς μέν ῥα Τρώεσσι καὶ “Ἕκτορι βούλετο νίκην,
f 5 fal / / 50» Ὁ“ /
κυδαίνων ᾿Αχιλῆα πόδας ταχύν: οὐδ᾽ ὅ γε πάμπαν
» 3 / /
ἤθελε λαὸν ὀλέσθαι ᾿Αχαιικὸν Ἰλιόθι πρό,
/
ἀλλὰ Θέτιν κύδαινε καὶ vida καρτερόθυμον. 350
᾿Αργείους δὲ Ποσειδάων ὀρόθυνε μετελθών,
ra a / >)
λάθρηι ὑπεξαναδὺς πολιῆς ἁλός: ἤχθετο yap pa
Τρωσὶν δαμναμένους, Au δὲ κρατερῶς ἐνεμέσσα.
ἢ μὰν ἀμφοτέροισιν ὁμὸν γένος ἠδ᾽ ἴα πάτρη,

343. κε: κέν τις ()R.
κραταιὼ : κρατερὼ DGP.
T

344. Oc: we Pay. o. || Τότε : Tore HJ. 345.
346. ἡρώεςειν ἐτεύχετον ἐν ἄλλωι A (written

ἐτεύχε): ἡρώεςει τετεύχετον ADP (Harl. a sup.): Hpwecci(N) τετεύχατον

CHJQRTU Harl. a, Pap. o: Apoweccit τετεύχατο GS.

Harl. a d: μὲν ἄρα 0.
AHPQR Par. d g.
350 ἀθ. Ar.

éxtwp R.

347. μέν pa Ar. AC
348. οὐδ᾽ ὅ re Aph. 2: οὐϑέ τι Ar.

349. ddéccar CHPQR Pap. o. || ayaiKon JPQ Lips.
351. 6pdeuNE: ὥτρυνε Zen. Aph.

352. γάρ pa: rap δὴ G.

354. H μὲν J: A μέν γ᾽ Schol. Ar. Haw. 255.

343. For the frank hatred of war
which is characteristic of H. see note
on A 222, and for the introduction of
the imaginary spectator, A 539, etc.

345. The following passage—to 360—
is clearly out of place; there appears
to be no other case of such a lengthy
and superfluous recapitulation in H.
Perhaps it may have originally formed
the proem to this book, and been super-
seded by the more elaborate passage
which now begins it. On the other
hand the imperf. ἐτεύχετον implies a
relation with what has gone before ;
hence it has been also suggested that
we have here the original introduction
to the Διὸς ἀπάτη in the next book.
It is noteworthy that the entire ms.
authority is for τετεύχετον or τετεύχατον.
The former seems to be meant for an
aor., though this is not possible, on
account of the stem-vowel; it could at
most be a thematic pluperf., which is,
of course, the same thing as an imperf.
The perf. is quite out of place in this
connexion. For the termination -erov
in the 8rd person of a historic tense
see ἢ. G. § 5 ad fin.

350 was athetized by Ar. as a super-
fluous repetition of 348. The form viéa

ocewrs only here in H. and in the
Alexandrine imitative Epics; but the
analogous υἱέος, υἱέϊ, υἱέες, υἱέας are all
common.

351, 6pdeune, imperf., was rousing ;
the aor. participles meaning ‘by enter-
ing among them on rising from the sea.’
Thus taken the passage is a mere re-
capitulation, not a fresh account of P.’s
appearance —a supposition on which
some, with hardly sutticient ground, have
based their objections to the passage.
The difficulty lies in the whole character
of the digression, or regression, not in
particular phrases. Even λάθρηι is not
inconsistent with 31-38, as it may be
implied in the fact that he leaves his
chariot before coming to land. On the
other hand, the attitude of Zeus does
to'some extent contradict the momentary
indifference of 1-9, which is there made
the excuse for Poseidon’s intervention.

353=16. Fortheacc. of the participle
after ἄχθομαι see H. G. § 245. 2.

354, πάτρη is elsewhere always used
in a purely local sense, home or birth-
place. But the gods of H. are remark-
ably free from any local connexion ;
we could not say where their birthplace
was ; as for their dwelling, Poseidon’s

IAIAAOC N (χπι) 29

/ / »
adda Ζεὺς πρότερος γεγόνει καὶ πλείονα ἤιδη. 355
cal ΄ \ > / \ > / > /
TO pa καὶ ἀμφαδίην μὲν ἀλεξέμεναι ἀλέεινε,
/ 9 r\ » \ / ’ \ ᾽ ΄,
λάθρηι δ᾽ αἰὲν ἔγειρε κατὰ στρατόν, ἀνδρὶ ἐοικώς.
τὼ δ᾽ ἔριδος κρατερῆς καὶ ὁμοιίου πολέμοιο
πεῖραρ ἐπαλλάξαντες ἐπ᾽ ἀμφοτέροισι τάνυσσαν,

” / ’ ” / \ a / , v
ἄρρηκτον τ ἄλυτον τε, TO πολλῶν γούνατ ἔλυσεν.

360

Μ , , 8.“ “ ΄

ἔνθα, μεσαιπόλιός περ ἐών, Δαναοῖσι κελεύσας
᾿Ιδομενεὺς Τρώεσσι μετάλμενος ἐν φόβον apace.
πέφνε γὰρ ᾿Οθρυονῆα Καβησόθεν ἔνδον ἐόντα,

355. ἤ(ι)ϑει CGQ Pap. o.
357. Greipe J().

359. πεῖραν R Par. f (p. ras. :
Guorépoici and ἀλλήλοιςι Ar. διχῶς.

ἐπάλμενος () Pap. o, Harl. b, Par. acdf

356. ἀμφαδίη(ι) ACGHJSTU Harl. a! Lips. Eust.
358. τὼ Ar. (Schol. T) P Harl. b (supr. τοὶ), Par. ἃ : εἰ Syr. :
of DQR Pap. o, Par. ὁ gj: τοὶ Aph. Q.

|| πτολέμοιο ADHJSTU Pap. o, Lips.

marg. ἢ πείρατα) : neipac Cant. (supr. p).

360. τ᾽ om. Pap. o. 362. τρώεςειν

g, ἐν ἄλλωι A. 363. rap: 3° ἂρ G.

καβηςόθεν ENOON: ἐκάβης νόθον υἱόν Argol.

was the sea rather than Olympos the
home of Zeus. The word therefore seems
here to have the more abstract sense
parentage, a specialization of the vaguer
γένος.

358-60. The text, the reading of Ar.,
gives the best sense to this difficult
passage ; the two gods knotted the rope of
strife and war and drew it tight for both
sides. This sense of ἐπαλλάξαι is given
by Schol. A: τῶι δὲ ἐπαλλάξαι ἐπὶ τοῦ
συνάψαι χρῶνται καὶ τῶν πεζολόγων τινές,
πλεονάζει δὲ ᾿Αριστόξενος ὁ μουσικὸς ἐπ-
ἠλλαγμένα λέγων τὰ συνημμένα. The
word seems to mean literally crossing
over a rope upon itself: similar uses will
be found in the Lexicon, e.g. ποὺς
ἐπαλλαχθεὶς ποδί, Eur. Heracl. 836, foot
linked to foot. For the metaphor see
note on H 102; the gods tie the two
armies to the rope of strife, and by it
pull them backwards and forwards. A
somewhat similar explanation was given
by Ar., only he distinguished two ropes,
one of war and one of strife, τὸν πόλεμον
τῆι ἔριδι συνέδησαν .. ὥσπερ οἱ τὰ
ἅμματα ποιοῦντες (Did.). This is very
artificial and needless. The general
sense of the passage would be better
given if we could translate ἐπαλλάξαντες
alternately. The use of ἀλλάσσειν makes
this possible, but we should require the
pres. part. in place of the aor. There
appears to have been a different reading
of the passage in which τοί took the
place of τώ, and ἀλλήλοισι of ἀμφοτέροιςει
(the vulgate τοὺ. . ἀμφοτέροισι being
conflate from the two). τοί now means

the two parties, Greeks and Trojans,
and the metaphor is taken from the
‘tug of war’; the two sides are re-
garded as having hold of a rope and
pulling one another backwards and
forwards. This is in itself intelligible ;
the objections to it are (1) that the
metaphor of rope-pulling in battle else-
where always indicates divine interfer-
ence ; (2) that the reading ἀλλήλοισι has
very weak support. (In the ordinary
reading τοί might be understood of Zeus
and Poseidon; but the dual is far more
Homeric in this sense.) It seems likely
that the original reading was ἐπαλ-
Adéavre. Confusion began when this
was altered to the plural to avoid hiatus ;
τώ was changed to rol, and so seemed
to belong to the two armies, and the
alteration of ἀμφοτέροισι to ἀλλήλοισι
was a necessary consequence.

361. μεςαιπόλιος, ‘half-grey,’ grizzled ;
cf. χιτὼν πυρφυροῦς μεσόλευκος, Xen. Cyr.
8. 3. 13, purple shot with white; μεσο-
πόρφυρος in Plutarch Aratus 53. The
first part of the compound is apparently
a locative ; (‘half way to grey’ Monro).
Cf. ξ 208 ἰθαιγενής.

363. ἔνδον ἑόντα, apparently being
(a guest) within the walls of Troy, a

rather strange expression. In Ὁ 438 we
have Κυθηρόθεν ἔνδον ἐόντα, which is

more natural as it is followed by ἐν
μεγάροισιν. A truly wonderful variant
is given by Didymos, ἐν τῆι ᾿Αργολικῆι
“ExadBns νόθον υἱὸν ἐόντα" καὶ τάχα ay
εἴη ἁμάρτημα, κατ᾽ ἄγνοιαν τῆς Καβήσου
(to judge from the various conjectural]

90 IAIAAOC Ν (x11)

ὅς pa νέον πολέμοιο μετὰ κλέος εἰληλούθει,
v \ ὮΝ A Ss > / -
ἤιτεε δὲ ἸΙριάμοιο θυγατρῶν εἶδος ἀρίστην 365
Κασσάνδρην ἀνάεδνον, ὑπέσχετο δὲ μέγα ἔργον,
ἐκ Τροίης ἀέκοντας ἀπωσέμεν υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶν.
τῶι δ᾽ ὁ γέρων IIpiayos ὑπό τ᾽ ἔσχετο καὶ κατένευσε
δωσέμεναι: ὁ δὲ μάρναθ᾽ ὑποσχεσίηισι πιθήσας.
᾽ \ > Sn ΄ \ a am
Ἰδομενεὺς δ᾽ αὐτοῖο τιτύσκετο δουρὶ φαεινῶι, 370
καὶ βάλεν ὕψι βιβάντα τυχών: οὐδ᾽ ἤρκεσε θώρηξ
χάλκεος ὃν φορέεσκε, μέσηι δ᾽ ἐν γαστέρι πῆξε.
δούπησεν δὲ πεσών: ὁ δ᾽ ἐπεύξατο φώνησέν τε:
““᾿Οθρυονεῦ, περὶ δή σε βροτῶν αἰνίζομ᾽ ἁπάντων,

3 Ἄν τὴν \ , / aa eens ἜΞ
εἰ €TEOV δὴ πάντα τελευτήσεις OD ὑπέστης 375
Aapéavidnu ἸΠριάμωι" ὁ δ᾽ ὑπέσχετο θυγατέρα Hv.
καί κέ τοι ἡμεῖς ταῦτά γ᾽ ὑποσχόμενοι τελέσαιμεν,

a ’ 4 n 5
δοῖμεν δ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδαο θυγατρῶν εἶδος ἀρίστην,

364. μετὰ : κατὰ Aph. 866. ἀνέεδνον R: GNéadnon J. || Unicyeto L. || δὲ:
on Ο e corr.: rap H. 367. ἀνωςέμεν Ar. || τινὲς δὲ ἐπάγουσι (add the Line)
φοιτῶν nea Kai Nea eouc ἐπὶ νῆας ἀχαιῶν Sch. Τ᾿ 368. ὑπό τ᾽ ἔςχετο:
tnécyeto DGJQ Syr. 369. mieHcac: πεποιθὼς H. 371. Hpxec’ ὁ U. 372.
én: ἐνὶ J. || πῆξε : τύψεν D. 373. τινὲς --ὃ-- θὲ κερτομέων ἔπος ηὔϑα T.

374. aepuoned Syr.: ὦ ὀθρυονεῦ ‘I’: Bepuoned (). || ainizou’ () and τινές wp.
Did. : ainiccouai Zen.: Oeiniccouait Komanos ap. Hesych. 375. πάντα:
ταῦτα R. 377. Γ᾽ om. P Syr. (ταῦτυπ.). unicxyouenor Pap. o. 378 om. U}.

sites given by Schol. T, ranging from
Thrace to Lykia, ignorance of Kabesos
was not confined to Argolis). It is
hardly necessary to say that illegitimate
sons are ascribed by H. to ladies of high
degree only when the father is a god ;

nor did Homeric Greeks, like those of

Alexandria, marry their half-sisters.
A still stranger reading mentioned by
the scholia is ἐνδονέοντα, κεκινημένον.

364. μετὰ κλέος, as A 227. Aph.
read κατὰ κλέος, for which ef. Pindar P.
iv. 125 ἤλυθον κείνου ye κατὰ κλέος, and
κατὰ πόδας, on the heels.

365. εἶθος ἀρίστην, a compliment paid
also to Laodike in I’ 124, Z 252. The
old critics appear to have puzzled them-
selves over this supposed inconsistency,
some actually taking εἶδος here to mean
τὴν εἴδησιν, knowledge of prophecy (which,
as the scholia on 2699 rightly remark, the
Homeric Kassandra does not possess),

366. ἀνάεδνον, see on 1 146. He
boastfully promises a victory in place
of the usual bride - price. So David
promises to slay 100 Philistines as the

price of Saul’s daughter, 1 Sam. xviii.
25. Virgil introduces Coroebus under
similar circumstances, idis ad Troiam

Sorte diebus Venerat insano Cassandrae

accensus amore, Ht gener auxilium
Priamo Phrygibusque ferebat, Aen. ti. 342.

367. Ar.’s variant ἀνωσέμεν would
mean drive out to sea.

371. ὕψι BiBanta, cf. I 22 μακρὰ
βιβάντα. The phrase portrays the
man’s swaggering character, and, as the
scholiast remarks, is in favour of the
line which some added after 367 (see
above). Possibly it means that he
walked upright, not ὑπασπίδια in the
orthodox fashion (158). τυχών is used
absolutely, as often, the acc. being
governed by βάλεν. This is one of the
places where Θώρηξ may be quite general,
armament (App. B, iii. 3, ¢).

374, αἰνίζομαι, compliment. Zen. pre-
sumably understood his reading αἰνίσσο-
μαι as a future (better αἰνίξομαι), which
suits the passage well ; reading the pres.
we must take ef τελευτήςεις as=if you
are going to fulfil.

a. ὡΚ

IAIAAOC Ν (xi) 31

af." > ‘ > / ” ‘ Μ
ργεος ἐξαγαγόντες, ὀπυιέμεν, εἴ κε σὺν ἄμμιν
\ ’
᾿Ἰλώυ ἐκπέρσηις ἐὺ ναιόμενον πτολίεθρον. 380
» > “ v > > \ \ / ,
ἀλλ᾽ ἕπευ, ὄφρ᾽ ἐπὶ νηυσὶ συνώμεθα ποντοπόύροισιν
» ’ὔ
ἀμφὶ γάμωι, ἐπεὶ οὔ τοι ἐεδνωταὶ κακοί εἰμεν."
> \ \ ΄ /
ὡς εἰπὼν ποδὸς εἷλκε κατὰ κρατερὴν ὑσμίνην
’ / lal
ἥρως ᾿Ιδομενεύς: τῶι δ᾽ "Ἄσιος ἦλθεν ἀμύντωρ

\ / 9 \ \ / > ”
πεζὸς πρόσθ᾽ ἵππων: τὼ δὲ πνείοντε κατ᾽ ὦμων

co
x
or

ΕΣ Πρ πα 6 κα ΄ὔ ε ν & -
αἰὲν ἔχ ἡνίοχος θεράπων: ὁ δὲ ἵετο θυμῶι
Ἰδομενῆα βαλεῖν: ὁ δέ μιν φθάμενος βάλε δουρὶ
λαιμὸν ὑπ᾽ ἀνθερεῶνα, διαπρὸ δὲ χαλκὸν ἔλασσεν.

μ ρὸ δὲ χ

᾿] “ a » λ,

ἤριπε δ᾽ ὡς ὅτε τις δρῦς ἤριπεν ἢ ἀχερωὶς
-ἂὃ / / / Ψ ” / ”
ne πίτυς βλωθρή, THY τ᾽ οὔρεσι τέκτονες ἄνδρες 390
ἐξέταμον πελέκεσσι νεήκεσι νήϊον εἶναι"

379, ef: αἱ Pap. ο: αἴ Vr. d.
cunewuesa (.

κατὰ) C King’s Par. 6.
Ar. JT Par. ἢ (ἐπ Gu.) and ap. Eust.

389. ἀχερωϊΐς : ἕτεροι δὲ ἀχελωΐς ὡς ἄν τις εἴποι ὑδατοτρεφής Eust.

δ᾽ Lips.

380. 1AIoN Pap. o.
382. ἧλιεν (" : ἐσμεν D.
| τινὲς κατὰ κρατερῆς ὑςμίνης T.

381. ουνώμεθα : +p.

κατὰ: διὰ A (Ύρ.
384. HAe’ ἐπαμύντωρ
385. @uon ΡΟΝ (and T in lemma).
390. THN

383. ἕλκε Ar.

381. neu, better ἔπε, which was
read by Ar. in K 146, though there is
no mention of any variant here. cuNne-
ueoa, come to terms, συνίημι, H. G. ὃ 81,
a doubtful contracted form. Fick sug-
gests συνηόμεθ᾽ (Menrad cuverdued’) ὠκυ-
mopoow or as an alternative συνήμεθα,
with the regular subj. lengthening, from
συνέμεθα. But this could only be on a
false analogy, -e- being here the verb-
stem, not the thematic vowel. Ar.
wrote συνὥμεθα, with interaspiration,
and so συνἡμοσύνας, agreements, X 261.

382. ἐεῦνωταί, match-makers, mar-
riage-brokers, a profession which is fully
recognized in many communities, civil-
ized as well as savage, to the present
day. Though there is no other trace of
it in.H., yet the existence of the broker
is a natural outcome of the commercial
view of marriage implied in the existence
of ἕδνα. For the verb éedvéw cf. B 53
ὥς κ᾽ αὐτὸς ἐεδνώσαιτο θύγατρα, get the
bride-price for his daughter.

384. Asios now appears, unlike the
other Trojans, with a chariot. The
description of his attack on the wall in
M 110-114 accounts for this, and indeed
appears to have been interpolated there
for the purpose. If the original μάχη
ἐπὶ ταῖς ναυσίν knew nothing of a wall,
but only described a gradual driving of
the Greeks along the plain up to their

ships, then the casual mention of a
chariot among the footmen would be
nothing remarkable. Fick suggests that
the name is “Acovos, from the town of
Assos. For the variant ἐπαμύντωρ ef.
ὑφηνίοχος Z19, ἐπίσκοπος K 38, with note.

385. πνείοντε Kat’ dun, cf. P 501
μὴ δή μοι ἀπόπροθεν ἰσχέμεν ἵππους, ἀλλὰ
μάλ᾽ ἐμπνείοντε μεταφρένωι. It is not
necessary to suppose with Schol. B that
this precaution τὸ ἕτοιμον τῆς φυγῆς καὶ
τὴν δειλίαν δηλοῖ.

9589-935--Ξ- Π 482-86. ἀχερωΐς, said to
be the λεύκη or white poplar (see Pau-
sanias v. 14. 2). This is the finest tree
which grows in modern Greece. Popular
etymologists explained that Herakles
had brought it from the river Acheron.
For the mythology connected with it see
Frazer on Paus.*v. 5. 5.

390. BAwepH only here (=II 483),
w 234 (ὄγχνη) and in late imitative epics.
It probably means ¢a//, but various other
senses are given in the scholia: τινὲς
ἁπαλήν, κατὰ ᾿Αρκάδας" of δὲ ὑψηλήν,
κατὰ Βοιωτούς, ἤτοι φλοιοβαρῇ, κατὰ
Μάγνητας, 7) τραχεῖαν, κατὰ Δρύοπας, ἣ
ηὐξημένην, κατὰ Tuponvots, ἢ σκληράν,
κατὰ Ἱζαρυστίου. This knowledge of
dialects is too universal to be trusted.

391. NHion, cf. I’ 61 ἀνέρος ὅς ῥά τε
τέχνηι νήϊον ἐκτάμνηισιν. Thereis perhaps
an intentional assonance in νήϊον νεήκ.

89 IAIAAOC Ν (χπι)

ἃ e / λυ ee \ / a /
ὡς ὁ πρόσθ᾽ ἵππων καὶ δίφρου κεῖτο Tavvabeis,
é

βεβρυχὼς Kovios dedpaypévos αἱματοέσσης.
ἐκ δέ οἱ ἡνίοχος TARYN φρένας ἃς πάρος εἶχεν,
οὐδ᾽ ὅ γ᾽ ἐτόλμησεν δήιων ὑπὸ χεῖρας ἀλύξας 395
x [νά / \ 3.9 I z
ay ἵππους στρέψαι. τὸν δ᾽ ᾿Αντέίλοχος μενεχάρμης
δουρὶ μέσον περόνησε τυχών" οὐδ᾽ ἤρκεσε θώρηξ
χάλκεος, ὃν φορέεσκε, μέσηι δ᾽ ἐν γαστέρι πῆξεν.
αὐτὰρ ὁ ἀσθμαίνων ἐυεργέος ἔκπεσε δίφρου,
ἵππους δ᾽ ᾿Αντέλοχος μεγαθύμου Νέστορος υἱὸς 400
5 / / 3 > / 5 ͵7
ἐξέλασε Τρώων μετ᾽ ἐυκνήμιδας ᾿Αχαιούς.

Δηΐφοβος δὲ μάλα σχεδὸν ἤλυθεν ᾿Ιδομενῆος,
) lal
Aciov ἀχνύμενος, καὶ ἀκόντισε δουρὶ φαεινῶι.
2 3 e \ » 5. Ι / / ”
ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν ἄντα ἰδὼν ἠλεύατο χάλκεον ἔγχος
> ΄ / \ Cam, 26 ἀπο / ey:
Ἰδομενεύς: κρύφθη yap ὑπ᾽ ἀσπίδι πάντοσ᾽ ἐΐσηι, 405
τὴν ap ὅ γε ῥινοῖσι βοῶν καὶ νώροπι χαλκῶι
δινωτὴν φορέεσκε, δύω κανόνεσσ᾽ apapviar:
The ὕπο πᾶς ἐάλη, τὸ δ᾽ ὑπέρπτατο χάλκεον ἔγχος,

/ / id > \ > / yA

καρφαλέον δέ οἱ ἀσπὶς ἐπιθρέξαντος ἄυσεν
» SEN? Τὰ 7 € , \ > a
ἔγχεος: οὐδ᾽ ἅλιόν pa βαρείης χειρὸς ἀφῆκεν, 410
ἀλλ᾽ ἔβαλ᾽ ἽἹππασίδην Ὕ ψηήνορα ποιμένα λαῶν
ἧπαρ ὑπὸ πραπίδων, εἶθαρ δ᾽ ὑπὸ γούνατ᾽ ἔλυσε.
Δηΐφοβος δ᾽ ἔκπωγλον ἐπεύξατο μακρὸν ἀύσας"

>

395. ἀλύξαι Lips.! 396. «τρέψας R Lips.! (cf. ἀλύξας: στρέψας. στρέψαι"
ἀλύξαι, Sch. T). 398. ἐν : ἐνὶ GJ. || ractép’ ἔπηξε Mor. 399. 6 Ar. PR:
or ἢ: 406. re CDQ Lips.: τ᾽ ἐν ὥ. 408. THI: THN TD: τῆι δ᾽ Vr. ἢ:
THIp Pap. o. 411. ἀλλὰ Bad’ 10. 412. rounata Aucen Pap. o.

surface of the shield. For the κανόνες
see App. B, i. 1. They are commonly
taken to be handles, πόρπακες, but these
were rings or loops, to which the word
κανών could hardly be applied. The
invention of such handles was ascribed
to the Karians; they are quite in-

393. βεβρυχώς, bellowing, as P 264,
μ 242, ete. Only the perf. forms are
found in H, ϑεδραγμένος, cf. ἕλε γαῖαν
ἀγοστῶι, A 425.
394. ἐκ... mAHrH, cf. σ 231 ἐκ γάρ
με πλήσσουσι, Σ 225 ἡνίοχοι δ᾽ ἔκπληγεν.
395. οὐκ ἐτόλμηςεν, he had not the

courage to run the momentary risk of
turning in escape (@Avzac). There seems
to be some trace of a variant ἀλύξαι.
στρέψας, which is rather more natural,
It is Antilochos who takes advantage of
the unfortunate driver here as in E 580.
399=E 585, from the same passage.
Here we are expressly told that Ar.
wrote ὁ, not ὅ γ΄, and it is probable that
he did the same in E. See note on B 105.
407. ϑινωτήν, see note onl’ 991. The
word here probably refers to concentric
rings as ornaments on the metallic

consistent with the great Mykenaean
shield, and can only have come in with
the small round target of later days.

408. ἐάλη, shrank together, Virgil’s se
collegit in arma. So 11 403, T 278.

409. καρφαλέον, like αὖον ἀύτευν, M
160, ete. ἐπιθρέξαντος, as it grazed the
surface ; this aor. form occurs only here
in H., though we have the derived
iterative θρέξασκον in Σ᾽ 599. It must
be admitted that both the form of the
word and the behaviour of the spear
give ground for suspicion.

IAIAAOC N (χι)

33

, ΕΣ na? / ,ὕ ΄
““οὐ μὰν αὖτ᾽ ἄτιτος κεῖτ᾽ "Ἄσιος, ἀλλά ἕ φημι

᾽ ” “ὦ. a7 / a
εις Αὐδός περ LOVTa πυλάρταο κρατεροιο

/ \ / > Ny) δὺς car fs ἫΝ
ynOnoew κατὰ θυμόν, ἐπεὶ ῥά οἱ Wraca πομπόν.
ἃ ” > Ψ , > » / ’ ? ΄
ὡς ἔφατ᾽, ᾿Αργείοισι δ᾽ ἄχος γένετ᾽ εὐξαμένοιο,
᾿Αντιλόχωι δὲ μάλιστα δαΐφρονι θυμὸν ὄρινεν"
> > »»? > / Δ ε΄. δὲ > , e /
ἀλλ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ἀχνύμενός περ ἑοῦ ἀμέλησεν ἑταίρου,

ἀλλὰ θέων περίβη καί οἱ σάκος ἀμφεκάλυψε.

420

\ \ ΝΜ > ¢ ΄ ΄ ay ΄ lal

Tov μὲν ἔπειθ᾽ ὑποδύντε δύω ἐρίηρες ἑταῖροι,
Μηκιστεὺς “Eyiovo πάϊς καὶ δῖος ᾿Αλάστωρ,
νῆας ἔπι γλαφυρὰς φερέτην βαρέα στενάχοντα.
᾽ \ ᾽ > a / , “ > Ce
Ἰδομενεὺς δ᾽ ov Aye μένος μέγα, ἵετο δ᾽ αἰεὶ

ἠέ τινα ρώων ἐρεβεννῆι νυκτὶ καλύψαι

xX > \ fel > / \ > al
ἢ αὐτὸς δουπῆσαι ἀμύνων λοιγὸν ᾿Αχαιοῖς.
ἔνθ᾽ Αἰσυήταο διοτρεφέος φίλον υἱόν,

415. ἰόντα Ar. 2: ἐόντα (VRST Par. ὁ (swpr.1) ἃ σἹ 1.
420. ἀμφικάλυψε Vr. d.

Cant. Par. j (yp. κρατεροῖο).

| καρτεροῖο I]t: Kpuepoio
422 om. At. 423.

CTENGXYONTG Zen. 2: crendxonte Ar. ATU Harl. ἃ, Par. a (c!?) h: στενάχοντες

Harl. a, Lips.
ἀχαιῶν Mor. Bar.

414, ἄτιτος, the ζ is regular, see on =
484 and App. D, vol. i. p. 595.

415. πυλάρταο, see on Θ 367.

420-23 = 0 331-34. It seems unlikely
that the lines are genuine in both places ;
and though the general character of Θ
would lead us to suppose that they are
borrowed there, in this case the pre-
sumption appears to be wrong. For
here the words βαρέα στενάχοντα are out
of place, as Hypsenor is clearly supposed
to be dead on the spot. Deiphobos evi-
dently thinks so (416), and it would be
quite unlike the epic style to represent
him as mistakén without explicitly say-
ingso. It was evidently in order to avoid
this difficulty that Ar. read στενάχοντε.
But the phrase βαρέα στενάχων is used
in the 71. only of wounded warriors (538,
= 432). On the other hand it is applied
four times in the Od. to mental pain
(e 420, etc.); and the same is the
case in the 71. with the similar βαρὺ
στενάχων (A 364, ete.). So this con-
sideration alone is not decisive, as we are
unable to say whether Ar.’s reading is a
mere conjecture or not. But we have
further to consider that it is not usual
for Homeric heroes to detach two of their
number to carry a dead body to the ships ;
when an important chief is wounded this
is natural enough, but a corpse they

VOL. II

424. ἰδομιενεὺς : τινὲς περισπῶσιν Sch. T (so A).
427. Ὀιοτροφέος J.

D

Jury.

426.

merely draw within their line in order
to prevent the enemy seizing it. The
next three lines also contain unusual
phrases ; so that the balance of proba-
bilities is decidedly in favour of regard-
ing the whole passage, perhaps from 417
to 426, as a very late interpolation, later
than 9.

424, μένος is perhaps best taken as
an acc. of relation, slacked not in his
jut in x 63 οὐδέ Kev ὧς ἔτι χεῖρας
ἐμὰς λήξαιμι φόνοιο the verb is clearly
transitive, and this use would be more
natural here, ef. παῦε τεὸν μένος A 282.
The variant ᾿Ιδομενεῦς as gen. is out of
the question. Φ 305 οὐδὲ Σκάμανδρος
ἔληγε τὸ ὃν μένος is exactly similar.

425. ἐρεβεννῆι νυκτὶ καλύψαι, a
unique expression, evidently formed on
the analogy of E 659 τὸν δὲ κατ᾽ ὀφθαλ-
μῶν ἐρεβεννὴ νὺξ ἐκάλυψεν.

426. δουπῆςαι; fo fall in battle; cf.
the common phrase δούπησεν δὲ πεσών.
For this pregnant sense the nearest ana-
logy is Ψ 679 δεδουπότος Οἰδιπόδαο és
τάφον, a very suspicious ally. The short
form of the dat. ᾿Αχαιοῖς at the end of
the line is also rare, but is not in itself
to be regarded as a proof of spurious-
ness ; we might quite well read ᾿Αχαιῶν
with Mor. Bar.

427. It is naturally impossible to say

34 IAIAAOC N (xu)

ἥρω᾽ ᾿Αλκάθοον---γαμβρὸς δ᾽ ἣν ᾿Αγχίσαο,

πρεσβυτάτην δ᾽ ὦπυιε θυγατρῶν “Ἱπποδάμειαν,

τὴν περὶ κῆρι φίλησε πατὴρ καὶ πότνια μήτηρ 430
ἐν peyapor: πᾶσαν yap ὁμηλικίην ἐκέκαστο

κάλλεϊ καὶ ἔργοισιν ἰδὲ φρεσί: τούνεκα καί μιν

fal > \ « 3εΕΝ / > I)
γῆμεν ἀνὴρ ὥριστος ἐνὶ Tpoine evpeine-—
τὸν τόθ᾽ ὑπ᾽ ᾿Ιδομενῆϊ Ποσειδάων ἐδάμασσε

θέλξας ὄσσε φαεινά, πέδησε δὲ φαίδιμα γυΐα" 435

/ 3 ΘΙ ΕΣ 5 /
οὔτε yap ἐξοπίσω φυγέειν δύνατ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ἀλέασθαι,

ἀλλ᾽ ὥς τε στήλην ἢ δένδρεον ὑψυπέτηλον

/ “- / 7 \
ἀτρέμας ἑσταότα στῆθος μέσον οὔτασε δουρὶ

ἥρως ᾿Ιδομενεύς, ῥῆξεν δέ οἱ ἀμφὶ χιτῶνα

χάλκεον, ὅς οἱ πρόσθεν ἀπὸ χροὸς ἤρκει ὄλεθρον" 440

5 / /
én TOTE γ᾽ avov ἄυσεν ἐρεικόμενος περὶ δουρί.

δούπησεν δὲ πεσών, δόρυ δ᾽ ἐν κραδίη, ἐπεπήγει,

τὰ ἰδ να e >? 7ὔ AN 3 Ud /
ἥ ῥά ol ἀσπαίρουσα καὶ ovpiayov πελέμιζεν

428. Hpw': ἥρων τινὲς ἀττικῶς Sch. T.

433. τινὲς ὑποτάσσουσι :

πρὶν “ANTHNopidac τραφέμεν καὶ Πάνθου υἷας,
Πριαμίϑας ©’, of Τρωςὶ ueténpenon innodduoicin,
ἕως ἔθ᾽ ἥβην εἶχεν, ὄφελλε δὲ οὔριον (sic) GNeoc.—Sch. T, Eust.

435. φαεινὼ CHJPQRTU Vr. A Lips. Eust.

439-41 om. Pt.
Aph. ADR Harl. b:

442. πεπήγει AC!P: ἐπεπήγη G().
πολέμιξεν H Par. e:

437. cTHAH DD.
443. meNéuizen Ar.
πτολέμιξεν J: πτελέμιξεν Par. ἃ

436. puréuen J.

(τ ev. d?): πελέμιξεν Q (and ἄλλοι ap. Did.).

whether this Aisyetes is the same whose
tomb is named as a landmark in B 793.
The construction of υἱόν is forgotten for
the time, and resumed with τόν, 434.

433. @picroc, as A 288. The three
added lines in Schol. T (see above) are
evidently an interpolation meant to
modify the too absolute praise. To
complete them Bekker added after ἱππο-
δάμοισιν, αὐτόν τ᾽ Αἰνείαν ἐπιείκελον ἀθα-
νάτοισιν. Something of the sort is
obviously needed. οὔριον, leg. θούριον.

435. ϑέλξας, see on M 255. For a
similar act on the part of a god compare
II 792.

437. ὧς goes closely with ἀτρέμας
ἑσταότα, following it in sense—an un-
usual construction in a Homeric simile.
The more regular form is to be found in
P 434 ἀλλ᾽’ ὥς τε στήλη μένει ἔμπεδον
κισολ.

439. oi goes with χιτῶνα, Gugi being
added adverbially, his tunic round about
him. This is more Homeric than the
alternative of taking ἀμφί as governing
oi, though the difference is slight ; ἀμφί

very rarely follows its case (ψ 46 is
perhaps the only instance), and in such
a phrase as Σ 205 ἀμφὶ δέ οἱ κεφαλῆι there
can be no doubt as to the nature of the
dat. of. So also % 420; see H. G. § 182.

440-41 are probably an interpolation
to turn the linen χιτών, the rending of.
which is the sign of triumph, into a
bronze corslet; see App. B, v. The
epithet χαλκοχίτωνες, from which the
phrase is derived, is another matter
(App. B, iii. 4).

441. €éperkdéuenoc, vent, recurs in H.
only in the intrans. aor. ἤρικε, Ῥ 295;
cf. Hesiod Sc. 287 ἤρεικον χθόνα δῖαν,
of ploughing.

443-44. Cf. II 612-18, P 528-29, where
444 is repeated but preceded by ovpiaxos
πελεμίχθη, a more simple and natural
expression than the (κραδίη) οὐρίαχον
πελέμιζεν of our passage, a piece of
exaggeration which looks more like the
work of an interpolator than of a genuine
epic poet. The imperf. πελέμιζεν is more
picturesque than the aor. οὐρίαχον, the
butt-end, does not necessarily imply such

IAIAAOC Ν (χπι) 35

ἔγχεος: ἔνθα δ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽ ἀφίει μένος ὄβριμος “Apne.
Ἰδομενεὺς δ᾽ ἔκπαγλον ἐπεύξατο μακρὸν ἀύσας: 445
“ Δηΐφοβ᾽, ἢ ἄρα δή τι ἐΐσκομεν ἄξιον εἶναι

τρεῖς ἑνὸς ἀντὶ πεφάσθαι; ἐπεὶ σύ περ εὔχεαι οὕτως"

,ὔ » By x \ ’ \ > / “ 5 > tal
δαιμόνι᾽, ἀλλὰ Kal αὐτὸς ἐναντίος ἵστασ᾽ ἐμεῖο,

ὄφρα ἴδηις οἷος Ζηνὸς γόνος ἐνθάδ᾽ ἱκάνω,

ὃς πρῶτον Μίνωα τέκε Κρήτηι ἐπίουρον" 450

Μίψως δ᾽ αὖ τέκεθ᾽ υἱὸν ἀμύμονα Δευκαλίωνα,

, /
Δευκαλίων δ᾽ ἐμὲ τίκτε πολέσσ᾽ ἄνδρεσσιν ἄνακτα
/ / lol ’ a
Κρήτηι ἐν εὐρείηι: νῦν δ᾽ ἐνθάδε νῆες ἔνεικαν
/ \ \ \ \ ” ΄, ”
gol τε κακὸν καὶ πατρὶ καὶ ἄλλοισι Tpwecow.

ὡς φάτο, Δηΐφοβος δὲ διάνδιχα μερμήριξεν, 45

σι
σι

» / , e / /
ἢ τινά που Tpwwy ἑταρίσσαιτο μεγαθύμων
ἂψ ἀναχωρήσας, ἢ πειρήσαιτο καὶ οἷος.
«e ,ὔὕ . / / / >
ὧδε δέ οἱ φρονέοντι δοάσσατο κέρδιον εἶναι,

a a 3 » , \ a τῷ - Cols
βῆναι ἘΠῚ Αἰνείαν" TOV ὃ υστατον ευρεν ομίλου

¢ Pas > \ \
EOTAOT* ALEL Yap

Πριάμωι ἐπεμήνιε δίωι, 460

444. wéNoc: μέγας (). || ὄμβριμος CHPR.
ἘΠ ὁ ΑΓ. cs yp: Harl. Ὁ: rot P (U2 sup.) Par. ἃ.
Harl. Ὁ ἃ, Par. ¢ (at-) αὶ j] Eust.: αὕτην G.
449. ὄφρα ἴδη(ι) Ar. PQ Harl. ἃ, Par. οἷ:
δ΄. 452. πολέεςς᾽ CGHPQRU Vr. b. || GNdpac(c)in PR (ὁ corr.).
Q: ef CHQST (supr. 4) and ἄλλοι (Did.).

[D]QU. || ἐμοῖο P.

446. ΤΙ Ar. 0: τί c HRT
447. αὕτως Zen. PRS
448. ἐναντίον A (yp. ἐναντίος;
ὄφρ᾽ eidAc Par.

456. H Ar.

a spike as is meant by the σαυρωτήρ of

K 153.

444, Ares seems to be regarded as a
‘spirit of battle’ presiding over every
detail, and deciding the fate of the
weapons—an idea which is found also
in the common use of the word Ἄρης to
signify the course of battle. Compare
also 569. Some have taken it to mean
here the weapon itself; but this is less
probable. Ares in person is on Olympos,
and ignorant of what is going on (521).

446, éfcxouen, do we fancy (do you
suppose we fancy) that the recompense
ts at all (τι) sufficient? For ἐΐσκω οἴ.
® 332; the word seems to imply that
Idomeneus contemptuously rejects the
idea that the recompense is enough, and
calls on Deiphobos to come forward and
make a fourth. It is possible also to
take the sentence affirmatively, we truly
think the recompense fair: but τι is in
favour of the interrogation. In the
variant τί σ᾽, which was rejected by Ar.,
σ᾽ could only stand for σοι, and the
elision would be very harsh, though
possible,

447. οὕτως and αὔτως (Zen. etc.) are
equally Homeric. The text means ‘as
you boast in this way, I will do the
same.’

449, ἴδηις or ἴδηι (ἴδη᾽), see on A 203.

450. ἐπίουρον, so v 405 ὑῶν ἐπίουρος.
The scholia mention a variant ἔπι οὖρον.

-but the compound is clearly more suit-

able. Compare ἐπίσκοπος K 38 with
note. For the birth of Minos see = 321,
where his mother is called Φοίνικος κούρη.
That passage, as we shall see, is of later
origin. There is not, however, anything
in it inconsistent with the genealogy
here. Minos is mentioned also in ἃ 322,
568, p 523, 7 178.

456. Hor εἰ, seeon Β 900. ἑταρίεςαιτο
= ἕταρον ἕλοιτο (K 242), transitive,
while the act. ἑταιρίσσαι is intrans. in
Q 335.

459. Fiisi has remarked that the selec-
tion of the first of the two alternatives
is against the usual scheme under which
the second is elsewhere always chosen
(= 20-4, etc.).

460. This curious statement is appar-
ently connected with a legend of which

86 IAIAAOC Ν (ἀπ)

,
οὕνεκ᾽ ap ἐσθλὸν ἐόντα μετ᾽ ἀνδράσιν οὔ τι τίεσκεν.

- / /
ἀγχοῦ δ᾽ ἱστάμενος ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
lol =
“Αἰνεία Τρώων βουληφόρε, viv σε μάλα χρὴ
γαμβρῶι ἀμυνέμεναι, εἴ πέρ τί σε κῆδος ἱκάνει.
ἀλλ᾽ ἕπευ, ᾿Αλκαθόωι ἐπαμύνομεν, ὅς σε πάρος γε
\ 2\ 7 / ” Ν af ;
γαμβρὸς ἐὼν ἔθρεψε δόμοις ἔνι τυτθὸν ἐόντα
τὸν δέ τοι ᾿Ιδομενεὺς δουρικλυτὸς ἐξενάριξεν."
ὡς φάτο, τῶι δ᾽ ἄρα θυμὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ὄρινε,
a \ 2, 9 ὃ A / / ,
βῆ δὲ per ᾿Ιδομενῆα μέγα πτολέμοιο peunros.
ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ᾿Ιδομενῆα φόβος λάβε τηλύγετον ὥς,
» 5. 3 id “ a ” ? si /
ἀλλ ἔμεν, WS OTE TLS σῦς οὔρεσιν ἀλκὶ πεποιθώς,
εἰ / lal
ὅς Te μένει κολοσυρτὸν ἐπερχόμενον πολὺν ἀνδρῶν
χώρωι ἐν οἰοπόλωι, φρίσσει δέ τε νῶτον ὕπερθεν"
> \ bf » e \ / 2 2Q/
ὀφθαλμὼ δ᾽ ἄρα οἱ πυρὶ λάμπετον: αὐτὰρ ὀδόντας

465

470

After 463 Vr. b adds aiyuHTHN τ᾽ ἔμεναι, καὶ eapcahéon πολεμιςτήν (=E 602,

Π 493, X 269).

R adds the same line after 464.

465. ἐπαμυνέμεν PR:

ἐπαμείνομεν S: τινὲς ἐπαμῦναι [ τινὲς “ érapuvéuev,” ἐπαμῦναι Ludw.] Sch. T. |
re: περ of the earlier printed vulg. from the Florentine ed. princeps on, is

presumably the reading of G.

ὄντα καὶ μόνον (2) J™,

469. πολέμοιο Lips.

470. ὥς: yp. Θ᾽ ὥς: ἤτοι

we see traces in Y 178-86 and 806,
pointing to some tradition of a rivalry
for the kingship of Troy between the
two lines of the royal family ; a tradition
which may very probably be based upon
historic fact, a family claiming descent
from Anchises having at some time
ousted another claiming from Priam, or
more probably, when in possession of
the chieftaincy, having thus justified
the inferiority of a supposed Priamid
branch. That there was a legend of the
permanence of the house of Aineias in
Troas we know from the fragments of
Demetrios of Skepsis and Hellanikos.
In Hymn. Ven. 196 Aphrodite prophesies
to Anchises, σοὶ δ᾽ ἔσται φίλος vids, ὃς
ἐν Τρώεσσιν ἀνάξει" καὶ παῖδες παίδεσσι
διαμπερὲς ἐκγεγάονται. But this may be
merely an echo of T 307, q.v. Menekrates
of Xanthos (ap. Dion. Hal. Ant. i. 48)
recorded a legend that Aineias, being
excluded from ‘sacred privileges’ (-yepéwy
ἱερῶν) by Paris, betrayed Troy to the
Achaians, who in return spared him,
and left him in possession of the land ;
see R. Ellis in C. 10. ii. 132.

461. μετ᾽ GNOpdcin goes with ἐσθλὸν
ἐόντα, on the analogy of ἐσθλὸν ἐνὶ mpo-
paxoow, A 458, ete., rather than with
οὐ τίεσκεν.

464. γαμβρός here and in E 474 means
brother-in-law (v. 429); elsewhere it
always is found in the ordinary sense of
son-in-law. κῆδος is grief, not in the
Attic sense family connexion, as is clear
from the recurrence of the same phrase
in O 245, If 516. This latter sense
does not occur in H., though the word
seems to be particularly used of grief at
the loss of friends or kinsmen, e.g. E 156,
7 241, ete.

466. Cf. A 223. It would seem from
this that Anchises, like Priam (Z 249),
had his son-in-law dwelling in his house.

469 = 297.

470. Ar. pointed out here, as usual,
that φόβος means not fear but flight ;
as Idomeneus himself says δείδια, 481.
THAUFETON, a boy, stripling; see on I
175.

471. For this fine simile οἵ, M 146—
53.

473. οἷοπόλωι, solitary ; and so P 54,
T 377, Ὦ 614, ἃ 574, cf. ἀκρόπολος =
ἄκρος, E 523, 7 205. In Hymn. Mere.
314 the word means sheep-feeding, as
if from dis. νῶτον is accus., the sub-
ject of φρίσσει being σῦς, as appears
from τ 446 φρίξας εὖ λοφιήν, Scut.
Her. 391 ὀρθὰς δ᾽ ἐν λοφιῆι φρίσσει
τρίχας.

[AIAAOC N (xt) 37

θήγει, ἀλέξασθαι μεμαὼς κύνας ἠδὲ καὶ ἄνδρας" 475
£ ¢ ᾽ ΄ ,ὔ
as μένεν ᾿Ιδομενεὺς δουρικλυτός, οὐδ᾽ ὑπεχώρει,
> ,ὔ bd / / = ’ ra ͵
Αἰνείαν ἐπιόντα βοηθόον' ave δ᾽ ἑταίρους,
᾿Ασκάλαφόν τ᾽ ἐσορῶν ᾿Αφαρῆά τε Δηΐπυρόν τε
Μηριόνην τε καὶ ᾿Αντίλοχον, μήστωρας ἀυτῆς:
τοὺς ὅ γ᾽ ἐποτρύνων ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα" 480

a / / a

“ δεῦτε, φίλοι, καί μ᾽ οἴω. ἀμύνετε: δείδια δ᾽ αἰνῶς
/ , Α

Αἰνείαν ἐπιόντα πόδας ταχύν, ὅς μοι ἔπεισιν,
¢ / a
ὃς μάλα καρτερός ἐστι payne ἔνι φῶτας ἐναίρειν"

\ 4 GA ” “ ΄ ᾽ ΄ὔ
καὶ δ᾽ ἔχει ἥβης ἄνθος, 6 τε κράτος ἐστὶ μέγιστον.

lal > lal

εἰ yap ὁμηλικίη ye γενοίμεθα τῶιδ᾽ ἐπὶ θυμῶι, 485
3 / >\ / Is / ΞΥΝ / »”
αἷψνά Kev née φέροιτο μέγα κράτος ne φεροίμην.

ἃ » , e +73 Ἂν / 4 \ \ M4

ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ apa πάντες Eva φρεσὶ θυμὸν ἔχοντες

> Vi ,

πλησίοι ἔστησαν, TAKE ὦμοισι κλίναντες.

> / ’ 1 / > / e e /
Αἰνείας δ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἐκέκλετο οἷς ἑτάροισι,

h , > a ͵, A
AnigoBov te Ilapw τ᾽ ἐσορῶν καὶ ᾿Αγήνορα δῖον, 490

/

of of ἅμ᾽ ἡγεμόνες Τρώων ἔσαν: αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα

480 om. Pap. ο (ἐν πολλοῖς οὐ φέρεται Sch. T).
484. ἐςτὶ : andpi Pap. ο.

ecci Pap. ο.

481. uw’: μοι 0. 483. ἐςτι:
485. ὁμηλικίην Zen. DU? Par. δ:

ὁμηλικίηι Ar. ? (so AGHT). || re om. JPQ: τε Par. e. || ἐπὶ Ar. A[D] Harl. b ἃ,

Par. c d ¢ h, Syr.: ἐνὶ 0.
PEPOIUHN Pap. o, Syr.

475. θήγει, see note on A 416. Heyne
aptly quotes Aelian de nat. an. 6. 1 6
γοῦν σῦς μέλλων ἐς μάχην ἰέναι πρὸς ταῖς
λείαις πέτραις τοὺς ὀδόντας ὑποθήγει. The
aor. mid. ἀλέξασθαι recurs in H. only
O 565, Il 562, o 62: Bekker reads
ἀλεξέμεναι, cf. on O 565 and van L.
Ench. p. 509. The aor. stem is ἀλεξησ-,
Q 371, γ 346.

476. οὐδ᾽ ὑπεχώρει is parenthetical,
Αἰνείαν being acc. after μένε. A
similar construction will be found in
A 376.

477. βοηϑόον : the word recurs in H.
only in P 481 (both times with the
variant βοῆι θοόν), and in the patronymic
Βοηθοΐδης ὃ 31, o 95, 140, which shews
that the word was felt as a real com-
pound at an early date. So we have
βοηθός and the verb βοηθεῖν as early as
Herod., and βοηδρομεῖν in Euripides
formed analogically. Hence Ar. was
no doubt right in preferring the form
Bonfdos. (The accent shews that it is
from @éw, not directly from @ods). The
testimony of mss. is immaterial. See

488. nAHcion P. || Ectacan C.

486. κράτος: κλέος PR Harl. a, Lips. || 4 κε

491. of: τοί Syr.

note on A 74 for similar cases. The
caesura seems to shew that ἀρηΐφιλος is
a real compound in [ 21, etc. ate, see
A 461.

479-80 = 93-4.

481. χ᾽ ΞΞ μοι, see on A 170, Z 165.

482. For ὅς Nauck conj. ὥς, ingeni-
ously but needlessly ; the close repeti-
tion of the same word is not avoided in
the epic style, and the relative clause
repeating a preceding thought is quite
Homeric, e.g. 1124 ἀθλοφόρους, of ἀέθλια
ποσσὶν ἄροντο.

485. ὁμηλικίη -- ὁμήλικες. This con-
crete use of the word is common, e.g. Ὕ
364 νεώτεροι ἄνδρες, πάντες ὁμηλικίη
μεγαθύμου Τηλεμάχοιο, and of a single
person, y 49 ἀλλὰ νεώτερός ἐστιν, ὁμη-
Akin δ᾽ ἐμοὶ αὐτῶι. So also ὕ 23, x 209.
ὁμηλικίην which Zen. read is apparently
untranslatable. ἐπί, so π 99, w 511;
it expresses a vague concomitance, cf.
ἀτελευτήτωι ἐπὶ ἔργωι A 175, πολλοῖσιν
ἐπὶ κτεάτεσσι 1 482.

486. Compare = 308.

488. See on A 593.

38 IAIAAOC N (x11)

° > a
λαοὶ ἕπονθ᾽, ὡς εἴ τε μετὰ κτίλον ἕσπετο μῆλα
/ / / ‘
πιόμεν᾽ ἐκ βοτάνης: γάνυται δ᾽ ἄρα τε φρένα ποιμὴν
ἃ / /
ὡς Αἰνείαι θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσι γεγήθει,

a / cee ᾽ a
ὡς ἴδε λαῶν ἔθνος ἐπισπόμενον ἑοῖ αὐτῶι.

495

οἱ δ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ᾿Αλκαθόωι αὐτοσχεδὸν ὡρμήθησαν

“-“ an \
μακροῖσι ξυστοῖσι: περὶ στήθεσσι δὲ χαλκὸς
» εἰ
σμερδαλέον κονάβιζε τιτυσκομένων Kal ὅμιλον

ἀλλήλων.

3 A a
Αἰνείας te καὶ ldopevets, ἀτάλαντοι “Apni,

δύο δ᾽ ἄνδρες ἀρήϊοι ἔξοχον ἄλλων,

500

ἵεντ ἀλλήλων ταμέειν χρόα νηλέϊ χαλκῶι.

Αἰνείας δὲ πρῶτος ἀκόντισεν ᾿Ιδομενῆος"

493. πιέλιεν᾽ Vr. b.
498. κονάβηςε Cant.
500. ἄρηος L.

|| Te om. PQR:
499. ἔξοχον ἅπασαι (Did.) 2: ἔξοχοι CDJPS Lips. Eust.
502. δὲ : TE PR. || πρῶτος : npdceen Aph.

@ Cant. Vr. A. 494. ainefao ()S.

492, This is a ‘two-sided’ simile,
like that in M 151; the joy of the shep-
herd, which is merely accessory to the
resemblance first brought forward, is
made in its turn the basis of another
likeness. Friedlinder has remarked that
this is the only case of ws εἴ τε in a
simile followed by the indic. In eleven
cases it has no verb, in nine it is fol-
lowed by the opt., and in one (I 481) by
the subj. Friedlander, on account of
this and some minor objections, none of
whick has any serious weight, wishes to
reject the whole simile as interpolated ;
but a single unusual construction is
certainiy not sufficient reason for con-
demning so appropriate and pleasing a
passage. The aor. indic. after ὥς τε is of
course familiar (Τ᾽ 23), and, as Lange has
shewn, the addition of εἰ does not really
affect the question; it merely brings
the action into closer connexion with
the narrator, calling attention to it as
a case put for consideration. Hence it
is that ὥς τε and ws εἴ τε are used indiffer-
ently in similes not containing a finite
verb (see L. Lange, EI, p. 539).

493. βοτάνης, the place of feeding.
In κ 411 ἐπὴν βοτάνης κορέσωνται, it is
used either in the abstract sense feeding
or more probably =jfood. Hence Ar.
considered it necessary to take ἐκ here

in a temporal sense, after feeding. But
this use of the preposition, though

common in Attic, is very rare in H.
(see however Εἰ 865, II 365, T 290, y 224).
The analogy of κ 159 κατήϊεν ἐκ νομοῦ
ὕλης πιόμενος is really decisive in favour

of the local sense of βοτάνης here ; com-
pare note on A 807. For the last half
of the line cf. © 559 γέγηθε δέ τε φρένα
ποιμήν.

495. éof, a form recurring only in 6
38 dua σπέσθαι Eot αὐτῶι. So we have
ἐέ, £171, Ὡ 134 (and perhaps = 162, q.v.
See also on T 384). In all but one ot
these places it is joined closely with a
form of αὐτός, and is used in the strictest
reflexive sense. It is very likely, there-
fore, that it is the emphatic form of the
pronoun, like ἐμοί beside μοι. This can
hardly be considered quite certain, as
the e may merely have arisen phonetic-
ally before the F; in the adjectival
form there seems to be no difference be-
tween éds and ὅς. It would naturally
be easy to write the longer form in most
of the passages where the pronoun is
orthotone, and it is quite possible that
many instances have been superseded by
the familiar short form. émicnéuenon,
the aor. means ‘when he saw his folk
attach themselves to him.’ This is the
regular sense of the verb,

496. ἀμφί, over the body of.

499. ἀλλήλων is the genitive of the
object aimed at, after τιτυσκομένων, pre-
cisely as in Z 3, where see note; and
so probably in 501, though there it may
be gen. after χρόα.

502. πρῶτος’ ἡ᾿Αριστοφάνειος πρόςθεν
ἀκόντισε, καὶ μήποτε βέλτιον: πρότερος
γὰρ ἂν εἶπεν, Did. ; and so Nauck reads.
But πρῶτος is quite intelligible in the
sense ‘ first of all his company,’ the λαοί
who are following him.

᾿ !AIAAOC Ν (x11) 39

ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν ἄντα ἰδὼν ἠλεύατο χάλκεον ἔγχος,
αἰχμὴ δ᾽ Αἰνείαο κραδαινομένη κατὰ γαίης
ὦιχετ᾽, ἐπεί ῥ᾽ ἅλιον στιβαρῆς ἀπὸ χειρὸς ὄρουσεν. 505
> \ ᾽ » + ΘΔ ὁ ΄ , ,ὔ
Ἰδομενεὺς δ᾽ ἄρα Οἰνόμαον βάλε γαστέρα μέσσην,
an ’ 5) 4
ῥῆξε δὲ θώρηκος γύαλον, διὰ δ᾽ ἔντερα χαλκὸς

> τ r -“
novo: ὁ δ᾽ ἐν κονίηισι πεσὼν ἕλε γαῖαν ἀγοστῶι.
’ \ » » \ / / »
Ἰδομενεὺς δ᾽ ἐκ μὲν νέκυος δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος

Meat a> ”

> / ’ 50.
ἐσπέσατ᾽, ovo

ἄρ᾽ ἔτ᾽ ἄλλα δυνήσατο τεύχεα καλὰ 510

@poiv ἀφελέσθαι: ἐπείγετο yap βελέεσσιν.
οὐ γὰρ ἔτ᾽ ἔμπεδα γυῖα ποδῶν ἣν ὁρμηθέντι
οὔτ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐπαῖξαι μεθ᾽ ἑὸν βέλος οὔτ᾽ ἀλέασθαι:
τῶ pa καὶ ἐν σταδίην μὲν ἀμύνετο νηλεὲς ἦμαρ,
/ ᾽ Ψ / es / / > / aod ee
τρέσσαι δ᾽ οὐκέτι ῥίμφα πόδες φέρον ἐκ πολέμοιο. 515
fal Ν / » / > / \ lal
τοῦ δὲ βάδην ἀπιόντος ἀκόντισε δουρὶ φαεινῶι
Δηΐφοβος: δὴ γάρ οἱ ἔχεν κότον ἐμμενὲς αἰεί.
ἀλλ᾽ ὅ γε καὶ τόθ᾽ ἅμαρτεν, ὁ δ᾽ ᾿Ασκάλαφον βάλε δουρί,
ΓΝ ? , ’ ” ee ld ”
υἱὸν νυαλίοιο: δι’ ὥμου δ᾽ ὄβριμον ἔγχος

» δ > 9 , \ ef “ 7 a Seas
EON EV, ο ὃ €V KOVLNLOL πέσων €XE yalav ayooToe. 520

PND ” / / / ” ΝΜ
οὐδ᾽ ἄρα πώ τι πέπυστο βριήπυος ὄβριμος "Ἄρης
υἷος ἑοῖο πεσόντος ἐνὶ κρατερῆι ὑσμίνηι,

503. ἀλεύατο J.
ἄρα τἄλλα ap. Herod.

[ 4 Δ΄

513. οὔτ᾽ ἄρ᾽: οὐδ᾽ ἂρ J.
ὄμβριμος CD*HP().

507. O€: ὃέ οἱ G. || θώρακος U.
512. οὐ rap: οὐδ᾽ dp PR. ὁρμηθῆναι Mor. Bar.
517. κότος U.

> ws

510. ἄρ᾽ ἔτ᾽ ἄλλα:

519. ὄμβριμον CP. 521.

504. κατὰ γαίης, cf. A 358 καταείσατο
γαίης, Τ' 217 κατὰ χθονὸς ὄμματα πήξας.
504-05=II 614-15.

507-08 =P 314-15. θώρηκος γύαλον,
see App. B, iii. 3e. Hard though it is to
believe that the words mean the hollow
of the shield, it must be admitted that it
is equally hard to understand the words
διὰ δ᾽ ἔντερα χαλκὸς ἤφυσε if the body
was covered by ἃ cuirass: see Schol. T
quoted on P 314.

508. H@uce, so = 517 διὰ δ᾽ ἔντερα
χαλκὸς ἄφυσσεν, let out like water. Cf.
A 526 χύντο χαμαὶ χολάδες, τ 450 πολ-
Nov δὲ διήφυσε σαρκὸς ὀδόντι. GrocTai,
see A 425.

510-11=E 621-22.

512. rufa, here in the original sense
joinis, from_root γὺυ to bend.

513. ἐπαΐξαι, to follow up his spear-
east so as to ‘finish’ his foe if wounded.

514. ἐν cradini, see on 325. In H

241 the word also occurs in antithesis
to ἐπαΐξαι.

515. τρέεςαι, for flight, as usual (φυ-
γεῖν μετὰ δέους, Ar.) ; οἵ, τρεῖν μ᾽ οὐκ ἐᾶι
Παλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη, ἘΞ 256.

517. κότον evidently refers to the
previous taunts which had passed (413-
16, 446). So Kai τότε in the next line
refers to Deiphobos’ failure to hit Ido-
meneus in 404.

520. €cyen, intrans., held its way; so
διέσχε, E 100, A 253.

521-25 are probably a later addition,
referring forward to O 110 ff., where
Ares hears of his bereavement. βριή-
nuoc, only here, perhaps with heavy
voice ; cf. βαρύφθογγος, βαρύβρομος, βαρύ-
κτυπος (all in the Hom. Hymns). Or βρι
may mean simply powerful as in βρι-αρός,
ὄ-βρι-μος : connexion with βριθύς ete. is
not certain. For the big voice of Ares
cf. E 860.

40 IAIAAOC Ν (χπὴ

A ,

ἀλλ᾽ ὅ γ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἄκρωι ᾿Ολύμπωι ὑπὸ χρυσέοισι νέφεσσιν
i a , »

ἧστο, Διὸς βουλῆισιν ἐελμένος, ἔνθά περ ἄλλοι

> , \ 8 > , /
ἀθάνατοι θεοὶ ἦσαν ἐεργομενοι πολεμοιο"

525

οἱ δ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ᾿Ασκαλάφωι αὐτοσχεδὸν ὡρμήθησαν.
Δηΐφοβος μὲν ἀπ᾽ ᾿Ασκαλάφου πήληκα φαεινὴν
ἥρπασε, Μηριόνης δὲ θοῶι ἀτάλαντος "Apyi

δουρὶ βραχίονα τύψεν ἐπάλμενος, ἐκ δ᾽ ἄρα χειρὸς

αὐλῶπις τρυφάλεια χαμαὶ βόμβησε πεσοῦσα.

530

Μηριόνης δ᾽ ἐξαῦτις ἐπάλμενος, αἰγυπιὸς ὥς,
ἐξέρυσε πρυμνοῖο βραχίονος ὄβριμον ἔγχος,

ay δ᾽ ἑτάρων εἰς ἔθνος ἐχάζετο.

τὸν δὲ Πολίτης

an /
αὐτοκασίγνητος, περὶ μέσσωι χεῖρε τιτήνας,

ἐξῆγεν πολέμοιο δυσηχέος, ὄφρ᾽ ἵκεθ᾽ ἵππους

535

2 , “ἶ e ” / ἠδὲ /
ὠκέας, οἵ οἱ ὄπισθε μάχης ἠδὲ πτολέμοιο

Ὁ ΦΕΥ͂ / \ A x She ky)
εστασαν ηνιοχον TE και αρματα ποικιλ ἔχοντες"

ἮΝ , Ν Ὁ , , ΄,
Ot TOV YE TT pote αστυ φέρον βαρέα στεναχοντα,

/
τειρόμενον: κατὰ δ᾽ αἷμα νεουτάτου ἔρρεε χειρός.

οἱ δ᾽ ἄλλοι μάρναντο, βοὴ δ᾽ ἄσβεστος ὀρώρει.

Αἰνείας δ᾽ ᾿Αφαρῆα Καλητορίδην ἐπορούσας

λαιμὸν TU, ἐπὶ of τετραμμένον, ὀξέϊ δουρί:

ἐκλίνθη δ᾽ ἑτέρωσε κάρη, ἐπὶ δ᾽ ἀσπὶς ἐάφθη

523. Und: ενὶ Syr.: ἐπὶ Mor.
Syr. || opuHeHcan Pap. o.
MECCHN P.
man. Tec.).
AC#L Lips., yp. Par. a:
χαλκῶι H.

524. éepuenoc Vr. A’.
531. ézaveic C.
535. ἐξῆγε πτολέμοιο ().

541. ainefac 0 GQ Par. a f and ἔνιοι ap. Did.: @ne’ ainéac Ar.
éne’ ainefac (2.
543. εκλινεν O Pap. o. || ἐκάφθη (Ὁ.

526. au αλκαϑόωι
532. ὄμβριον CHPR. 534.
537. ποικίλα χαλκῶ D (yp. ἔχοντες

|| Gnopotcac J. 542. ὀξέϊ δουρὶ

523. The idea of the gods sitting
under a canopy of golden clouds on
Olympos is hardly Homeric.

524. The rest of the 711. knows nothing
of this imprisonment of the gods in
Olympos, and the statement is in flat
contradiction to the visit of Poseidon to
the Greek camp. The interpolator seems
to have had an inaccurate recollection
of the beginning of Θ, where the gods
are bidden not to aid the combatants.

526—=496.

530. avA@nic τρυφάλεια, App. B, vii.

531. airunidc, see note on H 59.
532, mpuunoto, near the shoulder ; IL

533. For Polites son of Priam see B
791.
535-38 == 429-32,

539. xelpd6c=arm, not hand, as often :
e.g, A 252, Φ 166.

541, Aivéas, the form approved by
Ar., is not Homeric. Herodianos com-
pares for the synizesis ‘Epuéas, which
only occurs in the dat. ᾿Ἑρμέαι as a
dactyl, E 390; the contracted Ἑρμῆς
is not found earlier than the hymns.
᾿Αφαρῆα, ace. after τύψε.

543. éTépwee, as Θ 306, 308, to one
side, ξάφθη (so most Mss.: Ar. wrote
ἑάφθη, and is followed by ACT), a
doubtful and much disputed word which
recurs only in the similar passage — 419.
It may be referred to ἰάπτω (mpo-lawer,
A 3, etc.) if that is, as seems probable,
F.-Far-7w, conn. with Skt. vap-ami,
throw about, rather than with Lat. iae-io:
H. G.§ 46 note. It will then mean his
shield was hurled upon him. The fall of

IAIAAOC Ν (xii1) 41

\ / Εν \ / e / / a /
καὶ κόρυς, ἀμφὶ δέ οἱ θάνατος χύτο θυμοραϊστής.
᾿Αντίλοχος δὲ Θόωνα μεταστρεφθέντα δοκεύσας 545
ΕΣ ’ > BA ’ \ \ / " »
οὔτασ᾽ ἐπαΐξας, ἀπὸ δὲ φλέβα πᾶσαν ἔκερσεν,
ἥ T ἀνὰ νῶτα θέουσα διαμπερὲς αὐχέν᾽ ἱκάνει"

\ \ “ e ars

τὴν ἀπὸ πᾶσαν ἔκερσεν, ὁ δ᾽ ὕπτιος ἐν κονίηισι
/ - }

κώππεσεν, ἄμφω χεῖρε φίλοις ἑτάροισι πετάσσας.

a h > > , \ » / ᾽ es) ”
Ἀντίλοχος δ᾽ ἐπόρουσε καὶ αἴνυτο τεύχε᾽ ἀπ᾽ ὦμων
Τρῶες δὲ περισταδὸν ἄλλοθεν ἄλλος

7
παπταίνων"

” / > \ / » \ /
οὔταζον σάκος εὐρὺ παναίολον, οὐδὲ δύναντο
Μ BJ / / / Sow na
εἴσω ἐπιγράψαι Tépeva χρόα νηλέϊ χαλκῶι
> / / / . / ᾽ /
Ἀντιλόχου: πέρι yap pa Τ]οσειδάων ἐνοσίχθων
Νέστορος υἱὸν ἔρυτο καὶ ἐν πολλοῖσι βέλεσσιν. 555
> \ / ᾽ ” / > ’ \ > > \
ov μὲν γάρ ToT ἄνευ δήιων ἣν, ἀλλὰ κατ᾽ αὐτοὺς
ἊΝ .9 »5Ὸ 7 δ τὰν ",ἤ 5 > / ’ \ /~? JON
στρωφᾶτ᾽" οὐδέ οἱ ἔγχος ἔχ᾽ ἀτρέμας, ἀλλὰ μάλ᾽ αἰεὶ
, e
σειόμενον ἐλέλικτο: τιτύσκετο δὲ φρεσὶν Tow
e na
ἤ TEV ἀκοντίσσαι ἠὲ σχεδὸν ὁρμηθῆναι.

545. μεταςτραφθϑέντα |’.

Aph. Q.

the ponderous Mykenaean shield upon a
wounded warrior deserves a strong word.
(Note that ἰάπτω in β 376, 6 749 is prob-
ably a different word=hurt: it has no
f, and may be conn. with tWao A 454:
Schulze ᾧ. #. p. 168.) So in Aisch.
Septem 508 we have κεφαλὰν ἰάψειν, drop
the head of a falling warrior. ‘The
ancient commentators and most of the
modern connect the word with ἕπομαι
or ἅπτω (hence writing ἐ- for é-) and
explain shield and helmet clung to him,
followed him in his fall. This gives
ἃ rather more natural sense, but the
form of the verb cannot be satisfactorily
explained.

544. eumopaictHc, also II 414, 580,
591, Σ 220. Acc. to the scholia on Π 414
the grammarian Glaukos read θυμορραί-
a7ns, ἃ form which has been preferred by
Bekker, Lobeck, Nauck, van Leeuwen.
Cf. κυνοραίστης.

546. ἀπό, Zen. διά (and so presum-
ably in 548), which might seem prefer-
able were the text not sufficiently de-
fended by ἀπαμήσειε (or ἀποτμήξειε), Σ
34. φλέβα: it is hardly necessary to
say that no ‘vein’ running up the back
to the neck is known to modern anatom-
ists. Hippokrates, however, appears to
have held the view that there were four
pairs of large veins, of which the first

546. ἀπὸ : διὰ Zen.
553. énirnawar P (RK swpr. man. 1).

551. napactadon Zen.
555. πολλοῖς T. || βελέεςειν ()T.

started from the neck and ran along
both sides of the spine down to the
loins (Buchholz H. ἢ. i. 2. 85: ii. 2.
242). The ancients were not aware that
the arteries contained blood ; so that the
reference is probably not to the carotid
arteries, as we might suppose, but to
the jugular veins. The word φλέψ does
not recur in H,

550. ainuto, here clearly an imperf.,
not an aor. as A 531. Pallis suspects
550-59 on the grounds (1) that a warrior
cannot strip a fallen foe while actually
attacked all round: (2) that εἴσω ém-
γράψαι, graze inwardly, is a self-con-
tradictory expression: (3) the phrases
ἄνευ δήιων and φρεσὶ τιτύσκετο are both
strange. There is much force in these
objections.

554. Tloceiddon, as his ancestor (the
father of Neleus).

556. ἄνευ in sense away from here
only ; elsewhere ἄνευθεν.

557. crpw@at’, a questionable form,
see on Ὁ 666. Nauck reads ἐστρέφετ᾽,
Schulze orpopder’ with lengthening in
the first place; see App. ἢ, c (1). ἔχε,
held its place, cf. 679. The use of ἔχειν
with adverbs as a simple copula is not
Homeric.

558. ἐλέλικτο in the sense shook may
be right here (see on A 580), though

42 IAIAAOC N (xii)

ἀλλ᾽ οὐ AHO ᾿Αδάμαντα τιτυσκόμενος καθ᾽ ὅμιλον

560

᾿Ασιάδην, ὅς of οὗτα μέσον σάκος ὀξέϊ χαλκῶι
id 5 \
ἐγγύθεν ὁρμηθείς: ἀμενήνωσεν δέ οἱ αἰχμὴν
an / /
κυανοχαῖτα Iloceddwv, βιότοιο peynpas.

rn an? A an /
καὶ TO μὲν αὐτοῦ μεῖν ὥς TE σκῶλος πυρίικαυστος

nr? /
ἐν σάκει ᾿Αντιλόχοιο, τὸ δ᾽ ἥμισυ κεῖτ᾽ ἐπὶ γαίης" 565
aS
dw δ᾽ ἑτάρων εἰς ἔθνος ἐχάζετο Kip ἀλεείνων"
,ὔ a] > hi / / \
Μηριόνης δ᾽ ἀπιόντα μετασπόμενος βάλε δουρὶ

5 fa} , /
αἰδοίων τε μεσηγὺ Kal ὀμφαλοῦ, ἔνθα μάλιστα

γίνετ᾽ "Ἄρης ἀλεγεινὸς ὀϊζυροῖσι βροτοῖσιν.

ἔνθά οἱ
5 Ψ
ἤσπαιρ

ἰλλάσιν

” 7 e \ / \ \
ἔγχος ἔπηξεν: ὁ δὲ σπόμενος περὶ δουρὶ

560. τιτυσκόμενον P (S supr.).
ἁμενήνηςεν PR.

148. 3. 565. γαίη(ι) CHPR Pap. o Lips.
(πάντοςε . . ἐπαύρηι).
rirneT L.

LOS.)

561. χαλκῶι: Boupi A supr.
564. σκῶλον nupikaucton R (supr. ¢ over each n), Ap. Lex.

567. After this J adds 543 (ἐκλίνθη .
570. Secyduenoc U (decyd U? or 115 in ras.): 0° Ecxduenoc P (Xx in
ἐν ἄλλωι cxduenoc A (wrongly appended to 567).

570

εἰ rn > /
ὡς ὅτε βοῦς, τόν τ᾽ οὔρεσι βουκόλοι ἄνδρες
> 5 / / / ΕΣ
οὐκ ἐθέλοντα βίηι δήσαντες ἄγουσιν"

562.

566. After this D™ Harl. a™ add 649
. ἐάφϑθη). 569.

572. iceAdcin P. ||

ϑαμάςαντες Lips. || Gracin RU Pap. o, Vr. Ὁ".

Bentley would read ἐέλικτο (FeFéX.) was
brandished. The ictus is sufficient to
account for the lengthening of the -ον,
without the need of a F. The addition
of φρεεί to TITUckeTo is unique in H. ;
the verb is elsewhere used only in the
purely physical sense, as in 560.

561. ὅς oi, a very rare neglect of F in
ἔοι. Most editors read 6 οἱ, which Ar.
had in a 300 against the consensus of
our Mss., but Platt’s és F’ is better ; F’
may represent either Fe or ἔοι.

563. βιότοιο μεγήρας, grudging Ada-
mas (or it, the spear personified) the life
of Antilochos. Though the expression
is ambiguous, this gives a better sense
than the alternative ‘grudging to Adamas
(the preservation of) his life.’ The gen.
comes under the class of those which go
with verbs of anger, etc., H. G. § 151.
c; lit. ‘being jealous about his life,’
and may be compared with the common
construction φθονεῖν τινί τινος, as ¢ 68
οὔ τοι ἡμιόνων φθονέω, and Attic examples
which will be found in Lexx. ; and so
Aisch. Prom. 626 ἀλλ᾽ οὐ peyaipw τοῦδέ
σοι δωρήματος. For other constr. of
μεγαίρω see Ψ 865. κυανοχαῖτα, an
epithet of Poseidon only, except in T
224 of Boreas in the form of a horse.
In the vagueness of Homeric colour-
words it may mean only dark-haired ;

but blue-haired is appropriate to a god
of the blue sea, and Triton on a well-
known archaic pediment in Athens has
a beard painted bright blue.

564, TO μέν, a constr. ad sensum after
αἰχμή, cf. E140, A 238, 6508. εκῶλος,
cf. σκόλοψ, “ἃ stake.’ of yap ἄγροικοι
ἀποξύνοντες τὰ ξύλα πυρακτοῦσι TO ἄκρον,
ὅπως πιληθὲν (compressed) εἴη στερρότερον
[χρῶνται δὲ αὐτῶι ἀντὶ αἰχμῆς], Schol. A.
The last words seem to be a mistaken
addition. The meaning is that the
stump of the spear sticks in the shield
like a post driven into the ground, with
the end charred to prevent rotting; a
precaution which is still habitual.

569. “Apuc, the fortune of war: see
on 444.

570, δὲ cndmENOC, MSS. δ᾽ ἑσπόμενος :
see note on E 423. περί goes closely
with σπόμενος, taking the place of the
usual dua with ἕπεσθαι, lit. attached
to the spear round about. But the
phrase is properly used of a spear
when pulled out of a wound; and for
Hicnaip’ we should have expected ἤρυγεν
as in Tf 404 (Pallis).

572. ἰλλάςιν, twisted ropes (from Fel-
New) whether of thongs or withies: τοῖς ἐξ
ἱμάντων σχοινίοις, Schol. B. οὐκ ἐθέλοντα
Bini ἃ pleonastic expression, like Pinu
ἀέκοντος, ἀέκοντα Bint, A 430, etc.

IAIAAOC N (χη) 43

\ ᾽ / / ” 7 ΄
ὡς ὁ τυπεὶς ἤσπαιρε μίνυνθά περ, οὔ τι μάλα δήν,
” ΄ . > \ ” > ΄ > > / > Ν
ὄφρά οἱ ἐκ χροὸς ἔγχος ἀνεσπάσατ᾽ ἐγγύθεν ἐλθὼν

/
ἥρως Μηριόνης"

“ “ ᾽ ’
Δηΐπυρον δ᾽ “Enevos ξίφεϊ σχεδὸν ἤλασε κόρσην
Θρηϊκίωι μεγάλωι, ἀπὸ δὲ τρυφάλειαν ἄραξεν.
ἡ μὲν ἀποπλαγχθεῖσα χαμαὶ πέσε, καί τις ᾿Αχαιῶν
μαρναμένων μετὰ ποσσὶ κυλινδομένην ἐκόμισσε"
τὸν δὲ κατ᾽ ὀφθαλμῶν ἐρεβεννὴ νὺξ ἐκάλυψεν. 580
᾿Ατρεΐδην δ᾽ ἄγος εἷλε, βοὴν ἀγαθὸν Μενέλαον,
Pelon x 7) γῇ
a > 5 ΄ ¢ / Ὁ “ »
βῆ δ᾽ ἐπαπειλήσας “EXévar ἥρωϊ ἄνακτι
ὀξὺ δόρυ κραδάων: ὁ δὲ τόξου πῆχυν ἀνεῖλκε.
\ 7 AF ἃ / ς \ » a /
τὼ δ᾽ ἄρ ὁμαρτήδην ὁ μὲν ἔγχεϊ ὀξυόεντι
ier ἀκοντίσσαι, ὁ δ᾽ ἀπὸ νευρῆφιν ὀϊστῶι" 585
Πριαμίδης μὲν ἔπειτα Kata στῆθος βάλεν ἰῶι
, - /
θώρηκος γύαλον, ἀπὸ δ᾽ ἔπτατο πικρὸς ὀϊστός.

or
-.-
or

\ / /
Tov δὲ σκότος ὄσσε κάλυψε.

3 , 4. ks \
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἀπὸ πλατέος πτυόφιν μεγάλην KAT ἀλωὴν

573. Ecnaipe HR. 574, χροὸς: χερὸς 1, (P!?): χειρὸς D. 511. ῥῆξεν Ὁ
(yp. Gpazen). 578. anonAayeetca Lips. Vr. A. 580. dpeahuotc ἢ: ὀφθαλμὸν
ΠῚ 583. ἀνέλκε PR (A has ἀνεῖλκεν). 584. ὁμαρτήδην Ar.: ἁμαρ-
THTHN R Pap. o and ap. Did. (Sch. ΤῊ: ὁμαρτείτην J Par. d: ὁμαρτήτην ).

585. ἀπαὶ L. 587. amo: dia PR. 588. μεγάλων (). || Kae’ ἁλωὴν ὃ.

573. τυπείς, only of wounds given by
a thrust, ace. to the canon of Ar. ; who
must therefore have read δαμείς, as Lehrs
points out (47. p. 54), as in this case
the spear is cast, 567. For the whole
line οἵ, χ 473.

577. The ‘ Thracian sword’ of Astero-
paios is landed in Ψ 808. The Thracians
seem to have had an early reputation
as metal-workers (K 438, Ὦ 234; Hel-
big H. £. pp. 7-14), and were evidently
traders. ‘There is no reason to suppose
that the Thracian sword was of a differ-
ent shape or size from the ordinary
Homeric Weapon, as the Scholiasts do
(μόνοι yap ἐν βαρβάροις οἱ Θρᾶικες μεγίστοις
ξίφεσι χρῶνται, A); μέγα is ἃ regular
epithet of the sword. The fact “that
Livy (xxxi. 39) mentions javelins ingentis
longitudinis, called romphaeae or rum-
piae, as in use among the Thracians,
obviously proves nothing. Another in-
genious and very probable conjecture as
to the origin of the epithet will be found
am App. B, ix. 1.

579. μαρναμένων μετὰ ποςεί, cf. =
411.

582. ἥρωϊ ἄνακτι, an unusual phrase,

not analogous to o 117 Φαίδιμος ἥρως,
Σιδονίων βασιλεύς.

583. See on A 375.

584. ὁμαρτήδην, so apparently Ar. (or
ἁμαρτήδην Σ Lehrs Ar. p. 301); Mss.
ὁμαρτήτην OY ἁμαρτήτην, a genuine old
form (H. Οὐ. ὃ 19) against which there
is nothing to be said, except that in
similar passages τὼ δέ is commonly
without a verb, being followed by ὁ μὲν

ὁ δέ in distributive apposition (H
306, etc.) ; the asyndeton after ὁμαρτήτην,
though harsh, might be regarded as
‘explicative.’ The adverbial form does
not recur.

585. ἀπὸ νευρῆφιν goes attributively
with ὀϊστῶι, as A 476 i&e ἀπὸ νευρῆς.
Cf. 8 309. The couplet 584-85 is mere
tautology (Pallis).

586. ἔπειτα, therewpon, merely brings
the new sentence into immediate connex-
ion with what precedes, without having
as iar the full sense μετὰ ταῦτα. (So
Schol. A, contradicting a note of An.
which arent precedes.) Cf. T 113.

588. πτυόφιν, Ahrens needlessly reads
mrvoo; the instrumental form here
supplies the lost ablative, as elsewhere

44 IAIAAOC Ν (x11)

θρώισκωσιν κύαμοι peravoxpoes ἢ ἐρέβινθοι

πνοιῆι ὕπο λυιγυρῆι καὶ λικμητῆρος ἐρωῆι,

590

ὡς ἀπὸ θώρηκος Μενελάου κυδαλίμοιο

> » - /
πολλὸν ἀποπλαγχθεὶς ἑκὰς ἔπτατο πικρὸς ὀϊστός.
᾿Ατρεΐδης δ᾽ ἄρα χεῖρα, βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Μενέλαος,
Α͂Ρ » > /
τὴν βάλεν ie ῥ᾽ ἔχε τόξον ἐύξοον: ἐν δ᾽ ἄρα τόξωι

ἀντικρὺ διὰ χειρὸς ἐλήλατο χάλκεον ἔγχος.

595

av δ᾽ ἑτάρων εἰς ἔθνος ἐχάζετο κῆρ᾽ ἀλεείνων,

χεῖρα παρακρεμάσας" τὸ δ᾽ ἐφέλκετο μείλινον ἔγχος.

καὶ τὸ μὲν ἐκ χειρὸς ἔρυσεν μεγάθυμος ᾿Αγήνωρ,
Sen \ / > / \ Ye 72

αὐτὴν δὲ ξυνέδησεν ἐυστρόφωι οἰὸς ἀώτωι,

σφενδόνην ἣν ἄρα οἱ θεράπων ἔχε ποιμένι λαῶν. 600
Πείσανδρος δ᾽ ἰθὺς Μενελάου κυδαλίμοιο

589. ϑρώεκουςι(Νν) CGHPRT.
Vr. Ὁ ἃ A Lips.: dnondareeic P.

apa Tozou Pap. o. || τόξωι: χαλκῶ H.

598. χειρῶν (). 599. éuctpegel Ar.

590. ὑπαὶ LRS.
594. ἧι: ἥ CGHPS and τινές Did. || ex ὃ

592. ἀποπλαχϑεὶς Pap. o,

597. μείλινον : χάλκεον Vr. A.
601. neicandopon Pap. o.

the locative. πτύον is the shovel by
which the grain to be winnowed is
tossed into the air (prob. =aé6npndovyds
of \ 128). For the simile and for the
orthography of ἀλωή see H 499.

590. πνοιῆι and ἐρωῆι seem to be com-
bined by hendiadys, the keen breeze
caused by the effort of the winnower
with the fan.

594, ἧι, taken by Ar. to mean where,
as M 389. This seems to require τῆς
for τήν, and so Nauck and von Christ read,
without authority. It is far simpler to
take ἧι as referring to χειρός, in which.
The variant ἥ is of course equally possible.

599. ἐυστρόφωι, so all MSS., as in 716:
in O 463 and Od. the form ἐυστρεφής
is certain, and on this analogy Ar. read
ἐυστρεφεῖ both times in this book. But
the double stem is familiar enough ;
ἐυεργής and évepyos coexist (though in
different senses), ἐυπλεκής and ἐύπλεκτος,
ἐυρρεής and é’ppoos. Cf. also nom.
δίπτυχος, dat. δίπτυχι, Epinpos, pl. ἐρίηρες.
There is, therefore, no good reason for
rejecting the tradition.

600. σφενϑόνηι, a word which does
not recur in H. ; nor is the sling any-
where mentioned as a weapon unless, on
the strength of the present passage, we
find it in the ἐυστρόφωι olds ἀώτωι of
716. The context there obliges us to
understand it either of slings, or of

bowstrings, or, with Povelsen, of ‘close-
woven woollen jerkins.’ The latter is
excluded by the words οἷσιν tappéa βάλ-
λοντες (718), which can hardly apply to
τόξοισιν only. Bowstrings, too, would not
be made of wool, however well twisted,
so long as sinews could be had (A 118,
etc.) ; wool could not stand the strain
of a bow. We conclude, therefore, that
slings are alluded to in 716, and that
σφενδόνη here is to be taken in its usual
sense. Even if it meant only ‘bandage’
here (as in Hippokrates it means a
surgical sling) the sense could only be
secondary, and would imply a knowledge
of the weapon. And we know that
slings were employed in Mykenaean war-
fare from the famous siege-scene on the
silver bowl, vol. i. p. 572. There is,
therefore, no reason on this ground for
doubting the present passage ; the rarity
of allusion to the sling is doubtless due
to the fact that it was the weapon of
the despised light-armed soldier, and
therefore beneath the notice of the heroic
poet. But it must be admitted that
600 is added very awkwardly, and has
all the appearance of a gloss, though
probably enough a correct one. ol. .
ποιμένι λαῶν is not in the Epic style,
and the nameless θεράπων seems to be
a common soldier ; the Homeric θεράπων
is a brother-in-arms, a hero like his
chief.

IAIAAOC N (χιπ) 45

Mew Ν > »Μ Lal \ / / o
ἤϊε: τὸν δ᾽ ἄγε μοῖρα κακὴ θανάτοιο τέλοσδε,
/ / fol , > -“ “ -“
σοί, Μενέλαε, δαμῆναι ἐν αἰνῆι δηϊοτῆτι.
΄ > “ \ Ν a 4.88 > ,ὔ 7
οἱ δ᾽ ὅτε δὴ σχεδὸν ἦσαν ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλοισιν ἰόντες,
᾿Ατρεΐδης μὲν ἅμαρτε, παραὶ δέ οἱ ἐτράπετ᾽ ἔγχος, 605
Πείσανδρος δὲ σάκος Μενελάου κυδαλίμοιο
” 7Q\ \ / 4 /
οὕτασεν, οὐδὲ διαπρὸ δυνήσατο χαλκὸν ἐλάσσαι"
» \ ΄ > / / ᾽ ΣΝ “-
ἔσχεθε γὰρ σάκος εὐρύ, κατεκλάσθη δ᾽ ἐνὶ καυλῶι
Μ ¢ \ \ e / \ "4. /
ἔγχος" ὁ δὲ φρεσὶν ἧισι χάρη καὶ ἐέλπετο νίκην.
oh / 4
᾿Ατρεΐδης δὲ ἐρυσσάμενος ξίφος ἀργυρόηλον 610
} ΄ ΄
avr ἐπὶ ΠΠεισάνδρωι: ὁ δ᾽ ὑπ᾽ ἀσπίδος εἵλετο καλὴν
ἀξίνην ἐύχαλκον, ἐλαΐνων ἀμφὶ πελέκκωι
lal 9
μακρῶι ἐυξέστωι: ἅμα δ᾽ ἀλλήλων ἐφίκοντο.
/
ἤτοι ὁ μὲν κόρυθος φάλον ἤλασεν ἱπποδασείης
/ ¢€ /
ἄκρον ὑπὸ λόφον αὐτόν, ὁ δὲ προσιόντα μέτωπον 615
> e »
ῥινὸς ὕπερ πυμάτης: λάκε δ᾽ ὀστέα, τὼ δέ οἱ ὄσσε
/
Tap ποσὶν αἱματόεντα χαμαὶ πέσον ἐν κονίηισιν,
ἰδνώθη δὲ πεσών. ὁ δὲ λὰξ ἐν στήθεσι βαίνων
᾽ / ”
τεύχεά τ᾽ ἐξενάριξε καὶ εὐχόμενος ἔπος ηὔδα:

602-6 om. Pap. ο. 604. 605. napa GP Lips. Vr. A. 608.
écyeto HJPST Pap. o, Harl. a, yp. A. 609. ἐέλπετο AGQTU Pap. o, Harl. a,
Par. h: ἔλπετο 2. || μέγα 0’ ἥλπετο (Sch. A: ἔλπετο Sch. ΤῊ Zen. 610. δὲ:
και Pap. o. || Ξίφος ἀργυρόηλον : χείρεςει udyaipan Zen. 613. ἀφίκοντο ἢ]
and ap. Eust.: ἀφικέσϑθην (Sch. A: €pixéceHn Sch. T) Aph.: agixeceon others
(Did.). 615. ὑπαὶ GLR: ὑπὲρ Ap. Lew. 109. 5. 617. aiuatdente Par. d*, ap.
Eust. and Sch, BLT. || mécon Ar. 2: nécen ap. Did. 619. οἰχόμενος (ἱ.

608. Ecxeee, seeon 163. The question πέλεται If 814. The same exception

between aor. and imperf. here turns on
whether we take cdxoc as acc., he was
holding his shield, or nom., the shield
stopped it. There can be no doubt that
the latter is preferable (cf. M 184): the
former does not need stating. ἔσχεθε
is therefore aor.—unless we adopt the
variant ἔσχετο. καυλῶι, see on 162.

609. The readings of Zen. in this line
and the next are both wrong ; the former
on account of the F of FéAmoua, the
latter because the μάχαιρα is never a
weapon in H., but only a sacrificial
knife. See on I’ 271, Σ 597.

611. The position of the epithet καλήν
at the end of a line agreeing with a sub-
stantive in the next is not Homeric.
Hence Lehrs (47. p. 450) suggests καλῆς.
See also on IL 104. The cases where the
adjective forms part of the predicate are
of course different : e.g. καλὸν | εἶδος ἔπ᾽
Γ 44, ἔνθα πάχιστος | μυὼν ἀνθρώπου

applies to πάντες, θαμειάς (M 44, Σ 68
ἄκρος (M 51, O 653, P 264).

612. ἀξίνη, a weapon mentioned again
only in O 711, of which we can there-
fore give no account. The scholia sug-
gest that Peisandros carries it in view of
the attack upon the ships. The axe
was a familiar weapon in Mykenaian
times, and in the ‘‘ Karian”’ double form
was a most important religious symbol
(A. J. Evans in J. H. S. xxi. 99 ἢ).
πελέκκωι, handle, here only; for the
form cf. ἡμιπέλεκκα Ψ 851, on the
analogy of which Heyne suggests ἐλάϊνον
ἀμφιπέλεκκον here. ‘pe

613. ἀλλήλων, the ordinary genitive
of the goal reached, as with τυγχάνω, ete.

617. The actual ‘falling out’ of the
eyes does not seem to be a possible effect
of a single blow on the forehead, though
the eyeballs might be burst.

618. idncen, cf. B 266, M 205.

40 IAIAAOC Ν (πη)

δ “-
“λείψετέ θην οὕτω γε νέας Δαναῶν ταχυπώλων, 620

a n / an
Τρῶες ὑπερφίαλοι, δεινῆς ἀκόρητοι ἀυτῆς.
ἄλλης μὲν λώβης τε καὶ αἴσχεος οὐκ ἐπιδευεῖς,
ἣν ἐμὲ λωβήσασθε, κακαὶ κύνες, οὐδέ τι θυμῶι
Ζηνὸς ἐριβρεμέτεω χαλεπὴν ἐδδείσατε μῆνιν

ε > / /

Eewiov, ὅς τέ ποτ᾽ ὔὕμμι διαφθέρσει πόλιν αὐπήν" 625
“ / » \ / \
οἵ μευ κουριδίην ἄλοχον Kal κτήματα πολλὰ

\ ” ᾽ > / 5 \ / 5 ΟἹ an
μὰψ οἴχεσθ᾽ ἀνάγοντες, ἐπεὶ φιλέεσθε παρ᾽ αὐτῆι"

la Lo) /
νῦν αὖτ᾽ ἐν νηυσὶν μενεαίνετε ποντοπόροισι

lal lal J
πῦρ ὀλοὸν βαλέειν, κτεῖναι δ᾽ ἥρωας ᾿Αχαιούς.
ἀλλά ποθι σχήσεσθε καὶ ἐσσύμενοί περ “Apnos. 630
Led πάτερ, 7 τέ σέ φασι περὶ φρένας ἔμμεναι ἄλλων,
> an > \ ἴω / ’ 5 tf Uf /
ἀνδρῶν ἠδὲ θεῶν, σέο δ᾽ ἐκ τάδε πάντα πέλονται"

623. AwBrcecee Ph. || κακοὶ HJ (87. αι) ὃ. Mor. Vr. A.

620. λήψετε Vr. A”.
625. noe Guu DHQT. || αἰπῆν : αὐτήν

624. ἐριβρεμέτω J. || édeicate R.
C Lips. (yp. αἰπῆν). 626.
πάντα Ven. B.
Ar. διχῶς. ||
φρένα lL.

αὐτῆς

καὶ κτήμαθ᾽ ἅμ᾽ αὐτῆ A. ||
Zen. || Map’: περ A supr. and lemma: .

ἐν ἄλλωι

627. ofxeceon ἄγοντες
DS Par. f. 628.

πολλὰ:

νῦν δ᾽ H. 630. note R. 631.

620. For λείψετε one Ms. has λήψετε,
which would add to the irony of the
passage if such an active form of the fut.
of λαμβάνω were possible. It is, however,
no doubt merely an itacistic mistake.

622. As the text stands we must
either supply ἐστέ with ἐπιθϑευεῖς or
place a comma instead of a full stop
after ἀυτῆς. The analogy of I 225 is
in favour of the former; but the con-
tracted -e?s is suspicious in both cases,
and here also either ἐπιδευές or ἐπιδεύει
is probably right. The connexion of
thought in the speech apparently is
‘you have been full of wickedness
already, and now you add to it by
attempting to burn the ships and slay
the Achaians’; μέν being answered by
atte in 628. ‘his is rather like an
anti-climax, and Payne Knight is per-
haps right in rejecting the whole of the
speech from 623. In any case the latter
part, from 634, cannot be defended.

623. ἣν ἐμέ, for the double acc. of the
external and internal object see H. G.
S$ 132, 135. κύων is generally mase. ;
possibly therefore κακαί may contain a
taunt like ᾿Αχαιίδες, οὐκέτ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοί.
ἄκρως τῶι θηλυκῶι ἐχρήσατο εἰς τὴν
ἀνανδρίαν τῶν βαρβάρων Schol. T.

625. Observe the emphasis on Ξεινίου
due to its position ; so also e 271, ὃ 57.

ainHn, an anomalous form for αἰπεῖαν.
Nauck suggests αἰπύν, which is likely
to be right, as -vs is not unfrequently
used as a fem. termination; see H. G.
§ 116. 4.

627. ἀνάγοντες, a verb which is often
applied, as Ar. remarked, to the voyage
from Greece to Troy (Lehrs 47. p. 111).
Zen. read οἴχεσθον ἄγοντες, by which, as
An. says, τὸ δυϊκὸν συγχεῖται ἐπὶ πολλῶν
τασσόμενον (see on A 567). φιλέεςθε,
were entertained, as I’ 207, 354, Z 15,
ete. The gravamen of the offence lay
in the outrage on the laws of hospitality.

680. "Ἄρηος may go either with σχή-
σεσθε or with ἐσσύμενοι, but better with
the former ; see on 315.

631. From here to the end of the
speech is generally regarded as an inter-
polation. To be unwearied in war is not
a reproach which is likely to touch an
enemy, nor is success in battle a sign of
ὕβρις. 'The whole passage seems an ex-
pansion of δεινῆς ἀκόρητοι ἀυτῆς in 621,
which is of course not a taunt (‘although
ye be insatiate’), by means of the common-
places in 631-37, of which the last is
found again in y 145. Perhaps, how-
ever, the athetesis should begin only
with 634. U8picrAici will then, instead
of referring to what follows, more fitly
repeat the thought of 622.

IAIAAOC Ν (xu) 47

οἷον δὴ ἄνδρεσσι yapifear ὑβριστῆισι,
Τρωσίν, τῶν μένος αἰὲν ἀτάσθαλον, οὐδὲ δύνανται

φυλόπιδος κορέσασθαι ὁμοιίου πολέμοιο.

πάντων μὲν κόρος ἐστί, καὶ ὕπνου καὶ φιλότητος
μολπῆς τε γλυκερῆς καὶ ἀμύμονος ὀρχηθμοῖο,

a , \ A γ7 > » e
τῶν πέρ τις καὶ μᾶλλον ἐέλδεται ἐξ ἔρον εἷναι
x , fal \ / eZ ” »”

ἢ πολέμου: Τρῶες δὲ μάχης ἀκόρητοι ἔασιν.

ἃ Tara \ \ ” rae [OK \ e /
@MS εὐπὼν TA μὲν EVTE ATO χροος αιματοεντα

640

συλήσας ἑτάροισι δίδου Μενέλαος ἀμύμων,

> \ > 93 > r ὟΝ / > /
αὐτὸς δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ἐξαῦτις ἰὼν προμάχοισιν ἐμίχθη.

ἔνθά οἱ υἱὸς ἐπᾶλτο ΤΠυλαιμένεος βασιλῆος
“Αρπαλίων, ὅ pa πατρὶ φίλωι ἕπετο πτολεμίξων

ἐς Τροίην, οὐδ᾽ αὗτις ἀφίκετο πατρίδα γαῖαν"

645

“ « ΨΩ, of / / » \
ὅς pa τότ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδαο μέσον σάκος οὔτασε δουρὶ
> / > Ν Ν / \ > /
ἐγγύθεν, οὐδὲ διαπρὸ δυνήσατο χαλκὸν ἐλάσσαι,
ΕΝ > c / > Μ » / n_? > 4
ay ὃ ἑτάρων εἰς ἔθνος ἐχάζετο κῆρ ἀλεείνων,
/ “-
πάντοσε παπταίνων μή τις χρόα χαλκῶι ἐπαύρηι.
Μηριόνης δ᾽ ἀπιόντος ἵει χαλκήρε᾽ ὀϊστὸν 65

633. UBpictHpc Lips.

639. ἀκόρεετοι L (supr. HT).
Vr. A: αὖ HR. || é=adeic C.

635. duoioio Vr. A.
περισσὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι φασί τινες Schol. T.

641. ἑτάροις Edidou C.
643. κυλαιμένεος Zen. 7

πτολέμοιο DHORTU. 637.
638. πέρ: κεν Lips. Ven. B,
642. αὖτ᾽ om. DJPT
See Ludwich. 644, 0:

ὅς D. || mToNeuizoon U Harl. a: πολεμίξων ὦ) : πολεμίζων HPST: πολεμίζειν J,

yp. Lips.: πτολεμίζων 22.

J. || ἀτρείϑεο T. 648. xazetoS. 649

645 om. Τὺ (ins. Rhosos in marg.). |
. χαλκῶι: καλὸν ὦ.

αὖὗϑις. 646. ὥς ῥα
650. ὃ᾽ om. Pap. ο.

633. οἷον Ox regularly follows an
exclamation of reproach, applying it to
the particular instance in question: P
587, ® 57, € 183, λ 429: even as now.

637. μολπῆς acc. to Ar. meant only
sport or dance, not song. But though
the former sense is required in ¢ 101,
where it is applied to the game of ball
at which Nausikaa plays, yet here, in an
enumeration of sensual pleasures, it is
not likely that music should be entirely
omitted, and a word used which is hardly
distinguished from the following ὀρχη-
θμός. So in a 152, with its context, and
@ 430, μολπή clearly implies music.
The simple explanation is that the
word is exactly similar to our ‘ play,’ in
having both a more general application
to any sport (as in μέλπηθρα, δήιωι μέλ-
πεσθαι “Apni, H 241, ete.) and a special
sense in connexion with music, as here
and A 474, q.v. (See Lehrs Ar. 138 ff.)
Some critics rejected the line altogether
as superfluous. Cf. Pindar NW. vii. 53

κόρον δ᾽ ἔχει kal μέλι καὶ τὰ τέρπν᾽ ἄνθε᾽
᾿Αφροδίσια.

638. ἐξ Epon εἶναι, i.e. to enjoy to
satiety, as in the familiar ἐξ ἔρον ἕντο.
The infin. of the aor. does not recur,
but the act. in place of the mid. is found
also in Q 227.

640. τὰ μέν is pronominal, in anti-
thesis to αὐτὸς δέ, not the article. Cf.
on A 11.

644, πτολεμίξων : most MSS. πίτ)ολε-
μίζων, but the fut. is clearly best, and
the evidence of Mss. between ¢ and € is
of little weight, see App. Crit. on B 328,
K 451, O 179, Q 667. The variant
πολεμίζειν is quite admissible, and may
have contributed to the confusion, which
is, however, essentially graphic.

649. The subj. after the historic tense
is so rare in H. that we ought perhaps
to read ἐπαύροι with G. Hermann, in
spite of mss. (H. G. § 298).

650. ἀπιόντος, gen. of aim, see 613,
etc.

48 IAIAAOC N (x11)

/ de \
καί ῥ᾽ ἔβαλε γλουτὸν κάτα δεξιόν: αὐτὰρ ὀϊστὸς

ἀντικρὺ κατὰ κύστιν ὑπ᾽ ὀστέον ἐξεπέρησεν.

ἑζόμενος δὲ κατ᾽ αὖθι, φίλων ἐν χερσὶν ἑταίρων

θυμὸν ἀποπνείων, ὥς τε σκώληξ ἐπὶ yaine

κεῖτο tabels: ἐκ δ᾽ αἷμα μέλαν ῥέε, Sede δὲ γαῖαν. 655

τὸν μὲν Παφλαγόνες μεγαλήτορες ἀμφεπένοντο,

ΘΕᾺ,
ἐς δίφρον δ᾽ ἀνέσαντες ἄγον προτὶ Ἴλιον ἱρὴν
/
ἀχνύμενοι: μετὰ δέ σφι πατὴρ κίε δάκρυα λείβων,
ποινὴ δ᾽ οὔ τις παιδὸς ἐγίνετο τεθνηῶτος.

τοῦ δὲ Πάρις μάλα θυμὸν ἀποκταμένοιο χολώθη"

660

n \ /
ξεῖνος γάρ of ἔην πολέσιν μετὰ Ilapdayovecou:
an , of / > de /
τοῦ ὅ γε χωόμενος προΐει χαλκὴρε οἶστον.

ἣν δέ τις Εὐχήνωρ ΠΠολυΐδου μάντιος υἱός,

ἀφνειός τ᾽ ἀγαθὸς τε, ἹΚορινθόθι οἰκία ναίων,

651. pa βαλε Pap. o.

652. κατὰ : διὰ At,
Sch. BLT. || 0° om. A. || ἀναθέντες Ap. Rhod. || ποτὶ RS Vr. A.

657. ἀθετεῖται (by Ar. 2)
658-9. ὁ

᾿Αριστοφάνης ἀθετεῖ, ὁ δὲ ᾿Αρίσταρχος ἢ ἀθετεῖν φησι δεῖν ἢ ὁμωνυμίαν νομίζειν,

Sch. T. 658. δέ supr. οὔ Par. 1:
μετὰ 0° οὔ cp πατήρ Sch. A.
τεθνειῶτος {).
χωόμενον G.

ἔνιοι πιθανῶς (ἀπιθάνως Cobet) μεταγράφουσι
659. ἐγίγνετο L. || τεθνηῶτος (A 81:97.) JPRT:

660. μάλα: μέγα J. || ἀποκταμένοι᾽ ἐχολώθη P. 662.
663. πολυείδου ()S Syr.

|| μάντεος LL.

652. ὑπ᾽ ὀστέον, apparently through
the middle of the pelvis.

657. ἀνέςαντες, seating him, as ὃ 280
és δίφρον δέ μ᾽ ἕσας ἄγεν οἴκαδε, from ced
root of ἵζω (see also note on T 280). As
this word appeared unsuitable to a corpse,
Ap. Rhodius read ἀναθέντες.

658-59. Pylaimenes, king of the Paph-
lagonians, the father in question, has
already been killed, E 576 (where see
note). Various remedies were proposed
to remedy the undeniable contradiction ;
Aph. had recourse to the obvious athetesis
of the couplet; Ar. did so reluctantly,
unless it could be supposed that this
Pylaimenes was another man of the
same name (which is obviously out of
the question) ; Zen. read ἸΚυλαιμένεος in
643; others explained that it was the
spirit of the dead man which followed
the bier ; others again boldly read δ᾽ οὔ σφι
for δέ σφι (cf. on 1 453). But the contra-
diction, though glaring enough, is really
far less vital than many others which
are less obvious.

659. not, blood-wite, compare the
phrase νήποινοι ὄλοισθε a 380, β 145.
For a man to die and have no blood-

money or vengeance exacted by his family
was a disgrace, for it brought him to the
level of the worthless wretches who, as
in the Icelandic sagas, were outlaws on
account of their misdeeds, and might be
killed without payment. The death of
Harpalion is in fact at once avenged by
Paris when he slays Euchenor ; but the
price is not paid by Meriones himself.

661. nodécin, out of all the multitude
of Paphlagonians it was with him that
he had the closest tie.

663. For the name Πολύϊϑος cf. E
148, where it again occurs in connexion
with soothsaying. Pherekydes ap.
Schol. T here makes him a member of
the prophetic race of Melampus (his
great-great-grandson), The long ¢ is
explained by Schulze (Q. Z. p. 118) after
Wackernagel as from modvFidFos. The
variant Πολύειδος, though found in a
few Mss. and preferred by many recent
scholars, is not supported by inscriptions
and does not explain the Attic form in
-idos (e.g. in the play of Sophokles Πολύ-
ἴδος ἢ Μάντεις : see frag. 462 ὁρῶ πρὸ
χειρῶν ἸΤολυΐδου τοῦ μάντεωϑ).

664. Kopinedei, see notes on B 570,
Z 162.

"

;

᾿ς NHUCIN: xepcIN Dap. o.

IAIAAOC N (χη) 49

“ > 3\ γ΄... read » \ » \ \ Μ)
oS ρ εὖ εἰδὼς κῆρ᾽ ὀλοὴν ἐπὶ νηὸς ἔβαινε.

πολλάκι γάρ οἱ ἔειπε γέρων ἀγαθὸς Llodvidos
΄ [δον λοι 4 ΄, ? ? ,
νούσωι ὑπ᾽ ἀργαλέην φθίσθαι οἷς ἐν μεγάροισιν,
ἢ pet ᾿Αχαιῶν νηυσὶν ὑπὸ Τρώεσσι δαμῆναι"
cal £3 Ὁ ,’ > / \ , / > -“"
τῶ ῥ᾽ ἅμα T ἀργαλέην θωὴν ἀλέεινεν ᾿Αχαιῶν

fol / / A \ / “ “-
νοῦσόν τε στυγερήν, ἵνα μὴ πάθοι ἄλγεα θυμῶι.

670

τὸν Bar ὑπὸ γναθμοῖο καὶ οὔατος: ὦκα δὲ θυμὸς

ὦιχετ᾽ ἀπὸ μελέων, στυγερὸς δ᾽ ἄρα μιν σκότος εἷλεν.
ὡς οἱ μὲν μάρναντο δέμας πυρὸς αἰθομένοιο"

Ἕκτωρ δ᾽ οὐκ ἐπέπυστο διίφιλος, οὐδέ τι ἤιδη

“ Ὁ ον ΄ a sen Ἃς. 5 \ AW
OTTL pe Ol VNWV Ἐπ aplaTEepa δηϊόωντο

λαοὶ ὑπ᾽ ᾿Αργείων: «τάχα δ᾽ ἂν καὶ κῦδος ᾿Αχαιῶν
ἔπλετο: τοῖος γὰρ γαιήοχος ἐννοσίγαιος

Μ 3 ᾽ Va \ \ / > \ ”

ὦτρυν ᾿Αργείους, πρὸς δὲ σθένει αὐτὸς ἄμυνεν'

cTurepon S.

670. naex(1) 1 (Ὁ 5. Lips.
674. Hider CG Cant. Vr. b! A.

668.
672. anai L.
679. ἐπᾶλτο Vr. b.

667. geicea, aor. where we should
have expected the fut. It has been
suggested that 666 may be taken par-
enthetically, so that φθίσθαι will be
epexegetic of κῆρα above. But see note
on I’ 28; it is quite possible here to
take φθίσθαι with ἔειπεν as a simple com-
plement or object of the verb, without
reference to time; ‘announced to him
his perishing,’ just as we have νόστον
σοῦ πατρὸς σάφα εἰπέμεν in p 106, cf. also
6 561 σοὶ δ᾽ οὐ θέσφατόν ἐστι. . θανέειν.
The scholiasts naturally compare the
διχθάδιαι κῆρες offered to Achilles, I 411.

669. ϑωήν, evidently a detinite fine in
place of personal service. We have an
instance of it in Ψ 297, where Echepolos
gives Agamemnon a mare, dp’, ἵνα μή
οἱ ἕποιθ᾽ ὑπὸ Ἴλιον ἠνεμόεσσαν. The word
recurs in β 192.

673=A 596,21. We now leave the
Aristeia of Idomeneus, and enter on a
transitional passage leading to the Acds
ἀπάτη (see Introduction), The many
weaknesses and other signs of late com-
position which mark it will be noticed
in their places. Hector, it appears, is in
the centre of the battle. The lines are
apparently an imitation of A 497 ff.,
but with the position reversed ; there
Hector on the left knows nothing of the
Trojan defeat in the centre.

676. τάχα, soon, as always in H. ;

VOL. II

not

perhaps as in Attic. The statement as
to the imminent defeat of the Trojans
comes as a surprise ; the last exploit was
in their favour, and they have shewn no
sign of yielding.

677. τοῖος, Nauck suggests τοῖον,
which is plausible but hardly necessary :
ef. m 205 ἐγὼ τοιόσδε. . ἤλυθον. It
is a case of the ‘nominative in the predi-
cate,’ for which see H. G. ὃ 162. Cf.
also H 211.

678. ceéner: we have heard nothing
of this before: Poseidon’s help has been
strictly confined to drpivew. Some of
the ancient commentators explained the
word to mean ‘by the strength with
which he inspired them’ ; but the Greek
will not allow this.

679. ἔχεν is generally explained was
holding on his way, as in 520, 557, M
433, and often with διέσχε. But from
the mention of ἵπποι in 684 (and ef.
749) it appears that Hector is regarded
as being in his chariot. ἔχεν will then
have its regular Homeric sense, was
driving. A precisely similar question
occurs in 326, and in both cases probably
arises from a confusion of the original
narrative, where the chariots can drive
right up to the ships, with the later
interpolation of the wall and all the in-
cidents of the battle before it. The
special harshness in this case is due to

50 IAIAAOC N (xu)

ῥηξάμενος Δαναῶν πυκινὰς στίχας ἀσπιστάων, θ80

> / if. /
ἔνθ᾽ ἔσαν Αἴαντός te νέες καὶ ΤΙρωτεσιλάου

θῖν ἔφ᾽ ἁλὸς πολιῆς εἰρυμέναι, αὐτὰρ ὕπερθε

τεῖχος ἐδέδμητο χθαμαλώτατον, ἔνθα μάλιστα

ζαχρηεῖς γίνοντο μάχηι αὐτοί τε καὶ ἵπποι.
ἔνθα δὲ Βοιωτοὶ καὶ ᾿Ιάονες ἑλκεχίτωνες, 685

Λοκροὶ καὶ Φθῖοι καὶ φαιδιμόεντες ’Ezrevol,

an b] of. lal ” > \ δύ
σπουδῆι ἐπαΐσσοντα νεῶν ἔχον, οὐδὲ δύναντο

ὦσαι ἀπὸ σφείων φλογὶ εἴκελον “Extopa δῖον"

e ’ Yi al
οἱ μὲν ᾿Αθηναίων προλελεγμένοι" ἐν ὃ apa τοῖσιν

680. πυκνὰς Lips. Vr. A.

684. rirNonto I: γίνονται (). || μαχης Syr.: μάχαι ὃ.
686. λοκροί τε φοίοι ἢ. || φαιδιμόωντες J.

the mention of the wall (for the first
time since 124) in the same line. But
that must be taken as a sign of the un-
skilfulness of the interpolator of the
passage.

681. This is the first mention of the
ship of Protesilaos, which plays a promi-
nent part in the fighting at the end of
Ο. Αἴαντος without an adj. must mean
the Telamonian ; though acc. to A 8-9
his ships were at the extremity of the
line, and in A 5 the centre is occupied
by those of Odysseus. But we need not
trouble ourselves about the discrepancy
with so late a passage as the introduction
to A—certainly not to the extent of
supposing with Ar. that the Oilean Aias
is meant. In O the Telamonian is in-
timately connected with the defence of
Protesilaos’ ship; and this is quite
sufficient ground for the momentary
association of the two here.

684. zaypHetc, see notes on E 525, M
347. The meaning evidently is that
less care had been taken with the wall
where the Greeks and their chariots were
best able to take care of themselves.
But the idea of fighting in chariots be-
tween the wall and the ships is equally
absurd, whether used of Greeks or Tro-
jans.

685. This line is remarkable as con-
taining the only mention in H. of the
Ionian name. It is very probable that
the whole passage is an Attie interpola-
tion, with the object of giving respect-
able antiquity to the hegemony of Athens
over the Ionian tribes, with whom in 689
the Athenians seem to be identified.
The epithets ἐλκεχίτωνες and φαιθιμό-
enTec are ἅπαξ λεγόμενα in H. The

681. aiantoc νῆες Vr. ἡ.

683. d€duHTO T.
685. Gonec J: Yoonec ().
688. ἴκελον GQU.

former indicates the use of the long
flowing chiton, which was borrowed, as
its name shews, from the Semitic nations
(Hebr. Ketoneth), and in the classical
period was considered as_ peculiarly
Ionian, being worn chiefly by the
elderly and dignified and on solemn
occasions (see Strabo x. p. 466; Thuk.
i. 6; 1. 104 ; (lelbio we ee slicer
Studniczka 15-20). Hence the epithet
is appropriately applied, in the Hymn
to the Delian Apollo (147), to the
Ionians assembled at the great Delian
festival, but is out of place here when
used of Ionian soldiers, who can never
have worn in war a dress which was quite
incompatible with active exertion. The
word here is therefore only a national
epitheton ornans. ‘he analogous ἑλκεσί-
memos is restricted to Trojan women.
The formation of paiduioenTec is irregu-
lar, as it comes not from a substantive
but from an adjective; cf., however, on
ὀξυόεις, E 50 (φαίδιμοι ἔντεσ᾽ Bentley).
The name efor also recurs only in this
passage (693, 699); they are not men-
tioned among the inhabitants of Phthia
in the Catalogue (B 684), and the name
is therefore probably of later origin,
when Μυρμιδόνες, “ENAnves, and ᾿Αχαιοί
were either forgotten as tribal names or
altered in their extension.

687. It is more natural to take νεῶν
with ἐπαΐσσοντα than with ἔχον ; see
note on E 263. cnoudhi, hardly ; B 99,
ete.

689. This line is awkwardly added.
oi κέν seems to be in apposition with
*Tdoves (685), which it resumes,and should
be followed by οἱ δὲ ’Ezevot, ‘first the
picked men of Athens, then the Epeians.”

͵

IAIAAOC N (xii) 51

ἦρχ᾽ υἱὸς Ἰ]ετεῶο Μενεσθεύς, of δ᾽ ἅμ᾽ ἕποντο

690

Φείδας te Στιχίος τε Βίας τ᾽ eds: αὐτὰρ ᾿Κὐὗπειῶν
Φυλείδης τε Μέγης ᾿Αμφίων τε Δρακίος τε,
πρὸ Φθίων δὲ Μέδων τε μενεπτόλεμός τε [Τοδάρκης.

e / Ν , - fal /
ἤτοι ὁ μὲν νόθος υἱὸς ᾿Οἴλῆος θείοιο

ἔσκε Μέδων, Αἴαντος ἀδελφεός, αὐτὰρ ἔναιεν

695

> / / » / Μ 7
ἐν Φυλάκηι, γαίης ἄπο πατρίδος, ἄνδρα κατακτάς,
Ν lal rs , A CY ek Sart “ /
γνωτὸν μητρυιῆς “Epimmidos, ἣν ἔχ ‘Oirevs:
αὐτὰρ ὁ ᾿Ιφίκλοιο πάϊς τοῦ Φυλακίδαο:"
e \ \ / / /
οἱ μὲν πρὸ Φθίων μεγαθύμων θωρηχθέντες

“ ’ Ξ rc ,ὔ
ναῦφιν ἀμυνόμενοι μετὰ Βοιωτῶν ἐμάχοντο.

700

” > > / / ᾽ “- tal \ er
Αἴας δ᾽ οὐκέτι πάμπαν, Oirjos ταχὺς υιος,

τὰ 5 , r / , /
ἵστατ᾽ am Αἴαντος TeXapwviov, οὐδ᾽ Racor,

> ? “ ᾽ > lal / » \ ΕΣ
ἀλλ᾽ ws T ἐν νειῶν BoE οἴνοπε πηκτὸν ἄροτρον

5 Ν » ’ὔ ’ \ ? ”
ἶσον θυμὸν ἔχοντε τιταίνετον: ἀμφὶ δ᾽ apa σφι

692. μέγης τ᾽ (Zen. ?) Vr. A Harl. d, Par. j (τε).
698. ἰφιάλοιο () (swpr. kK).
702. ἵστατ᾽ : yxdzer Zen. || οὐδ᾽: ἠδ᾽ G.

694. Θείοιο : θεῖος Te J.

693. peiwn Te (TE) GPS.
701. υἱὸς : αἵας Ὁ).

én 0’ ἄρα... Βίας τ᾽ ἐύς is a parenthesis,
but none the less affects the form of
what follows. It will be seen that of
the tribes mentioned in 685-86 the leaders
of the Phthians and Epeians are given
in full; of the Lokrians we are told
that their leader the Oilean Aias is
absent (701); this leaves the Athenians
to represent the Ionians, the Boiotians
being barely mentioned a second time
(700).

690. For Menestheus see B 552, where
his companions are not named.

691. For Βίας τ᾽ ἐύς Nauck conj. καὶ
Iagos, on the ground that an “Iagos is
leader of the Athenians in O 332. If
the passage is to be harmonized, it needs
less half-hearted measures. ᾿Ἐπειῶν is
evidently gen. after ἦρχε above, though
with a slight change of construction,
and followed by another change in npo
Φοίων afterwards.

692. Comparing B 620 ff. we find that
of the four leaders of the Epeians there
named not one occurs here; while Meges
is made leader of the Dulichians. So
with the next line; Medon in the
Catalogue leads the forces of Philoktetes
(B 716-28), while Podarkes (B 695-706)
has succeeded to those of Protesilaos
from a different though neighbouring

region, including Phylake, here the
home of Medon.

694-97 =O 333-36, where they come
in more naturally.

697. γνωτόν, brother, or perhaps more
generally kinsman ; the word is ambigu-
ous, but sometimes the narrower meaning
seems best suited ; cf. X 234, P 35.

698. ὁ, sc. Podarkes.

700. ναῦφιν apparently represents an
ablative (see on 588) as in the constr.
of ἀμύνεσθαι with gen., e.g. M 155, 179.
It is, however, possible to take it as
a locative, at the ships, ἁμυνόμενοι
being used absolutely as in II 556,
622, β 62, x 106. For the very rare
use of μετά with gen. = with see note
on A 51.

701. This line stands in place of what
we should expect, a statement that the
Oilean Aias commanded the Lokrians.
The fully-armed chief does not fight
among his light-armed followers.

702. Yerato: the xdfero of Zen. does
not so well suit the following simile;
see ἕστασαν 708. οὐδ᾽ ἡβαιόν, B 380.

703. ἐν νειῶι, in breaking up a fallow,
the hardest work in ploughing. οἴνοπε.
the epithet is applied to oxen also in ν
32. It probably means dark brown.
πηκτὸν ἄροτρον, see on Καὶ 353.

52 IAIAAOC N (x1)

- /
πρυμνοῖσιν κεράεσσι πολὺς ἀνακηκίει ἱδρώς"

~I
So
Or

τὼ μέν τε ζυγὸν οἷον ἐύξοον ἀμφὶς ἐέργει
ἱεμένω κατὰ ὦλκα, τέμει δέ τε τέλσον ἀρούρης"
ὡς τὼ παρβεβαῶτε μάλ᾽ ἕστασαν ἀλλήλοιιν.
ἀλλ᾽ ἤτοι Τελαμωνιάδη, πολλοί τε καὶ ἐσθλοὶ

\ «“ > ed “ ς 7] ’ Λ
λαοὶ ἕπονθ᾽ ἕταροι, οἵ οἱ σάκος ἐξεδέχοντο,

« / , , \ e \ / ὩΣ
ὁππότε μιν κάματός τε καὶ ἱδρὼς γούναθ᾽ ἵκοιτο"

”

οὐδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ᾿Οἱλιάδην, μεγαλήτορι Λοκροὶ ἕποντο"
οὐ γάρ σφι σταδίηι ὑσμίνην. μίμνε φίλον Kp:
οὐ γὰρ ἔχον κόρυθας χαλκήρεας ἱπποδασείας,

105. πολὺς 0 HS and ap. Did., see below. || ἀνεκηκίει A (swpr. a) J : ἀνεκήκιεν

HPRS Syr. Par. cj]: ἀνακήκιεν Vr. Ὁ, Harl. Ὁ ἃ, Par.afg:

τοῦ ὃ ἀνεκηκίει (sic) καὶ διὰ τοῦ c Did.

ὥλκαν PR (ν in P possibly added later). || τέμνει ΠΗ PQRSU? Syr. Lips.

ἀλλήλοιειν GHJPQRU Syr. Harl. a.
711. ἵκηται JQ).

ἀνακηκίη Mor.: χωρὶς
106. Ζυγὸς οἷος ἐὕΐξοος Vr. A. 101.
708.

710. λαοὶ : ἄλλοι HPR: aién Vr. ἃ (ἢ).
712. ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἰλιάϑηι Zen.

713. οὐδ᾽ Gp cin Harl. a. ||

cTadinc UcuinHc ἔργα μέμηλε Strabo x. 449: yp. ἔργ᾽ ἐμεμήλει Sch. T. || KAP:

Htop Syr. Par. h.

705. The oxen are yoked by the horns
instead of by the necks, a practice which
is still habitual in S. Europe.

707. ὥλκα recurs in o 875 (again with
hiatus) and in the late Epic imitative
poets. It is evidently another form of
aidaé (Pindar, Attic and Tonic), ὦλαξ
(Dor.), ἄλοξ (Attic Trag.) ; cf. ὁμώλακες
Ap. Rhod. ii. 396, ἰῶλκα (ξῶλκα ἢ) and
édoxes in Hesych. ; all, with ὁλκός and
sulcus, from root suelg-, Fedx- (Darbi-
shire Rell. Phil. p. 49). Fick writes
Fédxa here (P. Knight κατ᾽ aFoAxa) ; the
retention of F before o is, however, very
rare (H. G. § 393). The second half of
the line is very obscure. Perhaps the
best suggestion is Monro’s, that τέμει
is the pres. of érerue, and means it (the
plough) reaches; though the omission
of the subject ἄροτρον is very harsh.
In this case the verb is probably distinct
from τέμνειν. TéAcon, the headland or
edge of the field where the plough turns
(= 544, 547), is not ‘cut’ by it. Various
emendations have been proposed ; Barnes
τάμον, Jortin ταμόντε δέ, I. H. Voss
ταμέσθ᾽ ἐπὶ τ. ἀρ., Brandreth ταμέσθαι
τ. ap. The most generally accepted is
vau Herwerden’s ταμεῖν ἐπὶ τ. ap. This
is strongly supported by Ap. Rhod. 11.
412 τὴν (vey) aia ταμὼν ἐπὶ τέλσον
ἀρότρωι. But it is hard to see how so
simple a phrase can have been corrupted.
The unmetrical (and un-Epic) τέμνει of
most Mss. is evidently a witness to the
ambiguity of τέμει. But it is impossible

to teel confident that the right solution
has been found.

708. μάλα must be taken with the
preceding partic. as P 571 épyouévn
μάλα, ὦ 400 ἐελδομένοισι μάλ᾽ ἡμῖν. This
weakens the caesura and gives ἃ dis-
agreeable rhythm, but that is to be
reckoned among the other peculiarities
of this doubtful passage. μάλα intensi-
fies the idea of closeness given by παρ-,
as in P 502 μάλ᾽ ἐμπνείοντε μεταφρένωι,
cf. P 359 μάλ᾽ aud’ αὐτῶι βεβάμεν.

710. λαοὶ. . ἕταροι in apposition,
another curious and unique phrase ;
either of the variants ἄλλοι and αἰέν
would be preferable. Heyne conj. ἕταροί
@. Nor is there any analogy for the
appearance of the shield-bearer in H. ;
the hero always carries that weapon for
himself.

714. See note on B 529. The char-
acter of the Lokrians as a tribe of bow-
men is unique in Greek history, “Ἑλλησιν
ὅτι μὴ Κρησὶν οὐκ ἐπιχώριον ὃν τοξεύειν.
Λοκροὺς γὰρ τοὺς ᾿Οπουντίους ὁπλιτεύοντας
ἤδη κατὰ τὰ Μηδικὰ ἴσμεν, ots “Ὅμηρος
ἐποίησεν ὡς φερόμενοι τόξα καὶ σφενδόνας
ἐς Ἴλιον ἔλθοιεν (Pausan. i. 28. 4). Even
in the Scutwm Herculis 25 the Lokrians
are called ἀγχέμαχοι. The whole of
this description may indeed be a
specimen of false archaism, the inter-
polator endeavouring to give an air of
antiquity by ascribing to the Lokrians
a practice which in his own time was
unfamiliar.

Pe

IAIAAOC N (xt) 53

οὐδ᾽ ἔχον ἀσπίδας εὐκύκλους Kal μείλινα δοῦρα, 715
> ? Μ , \ > , ὙΝ 2°
ἀλλ apa τόξοισιν καὶ ἐυστροφωι οἰὸς ἀώτωι
v > ee ’ μά / ”
ἴλιον εἰς ἅμ᾽ ἕποντο πεποιθότες, οἷσιν ἔπειτα
ταρφέα βάλλοντες ρώων ῥήγνυντο φάλαγγας.
/ ΄ , , e \ / \ bd ,
δή pa τόθ᾽ of μὲν πρόσθε σὺν ἔντεσι δαιδαλέοισι
μάρναντο Τρωσίν τε καὶ “κτορι χαλκοκορυστῆι, 720
,
οἱ δ᾽ ὄπιθεν βάλλοντες ἐλάνθανον" οὐδ᾽ ἔτι χάρμης
Τρῶες μιμνήσκοντο' συνεκλόνεον γὰρ ὀϊστοί.
» / / lal ” \ /
ἔνθά Ke λευγαλέως νηῶν ἄπο Kal κλισιάων
lal /
Τρῶες ἐχώρησαν προτὶ "ἵλιον ἠνεμόεσσαν,
> \ / \ “ > , Hor
εἰ μὴ Πουλυδάμας θρασὺν “Extopa εἶπε παραστάς" 725
/ r
“"KxtTop, ἀμήχανος ἐσσι παραρρητοῖσι πιθέσθαι,
715. οὐδ᾽ Exon: οὗτ᾽ ad R. | ϑῶρα 0. 716. ἐυςτρεφεῖ Ar. 717. ofc

7”

uddicta PR. 721. οὐδ’ ἔτι Syr.:

U! Vr. A.

οὐδέ Te J: οὐδέ τι ὦ.
726. παρὰ (or napa) pHTota GJPQRTU Syr.

725. nokvdduac

716. ἐυςτρόφωι, see notes on 599 and
600. There is no doubt that the reference
here is to slings, as Pausanias took it
(see last note). Povelsen would explain
well-woven doublets of wool: but apart
from the question whether ἐύστροφος can
bear this sense, we see from the epithet
λινοθώρηξ (B 529) that such a jacket
would be not of wool but of linen.

719. of μέν, the two Aiantes and,
presumably, the other tribes and leaders
of 685 ff.

721. It is quite unlike Homer to make
the sudden change of the course of battle,
even to ‘a sorry repulse from ships and
huts’ (723), depend not upon the doughty
deeds of individual heroes, but solely on
the effect of a body of archers concealed
in the rear. Of such soldiers H. always
speaks in a slighting tone, and nowhere
else do they exercise the least influence
on the course of a fight.

725 = Μ 60; the idea of making
Polydamas Hector’s military adviser
seems to be taken from that passage
combined with M 210 ff., all being
ultimately suggested by = 249 ff. From
739-40 one would suppose that Poly-
dainas is going to suggest a concentration
of forces ; his ultimate advice to hold a
council as to the advisability of retreat
is at least surprising, and shews him in
the light of a mere coward instead of a
sage adviser. Yet Hector, instead of
rudely snubbing him as in M, appears
to take his advice, and leaves him in
charge of the centre, going ‘thither’

(to the left?) to return ‘after giving
them good charge.’ But as a matter
of fact he does no more than blame
Paris unjustly and bring him back to
the centre, the ‘left,’ which in 674 ff.
was in hard straits, being thus further
weakened. When Hector and Paris
reach the centre the fight goes on, and
there is no further word of a consultation.
It is hard to imagine a more incon-
sequent piece of composition. The
purpose of it seems to have been to put
an end to the division of the battle into
separate sections, which plays so im-
portant a part in what has preceded,
but entirely vanishes in the following
books. The whole passage to 794 must
be one of the latest expansions of the
Iliad (so Erhardt, pp. 231-36).

726. ἀμήχανος, intractable, as Καὶ 167,
II 29. For the addition of the intin. ef.
H. G. § 232; ‘yon are intractable for
listening to’=you cannot be induced
to listen to. παραρρητοῖσι, persuasive
things, a neut. pl. used in a vague sense,
like the ‘impersonal’ neuter subject
of a verb (as οὐκέτι φυκτὰ πέλωνται, see
H. G. § 161), and approximating to the
abstract sense παράρρησις : cf. λεῖα δ᾽
ἐποίησεν, M 30, with note. So also we
may explain phrases like μειλιχίοισι προσ-
nvda, etc., where the supposed ‘ellipse
of ἐπέεσσι᾽ can hardly be called a scien-
tific explanation. The adj. recurs only
in I 526 in the sense open to persuasion,
and so we might possibly explain ‘you
cannot be brought to listen to men who

54 IAIAAOC N (x11)

οὕνεκά τοι πέρι δῶκε θεὸς πολεμήϊα ἔργα"

τούνεκα καὶ βουλῆι ἐθέλεις περιίδμεναι ἄλλων.

ἀλλ᾽ οὔ πως ἅμα πάντα δυνήσεαι αὐτὸς ἑλέσθαι"

ἄλλωι μὲν γὰρ ἔδωκε θεὸς πολεμήϊα ἔργα, 780
[ἄλλωι δ᾽ ὀρχηστύν, ἑτέρωι κίθαριν καὶ ἀοιδήν"]}

ἄλλωι δ᾽ ἐν στήθεσσι τιθεῖ νόον εὐρύοπα Ζεὺς

ἐσθλόν, τοῦ δέ τε πολλοὶ ἐπαυρίσκοντ᾽ ἄνθρωποι,

καί τε πολεῖς ἐσάωσε, μάλιστα δὲ καὐτὸς ἀνέγνω.

αὐτὰρ ἐγὼν ἐρέω ὥς μοι δοκεῖ εἶναι ἄριστα. 735
πάντηι γάρ σε περὶ στέφανος πολέμοιο δέδηε'

Τρῶες δὲ μεγάθυμοι, ἐπεὶ κατὰ τεῖχος ἔβησαν,

128. περιέμαιεναι Mor. Bar., yp. Par. 6, Eust. || περὶ Youen’
ἁπάντων Harl. Ὁ. Par. ἃ. 729. OuNHcaiTo ἀνελέςθαι () : θεοὶ ϑόςαν ἀνθρώποιςειν
An. on A 320. 780 om. G. || ϑῶκε P. 731 om. Q: habent A™D™GH™J PQRU
Harl. a, Lips. Vr. A: Ζηνόδοτος ὁ Μαλλώτης προστίθησιν Sch. T: quoted by Clem.
Al. Strom. iv. 625, Lucian περὶ ὀρχ. 23 (6pxHcTUN Te καὶ iuepdeccan ἀοιδήν).
732. NOON τίϑεϊ (sic) T: οὕτως ᾿Αριστοφάνης Sch. T. 733. πολλοὶ : πολλὸν Aph.
134. πολλοὺς Q (other mss. including A vary between πόλεις and πολεῖς). ||

727 om. Q.

δὲ καὐτὸς Ω : δεκαὐτὸς D: 3° αὐτὸς R: ὃ᾽ ἐκ αὐτὸς G: ὃέ κ᾿ αὐτὸς Ὡ. 135.

apicron Bar. Mor. Par. (a swpr.) 6, and ap. Eust.

737. δὲ: OH PR: O° αὖ Vr. b.

are open to conviction.” But this is
not Homeric either in thought or ex-
pression. The line is generally printed
with a full stop at the end, and a comma
at the end of 727; the punctuation
adopted is that recommended by Lehrs,
on the ground that οὕνεκα regularly
follows the clause of which it gives the
explanation (see note on I’ 400-5). The
sense is equally good in either case.

728. nepiiduena, the variant περι-
ἔμμεναι is the commoner phrase, e.g.
P 171 περὶ φρένας ἔμμεναι ἄλλων. The
text, however, has sufficient analogies
(K 247, γ 244, p 317).

729. αὐτός, μόνος, the εἷς ἀνήρ of
Attic; cf. © 99, and for the general
sentiment of the line, A 320.

731. This tasteless interpolation is
ascribed by Schol. T to Ζηνόδοτος ὁ
Μαλλώτης, who is not to be confused
with his more famous namesake of
Kphesos. He may be the same as the
Znvodoros ᾿Αλεξανδρεύς of Suidas, who
wrote on the atheteses of Ar. (Schrader
Porph. pp. 428 ff.). He believed Homer
to have been a Chaldean (Schol. A on
79). The line was, however, estab-
lished by Lucian’s day.

733. €naupickonta, cf. A 410 with

note. Here the word clearly implies
profit. The passage in A suggests that

tod here may be personal, referring to
the ἄλλος, not to his νόος.

784. πολεῖς, perhaps πολῦς, see on
B 4. The reading πόλεις, cities, is ex-
pressly recognized by the scholia, but
is not probable. δὲ καὐτός, see on Z 260.
An. says here κατὰ συναλοιφὴν ἐκληπτέον,
iva διαιρῆται μάλιστα δὲ καὶ αὐτός. But
on Υ 311 he quotes this and Z 270 as
instances of a superfluous κε (περισσὸς ὁ
xe—so also Schol. T here, πλεονάζει ὁ ke).
Thus the reading of Ar. is uncertain.
But it is clear that here xe is quite
inadmissible, and the only choice is
between the text and Hermann’s tempt-
ing conj. δέ τ᾽ αὐτός, on the analogy of
€ 185 μάλιστα δέ τ᾽ ἔκλυον αὐτοί. This
is certainly most like the Homeric idiom.
The sense is ‘the man who has the
νόος ἐσθλός best knows its value.’ The
word ἀναγνῶναι recurs only in Od., in
the sense of recognizing.

736. cTrépanoc occurs only here in H.;
it is clearly used of an encircling ring,
though in A 36 the verb ἐστεφάνωτο
seems to be applied to the central figure ;
see note on E739. For the use of ϑέϑηεν
of the fury of battle cf. M 35, T 18.

737. κατά, down upon; a vehement
irruption is regarded as a descent, even
when a wall is scaled. The simile in
O 381-4 explains the metaphor. So in

————E—

a!

σι
or

IAIAAOC N (x11)

r , ΄ A
οἱ μὲν ἀφεστᾶσιν σὺν τεύχεσιν, οἱ δὲ μάχονται
/ / -“
παυρότεροι πλεόνεσσι, κεδασθέντες κατὰ νῆας.
> Ae ΕᾺ ΄ ΄, > ΄ ΄ » ἡ a
ἀλλ ἀναχασσάμενος κάλει ἐνθάδε πάντας ἀρίστους. 740
΄“ /
ἔνθεν δ᾽ ἂν para πᾶσαν ἐπιφρασσαίμεθα βουλήν,
ἢ κεν ἐνὶ νήεσσι πολυκλήϊσι πέσωμεν,
” > 52 4 \ / / io »
αἴ κ᾽ ἐθέληισι θεὸς δόμεναι κράτος, 7) κεν ἔπειτα
be \ »
ἢ γὰρ ἔγωγε
, \ \ \ > / 3 \ Se
δείδω μὴ τὸ χθιζὸν ἀποστήσωνται Ἀχαιοὶ 745

Ν cr » > /
Tap νηῶν ἔλθοιμεν ἀπήμονες.

χρεῖος, ἐπεὶ παρὰ νηυσὶν ἀνὴρ τος πολέμοιο
μίμνει, ὃν οὐκέτι πάγχυ μάχης σχήσεσθαι ὀΐω."

ὡς φάτο ἸΠουλυδάμας, ἅδε δ᾽ “Ἕκτορι μῦθος ἀπήμων,

᾽ - A
αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἐξ ὀχέων σὺν τεύχεσιν ἄλτο χαμᾶζε,
/

Kal μιν φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα" 750
“ ΄ \ \ » Pras ΄ 5. -

Πουλυδάμα, σὺ μὲν αὐτοῦ ἐρύκακε πάντας ἀρίστους,

138. €pectaci J: ἀμφεεοτᾶει ().

Mor. || ἦ : e J.

ἀποτίςωνται °?. 746. nap L.
751. nouAuvdduan Zen. Chamaileo.

141. 0° GN: δὲ 5.
142. ἐν JPQRU. || nécomen J Eust., yp. Vr. Ὁ.
744. ἔλθωμεν A[GS]. | rap: rap ἂν PR.
coontal AT Par. a? c (sup7. τι) ἃ (supr. τι):
GnoctHcontai Par. h: Gnoticontai DJP (supr. w) S Vr. ἃ:
748. noAvdduac U!,

πάντας ἀρίετους : μώνυχας ἵππους ().

énippaccoiuesa Vr. A.
743. al: εἴ Bar. Pap. o: #
745. ἀποςτή-
Gnoxx*contar U (τι in ras.):
Gnocricwnta Vr. Ὁ:
749 om. AtHt Vr. d.

A 484 κατὰ στρατόν is used of the ship
coming from the ‘high seas’ down upon
the camp.

738. ἀφεοστᾶςιν, apparently are hold-
ing aloof, arms and all, ‘full-armed
though they are.’

741. ἔνϑεν may be either temporal,
From that moment, or more probably
Srom that point, starting from those cir-
cumstances ; cf. note on P 703. ἔνθα
δέ κεν Brandreth, van L.

742. The phrase ἐνὶ NHecci πεςεῖν is
not, as usual, ambiguous, but clearly
means ‘to attack the ships.’ See on
I 235, O 63.

743. ἔπειτα, thereafter, after dismiss-
ing the first alternative ; so also 2 356
φεύγωμεν . ἢ μιν ἔπειτα... λιτανεύ-
σομεν, and υ 63.

744. €Neowen is so strongly supported
that it must have the preference over

ἔλθωμεν. For the change of mood ef.
Σ 308.
745. Here again ms. authority is

nearly unanimous for ἀποτίσωνται, exact
the debt of yesterday. For this sense
of ἀποτίσασθαι cf. Y 512. The lengthen-

ing of the o is however intolerably
harsh, and there seems to be no choice
but to accept the variant GnocTHcwntal,
pay back the debt. This use of ἀποστή-
σασθαι (lit. weigh out, or rather get
weighed out) does not recur in H. ; the
nearest analogy is orjcar=weigh, X 350
etc. But this is of less importance in
so late a passage, for the verb is attested
in Attic, e.g. in an inscription ἀπαριθμη-
σάσθων καὶ ἀποστησάσθων τὰ χρήματα.
The use of the article in τὸ χϑιζόν
has also an Attic look. Both read-

ings give equally good sense. The
reference is evidently to the defeat

of the Greeks in 90, so that the
passage is later than the incorporation
of that book. Diintzer rejects 741-
47; but then Polydamas never gives
the advice which he announces; and
no half-measures will put things
right.

748-49=M 80-81—a piece of careless
borrowing, as Hector has left his chariot

outside the wall. Hence a few Mss.
omit 749. Buta similar blunder occurs
in 752:

56 IAIAAOC N (x11)

ΔΙΈΞΙΝ, pS a? 5 \ > / / *
αὐτὰρ ἐγὼ κεῖσ εἶμι καὶ ἀντιόω πολέμοιο
5 \ \ a > / 5)
αἶψα δ᾽ ἐλεύσομαι αὖτις, ἐπὴν ἐὺ τοῖς ἐπιτείλω.
3 id - , ,
ἢ pa καὶ ὡρμήθη ὄρεϊ νιφόεντι ἐοικώς,
5 J "
κεκληγώς, διὰ δὲ Τρώων πέτετ᾽ ἠδ᾽ ἐπικούρων. 755
/
of δ᾽ ἐς ΤΙανθοΐδην ayarnvopa ἸΙουλυδάμαντα
΄ὔ 5 ΄ > > AN te/ ” nN 10 /
πάντες ἐπεσσεύοντ᾽, ἐπεὶ “Extopos ἔκλυον αὐδὴν.
- / ”
αὐτὰρ ὁ AnipoBov τε βίην θ᾽ “λένοιο ἄνακτος
/ eX
᾿Ασιάδην τ᾽ ᾿Αδάμαντα καὶ "Ἄσιον Ὕρτάκου υἱὸν

5 /
φοίτα ava προμάχους διζήμενος, εἴ που ἐφεύροι.

Ξ- a Ἴ
τοὺς δ᾽ εὗρ᾽ οὐκέτι πάμπαν ἀπήμονας οὐδ᾽ ἀνολέθρους,
e na ’ a
ἀλλ᾽ of μὲν δὴ νηυσὶν ἔπι πρυμνῆισιν ᾿Αχαιῶν
\ Ce , > / J. Ἂν > /
χερσὶν ὑπ᾽ ᾿Αργείων κέατο ψυχὰς ολέσαντες,
» > 7
οἱ δ᾽ ἐν τείχει ἔσαν βεβλημένοι οὐτάμενοί τε.

\ AK / ,’ a
Tov δὲ τάχ᾽ εὗρε

δῖον ᾿Αλέξανδρον,

μάχης ἐπ᾽ ἀριστερὰ δακρυοέσσης 765
“Βλένης πόσιν ἠυκόμοιο,

753. aveic C: aver Ὁ. || ἐὺ om. ΟἹ : καὶ Ο man, ree.

763. κέαται C Par. j.

752-53 = M 368-69—careless borrowing
again. Here ketce has no particular
reference (apparently it means _ the
Greek left, though this has not been
mentioned) and ἀντιόω nodéuolo is
precisely the opposite of what Hector
does; he leaves the, fray instead of
entering it. ἐπιτείλω is substituted for
ἐπαμύνω in M 369, and does not give a
very good sense ; we must suppose it to
mean ‘when I have told them to mass
themselves together.” The πάντες ἄριστοι
are not, as we should suppose, those of
740, but the subordinate heroes named
in 790-92. These numerous difficulties
have naturally cast doubts on the passage ;
Christ, for instance, would omit 749-53
reading αὐτίκα δ᾽ ὡρμήθη, ete. But
the whole present portion of the book
requires a deeper use of the knife.

754. The comparison of a warrior
rushing at full speed to a snowy moun-
tain is extraordinarily inappropriate.
If we adopt Nitzsch’s explanation that
ὄρεϊ νιφόεντι means an avalanche, this
objection is removed, but only to make
way for two others: first, that the words
could hardly give the sense: secondly,
that the avalanche is apparently un-
known in Greece, and in any case cannot
have ever been familiar on the coasts of
Asia Minor. Allattempts to amend the
text are futile. The simile is imitated
by Virgil (den. xii. 699 ff. Quantus

756. €c: én Mor.

Athos gaudetque nivali Vertice se
attollens pater Apenninus ad awras) with-'
out avoiding bombast. When Suhrab
in the Shahnama drives his charger
at the foe ‘like a moving mountain’
we feel of course no offence.

756. ἀγαπήνορα, an epithet which re-
curs only in Θ 114, O 392, Ψ 118, 124, ἡ
170, and is applied only to heroes of the
second rank. It is commonly explained
as ἀγαπῶν ἠνορέην, loving valour, i.e.
valorous. But this is improbable, as
the second part of the compound can
only represent dvépa(s) not ἠνορέην.
The primitive sense of dyamdfew and
ἀγαπᾶν, as found in H., is to caress, to
shew the outward signs of affection.
The word therefore means much the
same as φιλόξεινος, ‘shewing all external
kindliness to his fellow-men,’ cf. ἡ 33
of the Phaiakians, οὐδ᾽ ἀγαπαζόμενοι
φιλέουσ᾽ ὅς κ᾿ ἄλλοθεν ἔλθηι.

760. εἴ που ἐφεύροι, see on Δ 88.

764. ἐν τείχει, from its antithesis to
νηυσὶν ἔπι πρυμνῆισιν, evidently means
‘within the walls of Troy,’ whither
Deiphobos had been taken (538); but
the use of the word is curious in a
passage where the Greek wall has been
so prominent, ~

765. It is strange that no mention is
made of Aineias who has taken a promi-
nent part in the fighting among the
other heroes now named (459 ff.).

IAIAAOC Ν (χα) 57

, } ΄ / \ ’ , ΄
θαρσύνονθ᾽ ἑτάρους καὶ ἐποτρύνοντα μάχεσθαι.

ἀγχοῦ δ᾽ ἱστάμενος προσέφη αἰσχροῖς ἐπέεσσι"
““Δύσπαρι, εἶδος ἄριστε, γυναιμανὲς ἠπεροπευτώ,
μ περ
a ὙΠ / , 2) (nh. 2 » y=
mov τοι Δηΐϊφοβός te Bin θ᾽ “Ιλένοιο ἄνακτος 770

᾿Ασιάδης τ᾽ ᾿Αδάμας ἠδ᾽ "Actos ὙὝρτάκου vids ;

» 7. > / fal » r ᾽ wv
ποῦ δέ ToL O@pvovevs ; νῦν WAETO πᾶσα κατ aKpPNS

wv » / lal rn ’ \ Vv ”
TXuos αἰπεινή, viv τοι σῶς αἰπὺς ὄλεθρος.
) ρ
‘\ , 9
τὸν © αὖτε προσέειπεν ᾿Αλέξανδρος θεοειδής"

co 5» / \ > / » / py ἂν ν»

Extop, ἐπεί τοι θυμὸς ἀναίτιον αἰτιάασθαι, 775
” lal fal
ἄλλοτε δή ποτε μᾶλλον ἐρωῆσαι πολέμοιο

A 5) 4 > > / > / ,ὔ 7
μέλλω, ἐπεί μ᾽ οὐ πάμπαν ἀνάλκιδα γείνατο μήτηρ᾽

\ » /
ἐξ οὗ yap Tapa νηυσὶ μάχην ἤγειρας ἑταίρων,
5 Pe! Tas AN 5. ¢ / a bs
ἐκ τοῦ 6 ἐνθάδ᾽ ἐόντες ὁμιλέομεν Δαναοῖσι
, [4 \ / a“ \ - pa

νωλεμέως: ἕταροι δὲ κατέκταθεν, ods σὺ μεταλλᾶις" 780

,
οἴω AnidoBos te Bin θ᾽ “EXévoio ἄνακτος
οἴχεσθον, μακρῆισι τετυμμένω ἐγχείηισιν

ἀμφοτέρω κατὰ χεῖρα, φόνον δ᾽ ἤμυνε Κρονίων.

770. Bin δ᾽ U.

Ὁ (ἐπεὶ ϑέμε RK). 119. ἰόντες P!.

τετυγμένω |’.

111. T om. Ἡ.
776. ἐρωήςειν Harl. ἃ. | πτολέμοιο GC).
780. ἕτεροι J.
783. χεῖρε HPR. | φόνον : φόβον Mor.

772, ὥιχετο Bekker Anec. 937. 9.
777. WOU (): οὐδέ με or οὐδ᾽ ἐμὲ
KATEKTAOON Lips. 782.

769=T 39.

772. κατ᾽ ἄκρης, τινὲς δὲ κρῆς μονοσυλ-
λάβως (i.e. κατὰ κρῆΞς), ἐπεὶ καὶ κρῆθεν
φησίν (see on IL 548), Schol. A. The
present phrase is only used of Troy (O
557, Q 728), except in € 313 ἔλασεν (μιν)
κῦμα κατ᾽ ἄκρης. It seems to be a case
of the not uncommon use of the fem. of
the adj. as a subst., though in the
present instance the fact that there is a
fem. substantive in the immediate neigh-
bourhood to which ἄκρης might refer
makes the question a little doubtful.
The phrase is fully established in Herod.
and Attic Trag. and prose (see Lex.) ;
here also the neighbourhood of a fem.
subst. is common but not universal, e.g.
Aisch. Cho. 691. For the sense cf.
Virgil’s rwit alto a culmine Troia, Aen.
iil, 290.

773. c@c is the form given by all Mss.
and approved by Ar., probably because
it begins the line in X 332, q.v. On the
other hand, in the acc. the form σόον has
everywhere Ms. authority on its side,
though here too Ar. sometimes read σῶν
(seeon A117). But in Π 252 he varied
between σόον and cdov. Of all these
forms σάος is probably the oldest (ef.

cawrepos A 32 and note on 1 424). The
phrase recurs in ε 305, x 28; it is evi-
dently an oxymoron, ‘one thing is safe
for you—sheer destruction.’ The idiom
by which safe = certain is very familiar
in our colloquial language.

775. This line in used with an ellipse
of the apodosis, as in Z 333, where see
note.

776. ἄλλοτε OH ποτε μᾶλλον, as we
should say, ‘at any time rather than
now’; the following ἐπεί logically im-
plies νῦν οὐ μέλλω. The aor. with μέλλω,
lit. Lam like to have withdrawn means
I confess I may have (Platt J. P. xxi.
40).

777. ἐπεί μ᾿ οὐ is given by one Ms.
only for the vulg. ἐπεὶ οὐδέ we (or οὐδ᾽
ἐμέ) ; but it had already been conjectured
by Brandreth, Platt, and van L. in order
to avoid the harsh synizesis, which is
however found again in 6 352 (A 249 ἢ), τ
314, v 227. If the vulg. is retained οὐδέ
we is better than οὐδ᾽ ἐμέ, as the em-
phasis conveyed by οὐδέ belongs to the
whole clause rather than to the personal
comparison of Paris to Hector.

782. We were not told in 596 ff. that
Helenos had left the field.

58 IAIAAOC N (x11)

rn τὸ ΕΣ ’ ve / / /
νῦν δ᾽ apy ὅππηι σε κραδίη θυμός τε κελεύει"

ἡμεῖς δ᾽ ἐμμεμαῶτες ἅμ᾽ ἑψόμεθ᾽, οὐδέ τί φημι

785

> fal / .“ / / /
ἀλκῆς δευήσεσθαι, ὅση δύναμίς γε πάρεστι"

‘ iy 3 > », \ > "4 / ”
πὰρ δύναμιν δ᾽ οὐκ ἔστι Kal ἐσσύμενον πολεμίζειν.
ὡς εἰπὼν παρέπεισεν ἀδελφειοῦ φρένας ἥρως.

Ν γ » ΝΜ / / \ ΄ Ge
βὰν δ᾽ ἴμεν ἔνθα μάλιστα μάχη καὶ φύλοπις Fev,

ἀμφί τε Κεβριόνην καὶ ἀμύμονα ΤΙουλυδάμαντα,

Φάλκην ᾿Ορθαῖόν τε καὶ ἀντίθεον ΤΙολυφήτην
Πάλμυν τ᾽ ᾿Ασκάνιόν τε Μόρυν θ᾽ vi? Ἱπποτίωνος,

7 se? >

οἵ p ἐξ ᾿Ασκανίης ἐριβώλακος ἦχθον ἀμοιβοὶ

ἠοῖ τῆι προτέρηι: τότε δὲ Ζεὺς ὦρσε μάχεσθαι.

οἱ δ᾽ ἴσαν ἀργαλέων ἀνέμων ἀτάλαντοι ἀέλληι, 795
“ ΓΝ is Lue \ = \ \ 3 ΄,

ἥ ῥά θ᾽ ὑπὸ βροντῆς πατρὸς Διὸς εἶσι πέδονδε,

θεσπεσίωι δ᾽ ὁμάδωι ἁλὶ μίσγεται, ἐν δέ τε πολλὰ

184. c€: cou Lips.! 785. Oo

787. πτολεμίΖειν G.

ui’: υἷε G: υἱὸν S Strabo xii. 565.

ἐν O€: €Nea Mor. Bar.

éuueudadtec Ar. ©
μεμαῶτες CDHQSTU King’s Harl. b, Lips. Mor. and ap. Did. |
791: noAugoitHN GL (supr. H) S.

(€éuua@tec J): δὲ
écnouee’ L.
792. uUpoN P. |

After this Strabo adds Muc®n ἀγχεμάχων
ἡγήτορα --καρτεροθύμων -- (cf. N 5, Ξ 512).

797. δ᾽ om. by some ap. Did. ἢ

785. The question between 0° éuue-
»καῶτες and δὲ μεμαῶτες recurs also in P
735, 746, X 143. Both are equally possi-
ble, and here mss. are nearly equally
divided. Their testimony is however of
even less significance than usual, as 6é
μεμαῶτες would commonly have been
written deuueuawres, like ενιμμεγαροισι,
καταρροον, etc. Ar. declared for ἐμμ- in
all cases, and as in the other passages the
Ms. tradition is on his side it is well to
follow him. It may be noticed that
Paris appears to know by intuition that
Hector wishes him to go elsewhere;
nothing to that effect has been said.

787. nap θύναμιν, beyond his strength,
cf. € 509 παρὰ μοῖραν, which seems to be
the only other instance of this use of
the preposition in H., common though it
is in later Greek (H. G. ὃ 191. 8). καὶ
éccUUWENON is again absolute ; see on 315.

788=Z 61, H 120.

792. ui’ seems to stand for via, not vie,
though the latter is written in full by G,
followed by the early printed editions.
Morys and Hippotion are slain together
in & 514.

793. GuoiBoi, to relieve others of their
countrymen, apparently. Neither the

word nor the idea recurs in H. Nauck
conj. duopBol, followers, a word said to
have been used by Antimachos, but
otherwise known only from the Alex-
andrian imitators.

794, It has been pointed out that there
is a slight discrepancy with the Catalogue
(B 862) in the words Ho? τῆι προτέρηι, as
Askanios is there mentioned among the
leaders of the allies at a date earlier than
this by several days. Cf. Φ 156.

795. The magnificent passage from
here to the end of the book is one of the
finest of the battle scenes in Homer, and
it is tempting to conjecture that we have
here part of the attack on the ships as it
stood in the original J/iad. But it is
necessary to be on guard against making
merit alone a test of antiquity ; appear-
ances are all in favour of its belonging
to the Διὸς ἀπάτη (see Introd. to 2).
The metaphor is from one of the ‘ white
squalls’ common in the Aegean Sea,
which seem to descend from the mountain-
tops upon the sea. Here the squall is
regarded as being sent by the thunder-
storm above.

797. ἐν,
storm.

within the region of the

Ἢ

IAIAAOC N (χπι) 59

κύματα παφλάζοντα πολυφλοίσβοιο θαλάσσης,
‘ , Ν / ᾽ Μ ’ ᾽ \ > ? Μ
κυρτὰ φαληρίιοωντα, πρὸ μὲν T ἀλλ, αὐτὰρ ἐπ ἀλλα:
ἃ a » ΄ \ > 3 »
ὡς Τρῶες πρὸ μὲν ἄλλοι ἀρηρότες, αὐτὰρ ἐπ᾽ ἄλλοι, 800
χαλκῶι μαρμαίροντες ἅμ᾽ ἡγεμόνεσσιν ἕποντο.
“ΝΣ te a a 3 " a
Extop δ᾽ ἡγεῖτο βροτολουγῶι icos “Api
Il / / δ᾽ Μ Ε / ΄ bd >./,
ριαμίδης" πρόσθεν ἔχεν ἀσπίδα πάντοσ᾽ ἐΐσην,
ῥινοῖσιν πυκινήν, πολλὸς δ᾽ ἐπελήλατο χαλκός:
ἀμφὶ δέ οἱ κροτάφοισι φαεινὴ σείετο πήληξ. 805
ing ) γῆ
, » ’ \ / » -“ ,ὔ
πάντηι δ᾽ ἀμφὶ φάλαγγας ἐπειρᾶτο προποδίζων,
εἴ πώς οἱ εἴξειαν ὑπασπίδια προβιβῶντι:"
5 Ν > > “
ἀλλ᾽ οὐ σύγχει θυμὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ᾿Αχαιῶν.
Μ \ n , Ν /
Αἴας δὲ πρῶτος προκαλέσσατο, μακρὰ βιβάσθων:
/ ° »
“ δαιμόνιε, σχεδὸν ἐλθέ: τί ἣ δειδίσσεαι αὔτως 810
᾿Αργείους; οὔ τοί τι μάχης ἀδαήμονές εἰμεν,
> \ Ν / a 5 / > ΄
ἀλλὰ Διὸς μάστιγι κακῆι ἐδάμημεν ᾿Αχαιοί.
ἣ θή / θ i 2éX ἐξ ri: , ᾿
) θήν πού τοι θυμὸς ἐέλπεται ἐξαλαπάξειι
fal “ / \ ΄ r
νῆας" apap δέ τε χεῖρες ἀμύνειν εἰσὶ καὶ ἡμῖν.
> \ / 2\ / / e \ =
ἢ Ke πολὺ φθαίη ἐὺ ναιομένη πόλις ὑμὴ 815
χερσὶν ὑφ᾽ ἡμετέρηισιν ἁλοῦσά τε περθομένη τε.
σοὶ δ᾽ αὐτῶι φημὶ σχεδὸν ἔμμεναι ὁππότε φεύγων

198. naugAdzonta LR (μ dotted). | πολυφλοίςεβοιο.. φαληριόωντα 07. Τί.

803. πρόςθϑεν : πρὸ ἕθεν ACU Syr. 806. προποδίζων : πολεμίζων R.
807. ὑπ᾽ ἀςπίοι JL (P!2): ὑπ᾽ acnida () Vr. Ὁ. 808. Znvddoros ὑποτάσσει λίην
γάρ c@iN πᾶςιν ἐκέκριτο edpcet πολλῶι An. 809. προκαλίΖετο Vr. ἃ (H?).

μακρὰ βιβάσκων L (R svpr.): φώνηςεν τε Syr. 810. αὔτως (or αὕτως) Ar.
Ω ; οὕτως ἄλλοι (Did.), CGHJQSTU Syr. Harl. ἃ b d, King’s Par. 1. 811. μάχη
U. || €cuen C. 813. ἐέλδεται S. || ἐξαλαπάξαι H. 814. Te: ot Syr. (supr. τ
man. 2). 815. πτόλις R. || Gun: Guin P!: ὕμμιν Mor. Bar. 817. ὁππότε:

ὅς note T.

799. κυρτά, curling over, as A 426, got into the printed vulgate from G, is
where the whole simile should be com- quite possible in itself, but the analogy
pared. See also ἃ 243 κῦμα. . κυρ. of 157 is in favour of npéceen.
τωθέν. φαληριόωντα, white with foam, 806. ἀμφί is best taken as governing

according to the old explanation; but φάλαγγας, though the analogy of = 601

‘the relations of the word are not very — shews that it may be adverbial, and the

clear. Hesych. has φάληρα: λευκὰ agpi- ace. governed by ἐπειρᾶτο.
Covra ίσσοντα, and αλιοί: λευκο- 809. BiBadcewn, only here, O 676, II
4 ρ , ᾿

μέτωποι: εὐφάλαρα: λαμπρά. Possibly 534. Perhaps it is for βι-βάδ-θων (ef.
the φάλαρα of the helmet (App. B, vii. Bad-ifew), like ἔσθειν for ἔδ-θειν.

3, ef. terpapddnpos) may be connected 812. For the scourge of Zeus see M 37.
through the idea of brightness (ef. 814. ἄφαρ, see note on A 418; the
Schulze Q. 1. p. 463 f.: aupiparos= word here seems to mean little more
shining on both sides?). Aristotle quotes than veri/y. Cf. β 169.

the line (2het. iii. 11) as an instance of 815. peat, i.e. before you destroy
vivid description (τὸ ἐνέργειαν ποιεῖν). our ships your own city would be

803. The variant πρὸ ἕθεν, which has _ taken.

60 IAIAAOC N (χιπ)

τ \ i
apnone Διὶ πατρὶ καὶ ἄλλοις ἀθανώτοισι
/ fs ὦ ,ὔ “4
θάσσονας ἰρήκων ἔμεναι καλλίτριχας ἵππους,
“ / ined 7 / , 3»
οἵ σε πόλινδ᾽ οἴσουσι κονίοντες πεδίοιο. 820
A > / / \ ”
ὡς dpa οἱ εἰπόντι ἐπέπτατο δεξιὸς ὄρνις,
, > \ > a
αἰετὸς ὑψιπέτης: ἐπὶ δ᾽ ἴαχε λαὸς ᾿Αχαιῶν
/ > a e ’ > if , “
θάρσυνος oiwvar. ὁ δ᾽ ἀμείβετο φαίδιμος “Extwp:
5 a , View - a
“Ajay ἁμαρτοεπές, Bovydie, οἷον ἔειπες.
ΩΝ Ν > \ ef \ 7. >) / 3
al yap ἐγὼν OVvTW YE Διὸς πάϊς αἰγιόχοιο 825
5 / / / , /
εἴην ἤματα πάντα, τέκοι δέ με πότνια “Hpn,
Ve ¢ 53) / 5 /
τιοίμην δ᾽ ὡς τίετ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίη καὶ ᾿Απόλλων,
e na € / e/ Ἂς / 3 /
ὡς νῦν ἡμέρη ἥδε κακὸν φέρει ᾿Αργείοισι
lal / ’ 5) \ \ lal / ” ,
πᾶσι μάλ᾽: ἐν δὲ σὺ τοῖσι πεφήσεαι, αἱ κε ταλάσσηις

na » U ε , /
μεῖναι ἐμὸν δόρυ μακρόν, 6 ToL χρόα λειριόεντα 830

818. ἀρήςει (). 821. of om. HP.

ἄλλοι δὲ βουκάκιε (/) Eust. || οἷον Ρ Bar.: ποῖον (.

CHJ Syr.: εἰ 2. || ré om. C Lips.
LIP: τοῖς re 1,7, || πεφύςεαι
ot) dele

ea

818. ἀρήςηι, the contracted form of
the 2nd sing. mid. is doubtful in H.; in
the other passages where it occurs we
can almost always write -e for -ea (A
160, B 365, Τ' 138, and often), or -y’ for
-nat in pres. subj. (see on B 232-33). The
only other cases in the Zliad which do
not admit this are B 367 (γνώσεαι εἰ,
Barnes), I 102, 2 434; in Od. there are
seven or eight (ire ¢ 297, ἕλκηι o 10,
being for -yac). Whether it be fut. indic.
or aor. subj. ἀρήσηι will stand for ἀρήσεαι,
but the analogy of Φ 111 shews that it is
the aor. subj. (cf. also A 164, Z 448,
Θ 373). Fick conj. ἀρήσηις, as we have
ἀρήμεναι, x 922, and the rareness of
the act. may have caused the corruption.

823. For the significance of the οἰωνός
see note on M 239, It has been sug-
gested that, as the immediate purpose of
Zeus is the humiliation of the Greeks,
he cannot be meant to have sent the
omen, which is not said to come from
him ; so that the people were mistaken
in accepting a fortuitous appearance as a
divine message. ‘This, however, would
not be in the Epic style; it would need
to be explicitly stated. As the words
of Aias are in the end to be abun-
dantly fulfilled, there is no reason why
Zeus should not have confirmed them.

828. φέροι JL Cant. Eust.
TahdccHic: ϑελήςηις Lips.

824. βουγῆϊε Zen.: of δὲ βουκάϊε Sch. A:

|| ἔειπας CPR.

| 825. al A (ai)
829. TOICI: τοῖς

830. ὅ

824, ἁμαρτοεπές, cf. ἀφαμαρτοεπὴς 1"
215. Barnes plausibly conjectures ἀμε-
τροεπές, on the ground that it is not the
stumbling but the excessive boastfulness
of Aias’ speech which Hector can deride ;
van L. avaproFerés, comparing ἀρτιεπής
X 281 and ἄρτια βάζειν ἘΞ 92, 8 240.
Bourdie, so also o 79 viv μὲν μήτ᾽ εἴης,
Bovydie, μήτε γένοιο, of the braggart Iros.
οἱ δὲ ‘*BouKdie,” 6 ἐστιν ἄγροικε" ““βουκαῖός
τ᾽ ἀλέγοι καὶ ὀροίτυπος ᾿ Νίκανδρος (Ther.
5), Schol. T. The exact origin of the
word is not very clear, The second
part of it probably comes from root yaF
of yalw, ἀ-γαυ-ός, ete., in the sense of
pride, and Bov- may be merely a prefix
indicating coarseness, as in Boras. (See
J. P. v. 18 and viii. 116.) It is possible
that Zen.’s βουγήϊε (which he supposed
tocome from γῆ) is the correct Ionic form.
Note that ποῖον of the vulg. is evidently
meant to avoid the hiatus, here
legitimate ; ofon is the regular word
in this connexion, H 455 ete. (H. G.
§ 267. 3). ποῖον occurs however three
times in Od. (8 85, 243, p 406), and in
the phrase ποῖον τὸν μῦθον ἔειπες.

825-28. See Θ 538-41.

830. λειριόεντα, see Τ 152. The word
is evidently used ironically, ‘that fair
tender flesh.’

IAIAAOC N (χπι)

/ > \ ry , / / >>? > \
δάψει: ἀτὰρ Τρώων κορέεις κύνας ἠδ᾽ οἰωνοὺς
δημῶι καὶ σάρκεσσι, πεσὼν ἐπὶ νηυσὶν ᾿Αχαιῶν."

ὡς ἄρα φωνήσας ἡγήσατο, τοὶ δ᾽ ἅμ᾽ ἕποντο

’ n ,ὔ > \ > ” \ »
ἠχῆι θεσπεσίηι, ἐπὶ δ᾽ ἴαχε λαὸς ὄπισθεν.
᾿Αργεῖοι δ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἐπίαχον, οὐδὲ λάθοντο
» a > > ΧΝ la ΄ ’ / > /
ἀλκῆς, ἀλλ᾽ ἔμενον Tpwwv ἐπιόντας ἀρίστους.

’ \ > > / “, 7 > / \ \ > /
ἠχὴ δ᾽ ἀμφοτέρων ἵκετ᾽ αἰθέρα καὶ Διὸς αὐγάς.

831. Kopéceic GQ Vr. A: yp. Cant. Harl. ἃ. 832. ἐπὶ : παρὰ ‘ Vat.

ἄλλωι A. 837. aug’ ἑτέρων (). | αὐγὰς : οἱ δὲ αὐλάς Sch. T.

x

61

ἐν

[INTRODUCTION

THE main story of the book, the lulling of Zeus by Hera’s wiles in 153-362,
with its continuation in O 1-366, and its probable introduction in N 1-125,
is as straightforward and almost as free from internal critical difficulties as
it is radiant with humour, grace, and healthful sensuousness—qualities
which give it a marked individuality among all the beautiful episodes of
the Iliad, and stamp it as the work of a single hand. Only one passage,
the ‘Leporello-catalogue’ of 317-27, has been widely questioned from
Aristarchos onwards ; and only one point of the narrative is left obscure—
the message given by Hypnos. to Poseidon in 354 ff. without any instruc-
tions, so far as we are told, from Hera. The fact that he tells Hera’s design,
though we do not hear that he has himself been informed of it, is noticeable
from its bearing on the oath in which Hera disclaims having set Poseidon
to help the Achaians (see O 41).

But in the scenes which introduce and continue the ἱερὸς γάμος of Zeus
and Hera, difficulties and doubts come thick. The question arises first—
why does Hera interfere just at this point? Poseidon has been working
undisturbed through the whole of the last book, and the idea of distracting
Zeus’ attention by craft comes too late. Nitzsch felt this so strongly that he
was led to suggest, with great ingenuity, that the beguiling of Zeus is to be
regarded not as subsequent to the events of N, but as contemporaneous with
them ; it is the dalliance of Zeus which explains why Poseidon was not
interfered with while aiding the Greeks in the early part of N ; thus 5 154
αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἔγνω τὸν μὲν ποιπνύοντα «.7.r., refers to the activity of Poseidon,
not in the immediately preceding lines, but in N 43 ff; and the meeting
of Poseidon with the wounded chiefs (& 136) is an incident of his exertions
in N 83 ff.

Were this possible, it would explain many difficulties—particularly the
problem of the combat of Aias and Hector. For in N 809-32 we have
loud challenges which lead to nothing, while with © 402 comes an actual
combat with no beginning. The πρῶτος with which it opens should in
accordance with Epic practice follow a passage introducing the two
warriors ; as it stands it has no more than a vague reference to the army at
large.

But even Nitzsch’s supposition will not save the text in its present form.
So violent a regression to an earlier point of the story is impossible without
explanation. Any hearer must suppose that the ἰαχή of Ξ 1 refers to the

62

IAIAAOC = (xiv) 63

ἴαχε of N 834, whereas by the hypothesis it goes back to the αὐΐαχοι of
N 41, or the ὅμαδος ἀλίαστος of M 471. The regression is one which
would require a difficult readjustment of the imagination even for a careful
reader fully instructed ; that a hearer should understand it without a word
of explanation is beyond all reason, Yet the scene at the beginning of the
book undoubtedly suits the beginning and not the end of N, That Nestor
and the other chiefs should be brought from their huts by the shouting is
perfectly natural when the wall has just been carried, but not when the
battle has long been surging backwards and forwards within the wall.

We are driven then to the conclusion that the two stories are not con-
temporaneous but alternative (Introduction to N). But there still remain
serious difficulties of detail.

(1) Is the opening of © (1-152) part of the original ᾿Απάτη, or is it an
addition? With regard to the last part of it (135-52) there can be little
doubt. The divinely loud shout in 148—49 of the god who is endeavouring
to conceal himself from Zeus in human shape reminds one of a favourite joke
of modern burlesques ; the couplet itself is borrowed from a very different
context in E 860-61, as 151-52 are from A 11-12. The vague disguise of
a παλαιὸς φώς in 136 is against the rule that the person whose semblance is
taken by a god is elsewhere always named ; and the introductory verse 135

* is not in place here, as it properly indicates that the god to whom it is

F applied is not in action, but only on the watch. These lines at all events
are designed only to recall the state of things when we last heard of
Poseidon in N 206-39.

Matters are not, however, so plain with regard to the meeting of the
chiefs in 1-134. The passage is not essential to the story, and in no way
advances the action. It is designed to follow immediately after the end of
M, and is less suited to any place after the rally of the Greeks brought
about by Poseidon. Agamemnon’s proposal of flight has already been twice
made, in B and 1. The speech of Diomedes, with its long and untimely
family history, is singularly unlike the downright plain speaking which
elsewhere marks him. And the story undoubtedly gains in compactness
and force if the action of Hera is made to follow immediately on that of
Poseidon in N 1-125. The whole passage may be a fragment from an
entirely different continuation of M.

(2) Passing now to 363, where the scene changes from Ida to the battle-
‘field, we again meet with great difficulties. The advice given by Poseidon,
and followed by the Greeks, to change armour (371-82), is partly un-
intelligible, partly ludicrous. Aristarchos, it is true, athetized 376-77, and,
we may safely conclude, 381—82, also ; but even so the absurdity of a change
of armour by the whole force in the thick of the battle is flagrant
enough, The description of Poseidon in 385-87 does not lead to any result
adequate to the terms in which it is announced. We are left to suppose
that he assists Aias to disable Hector ; but the divine sword so pompously
proclaimed does nothing whatever. In 390 the manner in which Poseidon
and Hector are spoken of as though they were equals is clearly not Homeric,
and the idea of the sea rushing up to take part in the fight is not in the
best Epic style.

All this points clearly to the lateness of this piece, in favour of which

64 IAIAAOC = (xiv)

the meeting of Hector and Aias has been displaced to the end of N, & 402
having once been the continuation of N 795-837. Why this extraordinary
dislocation should have been effected it is impossible for us, ignorant as we
are of the materials which the diaskeuast had before him, to say. It would
seem that in the original story the wounding of Hector was represented
(tacitly no doubt) as the outcome of Poseidon’s efforts. The diaskeuast thought
that something more explicit was needed after Hera’s efforts, and accord-
ingly added this passage (Erhardt). This however does not explain the
splitting up of the combat of Hector and Aias, which remains unaccountable,
while it is almost impossible to believe that the two halves of it do not
belong to one another.

(3) The conclusion of the book (508—end) does not fit on well to what
precedes (see note there). But here, as in so many similar battle-scenes, it is
rash to speak confidently as to the real age of the lines.

IAIAAOC =

Διὸς ἀπάτη.

Νέστορα δ᾽ οὐκ ἔλαθεν ἰαχὴ πίνοντά περ ἔμπης,

ἀλλ᾽ ᾿Ασκληπιάδην ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"

“φράζεο, δῖε Μαχᾶον,
μείζων δὴ παρὰ νηυσὶ
J \ \ \ lal “-“

ἀλλὰ σὺ μὲν νῦν πῖνε
> a \ \
εἰς ὅ κε θερμὰ λοετρὰ

βοὴ θαλερῶν αἰζηῶν.
καθήμενος αἴθοπα οἶνον, 5

“9 ” / ”
OTTMS εσται τάδε εργα"

ἐυπλόκαμος ᾿καμήδη

/ \ / A / e /
θερμήνηι καὶ Novant ἄπο βρότον αἱματόεντα"

> \ > Ν ᾽ \ / yy > / ”
αὐτὰρ ἐγὼν ἐλθὼν τάχα εἴσομαι ἐς περιωπήν.

ἃ ᾽ \ / La / e a
ως εὐπὼν OAKOS εἷλε τετύγμενον ULOS ἑοῖο,

Ἅ / e
κείμενον ἐν κλισίηι, Θρασυμήδεος ἱπποδάμοιο,

10

χαλκῶι παμφαῖνον: ὁ δ᾽ ἔχ᾽ ἀσπίδα πατρὸς ἑοῖο"

εἵλετο δ᾽ ἄλκιμον ἔγχος, ἀκαχμένον ὀξέϊ χαλκῶι,

a > > \ / tf, ’ "» a b) /
στῆ δ᾽ ἐκτὸς κλισίης, τάχα δ᾽ εἴσιδεν ἔργον ἀεικές,

\ Ν > / \ \ / vv
TOUS μὲν ορινομένους, TOUS δὲ κλονέοντας ὄπισθε,

Τρῶας ὑπερθύμους". ἐρέριπτο δὲ τεῖχος ᾿Αχαιῶν.

id 3 “ / A / / “-
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε πορφύρηι πέλαγος μέγα κύματι κωφῶιε,

8. τόδε ἔργον Harl. ἃ supr.
καθήμενος ἐν κλισίηιει 7.
Eust. 12 om. Q.

Lips. Vr. A. || κωφῶι : τινὲς πηγῶι yp.

4. βοὴ : μάχη Cant. δ.
1. καὶ λούςηι : λούςη ὃ᾽ 1).
13. ὃ᾽ ἐκτὸς : δὲ παρὰ Lips.

οἱ δὲ yp. μίμνε
9. ἑοῖο : ἑῆος
16. πορφύρει Zen. CS

4

1. ninonta, A 642, though in that line
Nestor and Machaon are said to have
finished drinking ; a trifling discrepancy
which some have needlessly exaggerated.

8. efcouat, i.e. Είσομαι, 1 will hasten,
from Flewa, see A 138. Others take
it to be from Fid, οἶδα, J will learn, and
join ἐλθὼν és περιωπήν. But this order
of words is very involved. περιωπήν as
W 451, « 146.

11. It is useless to inquire why father
and son had thus changed shields, as
the Scholiasts of course do. It may be

VOL. II

F

noticed that in 9—11 we have three con-
secutive rhyming lines.

13. The idea evidently is that Nestor
finds he has no need to go to a περιωπή
and look over the wall, as it has already
been passed by the combatants.

15. épépinto, from ἐρείπω (Ὁ
ef. H. G. ὃ 28. L. Meyer conj. ἔξριπτο
(from Fpim-rw), but this is needless. Cf.
κατ-ερήριπ-εν, δ.

16. This fine simile is taken from the
‘ground-swell’ produced by a storm at
a distance, and often followed by the

65

356),

68 IAIAAOC = (xv)

/
ὀσσόμενον λιγέων ἀνέμων λαιψηρὰ κέλευθα,

BA » ΟΣ ΝΜ / 50 . /
αὔτως, οὐδ᾽ apa TE προκυλίνδεται οὐδ᾽ ἑτέρωσε,

πρίν τινα κεκριμένον καταβήμεναι ἐκ Διὸς οὖρον,
ἃ id Gol .
ὡς ὁ γέρων ὥρμαινε Oaifouevos κατὰ θυμὸν 20

διχθάδι᾽, ἢ μεθ᾽ ὅμιλον ἴοι Δαναῶν ταχυπώλων

ne μετ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδην ᾿Αγαμέμνονα ποιμένα λαῶν.

ὧδε δέ οἱ φρονέοντι δοάσσατο κέρδιον εἶναι,

βῆναι ἐπ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδην.

οἱ δ᾽ ἀλλήλους ἐνάριζον

μαρνάμενοι, λάκε δέ σφι περὶ χροὶ χαλκὸς ἀτειρὴς 25
νυσσομένων ξίφεσίν τε Kal ἔγχεσιν ἀμφιγύοισι.

Νέστορι δὲ ξύμβληντο διοτρεφέες βασιλῆες
πὰρ νηῶν ἀνιόντες, ὅσοι βεβλήατο χαλκῶι,

Τυδείδης ᾿Οδυσεύς τε καὶ ᾿Ατρεΐδης ᾿Αγαμέμνων.

πολλὸν γὰρ ἀπάνευθε μάχης εἰρύατο νῆες 80

ω 5 3 e \ a ,
iv ἔφ ἁλὸς πολιῆς: τὰς γὰρ πρώτας πεδίονδε

18. οὕτως οὐδ᾽ ἄρα τε διὰ τοῦ τε Ar, (others Toi? or τι ).
21. d1ioTpogeec HJ.

21. wee: Kae’ 6.
31. πρῶτα P!.

storm itself. mop@uUpHi, see note on
A 103. πορφύρεος is applied to waves
in A 482, II 391, ᾧ 326 and several times
in Od. The verb recurs only in a meta-
phorical sense, κραδίη πόρφυρε, Φ 551,
ὃ 427, etc. κωφῶι, as opposed to the
splash and rush of the wave-tops before
a wind.

17. éccéuenon, foreboding, only here
of inanimate objects. Cf. A 105.

18. αὕτως, vaguely, aimlessly, keeps
up the personification, and is expanded
in the words which follow. For οὐδ᾽
ἑτέρωςε, (neither forward) nor aside, cf.
N 543; Bentley wrote πρὸ κυλίνδεται
to make this clear. Eust. read ovée-
Tépwoe, and so Nauck has; but H. knows
neither οὐδέτερος nor any derivative of
it. For te Scheindler conj. τῆι, neither
this way nor that (any other). κεκρι-
uéNoN, decided, as opposed to the shifting
‘puffs’ which precede the storm. - Cf.
Hesiod Opp. 670 τῆμος δ᾽ (in summer
time) εὐκρινέες 7 αὖραι καὶ πόντος
ἀπήμων, the winds are steady.

21. Oiyeddia, cf. Π 435 διχθὰ δέ μοι
κραδίη μέμονε φρεσὶν ὁρμαίνοντι. It
appears from Herod, that some wrote
διχθαδίηι (διχθαδίηι ἤ with synizesis 7)
but this was rejected by Ar.

26=N 147, Π 637. Observe the gen.
νυςςομένων after σφι, as often (H. G.
§ 243. 3 d); it is a near approach to the

20. ὅρμαινε 1).
30. γάρ ῥ᾽ ACDHJU Eust. || νῆας L.

gen. absolute, cf. Z 3. The middle is
reciprocal, ‘stabbing one another.’

28. ἁνιόντες, the ἀνα- implies inland.
πὰρ νηῶν is explained by 30-36.

30. For Γάρ some Mss. have γάρ ῥ᾽,
but the additional particle is not needed.
See on A 467. It is clear from the con-
text that νῆες means their ships, i.e.
those of Diomedes, Odysseus, and Aga-
memnon, as opposed to the rest of the
fleet. εἰρύατο with i as in 75, but the
regular ὕ is found in A 248 and elsewhere
(from Fe-Fpi-aro). The ὕ is probably due
to the analogy of other forms where it is
followed by a consonant, εἴρῦτο, εἰρυμέναι
(N 682), ete. Schulze Q. Z, p. 318.

31, Tac rap πρώτας is susceptible of
two different interpretations: (1) jor
these ships (those of the chiefs) they had
drawn up first to shore (in the innermost
line next the sea), but had built the wall
next the last (the outermost line inland).
Or (2) for those (others) they had drawn
up in the first row towards the land (away
from the sea) and had built the wall
hard by their sterns. The decision
mainly turns upon the word πρυμνῆισιν.
In (1) this is taken to mean the Jast
(outermost) as opposed to the first (inner-
most). To this Herodianos objects ὅτε
οὐ τίθησιν (the adj. πρυμνός) ἐπὶ διε-
στῶτος σώματος ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ ἡνωμένου, i.e.
Η. uses it of the end of a single long

IAIAAOC = (xiv) 67

\ lad a
εἴρυσαν, αὐτὰρ τεῖχος ἐπὶ πρυμνῆισιν ἔδειμαν.
οὐδὲ γὰρ οὐδ᾽ εὐρύς περ ἐὼν ἐδυνήσατο πάσας
? \ fal \ ,
αἰγιαλὸς νῆας χαδέειν, στείνοντο δὲ λαοί:

“ € / a ΄
τῶ pa προκρόσσας ἔρυσαν, καὶ πλῆσαν ἁπάσης

co
on

5... / / τ »

ἠΐονος στόμα μακρόν, ὅσον συνεέργαθον ἄκραι.
lal ε᾽ “ > 5 / a

T p οἵ γ᾽ ὀψείοντες ἀυτῆς Kal πολέμοιο

32. πρύμνοιειν U. 33. εὐοὺς J.

35. Epuon Ap. Lex. 135. 26.

ἁπάςας U.

36. μακρὸν : πολλὸν Zen. Aph.: Ar. διχῶς. || cuNeépraeen Harl. a!: cunéprasen

R (supr. 0). || ἄκρας Ὁ.
πτολέμοιο 1].

body, not of the Zast of a row. ‘This
appears to be true, and if no exception
to the rule is admissible it is decisive
in favour of (2). On the other hand
75 vies ὅσαι πρῶται εἰρύαται ἄγχι
θαλάσσης strongly supports (1) (see how-
eyer on O 653) and so does rdp instead
of the δέ which we should expect with
(2). Moreover (1) suits the whole tenor
of the passage far better. It is a con-
tradiction to explain the distance of
the ships from the fighting by saying
that the wall where the fighting is was
built close to their sterns. On the whole
therefore it seems advisable to admit an
unusual sense of πρυμνός, remembering
that the word is not very common, and
that in nine out of the 25 places where it
occurs it is found in the phrases νηυσὶν
ἐπὶ πρυμνῆισι, ἐπὶ πρυμνῆισι νέεσσι, Which
are ambiguous, as they are used of fight-
ing which occurs at the outermost ships,
and also at their sterns. Similarly
πρῶτος is used both of the end (of a pole
etc.) and of the first of a series. Accord-
ing to the grammarians πρύμνη as subst.
=stern is distinguished by accent from
the adj. Hence if we adopt (2) we
must write πρύμνηισι here with Mss. and
Herod. ; while Krates had πρυμνῆισι,
presumably adopting explanation (1). It
is commonly said that this line is in
contradiction to the closing portion of
H, as implying that the building of the
wall took place at the time when the
ships were drawn up on land. This is
certainly not involved in the words, and
would indeed require an imperf. rather
than the aor. ἔδειμαν. The phrase is
purely topographical, not historical.

35. mpoxpéccac can have only one
meaning here, iz rows or ranks, one be-
hind another ; the αἰγιαλός in the nar-
rowest sense not being able to hold all
the ships, they are drawn up ‘on to the
land as opposed to the beach. The only

37. ὀψείοντες Ar. 2: dwatontec Zen. 7 (v. infra).

difficulty in the interpretation of the
word is caused by attempts to explain it
from the far more obscure κρόσσας πύργων
in M 258, q.v. Ar. taking the word
there to mean ‘scaling ladders,’ ex-
plained προκρύσσας here to mean τὰς
κλιμακηδὸν νενεωλκημένας ἑτέρας πρὸ ἐτέ-
ρων, ὥστε θεατροειδὲς φαίνεσθαι τὸ νεώλκιον,
1.6. drawn up on the steep curving beach
in rows one above another like the
ladder-like seats of the Greek theatre.
The way in which Herodotos under-
stood the word is perfectly plain (vii. 188)
αἱ μὲν δὴ πρῶται τῶν νεῶν ὅρμεον πρὸς
γῆι, ἄλλαι δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἐκείνηισι ἐπ᾽ ἀγκυρέων "
ἅτε γὰρ τοῦ αἰγιαλοῦ ἐόντος οὐ μεγάλου,
πρόκροσσαι ὁρμέοντο ἐς πόντον καὶ ἐπὶ
ὀκτὼ νέας, they anchored in ranks eight
deep. The word recurs also in Herod. iv.
152, but does not explain anything
more. The arrangement in ranks is
not elsewhere mentioned in the Iliad ;
it is evidently an invention of the
moment to explain the long absence of
the wounded chiefs in the crisis of the
fight, due to the interposition of N.

36. ἠϊόνος is used here in a wider
sense than αἰγιαλός, as our ‘shore’ is
wider than ‘beach.’ For στόμα com-
pare the word στομαλίμνη, Z 4 (note), and
ποταμοῖο κατὰ στόμα ε 441. The pro-
montories are regarded as jaws, the bay
as the hollow of the mouth. ἄκραι,
Sigeion and Rhoiteion, which are about
five miles apart.

37. ὀψείοντες, (ἡ διπλῆ περιεστιγμένη)
ὅτι Ζηνόδοτος γράφει ὀψαΐοντες. εἴτε δὲ
μετὰ πολὺν χρόνον πορευόμενοι (sc. ὀψὰ
lévres) ἤθελεν ἀκούειν εἴτε μετὰ πολὺν
χρόνον ἀκούοντες (sc. ὄψ᾽ ἀΐοντες), ψεῦδος"
εὐθέως γὰρ ἀκούσαντες ὥρμησαν. καὶ τὸ
ὀψὰ ἀνελλήνιστον" οὕτω γὰρ εἴωθε λέγειν,
“ὀψὲ δὲ δὴ μετέειπε᾽᾽ An. ᾿Αρίσταρχός
φησι Ζηνόδοτον γράφειν ὀψαΐοντες, ὁ δὲ
᾿ἘἘπιθέτης Πτολεμαῖος “᾿τῶι ῥ᾽ οἵ γ᾽ οὐ
ψαύοντες᾽ καὶ λόγον φησὶν ἔχειν τὴν

68 IAIAAOC = (xiv)

” ΕῚ , / - , » Ψ

ἔγχει ἐρειδόμενοι κίον ἁθρόοι: ἄχνυτο δέ σφι

θυμὸς evi στήθεσσιν: ὁ δὲ ξύμβλητο γεραιὸς

Νέστωρ, πτῆξε δὲ θυμὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ᾿Αχαιῶν. 40
τὸν καὶ φωνήσας προσέφη κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων"

“ὦ Νέστορ Νηληϊάδη, μέγα κῦδος ᾿Αχαιῶν,

/ Ν / / a> 3 ,

τίπτε λιπὼν πόλεμον φθισήνορα δεῦρ ἀφικάνεις ;

δείδια μὴ δή μοι τελέσηι ἔπος ὄβριμος “Ἑκτωρ,

ὥς ποτ᾽ ἐπηπείλησεν ἐνὶ Τρώεσσ᾽ ἀγορεύων, 48

\ \ \ n \ " » / θ
μή πριν Tap VHWVY TPOTL ALOV aTTOVEET al,

40 a0. Ar. || πῆξε Zen., Dion. Sid., Herod. C (p. vas,) G Vr. ἃ, Harl. b, Par.

dt 1":
follows 43 in Bar. Mor.

Aph. C.

γραφήν, Did. This is interesting as
shewing that the edition of Zen. was
without breathings or accents, so that
even Ar. himself could not be sure how
the letters were to be read ; if we are
to believe his ‘assailant’ Ptolemy, he
was not even correctly informed as to
the letters themselves. The strictures
on the form ὀψά are well deserved ; but
the alternative explanation, ὄψ᾽ ἀΐοντες,
gives a perfectly good sense, and was
no doubt what Zen. meant if Ar. was
rightly informed. The alternative read-
ing attributed to Zen. is not acceptable,
as H. uses ψαύειν only in the physical
sense touch ; nor does the word ever seem
to mean take part in in Greek. It is
a long time since Agamemnon left the
field (A 283), and the fact that he should
only now have come to see after the
fortune of the fight might well seem
to reyuire explanation. This is given
by the distance at which his hut is
from the wall, so that he only hears
the din when the wall has long been
crossed. This gives a good sense to τῶ
(for which Pallis suggests τῆι, there), and
it is a question if the reading of Zen.
should not be preferred to that of Ar.
It may be added that ὀψείω is the only
desiderative in -σείω in H. (see van L.
Ench. p. 356), and that the constr. with
the gen. does not seem natural.

40. ἀθετεῖται ὅτι καὶ ἐκ τῶν προειρη-
μένων νοοῦμεν ὅτι Νέστωρ ἐστὶν ὁ γεραιός.
καὶ τὸ πτῆξε ἄκυρον: ἐπὶ γὰρ τῶν ἀπολε-
λυμένων τῆι ἀγωνίαι καὶ τῶι τῆς ψυχῆς
παλμῶι ἁρμόζει (i.e. the verb is properly
used not of him who causes, but of him
who suffers, dejection). The line may

πλῆξε ( and of δέ ap. Sch. T. || ἀχαιῶν : ἑταίρων Zen.

42 om. Q:

43. peeicHNopa δεῦρ᾽ ikdneic At (text in margin),
44. δείδια Aph. PR: ϑείϑω . || TeAécor Bar. ὄμβριμος CPR.

45. ὅς ποτ᾽

well be omitted. There is no reason
why the appearance of Nestor should
cause dismay, as he is not even wounded ;
and the use of the verb is quite without
parallel. The former objection applies
also to the variants πῆξε and πλῆξε.
The difficulties may be, however, evaded
by Ernesti’s conj. πτῆξε δὲ θυμός, or still
better by reading ἀχεύων for ᾿Αχαιῶν,
when πτῆξε θυμόν will refer to Nestor’s
own state of mind. ᾿Αχαιῶν as applied
to the three chiefs can hardly be right.
πτήσσειν in H: means elsewhere only
cower (θ 190, ὃ 354, 474, x 362), but
comes to mean fear in later Greek (e.g.
Soph. O. C. 1466 ἔπτηξα θυμόν, Theognis
1015 ἐχθροὺς πτῆξαι). The line does not
look like a mere interpolation for the
sake of bringing in Nestor’s name, as
Ar. thought.

44, deidia, the regular Homeric form
in other parts of the verse, is in the
first foot almost entirely supplanted by
δείδω, which Ar. read, apparently pre-
ferring a spondee in the first place.
The only exception is Φ 536 and the
variant of a few mss. here and ε 473.
δείδω is explained as a contraction of
deldoa = δέδξοα from δε- δ ο(ι)-α, whence
also comes δείδια -- δέδια from the ana-
logy of δείδιμεν, δειδιότες, ete. (H. G.
§ 22. 4n., van L. Ench. p. 411). In
any case δείδω must be a false form.

45. The allusion is evidently to the
words of Hector in Θ 181, 526. It
follows that this passage must be as
late as ©. Though note thus means
only the preceding day, it is excusable,
Ἢ "ἢ the poem itself © is ἃ long way
ack.

IAIAAOC = (xiv) 69

\ \ A > A A
πρὶν πυρὶ νῆας ἐνιπρῆσαι, κτεῖναι δὲ Kal αὐτούς.
-“ Ν / \ \ cal -
κεῖνος τὼς ἀγόρευε" τὰ δὴ νῦν πάντα τελεῖται.
* / Φ « \ ” > / > \
ὦ πόποι, ἦ pa Kal ἄλλοι ἐυκνήμιδες ᾿Αχαιοὶ
> lal / 7
ἐν θυμῶι βάλλονται ἐμοὶ χόλον, ὥς περ ᾿Αχιλλεύς, 50
50» > / / > \ a / ν᾽»
οὐδ᾽ ἐθέλουσι μάχεσθαι ἐπὶ πρυμνῆισι νέεσσι.
Ν ᾽ > / > Μ / ΄ / τ’

τὸν δ᾽ ἠἡμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα Τερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ'
“ 5 δ) Coles wpe -» / Os »

ἢ δὴ ταῦτά Ὑ ἑτοῖμα τετεύχαται, οὐδέ κεν ἄλλως
γ᾽ \ ig , SIN ΄,
Ζεὺς ὑψιβρεμέτης αὐτὸς παρατεκτήναιτο.

a \ se \ / A
τεῖχος μὲν yap δὴ κατερήριπεν, ὧι ἐπέπιθμεν

or
ζι

ἄρρηκτον νηῶν τε καὶ αὐτῶν εἶλαρ ἔσεσθαι:
οἱ δ᾽ ἐπὶ νηυσὶ θοῆισι μάχην ἀλίαστον ἔχουσι
/ 50.» x ” / / /
νωλεμές" οὐδ᾽ ἂν ἔτι γνοίης, μάλα περ σκοπιάζων,
ς /
ὁπποτέρωθεν ᾽Αχαιοὶ ὀρινόμενοι κλονέονται,
/ X \ 0

ὡς ἐπιμὶξ κτείνονται, ἀυτὴ δ᾽ οὐρανὸν ἵκει. 60
΄ -“ δὲ ΄ θ᾽ “ 4 / »”
ἡμεῖς δὲ φραζώμεθ᾽ ὅπως ἔσται τάδε ἔργα,

" Le «" , ᾽ » » ΄
εἴ τι νόος ῥέξει" πόλεμον δ᾽ οὐκ ἄμμε κελεύω

΄ > / / » / ν᾽
δύμεναι" οὐ γάρ πως βεβλημένον ἔστι μάχεσθαι.

Ν ’ 5 rn

Tov δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων"
: / \ a
“ Νέστορ, ἐπεὶ δὴ νηυσὶν ἔπι πρυμνῆισι μάχονται, 65

A ’
τεῖχος δ᾽ οὐκ ἔχραισμε τετυγμένον οὐδέ TL τάφρος,
- ,ὔ »»Ἄ A
ois ἔπι πόλλ᾽ ἔπαθον Δαναοί, ἔλποντο δὲ θυμῶι

48. ο᾽ Oc CDGJSU Par.defghj: ἐν ἄλλωι κεῖνός re (sc. τ᾽ ὥς) A (cf. B 330).
OH NON: δὲ νῦν J: NON δὴ Bar. Mor. 49. πόποι : πέπον J. 50. ἐκ eun0od
Q Lips. 51, ἐπὶ : ἐνὶ Mor. 53. ἄλλω G: ἄλλων U (supr. ¢ 103). 54.

παρετεκτήνατο (): παρατεκτήνατο U.
58. νωλεμέως H.

|| οὐ rap ἔτι Q. || γνοίη Aph.
γ᾽ ἔρξει PR (and ἄλλοι A): νόος ὃ᾽ ἔρξει τινές, A. ὕμμε Mor. ?
αἱ ᾿Αριστάρχου οἷς ἔπι καὶ ἧι ἔπι Did.: ἧι ἔπι Q. |

56. τινὲς ἄρρατον ἰσχυρόν, ἀνάλωτον T.
60. ἥκει PR. 62. νόος
67. διήλλαττον
πολλὰ πάθον PR.

49. This and the two following lines
are very suspicious. With very few ex-
ceptions, mostly of a doubtful character,
ὦ πόποι elsewhere begins a speech (see
N 99). We have apparently an addi-
tion, to explain the difficult line 40 ; the
dismay there caused to Agamemnon is
now attributed, very unnaturally, to a
fear that Nestor may have left the fight
in resentment against him. Besides,
from Agamemnon’s words in 65, it would
seem that he only learns of the fighting
ἐπὶ πρυμνῆισι νέεσσιν from the following
speech of Nestor. For ἐν ϑυμῶι βάλ-
λονται οἵ, 1 484.

53. ἑτοῖμα, ‘brought to reality,’ οἵ.
I 425, and so also @ 384. ἄλλως,
differently from what they are.

56=68. Bentley rejects it here. Cf.

H 437. The word dpparov mentioned
as a variant by Schol. T and meaning
hard appears to be found only in Plato
Rep. vii. 535 8B, Crat. 407 Ὁ.

58. Cf. E 85 Τυδεΐδην δ᾽ οὐκ av γνοίης
ποτέροισι μετείη.

62. εἴ Tl. . ῥέξει, assuming, as a
mere supposition, without implying any-
thing as to its correctness, that advice
will be of some good. Rhetorically, of
course, this is a suggestion that it will not.

63. βεβλημένον, an expression which
refers only to the others, as Nestor is not
wounded. He may perhaps include him-
self among them (due) on the score of age.
It is, of course, easy to read ὕμμε for
ἄμμε, with Barnes.

67. ofc, though supported only by
one of the two editions of Ar., seems

το IAIAAOC =

(xIv)

a \ >A 5 »
ἄρρηκτον νηῶν τε καὶ αὐτῶν εἶλαρ ἔσεσθαι,

Jaw / Φ
οὕτω που Διὶ μέλλει ὑπερμενέϊ φίλον εἶναι,

/ » / > >’
[νωνύμνους ἀπολέσθαι ar

"Apyeos ἐνθάδ᾽ ᾿Αχαιούς.] 70

3 \ \ ef / a ”
ἤιδεα μὲν yap ὅτε πρόφρων Δαναοῖσιν apvver,

Ss \ a ev \ \ e lal / -
οἷδα δὲ νῦν ὅτε τοὺς μὲν ὁμῶς μακάρεσσι θεοῖσι

κυδάνει,

ἡμέτερον δὲ μένος καὶ χεῖρας ἔδησεν.

᾽
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγεθ᾽, ὡς ἂν ἐγὼ εἴπω πειθώμεθα πάντες.

fol ec ral Seer yy / r=
νῆες ὅσαι πρῶται εἰρύαται ἄγχι θαλάσσης, 75
χὰ / \ SS. 2 e lal

ἕλκωμεν, πάσας δὲ ἐρύσσομεν εἰς ἅλα δῖαν,

> SE) > / e 7, > “ A
δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ εὐνάων ὁρμίσσομεν, εἰς ὃ κεν ἔλθηι

\ > f ” a > if ,
νὺξ ἀβρότη, εἴ κεν τῆι ἀποόσχωνται πολέμοιο

70 om. AtCtDPtR Vr. Ὁ

|| νωνύμους C™G (supr. N) HJP™TU Harl. a. (fale

ὅτε Ar. QO: ὅτι 15. 72. ὅτε Ar. PRT: ὅτι 0. 75. NHec AC (supr. a) U:
νῆας 2. 77. dpuricouen GP!QU. || ἔλθοι CL. 78. εἴ KEN Q Lips.: AN
Kai (2,

preferable to 7, as including the wall, θου 6 380. (Pallis’ conj. ἔλυσε is not
the most important part of the εἷλαρ. necessary. )

69=B 116, 1 23; 70=M 70, N 227.

71-72. The reading and constr. of this
couplet are both doubtful. Ar. read ὅτε
in both lines, and this gives the best
sense: As [ knew when Zeus was helping
the Danaans with all his heart, so I know
now when he is exalting the Trojans.
The object to #6ea and οἶδα is left
vague, ‘I knew what it meant,’ just as
in © 406 ὄφρ᾽ εἰδῆι γλαυκῶπις ὅτ᾽ ἂν ὧι
πατρὶ μάχηται, π 424 ἢ οὐκ οἷσθ᾽ ὅτε
δεῦρο πατὴρ τεὸς ἵκετο φεύγων ; (In all
these cases it will be seen that the ὅτε-
clause is not the object of the verb ; 9.8.
the last instance does not mean ‘do
you not know the date of your father’s
coming?’ but ‘do you not know what
had happened when he came?’) If we
read ὅτι in 72 with most mss., we still
have the same sense. It would then
be tempting however to take the ὅτι-
clause as the object both of ἤιδεα and
οἷδα: I knew, (even) when Zeus was
fighting for the Greeks, and I know
now, that he exalts the Trojans; i.e. I
knew all the time, even when we were
victorious, that Zeus was really in favour
of the Trojans. This gives a vigorous
sense, and suits the character of Agamem-
non; but πρόφρων, implying real and
not merely apparent aid, is fatal to it.

73. Kuddnei trans. = κυδαίνει, cf. olddver
νόον 1 554 and note on H 64. The verb
recurs only in f 42, where it is intrans.
For the metaphorical use of ἔϑηςε cf.
ὅς τίς μ᾽ ἀθανάτων πεδάαι Kal ἔδησε κελεύ-

74=B 189, I 26, in both cases in-
troducing a similar proposal by the same
speaker.

75. νῆες, though less strictly gram-
matical than the νῆας of most Mss.,
deserves preference as more idiomatic.
For similar cases of ‘inverse attraction’
see H. G. § 267. 4. πρῶται, here clearly
Jirst from the point of view of a spectator
by the sea, as in O 654 from the land.
See note on 31.

76. πάςας, se. all these, while ἁπάςας
in 79 means all the rest ; a tacit limita-
tion exactly like that of νῆες in 30.

ὕψι, afloat, perhaps a technical
term, which evidently does not mean,
as we might have expected, far out at
sea. Soin 6 785 ὑψοῦ δ᾽ ἐν νοτίωι τήν γ᾽
ὥρμισαν, ἐκ δ᾽ ἔβαν αὐτοί, where see M.
and R. ‘The expression describes a
ship ready for sailing at a moment’s
notice. . . She lies afloat; her stern
made fast with a hawser to the shore,
her bows made fast to the anchor-stone
(εὐναί).᾽ So also 6 55, Ap. Khod. ii.
1282 ὑψόθι vi’ ἐκέλευσεν ἐπ᾽ εὐναίηισιν
ἐρύσσαι.

78, νὺξ ἁβρότη, only here ; apparently
a variation of νὺξ ἀμβροσίη, ‘though an-
other possible explanation is suggested
on Καὶ 65. εἴ Ken, van L.’s conj. (αἴ κεν)
for ἢν καί, to remove the non-Homerie
ἤν, is supported by two mss. (εἰ καί
Brandreth). ‘The suggestion that the
Trojans may fight by night is ironical ;
such a thing was unknown in Homeric

IAIAAOC = (xiv) 71

Τρῶες: ἔπειτα δέ Kev ἐρυσαίμεθα νῆας ἁπάσας.
οὐ γάρ τις νέμεσις φυγέειν κακόν, οὐδ᾽ ἀνὰ νύκτα. 80
, ΟῚ / / Ν ΥΝ ΄ , 39
βέλτερον, ὃς φεύγων Tpopvynt κακὸν HE ἁλώηι.
us > =| ee! ΄ i > \ / / ’ /
τὸν © ap ὑπόδρα ἰδὼν προσέφη πολύμητις ᾿Οδυσσεύς:
“aN ‘5 nl " , ῳ »ο 7
τρεΐδη, ποῖόν σὲ ἔπος φύγεν ἕρκος ὀδόντων.
οὐλόμεν᾽, αἴθ᾽ ὥφελλες ἀεικελίου στρατοῦ ἄλλου

/ 2 ” > / τ᾿ BA \

σημαίνειν, μηδ᾽ ἄμμιν ἀνασσέμεν, οἷσιν apa Levs 8ῦ
/ fol /

ἐκ νεότητος ἔδωκε Kal ἐς γῆρας τολυπεύειν

ἀργαλέους πολέμους, ὄφρα φθιόμεσθα ἕκαστος.

A \ / , / 5] /
οὕτω δὴ μέμονας Τρώων πόλιν εὐρυάγυιαν
- f > -
καλλείψειν, ἧς εἵνεκ᾽ ὀϊζύομεν κακὰ πολλά;
/ / / . »” > al nr > /
σίγα, μή τίς T ἄλλος ᾿Αχαιῶν τοῦτον ἀκούσηι 90

a ἃ LA b) / \ / / 7
μῦθον ὃν οὔ κεν ἀνήρ ye διὰ στόμα πάμπαν ἄγοιτο,

[τ 5 / π \ 7 4
ὅς τις ἐπίσταιτο Huot φρεσὶν ἄρτια βάζειν

80. νύκτας ἢ. || οὐδ᾽ ὑπαλύξαι Max. Tyr. 41. 3 (οἵ, Μ 327).
L: προφύγει P. || ἤπερ ἁλώιηι ap. Eust.
89. καλλείψειν : éxnépcein Zen.
91. ἄροιτο Ἡ (supr. r).
crarar PRT Cant. Vr. b A, Harl..b ἃ, Par. c d g j, yp. Harl. a:

ἕκαστοι ( Lips. 88. οὕτως ().
om. JPRT: & Vr. bd A.

King’s, Par. e: énictaie’ Q.

81. προφύγοι
86. εἷς U. 87.
90. T
92. ἐπίστηται U: éni-
ἐπίστατο Lips.

84. εἴθ᾽ PR.

c

warfare, Monro. ΤΗ͂Ι seems to be a pure
dat., by reason of or even out of regard
to night; cf. H. G. § 143 and note on
H 282.

80. οὐ νέμεσις, see on I 156.
νύκτα, here only ; see H. (ἡ, § 210.

81. This line has been rejected by
Friedlander as a gnomic ‘tag.’ Though
such tags were peculiarly suitable for
interpolation, there is really no cause
for suspicion here. The sentiment of
course is the familiar saw about ‘him who
fights and runs away.’ For βέλτερον
ὅς (where és=el 71s) compare note on
H 401, and ο 72 ἴσόν τοι κακόν ἐσθ᾽, ὅς
τ᾿ οὐκ ἐθέλοντα νέεσθαι ξεῖνον ἐποτρύνει,
Hesiod Opp. 327 ἴσον δ᾽ ὅς θ᾽ ἱκέτην ὅς
τε ξεῖνον κακὸν ἔρξηι. Similar cases are
common in Euripides, Thuk. and others.
Ameis compares Luther’s words, ‘ Wer
zu viel Honig isset, das ist nicht gut.’
npopurHi evidently means escapes, as
distinguished from the simple φεύγων,

Slight.

83=A 350, and cf. I 409 with note.

84. οὐλόμενε, see note on ἃ 2. The
vocative is similarly used in p 484,
ctpatou, for the gen. see H. G. 8 151 Καὶ
CHUGINEIN, When meaning to command,
elsewhere always takes the dat., and so
Nauck would read here. But the ana-
logies in favour of the gen. are quite

ana

sufficient. So ἀνάσσειν generally takes
the dat., but is found eight or nine
times with the gen.

86. τολυπεύειν, fo wind up in the
sense of carrying through to the end ;
τολύπη being the ball of wool wound up
after spinning. So @ 7, and several
times in Od. ; see M. and R. on a 238,

87. peiduecea, aor. subj. as φθίεται,
Y 173. These words might contain a
bitter taunt against Agamemnon, as
though the destruction of every man
were his aim (ὄφρα final). But it is
more natural to take them as part of
the description of the heroes, ‘men who
are born to battle, and will fight till
they fall’ (ὄφρα temporal).

89. For καλλείψειν Zen. read ἐκπέρ-
σειν, which gives a very vigorous sense if
read with a note of interrogation: Js this
the way in which you expect to take Troy ?
(Is it possible that he may have read
καλλήψειν, and explained it by ἐκπέρσειν ?
See note on N 620.)

91. διὰ στόμα ἄγοιτο, bring through
the mouth, as though a word were a
tangible thing taken bodily out of a
man over the ‘barrier of the teeth.’
Hentze compares πάλιν λάζετο μῦθον,
Δ 357.

92, The so-called ‘attraction’ of the
mood in the subordinate clause to the

“1
bo

IAIAAOC = (xiv)

rn / ’ yy 7 6 / \
σκηπτοῦχος T εἴη, καί οἱ πειθοίατο λαοὶ
7» ¢ 7
τοσσοίδ᾽ ὅσσοισιν σὺ μετ᾽ ᾿Αργείοισιν ἀνάσσεις"
fal e ,
νῦν δέ σευ ὠνοσάμην πάγχυ φρένας, οἷον ἔειπες" 95
ἃ / an
Os κέλεαι πολέμοιο συνεσταότος καὶ ἀυτῆς
a , ¢ f 5 Σ n
νῆας ἐυσσέλμους ἅλαδ᾽ ἑλκέμεν, ὄφρ᾽ ETL μᾶλλον
/ / /
Τρωσὶ μὲν εὐκτὰ γένηται ἐπικρατέουσί περ ἔμπης,
εὐὰι 3 ee ” > , 3 \ ᾽ \
ἡμῖν δ᾽ αἰπὺς ὄλεθρος ἐπιρρέπηι. οὐ yap ᾿Αχαιοὶ
/ / lal [2 ’ « /
σχήσουσιν πόλεμον νηῶν ἅλαδ᾽ ἑλκομενάων, 100
ΕῚ \
ἀλλ᾽ ἀποπαπτανέουσιν, ἐρωήσουσι δὲ χάρμης.
, lal ”
ἔνθα Ke σὴ βουλὴ δηλήσεται, ὄρχαμε λαῶν.
\ b) ᾽ ΄ > © » ᾽ - ᾽ Ἷ:
τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν Ἀγαμέμνων"

> an / \ 5 “
“@ ᾿Οδυσεῦ, μάλα πώς με καθίκεο θυμὸν ἐνιπῆι

95 ἀθ. Aph. Ar. || ceu: ce Zen. ‘Vat. 10.’ || ἔειπας PR.
98. γένοιτο ©. || ἐπεὶ κρατέουει S: éeAdoueénoici

97. ἕλκειν Plato Leg. iv. 706 FE.
Plato ibid.
ibid. 101 om. R.

γ΄ ano) g, Plato ibid.: Gnantanéoucin H : dnontanéoucin (2.
ὄρχαμε GNOpaN S Par. a: of’ ἀγορεύεις Plato ibid.

99. ἐπιρρέποι C() Bar.: ἐπιρρέπει J Lips.
| Gnonantanéoucin JL Par. a f (ma dotted: marg. ἀλλά

96. μέλεαι ().
100. πολέμου Plato

102. δηλήςεαι J. ||
104. πώς: περ Lips.

opt. of the principal clause (as ὃν...
ἄγοιτο is here in relation to ὃς ἐπίσταιτο)
merely means that the condition is re-
garded from the same point of view as
the main action. Here the main action
οὔ Kev ἄγοιτο is put as a possibility only,
so the condition is left only as a possi-
bility, the speaker not caring to shift
his point of view in order to insist upon
his assumption or expectation of its reality
as he might do by the indic. or subj. re-
spectively. If it is desired, however, to
insist upon this expectation, the mood
is changed to the subj., e.g. 127 ὅν κ᾽
ἐὺ εἴπω after ἀτιμήσαιτε (cf. ΗΠ. G. ὃ 305
ad tin.) Thus Bentley’s conj. ἐπίστηται
for ἐπίσταιτο is needless, though to some
extent supported by the fact that several
Mss. have ἐπίσταται.

93. For the addition of the clause with
Kai oi cf. A 79, M 229.

95=P 173, q.v. The line was justly
athetized by Ar. and Aph., as out of
place ; NUN O€ requires some such phrase
as ‘I used to esteem your wisdom’ pre-
ceding it, but there is nothing of the
sort here. For ceu Zen. read ce, which
probably is for σε᾽(ο) : the hiatus after
σε would be very harsh, even at the end
of the first foot (see Β 87). For the aor.
ὠνοσςσάμην see H. G.§ 78.1. The idiom
is common in Attic (ἐπήινεσα, ete.) but
very rare in H.; cf. Ὁ 241. Aisch.
Agam. 277 παιδὸς νέας ὡς κάρτ᾽ ἐμωμήσω
φρένας.

97. ὄφρα seems here to be final, in
strong irony, as though the victory of
the Trojans were Agamemnon’s conscious
purpose ; cf. 87.

98. εὐκτά, for this quasi-abstract use
of the neut. plural cf. φυκτὰ πέλωνται,
II 128, @ 299, οὐκέτ᾽ ἀνεκτὰ πέλονται
v 223, and note on M 30. ἔμπης seems
to imply ‘though they are already
victorious, you are not content with
that, but mean to give them their heart’s
desire, the destruction of the ships.’

99. émppénui, descend in the scales
of fate; cf. O 72 ῥέπε δ᾽ αἴσιμον juap
᾿Αχαιῶν.

101. Gnonantanéouci, they will look
away from the fight thinking only of
retreat. The vulg. ἀποπτανέουσι is a
curious ‘mumpsimus’ which has in-
vaded nearly all Mss. and must be of
great antiquity, dating no doubt from
Alexandrian times. It was first cor-
rected by Bentley from Hesych. (Letter
to Dr. Davies), after Barnes, conscious
of metre but careless of form, had tried
αὐτὰρ ἀποπτανέουσιν.

102. It is impossible to say whether
OHAHMceTal is aor. subj. or fut. indie.
The former is, however, more usual,
For κε Barnes conj. σε, Axt δέ.

104. Kaeikeo: cf. a 342 ἐπεί we μάλιστα
καθίκετο πένθος ἄλαστον, the only other
instance of the compound in Η. In
Attic writers it is equally restricted to
the metaphorical sense.

IAIAAOC = (xiv) 73

\
ἐγὼν ἀέκοντας ἄνωγα 105

ἑλκέμεν υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶν.

᾿ / > \ ᾽ ‘
apyarent’ ἀτὰρ οὐ μεν
fol ᾽ / [4 ,
νῆας ἐυσσέλμους aad
cal > » Δ -“ / Φ
νῦν δ᾽ εἴη ὃς τῆσδέ γ
x / >\ , > \ ΄ > , yf. 43
ἢ νέος ἠὲ παλαιός: ἐμοὶ δέ κεν ἀσμένωι εἴη.
: nr \ \ / \ > \ /
τοῖσι δὲ καὶ μετέειπε βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης"
‘fae! \ » / > \ 4 ΝΜ > bia Wa
ἐγγὺς ἀνήρ---οὐ δηθὰ patevoopev—ai κ᾽ ἐθέλητε 110
πείθεσθαι καὶ μή τι κότωι ἀγάσησθε ἕκαστος,
οὕνεκα δὴ γενεῆφι νεώτατός εἰμι μεθ᾽ ὑμῖν.
» lal »
πατρὸς δ᾽ ἐξ ἀγαθοῦ καὶ ἐγὼ γένος εὔχομαι εἶναι
Τυδέος, ὃν Θήβηισι χυτὴ κατὰ γαῖα κάλυψε.
ΠῸορθέϊ γὰρ τρεῖς παῖδες ἀμύμονες ἐξεγένοντο, 115
’ “- an “
ὦικεον δ᾽ ἐν Πλευρῶνι καὶ αἰπεινῆι Καλυδῶνι,

> , fal ᾽ ,
ἀμείνονα μῆτιν ἐνίσποι,

Ληριος ἠδὲ Μέλας, τρίτατος δ᾽ ἣν ἱππότα Οἰνεύς,
πατρὸς ἐμοῖο πατήρ' ἀρετῆι δ᾽ Hv ἔξοχος αὐτῶν.

105. ἐγὼ C Lips. Ven. Β.
109. μετέπειτα ().

ἅπασαι Did.): νεώτερος PR Par. a f.

Zen.:

Strabo x. 463.
Bar. Mor.

107, κα: τ᾿ Cant.
110. μαχτεύςομαι U.
4. 33. || κότωι : χόλωι ap. Eust. || ἀγάςαςθε Ὁ) (sup. H).

om. Aph. (see Ludwich). || γαῖα κάλυψε Ar. 2:
rata καλύπτει A (yp. κάλυψε) C Harl. a, Lips. Ven. B.
118. ἐμοῖο Ar. 2: ἐμεῖο Zen. JLRT. || αὐτῶν : ἄλλων HO

108. ἄσμενος ἢ, yp. Lips.
111. πείθεςθϑαι : ἐξείπω Ap. Lev.
112. νεώτατος ἢ (and
113. γένος : μόνος P. 114 dd. Ar.
rat’ ἐκάλυψε ap. Did. :

117 placed before 116,

107. εἴη ὃς. . Enicnoi, P 640 εἴη δ᾽
ὅς τις. . ἀπαγγείλειε, ξ 496 ἀλλά τις εἴη
εἰπεῖν, The clause ἐμοὶ 0€ κεν ἀσμένωι
εἴη is virtually an apodosis to this wish ;
for if the wish had been expressed, as it
well might have been, by εἰ δ᾽ εἴη, we
could then not have been sure whether
we had an ordinary conditional protasis
and apodosis, or an independent wish-
clause, followed paratactically by a sen-
tence expressing the result of the wish,
as with the present text.

108. d@cuénoo, for the dat. ef. H 7,
M 374, y 228, etc.; H. G. § 143.

110. uareUcouen, only here in H.,
apparently in the same sense as ματάω,
we shall not be long at fault, see IL 474,
E 233. This is clearly the stage which
connects the older meaning, to linger (in
Attic restricted to ματᾶν, ματάζειν), with
the later to seek, in which parevew is
found from Pindar onwards.

112. See I 54-58.

114. Did. says that Zen. athetized
this line and Aph. omitted it; Ar.
though not named must also have
athetized it, as the obelos is aflixed in
A. The verse is unobjectionable in

itself, and if the genealogy is to follow
the father’s name seems indispensable.
But the whole passage from 114 to 125
is not only needless but incongruous, and
quite alien to the character of Diomedes,
who is fond of alluding to his father’s
prowess, but could hardly give a jejune
catalogue of his relationships at such a
moment. It is no doubt an interpola-
tion, like many others, of the genealogi-
cal school connected with the name of
Hesiod. The objection to 114 that
Tydeus, though killed in the siege of
Thebes, was buried, according to the
later legend, at Eleusis, is of no weight ;
for Pausanias (ix. 18. 2) says that his
tomb was shewn at Thebes as well.

115. Mlopeét, the dat. instead of the
gen. with ἐξεγένοντο is strange; ef. T
231. Mss. have Πορθεῖ, and so Ar. wrote
δισυλλάβως, but the contracted form is
against all analogy ; the only case where
it is required by the metre is ᾿Αχιλλεῖ
Ψ 792, αν. The e for 7 is on the
analogy of ᾿Ατρέϊ, Τυδέϊ, the only other
certain instances in H. (see, however,
Schulze ᾧ. ΑΕ. p. 458).

116. See B 638, N 217.

74 IAIAAOC = (xiv)

ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν αὐτόθι μεῖνε, πατὴρ δ᾽ ἐμὸς "Αργεῖ νάσθη

πλαγχθείς: ὡς γάρ που Ζεὺς ἤθελε καὶ θεοὶ ἄλλοι.

120

lal an lal
᾿Αδρήστοιο δ᾽ ἔγημε θυγατρῶν, vate δὲ δῶμα
> \ / ud δέ e 4 yA
ἀφνειὸν βιότοιο, ἅλις δέ οἱ ἦσαν ἄρουραι
[4 \ \ lal
πυροφόροι, πολλοὶ δὲ φυτῶν ἔσαν ὄρχατοι apis,
\ 7 - / 5. Ἂμ ,ὕ \ / 3 \
πολλὰ δέ of πρόβατ᾽ ἔσκε' κέκαστο δὲ πάντας Ἀχαιοὺς
> / \ ἊΝ , ’ > / > > /
eyxeinu: Ta δὲ μέλλετ᾽ ἀκουέμεν, εἰ ἐτεόν περ. 125
n / \
TO οὐκ ἄν με γένος γε κακὸν Kal ἀνάλκιδα φάντες
lal / el 5
μῦθον ἀτιμήσαιτε πεφασμένον ὅν K ἐὺ εἴπω.
rn / /
δεῦτ᾽ ἴομεν πόλεμόνδε, καὶ οὐτάμενοί περ, ἀνάγκηι"
», >) ” 3 > \ \ > , “. a
ἔνθα δ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽ αὐτοὶ μὲν ἐχώμεθα δηϊοτῆτος

/ / - δ,
ἐκ βελέων, μή πού τις ἐφ᾽ ἕλκεϊ ἕλκος ἄρηται"

190

119. αὐτόθι : τινὲς αὐτοῦ T, yp. καὶ αὐτοῦ A. || μίμνε Τ' ‘ Vat. 16,’ ἐν ἄλλωι A.

121. Gdpdcroio Lips. || euratépa ().

PR.

122. ἀφνειὸς H.
Ar.: @c ἐτεόν περ ὥ and ai δημώδεις : ὡς ἐτεόν re Vr. d.

125. ei ἐτεόν περ
126. ΓΕ om. G: τε

119. NdceH, was settled, had a home
given him, cf. 6 174 καί κέ οἱ “Apyet
νάσσα πόλιν Kal δώματ᾽ ἔτευξα.

120. According to the Scholiasts on
πλαγχϑείς, εὐσχημόνως παρεσιώπησε THY
τοῦ πατρὸς φυγήν, as according to
Pherekydes, whom they quote, Tydeus
was driven away for homicide and ob-
tained absolution in Argos. This is
the familiar form taken by legends of
migration; the absolution is ἃ post-
Homeric idea.

121. For the partitive gen. θυγατρῶν
in place of the acc. see H. G. § 151 ὁ,
with the instances quoted there (e.g. Εἰ
268). Tradition gives Deipyle as the
name of Tydeus’ wife. Diomedes him-
self married another of the daughters of
Adrastos, E 412.

122. The possession of property in
land, or τέμενος βασιλήϊον, must be a
mark of the unreserved admission of
Tydeus into the royal family; for in
Homeric times landed property seems to
have been restricted solely to the kings.

124, πρόβατα recurs in H. only Ψ 550.
It seems to mean cattle of all sorts, as
in Hes. Opp. 558 χαλεπὸς προβάτοις,
χαλεπὸς δ᾽ ἀνθρώποις.

125. αἱ ᾿Αριστάρχου εἶ ἐτεόν περ, iv’ ἦι,
ταῦτα δὲ ὑμᾶς εἰκὸς εἰδέναι ἀκηκοότας, εἰ
ἀληθῆ λέγω. αἱ δὲ δημώδεις ὧς ἐτεόν
περ, Did. Our mss. all agree with the
δημώδεις. We must take ἀκουέμεν in

the pregnant sense, ‘to know by having
heard’; cf. 2 543 καὶ σέ, γέρον, τὸ πρὶν
μὲν ἀκούομεν ὄλβιον εἶναι, and so β 118,
y 199, 6 94. ἀκούω is in fact a (thematic)
perfect in form as well as sense; H. 6΄.
p- 396. Ye must have heard these things,
whether it (what I say) 18 true, or, ace.
to Darbishire, Rell. Phil. p. 27, if τί is
to be said, deriving (F)eréos from (F)nul,
say.

126. οὐκ ἂν... ἁτμχήςαιτε, the opt.
is potential, you could not despise me on
the ground that ny descent is base. See
H. G. § 300, n. 8, where a slightly dif-
ferent tone isassumed. For the following
subj. eine, which expresses confidence,
see on 92.

127. nepacuénon from φαίνω, declared
by speaking, as in = 295,6 159. This is
the only Homeric instance of σ in the
perf. pass. of a v-stem. Acc. to Brug-
mann (7, il. § 862 it is due to the analogy
of the 2nd plural ré@acbe = πέ-φαν-σθε.

129. éxwueea with gen. -ε- ἀπεχώμεθα,
T 84, 6 422, etc.

130. ἐκ βελέων, not, as usual, coming
out of the range of missiles, but keeping
out of the range, as they are not to go
near at all. ‘This use is not like the
regular meaning of the preposition ἐκ,
and is not easily to be explained. We
should have expected ἀπό, which implies
merely distance from, not motion out of.
See on Θ 213, II 668 ; and HW. G. ὃ 223.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΟ = (xiv)

~J

οι

» > ’ z > / “A \ ,
ἄλλους δ᾽ ὀτρύνοντες ἐνήσομεν, οἱ τὸ πάρος περ
θυμῶι ἦρα φέροντες ἀφεστᾶσ᾽ οὐδὲ μάχονται."

aA , e > r / 4

ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ dpa τοῦ μάλα μὲν κλύον ἠδὲ πίθοντο:

\ δ᾽ » 9 δ᾽ » ” ω a > ,
βὰν ἴμεν, ἦρχε ἄρα σφιν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾽Αγαμέμνων.

οὐδ᾽ ἀλαοσκοπιὴν εἶχε κλυτὸς ἐννοσίγαιος, 135
ἀλλὰ μετ᾽ αὐτοὺς ἦλθε παλαιῶι φωτὶ ἐοικώς,

\ > ee. o.3 Λ

δεξιτερὴν δ᾽ ἕλε χεῖρ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνονος ᾿Ατρεΐδαο,

/
καί μιν φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
“᾿Ατρεΐδη, νῦν δή που ᾿Αχιλλῆος ὀλοὸν κῆρ

“-“ / , a

γηθεῖ ἐνὶ στήθεσσι, φόνον καὶ φύζαν ᾿Αχαιῶν 140
ὃ > \ » e » / 2) 9 ,

ερκομένωι, ἐπεὶ οὔ οἱ ἔνι φρένες, οὐδ᾽ ἠβαιαί.

5 e \ ἃ ,
ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν ὡς ἀπόλοιτο, θεὸς δέ ἑ σιφλώσειε:

131. ὀτρυνέοντες G. || yp. ἁνήςομεν Sch. AT.
δ᾽ ἄρα: ὃέ re C. || μάλα μὲν : μῦθον Lips.

132. apéctacan U. 133.
134. (βὰν) 0°: ῥ᾽ D Bar. Mor.

135. ἀλαοςοκοπιὴν At (with hyphen: ἀλαοςκοπιὴν A™): ἁλαὸν ςκοπίην (sic Ms.)

Zen. || κρείων ENocixewn D™JU Par. Ὁ:
Znvddoros ὑποτάσσει ἀντιθέωι φοίνικι ὁπάονι πηλείωνος An.

GQ (05 supr.) Vr. ἃ. || oi: τι Cram. Zp. 363. 18.

λέξις νεωτέρων Sch. T.

131. ἐνήςομεν, sc. δηϊοτῆτι, cf. K 89
Ζεὺς ἐνέηκε πόνοισι. Bentley most in-
geniously conj. ὀνήσομεν.

132. euudi, resentment against Aga-
memnon. Hpa φέροντες (see on A 572),
humouring, indulging.

135. See on K 515.

136. παλαιῶι φωτί, this vague expres-
sion is not Homeric, as the particular
person whose likeness is assumed is else-
where always named. Hence the line
added by Zen. (from Ψ 360).

140. rHeet Eni, Barnes’ γηθέει ἐν is
doubtless right. γηθει eve (γήθε᾽ imperf.)
Brandreth, with the Florentine edition.

141. δερκομένωι, dat. although the
gen. ᾿Αχιλῆος has preceded ; so I 636, Κα
188, y 206. But the converse is com-
moner, e.g. 26 above. Van L. (Ench.
p- 200) ingeniously suggests that the
original reading was depxouevo.(o), wrongly
transliterated into δερκομένωι in the new
alphabet. The δερκομένου of a few Mss.
is probably only a grammarian’s correc-
tion.

142. ὥς, so, by his own folly. The
order of the words prevents our taking
ὡς as expressing a wish as in = 107 ὡς
ἔρις ἔκ τε θεῶν Ex τ᾽ ἀνθρώπων ἀπόλοιτο.
εἰιφλώςειε, dz. λεγόμενον, and quite
obscure in origin. It caused Ar. to
athetize the line, if we may judge from
the note of Schol. T (probably An.).

ἀργυρότοξος ἀπόλλων [)¢. 136.
141. δερκομένου
142. περισσὸς ὁ στίχος καὶ 7

No form of the word occurs till the late
imitative Epics, who can only have
guessed at the meaning. Ap. Rhod. i.
204 has πόδε σιφλός, so he took the verb
to mean cripple ; and this is the common
interpretation, though it can hardly be
said to give a satisfactory sense. Enust.
says that the adj. was a Lykian word,
used of hollow reeds. He and the £
Mag. also quote a form σιπαλός from an
unnamed poet ἀλλὰ od μὲν σιπαλός τε καὶ
ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ἔφηλος, where it clearly means
blind. This too is apparently the sense
in the fragment in Oxryrhynchus Papyri
i. p. 37, . . Γλαύ͵κωι Λυκίωι, ὅτε σιφλὸς
érevye [ἀνθ᾽ ExatouBollwy ἐννεάβοια λαβεῖν
(has the reference to the Lykian any
significance 3). Hentze suggests that the
sense blind is particularly appropriate
with δερκομένωι, ‘may God blind his eyes
thus as he is feeding them on the woes
of his friends.’ This is ingenious, but
hardly Homeric. If we may accept the
statement of Eust. that the word was
not really Greek, but borrowed, a strik-
ingly appropriate explanation can be
found in the Semitic languages ; for the
Hebrew shaphal (Arab. safala) is the
verb which is regularly used of bringing
low the haughtiness of the proud by the
hand of God; ey. Isaiah ii. 17 ‘the
loftiness of man shall be bowed down,
and the haughtiness of men shall be

76 IAIAAOC = (xiv)

\ >] ” / ΄ Ἂν / /
σοὶ δ᾽ οὔ Tw μάλα πάγχυ θεοὶ μάκαρες κοτέουσιν,
> , ” , ς / >’ \ /
ἀλλ᾽ ἔτι που Τρώων ἡγήτορες ἠδὲ μέδοντες
> \ / / \ >] > / 21 \
ευρυ κονισουσιν πεδίον, σὺ ὃ ἐπόψεαι αυτος 145
[al ,’
φεύγοντας προτὶ ἄστυ νεῶν ἄπο Kal κλισιάων."
ἃ /
ὡς εἰπὼν μέγ᾽ ἄυσεν, ἐπεσσύμενος πεδίοιο.
“ > > / > i x 4
ὅσσον δ᾽ ἐννεάχιλοι ἐπίαχον ἢ δεκάχιλοι
> / 5 / 5», / 7
ἀνέρες ἐν πολέμωι, ἔριδα EvvayovTes “Apnos,
/ > / ” / 5 /
τόσσην ἐκ στήθεσφιν ὄπα κρείων ἐνοσίχθων 180
e >) al \ / , v > e 4
ἧκεν" ᾿Αχαιοῖσιν δὲ μέγα σθένος ἔμβαλ᾽ ἑκάστωι
καρδίηι, ἄλληκτον πολεμίζειν ἠδὲ μάχεσθαι.
“ “ ra
Hpy δ᾽ εἰσεῖδε χρυσόθρονος ὀφθαλμοῖσι
Κα τ 5 > / ΕΣ \ ε΄ Ἂς τ Ἐν
στᾶσ᾽ ἐξ Οὐλύμποιο ἀπὸ ῥίου: αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἔγνω

\ \ / / > Ἂν “
τὸν μὲν ποιπνύοντα μάχην ava κυδιάνειραν, 168
αὐτοκασίγνητον καὶ δαέρα, χαῖρε δὲ θυμῶι:

143. οὔ πω: οἱ δὲ yp. οὗποι (leg. οὔ πηι) T.
148. Occon ὃ᾽ Aph. 1), Par. fj: ὅςςόν τ᾽ Ar. Q. || ἐννεάχειλοι
150. ἐν cTHeecpin J: <€N?> cTHeeccin Bar.
154. Gnoppiou DST Vr. A.

supr.), ἐν ἄλλωι A,
. ϑεκάχειλοι Ar.? Cf. E 860.
Mor. 152. Kpadin(!) CDPQR.

145. αὐτοὺς GHJPRST (Lips.

made low’; x. 33 ‘the haughty shall
be humbled’ ; and so Daniel v. 19, vii.
24, and often. σιφλός of the bent reed
would give the required intermediate
form. But little stress can be laid upon
this, as the few Semitic words which have
been identified in primitive Greek are
all names of objects which we may reason-
ably suppose to have been imported
from the East (e.g. χιτών, oivos, ete.).
See also note on ἀσύφηλος, I 647.

143. οὔ nw, by no means rather than
‘not yet’; see note on I’ 306. The
following ἔτι, however, leaves the ques-
tion doubtful.

145. KoNicouciIN nedion, shal/ jill the
plain with dust; a curious variation of
the familiar κονίειν πεδίοιο. Cf. & 407,
X 405.

147-52. Poseidon appears to drop the
character of the ‘old man,’ and to
shout in his own person, without fear of
Zeus. The three chiefs too are suddenly
forgotten. 148-49=E 860-61 ; 151-52=
A 11-12. See Introduction.

148. Sccon 0’, almost all Mss. with Ar,
give ὅσσόν τ᾽ as in E 860, where the con-
nexion of the line is quite different, and
no conjunction is required. The reading
is however possible if we put a comma
at the end of 147 and a colon at the end
of 149.

154. crac’ ἐξ. Οὐλύμποιο ἀπὸ ῥίου

cohere closely with eicetde, she stood and
gazed out of Olympos from a pinnacle.
The order of the words is such as to
suggest that the meaning is that she
stood iz Olympos on a pinnacle ; but the
thought of the mere position is dominated
by that of the action which proceeds from
it. So in @ 419 τόν ῥ᾽ ἐπὶ πήχει ἑλὼν
ἕλκεν veupyy γλυφίδας τε αὐτόθεν ἐκ
δίφροιο καθήμενος : Eur. Ph. 1009 ἀλλ᾽
εἶμι καὶ στὰς ἐξ ἐπάλξεων ἄκρων σφάξας
ἐμαυτὸν σηκὸν εἰς μελαμβαθῆῇ. . ἐλευ-
θερώσω γαῖαν : ibid. 1224 ᾿Ετεοκλέης δ᾽
ὑπῆρξ᾽ ἀπ᾽ ὀρθίου σταθεὶς πύργου κελεύσας
σῖγα κηρῦξαι στρατῶι. In all these cases
the participle is strictly superfluous, and
is to be compared to the pleonastic use
of ἰών, λαβών, etc. in Trag. Without
altering the form of his sentence, the
Greek, for the sake of greater vividness,
puts in a word to describe the attitude
of his actor, and connects it by position
with the prepositions which express
action, not attitude. It is possible to
join στᾶσ᾽ ἐξ Οὐλύμποιο by the ordinary
pregnant construction, coming forth from
Olympos and standing, leaving ἀπὸ ῥίου
to go with eice?de: but the order of the
words is less natural, and we have to limit
the meaning of “Odvu7os in such a way as
to exclude the ῥίον from it. Another
explanation of these phrases will be
found in Jebb’s note on Soph. Ant, 411.

IAIAAOC = (xiv) 77

a > ’ a
Ζῆνα δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἀκροτάτης κορυφῆς πολυπίδακος “ldns
ἥμενον εἰσεῖδε, στυγερὸς δέ οἱ ἔπλετο θυμῶι.

΄ 3. οἷν - , “

μερμήριξε δ᾽ ἔπειτα βοῶπις πότνια “Hpn
ὅππως ἐξαπάφοιτο Διὸς νόον αἰγιόχοιο. 160
ἥδε δέ οἱ κατὰ θυμὸν ἀρίστη φαίνετο βουλή,
ἐχθεῖν εἰς Ἴδην ἐὺ ἐντύνασαν αὐτήν,

" . ΄ / /
εἴ πως ἱμείραιτο παραδραθέειν φιλότητι
He χροιῆι, τῶι δ᾽ ὕπνον ἀπήμονά τε λιαρόν τε

4 > \ / be \ /
χεύηι ἐπὶ βλεφάροισιν ἰδὲ φρεσὶ πευκαλίμηισι. 165
βῆ δ᾽ ἴμεν ἐς θάλαμον, Tov of φίλος υἱὸς ἔτευξεν
ae \ δὰ θύ Anas ee

φαιστος, πυκινὰς δὲ θύρας σταθμοῖσιν ἐπῆρσε
κληΐδι κρυπτῆι" τὴν δ᾽ οὐ θεὸς ἄλλος ἀνῶιγεν.

ϑάκου ἄλλοι, HJ Mor. Par. b j.

157-8 om. Syr.: 158 περισσόν Sch. T.
158. euudoc Par. Ὁ, Vr. ἡ.

157. πολυπίδακος Ar. ὥ : πολυπι-
ἔπλετο ἰἴϑούςηι"

οὕτως ἄμεινον, Sch. T. 160. τινὲς εἴ πως T. 162. ἐντείναςαν P. ἑωυτήν
Zen. 163. ὅππως (): ἐν ἄλλωι ὅπως iueipaito A. || ἱμείροιτο H. 164. xpeioi
Q Cant. 165. χεύει L: χεύοιεν (): χεῦεν S. 166. 0°: ρ᾽ Syr. 168. THN:

TON U (supr. HN (095) Par. a f! j! and τὰ πλείω τῶν ἀντιγράφων, Eust.: τριχῶς ἡ
γραφή ἐστι, THN O& τὴν κλεῖν, TON OE τὸν θάλαμον, τὰς δὲ Tas θύρας Sch. T.

ὃ᾽ om. S. || ἀνοῖγεν L: ἀνέωγεν P.

162. Bentley, offended at the neglect
of the F of Fé, conj. évrivaca, but this
change to the nom. would be very harsh.
P. Knight saw that € αὐτήν represents
ἔξ᾽ αὐτήν, ἐξέ being the emphatic form
of the 3rd person implied in the later
compound ἑαυτόν : see note on N 495.
and compare éés by ds.

164. χροιῆι here = skin. The word
does not recur in H., and in later Greek
generally means colowr, but the two ideas
are closely connected in the common
idea surface. So Theognis 1011 kara
χροιὴν ῥέει ἱδρώς, and conversely χρώς
=colour in Aisch. Pers. 317, while in E
354, N 279 and similar passages either
idea will suit. Still it must be confessed
that the phrase is an odd one.

165. The subj. χεύηι after the opt.
iueipairo cannot be satisfactorily ex-

plained, as the sending to sleep is con-
3 o

tingent upon the ἱμείρασθαι, and there-
fore could not be spoken of with more
confidence than its condition, even if we
were prepared to admit the use of the
subj. after a historic tense into H. at
all; see H. G. § 298. It is therefore
generally agreed that the opt. must be
restored. Thiersch, with a fine disregard
of metrical difficulties, conj. xeve’, in
which he has been followed, strange to
say, by Bekker, Baiumlein, and Doderlein.

L. Lange is hesitatingly in favour of χεύαι,
though this form is very rare in H. (see
note on B 4), and, as he himself remarks,
is elsewhere found only at the end of a
line or before consonants. Possibly we
should write χεύειε βλεφάροισιν, as the
locative use of the dat. is particularly
common of parts of the body ; or rather
xever ἐν βλεφάροισιν, which is suggested by
the variants of Qand S. Van Herwerden
conj. χεῦαι, to be taken as co-ordinate
with ἐλθεῖν.

167. énfipce, this form (from root ap
of dp-ap-icxw) recurs only in the repeti-
tion of this line in 339.

168. κληΐϊϑι is here used in the sense
not of key (as @ 6, 47) but of lock, or
vather bolt. So also Q 455 τρεῖς δ᾽ ava-
οἴγεσκον μεγάλην κληῖδα θυράων, where
the κληΐς seems to be identical with the
ἐπιβλής of 453. The same is the case
with a,442 ἐπὶ δὲ κληΐ δ᾽ ἐτάνυσσεν ἱμάντι,
where see M. and R. But as this sense
of the word was dropped in later Greek,
it led to the conjectures τόν (sc. θάλαμον
and τάς (se. θύρας) for τήν mentioned in the
scholia. It would then be necessary to
take κληΐδι with βῆ, not with ἐπῆρσε, ‘she
went with a key.’ This sociative use of
the dat. is possible in itself (H. @. ὃ 144),
but is very forced here on account of the
order of the words, and quite unnecessary.

78 IAIAAOC = (xiv)

> 5 lal
ἔνθ᾽ ἥ γ᾽ εἰσελθοῦσα θύρας ἐπέθηκε φαεινάς.
/ a /
ἀμβροσίην μὲν πρῶτον ἀπὸ χροὸς ἱμερόεντος 170
if
λύματα πάντα κάθηρεν, ἀλείψατο δὲ λίπ᾽ ἐλαίωι
ἀμβροσίωι ἑδανῶι, τό ῥά οἱ τεθυωμένον ἣεν"
“ \ / \ \ \ an
τοῦ καὶ κινυμένοιο Διὸς κατὰ χαλκοβατὲς δῶ
ἔμπης ἐς γαῖάν τε καὶ οὐρανὸν ἵκετ᾽ ἀυτμή.
an / /
τῶι ῥ᾽ ἥ γε χρόα καλὸν ἀλειψαμένη, ἰδὲ χαίτας 175
Ld \ iy ” \
πεξαμένη, χερσὶ πλοκάμους ἔπλεξε φαεινοὺς
καλοὺς ἀμβροσίους ἐκ κράατος ἀθανάτοιο.

169. Θύρας : yp. καὶ πύλας Sch. 1". || ἐπέθηκε : ἐπιθεῖςα Zen.
699 8.

S. || χροὸς ἀθανάτοιο Plut. Mor. p.

170. πρῶτα
171. Avxukaray RBar i oj):

puuuata Schol. Arist. Ach. 17. 11 πάντ᾽ éxdenipen Bar. Lips. || Ain’ ἐλαίωι :

χρόα λευκὸν Athen. xv. 688.
Hymn. Ven. 63).
πλεξαμένη Lips. || ἔπεξε S.

172. eanoi Pap. o: ἑανῶι Athen. ibid. (cf.
173. TOU: οὗ Athen. 1. 17. || κατὰ Ar. P: ποτὶ 2.
177. καλοὺς καὶ μεγάλους Zen. Aph.

176.

169. For ἐπέθηκε Zen. read ἐπιθεῖσα,
seemingly on account of the asyndeton
m the following line, and it may be
questioned if this is not superior to the
text. Ar. held that the shorter sen-
tence was the more Homeric.

170. GuBpocini, see on B 19. We
naturally cannot say in what form the
divine perfume was used, or how it
differed from the ἔλαιον ἀμβρόσιον below.

171. λύματα, defilement, see A 314.
Nin? ἐλαίωι, K 577.

172. €0an@1 is explained by the old
lexica as=76e?; and Brugmann (G7. ii.
p- 1048) regards this connexion as pos-
sible. Others would write édavac and
refer it to root ἐδ (see Aisch. Ag. 1407).
Those who are prepared to hear that
Hera used edible ointment may accept
this etymology. For the variant ἑανῶι,
which is as old as Hymn. Ven., see Allen
in J. H. S. xviii. 24. It is of course
indefensible, as the adj. éavds has a.
TEQUGIUENON ἧεν is the predicate, ‘ which
was (well) perfumed.’ The enclitic oi is
added without emphasis, and is difficult
to express in English; if we translate
‘was perfumed for her,’ it seems as though
we meant ‘was specially made for her
use,’ and this of course is not in the
words. The usual view is that τεθυω-
μένον is really for τεθυωμένωι, Td ῥά ot
jev, the epithet having been transferred
into the relative clause from its proper
place in the principal sentence ; compare
N 340 ἐγχείηισι μακρῆις, ἃς εἶχον ταμεσί-
xpoas, and other similar passages (e.g. O
389, 646, 2 167). The objection to this

is that if we take out the participle, the
relative clause τό ῥά οἱ ἣεν becomes void
of sense; of course Hera had the oil
which she used.

173. κατά is evidently right; the
meaningless mori seems to have got
into the vulgate from a reminiscence of
A 426.

174. ἔμπης, νῦν ὁμοίως Schol. B (Ar.?),
‘came alike to earth and heaven.’ But
it is impossible to reconcile this with
other uses of the word. It seems to
have meant originally altogether, here
perhaps everywhere, throughout. This
easily passes into the adversative sense,
as in our al-though, for all that, Fr.
toutefois (see M. and R. on β 199), It
is, however, possible to give the word its
ordinary sense, ‘if it was but stirred,
yet all the same the savour reached
heaven and earth,’ as though it had
been poured over both.

175. This is one of the three places
where ἴϑέ is not used as an iambus alter
the main trochaic caesura; the others
are Σ 589, T 285. See note on I 318.

177. G@uBpociouc: Zen. and Aph. καὶ
μεγάλους, probably because they thought
that three repetitions of the adj. ἀμβρό-
σιος in nine lines were sufficient. For
Homeric hair-dressing see Helbig H. Z.
p. 247. Kpdatoc: the form recurs only T
93, x 218. κράατ- appears to be a short
form of καρηατ-, with the original ἃ pre-
served, perhaps, by the idea that it was
by Epic diectasis from xpar-, while
καρηατ- was an extension of κάρη. Cf.
however κρή-δεμνον.

> Se

IAIAAOC

ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ap ἀμβρόσιον éavov

= (xiv) 79

" ΄' ΄
ἕσαθ᾽, ὅν οἱ ᾿Αθήνη

ἔξυσ᾽ ἀσκήσασα, τίθει δ᾽ ἐνὶ δαίδαλα πολλά:
, fol “ -
χρυσείηις δ᾽ ἐνετῆισι κατὰ στῆθος περονᾶτο. 180
ζώσατο δὲ ζώνην ἑκατὸν θυσάνοις ἀραρυῖαν,
cl » ” a e 5 7 -“
ἐν δ᾽ ἄρα ἕρματα ἧκεν ἐυτρήτοισι λοβοῖσι
4 / / > ᾽ ΄ ,
τρίγληνα μορόεντα" χάρις δ᾽ ἀπελάμπετο πολλή.
κρηδέμνων δ᾽ ἐφύπερθε καλύψατο δῖα θεάων
lal / \ > 93 ». “
καλῶι νηγατέωι: λευκὸν δ᾽ ἣν ἠέλιος ὥς" 185
ποσσὶ δ᾽ ὑπὸ λιπαροῖσιν ἐδήσατο καλὰ πέδιλα.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ δὴ πάντα περὶ χροὶ θήκατο κόσμον,
βῆ ῥ᾽ ἴμεν ἐκ θαλάμοιο, καλεσσαμένη δ᾽ ᾿Αφροδίτην

178. ecat Pap. o.

eNndéo1 Syr.

179. πολλά: πάντα DPR Bar. Mor.
Ar. P. || ἀραρυίηι Ar. (A supr.) P Pap. o (ef. note on E 857).

183. TpirAHN’ Guopdenta τινές T.
λευκὸν : κ]αλον Pap. o (sup. NJeuKon): λαμπρὸν Par. j, ἐν ἄλλωι A.
GLR Harl. a. || AAinapoicin Pap. o. || ἐδήςετο Vr. ἡ.

181. Ζώνηι
182. ἔνο᾽ ἄρα |] :
μοροεντα Pap. o. 185.
186. ὑπαὶ
188. ῥ᾽ : δ᾽ H Pap. o.

178. €anén, see E 734. €cato, cf.
ἕσαντο, Ὑ 150; the root Feo follows the
analogy of the dental roots in varying
between -σσ- and -c- in the sigmatic
aor.; A. G. § 39, 1.

179, ἔξυςε, scraped, so as to produce
either a smooth surface or a nap (like the
fuller), The final operation seems to
stand for the entire process of manu-
facture. Compare Attic ξυστίς, used of
fine cloth. dckHcaca, with cunning
handicraft, as A110, = 240, y 438. τίθει
by its position seems to imply that
the decoration was done when the
manufacture was completed, i.e. by
embroidery.

180-81. For the pinning of the dress
and the decoration of the girdle see
App. G, §§ 4, 10.

182, Note the double hiatus. That at
the end of the first foot is probably per-
missible (ἐν δέ 7’ ἄρ᾽ Heyne) ; not so the
second. P. Knight conj. ἕρμαθ᾽ ἕηκεν,
Heyne épuar’ ἐνῆκεν, Brandreth ἕρματα
θῆκεν. ἕρματα, earrings. The use of
these seems, like that of the éverai, to
mark a departure from Mykenaean
custom, as it is not clear that any of
the ornaments found in the acropolis
graves at Mykene were really for the
ears. This is asserted by Schuchhardt
of the ornaments which he figures on
p- 193, but doubted by Tsountas-
Manatt (p. 179), on the ground that
none of the Mykenaean monuments
represent a woman with rings in her

ears, With the single exception of a carved
mirror handle, probably of foreign fabric.

183. The adjectives are fully dis-
cussed by Helbig 1. £. pp. 271-74. tpi-
rAHNa, with three drops, see note on
γλήνη, 8 164, and the illustrations from
archaic art given by Helbig. μορόεντα
is of unknown meaning. ‘The following
explanations are purely conjectural :
(1) sparkling, from root pap of μαρμαίρω ;
(2) root wep of μέρ-ιμνα etc., wrought with
anxious toil; so Schol. πεπονημένα
τῆι κατασκευῆι, ἀπὸ TOU μορῆσαι, ὅ ἐστι
κακοπαθῆσαι (2); (3) berry-like, from
μόρον, mulberry; so Ernesti; (4) from
μόρα or μόρος in its primitive sense part
(cf. μορίον), hence made of many parts,
elaborately built up. The old reading
(τρίγλην᾽) ἀμορόεντα was variously ex-
plained as ‘a intensive’ (?) or im-
perishable. 3randreth conj. τρίγλην᾽
ἱμερόεντα. The line recurs in o 298,
but throws no fresh light on the question,
and earrings are not again mentioned
in H.

184. κρηδέμνωι, see App. G, ὃ 11.
Helbig notes the absence here of the
other ornaments for the head mentioned
in X 468-69.

185. NHratéwi, see on B43. λευκόν,
bright as well as white, cf. ¢ 45 λευκὴ
δ᾽ ἐπιδέδρομεν αἴγλη, κ 94 λευκὴ δ᾽ ἦν
ἀμφὶ γαλήνη. There is no need to adopt
the variant λαμπρόν, which indeed seems
to be a mere gloss. The description
clearly indicates linen as the material.

80 IAIAAOC = (xiv)

an / r Ν lal 5
τῶν ἄλλων ἀπάνευθε θεῶν πρὸς μῦθον ἔειπεν"

3 / « /
“ἢ pa νύ μοί τι πίθοιο, φίλον τέκος, ὅττί κεν εἴπω, 190

ὩΣ

ie / / / an
Ae κεν ἀρνήσαιο, κοτεσσαμένη TO γε θυμῶι,
ef 5 > Ν lal \ Ν
οὕνεκ᾽ ἐγὼ Δαναοῖσι, σὺ δὲ

᾿]

ρώεσσιν ἀρήγεις ;᾿
τὴν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα Διὸς θυγάτηρ ᾿Δφροδίτη"
if
“Ἥρη, πρέσβα θεά, θύγατερ μεγάλοιο Κρόνοιο,
bY “ / / / \ 7 =
αὔδα 6 τι φρονέεις" τελέσαι δέ pe θυμὸς ἄνωγεν, 195
εἰ δύναμαι τελέσαι γε Kal εἰ τετελεσμένον ἐστί."
τὴν δὲ δολοφρονέουσα προσηύδα πότνια “Hp:
na ῃ fe
“δὸς νῦν pot φιλότητα Kal ἵμερον, ὧι τε σὺ πάντας
an ’ / 5 Ν \ 5 /
dapvat ἀθανάτους ἠδὲ θνητοὺς ἀνθρώπους.
εἶμι γὰρ ὀψομένη πολυφόρβου πείρατα γαίης 200
Ὠκεανόν τε θεῶν γένεσιν καὶ μητέρα Τηθύν,
οἵ μ᾽ ἐν σφοῖσι δόμοισιν ἐὺ τρέφον ἠδ᾽ ἀτίταλλον,
/ «ς / “ “ by) / \
δεξάμενοι “Peins, ὅτε τε Κρόνον εὐρύοπα Ζεὺς
γαίης νέρθε καθεῖσε καὶ ἀτρυγέτοιο θαλάσσης"

5. ons ΄

189. πρὸς : μετὰ Mor. 190. H ῥά NU: Hpan Pap. ο (A ῥ᾽ ἂν ἴ). || τι:
cu P. 191. τό re: τόδε R. 193. τὸν 9° J Pap. o. || διὸς Θυγάτηρ:
φιλομμειδὴς Par. 1 (yp. d10c Θυγάτηρ). 195. ἄνώγει L (swp7. en), ἐν ἄλλωι A.
196. ΓΕ: τε Pap. o. || cra Cant. 198. NUN μοι: OH κοι PR: μοι NON CD
Lips.: ἐν ἄλλωι δὸς NON μοὶ NON (sic) A. πάντα Cant. 199. δαμνᾶς 1).
202. uw’ ἐν Ar. 2: με AtCD Vr. A, Harl. ἃ ἃ, King’s Lips! || ἐὺ τρέφον:
éTpopon J: ἐύστρεφον (): ἐὕὔτρεφον 2. 203. peiac Ar. Aph. || Te: περ S.
204. Kaleeici Pap. o.

190. A ῥά NU μοί TI πίθοιο, see A 93.

satisfactory. Others take it to mean
Van L. conj. ἢ pa κέ μοι, corrupted into

‘if it is a thing already accomplished

the text by an intermediate ἢ ῥ᾽ ἄν μοι,
which is now found in the papyrus.
195-96 = 426-27, ε 89-90. τετελε-
cuenon, capable of accomplishment. The
ideas ‘done’ and ‘doable’ are closely
allied, as is seen in the verbal adjectives
in -τος, which themselves are almost
participles (compare τυκτῆισι βόεσσι M
105 with σάκος τετυγμένον © 9) ; κτητός -Ξ-
gainable, ῥηκτός -- vulnerable, φυκτά 11 128,
πιστά \ 456, οὐκ ἐξιτόν, there is no getting
out, Hes. Theog. 732 (see H. G. ὃ 246%).
Here this pregnant sense has been im-
ported into the participle, so that
τετελεσμένον =* τελεστός, cf. ἀτέλεστος,
that cannot be acconiplished (so van L.
Ench. p. 326: ‘participium pro gerundio’
Brandreth). The phrase is commonly
explained to mean ‘if it is a thing that
has been accomplished and_ therefore
may be done again,’ which is not

in the designs of fate,’ i.e. destined to
be done. But such fatalism is not
Homeric either in expression or thought.

199. Saundi, read either δάμνασαι
with Bentley or δάμνης with Brandreth.

201. Tethys appears only here in H.,
nor do we find any mention elsewhere of
Okeanos as the progenitor of the gods ;
he is only personified as a deity, outside
this book, in Υ 7. Hesiod (Theog. 133-
36) names Okeanos and Tethys among
the other children of Gaia and Uranos,
including Kronos. Virgil goes ἃ step
farther with his Oceanumque patrem
rerum, (ἡ. iv. 382. Brandreth conj. ῥοῶν
(Fpowy as he writes it) for ee@n, father of
rivers, cf. 245, € 196. See also Plato’s
comments, Theaet. 152 D.

203. “Peixc, for the gen. after δέξασθαι
see on A 596. For the deposition of
Kronos see note on Θ 479,

δαονς,

IAIAAOC = (χιν) 81

\ 9 3 >) / ,ὔ .] v ,ὔ ,
τοὺς εἶμ᾽ ὀψομένη, καί σφ᾽ ἄκριτα νείκεα λύσω. 205
7 \ \ , ᾽ ,, > ΄
ἤδη γὰρ δηρὸν χρόνον ἀλλήλων ἀπέχονται
> fol \ / > \ / Μ al
εὐνῆς Kal φιλότητος, ἐπεὶ χόλος ἔμπεσε θυμῶι.
Ὃ / “ “-
εἰ κείνω γ᾽ ἐπέεσσι παραιπεπιθοῦσα φίλον κῆρ
\ / € fal ,
εἰς εὐνὴν ἀνέσαιμι ὁμωθῆναι φιλότητι,
/ / I
αἰεί κέ σφι φίλη TE Kai αἰδοίη καλεοίμην." 210
\ /
τὴν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπε φιλομμειδὴς >~Adpoditn:
ςς Ε] ” 3 »O\ 1} \ » > 7
οὐκ ἔστ᾽ οὐδὲ ἔοικε τεὸν ἔπος ἀρνήσασθαι"
\ \ lal /
Ζηνὸς yap τοῦ ἀρίστου ἐν ἀγκοίνηισιν avers.”
\ \ / , e ΄,
ἢ καὶ ἀπὸ στήθεσφιν ἐλύσατο κεστὸν ἱμάντα

bo
—_
σι

" ” /
ποικίλον: ἔνθα δέ οἱ θελκτήρια πάντα τέτυκτο"
» 2 oe \ , > > ὦ ? Se ‘
ἔνθ᾽ ἔνι μὲν φιλότης, ἐν δ᾽ ἵμερος, ἐν δ᾽ ὀαριστὺς
A Ὁ rue ed / ΄ ,
πάρφασις, ἣ T ἔκλεψε νοον πύκα περ φρονεόντων.
/ Se. Cae , » > τὰν > » > > PART ve
Tov ῥά οἱ ἔμβαλε χερσίν, ἔπος τ᾽ ἔφατ ἔκ τ᾽ ὀνόμαζε:
fol a lal e lal U
“TH νῦν, τοῦτον ἱμάντα τεῶι ἐγκάτθεο κόλπωι

208. κείνων Zen. Aph. JPQRS Harl. ἃ, Vr. d, A. 209. ομοιώθηναι Pap), o,
Syr. (not ommotennan). || φιλότητα Lips. 210. κέ: καί J: τέ P. 213 dé.
Aph. Ar. 215. τέτυκται Lips. 216 om. Lips. || ἐνὶ 8° ἵμερος (Pap. ο supr.),
Boissonade Anec. iv. 450. || ἔν τισι τῶν ὑπομνημάτων ἠδ᾽ (A 8’ Ms.) éapictuc Did.
217. pponéontoc L (supr. wn), Aristotle Eth. Nic. vii. 7: φρονέοντα J Ly. Mag.
546. 53. 218. ἔβαλε QS. 219. TH: τινὲς τῆι Ap. Lex. 152. 3(so DG). || τεῶι
δ᾽ G. || énixkdteco PR.

205. ἄκριτα, endless, never brought κόλπος (App. G, 5), not the girdle which
to a ‘crisis’; see note on B 246, and Aphrodite is wearing. It is not called
compare σ 264 ἔκριναν μέγα νεῖκος. ζώνη and is taken ἀπὸ στήθεσφι, whereas

207. εὐνῆς καὶ @iAdtHTocisco-ordinate the girdle lay lower, round the waist,
with and explanatory of ἀλλήλων, but at least in archaic times (Helbig H. EL.
does not govern it. The order of the p. 211). The strap may typify the bond
words, with the natural break at the which unites two lovers. Keetéc is a

end of the line, is enough to shew this. mere adjective (cf. πολύκεστος ἱμάς of
208. κείνω is preferable to the well- the helmet, I’ 371) and is not turned

attested κείνων : for the ‘whole-and- intoa subst., the cestws, till much later

part’ construction is usual with κῆρ. —hardly in fact before the Roman
209. ἀνέσαιμι <A, with interaspira- mythologists.

tion ; it is from ἵζω, should I set them on 215. Editors generally adopt Her-

their bed ; see on ἀνέσαντες, N 657. The mann’s τέ for 0€ against all Ms. authority
word evidently alludes to καθεῖσε above (including A, though La R.’s silence would
(204). For éuwefinai (ἅπ. \ey.) compare imply the contrary). But the change is

ὁμὸν λέχος εἰσαναβαίνειν, O 291. needless, cf. Z 245, Θ 48, N 21, Ψ 680.
213. ἀθετεῖται, ὅτι ἐκλύει τὴν χάριν 217. This line has all the appearance

(does away with the graciousness of the of a gloss on the word éapictuc, but
gift), εἰ ἕνεκα τοῦ Διὸς δίδωσι καὶ οὐκ there is no record that any of the ancient
αὐτῆς. προηθέτει δὲ καὶ ᾿Αριστοφάνης. critics condemned it. The use of the
The criticism is petty, and athetesis two words in apposition may be sup-
would leave us with a speech of one line _ ported, however, by γαλήνη. . νηνεμίη,
only—a thing which is found oceasion- ε 392, and perhaps μόσχοισι λύγοισιν, A
ally in the later books, but not elsewhere 105 (q.v.). ἔκλεψε, deceives, see on A 132.
before = 182. The use of the articlein For the sentiment cf. 0421-22. The last
τοῦ ἀρίστου is suspicious. half of the line is found also in I 554.
214. The ‘ pierced (embroidered) strap’ 219. TA is apparently an adverb from
seems to be a mere charm carried in the the pronominal stem fa, meaning simply

VOL. II G

82 IAIAAOC = (xiv)

ποικίλον, ὧν ἔνι πάντα τετεύχαται" οὐδέ σέ φημι 220
ἄπρηκτόν γε νέεσθαι, ὅ τι φρεσὶ σῆισι μενοινᾶις."

ὡς φάτο, μείδησεν δὲ βοῶπις πότνια “Ἥρη
μειδήσασα δ᾽ ἔπειτα ἑῶι ἐγκάτθετο κόλπωι.

ἡ μὲν ἔβη πρὸς δῶμα Διὸς θυγάτηρ ᾿Αφροδίτη,

Ἥρη δ᾽ ἀΐξασα λίπεν ῥίον Οὐλύμποιο,

bo
bo
On

Πιερίην δ᾽ ἐπιβᾶσα καὶ ᾿Ημαθίην ἐρατεινὴν
, 39? / a ” i
σεύατ᾽ eh ἱπποπόλων Θρηικῶν ὄρεα νιφόεντα,
ἀκροτάτας κορυφάς, οὐδὲ χθόνα μάρπτε ποδοῖιν"
> 5 / ’ 3: ΟΝ , > / /
ἐξ ᾿Αθόω δ᾽ ἐπὶ πόντον ἐβήσετο κυμαίνοντα,
Λῆμνον δ᾽ εἰσαφίκανε, πόλιν θείοιο Θόαντος" 230
ἔνθ᾽ Ὕπνωι ξύμβλητο, κασυγνήτωι Θανάτοιο,

221. renécear GS: γενέεςθαι ἀντὶ τοῦ γενήσεσθαι Demetrios. || ppecin ἧιςι 1).

222. WelOHCEN: rHeHce(N) J Harl. a (yp. κείϑηςε) Lips., yp. T.

223. ἑῶι Zen.

(Ar., Sch. T) Q: μέςω(!) Ar. (Zen., Sch. T) AJ Harl. a ἃ, Par. Ὁ: τεῶ(ι) R (τ
dotted) Harl. b, Par. ἃ. || ἐνικάτϑετο (P supr.) R: ἐνικάτθεο P!; érxateeo JU Lips.

226. ΟΥ᾽ τ΄ @: 227. ceuaT :

ἐν ἄλλωι Eccut’ A. || τινὲς inmoNduwN Sch. T:

yp. ἱπποκόμων Lips. || epax®n P. || νιφόεντα : cKidenta PRS Par. ἢ 228.

udpne HJS.
DePR:

ἄνακτος Θόαντος

229. ἐπὶ: ἐς Zen. Aph. || ἐβήςατο DGJS Syr. Pap. ο.
ἄνακτος Bar.

230. θείοιο

231. ἔνϑ᾽ : ἐν ὃ᾽ Q. || τινὲς

--προσ -- γράφουσιν ἐρχομένωι κατὰ φῦλα βροτῶν ἐπ᾽ ἀπείρονα γαῖαν 'T’.

there (see Brugmann Gr. ii. p. 787). The
form τῆτε however, quoted from Sophron,
shews that it must have been restricted
to an interjectional use on handing over
something, so that at an early date it
came to be felt as the imper. of a verb
meaning hold, take. Cf. the Cyprian
inser. (Collitz 135) on a terracotta askos,
τᾶ ᾿Ετεοδάμα πῖθι (like εἰ 347 Κύκλωψ,
τῆ πίε oivov). The whole line is very
similar to ε 346, where Leukothoé gives
her κρήδεμνον as a magic charm to save
Odysseus: τῇ δέ, τόδε κρήδεμνον ὑπὸ
στέρνοιο τανύσσαι.

221, νέεςϑαι in future sense as = 101,
Ψ 150, 6 633, ξ 152, and elsewhere, like
ἰέναι : see Curtius Vb. 11. 315 and the
general remarks of Delbriick Gr. iv. p.120.
6 τι implies an adverbial accus. τό in
the principal clause, thou shalt not return
foiled in respect of that which, etc. : see
ΗΠ. G. 88 269-70.

223. μέσωι for ξῶι seems to be an
alteration made to avoid hiatus. The
text is evidently right as answering to
τεῶι in 219.

226. Πιερίην, see B 766. ᾿Ημαϑίην
(evidently from ἄμαθος) the coast-land
of Macedonia (so Strabo). But in Hymn.
Ap. 216 it is in Thessaly, as the god
takes it (and Pieria) on his way from

Olympos to Iolkos. Compare e 50
Πιερίην δ᾽ ἐπιβὰς (Ἑρμῆς) ἐξ αἰθέρος
ἔμπεσε πόντωι᾽ σεύατ᾽ ἔπειτα κ.τ.λ.

229. Athos is named only here in H.
It recurs also in the catalogue of Hymn.
Ap. 33. Brandreth reads ᾿Αθάου (P.
Knight a@aFoo), Menrad ἐκ δ᾽ ᾿Αθόωι᾽ (ο),
the ‘ Attic’ declension in -ws being very
doubtful in Homer.

230. Thoas is mentioned again as the
contemporary king of Lemnos in Y 745.
He is of course not to be confused with
the Aitolian leader Θόας ᾿Ανδραίμονος υἱός,
B 638, ete. Why Lemnos should have
been chosen as the spot at which Sleep
was to be found we cannot even guess.
It is natural to suppose that there was
some local cult of Hypnos there, but if
so it has left no trace. A solution of the
question given by Schol. A is sufficiently
characteristic to be quoted. Lemnos
was a haunt of Hephaistos, who had
married Χάρις (= 382). It was therefore
a younger sister-in-law of his of whom
Hypnos was enamoured (275-76), and
his house would be a place to which the
amorous god would be likely to resort in
order to pay his addresses.

231. The brotherhood of Sleep and
Death is a familiar allegory in all litera-
ture; see, for instance, II 682, Hes.

IAIAAOC =

(X1V) 83

” ᾽ » e a , ” > » > ᾽ ria PP
ἐν T apa οἱ φῦ χειρί, ἔπος τ᾽ ἔφατ ἔκ τ᾽ ὀνόμαζεν"

/ "» ΄, - , ᾽ ,
“"Trve, ἄναξ πάντων τε θεῶν πάντων τ᾽ ἀνθρώπων,

> \ / 2 5 \ ” v >>> ” \ -
ἠμὲν ON TOT ἐμὸν ἔπος ἔκλυες, ἠδ᾽ ἔτι καὶ νῦν

/ > \ / / 0.) / v 7
πείθευ: ἐγὼ δέ κέ τοι ἰδέω χάριν ἤματα πάντα. 235

/ / r, \ ig ᾿ > / » ,
κοίμησόν μοι Ζηνὸς ὑπ᾽ ὀφρύσιν ὄσσε φαεινώ,

> fF > / > \ / > /
αὐτίκ᾽ ἐπεί KEV ἐγὼ παραλέξομαι ἐν φιλότητι.
lal ,ὔ , Ν / v , /
δῶρα δέ Tor δώσω καλὸν θρόνον, ἄφθιτον αἰεί,
/ “ / ᾽ 4. fa > ,
χρύσεον: “Hdaiotos δέ K ἐμὸς πάϊς ἀμφιγυήεις
τεύξει ἀσκήσας, ὑπὸ δὲ θρῆνυν ποσὶν ἥσει, 240

a > / \ / > 7 »”
TOL κεν ἐπισχοίης λιπαροὺς πόδας εἰλαπινάζων.
\ > Αἱ , ΄, 7, "“
τὴν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσεφώνεε νήδυμος Ὕπνος"
/ / ΄ ,
“Ἥρη, πρέσβα θεά, θύγατερ μεγάλοιο Κρόνοιο,
ἄλλον μέν κεν ἔγωγε θεῶν αἰειγενετάων

lal / > a ΄
ῥεῖα κατευνήσαιμι, καὶ ἂν ποταμοῖο ῥέεθρα 245
᾽Ωκεανοῦ, ὅς περ γένεσις πάντεσσι τέτυκται"
Lg, \ ’ > xX vv ἂν» / Φ e /
Ζηνὸς δ᾽ οὐκ ἂν ἔγωγε Kpoviovos ἄσσον ἱκοίμην
234. ἑμλὲν : εἰ μὲν JLRSU Lips. (yp. 4), yp. Eust. 235. neiee’ J() Par. bf:

πεῖθε D: πείθεο SU Pap. o.
χάριν eidéw Ar. LR: χάριν idéw P.
Lips. Vr. A. || Un’ Ar. Aph. Q:
239. ἐμὸς : ἐμοι S.

(οὕτως Ἡρωδιανός ΑἹ:
κατευνηθέντε ἴδηαι,

NHOUWOC σὺν τῶι ν An. 243.
ΠΥ Ύ Ἂς 246. ἀλλὰ σύ,

enicxoiac Syr.

240. Teuxel Syr.

ἰδέω χάριν : cidéw χάριν GOT and αἱ δημώδεις :
236. κοίμις(ςε)ον C (Η supr.) JL Ηδ1]. ἃ
én’ Zen.

>

King’s. 237. αὐτίκα ὃ᾽ εἴ KEN ().
(supr. =). 241. énicyoiec AC Ven. Ὁ
τινὲς ἐπάγουσιν αὐτὰρ ἐπὴν OH NOT

ἀγγεῖλαι τάδε πάντα ποςειϑδάωνι ἄνακτι. |. 242. ὅτι
ἥρα R.

τὸν ᾿Αρίσταρχον ἀγαπῶν ἀεὶ καὶ θαυμάζων, οὐκ ἀκούεις

θυγάτηρ PQ. 245. κατευνάςαιμι

Κράτητος ἀναγιγνώσκοντος ὠκεανὸς ὅςπερ γένεσις πάντεςςι τέτυκται, ἀνὸράςιν HOE

θεοῖς, πλείστην <O'> ἐπὶ γαῖαν ἵηςιν, Plut. Jor. p.

Theog. 212, 756-59, Virgil Aen. vi. 278.
Statues of the pair stood together at
Sparta (Paus. iii. 18. 1). Compare the
striking phrase quoted from the comedian
Mnesimachos, ὕπνος τὰ μικρὰ τοῦ θανάτου

μυστήρια.
284. Auen. . ἠδέ, as. . so, like II
236, 6 383, ef. H 301. A comparison of

A 453 suggests ἤδη μέν. εἰ μέν is of
course an admissible variant.

235. All the attested variants here are
wrong ; εἰδέω χάριν is condemned by the
synizesis, Ar.’s χάριν eldéw still more by
neglect of the F, and the vulgate idéw
by the short stem-vowel, which is quite
irregular. The correct form is Feidw
(οἴ, εἴδομεν, εἴδετε), which was first
restored by Brandreth. See H. G. ὃ 80.

240. τεύξει, read τεύξει F’ with van
L. For the nature of the θρόνος see
Helbig H. Z. p. 118 ff. For the last

938 E.
(zs

half of the line see
the feet, is not to
ὑπό.

241. ἐπιςχοίης is an entirely anomalous
form in H., nor are the variants éricxocas,
ἐπίσχοιες any better (H. Οὐ. ὃ 88). ἐπι-
σχείης might be defended asanon-thematic
form from the aor, stem cxe-, ef. imper.
oxés (which, however, is itself not
Homeric). ἐπίσχοιες seems to have been
the old vulgate. and is explained by the
scholiasts as a mistake of the μεταχα-
ρακτηρίσαντες for ἐπισχοίης. They remark
that a comfortable chair is an appropriate

k 367. ποείν, fur
be construed with

gift to the god of sleep.—The added
lines given by Schol. T are evidently
meant to account for the fact that in

354 Hypnos takes it upon him to go
and tell Poseidon. 3ut if they are
accepted, the words of Hera in O 41 ff.
become rank perjury.

84 IAIAAOC = (xiv)

»O\ / > .“ \ τ) , ΄
οὐδὲ κατευνήσαιμ᾽, ὅτε μὴ αὐτὸς γε κελεύοι.

ἤδη γάρ με καὶ ἄλλο τεὴ ἐπίνυσσεν ἐφετμή,

yA nn Ὡ na ς / \ e\

NATL τῶν OTE KELVOS ὑπέρθυμος Διὸς υἱὸς 200
/ /

ἔπλεεν ᾿Ιλιόθεν, Tpowy πόλιν ἐξαλαπάξας.

yA SaeaN \ ” \ / > /

Ἤτοι EYW μεν ἔθελξα Διὸς νόον αὐγιόχοίο

νήδυμος ἀμφιχυθείς, σὺ δέ οἱ κακὰ μήσαο θυμῶι,

" 5.5 Ἵ 51 7 3. Ἐν , 5.
ορσασ ἀργαλέων AVELO@VY ETL TOVTOV anTaAS,

248. ὅτι () (supr. €).

|| κελεύη J (supr. ot): κελεύει 1, (supr. οἱ) Bar. Lips.

249. ἄλλο τεὴ Ar. ACGH: ἄλλος Ten Par. 7:

Zen. (?) DU Par. e f*: ἀλλοτεῆι Syr. :

ἄλλο τε ἡ TeH R: ἄλλο TeA(1)

ἄλλοτε A(t) Parmeniskos JST Mor. Lips.
Harl. a: ἄλλοτε H P Par. f!: ἄλλοτε ch Cant. Vr. b: ἄλλοτε cA Vr. A:

ἄλλοτ᾽

ἐῆ (): ἄλλοϑ᾽ é€A Harl. b, King’s, Par. d. || enenuccen Syr. || ἐφεταῆ(ι) DJQSTU

Syr. Mor. Vr. A, King’s, Harl. a Ὁ, Par. de f.

ἔλεξα (2. 253. Kakou[Hcao Pap. o.

251. idider S. 252. ἔϑθελξα P:

248. ὅτε UH, wnless, see on N 319.

249. The critical questions raised by
this line are complicated and difficult,
though the general sense is clear enough.
Most of the readings recorded above are no
more than interpretations of an original
αλλοτεη(ι)επινυσσενεφετμη(ι) : the only
actual variants are αλλοτεσήη, αλλοθεη,
and εἐπενυσσεν. But of all the alterna-
tives none can be right. Those which
read ἄλλοτε, with the pause at the end
of the third foot, are metrically intoler-
able, while those with ἄλλο give no
satisfactory sense. Ar. indeed assumed
in his reading (that of the text) an
ellipse of κατά, in another respect a
command of thine taught me a lesson ;
but this use of ἄλλο is without analogy,
for X 322,and Ψ 454 which are quoted
prove nothing. As an alternative we

might assume for πινύσσω the constr. of

διδάσκω, thy command taught me another
lesson; but then we must take another
Zesson to mean ‘a lesson on another occa-
sion,’ which goes beyond all reasonable
limits of looseness of expression. The
same objections apply to the reading
ἄλλο Tene . . ἐφετμῆι, in another respect
Zeus taught me a lesson through a com-
mand of thine. Besides, the parallel
passages A 590, YT 90, shew that the
right phrase is ἤδη καὶ ἄλλοτε. It
appears then that there must be a very
ancient corruption of the text, to be
emended by conjecture. Van L. trans-
poses, ἄλλοτ᾽ ἐφετμῆ. σῆι ἐπίνυσσας
(remarking with truth that the aor. is
needed). Very ingenicus and less violent
is Brugmann’s ἄλλοθ᾽ ἑῆι ἐπίνυσσες (leg.
-cas) ἐφετμῆι, once before thou didst teach
me a lesson by a command of thine, for

which see App. A (vol. 1. -p. 564). This
he suggests was the reading of Zen., who
used ἑός freely of other persons than the
third sing. (the scholia only say ἄην.
σὺν τῶν! Ὁ 1.e. -he ἐφετμῆι). The
first part of this 601]. has now some Ms.
support ; if there ever existed a variant
ἐπίνυσσες (or -as) we should have expected
to find some notice of it, but in the
fragmentary state of our excerpts this
objection is not fata]. The whole con-
text (to say nothing of Διός in the next
line) shews that the ἐφετμή is that of
Hera, not of Zeus, and that Zeus cannot
be the subject of ἐπίνυσσεν : so that we
cannot read any form of éés, in view of
its reflexive sense, except with ἐπίνυσσες.
There is thus good ground for supposing
that the passage may have been altered
in order to avoid the application of ἐῆι
to the second person. minuccein, to make
wise, σωφρονίζειν, παιδεύειν, as the scholia
render it, occurs only here; cf. O 10.
The reading ἐπένυσσεν of Syr. suggests
the deriv. from ἐπι-νύσσω, pricked me on ;
but such a metaphorical use of νύσσω
seems to be without analogy in Greek.
Hesych. appears to have read ἐπίνυσκεν,
and this form is used by Aisch. Pers. 830.

250. Διὸς υἱός, Herakles, whose name
does not oceur till 266. This legend is
referred to again at somewhat greater
length in O 18-30; cf. also T 96-133 for
the enmity of Hera to Herakles. κεῖνος
expresses dislike as E 604 κεῖνος "Αρης.

252. ἔϑελξα is evidently superior to
ἔλεξα, put to bed, a grotesquely material
metaphor. ἔθελξα is given in the second
Aldine and most subsequent editions
till Heyne.

254. ἀήτας, see note on O 626.

IAIAAOC = (xiv) 85

/ »Μ yf δ᾽ \ / , /
καὶ μιν ETTELTA Κόων εν VQALOMEVIVY UTEVELKAS, 255

/ /
νόσφι φίλων πάντων.

¢ δ᾽ , / /
ο ETEYPOMEVOS χαλέπαινε,

΄ / \ “ ‘ » \ [ὩΣ] v ,
ῥιπτάζων κατὰ δῶμα θεούς, ἐμὲ δ᾽ ἔξοχα πάντων

/ / / > Mew ΕῚ , » / v a /
ζήτει" καί KE fe ἄϊστον am αἰθέρος ἔμβαλε πόντωι,

εἰ μὴ Νὺξ ὃμήτειρα θεῶν ἐσάωσε καὶ ἀνδρῶν"

\ ΄ / / e » > / , /
τὴν ἱκόμην φεύγων, ὁ δ᾽ ἐπαύσατο χωόμενος περ" 260

ἅζετο yap μὴ Νυκτὶ θοῆι ἀποθύμια ἔρδοι.

a > πο ἢ > »” > / ” , ’
νῦν av τοῦτο αὶ ἄνωγας ἀμήχανον ἄλλο τελέσσαι.

᾽

\ 2 > / al , “
τὸν ὃ αὖτε προσέειπε βοῶπις πότνια “Ἡρη:

7 / Ss \ N nr \ \ “- “
“"Vorve, τί ἣ δὲ σὺ ταῦτα μετὰ φρεσὶ σῆισι μενοινᾶις;

= \ ἃ a , > / > / γ7σ

ἢ φὴις ὡς Τρώεσσιν ἀρηξέμεν εὐρύοπα Ziv 265
¢ fal ΄ con

ὡς Ἡρακλῆος περιχώσατο, παιδὸς ἑοῖο ;
’ » ed ΄ ,

ἀλλ᾽ ἴθ᾽, ἐγὼ δέ κέ τοι Χαρίτων μίαν ὁπλοτεράων

’ > / \ \ lal » ἜΣ
δώσω ὀπυιέμεναι καὶ σὴν κεκλῆσθαι ἄκοιτιν. 268

ἃ ΄, 7 ᾽ \ 7,
ὡς φάτο, χήρατο δ᾽ Ὕπνος, ἀμειβόμενος δὲ προσηύδα" 270

255. κόων (072. 0’) U: κόονϑ᾽ Kallistratos C.
Eust.: ἐγρόμενος ἢ : énarpdouenoc Par. hi.
259. OUHTEIpa: μήτειρα Zen. Aph.
ΘΟΗ͂Ι : τινὲς φίλη! T.
δὲ eed λευκώλενος ἥρη, χειρί τέ μιν κατέρεξεν T.

an’: tn’ L.
aideto .. ῥέξηι ap. Hust.

256. GNerpouenoc J and wp.
258. κέ om. RTU.
261. ἅΖζετο Epdot :
263. yp. ὧς φάτο μείϑηςεν

265. ἀρηγέμεν (JC).

χαλέπηινε 3.

Ar. wrote ZA with ν᾿ at the beginning of the next line: so ACD'HJ Lips. Syr.

(zAt|N’). See 6 207, 2 332.

268. After this C™D™GHJS Vr. b insert

NacieéHN, ἧς αἰὲν ἱμείρεαι ἤματα πάντα 269

(ἐέλϑεαι [D™S]).

258. ζήτει, this verb occurs only here
in H. in place of difnua. Gicton, ‘put
out of sight,’ i.e. sent to perdition ; ef.
a 235, 242 οἴχετ᾽ ἄϊστος ἄπυστος, and ἀΐδη-
Nos = destroying.

259. For ὃμήτειρα Zen. and Aph.
read prepa, a barbarous form and far
less appropriate than the text. Cf. ὕπνος
πανδαμάτωρ, Ὁ 5.

260. ἱκόμην in pregnant sense, ‘ came
as ixérns’: cf. X 123.

261. ἀποθύμια is explained by A 562
ἀπὸ θυμοῦ εἶναι. The use of μή after
zero is curious; we should have ex-
pected the infin.

265. A φήις, an ironical question,
which regularly follows another with
τί ἢ, as in Z 55, Ο 244. For the form
Ζῆν at the end of the line cf. © 206.

267. ὁπλοτεράων, youthful rather than
younger, cf. θηλυτεράων, κουρότερος (A 316)
etc. (ΗΖ. G. § 122, van L. Ench. p. 246).
In many cases the word is a real com-
parative, e.g. B 707, A 825 (compare
also the superl. ὁπλότατος I 58); but
we cannot suppose that the existence of

older Graces is here implied. The χάριτες
are vaguely personified in E 338, P 51,
§ 18, @ 364, σ 194, as companions of
Aphrodite, givers of beauty, etc. ; and
in Σ 382 Χάρις is the wife of Hephaistos.
Their number seems from this passage
to have been regarded as indefinite. In
Hesiod TZheog. 907 we already find the
number three ; in 945 Hephaistos marries
Aglaie ὁπλοτάτην Χαρίτων. Pausanias
has an interesting chapter on the
question, ix. 35. The word ὁπλότερος
has not been satisfactorily explained.
The derivation from ὅπλον rarely, if
ever, gives a good sense, and here is
quite impossible. κε... δώςω, see on
X 66.

[269]. The scribe who first interpolated
this line from 276 appears to have aimed
at originality by writing
ἐέλδεαι, quite unconscious of his false
quantity.

270. xHpato, this aor. occurs here
only, though the reduplicated thematic
form (κεχάροντο etc.) is not uncommon,
and ἐχάρην is found also in T 28, Καὶ 541.

iuelpeac for

86 IAIAAOC = (χιν)

Ss:

/ lal 5) \ δ
“ἄγρει νῦν μοι ὄμοσσον ἀάατον Στυγὸς ὕδωρ,

χειρὶ δὲ τῆι ἑτέρη. μὲν ἕλε χθόνα πουλυβότειραν,

mn ,’ id / ee fe Cs “ων ee
τῆι δ᾽ ἑτέρη. ἅλα pappapénv, ἵνα νῶϊν ἅπαντες

μάρτυροι ao οἱ ἔνερθε θεοὶ Κρόνον ἀμφὶς ἐόντες,

Ss Ν ϑ \ , γ / / e ΄
ἢ μὲν ἐμοὶ δώσειν Χαρίτων μίαν ὁπλοτεράων, 275

L e 5) 51. ΙΝ "7 ” ,ὕ 5»
ΠΠασιθέην, nS T AUTOS ἐέλδομαι ματα στάντα.

ws ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησε θεὰ λευκώλενος “Ηρη,

” 7 ΄ , 7 \ ’ 2) / “
ὦμνυε δ᾽ ὡς ἐκέλευε, θεοὺς δ᾽ ὀνόμηνεν ἅπαντας

\ e / ON ni a /
TOUS UTOTAPTAPLOUS, οι Τιτῆνες καλέονται.

> \ > f 109) SP / / 7 \ 74
αὐτὰρ ἔπει P OMOTEV TE τελεύτησέν TE TOV Ορκον, 280

/
τὼ βήτην, Λήμνου te καὶ Ἴμβρου ἄστυ λιυπόντε,

ἠέρα ἑσσαμένω ῥίμφα πρήσσοντε κέλευθον.
Ἴδην δ᾽ ἱκέσθην πολυπίδακα, μητέρα θηρῶν,

Λεκτόν, ὅθι πρῶτον λιπέτην ἅλα" τὼ δ᾽ ἐπὶ χέρσου

271. ἄατον CPRSTU Pap. ο, Vr. A.
γι. ἃ. 214. μάρτυρες Zen. ||
276. τῆς T PR: ἧς (om. τ᾽) Zen. Aph.

272. πολυβότειραν T. 273. ἅπαντα

ὥς oi: ὅεςοι J: acin ἢ Sccor Eust. || κρόνου RS.

277. θεὰ λευκώλενος : βοῶπις πότνια

Syr. 278. <yp.> θεὸν δ᾽ ὀνόμηνεν EkacToN T. 279. τιτᾶνες R Lips. Vr.
A. ᾿υ--προσ-- γράφουσί τινες ὥμνυε δ᾽ ἐκ πέτρης κατειβόμλενον (sic) ετυτὸς ὕδωρ
Sch. T. 281. λῆμνόν S Pap. o (JNoNn), Par. cg. || ἴαβρον S: τινὲς λήμνοιο κατὰ

μέγα actu λιπόντε᾽ τί γὰρ viv πρὸς τὴν Ἴμβρον; Sch. T. || λιπόντες Bar. 282.

ἠέρα e Harl. ἃ.

283. ἵκανον Vr. d:

ikadceHN U

271. ἀάατον, a word of unknown
derivation and meaning. Connexion
with daw is usually assumed as obvious ;
but (apart from the question whether
the real form of the verb is not ἀάζω,
see on Θ 237) this explains neither form
(ἀα- for dva-), quantity (ef. ἀξάτη with
ἅτ), nor meaning. In @ 91, x 5 we
have ἀάατος (. — ὦ Οὐ applied to the
contest of the bow; but that expression
is equally unexplained. The word recurs
in Greek only in Ap. Rhod. ii. 77
κάρτος adaaros, invincible in strength.
The problem is beyond our powers of
solution. For the oath by the Styx see
on B 755. The appeal to the nether
gods does not reappear when Hera next
swears (O 36 ff.) ; it seems to indicate
the want of a more distinctly personal
sanction than a river, even in the case
of a god; for this purpose only the
older dynasty was available. Men also
appeal to the underworld in similar
circumstances, Τ 278. The touching of
land and sea may be regarded as an
inclusion of the entire order of nature
among the witnesses, or perhaps as a
physical means of calling the attention
of the powers below ; see I 568.

273. μαρμαρέην, here only as an

epithet of the sea; cf. Virgil’s aequor
marmoreum.

274. The Homeric form is not ca
but ἔωσι (except in the very late passage
ω 491). We cannot read μάρτυρ᾽ ἔωσι,
as the elision of -o. in the nom. plur.
is inadmissible; van L.’s μαρτυρέωσι is
possible, though the verb happens not
tooceurin H. Eust. mentions a variant
ὅσσοι ἔνερθε θεοί, but the passages quoted
to defend the omission of the subjunctive
of εἰμί are insufficient to justify it here
(A 547, E 481, A 477, © 376, 0 394. Cf.
also ἤισιν for ἔηισιν, Τ 202, 6 580).
Nauck would expel 272-74 altogether.

279. For the Titans see 8 479. The
genuineness of this line has been ques-
tioned, but without sufficient ground,
as it seems to be implied in 274, and
there is no case of an Olympian god
swearing by his fellows. At all events
if 279 is condemned, 278 must go
with it.

284. Aexton, the promontory forming
the S.W. angle of the Troad (see Θ 47),
is naturally brought by the Scholiasts
into etymological connexion with the
λέχος of Zeus and Hera.

IAIAAOC Ξ (xiv)

/ > / \ cal ᾿ “
βήτην, axpotatn δὲ ποδῶν ὕπο σείετο ὕλη.

ἔνθ᾽ “Ὕπνος μὲν ἔμεινε πάρος Διὸς ὄσσε ἰδέσθαι,
εἰς ἐλάτην ἀναβὰς περιμήκετον, ἣ τότ᾽ ἐν “Ldn
μακροτάτη πεφυυῖα δι᾿ ἠέρος αἰθέρ᾽ ἵκανεν"
ἔνθ᾽ ἧστ᾽ ὄζοισιν πεπυκασμένος εἰλατίνοισιν,

vv A 2 / {4 > > v
ὄρνιθι λυγυρῆι ἐναλίγκιος, ἥν τ᾽ ἐν operat

290

χαλκίδα κικλήσκουσι θεοί, ἄνδρες δὲ κύμινδιν.

Ἥρη δὲ κραιπνῶς προσεβήσετο Vdpyapov ἄκρον

Ἴδης ὑψηλῆς" ἴδε δὲ νεφεληγερέτα Ζεύς.

ὡς δ᾽ ἴδεν, ὥς μιν ἔρος πυκινὰς φρένας ἀμφεκάλυψεν,

285. ὕπο cefero Ar. Zen. Aph. Pap. o (uno[): ἐπεςείετο R: ὑπεςείετο 0.

UAH: YOu Vr. ἃ, yp. Lips.

Cant. Vr. A. 288. πεφυκυῖα R.

16’: ἔρως 2. || πυκνὰς Lips.: πυκινὰ

285. The hiatus before UAH is unex-
plained, except as a possible trace of the
lost initial sibilant; a very doubtful
resource. The variant δὴ does not
help matters. Note also that this is
the only place in H. where a short
syllable stands before σείω, which is
elsewhere always regarded as beginning
with a double consonant, probably of,
written oo after the augment and in
composition, just as with cedar: see note
on A 549.

286. Scce may be taken either as
subject or object of the verb: but O 147
ἐπὴν ἔλθητε Διὸς δ᾽ els ὦπα ἴδησθε is in
favour of the latter.

288. 01° ἠέρος αἰθέρ᾽ ἵκανε, a poeti-
cal hyperbole: the tree is so tall as to
pass through the mist clinging to the
hillside and reach the clear air. ἀήρ
as usual means mist or cloud ; there is
no ground for supposing that to Homer
it meant, as we are often told, the lower
stratum of the atmosphere in which
clouds are formed. See App. H.

290. ἐν Specci belongs really to the
principal sentence, in the sense ὀρεσι-
τρόφωι, not to the relative. For other
instances of this hyperbaton see note on
172. What the bird was it is naturally
impossible to say, though we may reason-
ably suppose that it was nocturnal in
habits. Aristotle H. 4. ix. 12 says ὁ
κύμινδις ὀλιγάκις μὲν φαίνεται" οἰκεῖ yap
ὄρη. . κύμινδιν δὲ καλοῦσιν Ἴωνες αὐτήν.
But it is not to be supposed that he had
any genuine tradition of the name which
would enable him to identify the bird.

286. ἔμιλινε A supr.

s.

Occe idécoai: dccon ixécoar

289. πεπυκνωμένος P (γρ. πεπυκαςμένος).
292. προςεβήςατο DJQRSU Pap. ο, Syr.

293 om. R. 294. Epoc Syr. ‘ Vat.

For the various modern suggestions see
Thompson Gloss. p. 108; and for the
language of the gods see note on A 403.
Thompson suggests that the relation
between Hypnos and the χαλκίς may
have some connexion with the phrase
χάλκεος ὕπνος. For a god in the likeness
of a bird see on H 59.

294. ὥς... ὥς, compare note on A
512 and see also T 16, T 424. The two
latter passages differ from the first and
agree with the present in that the
parallelism as .. so does not express
the meaning, which is clearly ‘no sooner
did he see than.’ In other words ὡς is
no longer the modal as, but has become
the temporal when; and has affected
the correlative ὥς till we can take it as
then—a difference which is expressed by
the aor. in the second clause, where
A 513 has the imperf. Though ds is
often temporal, there is no other case
of such use of the demonstrative ds:
the use of the word has evidently been
accommodated to that of the relative for
the effect of the antithesis. Fairclough
(C. R. xiv. 395) writes ὡς. . ὡς and
regards the second as exclamative, when
he saw, how he leapt. This is no doubt
the way in which Theokritos and Virgil
took the phrase (see on A 512). The
exclamative use of ws, if we deduct the
places where it is = ὅτι οὕτως, is rare,
but undeniable; see ® 273, 441, κ 38,
w 364, o 26, w 194 (and we should
perhaps add the use in wishes and ὡς
ὄφελον). But the obvious correlation
seems to forbid such an explanation

88 IAIAAOC = (x1v)

e ¢ nf t
οἷον ὅτε TPWTOV περ ἐμισγέσθην φιλότητι, 295
> aN na / / an
εἰς εὐνὴν φοιτῶντε φίλους λήθοντε τοκῆας.
a 2 δ νι / 4 =) ” > » ’ De
στῆ δ᾽ αὐτῆς προπάροιθεν, ἔπος τ᾽ ἔφατ᾽ ἔκ τ᾽ ὀνόμαζεν"

ad τὲ an an 3 ΙΝ Ω . /
“Ἥρη, πῆι μεμαυῖα cat Οὐλύμπου τὸδ ἱκάνεις;

“, 3 > / \ A nan 3 > 7, 55)
LTT TT Ob ὃ ου παρεᾶσι Kal αρματα, τῶν κ ἐπιβαίης.

τὸν δὲ δολοφρονέουσα προσηύδα πότνια “Hp: 800
“ ἔρχομαι ὀψομένη πολυφόρβου πείρατα γαίης,
’Oxeavov τε θεῶν γένεσιν καὶ μητέρα Τηθύν,

/ 5 an , \ / 509 Σ /
οἵ μ᾽ ἐν σφοῖσι δόμοισιν ἐὺ τρέφον ἠδ᾽ atitaddov:

\ S ’ 5» 7 UZ 5» By / JA
TOUS εἰν οψομένη, καί oh ἀκριτα νείκεα λύσω.

ἤδη γὰρ δηρὸν χρόνον ἀλλήλων ἀπέχονται 305

> an \ “ ΠῚ Ν / ” a
εὐνῆς καὶ φιλότητος, ἐπεὶ χόλος ἐμπεσε θυμῶι.

ἵπποι δ᾽ ἐν πρυμνωρείηι πολυπίδακος Ἴδης

- nan?) / 5 ” > \ / \ ¢e i
EOTAT , OL fL οἰσουσιν ἐπὶ τραφερὴν TE καὶ ὑγρὴν.

rn τ n He n 9. 7 Io e
νῦν δὲ σεῦ εἵνεκα δεῦρο Kat Οὐλύμπου τόδ᾽ ἱκάνω,

/ , , / ” fal
μὴ TOS μοι [METETTELTA χολώσεαι, αι κε σιωπὴν | 35110

οἴχωμαι πρὸς δῶμα βαθυρρόου ᾿Ωκεανοῖο.᾽"

295. οἷος P, yp. A. || πρῶτόν περ Ar. ACP Harl. a: πρῶτον R: πρώτιετον ©, ||

éuiréceHn JPRS Vr. A Mose. 2:
R. 299. κ᾽ om. Zen. Aph.

Ar. A™GPRT Syr.: noAumddKou 0.

MIrECOHN 1).
300. προςηύδα om. C: προςέφη P Lips. 808.
mw’ ἐν: ue A (yp. uw’ én) CDQ Lips. Vr. A (cf. 202).

306. After this Syr. repeats 208-09 (with ομοιωθῆναι).
308. οἵςονται L,

297. αὗτις S. 298. ΠΗ͂Ι : ποῦ
304-06 ἀθ. Ar. Zen.
307. πολυπίδακος
310. μετόπισθε Zen.

Aph. DSU Mor. Bar. Harl. Ὁ, King’s Par. a ὁ d ἢ g. || κοτέεςεαι Mor. Bar. Par.

dg: xodécceat ().

here.—For ἔρος, the only Homeric form,
see note on I’ 442. nuxinde, firm, i.e.
prudent: cf. πύκα φρονεόντων 217. It
is possible to read πυκινά with S, taking
it as an adv. with ἀμφεκάλυψε, beset
closely; but such common phrases as
πυκινὴν ἠρτύνατο βουλήν, etc. are all in
favour of the text.

296. The secret wedlock of Zeus and
Hera was a favourite theme of later poets
and mythographers, and played a pro-
minent part in several ancieut local cults
(see Frazer Paus. ili. Ὁ. 183). According
to Kallimachos (ap. Schol. A on A 609)
it lasted no less than three centuries.
Cf. also Theokr. xv. 64 πάντα γυναῖκες
ἴσαντι, Kal ws Ζεὺς ἀγάγεθ᾽ Hpar.

298. τόδ᾽ ἱκάνεις, so 309, 2172; else
an Odyssean idiom (a 409, etc.). See
HH. G. § 138.

299. Zen. and Aph. omitted κ΄. It
cannot be said that the presence or
absence of the particle makes any ap-
preciable difference in sense; but the

absence in such final clauses is very
rare (according to 77. G. ὃ 304. 1b, X 348
seems to be the only instance).

301-03 = 200-02; 304-06 = 205-07.
The last three lines were athetized by
Zen. and Ar. on the ground that they
were not suitable in speaking to Zeus, as
the possession of the κεστὸς ἱμάς made
any excuses needless. ‘And perhaps
Zeus might have taken her at her word
and urged her to go; at all events (Ms.
οὖν, for γοῦν 1) she should not run the
risk of it,’ Schol. A. It is more likely
that the Alexandrian critics found an
ἀπρεπές in the use of the expression to
one of the other sex. But its very
suggestiveness is in its favour.

308. TpagepHn, solid land, only here
and υ 98. It is connected with the sense
curdle of τρέφεσθαι (ἢ 903). ὑγρήν
occurs also in K 27, Q 341, a 97, ete.

310. μετέπειτα, elsewhere only in Od.
The usual word is μετόπισθε, as Zen. and
Aph. read.

SMS.

a ὦ»

IAIAAOC Ξ (x1v) 89
τὴν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη νεφεληγερέτα “Ζεύς
εἰ Ἥρη, κεῖσε μὲν ἔστι καὶ ὕστερον ὁρμηθῆναι,
νῶϊ δ᾽ ay ἐν φιλότητι τραπείομεν εὐνηθέντε:"
y φιλότητι Tp μ η

> / , / 5 a a ” 2 \ ‘
ov γάρ πώ ποτέ μ᾽ ὧδε θεᾶς Epos οὐδὲ γυναικὸς ᾿

co
"ὦ
baa |

θυμὸν evi στήθεσσι περιπροχυθεὶς eddpaccer,
» 0» e δι. 2 Ζ > / ’ ,

οὐδ᾽ ὁπότ᾽ ἠρασάμην ᾿Ιξιονίης ἀλόχοιο,

ἣ τέκε ἸΠειρίθοον θεόφιν μήστωρ᾽ ἀτάλαντον"

οὐδ᾽ ὅτε περ Δανάης καλλισφύρου ᾿Ακρισιώνης,

ἃ / a / > ΄, πεσε le
ἣ τέκε ἸΪερσῆα πάντων ἀριδείκετον ἀνδρῶν" 320
50 Ὡ ’, ,, “
οὐδ᾽ ὅτε Φοίνικος κούρης τηλεκλειτοῖο,
ἣ τέκε μοι Μίνων τε καὶ ἀντίθεον Ῥαδάμανθυν:
οὐδ᾽ ὅτε περ Σεμέλης οὐδ᾽ ᾿Αλκμήνης ἐνὶ Θήβηι,
p Ἡρακλῆα κρατερόφρονα γείνωτο παῖδα"
ἡ δὲ Διώνυσον Σεμέλη τέκε χάρμα βροτοῖσιν" 325
»Ὸ» ev / / » /
οὐδ᾽ ὅτε Δήμητρος καλλιπλοκάμοιο ἀνάσσης,
οὐδ᾽ ὁπότε Λητοῦς ἐρικυδέος, οὐδὲ σεῦ αὐτῆς,
ὡς σέο νῦν ἔραμαι καί με γλυκὺς ἵμερος αἱρεῖ."
314. νῶϊ ὃέ γ᾽ Q: NON ὃ᾽ ἄγετ᾽ J. || εὐνηϑθέντες DHJS Syr. Bar. Lips. 315.
ἔρως AC'DHIPQ. 316. περιπροχυθεὶς : περιπλεχϑεὶς Dem. Ixion : περιχυθεὶς
HS. 317-27 ἀθ. Ar. Aph. 319. οὐδ᾽ ὁπότε Vr. A. 320. ἀριδείκετον :

PR Vr. b: μινώωα Syr.
327. οὐδὲ : οὔτε J.

322. sol om. Ὁ. || «αἴνων Ar.
323. καὶ GAKuHNuc 1).

τινὲς πολὺ φίλτατον T.

and τινές, T: μίνω Zen. 2.
cou ().

314. ἐν φιλότητι Goes With EUNHEENTE,
as 360. tTpanefouen from τέρπω, see on
T 441,

316. nepinpoxueeic, cf. 6 716 τὴν δ᾽
ἄχος ἀμφεχύθη and ἀμφεκάλυψε in 294
for this vivid metaphor of the invasion
of the mind by violent feeling.

317. Ar. and Aph. athetized 317-27
ὅτι ἄκαιρος ἡ ἀπαρίθμησις τῶν ὀνομάτων"
μᾶλλον γὰρ ἀλλοτριοῖ τὴν Ἥραν ἢ προσ-
άγεται. καὶ ὁ ἐπειγόμενος συγκοιμηθῆ-
ναι διὰ τὴν τοῦ κεστοῦ δύναμιν πολυλογεῖ.
It might be added that the whole char-
acter of the passage reminds one of the
Hesiodean κατάλογοι γυναικῶν or ’Hotar,
and that the legends named, though
familiar in classical times, are not
Homeric; the birth of Herakles from
Alkmene is mentioned in T 99, a late
passage, and Dionysos is definitely late
(see on Z 130). Demeter too has no
real personality in H. except in ε 125,
where we are told of an amour of far more
primitive character than this. But the
whole of the ἀπάτη contains myths not
elsewhere found in H.; so that this does

not form a convincing objection to the
passage in this place. The wife of Ixion
was named Dia, according to the legend
which recurs in various nythographers.

318. Peirithoos is mentioned as a son
of Zeus also in B 741. eed@in, the
instrumental in its ‘comitative’ sense,

A. G. § 155.

319. ᾿Ακριειώνης, a feminine patrony-
mic, cf. Εὐηνίνη I 557, ᾿Αδρηστίνη E 412.
This famous legend is mentioned again
in Seut. Herc. 216 ff., and often from
Pindar onwards.

321. Φοίνικος κούρης, Europa, daugh-
ter of Agenor according to another and
commoner form of the legend, which
probably contained a tradition -of the
mingling of Greek and Phoenician ele-
ments in Crete.

322, Minwn, so Ar.; the acc. is
Μίνωα in N 450, and so we can of course
read here. But compare iid Bete
beside "Apna, Méyn7a. The vulg. Μίνω
is hardly defensible. For Miioaz see also
N 450, \ 322, 7 178, and for Rhada-
manthys 6 564, 7 323.

90 IAIAAOC = (xiv)

\ / "
τὸν δὲ δολοφρονέουσα προσηύδα πότνια “Hpn:
/ 7 / rol rn ,
“αἰνότατε Kpovidn, ποῖον tov μῦθον ἔειπες ; 880
εἰ νῦν ἐν φιλότητι λιλαίεαι εὐνηθῆναι
” ΟἹ ἫΝ \ \ fs ee
Idns ἐν κορυφῆισι, τὰ δὲ προπέφανται ἅπαντα,
πῶς κ᾽ ἔοι, εἴ τις νῶϊ θεῶν αἰευγενετάων
εὕδοντ᾽ ἀθρήσειε, θεοῖσι δὲ πᾶσι μετελθὼν
(ὃ δ >) ΕΝ 5 τ x \ δῶ / 335
πεφράδοι; οὐκ ἂν ἔγωγε τεὸν πρὸς δῶμα νεοίμην
ἐξ εὐνῆς ἀνστᾶσα, νεμεσσητὸν δέ κεν εἴη.
arn εἰ δή ῥ᾽ ἐθέλεις καί ToL φίλον ἔπλετο θυμῶι,
” / ΄ I? 7] e\ 7
ἔστίν τοι θάλαμος, Tov τοι φίλος υἱὸς ἔτευξεν
“ Ν Ν / a 5 lal
Ηφαιστος, πυκινὰς δὲ θύρας σταθμοῖσιν ἐπήρσεν"
yy 3 » / ’ / / 7 ’ 439
ἔνθ᾽ ἴομεν κείοντες, ἐπεί νύ ToL εὔαδεν εὐνή. 840
/ /
τὴν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη νεφεληγερέτα Ζεύς"
“"Hon, μήτε θεῶν τό γε δείδιθι μήτέ τιν᾽ ἀνδρῶν
ὄψεσθαι: τοῖόν τοι ἐγὼ νέφος ἀμφικαλύψω
΄, 5.) ἃ ne / 5) t ,
χρύσεον" οὐδ᾽ ἂν νῶϊ διαδράκοι ᾿Ηέλιος περ,
οὗ τε καὶ ὀξύτατον πέλεται φάος εἰσοράασθαι." 345

330. €einac C. 335. ἔγωΓΕ : ἔπειτα Bar. 338. τόν

|| τεὸν : ϑεῶν Lips.

TOL: TON col (): TON Ge J. 340. εὐνήν Zen. Aph. 342. econ AH (sup. o)
PRY (supr. @) Syr. Mose. 2, Ven. B. || GNOPOON : ἄλλον Syr. Vr. d: ἄλλον

ἀνδρῶν H. 343. ὄψεςθαι : aeanaTon Syr. 344. GN: ἂρ 5. || n@e U.

emphatic part of the speech in 333.
πῶς κ᾿ ἔοι is the Van L. suggests ἢ for εἰ in 331 with

331-36. The construction of this sen-
tence is as follows.

apodosis to the conditional protasis εἴ
Tic . . πεφράϑοι, and is taken up again
and expanded in the categorical form
in οὐκ Gn... εἴη. (This form of con-
ditional sentence is similar to those in
o 223-25, 357-61, ¢ 195-97, in each of
which the apodosis consists of an inter-
rogation pretixed to the protasis intro-
duced by εἰ with opt., and subsequently
repeated in another form.) To this
complex conditional sentence there is
prefixed the ἐπ Εν ἢ made by εἰ
with the indic. in 331-32, as the founda-
tion upon which all rests ; this is the
not uncommon form of two protases to
one Byers which is noticed on E 212.
The clause τὰ ὃὲ προπέφανται ἅπαντα
belongs closely to the preceding; in
English we should add it not paratactic-
ally but by a relative, ‘where everything
is open to the view.’ Hentze prefers to
make this clause the apodosis to the
preceding e/-clause, and puts a colon
after ἅπαντα, but this seems to throw
too much weight upon an obvious fact,
and thrusts into the background the

a note of interrogation after κορυφῆισι.
Other punctuations may be found in
Hentze, Anh., but all of them are
inferior to that given above (after Lange,
EI p. 451).

338-39 = 166-67.

340. κείοντες, see κακκείοντες, A 606.
εὐνήν, the reading of Zen. and Aph., must
be taken with ἴομεν as ace. of the
terminus ad quem, ἐπεί vi ro εὔαδεν
becoming a parenthesis. For etaden
see on P 647.

342. See E 827, with note, and 5. G.
§ 234. 3; and for the addition of 6wecear
cf. x 39-40 οὔτε θεοὺς δείσαντες. . οὔτέ
Tw’ ἀνθρώπων νέμεσιν κατόπισθεν ἔσεσθαι.
τό re is perhaps the object οἵ ὄψεσθαι,
but it is of course equally possible to
take it as an adverbial ace. (as in E), for
that matter, and this is on the whole
more Homeric.

345. φάος seems here to have a double
significance, ‘light’ and ‘sight.’ But
the confusion is a natural one; the
power of sight being regarded as some-
thing which goes out of a man, it is

———— ἍὨ

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΟ = (xiv) 91

ἢ pa καὶ ἀγκὰς
lol , 4 Ν \
τοῖσι δ᾽ ὑπὸ χθὼν
/ , € /
λωτόν θ᾽ ἑρσήεντα

, ΑΥ̓͂, A r ΄
ἔμαρπτε Κρόνου παῖς ἣν παράκοιτιν"
dia φύεν νεοθηλέα ποίην,

τι \ / ’ , C.F

ἰδὲ κρόκον ἠδ᾽ ὑάκινθον

Ν \ / Δ > \ \ ΄ ify ἂν
πυκνὸν καὶ μαλακὸν, ὃς ἀπὸ χθονὸς ὑψόσ᾽ ἔεργε.
a , ΓΝ \ , e
τῶι ἔνι λεξάσθην, ἐπὶ δὲ νεφέλην ἕσσαντο 350
\ / \ , , "
καλὴν χρυσείην: στιλπναὶ δ᾽ ἀπέπιπτον εερσαι.

A e ͵ e \ 4 πῃ 7 "
ὡς ὁ μὲν ἀτρέμας εὗδε πατὴρ ἀνὰ Ταργάρωι ἄκρωι,
e \ / / 4 , > \ ”
ὕπνωι καὶ φιλότητι dapeis, ἔχε δ᾽ ἀγκὰς ἄκοιτιν"
an \ / > a) fal > “ 7, “
βῆ δὲ θέειν ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν νήδυμος Ὕπνος
/ / 7
ἀγγελίην ἐρέων γαιηόχωι ἐννοσιγαίωι. 355
r+ γ᾽ e , , ὮΝ
ἀγχοῦ δ᾽ ἱστάμενος ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
“ / fal - / b /
πρόφρων viv Δαναοῖσι, Ποσείδαον, ἐπάμυνε.
/ a ” / / ” ᾽ » a>
καί σφιν κῦδος ὄπαζε μίνυνθά περ, ὄφρ᾽ ἔτι εὕδει
/ 5 \ >’ A > x \ \ “ ,
Ζεύς, ἐπεὶ αὐτῶι ἐγὼ μαλακὸν περὶ κῶμα κάλυψα:"

“Ἥρη δ᾽ ἐν φιλότητι παρήπαφεν εὐνηθῆναι."
βρη ρη 197)

360

ἃ > \ ε \ v ’ > \ \ Ay? > ,
ὡς ELT@V O μέν. MLYET ἐπὶ KUTA φῦλ ἀνθρώπων,

846. ἔμαρπτε: ἕλαζΖε Bar. (cf. E 371).

349. €epre Ar. Q: ἐν δέ τισιν ἄειρε

καὶ €epne(?) ἐν δὲ τῆι Χίαι ἵκανε: Ζηνόδοτος ἵν᾽ ἀπὸ χϑονὸς GrKazécexHn J )idl.
351. ἐπέπιπτον ‘ Vat. 16’ (Zen.? Sch. A): ἀνέπιπτον ἀντὶ τοῦ ἐπέπιπτον Zen. (Sch.
T). || ἐπάγουσι δέ τινες OH ῥα τότ᾽ d6peaduoicl θιὸς χύτο νήϑυμος ὕπνος Sch. T.

357. NUN: δὴ JS Mor. || ἐπάμυνε ADLT Syr.: ἐπάμυνον ©. :

εὔϑη 1.

ἄλλωι Α. 360. εὐνηθεῖςα S.

358. περ: τι Ὁ.

359. κῶμα κάλυψα ACGST Pap. ο. Syr.: κῶμ᾽ ἐκάλυψα 0, ἐν

natural to represent the sun’s power of
sight by what goes out of him. In
other words, what enables men to see
enables him to see too. We cannot
fairly compare the use of φάεα for
eyes in a formal line of the Odyssey
(7 15, p 39, τ 417); the verb λεύσσω,
however, properly to shine, and then to
see, is analogous. eicopdaceat is of course
mid., keenest for beholding, not passive.

347. This beautiful passage, the most
‘romantic’ in Homer, may for its sense
of sympathy with nature be compared
with the voyage of Poseidon at the
beginning of N. There is a delightful
allegorical reminiscence of it in Virg.
G. ii. 325 ff. ; see also Milton P.Z. iv.
670 ff., viii. 573 ff.

348. Brandreth reads λωτὸν ἐερσήεντα,
the only Homeric form being ἐέρση,
except in Ὦ 757, q.v. (ει 2222). So also
in Pindar. The word is for éFépon, see
Brugm. Gr. i. § 626.

349. Of the variants given in the App.
Crit. it is evident that decpe is the only
one which can compete with €epre for
beauty and appropriateness.

351. στιλπναί, formed like τερπνός, here
only in H. 4Gnéninton, rained from th
cloud: Zen.’s ἀνέπιπτον, fell on them,
is again inferior. The added line
mentioned by Schol. T is evidently
designed to meet the prosaic objection
that the Sleep-god does nothing after
his long journey. Most readers will
feel that the efficacy tacitly implied in
his mere neighbourhood is a thoroughly
poetical expression of his mysterious
workings. On the other hand suspicion
may justly be felt as to his self-imposed
message to Poseidon in 354 ff. It is not
needed for the story, and is probably only
designed to effect a connexion with the
following interpolation. See note on
241.

358. ἔτι εὕϑει, hiatus and
not to be explained, as the etymology
of the verb εὕδειν is not known. dpa
κ᾽ ἔθ᾽ εὕδει (evdm), Brandreth, will of
course not do. Bentley.

359. Cf. σ 201 4 με μάλ᾽
μαλακὸν περὶ κῶμα κάλυψεν, of the deep
sleep sent by Athene to Penelope.

illicitu S,

ἔτι Ὕ

αἰνοπαθῆ

92 IAIAAOC = (χιν)

\ 2 ” a ’ aA > / a
τὸν δ᾽ ἔτι μᾶλλον ἀνῆκεν ἀμυνέμεναι Δαναοῖσιν.
/ /
αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἐν πρώτοισι μέγα προθορὼν ἐκέλευσεν"
co? rn x δ᾽ 9) θί Ry /
Ἀργεῖοι, Kat αὖτε μεθίετε “Extope νίκην
of a me \ n ͵
Πριαμίδηι, ἵνα νῆας EXne καὶ κῦδος ἄρηται ;
¢ \ \ S68 >> \
ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν οὕτω φησὶ καὶ εὔχεται, οὕνεκ Αχιλλεὺς
n IA lo
νηυσὶν ἔπι γχλαφυρῆισι μένει κεχολωμένος TTOP*
t 3 » \ oY " cay:
κείνου ὃ οὔ TL λίην ποθὴ ἔσσεται, εἴ κεν οἱ ἄλλοι
e lal ’ ’, 5 , Be 5 if
ἡμεῖς ὀτρυνώμεθ᾽ ἀμυνέμεν ἀλλήλοισιν"
5 > ¢ XN δ =
arr ἀἄγεθ᾽, ὡς ἂν ἐγὼ εἴπω, πειθώμεθα πάντες. 370
¢ 4 a
ἀσπίδες ὅσσαι ἄρισται ἐνὶ στρατῶι ἠδὲ μέγισται
« / \ \ 7 7
ἑσσάμενοι, κεφαλὰς δὲ παναίθηισιν κορύθεσσι
/ \ \ aN / :} ” 5 € /
κρύψαντες, χερσὶν δὲ Ta μακρότατ᾽ éyye ἑλόντες,
- / »
ἴομεν: αὐτὰρ ἐγὼν ἡγήσομαι, οὐδ᾽ ἔτι φημὶ
any (ὃ / / lal =
KTOpa Πριαμί NV μενέει»ν μάλα περ μεμαῶτα. 375
ἃ > \ / ” > , ΄ ,
ὃς δέ K ἀνὴρ μενέχαρμος, ἔχηι δ᾽ ὀλίγον σάκος MLL,
7 \ / e > 5] ΩΣ 7, ip / 359
χείρονι φωτὶ δότω, ὁ δ᾽ ἐν ἀσπίδι μείζονι δύτω.

363. εκελευε Syr.
D: ueo(e)ieuen 2.
368. πόθος Harl. a supr.

(incl. Syr.). 373. xepcin τε [GIT. || ἔγχη J.
Ar. Aph., om. Zen.
(supr. ΓῚ.

364. seoteTe QS Harl. a, Lips. (supr. wen): meeciouen
365. ἄρηται : ἕλοιτο Lips.
370. ἐγὼν Η.

366. εὔχεται : ἔλπεται Zen.
371. ἀςπίδες ACJPT: denidac Ὡ
814. εγὼ Syr. 376-77 ἀθ.

376. ἔχει Ar. [GJJQ(S]TU. || δ᾽ ὀλίγον : ϑολιχον Pap. o

363. It is to be presumed that Poseidon
is still in the guise of a φὼς παλαιός
(136), though μέγα npoeopwon hardly
seems to suit this character. It is re-
markable that in spite of all the pains
which Hera has taken to give him free-
dom of action, he does nothing more
now than at any time since he came to
Troy at the beginning of N, only urging
on the Greeks with taunts instead of
displaying his divine power.

364, 0’=67, see on A 840. μεθίετε
is preferable to the vulg. μεθίεμεν, as
the desire to abolish permitted hiatus
will account for the change.

371. The idiomatic a&cnidec has been
supplanted by the strictly grammatical
ἀσπίδας in most MSsS., just as in 75 q.v.

372. €ccduenol, a curious word to use
of taking shields. So far as it goes, it
supports Reichel’s theory that χαλκοχί-
Twves, χαλκεοθώρηκες do notimply the use
of breastplates ; App. B, iil. 4. manai-
@HICIN is ἅπαξ λεγ., and not Homeric in
style. The whole idea, as well as the ex-
pression, of this passage is extraordinary ;
the suggestion of a change of armour in
the hottest of the fight can hardly come

from a poet familiar with real war, as
the poet of A, for instance, must have
been. Even if the climax of absurdity
in 376-77, 381-82, be expelled, the pas-
sage is not much the better, as we must
assume that the soldiers have, as a rule,
only their second-best shields with them,
and retire sub silentio to their tents to
change. It would appear also either that
they have, as a rule, left their helmets
behind, or else that the πάναιθαι κόρυθες
are a superior sort to those which they
have. Thus the condemnation of 376-
77 (which Ar. and Aph. athetized, and
Zen. οὐδὲ ἔγραφεν) avails nothing. The
athetesis must begin at all events with
370, and. must extend at least to 382.
Even then 383 is left without any context.
The whole passage from 352 to 401 is a
very poor addition (see Introduction).

374. Poseidon here quite drops the
character of the old man, apparently
without exciting notice or comment.

376. After ὃς 0€ ke supply ἔηισι, see
note on 274. Ar.’s reading ἔχει is very
harsh, but not impossible ; somewhat
similar cases of subj. followed by indie.
are found in similes, e.g. I 324.

ay ὧδ καὶ

IAIAAOC = (χιν) 93

ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, of δ᾽ dpa τοῦ μάλα μὲν κλύον ἠδὲ πίθοντο.
τοὺς δ᾽ αὐτοὶ βασιλῆες ἐκόσμεον οὐτάμενοί περ,
Τυδεΐδης ᾿Οδυσεύς τε καὶ ᾿Ατρεΐδης ᾿Αγαμέμνων" 380
οἰχόμενοι δ᾽ ἐπὶ πάντας ἀρήϊα τεύχε ἄμειβον"
ἐσθλὰ μὲν ἐσθλὸς ἔδυνε, χέρηϊ δὲ χείρονα δόσκεν.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεί ῥ᾽ ἕσσαντο περὶ χροὶ νώροπα χαλκόν,
βάν ῥ᾽ ἴμεν: ἦρχε δ᾽ ἄρα σφι Ἰ]οσειδάων ἐνοσίχθων,
δεινὸν ἄορ τανύηκες ἔχων ἐν χειρὶ παχείηι, 385
εἴκελον ἀστεροπῆι'" τῶι δ᾽ οὐ θέμις ἐστὶ μιγῆναι
ἐν δαὶ λευγαλέηι, ἀλλὰ δέος ἰσχάνει ἄνδρας.

Τρῶας δ᾽ αὖθ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἐκόσμεε φαίδιμος “

ὕκτωρ.

3 ςε pe) > ΄ » ΄ ,
δή ρα TOT ALVOTATHV ἔριδα πτολέμοιο τανυσσαν

κυανοχαῖτα Ἰ]οσειδάων καὶ φαίδιμος “Extwp, 390

” ε \ , ¢e ΝΜ 15] / > /
ἤτοι ὁ μὲν Ἱρώεσσιν, ὁ ὃ Ἀργείοισιν ἀρήγων.

͵7
ἐκλύσθη δὲ θάλασσα ποτὶ κλισίας τε νέας τε
| ie. ε \ ΄ A
᾿Αργείων: of δὲ ξύνισαν μεγάλωι ἀλαλητῶι.
4 £ r , ,
οὔτε θαλάσσης κῦμα τόσον βοάαι ποτὶ χέρσον,

379. Περ: τε DD.

382. χέρηϊ δὲ χείρονα IP: χέρεια (χερήϊα R) dé χείρονι
Q. || θόεκον HT King’s, Harl. ἃ, Par. ὁ ἃ g:

O@ke(N) PR: ᾿Αρίσταρχος ϑόεςκον,

ἔνια δὲ τῶν ὑπομνημάτων δῶκεν ἀντὶ τοῦ ϑόςκεν (A gives ϑόςκεν as the reading of
Ar., but must be corrected from T, οὕτως Ap, ϑόςκον : see Ludwich ; Maass is wrong):

ϑόσκον γράφουσιν οἱ ἀκριβέστεροι Eust.

Ban ὃ᾽ Pap. ο. 387. ἀν dai T.

394. προτὶ G.

388. δ᾽ αὖ L Cant.
389. Tadnuccen ap. Did.? (οὕτω. διὰ τοῦ a γραπτέον TaNuccaN).
394-95 placed by Zen. after 399.

383. αὐτοὶ ἐπεὶ L (om. p’”). 384.
ἐκόςμεε (3: ἐκόςμει 22,
392. προτὶ L

380. See 28. Nestor is forgotten here.

381-82. There is no record of the
athetesis of these lines by Ar. or the
others, though if 376-77 go, these must
necessarily follow ; and An. says of 382
οὗτος ὁ στίχος τοὺς προκειμένους ἀναιρεῖ.
οἰχόμενοι ἐπί, ἐποιχόμενοι, visiting all the
divisions. ἄμειβον, it would seem, must
mean ‘caused them to change’ their
armour.

382. χέρηϊ δὲ χείρονα deserves pre-
ference over the vulg. χέρεια δὲ χείρονι.
as preserving the favourite ‘chiasmus’ ;
and xépys is elsewhere found only as a
mase. See note on A 80. There seems
little to choose between Odcken and
décxov. The former of course is logic-
ally consistent, but the latter is quite
defensible.

383. ῥ᾽ is an obvious metrical stop-gap
(Féccavro), unless we read éFécavro with
van L.

386. τῶι, apparently ἄορι, μιγῆναι
meaning ‘to meet, come in contact
with’; a strange use. According to the
regular sense of the Homeric formula
μιγήμεναι ἐν dat λυγρῆι the words should
mean ‘it is not permitted for him (or
it) to join in the battle,’ which is sense-
less here. We might translate ἐξ is not
permitted (to mortals) to join in battle
with if (instrum. dat., using it as a
weapon), but this is little better.

389. ἔριδα πτολέμοιο TaNuccaN, see
on H 102. Poseidon and Hector are
here treated as two equal powers, like
Poseidon and Zeus in N; a thoroughly
un-Homeric conception. Gpxroon itself
is a word suited to an ally from without,
but not to a general commanding his
own troops; cf. E 507, 511. For the
gen. πτολέμοιο cf. νεῖκος πολέμοιο, N 271.

392. For the participation of inanimate
nature cf. N 29, Φ 387.

94 IAIAAOC = (xiv)

A , ) A γ 2
ποντόθεν ὀρνύμενον πνοιῆι βορέω ἀλεγεινῆι, 395

” Ν , , / if > /
οὔτε πυρὸς τόσσός γε πέλει βρόμος αἰθομένοιο

” > / oe ’ ” / ee
οὔρεος ἐν βήσσηις, OTE T ὠρετο καιέμεν ὕλην,

> , Ν e ,
οὔτ᾽ ἄνεμος τόσσόν γε περὶ Opvaly ὑψικόμοισιν

> / “ / / / /
HTVEL, ὅς TE μάλιστα μέγω βρέμεται χαλεπαίνων,

ὅσση ἄρα Τρώων καὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν ἔπλετο φωνὴ 400

Ν 5 , hese) > 5) 5 / ”
δεινὸν ἀυσώντων, OT ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλοισιν ὄρουσαν.

an /
Αἴαντος δὲ πρῶτος ἀκόντισε φαίδιμος “Extap

” > \ / N 5 / τ »Ὸ» 5 7,
εγχει, ἐπεὶ TETPATTTO πρὸς ἰθύ οἱ, οὐδ ἀφάμαρτε,

nr 6 δύ lal ‘ \ Nal yf θ
τῆι pa Ovw τελαμῶνε περι στήθεσσι τετάσθην,

" ΄ Ν ΄ ς δὲ ΄ὔ 5 ΄ y =
TOL O μὲν σώκεος, O OE φασγάνου ἀργυροήλου" 405

/ Υ
τώ οἱ ῥυσάσθην τέρενα χρόα.

χώσατο δ᾽ ἽἝκτωρ,

“ 7 εἰν e , 2 \ > / ” /
ὅττί pa οἱ βέλος ὠκὺ ἐτώσιον ἔκφυγε χειρὸς,

iy δ᾽ ἑτάρων εἰς ἔθνος ἐχάξζετο κῆρ᾽ ἀλεείνων.

Ν \ ΕΣ 5» 5 / / / ”
Tov μὲν ἔπειτ᾽ ἀπιόντα μέγας Τελαμώνιος Αἴας

395. πάντοθεν Cant. || βορέα S:

ἀνέμου C: ἀνέμων Lips.

396. ΓΕ: Te G. ||

πέλει Lt. Mag. 214. 36: πέλεται Schol. Ap. Rhod. iii. 861: moet HPR: ποτὶ ©.

397. COpETO : ἔν τισι τῶν ὑπομνημάτων ὥρορε Did.
Ὁ, Par. ὁ d. || περὶ ADJPRS Harl. a:
399. μέγα : μάλα ὦ.
(cco: P!) R King’s (Lips. swpr.) Harl. d, Par. 6 σ᾽}:
Q: τράπετο Lips. || ἰϑύ of: teu Syr. (or τϑὺν 7).
406. epucaceHN Syr.

Agathokles ap. Eust.

P: πετάςθην G Lips.

398. τόςςός Zen. JQ Harl.
ποτὶ 2. || UWIKOMWOICIN: izopépoicin
400. OccH Zen. Aph. Ar. A[C]P2
TOCCH {), 403. ἐτέτραπτο
404. τοῦ pa U. || Tetaceon
409. ἐπιόντα Lips.

395. Notice the contrast of θάλασσα,
the sea near the shore, and πόντος the
deep sea, βορέω, rather Sopéa’(o) (van
L.): note the reading of S.

396. The meaningless ποτί has invaded
almost all our mss., and πέλει has no
authority but a quotation in the Lt.
Mag. The variant ποθι is just possible
(supplying Boda from 394) but not
likely. Van L. reads τόσσος πέλεται
βρόμος from a very imperfect quot. of
the scholiast on Ap. Rhod. Bentley’s
ποτὶ δρυμόν is almost too ingenious,

398. For the variant ἐξοφόροισιν cf.
δρύας ἰξοφόρους quoted by Hesych. from
Sophokles (frag. 854 Dind. ).

399. udAicta goes with the whole
sentence, not particularly with μέγα,
‘the wind which most of all roars loud
in anger. When μάλιστα is followed by
an adj. the end of a line is generally
interposed, E 5, N 568, etc.

402. Here we enter upon a different
region of ideas, and are on purely
Homeric ground. Lachmann rightly
felt the change of style, and therefore
joined the following passage to his

‘tenth lay,’ following immediately after
A 557, an artifice which has been gener-
ally recognised as the weakest point in
detail of his theory, and has given
rise to infinite discussion. See Intro-
duction.

403. τέτραπτο πρὸς ieu oi, see N 542
ἐπὶ of τετραμμένον. But the position of
the pronoun is wrong (the words must
mean προστέτραπτό οἱ iv), and ‘the
sense seems to require πρὸς ἰθύν, in the
direction of his aim,’ H.G. ὃ 365. This
correction gains support from the reading
of Syr.

404. TH, we must supply Hit him from
οὐδ᾽ ἀφάμαρτεν. The point indicated
must be the middle of the breast where
the baldricks crossed, that of the sword
lying over the right shoulder, that of
the shield over the left. Cf. Herod. i.
171 τελαμῶσι σκυτίνοισι οἷηκίζοντες (τὰς
ἀσπίδας) περὶ τοῖσι αὐχέσι τε καὶ τοῖσι
ἀριστεροῖσι ὥὦμοισι περικείμενοι (Reichel
Ῥ. 82). It is clear that Aias cannot have
been wearing a breastplate (see 406), as
was noted indeed by some ancient critics
(ap. Schol. T).

; IAIAAOC = (xiv)

/ / Ὁ \ / » -
χερμαδίωι, τά pa πολλὰ θοάων ἔχματα νηῶν
πὰρ ποσὶ μαρναμένων ἐκυλίνδετο, τῶν ὃν ἀείρας

an ” ᾽ tal
στῆθος βεβλήκει ὑπὲρ ἄντυγος, ἀγχόθι δειρῆς,

/ ε » , \ > vo /
στρόμβον δ᾽ ὡς ἔσσευε βαλών, περὶ δ᾽ ἔδραμε πάντηι.

Φ e ’ «Δ᾽ ς Ἂς ΄ a Ν \ > , Ὁ “-
ὡς δ᾽ ὅθ᾽ ὑπὸ ῥιπῆς πατρὸς Διὸς ἐξερίπηι δρῦς
/ , ᾿
mpoppitos, δεινὴ δὲ θεείου γίνεται ὀδμὴ
ἐξ αὐτῆς" τὸν δ᾽ οὔ περ ἔχει θράσος, ὅς κεν ἴδηται
5 \ x7 \ \ \ , ,
ἐγγὺς ἐών, χαλεπὸς δὲ Διὸς μεγάλοιο κεραυνός"
a > \ ΑΙ ,
ὡς ἔπεσ᾽ “Extopos ὠκὺ χαμαὶ μένος ἐν κονίηισι.
, r \ p a
χειρὸς δ᾽ ἔκβαλεν ἔγχος, ἐπ᾿ αὐτῶι δ᾽ ἀσπὶς ἐάφθη
\ / > \ Qs € / / A
καὶ κόρυς, ἀμφὶ δέ of βράχε τεύχεα ποικίλα χαλκῶι.

420

΄ \ , 5. ἡ ey. = » =
of δὲ μέγα ἰάχοντες ἐπέδραμον vies ᾿Αχαιῶν,

ἐλπόμενοι ἐρύεσθαι, ἀκόντιζον δὲ θαμειὰς

412. ἐβεβλήκει JU and ap. Eust.: βεβλήκειν Zen. Aph.
ὑπὸ ADHQTU Syr. Harl. a, Mor. Cant. Lips.: ὑπαὶ Q.
ὑπο ριπῆς) H Ambr. Pap. o, Harl. a (yp. ῥιπῆς). | ἐξέριπε Mor.

416. οὔ περ... ὅς KEN: οὔ TIN’.
KEN Bar. 417 om. R.

420 om. At Ambr. Pap. o.
épuceceal R.

. ὅστις (with τῶν for TON?) Aph.
418. πέςεν J Ambr.
421. μέγ᾽ R Lips.

“Wat. 18: 414.
pinfic: πληγῆς A (yp.
415. γίγνεται L.
περ:
ὠκὺ Ar. P: ὦκα 2 Chia Mass.
422. epucaceai Ambr. :

410. χερμαδίωι, the construction is
altered in the’ next line, as often, after
the parenthesis. τά, (of those) which,
virtually =ola. Cf. ε 422 κῆτος... οἷά τε
πολλὰ τρέφει, § 150 εἰ μέν τις θεός ἐσσι
τοὶ οὐρανὸν εὐρὺν ἔχουσιν, μα 917 κῆτος
ἃ μυρία βόσκει ἀγάστονος ᾿Αμφιτρίτη.
ἔχματα, a word which recurs only in
M 260, N 139, Φ 259, in different senses.
It is most natural to regard it as=
ἕρματα, A 486, Β 154, stones used as
shores to keep the ships upright; cf.
Hes. Opp. 624 νῆα δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἠπείρου ἐρύσαι,
πυκάσαι τε λίθοισι πάντοθεν. The only
difficulty is to see how such stones could
have been lying about in numbers un-
employed. Dr. Hayman (Odyssey i. App.
Ῥ. exiv.) plausibly suggests that the word
may mean stones used for ballast. These
would naturally be thrown out when
the ships were drawn up on land, in
order to avoid straining the hulls; but
into the sea rather than on the land.
The imperf. ἐκυλίνϑετο seems to imply
that they were being used as missiles by
others also.

412. ἄντυγος, the rim of the shield,
Z 118.

413. Ch A 147 ὅλμον δ᾽ ὡς ἔσσευε
κυλίνδεσθαι δι’ ὁμίλου. The traditional
meaning of στρόμβος is whipping-top,
also called βέμβιξ, and in this sense

Virgil imitates the simile, cew quondam
rapido volitans sub verbere turbo, Aen.
vii. 378. Others took it to mean a
spindle, others again a ῥόμβος or ‘ bull-
roarer’ (see Lang Custom and Myth pp.
29-44). Aischylos uses the word of a
whirlwind, and in later Greek it usually
means a spiral shell. It is not very
clear whether Hector or the stone is
the object of the comparison and the
subject of ἔδραμε, i.e. whether Alias
whirls the stone like a στρόμβος or
makes Hector spin like a στρόμβος.
The latter is implied by the order of
events, though the former seems more
natural.

416-17. This couplet has been objected
to as superfluous, and is certainly rather
weak ; note especially the use of αὐτῆς
in an emphatic position, but entirely
without emphasis—it is in fact re-
dundant. The dislocation of τόν from
its governing verb ἴδηται is unusual.

419. The ἔγχος must be the second
spear which the Homeric hero usually
carried: Hector has already cast one.
ἐάφθη, see on N 543.

422, eaueidc is legitimately separated
from its substantive αἰχμάς by the end
of a line, because it is not an epithet,
but part of the predicate, cast thick.
See note on N 611.

96 IAIAAOC = (xiv)

> / >’ ε » ’ id / lal

αἰχμάς: ἀλλ’ ov τις ἐδυνήσατο ποιμένα λαῶν

2) if ’ Nie is “- \ \ ͵ BA

οὐτάσαι οὐδὲ βαλεῖν: πρὶν yap περίβησαν ἄριστοι,
Πουλυδάμας τε καὶ Αἰνείας καὶ δῖος ᾿ΔΑγήνωρ 425

΄ 3 lal ᾽
Σαρπηδών τ᾽ ἀρχὸς Λυκίων καὶ Pradcos ἀμύμων"

ω > 7 / e
τῶν δ᾽ ἄλλων ov Tis εὖ ἀκήδεσεν, ANNA πάροιθεν

> / 5 / / 5) rn
ἀσπίδας εὐκύκλους σχέθον αὐτοῦ.

Ἂν > ΕΣ 5 ς lal
Tov ὃ ἄρ᾽ ἑταῖροι

\ 5. δ Ἂ / 5) / ” 5. Ὅλ θ᾽ oY
χερσιν ἀειρᾶντες φέρον €K TOVOU, opp {κε UTTTTOUS

/ “, e 5)
ὠκέας, οἵ οἱ ὄπισθε μάχης ἠδὲ πτολέμοιο 480

Ο / / Ἂν If
ἕστασαν ἡνίοχον τε καὶ ἅρματα ποικίλ᾽ ἔχοντες"

Δ / \ yy ig , ΄
οἱ τὸν γε προτὶ ἄστυ φέρον βαρέα στενάχοντα.

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ πόρον ἷξον ἐυρρεῖος ποταμοῖο,

— Ie δ /
Ξάνθου δινήεντος, ὃν ἀθάνατος τέκετο Ζεύς,

ἔνθά μιν ἐξ ἵππων πέλασαν χθονί, Kad δέ οἱ ὕδωρ 435

yedav: ὁ δ᾽ ἀμπνύνθη καὶ ἀνέδρακεν ὀφθαλμοῖσιν,

ες! ΒΟ an \ en 9 > ,
ἑζόμενος ὃ ἐπὶ γοῦνα κελαινεφὲς αἷμ᾽ ἀπέμεσσεν.

αὖτις δ᾽ ἐξοπίσω πλῆτο χθονί, τὼ δέ οἱ ὄσσε
νὺξ ἐκάλυψε μέλαινα, βέλος δ᾽ ἔτι θυμὸν ἐδάμνα.

423. ἐδυνήςετο Lips.
ἅπαντες A.

L: διήλλαττον ai ᾿Αριστάρχου GKHOECEN καὶ ἀκηδέςατο Did.
433. ON: δὲ Ambr. || ἐύρρῆος PR: ἐυρεῖος ST.
436. ἀμπνύνϑθη ὥ:
431. ἱζόμενος S. || Gméueccen Ar. Ὡ: ἀπέμαςςεν Zen.

PR Lips.
Zen. U.
ἀνέδραμεν P Lips.

435. néhacen P.

424. Gpictor: ἕκαστοι ( (yp. ἄριετοι) : ἐν ἄλλωι
421. ὃ᾽ : T Zen. || εὖ : ceu Η. || ἀκήθηςεν Vr. b d, Ραν. } : ἀκήθης᾽

429. ἀείροντες
484. ἀθάνατον
ἅἄμπνυτο (): ἐμπνύνθη Ar. ? ||

A (uéccen A™) CDS Pap. o, Par. ej (-acen): ἀπήμεςςεν R: of δὲ yp. Gnéceicen T.
438. aveic C. || τὼ δέ Ar. ACHPRS Lips. Mor.: Kad δὲ Q and ap. Did.

423, €dunHcato: ῥ᾽ ἐδυνήσατο Barnes,
γε δυνήσατο Bentley, Fe δυνήσατο G.
Hermann (after N 600: but see note
there). But there is nothing in the
lengthening of τις in the principal caesura
to justify a change.

426. Glaukos was wounded in M 387,
and in IL 508 is still unable to fight.
The point is inconsiderable, but may
indicate the interpolation of the line.

427. ἀκήϑεςεν, a curious form; it
seems to imply a present *axndéo-jw
from the stem dkndeo of ἀκηδής. This
would form an aor. ἀκηδέσ-σαι, with the
usual power of dropping one o (H. G.
§ 39). Compare ἀκηδέστως. The only
other instance of the verb in H. is Ψ 70
ἀκήδεις (ἀκήδεες), imperf. Hence Nauck
reads ἀκήδεεν here.

429-32 =N 535-38.

433-34= 1-2, Q 692-93. In all the
numerous alternations of the war this is
the first mention we have had of the
ford across the Skamandros, which in

the passages quoted lies directly between
the camp and the city. The poet treats
his topography with the utmost freedom,
according to his needs for the moment.

434, ἀθάνατος, Zen. ἀθάνατον, prob-
ably on the ground that ἀθάνατος is
nowhere in H. joined to a divine name,
except in the repetitions of this line and
B 741 (in the same half line); and in
the Odyssey of the subordinate divinities
Proteus (6 385) and Kirke (μ 302). The
acc. as predicate in the rel. clause is
quite defensible, see note on N 340.

436. ἀμπνύνθη, see note on E 697.
There is no authority here for the correct
form ἀμπνύθη.

437. It is strange that Nikanor should
think it necessary to point out that
ἐπὶ γοῦνα is to be joined with ἑζόμενος,
not with ἀπέμεσσεν. The phrase evi-
dently means ‘ sitting with his knees on
the ground,’ which we call ‘sitting on
his heels.’ Zen.’s weak variant ἀπ-
έμασσεν has some MS. support.

IAIAAOC = (xiv) 97

r ΄ “ἶΥΣΝ / ,
᾿Αργεῖοι δ᾽ ὡς οὖν ἴδον “Extopa νόσφι κιόντα, “0
la] ar ΣΝ, r , , / © \ ,
μᾶλλον ἐπὶ Τρώεσσι θόρον, μνήσαντο δὲ χάρμης.
» \ ΄, ᾽ bong, εἴς ‘ y
ἔνθα πολὺ πρώτιστος ‘Oirnos ταχὺς Alas
Σάτνιον οὔτασε δουρὶ μετάλμενος ὀξυόεντι
> , ὰ ” ΄ , ry ΝΥ
Ηνοπίδην, ὃν ἄρα νύμφη τέκε vis ἀμύμων
» / > " φ ,
Ηνοπι βουκολέοντι παρ᾽ ὄχθας Σατνιόεντος.
τὸν μὲν ᾿Οἱλιάδης δουρικλυτὸς ἐγγύθεν ἐλθὼν
” / ε ’ > , | > ‘ ον ΠΣ: ᾽ -
οὔτασε καὶ λαπάρην' ὁ δ᾽ ἀνετράπετ᾽, ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ αὐτῶι
Τρῶες καὶ Δαναοὶ σύνωγον κρατερὴν ὑσμίνην.
τῶι δ᾽ ἐπὶ ἸΠουλυδάμας ἐγχέσπαλος ἦλθεν ἀμύντωρ
Πανθοΐδης, βάλε δὲ ΤΙροθοήνορα δεξιὸν ὦμον, £5(
eX Ε wy / bd ” > »
υἱὸν ᾿Αρηϊλύκοιο' δι’ ὥμου δ᾽ ὄβριμον ἔγχος
> δ ω 3 -
ἔσχεν, ὁ δ᾽ ἐν κονίηισι πεσὼν ἕλε γαῖαν ἀγοστῶι.
/ \ gf
Πουλυδάμας δ᾽ ἔκπαγλον ἐπεύξατο μακρὸν ἀύσας"
Cree \ G3) Is ͵ “Ὁ
οὐ μὰν αὖτ᾽ ὀΐω μεγαθύμου []ανθοΐδαο
χειρὸς ἄπο στιβαρῆς ἅλιον πηδῆσαι ἄκοντα, 155
yi oh J.
ἀλλά τις ᾿Αργείων κόμισε χροΐ, Kal μιν ὀΐω
fal / ᾿ - ” Ἵ
αὐτῶι σκηπτόμενον κατίμεν δόμον “Aidos εἴσω.
δ M4 ’ > / > » ΄ > b) ,
ὡς ἔφατ᾽, ᾿Αργείοισι δ᾽ ἄχος γένετ᾽ εὐξαμένοιο-
Αἴαντι δὲ μάλιστα δαΐφρονι θυμὸν ὄρινε,
τῶι Τελαμωνιάδηι: τοῦ γὰρ πέσεν ἄγχι μάλιστα. 460
/ “
καρπαλίμως δ᾽ ἀπιόντος ἀκόντισε δουρὶ φαεινῶι"
Πουλυδάμας δ᾽ αὐτὸς μὲν ἀλεύατο κῆρα μέλαιναν
λικριφὶς ἀΐξας, κόμισεν δ᾽ ᾿Αντήνορος υἱὸς

>

-
440. νόςφιν ἐόντα Ar. (2) A (yp. κιόντα) CS Lips. Harl. ad, Par. ae f. 444.
oinonioHN Bar. Mor. 445. οἴνοπι Mor. || ὄχθη P: ὄχθῃ R (supr. ci man. rec.) :
ὄχθης Zen. || ςατνιόεντος : τινὲς carrapioto ‘I. 447. οὗτα κατὰ λαπάρην [( ’}
(this is the printed vulgate). 449. ἦλθεν : τινὲς ἧἥεν T. 451. ὄμβριμον CPRS
Lips. 453. noAuddauac R. || yp. καὶ ἔκπαγλος T. || μακρὰ BiBacewn A (4p.
μακρὸν ἀύςας) HS Pap. o, Harl. a. 460. TOU: τῶ ὦ. 462. ἀλεύςατο 5.

440. The variant ἐόντα for κιόντα is 457. ‘‘atTa@i is emphatic, the staft
due no doubt to a feeling that the latter ‘as it was,’ ready to his hand; he
is not the right word for a man who is would need no other on his way to
carried away unconscious. Hades,” Monro. cKHNTOMENON, τύ), “S

443. Carnion, a short form for La7- ὦ staff: the verb is found only here
νιοείσιος : compare the name Σιμοείσιος in H.

(A 474) also derived from ariver. For 458-59=N 417-18. 460 is a weak
the position of the Satnioeis see note verse, whose authenticity is doubted
on Z 35. with good reason by Heyne and others.

444, νηΐς, see notes on B 865, Z 22, The use of τῶι is hardly Homeric, and
and similar phrases in Z 25, 34. So447 from the context we should suppose

is nearly identical with Z 64. 452= that this is still the Oilean Aias.

N 520. drocrai, A 425. 463. λικριφὶς ἀΐξας, so also 7 45]
455. πηϑῆςαι, for the commoner é¢x- the oblique charge of a wild boar (ef.

φυγεῖν : the dart is spoken of like an on M 148) Compare Nxpol (λεκροί) " οἱ

animate being. ὄζοι τῶν ἐλαφείων κεράτων (Hesych.

VOL, IT H

98 IAIAAOC = (xiv)

᾿Αρχέλοχος" τῶι yap pa θεοὶ βούλευσαν ὄλεθρον.

, e? ΝΜ fal \ > ’ > A
τόν p ἔβαλεν κεφαλῆς τε καὶ αὐχένος ἐν συνεοχμῶι, 465
νείατον ἀστράγαλον, ἀπὸ δ᾽ ἄμφω κέρσε τένοντε'

cal Ἂς \ / \ / tn /
τοῦ δὲ πολὺ προτέρη κεφαλὴ στόμα TE ῥῖνές τε
> - “- » a r /
οὔδει TAHVT ἤ περ κνῆμαι καὶ γοῦνα πεσόντος.

Αἴας δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ἐγέγωνεν ἀμύμονι ἸΠουλυδάμαντι"
“φράζεο, ἸΤουλυδάμα, καί μοι νημερτὲς ἐνίσπες" 470
ἢ ῥ᾽ οὐχ οὗτος ἀνὴρ Ἰ]ροθοήνορος ἀντὶ πεφάσθαι

ἄξιος ;

» / \ » 2Q\ a Μ
οὐ μέν μοι κακὸς εἴδεται οὐδὲ κακῶν ἐξ,

3 © /
ἀλλὰ κασίγνητος ᾿Αντήνορος ἱπποδάμοιο

> a Ὁ Ν \ , bts 39
ἢ παῖς: αὐτῶι γὰρ γενεὴν ἄγχιστα ἐώικει.

> ©

ἢ ρ

εὖ γινώσκων, Τρῶας δ᾽ ἄχος ἔλλαβε θυμόν. 475

ἔνθ᾽ ᾿Ακάμας IIpouayov Βοιώτιον οὔτασε δουρί,
ἀμφὶ κασιγνήτων BeBaws: ὁ δ᾽ ὕφελκε ποδοῖιν.

an > 5 τ »Ά >) / \ ΕΛ
τῶι δ᾽ ᾿Ακάμας ἔκπαγλον ἐπεύξατο μακρὸν avaas:

“ce? “- 57 > , > /
Ἀργεῖοι LO“@MPOL, ATELNAWY aKOpP)TOL,

5 » / , ΕῚ
ου θην οιἰοισιν YE πονος T

Μ ge
ἔσεται καὶ ὀϊζὺς 480

. cr e / BA
ἡμῖν, ἀλλά ποθ᾽ ὧδε κατακτανέεσθε Kal ὕμμες.

464. ἀρχέλοχος Ar. Ὡ:
ευνεεχμῶι Pap. ο.
a supr.) Eust.
Sauanta Zen.
01: τοι S.
ἔοικεν Aph. J, ἐν ἄλλωι A.

pinac Pap. o.

ἀρχίλοχος S.
466. Tenontac Lips.
468. neconta Vr. ἃ.
470. πουλυϑάμαν Zen. || ENicmec AJ Pap. o: Enicne 2.
474, ΓΕΝΕῊΝ : κεφαλὴν (or κ ἐφάμην 2) Pap. o: pa φυὴν Aph. |

475. γιγνώςκων LL.

465. TON O° 1. κεφαλὴν Η. |
467. πρότερον (Harl. a supr., Par.
469. Guvuona πουλυ-
472.

|| ϑυμκῶι GT: euuod Cant.

λέχριος, ob-liqu-us, and for the termina-
tion, dudi-s. κόμιςεν, caught in his
body, as in 456 above.

465, cuneoxuai, here only in Greek.
It appears to come from συν-έχω, cf.
συνοχή. joining ; but the e is then quite
anomalous.

466. ἄμφω τένοντε, see notes on A
521, K 456.

467. The meaning may be either that
the head is cut completely off with such
force as to bring it to the ground before
the body has time to fall, or that it is
only partially severed, but that the
blow is so violent as to turn the man
head over heels and bring him face
foremost on the ground.

471. Compare the similar taunt in
N 446.

472. The neglect of the F of ξείϑεται
is very rare. Bentley’s οὔ τι. κακός μοι
Feiéerac is condemned by the want of

caesura. Brandreth reads ἔσσεται for
εἴδεται with equal improbability.

474, ἐώικει, the plupf. (=imperf.)
implies ‘I thought he was,’ when he
was alive. reneHN is a strange word,
apparently expressing what we should
give by ‘family type’; but neither the
phrase nor the idea is like H. Aph.
read αὐτῶι γάρ pa φυὴν ἄγχιστα ἔοικεν.
which is plain, and has been adopted by
Nauck, von Christ, and van L.

475. εὖ γινώσκων, though he knew
him well he pretended not to do so for
the sake of the sarcasm.

477. ὕφελκε: trs=away from Aka-
mas; nodotin, by the feet (or from
under Akamas’ feet ἢ. Akamas also is
son of Antenor, B 823, A 60, M 100.

479. ἰόμωροι, see note on A 242.

481. kataxtanéecee, Cobet JZ C. 330
would read κατακτενέεσθε, see note on
Z 409.

eo

IAIAAOC = (xiv) 99
φράξεσθ' ὡς ὑμῖν Mpopaxos δεδμημένος εὕδει
ἔγχει ewan, iva μή τι κασιγνήτοιό γε ποινὴ
δηρὸν ἄτιτος ener τῶ καί τέ τις εὔχεται ἀνὴρ
γνωτὸν ἐνὶ μεγώροισιν ἄρεω ἀλκτῆρα λιπέσθαι."
ἃ 3, , ΄ > » , ’ > ΄
ὡς ἔφατ᾽, ᾿Αργείοισι δ᾽ ἄχος γένετ᾽ εὐξαμένοιο"
[Invérews δὲ μάλιστα δαΐφρονι θυμὸν ὄρινεν"
ὡρμήθη δ᾽ ᾿Ακάμαντος" ὁ δ᾽ οὐχ ὑπέμεινεν ἐρωὴν
Ul , ” e 8 ” | a
ηνελέοιο ἄνακτος" ὁ οὔτασεν ᾿Ιλιονῆα
υἱὸν Φόρβαντος πολυμήλου, τόν pa μάλιστα 190
¢ / , ᾽ ΄ \ fal v
Ἑρμείας Τρώων ἐφίλει καὶ κτῆσιν ὄπασσε'

482. ὑμῖν : ἡμῖν ():
483. ἵνα WH: ἐν ἄλλωι μή τοι A.
HJ: om. P!Q Lips.: κε Q.
ἄρεω Ar. ? (see Ludwich) :
edgh: Gpewc 0.
© (incl. A):
TON pa: TON δὲ Mor. Bar.

HU@N Lips. :
| ΓΕ : τε 5.

ὕμμιν H (
484. Gtiuoc ἢ, τέ

ὑμῶν Harl. a supr.: ant.

A supr.)
1

482. εὕϑει is used only here
but cf. κοιμήσατο χάλκεον ὕπνον, A 241.

484, The scansion of ἄτιτος with ¢ is
entirely contrary to all analogy; see
N 414, and compare παλίντιτος, ἄντιτος,

‘Aurés, στατός, etc. always with a short

stem-vowel. Hence Clarke transposed
and wrote éy driros. This, however,
is almost too simple—there is no reason

why it should ever have got wrong. I

strongly suspect that the “original read-
ing is that of R, ἄτιμος, in the sense
unassessed. When a man’s next-of-kin
was gone, he had lost the avenger who
exacted the price for the blood shed.
Compare π᾿ 431 τοῦ viv οἷκον ἄτιμον des,
whose house thow eatest up with no price
set on it, i.e. without retribution, and
note on ἀτίμητον μετανάστην 1 648. The
sense «assess is of course quite familiar
in the verb τιμάω : and even if Schulze
is right in referring τίμη to a different
root (riw=honowr) from that of τίσις
(rt = exact), the two had been com-
pletely confused at a very early date, as
he admits (see App. D, vol. i. p. 595).—
The vulg. καί κέ τις is clearly impossible.
For καί τέ τις Monro (H. G. ὃ 82) writes
καί ris 7’, the regular order, which may
be indirectly supported by the entire
omission of the particle in a few Mss.
But there seems to be a certain tendency
of τε in this generalizing sense to cohere
with καί, ef. A 521 and other instances
in H. G. § 332, so that the text may
be accepted.

485. werdapoicin Zen. (Ar. ?) DJS: μεγάροις 2.
ἀρῆς Zen.: ἄρεος (Ὁ supr.) PQ Harl. a Ὁ, King’s, Par.
λιπέςθϑαι : renéceai S Eust. 489 on. I’. πηνελέοιο
καὶ μέγα ws Μενελέως (sic)j Harl. a: πηνέλεω Cant. 490.
491. Snaze 3S.
of death ; 485. ἄρεω, i.e. ἄρη᾽ (ο), gen. of ἄρης,
harm, wrongly transliterated from
APEO: see note on M 334. The

variant ἀρῆς naturally arises from the
acc. &pnv, confused with dapny=prayer,
curse. ‘The explanation of Ar., that

“Apew is from “Apews a by-form of “Apns,

does not hold here, for when a man is
killed in battle it cannot be said that
a survivor “Apny ἀμύνει, though he 1 may
keep disaster from the family “by saving
them the disgrace of a kinsman slain
and no blood-price exacted. ἀλκτῆρα
from ἀλκ- (ἀλ-αλκ-εῖν ete.). Schulze
(K. Z. xxix.) makes FaNxrnp=ultor for
volctor ; but this is disproved by ὃ 531
κυνῶν ἀλκτῆρα καὶ ἀνδρῶν. Cf. also
ἀρὴν (ἄρην) ἑτάροισιν ἀμύνειν M 354, ete.
Ainécea, be left behind; this aor. is
always used in passive sense.

488. ὡρμήθη with gen. as Φ 595.

489. Edd. read IInveNéwo, like Ileréwo
B 552 etc., as the other cases (in MSs.
come from a nom. -ews. But Aph. read
ΠΠηνέλεον in N 92, and the declension
in -os can always be restored: van L.
Ench, p. 206.

491. κτῆςιν Smacce, as god of flocks
and herds. Hence in ὃ 435 the swine-herd
offers to the nymphs and Hermes, and the
schol. quote from Simonides (Amorg. fr.
18) θύουσι νύμφαις τῶι τε Macados τόκωι"
οὗτοι γὰρ ἀνδρῶν alu’ ἔχουσι ποιμένων.
Cf. also o 819. The pastoral character
of Hermes is more pronounced in later
mythology, e.g. in the Hymn to him.

100 IAIAAOC Ξ (xrv)

τῶι δ᾽ ap ὑπὸ μήτηρ μοῦνον τέκεν Ἰλιονῆα"
τὸν τόθ᾽ ὑπ᾽ ὀφρύος οὗτα κατ᾽ ὀφθαλμοῖο θέμεθλα,
ἐκ δ᾽ ὦσε γλήνην: δόρυ δ᾽ ὀφθαλμοῖο διαπρὸ

καὶ διὰ iviov ἦλθεν, ὁ δ᾽ ἕζετο χεῖρε πετάσσας 495
ἄμφω. IInvédews δὲ ἐρυσσάμενος ξίφος ὀξὺ

> / / ” > / \ an

αὐχένα μέσσον ἔλασσεν, ἀπήραξεν δὲ χαμᾶζε

αὐτῆι σὺν πήληκι κάρη" ἔτι δ᾽ ὄβριμον ἔγχος

nev ἐν ὀφθαλμῶι: ὁ δὲ φὴ κώδειαν ἀνασχὼν
4 / , \ > / 7 ”

πέφραδέ ΠΕ Τρώεσσι καὶ εὐχόμενος ἔπος ηὔδα". 500

“ εἰπέμεναί μοι, Τρῶες, ἀγαυοῦ ᾿Ιλιονῆος

πατρὶ φίλωι καὶ μητρὶ γοήμεναι ἐν μεγάροισιν"

οὐδὲ γὰρ ἡ ἸἹΙρομάχοιο δάμαρ ᾿Αλεγηνορίδαο

2) \ / b} / Ve ec , \

ἀνδρὶ φίλωι ἐλθόντι γανύσσεται, ὁππότε κεν δὴ

5 , \ \ ΄ r 5 lal 3.»

εκ Τροίης συν νηυσι νεώμεθα KOUpOL Αχαιῶν. 505
a / \ >) ” / ce \ / ΕΣ fol
ὡς φάτο, τοὺς δ᾽ apa πάντας ὑπὸ τρόμος ἔλλαβε γυῖα,

/ NA “ “ Ἢ > \ bl

πάπτηνεν δὲ ἕκαστος ὅπηι φύγοι αἰπὺν ὄλεθρον.
, r rn 3 ,ὔ / > 7
ἔσπετε νῦν μοι, μοῦσαι ᾿Ολύμπια δώματ᾽ ἔχουσαι,

e Χ lal / >? > 7 3. Sy lal
ὅς τις δὴ πρῶτος BpoToevT avdpaypr ᾿Αχαιῶν

£495. χεῖρα PQ. 498. κάρην G2. || duBpmu0on CHPQRS. 499. δὲ OH
Zen. : δὲ φῆ Ar. AJ: δὴ φὴ G: δ᾽ ἔφη ὥ. 500 ἀθ. Ar. ? (see below). 505.
cUN: ἐν Zen. Aph. J. 506. τρόμος ἔλλαβε γυῖα : χλωρὸν δέος efAe(n)
DGPQRTU Harl. a, yp. A. || ἔλλαβε : eYAetoS. δ01. ὅποι GR Eust. || φύγη!)

JQ Cant. Lips.: φύγει D. B09 τις ἀδετοῦσι Schol. AT (see below).

He was worshipped as ἐπιμήλιος at
Koroneia, κριοφόρος at Tanagra (see
Frazer Paws. v. p. 87), and as νόμιος
commonly.

495. iniou, see note on E 73.

497. ἀπήραξεν, cf. N 577 ἀπὸ δὲ τρυ-
φάλειαν ἄραξεν.

499. φή, see on Β 144 ; he held up the
head on the spear-point like a poppy-
head on its long stalk. 7 is here, as in

the ships on land, never on board (except
as variant in B 351).

508. The following passage is probably
a later addition. The appeal to the
Muses is out of place, as there is no
great crisis, but only a temporary reflux
of the tide of battle (cf. A 218). The
allusion to the agency of Poseidon refers
to 383-401, a decidedly late passage.
The turning of the battle took place
really with the wounding of Hector, and

B, the reading of Zen. ; Ar. read φῆ:
ἔφη and probably athetized the next
verse (δοκεῖ ἀθετεῖν τὸν δεύτερον στίχον.
Herod.) ; he understood the words to
mean ‘he said, holding it up (as) a
poppy-head.’ The unnaturalness of this
construction need not be dwelt upon.

500. néppade, shewed, pointed out, as
335 above, ἡ 49 δόμος ὅν me κελεύεις
meppadeuev, K 111, ἃ 22, etc.

5035. cUN NHuci and ἐν νηυσί are equally
Homeric, but the former is commoner.
But ἐπὶ νηυσίν always means af or among

since then many ἀνδράγρια have been
won. The phrase GNoparpia, spoils of
heroes, is unique; hence τινὲς (not,
apparently, including Ar.) ἀθετοῦσι διὰ
τὸ ξένον τῆς λέξεως Kal μὴ κείμενον ἀλλα-
χοῦ. (Those who athetized 509 must
equally have condemned the preceding
and following lines; and this with δέ
for pa in 511 might suffice to save the
rest of the passage). The analogous
words are Boaypia (M 22, q.v.), ζωάγρια
(2 407), μοιχάγρια (θ 332), but not one
of these is exactly parallel.

IAIAAOC =

» > > / oi ΄, ‘ ᾽ ,
ἤρατ, emer p ἐκλινε μάχην κλυτὸς ἐννοσίγαιος. 510

(XIV) 101

Alas pa πρῶτος Τελαμώνιος “Tptiov οὗτα
Γυρτιάδην, Μυσῶν ἡγήτορα καρτεροθύμων"
Φάλκην δ᾽ ᾿Αντίλοχος καὶ Μέρμερον ἐξενάριξε:
,, / ,
Μηριόνης δὲ Μόρυν τε καὶ “Ἱπποτίωνα κατέκτα,
rn , ΄ > ,
Τεῦκρος δὲ ΤΠροθόωνά τ᾽ ἐνήρατο καὶ ἹἸ]εριφήτην. 515
5) 5 > , “-
᾿Ατρεΐδης δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔπειθ᾽ ὙὝπερήνορα ποιμένα λαῶν
" ΄ \ > \ Ψ
οὔτασε καὶ λαπάρην, διὰ δ᾽ ἔντερα χαλκὸς ἄφυσσε
, \ \ νι > / » \ ;
δηιώσας" ψυχὴ δὲ κατ᾽ οὐταμένην ὠτειλὴν
᾽ \ , » ͵
ἔσσυτ᾽ ἐπειγομένη, τὸν δὲ σκότος ὄσσε κάλυψε.
πλείστους δ᾽ Αἴας εἷλεν Οἴλῆος ταχὺς υἱός: 520
οὐ γάρ οἵ τις ὁμοῖος ἐπισπέσθαι ποσὶν ἣεν

ve

ἀνδρῶν τρεσσάντων, ὅτε τε Ζεὺς ἐν φόβον ὄρσηι.

510. Hpeto ἢ ἥρατο Eust. || ῥ᾽ : περ Mor. || μάχης S.
512. μυρτιάδην (). καρτερόθυμον S: βαρβαροφώνων τινές, T.
517. oUTace καὶ 2: οὗτα κατὰ DGOTU Par.
ἔντεα T! Mor.
OH ϑεὸς τινές T.

R Vr. A: φάλτην Bar. Mor.
eh, yp. A. || δ᾽ : τ᾽ Mor. |
αἴας R (cf. N 701). 522. Te Ζεὺς:

511. pa: μὲν (.
513. φάλκυν

υἱός:
ὄρςηι:

520. οιλιαῦης Pap. o.
én: éc P.

@pce(n) CDHTU Lips. Par. 1 (yp. 6pcu): wl Pap. o: A has épemi sup. € over Η.

514. Μόρυν τε καὶ ‘Innotiona, see
on N 792. From the same passage (791)
Barnes conj. Πολυφοίτην (Ilok\vpyrny) for
Περιφήτην.

516. ᾿Ατρεΐϑης, Menelaos, who alludes
in P 24 to the death of Hyperenor, though
he adds details which are not mentioned
here.

517. See note on N 508.

518. κατ᾽ ὠτειλήν, down the course of

the wound, as though it were a channel
along which the soul flowed; cf. κατὰ
ῥόον.

521. ἐπιςπέςθϑαι may consistently with

the use of ἕπομαι mean either ‘no man
was his match so as to keep pace with
him in running,’ or ‘no man was his
equal for clinging to the foe when men
have turned to flee.’ In the latter case
GNOP@N TpeccaNTWON May be a ven.
absolute, and nocin mean ‘by speed of
foot.’ It is perhaps possible, however,
to make ἀνδρῶν depend on ποσίν, and
take this with ἐπισπέσθαι, as we talk of
‘hanging on the heels’ of a flying
enemy. There is little to choose between
SpcHi and ὦρσε. For the phrase compare
A 544, N 362.

O

INTRODUCTION

THE book consists of two principal parts—(1) the awaking of Zeus and
the restoration of Hector to the battle by Apollo’s aid, 1-366 ; and (2) the
final battle or battles at the ships, 515-746. The intervening portion,
367-514, seems to be an interpolation designed partly to effect the transi-
tion between the two sections, partly to bring the whole into connexion
with the main plot as it was left at the end of A.

The division between 2 and O is purely arbitrary. The first portion,
O 1-262, is the necessary continuation of the Διὸς ἀπάτη, and shares the
merits of that delightful poem. It contains several passages of doubtful
authenticity, but none of them are of large compass, nor does the doubt
cast upon them affect the general context. Reference may be made to the
notes on 18, 56, 212-14, 231.

With 263 more serious questions begin. We find the long and splendid
simile by which Paris is portrayed in Z 506 ff. applied with far less
appropriateness to Hector. Yet if we cut it out there is left not a word
even to hint that Hector has to come all the way from the ford of
Skamandros (2 433) before joining his men; this we should hardly expect
the Epic poet to leave out. The simile of the galloping horse may to some
extent bridge this gap.

The speech of Thoas, 281-305, is full of difficulties, which are pointed
out in the notes. It would seem as though the whole passage from 263-305
were an interpolation; most of the lines which are not un-Homeric in
thought or expression come from other parts of the poems (263-68 =
Z 506-11; 269=X 24; 270, cf. N 757, β΄ 297; 271, cf Τ 24; 272=
A 549; 277-78 =P 730-31, cf. N 147; 285=A 73, ete.; 286—N 99;
290, cf. y 372, Καὶ 44; 294=B 139; 298 cf. A 594; 299 cf. K 433;
300=H 379). It is not easy to see what was the reason of the interpola-
tion, unless it may have been desired for local or family reasons to bring in
the curious eulogy on Thoas, who at once disappears from the scene, together
with his futile tactical advice—a distant echo of that of Poseidon in ΚΞ
370 ff.

The description of the fight at the ships, 306-66, contains no note-
worthy difficulty, with the exception of the fact that Hector who is on foot
in 307 (μακρὰ βιβάς) suddenly appears on his chariot in 352. On this
little stress can be laid, as similar instances are common in the Homeric

102

IAIAAOC Ο (xv) 103

fights ; we have only to assume that Hector, who was carried to his chariot
in Ξ 429, returns with it to the fight, and mounts or dismounts as occasion
serves.

With 366 Apollo disappears from the battle, having carried out the
charge laid on him in 229-33 ; henceforth it is Zeus alone who directs the
fight. Here, then, we may confidently place the end of the Διὸς ἀπάτη.
And from this point difficulties and complications thicken.

The introduction of Nestor in 370 is sudden and unexplained ; we last
heard of him in © 1-134, as he is not mentioned in Ξ 380 with the friends
in whose company he was last found. The omen of the thunder, too (379),
seems to miss its mark and produce the opposite effect to that intended.
There is thus some ground for suspicion, though hardly for condemnation
of the passage.

The passage about Patroklos (390-404) is also difficult, apart from the
general question of the authenticity of the whole Eurypylos incident (see
Introduction to A) ; for it is impossible to say what are the times alluded to
in 391 and 395. There does not seem to be a proper contrast between the
period when ‘they were fighting for the wall’—which would seem to be
the stage of the battle described in M—and the moment when ‘he marked
the Trojans assaulting the wall.’ Even if we take ἐπεσσυμένους to imply
‘carrying’ the wall, the difficulty is not solved, for that was done at the
end of M ; are we to suppose that Patroklos never noticed all the disasters
of N and ΚΞ, and only remarks when the wall is carried for the second time?
The lines could only be in place immediately after the end of M; but it
may remain doubtful whether they were originally composed for that place,
or are purposely left with a vague reference so as to introduce the
Patrokleia at any point of the story. It may be remarked that of the ten
lines 395—404 six are borrowed ; 395-96 = M 143-44 ; 397-98 =O 113-14,
403-04 = A 792-93; and this fact, together with the use of the non-Homeric
word λόγους, seems to point to late origin. The same may be said of the
word σοφίης in the next passage (405-14), which is further complicated
by a confusion in the picture of the battle which runs through most of
the rest of the book. In 387 we were told that the Greeks have mounted
the ships and are fighting from them. But here (407-09) they are drawn
up in φάλαγγες, and are keeping the Trojans away from the ships. In 416
it is not made clear whether Aias is on the ship or before it, but the
context is on the whole in favour of the latter ; for though Lykophron, who
is standing by Aias, falls when wounded νηὸς ἀπὸ πρυμνῆς, there is nothing
whatever in the following passage, down to 591, to shew that the battle is
not on the level ground. In 442 and 483 there is no mention of any
climbing of the ship, and in 515-91 the fighting is of the normal type,
with rushes forward and backward on either side. In 566 the phrase
φράξαντο νῆας ἕρκεϊ χαλκείωι naturally implies a wall of armed men in
front of the ships ; and in 593 we are told, to our surprise, that the Trojans
‘attacked the ships,’ as though they had not done so already in 385.

It is clear, then, that this part of the battle cannot be harmonized with
the lines which first describe the Greeks as posted on the ships. These
lines are 379-89, (414?) and 435. The latter carries with it the whole
episode of Teukros and his bow, which takes us down to 514. The whole

104 IAIAAOC O (xv)

passage 367-514 is in fact only a string of episodes which have grown up
independently about one central idea with details differently conceived, and
have been brought into merely superficial connexion, They partly con-
tradict one another as to the position of Aias, and cannot be reconciled with
what follows.

But after 514 all goes smoothly enough, and the only question is as to
the point at which we once more enter the stream of the Mavs. Either
515 or 592 fits on excellently to the general situation as it was left in
A 595. The slow and stubborn retreat of the Greeks there described is
resumed here in a brief stand in front of the ships, till the Trojans charge
and drive them inside the line (see note on εἰσωποί 653) and among the huts.

Now at length Aias, not content to be confined in one of these
dislocated groups, mounts on the ships’ decks, and fights first from one and
then from another ; finally he has to defend the ship of Protesilaos, which
Hector attempts to burn,

As between 515 and 592 the decision is not easy ; 515-91, though
rather commonplace and entirely without significance in the story, contain
no serious difficulties, but it cannot be doubted that 592 is far more suitable
as the exordinm of a new rhapsody. The question is fortunately not
important. For two short interpolations it will be sufficient to refer to the
notes on 610 and 668.

IAIAAOC O

Παλίωξις mapa τῶν νεῶν.

αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ διά τε σκόλοπας καὶ τάφρον ἔβησαν

φεύγοντες, πολλοὶ δὲ δάμεν Δαναῶν ὑπὸ χερσίν,

e Ν \ > v > / /
οἱ μὲν δὴ Tap ὄχεσφιν ἐρητύοντο μένοντες,

χλωροὶ ὑπαὶ δείους, πεφοβημένοι, ἔγρετο δὲ Ζεὺς

Ἴδης ἐν κορυφῆισι παρὰ χρυσοθρόνου “Ἥρης.

στῆ δ᾽ dp ἀναΐξας, ἴδε δὲ Τρῶας καὶ ᾿Αχαιούς,

\ \ ᾿ , \ \ / “
TOUS μὲν ορίνομενοῦς, τους δὲ κλονέοντας ὄπισθεν

᾿Αργείους, μετὰ δέ σφι Ἰ]οσειδάωνα ἄνακτα.

ὙΈκτορα δ᾽ ἐν πεδίωι ἴδε κείμενον, ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἑταῖροι

“ > e > > / » > ” A > /
cial: ὁ ὃ ἀργαλέων ἔχετ ἄσθματι κῆρ ἀπινύσσων,

te τ ΜΈΝ ἡ > \ ” > / Ἂς zr” > \ a
αἷμ᾽ ἐμέων, ἐπεὶ οὔ μιν ἀφαυρότατος Barn ᾿Αχαιῶν.

τὸν δὲ ἰδὼν ἐλέησε πατὴρ ἀνδρῶν τε θεῶν τε,

δεινὰ δ᾽ ὑπόδρα ἰδὼν “Ἥρην πρὸς μῦθον ἔειπεν"

= ΄,

ἢ μά

ee

7 a \ 7,
Ἕκτορα δῖον ἔπαυσε μάχης, ἐφόβησε δὲ λαούς.

λα δὴ κακότεχνος, ἀμήχανε, σὸς δόλος, Ἥρη,

18

4, ὑπαὶ Ar. 2: ὑπὸ Lips.
ὀρϑωθεὶς μαλακὸν ὃ᾽ ἔ

Unaiddeiouc T.
ἔνϑυνε χιτῶνα (= B 42) T.

δ. προστιθέασι καὶ τὸ ἕζετο ὃ
10. κῆρ ἀπινύςςων Ar. ©:

κῆρ ἀπινύεκων Aph.: τινὲς κῆρα --πινύσςων-- T: κῆρ ἀπονύςςων Par. ὁ.

11. a4paupdétepoc ΟΤ Vr. b A.

1-3=0 343-45. οἱ μέν, the Trojans.

4. θείους, a form which recurs only in
K 376 in the same phrase ; it represents
an original ὑπὸ dFéeos.

10. For eYae’, a form which recurs
some fifteen times in H., Ar. strangely
read εἴαθ᾽, as {που} τε ἦσαν, as also in
Q 84,106. In the last passage there
is more excuse for him, as the verb is
there applied to an inanimate object.
Gceuati, cf. 241. aminvccon, dazed,
ἀντὶ τοῦ παραφρονῶν καὶ ἀναισθητῶν "
πινυτὸν γὰρ τὸ αἰσθητικόν, Schol. BL.

108

15. τινὲς ἐφόβηςε 9° ἀχαιούς T.

The verb recurs only ε 342, ¢ 258, in
the sense to be foolish; see note on
= 249. The variant κῆρα πινύσσων was
explained to mean expecting death.

11. Cf. 437. οὐ. . ἀφαυρότατος,
sc. Aias (litotes).

13. δεινά must be taken as qualifying
the whole phrase ὑπόδρα iden, scowling
terribly. But the expression is rather
awkward.

14. ἁμήχανε,
726. ‘The order
unusual.

as N
very

7).
vwrnanaqeanle,

of the words is

100

IAIAAOC O (xv)

5» Ν SO) ’ lo} » Ψ a
OU fav οἷὸ ει AUTE κακορραφίης ἀλεγεινὴς
/ n ΄
πρώτη ἐπαύρηαι καί σε πληγῆισιν ἱμάσσω.

τ > / vA / S /
ἢ οὐ μέμνηιν ὅτε TE κρέμω ὕψοθεν ;

ἐκ δὲ ποδοῖιν

ἄκμονας ἧκα δύω, περὶ χερσὶ δὲ δεσμὸν ἴηλα

χρύσεον ἄρρηκτον, σὺ δ᾽ ἐν αἰθέρι καὶ νεφέληισιν 20
ἐκρέμω: ἠλάστεον δὲ θεοὶ κατὰ μακρὸν "OdvpTror,

λῦσαι δ᾽ οὐκ ἐδύναντο παρασταδόν: ὃν δὲ λάβοιμι,

17. πρῶτον Harl. a supr.
om. Zen. 19. mepi: napa ῶ.
Ke (). || AGBoou J (yp. λάβοιμι).

16. οὐ μὰν oid’ εἶ, exactly the Latin
haud scio an, in the sense of ‘very
likely.’ atte, hereafter, as A 340, ete.

17. πρώτη ἐπαύρηαι, Le the first to reap
the fruits, see on A 410 ἐπαύρωνται
βασιλῆος. imaccw is best taken as an
aor. to correspond with ἐπαύρηαι : the
stem is dental, iua(v)r, and can make
ἵμασσα as well as ἵμασα (Εἰ 589, ete.).
For the πληγαί of Zeus (the thunder-
bolt) ef. 8 12.

18-31. This whole passage, the κόλασις
τῆς Ἥρας, was omitted entirely by Zen.
His authority would be greater but for
the suspicion that he may have seen an
ἀπρεπές in such a tale of the gods.
Internal evidence, however, is strongly
in his favour. The last line (31) comes
in very awkwardly, αὖτις having no par-
ticular reference, whereas 32 joins on
perfectly to 17. There are several forms

which do not belong to the old Epic:

dialect, e.g. μέμνηι, κρέμω, ἠλάστεον, γῆν
for γαῖαν (see note on I’ 104). ἀθλήσαντα
(for ἀεθλ.). ξύν for σύν in order to
‘make position’ for a short syllable zn
thest can hardly be right, and ῥυσάμην
elsewhere always has thev long. It is
of course possible to emend by conjec-
ture ; for méuNHI we can read μέμνη᾽ (αι)
(cf. Φ 442) as also in T 188, Φ 396,
ω 115 (διὰ τοῦ ἡ εἶχον πᾶσαι Did. : does
this imply μέμνεαι as Ludw. thinks?
or should we read διὰ τοῦ -—or yr—im-
plying μέμνη᾽ as the variant?) or μέμ-
yno (ac) with Choiroboskos, cf. Ψ 648. So
for κρέχχω we can read κρέμα᾽ (ο) (Nauck
has ce κρέμασ᾽(α) for τε Kpéuw); and
ῥύμην for ῥυςάμην with Heyne. But
it may be questioned whether the older
forms ever stood in this place. The
rather barbarous character of the legend
is no argument for the antiquity of the
passage itself ; for the rudest mythology

18. weunHe’ wp. Rh. Gr. πὶ. 244. 23. 18-31
21. ἠλάτεον Vr. A: ἐλάτεον 8. 22. ON

of Greece attains to literary recognition
only in post- Homeric times, and is
studiously ignored in the older period
of the Epos. The legend is evidently
closely related to that in & 249 q.v.

18. ἧ οὐ : Brandreth is probably right
in omitting ἢ, see on E 349. For Te
κρέμω Mss. write τ᾽ ἐκρέμω, entirely
abolishing the caesura.

19. Gkuonac, the anvil is the largest
mass of metal with which primitive
man commonly deals, and is therefore
a handy means of torture. Curtius
suggests however that the word may
here mean thunderbolts, regarded as
heavy stones, a sufliciently appropriate
implement for Zeus; he compares Skt.
acman, stone, thunderbolt, Lith. amen,

stone. See also Hes. Theog. 722 where
χάλκεος ἄκμων οὐρανόθεν κατιών may

mean thunderbolt, but is more probably
anvil. A similar rough and ready
torture is applied to Melanthios in x 173.
21. ἡλάστεον, see note on M 163.
‘#\vcoov ?’ A. Pallis: but that word
seems too strong: see X70. Schol. T
and Eust. say προσγράφουσί τινες
πρίν γ᾽ ὅτε δή σ᾽ ἀπέλυσα πεδῶν (Heyne:
ποδῶν MSS.), μυδροὺς δ᾽ ἐνὶ Τροίηι
κάββαλον, ὄφρα πέλοιτο καὶ ἐσσομένοισι
πυθέσθαι.

καὶ δείκνυνται, φασίν, ὑπὸ τῶν περιηγητῶν
οἱ τοιοῦτοι μύδροι, ods ἀνωτέρω ἄκμονας
εἶπεν. The lines will not fit into our
text ; if they ever stood there, it must
have been in place of 22-30, Ludwich
suggests that thev may merely have
been copied into the margin of some
archetype from a lost Epic, by way of
illustration. They probably were meant
to explain the presence of some meteoric
stones in the Troad. mapactaddén, παρα-
στάντες, cf. ἀποσταδόν, 556; H. G. ἃ 401.

7

IAIAAOC O (xv) 107

ῥίπτασκον τεταγὼν ἀπὸ βηλοῦ, ὄφρ᾽ ἂν ἵκηται
γῆν ὀλιγηπελέων.
ἀζηχὴς ὀδύνη Ἡρακλῆος θείοιο, 2!
tov σὺ ξὺν Bopéne ἀνέμωι πεπιθοῦσα θυέλλας

Α , , , 4 ‘
ἐμὲ δ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ὡς θυμὸν ἀνίει

οι

πέμψας ἐπ᾽ ἀτρύγετον πόντον κακὰ μητιύωσα,

καί μιν ἔπειτα Ἰζόωνδ᾽ ἐὺ ναιομένην ἀπένεικας.

τὸν μὲν ἐγὼν ἔνθεν ῥυσάμην καὶ ἀνήγαγον αὗτις

"Apyos ἐς ἱππόβοτον, καὶ πολλά περ ἀθλήσαντα. 30
τῶν σ᾽ αὗτις μνήσω, ἵν᾿ ἀπολήξηις ἀπατάων,

ape ἴδηις ἤν τοι χραίσμηι φιλότης τε καὶ εὐνή,

ἣν ἐμίγης ἐλθοῦσα θεῶν ἄπο καί μ᾽ ἀπάτησας.

24, PUMON Ar. 2: eumdc C2GPRSTU Harl. a, King’s Par.
(Lips. supr.). 1 ἀνίει : ἀνήει HPQR: ἀνήηι U: ἀνίη Τ᾽.
ἀνέμων Mor. 28. κόων (07. 0°) Lips. 29. ἔνϑεν : αὗτις Cant. αὖτις:
αὖϑις C. | οἱ δὲ yp. ἀπήγαγον αὗτις T. 31. avec C. ἀπολήξηις Ar. DRT
Lips. Bar. Vr. A: ἀπολλήξηις ἢ. 31-62 lost in J (one leaf). 32. ὄφρα ἴδηι

Ar.: ὄφρα Yeo Lips.: ὄφρα ἴδοις Par. e: ὄφρ᾽ εἰδῆ(ι)ς GPQRS. | Tor: τι Ρι).
33 om. Zen. Aph.

ed f? (or 11}
26. Bopéa ().

23. Cf. A 591 ῥῖψε ποδὸς τεταγὼν ἀπὸ
βηλοῦ θεσπεσίοιο, whence this line has
evidently been adapted, for βηλοῦ with-
out the epithet is less clear. But Schol.
A on A 591 says Παρμενίων ὁ γὙλωσσο-
ypagos φησὶν ᾿Αχαιοὺς καὶ Δρύοπας καλεῖν froin, as in the phrase ὕπνος ἀνῆκε, ete.
τὸν οὐρανὸν βηλόν. So Qu. Smyrn. 25. ἀζηχής, see note on A 435.
understood the word when he wrote 26. ξὺν Βορέηι ἀνέμωι is to be taken
ἀστερόεις βηλός (xiii. 483). Perhaps this with πέμψας, as we say ‘to go with the
contains a genuine tradition, and βηλός wind.’ ἅμα πνοιῆις is the commoner
is really an old Achaian word distinct phrase, but ξύν suits the marked personi-
from Bydés=threshold, Ψ 202, which fication, ‘in the company of.’ Scho.
certainly is not particularly appropriate T gives two very inferior alternatives,
here. pintackon is a wrong form, it ἄδηλον πότερον Ἥρα καὶ Boppas ἀνέπεισαν
should be either ῥίπτεσκον or ῥίψασκον, τὰς θυέλλας, ἢ Ἥρα ἅμα Βορρᾶ: καὶ ras

Θυλιόν, Others θυμός (anger, in apposi-
tion with ὀδύνη. There is not much to
choose between the two, though apart
from authority the second is perhaps
slightly preferable. ἁνίει, deft, departed

as the Homeric iteratives are formed
either with the stem-vowel or thematic
e of the present stem, or the sigmatic
aorist stem in-oa. ‘The mistake is per-
haps due to a reminiscence of ῥιπτάζων
in the similar passage, = 257. νικάσκο-
μὲν (λ 512) and τρωπάσκετο (A 568
if right) are of course different, being
contracted forms from a-stems. The
hiatus after βηλοῦ is defensible in the
bucolic diaeresis. ἵκηται, the sue: is
thoroughly un-Homeric ; see H. (΄. ὃ 298,
We must either read ἵκοιτο or regard
the mood as positive evidence of the
lateness of the passage.

24. ὀλιγηπελέων, cf. 245, and ὀλιγοδρα-
νέων, 246, fainting, apparently ‘little
moving’ (πέλομαι), hardly able to stir ;
ef. νηπελεῖν quoted from Hippokrates.

θυέλλας ἔπεισεν. The variant ἀνέμων

would be tempting if better attested.
28==2 255, shewing that the same

event is spoken of in both passages.

29. pucduHNn, Bentley ῥυόμην, Heyne
ee (see on 18-31 above). Schulze
(Q.E. p. 328) thinks that the ὕ may be
due to lie influence of ἐρύσασθαι.

30. ἀθλήςαντα, see note on H 455.
ἀλγήσαντα van L., καὶ πολλὸν ἀεθλήσαντα
Brandreth ; both needless in this passage

31. This line has all the appearance
of an awkward transition from an addi-
tion to the original text.

33. HN, cognate acc. ; see H, (7. ὃ 190.
1, and ef. νίκης τήν μιν ἐγὼ νίκησα. ἃ
545. The line was omitted by Zen. and
Aph., but there is no obvious reason for
its condemnation.

108 IAIAAOC O (xv)
ὡς φάτο, ῥίγησεν δὲ βοῶπις πότνια “Ἥρη,
καί μιν φωνήσασ᾽ ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα" 35

cco fal / lal \ > \ b) \ er
toT@ νυν TOOE Yala Kab ovpavos EUPUS ὕπερθε

ἊΣ

\ \ / Ἂν δ δ f
Kal TO κατειβόμενον Στυγὸς ὕδωρ, ὅς τε μέγιστος

“ / , ΄, ΄ A
ορκος δεινότατός τε πέλει μακαρεσσι θεοῖσι,

σή θ᾽ ἱερὴ κεφαλὴ καὶ νωΐτερον λέχος αὐτῶν

/ \ \ > xX 2 , \ 5 /
KOUPLOLOV, TO μὲν οὐκ ἂν ἐγώ ποτε pay ομοσαιμι" 40

μὴ Ov ἐμὴν ἰότητα 1Ἰοσειδάων ἐνοσίχθων

7, aA No - 3 5) /
πημαίνει Tpaas te καὶ “Ἕκτορα, τοῖσι δ᾽ ἀρήγει,

’ / > \ \ ’ 4 \ ’ fe
ἀλλά που αὐτὸν θυμὸς ἐποτρύνει καὶ ἀνώγει,

/ >) By ὧν \ Jia 3 Δ :) 7:
TELPOMEVOUS δ᾽ ἐπὶ νηυσὶν ἰδὼν ἐλέησεν Ayatovs*

> 7 / -
αὐτάρ τοι καὶ κείνων ἐγὼ παραμυθησαίμην 45

fal ” e \ ΄ 7 ΄ , "Ὁ
τῆι ἴμεν ἧι κεν δὴ σύ, κελαινεφές, ἡγεμονεύηις.

ὡς φάτο, μείδησεν δὲ πατὴρ ἀνδρῶν τε θεῶν τε,

f / 7...
καί μιν ἀμειβόμενος ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"

ἘΣ \ \ ΄ ΚΝ a / “
εἰ μὲν δὴ σύ γ᾽ ἔπειτα, βοῶπις πότνια “Hpn,

9. ? \ / 5 > ΄ ΄
ἶσον ἐμοὶ φρονέουσα pet ἀθανάτοισι καθίζοις, 50

lal / /.
ta κε Ποσειδάων ye, καὶ εἰ para βούλεται ἄλληι,

a ΄ , \ \ \ SEO a
aiya μεταστρέψειε VOOVY μετὰ σὸν καὶ ἐμὸν κῆρ.

86. τόδε: τό τε R.

39. ἱερὰ DP Lips.

42. πημαίνειν R Lips. || ἀρήγειν

Re 43 om. Q frag. Mose. 44, κτεινομένους Aph. Argol. Mass. 45. καὶ
κείνω(!) Ar. ACQT Cant. Harl. a, fr. Mose. Ven. B: κἀκείνω(ι) ©. 46.
ἡγεμκονεύηια AP2RU Harl. a, fr. Mosc.: Areuonevoic G: Hreuoneveic (2. 48.

ἀμειβόμενος : φωνήςας Vr. b.

(p. Tas. ).

om. T Harl. a. 52. μετατρέψειε 8.

49. βοῶπις Aph. 2: βοῶπι Ar. (?) APRU?
50. yp. καὶ ἐν Geanatoici T.

|| Kaefzeic ST Bar. Par. ἃ f. 51. re

36-38 =e 184-86, where see M. and R.
for the legends connected with the Styx.
Compare also B 755, & 271 ff., with
notes. The Styx here seems to repre-
seut both the waters and the under-
world, which with heaven and earth
make up the universe (see 187-93).

40. Koupidion, A 114.

41. For μή with indic. in oaths see Καὶ
350, T 261, and A. G. ὃ 358. It should
be noticed that the construction here is
slightly different froin that in K, as μή
here negatives only the following words,
δι᾿ ἐμὴν ἰότητα, not the verb πημαίνει,
whereas in K it negatives the verb
ἐποχήσεται. Hera speaks the truth so
far, that Poseidon had intervened on his
own initiative, not on account of any
wish of hers (δι᾽ ἐμὴν ἰότητα, which. may
perhaps be purposely used in place’ of the
usual ἰότητι), as with the present text

there has been no communication be-
tween them (see note on = 241); but
morally of course παρακέκρουσται τὸν
ὅρκον, her oath is fraudulent, as Ar. says.
There is but a slight technical change in
Hera’s favour even if we omit 2 252-60
(see Introd. to Z). Zeus evidently grasps
the real position.

45. καί goes with παραμυθησαίμην, the
optat. being concessive, ‘so far from
inciting, I am even willing to advise
him’ (H. G. § 299 d).

50. Schol. A (Did.) has ἐν rots εἰκαιο-
τέροις “᾿ἀθανάτοισι θεοῖσι,᾽᾿ which is im-
possible without further alteration (¢po-
νέοισθα ). Doubtless T, as often, has
the correct reading, and the variant
was ἐν for wet with legitimate hiatus.

51. re καὶ εἶ, εἰ καί Bentley, a decided
improvement, as εἰ καί is the regular
phrase and the γε otiose.

i ae Cain

IAIAAOC O (xv)

109

> ,’ μι > BJ , \ > / > ,

ἀλλ᾽ εἰ δή ῥ᾽ ἐτεόν γε καὶ ἀτρεκέως ἀγορεύεις,

, le) \ “- A“ \ ΄ ,
ἔρχεο νῦν μετὰ φῦλα θεῶν καὶ δεῦρο κάλεσσον

/ > > / \ 5 | ‘ ,

Ipiv τ᾽ ἐλθέμεναι καὶ ᾿Απόλλωνα κλυτότοξον, 55
ὄ 5 Θ ὲ € \ x Ν » A lal Ἂ ,

pp ἡ μὲν μετὰ λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων

” \ » » »Μ

ἔλθηι καὶ εἴπηισι Ἰ]οσειδάωνι ἄνακτι

παυσάμενον πολέμοιο τὰ ἃ πρὸς δώμαθ᾽ ἱκέσθαι,
“ ᾽ | / a , ,
Εκτορα δ᾽ ὀτρύνηισι μάχην ἐς Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων,
s ’ > / ,ὔ / > 0. 7
αὗτις δ᾽ ἐμπνεύσηισι μένος, λελάθηι δ᾽ ὀδυνάων 60
“δ fom / ‘
al νῦν pw τείρουσι Kata φρένας, αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχαιοὺς
φ > / > / / > /

αὗτις ἀποστρέψηισιν ἀνάλκιδα φύζαν ἐνόρσας,

, /
φεύγοντες δ᾽ ἐν νηυσὶ πολυκλήϊσι πέσωσι

53. οὕτω διὰ τοῦ ΓΕ Ar. Aph. (others Te?

ἐν ἄλλωι κέλευςον A.
Aph. Ar.

C. || Gnoctpépuict Mor.

55. κλυτότοξον : τινὲς κλυτὸν αὐδὴν Τ.
60. αὖὗϑις CPR. || ἀμπνεύεςηει L.
H written one over the other: both maz. 1 7).

So Harl. d).

ἀγορεύοις (). 54.
56-77 ad.
λελάθοι H fr. Mosc. (T has ot and

61. ΜΙΝ: μοι (). 62. aveic

53. Except here and B 10 ἀτρεκέως
occurs only in K, 2 and Od.

56-77. This passage was athetized by
Aph. and Ar.; Zen. entirely omitted
64-77, saying that they were ‘like an
Euripidean prologue.’ Most edd. agree
in the condemnation, though some would
exempt 56-63 and 72-77. ‘The first eight
lines contain no serious cause of offence :
beyond the general grounds that the
whole passage is a needless recital and
inferior in composition, the only argu-
ment brought by Ar. against this part of
it is that ws ἐπίπαν πρὸς τὸ δεύτερον πρύ-
τερον ἀπαντᾶι, νῦν δὲ πρὸς τὸ πρότερον
ἀπήντηκεν “ὄφρ᾽ ἡ μὲν μετὰ λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν᾽᾽
(i.e. 7 μέν means the former, not as often the
latter of two persons mentioned ; but this
is by no means universal, see for instance
Ο 7). Against 64-71 the objections
are decisive. In the first place the
prophecy of the course of the war is not
in accordance with Homeric practice,
and is quite unnecessary. Then it does
not accord with facts; the rout of the
Achaians does not come on the ships of
Achilles ; and it is not Achilles who
stirs up Patroklos, but vice versa. ἐκ
τοῦ in 69 is awkward ; it must mean not,
as the words imply, from the time of
Hector’s death, but from the time of the
sending of Patroklos (64). The twice-
repeated form κτενεῖ is not Homeric, nor
is Ἴλιον as a neuter (but for this see note
on71). The last six lines do not inter-
fere with the context, and might be left,

though suspicion attaches to the use of
TO πρίν (see note) and the form κάρητι
for καρήατι.

58. παυςάμενον, acc. because it goes
closely with the infin., ‘to cease and
go’; H. G. § 240. Eust. cites παυσα-
péven, but there is no ground for con-
sidering. this a real variant. τὰ ἅ, ἐξά
P. Knight as elsewhere.

59. Note the sequence of subjunctives
in -ηίῶσι, OTPUNHICI, EUMNEUCHICI, Gno-
ctpewHict. This form is certainly not
original in the non-thematic (sigmati:
aor. Hence Mulvany (C. &. x. 24) takes
ὀτρύνηισι for pres., reads ἐμπνείηισι, and
regards ἀποστρέψηισι as evidence that the
late interpolation begins with 61, not
64. But the aor. seems to be required
in both the former cases; and as the
analogy of the thematic present must
have affected the aor. before the end of
the Epic period, it is probably better to
accept the forms as they stand.

60. λελάθηι, in causal sense, make to

Sorget, B 600, etc., as with λελαχεῖν ; in

the sense ‘to forget’ the mid. λελαθέσθαι
is used.

62. Pallis suggests ἀποτρέψηισι (ef. A
758). The two verbs are often confused
in Mss., see M 249, T 256; but change
is needless.

63. ἐν νηυςὶ πέςωςι, this is one of the
few passages where this common phrase
is free from ambiguity, though in a dif-
ferei. sense from the equally unambigu-
ous N ‘742; see on I 235.

110 TAIAAOC

O (xv)

Πηλεΐδεω ᾿Αχιλῆος: ὁ δ᾽ ἀνστήσει ὃν ἑταῖρον

Πάτροκλον: τὸν δὲ κτενεῖ ἔγχεϊ φαίδιμος “Extwp 65

Ἰλίου προπάροιθε, πολεῖς ὀλέσαντ᾽ αἰζηοὺς

» 2 CN \ / -
τοὺς ἄλλους, μετὰ δ᾽ υἱὸν ἐμὸν Σαρπηδόνα δῖον.

fol \
TOU δὲ
ἐκ τοῦ

ὟΝ 5... “ἢ ig / > “ αν ΟἹ \
QAvEV EYW τεύχοιμι διαμπερές, εἰς Ο K Ayatot

an 4 fal >)
χολωσάμενος κτενεῖ “Extopa dios ᾿Αχιλλεύς.
δ᾽ ἄν τοι ἔπειτα παλίωξιν παρὰ νηῶν

Ἴλιον αἰπὺ ἕλοιεν ᾿Αθηναίης διὰ βουλάς.

Ν \ Νὴ yy Ae) ΣΝ / / ay 5 BY
TO πρὶν δ᾽ οὔτ᾽ dp ἐγὼ παύω χόλον οὔτέ τιν ἄλλον

> / an 2 2 >’ aN) 7/7
ἀθανάτων Δαναοῖσιν ἀμυνέμεν ἐνθάδ᾽ ἐάσω,

πρίν γε τὸ ΠΠηλεΐδαο τελευτηθῆναι ἐέλδωρ,

δ c , a > A
ὥς οἱ ὑπέστην πρῶτον, ἐμῶν

=~
or

’ /
δ᾽ ἐπένευσα κάρητι,

> fal ‘Cie? lal Ἂς Π /
ἤματι τῶι OT ἐμεῖο θεὰ Θέτις ἥψατο γούνων

λισσομένη τιμῆσαι ᾿Αχιλλῆα πτολίπορθον."

ὡς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησε θεὰ λευκώλενος Ἥρη,

βῆ δὲ κατ᾽ ᾿Ιδαίων ὀρέων ἐς μακρὸν "Ολυμπον.

9 Ἕ οι
64. GNCTHCEl ON Ar.
(Did.), S Par. a: @NactHceien Par, f.

Ὁ (@netHco L:
64-77 om. Zen.

GNCTHCEIEN τινές
65. κτανεῖ J (swp7. €).

GnactHcer R Par. e):

66. πολέας P: noA(A)oUc Ci). | ὁλέςοντ᾽ At. 69. δ᾽ GN: OH Cant.: 9° ἄρ ᾧ.
71. αἰπὺ ἕλοιεν : ἐκπέρεωςιν Ar. (2). || αἰπὺ : αἰπὺν R2 Harl. a, Mor. Par. ὁ. ||

ἕλοιεν : ἕλωςιν C Lips.}
b ἃ, King’s Par. ἃ ὁ g ἢ. || ἄλλων DPQ.

fr. Mose. 76. ἐμοῖο P.
δὲ κατ᾽: 0° ἐξ (Zen. ? see below) S Harl.

72. παύω Ar. Q:

naucw (C supr.) DHJPQU Harl.
75. πρώτωι Ol. || ὑπένευςα () Cant.

78. Θεὰ λευκώλενος ; βοῶπις πότνια S. || τινὲς
μετὰ τοῦτον γράφουσι Ζῆν᾽ ὑποταρβήςαςα, νόος ὃέ οἱ ἄλλα μενοίνα T.

19.
a, Par. a (yp. BH δὲ κατ᾽) fj. || εἰς R.

66. “IAtou, i.e. ᾿Ιλίοο : the ancient form
is evidently copied from passages such
as Φ 104, X 6. πολεῖς, the contracted
form is no doubt original here ; cf. note
on B 4.

69. Ar. noted that naAiwzic is here
used of continued defeat, not in the
Homeric sense of the turning of the tide
of battle.

70. τεύχοιμι, τεύχωμι Cobet (see on A
549), with the consequent adoption of
ἕλωσιν in 71. The subj. is certainly the
mood of prophecy, not the opt.

71. (ἡ διπλῆ) ὅτι viv μόνως οὐδετέρως
εἴρηται Ἴλιον, An. ; ᾿Αρίσταρχος (τινές, T)
“Ἴλιον ἐκπέρσωσιν᾽᾽ Did. ‘The two state-
ments are obviously contradictory, aud
no doubt we ought to read ᾿Αριστοφάνης
in the latter. The difficulty of Ἴλιον
as a neuter may however be evaded by
reading αἰπύν, with slight Ms. support,
as Bentley proposed. For -vs as a fem.
termination cf. θῆλυς ἐέρση, ete. (H. G.
8 116. 4). Zen. accepted the neut. Ἴλιον

as Homeric, cf. I1 92, 2 174. It was of
course the regular form in post-Homeric
times, and very probably stood here
from the first. “AeHNaiHc, as inspirer
of the device of the wooden horse,
τὸν ᾿Επειὸς ἐποίησεν σὺν ᾿Αθήνηι, 6 493.

72. τὸ πρίν is nowhere else found in
the sense of the simple πρίν : it always
means formerly. ἄρ᾽ : Barnes ἄν, taking
παύω as subj., or reading παύσω.

75. κάρητι, cf. κάρητος ᾧ 230, ψ 157.
κάρη belongs to the same stem (for kap7r),
but no other cases of it occur. The
form need not be regarded as contracted
from καρήατι. Ar. (Sch. T) took it as
masc., from κάρης.

77. Ar. objected that πτολίπορθος is
an epithet of Odysseus, not of Achilles ;
but see Θ 372, Φ 550,02108. The title
is sufficiently justified by I 328-29.

79. The variant δ᾽ ἐξ for δὲ κατ᾽ is
attributed to Zen. by Did. But this
must be an error, for we know that it was
Ar. who elsewhere objected to κατά and

~~

IAIAAOC O (xv)

>]
ὡς ὃ
γαῖαν

Ὁ &y@?

vw 9 * 5. ,Κ ,ὔ » / " 5» ’ \ ‘

ὅτ᾽ ἂν ἀΐξηι νόος ἀνέρος, ὅς τ᾽ ἐπὶ πολλὴν 80
3 \ \ , /

ἐληλουθὼς φρεσὶ πευκαλίμηισι νοήσηι

» x » Ὁ 7 ’ ,

εἴην ἢ ἔνθα, μενοινήηισί τε πολλά,

A a ~~ ͵ "
ὡς κραιπνῶς μεμαυῖα διέπτατο πότνια “Ἥρη.

΄, ᾽ > \ ” ¢ , ~ > -
ἵκετο ὃ αἰπὺν ᾿Ολυμπον, ὁμηγερέεσσι δ᾽ ἐπῆλθεν

ἀθανάτοισι θεοῖσι Διὸς δόμωι: οἱ δὲ

0"

LOOVTES 85

/ few , avs
πάντες ἀνήϊξαν καὶ δεικανόωντο δέπασσιν.

ἡ δ᾽ ἄλλους μὲν ἔασε, Θέμιστι δὲ καλλιπαρήιωι

/ / , \ > ΨΦ /
δέκτο δέπας: πρώτη yap ἐναντίη ἦλθε θέουσα,

/ / ») » , Ὁ
καὶ μιν φωνήσασ ETT Ea πτερόεντα προσηυοθα"

“"Hon, τίπτε βέβηκας ;

> , μ᾿ / r / 7. “ » , >
ἢ para δή σ᾽ ἐφόβησε Κρόνου πάϊς, ὅς τοι ἀκοίτης.

5 / ΟΝ »Μ
ἀτυζομένην δὲ ἔοικας" 90

,

τὴν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα θεὰ λευκώλενος “Hpn:

“un με, θεὰ Θέμι, ταῦτα διείρεο: οἶσθα καὶ αὐτὴ

81. ἐληλευθὼς H: ἐληλυθὼς PRTU Lips.
εἴη D (p. ras.) GHPQRTU! (ἴηι 103, ἢ εἴην U™) fr. Mose. Par. ὁ
ἢ εἴη) h: Her Lips.: YHN Par. f1: εἴην, HHN, and εἴη op. Eust.
83. diénta Lips.
86. ἐδεικανόωντο CH.
ὍΡΟΙ Vr. A Harl. Ὁ, Par. de: énéecein Zen. (Sch. B:
τέ μιν εἷς ὃ Exactoc οὐκ εὖ (=W 208) Sch. A.

Ar. [S %] Par. α:

@: MENOINHCcELE (2.

Q. 85. θόμον J.

P Mor.: ἐναντίος L. || e€0uca: φέρουςα Lips. Harl. :

~epouca, T’. 90. Hpa Lips.

| νοήςει L (swpr. Η) Ὁ Eust. 82.
d! ἢ) e g (yp. εἴην
JLENOINHHICI
84. ἀπῆλθεν S: ἐπῆλθον
Oénaccin Ar. 2: ϑεπάεςειν
τινές AT). || év ἐνίοις κάλεόν
87. ἄλλως (). 88. ἐναντίον
i, ir. Mose. Ear.h:

ἄμεινον

91. ὅς Tol: ὅςτις J fr. Mose.: ςός τοι Q Lips.

92. Θεὰ λευκώλενος : βοῶπις πότνια PRS Par. a f (and ἐν ἄλλωι A).

wrote ἐξ when the passage was made
from mountain to mountain, not from
the mountain to the plain (see on Θ
410); probably Zen. wrote κατ᾽ here.
80. This curious simile is the only

illustration taken from purely mental,

processes in H., if we except the com-
parison of ἡ 36 τῶν νέες ὠκεῖαι ws εἰ
πτερὸν ἠὲ νόημα, and ὁ δ᾽ ὥστε νόημα
ποτᾶτο, Scut.—Herc. 222. A somewhat
similar one will be found in Ap. Rhod.
ii. 541 ff. The presence of ἄν in a simile
is against the rule (H. G. ὃ 283). We
can of course easily write ἀναΐξηι, but the
compound is strictly limited to the sense
spring up from a lower position to a
higher, which is excluded here.

82. εἴην, a proper opt. 7 would he in
this place or that—and the wish is its own
accomplishment; by the power of memory
be is in an instant wherever he wills.
MENOINHHICi Te πολλά is rather obscure,
but it probably means and he has many
wishes, i.e. however many wishes he has
(respecting the place he would be in), it

is allthesame. The primitive parataxis
by which a clause is simply tacked on by
a τε or δέ, and the exact connexion of
thought—here ‘even though’—left to
be inferred is common enough. Others
take it to mean he longs much (after the
places he remembers), or makes many
plans (for the future); but these seem
hardly relevant. μενοινήηιςι is the
reading of <Ar.; the assimilation (for
μενοινἄηισι) is rare (ΗΠ. G. ὃ 55), but the
subj. seems preferable to the opt. of the
vulg., which is probably due to the
influence on the copyist’s mind of the
neighbouring εἴην, or εἴη as Many Mss.
have. No doubt the latter form was
taken to mean considers whether he should
go (ef. Hesych. εἴημι: πορεύομαι) hither
or thither. But the explanation first
given seems decidedly better.

86. δεικανόωντο. see note on A 4.
Schulze takes the word as=dexavéwvro,
with purely metrical lengthening.

87. For the dat. after ϑέκτο see note
on A 596 and ἢ. G. ὃ 143. 2.

112

IAIAAOC O (xv)

- > / / e / \ b) /
οἷος ἐκείνου θυμός, ὑπερφίαλος καὶ ἀπηνής.
Ta / δ Ie
ἀλλὰ σύ γ᾽ ἄρχε θεοῖσι δόμοις ἔνι δαιτὸς ἐΐσης" 95

ἴω \ \ \ a /
ταῦτα δὲ Kal μετὰ πᾶσιν ἀκούσεαι ἀθανάτοισιν,

- \ Neo / IN /
οἷα Ζεὺς κακὰ ἔργα πιφαύσκεται: οὐδέ τί φημι

πᾶσιν ὁμῶς θυμὸν κεχαρησέμεν, οὔτε βροτοῖσιν
οὔτε θεοῖς, εἴ πέρ τις ἔτι νῦν δαίνυται εὔφρων."

59 a r / “
ἡ μὲν ἄρ᾽ ὡς εἰποῦσα καθέζετο πότνια “Ἡρη, 100

ὦὥχθησαν δ᾽ ἀνὰ δῶμα Διὸς θεοί: ἡ δὲ γέλασσε

I > \ / > > 5 if /
χείλεσιν, οὐδὲ μέτωπον ETT οφρύσι KUQAVENLO LY

> Ia lal \ lal /
ἰάνθη: πᾶσιν δὲ νεμεσσηθεῖσα μετηύδα:

τ / NOG \ / 5) is
νήπιοι, ov Ζηνὶ μενεαίνομεν ἀφρονέοντες.

a / 5 id
ἢ ἔτι μιν μέμαμεν καταπαυσέμεν ἄσσον ἰόντες 105
3 \ « ᾽ / ,
ἢ ἔπει ne Pinu: ὁ δ᾽ ἀφήμενος οὐκ ἀλεγίζει
5.0.5 9" \ \ b) ΕΣ ΄ A
οὐδ᾽ ὄθεται- φησὶν yap ἐν ἀθανάτοισι θεοῖσι

΄ .Λ / .Λ Ν 53 »
KAPTEL “πε σθένεϊ iG διακριδὸν εἰιναΐν aploTos.

lal ’ χω / \ / c
τῶ ἔχεθ᾽ ὅττί κεν ὕμμι κακὸν πέμπηισιν ἑκάστωι.

94. ἐκείνου Ὡ: κείνου Ar. || eumdc ἐκείνου Lips.

95. ἐΐεςης P. 97.

πιφάςκεται JPQR: πιφάςσςεται Mor. || Tr: τε S: € H Harl. Ὁ (and yp. Lips.)

98. ϑΘυμῷ H Vr. b.
b A, fr. Mosc.

100. Kaeizeto J.
102. Kuaneoici(n) PQ.

101. Sxexcan HTU Harl. a, Lips. Vr.
103. προςηύδα HTU. 104. Ζηνὸς

Bar. || @ppadéontec (A supr.) C Mor. || τινὲς ἐριϑαίνομεν ἀφρονέοντι Did. (T):

WENEGINOUEN icopapizein Heracl. A//. 2.

109. Guu ἢ ὕμμι Eust.

94, Ar. read κείνου, the regular
Homeric form for ἐκείνου, see note on
I 63. But it must be admitted that
the spondaic form gives a very harsh
rhythm here. Van L.’s κείνοο is a little
better.

97. m@avcxeral, almost =7s parading ;
ef. Μ 280 πιφαυσκόμενος τὰ ἃ κῆλα.

98. κεχαρηςέμεν, intrans., like the
mid. οὐ μέν τοι θυμὸς κεχαρήσεται Y 266,
the only other form of the redupl. future.
Pallis would read χαιρησέμεν from T 363.
It is however possible, and with the
weakly attested variant οὐδέ ἑ would be
necessary, to take it as causative ; and
the analogy of πεπιθήσω and κεκαδήσω
points to this (H#. G. § 65). In this
case it is well to make Hera herself
rather than Zeus the subject of the verb:
Ido not suppose that I shall gladden the
hearts of all alike (Monro). The phrase
is of course a ditofes, meaning ‘I am sure
that some of you will be very angry.’
She is thinking of Ares (110). βροτοῖσιν
seems to be added rather for rhetorical
effect than for any direct interest which
humanity could have in the quarrel.

101. Cf. A 570. réAacce χείλεειν,

a phrase which may be compared with
υ 347 γναθμοῖσι γελώων ἀλλοτρίοισιν,
though the present expression is simpler
and more natural ; it is notorious that a
‘forced smile’ is far easier for the lips
than for the eyes and brow. In the
Odyssey the effect aimed at is that of a
ghastly and unnatural laugh.

104. Gpponéontec, the verb occurs
here only in H. For the variant ἀφρα-
δέοντες cf. I 32, ἡ 294. The cunning
of Hera in stirring up rebellion while
pretending to counsel submission is a
masterpiece worthy of Mark Antony.

105. @ccon ἰόντες in the sense of
hostile approach, as A 567. The same
connotation is found with the Hebrew
garab, e.g. Ps, xxxii. 9 ‘Whose mouth
must be held in with bit and bridle
lest they come near unto thee.’ Hence
qrab=battle. For the fut. infin. with
πέμαμεν see note on H 36.

106. ἀφήμενος, sitting
compound occurs only here.
A 81.

108. Compare M 103.

109. ἔχετε, imper. rather than indic.
It is not clear whether it is to be taken

apart; the
Cf. Θ 207,

IAIAAOC Ο (xv) 113

ἤδ Ν, Lal EX » "» \ PY A τ -“ / a
ἤδη yap νῦν ἔλπομ᾽ “Apni ye πῆμα τετύχθαι' 110
ey / e ΕΣ / »Μ / , -“"
υἱὸς γάρ οἱ ὄλωλε μάχηι ἔνι, φίλτατος ἀνδρῶν,
? / / Δ » » ’ ”
Ἀσκάλαφος, τόν φησιν ov ἔμμεναι ὄβριμος “Apns.
Δ / % \ ” ‘
ὡς pat, αὐτὰρ “Apns θαλερὼ πεπλήγετο μηρὼ
\ ͵ , > , \ mrs
χερσὶ καταπρηνέσσ᾽, ὀλοφυρόμενος δὲ προσηύδα:
\ r / , » Α ,7 »
“μὴ νῦν μοι νεμεσήσετ᾽, Ὀλύμπια δώματ᾽ ἔχοντες, 115
y / / a “
τίσασθαι φόνον υἷος ἰόντ᾽ ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν,
la / \ lal \ “-“
εἴ πέρ μοι καὶ μοῖρα Διὸς πληγέντι κεραυνῶι
a ¢e fal
κεῖσθαι ὁμοῦ νεκύεσσι μεθ᾽ αἵματι Kal κονίηισιν."
Ν , ,ὔ Gs δὲ ΄ cal / /
ὡς φάτο, καί ῥ᾽ ἵππους κέλετο Acivov te Φόβον τε
΄ὔ ᾽
ζευγνύμεν, αὐτὸς δ᾽ ἔντε᾽ ἐδύσετο παμφανόωντα. 120
» / , » / \ > / Μ
ἔνθώ κ᾽ ἔτι μείζων τε καὶ ἀργαλεώτερος ἄλλος
\ \ > 7 / \ a > /
map Διὸς ἀθανάτοισι χόλος καὶ μῆνις ἐτύχθη,
> Ay at / a / a
εἰ μὴ ᾿Αθήνη πᾶσι περιδδείσασα θεοῖσιν
>
ὦρτο διὲκ προθύρου, λίπε δὲ θρόνον ἔνθα θάασσε,
- δ᾽ > N \ a / > ¢, \ , "
του ἄπο μεν κεφαλῆς κόρυθ εἵλετο καὶ σάκος μων, 125

112. ὄμβριμος CHPR. 114. καταπρηνὲς ‘Il: κατὰ πρηνὲς I’.
Q: 0 ἔπος ηὔδα Ar. AR Harl. ἃ d, Par. h (yp. ἐπηύϑα T). 116. Ticeceai (A
supr.) Cant. 119. κέκλετο GJPR: κέλεται (). 120. Entea OUceTo IR.
éducato A (supr. ε) CJQST Vr. A Bar. fr. Mose. Lips. naugaNnoenta Jar,
121. κ᾽ ἔτι: κέ 11S Harl. a, Vr. A fr. Mosc.: κέ τις DGP (καί) RU. 122.
φόνος kai μῆτις Vr. d. 123. nepideicaca Ar. P. 124. μὲν ἐκ ἢ Or ἐκ Eust.
125. ὥμοιιν H.

d€ NpocHUda

intrans., hold on, i.e. be patient; or
trans., accept, endure, whatever ill he
sends you. ‘The latter, though not a
common use of ἔχειν, is sufficiently sup-
ported by ἃ 482 ἔχω κακά. In fact the
distinction between the two is very
slight, for even if we do not take the

relative clause as the direct object of

éxere it still represents an adverbial
accus.

110. €Anoua, 7 fancy, of present or
past events as H 199, II 281, etc. The
word is ironical, as Hera evidently has
no doubt of the fact. For the death of
Askalaphos see N 518. That passage
was obviously composed in preparation
for the present scene. We are not told
how Hera came to know of Askalaphos’
death ; until she left Olympos for Ida
in ©, after the event, she seems to have
been completely aloof from the war like
Ares himself. This, however, is one of
the small difficulties which may trouble
the reader as little as the poet.

113. πεπλήγετο μηρώ, a gesture of
annoyance ; 397, M 162, Π 125.

VOT. Τὶ

116. ἰόντ᾽, i.e. ἰόντα, not ἰόντι, as 58,
etc. For the infin. after νεμεςήςετε cf.
ὃ 158, 195, and for ace. and infin. note
on P 254.

118. ὁμοῦ with dat. as E 867 ὁμοῦ
vepéecow (where see note). μετά, mean-
ing among, is very rarely tound with
the dat. singular; there are only five
other cases. Here αἴματι must be re-
garded as a sort of noun of multitude, the
bloody corpses. Cf. μετὰ στροφάλιγγι
Φ 503 beside ἐν στρ. IL 775 (H. G. ὃ 194).
The similar words of the same speaker
in E 886 may be compared, πήματ᾽
ἔπασχον ἐν αἰνῆισιν vexadecow. The
emphasis laid on carnage is well suited
to the character of Ares.

119. For Δεῖμος and Φόβος as partici-
pators in the battle see 4440. In N 299
Φόβος is called the son of Ares. It would
seem more natural, but for these passages,
to look upon them here as the horses
themselves, not as the attendants who
harness them; and this opinion was in
fact held by some of the ancient critics,
but refuted by Ar.

{14 IAIAAOC O (xv)

» > a ᾽ \ \ - -
ἔγχος ὃ ἔστησε στιβαρῆς ἀπὸ χειρὸς ἑλοῦσα
΄ ec yo Ff 7 n 5) 4
χάλκεον: ἡ δ᾽ ἐπέεσσι καθάπτετο θοῦρον “Apna:
/ if / / 5 »
“ μαινόμενε, φρένας ἡλέ, διέφθορας. ἢ νύ τοι αὔτως
7 9 ΕῚ / ” / > ’ / \ > J
οὔατ᾽ ἀκουέμεν ἔστι, νόος 6 ἀπόλωλε καὶ αἰδώς.
of - /
οὐκ ἀΐεις ἅ τέ φησι θεὰ λευκώλενος “Ἥρη, : 130
a \ na \ 5
ἣ δὴ νῦν πὰρ Ζηνὸς Ολυμπίου εἰλήλουθεν ;
Ξ: \ \
ἢ ἐθέλεις αὐτὸς μὲν ἀναπλήσας κακὰ πολλὰ
ΕΝ yy A , \ ᾽ ΄ / ΘΑ ΟΣ,
ἂψ ἴμεν Οὔλυμπονδε, καὶ ἀχνύμενός περ, ἀνάγκηι,
αὐτὰρ τοῖς ἄλλοισι κακὸν μέγα πᾶσι φυτεῦσαι ;
ΙΑ \ an c », 3 Ἐ
αὐτίκα γὰρ Τρῶας μὲν ὑπερθύμους καὶ ᾿Αχαιοὺς 135
7 ες 5 / 9 /
λείψει, ὁ δ᾽ ἡμέας εἶσι κυδοιμήσων ἐς “OXvpTO?,

if ’ € Ye ad > ” “ \ > /
pape δ᾽ ἑξείης ὅς τ᾽ αἴτιος ὅς TE καὶ οὐκί.
aA 5) > an 7ὕ , / - a
TO σ᾽ av viv κέλομαι μεθέμεν χόλον υἷος ἑοῖο.
» / n - /
ἤδη yap τις τοῦ ye βίην καὶ χεῖρας ἀμείνων
xX / ’ Ἃ \ ” f > / \
7) πέφατ ἢ καὶ €TTELTA πεφήσεται" apyanreov δὲ 140
> / lal / 5
πάντων ἀνθρώπων ῥῦσθαι γενεήν τε τόκον TE.”

126. ἀπὸ : ἐκ (A supr.) CP: ἀπὸ ἢ ἐκ Eust.
128. WaINdMENE: ϑαιλιόνιε Ht. Mag. 68. 46, Ht. Gud. 38. 86.
131. εἰληλούθει L.
πῆμα Zen, || πᾶσι; πῆμα S Par. af (and ἐν ἄλλωι A).
ἑοῖο Zen. H (supr. fioc) R, yp. L: ἐῆο Par. e:
APRT Vr. Ὁ; Harl. bd: τοῦδε Zen. Aph. Q:

autéc Bar. Mor.

127. Kaerinteto P (T supr.). ὁ
129. αἰδώς :
184. αὐτὰρ ὁ G Vr. A. || θεοῖς μέγα
136. ἐς: én’ R. 158.
ἑῆος Ar, Q. 139. τοῦ re Ar.
Touce ὦ. 140. nepdccertai S.

126. EctHce, stood, presumably in the
σῦριγξ of a spear-stand (δουροδόκη a 128,
ef. T 387).

128. ἡλέ, here only, with φρένας ἠλεέ
B 243, otvos ἠλεός ξ 464. The word is
evidently connected with ἄλη, ἠλασκάζειν
(ει 457), ἠλίθιος, etc., and there is some
evidence for an Aiolic form ἄλλος in the
same sense (conj. by. Bergk in the famous
ode of Sappho, fr. 2. 16 φαίνομαι ἄλλα, L
am as one distraught). Fick therefore
writes ἄλλε here. Itis possible that ἀλλο-
φρονέων may be derived from this, and,
as the Ht. Mag. (68. 45) suggests, even
the familiar use of ἄλλως in the sense
uselessly ; though in that case confusion
between the two words must have been
very early. Compare ἀλλοφάσσω, to be
delirious, in Hippokrates, and see Meister
Gr. Dial, i. 142. S1épeopac (the perf.
only here in H.) is best taken in a pass.
sense as in Hippokrates and late writers ;
in Attic it is always trans. (e.g. Soph.
El. 306), and so of course it may be
here if, by a slight change of punctua-
tion, we join it with φρένας. But then
the order of the words is not Homeric.
αὔτως, it is for nothing that thow hast

ears to hear with. The clause may
equally well be taken interrogatively.

132. ἀναπλήςας, see note on A 170.

136. κυϑομλήςων, trans. drive in up-
roar; the word recurs only in A 324,
where it is intrans.

138. ἑοῖο, thine own; reflexive as re-
ferring to the subject of the subordinate
infinitive clause. See App. A, vol. i. p.
562.

141. γενεήν Te τόκον Te, see note on
H 128. The line is obscure ; to say it
is hard to protect the lineage and offspring
of all men would serve to dissuade Ares
from avenging a common mortal, but
has little force when the offspring re-
ferred to is that of a god, even though
the mother be human. Perhaps what
Athene means is that ‘it is hard to
keep watch and ward over (pay constant
attention to) the birth and parentage of
all men’; i.e. all heroes—at least all
worth mentioning, all of royal blood—
are in the last resort sprung from gods,
and would then all have a right to
involve the gods in their blood-feuds
if the claim were once admitted; the
only thing therefore is to neglect divine

ᾳῳ Ὧν

IAIAAOC Ο (xv) 115

ἃ ᾽ a -9 16 fa} / ” “- v

ὡς εἰποῦσ ἵδρυσε θρόνωι ἔνι θοῦρον “Apna.
“ > » / / " \

Hpn δ᾽ ᾿Απόλλωνα καλέσσατο δώματος exTds
7 / θ᾽ a 6 val 7 ᾽ 7,

ρίν θ᾽, ἥ τε θεοῖσι μετάγγελος ἀθανάτοισι,
καί σφεας φωνήσασ᾽ ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
“ Ζεὺς σφὼ εἰς ἤϊδην κέλετ᾽ ἐλθέμεν ὅττι τάχιστα'
ΒΡ». ἐνὶ δ ν Ἢ, of ᾽ / > > 5 "
αὐτὰρ ἐπὴν ἔλθητε Διός τ᾽ εἰς ὦπα ἴδησθε,
ἔρδειν ὅττί κε κεῖνος ἐποτρύνηι καὶ ἀνώγηι."

ἡ μὲν ἄρ᾽ ὡς εἰποῦσα πάλιν κίε πότνια “Hpn,
-“ ᾽ αὖν ὦ / \ 3 5.7 ,
ἕζετο δ᾽ etvi θρόνωι. τὼ δ᾽ ἀΐξαντε πετέσθην.
” me tf / / cal
Idnv δ᾽ ἵκανον πολυπίδακα, μητέρα θηρῶν,

e ’ / / 5
εὗρον δ᾽ εὐρύοπα Kpovidny ava Vapyapor ἄκρωι
Ὁ ΕΣ \ δέ / / b) ΄
ἥμενον: ἀμφὶ δέ μιν θυόεν νέφος ἐστεφάνωτο.

>

τὼ δὲ πάροιθ᾽ ἐλθόντε Διὸς νεφεληγερέταο

/ “ > \ > / r
στήτην" οὐδέ σφωε ἰδὼν ἐχολώσατο θυμῶι, 155
a / ἘΝ 5. 9. Ὁ , > / Ἵ
ὅττί οἱ ὧκ ἐπέεσσι φίλης ἀλόχοιο πιθέσθην.
3 »
Ipw δὲ προτέρην ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
“ βάσκ᾽ ἴθι, “Ipe ταχεῖα, 1ϊ]οσειδάωνι ἄνακτι
πάντα τάδ᾽ ἀγγεῖλαι, μηδὲ ψευδάγγελος εἶναι.

/

παυσάμενόν μιν ἄνωχθι μάχης ἠδὲ πτολέμοιο
ἔρχεσθαι μετὰ φῦλα θεῶν ἢ εἰς ἅλα δῖαν.

160

> / 5 > / ’ 5 / 5 > ᾽ 7
εἰ δέ μοι οὐκ ἐπέεσσ᾽ ἐπιπείσεται, ἀλλ᾽ ἀλογήσει,

141, T om. P: ὃ᾽ U Vr. b, yp. Sch.
| ἀνώγει DHSU

146. ἐλθεῖν 3S. 147-8 ἀθ. Ar. Aph.
X. || {ecear P: Yecee ( Lips. 148. ἐποτρύνει DSU Vr. Ὁ.
Wir: Ὁ: 150. Yzeto J. 151. 0°: © Mor. 155. cpwe KR: cpwin (cp@in)
Q. || ϑυμὸν D. 157. HpHN () (supr. ἴριν). || mpotépan P: πρότερον δ. 161.
ἔρχεςθαι : Epxece’ ἢ PS, yp. A. 162-78 om. Kt. 162. ΜΟΙ: wou Ammonios
ap. Sch. T. || énéecct πεπείςεται QR. || énineieera: Harl. d, Δ. Mag. 69. 39.

wishes to see carried out, These are
quite inadequate ; a speech of a single
line is a rare thing in H., and in this

descent altogether. This involves a
sense of picear to which no exact
parallel occurs ; but a somewhat similar

use will be found in © 584. Van L.
boldly reads ἀθανάτων for ἀνθρώπων,
comparing Π 449, Φ 187. This gives
the required sense, but there is nothing
to account for the alteration.

144. μετάγτγελος, internuntia, cf. note
on ὑφηνίοχος, Z19. There is no advan-
tage in writing the preposition separately
here, and still less in Ψ 199, the only
place where the word recurs. Ms.
authority counts of course for nothing.

147-48 were athetized by Aph. and Ar.
on the grounds that they are needless,
as Iris and Apollo must obey in any
case, and unsuited to Hera, because the
commands of Zeus are not such as she

case 146 would be particularly curt.

153. The ‘fragrant cloud’ seems to
be an allusion to the νεφέλη καλὴ χρυσείη
of Ξ 350. θυόεις does not recur in H.
(Hymn. Cer. 97, 318, 490) ; but we find
θυήεις (8 48 etc.), θυώδης (δ. 121 ete.).

155. Heynes conj. cpwe for σφωΐν of
the vulg. now has the support of one
Ms. It is obviously right. σῴφωϊν would
only be construed with ἐχολώσατο, a
very unnatural order of words. οὐδὲ
ἐχολώςατο, Jitotes, ‘was well pleased.’

162. ef. . οὐκ, see note on A 160.
ἁλογήςει, here only in H., where the
simple λόγος occurs only twice, see note

on 393. Hence Nauck conj. ἀπιθήσει.

116

IAIAAOC O (xv)

φραζέσθω δὴ ἔπειτα κατὰ φρένα καὶ κατὰ θυμόν,

/ > »9\ / »\ ᾽ / /
μή μ᾽ οὐδὲ κρατερὸς περ ἐὼν ἐπιόντα ταλάσσηι

μεῖναι, ἐπεί €0 φημι Pinu πολὺ φέρτερος εἶναι 165

\ a / ᾿ la ’ 5 ” , LM
καὶ γενεῆν, πρότερος" τοῦ δ᾽ οὐκ ὄθεται φίλον ἧτορ

5S > \ / / / \ yA 2»
σον ἐμοὶ φάσθαι, τὸν τε στυγέουσι καὶ ἄλλοι.

ws ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησε ποδήνεμος ὠκέα Ἶρις,

βῆ δὲ κατ᾽ ᾿Ιδαίων ὀρέων εἰς ἵλιον ἱρήν.

ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἂν ἐκ νεφέων πτῆται νιφὰς ἠὲ χάλαζα 170

ψυχρὴ ὑπαὶ ῥιπῆς αἰθρηγενέος Βορέαο,

ὡς κραιπνῶς μεμαυῖα διέπτατο ὠκέα ᾿Ἴρις,

> la) ᾽ς / / \ b /
ἀγχοῦ δ᾽ ἱσταμένη προσέφη κλυτὸν ἐννοσίγαιον"

7 rn
“ ἀγγελίην τινά TOL, yalnoye KUaVoyYalta,
)

ἦλθον δεῦρο φέρουσα παραὶ Διὸς αἰγιόχοιο.

175.

/ / ᾽ ’ / / > \ UA
παυσάμενον GT ἐκέλευσε μάχης ἠδὲ πτολέμοιο

ἔρχεσθαι μετὰ φῦλα θεῶν ἢ εἰς ἅλα δῖαν.

> / δ > 5 / 2 5" Ἢ 5 5 > 7
εἰ δέ οἱ οὐκ ἐπέεσσ᾽ ἐπιπείσεαι, ἀλλ ἀλογήσεις,

> / \ lal 77 /
ἠπείλει καὶ κεῖνος ἐναντίβιον πολεμίξων

163. δὴ ἔπειτα : O° ἔπειτα : δῆπειτα (δ᾽ ἤπειτα) ὥ.

τινὲς ϑελήςηι Sch. T:
ἀθ. Ar.
171. ψυχρὸν (). || uno Syr.

naAdceai (2) S.

166. ὄθοται U (second o in ras. 4).
175. παραὶ : παρὰ Mor., Ap. Lex. 7.11. 176.

164. ταλάςςει R?:
165. €6: εὖ A: εὖ fr. Mose. 166-7
169. κατ᾽ : μετ᾿ P: ἐξ Zen.

ς᾽ ἐκέλευςε (ce κέλευςε) (2: ce κέλευε PT Vr. b, fr. Mose., Par. g! h, yp. A: ce

κέλ(λ)εται ACQ Par. οὐ, Harl. d, Lips.
énéecci πεπείςεαι ().

π(τ)ολεμίζων Zen. ©.

177. €pyece’ ἢ GS (cf. 161). 178.

179. κἀκεῖνος DGQSTU: καὶ ἐκεῖνος R. || πολεμίξων
Ar ΡΠ bar. miasenV ore ἢ (πη Moremi ste:

πτολεμίξων DHJU (= in ras.):

164, ἡ οὐ go together, see note on
A 26.

166. The parallel line 182 shews clearly
that τοῦ = Ποσειδῶνος, and is not, as
some take it, gen. after ὄθεται, ‘he recks
not of this.’ In its emphatic position
it refers back to the similarly placed ἐο,
‘yet he it is whose heart fears not.’
Thus the two sentences are closely
connected ; Hentze, indeed, only puts a
comma after πρότερος.

167. Tcon ἐμοὶ pdceai, see A 187 with
note. cTuréouci, fear, as A 186, H
112, © 515. This line and the preced-
ing were athetized by Ar. as wrongly
inserted from 182-83; Zeus, he thinks,
should appeal only to superior force, not
to the privilege of seniority, τὰ τοιαῦτα
yap τῶν δεομένων : while in the mouth of
Iris the words are right, as they would
offer Poseidon an honourable excuse for
yielding.

170. πτῆται, either = πτά - εται, aor.

subj. from ἐ-πτά- μην, or one of the hypo-
thetical subjunctives with lengthened
stem-vowel (see on A 129), also from
ἐπτάμην, or a thematic form, ef. ἐπι-πτ-
έσθαι A 126.

171=T 358. ὑπαὶ pinfc goes with
πτῆται, is driven by the stress of the
wind. aiepHrenéoc, born in the upper
air, because the N. wind was looked
upon as coming from the high tops of
the Thracian mountains. So we have
Βορέης αἰθρηγενέτης in ε 296, where M.
and R.’s note may be compared. Others
refer it to ai@pos, apparently meaning
cold, in € 318, and translate producing
cold; but compounds with -yevys are
regularly passive.

179. Kai κεῖνος, where we should have
expected καὶ αὐτός. It seems to be a
sort of hyperbaton such as is common
in conversation : he too threatened that he
would come for he threatened that he too
would come.

-

IAIAAOC Ο (xy)

᾽ AN ΄ Ὅς 5
ἐνθάδ᾽ ἐλεύσεσθαι: σὲ δ᾽ ὑπεξαλέασθαι ἀνώγει 180
a ᾽ \ / \ , \ , *
χεῖρας, ἐπεὶ σέο φησὶ Bine πολὺ φέρτερος εἶναι
\ “ / \ ᾽ »
καὶ γενεῆι πρότερος" σὸν δ᾽ οὐκ ὄθεται φίλον ἧτορ
9S / ΄ / / , \ v »”
icov of φάσθαι, Tov τε στυγέουσι καὶ ἄλλοι.
\ δὲ | ae] κ᾿ 0 ‘ / \ > 7,
τὴν δὲ μέγ ὀχθήσας προσέφη κλυτὸς ἐννοσίγαιος"
x “ ς. .. » / \ ΄
“ὦ πόποι, ἢ ῥ᾽ ἀγαθὸς περ ἐὼν ὑπέροπλον ἔειπεν, 185
ΕΣ » € / s/ ,ὔ 5.9 /
εἴ μ᾽’ ὁμότιμον ἐόντα βίηι ἀέκοντα καθέξει.
fal s > >’ K / > \ > / A / 17)
τρεῖς γάρ τ ἐκ Κρόνου εἰμὲν ἀδελφεοί, ods τέκετο Ῥέα,
τή \ \ BJ , / δ᾽ "Add Peed > /
εὺς Kal ἐγώ, τρίτατος ions ἐνέροισιν ἀνάσσων"

τριχθὰ δὲ πάντα δέδασται, ἕκαστος δ᾽ ἔμμορε τιμῆς"

4 Foes% » \ e / > \
ἤτοι ἐγὼν ἔλαχον πολιὴν ἅλα ναιέμεν αἰεὶ 190
Pas 5)
παλλομένων, “Aidns δ᾽ ἔλαχε ζόφον ἠερόεντα,
\ ’ x!
Ζεὺς δ᾽ ἔλαχ᾽ οὐρανὸν εὐρὺν ἐν αἰθέρι καὶ νεφέληισι"
vad > κ \ , \ \ ”
γαῖα δ᾽ ἔτι ξυνὴ πάντων καὶ μακρὸς "Ολυμπος.

fal « \ f \ / \ ξ΄
τῶ ῥα καὶ οὔ τι Διὸς βέομαι φρεσίν, ἀλλὰ ἕκηλος,

180. ἄνωγε DS Harl. ἃ.
ποι ὦ: δὲ ἢ. 185. ἔειπες ὦ.

181. φέρτατος Vr. b.
181. T om. DR Vr. A.

183. of : exo: Syr. || Te:
, z
τ᾽ ἐκ KpONoU Ar.

Q: τ᾽ éxpénou H! Par. j: τε κρόνου Syr. Par. e, Lips. (yp. ἐκ κρόνου) and ap,
Did. || τέκετο ῥέα : τέκε ῥέα JQ fr. Mosc. Vr. b, King’s Par. ac ἢ g h and ap.

Eust.: τέκε ῥείη ap. Eust.: τέκε pHH G: τέτοκε ῥέα U.
πάντα : πάντ᾽ ἃ τινές Sch. T (comparing ἐπίστιον for ἐφίστιον).

οἱ δὲ πολλὴν Sch. T.

191. παλλομένην Herakleitos ap. Sch. Bon O 21.

189. τριχϑά τε R.
190. πολιὴν :
192.

εὐρὺν : αἰπὺν Zen. || νεφέληιςι : Nepéecct Schol. 1, (Porph.) on 11365. 193.

Oo ἔτι: 0€ τι DH: 2€ τοι S.

185. ὑπέροπλον insolent, only here
and P 170 (in the same phrase) in H.
(also Hesiod and Pindar); with ὑπερο-
ain A 205, ὑπεροπλίσσαιτο p 268. The
derivation is quite uncertain. Cf. note
on ὁπλότερος = 267.

187. Perhaps we should read τέκε ‘Pein.
after = 203, the only other place where
the name occurs in H., thus avoiding
the synizesis. But some critics thought
a dactyl permissible in the 6th foot ;
see note on Q 269.

189. The neglect of the F of ἕκαστος
is very rare. δέδαστο Bentley, τριχθὰ
δέδασται πάντα van L. ἔμμορε is gener-
ally regarded asa perf., and to this the
o points. But it may possibly be an
aorist (cf. ἔ-πορ-ον, etc., H. G. ὃ 31. 5).
In A 278 the aor. is as well suited to
the context as the perf., and in ε 335,
d 338, it seems to be admissible. These
are the only other places in H. where
the word occurs—always in the phrase
ἔμμορε τιμῆς. The gnomic aor. suits
Hes. Opp. 347, and Ap. Rhod. took it
in the same way, as he writes ἔμμορες

(iii. 4), and Δ. Mag. ὅτι δὲ δεύτερος
ἀόριστος ἐστί, δῆλον" καὶ τὸ τρίτον τῶν
πληθυντικῶν ““ἔμμορον ἐκεῖνοι. On the
other hand, Hesych. quotes ἐμμόραντι
(Doric 3rd plur.). For the explanation
of the form as a perf. see Curtius Vb.
ii. 181, A. G. ὃ 23. 2, G. Meyer Gr.
§ 545. The normal Ionic form εἵμαρτο
is also found in ® 281, ε 312, w 34.

191. παλλομένων, when we were cast-
ing lots; see 2 400 τῶν μετὰ παλλόμενος.
So Herod. iii. 128 παλλομένων δὲ λαγχά-
νει ἐκ πάντων Βαγαῖος. Pindar mentions
the division of the earth among the
gods (O. vii. 55), but that is of course
a different tradition, for here the earth
remains common ground.

194. Béoua, 7 shall Vive, cf. Béne II
852, 2131. It appears to be a present
with fut. sense. βείομαι (X 431) may
perhaps be aor. subj. (cf. H. G@. ὃ 80).
The relation of the two forms to one
another and to Bios is, however, doubtful.
Acc. to G. Meyer Gr. § 499 βει- is the
strong form, βι- the weak, both appear-
ing in the pres. stem (cf. rlw:7elw): in

118

IAIAAOC O (xv)

if
καὶ κρατερός περ ἐών, μενέτω τριτάτηι ἐνὶ μοίρηι. 195

\ δὲ / / / \ ἃ ὃ ὃ Uf fa) Η
χερσὶ ὃὲ μὴ τί μὲ πάγχυ κακὸν ὡς ὁειθίισσέσύω

θυγατέρεσσιν γάρ τε καὶ υἱάσι βέλτερον εἴη

, , AN , ee,
ἐκπάγλοις ἐπέεσσιν ἐνισσέμεν, OVS τέκεν AUTOS,

A

€ 5 / > 7 \ ’ / x”
οι ἐθεν OTPUVOVTOS QKOVOOVTAL καὶ AVAYKN)L.

τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα ποδήνεμος ὠκέα Ἶρις" 200

“οὕτω γὰρ δή τοι, γαιήοχε κυανοχαῖτα,

τόνδε φέρω Aut μῦθον ἀπηνέα τε κρατερόν τε,

Bd /
ἢ TL μεταστρέψεις ;

στρεπταὶ μέν Te φρένες ἐσθλῶν.

3 > - / 4 b / d\ [νὰ 35
οἷσθ᾽ ὡς πρεσβυτέροισιν ἐρινῦες ALEV ἕπονται.

τὴν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπε ἰ]οσειδάων ἐνοσίχθων" 205

6697 fa) / / la) 54 \ a yy Η
pe eda, μάλα TOUTO ἔπος KATA Molpav €€LTTES

(fue) , δὼ κα
ἐσθλὸν καὶ τὸ τέτυκται, ὅτ᾽ ἄγγελος αἴσιμα εἰδῆι.

/ ” \ \ e
ἀλλὰ τόδ᾽ αἰνὸν ἄχος κραδίην καὶ θυμὸν ἱκάνει,

΄ 7 J v4 AN Ss nr / /
OTTOT ἂν ἰσόμορον Kal ὁμῆι πεπρωμένον αἴσηι

195. μοίρα DP.
ari ἃ. ]}

τινὲς υἱέει T.

196. ϑειδίεςεςϑθαι P: ϑειθιξέσϑω Syr.
βέλτερον Ar. Q[S] Harl. b, King’s Par. ac ἃ ἔφ:

197. Te: Ke ὦ

κάλλιον Aph.: φίλτερον J: κέρϑιον οἱ εἰκαιότεροι, Ὡ. || εἴη : εἶναι HL King’s.

208. H τι: Ητε Syr.:
ΘΗ τοι : ὃέ τοι Harl. a (yp. μέν τε).

εἴ τι Lips. || wén τε: μέντοι PR: γάρ τοι J: μὲν Q:
204. npecBuTdtoicin S.

206. Znvddoros

ἐσημειώσατο (2) Sch. T. || κατὰ μοῖραν : νημερτὲς J and ap. Eust. || ἔειπας QR

Bar. 207. εἰδῆι : εἴπηι Zen.

βέομαι the ec has become semivocalic and
dropped out, as often. Fick, on the
other hand, would read βίομαι for βέομαι,
ef. Hymn. Ap. 528 βιόμεσθα. | (See also
Schulze . #. p. 246 note 2, van L.
Ench. p. 442.) pecin must be a comi-
tative dat. in company with=in accord-
ance with. But the whole phrase is
obscure and unusual.

196. Compare B 190.

197. The lengthening in thesis by v
ἐφελκ. alone of the last syll. of eura-
τέρεςειν is rare in the second foot, though
not uncommon in the first. Compare,
however, the similar rhythm of A 388
ἠπείλησεν μῦθον, and so TI’ 348. The
variant κε for Te is perhaps right, but
the pure opt. is quite adinissible in a
concessive sense (H. G. ὃ 299 αὐ); it
expresses ‘for all I care.’ The words
‘it is better for his children for him to
scold them’ mean really of course ‘it is
better that he should scold his children.’
For éniccéuen and its relation to ἐνίπτω
see H. G. 8 46, Brugmann Gi. 11. p.
1042, Curtius Δ. no. 623.

203. metactpeweic, the object is evi-
dently νόον or φρένας to be supplied, cf.

52, Κα 107: so also αὶ 67 pH Te pera-
στρέψωσιν (sc. θεοί) ἀγασσάμενοι κακὰ ἔργα.
ctpentat, 1 497, Ν 115.

204. For the respect due to elder
brethren ef. N 355, and for the ἐρινύεα
as guardians of family relations see note
on 1454. ἕπονται, attend, as ministers
ready to answer a call.

207. τῶν δ᾽ Ὁμήρου καὶ τόδε συνθέμενος
ῥῆμα πόρσυν᾽" ἄγγελον ἐσλὸν ἔφα τιμὰν
μεγίσταν πράγματι παντὶ φέρειν: αὔξεται
καὶ Μοῖσα δι᾽ ἀγγελίας ὀρθᾶς Pindar P.
iv. 277. The allusion to this line is
obviously far from exact, but there can
be little doubt that it is what Pindar
meant. It is the only place where he
quotes Homer by name. Compare also
Aisch. Cho. 773.

208=II 52, q.v.

209. ἰσόμορον, here μόρος evidently
=potpa, without any connotation of
death or ill fate such as always attaches
to the word when used alone. Similarly
aicHi=share,as in 2327, though this word
too conveys the sense share of ill in the
same phrase, II 441, X 179, and commonly
elsewhere. See note on A418. ὁππότ᾽
ἄν, read ὁππότε (ξισόμορον) (Bentley).

- Ὁ

IAIAAOC O (xv)

/ 52 al » ,
νεικείειν ἐθέληισι χολωτοῖσιν ἐπέεσσιν. 210
᾽ > v “ / \ ΄ ,
ἀλλ᾽ ἤτοι viv μέν ye νεμεσσηθεὶς ὑποείξω,
» δέ > / \ > ’ὔ / -
ἄλλο O€ TOL ἐρέω, καὶ ἀπειλήσω TO γε θυμῶι:
Μ Μ > / \ ᾽ / ᾽ /
ai κεν ἄνευ ἐμέθεν καὶ ᾿Αθηναίης ἀγελείης,
a € / »
Hpns ‘Eppetw τε καὶ Ἡφαίστοιο ἄνακτος,
> / ? fel 7
Τλίου αἰπεινῆς πεφιδήσεται, οὐδ᾽ ἐθελήσει

τε
_
οι

5 ͵ὔ lal \ / / > /
ἐκπέρσαι, δοῦναι δὲ μέγα κράτος ᾿ΔΛργείοισιν,
lal > Aw » ν᾽
ἴστω τοῦθ᾽, ὅτι νῶϊν ἀνήκεστος χόλος ἔσται.
Δ aur τ , \ 5) \ > ΄
ὡς εἰπὼν λίπε λαὸν ᾿Αχαιικὸν ἐννοσίγαιος,
rn \ , »s / ’ “ ᾽ ,
δῦνε δὲ πόντον ἰών, πόθεσαν δ᾽ ἥρωες ᾿Δχαιοί.
\ Loe > > / 7
καὶ τότ᾽ ᾿Απόλλωνα προσέφη νεφεληγερέτα Ζεύς 220
» “-“ " cr
“ἔρχεο viv, φίλε Φοῖβε, μεθ᾽ “Extopa χαλκοκορυστήν'
\
ἤδη μὲν γάρ TOL γαιήοχος ἐννοσίγαιος
»Μ > -“ rn > / / , \
οἴχεται ELS ἅλα δῖαν, ἀλευάμενος χόλον auTruy

211. ef τι P (supr. H τοι). || ΓΕ Ar.: κε © (La R. seems to imply that his mss.
have re: but this is probably only a blunder). 212-17 ἀθ. Ar. (v. infra). 212.
uveoi Cant. 214. τινὲς Ἥρης “Hgaictou te καὶ “Epueiao AT. | Ἡρης e” Syr.
215. πεφιϑήςει (). || ἐθελήςη JP: ἐθέλησιν R. 216. δὲ : τε 8. || κράτος μέγα R.
223. ἀλευόμενος H.

211. NeweccHeeic, though indignant—
the only sense justified by the use of
the verb or the subst. νέμεσις. In 227
the sense reverencing seems more suit-
able, and has been supported by the
similar use of νεμεσίζετο in a 263. But
that isolated phrase is extremely sus-
picious (see note on A 649), and no
argument can be founded on it. The
scholia here explain ‘indignant with
myself,’ i.e. penitent. This explanation
is possible (though not necessary) in
B 64; but the context here makes it
practically out of the question, in the
absence of further explanation, for the
hearer to think of any indignation other
than that which Poseidon has been so
forcibly expressing against Zeus. re of
Ar. is obviously better than κε of Mss.

212. ἀθετοῦνται στίχοι ἕξ (212-17) ὅτι
εὐτελῆ τὰ κατὰ τὴν σύνθεσιν καὶ τὰ
κατὰ τὴν διάνοιαν. προειπὼν γὰρ “ἑνεμεσ-
σηθεὶς ὑποείξω,᾽" οἱονεὶ μεταμεληθεὶς ἐπι-
φέρει “᾿ ἀπειλήσω.᾽ ὅ τε ἸΠοσειδῶν ἐπί-
σταται ὅτι οὐκ εἰς τέλος φείσεται τῆς
πόλεως, ἀλλ᾽ ὅσον μόνον ἕνεκα τοῦ τιμῆσαι
τὸν ᾿Αχιλλέα ἐπαμύνει τοῖς Τρωσίν. This
is by no means convincing ; 211 does
not make a good end to a speech, as NON
uén re clearly indicates that some anti-
thesis is to follow.

213. αἵ xen: Thiersch εἰ μέν : but for
αἴ (et) κε with fut. indic. see H. G. ὃ 326.
5, and note on B 258.

214. This line is certainly to be con-
demned, as Hermes and Hephaistos
never take any prominent part against
Troy ; their names are clearly taken from
the position given them in the Theo-
machy (see T 33-36). So Ar., τὰ τῶν
θεῶν ὀνόματα μετενήνοχέ Tis ἀπὸ τῆς
θεομαχίας συναθροίσας τῶν ἐναντιουμένων
τοῖς βαρβάροις θεοῖς, οὐκέτι ἐπιστήσας ὡς
οὔτε τῶι Ἕρμῆι οὔτε τῶι Ἡ φαίστωι ἔμελεν
ἰδίαι τὰ τῆς πορθήσεως, ἀλλ᾽ ἕνεκα τῆς
ἀντικαταστάσεως (‘pairing off’) μόνον
παρείληφεν αὐτούς. It may be added
that the form Ἑ ρμείω is not Epic.
This difficulty is evaded by the variant
Ἡφαίστου τε kal ἙῬρμείαο ἄνακτος, which,
however, looks like a learned conjec-
ture. The cause of the interpolation
was evidently the omission of the name
of Hera as one whose consent was
needed ; and this is certainly curious.

217. tode’, one of the few exceptions
in H. to the rule that οὗτος refers to
the person addressed, and _ therefore
generally to what has preceded, not to
what follows.

219. ndéeecan,
B 703, 726.

missed his help, as

120

IAIAAOC O (xv)

e / / / / > / ΝΥ γῇ
ἡμέτερον: μάλα γάρ κε μάχης ἐπύθοντο καὶ ἄλλοι,

“ Says, / ’ ΄ / τ \ a/

Ol TEP EVEPTEPOL εἰσι θεοί, Κρονον ἀμφὶς ἐόντες. 225
/ / rn
ἀλλὰ τόδ᾽ ἠμὲν ἐμοὶ πολὺ κέρδιον ἠδέ οἱ αὐτῶι
7 Ὁ / \ ς /
ἔπλετο, ὅττι πάροιθε νεμεσσηθεὶς ὑπόειξε
χεῖρας ἐμάς, ἐπεὶ οὔ κεν ἀνιδρωτί γε τελέσθη.
/
ἀλλὰ σύ γ᾽ ἐν χείρεσσι Aa αἰγίδα θυσανόεσσαν,

fal δ >

Tit μάλ᾽ ἐπισσείων φοβέειν ἥρωας ᾿Αχαιούς" 280
rn / /
σοὶ δ᾽ αὐτῶι μελέτω, ἑκατηβόλε, φαίδιμος “Extwp:

/ \ 5 eo [ if vw oN 3 \
Toppa yap οὖν οἱ ἔγειρε μένος μέγα, ὄφρ av Αχαιοὶ
φεύγοντες νῆάς τε καὶ ᾿λλήσποντον ἵκωνται.

a ’ se ee ΄ ” / »
κεῖθεν & αὐτὸς ἐγὼ φράσομαι ἔργόν τε ἔπος τε,

“ \ = > \ 3 ΄ / 55
ως κε KAL αὖτις Αχαιοὶ αναπνευσωσι TOVOLO. 235

ἃ ” ᾽ PNG 7 \ ᾽ ΄ 5 /
ὡς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ apa πατρὸς ἀνηκούστησεν ᾿Απόλλων,
βῆ δὲ κατ᾽ ᾿Ιδαίων ὀρέων ἴρηκι ἐοικὼς

224. κε: τε ACDJRT Cant.
fr. Mose. Lips. :
κάλλιον Apoll. Pron. 54.
231-35 a0. Ar. Aph.
A. || aGeic CRU.

νέρτεροί (2: (ἐ)νέρτατοί Zen. || Kpénou QR.
228. οὔ KEN: οὔτι Ὁ.
232. ὄφρ᾽ : Topp’ Ar. Ὁ.

225. ἐνέρτεροί (A supr.) DJPQT Mor. Cant.

226. KEPOION :
230. THI: THN CGH?J.
235. Ke: Te (A supr.) Vr.

224. The well-supported variant τε for
Ke can only be explained others (ere
now) have heard of battle, i.e. experienced
the meaning of battle with me. But
this gives a much less natural sense
than κε, ‘if we had come to battle, the
noise of it, would have reached even to
the underworld.’

225. Cf. Ξ 274, and for ἐνέρτεροι or
νέρτεροι see note on E 898, where the
longer form is metrically fixed. The
line is rejected by van L.

227. See note on 211. ὑπόειξε takes
the ace. χεῖρας by a sort of construction
ad sensum, as though it had been ἔφυγε
or the lke. But the way in which 228
is added is most awkward. Heyne sus-
pected it as a rhapsodi pannus ; the only
question is whether a like suspicion
should not be extended to 227, which
has all the air of a tag meant to supply
the needless ἔπλετο to 226, and padded
out from 211, regardless of the sense
of νεμεσσηθείς, which is here unsuitable
to its context.

230. τῆι (to be taken with φοβέειν)
is by far the best attested reading, and
τήν (though—or because—it gives the
more usual order of words) is just the
corruption which we should expect. For
the aegis see note on B 447.

231-35. ἀθετοῦνται στίχοι πέντε ὅτι

ἄκαιροι οἱ λόγοι. . καὶ ἄκαιρος ἣ πρόρ-
pnows καὶ οὐ κεχαρισμένη τῶι ᾿Απόλλωνι.
καὶ παρὰ ᾿Αριστοφάνει ἠθετοῦντο. The
objection is that this is not the moment
for Zeus to announce his intention of
giving the Achaians a respite. But this
only affects the last two lines which
may well be spared; 2381-33 contain
the essence of the errand and are in-
dispensable. Fisi has remarked that
coi δ᾽ αὐτῶι comes in very awkwardly,
as it seems to indicate a contrast of
person, whereas σύ has already preceded.
But, as he says, this should lead to the
athetesis not of 231, but of 229-80;
this couplet is quite needless, and may
have been interpolated as an explanation
of the fact that the aegis, commonly
the weapon of Zeus, is in 308 found in
the hands of Apollo. And if 227-28
are omitted, as suggested above, 229 is
further condemned by the awkward re-
petition of ἀλλά at the head of the line.

234. κεῖθεν, from that point onward ;
ause found only here,=ék τοῦ, 69, and
compare the use of ἔνθεν, N 741. φρά-
couai «x.7.d., ‘I will consider what to do
and say, in order that,’ ete.

237. The comparison to the hawk
appears to refer to speed only, not to
an assumption of its form. See note on
HRD 9:

> 7.. Α “ , Vv -
ὠκέϊ φασσοφόνωι, ὅς T ὥκιστος πετεηνῶν.
4Φι9 ey / ὦ ie i) an
εὗρ᾽ υἱὸν I pidpovo δαΐφρονος, “Extopa δῖον,

{4

> »"» , , ,
ἥμενον, οὐδ᾽ ἔτι κεῖτο, νέον δ᾽ ἐσαγείρετο θυμόν,

bd Nar / Cae > \ 2 ‘ ‘~ 4

ἀμφὶ γινώσκων ἑτάρους, ἀτὰρ ἄσθμα καὶ ἱδρὼς
/ > / , \ , /

TaveT, ἐπεί μιν ἔγειρε Διὸς νόος αἰγιόχοιο.

» a ᾽ € / , ΄ ΄ > ,

ἀγχοῦ δ᾽ ἱστάμενος προσέφη ἑκάεργος ᾿Απόλλων:

Ho ὀλιγηπελέων ;

> Sah [2 » “ ᾽ ΡΝ
οὐκ ἀΐεις ὅ με νηυσὶν ἔπι πρυμνῆισιν Ἀχαιῶν

Ν / 2
οὺς ἑτάρους ὀλέκοντα βοὴν ἀγαθὸς βάλεν Λἴας

IAIAAOC O (xv) 121
240
“ / > >
“"Extop vie Πριάμοιο, τί ἣ δὲ σὺ νόσφιν am ἄλλων
ἢ πού τί σε κῆδος ἱκάνει ;” 245
\ “ΤᾺ
τὸν δ᾽ ὀλιγοδρανέων προσέφη κορυθαίολος “Extwp:
ee \ Zs , A + > " "
τίς δὲ σύ ἐσσι, φέριστε, θεῶν, ὅς μ᾽ εἴρεαι ἄντην ;
250

χερμαδίων πρὸς στῆθος, ἔπαυσε δὲ θούριδος ἀλκῆς ;

\ \ ” » > / / \ “ τὴν ap! sh
καὶ δὴ ἔγωγ᾽ ἐφάμην véxvas καὶ δῶμ᾽ > Aidao
la n 2 Mae =
ἤματι TOL ὄψεσθαι, ἐπεὶ φίλον ἄϊον ἦτορ."
\ > 5 / ” e / > /
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπεν ἄναξ ἑκάεργος ᾿Απόλλων"

239. εὗρε O° υἱὸν L.
241. γιγνώσκων LOR Lips.
ἀλλοφρονέων Aristotle (7) ; v. infra.
Par. g.
Sch. T.

239. εὗρε as usual begins the sentence
asyndetically ; seeon Δ 89, The variant
of L is metrically possible, but is against
the ordinary use, and is not supported
by other members of the family.

240. NEON, newly, i.e. ‘only just,’ as
x 426. The imperf. ésayelpero is ob-
viously to be preferred for its picturesque-
ness to the aor.

341. γινώσκων, beginning to recognise
his friends about him.

242. This ‘action at a distance’ of
the mind of Zeus, without any indication
of the material means by which the effect
is produced, is very rare in H., 463
giving the most similar instance; in ὦ
164 ἔγειρε is used in a less material
sense. ‘This is probably the reason why
Nauck has marked the two lines as
‘spurii?’ It is possible that γόνος, the
variant of R, may be right.

245. Aristotle (Metaph. iii. 5) says
(Ὅμηρος) ἐποίησε τὸν “Ἕκτορα, ws ἐξέστη
ὑπὸ τῆς πληγῆς, κεῖσθαι ἀλλοφρονέοντα,
but this may be only an instance of in-
accurate quotation, with a reminiscence
of Ψ 698. ἀλλοφρονέων (for which see note

240. ἐςαγείρετο Ar. 2: écareipato CDH (eic-) JQT.
242. νόος: γόνος R (and P™),

245. κεῖς

249. ὀλέκοντα : yp. «τέλλοντα Lips.

252. ἥλιατι : SuuaTi (). || Sweceai: Y=ecear Ar.: οἱ δὲ ἱξεῖςθαι (ἢ
253. ἑκάεργος : d1dc υἱὸς Ci) Lips., yp. Sch. X.

on 128) is however adopted by van L.,
after Naber, on account of the immediate
neighbourhood of ὀλιγοδρανέων, which
seems to be identical in sense with
ὀλιγηπελέων. But Epic poetry does not
studiously avoid such juxtapositions.

247. This appearance of a god in his
own shape, so as to be immediately
recognized, is comparatively rare; οἵ,
χαλεποὶ δὲ θεοὶ φαίνεσθαι ἐναργεῖς T 131,
and the gift of Athene to Diomedes in
E127. Other instances are A 199, = 166,
2. 170.

249. ὁλέκοντα: the variant στέλλοντα
is noteworthy as implying the reference
of otc to με, arraying my fellows. In
= 412 however Hector is wounded in
attacking.

252. There is not
between Swecear of Mss. and ἵξεσθαι of
Ar. (οὐκ ἄχαρις ἡ γραφή, Did.). <A
similar variation is found in p 448 μὴ
Taxa πικρὴν Αἴγυπτον καὶ Κύπρον ἴδηαι,
αἰ. ἵκηαι. ἄϊον, breathed out, from aF-iw,
cf. ἄξ-ημι, and ἀΐσθων II 468
(whence van Herwerden conj. ἦτορ ἄϊσθον
here, as ἀΐω does not recur in this sense).
Similarly ψυχὴν ἐκάπυσσεν X 467.

choose

much to

θυμὸν

΄

122

IAIAAOC O (xv)

-ς 7 an n/ > n ie )ὔ
7
θάρσει νῦν: τοῖόν τοι ἀοσσητῆρα Kpoviwy

3 ” / if \ ? /
ἐξ Ἴδης προέηκε παρεστάμεναι Kal ἀμύνειν,

255

Φοῖβον ᾿Απόλλωνα χρυσάορον, ὅς σε πάρος περ

παν Ὁ CaN } al \ > \ ,
PVOM , ομῶὼῶς αὑτὸν TE καὶ ALTTELVOV πτολίεθρον.

> , ” a e n 5 UA
αλλ aye νῦν ἱππεῦσιν ἐπότρυνον πολέεσσι

\ ΝΜ, rn ? / ’ / (vf
νηυσὶν ἔπι γλαφυρῆισιν ἐλαυνέμεν ὠκέας ἵππους"

5 Ν > \ / \ (7 /
αὐτὰρ εγὼ προπάροιθε κιὼν ἵπποισι κέλευθον 260

πᾶσαν λειανέω, τρέψω δ᾽ ἥρωας ᾿Αχαιούς.

a / / a
ὡς εἰπὼν ἔμπνευσε μένος μέγα ποιμένι λαῶν.

e > vA \ Wf 5 / ’ \ /
@S ὃ OTE TLS στατος ψπῆτος, ὠκοστήσας ETL φάτνηι,

\ > 7 / i ΄
δεσμὸν ἀπορρήξας θείηι πεδίοιο Κροαινῶν,

εἰωθὼς λούεσθαι ἐυρρεῖος ποταμοῖο, 265
/ ¢ n \ ΄ » τ \ \ a

κυδιόων: ὑψοῦ δὲ κάρη ἔχει, ἀμφὶ δὲ χαῖται

BA PIA C ’ > fh "

ὦμοις ἀΐσσονται" ὁ δ᾽ ἀγλαΐηφι πεποιθώς,

e/ / e la) / ΄ > » \ \
plupa ἑ γοῦνα φέρει μετά τ᾽ ἤθεα Kat νομὸν ἵππων"

ἃ /
as “Extwp λαιψηρὰ πόδας
ὀτρύνων ἱππῆας, ἐπεὶ θεοῦ

/
ἔκλυεν αὐδήν.

J ’ 7;
καὶ γούνατ᾽ ἐνώμα

270

[ > A 3 x Μ \ Ἂ » 5S
οἱ δ᾽, ὥς τ᾽ ἢ ἔλαφον κεραὸν ἢ ἄγριον αἶγα

/ / Ν / a
ἐσσεύοντο κύνες TE καὶ ἀνέρες ἀγροιῶται"

255. παριοστάμεναι T Vr. d, fr. Mose.
258. ἐπότρυνε R. 259 om. Dt. ||

Lips. || κελεύεσω C (yp. κέλευθον).
λειανέω). 262 om. P. || ἔπνευςε Vr. b A.

ἐλαύνειν ὃ.

256. Περ A (supr. re) T: ke Q: re.
260. προπάροιθεν ἰὼν ()
261. €cudeon difénar C! (yp. πᾶςαν
263. φάτνης Ht. Mag. 51. 10.

264. decud Siapprizac eeiH! nedionde Hi. Mag. 51. 12. || eeier DJ. || κροαίνων :

τινὲς ἐπιθυμκκῶν T. 205-68 ἀθ. Ar.

ἔκλυον Lips.

265 om. Zen.
γοῦνα : τινὲς ruta T (wrongly appended to 269).
272. écceuanto Ar. Par. g.

266. ἔχηι Vr. ἃ. 268.
270. τινὲς ὀτρυνέων T. ||

254. ἀοςςητῆρα, a word which recurs
in 735, X 333, 6 165. The most prob-
able explanation is that of Curtius,
who derives it from a=sa, ‘together,’
and root seq of ἕπ-ομαι, sequor, as if
ἀ-σοκ-Ἴη-τήρ, COIN-SOC-ta-tUs.

256. ypucdopon, rather ypvodopa, see
note on E 509. περ, not ye, see on
P 587.

258. éndétpunon, only here and κ 531
with dat. Compare the double use of
κελεύειν (note on I’ 259). πολέεςει, the
many. But we should rather expect
πάντεσσι (ἅμα πᾶσι Pallis).

268-68=Z 506-11. ‘This simile, so
fine when applied to the vain and hand-
some Paris, loses much of its force here,
where it is inserted to illustrate not the
exultant beauty but merely the speed
of Hector. Ar. athetized 265-68 as a
wrong repetition, but retained 263-64

as an introduction to 269-70; Zen. re-

jected 265 only. But the whole passage

from 263-70 must go together; 269 is
an Epic commonplace, serving to join
the simile to its context. We have
here, as at the end of © (557-58), a
clear plagiarism of a passage whose
intrinsic beauty marked it out for
plunder. How a single ‘Homer’ could
have thus repeated his own best pass-
ages, careless of their appropriateness,
it is for the defenders of the unity of
the Iliad to say. But we have no right
to talk of interpolation ; the simile is
embedded in the structure of the book
and has doubtless been so from the first,
like the drums from older temples in
the wall of Themistokles.

71 ΞΞῚ’ 24. 272 = Ne 54o> Seemaue
note on the latter passage for the (aor.)
form ἐσσεύοντο.

—

IAIAAOC O (xv) 23

\ / ’ > / / “
Tov μέν T ἠλίβατος πέτρη Kal δάσκιος ὕλη

» v4 ’ > »Μ / v
εἰρύσατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ apa τέ σφι κιχήμεναι αἴσιμον ev:

lal / > . Ν > “ > / \ > ,ὔ P=
τῶν δέ θ᾽ ὑπὸ ἰαχῆς ἐφάνη ls ἠυγένειος 275

> eas 3 \ / > / κ᾿ “-
εἰς ὁδὸν, αἶψα δὲ πάντας ἀπέτραπε καὶ μεμαῶτας"

Δ \ “ Ν ς \ \ “
ὡς Δαναοὶ εἴως μὲν ὁμιλαδὸν αἰὲν ἕποντο

4 / / \ » > /
νύσσοντες ξίφεσίν τε καὶ ἔγχεσιν ἀμφιγύοισιν,

τὴν > δ ὦ “ > > , ,ὔ SULA fn
αὐτὰρ €7TEL ἴδον Exrop εἐπούχομενον TTLY AS avopor,

/ - \ Ν \ s /
τάρβησαν, πᾶσιν δὲ παραὶ ποσὶ κάππεσε θυμός.

280

lal ᾽ bl ᾽ εἰ / / , 4 e/
τοῖσι δ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽ ἀγόρευε Θόας ᾿Ανδραίμονος υἱός,

» lal 5 / ‘ >
Αὐτωλῶν ὄχ᾽ ἄριστος, ἐπιστάμενος μὲν ἄκοντι,

ἐσθλὸς δ᾽ ἐν σταδίηι' ἀγορῆι δέ ἑ παῦροι ᾿Αχαιῶν

,ὔ . a rat /
νίκων, ὁππότε κοῦροι ἐρίσσειαν περὶ μύθων"

a >\ / 2 / \ /
ὃ σφιν ἐὺ φρονέων ἀγορήσατο καὶ μετέειπεν" 285

/ cr / al e -
“@ πόποι, ἢ μέγα θαῦμα τόδ᾽ ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ὁρῶμαι:

214. τέ: TiS (and τινές, T? tat Ms.). 275. ὑπαὶ GPR.
277. εἴως : τείως Zen.
285. ὅ Ar. Ω: ὅς P Vr. d, Harl. ἃ, King’s.

Lips.: énérpane ὦ.
MENON Vr. ἃ. 280. napa Vr. d.

276. ἀπέτρεπε
279. ἐποιχόμιενον : éneccU-

273. AMBatoc, a word of quite un-
known origin and meaning; in Η.
always an epithet of πέτρη (Hymn. Ven.
267 of pines and oaks). The many ex-
planations of the scholia are mere guess-
work. πέτρη is the home of the goat,
ὕλη of the stag.

274. Hen, the imperf. seems to be
taken from the mind of the hunters ;
when the quarry escaped them they
would say οὐκ dp’ ἡμῖν Kix. αἴσιμον fev,
‘after all we are not fated to catch it.’
It is only by some such supposition that
the presence of the imperf. in a simile
is to be explained.

279. ἐποιχόμενον, assailing like a
divine ‘visitation.’ The word in this
hostile sense is used only of gods or
heroes directly inspired, as here: see
note on K 487.

280. παραὶ noci κάππεςε, apparently
our colloquial ‘ their courage sank into
their heels,’ with an obvious allusion to
running away. So Demosth. de Halonn.
§ 45 (quoted by Schol. L) τὸν ἐγκέφαλον
. . ἐν Tals πτέρναις φορεῖτε.

281. The authenticity of the following
passage, to 305, is very doubtful (see
Introduction). The plan of sending the
mass of the troops to the rear (295-99)
at a moment when it would seem that
every nerve should be strained to defend
the wall is quite inexplicable. Besides,
ἀολλέες (312), Aads (319), and the similes

in 323 clearly shew that the host of
the Achaians is in the passage imme-
diately following regarded as still united.
The phrase used in 284 is not Homeric.
The omission of the F of βεκάστου
(288) cannot be remedied by conjec-
ture, and ἀνώξομεν (295) is a doubtful
form.

282. ἐπιστάμενος ἄκοντι, the dat. is
apparently comitative, as in our phrase
‘skilled with the javelin’; but the ex-
pression is a curious one. See H. G.
§ 144. Van Herwerden conj. ἄκοντος,
the more usual constr.; e.g. Φ 406
φόρμιγγος ἐπιστάμενος καὶ ἀοιδῆς. cTadini,
here close fight as opposed to the use of
missiles. Cf. H 241, and av’rocradin,
N 325.

284. περὶ μύθων, cf. @ 225 of ῥα καὶ
ἀθανάτοισιν ἐρίζεσκον περὶ τόξων, ‘in the
art of archery.’ The phrase would thus
seem to imply regular contests for a prize
of eloquence ; but such a custom is en-
tirely unknown to Homer. We must
take μῦθοι to mean rather the subject
than the manner of their speeches, ‘ vied
with one another in their proposals,’
as e.g. H 358 and often. Compare also
the ‘court-fee’ in = 508 τῶι δόμεν ds
μετὰ τοῖσι δίκην ἰθύντατα εἴποι (App. I,
§§ 28-30). κοῦροι, the young men as
opposed to their elders, such as Nestor,
with whom they would hardly presume
to compete.

124

IAIAAOC O (xv)

“ a , A 7,
οἷον δ᾽ abr ἐξαῦτις ἀνέστη κῆρας ἀλύξας
“ 5 / ΄ > \ ς /
Exrowp: ἢ Onv μιν para ἔλπετο θυμὸς ἑκάστου
’ 5 /
χερσὶν vm Αἴαντος θανέειν 'Γελαμωνιάδαο.
> / i La) > 7 x ’ /
ἀλλά τις αὖτε θεῶν ἐρρύσατο Kai ἐσάωσεν 290
“ » A \ fal rn ἈΝ fe ᾽
Εἰ κτορ᾽, ὃ δὴ πολλῶν Δαναῶν ὑπὸ γούνατ᾽ ἔλυσεν,
- \ an 5 2.Λ
ὡς καὶ νῦν ἔσσεσθαι ὀΐομαι" οὐ γὰρ ἄτερ γε
\ / / “, lal
“Ζηνὸς ἐρυγδούπου πρόμος ἵσταται ὧδε μενοινῶν.
5 5 ” 2 (¢ Xv > \ Μ Vi A
arr’ aye’, ὡς av ἐγὼ εἴπω, πειθώμεθα πάντες.
\ \ n /
πληθὺν μὲν ποτὶ νῆας ἀνώξομεν ἀπονέεσθαι: 295
ty / lal / 5
αὐτοὶ δ᾽, ὅσσοι ἄριστοι ἐνὶ στρατῶι εὐχόμεθ᾽ εἶναι,
/ rn /
στείομεν, εἴ KE πρῶτον ἐρύξομεν ἀντιάσαντες
/ 5 7 Ν ’ an
dovpat ἀνασχόμενοι: τὸν δ᾽ οἴω Kal μεμαῶτα
a 7 fal n “ ”
θυμῶι δείσεσθαι Δαναῶν καταδῦναι ὅμιλον.
ἃ ᾽ « 5. ον a ΄ \ / 7
ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ & ἄρα τοῦ μάλα μὲν κλύον ἠδὲ πίθοντο.
. \ yo) 3 Noe a f
οἱ μὲν ap aud Αἴαντε καὶ ᾿ἰδομενῆα ἄνακτα, 801
rn / / ’ “.
Τεῦκρον Μηριόνην τε Μέγην τ᾽ ἀτάλαντον "Ἀρηὶ,
ig LY » n /
ὑσμίνην ἤρτυνον, ἀριστῆας καλέσαντες,
“ Ν ὙΠῚΕΖ 5 , ON yy)
Extope καὶ Tpwecow ἐναντίον: αὐτὰρ ὀπίσσω

\ \ lal 2 rn ‘6
ἡ πληθὺς ἐπὶ νῆας Ayatov ἀπονέοντο. 305

287. ἐξαῦοις C. 288. ΜΙΝ:
294. ἐγὼν HU. 295. προτὶ CPR.
298. ἀνεχόμενοι Lips.
aianta (2.

nou Vr. d:

μοὶ (). 289. eanéuen Lips.
297. εἴ: ὥς A (yp. ef), yp. Harl. a.

301. αἴαντε Zen. Aph. (A swpr.) PQRTU Par. ej, Cant. :
303. ὑσμίνην τ᾿ R. || Hptuon Vr. b.

287. οἷον θ᾽ atte, see note on N 633.

290. Cf. x 372, K 44. From the latter
Bekker would read ἠδὲ σάωσεν, in order
to put the hiatus into the bucolic
diaeresis, where it is admissible. Were
not the whole passage suspect it would
be tempting to read καί F’ ἐσάωσεν with
3randreth, regarding Ἕκτορα as a gloss
added to explain the object, after the
pronoun Fe had disappeared, and the
rest of 291 as a mere stop-gap to make
up a line.

292. The reference of ὧς... Ecceceat
is not very clear. As the text stands it
seems to mean ‘so it will happen again
that he will lay low many a Danaan.’
But by omitting 291 it will be ‘as I
deem some god will again protect and
save him, if the need comes.’ The latter
seems rather more natural.

293. JWENOINON, desiring, Seems mean-
ingless, and the Epic form is μενοινάων.
The scholia supply διαμάχεσθαι ἡμῖν,
which is weak enough. We want a
word such as μεμαώς (Pallis).

295, GNw=zouen may be either fut.

indic. as 7 404, or aor. subj., οἵ, ἀνῶξαι,
κ 531, The latter is to be preferred.

297. creftouen for στήομεν with the
traditional change of ἡ to e before o (w):
we have στήηι, παρστήετον, but περι-
otelwor P 95 (with variant περιστήωσι).
See H, G. p. 384, and compare the form
στέωμεν A 348, with note. The original
form was presumably ord-owev. πρῶτον,
the first rush: Thoas contemplates a
rear-guard action to cover the retreat of
the main body. For κε Bentley conj. é.

301. The dual Αἴαντε is preferable
to the singular, as through the whole
of the battle at the ships the two name-
sakes act together. For the use of ἀμφί
see on 1 146. The omission of Menelaos
from the list of heroes is strange.

303. HpTUNON closed wp the ranks, ef.
A 216 ἀρτύνθη δὲ μάχη.

305. A πληϑύσ looks like the later use
of the article ; but it may be defended as
Homeric, since it expresses the antithesis
to oi μέν above. Cf. B 278 ὡς φάσαν ἡ
πληθύς, immediately followed by ava δ᾽ ὁ
πτολίπορθος ᾿Οδυσσεύς.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΟ Ο (xy) 12

οι

fal \ / ΄ ‘

Τρῶες δὲ προύτυψαν ἀολλέες, ἦρχε δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ “Extwp
μακρὰ βιβάς: πρόσθεν δὲ Ki’ αὐτοῦ Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων

ΓΕ, ὁ » ,, μὴ ᾽ ϑ. οὖ fa
εἱμένος @mouv νεφέλην, ἔχε 6 αἰγίδα θοῦριν
δεινὴν ἀμφιδάσειαν ἀριπρεπέ, ἣν ἄρα χαλκεὺς
“ a ) > r

Ηφαιστος Avi δῶκε φορήμεναι ἐς φόβον ἀνδρῶν: 310

« > » ΄ -

τὴν ἄρ᾽ ὅ γ᾽ ἐν χείρεσσιν ἔχων ἡγήσατο λαῶν.
"A a δ᾽ e / > λλέ = > δ᾽ > ‘

ργεῖοι δ᾽ ὑπέμειναν ἀολλέες, ὦρτο δ᾽ ἀυτὴ
>? nn ᾽ / ? \ fal > Des \
ὀξεῖ ἀμφοτέρωθεν, ἀπὸ νευρῆφι δ᾽ ὀϊστοὶ
θρῶισκον: πολλὰ δὲ δοῦρα θρασειάων ἀπὸ χειρῶν

A \ > ay / 5 > ” / » lal
ἄλλα μὲν ἐν χροὶ πήγνυτ᾽ ἀρηϊθόων αἰζηῶν, 315
πολλὰ δὲ καὶ μεσσηγύ, πάρος χρόα λευκὸν ἐπαυρεῖν,

/

ἐν γαίης ἵσταντο, λιλαιόμενα χροὸς σαι.
ὄφρα μὲν αἰγίδα χερσὶν ἔχ᾽ ἀτρέμα Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων,

/ i al \
Toppa μάλ᾽ ἀμφοτέρων βέλε᾽ ἥπτετο, πῖπτε δὲ λαός:
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ κατ᾽ ἔνωπα ἰδὼν Δαναῶν ταχυπώλων 820

306. προέτυψαν J: προύτρεψαν () (sup. τυ).

307. BiBdc 2: βιβῶν (-ὡν)

Ar. (see below) (H supr.) JP (supr. ac) SU Harl. b, Par. a bd fh, Vr. b, fr. Mose. :

βοῶν Zen. || αὐτοῦ : αὐτῶ P.

νευρῆφιν Τ' (supr. δ᾽ man. rec.).
λευκὸν : καλὸν GR.

308. dduoici(N) ACHRS Vr. b A.
τινὲς ἀςπίδα Eust. (and so yp. H man. rec.).
315. πῆχϑεν U.

αἰγίδα :
313. ἀπαὶ L. | νευρῆφι ὃ᾽:
316. πολλὰ : ἄλλα Vr. d.

306=N 136, P 262.

307. BiBdc: βιβῶν πᾶσαι εἶχον... ’Api-
σταρχος βιβῶν, Did. In H 213 we are
told that Ar. read βιβάς. Itis therefore

robable that he admitted both forms as
justifiable, and did not fear the incon-
sistency of following Ms. authority in each
place. Our Mss. retain this inconsistency
in a marked degree. In IT 22, N 807, Π
609, ἃ 539, all (as far as is known) agree
in the form with -&-; in H 213, N 18, 158,
371, « 450, p 27, all equally agree in the
form with -d-; only here and in 686
below is there any division of authority,
in both cases with a large majority in
favour of βιβάς. This form is undoubtedly
preferable linguistically ; but we have
no right, in the face of the evidence,
to expel βιβῶν from the text where
unanimously supported.

308. θοῦριν goes with alrida as else-
where with ἀσπίδα, which is indeed a
variant here. For the construction of the
aegis see note on B 447. ἀμφιϑάςειαν,
covered with hair, like ἀμφίκομος of a
bush, covered with leafage, P 677. It
would seem that the idea calls rather
for περί than ἀμφί, on both sides; but
the two prepositions are apt to trespass

on one another’s ground, and metrical
requirements may have determined the
choice. Conversely in ® 108 περιδέξιος
seems to stand for ἀμφιδέξιος. Many
apply the word to the θύσανοι, and
explain ‘fringed round about.’

310. ἐς φόβον GNOPON, for the putting
to flight of warriors. és must here in-
dicate end, i.e. intent—a rare use, but
sufficiently supported by εἰπεῖν, πείθεσθαι
els ἀγαθόν (I 102, A 789, Ψ 305), els
ἄτην κοιμήσατε μα 372, δίδωμι ἐς γάμου
ὥρην ο 126. Monro takes it ‘in ἃ con-
crete sense, to the scene of flight ; ep. és
πόλεμον gopéev.’ But this seems, to
say the least, a weak way of expressing
that it is the aegis itself which causes
the rout. In any case the phrase is
curious ; μόθον (Pallis) for φόβον would
be simpler.

314-17, see A
A 85.

320. κατ᾽ ἔνωπα, full in the face.
The old grammarians were <ivided as to
the orthography, some reading κατένωπα
(like xarévavrTa), ἐνῶπα, sup-
posed to be a metaplastic acc. of
(see E 374) like ἰῶκα beside
Monro (H. G. § 107. 2) suggests that

571-74; 319=0 67,

others κατ᾽
ἐνωπὴ

(WK7).

[

196 IAIAAOC O (xv)

Ae 5 ΩΝ 2 ΣΝ ἂν » 4 / - Ν \
σεῖσ᾽, ἐπὶ δ᾽ αὐτὸς ἄυσε μάλα μέγα, τοῖσι δὲ θυμὸν

ἐν στήθεσσιν ἔθελξε, λάθοντο δὲ θούριδος ἀλκῆς.

e > A , DIN - > ΄, XN - 2 3 an
οἱ 6, ὥς T ἠὲ βοῶν ἀγέλην ἢ πῶυ μέγ οἰῶν

θῆρε δύω κλονέωσι μελαίνης νυκτὸς ἀμολγῶι,
> / ’ 2 , ΄ > ff
ἐλθόντ ἐξαπίνης σημάντορος οὐ παρεοντος, 325
ὡς ἐφόβηθεν ᾿Αχαιοὶ ἀνάλκιδες: ἐν yap ᾿Απόλλων
ἧκε φόβον, Τρωσὶν δὲ καὶ Ἕκτορι κῦδος ὄπαζεν.
” 3 ΟΝ WA 7 , - /
ἔνθα δ᾽ ἀνὴρ ἕλεν ἄνδρα κεδασθείσης ὑσμίνης.

/ 5 , 7
“Ἑκτωρ μὲν Στιχίον τε καὶ ᾿Αρκεσίλαον ἔπεφνε,

τὸν μὲν Βοιωτῶν ἡγήτορα χαλκοχιτώνων, 990

Ν \ lol / \ ε fal
τὸν δὲ Μενεσθῆος μεγαθύμου πιστὸν ἑταῖρον"
Αἰνείας δὲ Μέδοντα καὶ Ἴασον ἐξενάριξεν"
ἤτοι ὁ μὲν νόθος υἱὸς ᾿Οἴλῆος θείοιο
ἔσκε, Μέδων Αἴαντος ἀδελφεός, αὐτὰρ ἔναιεν
> / / 7 / v /
ἐν Φυλάκηι, γαίης ἀπο πατρίδος, ἄνδρα κατακτᾶς, 335

γνωτὸν μητρυιῆς ᾿Ι!ριώπιδος, ἣν ἔχ᾽ ‘Oidevs:

5 \ 3 7,
"Tacos att ἀρχὸς μὲν ᾿Αθηναίων ἐτέτυκτο,

υἱὸς δὲ Σφήλοιο καλέσκετο Βουκολίδαο.
Μηκιστῆ δ᾽ ἕλε Πουλυδάμας, ᾿Εἰχίον δὲ ἸΠολίτης

324. OU: ϑύο T. κλονέωςι AJQU Bar. Harl. a, fr. Μοβα. : κλονέουσι ὥ,

326. ἐνάλκιϑες Sch. X (yp. ἀνάλκιϑεο).

327. ἧκε: ϑῆκε H. 328. Ene’ ἀνὴρ

PR: 330. χαλκοχιτώνων : KapTepooUuwn J Par. b h, Vr. b, fr. Mose. (and

yp. A, Harl. a).
αὖτ᾽ : αὖ J.

332. λιέδοντα : μέδον τε ().
339. UWHKICTHN (-AN) (C sup.) G Vr. b Cant.

333. ὁ Ἴλῆος Zen. 337.

both ὦπα (εἰς ὦπα ἰδέσθαι) and ἔνωπα
may be neut. sing. from which we have
the plur. προσ-ώπατα (H 212). Cf. ἐνωπα-
diws ἐσίδεσκεν W 94. See also Delbriick
Gr. τὰ. p. 636.

321. The apodosis begins with Tote
δέ.

322. ἔϑελξε, see note on M 255,

324, ϑύω, a pair like Apollo and Hector.
ἀμολτγῶι, A 173, X 27.

325, cHuadNTopoc, this word occurs
only here in H. (and three times in the
Hymns); but cf. μήλοισιν ἀσημάντοισιν
K 485, and for onuaiveer=command, A
289, etc.

327. φόβον, as used with ἐνῆκε, seems
to mean fear rather than flight, the only
sense permitted by the canon of Ar.
Hence van L. reads ὦρσε for ἧκε.

328. KedaceeicHc Ucuinnc, when the
ranks were broken ; opposed to ὑσμίνην
ἤρτυνον above (303).

330. TON μέν, the latter, TON O€, the

Jormer, by the usual chiasmus or ὕστερον
πρότερον : Arkesilaos is the Boiotian (B
495), Stichios the Athenian (N 195),

333-36=N 694-97.

337, a@pxéc, an officer, under Mene-
stheus, hike Stichios (N 196).

339. MuxictA: the only other con-
tracted acc. from a noun in -εύς is the
doubtful Τυδῆ A 384. Hence Brandreth
conj. Μηκιστῆα δὲ Πουλυδάμας. But
perhaps we should adopt the variant
Μηκιστήν (or -Ὧν) : compare ᾿Αντιφάτην
M 191 but ᾿Αντιφατῆα κ 114 (Menrad)
Mekisteus is son of Echios in 9 333, so
perhaps it is meant that father and son
are killed together (cf. & 514). But
these lists of the unimportant slain are
to be regarded as only extemporized ; so
that names which have occurred together
in other passages are very likely to be
brought into contact again in fresh
relations, without thought of any special
significance.

IAIAAOC Ο (xv) 127

/ r e “
πρώτηι ἐν ὑσμίνηι, Kroviov δ᾽ ἕλε δῖος ᾿Αγήνωρ.

Δηΐοχον δὲ Ildpius βάλε νείατον ὦμον ὄπισθε

φεύγοντ᾽ ἐν προμάχοισι, διαπρὸ δὲ χαλκὸν ἔλασσεν.
” ᾽ e \ > / > > ” ΄ > 9 ‘
ὄφρ᾽ οἱ τοὺς ἐνάριζον ἀπ᾽ ἔντεα, τόφρα δ᾽ ᾽Αχαιοὶ

τάφρωι καὶ σκολόπεσσιν ἐνιπλήξαντες ὀρυκτῆι

ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα φέβοντο, δύοντο δὲ τεῖχος ἀνάγκηι.
“Ἕκτωρ δὲ Τρώεσσιν ἐκέκλετο
-- \ > ΄ dA >

νηυσὶν ἐπισσεύεσθαι, ἐᾶν ὃ
a 7 oN = tale ᾽ ΄ a
ὃν δ᾽ ἂν ἐγὼν ἀπάνευθε νεῶν

> fal Is a / > / /
αὐτοῦ of θάνατον μητίσομαι, οὐδέ νυ τόν γε

, \
γνωτοί τε γνωταί τε πυρὸς λελάχωσι θανόντα,

340
345
\ > Tey
μακρὸν ἀύσας"
΄

ἔναρα βροτόεντα"

ἑτέρωθι νοήσω,
350

> Xx & > / \ ΝΜ id δ᾽ ᾽᾽
ἀλλὰ κύνες ἐρύουσι πρὸ ἄστεος ἡμετέροιο.

ὡς εἰπὼν μάστιγι
, ΄
κεκλόμενος Τρώεσσιν
.
πάντες ὁμοκλήσαντες

342. προλιάχοιςι : yp, πυμάτοιςι T.
Zen.: émicevecee Par. ὃ.

[G]P Par. 1 (vp. ἐπὶ).

ἐπὶ στίχας.

348. ἐγὼ J Lips.
Plut. 117. 31:' ἐθέλοντα JU Par. b (pseudo-)Plut. 157. 9.
J. 351. κύνες γ᾽ L. || EpUcouci Cant.

\ » “
κατωμαδὸν ἤλασεν ἵππους

΄ \ \ > r
οἱ δὲ σὺν αὐτῶι

ἔχον ἐρυσάρματας ἵππους

344. SpeKTH (). 347. éniccevecoon
ἑτέρωθι: ἑτέρωςε ap. (pseudo-)
349. TON Tre: τόνδε

353. τρώεςειν Eni: τρώεςει κατὰ

840. Κλονίον, a Boiotian, Β 495,

944. Cf. M 72 τάφρωι ἐνιπλήξωμεν
ὀρυκτῆι. The separation οἵ ὀρυκτῆι from
the substantive to which it belongs is
curious, but may be justified by the fact
that τάφρωι καὶ σκολόπεσσιν form a single
idea, ‘the trench with its stakes.’

345. ϑύοντο, go behind, cf. X 99 πύλας
καὶ τείχεα δύω.

847. Nikanor says that this line was
usually taken with the preceding, so

that the infinitives depended upon ἐκέ-

κλετο, and in this some modern editors
have acquiesced. But then the transition
from the narrative to direct speech is
very harsh (see A 303), and there is no
difficulty whatever in making the speech
begin as usual immediately after the
formal line 346, the infinitives being
taken imperatively. Zen. indeed read
ἐπισσεύεσθον, regarding the dual as equi-
valent to a plural (A 567). But we
ought no doubt to read ἐπισσεύεσθ᾽,
édew, with Fick.

348. Compare B 391, © 10.
elsewhere than in the battle.

350, πυρὸς λελάχωει, as H 80, X 343,
Ψ 76. The redupl. aor. occurs only in
this causal sense and only in these four

ἑτέρωθι,

passages. Notice the subjunctive equi-
valent to a prophetic future ; hence used
with οὐ, and followed by ἐρύουσι.

352. We have not been told that Hector
has mounted his chariot ; indeed μακρὰ
βιβάς in 307 implies that he was then
on foot, though a chariot advance is
indicated in 258-61, and in © 429-31
Hector is carried to his chariot, evidently
in anticipation of its use when he re-
covers. But the merely temporary use
of the car is so essential to Homeric
tactics that these changes are a matter
of course. See on O 348, T 498. κατ-
wuadoen, lit. down Srom the shoulder,
i.e. with the full swing of his arm, as we
bowl ‘from the shoulder.’ So W 431
δίσκου οὖρα κατωμαδίοιο.

353. ἐπὶ στίχας, so nearly all Mss. ;
recent edd. all adopt κατὰ στίχας on the
analogy of A 91, but in the face of such
strong testimony the alteration is not
justifiable. The phrase may be taken
with HAacen, drove his horses against
the ranks ot the enemy, or more simply
with KexAduenoc, shouting across th
ranks. The scholia prefer the former.

354, €pucdpuatac, also If 370. For
the form of the compound see H. G. ὃ 126.

198

IAIAAOC O (xv)

nyne θεσπεσίηι: προπάροιθε δὲ Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων 355
ῥεῖ ὄχθας καπέτοιο βαθείης ποσσὶν ἐρείπων
ἐς μέσσον κατέβαλλε, γεφύρωσεν δὲ κέλευθον
μακρὴν ἠδ᾽ εὐρεῖαν, ὅσον τ᾽ ἐπὶ δουρὸς ἐρωὴ
γίνεται, ὁππότ᾽ ἀνὴρ σθένεος πειρώμενος For.
The ῥ᾽ οἵ γε προχέοντο φαλαγγηδόν, πρὸ δ᾽ ᾿Απόλλων 860
αἰγίδ᾽ ἔχων ἐρίτιμον: ἔρΞιπε δὲ τεῖχος ᾿Αχαιῶν
ῥεῖα μάλ᾽, ὡς ὅτε τις ψάμαθον πάϊς ἄγχι θαλάσσης,
ὅς T ἐπεὶ οὖν ποιήσηι ἀθύρματα νηπιέηισιν,
ay αὗτις συνέχευε ποσὶν καὶ χερσὶν ἀθύρων.
ὥς pa σύ, ἤϊε Φοῖβε, πολὺν κάματον καὶ ὀϊξὺν 365
σύγχεας ᾿Αργείων, αὐτοῖσι δὲ φύζαν ἐνῶρσας.
ὡς οἱ μὲν παρὰ νηυσὶν ἐρητύοντο μένοντες,
ἀλλήλοισί τε κεκλόμενοι καὶ πᾶσι θεοῖσι
χεῖρας ἀνίσχοντες μεγάλ᾽ εὐχετόωντο ἕκαστος"
Νέστωρ αὖτε μάλιστα Γερήνιος, οὖρος ᾿Αχαιῶν, 870
εὔχετο, χεῖρ᾽ ὀρέγων εἰς οὐρανὸν ἀστερόεντα"

356. MocciN: yepcin Zen. || ποςὶ καὶ χερεὶν ἐρίπτων Ef. Gud. 307. 2. 357.

κατάβαλλε L.
B: Heer GJQRTU Syr. :

359. γίγνεται L Syr. || A(1)c1(N) ADHP Harl. a, fr. Mosc. Ven.
eici C (yp. Heel).
AHJU Syr. Cant. Bar. Harl. a, Mor. fr.

363. MOIHCHI
364. ateic CL.

361. πολύτιμον D.
Mose. : ποιήςει ὥ.

366. After this line U repeats O 1-2 (αὐτὰρ... xepcin), and begins 867 of μὲν ON

for @c οἱ WEN. 369. énicyontec ἢ.

370. Néctwp 0’ H Syr.

356. κάπετος recurs in = 564 of the
ditch round a vineyard, 2 797 of a grave.
Perhaps its use here as applied to the
moat is somewhat contemptuous, ‘ditch’
rather than ‘fosse.’ For noccin Zen.
read χερσίν, to which Ar. objected as
less consistent with the dignity of a
god.

357. repupwcen, made the road into
a causey, or embankment. The verb is
used in a slightly different way in Φ 245.
For the Homeric γέφυρα see on E 89.

358. ὅςον τ᾽ ἐπί, see Τ' 12. ἐρωή, as
® 251, cf. A 357.

359. So Ψ 482 δίσκου οὖρα... ὅν τ’
αἰζηὸς ἀφῆκεν ἀνὴρ πειρώμενος ἥβης. The

phrase evidently expresses the longest
possible cast. ict if right must be
explained as a subj. with the long stem
+termination, οἵ, δῶσι A 129, φθῆισι
Ψ 805, not as contracted from ἥηισι,
the Homeric form (hardly ἕηισι, in spite
of ἀφέηι IL 590). We can of course
read ἥηι (Monro). But it is a question
if the whole line is not interpolated in

order to supply a verb to ἐρωή (ef. on
H 353, I 44, @ 45, etc. ; the verb being
taken from the familiar πολέμου δ᾽ οὐ
ylver’ ἐρωή), and filled up with a remi-
niscence of Ψ 432. It certainly is not
needed. (See Menrad, p. 158.)

361. €peine is trans. as in 356, and
from it we must supply ἐρείπηι with πάϊς.

363, ἀθύρματα is perhaps best taken
as part of the predicate, when he has made
the sand into a plaything. νηπιέηισιν,
in his childishness ; cf. I 491.

365, Hie, a word recurring only in T
152 and Hymn. Ap. 120; like so many
divine epithets it is of quite unknown
meaning. Various derivations have been
proposed, but all are mere guesses. Ar.
wrote je, deriving from ἕημι, to shoot, in
the sense Archer. Whether it has any
connexion with the commoner ios is
very doubtful. Kdauaton in concrete
sense, the result of toil, as € 417 ἄλλοι
δ᾽ ἡμέτερον κάματον νήποινον ἔδουσιν.
αὐτοῖσι, the men as opposed to their work.

367-69=0 345-47, where see note.

“ὦ ἀν μι al EE ——

IAIAAOC O (xv)

129

, / / v ." ,
“Ζεῦ πάτερ, εἴ ποτέ τίς τοι ἐν "Αργεί περ πολυπύρωι

x \ ἡ Mew \ / , ,
ἢ Boos ἢ dios κατὰ πίονα μηρία καίων

" fal \ >»? e / ‘ ,
εὔχετο νοστῆσαι, GU ο υπεέσχεο καὶ κατενευσας,

lal A \ b / \ ?
TOV μνῆσαι καὶ ἄμυνον, Ολύμπιε, νήηλεες ἡμαρ,

μηδ᾽ οὕτω Τρώεσσιν ἔα δάμνασθαι ᾿Αχαιούς."
ὡς ἔφατ᾽ εὐχόμενος, μέγα δ᾽ ἔκτυπε μητίετα Ζεύς,

’ / dh τ “4.727 ,ὔ
ἀράων ἀΐων Νηληϊάδαο γέροντος.
Τρῶες δ᾽ ὡς ἐπύθοντο Διὸς κτύπον αἰγιόχοιο,

μᾶλλον ἐπ᾽ ᾿Αργείοισι θόρον, μνήσαντο δὲ χάρμης.

Νὴ

e ᾽ [4 / fal / > /
οἱ δ᾽, ὥς τε μέγα κῦμα θαλάσσης εὐρυπόροιο
x / / 6 / » ,
νηὸς ὑπὲρ τοίχων καταβήσεται, ὁππότ᾽ ἐπείγηι
» ᾽ , ς ΄ / ΄ / ’ > ,
is ἀνέμου: ἡ yap τε μάλιστά ye κύματ᾽ ὀφέλλει:
Ἢ aA a a )
ὡς Τρῶες μεγάληι ἰαχῆι κατὰ τεῖχος ἔβαινον,

A > > , 4 ΄ 7
ἱπποὺυς. ὃ εἰσέελάσαντες ΕΤΓι πρυμνηϊισι μαχοντο

» 5 / » / e \ > ΦΈΡΟΝ
ἔγχεσιν ἀμφιγύοις αὐτοσχεδόν, οἱ μὲν ἀφ ἵππων,

3 \ lal ev / ΄
οἱ δ᾽ ἀπὸ νηῶν ὕψι μελαινάων ἐπιβάντες

372. TOL: (οἱ G.
376. Oadunecea Bar.
εὐράων J.

373. κατὰ : μετὰ L.
377. ἔκτυπε : ἔκλυε Zen. ‘Vat. 1.’
379. κτύπον Ὡ: νόον of early printed edd., if not a conj. of

374. NOCTHCaI: yp. cein Harl. a.
378. ἀράων:

Chalcondylas, is presumably the reading of G, in spite of La R.’s statement to the

contrary.
re J: pa Harl. a.

382. ἐπείγει PR: ἐπείγοι ().
384. ἔβαινον : ἔβηςαν (AC spr.) Q.

383. ἀνέμοιο 1). || H: ὃ 0. || Te:

387. anoBantec Ambr.

372. ἐν “Apret περ, even in Argos ;
i.e. at the very first, even before the
expedition had left Greece, Zeus had
given his promise of safe return. ὑπ-
€cxeo is thus really the principal verb to
which εὔχετο is subordinate in sense.
It is perhaps possible, though less satis-
factory, to take wep with εἰ, if indeed,
as though Nestor were pretending to
doubt even such a certain fact; cf. εἰ
δὲ καὶ “Ἕκτορά περ φιλέεις, H 204, with
note.

379. It is strange that the thunder,
though expressly said to be in answer
to Nestor’s prayer, should encourage
not the Greeks but the Trojans; a
difficulty which may be evaded by re-
jecting 378 with Heyne, and regarding
the thunder as a mark of disfavour.
But the whole passage 367-80 has the
air of a later addition designed to bring
Nestor once more into prominence. We
last heard of him as an onlooker at
the beginning of =, and his appearance
here is certainly unexpected. To all
appearance, as is pointed ont in the
Introduction, 366 is the last line of the

VOL. II

Διὸς ἀπάτη ; at the point of juncture
with the continuation of the story we
may naturally expect to find short inter-
polated passages of transition ; another
follows immediately in 390-404, and
380-90 are by no means devoid of
difficulty. It may be added that ὥς
in 367 has a very vague reference to
the general situation, and comes in
awkwardly after the ὥς of 365.

381. εὐρυπόροιο, cf. 5 432, u 2, πόρους
ἁλός μ 259, and χθονὸς εὐρυοδείης.

382. καταβήςεται, aor. 5110]. corre-
sponding rather to indic. κατεβήσατο
than to the thematic -εβήσετο, the regular
form in H. Nauck’s conj. κατεβήσετο
is needless.

384. κατά, down upon, like the wave
descending on the ship. Compare note

on N 737. ἔβαινον seems to be used
of the footmen as distinct from the
charioteers of the next line. But

the phraseology of the whole passage
is rather awkward ; μάχοντο in 885 is
first used of the Trojans only, and is
extended to the Greeks in 387 by an
afterthought.

190

na lal / Lta/£
μακροῖσι ξυστοῖσι, Ta pa
coh / \
vavpaya κολλήεντα, KATA
΄ > “ \
Πάτροκλος δ᾽, εἴως μὲν

IAIAAOC O (xv)

5 5 Ἂς \ »
op ἐπὶ νηυσὶν E€EKELTO
/ e / lal
TTOMA εἰμένα χαλκῶι.
ans
᾿Αχαιοί τε Τρῶές τε 890

τείχεος ἀμφεμάχοντο θοάων ἔκτοθι νηῶν,
δ / > f
Topp ὅ γ᾽ ἐνὶ κλισίην ἀγαπήνορος Euvputrudoto
δ / \ \ ” / Say δὲ DN, . x a
ἧστό TE καὶ τὸν ἔτερπε λόγοις, ἐπὶ ἕλκεϊ λυγρῶι

7 ? > / =! » / ὟΝ /
φάρμακ ακεσματ ETTAO OE μελαινάων OOUVaAOW).

3. ἘΠῚ 3. \ a 2 Ἵ sons f
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ δὴ τεῖχος ἐπεσσυμένους EVONTE 395
lol n / > 74 /
Τρῶας, ἀτὰρ Δαναῶν γένετο ἰωχή τε φόβος Te,
» τ 5, \ A / \
ὠιμωξέν τ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔπειτα Kal πεπλήγετο μηρὼ

388. ἔκειντο ().
Sr’ én Vr. A.
D Lips.: ἀκήματ᾽ Ὡ : Ar. διχῶς.

389. χαλκῶι : χαλκόν S Ambr.
393. τινὲς ἔτερπε λούων (λόων corr. Nauck) T.
395. Gneccuuenouc J.

392. Or’ ἐνὶ : ὅεγ᾽ ἐν Ο :
394. &kécuarT’
397. ἐπεπλήγετο ἘΣ

388. χιακροῖαοι, 22 cubits long, see 677.
These are the only two passages in H.
where sea-fighting is alluded to; but
this is probably a mere accident, as a
sea-faring race, when at war, would be
hardly likely to abstain from attacking
the enemy’s ships, though their gear
would no doubt be of an elementary
sort. A naval conflict is indeed implied
when the suitors send a ship to waylay
Telemachos on his return from Pylos,
ὃ 669, 842, ο 28, π 351. It is probable
that boarding would be the only tactics
pursued, as the ships of Homer do not
seem to have been provided with beaks
for ramming. See Helbig, p. 77. (The
evidence is, however, purely negative ;
beaks are found on very ancient figured
vases —those of the ‘Dipylon’ style.
See Kroker in Jahrb. des Arch. Inst. 1.
p- 107 ff.) These long poles would then
no doubt be used to ‘fend off’ an enemy
of superior strength, or perhaps even
to strike the rowers over the oars.
The allusion does not tend to prove
the lateness of the passage, as Fick
holds.

389. κολλήεντα evidently means that
they were made of pieces glued side by
side, and arranged so that their ends
lay at different distances, in order to
gain strength. See note on κολλητὸν
βλήτροισι, 678. στόμα, the front, i.e.
point; a unique expression as applied
to a weapon, though somewhat similar
metaphors are found in later Greek ;
e.g. Xen. uses στόμα of the front of the
battle, ἄκρον στόμα πύργων, Eur. Phoen.
1166. It is impossible not to be re-
minded of the common Hebraism ‘the

mouth of the sword,’ which appears in
St. Luke xxi. 24, ete.

390. The story now returns to Patro-
klos, who was left at the end of A
tending the wounded Eurypylos. For the

- difficulties of the passage see the Introd.

991. τείχεος ἀμκφεμάχοντο, were fight-
ing for the wall. ἀμφιμάχεσθαι with gen.
seems always to have this sense, e.g.
II 496, 533, 2 20. With the ace. it is
local, to fight arownd. ἔκτοθι, while the
fight was not yet among the ships.

392. GranHnopoc, see on N 756.

393. λόγοις, talk or possibly tales.
The word occurs only here and a 56 in
H., and is evidence of the lateness of
the passage. Nauck prefers te adopt
the variant λούων (λόξων) of Sch. T;
when we last heard of Patroklos (A 848)
he was washing Eurypylos’ wound, and
his haste when he left Nestor (A 647)
should confine him to the actual work
of surgery. But on the other hand the
length to which the battle has extended
demands an occupation of more elastic
duration than the mere washing of a
wound ; nor does ἔτερπε suit λόων as
well as λόγοις. There is therefore no
reason to depart from the text. Van
Herwerden conj. ξέπεσσ᾽ for λόγοις, and
this van L. adopts, but without justi-
fication.

394. Compare A 830.
predicative, as remedies.

395-96 = M 148-44; 397-98, cf. 0113-
14. In 395 Nitzsch con]. νῆας for τεῖχος.
The context evidently requires the
change; but it is probable that the
earlier passage has been borrowed verba-
tim without the necessary adaptation.

akécuata is

SS

χερσὶ καταωπρηνέσσ᾽,
“ Ἐὐρύπυλ᾽,

, / / \ \ / lal ΕΣ
ἐνθάδε παρμενέμεν: δὴ γὰρ μέγα νεῖκος ὄρωρεν"
ἀλλὰ σὲ μὲν θεράπων ποτιτερπέτω, αὐτὰρ

4 ’ wu a ων» > ΄΄ ,
σπεύσομαι εἰς Αχιλῆα, ἵν ὀτρύνω πολεμίζειν.
/ ’ 40. Μ / ΄ \ , \ τς ἮΝ,
tis δ᾽ οἷδ᾽ εἴ κέν οἱ σὺν δαίμονι θυμὸν ὀρίνω

παρειπών ;

\ \ αι 9 Δ i ΄ , / > \
τὸν μὲν ap ὡς εἰπόντα πόδες φέρον" αὐτὰρ

Τρῶας ἐπερχομένους μένον ἔμπεδον, οὐδὲ δύναντο

/ , r
παυροτέρους περ ἐόντας ἀπώσασθαι Tapa νηῶν"

οὐδέ ποτε Τρῶες Δαναῶν ἐδύναντο φάλαγγας

ῥηξάμενοι κλισίηισι μιγήμεναι ἠδὲ νέεσσιν.

IAIAAOC O (xv) 131
? / \ ‘o>
ὀλοφυρόμενος δὲ προσηύδα"
οὐκέτι τοι δύναμαι χατέοντί περ ἔμπης
100
ἔγωγε
» \ \ / / » ΄ / ”
ἀγαθὴ δὲ παραίφασίς ἐστιν ἑταίρου.
᾿Αχαιοὶ 405
110

ἀλλ᾽ ὥς τε στάθμη δόρυ νήϊον ἐξιθύνει

, , Ca ces ,
τέκτονος ἐν παλάμηισι Sanpovos, ὅς ῥά TE πάσης

εὖ εἰδῆι. σοφίης ὑποθημοσύνηισιν ᾿Αθήνης,

ἃ - 5 , , ,
ὡς μὲν τῶν ἐπὶ ἴσα μάχη τέτατο πτόλεμός τε.

398. δὲ MpocHUda: δ᾽ ἔπος ηὔϑα Ar. AGPR Harl.
408. οὐδέ: οὔτέ DGT.
410. €=10UNH () (
413. πόλεμός Pi).

ἀμύνεςθαι S.
A): οὐδὲ 2: οὐδὲ ἢ HOE Eust.
εἰδὼς fr. Mosc. Harl..a (yp. €10H).

ma me :

409. HOE rc Ἴ Bar. Vr. A
(cIN Written over H).

(ἐν ἄλλωι
412.

401. Why notitepnétw? The pre-
position seems quite meaningless —zpds
τῶι φαρμάκωι, Sch. T, will not do—
and the compound does not recur in
Greek literature. Pallis suggests φρένα
τερπέτω.

408-04--Λ 792-93.

409. μιγήμεναι, to get into the midst
of. The idea clearly is not that the
Trojans could just reach the ships (sce
414, 416), but that they could not do
more ; it is at the sterns that they are
stopped. The huts, in a subsequent
passage, 656, are regarded as being be-
hind the first line of ships, but it does
not follow that they were entirely be-
tween the ships and the sea. Such an
arrangement is highly improbable. It
is more likely that huts and ships are
supposed to alternate in rows, each man
having his hut near his own ship.

410. crdéeun ἐργαλεῖον τεκτονικόν, 7
καὶ κατευθυντηρία λεγομένη. . τούτωι δὲ
κανονίζεται τὰ ξύλα. ἔστι δὲ σχοινίον
λεπτὸν ἐρυθρῶι ἢ μέλανι χρώματι βεβαμ-
μένον, Schol. A. The metaphor hangs
on the word τέτατο in 413—for which
see M 436 and note on H 192. A stub-
born and equal struggle is symbolized

by the equal straining of the ‘ropes’ by
which the two armies are moved ; and
this is compared to the tight straining
of the cord by which a carpenter guides
himself in cutting a plank, as Ody ssets
does in building his raft, ξέσσε δ᾽ ἐπιστα-
μένως καὶ ἐπὶ στάθμην ὙΔΟΥΣ e 245. The
simile is not very exact, as the point to
be illustrated is the equality of two
strains (ἐπὶ ἴσα, 413) while the simile
only gives the intensity of one; but it
is not unnatural that the poet should
think of the equality and severity of a
fight as almost synonymous. He prob-
ably had before him the very similar
but more correct comparison of M 433-
36, where the equality is well compared
to the level balance, σταθμός. <A _ re-
miniscence of στάθμη ‘in ε 245 may have
suggested the new simile.

412. For the gen. after eidAi see H. G.
§ 151 d; and for Athene as teacher of
shipbuilding, among other useful arts,
E 60-61. Neither σοφίη nor σοῴός nor

any other word of the family recurs in
H. (cecogicuévos Hes. Opp. 649, σοφίη
Hymn. Mere. 483, 511); we have thus

another proot of the late origin of this
passage.

132

IAIAAOC O (xv)

ἄλλοι δ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ἄλληισι μάχην ἐμάχοντο νέεσσιν"

6 /
‘Extop δ᾽ ἄντ᾽ Αἴαντος ἐείσατο κυδαλίμοιο.

415

\ N a \ \ ” / ἠδὲ δύ
τῶ δὲ μίιὴς περι Ψὴος εχον TOVOV, QOUOE UVaAVTO

vy) ¢ \ ) / \ > a \ a
ov O TOV ἐξελάσαι Kab EVLTT P10 al συρι Vyas;

οὔθ᾽ ὁ τὸν ay ὦσασθαι, ἐπεί ῥ᾽ ἐπέλασσέ γε δαίμων.
ἔνθ᾽ υἷα Κλυτίοιο Καλήτορα φαίδιμος Αἴας

πῦρ ἐς νῆα φέροντα κατὰ στῆθος βάλε δουρί:

420

7ὔ - > /
δούπησεν δὲ πεσών, δαλὸς δέ οἱ ἔκπεσε χειρός.

“Ἕκτωρ δ᾽ ὡς ἐνόησεν ἀνεψιὸν ὀφθαλμοῖσιν

/ \ if Jp
ἐν κονίηισι πεσόντα νεὸς προπάροιθε μελαίνης,

/ ἊΝ See
Τρωσί τε καὶ Λυκίοισιν ἐκέκλετο μακρὸν ἀύσας"

“Todes καὶ Λύκιοι καὶ Δάρδανοι ἀγχιμαχηταί,

425

\ / / / > / - lal
μὴ δή πω χάζεσθε μάχης ἐν στείνεϊ τῶιδε,
ἀλλ᾽ υἷα Κλυτίοιο σαώσατε, μή μιν ᾿Αχαιοὶ

rn > 5) - / ΕΣ]
τεύχεα συλήσωσι νεῶν ἐν ἀγῶνι πεσόντα.

aA 5 \ ΕΣ
ὡς εἰπὼν Αἴαντος

n \ [τ Ε e > πὰρ
τοῦ μὲν ἅμαρθ᾽, ὁ δ᾽ ἔπειτα

> ἢ \ lal
ἀκόντισε δουρὶ φαεινῶι:"
Λυκόφρονα Μάστορος υἱόν, 480

416. δὲ
Par.

415. ἄντ᾽ : αὖτ᾽ ΟἽ.
417 om. ᾧ. || νῆας Ὡ : νῆα Ar,
D supr. 423. νεὸς AQ[S]:
ἐνταῦθα, καὶ ἐν ἄλλοις τόποις,
(suwpr. © 427. cawcete Vr. d.

μιῆς:
855}:
νηὸς GU:
νεὸς διὰ τοῦ
430.

δὲ ἰῆς Vr. A περὶ : παρὰ ὦ.

418. re: ἑ 5. 419. υἷα : υἱὸν
νεὼς (2 (τὰ πλεῖστα τῶν ἀντιγράφων καὶ
ο, Kust. on mw 100). 426. μάχη U
uudicTopoc: Kdctopoc P: μήεστορος OC.

414, cf. M175. Ar. held that the line
in M was interpolated hence, ἐκ τούτου
διεσκεύασται ὁ THs τειχομαχίας στίχος.
It is likely enough that both passages
may be by the same hand; but this
particular line is more relevant to the
context in M than here.

415. ἄντ᾽ --ἄντα; II 621, etc. ἐείςατο,
for éFicaro, rushed, A 1388. As verbs

of aiming regularly take a gen. of the
object aimed at, it is a question if we
ought not to adopt the variant αὖτ᾽ for

ἄντ᾽. Cf. x 89 ᾿Οδυσῆος ἐείσατο ἀντίος
ἀΐξας. The change was ἃ likely one when

ἐείσατο came to be referred to εἶμι.
417. Ar.

wrote νῆα, προεῖπε yap ““τὼ

δὲ μιᾶς περὶ νηὸς ἔχον πόνον ᾽᾿ ἀλλ᾽
οὐδὲ τὸ μέτρον ἐπιδέχεται ““ νῆας ᾿ γράφειν
(sc. 420). But the plur. is better: νῆας

ἐνιπρῆσαι is Hector’s constant aim (Θ 182,
235, M 198, and often); the particular
ship is merely a step on the road. In
420, on the other hand, the singular is
obviously required. It must be confessed
that νῆα looks like a conjecture of Ar.
418. énéXacce from πελάζξω rather than
ἐπελαύνειν, Which occurs only in N 804,
P 493 in a quite different sense. Cf.

Φ 93. re seems to emphasize the reason
why Hector could not be driven back,
‘because it was the will of heaven that
brought him up.’

422. ἀνεψιόν, because his father Kly-
tios was Priam’s brother, T 238.

426. μή πω, in no wise; the sense
not yet is very inappropriate here. See
on 1 306. μάχης goes naturally with
χάζεσθε, EN cTEINeT TIDE, in this stratt,
standing by itself, cf. Θ 476 στείνει ἐν
αἰνοτάτωι.

428, νεῶν ἐν ἀγῶνι, a phrase which
recurs in II 299. 500, T 42, Y 33, and
indicates that the original meaning of
ἀγών was assembly. This was specialized
into ‘assembly (or place of assembly)
of spectators’ at games, a stage which
has been reached in Homer (WY passim,
Q 1, and 6); we find the final tran-
sition to the sense of ‘the contest’
itself only in @ 259 (probably). Compare
ἐν νηῶν ἀγύρει 2 141 and θεῖον ἀγῶνα
H 298 (with note). παρὰ Βοιωτοῖς ἀγὼν
ἡ ayopa: ὅθεν καὶ aywvlous θεοὺς Αἰσχύλος
τοὺς ἀγοραίους, Schol. B on 2 1. But
θεοὶ ἀγώνιοι in Aischylos means the gods
in assembly, see Verrall on Ag. 518.

IAIAAOC Ο (xv)

133

vv / r / iad e ᾽ > -
Αἴαντος θεράποντα Ἰζυθήριον, ὅς pa παρ᾽ αὐτῶι
~ > \ ve / r / £
vai, ἐπεὶ ἄνδρα κατέκτα ἸΚυθήροισι ζαθέοισι,
τόν ῥ᾽ ἔβαλεν κεφαλὴν ὑπὲρ οὔατος ὀξέϊ χαλκῶι
ἑσταότ᾽ ἄγχ᾽ Αἴαντος: ὁ δ᾽ ὕπτιος ἐν κονίηισι

Ua -“ / / ‘ -
vnos ἄπο πρυμνῆς χαμάδις πέσε, λύντο δὲ γυῖα. 435
’
Alas δ᾽ ἐρρίγησε, κασίγνητον δὲ προσηύδα"
fa) / a / \ ΄ a
“Τεῦκρε πέπον, δὴ νῶϊν ἀπέκτατο πιστὸς ἑταῖρος

Μαστορίδης, ὃν νῶϊ Κυθηρόθεν ἔνδον ἐόντα
ριδη np

5 I “ a2 7 > /
ica φίλοισι τοκεῦσιν ἐτίομεν EV μεγάροισι"

Ν ΟΝ ΄ > /
TOV ὃ κτωρ μεγάθυμος ATTEKTQAVE.

lal / > 4
TOU VU TOL LOL $40

a , A
ὠκύμοροι Kal τόξον, 6 τοι πόρε Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων ;᾿

ὡς pal’, ὁ δὲ ξυνέηκε, θέων δέ οἱ ἄγχι παρέστη

, » > \ / »O\ /
τόξον ἔχων ἐν χειρὶ παλίντονον ἠδὲ φαρέτρην
>
ἰοδόκον: μάλα δ᾽ ὦκα βέλεα Tpwecow ἐφίει.
5 σ΄ cr ΄
καί p ἔβαλε Κλεῖτον ΠΕεισήνορος ἀγλαὸν υἱόν, 145

Πουλυδάμαντος ἑταῖρον ἀγαυοῦ 1Τ]ανθοΐδαο,

8 / ? +)

ἡνία χερσὶν ἔχοντα" ὁ μὲν πεπόνητο καθ᾽ ἵππους"

A \ vo» κο ε \ a ͵ ΄

τῆι γὰρ ἔχ ἧι pa πολυ πλεῖσται κλονέεοντο φάλαγγες,

v / “
Ἕκτορι καὶ Τρώεσσι χαριζόμενος" τάχα δ᾽ αὐτῶι

5" / / e -
ἦλθε κακόν, TO οἱ οὔ τις ἐρύκακεν ἱεμένων περ. 450

433. κεφαλῆς PR.
Kactopiouc P.

[GS ἢ. || ἐφίη Bar. : ἀφίει Vr. Ὁ.

435. λῦτο Cant.
439. TOKEUCIN: TéKeccIN Zen.
447. ἵππων H.

438. wacTopioHc altered to
441. ὅ,τι J. 444. βέλη
449-51 ἀθ. Ar. (see below).

450. ieuénoo() (or ie-) CGJPQRU Lips. (suvpr. ieuénou) Harl. ab, Par. ἃ ἢ g h 17:

yp. T: Ar. διχῶς.

432. zaeéoici, doubtless because this
was the point from which the Phoenician
worship of Aphrodite was, according to
unanimous tradition, introduced into
Greece (ἱερὸν ἁγιώτατον καὶ ἱερῶν ὁπόσα
᾿Αφροδίτης map “Ἑλλησίν ἐστιν ἀρχαιότα-
τον, Paus. iii, 23. 1). The only other
trace of this connexion in H. is the name
Κυθέρεια in the Od. The epithet ζάθεος
has evident reference to the habitation
ofa god in the case of Killa (A 38, 452)
and Krisa (B 520); but no such re-
ligious significance is known in Nisa
(B 508) or Pherai (I 151, 293). These
are the only places where the word occurs
in H.

438. Cf. N 363. €Ndon ἐόντα, ‘an
inmate of our house.’ The phrase is
evidently borrowed hence in N.

440. ποῦ NU τοι iol, cf. E 171.

441. ὠκύμοροι, swiftly slaying, as x
75; else always quickly dying, A 417,
etc. τόξον λέγει οὐ τὸ σκεῦος τὸ πολε-

μικόν, ἀλλὰ τὴν τοξικὴν τέχνην, AN.
This is on the analogy of Β 827, q.v.

443. παλίντονον, sce on Θ 266.

444. For βέλεα von Christ writes
βέλος, in order to avoid the synizesis.
The singular is equally appropriate, but
there is no reason why the change to
the plur. should have been made.

447. πεπόνητο, ‘was in trouble with
his horses,’ as we say.

449-50 = P 291-92. χαριζόμενος
seems to imply something like ‘ currying
favour’; he is apparently going beyond
his duty in order to display his zeal, and
drives into the thick of the fight instead
of hanging on the outskirts out of range,
as the charioteer should do when his
principal is on foot. An. tells us that
Ar. athetized 449-51, but subsequently,
in his treatise On the Naval Camp,
changed his mind and defended them.
He first held that 449-50 were wrongly
repeated from P (οὐ γὰρ “Exrop: χαριζό-

134 IAIAAOC O (xv)

> / 7 e vv Ζ, », ΜΙ ᾿Ξ
αὐχένι yap οἱ ὄπισθε πολύστονος ἔμπεσεν LOS
» >] 5 ᾽ / c / δέ i “4
ἤριπε δ᾽ ἐξ ὀχέων, ὑπερώησαν δὲ οἱ ἵπποι
U ’ Sih /
κείν᾽ ὄχεα KpoTtéovTes. ἄναξ δ᾽ ἐνόησε τάχιστα
lal / », ΤᾺ
Πουλυδάμας, καὶ πρῶτος ἐναντίος ἤλυθεν ἵππων.
Cf an
γ᾽ ᾿Αστυνόωι Ἰ]ροτιάονος υἱέϊ δῶκε, 455

«

τοὺς μὲν ὅ
Ν > > ΄ \ " > /
πολλὰ ὃ ἐπώτρυνε σχεδὸν ἴσχειν ELDOPOMVTA
5 Ξ ͵, /
ἵππους: αὐτὸς δ᾽ αὖτις ἰὼν προμάχοισιν ἐμίχθη.
a 36 ΘΕ n
Τεῦκρος δ᾽ ἄλλον ὀϊστὸν ἐφ᾽ “Kxtops χαλκοκορυστῆι
\ Ν 3 -
αἴνυτο, καί κεν ἔπαυσε μάχης ἐπὶ νηυσὶν Ἀχαιῶν,
” I /
εἴ μιν ἀριστεύοντα βαλὼν ἐξείλετο θυμόν. 460
> a if © 3 /
ἀλλ᾽ ov λῆθε Διὸς πυκινὸν νόον, ὅς ῥ᾽ ἐφύλασσεν
“ > \ n al , i > /
Extop, ἀτὰρ “Τεῦκρον ελαμώνιον εὖχος ἀπηύρα,
ε c ͵ /
ὅς οἱ ἐυστρεφέα νευρὴν ἐν ἀμύμονι τόξων
ῥῆξ᾽ ἐπὶ τῶι ἐρύοντι: παρεπλάγχθη δέ οἱ ἄλληι

ἰὸς χαλκοβαρής, τόξον δέ οἱ ἔκπεσε χειρός. 465

Τεῦκρος δ᾽ ἐρρίγησε, κασίγνητον δὲ προσηύδα:

451. Omicee: mpdcee Aph.

456. énétpune AHR.
H. || ateic C.
King’s Par. (a supr.) d σ΄.

453. KpaTéontec J: κρονέοντες ἢ. 454.
noAudduac G. ἐναντίον DGH (supr. c) JP.

455. mpotidnopoc fr. Mosc.

457. ἵππους αὐτὸς 0 αὖτις: αὐτὸς δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ἐξαῦτις
459. μάχης Zen. (v. infra) Ὡ : μάχην Aph. (Ar. 20 Harl. b,
463. élictpopéea G.

μενος, ἀλλ᾽ ἑαυτῶι καὶ πατρί) and that
451 was condemned by the word ὄπισθε
(see below). The former argument
means that the phrase is properly used
in P of a foreigner anxious to please
‘Hector and the Trojans,’ but wrongly
here of one of the Trojans themselves.

451. For Omicee Aph. read πρόσθε,
on the ground that Kleitos in driving
into the fight could only have been
wounded in front. It is easy to suppose
that he was at the moment wheeling
round. Ar. when defending the lines
had recourse to the curious supposition
that Polydamas was standing in the
car and fighting from the back against
the ships, while the horses and driver
were standing with their heads away
from the sea, ἵνα ἀπὸ τοῦ ἴσου γένηται
ἡ μάχη. But ἐναντίος (454) would not
be used of a παραβάτης going to the
horses from the chariot ; it evidently
means that Polydamas was on foot a
little way off, and on seeing the disaster
runs up to stop his horses. And 447-
48 must mean that the charioteer is
acting independently for the time.

453. Kein°=xevd, see A 160.

456. Polydamas is careful to give such
orders as will prevent a repetition of the
disaster; Astynoos, unlike Kleitos, is
to keep his eyes on his chief.

459, Znvddoros λάχηςσ, ἄλλοι δὲ μάχην"
καὶ ᾿Αριστοφάνης δὲ μάχην, Did. This is
corrupt, as Did. never gives a reading
of Zen. and Aph. by name while leaving
the reading of Ar. either unnoticed or
implied in the somewhat supercilious
ἄλλοι. Probably ἄλλοι is a mistake for
᾿Αρίσταρχος. μάχην, as the text stands,
is obviously necessary ; we do not need
to be informed that if Hector had been
killed he would have been put hors de
combat ; whereas it gives ἃ perfectly
good sense to say that the death of
Hector alone would have put an end to
the battle. Either, therefore, the mis-
take is due to a reminiscence of the
common sequence ἔπαυσε μάχης, or,
which is more probable, 460 is an inter-
polation, as Bentley long ago suggested.
In that case the genitive is perfectly
natural,

464. ἐπὶ τῶι, at Hector, Epvonti agree-
ing with of mapenAdryxen, cf. N 578.

IAIAAOC Ο (xv) 135

co Ἃ / > \ / / ee, / ,
ὦ πόποι, 7 δὴ πάγχυ μάχης ἐπὶ μήδεα κείρει
/, ΄ δ oY
δαίμων ἡμετέρης, ὅ τέ μοι βιὸν ἔκβαλε χειρός,
\ / d > a
veupnv δ᾽ ἐξέρρηξε veootpodor, ἣν ἐνέδησα
πρώϊον, ὄφρ᾽ ἀνέχοιτο θαμὰ θρώισκοντας dictovs.” 170
\ ᾽ > / ,’ v / mn , »
τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα μέγας Τελαμώνιος Αἴας:
ce 2 / » \ \ \ » Ν / > τῷ
ὦ πέπον, ἀλλὰ βιὸν μὲν ἔα Kal ταρφέας ἰοὺς
κεῖσθαι, ἐπεὶ συνέχευε θεὸς Δαναοῖσι μεγήρας"
RON \ et, \ \ , \ / »
αὐτὰρ χερσὶν ἑλὼν δολιχὸν δόρυ καὶ σάκος ὦμωι
/ , , \ By vu / ye
feapvao te Τρώεσσι καὶ ἄλλους ὄρνυθι λαούς. 475
\
μὴ μὰν ἀσπουδί ye, δαμασσάμενοί περ, ἕλοιεν

νῆας ἐυσσέλμους,

ds μάθ᾽, ἃ δὲ

ἀλλὰ μνησώμεθα χάρμης."
τόξον μὲν ἐνὶ κλισίηισιν ἔθηκεν,

>? \ ef 5 > > » ,ὔ / /
αὐτὰρ ὃ γ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ὠμοισι σάκος θέτο τετραθέλυμνον,

\ 7 2 2 > / / 5.5 ”
κρατὶ δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἰφθίμωι κυνέην ἐύτυκτον ἔθηκεν" 480
oy > » y > ὔ Sessa a f
εἵλετο δ᾽ ἄλκιμον ἔγχος, ἀκαχμένον ὀξέϊ χαλκῶι, 482
fol > VE / >] 3 / » /
βῆ δ᾽ ἰέναι, μάλα δ᾽ ὦκα θέων Αἴαντι παρέστη.
467. ὦ πέπον Zen. (2), ἐν ἄλλωι A (not H). 468. ἡμέτερος P. 469.

NEOCTPO@ON : NeocTpepéa An. on Θ 328: éUcTpo@on S (yp. Lips., τινές ap. Did.).

énéduca J.
472. ἰοὺς : ὀϊετούς R.
477. μνηςαίμεθα Bar. (ποΐ Harl. a).

470. πρώϊον : npwiHN Zen. (v. infra). || ἂν ἔχοιτο D®PQT.
475. OpNue ().

476. Gcnouoi Ar. A:
478. Θὲ: ὃ᾽ αὖ PR.

ἀςπουδεί {).
| KAiciHeen ἢ.

479-81 om. J. || After 480 CDG insert (from I 337)
ἵππουριν. δεινὸν δὲ λόφος καθύπερθεν ENEUEN. 481

467. ἐπικείρει, cuts off, thwarts; see
on 97. So also Π 120.

468. & τε, an adverbial neuter, in
that; see H. G. § 269. 3. Some take
it as a masc. relative (e.g. Hentze and
Fiisi), but this does not suit the use of
ὅ τε asarelative expressing ‘a constant
or general characteristic’; see H. G. § 263.

470. mpwion, early this morning.
Zen. read πρώιην, no doubt in the sense
recently, οἵ. E 832, 2 500, though Ar.
objected that it would mean the day
before yesterday (cf. note on B 303) or
at all events imply a considerable length
of time (ἔμφασις δὲ γίνεται πλείονος
χρόνου) : whereas Teukros’ string had
been broken only the day before (0 328).
It may be questioned however whether
the author of this passage had the exact
chronology in mind, or was indeed re-
ferring to Θ at all. He may be merely
emphasizing Teukros’ prudence in put-
ting on a new string for the day’s work.

473 has a suspicious resemblance to
several lines which have been added in
order to supply,an infin. to édew: see

E 848, T 312, 2 558. It is however
quite inoffensive in itself.

476. For the construction of this sen-
tence compare Θ 512 μὴ μὰν ἀσπουδί γε
νεῶν ἐπιβαῖεν ἕκηλοι, Χ 304 μὴ μὰν
ἀσπουδί γε καὶ ἀκλειῶς ἀπολοίμην. Hentze
has pointed out that these are not nega-
tive wishes at all; μάν is a particle ex-
pressing strong determination and does
not suit awish. In each case μή is to be
taken closely not with the verb but with
ἀσπουδί γε, the opt. being concessive.
The thought is then ‘though they may
take the ships, at least it surely must
not be without a struggle.’

478. δέ, a harsh case of ictus-lengthen-
ing, though in the face of Ms. testimony
we can hardly doubt that it, and not
the obvious correction δ᾽ αὖ, is the true
reading. Cf. ἠδ᾽ ὁπόσα τολύπευσε 2 7,
πόλλ᾽ ἑτέα τε καὶ οὐκί T 255 in the same
place ; and ὁ ξεῖνος ἐμέθεν τ 99.

479. TetpaeeAuuNnon, evidently with

four foundations, e.g. layers of hide to

support the metal facing ; see on I 541,

N 130.

136 IAIAAOC O (xv)
"Extop δ᾽ ὡς εἶδεν Τεύκρου βλαφθέντα βέλεμνα,
Τρωσί τε καὶ Λυκίοισιν ἐκέκλετο μακρὸν avoas: 48

rn / > /
“Τρῶες καὶ Λύκιοι καὶ Δάρδανοι ἀγχιμαχηταί,
Ξ \ ΄ > aA
ἀνέρες ἔστε, φίλοι, μνήσασθε δὲ θούριδος ἀλκῆς
fal \ ) fol
νῆας ava γλαφυράς: δὴ yap ἴδον ὀφθαλμοῖσιν
> an / / t
ἀνδρὸς ἀριστῆος Διόθεν βλαφθέντα βέλεμνα.
ca / > th
ῥεῖα δ᾽ ἀρίγνωτος Διὸς ἀνδράσι γίνεται ἀλκή, 490
εξ - / 5 7ὔ
ἠμὲν ὅτοισιν κῦδος ὑπέρτερον ἐγγυαλίξηι,
> ’ ec , x 9, 5) / >] /
ἠδ᾽ ὅτινας μινύθηισι καὶ οὐκ ἐθέληισιν ἀμύνειν,
. rn “ / I? fie 5, re > /
ὡς νῦν ᾿Αργείων μινύθει μένος, ἄμμι ἀρήγει.
i A / δ
ἀλλὰ μάχεσθ᾽ ἐπὶ νηυσὶν ἀολλέες: ὃς δέ κεν ὕμεων
7 SEN \ / \ / 5 7.
βλήμενος ἠὲ τυπεὶς θάνατον καὶ πότμον ἐπίσπηι, 495
> Ὁ /
τεθνάτω: οὔ οἱ ἀεικὲς ἀμυνομένων περὶ πάτρης
ip ’ 3 ” / / \ a ’ /
τεθνάμεν: ἀλλ᾽ ἄλοχός TE GON Kal παῖδες ὀπίσσω,
5 Qn 5
καὶ οἶκος καὶ κλῆρος ἀκήρατος, εἴ κεν ᾿Αχαιοὶ
5 / a 5
οἴχωνται σὺν νηυσὶ φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν."

490. γίγνεται LR. 491. OTOICIN α.
ὑπέρτατον H. || ἐγγυαλίξει CP) (supr. Η) R: ἐγγυαλίΖει δ΄. 492. κἰνύθηιςσι
Syr. (Η ἢ Vr. ἃ: μινύθει τε CQSU Par. ἃ g, Bar. Vr. b A: χινύθϑηι Te ὥ. ||
ἁμῦναι H!. 493. μένος: γένος (). 494. ἐπὶ : ἐν Vr. b. || NHuci διαμπερὲς
Lykurg. (v. infra). || 6¢: ὡς Q. 495. énicne C. 496. ἀμυνέμεναι J

Herod. ? (v. infra): δτέοιςι(ν) Q. ||

(supr. ©). 497. παῖδες Oniccoo: νήπια τέκνα Lyk. 498. κλῆρος καὶ
οἶκος πὰ | οἶκος: οἷμος J (supr. x). 499. οἴχονται GQR Lips. Cant.
Harl. ἵκωνται or ἥ(ι)κωνται, several Mss. of Lykurg.

484. BAapeenta is used in the later
sense, injured ; elsewhere in H. βλάπτω

by the mss. The shorter form is to be
preferred, as avoiding the synizesis, and
for which see

is applied only to things or persons
hindered or tripped while actually in
movement ; or to the mind, hindered in
its working, either by divine interference
or by wine. See on II 660.

489. Διόθεν, an assumption explained
by the next line. It would seem more
natural for Hector to attribute the act
to Apollo, after the visible appearance
of that god on his behalf (254 ff. ; see
also 8311); but since 366, where, as was
pointed out, the episode of the ἀπάτη Acds
properly ends, Apollo has been entirely
forgotten, and Zeus, though his actual
presence on the field is not mentioned nor
perhaps even implied, is the only god who
interferes. This is a slight indication of
difference of authorship, but, in con-
nexion with others, not insignificant.

491. τὸ ὅτοισι τρισύλλαβον ἐπὶ τὴν
πρώτην ἔχει συλλαβὴν τὴν ὀξεῖαν, τὸ μέντοι
ὁτέοισιν οὐκέτι Herod. This probably
shews that there was an old variant
Stoicin instead of ὁτέοισιν which is given

on the analogy of ὅτωι,
note on 664. The use of ν ἐῴφελκ. to make
position in the second thesis is very un-
usual ; cf.on 197. For κῦδος ὑπέρτερον
see note on A 290.

492. οὐκ ἐθέληιςιν go closely together,
=vrefuses ; else we should require μή with
the subj. in a quasi-conditional clause.

494-99. These famous lines are quoted
by Lykurgos adv. Leocr. ὃ 103. ‘The
text there found, as will be seen above,
differs in three places from the vulgate ;
but the changes are less considerable
on the whole than those of the con-
temporary orator Aischines. Still they
shew the same tendency to variation
which _ becomes observable about the
middle of the fourth century B.c. ὕμεων
as H 159, ν 7, v351, x 219. It probably
represents an older ὕμων, Aiol. ὕμμων,
analogous to ἄμμων quoted as an Aiolic
form by Apoll. de pron.

498. κλῆρος χωρικὴ περίκτησις καὶ οὐσία,
ἐπεὶ οἱ πρῶτοι καταλαβόντες χώραν κλήρωι

IAIAAOC Ο (xv)

137

A ? \ ” / ν᾿
ὡς εἰπὼν ὥτρυνε μένος καὶ θυμὸν ἑκάστου. 500
, af)? / / ΄
Αἴας δ᾽ αὖθ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἐκέκλετο οἷς ἑτάροισιν"

“αἰδώς, ᾿Αργεῖοι: νῦν ἄρκιον ἢ ἀπολέσθαι

γ᾽. fal \ ΄ \ “-
ἠὲ σαωθῆναι καὶ ἀπώσασθαι κακὰ νηῶν.

ἢ ἔλπεσθ᾽,

“- τ “
εἰ νῆας ἕληι κορυθαίολος

ἄκτωρ,

ἐμβαδὸν ἵξεσθαι ἣν πατρίδα γαῖαν ἕκαστος ; 505

> > ’ / > / Ν eo
7) OUK OTPUVOVTOS ἀκούετε λαὸν ἅπαντα

“ ᾿ ὰ \ a > a /
Exropos, os δὴ vias EvLTT Poa PEVEALVEL 5

ov μὰν ἔς ye χορὸν κέλετ᾽ ἐλθέμεν, ἀλλὰ μάχεσθαι.

ἙΝ 2] », a / \ tal > ,

ἡμῖν δ᾽ οὔ τις τοῦδε νόος καὶ μῆτις ἀμείνων,

ἢ αὐτοσχεδίηι μῖξαι χεῖράς TE μένος τε. 510
βέλτερον ἢ ἀπολέσθαι ἕνα χρόνον ἠὲ βιῶναι,

500. ὄτρυνε ().
WN. δ06. ἀκούετε: ἀΐετε Harl. b.

Harl. a, King’s, τινὲς μετὰ τοῦ ν Sch. BT.

501. οἷς ἑτάροιςιν : χιακρὸν ἀύςας Li Jips.

504. εἰ POL

508. re; te Syr. 510. aUTocyediHN

αὐτὴν διενέμοντο, Schol. A. This is
nearly right, except that the reference
is doubtless not to an original partition
of conquered land, but to the periodical
division by lot of "shares in the land of
the community, ‘allotment’ in the most
literal sense (so also ξ 64). The mean-
ing is that when a man dies his right to
a share in this allotment is reserved
intact to his family. So under the
Spartan rule, when a child was born,
τῶν φυλετῶν ol πρεσβύτατοι. . τρέφειν
ἐκέλευον, κλῆρον αὐτῶι τῶν ἐνακισχιλίων
προσνείμαντες, Plut. Lyc. xvi. 1. The
last clause εἴ κεν x.7.d. is strange, as
Hector should rather be confident of
gaining his end, which is to prevent
the departure of the Achaians. 499
recurs in H 460 where it suits the
context, but we can hardly suppose it
borrowed here from so late a passage
unless we reject 498-99 altogether, with
Ribbeck, Diintzer, Nitzsch, ete.: the
mention of the κλῆρος, however, is not
like an interpolator’s work.

502. αἰδώς, see E 787. ἄρκιον, now
we are sure either to die or conquer, i.e.
the present crisis must end one way or
the other. See note on B 393.

504. εἰ 15 better than the non-Homeric
ἤν; the constr. is that which ‘is
naturally employed by a speaker who
does not wish to imply that the occasion
will actually arise,’ 7. G. ὃ 292 α (M 223,
X 86 etc.). There is no need for the
Βέλπεσθ᾽, εἴ κεν νῆας of Brandreth and
van L. ἕκαετος ἴῃ the next line without
F is suspicious ; és πατρίδα γαῖαν ἅπαντες

Bentley, while Fick rejects the whole
couplet as ‘ absurd.’

505. €uBaden, on foot, a sarcastic
taunt, reminding one of the artless
humour of the words of Telemachos to
the visitor in his island, οὐ μὲν yap τί
σε πεζὸν ὀΐομαι ἐνθάδ᾽ ἱκέσθαι, a 173.

510. For H after τοῦδε compare ᾧ 182
ov μὲν yap τοῦ γε κρεῖσσον. . ἤ, etc.
Fisi quotes from Cicero de Nat. Deorwin
i. 15. 38 ‘quo quid absurdius quam

. homines iam morte deletos reponere
in deos?’

511-12. Cf. w 350-51 βούλομ᾽ ἅπαξ...
ἀπὸ θυμὸν ὀλέσσαι. ἢ δηθὰ στρεύγεσθαι ἐὼν
ἐν νήσωι ἐρήμηι. ἕνα χρόνον here is
clearly equivalent to ἅπαξ there, and
answers exactly to our idiomatic use
‘three times’=thrice, ete. The phrase
is a strange one, as χρόνον in H. (where
the acc. is the only case which is found
as in later Greek, always means ‘a
while,’ .dwration of time, whereas ἅπαξ
marks a point of time. The sentence
consists of two main clauses βέλτερον.
βιῶναι and 7. . χειροτέροισιν, opposing
ἕνα χρόνον to δηθά, of which the first
includes the two disjunctive clauses, ἢ
ἀπολέσθαι and ἠὲ βιῶναι. two alterna-
tives both comprised under ἕνα χρόνον.
βιῶναι must be taken in the strict sense
of the aor., ‘to win life,’ not simply ‘to
live.” crpeureceat is explained by the
Schol. with στραγγίζεσ σθαι. ‘to be wrung,
squeezed out,’ and in w 351 στρέγγεσθαι
is a variant in Harl. The metaphor of
squeezing vividly expresses the situation
of the Achaians; it is hardly ‘better

198

IAIAAOC O (xv)

ἢ δηθὰ στρεύγεσθαι ἐν αἰνῆι δηϊοτῆτι

e > » \ \ e +) 3 »»} 7] 59
OO αὐυὐτῶς παρᾶ νηυσιν ὅπ ἀνδράσι χειροτεροισίιν.

ἃ > \ ” Ne \ 6 Ν id ia
WS ELTT@V WT PUVE μενος Kat U[LOV εκαστοῦυ.

ἔνθ᾽ “Ἄκτωρ μὲν ἕλε Σχεδίον ἸΠεριμήδεος υἱόν, 515

ἀρχὸν Φωκήων, Αἴας δ᾽ ἕλε Λαοδάμαντα

e / / > / > \ Cole
ἡγεμόνα πρύλέων, ᾿Αντήνορος ἀγλαὸν υἱὸν"
Πουλυδάμας δ᾽ Ὦτον Κυλλήνιον ἐξενάριξε,

> 5 a
Φυλεΐδεω ἕταρον, μεγαθύμων ἀρχὸν ᾿Ιὑπειῶν.

τῶι δὲ Μέγης ἐπόρουσεν ἰδών: ὁ δ᾽ ὕπαιθα λιάσθη 520
Πουλυδάμας. καὶ τοῦ μὲν ἀπήμβροτεν: οὐ yap ᾿Απόλλων

» , e\ AN ΄ a
ela IlavO0ov υἱὸν évi προμάχοισι δαμῆναι"

αὐτὰρ 6 ye Κροίσμου στῆθος μέσον οὔτασε δουρί"

/ \ 7 ς » > > ” fe > > uA
δούπησεν δὲ πεσών, ὁ δ᾽ ἀπ᾽ ὦμων τεύχε᾽ ἐσύλα.

τόφρα δὲ τῶι ἐπόρουσε Δόλοψ αἰχμῆς ἐὺ εἰδώς, 525
Λαμπετίδης, ὃν Λάμπος ἐγείνατο φέρτατος ἀνδρῶν,
Λαομεδοντιάδης, ἐὺ εἰδότα θούριδος ἀλκῆς"

ὃς τότε Φυλεΐδαο μέσον σάκος οὔτασε δουρὶ
5 / e / Ν / Ὡ BA ΄
ἐγγύθεν ὁρμηθείς- πυκινὸς δέ οἱ ἤρκεσε θώρηξ,
, / /
τόν ῥ᾽ ἐφόρει γυάλοισιν ἀρηρότα" Tov ποτε Φυλεὺς ὅ80

512. τρεύτγεςθαι (): ετράγγευςθαι Mor.

XEIPOTEPOICIN : παυροτέροιει ap. Eust.

φωκείων Syr. (διχῶς τὰ τοιαῦτα, Did. on B 517). || Aaouédonta fr. Mose.

513 om. Ht. || ὑπ᾽ : én ἢ ὑπ᾽ Eust. ||
516. φουκήων : τινὲς ᾿Αθηναίων T :
522.

nanedou Mor.: ndneou ῶ. || προμάχοισι : τρώεςει H. || δαμῆναι : μιγῆναι P

(yp. δαμῆναι) Harl. a.
DGIJSTU Harl. a, yp. Lips.: υἱόν 0.

526. @éptatoc DG: φέρτατον 2. || GNOPON

adapted to express slow death by starva-
tion in a desert island’ as Kammer
thinks, holding that the phrase is copied
from Od.

513. αὔτως, helplessly, for nothing.

515. In B 517 we find a Phokian
Schedios, son of Iphitos, who is slain by
Hector in P 306. Hence ace. to Schol. T
some read ᾿Αθηναίων here for Φωκήων.
But the names of subordinate personages
are to all appearance quite arbitrary,
and these trifling discrepancies hardly
need notice. If the point be pressed,
there is no difficulty in supposing that
there may have been two Phokian leaders
named Schedios.

517. πρυλέων, see on E 744. Here as
in A 49 the word must mean footmen ;
the alternative explanation champions
does not suit, for the champions would
not have a leader.

518. KuAAHNION* ὅτι οὐκ ἀπὸ Κυλλήνης
τοῦ ἐν ᾿Αρκαδίαι ὄρους, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπίνειόν ἐστιν

᾿Ἤλείων Κυλλήνη, An. ; this is confirmed
by Strabo and Pausanias (vi. 26. 4; see
Frazer, iv. p. 109).

520. ὕπαιθα Aidcen, slipped from be-
neath him, as ® 255. The form ὕπαιθα
recurs only in the later books of the
Iliad (five times; >, ®, and X). The
suffix is presumably a weak form of -@e(v)
but has lost any special significance.

522. Tlanedou, so only one Ms. But
both the metre and Epic use require the
fuller form ; see also P 9, 23, 40,59. H.
does not mention the legend that he was
a diviner or priest, but this is evidently
implied in the special protection of
Apollo.

526. Λάμπος is an abbreviated familiar
form of the name Λάβπετος, from which
the patronymic comes. Payne Knight’s
conj. Λαμπιάδης is needless.

530. For this explicit mention of the
cuirass and its γύαλα see vol. 1., App. B,
11. 3d.

IAIAAOC O (xy)

”

139

ἤγαγεν ἐξ ᾿φύρης, ποταμοῦ ἄπο Σελλήεντος"

o ΄ Φ, 5“. » > “ Lh im) /
ξεῖνος γάρ οἱ ἔδωκεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Ιυφήτης
> / , / > fal > /
ἐς πόλεμον φορέειν, δήιων ἀνδρῶν ἀλεωρήν"

Ὁ“ e \ / \ b) \ Ν » > »"
ὅς οἱ καὶ τότε παιδὸς ἀπὸ χροὸς ἤρκεσ᾽ ὄλεθρον.

τοῦ δὲ Μέγης κόρυθος χαλκήρεος ἱπποδασείης δ:

ὡς
οι

/ ’ / 4} Μ “ “ /
κύμβαχον ἀκρότατον vv& ἔγχεϊ ὀξυόεντι,
ῥῆξε δ᾽ ἀφ᾽ ἵππειον λόφον αὐτοῦ: πᾶς δὲ χαμᾶζε

/ » / / tf /
κάππεσεν EV κονίηισι, νέον φοίνικι φαεινος.

toa e r ,ὔ / "» , » ,ὕ
ἕως ὁ τῶι πολέμιζε μένων, ἔτι δ᾽ ἔλπετο νίκην,

τόφρα δέ οἱ Μενέλαος ἀρήϊος ἦλθεν ἀμύντωρ, 540
στῆ δ᾽ εὐρὰξ σὺν δουρὶ λαθών, βάλε δ᾽ ὦμον ὄπισθεν"
αἰχμὴ δὲ στέρνοιο διέσσυτο μαιμώωσα,

πρόσσω ἱεμένη" ὁ δ᾽ ἄρα πρηνὴς ἐλιάσθη.

τὼ μὲν ἐεισάσθην χαλκήρεα τεύχε᾽ aT’ ὥμων

/ “ \ /
συλήσειν: “Extwp δὲ κασιγνήτοισι κέλευσε 545

a / lal rf eat? / pHa tL
πᾶσι μάλα, πρῶτον δ᾽ “ἱκεταονίδην ἐνένιπεν

ἴφθιμον Μελάνιππον.

ὁ δ᾽ ὄφρα μὲν εἰλίποδας βοῦς

/ 2 ΕῚ , / > / af,
Bock’ ἐν ἸἹ]ερκώτηι, δήιων ἀπονόσφιν ἐόντων"

531. ἤγαΓεν : ἐν ἄλλωι
Ν 440). 539. εἵως Η΄: €oc G.

540. HAe’ énauuntwp Par. h, fr. Mose., ἐν ἄλλωι A (Ar. ? cf. N
543. ἰἱεμένω H.

ἁμκύνων U (corr. man. 1).

firdrer A.
ἔλπετο (Ar. ? cf. Did. on P 603) P: HAneto 2.

534. HpKec’: ἥρκει VHJPRSU (ef.

ἦλθεν
546.

384):
545. κέλευε G Syr.

énénicne(n) JQ Vr. b? A Eust.: énéninnen D: énéninten Cant. (and yp. G2).

548. περκώπη P().

531=B 659. For the name ᾿Ἐφύρη
see note on Z 152. The town here
meant is the Elean (see on <A 740);
Phyleus is connected with the Augeias-
Medeia myth localised there (B 629).

536. KUuBayon as subst. occurs here
only; but see E 586 with note. It
probably means either the crown of the
helmet, or the upright stem at the top
in which the plume is fixed (see App. B,
figs. 1, 2). A single blow on this might
well carry off the crest.

537. αὐτοῦ, perhaps adverbial, there,
on the spot, or it may mean from the heli
itself, i.e. the body of it. If referred
to Dolops, from him, the use of the
emphatic pronoun is very weak.

538. NEON φοίνικι φαεινός, resplendent
with the purple in which it had been
recently dyed.

539. μένων, ἔτι O°: μένων δ᾽ ἔτι
Bentley ; καὶ ἐξέλπετο Brandreth.

541. εὐράξ, see note on A 251. Sniceen,
perhaps behind the shield.

544. €eicGceHn, rushed, were eager
(ἐξισ- : A 138). It is followed by the
fut. inf. like μέμονα and other verbs, see
note on H 36.

545. KacirnHtoict seems here to be
used in a wide sense, including cousins ;
Hiketaon, father of Melanippos, is brother
of Priam, T 238.

546. For ἐνένιπεν see //. (7.
where it is suggested that the word may
be a thematic plpf. It is common in
Od. but in Zl. recurs only 552, Π 626,
W 473. The mss. usually give the
alternative forms ἐνένιπτε and ἐνένισπε.
Compare ἠνίπαπε B 245.

547. Sppa in sense for a while is
found here only: hence Brandreth and
others write τόφρα for δ᾽ ὄφρα. But the
form may be defended on the analogy
of ἕως and ὁτέ in the same sense.

548. For Perkote see B 835, A 229.
A son of Priam was equally engaged, as
it would seem, in pastoral pursuits in
the neighbouring town of Abydos, A 500.

Ρ. 397,

140 IAIAAOC O (xv)

rn 7
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ Δαναῶν νέες ἤλυθον ἀμφιέλισσαι,
3 9S /
ἂψ' eis Ἴλιον ἦλθε, μετέπρεπε δὲ Τρώεσσι, 550
cn 3 {i
ναῖε δὲ πὰρ ἸΙριάμωι, ὁ δέ μιν τίεν ἴσα τέκεσσι"
, .) ἢ“ 5: Δ », 5 ” 3 ” ΟῚ > ,
τόν ῥ᾽ “Extwp ἐνένιπεν, ἔπος T ἔφατ ἐκ τ ovopacev:
εξ / ͵
“οὕτω δή, Μελάνιππε, μεθήσομεν ; οὐδέ νυ σοί περ
- - ,
ἐντρέπεται φίλον TOP ἀνεψριοῦ κταμένοιο ;
t en =) δ =:
οὐχ ὁράαις οἷον Δόλοπος περὶ τεύχε᾽ ἕπουσιν ; 555
> > eo by \ Ae) ” 5) 60 "ΑΝ /
ἀλλ᾽ ἕπευ: ov yap ἔτ᾽ ἔστιν ἀποσταδὸν Δργείοισι
IEW ἢ Li
μάρνασθαι, πρίν y ἠὲ κατακτάμεν ἠὲ κατ᾽ ἄκρης
΄ 5
Ἴλιον αἰπεινὴν ἑλέειν κτάσθαί τε πολίτας."
aA > \ e \ > Ε] . ’ ch as a > he /
ὡς εἰπὼν ὁ μὲν ἦρχ᾽, ὁ δ᾽ ἅμ᾽ ἕσπετο ἰσόθεος φώς.
᾿Αργείους δ᾽ ὦτρυνε μέγας Τελαμώνιος Αἴας" 560
“a φίλοι, ἀνέρες ἔστε καὶ αἰδῶ θέσθ᾽ ἐνὶ θυμῶι,
Ψ 7 5 3 rn \ \ ΄ /
ἀλλήλους τ᾽ αἰδεῖσθε κατὰ κρατερὰς ὕσμινας.
> / > rn 7 / ΨΝ /
αἰδομένων ἀνδρῶν πλέονες σόοι ἠὲ πέφανται"
/ > vy 9 xX / v v / ’ 7 5»
φευγόντων δ᾽ οὔτ ἂρ κλέος ὄρνυται οὔτε τις αλκῆη.
ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δὲ καὶ αὐτοὶ ἀλέξασθαι μενέαινον, 565
ἐν θυμῶι δ᾽ ἐβάλοντο ἔπος, φράξαντο δὲ νῆας
« oo he 2 \ \ γι, \ Qn ΕΣ
ἕρκεϊ χαλκείωι: ἐπὶ δὲ Ζεὺς Γρῶας ἔγειρεν.
᾿Αντίλοχον δ᾽ wtpuve βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Μενέλαος:
=) > r “
ει Αντίλοχ᾽, οὔ τις σεῖο νεώτερος ἄλλος ᾿Αχαιῶν,

550. ἐς P. || μετέτρεπε J. 551 om. Syr. 552. TON ῥ᾽: TON O° Syr. ||
énénicnen JQ Vr. A: énéninnen 7). 553. μεθήςομαι Ὁ. 555. €xoucin Vr. bi.
559. ἦρχεν PR. || ἅμ᾽ om. J. 560. apreioic T. 562 om. DtST Vr. A. 563.
αἰδομένων Ar. 7) Par. hh: aidouénwn ὃ᾽ © (cf. E 531). 565. ἀλεξέμεναι H :
ἀλέξεςϑαι P. 567. ἕρκεϊ : ἔγχεϊ A (ἐρκεῖ A™) C Lips. 568 oi. R. || BOHN
ar. μενέλαος: μέγας τελαμώνιος αἴας Bar. Mor.

549-51=N 174-76. 559=A 472; 561-64=E 529-32; 565
554. ἀνεψιοῦ, i.e. ἀνεψιόο, see notes on 2. But the change in the second
B 325,518. ἐντρέπεται, pay heed : only alf of 561 makes 562 tautological

here and in the similar line a 60 in H.,
but familiar in Attic.

555. €noucin, see note on Z 321 περ-ὀ more full of youthful vigour. But the
καλλέα τεύχε᾽ Exovta. The verb seems phrase is an unusual one. Peppmiiller

to be used here also in the primitive
sense of ‘handling’; lit. ‘how they are
pulling about the arms of D.’

556. €neu, rather ἕπε᾽ (οὐ as Ar. read
in K 146; it is probable that he was
consistent in adopting the same reading
here also.

557. Observe the change of subject
and object, Kataxtduen, ‘till we slay
them,’ ἐλέειν, ‘they take.’ πολίτας,
see note on B 806.

thinks it due to an awkward imitation
of Ψ 439 ᾿Αντίλοχ᾽, οὔ τις σεῖο βροτῶν
ὀλοώτερος ἄλλος. Heyne followed by
Monro and others removes the comma
at the end of the line and takes οὔ τις
νεώτερος ᾿Αχαιῶν together as= none of
the younger Achaians, so that σεῖο is
governed by θάσσων in the next line.
But such an involved order is incredible ;
no hearer could possibly make out what
was meant.

᾿ —_ τς

IAIAAOC Ο (xy) 14]
” \ ΄, vos» v ΄ ‘ ,
οὔτε ποσὶν θάσσων οὔτ ἄλκιμος ὡς σὺ μάχεσθαι: 570

ld / , / ¥ & ry /
εἴ τινά που Tpawy ἐξάλμενος ἄνδρα βάλοισθα."

Δ » \ e \ ° > , ‘ Ὁ > ,

ὡς εἰπὼν ὁ μὲν avTis ἀπέσσυτο, τὸν δ᾽ ὀρόθυνεν"
’ > » ΄, \ > / °C ‘ σὰ
ἐκ δ᾽ ἔθορε προμάχων, καὶ ἀκόντισε δουρὶ φαεινῶι
» \ Δ / ΄ Ν \ χα" “-“ so
ἀμφὶ παπτήνας" ὑπὸ δὲ Τρῶες κεκάδοντο

ἀνδρὸς ἀκοντίσσαντος" ὁ δ᾽ οὐχ ἅλιον βέλος ἧκεν, 57:
ἀλλ᾽ Ἱκετάονος υἱὸν ὑπέρθυμον Μελάνιππον
/ / / / “ \ ,
νισσόμενον πόλεμόνδε βάλε στῆθος παρὰ pator.
δούπησεν δὲ πεσών, τὸν δὲ σκότος ὄσσε κάλυψεν.
2 » > / / ev ef > , \ / a
Ἀντίλοχος δ᾽ ἐπόρουσε κύων ὥς, ὅς T ἐπὶ νεβρῶι
of fol /
βλημένωι ἀΐξηι, Tov τ᾽ ἐξ εὐνῆφι θορόντα 580
\ ΒΡ ΄ ς , \ a
θηρητὴρ ἐτύχησε βαλών, ὑπέλυσε δὲ γυῖα"
Δ > + ᾽ὔ } / J Ὁ 5 / ,
ὡς ἐπὶ σοί, Μελάνιππε, Bop’ ᾿Αντίλοχος μενεχάρμης
dT rn
τεύχεα συλήσων. ἀλλ᾽ οὐ λάθεν Extopa δῖον,
.“ «.Ά id » / 3 / > Ν “. al
ὅς ῥά οἱ ἀντίος ἦλθε θέων ava δηϊοτῆτα.
"A = > » lad θ / 2\ x 558 ep
ντίλοχος οὐ μεῖνε, θοὸς περ ἐὼν πολεμιστής, 585
᾽ » “ ’ V3 » \ \ evs > ,
ἀλλ᾽ ὅ γ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔτρεσε θηρὶ κακὸν ῥέξαντι ἐοικώς,
΄“ 4 / XK / > \ /
ὅς Te κύνα κτείνας ἢ βουκόλον ἀμφὶ βόεσσι
/ / Ὁ > / > lal
φεύγει, πρίν περ ὅμιλον ἀολλισθήμεναι avdpov-
ἃ ἊΝ 4 Ν (ὃ art δὲ Towés ὶ ἽΒκτ
ὡς τρέσε Νεστορίδης, ἐπὶ δὲ Τρῶές τε καὶ “Extwp
ἠχῆι θεσπεσίηι βέλεα στονόεντα χέοντο' 590
στῆ δὲ μεταστρεφθείς, ἐπεὶ ἵκετο ἔθνος ἑταίρων.
Τρῶες δὲ λείουσιν ἐοικότες ὠμοφάγοισι

570. οὔτε. . οὔτ᾽ : οὐδὲ... οὐδ᾽ HPR. || ὡς cU μάχεςθαι : εἰςοράαςθαι

Par. 1 (yp. ὡς εὺ μάχεςθαι). 571. βάληςϑθα LRS: βάληςςϑα P. 572. aveic
C. || énéccuto CS: ἀπέςτιχε PR. 574. κελάϑοντο Lips. 577. NICOMLENON
ACDH'PT: neicéuenon Harl. a, fr. Mose. Vr. A: νιςςόμενος G. 578 om. QU
Vr. bd. || GpaBuce ϑὲ τεύχε᾽ En’ αὐτῶι DGRT. 579. κύων: λέων Bar. Mor.
(Harl. a supr.). 580. dizer CL? Eust. || τόν τ᾽ : τόν O° R. 581. ὑπέλυςε:
énéAuce ὦ. 583. Adeer’ Vr. b. 584. GNTION (sic) P. 585. μίμνε ().
586. ἀλλ᾽ ὅ τ᾽ ἄρ᾽ Erpece G[S] (ὃ rap 2): ἀλλὰ παρέτρεςε ὦ Mor. Bar. Lips.
(mapeitpece): ἀλλ᾽ ὃ napetpec(c)e J Vr. A. 587. κύνας A (κύνα in lemma) S.

ἀμφὶ βόεςει : ἀμφί οἱ αὐτῶι Zen. 588. peurH PR. 589. Tpice R. 592.

δὲ : δ᾽ αὖ Ὁ Harl. a.

571. For εἰ with opt. expressing ἃ ever, seems to have been Virgil’s idea
wish cf. K 111 andthe references in in his imitation of the passage, Aen.

the note there. xi. 809-19 conscius audacis facti. ἀμφὶ
573-75=A 496-98 ; 577, see N 186. Boéecci, Zen. ἀμφὶ of αὐτῶι, to go with
580. τόν is governed by βαλών, see ἀολλισθήμεναι. ‘This is not the Homeric
note on A 106. order of words.
586. Erpece, ran away, as usual. 592. Nefoucin, Frlecow Brandreth,

Note the variant ἀλλὰ παρέτρεσε. κακόν, see on E782. A consonant has appar-
mischief to the herd; not as some have — ently been lost at the beginning of the
taken it, ‘conscious of having done word, but it is more probably o than F
wrong.’ Such a feeling is hardly to be (Schulze ᾧ. 1. p. 70). The line would
looked for in wild beasts. This, how- naturally describe the first assault upon

142

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΟ Ο (xv) -

νηυσὶν ἐπεσσεύοντο, Διὸς δ᾽ ἐτέλειον ἐφετμάς,

ὅ σφισιν αἰὲν ἔγειρε μένος μέγα, θέλγε δὲ θυμὸν

᾿Αργείων καὶ κῦδος ἀπαίνυτο, τοὺς © ὀρόθυνεν. 595
“Ἕκτορι γάρ οἱ θυμὸς ἐβούλετο κῦδος ὀρέξαι

Πριαμίδηι, ἵνα νηυσὶ κορωνίσι θεσπιδαὲς πῦρ

ἐμβάληι ἀκάματον, Θέτιδος δ᾽ ἐξαίσιον ἀρὴν

πᾶσαν ἐπικρήνειε: τὸ γὰρ μένε μητίετα Ζεύς,

νηὸς καιομένης σέλας ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ἰδέσθαι" 600
ἐκ γὰρ δὴ τοῦ μέλλε παλίωξιν παρὰ νηῶν

θησέμεναι Ῥρώων, Δαναοῖσι δὲ κῦδος ὀρέξειν.

τὰ φρονέων νήεσσιν ἔπι γλαφυρῆισιν ἔγειρεν

“Ἕκτορα Πριαμίδην, μάλα περ μεμαῶτα καὶ αὐτόν.

μαίνετο δ᾽, ὡς ὅτ᾽ “Apns ἐγχέσπαλος ἢ ὀλοὸν πῦρ 605
BA / / > / vA

οὔρεσι μαίνηται Babéns ἐν τάρφεσιν ὕλης"

> \ \ \ IA / \ δέ ε »

ἀφλοισμὸς δὲ περὶ στόμα γίνετο, τὼ δέ οἱ ὄσσε
λαμπέσθην βλοσυρῆισιν ὑπ᾽ ὀφρύσιν, ἀμφὶ δὲ πήληξ
σμερδαλέον κροτάφοισι τινάσσετο μαρναμένοιο

594. ὅ:
Lips. || 6pézein Cant.
Ms.): ἔμελλε QQ.

βλοευροῖειν CP.
on Φ 5).

the ships, after the crossing of the wall ;
it stands much less naturally of a
renewed attack of an army which is
already at the ships. The whole of the
following passage in fact looks like an
exordium to a new rhapsody. The
prophetic character of 596-604 is rare
in H., and has raised doubts as to its
originality. Possibly 597-604 may be a
later addition, designed to bring back
the motive of the Mis to the hearer’s
recollection after long oblivion.

593. €petudc, the charge which Zeus
had laid upon them, not in direct words,
but in his own counsel, as is explained
in what follows.

598. ἐμβάληι, so all mss.; Hermann
ἐμβάλοι. The use of the subj. is very
doubtful, but perhaps defensible; see
note on T 354. Yhe following opt.
makes it additionally harsh here. ἐξ-
αἴσιον, going beyond measure (A 418),
i.e. unreasonable. The poet thus speaks
explicitly as a Greek partisan. Cf. 6
690, p 577.

599. μένε, was awaiting before bring-

ὅς HJPQU. || cpicin: cpin JPR. || μέγα μένος T.
598. eetioc P (p. ras. 3).

602. ὀρέξειν (A supr.) DGPQSTU:
609. cuepdahéa P: cuapdahéon §. || μαινομένοιο Ar. (An.

596, βούλετο
601. μέλλε Ar. (‘ Aph.’
ὁρέξαι ῶ. 608.

ing about the change. For the infin.
after μένω cf. A 247 μένετε Τρῶας σχεδὸν
ἐλθέμεν. Some take μένε here as an
imperf. to μέμονα, was minded to see.
This is not impossible, but really comes
to the same thing, for the sense to wait
is derived from that of thinking, i.e.
‘deliberating.’ Cf. μένω δ᾽ ἀκοῦσαι
πῶς ἀγὼν κριθήσεται, Aisch. Hum. 677,
and so Ag. 459, where the sense desire
is possible. But in all these cases
the ordinary meaning of the verb is
all that is required, and it is not very
probable that we should find a few
isolated survivals of the primitive use
when the verb is so common in the fully
specialised application.

606. BaeéHe for the regular βαθείης
recurs in E 142, Φ 213; βαθέην Π 766.
Compare ὠκέα B 786, ete.

607. apdoicude, here only. The
scholia call it an Aitolian form for
ἀφρός. Cf. φλιδάω, prude and ‘* διαπέ-
φλοιδεν ᾿ διακέχυται᾽᾽ Hesych.; all express
bubbling over. στόμα rineto, rhythm
suggests ordu’ ἐγίνετο.

a

τῷ

JAIAAOC Ο (xv) 143
"Extopos: αὐτὸς yap οἱ ἀπ᾽ αἰθέρος ἧεν ἀμύντωρ 610
Ζεύς, ὅς μιν πλεόνεσσι μετ᾽ ἀνδράσι μοῦνον ἐόντα
τίμα καὶ κύδαινε. μινυνθάδιος γὰρ ἔμελλεν
ἔσσεσθ᾽. ἤδη γάρ οἱ ἐπώρνυε μόρσιμον ἦμαρ
Παλλὰς ᾿Αθηναίη ὑπὸ Ἰ]Πηλεΐδαο βίηφι.
καί p ἔθελε ῥῆξαι στίχας ἀνδρῶν πειρητίζων, 615

e \ a er \ ΄, ΕΠ
ἧι δὴ πλεῖστον ὅμιλον ὅρα καὶ τεύχε᾽ ἄριστα:
>) » / rt
ἀλλ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ws δύνατο ῥῆξαι, μάλα περ μενεαίνων"
" Ν \ > / /
ἴσχον yap πυργηδὸν ἀρηρότες, ἠύτε πέτρη
» St / rn ΄ ἣν » \ , A
ἠλίβωτος μεγάλη, πολιῆς ὧλος ἐγγὺς ἐοῦσα,
Wa / / /
ἢ τε μένει NUYEWV ἀνέμων λαιψηρὰ κέλευθα 620
, ͵7ὔ / rn
κύματά τε τροφύεντα, τά TE προσερεύγεται ἀκτῆι"
aA \ an la >
ὡς Δαναοὶ Τρῶας μένον ἔμπεδον οὐδὲ φέβοντο.
aN , \ / 7 ae reef
αὐτὰρ ὁ λαμπόμενος πυρὶ πάντοθεν EvOop ὁμίχωι,
> ”) > .“ a an . A.

ἐν δ᾽ ἔπεσ᾽ ws ὅτε κῦμα θοῆι ἐν νηὶ πέσηισι

/ rg e r
λάβρον ὑπαὶ νεφέων ἀνεμοτρεφές: ἡ δέ τε πᾶσα 625

610-14 om. Zen. ad. Ar. 613. ἐπόρνυε JPQT: ἐπήρτυε Harl. a, Lips.
614. βίηφι : δαμῆναι S™ Harl. a (yp. βίηφι). 621. Tpoméonta A: τροφέοντα 7)
τροφόεντα, Eust. || προερεύγεται Vr. A. || ἀκτῆ(!) H (supr. nN) PT Par. a f j,
Harl. Ὁ: ἀκτὴ RU (in ras.): ἀκτὴν S™ Par. d?: avTA(i) G Vr. d A, Par. g:
αὐτὴν Ar. Q: ἀκτὴν ἢ ἀκτῆι ἢ μᾶλλον αὐτὴν Eust. 622. ὧς Δαναοὶ Τρῶας:
ἐξ ἁλός, ὡς Δαναοί, ἔν τισι, An. 624. ἐν (νηΐ) : ἐνὶ GS: ἐπὶ ὦ. 625.
ἀνεμοτραφὲς Bar.

610-14. hese five lines were omitted
by Zen. and athetized by Ar. Various

ws ὅτε ταῦρος ἤρυγεν, the verb is clearly
used in the sense ‘to roar,’ rug-ire.

reasons combine to support this decision.
The addition of “Extopoc is quite need-
less. Zeus is on Ida, not ἐν αἰθέρι.
MOONON ἐόντα is a strange expression,
as Hector has his whole army with him.
The prophecy in 613 is against the usual
practice, and it is a departure from the
accepted theology to make Athene carry
out the work of fate. Ar. adds that
the passage weakens the fiery rush of
Hector, and is a commonplace repetition
of 603. Most editors have agreed with
him.

617. οὐδ᾽ dc, Pallis suggests οὔ πως,
for no special effort, such as οὐδ᾽ ὧς im-
plies, has been mentioned.

618. nuprHoon, like ὦ wall, in serried
ranks. See on A 334, M 258, 332.

621. tpopdéenta, big; see note on
τρόφι κῦμα A 307, and cf. ἀνεμοτρεφές,
625. ἀκτῆι 15. evidently superior to the
intolerably weak αὐτήν of Ar. Naber
conj. ἄντην. For npocepeurerai cf. P
265, £403. In the latter passage ἤρυγεν

When used of the sea-waves it is in-
different whether we take it thus, or in
the derived sense ruct-are.

622. Note the variant ἐξ ἀλός" ὡς
Δαναοί. An. objects to it that ‘the
mention of the motive force weakens
the picture of steadfast immobility.’
This is not sufficient to condemn the
reading, which has intrinsic merit ; but
as it is not found in any Ms. it must
have had very weak support.

623. The rhythm shews that πάντοθεν
is to be taken not with the following
but with the preceding words, ‘shining
with fire all about.’

625. ὑπαί, either driven by the clouds,
which are regarded as actually bringing
the winds (ef. A 278 (νέφος) ἄγει δέ τε
λαίλαπα πολλήν, N 796 ἀέλληι, ἤ ῥά θ᾽
ὑπὸ βροντῆς πατρὸς Διὸς εἶσι πέδον δε) or
perhaps better with Schol. B up under
the clouds, i.e. seeming to reach them,
cf. Π 375 (so H. G. § 204. 2).

14:

IAIAAOC O (xv)

ἄχνηι ὑπεκρύφθη, ἀνέμοιο δὲ δεινὸς ἀήτη

ἱστίωι ἐμβρέμεται, τρομέουσι δέ τε φρένα ναῦται
δειδιότες: τυτθὸν γὰρ ὑπὲκ θανάτοιο φέρονται"
ὡς ἐδαΐζετο θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ᾿Αχαιῶν.

“ > ε 5 / \ ,
αὐτὰρ 6 γ᾽ ὥς τε λέων ὀλοόφρων βουσὶν ἐπελθών,

“, cs > ’ e an vA J Τὰ
ai ῥά τ᾽ ἐν εἰαμενῆνι ἕλεος μεγάλοιο νέμονται
7 ’ / fel \ ” / Loa
μυρίαι, ἐν δέ τε τῆισι νομεὺς οὔ πω σάφα εἰδὼς
a \ > \ a
θηρὶ μαχέσσασθαι ἕλικος Boos ἀμφὶ φονῆισιν"
> ἊΝ “
ἤτοι ὁ μὲν πρώτηισι καὶ ὑστατίηισι βόεσσιν
\ « 7 id ᾿ς = > / 2 A
αἰὲν ομοστιχάει, O dé τὶ ἐν μεσσηίσιν ορουσας 635

βοῦν ἔδει, ai δέ Te πᾶσαι ὑπέτρεσαν: ὡς TOT >Axatol
θεσπεσίως ἐφόβηθεν ὑφ᾽ “Extope καὶ Act πατρὶ
πάντες, ὁ δ᾽ οἷον ἔπεφνε Μυκηναῖον Ilepepyrny,
Κοπρῆος φίλον υἱόν, ὃς Εὐρυσθῆος ἀέθλων

626. ἄχνη Zen.
ἀήτης (2. 632. 0€ Te: ὃ᾽ ἄρα Ρ.

Ar. 634. πρώτοισι JP. || Gcratioici J.
637. καὶ Διὶ πατρὶ : yadKoxopuctAi PR.

ὁμοςτιχεύει P.

ὑπαὶ κρύφϑθη ὦ. || ἀνέμοιό τε CQ) Mor. || GHTH Ar. A:

633. eHpi: χειρὶ U Bar. μαχήςαςθαι
635. αἰεὶ H. || Guoctiydne S:
639. ἀέθλων

A™MHJU Par. ἢ, fr. Mose., Schol. Pind. ὦ. i11. 50: ἄνακτος 2: διττὴ ἐνταῦθα γραφὴ

ἀέϑλων καὶ ἄνακτος Hust.

626. Zen.’s reading ἄχνη is very weak.
On GHTH as against the vulg. ἀήτης An.
remarks ἀρσενικῶς Oeindc GHTH, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ
- ΕΠ t ‘iG Ἃ \ Tl ey 77 Β 742
δεινή, ws ““ κλυτὸς ᾿Ιπποδάμεια ᾿᾿ (Β 742,

4. ν.). ἔνιοι δὲ ἀγνοοῦντες ποιοῦσι δεινὸς
ἀήτης. The other passages are neutral
αὶ

(ΞΙ, 254, 6 567, « 189, unless we read
πνείοντας for πνείοντος in 6, against the
best authority). We may therefore be
content to follow Ar. Ap, Rhod. how-
ever uses the form ἀήτης (i. 423). The
short syllable before 6(F)ewds is very rare,
but admits of no obvious correction.
ἀνέμου δέ is probably forbidden by
‘Wernicke’s law.’ Cf. νότοιό τε δεινὰς
ἀήτας Hes. Opp. 675.

629. It will be observed that the
simile is ‘two-sided,’ beginning with
one comparison, and evolving another
from the same picture.

630. There is a double anacoluthon in
this simile, as λέων has no verb till it
is taken up again by 6 μέν in 634, and
the constr. of 6 ye is entirely forgotten,
the comparison receiving a different
turn in 686.

631, see A 483.

633. φονῆιςιν, Schol. B τῶι φόνωι ἢ τῶι
τύπωι ἔνθα πεφόνευται. But the proper

sense of φοναί seems to be blood (shed),
and secondarily carnage, here the gory
carcase, cf. K 521. So also Aisch. 4g.
446. See Bayfield in C.R. xv. 251.

635, ὁμοςτιχάει, a strange compound,
justly called ‘ barbarous’ by Dion. Thrax.
Bekker’s ὁμοῦ στιχάει must be right ; the
error is due to mistransliteration of the
old ΟΜΟ-- ὁμοῦ. Cf. Σ 577 dw ἐστιχά-
ovro βόεσσιν (Cauer Grundfr. p. 78).
Eust. notes a similar variant ὁμοτροχόωντα
for ἅμα τροχόωντα ino 451. The herds-
man spends his time in looking after
the van and rear of a line of cattle, and
neglects the middle.

639. ἀέθλων is superior to the vulg.
ἄνακτος, with F ignored. Konpfioc, evi-
dently a name invented to express con-
tempt. The story was that Eurystheus
feared Herakles too much to meet him
face to face, and for safety’s sake lived
in a huge jar sunk in the ground,
employing Kopreus as go-between. He
appears in thischaracter in the Heraclidae
of Euripides. The antecedent to ὅς is
Κοπρῆος, not υἱόν. It is noteworthy
that Periphetes is the only Mykenaean
who appears in the Z/iad ; the town is
very rarely mentioned except as the
realm of Agamemnon.

IAIAAOC Ο (χν)

ἀγγελίης οἴχνεσκε βίηι ἹΠρακληείηι"

nr 5 σι ,
τοῦ yéveT ἐκ πατρὸς πολὺ χείρονος υἱὸς ἀμείνων
’ \ /
. παντοίας ἀρετάς, ἠμὲν πόδας ἠδὲ μάχεσθαι,
καὶ νόον ἐν πρώτοισι Μυκηναίων ἐτέτυκτο"
cA e Δ᾽ “ΤᾺ rn ΄ ,ὔ ᾽ /
ὅς pa τοθ᾽ “Kxtope κῦδος ὑπέρτερον ἐγγυάλιξε.

στρεφθεὶς γὰρ μετόπισθεν ἐν ἀσπίδος ἄντυγι πάλτο,

645

\ ae / \ “ ᾽ /
Τὴν αὐτὸς φορέεσκε ποδηνεκὲς ἕρκος ἀκόντων"
ΡΞ ᾽ δ /
“τῆι 6 y evi βλαφθεὶς πέσεν ὕπτιος, ἀμφὶ δὲ πήληξ
σμερδαλέον κονάβησε περὶ κροτάφοισι πεσόντος.
“ > %H\ / ΄ὔ , Cas ΄
Extop δ᾽ ὀξὺ νόησε, θέων δέ οἱ ἄγχι παρέστη,

στήθεϊ δ᾽ ἐν δόρυ πῆξε, φίλων δέ μιν ἐγγὺς ἑταίρων

650

a? e , > ’ / \ ’ / I ΄ ’ὔ
κτεῖν᾽" οἱ δ᾽ οὐκ ἐδύναντο, καὶ ἀχνύμενοί περ ἑταίρου,
a “ἷἶΤΔ cal

χραισμεῖν: αὐτοὶ yap μάλα δείδισαν “Extopa δῖον.

> \ ᾿] > / r \ ’ ” ”
εἰσωποὶ δ᾽ ἐγένοντο νεῶν, περὶ δ᾽ ἔσχεθον ἄκραι

640. ἀγγελίης Ar. 2: ἀγγελίην Zen. ‘Vat. 1.’
641. ἀμείνων : ἁμύμων Vr. ἡ.

ul supra.

Yynecke P() Schol. Pind.
642. παντοίην ἀρετὴν [1 :

παντοίην ἀρετὴν ἢ παντοίας ἀρετὰς Hust.: παντοίας ἀρετὰς with N over each ς,

Farj. 644 6c: dc J.

645. διχῶς τὸ cTpepeeic καὶ διὰ τοῦ a (ctpageeic)

καὶ διὰ τοῦ ε Did. πάλτο : κατ᾽ ἔνια τῶν ἀντιγράφων χωρὶς τοῦ π GATO Did.

646. ποδηνεκέ᾽ Ηἰ (not A).
T Cant. 661. ἑταίρου : ἑταῖροι ὦ.

648. «μαρϑαλέον S. || περὶ : παρὰ ()S.

| κροτάφοιο
652. μάλ᾽ ἐδείϑιςκαν YRSTU.

640. ἀγγελίης, see notes on 1 206,
N 252. Zen. read ἀγγελίην here; but
ἀγγελίας is a more probable reading.
This acc. plur. might be taken for a
nom. sing. mase. and changed into -ίης,
when the poems were brought into their
present dialect. Cf. Pindar 0. ili. 28
εὖτέ μιν (sc. Herakles) ἀγγελίαις Εὐρυσθέος
ἔντυ᾽ ἀνάγκα πατρόθεν. For the dat. cf.
Τρωσὶν δ᾽ ἄγγελος ἦλθε, Β 786.

642. For the collocation of acc. and
infin. in πόδας ἠδὲ uayecea cf. A 258,

645. πάλτο must mean tripped; but
it is hard to see how this can be derived
from πάλλομαι, which always indicates
vibrating or throbbing movement (ef.
σφονδυλίων ἔκπαλτο, throbbed out, T 483).
Perhaps guided by the variant ἄλτο
(ἄλτοὺ we should read ἄντυγ᾽ ἔπαλτο
(€x-GAro). Leapt on the rim of his shield
is not entirely satisfactory, but it is at
least possible (Agar J. P. xxv. 37).
If we could with Darbishire read βάλτο
as from root Fed, twisted himself, the
problem would be solved ; but the evi-
dence for such a word is too slight to
justify a change.—An accident such as
this might easily happen with the huge
ποδηνεκής Mykenaean shield ; cf. Z 117

VOL. II

L

σφυρὰ τύπτε καὶ αὐχένα δέρμα κελαινόν,
ἄντυξ ἣ πυμάτη θέεν ἀσπίδος (App. "Ὁ, i. 3).

646. For ποϑηνεκές we should perhaps
read ποδηνεκέ᾽ as part of the predicate,
cf. N 340 ἃς εἶχον rauecixpoas. But the
text, which has almost unanimous Ms.
support, is defensible; the objection of
course is that ἕρκος ἀκόντων is the sort
of phrase that should stand by itself, as
in A 137. Compare the use of épxos
᾿Αχαιῶν Τ' 229, ete.

653. εἰςωποὶ ἐγένοντο, ἐναντίοι, ἢ ἔσω-
θεν βλεπόμενοι, ἢ ἔνδον τῆς ἐπιφανείας
ὄντες, Hesych. ἐν ὄψει τὰς ναῦς ἔβλεπον,
ὅ ἐστιν εἰσῆλθον εἰς αὐτὰς καὶ ὑπὸ τὴν
στέγην αὐτῶν ἐγένοντο, Schol. A; they
had the ships before their faces, i.e. got
behind them. But it is only by much
violence that this can be got from the
Greek. The natural sense would be
‘they came in sight of the ships,’ which
evidently does not suit the context.
Even if with Lachmann we supposed
that this line originally followed im-
mediately after 366 nothing would be
gained ; for it would be in the highest
degree unnatural that that stage of the
fight should be followed directly by the
desertion of the ships in 655; between

140

IAIAAOC O (xv)

fal δ A > re \ 3 Ψ' /
νῆες ὅσαι πρῶται εἰρύωατο' τοὶ δ᾽ ἐπέχυντο.

“-“ ων \ > /
᾿Αργεῖοι δὲ νεῶν μὲν ἐχώρησαν Kal avayKnt 655
a an \ / »
τῶν πρωτέων, αὐτοῦ δὲ παρὰ κλισίηισιν ἔμειναν.

τ / 5 \ \
ἁθρόοι, οὐδ᾽ ἐκέδασθεν ava στρατόν" ὙΠ γὰρ αἰδὼς
καὶ δέος: ἀζηχὲς yap ὁμόκλεον ἀλλήλοισι,

5 > 3
Νέστωρ αὖτε μάλιστα Ἱξερήνιος, οὖρος ᾿Αχαιῶν,

, 5. ΠΕ ΤΑ , / ” ὃ “ J
λίσσεθ ὕπερ τέκεων γουνουμένος AVOPAa εκᾶστον

SG 5

060

ὦ φίλοι, ἀνέρες ἔστε, καὶ αἰδῷ θέσθ᾽ ἐνὶ θυμῶι

666. πρωτέων (Ar. 7) ACP Lips. Harl. b: προτέρων ἢ (yp. Lips.): yp. πρώτων

καὶ προτέρων καὶ πρωτέων A. || αὐτοῦ : αὐτοὶ AJ. ||
659. Νέετωρ 0° GH.

657. rap: δὲ 1.
TOKEOON (2.

| αὖτε : γάρ τε 8.

ἔμιανον HPQR Mor.
660. TeKéwon QU:

‘coming in sight of the ships’ and being
driven out of them there is a long
interval which needs description. If an
explanation is possible it must be sought
elsewhere. Christ has proposed to de-
rive the adjective from ὀπή, ‘they got
into the intervals of the ships,’ i.e. in-
stead of standing in line level with the
front of the ships they are now driven
in between them. This gives exactly
the sense required ; the only question is
as to the use of ὀπή, which is not
adequately defended by the analogy
of perorj—the transition from ‘hole’
(properly peep-hole) to ‘an interval’ on
so large a scale is doubtful. It is better
to regard the word as a compound of ὁπ-
in which the second element has lost
its distinctive force, ‘ inside-looking’ =
inside simply. The word ἐξώπιος, of
which Euripides is so fond, seems exactly
similar; he uses it=outside simply, not
out of sight of as commonly taken ; cf.
(Euripides in) Aristoph. Zhesm. 881
αὐτὸς δὲ Ipwreds ἔνδον ἔστ᾽ ἢἣ ᾿ξώπιος ;
On the same analogy ἐνώπια = inside walls
(note on Θ 4835), στεινωπός = στεινός,
Ψ 427. Cf. also ἄνθρ-ωπος = human.
The matter would be still simpler if
with Conway (Proc. Camb. Phil. Soe.
1891, p. 23) we could regard -πο-, with
its short form -π- (oivoy, etc.), as a form
of the suffix -go (Brugmann G7. ii. ἃ 86) ;
but for this the evidence is very scanty.
In any case the sense is clear from the
context, ‘they (the Argives) got between
the foremost ships’; in 655 they are
driven still farther back, behind the
foremost ships. πρῶται is here used in
the opposite sense to that found in = 31,
q.v., but the difference is not unnatural,
for there we are being taken with Nestor

from the sea inland, here with Hector
from the land towards the sea; so that
in each case πρῶται means the first line
we meet with. ἄκραι, separated from
its subst. by the end of the line, is
not a mere epithet ; it seems to mean
‘enclosed them with their extremities,’
i.e. between stem and stern. Compare
Soph. Az. 1276 ἀμφὶ μὲν νεῶν ἄκροισιν
ἤδη ναυτικοῖς ἐδωλίοις, with Jebb’s note
(Ἢ ἄκροισιν denotes the position of the
ἑδώλια at the extremities, or sterns, of
the ships’).

656. It is useless to ‘inquire carefully
into the arrangement of huts and ships,
which the poet can imagine according
to the needs of the moment. Here he
probably regards the ships as being a
single line, surrounding the camp like
a wall.

660. τεκέων has poor Ms. support,
but is better than roxéwy (recurring only
in ® 587) where the short ε is the only
exception (other than in proper names)
to the rule that nouns in -evs have -7-:
see τοκήων in 663 (so Brandreth). Schol.
A explaining ὑπὲρ τοκέων, says ἤτοι ὡς
λέγομεν ‘* πρὸς Ards,” ἢ ὅπερ ἂν παρόντες
ἐποίουν οἱ γονεῖς" ὅπερ μᾶλλον εἰκός"
ἐπιφέρει γὰρ ““ τῶν ὕπερ ἐνθάδ᾽ ἐγὼ γουνά-
fouat.”’ But κτήσιος in the latter passage
(665) proves that ὑπέρ cannot=ayrri, and
o 261 λίσσομ᾽ ὑπὲρ θυέων καὶ δαίμονος
κιτ.Ὰ. shews that it is merely the ordinary

form of adjuration dy an object. So also
X 338, Q 466.
661. Cf. N 121 and H 529. The

addition of ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων here
shews the origin of the Homeric αἰδώς,
which is elsewhere used absolutely. So
we have ἀνθρώπων νέμεσιν x 40, as well
as νέμεσιν used absolutely in N 121.

IAIAAOC O (xv)

147

7, ,ὔ \
ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων, ἐπὶ δὲ μνήσασθε ἕκαστος

/ »9? ’ / \ ΄ IO 7
παίδων ἠδ ἀλόχων καὶ κτήσιος ἠδὲ τοκήων,

\ a / e
ἡμὲν ὅτωι ζώουσι Kal ὧι κατατεθνήκασι"

Ὁ“ ef > 79 > \ / > /
τῶν ὕπερ ἐνθάδ᾽ ἐγὼ γουνάζομαι ov παρεόντων 665

ἑστάμεναι κρατερῶς, μὴ δὲ τροπάασθε φόβονδε."

A > \ ΝΜ / Ν Ν e /
ὡς εἰπὼν ὥτρυνε μένος Kal θυμὸν ἑκάστου.

a > > A > ,
τοῖσι δ᾽ ἀπ᾿ ὀφθαλμῶν νέφος ἀχλύος ὧσεν ᾿Αθήνη
/ / / / / ,’ > /
θεσπέσιον: μάλα δέ σφι φόως γένετ᾽ ἀμφοτέρωθεν,
ἠμὲν πρὸς νηῶν καὶ ὁμοιίου πολέμοιο: 670

/ ,
"Extopa δὲ φράσσαντο βοὴν ἀγαθὸν καὶ ἑταίρους,

664. ὅτω(!) YH? Bar. Mor.: ὅτ᾽ ἐν R: ὅτεω(ι) £2.

(U* supr.). 666. ἱστάμεναι Jar.

tpondacear H Mor. Bar.: Tewndacea |’: Tponwaceai 8:

KATATEONHKOCIN Vr. εἰ

΄ ‘D (
Tponaacee GR (supr. ai over €) Cant.:

Tpondceal (): Tpondcee

Vr. d: tpwndceai A (supr. ε) JT fr. Mosc. Vr. Ὁ A: tpwnacee CU Harl. a Lips.

667. ὄτρυνε A. 668-73 ad. Ar,

670. πρὸς: πρὸ PQ) Lips.” (yp. πὰρ): nap Vr. Ὁ:

πρὸς ἢ πὰρ Eust. | πτολέμοιο CNGHQTU Bar. Ven. B.

Public opinion and fear of the gods are
the double moral sanction of the Homeric
Greeks, as of many more modern peoples.

664, ὅτωι has only weak Ms. support
here, but the form without synizesis is
a priori preferable, and in M 428 (q.v.)
authority is all in favour of it. Cf. also
note on ὅτοισιν, Ὁ 491. The present
line comes in very oddly, as we should
naturally suppose that the appeal by
the parents was the same as by ‘children
and wives and possessions,’ viz. if you do
not fight manfally now you will never
see them again. As the text stands
we have to understand ‘remember your
parents’ in the sense of ‘think of your
family honour.’ This sudden shifting
of the point of view by an after-thought
is very prosaic, and Payne Knight
(followed by Diintzer, van L., and others)
is probably right in rejecting the line
as an interpolation due to the obvious
consideration that many of the Greek
warriors must be orphans.

666. All the variants given above lead
back to an original TPOITAZOE=7po-
πᾶσθε for τροπάεσθε (-a for -e being only
itacistic). τρωπᾶν (though given with-
out MS. variation in I 500, A 568, Σ 585)
is a mere figment, though an old one,
dating from the period which produced
the ‘Epic diectasis’; we can always
restore τροπάειν. So τρωχᾶν for τροχάειν
(X 163, ¢ 318 rpexérnv) and στρωφᾶν for
στροφάειν (except N 557, see note). Cf.
Menrad Contr. p. 126, H. G. § 55. 9.

668. ἀπὸ τούτου ἕως τοῦ ‘76 ὅσσοι
παρὰ vynvoly” (673) ἀθετοῦνται στίχοι ἔξ,
ὅτι οὐ προσυνίσταται ἀχλύς, ἀλλὰ συνεχῶς
μάχονται. νῦν δέ φησιν “Ἕκτορα δὲ
φράσσαντο βοὴν ἀγαθὸν καὶ ἑταίρους ᾿"
πρότερον δὲ οὐ καθεώρων, ὅτε ἔλεγε “STH
δὲ μιῆς περὶ νηὸς ἔχον πόνον (416) καὶ
ὅτε παρεκάλει αὐτοὺς “ἀλλὰ μάχεσθ᾽ ἐπὶ
νηυσὶν ἀολλέες (494). πῶς δὲ ἔφυγον
σκότους ὄντος ; ἥ τε ᾿Αθηνᾶ οὐ πάρεστι διὰ
τὴν τοῦ Διὸς ἀπειλήν, An. The force of
these arguments cannot be gainsaid, and
only one or two scholars have made des-
perate efforts to save the passage by ex-
plaining νέφος ἀχλύος of a mental cloud,
despair, and φόως of the light of hope.
This is entirely un-Homeric. Lachmann
thought that there was here a gap in
the story of his ‘lay,’ the account of the
bringing of this mist having been lost,
as indeed is suggested by Schol. T. We

_ probably have a piece from the same

hand in P 268-73, q.v. The only doubt
is whether the athetesis should not ex-
tend to Nestor’s speech, 659-67, as well.
If we are right in regarding this part of
O as belonging to the original Μῆνις,
there can be no question that Nestor
has been introduced later; for it is only
in later additions that he has been
brought back to the battlefield at all. In
the Μῆνις he was last heard of in his
hut with Machaon at the end of A.

671. βοὴν ἀγαθόν of Hector, as N
123; the only cases where it follows
instead of preceding the name.

148

IAIAAOC O (xv)

8. . ἢ .“ / > / δὲ /
μεν OTOL μετόπισθεν ἀφέστασαν οὐδε μάχοντο,

δ ΄ an
ἠδ᾽ ὅσσοι Tapa νηυσὶ μάχην ἐμάχοντο θοῆισιν.
> » 95 / A
οὐδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔτ᾽ Αἴαντι μεγαλήτορι ἥνδανε θυμῶι ~~
a 5 “ \ =
ἑστάμεν ἔνθά περ ἄλλοι ἀφέστασαν vies Ayadv: \ 67ὅ
ω r \ 4
ἀλλ᾽ 6 ye νηῶν ixpe ἐπώιχετο μακρὰ βιβάσθων,
/ BJ ,
νώμα δὲ ξυστὸν μέγα ναύμαχον ἐν παλάμηϊισ
\ / /
κολλητὸν βλήτροισι, δυωκαιεικοσίπηχυ.
i > ve 9 > \ 4 / 2\ [ὃ /
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἀνὴρ ἵπποισι κελητίζειν ἐὺ εἰδώς,
a > b) \ > / , / “,
OS τ ἐπεὶ ἐκ πολέων πίισυρᾶας συναείρεται ἵπποῦυς, 680

/ > / / \ yy ol
σεύας ἐκ πεδίοιο μέγα προτὶ ἄστυ δίηται
6 ΄ / / e /
λαοφόρον καθ᾽ ὁδόν: πολέες TE ἑ θηήσαντο
ἘΞ ΄ > SEN
ἀνέρες ἠδὲ γυναῖκες" ὁ δ᾽ ἔμπεδον ἀσφαλὲς αἰεὶ

673 om. Lips. || ὅεςοι : ὁπόςοι S.
676. BiBdckoon [, Cant.: BiBdaccoon S.
see Schol. AT).
Ὁ (including A).

675 om. P. ||
679. KeAHeizeiIn Ambr. (i.e. KéAHe’ ἵζειν :
680. ευναείρεται Philemon wp. Porph. (see below): cunarefpera
681. ceUcac Harl. ἃ. || €k: δ᾽ ἐκ PR. || ποτὶ S. || δίηται :

€pécracan CGHJSU Ambr.

ὀιώκηι C!(?) HJ Ambr. fr. Mosc., Harl. a (supr. Htat), yp. A: ϑιώκοι C2PR:

διώκει GS. 682. τέ: O€ Vr. A.

672. ὅςοι does not belong to ἑταίρους,
but is the subject of φράσσαντο.

673. This line is in obvious contradic-
tion to 675; the Greek host is at the
moment not fighting at all (see 655), but
is rallying for a fresh effort amid the huts.

675. a@@éctacan, stood apart from the
enemy in detached groups between the
ships, opposed to ἐφέστασαν, ‘stood
close,’ 703.

676. ἵκρια, the small deck at the bows
(μ 230) or stern (v 74) of the ship. See
M. and R. Od. App. p. 536.

677. =UCTON ναύμαχον, see on 388.
We cannot be certain what βλήτροιςι
means, whether ‘in lengths’ or ‘by
clamps,’ or hoops or rivets used to keep
the separate pieces together. The word
appears not to recur in Greek, so we
have only the probabilities of the present
passage to guide us. The enormous
length of the ξυστόν is explical le if we
suppose that it was really used as sug-
gested on 388; that a hero should be
able to employ it as an ordinary sjear is
merely a proof of his heroic strength.
See also on Z 319.

679. κέλητα αὐτὸς (sc."Ounpos) μὲν οἶδε,
χρωμένους δὲ τοὺς ἥρωας οὐ συνίστησιν,
Ar., who pointed out with equal acumen
that the trumpet (= 219) occurs only in
similes, not in the actual deseiption
of heroic times (see also nete on Φ
362). The poet was conscious that

these inventions were still recent, and
not to be ascribed to the antiquity of
which he sang. The κέλης appears again
in the simile of Odysseus astride on the
keel, κέληθ᾽ ws ἵππον ἐλαύνων ε 371, and
there seems to be one case where heroes
are actually represented as riding on
horseback, see note on K 513.

680. ἐκ πολέων, i.e. picked horses, for
his feats would be possible only on a
carefully-matched team. cunaeipetar
(aor. subj.), harnesses together, see note
on K 499. The on y authority for the
word here is Porphvrios who quotes
(from an unknown Philemon) cuvayeé-
perat as an instance of the ἁμαρτήματα
γραφικὰ καὶ Ta ἄλλα παραδιορθώματα
πάνυ ἄγροικα which disfigure the text of
H.: ἐνταῦθα yap πρὸς οὐδὲν ἀναγκαῖον
ἐγράφη διὰ τοῦ Ὕ. . τὸ δὲ χωρὶς τοῦ ΎὝ
γράφειν 'Ομηρικόν . . τὸ γὰρ CuNGeiperal
μᾶλλον προσεχῶς σημαίνει τὸ συνάγειν καὶ
συναρμύζειν. It does not appear however
that he has any grounds for the change
beyond conjecture. As Philemon quotes
Alexander of Kotyaia, he cannot have
lived before the 2nd cent. A.D. Farther
back the reading cannot be traced. See
Schrader Porph. p. 287. mnicupac, see
H. G. § 130. 3.

681. μέγα Gctu, οὐ γὰρ ἐν μικρᾶι πόλει
ταῦτα yiverat, Sch. T. ϑίηται, cf. Σ 584.

683. ἔμπεδον seems to mean ‘without
hesitation’ or uncertainty ; cf. ἀσφαλέως

OO Ὡ εὲὲδϑιθιξικιστσες

IAIAAOC Ο (xv) 149

θρώισκων ἄλλοτ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἄλλον ἀμείβεται, of δὲ πέτονται"

A » το, \ 4 » - =
ὡς Alas ἐπὶ πολλὰ θοάων ἴκρια νηῶν 685
φοίτα μακρὰ βιβάς, φωνὴ δέ οἱ αἰθέρ᾽ ἵκανεν.

> \ \ \ / ΄“ /

αἰεὶ δὲ σμερδνὸν βοάων Δαναοῖσι κέλευε

νηυσί τε καὶ κλισίηισιν ἀμυνέμεν.

HES ἤδις δ
οὐδὲ μὲν “Extawp

’ > , e / / ,
μίμνεν ἐνὶ Τρώων ὁμάδωι πύκα OwpnKxtawy:

᾽ > as , a ᾽ Ν " 7
ἀλλ᾽ ὥς τ᾽ ὀρνίθων πετεηνῶν αἰετὸς αἴθων 690

») » lal ‘ / ΄
ἔθνος ἐφορμᾶται, ποταμὸν πάρα βοσκομενάων,
χηνῶν ἢ γεράνων ἢ κύκνων δουλιχοδείρων,
a ΄
ὡς “Extwp ἴθυσε νεὸς κυανοπρώροιο
» ’ > 1 x Ἁ Ἁ » 2 Μ
ἀντίος ἀΐξας: τὸν δὲ Ζεὺς ὦρσεν ὄπισθε
χειρὶ μάλα μεγάληι, ὥτρυνε δὲ λαὸν ἅμ᾽ αὐτῶι. 695
αὗτις δὲ δριμεῖα μάχη παρὰ νηυσὶν ἐτύχθη"
Ψ r
φαίης K ἀκμῆτας καὶ ἀτειρέας ἀλλήλοισιν
ἀντέσθ᾽ ἐν πολέμωι, ὡς ἐσσυμένως ἐμάχοντο.
τοῖσι δὲ μαρναμένοισιν ὅδ᾽ ἣν νόος: ἤτοι ᾽Αχαιοὶ
οὐκ ἔφασαν φεύξεσθαι ὑπὲκ κακοῦ, ἀλλ᾽ ὀλέεσθαι, 700

686. βιβῶν PRS (-ὡν) Harl. Ὁ, Par. a ὁ d f κα ἢ, fr. Mosc. :

687. βοάων JP Bar.: Boden ὥ.

ΎΡ. βιβὼν A.

688. οὐδὲ WEN: οὐδέ KEN P. 689. τινὲς

ἐπισυνάπτουσι τούτωι τόνδε ἀλλὰ πολὺ Npoeéecke, TO ὃν μένος οὐϑένι εἴκων

(=) 459), T.
ϑολιχοδείρων PC) Lips.
νηὸς P.
ὥςεν Ar. H Par. c e j, yp. Par. g.
696. aveic C.

691. ποταμῶν JPRS:

ποταμῶι Harl. a. 692 om. C.

693. νεὼς CDH (supr. o) JQR Vr. b, fr. Mose. Harl. a?:
694. ἀντίον R and ap. Did.

Giccwn A (yp. ἀϊξας) (Ὁ. ᾿ Spcen Τ᾿:

695. ὥτρυνε: ὄτρυνε R: ὥξυνε |’.
700. pevzaceai P Lips. Vr. b: geérzeceai J.

θέει ἔμπεδον of a boulder, N 141, θέεν
ἔμπεδον of a ship, ν 86. The feat de-
scribed is not likely to be that of the
modern circus, where a man stands on
the horses’ backs and leaps across from
one to the other ; more probably while
holding the reins of four horses in his
hands the performer leaps to the ground
from one and mounts another while
they are going at full speed. So Aias
leaps from the deck to the earth, and
springs thence to the deck of the next
ship. We may compare the favourite
exercises of the Thessalian ἀναβάται. who
used to spring from their horses at full
speed, run by their sides holding the
reins, and leap up again. én’ ἀμείβεται,
tmesis; cf. Z 339 νίκη δ᾽ ἐπαμείβεται
ἄνδρας.

691. Eenoc= flock, B 459 ; 692= Β 460.

693. νεός, a ship, or perhaps the ship,
on which Aias is from time to time.
But the expression would be more natural
if Aias remained on one ship only, as in
416. So in the next line dtzac, the

reading of Ar. and most Mss., is suitable
to a single rush ; while ἀΐσσων would be
right if Hector is pursuing him from one
ship to another.

694. @pcen, as N 83; Ar. Scev, which
however is elsewhere always used of
thrusting away. At the same time it
better suits the very material conception
of χειρὶ μάλα μεγάληι, an anthropomor-
phic metaphor which contrasts strongly
with the immaterial aetio in distans of
Διὸς νόος, 242. The nearest parallel in
H. is the pulling backwards and for-
wards of the armies by ropes held in the
hands of the gods. We have no right to
suppose that Zeus has descended from
Ida and is present in person on the
battlefield.

696. δριμεῖα is only used of meta-
phorically bitter things ; here it is virtu-
ally equivalent to πολύστονος or the like.

698. Tyrannio’s accentuation ἀντέςθαι
seems to be right; the verb is, or may
be, an aor. wherever it occurs (H.G.

Ἂς .
§ 32. 2

150 IAIAAOC O (xv)

Als \ δ᾽ Μ Ν DOAN tg [2 /
ρωσὶν ἔλπετο θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ἑκάστου
νῆας ἐνιπρήσειν κτενέειν Θ᾽ ἥρωας ᾿Αχαιφύς.
οἱ μὲν τὰ φρονέοντες ἐφέστασαν ἀλλήλοισιν" —
"Extop δὲ πρύμνης νεὸς ἥψατο ποντοπόροιο, ἣν
καλῆς ὠκυάλου, ἣ IIpwrectNaov EVELKEV "ΠΡ
> , A) BSS ΄
ἐς Τροίην, οὐδ᾽ αὖτις ἀπήγαγε πατρίδα γαῖα: -
an \ n
τοῦ περ δὴ περὶ νηὸς ᾿Αχαιοί te 'Γρῶές τε
ΤᾺ > / » / 50» ” /
dnLovv ἀλλήλους αὐτοσχεδόν' οὐδ᾽ ἄρα τοί γε
/ 5. Ν > A / bined Raed 5 Ii
τόξων ἀϊκὰς ἀμφὶς μένον οὐδ᾽ ET ἀκόντων,
᾽ ᾽ “ ᾽ ’ / e 7, Ὡ“ \ ”
ἀλλ᾽ οἵ γ᾽ ἐγγύθεν ἱστάμενοι Eva θυμὸν ἔχοντες 710
> / \ / \ ’ / {4
ὀξέσι δὴ πελέκεσσι καὶ ἀξίνηισι μάχοντο
\ / / AN Μ 5 γ
καὶ ξίφεσιν μεγάλοισι καὶ ἔγχεσιν ἀμφιγύοισι.
πολλὰ δὲ φάσγανα καλὰ μελάνδετα κωπήεντα
» \ b) la / / By ’ Jed ”
ἄλλα μὲν ἐκ χειρῶν χαμάδις πέσον, ἄλλα δ᾽ aT ὥμων
n ’ ¢, nw Lod
ἀνδρῶν μαρναμένων: ῥέε δ᾽ αἵματι γαῖα μέλαινα. 715

701. ἔλπετο JPQ Lips.: HAneTo ©.
703. Gpécracan RK.
ἀπήγαγε : ἐπήγαγε H: τινὲς ἀφίκετο T.
114. χειρῶν : χειρός P Harl. ἃ.

704. νεὼς CDJPQRT Mor. Vr. b.

|| mécon Ar.

702. κτανέειν DJP Bar. || ϑ᾽ : δ᾽ HQT.
706. ateic C. ||
709-10 om. (). 712 a0. Ar. (v. infra).

APRT Harl. d, Par. e: nécen Q.

703. ee Peres this
phrase is used, N 133, If 217, of men
standing close in serried ranks ; it there-
fore expresses here very vividly the
closeness with which the two armies
‘stand up to’ one another.

705. For Protesilaos see B 698, N 681.
ὠκυάλου, a curious compound ; swift
at sea? or swiftly leaping? Or can
it be connected with Fed-, swiftly turn-
ing? See on ἀμφιέλισσα, B165. Herodi-
anos is followed by Lobeck in regarding
-ados aS a mere termination ; Dionysios
of Halikarnassos wrote ὠκυἅλου, to shew
that it was derived from ds.

706. For the acc. natpida γαῖαν ex-
pressing the terminus ad quem cf. H. G.
δ. 140. 4.

709. ἀϊκάς (dm. dey.) Tas φορὰς καὶ
τὰς ὁρμάς, Ap. Lex. οὐδ᾽ ἔτ᾽, so Monro
for οὐδέ τ᾽ of MSS., Where 7’ is meaning-
less.

710. of re, like τοί ye above, can
refer only to the Greeks ; ἕνα θυμὸν ἔχειν
always implies harmonious co-operation
(IL 219, P 267, y 128). Agar (J.P. xxv.
38) reads δίχα for ἕνα, referring the lines
to both parties. But the Trojans have
not been keeping ‘at long range’ (ἀμφίς
709) nor can we suppose that they use
the abnormal weapons of 711.

711. See on N 612. The use of axes
and hatchets (or whatever the difference
between the πέλεκυς and ἀξίνη may have
been), which are not employed in regular
Homeric warfare, is doubtless due here
to the peculiar circumstances of the
fight ; such tools would form part of the
carpenters’ stores of the fleet and camp,
and every man fights with what comes
first to hand.

712. This may be understood of the
Trojans and many of the Greeks. But
ἀθετεῖται, ὅτι εὐτελὴς ὁ στίχος Kal 7
ἰδιότης τῆς μάχης οὐ σώζεται" ξίφεσι μὲν
γὰρ καὶ ἔγχεσι πάντοτε μάχονται. νῦν δὲ
πελέκεσι καὶ ἀξίναις, An.

713. For μελάνϑετα see App. B, ix. 3.
σιδηρόδετα.. . ol δὲ μελαίνας λαβὰς ἔχοντα"
τὴν δὲ λαβὴν δεσμὸν καλεῖ ὁ Σιμωνίδης.
ot δὲ ἐπιμελῶς ἐνδεδεμένα πρὸς τὴν λαβήν.
The last explanation is consistent with
that given in App. B.

714. an’ ὥμων, ὅτι οὐ χρωμένων τοῖς
ξίφεσι πρὸς μάχην χαμάδις ἔπιπτον, An.,
1.6. the swords fell in the sheaths, the
τελαμῶνες being severed by blows lighting
on the shoulder. This is preferable to
the alternative explanation that the
swords fell because the arms which
wielded them were severed at the
shoulder.

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΟ Ο (χν) 151]

τιν \ ‘ ,
Extop δὲ πρύμνηθεν ἐπεὶ λάβεν, οὐχὶ μεθίει

ἄφλαστον μετὰ χερσὶν ἔχων, ρωσὶν δὲ κέλευεν"

« Μ lal “ δ᾽ ᾽ \ > / v ᾽ > /
οἴσετε πῦρ, ἅμα αὐτοὶ ἀολλέες ὄρνυτ αὐτὴν"

» ΄ -“ / r \ A δ v
νῦν ἡμῖν πάντων Ζεὺς ἄξιον ἦμαρ ἔδωκε,

-“ὴ ΄ -“ “Ὁ al -" a3 2 rt on
νῆας ελεῖν, αἱ δεῦρο θεῶν ἀέκητι μολοῦσαι 720

ᾳ lal / \ / / /
ἡμῖν πήματα πολλὰ θέσαν, κακότητι γερόντων,

dd > | / / > \ - /
οἵ μ᾽ ἐθέλοντα μάχεσθαι ἐπὶ πρυμνῆισι νέεσσιν

Ἂν / > > / > / / /
αὐτὸν τ ἐἰσχαναασκον EPNTVOVTO Te λαὸν.

ἀλλ᾽ εἰ δή pa τότε βλάπτε φρένας εὐρύοπα Ζεὺς

΄ / r Ν / ΄,
ἡμετέρας, νῦν αὐτὸς ἐποτρύνει καὶ ἀνώγει.

ὍΝ
τῷ
φι

ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα μᾶλλον ἐπ᾽ ᾿Δργείοισιν ὄρουσαν.

Αἴας δ᾽ οὐκέτ᾽ ἔμιμνε. βιάζετο γὰρ βελέεσσιν"

ἀλλ᾽ ἀνεχάζετο τυτθόν, ὀϊόμενος θανέεσθαι,

θρῆνυν ἐφ᾽ ἑπταπόδην, λίπε δ᾽ ἴκρια νηὸς ἐΐσης.

NHICIN ἀχαιῶν T’,

716. οὐκ éueoie: Zen.: οὔτι μεϑίει Schol. Ap. Rh. i. 1089.
ἄλλοι P. | ὄρνυτ᾽ : ἄρνυτ᾽ R: wpnut’ A.
726. μᾶλλον : πάντες PR Vr. ἃ.

118. αὐτοὶ:
122. πρυμνῆιςι NEECCIN: npUL-
128. ἀναχάζετο 1".

129. ἐφ᾽ : ὑφ᾽ R Ap. Lew. 88. 17, Et. May. 454. 58. || ἑπταπόδην : ἑπτάποδα LH.

Mag. 454. 58 (but -HN, 455. 7).

716. npUunHeen, ὑμ the stern; οἵ, IL
762. οὐκ ἐμεθίει, the reading of Zen.,
is justly stigmatized as barbarous by the
scholia. So also Π 762. The form οὐχί
occurs only in these two passages, and
is probably not Epic. Platt (J.P. xix.
42) proposes οὔ ἑ, cf. Q 214: οὔ τι is
simpler and has a little authority, but
does not explain Zen.’s reading. οὐκί is
found in H. only at the end of a clause.
For the ἄφλαστον or «aplustre see on
I 241. The word occurs here only in H.
Compare Herod. vi. 114 (Kuvéyecpos)
ἐπιλαμβανόμενος τῶν ἀφλάστων νεός, τὴν
χεῖρα ἀποκοπεὶς πελέκεϊ πίπτει.

718. οἴςετε, aor. imper., see I 103.

719. πάντων ἄξιον, a recompense for
all (that we have suffered).

721. γερόντων, cowncillors, as γέρουσι
βουλευτῆισι Z 113, and see B 58, ete.
Cf. also the Trojan δημογέροντες, I’ 149.
There is no hint elsewhere of such an
excuse for Hector’s backward strategy ;
a different reason is given in 1 352 ff.

723. €pHTUONTO, the middle is only
here used transitively.

727. Bedéeccin, missiles, because with
his long ξυστόν he keeps them too far
off for their spears to reach him.

729. €ntanddun, the Lf. May. in one
place gives the form ἑπτάποδα, which
is more in accordance with analogy, and

may have been altered from a supposed
metrical necessity. The same correction
should perhaps be made in Hes. Opp.
423 τριπόδην. What this epANuc was
can be only a matter of conjecture, as it
is not elsewhere mentioned. The scholia
give various explanations: ἡ ἐν τῶι πλοίωι
ἀπὸ τοῦ τοίχου ἐπὶ τοῖχον διάβασις, Ap.
Lex.: τινὲς δὲ τόπον τῆς νεὼς βάσιν ἔχοντα
ἐφ᾽ οὗ τὸν κυβερνήτην τοὺς πόδας τιθέναι,
ὃ καὶ ἑδώλιόν φασιν. ἄλλοι δὲ τὴν ὑπο-
δεχομένην τὸν ἱστὸν τράπεζαν εἶπον. oi
δὲ διαβάθραν ἀπὸ νεὼς εἰς νῆα, Sch. A. Of
these the explanation which best suits the
ordinary use of the word ‘footstool’ is
that which makes it ‘a low stool or
bench fixed athwart the deck,’ so as to
raise the helmsman and give him more
power over his oar (M. and R. App. p.
544). But this must needs be on the
ἴκρια at the extreme stern, and it is pre-
cisely from this point that Aias is driven.
Now if we consider that there must have
been some sort of bridge over the hold
by which the sailors could pass between
the after and fore decks without inter-
fering with the rowers, we find that we
have here a point of retreat which would
just suit Aias ; one where he would be
defended from close approach by the
hold on either side, while still able to
wield his 22-cubit pole. éntandédHNn

152 IAIAAOC O (xv)

ἔνθ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὅ γ᾽ ἑστήκει δεδοκημένος, ἔγχεϊ δ᾽ αἰεὶ 730

Τρῶας ἄμυνε νεῶν, ὅς τις φέροι ἀκάματον Tip:
SN \ \ / qn /
αἰεὶ δὲ σμερδνὸν βοάων Δαναοῖσι κέλευεν"
“@ φίλοι ἥρωες Δαναοί, θεράποντες Ἀρηος, Ὶ
ἀνέρες ἔστε, φίλοι, μνήσασθε δὲ θούριδος oN ν
Ἂς
ἠέ τινάς φαμεν εἶναι ἀοσσητῆρας ὀπίσσω,

τ᾽

-

ἘΠῚ
eo
ζι

Bas. an ” “ > > ὃ / Ν > / Ε
HE Tb τεύχος apelov, O K ἂν Pact λουγὸν APLVVAL ;

/ I / a
οὐ μέν TL σχεδὸν ἐστι πόλις πύργοις ἀραρυῖα,

- 3. 9 , Sure 7 a y”
ἣν κ᾽ ἀπαμυναίμεσθ᾽ ἑτεραλκέα δῆμον ἔχοντες"
> 2 > \ 4 » id /
arr ἐν yap ρώων πεδίων πύκα θωρηκτάων,

fi o -
πόντωι κεκλιμένοι, ἑκὰς ἥμεθα πατρίδος αἴης" 740
n > \ / 2 / / 35
τῷ ἐν χερσὶ φόως, οὐ μειλιχίηι πολέμοιο.

3 “ 5

ἢ καὶ μαιμώων ἔφεπ᾽ ἔγχεϊ ὀξυόεντι.
cd \ / , 9 \ \ /
ds τις δὲ Τρώων κοίληις ἐπὶ νηυσὶ φέροιτο

/

σὺν πυρὶ κηλείωι, χάριν “Extopos ὀτρύναντος,

τὸν δ᾽ Αἴας οὔτασκε δεδεγμένος ἔγχεϊ μακρῶι" 745

δώδεκα δὲ προπάροιθε νεῶν αὐτοσχεδὸν οὗτα.

730. ἑστήκει Ar. APQ Bar. Lips. Vr. d, fr. Mose. :
732. βοάων R: Boden ©.

Tot. ny Ar ΗΒ Mors: crol ΒΗ Varese
énauunaiuece’ C (-Néu-) () Lips. Vr. bd A, Harl. a (and A supr.).
741. μειλιχίη Dion. Thrax.
κοίλας ἐπὶ νῆας ἄγοιτο G Harl. a. || NHUcIN ἄγοιτο PR.

745. ἔγχεϊ μακρῶι: ὀξέϊ χαλκῶ() CGPQR: ὀξέϊ ϑουρὶ Eust.

DGLR Lips. Harl. ἃ.

ἀμύνη HH,

ἐν ἄλλωι τρώων ὁμάϑωι A.

fr. Mose.
746. δὲ ἢ ON Eust.

eicTHKel 2. 731. φέρει
736. ἢ ἔτι QOS. || ἀμύνει ἢ :
τς Ὡ: 738.
739. πεδίωι :
743. δὲ: δὴ Q. ||
744, ὀτρύνοντος HJR

would then naturally mean ‘7 feet
high’ above the floor of the hold—pre-
cisely what would be needed in order to
enable the rowers to move freely about
beneath it.

730. ϑεϑοκημένος, on the watch, here
only in H.; itis generally referred to déxo-
μαι, cf. A 107 δεδεγμένος ἐν προδοκῆισιν.
For the double stem we may compare
Att. μεμένηκα by μέν-ω, ete. Other de-
rived verbs in the same sense are δοκεύω
and προσδοκᾶν =to look for.

735. GoccHtApac, see 254. ἄρειον,
better than the wall formed by ships and
the line of battle, the ἕρκος χάλκειον of
567. It is not necessary to assume that
this portion of the poem belongs to those
which speak of the wall round the ships,
in order to explain ‘a better wall than
that which we have lost.’ See A 407.

Cf. Virgil den. ix. 779 quos alios muvros,
quae iam ultra moenia habetis ?

738. ἑτεραλκέα, see note on H 26.

740. πόντωι κεκλιμένοι, leaning on the
sed, With no other support or base: cf.
II 68 ῥηγμῖνι θαλάσσης κεκλίαται, and EH
709 λίμνηι κεκλιμένος ἹΚηφισίδι, with note.

741. φόως, safety, as often. μειλιχίηι,
so Ar., while Dion. Thrax read the nom.
μειλιχίη. This must be taken as a phrase
like οὐχ ἕδος, this is no time for slackness.

742. pene, kept driving the enemy.
See on A 496.

744. κηλείωι, more correctly καυαλέωι
(so Fick from MHesych.) or κηαλέωι
(Schulze ᾧ. 1. p. 475) from root καᾷ of
ka(F)iw. Elsewhere in H. only κήλεος
is found, always in the phrase πυρὶ
κηλέωι (seven times). χάριν “Extopoc,
cf. φέρων χάριν “Ἕκτορι diac ἘΠ 211, and
χαριζόμενος, 449 above.

Il

INTRODUCTION

To those who have accepted the hypothesis which excludes the ninth book
from the original Μῆνις, and concur generally in the conjectural scheme for
the original form of that poem which has been set out in the introductions
to the preceding books, the opening of the IlatpéxAeva presents no difficulty.
Achilles, who in the first book vowed that great yearning for him should
come on the sons of the Achaians, and that in the day of trouble Agamemnon
should not avail to help them, was in the eleventh so far moved by their
disaster as to send Patroklos to ask after a wounded warrior whom he saw
driven past his hut in Nestor’s chariot. During his brief absence things
have moved apace. The Greeks, deprived of Agamemnon, Odysseus, and
Diomedes, have been driven back to their ships, and are only holding even
the first line of these through the prowess of Aias, who alone is keeping
Hector at bay (Ὁ 592 to end).

At this critical moment Patroklos returns to Achilles, weeping, and is
received with an ironical question as to the cause of his grief. The un-
important errand on which he has been sent is naturally forgotten by both
speakers, and without an allusion to Machaon, Patroklos, as Nestor had
urged him, asks to be sent in command of the Myrmidons against the foe.
Achilles consents in a- speech which is a fine picture of the struggle between
his wounded pride and his patriotic feeling ; he bids Patroklos do no more
than barely save the camp, lest too complete a victory rob him of the
atonement which Agamemnon owes him.

To those who regard the ninth book as an integral part of the Jliad from
the first this speech in its present form offers insuperable difficulties. The
words of Achilles in 60—61 and 84—86 are entirely inconsistent with the ample,
and indeed abject, humiliation of Agamemnon in I. This is not a mere
superficial inconsistency due to a temporary forgetfulness, such, for instance,
as the accidental resuscitation of the dead Pylaimenes in N ; it is a contra-
diction at the very root of the story, as flagrant as if Shakespear had
forgotten in the fifth act of Macbeth that Duncan had been murdered in
the second. To suppose that the same intellect which prepared the embassy
to Achilles by the eighth book, and wrought it out in such magnificence
and wealth of detail in the ninth, could afterwards compose a speech, so
different and yet so grand, in entire oblivion of what had gone before, is
to demand a credulity rendering any rational criticism impossible.

153

154 IAIAAOC Π (xvr)

This speech has accordingly been riddled by the artillery of modern
criticism. It has in fact been the target not only of believers in the ninth
book, but of those who desire to make Achilles logical—heaven save the
mark! Because in 60 he will ‘let bygones be bygones,’ he must not recur
to the old grudge in 72 ; because he puts down the Greek defeat to his own
retirement, he must not gloat over the disabling of Agamemnon and
Diomedes as well. So it comes that of the fifty-two lines of which it consists,
no fewer than thirty-six (I follow Hentze’s Anhang) have been rejected by
one critic or another. The less destructive (including Hentze) condemn
69-79 and 84-86 only, urging that the omission of the lines makes the
reference in ἀλλὰ Kai ὡς (80) clearer than it was before. To this it is
sufficient to reply that the meaning of the words was already clear enough, and
has probably never puzzled or misled a single reader. Nobody has attempted
to explain why the lines should ever have been interpolated. The only assign-
able cause is a malicious desire to create confusion by contradicting the
previous story. ‘The interpolation of a poem like the ninth book, even at the
expense of subsequent inconsistency, is intelligible enough, for such a poem
has every right to be regarded as an end in itself; but no visible purpose is
subserved by the two passages here in question. Space does not permit a
discussion at length of the various arguments. Some of them will be found
in the notes; on the general question I prefer only to express my own
conviction, formed after long and careful reflexion, that the whole speech of
Achilles in its present form, with its alternations of penitence and passion,
is as perfectly conceived and perfectly executed as any other literary piece
in existence. One line certainly (64) has been added later with a definite
object, but in no way impairs the masterly whole.

The narrative now runs on smoothly, except for the purely negative
difficulty that in 101—23 no specific reference is made to the peculiar
circumstances under which Aias was fighting when we left him at the end of
QO. The next question which arises is one of considerable importance, as it
is involved in large portions of the subsequent narrative. Many signs
indicate, as Bergk first pointed out, that the equipment of Patroklos in the
arms of Achilles is no part of the original story.

The lines in this book which have to be excised to get rid of the change
of armour are 40—43, 64, 140—44, 248 (ἢ), 796-800. Even of these fifteen or
sixteen lines seven are taken from other passages—41—43 from A 799-801
and 141-44 from T 388-91, Zenodotos athetized the last four here on good
grounds ; there can be no doubt that they are in place in T. It will
probably surprise most readers to learn that an incident so familiar in our
conception of the J/iad is announced only in these few lines, of which half
are suspect, and all can be cut out of the text without leaving the slightest
gap. Moreover, the intention of the exchange can only have been to strike
terror into the enemy; it not only fails of this, but passes absolutely
unnoticed, for the belief of the Trojans that Achilles has joined the fight
(281-82) is only momentary, and is amply explained by the appearance of his
troops. The words of Sarpedon in 423-24 shew that in fact Patroklos is not
taken for Achilles. If, therefore, in the next two books we find reason to
suppose that the change of armour is an interpolation into the original story,
such a hypothesis will find a support rather than a difficulty in the narrative

C—O ee ae.

IAIAAOC Π (xvi) 155

of II, and we shall have reason to be grateful to the interpolator for the very
conservative way in which he has introduced his episode.

The short ‘catalogue’ of the Myrmidons (168-97) is clearly late, and
with it the following speech of Achilles (198-211) must probably go, as is
shewn in the notes; nor is further reference necessary to the few doubtful
lines which occur in the plain and doubtless original narrative down to 363
(see notes on 156, 259, 296, 326-29, 353). The obscure and hardly
Homeric simile of 364—65, however, introduces a passage of extremely dubious
authenticity. We have already had ample reason to suppose that the wall
round the Greek camp was not in the original M7jvis at all ; this supposition
is greatly strengthened by the confusion and linguistic difficulties connected
with the allusions to it in 364-71, 380-83. If these lines are cut out, all
runs smoothly ; the wall is ignored, and the much-disputed line 397 becomes
intelligible.

The long episcde of Sarpedon’s death extends from 419 to 683. It is
not in any way essential to the story, and can be omitted without injuring
the structure ; but it is on the other hand inserted so as in no way to shew
the seams. It is moreover splendidly animated and picturesque. But if
the analysis of previous books is correct, it must be an addition, for Sarpedon
has hitherto appeared only in places which are not so old as the Mjvis. He
takes an active part in the Iliad only thrice; in his duel with Tlepolemos
in E, in the assault on the wall in M,and here. The second of these at least
is late; the first is hardly datable (see Introd. to E), but is at all events
not in the oldest stratum. And in this book we have two explicit
references to M, which must be at least as late as that book.

Whether the whole episode is contemporary with these references is
doubtful. It is perfectly possible to excise them (see notes on 508, 558) ;
but the alternative hypothesis, that all the Sarpedon episodes in their entirety
are by the same hand, and not older than the τειχομαχία, has much to
commend it. But on the whole the evidence of the difficult line 660 tends
to shew that the episode has been very largely expanded, possibly by the
addition of not less than 505-658. Two other parts of the episode, the
scene between Zeus and Hera in 431-61, and its pendant in 666—83, have
been doubted from ancient times. To me the evidence against 444—49
and 666—75 seems strong; that against the remainder of the two passages
considerably weaker.

After the death of Sarpedon we pass on with only one serious stumbling-
block (see note on 698) to the death of Kebriones. It is strange that, after
we have been led to expect the final fight between Patroklos and Hector
(see particularly 755-64), the scene should suddenly change to a general
mellay, lasting apparently a long time (765 ff., particularly 777-80). When
the protagonists again appear, they are no longer face to face (see 818-20).
It would seem as though the poem originally ended with the slaying of
Patroklos by Hector alone ; and this climax had been fused with another in
which, for the greater glory of the Greek, Hector was aided by Apollo and
Euphorbos. No mere rejection of lines helps here; if the conjecture is
right, the original battle with Hector has been lost, and we have only the final
stroke in 820.

Within this doubtful part itself (765-820) are numerous difficulties. In

156 IAIAAOC Π (νὴ

the next book the contest is not merely for the body of Patroklos, but for the
armour upon it; yet in 793 and 846 we are distinctly told that Apollo took
the helmet from his head and the armour from his shoulders. It is hard to
see how the seventeenth book could have been composed in the face of these
passages ; while it is easy to see why they were interpolated, if, as has
already been indicated, the arming of Patroklos with Achilles’ arms was a
late addition—for in divine armour he must have been invulnerable. There
is thus every reason for rejecting not only 796-800, where the arms of
Achilles are expressly mentioned, but the whole passage 792-804, and with
it the entirely superfluous 846 (so Kéchly and Hentze). Reasons are also
given in the notes for condemning 813-16 ; the last trace of disarmament
then disappears with the word γυμνόν, and the narrative runs smoothly.
Apollo by a blow stuns Patroklos; Euphorbos takes advantage of his
staggering to wound him in the back, and Hector comes up to finish him.

Thus this splendid book, full of life and movement as of pathos and
truth, has paid the penalty of antiquity in frequent expansion and interpola-
tion ; but it has gained smoothness from long weathering, and is harmonized
into a beautiful unity. The spirit of the Μῆηνις dwells upon it, and it is well
worthy of the cardinal place which it holds in the tale of the Iliad.

IAIAAOC Π

Πατρόκλεια.

ὡς οἱ μὲν περὶ νηὸς ἐυσσέλμοιο μάχοντο"
Πάτροκλος δ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆϊ παρίστατο ποιμένι λαῶν,
δάκρυα θερμὰ χέων ὥς τε κρήνη μελάνυδρος,
ἥ τε κατ᾽ αἰγίλιπος πέτρης δνοφερὸν χέει ὕδωρ.
τὸν δὲ ἰδὼν ὥικτειρε ποδάρκης δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς, 5
καί μιν φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
“ce / / / 5.7 /
τίπτε δεδάκρυσαι, Ἰ]ατρόκλεις, ἠύτε κούρη

/ 4 > [4 \ / 3 > / > ,
νηπίη, ἥ θ᾽ ἅμα μητρὶ θέουσ᾽ ἀνελέσθαι ἀνώγει,

. la) / , » / /
elavov ἁπτομένη, καί T ἐσσυμένην KATEPUKEL,

, ΄ / ” > > eer
δακρυόεσσα δέ μιν ποτιδέρκεται, ὄφρ ἀνέληται"

10

τῆι ἴκελος, ἸΙάτροκλε, τέρεν κατὰ δάκρυον εἴβεις.
/ 93 b] lal
ἠέ τι Μυρμιδόνεσσι πιφαύσκεαι, ἣ ἐμοὶ αὐτῶι,

4, γνοφερὸν S. || χέεν Et. Mag. 27. 44.

9. éccuuénH J Mose. 2! and wp. Eust.
ἂν ἕληται JLQS Vr. b. 12. He Te
πιφάςκεαι JPQRS Mose. 2.

10. ϑακρύουςα ().
ALS

5. ὥικτειρε: eduBHce Ar.
προςϑέρκεται Zen.

4: ι΄ 53.

H ἔτι Eb (yp. ἀξ τὸ 10: 8 ἔτι 5.

1. νηός, the ship of Protesilaos, Ο 704.

2. Patroklos was last heard of in O
390-405 on his way back from Nestor to
Achilles. παρίστατο, was coming up,
as usual, B 244; ef. A 197, ete.

3—4=[ 14-15.

7. δεδάκρυςαι, cf. X 491 δεδάκρυνται
δὲ παρειαί, v 204 δεδάκρυνται δέ μοι ὄσσε.
So πεποτήαται, are on the wing, B 90,
πεφυλαγμένος, on the watch, κεκλαυμένα,

Aisch. Cho. 458, Soph. O. 7. 1490;
Η. G. § 28.
8. Hentze conj. ἀνώγηι͵. . κατερύκηι,

so that the subj. may distinguish the
subordinate verbs forming the supposi-
tion from ποτιϑέρκεται in the clause
which contains the point of comparison.

9, εἰανοῦ, i.e. Feavod (see on E 734),
with ε lengthened in the first arsis ;

157

App: Ρ, σ 1:
Feavoto καὶ ἐσσ.
suggests F for 7’.

11. Notice Πάτροκλε by Πατρόκλεις
(Πατρόκλεξες) above. The former is the
familiar shortened form like “AXx:uos by
᾿Αλκιμέδων, etc. τέρεν, I 142.

12. Hé appears to be the correct ac-
centuation, not Hé, as approved by
Herod., who regarded # as an interroga-
tive particle, here introducing asyndeti-
cally three independent questions, like
an—an—an. There is no reason to
suppose it any other than the ordinary
conjunction marking three disjunctive
340. The

Brandreth’s ἁπτομένη
is needless. Van L.

questions; see H. G. ὃ
questions are of course ironical. It is
perfectly natural that in the altered

state of affairs Achilles should forget the

158

IAIAAOC Π (νὴ

He τιν᾽ ἀγγελίην Φθίης ἐξ ἔκλυες οἷος ;
/ \ 4 \ Τὰ ΕΝ er
ζώειν μὰν ἔτι φασὶ Μενοίτιον "Ἄκτορος υἱόν,
i
ζώει δ᾽ Αἰακίδης Τ]ηλεὺς μετὰ Μυρμιδόνεσσι, 15
a /~? 5 ff 5 7 /
TOV κε μάλ᾽ ἀμφοτέρων ἀκαχοίμεθα τεθνηώτων.
5 , J Oey , > 7 CG I~
ne avy Ἀργείων ὁλοφύρεαι, ὡς ολέκονται
\ »Μ a e / “ n
νηυσὶν ἔπι γλαφυρῆισιν ὑπερβασίης ἕνεκα σφῆς ;
> / \ an / “, ” ” 39
ἐξαύδα, μὴ κεῦθε νόωι, ἵνα εἴδομεν ἄμφω.
\ / nr =
τὸν δὲ βαρὺ στενάχων προσέφης, Ἰ]ατρόκλεις immed: 20

[7

ὦ ᾿Αχιλεῦ Indios υἱέ, μέγα φέρτατ᾽ ᾿Αχαιῶν,

μὴ νεμέσα: τοῖον γὰρ ἄχος βεβίηκεν ᾿Αχαιούς.

οἱ μὲν γὰρ δὴ πάντες, ὅσοι πάρος ἦσαν ἄριστοι,

ἐν νηυσὶν κέαται βεβλημένον οὐτάμενοί τε.

βέβληται μὲν ὁ Τυδείδης κρατερὸς Διομήδης, 25
οὔτασται δ᾽ ᾿Οδυσεὺς δουρικλυτὸς ἠδ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνων,

/ \ - nr
βέβληται δὲ καὶ Εὐρύπυλος κατὰ μηρὸν ὀϊστῶι.
\ / ’ > \ / ᾽
τοὺς μέν τ᾽ ἰητροὶ πολυφάρμακοι ἀμφιπένονται,
δ if \ 5 / ΝΜ, 5 fal
Ede ἀκειόμενοι" σὺ δ᾽ ἀμήχανος ἔπλευ, ᾿Αχιυλλεῦ.

5 5, eras: 7 x ‘
μὴ ἔμεγ᾽ οὖν οὗτός ye λάβοι χόλος ὃν σὺ φυλάσσεις, 30

> / / ” » »: >’ / /
αἰνωρέτα: TL σευ ἄλλος ονήσεται οψίύγονος περ,

” \ 3 / ΕΣ / \ > /
ai Ke μὴ Ἀργείοισιν ἀεικέα λοιγὸν ἀμύνηις ;

14. WGN: μὲν J Eust.

16. axayHueea CGPR Vr. A. |!
© (D supr.) JPRT: τεϑθνηιώτων Ar, (A supr.): τεθνειώτων ὥ.

TEONHCOTCON
20. προςέφη

H'JQRST'U Bar. Lips. Vr. A. || Πατροκλῆς Vr. ἃ. || ἱππεύς H!QRS Lips.

21. Πηλῆος Ar. L Harl. a Lips.: πηλέως HT Ptol.: Πηλέος ©.
28. T om. L Harl. a Lips.: γ᾽ Eust. || @uupenénonto Eust.
30. οὕτως Q (om. re). || puddccoic OC.
31. ainapéra Bar. Mor.: ainapérH Ar. Q: ain’ ἀρετῆι 8:
αἰναρέτης ap. Sch. AT. || τίς ce P (tic ς᾽ L):

Vr. A. || ὁ om. Aph.
29. ἀκειάμενοι ACHJPQU Vr. A.

Cram. 47. Ox. 111. 389, 390.
(sup. H): ἀμύνεις Bar.

25. BéBAHTO

ain’ ἀρετῆς and
Tic ced (ςευ) G2IQRT. || ὀψιγόνων

32. λοιμόν R}. ἀμύνη () (swpr. εἰς): Guunoic L

trivial errand on which he dispatched

Patroklos in the eleventh book, a mere
piece of machinery introduced for the
purpose of the moment.

22=K 145, 23-37=A 658-62.
last line is properly in place here.

27. It is needless to find a difficulty,
as some have done, in the omission of
Machaon among the wounded ; he is of
very trifling importance compared to the
three great chiefs.

30. For γ᾽ οὗν see H. G. ὃ 349. The
combination recurs only in E 258 (where
see note).

31. ainapéta, though very poorly
attested, is the correct form of the voc.,
with the @ lengthened by ictus and the
pause natural after this case (H. G.

The

§ 387). The only analogies to the vulg.
αἰναρέτη are ᾿Ατρεΐδη and ὑψαγόρη (β 85,
303, p 406 only ; we should probably
read ὑψαγόρα). The variant aivapérns
as an exclamatory nom. is quite possible
(H. G. § 163), and there is something to
be said for aiv’ ἀρετῆς, which would come
to the same thing as the compound,
cursed in thy valour. (Brandreth conj.
aiv’, ἀρετῆς τίς τ᾽ ἄλλος, comparing A 763
οἷος τῆς ἀρετῆς ἀπονήσεται.) For the
sense we may compare the later com-
pounds αἰνόπατερ Aisch. Cho, 315,
αἰνόγαμος, αἰνόλεκτρος, Αἰνόπαρις, etc.,
though these do not contain the same
oxymoron, which is like that of δυσαρι-
στοτόκεια Σ 54. ἐπὶ κακῶι τὴν ἀρετὴν
ἔχων, An., rightly.

IAIAAOC Π (χνι) 159

, > ” , \ 2 ΄ , Ἢ
νηλεές, οὐκ ἄρα σοί γε πατὴρ ἣν ἱππότα [ἰηλεὺς
/ \ / ,
οὐδὲ Θέτις μήτηρ' γλαυκὴ δέ σε τίκτε θάλασσα
td / » Ἁ ,ὔ
πέτραι T ἠλίβατοι, ὅτι τοι νόος ἐστὶν ἀπηνής. 35
> / \ fol / > ,
εἰ δέ τινα φρεσὶ σῆισι θεοπροπίην ἀλεείνεις
καί τινά τοι πὰρ Ζηνὸς ἐπέφραδε πότνια μήτηρ,
GAN ἐμέ περ πρόες ay, ἅμα δ᾽ ἄλλον λαὸν ὄπασσον
Μυρμιδόνων, αἴ κέν τι φόως Δαναοῖσι γένωμαι.
\ » / tal
δὸς δέ μοι wpouv Ta σὰ τεύχεα θωρηχθῆναι, 10
/ /
αἴ κέ με σοὶ ἴσκοντες ἀπόσχωνται πολέμοιο
a / ’ Ia > a
Τρῶες, ἀναπνεύσωσι δ᾽ ἀρήϊοι vies Λχαιῶν
/ ’ /
τειρόμενοι" ὀλίγη δέ τ᾽ ἀνάπνευσις πολέμοιο.
fo > - / “
ῥεῖα δέ κ᾿ ἀκμῆτες κεκμηότας ἄνδρας ἀυτῆι
, , lal ,
ὥσαιμεν προτὶ ἄστυ νεῶν ἄπο Kal κλισιάων.᾽ 15
A ΄ , , ΄, ᾿ \ ”
ὡς φάτο λισσόμενος μέγα νήπιος" ἢ Yap ἐμελλεν
lol / \ fal
of αὐτῶι θάνατόν τε κακὸν καὶ κῆρα λιτέσθαι.

τὸν δὲ μέγ᾽ ὀχθήσας προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς'

“ὦ μοι, διογενὲς Ἰ]ατρόκλεις, οἷον ἔειπες"

οὔτε θεοπροπίης ἐμπάζομαι, ἥν τινα το 50
35. πέτρα ὃ᾽ ἡλίβατος Lips. | T HPTU: ὃ᾽ Ω. | ὅτι : ὅτε Ar. 36. ἀλεείνης

LR Harl. a. 37. énippade Vr. A. 39. αἴ κέν (Η ὃ) Vr. ἃ : ἥν πού. 41.
εἴεκοντες Ar. R. || ἀπόσχονται U Bar.: ἀποίχωνται (Ὁ. 42-3 om. J Par. a.
42. Gnannevcouci LS. 43. πτολέμοιο (τί). 44. κεκμηκότας Hust. 45.

ὥςομεν S: ὥσοιλιεν Vr. A. || ποτὶ KS. 47. of τ᾽ αὐτῶ(ι) HQ Mor. Vr. b A.
αὐτὸν R. || Ainécoa:r CPR (Aitéceat clossed καταλιπεῖν T™), 49, ἔειπας C Mor. Har.
50. HN TING: εἴ TING Ar.: eitiINoc TY supr.

It twice has a short vowel before the ἃ
of λιτ-. Of this there is no other in-

34. νῦν ἅπαξ τὴν θάλασσαν ἐπιθετικῶς
γλαυκὴν εἶπεν, An., adding that Hesiod
uses γλαυκή by itself for the sea (Theog. stance in 71. (see on A 15), and only
440 γλαυκὴν δυσπέμφελον). The word eight in Od. out of some thirty instances
recurs in H. only in γλαυκῶπις (see note of the root (including rior X 34).
on A 206) and γλαυκιόων Υ 172. It Further, the aor. λιτέσθαι (or pres. if we

probably means only gleaming, though
the ‘grey’ sea would better give the
idea of the merciless element, sunless
and wind-swept.

35. ὅτι, as I know because: H. G.
§ 269. 2. Ar.’s ὅ re is equally possible
(ibid. 3).

36-45. See A 794-803, with the notes.
The lines must be interpolated in both
places with the whole idea of the ex-
change of armour (see Introduction). αἵ
κέν: it is curious that the incorrect
ἤν πού, which in the parallel line
has hardly any authority, has here
invaded almost all mss. In Θ 282 ἤν
πού does not appear at all.

46-47. This couplet, which is quite
unnecessary, seems to be a late addition.

read λίτεσθαι with Ptol. Ask.) does not
recur in H. (in & 406 read Kpoviwv’
ἀλιτοίμην : see van L. Lach. p. 280

nor does either aor. or pres. agree with
the Epic use of μέλλω (Platt in J. P.

xxi. 41). If the line is to be saved we
must read λίσεσθαι with van L. ; he was
destined to pray ; not he was like to hav

been (or to be) praying.

50. For Hn τινα Ar, read εἴ τινα, even
if I do know of one; no doubt in order
to bring the line into harmony with I
410, where Achilles speaks of a prophetic
warning from his mother. That pass-
age, however, must be regarded as much
later than the present. And in any case
‘ Achilles does not necessarily mean that
Thetis has told him nothing: he only

160

IAIAAOC Π (xv1)

” Ἢ / \ ig, \ >? / / /

οὔτέ τί μοι πὰρ Ζηνὸς ἐπέφραδε πότνια μήτηρ᾽

> \ AN) ΩΝ ” / \ ἊΝ € /
ἀλλὰ τόδ᾽ αἰνὸν ἄχος κραδίην Kai θυμὸν ἱκάνει,
ὁππότε δὴ τὸν ὁμοῖον ἀνὴρ ἐθέληισιν ἀμέρσαι

καὶ γέρας ap ἀφελέσθαι, ὅ τε κράτεϊ προβεβήκηι"

3. Ἃ A / iA > 5 \ / ” @ ἴον
αἰνὸν ἄχος τὸ [OL εστιν, ἐπεὶ πάθον adyea θυμῶι. 55

/ A ” / ” - 3 nr
κούρην ἣν apa μοι γέρας ἔξελον vies Ἀχαιῶν,
fal / /
δουρὶ δ᾽ ἐμῶι κτεάτισσα, πόλιν ἐυτείχεα πέρσας,
Ε A ¢ ) a
τὴν aw ἐκ χειρῶν ἕλετο κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων
- sy ’
᾿Ατρεΐδης ὡς εἴ τιν᾽ ἀτίμητον μετανάστην.
» \ \ \ ΄ Sih: ’ > », oO
ἀλλὰ τὰ μὲν προτετύχθαι ἐάσομεν, οὐδ᾽ apa πως ἣν 60
> \ a 9. Ν / », »Μ
ἀσπερχὲς κεχολῶσθαι ἐνὶ φρεσίν: ἤτοι ἔφην γε

51-2 om. Q. 51. Unéppade L.

53. OM: Tic Ar. 54. προβεβήκει
57. ϑουρί τ᾽ R. || εὐτείχεον C()T Lips.

59. weTaNnacTIN (7) Rhianos Mass. (sseTanacteiNn Sch. 1, werTanacTHN

CIGHPQRU. 55. πάθον : μάθον P.
58 om. Vr. ἃ.
Sch. BL). 60. προτέτυκται R (spr. Xe).

denies that anything she may have told
him is the reason of his refusing to fight’
(Monro).

52. τόδε is best taken as an acc., it is
for this that sore grief comes to my heart,
the pronoun anticipating the following
relative sentence: see the same line in
O 208. So τό after ἄχος, 55.

53. ὁμοῖον, sc. in birth and worth ;
but κράτεϊ προβεβήκηι because πλεό-
νεσσιν ἀνάσσει A 281. The use of the
article to classify—rov ouotov=any one
who is his equal—is very rare in H.
See note on A 106 and H. G. § 260 ὁ.
So again p 218 ws ἀεὶ τὸν ὁμοῖον ἄγει
θεὸς ὡς τὸν ὁμοῖον. ἀμέρςαι, to despoil ;
see note on N 340. ‘The pres. is ἀμέρδω
in H., ἀμείρω in Pindar.

55. τό anticipates the following κούρην
ἥν κιτ.λ. πάθον ἄλγεα θυμῶι, cf. 1 321,
where it is used of sufferings undergone
in war. Here it refers to the humiliation
endured.

57. Cf. I 343 δουρικτητήν περ ἐοῦσαν.
πόλιν, Lyrnessos, B 690. ἐυτείχεα, else-
where always ἐυτείχεον (A 129, etc.).
But the present form is more in accord-
ance with analogy, and Nauck is perhaps
right in wishing to restore it throughout ;
ἐυτείχεον always occurs before the bucolic
diaeresis, where the hiatus is admissible,
and the fact that several Mss. read it
here against the metre shews that there
was a standing tendency to introduce it.

59. Cf. I 648 ὥς μ’ ἀσύφηλον ἔρεξεν
᾿Ατρεΐδης ws εἴ τιν᾽ ἀτίμητον μετανάστην,
where see note. It is clear that the
μετανάστης is here also Achilles himself,

not Briseis; it could be no outrage to
treat one who was already δουρικτητή as
an outlander. But the omission of the
pronoun is undoubtedly very harsh ; it
is easy to conjecture τήν αὐ dy, but not
to see why the letter should have been
lost. The text is in any case very
ancient, for Rhianos and the Massaliot
edition probably read μετανάστιν, as a
feminine. Bentley was perhaps right in
rejecting the line here.

60. This phrase, to Jet bygones be
bygones, is again used by Achilles in
Σ 112, T 65. ‘ We will let these matters
go their way, 1.6. put them away from
us. The common explanation is let them
have happened before, i.e. treat them as
past and done with; but this is not the
exact force of the expression. ‘The inf.
προτετύχϑαι is not=Wwamep προτετυγμένα
but=®ore προτετυγμένα εἷναι. And it
is more natural to take πρό = forth,
away ; cp. προ-ίαψε,᾽ etc.: Monro. But
this is not entirely convincing. HN, the
common use of the imperf. to express
the contrast of a past belief with the
reality : ‘I see that it was not possible
for me.’

61. ἔφην is commonly referred to the
words of Achilles in I 650. But it need
hardly be said that φημί does not neces-
sarily imply more than ‘I thought,’ and
so Ar. took it (ὅτι τὸ ἔφην γε ἀντὶ τοῦ
διενοήθην, An.). There is thus nothing
inconsistent with the supposition of the
later origin of I; the words there put
into Achilles’ mouth may well have been
suggested by this very phrase.

IAIAAOC Π (xvi) 161

οὐ πρὶν μηνιθμὸν καταπαυσέμεν, ἀλλ᾽ ὁπότ᾽ ἂν δὴ

νῆας ἐμὰς ἀφίκηται ἀντή τε πτόλεμός τε.

τύνη δ᾽ ὦμοιιν μὲν ἐμὰ κλυτὰ τεύχεα δῦθι,

ἄρχε δὲ Μυρμιδόνεσσι φιλοπτολέμοισι μάχεσθαι, 65

εἰ δὴ κυάνεον Γρώων νέφος ἀμφιβέβηκε

νηυσὶν ἐπικρατέως, οἱ δὲ ῥηγμῖνι θαλάσσης

κεκλίαται, χώρης ὀλίγην ἔτι μοῖραν ἔχοντες,
- ᾿Αργεῖοι: Τρώων δὲ πόλις ἐπὶ πᾶσα βέβηκε

θάρσυνος" οὐ γὰρ ἐμῆς κόρυθος λεύσσουσι μέτωπον 70

ἐγγύθι λαμπομένης" Taya Kev φεύγοντες ἐναύλους

πλήσειαν νεκύων, εἴ μοι κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων᾽

62. οὐ : μὴ LU. 63. πόλεμός GPR. 66. εἶ : yp. ἧι Schol. T. 69.
βεβήκει H Harl. a, Vr. A. 71. ἐναύλους Ar. διὰ τοῦ ν, 2: others ἐπαύλους ?
12. mol: μὴ L.

62. MHNIEUWON, a word peculiar to this tarians have almost without exception
book, see 202, 282. ἀλλ᾽ ὁπότ᾽ Gn, ἃ thought it necessary to expunge the
slight alteration for the second πρίν lines, always on the weakest grounds.
which we should have expected. ΟΕ. E.g. it is objected by Hentze that the
23 οὐδέ Kev αὐτὸς ὑπέκφυγε κῆρα, ἀλλ᾿: acc. στρατόν does not suit the present
Ἥφαιστος ἔρυτο, for εἰ μή. position of affairs, as ἀμφιμάχεσθαι when

66. εἰ OH, since now, not expressing any it takes the acc. is used only in a local
doubt. κυάνεον νέφος, cf. A282 φάλαγ- sense, ‘to fight round about,’ as the
yes κυάνεαι, A 274, Ψ 133 νέφος εἵπετο Greeks are said Ἴλιον ἀμφιμάχεσθαι ἢ
πεζῶν, and see P 243. ἀμφιβέβηκε 461, cf. I 412, Σ 208. Now that the
with dat. is elsewhere used only in the possession of the camp is at stake the
sense of protection, but always with gen. should be used, as νεκροῦ ἀμφιμά-
tmesis ; the acc. is used when surround- ἄχεσθαι is ‘to fight for the possession of a
ing is implied, cf. μι 74 νεφέλη δέ ww dead body.’ This is surely hypercritical ;
ἀμφιβέβηκε xvavén. The dative may be _ the battle is going on rownd the camp in
explained by the idea of hostile attack the literal sense, as well as for it; it is

which is emphasized by the ém- of ἐπι- ποῦ yet in the camp, for the outer ships
κρατέως, as in the common ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλοισιν are only the edge of it. If we remember
ἰόντες. that the wall is not-part of the original

68. κεκλίαται, see note on Ὁ 740. scenery there is nothing to be said against

71. ἐναύλους, cf. & 283 ὅν par’ ἔναυλος the phrase. Fick, though he does not
ἀποέρσηι χειμῶνι περῶντα. The word ap: _ believe in the originality of I, still rejects
parently means torrent-beds, but does 64-79, but the only serious linguistic
not seem to recur in this sense after reasons he gives are the form νικῶντες
Homer. The reference must be to the (79), for which he would apparently,
gullies in the open plain, opposed tothe if on other grounds convinced of the
camp, στρατόν. genuineness of the passage, be prepared

72-73. This couplet contains a more’ to read the Aiolic vixayres, and the two
apparent than real contradiction with I. Ionic genitives Tudetdew and "Atpetdew.
Of course Agamemnon has done all in But in the first place there is no reason
his power to shew friendliness to Achilles why the old Epic language may not
in the Embassy, which therefore appears have had in the -a declension a short
to be ignored ; but it is no doubt true form of the gen. (either -a, like Thessalian
that ἥπια εἰδείη refers to the whole and Aiolic, or -av like Arkadian or -w
course of Agamemnon’s action. Achilles like Cyprian) beside -ao just as in the
means ‘if Agamemnon “‘were of gentle -ὦ decl. it has -ov beside -o1o. Secondly
mind” to him, 1.6. behaved as a good it is quite possible to read ᾿Ατρεΐδα᾽ ὁπός,
friend generally, such mischief would ἴον (F)éy in H. has lost the F (Knés Dig.
not arise’ (Monro). None the less uni-_p. 88, #7. G. ὃ 393); and van L. reads

VOL. II M

162 IAIAAOC Π (xv1)

Μ > i. lal \ \ > IK
ἤπια εἰδείη" νῦν δὲ στρατὸν ἀμφιμάχονται.
οὐ γὰρ Tvdeidem Διομήδεος ἐν παλάμηισι

/ a \ πὶ =
μαίνεται ἐγχείη Δαναῶν ἀπὸ λοιγὸν ἀμῦναι" 75

οὐδέ πω ᾿Ατρεΐδεω ὀπὸς ἔκλυον αὐδήσαντος
ἐχθρῆς ἐκ κεφαλῆς": ἀλλ᾽ “Extopos ἀνδροφόνοιο
Τρωσὶ κελεύοντος περιάγνυται, οἱ δ᾽ ἀλαλητῶν

rn a 9 74
πᾶν πεδίον κατέχουσι, μάχηι νικῶντες Ἀχαιούς.

e n \ \ ΄
ἀλλὰ καὶ ὧς, ἸΙάτροκλε, νεῶν ἀπὸ λοιγὸν ἀμύνων 80

” > 5 / \ \ \ > Ἵ
EMITTED ETLKPATEWS, μὴ δὴ συρος αἰθομένοιο

lol > / / ’ > \ / ef-
νῆας ἐνιπρήσωσι, φίλον δ᾽ ἀπὸ νόστον ἕλωνται.

πείθεο δ᾽ ὥς τοι ἐγὼ μύθου τέλος ἐν φρεσὶ θείω,

e ” \ / \ “ yA
ὡς ἄν μοι τιμὴν μεγάλην καὶ κῦδος ἄρηαι

Ν / A lal > \ e ie /
πρὸς πάντων Δαναῶν, ἀτὰρ οἱ περικαλλέα κούρην 85

x > ΄ὔ \ , > \ lal ,
ay ἀὠπονάσσωσιν, ποτὶ ὃ ἀγλαὰ δῶρα πορωσίιν.

> an oe WZ 7 ΄ὔ > , 5
EK VIWV ἐλάσας ἰέναι πάλιν" εἰ δέ κεν AU τοι

dane κῦδος ἀρέσθαι ἐρίγδουπος πόσις Ἥρης,

\ ΄ 9 val /
μὴ σύ γ᾽ ἄνευθεν ἐμεῖο λιλαίεσθαι πολεμίζειν

76. ὀπὸς: ἔν τισι τῶν ὑπομνημάτων ἔπος Did.
νηῶν ὃ᾽ Ὁ Vr. ἃ A. || αὗτε DHQU Bar.
89-90 om. Zen.

Cram: An. Ox: 11. 353:

86. προτὶ JPQ. 87.
Mor. Vr. b A, Mose. 2. 88. κύϑε᾽
89. ἐμοῖο GP.

Τυδεΐδηι Διομήδει. The only other argu-
ment for rejection lies in the alleged
want of reference in ἀλλὰ καὶ ὥς, 80.
This clearly alludes to the thought of
72, and not to the intervening passage ;
but such a rapid transition is surely
highly dramatic and suitable to the
temper of Achilles, whose injured pride
is continually uppermost in his thoughts,
even when his words do not directly
name it. I see no reason at all, there-
fore, for rejecting any lines beyond 64 in
this portion of Achilles’ speech.

73. For εἰϑείη used of disposition see
on E 326.

75. μαίνεται, ἃ5 0 111. For Δαναῶν,
gen. in place of the commoner dat., cf.
A 11, M 402, ete.

77. κεφαλῆς, for the head as the seat
of the voice cf. A 462 ἤυσεν ὅσον κεφαλὴ
χάδε φωτός.

78. περιάγνυται, the metaphor is not
very clear; it recurs in Sceut. Her. 348
περὶ δέ σῴφισιν ἄγνυτο ἠχώ. Perhaps it
comes from the breaking of the wave
upon the beach, cf. κύματος ayy, Ap.
Rhod. i. 554. ὄψ᾽ must be supplied from
the preceding line.

79. The picture is consistent with the
supposition that the original μάχη ἐπὶ

ταῖς ναυσίν was comparatively brief and
knew nothing of the wall; only the fore-
most ranks of the Trojans are fighting
at the ships, the mass of them still cover
the plain.

83. suteou τέλος, the swm, outcome of
my command. So I 625 μύθοιο τελευτή.
ἐν ppeci ociw, so Τ' 121 ἔπος Ti τοι ἐν
φρεσὶ θήσω, and π᾿ 282.

85. Here, again, those who believe in
the antiquity of I have to resort to
athetesis, as the restoration of Briseis
and the ἀγλαὰ δῶρα are actually offered
in I 274. The selfishness of Achilles
is open enough, and is quite in keeping
with his character ; his friend’s glory is
to be sacrificed in favour of his own.
Hentze finds the interposition of 84-86
between the announcement and the ex-
pression of Achilles’ advice ‘clumsy and
confusing.’ This can hardly be anything
but the result of a parti pris.

86. Gnondccoocn, lit. remove from home
(compare the use of the mid. in B 629,
o 254), ie. send back. But the word
is strange. Bekker conj. ἀποδάσσωσιν,
award; but δάσασθαι and compounds
appear elsewhere only in mid.

89-90. Zen. was presumably moved
to omit this couplet by the somewhat

_

IAIAAOC Π (xvi)

163

Tpwol φιλοπτολέμοισιν: ἀτιμότερον δέ pe θήσεις" 90
, oy lal

μηδ᾽ ἐπαγαλλόμενος πολέμωι καὶ δηϊοτῆτι,
ce / ΄

Τρῶας ἐναιρόμενος, προτὶ Ἴλιον ἡγεμονεύειν,

μή τις ἀπ᾿ Οὐλύμποιο θεῶν αἰειγενετάων

ἐμβήηι: μάλα τούς γε φιλεῖ ἑκάεργος ᾿Απόλλων'

> \ / / ᾽ \ / > ΄,

ἀλλὰ πάλιν τροπάασθαι ἐπὴν φάος ἐν νήεσσι 95
/ \ / > bia! ,’ὔ / ,

θήηις, τοὺς δέ τ᾽ ἐᾶν πεδίον κάτα δηριάασθαι.

al yap, Zed τε πάτερ Kai ᾿Αθηναίη καὶ Λπολλον,

μήτέ τις οὖν Τρώων θάνατον φύγοι, ὅσσοι ἔασι,
/ / » / a > ΕῚ lal ”

μήτέ τις ᾿Αργείων, νῶϊ δ᾽ ἐκδῦμεν ὄλεθρον,

” 3 5 ,ὔ e \ ΄ ΄ »”

ὄφρ᾽ οἷοι Τροίης ἱερὰ κρήδεμνα λύωμεν. 100
ὡς οἱ μὲν τοιαῦτα πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἀγύρευον,

90. θείης T. 91. μὴ εὖ γ᾽ ἀγαλλόμενος Zen. 92. ποτὶ GJR: ποτ᾽ S.
ἡγεμονεύειν : αἰπὺ δίεσθαι Zen. 93-6 Ζηνόδοτος ἤιρκε, γράφει δὲ μή ς᾽
ἀπογυμνωθέντα (Gnouounweénta |) λάβηι κορυθαίολος “Ἕκτωρ An. 94.

éuBain J.

(see below). 98. φύγηι Lips.

95. Tpondacea AtCLYKS Lips. Mor. Harl. a, Vr. b A: tpwndacea ":
tpwndcear A™D (-dcear) GHITU (cf. 0 666). || aoc: φόως ὦ.
τούςϑε (τοὺς dt) δ᾽ AMGHPRTU. || €a ἃ. || καταϑηριάςαςθαι ().

nt

99. νῶϊ JLR Par. ἃ :

96. θείης GLK.
97-100 ἀθ. Ar.

νῶϊν {), 100. λύοιμεν

A™ (7) supr.) 1003: λύημεν S: ἕλωμεν Lips.

tautological repetitions, which however
are not ill suited to the emphasis which
Achilles wishes to lay on his words.

90. ἀτιμότερον dé με θήςεις, a rhetori-
eal way of saying ‘you will prevent
my obtaining any τιμή or recompense.’
Achilles means his friend to save the
ships, but not to relieve the Greeks from
the stress of battle.

94. ἐμβήηι, intervenc, enter the fray.

96. τοὺς ὃέ τ᾽ ἐᾶν should be τοὺς δ᾽
ἐάειν (P. Knight) both on account of the
contraction, and because re is not in
place here ; see H. G. ὃ 352.

97-100. ἀθετοῦνται στίχοι τέσσαρες,
διότι κατὰ διασκευὴν (interpolation) ἐμφαί-
νουσι γεγράφθαι ὑπό τινος τῶν νομιζόντων
ἐρᾶν τὸν ᾿Αχιλλέα τοῦ ἸΤατρόκλου τοιοῦτοι
yap οἱ λόγοι, “πάντες ἀπόλοιντο πλὴν
ἡμῶν, καὶ ὁ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς οὐ τοιοῦτος, συμπαθὴς
δέ, An. καλῶς οὖν φησὶν ᾿Αρίσταρχος
“ηνύδοτον ὑπωπτευκέναι ὡς εἶεν παρεν-
τεθέντες οἱ στίχοι ὑπὸ τῶν ἀρσενικοὺς
ἔρωτας λεγόντων εἷναι παρ᾽ Ὁμήρωι καὶ
ὑπονοούντων παιδικὰ εἶναι ᾿Αχιλλέα Πα-
τρόκλου, Schol. T. Modern critics gener-
ally reject the lines, but on less morbid
grounds; the main ecru being 1. 99.
The text gives the only satisfactory
constr., ἐκδῦμεν being taken as opt. with

ι lost alter v as in δαίνυτο Ὁ 665 and
other cases in H. G. § 83.1. The ordinary
reading νῶϊν δ᾽ ἐκδύμεν (infin. ) assumes an
impossible omission of εἴη. The length-
ening in arsi of the ε of νῶϊ is analogous
to the very frequent lengthening of -ἰ of
the dative—whether the vowel was origin-
ally long by nature we cannot say (see
H. G. § 373). Those who think the
metrical license violent may prefer Axt’s
νὼ δ᾽ ἐκδύημεν, though the short form vw
is found at most twice (E 219 q.v.,
o 475%). Zen. may have understood
the line in the same way, for he re-
garded νῶϊν asa legitimate form of the
nom. (La Ἢ H. 7. p. 319). Taken
in this way the wish seems clear enough
and not too extravagant for Achilles’
passion ; all the Greeks have wronged
him, let them all perish. This passage
may be vaguely alluded to in Pind. Ὁ.
ix. 76 ff. ἐξ οὗ Θέτιος γόνος οὐλίωι νιν
(Πάτροκλον) ἐν “Apec παραγορεῖτο μὴ ποτε
σφετέρας ἄτερθε ταξιοῦσθαι δαμασιμβρότου
αἰχμᾶς.

100. κρήδεμνα of the ‘diadem of
towers’ also in ν 388, Hes. Scut. 105,
Hymn. Cer. 151. Compare B 117 πολίων
κατέλυσε κάρηνα, Eur. Hee. 910 στεφάναν
πύργων.

104

IAIAAOC Π (xvr)

5 Le sy \ /
Alas δ᾽ οὐκέτ᾽ ἔμιμνε: βιάζετο yap βελέεσσι"

“2 rz, / , Ν ny “ >’ \
δάμνα μιν Ζηνός τε voos καὶ Τρῶες ἀγαυοὶ

βάλλοντες" δεινὴν δὲ περὶ κροτάφοισι φαεινὴ

πήληξ βαλλομένη καναχὴν ἔχε, βάλλετο δ᾽ αἰεὶ 105

kat φάλαρ᾽ εὐποίηθ᾽. ὁ δ᾽ ἀριστερὸν ὦμον ἔκαμνεν,

5, / 2O\ ,
ἔμπεδον αἰὲν ἔχων σάκος αἰόλον, οὐδὲ δύναντο

fal /
ἀμφ᾽ αὐτῶι πελεμίξαι ἐρείδοντες βελέεσσιν.

αἰεὶ δ᾽ ἀργαλέωι ἔχετ᾽ ἄσθματι, Kad δέ οἱ ἱδρὼς

> VA 3 τ
πάντοθεν ἐκ μελέων πολὺς ἔρρεεν, οὐδέ πηι εἶχεν 110

an \ lal > /
ἀμπνεῦσαι: πάντην δὲ κακὸν κακῶι ETTNPLKTO.

" a an ’ / NA > δ)
E€OTTETE νυν μοι, μουσαι Ολύμπια οματ εχούυσαι,

ὅππως δὴ πρῶτον πῦρ ἔμπεσε νηυσὶν ᾿Αχαιῶν.

ἽΒκτωρ Αἴαντος δόρυ μείλινον ἄγχι παραστὰς

πλῆξ᾽ ἄορι μεγάλωι, αἰχμῆς παρὰ καυλὸν ὄπισθεν, 11ὅ
> \ Ὁ. ΄ὔ NET ΤῊΝ ΄ »“

ἀντικρὺ δ᾽ ἀπάραξε: τὸ μὲν Τελαμώνιος Αἴας

“ 2 AK / / an Qo 5 5 > nr
THX αὔτως ἐν χειρὶ κολον δόρυ, τῆλε O aT αὑτοῦ

αἰχμὴ χαλκείη χαμάδις βόμβησε πεσοῦσα.

104. δεινὴν Herod. (Ar. ?) CGPU? Harl. abd, Par. a, Ven. B Lips.: δεινὸν L

Par. 1: ϑεινὴ Q.

105. βάλλετο : τινὲς yp. TUNTeTO An.

106. Kai φάλαρ᾽ Ar.

(and yp. C): καμφάλαρ᾽ S: παμφάλαρ᾽ R. || EKQUNEN: ἔκαμψεν Bar. (yp.
éxaunen) Mor. 108. αὐτοῦ 0. || πολεμίξαι JQ. || TeAéeccin Bar. Mor. 110.

MH: no Bar.: τί LD.
153 A. 117. yepci Bar.

111. éunnedcai JS.

115. αἰχακὴν Schol. Plat. Charm.

102=0 727. The story now returns
to the state of aflairs described at the
end of the preceding book. It is not
clear, however, from the following lines
that Aias is still on the ship of Protesi-
laos; the expression used would be
equally applicable to an ordinary battle
on the plain, while we should have
expected some allusion to the peculiar
circumstances. But this is not ground
enough for dividing the authorship, as
some would do. In 106, too, he is
represented as holding a shield on his
left arm, whereas in O 677 he wields the
ξυστὸν ναύμαχον with both hands.

103. For Ζηνὸς νόος cf. on Ὁ 242.
The obvious difference between the two
passages is that the will of Zeus here
works not immediately but through the
agency of the Trojans.

104. The position of the epithet
@aeINH, separated from its substantive
by the end of the line, is hardly Homeric:
see on N 611, the only quite similar
instance. Lehrs thinks that there is a
corruption here, due to a reminiscence

of N 805 dui δέ οἱ κροτάφοισι φαεινὴ
σείετο THANE, but he has no fitter emenda-
tion to offer than ἀμφὶ κροτάφοισι μένον-
Tos, Or even περὶ κροτάφοις ἀραρυῖα.

105. καναχὴν ἔχε, kept up the din,
cf. βοὴν ἔχον = 495.

106. kan, Ar. καί, apparently regard-
ing βάλλετο δ᾽ aici as parenthetical.
For the φάλαρα see App. B, vil. 3.

108. aug’ αὐτῶι seems to refer to the
shield, ‘to shake it over him,’ as P 132
ἀμφὶ Μενοιτιάδηι σάκος καλύψας, etc. We
might also understand it of the Trojans,
‘they, round about him,’ as N 496 of
δ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ᾿Αλκαθόωι. . ὡρμήθησαν, P 267
ἕστασαν ἀμφὶ Μενοιτιάδηι etc. ‘The
former use, however, is the commoner.

111. κακὸν κακῶι EctHpiKTo, trouble
leant upon trouble, i.e. one followed
closely on another. Cf. T 290 δέχεται
κακὸν ἐκ κακοῦ αἰεί.

112. The appeal to the Muses fitly
introduces the great crisis of the Iliad—
the climax of Greek defeat on which the
plot turns. Cf. A218, and B 484.

115. καυλόν, see note on N 162.

2 πν

ὡ Ἢ

IAIAAOC Π (χνιὴ 165

“ ᾽ " \ \ ᾽ / es /
γνῶ δ᾽ Alas κατὰ θυμὸν ἀμύμονα ῥίγησέν τε
ἔργα θεῶν, ὅ pa πάγχυ μάχης ἐπὶ μήδεα κεῖρε 120
Ζεὺς ὑψιβρεμέτης, Τρώεσσι δὲ βούλετο νίκην"

χάζετο δ᾽ ἐκ βελέων.

\ ’ , “-
τοὶ δ᾽ ἔμβαλον ἀκάματον πῦρ

νηὶ Gone τῆς δ᾽ αἶψα κατ᾽ ἀσβέστη κέχυτο φλόξ.

ὡς τὴν μὲν πρυμνὴν πῦρ ἄμφεπεν: αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
μηρὼ πληξάμενος Ἰ]ατροκλῆα προσέειπεν" 125
“ ὄρσεο, διογενὲς Π]ατρόκλεις, ἱπποκέλευθε:"

/ \ \ \ Ν
λεύσσω δὴ παρὰ νηυσὶ πυρὸς
\ ὃ) -“ led \ > /
μὴ δὴ νῆας ἕλωσι καὶ οὐκέτι

Α / -“
δύσεο τεύχεα θᾶσσον, ἐγὼ δέ

A > /
δηΐοιο ἰωήν"
\ /
φυκτὰ πέλωνται"
Ν ΕῚ ,ὔ ”
κε λαὸν εγείρω.

ὡς φάτο, ἸΪάτροκλος δὲ κορύσσετο νώροπι χαλκῶι. 180
κνημῖδας μὲν πρῶτα περὶ κνήμηισιν ἔθηκε
καλάς, ἀργυρέοισιν ἐπισφυρίοις ἀραρυίας"
δεύτερον αὖ θώρηκα περὶ στήθεσσιν ἔδυνε
ποικίλον ἀστερόεντα ποδώκεος Αἰακίδαο.

120. ecod H. || Kefpe Ar. AtC Lips. Mose. 2, Ven. B:
122. of 3’ Ἣν
124. τῆς wen npuuNnAc J'T! Vr. A.
GHJPQSTU Par. ἃ e f h j, Ven. B, yp. Harl. a.
129. θᾶττον J. || ἐγείρω PR: ἀγείρω 0.

121. βούλετ᾽ ἀρήγειν 7) Vr. b A.
&cBectoc S.

κείρει (2 (κήρει S).
ἔβαλον () Lips. 123.
127. ἰωήν : ἐρωήν Mass.

128. πέλονται DHT Vr. Ὁ.

After this line D™J Vr. A add

MUPLIOGNON* HN πού τι φάος ϑαναοῖςει γένηαι (γένωνται J) (from 39). 133.

dune: ἔϑηκεί(ν) U Vr. ἃ.
ἀλεωρήν T.

134. ποδώκεος diakidao: τινὲς κακῶν βελέων

119. ῥίγηςεν, οἵ. ῥιγήσειν πόλεμον, E
351. This shews that the verb here
need not be regarded as parenthetical.

120. ἐπὶ μκήϑεα κεῖρε, as O 407.

123. TAc .. κατά, spread down over
the ship, as κατὰ δ᾽ ὀφθαλμῶν κέχυτ᾽
ἀχλύς. The use seems to be an instance
of the local gen. ; see H. G. § 213.
1324. Guenen, lapped round, lit. sur-
rounded as with hands (érw=to handle).
So also Σ 348 γάστρην τρίποδος πῦρ
ἄμφεπεν.

125. κηρὼ πληξάμενος, cf. M 162,
Ο 397.

126. ἱπποκέλευθε, only here and 584,
839. It was variously explained, ἵπποις
κελεύων, ἢ ὁ πολλὴν ὁδὸν πορευόμενος
(Hesych.), ἢ ἐφ᾽ ἵππων τὴν πορείαν ποιού-
μενος Schol. B. As the word stands it
must be referred to κέλευθος, one who

Fares with horses ; cf. ἀ-κόλουθ-ος. But

the derivation from κελεύω seems much
more natural: hence Bentley writes
ἱπποκελευστά from Hesych. (immoxe\eura
Nauck).

127. For ἰωή (ξιωή) see note on A 276.

The strongly supported variant ἐρωή
introduces of course a forbidden hiatus.

128. μὴ... ἕλωςι . . πέλωνται, this
line is best taken independently, as
punctuated. Many edd. make it sub-
ordinate to ὄρσεο, taking 127 as a par-
enthesis, but this is needlessly compli-
cated. μή with subj. is the primitive
expression of fear and the like; sub-
ordination to a verb is a later develop-
ment. Cf. A 26 μή σε κιχείω, ete. ; I.
and T. §§ 261, 307. For ov following
μή (‘resistance to a negative’) cf. E 233
μὴ τὼ “μὲν. . ματήσετον οὐδ᾽ ἐθέλητον,
also in ἃ separate clause; H. G. ὃ 278.
φυκτά, neut. plur. as an abstract, cf. on
M 30, Ξ 98.

129. It will be felt that dUceo τεύχεα
is hardly the phrase that would be used
if Achilles meant ‘put on my armour.’
éreipw, arouse, is evidently more vigor-
ous than the vulg. dyelpw. The words
are often confused in Mss.

131-33 =I 330-32, 185-39 =T 894---

134. ἀςτερόεντα, the adjective is els
where used only of the sky, except =

9

a
ὃ,
ρ.

166

ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὦμοισιν βάλετο ξίφος ἀργυρόηλον 85

IAIAAOC Π (xv1)

/ SEAN ” / / /
χάλκεον, αὐυταρ ETTELTA σάκος MEYA TE στιβαρὸν ΠΕΣ

\ ᾽ 92295 (5. 7 ,ὔ "7 »
κρατὶ δ᾽ ἐπ᾿ ἰφθίμωι κυνέην ἐύτυκτον ἔθηκεν
ἵππουριν" δεινὸν δὲ λόφος καθύπερθεν ἔνευεν.

εἵλετο δ᾽ ἄλκιμα δοῦρε, τά οἱ παλάμηφιν ἀρήρει.

ἔγχος δ᾽ οὐχ ἕλετ᾽ οἷον ἀμύμονος Αἰακίδαο, 140

βριθὺ μέγα στιβαρόν: τὸ μὲν οὐ δύνατ᾽ ἄλλος ᾿Αχαιῶν

πάλλειν, ἀλλά μιν οἷος ἐπίστατο πῆλαι ᾿Αχιλλεύς,
Πηλιάδα μελίην, τὴν πατρὶ φίλωι πόρε Χείρων
Πηλίου ἐκ κορυφῆς, φόνον ἔμμεναι ἡρώεσσιν.

ἵππους δ᾽ Δὐτομέδοντα θοῶς ζευγνῦμεν ἄνωγε, : 145

137. κρατὶ 8° én’ ἀμφίφαλον κυνέην Θέτο τετραφάληρον T. || EUTUKTON:

εὔϑηκτον L.
141 44 om. Zen.

139. dotpa R.
142. πᾶλαι Lips.

πόρε) Par. c gj, Cant. Vr. b: διχῶς Ar.

140 ἀθ. Zen. ||

αἰακίδαο : πηλείϑαο P.
143 om. Ht. || πόρε: τάμε Ηπ,, (yp.
144. ἐκ κορυφῆς: ἐν κορυφῆις Ar.

370 of the house of Hephaistos. Here
it may mean simply shining like a star,
or perhaps ‘adorned with — star-like
ornaments, which may include inlaid
rosettes and similar forms such as the
so-called Swastika, which we sometimes
find indicated on breast-plates in vase-
paintings. Cf. dv@eudevra Ψ 885. The
variant κακῶν βελέων ἀλεωρήν for nodes-
Keoc Aiaxidao is in all probability the
original reading altered when the change
of armour was introduced. It seems to
have remained in familiar use even to
the time of Aristophanes; for it must
be this which he parodies in Vesp. 615
τόδε κέκτημαι πρόβλημα κακῶν σκευὴν
βελέων ἀλεωρήν. The only other similar
phrase in H. is δήιων ἀνδρῶν ἀλεωρήν,
M 57, O 533, and that is not near
enough to the parody (van L.). But
however the couplet stood, it lies under
the suspicion attaching to all allusions
to the breast-plate (App. B, iii. 3). It
would appear that alterations in favour
of the change of armour took place after
the introduction of the θώρηξ into the
Homeric armoury.

141-44=T 388-91. Zen. athetized
140 and omitted 141-44 altogether as
copied from T; while Ar. retained them
here and athetized them in T. There
can be little doubt that Zen. was right.
140 is a most awkward line; it should
stand before 139, not after it. Equally
awkward is the description 141-44 ina
negative passage ; the poet should en-
large upon the spear when it is being

taken, not when it is being left behind.
It is quite intelligible that the lines
should be added here to explain how, in
spite of the change of armour, Achilles
is still found in T with the redoubtable
spear. Schol. A thinks that it is
arranged that Achilles shall not lose
his spear with the rest of his arms, be-
cause Hephaistos is only a metal worker,
and therefore would not make spears.
He goes on to quote the legend of this
spear from the Kypria ; Χείρων δὲ μελίαν
εὐθαλῆ τεμὼν eis δόρυ παρέσχεν (as a
wedding present to Peleus). φασὶ μὲν
᾿Αθηνᾶν ἕξέσαι αὐτό, Ἥφαιστον δὲ κατα-
σκευάσαι (this evidently means ‘put on
the point’). Cf. also Pindar J. iii. 33
γέγαθε Πηλεὺς ἄναξ ὑπέραλλον αἰχμὰν
ταμών.

143. There is an evident play on sound
between πῆλαι and Pelion, as well as in
the allusion to Peleus, though he is not
actually named. Ar. hesitated between
πόρε and τάμε; the latter seems to be
an adaptation to the legend in the
Kypria, according to which Cheiron gave
the shaft only.

145. The long v in Ζευγνῦμεν is
irregular, see 1 260, O 120. It may
possibly be due to the analogy of
τιθήμεναι ἀήμεναι, which are explained
by metrical necessity. See note on K 34
and ef. ἔμεναι T 365. ἸΠάτροκλος μὲν
᾿Αχιλλέως ἡνίοχος, Πατρόκλου δὲ Αὐτο-
μέδων, An. So Meriones, the charioteer
of Idomeneus, himself has a charioteer
in P 610 (if the passage is not corrupt).

IAIAAOC Π (xvi)

167

Ν nS A ΄ -
τὸν μετ ᾿Αχιλλῆα ῥηξήνορα τῖε μάλιστα,
‘ x “ ¢ ΄
πιστότατος δέ οἱ ἔσκε μάχηι ἔνι μεῖναι ὁμοκλήν.
lal \ \ > / »“ \ ’ / ΄“
τῶι δὲ καὶ Αὐτομέδων ὕπαγε ζυγὸν ὠκέας ἵππους,
4 \ / \ fad -“ ,ὔ
Ξάνθον καὶ Βαλίον, τὼ ἅμα πνοιῆισι πετέσθην,
\ » ig / , / ev /
tous ἔτεκε “εφύρωι ἀνέμων ἅρπυια llodapyn 150
/ fal ΄ ᾽ “
βοσκομένη λειμῶνι παρὰ ῥόον Ὠκεανοῖο.
’ / ΄
ἐν δὲ παρηορίηισιν ἀμύμονα IInédacor ἵει,
/ ΄ εχ ae ΄ / » ,
τὸν ῥά ποτ᾽ ᾿Ηετίωνος ἑλὼν πόλιν ἤγαγ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεύς,
a \ Ν >\ “ » “, > 77
ὃς καὶ θνητὸς ἐὼν ἕπεθ᾽ ἵπποις ἀθανάτοισι.
, ᾽ / , ΄ > ‘
Μυρμιδόνας δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ érrovyopevos θώρηξεν ᾿Αχιλλεὺς 155
/ \ e δ
πάντας ἀνὰ κλισίας σὺν τεύχεσιν" οἱ δὲ λύκοι ὡς

148. δὲ Kai: ὃέ Ken Vr. A.
noddptH LU: nddaproc Zen.

ἄμεινον KOCUHCEN 7.

150. The Gpnuia or storm-gust (lit.
snatcher) appears here only in the Ziad ;
in the Od. (a 241, € 371, v77) it is less
distinctly personified ; indeed a com-
parison of v 66 with 77 shews that the
ἅρπυιαι are identical with θύελλαι. It is
needless to say that they have nothing
in common with the foul creatures of
the Aeneid. The oldest form of the
name is ᾿Αρέπυια, found on an archaic
vase from Aegina, and further attested
by the Μὲ. Mag. This could be restored
in all the Homeric passages. See on
Y 234. In Υ 223 Boreas is the pro-
genitor of a race of fleet horses, but by
mortal mares. For Ποδάργη Zen. read
modapyos as an adj., taking “Aprua as
the proper name; but see T 400. For
the idea that mares were impregnated by
the wind see Virgil G. iii. 271, Pliny
H. N. viii. 42. Here of course the mares
are themselves winds.

151. The variant Ἡριδανοῖο for Ὥκεα-
noio is noteworthy. In _ post-Homeric
mythology the Eridanos was a river of
fairyland, and well suited for the scene
of such an event. The name _ first
occurs in Hesiod Theog. 338.

152. The napHopoc recurs in H. only
in 9 87, which is probably a late passage
(see note there). Some critics have pro-
posed to reject 152-54 and 462-76 where
Pedasos again occurs, on the ground that
the third horse is not Homeric. But
there are considerable difficulties respect-
ing the excision of the latter passage
(see note on 467), and the fact that the

149. πετάςθην |).
151. napappdon CST.
(Par. ἃ supr. man. vec.) and πολλὰ τῶν ἀντιγράφων Eust.
-aicin ἢ". | GuUuoNa: γρ. ἀμείνονα X.
156. πάντας : πάντηι Zen.

150. ποϑδάρκη (C supr.) 8:
ὠκεανοῖο : Apidanoio |
152. napxopioicin KR’,

153-54 om. (. 155. @COPHEEN :

practice is only once mentioned is a
matter of small weight. The use of the
mapnopos was perhaps to kick and bite
rather than to draw; he would also be
a reserve if a yoke-horse were killed.
See Helbig H. H. 129.

153. Ἡετίωνος πόλιν, Thebe, Z 397.

156. cUN τεύχεσιν seems to imply a
confusion of the comitative and instru-
mental senses, ‘armed them with their
shields’ as in English. We may compare

σὺν ἔντεσι μαρμαίροντας 279, and σὺν
μεγάλωι ἀπέτισαν Δ 161. Sch. T re-

marks that κόσμησεν would be better
than θώρηξεν, but this is an opinion
only, not a variant. For πάντας Zen.
read πάντηι, the more usual expression,
e.g. A 384; he is followed by Nauck.
The verb of of δέ is forgotten till we
come to ῥώοντο, 166.—The following
elaborate simile is unique as presenting
two distinct scenes, first the rending of
the body, and then the rush to the
spring. The second part, 160-63, con-
tains several strange expressions, and
is quite unsuited to its place; for though
the eager Myrmidons may be compared
to wolves tearing a deer (though even
this is premature, while they are only
arming), there is less than no point in
comparing them to g/utted wolves going
off to drink. The Epic poet often ex-
pands a simile with touches which do
not directly bear on the main comparison,
but not with a further development
directly contradicting it. The natural
history of 163 is wrong, for a glutted

108

IAIAAOC Π (νὴ

᾿ 7 ἈΠ ἢ, N \ 7 b) /
ὠμοφάγοι, τοῖσιν τε περὶ φρεσὶν ἄσπετος ἀλκὴ,

3

“
οι τ

” \ if BA /
ἔλαφον κεραὸν μέγαν οὔρεσι δηιώσαντες

ft a \ Jw ivf / -
δάπτουσιν" παισιν δὲ παρήϊνον ALLaTL φοινὸν

/ ’ N ἊΝ / J
Kal T ἀγεληδὸν ἴασιν ἀπὸ κρήνης μελανύδρου

160

λάψοντες γλώσσηισιν ἁραιῆισιν μέλαν ὕδωρ

ἄκρον, ἐρευγόμενοι φόνον αἵματος" ἐν δέ τε θυμὸς

στήθεσιν ἄτρομός ἐστι, περιστένεται δέ τε γαστήρ᾽

τοῖοι Μυρμιδόνων ἡγήτορες ἠδὲ μέδοντες

ἀμφ᾽ ἀγαθὸν θεράποντα ποδώκεος Αἰακίδαο 165
pwovr: ἐν & ἄρα τοῖσιν ἀρήϊος ἵστατ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς

/ fo / ’ /
ὀτρύνων ἵππους τε Kal avépas ἀσπιδιώτας.
77 3. 5 3. n / - 5. \
πεντήκοντ ἦσαν νῆες θοαί, how ᾿Αχιλλεὺς

157. περὶ : παρὰ S.
160. ano: ἐπὶ Vr. A.
Adxwantec It: Aduwontec Par. d.

159. αἵματι ϑαφοινὸν (Jemma αἷμλα δϑαφοινὸν) T.
161. λάψαντες Zen.: λάμψαντες Harl. d, Par. j:

wolf is a thorough coward. ἀγεληδόν
too seems out of place in a simile
expressly confined to the leaders only
(164). In spite therefore of the vigorous
character of the four lines, we must
condemn them with Hentze. They may
be interpolated from some poem where
they were more appropriately applied
to an army returning from victory. And
one cannot but feel a reluctant suspicion
that the directness of the Epic style
would be better preserved by the excision
of 158-64 altogether. We thus get rid
of the ἡγήτορες ἠδὲ μέδοντες (164), so
that it is the whole body (πάντας 156)
which is compared to the herd of wolves,
as it should be.

159. napHion, the singular is used
collectively, as γαστήρ below, 163. La
Roche conjectures παρήϊα αἵματι dowd,
which may be right, as the plur. γλώσ-
ont immediately follows, and the desire
to avoid the legitimate hiatus in the
bucolic diaeresis would account for a
corruption. φοινόν, here only in H., but
δαφοινόν three times (δαφοινεόν Σ 538),
and φοίνιον σ 97. In Hymn. Ap. 362
φοιν ὁς = murderous.

161. Zenod. read λάψαντες, taking
ἀπό closely with ἴασιν, thus entirely
altering the picture — hardly for the
better. Gpaificin, see note on E 425.

162. aYuatoc apparently Ξε αἱματόεντα,
a sort of gen. of material, consisting of
blood. @énon=gore, cf. κέατ᾽ ἐν φόνωι
2 610, K 298, x 376; but the phrase is
a strange one. Fick suggests that φόνον

here may have nothing to do with the
ordinary φόνος = slaughter, but mean
‘abundance’ ; cf. d-pev-os εὐ-θεν-έω (and
so H. W. Smyth in-Al ἦε Ph χη ΘΒ):
But it is precisely in connexion with
αἵματος that such a word could not be
used without certainty of confusion.

163. nepicténetai, explained στενοχω-
petra, βαρύνεται : Ar. compared στεινό-
μενος νεκύεσσι ᾧ 220, and so Quintus took
it, νεκύεσσι περιστείνοντο péeOpa. And
this, inappropriate though it seems, must
be the sense: though their bellies are
glutled, their courage is unshaken. We
should expect hunger, not repletion, to
be dwelt on in this description.

166. ῥώοντο, see A 50 with refs. there.

168. The following ‘Catalogue’ of the

-Myrmidons is certainly a later addition.

Phoinix (196), so far from being one of
the characters of the original story,
belongs only to the very latest develop-
ments of it; see note on I 168. The
other chiefs, Menesthios, Eudoros,
Peisandros, in spite of the pomp and
ceremony with which they are announced,
are not so much as named again in the
sequel. The speech of Achilles which
concludes the passage contains several
strange expressions; ἕης is a false
archaism on the analogy of ὅου B 325,
which really stands for 60, and χόλωι
τρέφειν, ‘to rear on bile’ instead of milk,
is not like a Homeric phrase. We need
therefore not hesitate to reject 168-211.
πεντήκοντα, the same number as in the
Catalogue, B 685, where see note.

IAIAAOC Π (χνὴ

109

> / lal , \ ΄ ,
ἐς Τροίην ἡγεῖτο διίφιλος: ἐν δὲ ἑκάστηι
/ » Yj , = ΄ -
πεντήκοντ᾽ ἔσαν ἄνδρες ἐπὶ κληΐσιν ἑταῖροι" 170
Ld » ΟῚ / / a
πέντε δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἡγεμόνας ποιήσατο τοῖς ἐπεποίθει

/ > \ \ /
σημαίνειν, αὐτὸς δὲ μέγα

κρατέων

”
ἡνασσε.

τῆς μὲν ins στιχὸς ἦρχε Μενέσθιος αἰολοθώρηξ,

υἱὸς Σπερχειοῖο διιπετέος ποταμοῖο,
ὃν τέκε ΠΠηλῆος θυγάτηρ καλὴ Ἰ]ολυδώρη 175
Σπερχειῶι ἀκάμαντι, γυνὴ θεῶι εὐνηθεῖσα,

> \ οἰ / , / e
αὐτὰρ ἐπίκλησιν βΒώρωι Llepijpeos vir,

μὲ es > Ν v \ > / a>
ὅς ῥ᾽ ἀναφανδὸν ὄπυιε, πορὼν ἀπερείσια ἕδνα.
τῆς δ᾽ ἑτέρης ᾿ύδωρος ἀρήϊος ἡγεμόνευε

/ \ ” a \ /

παρθένιος, TOV ETLKTE χορῶι" καλὴ Πολυμήλη, 130

169. διΐφιλος: « θεῶν φίλος P;
and apud Eust.
weNEcTioc (): μενέσςϑλιος J.
DGHST Harl. ab, Par. a.
viet R (and ap. Herod.).
ἄποινα Vr. b.

170. It is hard to say whether the
KAHidec were the rowers’ benches or the
rowlocks, The word recurs in the J/iad
in connexion with ships only in the com-
pound πολυκλήϊς, though it is common
in Od.; and in θ 37 δησάμενοι. . ἐπὶ
KAniow ἐρετμά it is simplest to under-
stand it of the rowlocks or thole-pins,
the later σκαλμοί, ‘on which the oars
worked, and to which they were attached
by a leathern loop or strap, called τροπός
(6 782, θ 53),’ M. and R., App. i. p. 540.
We must then translate ἐπὶ KAHicIN ‘sat
at the rowlocks.’ Ap. Rhod. however
always takes it to mean benches (Seaton
in J. P. xix. 6). It may be added that
some regarded the words as meant to
distinguish the rowers from the fighting
men, whose number is not stated ; they
thought that a full complement of fifty
men to a ship would be too small as
compared with the 120 of the Boeotians
(B 510). But see B 719.

172. cuuainein, cf. A 289. The infin.
is epexegetic of the whole preceding line;
most edd. place commas before and after
τοῖς ἐπεποίθει, but La R. has rightly
removed them.

174, διιπετέος, only of rivers ; P 263,
ᾧ 268, 326, and in Od. of the Nile. It
is generally taken to mean falling from
Zeus, as rivers are fed by rain from
heaven. But Schulze (ῳ. Μ΄. p. 238) re-
marks that this would require διοπετής

dE: δ᾽ ἂρ ACHPQR Bar. Ven. B Vr. b A,
170. κληῖςιν : κλιςίηιςιν S Bar.

180. καλὴ : κεφαλὴ J.

173. wen: δὲ R ΕἸ. Gud. ἢ

174. διοπετέος H. 175. ON Ar. Aph. ῶ : TON
Πολυδώρη : Κλεοδώρη Zen. 177. βόρρωι Vr. A.
178. €ONA: B@pa KR (yp. Edna R™): (dnepeicia)

(Eur. Z. 7. 977). He therefore explains
‘Iovis iussu et opera decurrens.’ Zeno-
doros (ap. Porph. on P 263) explained
it by διαυγής, transparent; and so
apparently Eur. Bacch. 1268 λαμπρότερος
ἢ πρὶν καὶ διιπετέστερος.

175. Πολυδώρη:: Ζηνόδοτος δὲ ““ Κλεο-
δώρην᾽᾽ φησίν, ᾿Ησιόδου καὶ τῶν ἄλλων

** Ποολυδώρην ” αὐτὴν καλούντων, Schol. T.
We know nothing further of her. As
her son must have been Achilles’ nephew,
we should have expected the relation-
ship to have been alluded to. On these
grounds, the scholia tell us, held
that this Peleus was merely a namesake
of Achilles’ father.

177. énixAncin, nominally ; elsewhere
in H. always of a nickname, see H 138,
> 487, X 506. Devices such as this, to
reconcile a traditional genealogy with
political convenience or family pride,
are common throughout Greece. The
god may always be regarded as the later
comer, and has degraded the original
divine ancestor to a mortal hero.

178. ἕδνα, the bride-price. See note
on 1146. ὅς ῥ᾽: ὅς F’ Brandreth, van L.

180. παρθένιος λέγεται ὁ ἐξ ἔτι παρ-
θένου νομιζομένης γεννώμενος, σκότιος δὲ
(v. Z 24) ὁ κατὰ λαθραίαν μῖξιν καὶ οὐκ
ἀπὸ νομίμου μίξεως. An. Cf. the story
of the colonization of Tarentum by
παρθένιοι from Sparta. This is another
genealogical fiction, like the preceding,

some

170

IAIAAOC Π (xv1)

Φύλαντος θυγάτηρ: τῆς δὲ κρατὺς apyeipovTns

an »
ἠράσατ᾽, ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ἰδὼν μετὰ μελπομένηισιν

ἐν χορῶι ᾿Αρτέμιδος χρυσηλακάτου κελαδεινῆς.

αὐτίκα δ᾽ εἰς ὑπερῶι᾽ ἀναβὰς. παρελέξατο λάθρηι

ic / ᾽ / / / ς > - Ν e\
Eppetas QKAKNTA, πόρεν δέ οἱ ἀγλαὸν υἱὸν

18

Ἐὔδωρον, πέρι μὲν θείειν ταχὺν ἠδὲ μαχητήν.

᾽ \ > \ Ni / / > /
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ δὴ Tov ye μογοστόκος KinerOura

ἐξάγαγε πρὸ φόωσδε καὶ ἠελίου ἴδεν αὐγάς,

τὴν μὲν ᾿Εἰχεκλῆος κρατερὸν μένος ᾿Ακτορίδαο

> / \ / 3 > \ / / “
ἠγώγετο πρὸς δώματ᾽, ἐπεὶ πόρε μυρία ἕδνα,

190

, 3
τὸν 6 ὁ γέρων Φύλας ἐὺ ἔτρεφεν ἠδ᾽ ἀτίταλλεν,

3 / e ” ’ ex e\ 7
ἀμφαγαπαζόμενος ὡς εἴ θ᾽ ἐὸν υἱὸν ἐόντα.

fal Ν / / > 7.. e /
τῆς δὲ τρίτης Πείσανδρος ἀρήϊος ἡγεμόνευε

Μαιμαλίδης, ὃς πᾶσι μετέπρεπε Μυρμιδόνεσσιν

” ” / \ . ς »
εγχεῖ μάρνασθαι μετὰ ἸΙηλεΐωνος ἑταῖρον.

τῆς δὲ τετάρτης ἦρχε γέρων ἱππηλάτα Φοῖνιξ,

πέμπτης δ᾽ ᾿Αλκιμέδων Λαέρκεος υἱὸς ἀμύμων.

> \ ) \ \ / Fiat) ς / 5 \
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ δὴ πάντας ἅμ᾽ ἡγεμόνεσσιν ᾿Αχιλλεὺς

‘al SBN / \ 3 5 N la Ne
στῆσεν ἐὺ κρίνας, κρατερὸν δ᾽ ἐπὶ μῦθον ἔτελλε:

181. κρατὺς: epactc LR (and P swpr.):
188. πρὸ φόωςδε (προφόως Be) Zen. Ὡ: φώως δὲ Ar. Aph. At Par. h:
@docde C: φόωςϑε () King’s Harl. d, Par. ὁ οἱ : πρὸς φόωςϑε Par. f.
196. γέρων ἱππηλάτα : τινὲς yp. γτερήνιος

194. χιετέπρεπεν Hreudneccin LL.
ἱππότα 1. 197. πέμπτος P.

183 ἀθ. Ar.
πρὸ
(See T 118.)

κράτος Vr. A.

to combine a descent from a god with
the legendary family eponymos Echekles
(189). χορῶι καλή go together, like
ἄρηϊ φίλος, etc., to form a single epithet.

183 ἀθετεῖται: ἠιδέσθη yap ἂν (se.
Hermes) τὴν θεόν, Schol. T. ypucHdd-
KaTOC* καλλίτοξος: ἠλακάτη yap ὁ τοξικὸς
κάλαμος, Hesych. This must be right,
as the distatf is no attribute of Artemis.
Pindar is rather fond of the epithet,
applying it to Latona, Amphitrite, and
the Nereids; he probably thought of
the distaff. κελαθεινή is explained by
πολὺν κέλαδον καὶ ἀυτήν I 547. So
Schol. A κυνηγετικῆς, παρὰ τὸν γιγνό-
μενον ἐν τοῖς κυνηγίοις κέλαδον, ὅ ἐστι
θόρυβον. The word is used as a subst. =
Ἄρτεμις, Φ 511.

185. ἀκάκητα, a title of Hermes re-
curring in H. only ὦ 10. It appears to
have been a local Arkadian name (see
Paus. vill. 36. 10) connected with the
worship of Zeus Lykaon. It is probably

useless to seek for any etymological ex-
planation of the word, though in later
Greek it was referred to either ἄκακος
or ἀκεῖσθαι. ἀκάκης as an epithet of
Hades was probably a euphemism ; but
why Prometheus should be called ἀκάκητα
in Hes. Theog. 614 it is hard to see.

187. κιογοστόκος Εἰλείθυια, see A 270.

188. πρὸ φόωςδε (cf. B 309) is the
reading of Zen., while Aph. and Ar.
read φώωσδε, reserving πρὸ φόωσδε for
T 118, where they held that πρό implied
‘prematurely,’ a sense which does not
suit here. But there is no reason why
it should mean more than ‘forth,’ and
φώως is an indefensible form.

190. ἠγάγετο, the mid. is regularly
used of taking home a wife, Τ' 404, ete.

191. Φύλας, her father, 181. This is
possibly a distant reminiscence of the
form of marriage in which the children
belonged to the family of the mother,
not of the father.

<

IAIAAOC Π (xvi) 171

“Μυρμιδόνες, μή τίς μοι ἀπειλάων λελαθέσθω, 200

Δ pe, \ a by) “ lp ,
as ἐπὶ νηυσὶ θοῆισιν ἀπειλεῖτε Τρώεσσι
/ ha ΄ \ ,ὔ ,ὕ > > , “
πάνθ᾽ ὑπὸ μηνιθμόν, καί μ᾽ ἠιτιάασθε ἕκαστος"
/ ΄ / ” » ΄
“σχέτλιε Ἰ]ηλέος υἱέ, χόλωι ἄρα σ᾽ ἔτρεφε μήτηρ,
» / e ,ὔ
νηλεές, ὃς παρὰ νηυσὶν ἔχεις ἀέκοντας ἑταίρους"
/ / /
οἴκαδέ περ σὺν νηυσὶ νεώμεθα ποντοπύροισιν 205
/ ay Ν / » ΄- ,
αὗτις, ἐπεί ῥά TOL ὧδε κακὸς χόλος ἔμπεσε θυμῶι.
r / > , / / 3 > & “ \ /
ταῦτά μ᾽ ἀγειρόμενοι θάμ᾽ ἐβάζετε: νῦν δὲ πέφανται
/ , ᾽
φυλόπιδος μέγα ἔργον, Ens τὸ πρίν γ᾽ ἐράασθε:'
», / ” 3 ΝΜ , / ”
ἔνθά τις ἄλκιμον ἦτορ ἔχων Τρώεσσι μαχέσθω.
Δ > Ἢ Ν
ὡς εἰπὼν ὥτρυνε μένος καὶ θυμὸν ἑκάστου. 210
lal / \ fol »
μᾶλλον δὲ στίχες ἄρθεν, ἐπεὶ βασιλῆος ἄκουσαν.
? al \ a
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε τοῖχον ἀνὴρ apapne πυκινοῖσι λίθοισι
tA - lal / b Ye » /
δώματος ὑψηλοῖο, βίας ἀνέμων ἀλεείνων,
A » , / \ > , ’ U
ὡς apapov κὀρυθές τε καὶ ἀσπίδες ὀμφαλόεσσαι.

202. μητιάαςθε Zen.:
201. ταῦτά κ᾽ Ar. 2:

aver

Syr.: ταῦτ᾽ Gu’ ὦ. || θαμὰ Bazete Ar.

ἀράρει ().

wu.’ aitidacea ().
ταῦθ᾽ ἅμ᾽ Hermeias ὁ Κρατήτειος, HU

206. aveic C.
‘yp. ταῦτά μ᾽ 05)
212. τεῖχον R.

203. Πηλέως ἢ.

210. ὄτρυνε ἢ.

200. Note μή with aor. imperat. instead
of subj. ; A 410.

202. This is the only certain case in
H. where ὑπό with acc. is used in a
temporal sense ; in later Greek it is not
uncommon, but expresses ‘about the
time of,’ not ‘during,’ as must be the
case here (cf. however ὑπὸ τὴν παροιχο-
μένην νύκτα, Herod. ix. 58). The use
must be reckoned among the other
linguistic peculiarities of the passage.
For X 102 νύχθ᾽ ὕπο τήνδ᾽ ὀλοήν see note
there and H. G. ὃ 203. μ᾽ ἠιτιάαςθε,
Zen. μητιάασθε as X 174, a clearly inferior
reading. Cf. Cobet 27. C. 262, where he
speaks of this as a palmaris coniectura
of Ar. There is not the least ground for
supposing that the reading is conjectural.

203. χόλωι ἀρδενικῶς ἀντὶ τοῦ χολῆι.
ὑπερβολικῶς οὐ γάλακτι, ἀλλὰ χολῆι, ΑΥ.
This is apparently right; χόλος is of
course originally only another form of
χολή, though throughout Greek it is
elsewhere used only in the metaphorical
sense, while χολή is found in both the
physical and metaphorical meanings.
The alternative rendering ‘thy mother
reared thee for anger’ is intolerably
weak, though the constr. is supported
by A 418 κακῆι αἴσηι τέκον, where see
the note.

207. It is not clear whether κα΄ repre-

sents μὲ or wo. In favour of the former
is the (rather doubtful) phrase in I 58
πεπνυμένα βάζεις ᾿Αργείων βασιλῆας, and
the constr. οἵ εἰπεῖν with ace. of the
person addressed, M 60, P 237, etc. ;
while the analogy of λέγειν τινά τι, to
say something of a person, is common
from Herodotos onwards. On the other
hand, the elision of μοι may be supported
by Ζ 165, I 673, K 544, N 481, P 100,
and cf. on A 170. We may therefore
choose between ‘ye said of me,’ and
‘ye said to me.’ πέφανται, cf. A 734
φάνη μέγα ἔργον "Ἄρηος, M 416 μέγα δέ
σφισι φαίνετο ἔργον.

208. ἕης, an indefensible form, see
note on 168; it is a supposed case of
‘Epic diectasis’ on the false analogy
of gov B 325, aided perhaps by that of
the possessive pronoun ἥ :- ἑή (σξή). P.
Knight reads 60. €paacee from ἔραμαι
is also fictitious. It is apparently
formed on the analogy of ἀγάασθε ε 119
(cf. € 122, m 203).

209. tic, cach man, as in the similar
passage B 382-84,

214. Gpapon the 2nd aor. is used in-
trans. (=dp0ev above) only here and ὃ
TAT Hpape. Ch M 105 ἀλλήλους ἄραρον
τυκτῆισι βόεσσιν. The juxtaposition of
the trans. (212) and intrans. uses of the
same word is perhaps somewhat harsh,

172

b) \ vy 9 ΕΣ LANDA / ff ΓΕ ἢ τ Ε A
@OTTLS ap ἀσπίδ ἔρειδε, KOPUS KOPU), AVEpa ὃ aV1)p.

IAIAAOC Π (νὴ

δ
μι
or

r ν} id / , lad ,
ψαῦον δ᾽ ἱππόκομοι κόρυθες λαμπροῖσι φάλοισι

, ἃ \ apes 3 ,
νευόντων" WS πυκνοὶ ἐφέστασαν ἀλλήλοισι.

πάντων δὲ προπάροιθε δύ᾽ ἀνέρε θωρήσσεσθον,

Ilatpoxdos τε καὶ Αὐτομέδων, ἕνα θυμὸν ἔχοντες,

πρόσθεν Μυρμιδόνων πολεμιζέμεν.

αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχϑλεὺς 220

- «> ΕΣ > / a > 3, \ n 3 ai /
βῆ ῥ᾽ ἴμεν ἐς κλισίην, χηλοῦ δ᾽ ἀπὸ πῶμ᾽ ἀνέωιγε
καλῆς δαιδαλέης, τήν οἱ Θέτις ἀργυρόπεξα

res 9 Χἃ \ ” 2. / ,
θῆκ᾽ ἐπὶ νηὸς ἄγεσθαι, ἐὺ πλήσασα χιτώνων

/ bd 3, / ” /
χλαινάων T AVELOOKETTEMV OUAWV TE TAT TOV.

ἔνθα δέ of δέπας ἔσκε τετυγμένον, οὐδέ τις ἄλλος 225

vy > n / > 5 > an ” 3,
OUT ἀνδρῶν TLVECOKEV ATT AUTOU αἴθοπα ΟὐΨνΟΥ,

” / / an “ \ \ /
οὔτέ Tews σπένδεσκε θεῶν, ὅτε μὴ Διὶ πατρί.

/ < / » ’ lal \ 5 / /
TO pa TOT ἐκ χηλοῖο λαβὼν ἐκάθηρε θεείωι
πρῶτον, ἔπειτα δ᾽ ἔνιψ᾽ ὕδατος καλῆισι ῥοῆισι,
νίψρατο δ᾽ αὐτὸς χεῖρας, ἀφύσσατο δ᾽ αἴθοπα οἶνον. 280

215. κόρυν: τινὲς κόρυθα T.
ewpHcconto ὦ (and yp. A).
ἰόντι Zen. Aph.
227. TEad1: τέως S. ||
ὅτι. Ar. Q2.

(U? supr.).

9. 7

229.

217. MUKNON J.
220. πολεμίζειν S Ambr. Vr. A.
224. οὔλων : ἄλλων PR! (cr. R2).

ἔνιψ᾽ : Oeniz’ Syr.

218. ewpHcceceon A, 7p. T:
223. areceal:
225. οὐδέ: οὔτε C Ambr.

ecOn: eed 1). || ὅτε CGQSTU Harl. a Ὁ, King’s Par. a:
228. τό pa Ar. 2: τόρρα (τόρῥα) ΠΟΤ} Lips.: τόν pa CS Syr.

230. Gpucceto Vr. A.

though it emphasizes the simile.
τε kal ἀσπίδας Bentley.

215-17=N 131-33.

218. ewprcceceon is preferable to
θωρήσσοντο : the termination of the im-
perf. in -σθον instead of -σθην, though
apparently correct in H. (77. G. ὃ 5) is
against the later rule, and thus likely
to be altered. προπάροιθε, local not
temporal, like πρόσθεν below.

224, ἀνεμοςκεπέων, cf. χλαῖναν ἀλεξ-
άνεμον £529. οὔλων = woollen, see Καὶ 194.
τάπητες, rugs, used chiefly for bedding, see
I 200, K 156, @ 645 (with note), κ 12 ete.

225. οὐδέ Tic x.7.d. ; the meaning of
this sentence is clear though not very
exactly expressed ; ‘he allowed no man
to drink from it, and himself used it
only for libations to Zeus.’ The sen-
tence starts as though it were to be
‘none other drank from it, whether
man or god, but Zeus alone’ ; but for the
violent metaphor of a god drinking from
the cup there is substituted the literal
libation which typified the god’s draught.

227. ὅτε μή, see N 319; most Mss.
give ὅτι μή with Ar., but there is no

κύρυθάς

other instance of this idiom in H.,
though it is common in Herod. and
later writers. It is therefore best to
adhere to the known Homeric form
ὅτε ; the fact that it is only here used
without a verb is a matter of no signi-
ficance; see Lange EI p. 467, where
the analogy to ws εἰ and εἰ μή without a
finite verb is shewn.

228. τό is lengthened by the first
ictus as X 307 τό οἱ. ϑεείωι, the dis-
infecting power of sulphurous fumes
seems to have been in some degree
known in heroic times; the volcanic
origin of sulphur and the sulphurous
smell of a lightning flash (Ξ 415, © 135,
#2 417) no doubt caused it to be regarded
as a partly divine substance, and to this
a popular etymology from θεός may, at
all events in later times, have contri-
buted ; cf. χ 481 οἷσε θέειον, ypnii, κακῶν
ἄκος, Y 50 δῶμα θεειοῦται, Eur. Hel. 866,
Theokr. xxiv. 94 καθαρῶι δὲ πυρώσατε
δῶμα θεείωι.

230. G@uccato, ladled from a κρητήρ
which, we must suppose, stood always
full in his hut.

IAIAAOC Π (xv1) 73

” > » ‘ , ” λα pe \ *

evyeT ἔπειτα στὰς μέσωι EpKel, λεῖβε δὲ οἶνον

> \ > , ,ὔ ᾽ > / ,

οὐρανὸν εἰσανιδών: Δία 6 οὐ λάθε τερπικέραυνον᾽

“Zed ἄνα Δωδωναῖε Πελασγικέ, τηλόθι ναίων,

Δωδώνης μεδέων δυσχειμέρου, ἀμφὶ δέ σ᾽ “EXXoi

σοὶ ναίουσ᾽ ὑποφῆται ἀνιπτόποδες χαμαιεῦναι" 235

231 om. Pt Mose. 2.
see quot. below.
see below.

231, μέςωι ἕρκεϊ, where there stood
the altar of Zeus “Epxevos, the hut being
regarded as possessing the forecourt of
the ordinary heroic house; ef. A 774,
x 334, and for a full collection of
passages in later Greek, Jebb’s note on
Soph. Ant. 487. On account of the
rhythm ‘Turnebus read μέσωι στάς,
Bentley ἔπειτ᾽ ἀνστάς (and so Syr.).

232. The neglected F in eicanidcon is
remarkable in so ancient a passage ;
Bentley conj. εἰσορόων. The line is of
course not indispensable. τερπικέ-
pauNnon, see on A 772, and compare
Pindar’s ἐλασίβροντα παῖ “Peds (fr. 144
Schrédér).

233. There are several interesting
variants in this remarkable address.
Steph. Byzant. says (from Epaphroditos)
Znvodoros γράφει Φηγωναῖε (for Awdw-
vate), ἐπεὶ ἐν Δωδώνηι πρῶτον φηγὸς ἐμαν-
τεύετο. καὶ Σουίδας δέ φησι Φηγωναίου
Διὸς ἱερὸν εἶναι ἐν Θεσσαλίαι, καὶ τοῦτον ἐπι-
καλεῖσθαι " ἕτεροι δὲ γράφουσι Βωϑωναῖε "
πόλιν γὰρ εἶναι Βωδώνην, ὅπου τιμᾶται
(similarly Schol. B). Πελαεγικὲ δέ, ὅτι
ὑπὸ Πελασγῶν ἵδρυται τὸ περὶ Δωδώνην
τέμενος. οἱ δὲ Πελαργικέ: λόφον γὰρ
εἶναι λευκὸν ἐκεῖ φασιν οὕτω καλούμενον.
οἱ δὲ Πελαςτικέ, οὗ πέλας ἐστὶν ὁ ἀήρ,
Schol. B. In the next line Schol. T
says that Zen. read πολυπίδακος for
Oucyewépou, and An. calls attention
to the doubt as to whether we should
read Σελλοί or σ᾽ Ἕλλοί. This last ques-
tion—the only variant of real importance
—-Ar. decided in favour of Σελλοί, on
the ground that the river Σελλήεις (see
on B 659) was named from them. As
however it is doubtful whether this
river was in Thesprotia at all, it is per-
haps better to accept the positive testi-
mony of Schol. A (Did. ?) and Strabo
(vii. 328) that Pindar (fr. 59 Sch.) called
the people Ἑλλοί, and to read it in the
text (they are also spoken of as ἕλλοπες,
ef. Hesiod Frag. 156, Rzach, ἔστι τις
‘Edo7in). On the other hand, Sopho-

|| eneit’ anctac Syr.
234, δυςχειμέρου : πολυπίδακος Zen.

233. Δωδωναῖε MeXacrixé :
ce’ Ἑλλοί : (ζελλοί.

kles has Σελλοί (see below), so that
the question is very evenly balanced.
In either case the sense is the same, cot
in 235 not being the dat. of σύ but the
nom. pl. of σός. For the religious con-
nexion between Epeiros and Thessaly
which causes Achilles to pray to the
god of Dodona, see notes on B 681, 749.
It is very probable that when migrating
eastwards across Pindos the Thessalian
tribes carried Dodona with them as a
purely religious name, just as other
migrations southward took Olympia
from the north of Thessaly to Elis, but
only as a sanctuary, not as a city-name.
The contrary supposition, that there
was a Thessalian Dodona (Skotussa 7)
older than the Epeirot is in the last de-
gree improbable, as the historical Dodona
shews every sign of a hoary antiquity,
and in ἕ 327 Dodona with its oracle is
clearly in Thesprotia. It would scem
that the Achaian tribes when in Epeiros
had adopted the worship of the pre-
historic god whom they found established
at Dodona, identifying him with their
own Zeus—a familiar process in the
history of invading peoples. Some of
them, the Σελλοί or Ἕλλοί, had remained
in charge of the sanctuary and oracle
when other members of the same tribe
had passed eastward under the name of
Ἕλληνες, which was destined to pass to
the whole Greek race (this view is as old
as Aristotle meteor. i. 14. 9 αὕτη dé—se.
ἡ Ἑλλὰς ἡ dpxala—éorw ἡ περὶ Thy
Δωδώνην καὶ τὸν ᾿Αχελῶιον ὥικουν
γὰρ οἱ Σελλοὶ ἐνταῦθα καὶ οἱ καλούμενοι
τότε μὲν Vpacxol νῦν δὲ “Βλληνες). This
priestly tribe retained the customs οὗ
primitive barbarism in token of sanctity
as the ‘mouthpieces’ of Zens, and hence
are χαμαιεῦναι. Frazer has pointed out
similar curious survivals in the rules
that the bedstead of the Flamen Dialis
at Rome must be smeared with fine
mud; and that the priest of the old
Prussian god Potrimpo must sleep on

174 IAIAAOC TT (xv1)
’ \ δή ’ > \ ” ” > ip;
ἡμὲν δὴ TOT ἐμὸν ἔπος ἔκλυες εὐξαμένοιο,
/ \ ’ / / 3 By \ , rn
τίμησας μὲν ἐμέ, μέγα δ᾽ ἴψαο λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν"
Σ»Ὸ) ν \ n LN ΣῚ ΄ Ἐς
ἠδ ἔτι καὶ νῦν μοι τόδ᾽ ἐπικρήηνον ἐέλδωρ.
> \ \ \ \ / lal fal
αὐτὸς μὲν γὰρ ἐγὼ μενέω νηῶν ἐν ἀγῶνι,
3 ω /
ἀλλ᾽ ἕταρον πέμπω πολέσιν μετὰ Μυρμιδόνεσσι 240
n a td fa)
μάρνασθαι' τῶν κῦδος ἅμα πρόες, εὐρύοπα Ζεῦ, ‘
΄ὕ 7 e 9 SN / ” NOs:
θάρσυνον δέ οἱ ἦτορ ἐνὶ φρεσίν, ὄφρα καὶ “Extwp
5 > \ “- /
εἴσεται ἤ pa καὶ οἷος ἐπίστηται πολεμίζειν
" 5 ε , A
ἡμέτερος θεράπων, ἢ οἱ τότε χεῖρες ἄαπτοι
/ ) Ls ify Se) 5. 4 / \ la} ”
μαίνονθ᾽, ommoT ἐγώ περ ἴω μετὰ μῶλον Αρηος.
/ “-
αὐτὰρ ἐπεί K ἀπὸ ναῦφι μάχην ἐνοπήν τε δίηται,
ἀσκηθής μοι ἔπειτα θοὰς ἐπὶ νῆας ἵκοιτο
/ / N n \
τεύχεσί Te Evy πᾶσι Kal ἀγχεμάχοις ἑτάροισιν."
ἃ ” 2 ᾽ n ’ ΝΜ / We
ὡς ἔφατ᾽ εὐχόμενος, τοῦ δ᾽ ἔκλυε μητίετα Ζεύς.
rn >) © \ /
τῶι δ᾽ ἕτερον μὲν ἔδωκε πατήρ, ἕτερον δ᾽ avéveuce:
lal {3 / /
νηῶν μέν οἱ ἀπώσασθαι πόλεμόν TE μάχην τε
nr , >
δῶκε, Toov δ᾽ avévevoe payns ἐξαπονέεσθαι.

245

250

236. ef μὲν (JR (εἰ WEN ἢ μᾶλλον H μέν, Hust.). εὐχομένοιο S, 237% ἀθ.
Ar. Aph.: om. Zen. 239. αὐτὸς : αὐτὰρ J. 443. énicratar PS (U2 supr.)
Lips. Vr. A Par.ed eg: yp. καὶ énicrairo καὶ ἐπίστηται Harl. a: émicréatai Zen.
244. εἰ οἱ καὶ τότε 1. 241. ikécew PR Syr. 248. suunaci Syr.: =suundca DQ):
cuunda C. || éryeudyoic S: arywudyoic () Bar. Mor. 248-49 om. Vr. A.
250. ἔδωκε : δῶκε Hust. 251. of: τοι C. 252. ἀνένευε Mor. || διχῶς yp.
καὶ ςόον καὶ cdon Did.: cf. N 778. ‘

239. νηῶν EN ἀγῶνι, see note on O
428.

241. κῦϑος Gua npdec, send forth
glory beside him, as in κῦδος ἅμ᾽ ἕψεται

the bare earth for three nights before
sacrificing (CL 10. ii, p. 322), Compare
also Soph. Zach. 1166 (Herakles is
speaking of certain oracles) ἃ τῶν ὀρείων

Kal χαμαικοιτῶν ἐγὼ Σελλῶν ἐσελθὼν A 415, κ. ὀπηδεῖ Ρ 251, and the common
ἄλσος εἰσεγραψάμην. So also Eur. κῦδος ὀπάζειν.

248. εἴςεται, cf. on Θ 111. It will
be seen that there is no Ms, authority for
εἴ here, H being in place in a disjunctive
clause. ἐπίστηται, subj., ‘will prove to
know,’ H. G. 280. The variants
ἐπίσταται and ἐπιστέαται seem to point
to an older and linguistically correct
ἐπιστάεται. Observe that in the next
clause the indic. μαίνονται is used; we
should probably read μαίνωνθ᾽.

246, OinTaI, as representing the Lat.
Sut. exactum, should be anaor. But the
other forms from the same stem seem to
be presents; Herod. mentions that the
traditional accentuation of the inf. was

Erechtheus (fr. 355) ἐν ἀστρώτωι πέδωι
εὕδουσι, πηγαῖς ὃ οὐχ ὑγραίνουσιν πόδας.
An admirable summary of what is
known about ancient Dodona will be
found in Jebb’s note and Appendix on
the passage from the 7’rachiniae.

236-38 =A 453-55, q.v. Ar. rejected
237 on the ground that Achilles had not
obtained his wish by a prayer of his own,
but by the interposition of Thetis; he
thus regarded 236 as quite general in its
application. This objection, however,
seems hypercritical ; Thetis had in fact,
if not in form, been the bearer of a prayer
from Achilles to Zeus (see particularly

75); and the large number of borrowed
lines which are found in the episode of
the restoration of Chryseis (see the Intro-
duction to A) is a strong argument for
the genuineness of the line here.

δίεσθαι, not διέσθαι.

248. Teuyecl, perhaps an allusion to
the change of armour. In that case it
must be rejected, though in itself clear
of offence.

IAIAAOC Π (xvi)

"» e \ ’, \ » ’ \ 4
ἤτοι ὁ μὲν σπείσας τε Kal εὐξάμενος Διὶ πατρὶ

/ b ey / , , ‘ -
ἂψ κλισίην εἰσῆλθε, δέπας δ᾽ ἀπέθηκ᾽ ἐνὶ χηλῶι,

στῆ δὲ πάροιθ᾽ ἐλθὼν κλισίης, ἔτι δ᾽ ἤθελε θυμῶι 255

εἰσιδέειν ρώων καὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν φύλοπιν aivijy:

οἱ δ᾽ ἅμα Τ]ατρόκλωι μεγαλήτορι θωρηχθέντες

ἔστιχον, ὄφρ᾽ ἐν Τρωσὶ μέγα φρονέοντες ὄρουσαν.

αὐτίκα δὲ σφήκεσσιν ἐοικότες ἐξεχέοντο

εἰνοδίοις, ods παῖδες ἐριδμαίνωσιν ἔθοντες, 260

rma / torn » at fs)
alel KEPTOLLEOVTES, ὁδῶι €7L OLKL EXOVTAS,

vs Ἂς ᾿ \ / re
νηπίαχοι: ξυνὸν δὲ κακὸν πολέεσσι τιθεῖσι"

253. πείςας ().

254. KAIciHN O° H() Lips.

ἀνέθηκ᾽ () King’s: οὕτως ἀπέθηκε

διὰ τοῦ a Did. (διὰ τοῦ π ἢ). || ἐνὶ : ἐπὶ KR. ||) YHA: χαλκῶι Par. f (γρ. yHA@).

255. KAIciHN R (yp. c supr.).
€piduainoucin () Harl. a, Par. a:

€piduaipwan S (Sch. T is incorrectly published: it says ἐριδμαίνωσιν :
ἐμβάλλουσιν: οἱ δὲ ἐριδμαίνουσιν, ἐρεθίζουσιν).

268. ὄρουςαν : ἔβηςαν Vr. b A. 260,
Epirdudinwein J: €piduainontec Par, οἷ:
els ἔριν

261 a#. Ar. Aph. |) ἔχοντας

Ar, (καὶ ἅπασαι) 2: ἔχοντες CD'ST'U Syr. Bar. Lips.! Mosc. 2), Harl. a b, Par.

ἃ οἱ df gh, and τινές Sch. T.

258. ἔςτιχον is commonly taken for
an aor., but no other form recurs in H.
or elsewhere in Greek (ἔστιχον also in Ap.
Rhod., Theokritos and Kallimachos), and
the context seems to require an imperf. ;
compare στίχουσι" βαδίζουσι, πορεύονται
Hesych. See Delbriick ΟὟ. iv. p. 99.

259. Some doubt has been thrown
upon the following passage, Hentze and
others thinking that 278 more natur-
ally follows immediately upon 258 ; the
actual charge upon the ‘l'rojans being
narrated in 258, it is not a suitable place
for a retardation in the story and a
return to the same event in 276 ἐν δ᾽
ἔπεσον Tpwecow. Furthermore the pass-
age from 267-77 is almost entirely made
up of ‘tags’ from other parts (267, see
M500 268, 7 66; 27/0=Z 112, etc. ;
971-72, see P 164-65; 273-74=A 411-12;
975=210, οἷο. ; 277=B 334). In fact
out of the whole passage 268-75 the only
words that do not appear elsewhere and
have any special significance are ws ἂν
ἸΠηλεΐδην τιμήσομεν. Again αὐτίκα
ἐξεχέοντο, 259 (and 267), seems hardly
in place after ἐν Τρωσὶ. . ὄρουσαν. To
this it might be replied that the principal
verb in 258 is ἔστιχον, and the description
is that of the march wntil they attack,
the attack itself being reserved till 277.
This obviates the difficulty of the connex-
ion of 258 with the sequel, though it is
certainly a forcing of the literal sense of
the words. It has further been argued
by Friedliinder that there is a double

recension within the simile itself, the
rousing of the wasps heing first attri-
buted to wanton children (260-62), and
then to an innocent wayfarer (263-65).
So also Nitzsch, who rejects 260-62 (writ-
ing tovs—or rather τούς r’— for τοὺς δ᾽ in
263), and thinks that the simile gains
force, as describing the keenness for war
of the Myrmidons, if the wasps’ attack
is conceived as unprovoked.

260. €eontec, swo more, with the
wantonness of children. So of the
Kalydonian boar, κακὰ πόλλ᾽ ἔρδεσκεν
ἔθων Οἰνῆος ἀλωήν, 1 540. Epiduainecin,
a word of doubtful formation, found only
here. In sense it is evidently equivalent
to ἐρεθίζωσιν, and shews no relation to
ἐρίζω, to which analogy would lead us
(cf. σκυδμαίνω by σκύζομαι. Hence
Agar (J. P. xxv. 41) ingeniously conj.
ἐριδμαίνωσ᾽ ἐρέθοντες, vie in provoking.

261 ἀθετεῖται, ὅτι τὸ κερτομεῖν οὐ τίθησιν
ἐπὶ τοῦ δι᾽ ἔργου ἐρεθίζειν, ἀλλὰ διὰ λόγων.
καὶ ὅτι διὰ τοῦ προειρημένου στίχου ταὐτὸν
εἴρηται, τὸ γὰρ εἰνοδίοις ταὐτόν ἐστι τῶι
ὁδῶι ἔπι οἰκί᾽ ἔχοντας καὶ τὸ ἐριδμαίνωσι
τῶι κερτομέοντες, καὶ τὸ ἀεὶ τῶι ἔθοντες, ἐξ
ἔθους συνεχῶς ἐπιφοιτῶντες. ἠθέτει καὶ
᾿Αριστοφάνης, An. With the exception
of the explanation of ἔθοντες this is
certainly right.

262. τιθεῖσι may hve as its subject
either the wasps or the children; but
the application of the simile points un-
mistakably to the former.

176

IAIAAOC Π (xvi)

\ > v ΄ὔ / \ ” eqs
TOUS ὃ εἰ TEP Tapa TLS TE κιὼν ἄνθρωπος ὁδίτης

7 3. ἢ [4 Ψ vv 5 »
Κινῆ σ“ἣν AEKWYV, Οἱ ὃ αλκιμον 1)/TOP EX OVTES

/ a “ \ ΄ e /
προσσῶ πᾶς TTETETAL Και ἀμύνει OlLOL τεέκεσσι.

τ

τῷ
o

A , i / , \ \ ”
τῶν τότε Μυρμιδόνες κραδίην καὶ θυμὸν ἔχοντες

> lal > / \ ’ ” 3 /
ἐκ νηῶν ἐχέοντο: βοὴ δ᾽ ἄσβεστος op@pet.

/ od « ip Srey \ ΡΣ
Πάτροκλος ὃ ἑτάροισιν ἐκέκλετο μακρὸν avaas:

“Μυρμιδόνες, ἕταροι [Πηληϊάδεω ᾿Αχιλῆος,

ἀνέρες ἔστε, φίλοι, μνήσασθε δὲ θούριδος ἀλκῆς,

270

e xX “ΜΛ / ἃ Ve) ”
ὡς ἂν IInreidnv τιμήσομεν, ὃς μέγ᾽ ἄριστος

᾿Αργείων παρὰ νηυσὶ καὶ ἀγχέμαχοι θεράποντες,

γνῶι δὲ καὶ ᾿Ατρεΐδης εὐρὺ κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων

A Ψ A ΕἸ ” 5 an > \ v ”
ἣν ἄτην, ὃ τ΄ ἄριστον Αχαιῶν οὐδὲν ἔτισεν.

ἃ ’ \ ” / \ \ e /
WS €ELTT@YV WT PUVE μένος Kat θυμὸν EKQAOTOU.

ἐν © ἔπεσον Τρώεσσιν ἀολλέες: ἀμφὶ δὲ νῆες

/ / > / c ee) lal
σμερδαλέον κονάβησαν ἀυσάντων im ᾿Αχαιῶν.

Τρῶες δ᾽ ὡς εἴδοντο Μενοιτίου ἄλκιμον υἱόν,

Ν \ / re
αὐτὸν καὶ θεράποντα, σὺν ἔντεσι μαρμαίροντας,

πᾶσιν ὀρίνθη θυμός, ἐκίνηθεν δὲ φάλαγγες,

280

ἐχλπόμενοι παρὰ ναῦφι ποδώκεα |Ιηλεΐωνα
an }
μηνιθμὸν μὲν ἀπορρῖψαι, φιλότητα 6 ἑλέσθαι"
/ \ “ “ / 3 \ 5)
πάπτηνεν δὲ ἕκαστος ὅπηι φύγοι αἰπὺν ὄλεθρον.

Πάτροκλος δὲ πρῶτος ἀκόντισε δουρὶ φαεινῶι

7: \ \ / “ “ J
ἀντικρὺ KATA μέσσον, ὅθι πλεῖστοι κλονέοντο, 285

268. 0 om. ϑ'γι.1}} Τε : Ke Harl. ἃ.
268. κέκλετο T’.
277. cuapdaheéon S. || KonNdBiccan J.
φύτγη(ι) PQT.

264. κινήςει CGP1()T.
272 a0. Seleukos. || aryiuayor Vr. A.
281. ἐλπόμεναι Zen.
285. κλονέοντο : καὶ Gpicro: Bar. Mor.

265. πέταται J T-
275. ὄτρυνε RU.
283. ὅποι Vr. A. ||

263. The conjunction of ἄνθρωπος
with another subst. is as rare as that of
ἀνήρ is common. Perhaps the only
other instance is vy 123 ὁδιτάων ἀνθρώπων.
In Q 202, ἡ 32 ξείνους may be an adj.

265. πᾶς πέτεται, for the anacoluthon
see H. G. 8 170; this is the only case
where the verb is attracted to the num-
ber of the distributive πᾶς.

273-74=A 411-12; they are hardly
appropriate here where Patroklos is going
to aid the Greeks, whereas in their ori-
ginal position they are a threat. Patro-
klos’ mission is, so far as it goes, a renun-
ciation on Achilles’ part of the severe
lesson he wishes to read Agamemnon.

279. cUN ἔντεσι, an instrumental use ;
cf. on σὺν τεύχεσιν, 156. μαρμαίροντας
is an unustial expression as applied to

men : Diintzer would read δαιδαλέοισιν as
in N 331. See however N 801.

281. ἐλπόμενοι, const. ad sensum, see
H. G. ὃ 109. Zen. read ἐλπόμεναι, ap-
parently a correction merely for the sake
of grammatical exactitude. Schol. T
aptly compares Thuk. i. 110 τριήρεις
πλέουσαι ἐς Aiyumrov ἔσχον κατὰ τὸ Mev-
δήσιον κέρας, οὐκ εἰδότες τῶν γεγενημένων
οὐδέν. For ἔλπεςσϑθαι with aor. intin. =
suppose, see Ὁ 110. Bergk considers
281-83 an interpolation belonging to the
exchange of armour—which never has
any effect but what we find here. But
this is not necessary (see Introduction).

283. Aristotle (ap. Schol. T) called this
line δεινότατον τῶν ἐπῶν Ὁμήρου. One
would expect it to mean that the Trojans
took to flight, as in & 507 ff. ; here how-
ever they hold their ground for a time.

IAIAAOC Π (χνι) l

ba |
=~]

νηὶ πάρα πρυμνῆι μεγαθύμου Ipwrecidaov,
καὶ βάλε ἸΙυραίχμην, ὃς Παίονας ἱπποκορυστὰς
» > ’ la παν δὶ - ΦΙΡῪ er
ἤγαγεν ἐξ ᾿Αμυδῶνος ἀπ Ἀξιοῦ εὐρὺ ῥέοντος"
‘ , ‘ 5Ξ- ΄ 4 ὦ ᾽ ,
τὸν Bare δεξιὸν ὦμον: ὁ δ᾽ ὕπτιος ἐν κονίηισι
κάώππεσεν οἰμώξας, ἕταροι δέ μιν ἀμφιφόβηθεν 290
Παίονες" ἐν yap ἸΙάτροκλος φόβον ἧκεν ἅπασιν
ἡγεμόνα κτείνας, ὃς ἀριστεύεσκε μάχεσθαι.
> A ae \ > » 2! -
ἐκ νηῶν ὃ ἔλασεν, κατὰ δ᾽ ἔσβεσεν αἰθόμενον πῦρ.
> fal / / \ ,,;

ἡμιδαὴς δ᾽ ἄρα νηῦς λίπετ᾽ αὐτόθι: τοὶ δὲ φόβηθεν
Τρῶες θεσπεσίωι ὁμάδωι, Δαναοὶ δ᾽ ἐπέχυντο 295
a ει ᾽ tebe J
νῆας ava γλαφυράς" ὅμαδος 6 ἀλίαστος ἐτύχθη.

> wv? ᾽ “-“ fol » ,
ὡς ὅτ ἀφ ὑψηλῆς κορυφῆς ὄρεος μεγάλοιο
κινήσηι πυκινὴν νεφέλην στεροπηγερέτα Levs,

> cr »
ἔκ T ἔφανεν πᾶσαι σκοπιαὶ Kal πρώονες ἄκροι
καὶ νάπαι, οὐρανόθεν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπερράγη ἄσπετος αἰθήρ, 300
ὡς Δαναοὶ νηῶν μὲν ἀπωσάμενοι δήϊον πῦρ

> >

τυτθὸν ἀνέπνευσαν, πολέμου δ᾽ οὐ yiveT ἐρωή:
> / , r a > “1. (eel me |
ov yap πώ τι Tpwes ἀρηϊφίλων ὑπ ᾿Αχαιῶν
προτροπάδην φοβέοντο μελαινάων ἀπὸ νηῶν, ©
> LS Keer) » 5» > / fal ᾽ c / > / ἊΣ
ἀλλ᾿ ἔτ ἄρ᾽ ἀνθίσταντο, νεῶν δ᾽ ὑπόεικον ἀνάγκηι. 305

288. After this Q adds ἀξιοῦ οὗ κάλλιετον ὕϑωρ ἐπικίδναται alan (=B 850).

290. augipoBHeen Ar. CPR Lips.: augpepdBueen 2. 293. EcBecan ἢ. || ἐν
ἄλλωι ἀκάματον πῦρ A. 298. κινήςει CT: κινήςειν (1. 299. ἔφανον (1():
ἔφανε D: ἔφαναν CH Vr. b, Mose. 2. || ἄκραι Mose. 2. 300. ἀπερράγη PR.
301. νηὸς "Ὁ. 302. πολέμωι Lips. γίγνετ᾽ [8]. 304. φοβέοντο:
ἐφέβοντο HK. 305. τινὲς ἄντα ἵσταντο (i.e. Ne’ ἵσταντο) Schol. AT.

287-88. See B 848-49. Pyraichmes Zeds ἀστεροπητής, but why should this
has not been elsewhere named. The familiar phrase have been corrupted ?

scholia note that in B the Paionians 299-300=0 557-58, q.v. There is no
are archers, ἀγκυλότοξοι, not horsemen question of the appropriateness of these
as here. grand lines here.

296. This line, as Bekker and others 302. anénneucan, had breathing time ;
have remarked, is probably interpolated οἵ, A 800, where this result is anticipated.
from M 471; not only is it quite super- €pwH, cessation; see note on B 179.
fluous, but the repetition oudda . . srugmann (Gr. ii. p. 129) connects the
ὅμαδος is very awkward. word in this sense with Germ. Ruhe,

297. The sudden gleam of new hope’ est. It recurs only P 761.
is magnificently compared to a sudden 303. In this sentence προτροπάδην is

burst of light through clouds hanging the emphatic word; although the Tro-
over a mountain peak, as though acleft jams are repulsed (φόβηθεν, 294) they are
were opened into the very depths of ποῖ yet in headlong flight (cf. οὔτέ ποτε
heaven. προτρέποντο Ἐ 700) and the Greeks dare

298. creponHrepera here only, because not relax their efforts—just as the
the regular νεφεληγερέτα is obviously clouds are not cleared away by the rift
impossible after νεφέλην. The idea, in their midst. So ἀνάγκηι almost=
*‘gatherer’ of lightnings, is, however, σπουδῆι, perforce, not from any anxiety
not very appropriate; P. Knight conj. to escape ; O 655.

VOL, I N

IAIAAOC Π (νὴ

ἔνθα δ᾽ ἀνὴρ ἕλεν ἄνδρα κεδασθείσης ὑσμίνης
ἡγεμόνων, πρῶτος δὲ Μενοιτίου ἄλκιμος υἱός.
αὐτίκ᾽ ἄρα στρεφθέντος ᾿Αρηϊλύκου βάλε μηρὸν
» - ’ / ἊΝ \ \ ”
ἔγχεϊ ὀξυόεντι, διαπρὸ δὲ χαλκὸν ἔλασσε:
on 2) / » ς δὲ \ IAN / =
ῥῆξεν δ᾽ ὀστέον εγχος, O O€ πρηνὴς ἐπι γαίηι 910
7 > 5 \ T i? > “7. i /
κάππεσ. ἀτὰρ Μενέλαος ἀρήϊος ota Θόαντα
στέρνον γυμνωθέντα παρ᾽ ἀσπίδα, λῦσε δὲ γυῖα.
Φυλεΐδης δ᾽ "Αμφικλον ἐφορμηθέντα δοκεύσας
ἔφθη ὀρεξάμενος πρυμνὸν σκέλος, ἔνθα πάχιστος
μυὼν ἀνθρώπου πέλεται: περὶ δ᾽ ἔγχεος αἰχμῆι 315
lal / \ \ / ΒΗ /
νεῦρα διεσχίσθη, Tov δὲ σκότος ὄσσε κάλυψε.
Νεστορίδαι δ᾽ ὁ μὲν οὔτασ᾽ ᾿Ατύμνιον ὀξέϊ δουρὶ
᾿Αντίέλοχος, λαπάρης δὲ διήλασε χάλκεον ἔγχος"
” \ if / » > δὰ \
ἤριπε δὲ προπάροιθε. Μάρις δ᾽ αὐτοσχεδὰ δουρὶ
τ) , 5 / / Uy
Αντίλογωι ἐπόρουσε κασιγνήτοιο οχλωθείς, 920
xe Pp Ue x :
a lal > /
στὰς πρόσθεν véxvos: τοῦ δ᾽ ἀντίθεος Θρασυμήδης
” 5 / \ > / > 2 5 /
ἔφθη ὀρεξάμενος πρὶν οὐτάσαι, οὐδ᾽ ἀφάμαρτεν,
ὦμον ἄφαρ: πρυμνὸν δὲ βραχίονα δουρὸς ἀκωκὴ

306. ἔνϑ᾽ ἀνὴρ PR. 808. αὐτίκα 0’ ἄρ RK: αὐτίκα & ἄρα P. 310.
γαίης AC(Q)S, 313. ὑφορμηϑέντα Aph. 315. αυἱὼν ADP Cant. Mose. 2,
Ven. B. || αἴχαβι: ὁρμῇ Q Mor. and yp. Lips.: ἄκμῆι Harl. ἃ. 317. τινὲς
οὐτὰς (7) T. 319. πάρης J Bar. Lips. Vr. A Mose. 2. 321. MpOceen :
προπάροιθε Harl. a.

306=O 328. In 307 the full stop is

recurs only in 322, Ψ 805, and always

usually placed after ἡγεμόνων, but the
punctuation of the text is suggested by
Nikanor (αὐτίκ᾽ ἄρα" τοῦτο καὶ ἀπ’
ἄλλης ἀρχῆς δύναται λέγεσθαι, ἵνα στίζω-
μεν ἐπὶ τὸ υἱός), and is supported by the
use of αὐτίκ᾽ dpa, which regularly begins
the clause—generally an apodosis after
ἐπεί or Ore; but in 6 220 it is used
exactly as here, after an independent
sentence beginning with ἔνθα. Note the
variant αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἄρ.

313. ἐφορμηϑέντα, Aph. ὑφορμηθέντα,
which Nauck adopts in the sense clam
aggredientem. But this use of ὑπό in
composition is very rare, if not unknown,
in H.; ὑπόδρα approaches most nearly
to it, and even there the meaning is
rather different. Schol. T explains the
form by ὑποχωρήσαντα, so that ὑπο--Ξ
before him, as often, e.g. 303.

314. ὀρεξάμενος, cf. A 307 ἔγχει ὀρεξά-
μενος. The use with the acc. in the
sense to reach, i.e. strike, with a weapon

with a form of φθάνω.

316. The scholia remark that a wound
at the root of the thigh (apparently in
the gluteus maximus, which is in fact
the ‘thickest muscle’ in the human
body) would hardly produce immediate
death, which seems to be implied. If the
femoral artery were severed however, the
victim would soon die. νεῦρα, tendons.

317. 6 μέν, as though ὁ δὲ Θρασυμήδης
were to follow, in distributive apposition ;
the construction is altered in 321. So
bh 73 οἱ δὲ δύω σκόπελοι, ὁ μέν K.T.rN. 15
followed by τὸν δ᾽ ἕτερον σκόπελον, 10].

921. τοῦ is gen. after @uon, which is
governed by ὀρεξάμενος, as in 3814; οὐδ᾽
ἀφάμαρτεν being parenthetical, as A
350. But Brandreth’s conj. τόν for τοῦ is
very probable.

323. ἄφαρ seems here, as in some
other places, to have merged the sense
of quickly into a general asseverative
force, such as ‘right into the shoulder.’
See note on A 418.

: IAIAAOC Π (xv) 179

ὃ / , > Ν , > Ἢ δ᾽ 3 , Μ) = »Μ =
pul ἀπὸ μυώνων, ἀπὸ ὀστέον ἄχρις ἄραξε.

/ \ / \ \ , wv 7
δούπησεν δὲ πεσών, κατὰ δὲ σκότος ὄσσε κάλυψεν. 325

ὡς Tw μὲν δοιοῖσι κασιγνήτοισι δαμέντε

/ > Μ > 60 » θ \ e -
βήτην εἰς ἔρεβος, Σαρπηδόνος ἐσθλοὶ ἑταῖροι,

» τ᾿ r

vies ἀκοντισταὶ ᾿Αμισωδάρου, ὅς pa Χίμαιραν
θρέψεν ἀμαιμακέτην πολέσιν κακὸν ἀνθρώποισιν.
Αἴας δὲ Κλεόβουλον ᾿Οἱλιάδης ἐπορούσας 330
ζωὸν ἕλε, βλαφθέντα κατὰ κλόνον: ἀλλά οἱ αὖθι
λῦσε μένος, πλήξας ξίφει αὐχένα κωπήεντι.

cal > e / / “ Ν \ , ΕΣ
πᾶν δ᾽ ὑπεθερμάνθη ξίφος αἵματι: τὸν δὲ κατ᾽ ὄσσε
Μ" ΄ὔ / \ al ‘
ἔλλαβε πορφύρεος θάνατος καὶ μοῖρα κραταιή.

Πηνέλεως δὲ Λύκων τε συνέδραμον: ἔγχεσι μὲν γὰρ 33:

ἤμβροτον ἀλλήλων, μέλεον δ᾽ ἠκόντισαν ἄμφω,

τὼ δ᾽ αὗτις ξιφέεσσι συνέδραμον.

ἔνθα Λύκων μὲν

ἱπποκόμου κόρυθος φάλον ἤλασεν, ἀμφὶ δὲ καυλὸν
φάσγανον ἐρραίσθη- ὁ δ᾽ ὑπ᾽ οὔατος αὐχένα θεῖνε
Πηνέλεως, πᾶν δ᾽ εἴσω ἔδυ ξίφος, ἔσχεθε δ᾽ οἷον 340
δέρμα, παρηέρθη δὲ κάρη, ὑπέλυντο δὲ γυῖα.

Μηριόνης δ᾽ ᾿Ακάμαντα κιχεὶς ποσὶ καρπαλίμοισι

7. 4 > / \ \ εν

νύξ᾽ ἵππων ἐπιβησόμενον κατὰ δεξιὸν ὦμον"
ἤριπε δ᾽ ἐξ ὀχέων, κατὰ δ᾽ ὀφθαλμῶν κέχυτ᾽ ἀχλύς.

324. μυιώνων ADPTU Vr. A Mose.
335. cunedpauen PU?.

338. καυλὸν [6 2]JQRT: καυλῶι Mor. Bar.: ϑάλον S: καλόν

Gnopoucac J. 331. aveic ὦ.
337. aveic Ὁ.
(κᾶλον) 2.

344 om. Lips.

ἘΣ ᾿ς

339. ἐρράςθη JR. |

I cedne V1 b:

2. 328. Guicaddpou P. 330.
ἔγχεϊ Harl. a.

340. ἔεχε 0€ οἷον GH (8’).

324. OpUw ἀπὸ μυώνων, fore Way
From the muscles which join it to the
shoulder. ἄχρις, completely, A 522.

326-29. These lines, besides falling
under the suspicion which hangs over
the presence of Sarpedon in the original
M7jvis, contain several unusual expres-
sions, and were rejected by P. Knight.
βήτην εἷς ἔρεβος is a phrase which does
not occur elsewhere, though we have
ἱεμένων ἔρεβόσδε, v 356. GKontictai re-
curs only in σ 262. ᾿Αμιςώϑαρος is not
named in the other passage referring to
the Chimaira (Z 179-83), which is ap-
parently a wild beast and not one
‘nurtured’ by a human being. It has
been noticed that Amisodaros is a
genuine non-Greek name; the form
resembles Pixodaros of Karia (Herod. v.
118), Pandaros, and Akestodaros in a
Cyprian inscription. The name is prob-
ably connected with the town of Amisos

in Pontos. For the rationalizing history
of him see Plut. Vor. 247 F.

329. ἁμαιμακέτην, see on Z 179.

333-34. See E 82-83. Uneeepudnen,
the ὑπό implies ‘thereat.’ A 417.

338. φάλον, App. B, vii. 2; καυλόν.
N 162. mss. generally give καλόν, but
the separation of adjective and sub-
stantive by the end of a line is not
Homeric (see N 611). The accentuation
κᾶλον shews that some took it to mean
wood, cf. Hes. Opp. 427 ἐπικάμπυλα κᾶλα.
The word is found only in plur.

340. Ecyeee, held fast, intrans., as M
461, etc. We cannot supply κάρη as
object, on account of the manner in
which it is mentioned immediately after-
wards; nor ξίφος, because the skin
would not be said to stop the sword.

341. παρηέρϑθη, hung down at the side ;
see on dopro 1" 272.

343-44. See E 46-47, with notes.

180 IAIAAOC Π (xy1)

/ Me Ξ 2
᾿Ιδομενεὺς δ᾽ ᾿ρύμαντα κατὰ στόμα νηλέϊ χαλκῶι 345
/ \ ’ ’ A) / / ’ /
νύξε: τὸ δ᾽ ἀντικρὺ δόρυ χάλκεον ἐξεπέρησε
S. 2 5» ΕῚ 7 / ’ Sia) > / /
νέρθεν ὑπ᾽ ἐγκεφάλοιο, κέασσε δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὀστέα λευκώ'
/ > 5
ἐκ δ᾽ ἐτίναχθεν ὀδόντες, ἐνέπλησθεν δέ οἱ ἄμφω
“ 5 / \ , ESN / \ \ on
αἵματος ὀφθαλμοί: τὸ δ᾽ ava στόμα καὶ κατὰ ῥῖνας
πρῆσε χανών: θανάτου δὲ μέλαν νέφος ἀμφεκάλυψεν. 350
οὗτοι ἄρ᾽ ἡγεμόνες Δαναῶν ἕλον ἄνδρα ἕκαστος.
e \ / yy > / ΕΝ 3. τον,
ὡς δὲ λύκοι ἄρνεσσιν ἐπέχραον ἢ ἐρίφοισι
ε ς 2 »
σίνται, ὑπὲκ μήλων αἱρεύμενοι, al T ἐν ὄρεσσι
/ 9 ,ὔ / e Ν ’ /
ποιμένος ἀφραδίηισι διέτμαγεν: οἱ δὲ ἰδόντες
αἶψα διαρπάζουσιν ἀνάλκιδα θυμὸν ἐχούσας" 855
ἃ , e /
ὡς Δαναοὶ Τρώεσσιν ἐπέχραον' οἱ δὲ φόβοιο
δυσκελάδου μνήσαντο, λάθοντο δὲ θούριδος ἀλκῆς.
R “ a
Αἴας δ᾽ ὁ μέγας αἰὲν ἐφ᾽ “Extope χαλκοκορυστῆι
“ 3 ’ / ig \ 5 / /
ἵετ᾽ ἀκοντίσσαι: ὁ δὲ lOpeine πολέμοιο,
> / / / » / ”
ἀσπίδι ταυρείηι κεκαλυμμένος εὐρέας ὦμους, 860
- lal CR. la /
σκέπτετ᾽ ὀϊστῶν TE ῥοῖζον Kal δοῦπον ἀκόντων.
ἢ μὲν δὴ γίνωσκε μάχης ἑτεραλκέα νίκην"
>) \ \ ‘es 5 / / 2 > / c /
ἀλλὰ καὶ ὡς ἀνέμιμνε, σάω δ᾽ ἐρίηρας ἑταίρους.

845. Ἐρύμαντα : τινὲς ‘Opuuanta T. 846. εἰςεπέρηςε U. 347. κέθαςε
Q Lips. (yp. κέαςε). || λευκά : χαλκά 1, (χαλκός "). 848. ἐκ O': ἐν δ᾽ U:
οὐδ᾽ J. 349. pina J. 351. οὗτοι Gu’ Harl. a (vp. ἂρ). || ἕλεν C. || Exacton
Syr. Par. ὁ e g: ἐν ἄλλωι GNOpac Gpicrouc A. 352. Eniypaon BS. || ἐρίφεςει R.
353. αἱρούμενοι J: yp. καὶ ἀγρεύμενοι X. οὕτως αἵ τε θηλυκῶς, ai ὄϊες Did.
(others οἵ Te). 354, OléTuaren Ar. 2: diétuaron S Syr. Par. b ¢ g. 356.
anéxpaon G. 358. ἐφ᾽ : ὑφ᾽ L. 362. rirneocke Syr. 363. ἀνάμιμινε J.

μέγας καὶ δῖος ᾿Οδυσσεύς I 169, and so A
563, etc. The usual phrase is μέγας
Τελαμώνιος Αἴας.

350. πρῆςε, spirted or even ‘blew’
out the blood ; see on A 481.
353. The change of gender, uHAon..

αἵ τε is harsh, but it may be paralleled
by E 140, and is used as though ὄϊες had
preceded. Fick would reject from ἢ
ἐρίφοισι to αἱρεύμενοι, so getting rid of
this harshness, and also of the Jonic
contraction αἱρεύμενοι. Besides ὑπὲκ
μήλων, from among the herd, is in-
consistent with ϑιέταλαγεν, which makes
them stragglers from the main body.
There is, therefore, something in favour of
his athetesis ; though the words are not
like the empty work of an interpolator.
Agar’s μητρῶν for μήλων is ingenious,
but the form is not Homeric (J. P. xxv.
43). ἐπέχραον, 3 50 μητέρι μοι μνηστῆρες
ἐπέχραον, beset. See on E 198, Φ 369.
358. ὁ werac, the article occurs here
only in this phrase, which is perhaps
a mistake for Αἴας δὲ μέγας. Cf. Αἴας Te

559. idpeiHt as H 198, and compare
Hector’s own boast in H 237-41.

361. cKénteto, so P 652 σκέπτεο. The
only other instance in H. is σκεψάμενος
μ 247, so that here there is no sign of
the later preference of the aor. fut. and
perf. over the pres. and imperf. of this
verb. σκοπεῖν is not found in H. at all.
The use of the verb with potzon (whist-
ling, « 315, Καὶ 502) and δοῦπον, both
expressing sownd, is rather curious ; ‘he
watched for’ is of course the sense.

362. μάχης ἑτεραλκέα νίκην, fle twri
of the tide of victory; see note on
H 26. ‘

363. cdo, from the non-thematic form
σάωμι, found again in Φ 238, and as an
imper. in ν 230, p 595. See note on I
424.

IAIAAOC Π (xvi) 181
΄ ’ fs SD , , > / ‘ » ‘ "
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἀπ᾿ Οὐλύμπου νέφος ἔρχεται οὐρανὸν εἴσω
> fA 5 / “ % \ , /
αἰθέρος ἐκ Sins, ὅτε τε Ζεὺς λαίλαπα τείνηι, 365
ὡς TOV ἐκ νηῶν γένετο ἰαχή τε φόβος τε,
cal dm “
οὐδὲ κατὰ μοῖραν πέραον πάλιν. “Extopa δ᾽ ἵπποι
Μ 5 ΄ 4 ra 4 ‘
ἔκφερον ὠκύποδες σὺν τεύχεσι, λεῖπε δὲ λαὸν
ἌΣ Ὁ / »
Τρωϊκὸν, ods ἀέκοντας ὀρυκτὴ τάφρος ἔρυκε.
\ 3. 5 ΄ > ΄ ΓΟ ΨΥ, “
πολλοὶ δ᾽ ἐν τάφρωι ἐρυσάρματες ὠκέες ἵπποι 370
ΕΣ lal 4
ἄξαντ᾽ ἐν πρώτωι ῥυμῶι λίπον ἅρματ᾽ ἀνάκτων.
365. ἐκ δίης : εὐδίης P (yp. ἐκ δίης) KR (svpr. εἰ overt). | Te: γε Τ᾿ ᾿ λαίλαπι
Par. 6 and Ar, ἐν τοῖς ὑπομνήμασι. || τείνει (1} 2) ΘΕ" : τείνειη (i.e. τείνει supr.
Η) D: τείνοι (P!?) Bar. Mor. 367. népcon I (népaon |"): πέρεον U. 369.

ἔρυκε: e€pre Syr.

364. The following passage contains
many difficulties and inconsistencies.
The opening simile is obscure. The
unexcused and unexplained flight of
Hector in 367 is strange after his very
different attitude in 363. ἐκ νηῶν
should rather be ἀπὸ νεῶν, as they are
no longer among the ships, unless the
phrase is meant to be a recapitulation
of the whole retreat; but then the
second mention of Hector would be out
of place, as it must be meant to follow
after what is said in 358-63. Again, to
say nothing of the entire omission of the
wall, it is hard to see how the trench
can hinder the fugitives on foot while it
causes no hindrance to Hector in his
chariot ; in M 61-79 the conditions are
exactly the opposite. The filling up of
‘the trench by Apollo in O 356 is entirely
forgotten ; but for this the absence of
the wall might be explained from O 361.
Linguistically the dual ἄξαντε in 371
is doubtful, and the omission of the
digamma in ἅρματ᾽ ἀνάκτων hardly re-
mediable. It is clear, then, that there
is some interpolation. Naber would re-
ject only 367-71, but this, besides leav-
ing the questionable simile, gives a very
harsh repetition, (ayy τε φόβος τε.
ἰαχῆι τε φόβωι τε separated only by a
single line. The least that can be con-
demned is therefore, as it would seem,
364-71. The interpolation of the last
four lines is easily explicable, if it be
admitted that the original Mjms knew
nothing of the wall; when it had once
been inserted into the poem, it needed
mention in a retreat as much as in an
advance.

365. On the phrase αἰθέρος ἐκ dic
see App. H. The variant εὐδίης is in-
teresting ; it might mean ‘amid clear

370. ἐρυςάρματοι Lips. (supr. ες).

weather,’ but it does not help the meta-
phor. εὔδιος is not a Homeric word,
and in later poets the c is always short,
except rarely in arsis.—The simile is
very vague and inappropriate; ‘as a
storm-cloud appears on the face of
heaven, such was their shouting and
panic out of the ships.’ It is hard to
see what the point of comparison is.
A crowd of men is sometimes called a
νέφος. but there the similarity seems to
end. The interpolator of the allusion to
the trench seems to have aimed at a
counterpart to the great cloud simile of
297 ff. ; because the coming of the
Myrmidons is there compared to the
breaking of clouds, the departure of the
Trojans may be compared to the coming
of clouds. The result hardly justifies
the argument. λαίλαπα, ἐν τοῖς ὑπο-
μνήμασι κατὰ δοτικὴν τὸ ““ λαίλαπι," ἵν᾽ Fe
ὅταν ὁ Ζεὺς ἐν λαίλαπι παρατείνηι τὰ
νέφη, Schol. T.

367. οὐ κατὰ μοῖραν, cf. M 225 οὐ
κόσμωι παρὰ ναῦφιν ἐλευσόμεθ᾽ αὐτὰ κέλευ-
θα. Schol. Β (Porph.) on Z 488 οὐ κατὰ
τὸ καθῆκον, ἀλλὰ αἰσχρῶς. N€paon, crossed,
but whether the wall or the moat is meant
we are not told.

368. cUN TeUyecl seems to mean
spite of the weight of his armour.’

371. ‘The Dual is used of a group of
pairs . . the Dual ἄξαντε (like the sing.
puuai) refers to one chariot. Probably
too we should read ἅρμα ἀνάκτων (1.6.
Γανάκτων),᾽ H. G. § 170, comparing ¥
362 πάντες ἐφ᾽ ἵπποιιν μάστιγας ἄειραν, v
948 ὄσσε δ᾽ ἄρα σφεων δακρυόῴφιν πίμπλαντο,
I 503, 7 444. But it must be noticed
that the sing. ῥυμῶι, as describing gener-
ally a single spot belonging to each
chariot, is not really a support for this ;
the poet would hardly have said ἐν

‘in

182

IAIAAOC Π (xvt)

IlatporXos δ᾽ ἕπετο σφεδανὸν Δαναοῖσι κελεύων,

Τρωσὶ κακὰ φρονέων: οἱ δὲ ἰαχῆι τε φόβωι τε

na > » ,
πάσας πλῆσαν ὁδούς, ἐπεὶ ἂρ τμάγεν: ὕψι δ᾽ ἀέλλη

if ie if
σκίδναθ᾽ ὑπαὶ νεφέων, τανύοντο δὲ μώνυχες ἵπποι 87

οι

” 8 n » \ ,
ἄψρορρον TpoTt ἄστυ νέῶν ATO Και κλισιάων.

- fal , /
Πάτροκλος δ᾽ ἧι πλεῖστον ὀρινόμενον ἴδε λαὸν,
7) P

an eo » 9 Ό / ΄ Ν > ΕΣ al ”
τῆι ῥ᾽ ἔχ᾽ ὁμοκλήσας: ὑπὸ δ᾽ ἄξοσι φῶτες ἔπιπτον
πρηνέες ἐξ ὀχέων, δίφροι δ᾽ ἀνακυμβαλίαζον.

2 \ ’ ” ΄ G / » , vf
QVTLKPU ὃ apa τάφρον ὑπέρθορον @MKEES LTT Ob

372. CpedaNON Ar. (2: others σφεθανῶν (see on Φ 542).
ἐν ἄλλωι Gpoppon προτὶ actu ἑλιχϑέντων ὑπ᾽ ἀχαιῶν A.
ἐξοπίσω H. || GnakuuBadiazon Ar. A Syr.: ἀνεκυμβαλίαζον 0.

ana GR. || Unéxeopon () Cant.

πρώτοις ῥυμοῖς in any case when he
meant that all were broken at the same
place. It looks as though the inter-
polator (see Introd.) had adapted a line,
perhaps from an old Epic, which applied
to the breaking of a single chariot, by
simply reading ἅρματ᾽ ἀνάκτων for ἅρμα
ἄνακτος, under the belief supported by
Zen. (probably not without ancient
tradition) that the dual could be used
as a plural; or the line may merely be
made up of Z 40 (q.v.) and IL 507. The
harshness of the constr. will be somewhat
softened if we read πολλῶν for πολλοί.
ἐν πρώτωι ῥυμῶι, at the front end of
the pole, where the yoke was attached,
see App. M. This would of course be
the likeliest place for the pole to break ;
and as the horses were attached by the
yoke only, without traces, a fracture
there would at once set them free.

374. ὁθούς, probably the tracks across
the plain. tTudren, were cut wp into
straggling bodies, cf. 354. ἀέλλη, so
Mss. ; edd. have generally altered it to
ἄελλα, on the analogy of θύελλα. The
nom. sing. does not occur elsewhere, and
there is no justification for deserting
Ms. authority. For the use of the word
to signify a cloud of dust cf. Ψ 366, and
κονίσαλος ἀελλής I 13.

375. ὑπαὶ νεφέων, wp to the clouds,
see on Ὁ 625. Editors unanimously
read ὑπό, MSS. unanimously (so far as is
known) ὑπαί. Of course the former is
metrically adequate; but the latter is
quite firmly established and is found
occasionally in Trag. (e.g. Soph. £7. 711,
Aisch. Ag. 892 etc.), doubtless as an
archaism. Cf. also ὕπαιθα, and παραι-,
μεται- in composition. Prepositions

380

376. ποτὶ LR. ||
379. ἐξ ὀχέων:
380. ἄρα:

originally being adverbs, the locative
termination is unobjectionable. There
seems to be no reason therefore for
favouring one form at the expense of
the other. It is likely enough that in
many places the antiquated form in -ac
has had to give place to the more familiar.

379. @NaxuuBahiazon occurs only here
in Greek. It is commonly explained
‘turned over with a rattle,’ as from
κύμβαλον. The analogy with κύμβαχος
(ΕΒ 586 ἔκπεσε δίφρου κύμβαχος ἐν κονίηισιν)
is very close, and the two words were
doubtless connected ; where both are
so obscure it is useless to say more, or
to correct the text, with Valkenaer and
others, to ἀνακυμβαχίαζον.

380-83. Here again we have a passage
apparently interpolated in order to bring
in an allusion to the trench. It will be
seen that the simile in 384 which refers
to the whole Trojan cavalry comes in
far more appropriately after the account
of the confusion of the Trojan horses at
large in 378-79 than where a transition
has been made to two single teams in
380 (Patroklos’) and 883 (Hector’s).
The transition, too, from δίφροι (379), the
chariots of the enemy, to ὠκέες ἵπποι,
P.’s horses, is harsh, because when we
first read 380 we suppose that the horses
meant are those belonging to the chariots
in question ; it is only when we come to
the end of 382 that we find that we are
wrong. The phrase ἐπὶ Ἕκτορι κέκλετο
euudc, his heart bade him attack Hector,
is quite unlike any of the uses of the
very frequent κέλομαι, which requires
the infin. to be expressed, and the
omission of the object (Patroklos ? or his
horses?) makes the phrase doubly obscure.

IAIAAOC Π (xvi)

183

[ἄμβροτοι, ods ἸΠηλῆϊ θεοὶ δόσαν ἀγλαὰ δῶρα,]

, es a > ἢ , ,
πρόσσω ἱέμενοι, ἐπὶ ὃ Extope κέκλετο θυμός.
“, \ / \ > ᾽ , A
ἵετο yap βαλέειν: τὸν δ᾽ ἔκφερον ὠκέες ἵπποι.
ὡς δ᾽ ὑπὸ λαίλαπι πᾶσα κελαινὴ βέβριθε χθὼν

cal / ad

ἤματ᾽ ὀπωρινῶι, ὅτε λαβρότατον χέει ὕδωρ 385
Ζεύς, ὅτε δὴ ἄνδρεσσι κοτεσσάμενος χαλεπήνηι,
οἱ βίηι εἰν ἀγορῆι σκολιὰς κρίνωσι θέμιστας,
> \ ’ / Led Μ » > /
ἐκ δὲ δίκην ἐλάσωσι, θεῶν ὄπιν οὐκ ἀλέγοντες"
τῶν δέ τε πάντες μὲν ποταμοὶ πλήθουσι ῥέοντες,

381 om. ACDHSU Syr. || ἄβροτοι (.

R Bar. Mor. Vr. A: BéBpiye I’.
e corr.
εἰ G. || κρίνουσι Harl. a.

385. Huati χειμκερίω PR (yau- ΕἾ).
386. OH ACH Syr. Mose. 2 Lips.: δή τ᾽ ἢ.
388. €Adcouci Harl. a.

384. ὡς ὃ 08’ ὑπο Syr.

387. εἶν om. : ἐν 1:

381. This line is interpolated from
867, evidently because the ambiguity of
ὠκέες ἵπποι (see above) was felt to require
immediate correction.

384. This very remarkable simile, with
which we may compare that in A 450 ff.,
has been roughly treated by many critics ;
Fick goes so far as to call it ‘simply
absurd’ (sogar abgeschmackt). The
picture is surely a very fine and appro-

riate one. The Trojan horses, broken
rom their chariots and galloping in
wild confusion across the plain, are com-
pared to the torrents in a mountain
country during a time of rain so ex-
cessive that it can only be regarded as
a divine judgment. The only lines to
which exception can fairly be taken are
387-88 (see note). The comparison of
mountain torrents to galloping horses
has not improbably given rise to the
legend of the Centaurs. κελαινή, dark
with the clouds that cover it. Spitzner
conj. κελαινῆι, comparing A 747 κελαινῆι
λαίλαπι ἴσος, but the change is needless,
and the order of the words is against
it. BéBpiee, as though the clouds were
a heavy weight upon the earth—a most
vigorous and picturesque expression.
The variant βέβρυχε, groans, is also
possible, and corresponds well with the
στενάχοντο of 393; see u 242 (of Skylla)
ἀμφὶ δὲ πέτρη δεινὸν βεβρύχει.

385. The variant χειμερίωι is perhaps
a reminiscence of the fine simile in M
279. It is less appropriate here, for the
winter is a comparatively fine season in
Greece, autumn being the time of heavy
Tain. ὁπωρινῶι, see on E 5.

386. Edd. generally read δή ῥ᾽ without
authority. 4 remains long before a

vowel in the same position in Z 306, K
536, A 171, N 633.

387-88. There are many reasons for
thinking this couplet spurious. It en-
tirely spoils the balance of the simile by
laying weight on a point which is far
removed from the required picture. The
phrase κρίνειν eéuicrac for δίκας is not
Homeric in expression or thought; to
H. the θέμιστες are rather laws or prin-
ciples than judgments to be given, and
they are in the keeping of the kings,
not, as seems here to be implied, in the
power of the community. ὄπιν is a
word occurring elsewhere only in the Od.
(twice in & once each in v and ¢), and in
Hesiod, Pindar, ete. (see L. and S., s.v.).
The couplet is evidently made up from
Hesiod Opp., ef. 221 σκολιῆις δὲ δίκηις
κρίνωσι θέμιστας, 223 (Δίκη) κακὸν ἀνθρώ-
ποισι φέρουσα οἵ τέ μιν ἐξελάσωσι καὶ οὐκ
ἰθεῖαν ἔνειμαν, and the following passage
concerning the blessings given by Zeus
to men who give righteous judgments.
Again in 250 we find ὅσοι σκολιῆισι
δίκηισιν ἀλλήλους τρίβουσι, θεῶν ὅπιν οὐκ
ἀλέγοντες. The excellent opportunity for
a sententious interpolation was evidently
too much for a poet of the Hesiodean
school,

389. τῶν must mean ‘the rivers of
these men,’ a strange expression, but
less harsh than the alternative which
regards τῶν as referring in a collective
sense to ὕδωρ above, ‘these floods.’
Possibly the word may have been altered
by the interpolator; e.g. it may have
been τοῦ (se. ὕδατος), which would seem
to have too distant a reference when the
two lines had been added.

184 ᾿

IAIAAOC Π (νὴ

πολλὰς δὲ κλιτῦς τότ᾽ ἀποτμήγουσι χαράδραι, 390
’ 5 eo / / / ον

ἐς δ᾽ ἅλα πορφυρέην μεγάλα στενάχουσι ῥέουσαι

3 > / ΡΝ » te / 4 3 > 7

ἐξ ὀρέων ἐπὶ κάρ, μινύθει δέ τε ἔργ᾽ ἀνθρώπων"

ὡς ἵπποι 'Ῥρωιαὶ μεγάλα στενάχοντο θέουσαι.

/ 5 5S

Πάτροκλος δ᾽ ἐπεὶ οὖν πρώτας ἐπέκερσε φάλαγγας,
xX \ n le /
aw ἐπὶ νῆας ἔεργε παλιμπετές, οὐδὲ πόληος 395
/ e / >? if 5 \ \
εἴα ἱεμένους ἐπιβαινέμεν, ἀλλὰ μεσηγὺυ
νηῶν καὶ ποταμοῦ καὶ τείχεος ὑψηλοῖο

lal oh / , /
κτεῖνε μεταΐσσων, πολέων ὃ ἀπετίνυτο ποινήν.

> 5, / n rn
ἔνθ᾽ ἤτοι Upovoov πρῶτον βάλε δουρὶ φαεινῶι,

Τὰ / > ’ / nr \ n
στερνον γυμνωθέντα Tap ἀσπίδα, λῦσε δὲ γυια" 400

/ Ν i.
δούπησεν δὲ πεσών.

ὁ δὲ Θέστορα ΓΠνοπος υἱὸν

391. εἰς Syr. || ῥέοντες ().

393. τρώων 1).

894. πρώταις ενέκερςε

φάλαγξι Syr. || énéxupce DJT Lips. Vr. d: anékepce Q Cant.: δ᾽ ἀπέκερςε S.

396. ἐπιβαίνειν PR.

398. ἀπετίννυτο CPR:

Gnainuto (). 399. πρῶτον

πρόνοον H. || ἐν ἄλλωι βάλε ποιμένα λαῶν A.

390. ἀποτμήγουςι, the torrent beds
divide the hill-sides. he force of ἀπο-
Tunyew is not necessarily the same as our
‘cut off,’ 1.6. it does not always imply
the separation of the thing cut from
something else, but may mean merely a
division within it by a deep cleft as
we say ‘cut up’; see note on λαιμὸν
ἀποτμήξειε (ἀπαμήσειε) Σ 34.

9591, πορφυρέην, the epithet is only
here applied to the ἅλς or shallow water
of the coast ; when used of water it else-
where belongs only to κῦμα. Virgil
imitates the line, (Georg. iv. 373 In
mare purpureum violentior effiuit aminis.
For the personification in ctTenayouci
ef. Ψ 230 Θρηΐκιον κατὰ πόντον, ὁ δ᾽
ἔστενεν οἴδματι θύων. *:

992. ἐπὶ Kap, an obscure phrase ; the
ancients doubted if it should be written
in one word or two, and explained head-
long (as from ἐπὶ κάρα) or sideways. The
adj. ἐπικάρσιαι (c 70), of ships in a storm,
is equally doubtful. The sense headlong
certainly suits this place best; but the
adj. (like ἐγκάρσιος) always means athwart
in later Greek. The derivation of this
sense is obscure. wuinveel, intrans., as
P 738, 6 374. ἔργα, chiefly or solely
tillage in this connexion. Cf. B 751,
E 92, M 283, T 131, β 22, £344 ᾿Ιθάκης
épya=the fields of Ithaka.

394, énéxepce, cf. Ο 467, II 120, where
the verb is used in a metaphorical sense.
Here we may equally translate ‘cut off,
thwarted’; the sense seems to be that

Patroklos outstrips the foremost batta-
lions of the Trojans and stops their career.
The variant πρώταις ἐνέκερσε φάλαγξι of
Syr. is probably a reminiscence of πυκινῆις
evéxupoe φάλαγξι, N 145 (ef. ἐπέκυρσε in
T, etc.). ἀπέκερσε of QS would exactly
represent our cut off from retreat, and
is what we should expect to find. The
word recurs only in the literal sense,
K 456, etc., but cf. ἀποτμήγειν Καὶ 364,
A 468, X 456,

395, πόληος ἐπιβαινέμεν, fo set foot in
the city, as ¢ 262 ἐπὴν πόλιος ἐπιβείομεν.

397. τείχεος clearly means the wall of
Troy, not the Greek wall, as many have
supposed ; in the latter case it is impos-
sible to get any sense out of the words,
whereas the line as it stands is free
from objection if we consider that in
the original Mims there was only one
wall—that round Troy; so that after
the excision of 364-71, 380-83 there is
no longer any ambiguity in the words.
Almost all editors regard the line as a
mere gloss, because they hold that τείχεος
necessarily means the Greek wall.

398. πολέων ἀπετίνυτο NOINHN, exacted
vengeance for many fallen Greeks. This
is the regular sense of the mid. ἀποτί-
νυμαι (8 73) with ἀπετισάμην and ἀποτί-
σομαι, the act. ἀποτίνω being=to pay
back. Cf. note on N 745. 400=312.

401. “Hnonoc υἱόν, cf. = 445. The
constr. is dropped and resumed again
with νύξε, 404.

.

IAIAAOC Π (xvi)

/ e / e ‘ es } eh’ ,
δεύτερον ὁρμηθείς---ὁ μὲν εὐξέστωι ἐνὶ δίφρωι
> U ᾽ \ / / , δν Μ “
ἧστο ἀλείς: ἐκ γὰρ πλήγη φρένας, ἐκ δ᾽ ἄρα χειρῶν
e 3 » - \
ἡνία ἠΐχθησαν: ὁ δ᾽ ἔγχεϊ νύξε παραστὰς

γναθμὸν δεξιτερόν, διὰ δ᾽ αὐτοῦ πεῖρεν ὀδόντων,

405

ἕλκε δὲ δουρὸς ἑλὼν ὑπὲρ ἄντυγος, ὡς OTE τις φὼς

πέτρηι ἔπι προβλῆτι καθήμενος ἱερὸν ἰχθὺν

ἐκ πόντοιο θύραζε λίνων καὶ ἤνοπι χαλκῶι"

ὡς ἕλκ᾽ ἐκ δίφροιο κεχηνότα δουρὶ φαεινῶι,

καὸὃ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐπὶ στόμ᾽ ἔωσε: πεσόντα δέ μιν λίπε θυμός. 410

5 / / /
αὐτὰρ ἔπειτ᾽ ᾿δὡδρύλαον ἐπεσσύμενον βάλε πέτρωι

402. δεύτερος Ki.
406. ἕλκε Ar. 2: εἷλκε (τῷ.
CDGJSTU: efx’ ὦ:

éneccUuenoc (A supr.) D, yp. T. ||
πέτρηι Eust.

403. ἐκ rap: καὶ rap L.
408. οἴνοπι ().
εἴλκεν Lips.: ἕλκετ᾽ P.
Mose. 2?: εὐρύλαον LS: εὐρύαλον APQRT Cant. Mor. Lips. :
πέτρω!: δουρὶ KR (7p. πέτρωι; : πέτρωι ἢ

405. ὀδόντας J Vr. A.

409. ἕλκ᾽ Ar. ὦ : efx’
411. ἐρύλαον DJ Harl. a.
ἐρύαλον OCOGHU.

403. éx . . mAdrH as N 394.

404. Note the hiatus at the end of
the first foot ; van L. writes ἡνία F’(o),
Brandreth ἡνία Fo ἤϊχθεν. But see on
B 87.

405. πεῖρεν, drove it through; the
word generally means to pierce, the
object being the thing pierced, not, as
here, the spear. It is possible here,
however, to make ἔγχος the subject, it
pierced through the teeth. αὐτοῦ is a
suspicious word, as it seems to mean
‘his’ in the weakest sense, ᾿Αττικῶς as
the Schol. say. Bekk. conj. αὐτῶν,
through the very teeth.

406. δουρός, by the spear, as though
it were a part of the man, like χειρὸς
ἑλεῖν. ὡς ὅτε sc. ἕλκει or ἕλκη. The
simile from angling is worked out at
greater length in μ 251-54, where ἐπὶ
προβόλωι and θύραζε remind one of the
present passage. See also on Q 80-82.

407. For the use of fepén here see
note on A 366 and App. D (vol. i.
p- 592). ὅτι οὐκ ἐπί τι εἶδος ἰχθύος φερό-
μενος εἴρηκεν ἱερὸν ἰχϑύν, καθάπερ τινὲς
ἀποδεδώκασι τὸν πομπίλον, οἱ δὲ τὸν κάλ-
λιχθυν (ν. Lex.): ἀλλὰ κοινότερον τὸν
ἀνετὸν καὶ εὐτραφῆ, ὡς ἱερὸν βοῦν λέγομεν
τὸν ἀνειμένον, An., i.e. fat as a sacred
ox which has no work to do. So Fiisi
explains the adj. to mean ‘living an
idle life’ like sacred cattle, nu2lo mortali
opere contacti (Tac.), and owning allegi-
ance only to the god of the sea. But
all this is needlessly far-fetched. There
is in fact abundant evidence for the

sanctity of fish both in Greece and
elsewhere ; Frazer gives it with his
usual wealth of reference in Paus. iv.

153-54. The Homeric Greeks had only
partially outgrown the superstitious dis-
like to eating the sacred fish; they
would do so under the stress of necessity
(see 6 368-69), but they still retained
the epithet which implied that it was
wrong.

408. HNom, only here, Σ 349, κ 360,
always in the same phrase, like vaépoy
(see on B 578), and equally uncertain in
origin and meaning with that word.
As καί is not shortened, the word was
presumably Fivoy.

410. στόμα F’ ὦσε Brandreth.

411. Bade πέτρωι, he is therefore on
foot; in 378 (éxye=drove) he was still
on the chariot, and in 427 he is again
mounted. This illustrates the rapid
mounting and dismounting of the heroes,
which is a constant characteristic of
Homeric warfare. Diintzer is wrone in
taking it as evidence that 411-17 are
interpolated ; this does not do away
with the difficulty, for it is not clear
that παραστάς in 404 can be used of

‘coming up’ in a chariot. The pass-
age, however, is an insignificant and

mechanical production, made up of names
and repetitions of lines from other places
(Alic ch T° 288; 412=7T 413 ef.
Φ 118; 414=N 544; 418=M 194), and
can be perfectly well dispensed with.
Another ’Epvuas (415) was killed a short
time back (345) ; repetition within such

ὥς -
δ :

186

IAIAAOC Π (xv1)

μέσσην Kak κεφαλήν: ἡ δ᾽ ἄνδιχα πᾶσα κεάσθη
ἐν κόρυθι βριαρῆι" ὁ δ᾽ ἄρα πρηνὴς ἐπὶ γαίηι
κώππεσεν, ἀμφὶ δέ μιν θάνατος χύτο θυμοραϊστής.

by \ ” >
αὐτὰρ ETTELT

᾿Ερύμαντα καὶ ᾿Αμφοτερὸν καὶ “Earaddtny 416

Τληπόλεμόν τε Δαμαστορίδην ᾿Εὐχίον τε Ivpw τε
Ἰφέα τ᾽ ὔνππόν τε καὶ ᾿Αργεάδην Ἰ]ολύμηλον
πάντας ἐπασσυτέρους πέλασε χθονὶ πουλυβοτείρηι.
’ 5 ’
Σαρπηδὼν δ᾽ ὡς οὖν ἴδ᾽ ἀμιτροχίτωνας ἑταίρους
’ " /

χέρσ ὕπο Ilatpoxdovo Μενοιτιάδαο δαμέντας, 420
/ 2 ΓΙᾺ 5) ΕῚ i? ,ὔ ,
κέκλετ ἄρ᾽ ἀντιθέοισι καθαπτόμενος Λυκίοισιν"

5, / 5 / / /
“αἰδώς, ὦ Λύκιοι, πόσε φεύγετε ;

rn \ »
νῦν θοοὶ ἔστε"

’ / s b] \ no > Uy Μ ry /

ἀντήσω yap ἐγὼ τοῦδ᾽ ἀνέρος, ὄφρα δαείω

“ “ 7 \ \ \ \ »

ὅς τις ὅδε κρατέει καὶ δὴ κακὰ πολλὰ ἔοργε
lal a nr ,

Τρῶας, ἐπεὶ πολλῶν τε Kal ἐσθλῶν γούνατ᾽ ἔλυσεν. 425
ἢ pa καὶ ἐξ ὀχέων σὺν τεύχεσιν ἄλτο χαμᾶζε.

Πάτροκλος δ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν, ἐπεὶ ἴδεν, ἔκθορε δίφρου.

ε ᾽ ev 5) > N , ᾽ a

οἱ δ᾽, ὥς T αὐἰγυπιοὶ γαμψώνυχες ἀγκυλοχεῖλαι

416. πύρην G: πύρον Lips.
οὖν 10°: ciden Lips.: εἶδ᾽ Q.
0° ἄρ᾽ Vr. A

418. πολυβοτείρηι U.
420. δαμέντας : eaNndntac PR.
428. οἱ δ᾽ ὥς τ᾽: ὡς O° Ste Bar.

419. ὃ᾽ om. Bar. Mor. ||
423. rap:

narrow limits is usually avoided, even
with unimportant names.

419. For the position of the following
episode in the story see Introd. ἄμιτρο-
xitwnac, App. B, iv. 5. This seems to
be regarded as a national peculiarity of
the Lykians. There are but few other
similar allusions in H., see B 542, A 533.
The Greeks do not differ from their
neighbours in dress. There is evidently
no difference between the arms of

Diomedes and the lLykian Glaukos
when they exchange in Z: see Helbig
Jabs JAN oe Ὁ 1:

421. καθαπτόμενος is here absolute,
the dat. being taken with κέκλετο.

422. écreimper. ; we can equally read
ἐστέ [indic.], and the choice is not easy.
The latter gives a tone of bitter sarcasm
well suited to the passage, ‘now ye are
swift’ (viz. when running away) ; the
point depending on the fact that Gods
when used of men is properly a word of
praise, ‘keen in attack’; its use of
flying, or at least reluctant, warriors is
therefore a strong oxymoron. It is,
however, perhaps better to accept the
simple and straightforward imper. ‘now
be swift to fight’; γάρ in the next line
has a more natural connexion if it ex-

presses a continuation, not an opposition,
to what immediately precedes.

423, ἀντήςω, here only with gen. of
meeting an opponent (and σέθεν ἀντι-
άσαιμεν H 231), the dat. being the regular
case, Z 399, H 423, and so with ἀντιάαν
Z127, ® 151, 431; we have ἀντήσειε
μάχης H 158 and ἀντιάαν πολέμοιο fre-
quently, when the gen. is clearly par-
titive ; here it is to be explained from
the ‘improper preposition’ ἄντα, and is
probably the ‘pure’ gen. (H. G. § 152).
These words of Sarpedon’s are the
only indication of any doubt on the
Tees part as to who Patroklos really

they clearly intimate that he is not
Beare for Achilles (οἷδε μὲν ὅτι οὐκ
᾿Αχιλλεύς - ἀγνοεῖ δὲ εἰ ἸΠάτροκλός ἐστιν,
Sehr i):

424-25 =F 175-76.

428. airumtoi, see on H 59. ἀγκυλο-
χείλης recurs in τ 538, x 302, lit. with
curved lips, of the hooked beak, cf. Eur.
Ion 1199 of doves és αὐτὸ χείλη...
καθῆκαν. Still the phrase is an odd
one. ἀγκυλοχῆλαι has been proposed
(χηλή of birds’ claws Aisch. Pers. 208,
Soph. Anf. 1003, Eur. Jon 1208) but
this would be a mere repetition of
γαμψώνυχες (so Ht. Mag. s.v.).

IAIAAOC Π (xvi) 187

᾽ cal ,
πέτρηι eh ὑψηλῆι μεγάλα κλάζοντε μάχωνται,
΄ 5 ,
ὡς οἱ κεκλήγοντες ἐπ᾿ ἀλλήλοισιν ὄρουσαν. 430
\ \ Oo \ / r / 7.» ᾽ ,
τοὺς δὲ ἰδὼν ἐλέησε Κρόνου πάϊς ἀγκυλομήτεω,
Ἥρην δὲ προσέειπε κασιγνήτην ἄλοχόν Te:
ce " ᾿ ΄ “ / ©. 73 δό > _ aA
ὦ μοι ἐγών, ὅ τέ μοι Σαρπηδόνα φίλτατον ἀνδρῶν
nm? id \ / M (ὃ ind a
potp ὑπὸ Llatpoxrovo Μενοιτιάδαο δαμῆναι.
διχθὰ δέ μοι κραδίη μέμονε φρεσὶν ὁρμαίνοντι, 135
ἤ μιν ζωὸν ἐόντα μάχης ἄπο δακρυοέσσης
θείω ἀναρπάξας Λυκίης ἐν πίονι δήμωι,
Εν A e \ \ M (ὃ ὃ . ͵, ”
ἢ ἤδη ὑπὸ χερσὶ Μενοιτιάδαο δαμάσσω.
\ ᾽ ᾽ ,ὔ > Ἂἤ fal / “
τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα βοῶπις πότνια ᾿ Ἡρη"
/ σ΄ a fal »
“αἰνότατε Κρονίδη, ποῖον τὸν μῦθον ἔειπες ; 440
ἄνδρα θνητὸν ἐόντα, πάλαι πεπρωμένον αἴσηι,
ἂψ ἐθέλεις θανάτοιο δυσηχέος ἐξαναλῦσαι ;
” ’ > \ bd , > / \ »,
ἔρδ᾽- ἀτὰρ οὔ τοι πάντες ἐπαινέομεν θεοὶ ἄλλοι.
\ ? fal
ἄλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω, σὺ δ᾽ ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῆισιν"
τι / δ Ἢ
αἴ κε ζὼν πέμψηις Σαρπηδόνα ὅνδε δόμονδε, 445

429. KAdzontec PRT. μάχονται CGHQSU. 430. κεκληγότες JPORS
Harl. a, King’s Par. ὁ e g j: κεκλήγδτες T: κεκληγῶτες Par. h: ἐν τῆι ἑτέραι
τῶν ᾿Αριστάρχου κεκληγῶτες Did. 431. κρόνου «.7.\.: πατὴρ ἀνθρῶν τε
θεῶν τε JT. 432-58 om. Zen. 433. ὦ μοι: ai ai Plat. Rep. iii. 388c.
435. μέμον᾽ ἐν JS (μαίμον᾽). 431. λυκίων Ὁ. | ἐνὶ (10). 440. ἔειπας ἢ
ἔειπες Eust. 442. ἐθέλοις Vr. b. 445. ZOON (Ζῶν) Ar. 2: ζωὸν DHPQRSTU
Harl. a Ὁ ἃ, King’s Par.a Ὁ cle f gj, and ἄλλοι ap. Did.

430. κεκλήγοντες, see M 125.

432. ὅτι Znvddoros καθόλου περιγράφει
(ejects) τὴν ὁμιλίαν τοῦ Διὸς καὶ τῆς Hpas
(4382-58, or 431-61?) An. His ground
was that Hera had left Ida and gone to 666.

Olympos (O 79), and we have heard 435. eyed, so a 23 (in the literal
nothing of her return; to which Ar. — sense); elsewhere δίχα = 510, ete., and
replied, ὅτι πολλὰ κατὰ συμπέρασμα once διχθάδια Ξ 21.

λέγει ὁ ποιητὴς σιωπωμένως γεγονότα. A 436. ἄπο, far away (as A 242), with
more important consideration for us lies θείω.

in the probability that the whole of the 439-40=A 551-52 ;
Διὸς ἀπάτη is of later origin than the

in Olympos. This does not justify any
serious doubt as to the position of the
passage in the original form of the
Sarpedon episode. See also note on

441-43=X 179-
444=A 297, etc.

81; 443=A 29, q.v. ;
present passage. We have therefore no
special ground for regarding Hera as
anywhere but with Zeus; possibly the
poet thinks of both as still on Olympos,
just as in the very similar scene X 167
87. See note on 677. ‘There are no
linguistic faults, and the only serious
objections are those which apply to the
single passage 444-49 (see note on 445).
It is true that the lines 439-44 occur
in other passages, and that there seems
to have been a tendency on the part
of later rhapsodists to interpolate scenes

For πεπρωμένον αἴςηι see on 0) 209,
and for ϑυςηχέος B 686.

445. zoon, see note on (ws E 887—the
only other instance of this short form.
Probably we should read εἰ ζωὸν πέμψηις
—note that more than half of our Mss.
read εἴ κε ζωόν. εἴ κε cdov Bentley (al xe
σάον van L.). Perhaps Fick is night in
regarding the form as evidence of the
later origin of 444-49—lines which are
certainly excessively weak, and would
be better away. The sons of gods war-
ring before Troy are only a few, not

188 IAIAAOC Π (xvr)

nr 7, \ f
φράζεο μή τις ἔπειτα θεῶν ἐθέληισι καὶ ἄλλος
¢ \ fel /
πέμπειν ὃν φίλον υἱὸν ἀπὸ κρατερῆς ὑσμίνης"
πολλοὶ γὰρ περὶ ἄστυ μέγα Τ]ριάμοιο μάχονται
c lal IR δ Vi
υἱέες ἀθανάτων, τοῖσιν κότον αἰνὸν ἐνήσεις.
Ν > 2) Ue ΜῈΝ
ἀλλ᾽ εἴ τοι φίλος ἐστί, τεὸν δ᾽ ὀλοφύρεται ἢτορ, 450
» an Ω /
ἤτοι μέν μιν ἔασον ἐνὶ κρατερῆι ὑσμίνην
ε / n
χέρσ᾽ ὕπο [Πατρόκλοιο Μενοιτιάδαο δαμῆναι"
> \ > \ \\ / / / \ Sih.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ δὴ Tov γε λίπην ψυχή TE καὶ αἰών,
/ ¢ ΄ / / \ ὃ la ἢ
πέμπειν μιν Θάνατον τε φέρειν καὶ νῆδυμον ἵπνον,
b) a \ / 3: RY. a “
εἰς ὅ κε δὴ Λυκίης εὐρείης δῆμον ἵκωνται, 455
ἔνθά ἑ ταρχύσουσι κασίγνητοί τε ἔται TE
/ ΄ \ \ / > A / 55
τύμβωι τε στήλην τε' τὸ γὰρ γέρας ἐστὶ θανόντων.
A ” ᾽ 50» 5 ΄, \ > lal a
ὡς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησε πατὴρ ἀνδρῶν τε θεῶν Te.
A , 5
αἱμωτοέσσας δὲ ψιάδας κατέχευεν ἔραζε
- n /
παῖδα φίλον τιμῶν, Tov ot Ilatpoxdos ἔμελλε 460
/ Δ ἢ /
φθίσειν ἐν Tpoine ἐριβώλακι, τηλόθι πάτρης.
ε 3 ϑ' ,
οἱ δ᾽ ὅτε δὴ σχεδὸν ἦσαν ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλοισιν ἰόντες,

450. εἴ τι P:' & toi AJ Harl. a.
Vr. A Harl. bd, Par. acd f g!:

φίλος Ar. ῶ: φίλον ADLU Mor. Cant.
453. ἐπεὶ δὴ (ἐπειδὴ mss.) ACHJQT Bar. Mor.

Lips. Mosc. 2, Harl. a: ἐπὴν δὴ Q, ἐν ἄλλωι A. || λίποι P'R. || Te om. PR. 454.
Te: re LQU. 455. ON om. C. || ἵκηται ‘ Vat. 10’: ἐν ἄλλωι ἵκοιτο A. 456.

ἔνϑά : ὄφρα Stob. Mor. 123. 7.
Vr. b A. |) KacirNHutdéc G,

ταρχήςουςι JPR: tapyucwct H() Bar. Lips.

‘many’ (as 448); there are Ialmenos, Sleep to carry; but this would require
son of Ares, B 512 (Askalaphos being the dat. Θανάτωι, cf. πέμπον ἄγειν ἁλιεῦσι
dead), Menesthios, son of Spercheios, ὦ 419. For the order Monro compares
and Eudoros, son of Hermes (II 174, Φ 347 χαίρει δέ μιν ὅστις ἐθείρη. There
185)—all belonging to very late passages is always a tendency to put enclitic
—as well as Achilles and Aineias. pronouns as close as possible to the be-
With the exception of the two last ginning ofaclause. ὅτι σαφῶς νήϑυμον
these are entirely insignificant. The μετὰ τοῦ ν. καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἀμφιβόλων ἄρα
passage seems to be a reminiscence οἱ τόπων (e.g. Β 2 where see note) σὺν τῶι
O 139-41, which is also probably inter- ν ἐκληπτέον, An. The line is of archaeo-

polated. logical importance in connexion with
449, τοῖσιν, sc. the immortals. κότον, early vase-pictures representing a dead
jealousy. hero carried by Death and Sleep. Re-

453. ἐπεί with subj. as A 478, O 569,
680, υ 86. See H. G. ὃ 296. The form
ἐπήν is not to be approved in H. in
spite of the Mss.

454. Θάνατον must be acc. after
πέμπειν, WIN after φέρειν. On the ana-
logy of 681 πέμπε δέ μιν. . φέρεσθαι,
as well as from the order of the words,
it might seem more natural to take
πέμπειν μιν together, φέρειν being added
epexegetically, send him, for Death and

ference may be made on this point to
Robert Bild und Lied p. 104, Schneider
Tro. Sagenkreis p. 146.

456. Tapxucouci, see on H 85.

459. Cf. A 53 ἐέρσας αἵματι μυδαλέας,
where the significance of the portent as
a sign of coming slaughter is shewn.

460. τιχῶν, Fick τείων to avoid the
contraction.

462 seems weak after 490.
61 are rejected, this must go too.

If 432-

IAIAAOC Π (χνὴὴ

189

| ee’ ΄ \ /
ἔνθ᾽ ἤτοι Ἰ]Ϊάτροκλος ἀγακλειτὸν Θρασύδημον,

©

ὅς p

2 θ , vy ὃ / io »
US εράπων ““Ξαἀρπῆη OVOS HEV aAVQaAKTOS,

\ / / \ / -“ \ A

Tov βάλε νείαιραν κατὰ γαστέρα, λῦσε δὲ γυῖα: 165
Σαρπηδὼν δ᾽ αὐτοῦ μὲν ἀπήμβροτε δουρὶ φαεινῶι

δεύτερος ὁρμηθείς, ὁ δὲ Πήδασον οὔτασεν ἵππον

"» oy \ 9 id ’ v \ γ,}

ἔγχεϊ δεξιὸν ὦμον: ὁ δ᾽ ἔβραχε θυμὸν ἀΐσθων,

Kao δ᾽ ἔπεσ᾽ ἐν κονίηισι μακών, ἀπὸ δ᾽ ἔπτατο θυμός.

τὼ δὲ διαστήτην, Ἴ δὲ = ζυγόν, ἡνία δέ σοὶ 470

—_— a

463. πάτροκλος μὲν CG Ven. B.
Lips. Vr. Ὁ, ἐν ἄλλωι A:
464. ἄνακτος : dpictoc S.
ἤἥλαςεν Philemon.

spouires DHP
ϑραςσύμηδον J:
467. OeUTEpoN Ar.
|| yp. ᾿Αρίσταρχος (? see below) ὁ δὲ πήϑαςον ἀγλαὸν ἵππον, TON

UHAON) ()S
epacuuHoHN (: Cant.: epacuuHdon °?.
CDH. OUTACEN :

supr.

(A. supr. )

ῥά not’ ἠετίωνος ἑλὼν πόλιν Hrar’ ἀχιλλεύς, <6c> καὶ θνητὸς ἐὼν ἕπεθ᾽ ἵπποις

Geandtoici, τὸν βάλε δεξιὸν LON, Sch.

ὑπὸ R.

ἀναγνωστέον τὸ Ζυγόν P™,

ihe 468. ἀΐεσςων Lips.
470. K ίκε : και Κριγε και Tpire ΤῈΣ
ρ

4ρ9. ἀπὸ:

| Ζυγὸς (U e corr.) Vr. A: οὐδετέρως

463. There is not much to choose
between the readings OpacUdHuUON and
Θρασύμηλον. It is true that the conjunc-
tion ‘ flock-bold’ may raise a smile ; but
such combinations arise not uncommonly
in Greek from the practice of joining
elements taken from the family names
of both father and mother. Pheidippides
naturally suggests himself ; but instances
from real life Ce. .g. ‘Pdd- ἱππος) are quoted
by Brugmann G7. ii. p. 33. The con-
struction is resumed by TON in 465 after
the parenthesis.

465. Neiaipan, see note on E 539.

467, δεύτερος, not δέυτερον, is the
Homeric constr. (see 1᾽ 349, E 855,H 248,
P 45), though Ar. curiously supported
the neuter here. ottacen, elsewhere in H.
used only of a thrust, is here applied to
a wound given by a weapon cast. This
troubled the Avistarchean school greatly,
as an exception to a canon of the master
-δοκεῖ διὰ τούτων συγχεῖσθαι ἡ διαφορὰ
τοῦ βαλεῖν καὶ οὐτάσαι- βέβληται γὰρ ὁ
Iljdacos. καὶ μήποτε γραφή τις ἐφέρετο
δι᾿ ἧς τὸ τῆς λέξεως σύνηθες ἐφύλασσεν
Ὅμηρος" οὐ γὰρ ἂν αὐτὸ ἀπαραμύθητον
ὁ ᾿Αρίσταρχος ἀφῆκεν. ἐν τοίνυν τῆι
Φιλήμονος οὕτως ἐφέρετο “ὁ ὁ δὲ Πήδασον
ἤλασεν ἵππον ᾽᾿" ἔστι γὰρ ὅτε ἐπὶ τῆς (πόρ-
ρωθεν add, Lehrs) πληγῆς τὸ ““ἤλασεν ”
κεῖται, ὡς ἐπὶ τοῦ ᾿Αρήτου (P 517) ““ καὶ
βάλεν ᾿ἈΑρήτοιο,᾽᾽ εἶτα (519) ““ νειαίρηι δ᾽
ἐν γαστρὶ διὰ ζωστῆρος ἔλασσεν,᾽᾽ Did.
The statement of Schol. T that Ar. to
escape the difficulty entirely altered the
text, adding two lines (see above) is
tacitly contradicted by Did. and is so

jection of

unlike all that we know of Ar. as to be
unworthy of credence. In all prob-
ability ᾿Αρίσταρχος has, as often else-
where, supplanted the name of some less
known critic. We have merely to
register a departure in an insignificant
matter from the usual Homeric practice.
To make οὔτασεν a ground for the re-
463-76 (Fick) or 467-

(Lachmann) is going too far. These
critics wish to expel the mortal horse
Pedasos from the text, mainly because
the trace-horse is not found elsewhere ;
but the linguistic arguments against this
passage come to very little, and the
narrative shews an obvious gap after
either excision. Fick leaves αὖ in 477
without any meaning; Lachmann pro-
duces a false antithesis between αὐτοῦ
έν (466) and Πατρόκλου d€ (478). The
whole episode is particularly vigorous and
picturesque, and cannot be dispensed with.

468. €Bpaye, crashed down, as E 859.
atceon (also T 403), gasping out his life ;
perhaps related to diw (ἄϊον ἦτορ O 252,
where see note), as βιβάσθων to ,/B8a.
469=x 163, 7 454.

470. τώ, the immortal horses—though
they have not been named. κρίκε, creaked
with the strain. The horses are harnessed
to the yoke alone; they spring as far
apart as possible with their hind-quarters
in their terror. The form Kpixe appears
to occur only here in Greek. Bentley
prefers xplye on the analogy of the later
κριγή and κεκριγότες (Ar. Aves 1521),
but all the forms are too rare to form a
basis for argument.

190

IAIAAOC Π (xvi)

σύγχυτ᾽, ἐπεὶ δὴ κεῖτο παρήορος ἐν κονίηισι.
τοῖο μὲν Αὐτομέδων δουρικλυτὸς εὕρετο τέκμωρ"
σπασσάμενος τανύηκες ἄορ παχέος παρὰ μηροῦ,
ἀΐξας ἀπέκοψε παρήορον οὐδὲ μάτησε,
τὼ δ᾽ ἰθυνθήτην, ἐν δὲ ῥυτῆρσι τάνυσθεν" 475
\ > § Ie BA / /
τὼ δ᾽ αὖτις συνίτην ἔριδος πέρι θυμοβόροιο.

” by > v δὰ \ 5) 7 ὃ \ na

ἔνθ᾽ av Σαρπηδὼν μὲν ἀπήμβροτε δουρὶ φαεινῶιε,

5 > >
Πατρόκλου δ᾽ ὑπὲρ ὦμον ἀριστερὸν ἤλυθ᾽ ἀκωκὴ
» 55 » 3 Ses, ς 9) ies ” an
ἔγχεος, οὐδ᾽ ἔβαλ᾽ αὐτόν: ὁ δ᾽ ὕστερος ὥρνυτο χαλκῶι
A 5)
Πάτροκλος: τοῦ δ᾽ οὐχ ἅλιον βέλος ἔκφυγε χειρός, 480
> Lal

ἀλλ᾽ ἔβαλ᾽ ἔνθ᾽ dpa τε φρένες ἔρχαται ἀμφ᾽ adwov κῆρ.
ἤριπε δ᾽, ὡς ὅτε τις δρῦς ἤριπεν ἢ ἀχερωὶς
3. / 4 / 2 ” / yy
ne πίτυς βλωθρή, τήν τ᾽ οὔρεσι τέκτονες ἄνδρες
ἐξέταμον πελέκεσσι νεήκεσι νήϊον εἶναι"
ἃ ¢ , Oh ty \ / a / £
ὡς ὁ πρόσθ᾽ ἵππων Kat δίφρου κεῖτο τανυσθείς, 485
βεβρυχὼς κόνιος δεδραγμένος αἱματοέσσης.

412. εὕρατο ( Lips. 473.
Tanuceon Rh. 476. aveic C. ||
479. ὄρνυτο (). 482. Tic om. PR.

Vr. A.

τανάηκες Vr, A.
=SUNITHN Cant. Vr. A.
483. T om. L.
486. BeBpuycoc: τινὲς διὰ τοῦ κ (βεβρυκὼς) Sch. T. |) κονίης Vr. A.

475. yp. ῥυτῆρι T. ||
477. ἐν 0 av P.
484 om. U*. || ἐξέτεμον

472. τοῖο, ‘of this confusion A. found
the end’ at which he was aiming (see on
H 30). The mid. εὑρέσθαι recurs only
in Od. (ι 422, τ 403, @ 304), and seems
to imply finding for one’s own benefit.
473=k 439, \ 231.

474. οὐδὲ udtHce, lost no time; see
= 110. Compare the description of the
similar emergency in © 87.

475. ἰϑυνϑήτην, ranged themselves
again beside the pole, ἐν 9€ puTApct
Tanuceen, and pulled at (in the line of)
the reins. Compare note ou Ψ 323 οὐδέ
ἑ λήθει ὅππως τὸ πρῶτον τανύσηι βοέοισιν
ἱμᾶσιν, and see Helbig H. Δ. p. 128,
note 7. The reins are called pura in
Scut. Herc. 308; ef. σπεύδειν ἀπὸ ῥυτῆρος,
immissis habenis, Soph. O. C. 900. It
would seem more natural to translate
‘traces,’ but there is no reason to sup-
pose that the horses were harnessed to
the car by anything but the yoke.
Grashof preferred the variant ῥυτῆρι,
which he took to mean the pole (ῥυμός) ;
he understood κρίκε to mean broke, and sup-
posed that Automedon was obliged to har-
ness the horses to the pole, the yoke being
gone. But the epic style would require
that such a process should be mentioned
and not left to be inferred from its results.

476. Cf. H 301.

478-80=E 16-18.

481. €pxarai, a strange form recurring
in P 354 (ἔρχατο) ; if for Fe-Fépy-ara
from Fépy«, it shews neither F nor redupl.
In E 89 it has lost F only (ἐ-εργμέναι) ;
in « 221, κ 283 it stands at the begin-
ning of the line, in ξ 73 after the bucolic
caesura, so that we cannot judge of the
presence or absence of F. ἕρκος has en-
tirely lost the F as far as we can tell;
Fepxiov has it in σ 102 but not in I 476.
It would appear that this root began to
lose the F at a very early period. See
Knos Dig. p. 97, van L. Ench. §§ 133,
230. But Monro suggests that initial
F was not originally reduplicated in
perf., and that €-Fepy- is a primitive
form, Fé-Foxa, ete., being analogical
(Hl. G. ὃ 23. δ). In that case we ought
perhaps to read eipyara, -aro with von
Christ (cf. ἐέρχατο κ 241). ἔργω properly
=to keep off as a fence; for the transition
by which it means in pass. to be made
a fence compare the double constr. of
καλύπτειν E 315 (and note on E 89),
Cf. also ε 301 ὅθι φρένες ἧπαρ ἔχουσι. ἄδι-
NON, Β 87. ‘This is the only place where
κῆρ is used in the literal physical sense.

482-86=N 389-93.

IAIAAOC Π (xvi) 191

4 fal ΄
ἠύτε ταῦρον ἔπεφνε λέων ἀγέληφι μετελθών,
» / > » / ,
αἴθωνα μεγάθυμον, ἐν εἰλιπόδεσσι βόεσσιν,

BA / / id \ fal ,ὔ
ὦὥλετο τε στενάχων ὑπὸ γαμφηλῆισι λέοντος,

Ω /

ὡς ὑπὸ Π}ατρόκλων Λυκίων ἀγὸς ἀσπιστάων 190
/ / / / ΄ «

κτεινόμενος μενέαινε, φίλον δ᾽ ὀνόμηνεν ἑταῖρον"

nr ᾽ r ,
“ΤῬλαῦκε πέπον, πολεμιστὰ μετ ἀνδράσι, νῦν σε μάλα

χρὴ

> ’ὔ ’ » Ν / /
αἰχμητήν τ᾽ ἔμεναι καὶ θαρσαλέον πολεμιστήν"
lal > / / ’ > , >
νῦν τοι ἐελδέσθω πόλεμος κακός, εἰ Boos ἐσσι.
lal / ΄ »
πρῶτα μὲν ὄτρυνον Λυκίων ἡγήτορας ἄνδρας, 195
͵,ὔ / /
πάντηι ἐποιχόμενος, Σαρπηδόνος ἀμφιμάχεσθαι:"
᾽ Ἂ Yj \ \ “ / , A
αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα καὶ αὐτὸς ἐμεῦ πέρι μάρναο χαλκῶι.
\ \ \ Yj / >
σοὶ yap ἐγὼ καὶ ἔπειτα κατηφείη καὶ ὄνειδος
/ yf > 5
ἔσσομαι ἤματα πάντα διαμπερές, εἴ κέ μ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοὶ
£ / lal ΄- ,
τεύχεα συλήσωσι νεῶν ἐν ἀγῶνι πεσόντα. 500
᾽ to fa) ” \ \ “ »
αλλ eXEO κρατερῶς, ὄτρυνε δὲ λαὸν ἅπαντα.

488. ἐν Ar. Q: én’ (A supr.) HQ Mor. Bar. Vr. b A, Harl. Ὁ ἃ, King’s Par.

acdfgj, yp. Sch. T.
Sch. T.
πάντας Harl. a.

489. ΤΕ om. P.
494. κακὸς : τινὲς epacic yp. Sch. T.
497 om. ΟἹ. 499.

492. NEMON: ἄμεινον γράφειν πάρος,
496. πάντηι: ταύτη Τ᾿:

487. ἀγέληφι, locative. The juxta-
position of the two similes has caused
suspicions of the first, as being repeated
from N. But without 482 we have no
actual statement of Sarpedon’s fall, which
could hardly be omitted in the epic
style. The two evidently describe differ-
ent moments—first the fall, then the
struggle on the ground. The question
as to which of the identical passages is
borrowed can only be solved by a decision
on other grounds as to the relative an-
tiquity of N and the Sarpedon episode ;
the simile is certainly quite suitable to
its place here.

491, μενέαινε, this verb seems to im-
ply any violent mental passion, whether
of wrath or desire; cf. X 10. Here
then it will mean strugg/ed mentally,
wrestled with his fate. Paley compares
Aisch. Ag. 1388 οὕτω τὸν αὑτοῦ θυμὸν
ὁρμαίνει πεσών. Ar. strangely explained
μενέαινε by ἐλιποθύμει.

492. πολεμιστὰ χιετ᾽ aNdpdci, soldier
among men, recognized as a man of war.
Cf. N 461 ἐσθλὸν ἐόντα μετ᾽ ἀνδράσιν.
πολεμιοτά is used pregnantly, as a word
of honour, like αἰχμητής below, A290, ete.

494. €eAdEceos, in passive sense, Jet wur
be thy desire; a quite unique use. It
might be supposed that there was an
oxymoron in the use of κακός in this

monly used of πόλεμος that it is no more
than an epitheton ornans. ϑοός, see on
422.

497. Some read περιμάρναο, but the
division is recommended by the bucolic
diaeresis as well as by the general con-
siderations mentioned in ZZ. G. ὃ 180
ad fin.

498. κατηφείη, cf. I 51 δυσμενέσιν
μὲν χάρμα, κατηφείην δὲ σοὶ αὐτῶι. So
P 556. The origin of the word is doubt-
ful; the old derivation from κάτω- φάος,
with downcast eyes, though it gives the
required sense, is impossible ; nor is the
connexion with καθάπτεσθαι more prob-
able. Cf. X 293, Q 253.

500. νεῶν EN ἀγῶνι, see on Ὁ 428,
where the expression is more appropriate
than it is here. Perhaps it conveys a
rhetorical reproach : it is more shameful
that he should be despoiled just when
he has stormed the enemy’s stronghold.
The reading νέων, in the gathering of
young men, mentioned in the scholia, is
of course unacceptable.

501. €xeo, hold thy ground. This ab-
solute use of the mid. recurs in the
identical line P 559, but is elsewhere
hardly found except in the ambiguous
phrase οὐδ᾽ ἔτ᾽ ἔφαντο σχήσεσθαι (M 107,
and see I 235).

192 IAIAAOTC TT (xv1)

ὡς ἄρα μιν εἰπόντα τέλος θανάτοιο κάλυψεν
ὀφθαλμοὺς pivas θ᾽. ὁ δὲ λὰξ ἐν στήθεσι βαίνων
ry / \ rn ©
ἐκ χροὸς ἕλκε δόρυ, προτὶ δὲ φρένες αὐτῶι ἕποντο"
lal 9, [2 / \ ” 5} / 5 ’ /
τοῖο ὃ αμα ψυχὴν τε καὶ ἔγχεος ἐξέρυσ αὐχήν. 505
Μυρμιδόνες δ᾽ αὐτοῦ σχέθον ἵππους φυσιόωντας,
e / / > AN / “ τ 5 ,
ἱεμένους φοβέεσθαι, ἐπεὶ λίπεν ἅρματ᾽ avaKTov.
Γλαύκων δ᾽ αἰνὸν ἄχος γένετο φθογγῆς ἀΐοντι"
΄ e 5 δ > rn
ὠρίνθη δέ of ἦτορ, 6 T οὐ δύνατο προσαμῦναι.
\ Je \ ᾽ / / tal \ SEEN
χειρὶ ὃ ἑλὼν ἐπίεζε βραχίονα" TELPE γὰρ AUTOV 510
ed A / Di sles ’ / ΄ In
ἕλκος, ὃ δή μιν Τεῦκρος ἐπεσσύμενον βάλεν tor
τείχεος ὑψηλοῖο, ἀρὴν ἑτάροισιν ἀμύνων.

503. ὀφθαλμούς τε () Lips. Vr. A.

Sch. T) CDHQST Lips. Vr. A. || ἕποντο : ἔχοντο Ar.

504. ἕλκε Ar. P: εἷλκε Q. || ποτὶ (Ar. ?
506. αὐτοὺς L. 507.

λίπεν Ar. ADHJTU Mosc. 2 Par. cl ἃ g (supr. on) h 7: λίπον Zen. Q. 509.

προςαμύνειν U.

510. 0 ἑλὼν: λαβὼν δ᾽ Vr.d: δ᾽ ἔχων Cramer Zp. 291. 6. ||

énieze Ar. 2: others éniaze. || Tefpe: πεῖρε H. || rap: te Vr. A. 511.

éneccuuenoc C!.

512. ἀρὴν : ἀνὴρ S.

503. ὀφθαλμοὺς ῥῖνάς Te, because open
eyes and breathing are the two visible
signs of life (so the scholia). Some have
supposed that ῥῖνας alludes to the ‘pinch-
ing in’ of the nose, which is a well-known
sign of approaching death in the facies
Hippocraticu (as the dying Falstaff’s
nose was ‘as sharp asa pen’); but this
is too fanciful for H., and the symptom
belongs rather to gradual dissolution
than to a violent and rapid death.

505. The curious zeugma in this line
is without a parallel in H., and to a
modern reader has almost a comic effect.
It was natural enough to those who
conceived the soul as actually escaping
from the body through the wound.

507. Authority is fairly divided be-
tween λίπεν and λίπον : but the latter
makes no good sense, as the meaning
evidently is that the Myrmidons capture
chariot and horses; there is nothing
whatever in the narrative to explain
how or why the horses could have broken
away, as for instance in Z 39-41. On
the other hand, there are formidable
difficulties in the way of Ar.’s reading.
He took λίπεν to be the 3rd plur. of
a passive aor. ἐλίπην, of which there are
no other traces in Greek (in the pass.
sense H. always uses the mid. λιπέσθαι),
and understood it to mean either since
the chariots of their lords were deserted,
or, taking ἀνάκτων with λίπεν, were
deserted by their lords (cf. Soph. Ant.

548 σοῦ δλελειμμένηι), a construction
which is quite without analogy in H.
There would be no difficulty as to sense
or construction if we could read with
Jortin (ap. Heyne) ἐπεὶ λίπον ἅρμα ἄνακ-
τες, but we can say with confidence that if
such a reading ever existed it had entirely
disappeared before the time of Ar. ; and
it is one which could hardly have been
misunderstood or corrupted. Bayfield’s
suggestion λίπεν... ἀνάκτωρ deserves
consideration ; the noun does not occur in
H., but we have ἀνακτορίηισι in ο 397.

508. The following episode with its
explicit reference to the τειχομαχία, is of
course at least as late as M: see Introd.
As Heyne pointed out, the lines to be
omitted are 509-31, if any.

510. €nieze, either to relieve the ten-
sion of the inflamed part, or perhaps to
vent his vexation at the wound—a not
unnatural process. αὐτόν at the end of
the line in no more than the anaphoric
sense is terribly weak; the Florentine
edition reads αἰνῶς as in EB 352, and this
is clearly preferable. It probably exists
in some Ms. (G?) though not quoted by
collators. It is hardly possible to take
αὐτόν as emphatic; ‘he was himself
suffering’ (Monro).

511. For the double acc. ὅ μιν βάλεν
see Κα 361 ἕλκος 6 με βροτὸς οὔτασεν, and
cf. Θ 405 ἕλκεα... ἅ κεν μάρπτηισι κεραυ-
vos. The constr. ἐπεσσύμενον τείχεος
is the same as in M 388, q.v.

IAIAAOC Π (xvi) 193
,ὔ /
εὐχόμενος δ᾽ ἄρα εἶπεν ἑκηβόλωι ᾿Απόλλωνι:
“κλῦθι, ἄναξ, ὅς που Λυκίης ἐν πίονι δήμωι
» a b] rl / 4 \ \ , > > /
εἰς ἢ εν Ῥροίηι: δύνασαι δὲ σὺ πάντοσ᾽ ἀκούειν 515
ἀνέρι κηδομένωι, ὡς νῦν ἐμὲ κῆδος ἱκάνει.
oe \ \ ” / / > \ / \
ἕλκος μὲν yap ἔχω τόδε καρτερόν, ἀμφὶ δέ μοι χεὶρ
> / 5 / I / > /
ὀξείηις ὀδύνηισιν ἐλήλαται, οὐδέ μοι αἷμα
τερσῆναι δύναται, βαρύθει δέ μοι ὦμος ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ:
, / fal > \ /
ἔγχος ὃ ov δύναμαι σχεῖν ἔμπεδον, οὐδὲ μάχεσθαι 520
\ ΄ > \ 2 Ow y
ἐλθὼν δυσμενέεσσιν. ἀνὴρ ὃ ὠριστος ὄλωλε,
\ Ν e/ ¢ > >a 2 \ > /
Σαρπηδὼν Διὸς υἱός: ὁ δ᾽ οὐδ᾽ οὗ παιδὸς ἀμύνει.
> \ 4 / ” / Ν cd ”
ἀλλὰ σύ πέρ μοι, ἄναξ, τόδε καρτερὸν ἕλκος ἄκεσσαι,
/ > ’ / \ \ / » 5 ¢ /
κοίμησον δ᾽ ὀδύνας, δὸς δὲ κράτος, ὄφρ᾽ ἑτάροισι
,
κεκλόμενος Λυκίοισιν ἐποτρύνω πολεμίζειν, 525

ΕΣῚ

- ΤΩ 4 as \ / a ΄
αὐτὸς τ ἀμφὶ νέκυι κατατεθνηῶτι μάχωμαι.

513. εὐξάμενος P. || ἐκηβόλον ἀπόλλωνα Har), a. 515. ἐν PRS: ἐνὶ 2.

δὲ cU: dé Te GQ. || πάντος᾽ Ar.: παντὸς others?:
517. sol: μιν () Eust.
1, Lips.: βαρύνθη (): Bapunee: U (no in ras.).

πάντοϑι Sch. Tl’.

ὕπερθε H.
Ar. Q: ὧι παιδὶ 2.
CGPQST Vr. A Harl. a, Lips.

κατατεθνηῶτα ἴ,: κατατεθνειῶτι {?.

521. ὥριετος : ἄριετος U: ὡς ἄριετος Harl. a.
523. ἕλκος: ἄλγος ( Harl. ἃ.

526. αὐτὸς ὃ᾽ J
κατατεθνηῶτι Ar. A (supr. εἰ) H (supr. εἰ) JR Vr. A:

πάντ᾽ ἐςακούειν Zen.: τινὲς
519. βαρύθει : βρίθει J : βαρύϑηᾳι)
ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ : ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶ U:
522. οὗ παιδὸς
ἄκεςαις 1. 524. κοίμις(ς)ον
Vr. d. || νέκυν LP Lips.

κατατεθνειῶτα P Lips. :

515. ἐν is better than évi of most Mss.,
as the shortening of ἤ (7Fé) is always
doubtful; see on ® 576. For ndntoce
where we should have expected πάντοθεν
see notes on A 455, A 21; Zen. read
πάντ᾽ ἐσακούειν, i.e. παντί (Schol. B).
ἀκούειν with dat. of the person whose
prayer is heard, see 531 below, and ἢ
335. It is precisely analogous to κλῦθί
μοι E115, where see note, and cf. H. G.
ὃ 143. 3. The dat. as compared with
the gen. gives the idea of hearing with
favour.

518. ἐλήλαται is pierced, Gugi from
side to side. ἐλαύνεσθαι is more regularly
used of the weapon itself than of the
thing pierced (A 135, E 400, etc.) ; ef.
note on πεῖρεν, 405, where a similar
ambiguity is remarked.

519. TepcAnai, a pass. form, like τερσή-
μεναι, ¢ 98, as if from ἑτέρσην, an aor.
of τέρσομαι, not occurring elsewhere ;
and not to be confused with the traus.
τερσαίνω, which is found in H. only in
529. βαρύθει here only; intrans. like
μινύθω (see 392), φθινύθω, etc. αὐτοῦ is

VOL. II

another instance of the weak anaphoric
use of the pronoun. The variant ὕπερθεν
is perhaps preferable ; cf. A 421 and the
common phrase πόδας καὶ χεῖρας ὕπερθεν.

521. The variant of Harl. a suggests
Brandreth’s ὃς ἄριστος in place of
espictoc, sce note on A 288.

522. The gen. οὗ παιδός is sufficiently
defended by N 110, where see note. The
hiatus of the vulg. ὧς παιδί is inadmiss-
ible. Compare also note on=171. For
οὐδ᾽ Heyne read οὐ, and for sor in the
next line με.

526. νέκυι is a disyll. also in 565, Q
108 ; cf. πληθυῖ X 458 and four or five
other words in Od. ; uw remains uncon-
tracted in out, δρυΐ, νηδύϊ (ἢ T 486 (van
L. Ench. ὃ 75). It is tempting to accept
the variant νέκυν κατατεθνηῶτα ; but
the acc. is only twice found in this sense
after ἀμφί (775, P , and the dat. is
the regular case, Γ 70, 254, ete., while
the compound ἀμφιμάχεσθαι takes the
gen. (e.g. 533)—a case which is almost
unknown to H. with the separate pre-
position, see on 825.

ΟἹ
S88

194 IAIAAOC Π (νὴ)

ἃ » la » a /
ws ἔφατ᾽ εὐχόμενος, τοῦ δ᾽ ἔκλυε Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων.
Sees, An 5 / b) \ 2 oe 5 ,
αὐτίκα παῦσ᾽ ὀδύνας, ἀπὸ δ᾽ ἕλκεος ἀργαλέοιο
a) / / , / ἘΝ .5᾽. lal
αἷμα μέλαν τέρσηνε, μένος δέ οἱ ἔμβαλε θυμῶι.
Γλαῦκος δ᾽ ἔγνω ἧισιν ἐνὶ φρεσί, γήθησέν τε,
ὅττί οἱ ὦκ᾽ ἤκουσε μέγας θεὸς εὐξαμένοιο.
πρῶτα μὲν ὥτρυνεν Λυκίων ἡγήτορας ἄνδρας,
/ fe
πάντηι ἐποιχόμενος, Σαρπηδόνος ἀμφιμάχεσθαι:"
DN » \ tps / \ ΄
αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα μετὰ ρῶας κίε μακρὰ βιβάσθων,
Πουλυδάμαντ᾽ ἔπι Ἰ]ανθοΐδην καὶ ᾿Αγήνορα δῖον,
a \ ᾽ 3 / Ν᾽ ὦ ΄
βῆ δὲ μετ᾽ Αἰνείαν τε καὶ “Extopa χαλκοκορυστὴν.
a /
ἀγχοῦ δ᾽ ἱστάμενος ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
col bs δὴ ΄ / x > ,
Kxtop, νῦν δὴ Tayyu λελασμένος εἰς ἐπικούρων,
Δ A WA fol / \ / ",
οἱ σέθεν εἵνεκα τῆλε φίλων καὶ πατρίδος αἴης
3
θυμὸν ἀποφθινύθουσι, σὺ δ᾽ οὐκ ἐθέλεις ἐπαμύνειν.
κεῖται Σαρπηδὼν Λυκίων ἀγὸς ἀσπιστάων,

530

σι
co
nr

ὃς Λυκίην eiputo δίκηισί τε καὶ σθένεϊ ὧι"

τὸν δ᾽ ὑπὸ ΠΙ}ατρόκλωι δάμασ᾽ ἔγχεϊ χάλκεος Δρης.
ἀχλά, φίλοι, πάρστητε, νεμεσσήθητε δὲ θυμῶι,

μὴ ἀπὸ τεύχε᾽ ἕλωνται, ἀεικίσσωσι δὲ νεκρὸν

/ an Λ “ /
Μυρμιδόνες, Δαναῶν κεχολωμένοι ὅσσοι ὄλοντο,
\ rn , , »”
τοὺς ἐπὶ νηυσὶ θοῆισιν ἐπέφνομεν ἐγχείηισιν.

527 om. R. 528. αὐτίκ᾽ ἔπαυς᾽ 0. 581. μέγας: ἄναξ S: μέγα U
(c add. U*). 582. ὄτρυνε(ν) AD. 534. BiBdckwn L. 540. ἐπαμῦναι 1) Cant.
Harl. a (κρεῖττον ἐπαμύνειν, marg.), Vr. A. 544. δὲ om. H Vr. A: Te Q.

531. For the dat. oi see on 515.
εὐξαμένοιο is a change to the more com-
mon constr. with the gen., see H. G.
§ 243. 3 (d). The transition is rather
harsh as the pronoun and participle are
so close together; as arule, when they
stand in different cases they are in dif-
ferent lines. ὃ 646 ἤ σε Bin ἀέκοντος
ἀπηύρα is not really similar, as ἀέκοντος
goes closely with Bin, leaving ce to be
construed with the verb (see however M.
and R.’s note there). So in € 527 ὅττί
ῥά ot βιότου περικήδετο νόσφιν ἐόντος the
part. is gen. after βιύτου. It is needless
to read εὖ with Diintzer ; still less can
we, with La Roche, take of as dat.
after εὐξαμένοιο, sc. ᾿Απόλλωνι.

540. ϑυλιόν is perhaps ‘acc. of respect,’
as φθινύθειν is generally intrans. ; so
also A 491 (cf. however κ 485, o 204,
where the verb must be trans.).

542. εἴρυτο, of the protection given to
his country by a king, as 1396, ef. Q 499,

Z 403. The addition of ϑίκηισι shews
that in this connexion the word really
means no more than ‘govern.’ Schol. T
well quotes a fragment of Aisch. ὅπου
γὰρ ἰσχὺς συζυγοῦσι καὶ δίκαι, ποία Evywpis
τῶνδε καρτερωτέρα ;

543. For Πατρόκλωι, Doderlein con}.
ἸΤατρόκλου, which is very likely right ;
as the text stands the spear must be the
spear of Ares in a purely metaphorical
sense, like the scourge of Zeus (M 37),
unless indeed we can regard ἸΠατρόκλωι

. ἔγχεϊ as in apposition by a sort of
‘whole and part’ figure. This however
is not natural.

545. μή F’ ἀπό Cobet, rightly no
doubt. It is indifferent whether we
take μή as dependent, ‘lest they take,’
or paratactic, ‘let them not take,’ the
more primitive constr. In the former
case νεμεσσήθητε δὲ θυμῶι will be paren-
thetical.

IAIAAOC Π (xv1) 195

ὡς ἔφατο, Τρῶας δὲ κατακρῆθεν λάβε πένθος
/ > * ,

ἄσχετον, οὐκ ETTLELKTOV, ἐπεί σφισιν ἕρμα πόληος
v \ 5 Us LA / \ “ ’ -
ἔσκε, καὶ ἀλλοδαπὸς περ ἐών: πολέες γὰρ ἅμ᾽ αὐτῶι 550

\ “ 5 > > » \ ᾽ / /
λαοὶ ἕποντ᾽, ἐν δ᾽ αὐτὸς ἀριστεύεσκε μάχεσθαι.

fal / »

βὰν δ᾽ ἰθὺς Δαναῶν λελιημένοι" ἦρχε δ᾽ ἄρα σφιν

“Extop χωόμενος Σαρπηδόνος.

> \ >? 4
αὐτὰρ Ἀχαιοὺς

ὧρσε Μενοιτιάδεω []ατροκλῆος λάσιον Kijp:

Αἴαντε πρώτω προσέφη, μεμαῶτε καὶ αὐτώ" 55

“Αἴαντε, viv σφῶϊν ἀμύνεσθαι φίλον ἔστω,
οἷοί περ πάρος ἦτε μετ᾽ ἀνδράσιν, ἢ καὶ ἀρείους.

548. κατὰ Κρῆθεν Δι. : κατ᾽ ἄκρηθεν others.
554. wenoitiddao JPRSTU Harl. a:

vas.) U: μαχόμενος P.

556. αἵαντες PR. || φίλον : ἐν ἄλλωι μένος A.

553. κπχμενος (χωό 77
λλενοιτιάθαω (i,
557. μετ᾽ ἁἀνορῶν P.

548. κατακρῆθεν, ἃ puzzling word.
Ar, divided κατὰ κρῆθεν, lit. down from
the head, from head to foot: ef. Kak
κεφαλῆς = 24. For κρη- as one of the
numerous related stems meaning head
cf. κρή-δεμνον. κατὰ κρῆθεν is clearly
used in the literal sense in Hes. Theog.
574 (κατὰ κρῆθεν δὲ καλύπτρην), Hymn.
Cer. 182 (κατὰ κρῆθεν κεκαλυμμένη), prob-
ably in ἃ 588 κατὰ κρῆθεν χέε καρπόν,
and ἀπὸ κρῆθεν (ϑοιέ. H. 7) is unambi-
guous ; so that this interpretation is at
least very old. Yet it is difficult to
separate κατακρηθεν from κατακρὴς which
is precisely identical in sense (see note
on N 772), and was yet to the linguistic
sense of the Greeks a derivative of ἄκρος
(see Delbriick Gr. iii. p. 636). It would
seem then that κατὰ κρῆθεν was originally
felt as two words, from the head down ;
but that as early as this passage con-
fusion with κατ᾽ ἄκρης had already come in.

549. οὐκ ἐπιεικτόν (also E 592, Θ 32)
commonly explained wnyielding, from
(Fyeikw. But Schulze (Q. #. p. 495) has
plausibly suggested that Fecc7ds here
=Lat. victws, so that the meaning is
unconquered. €pua, buttress, as ἕρματα
νηῶν A 486, B 154 (cf. note on A 117).
So Theron is ἔρεισμ᾽ ᾿Ακράγαντος Pindar
0. 11.6; cf. Soph. Ὁ: C. 58.

554. The variant Μενοιτιάδαο is not
acceptable here, as the stem πατρο- never
has @ (see Z 479). For the svnizesis of
-ew See on 72-73. Adcion κῆρ, A 189,
B 851.

555. The following passage, with
another allusion to the τειχομαχία, must
go with 509 ff. Kochly condemns 555-
62, but we must carry on the athetesis

to 568. 555=N 46, where πρώτω is in
place, for the words spoken to the Aiantes
are the beginning of Poseidon’s plan of
action ; here there is nothing to account
for the word. ἀρείους 557 is probably
a post-Homeric form ; though the neuter
in τῷ recurs several times the mase. -ous
is found again only in B 277, « 48 (a
suspicious line, see Menrad Contr. ef Syn.
p- 81), ὦ 464. 558=M 438, where it is
used not of Sarpedon but of Hector.
562=0 565. The discrepancy in the
application of the identical words in 558
and M 438 is certainly striking, but too
much stress cannot be laid upon it; a
reminiscence of the prominent part there
played by Sarpedon in attacking the
wall might easily suggest a phrase in
the immediate context. The contradic-
tion in fact is rather within the twelfth
book than between that and this (see
Introd. to M). The supernatural dark-
ness in 567-68 is introduced only to be
forgotten again, though it could not
but change the whole character of
the fighting. It is no more than a
rhapsodist’s cheap device to produce
an effect of awe; we find similar
attempts in O 668, P 368, perhaps by
the same hand.

557. wer’ andpadcin, cf. 492 above.
dpefouc is best regarded as a nom., for
it would be felt to be really co-ordinate
with οἷοι in sense, though grammatically
the constr. is not exact. It might be
possible to take it as an acc. supplying
ἐόντας. The acc. would then follow the
dat. as in A 541-42 αἰεί τοι φίλον ἐστιν
. . φρονέοντα δικαζέμεν. This however
is less simple. ‘ Ecquid ἄρειον ?’ van L.

196

IAIAAOC Π (xvr)

a 5. ΞΕῚΝ ὰ a aan, δ᾿ > a
KELTAL avnp Os TpPpWTOS εἐσήλωτο TELVOS Ἀχαιῶν,

5 5) » > /
Σαρπηδών: ἀλλ᾽ εἴ μιν ἀεικισσαίμεθ᾽ ἕλοντες,

/ / 3.15 5) , ,ὔ ate 2
τεύχεα T ὦμοιύνν ἀφελοίμεθα, και τιν ETALPOV

560

=) la) 5 / / 7.» lal »”
αὐτοῦ ἀμυνομένων δαμασαίμεθα νηλέϊ χαλκῶι.

ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δὲ καὶ αὐτοὶ ἀλέξασθαι μενέαινον.

οἱ δ᾽ ἐπεὶ ἀμφοτέρωθεν ἐκαρτύναντο φάλαγγας,

ων / /
Τρῶες καὶ Λύκιοι καὶ Μυρμιδόνες καὶ ᾿Αχαιοί,

σύμβαλον ἀμφὶ νέκυν κατατεθνηῶτι μάχεσθαι

565

δεινὸν ἀύσαντες" μέγα δ᾽ ἔβραχε τεύχεα φωτῶν.

n Θ᾽ /
Ζεὺς δ᾽ ἐπὶ νύκτ᾽ ὀλοὴν τάνυσε κρατερῆι Vapivyt,

ὄφρα φίλωι περὶ παιδὶ μάχης ὀλοὸς πόνος εἴη.

ὦσαν δὲ πρότεροι Tpaes ἑλίκωπας ᾿Αχαιούς:

βλῆτο γὰρ οὔ τι κάκιστος ἀνὴρ μετὰ Μυρμιδόνεσσιν,

570

vids ᾿Αγακλῆος μεγαθύμου, δῖος ’Ezevyevs,

“ .᾽ > y \ / ”
OS Jp ev Bovéeiws ἐὺ ναιομένων ἤνασσε

τὸ πρίν: ἀτὰρ τότε γ᾽ ἐσθλὸν ἀνεψιὸν ἐξεναρίξας

558. écHAato Ar. A:
εὖ Rhianos.

Vr. bl. || ἑταῖρον ().

568. napa S swpr.

ἐπήλατο J: ἐεύλα Thom. Mag. 335. 11.
560. τεύχε᾽ an’ S. || Guoicin (). ἀφελώμεθα DH (supr. o1) U
561. Oaccaiueea ().

κατατεϑθνηῶτι JPRT Mor. Vr. A: κατατεθνειῶτι (2.
569. πρότερον Bar. Mor.

559. ef Ar. Q:

562. ἀλέξεςϑθαι KR. 565.
567. κρατερὴν ὑσμίνην 5.
571. ἐπηγεὺς AHSU Harl.a, Lips.

558. ᾿Αρίσταρχος καὶ οἱ ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ δασύ-
νουσι (i.e. read ἐσἥλατο to shew that it
was from ἅλλομαι), Λυσανίας δὲ ψιλοῖ,
προσνέμων τὸ σ τῶι H* σήλασθαι γάρ φησι
σημαίνειν τὸ ἀποσπᾶν καὶ σαλεύειν, ὁ δὲ
σαλεύσας πρῶτος τὸ τεῖχος Σαρπηδών ἐστιν,
ὁ δὲ εἰσπηδήσας “Ἕκτωρ (Herodianos).
It is needless to say that Ar. was right
in rejecting this extraordinary expedient
for reconciling the difference. He took
the word to mean ‘leapt wpon,’ without
the idea of passing through. See Lehrs,
Ar. Ρ. 307.

559. εἰ with opt. expresses a wish, as
K 111, q.v. The edition of Rhianos had
εὖ, which is hardly to be explained.

561. αὐτοῦ ἀμυνομένων, defending
the body (as opposed to the arms). For
the gen. see 522; it is commoner with
the mid. than with the act. ; see I 531,
M 155, 179, N 700. Ar. thought that
αὐτοῦ might also be taken in a local
sense, there: but this is too weak.

565. Cf. 526, cuuBadon, perhaps we
should supply φάλαγγας from 563, as
T 55 τοὺς ἀμφοτέρους θεοὶ σύμβαλον, TV 70
ἔμ᾽ ἐν μέσσωι. . καὶ Μενέλαον συμβάλετε

. μάχεσθαι. The act. of this aor. does
not occur absolutely in H., in the sense

᾽

to join battle, though the mid. is thus
used in YT 335 and ξυμβλήμεναι, Evp-
βλήτην (Φ 578, φ 15) are act. forms.
In later Greek the act. is common
enough (e.g. <Aisch. Cho. 461 “Apns
"Apec ξυμβαλεῖ δίκα δίκαι, and often in
Herodotos).

567-68. The repetition ὁλοὴν
ὀλοός is disagreeable ; Nauck conj. ἅλιος
πόνος. For ὀλοὴ νύξ cf. the same phrase
in ἃ 19 of the Kimmerian darkness.

568. περί with dat. as ε 310 περὶ
Πηλεΐωνι θανόντι, p 471 ἀνὴρ περὶ οἷσι
μαχειόμενος κτεάτεσσιν. The use, how-
ever, is very rare, the gen. being the
regular case of the object of a contest.
In P 4, 133 the dat. is used of an object
protected, and is therefore probably ἃ
true dative, whereas here it must be
locatival. With mudyHe πόνος cf. φυλό-
πιδος ἔργον, 208.

572. Βούϑειον was variously localized
by the ancients in Phthia (Sch. A),
Magnesia (Steph. Byz.), Epeiros (Zé.
Mag.), Boiotia (Eust.)—all mere guesses,
the first an obviously bad one.

573. τότε re has no very clear refer-
ence; taken with the context it seems
to mean ‘at the moment’ when Achilles

IAIAAOC Π (xvi) 197

a? >
ἐς ἸΠηλῆ ἱκέτευσε καὶ ἐς Θέτιν ἀργυρόπεζαν'
] : PYUP $
e ’ “¢ ? Ae € ΄ “
οἱ δ᾽ ἅμ᾽ ᾿Αχρλλῆϊ ῥηξήνορι πέμπον ἕπεσθαι 575
Ἴλιον εἰς ἐύπωλον, ἵνα Tpwecor μάχοιτο.
΄ / + ,
τόν pa τόθ᾽ ἁπτόμενον véxvos Bare φαίδιμος “EKtwp
p μ β
/ / e > »Μ -“ 7
χερμαδίωι κεφαλήν: ἡ δ᾽ ἄνδιχα πᾶσα κεάσθη
/ a e , » iS aa -
ἐν κόρυθι βριαρῆι' ὁ δ᾽ apa πρηνὴς ἐπὶ νεκρῶι
vn ρ
/ / oe /
κάππεσεν, ἀμφὶ δέ μιν θάνατος χύτο θυμοραϊστής. 580
/ ΄ 7
Πατρόκλωι δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἄχος γένετο φθιμένου ἑτάροιο,
ἴθυσεν δὲ διὰ προμάχων ἴρηκι ἐοικὼς
μάχων ἴρη
“ « / “-
ὠκέϊ, ὅς T ἐφόβησε κολοιούς τε ψῆράς τε"
ἢ ip
/ / Γι /
ὡς ἰθὺς Λυκίων, Π}ατρόκλεις ἱπποκέλευθε,
, / a ΄ ΄,
ἔσσυο καὶ ρώων, κεχόλωσο δὲ κῆρ ἑτάροιο. 585
καί ῥ᾽ ἔβαλε Σθενέλαον ᾿Ιθαιμένεος dirov υἱὸν
μ
/ fal an
αὐχένα χερμαδίωι, ῥῆξεν δ᾽ ἀπὸ τοῖο τένοντας.
, / dm
χώρησαν δ᾽ ὑπό τε πρόμαχοι καὶ φαίδιμος “Extwp.
ὅσση δ᾽ αἰγανέης ῥιπὴ ταναοῖο τέτυκται,
ἥν ῥά T ἀνὴρ ἀφέηι πειρώμενος ἢ ἐν ἀέθλωι ὅ90
μενος ἢ
ἠὲ καὶ ἐν πολέμωι δήιων ὕπο θυμοραϊστέων,

575. οἷ: ὁ D®. | néunen D. 579. νεκρῶι : γαίηι S. 585. κεχόλωτο

G Cant. 586. ἔβαλες Lips. || coenedon (sic) (): coenéAeon U. 587. TENONTE
(A supr.) GR. 588. Und: and Vr. b. 589. ὅςςη γ᾽ J. | τέτυκτο GP.

590. ἀφέηκε PQRS: ἀφῆκε Lips.: προέηι Vr. A. 591. eumopaictdewn KR.

was leaving for Troy. Epeigeus, like 774, and for the spear-cast as a measure,

Phoinix and Patroklos, is a ‘retainer’
who gives his services in return for pro-
tection against the avengers of blood.
These ‘broken men’ are an important
factor in early nation-making. It will
be noticed that the blood shed is a
kinsman’s, and therefore cannot be com-
muted ; the homicide must save himself
by flight, as B 662. I 632-34 implies
a later stage ; see on Σ 498 (App. I, ὃ 24).
Ar. remarked ὅτι οὐκ ἀπολελοίπει ἡ Θέτις
τὸν Πηλέως οἶκον, ὡς οἱ νεώτεροι, ἀλλὰ
συνώικει αὐτῶι.

578-80=412-14. 582, cf. Ο 237.

586. Fick remarks that the first
syllable of ᾿Ιϑαμκένεος cannot be short.
We must therefore read Σθένελον for
Ceenédaon.

587. TéNontac, perhaps rather τένοντε.
The dual occurs in A 521, E 307, K 456,
= 466, P 290, X 396, and as a variant
in f 478. The only passage where the
tradition is unanimous for the plural is
y 449. See note on A 521, and for the ten-
dons of the neck, Καὶ 456. 588=A 505.

589. For the airanéu cf. note on B

O 358-59.

590. ἀφέηι is a doubtful form, as it is
the only instance of this class of aor.
subjunctives with a short vowel in the
sing. (cf. ἀφήηι, avin, θήηι, ete. ; in the
plur. it is commoner, H. G. ὃ 80).
Schulze (ῷ. #. p. 278 n. 3) ingeniously
suggests that we should write ἀφέη as
indic. (like ἔστη, ἔβη), an old form sup-
planted by ἀφέηκε. Cf. Ψ 432 δίσκου,
ὅν τ᾽ αἰζηὸς ἀφῆκεν ἀνὴρ πειρώμενος ἥβης
—which further illustrates πειρώμενος
here. So also c@éveos πειρώμενος Ὁ 359.
Here it seems to imply casting for a
man’s own satisfaction in practice as
opposed to a contest.

591. This awkward line has almost
certainly been added, partly from > 220,
by some one who did not see the anti-
thesis of πειρώμενος and ἐν ἀέθλωι above.
The alyavéy is a hunting-spear not used
in war and πειρώμενος distinctly excludes
real earnest ; while the constr. of ὑπό,
under the stress of (cf. H. G. ὃ 204. 3),
is very harsh at such a distance from
the verb. Fick rejects 590 as well, but

198

IAIAAOC Π (xvi)

/ ΕῚ / [4 Ἀ] ἴω ” ᾿] 3 /
τόσσον ἐχώρησαν Τρῶες, ὥσαντο δ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοί.

lal nr Ν
Γλαῦκος δὲ πρῶτος, Λυκίων ἀγὸς ἀσπιστάων,
Ὗ

ἐτράπετ᾽, ἔκτεινεν δὲ Βαθυκλῆα μεγάθυμον,

Χάλκωνος φίλον υἱόν, ὃς ᾿ὥλλάδι οἰκία ναίων 595
/

ὄλβωι τε πλούτωι τε μετέπρεπε Μυρμιδόνεσσι.

\ \ ” a lal / ” /
τὸν μὲν dpa Γλαῦκος στῆθος μέσον οὔτασε δουρί,

Ν 3 / eo Ἢ /
στρεφθεὶς ἐξαπίνης, ὅτε μιν κατέμαρπτε διώκων᾽
δούπησεν δὲ πεσών: πυκινὸν δ᾽ ἄχος ἔλλαβ᾽ ᾿Αχαιούς,

ὡς ἔπεσ᾽ ἐσθλὸς ἀνήρ: μέγα δὲ Τρῶες κεχάροντο, 600

στὰν δ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ αὐτὸν ἰόντες ἀολλέες: οὐδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοὶ

ἀλκῆς ἐξελάθοντο, μένος δ᾽ ἰθὺς φέρον αὐτῶν.

v > 5 , / r ΄ (v4 ” Wd

ἔνθ᾽ αὖ Μηριόνης Τρώων ἕλεν ἄνδρα κορυστήν,

Λαόγονον θρασὺν υἱὸν ᾿Ονήτορος, ὃς Διὸς ἱρεὺς

Ἰδαίου ἐτέτυκτο, θεὸς δ᾽ ὡς τίετο δήμωι" 605

\ κ᾿ 5 \ \
τὸν Ban ὑπὸ γναθμοῖο καὶ οὔατος: ὦκα δὲ θυμὸς

” > 2 ἊΝ ,ὔ Ν > » / e
WLYET TO μελέων, στυγερὸς δ᾽ ἄρα μιν σκότος εἷλεν.

Αἰνείας δ᾽ ἐπὶ Μηριόνη. δόρυ χάλκεον ἧκεν"

ἔλπετο γὰρ τεύξεσθαι ὑπασπίδια προβιβῶντος.

> c 5. γ
ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν ἄντα ἰδὼν ἠλεύατο χάλκεον ἔγχος" 610

/ \ / \ > > Ms / \
πρόσσω yap «“κατέκυψε, τὸ δ᾽ ἐξόπιθεν δόρυ μακρὸν
yA > / 5. 5 ? be a /
οὔδει ἐνισκίμφθη, ἐπὶ δ᾽ οὐρίαχος πελεμίχθη

ἔγχεος: ἔνθα δ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽ ἀφίει μένος ὄβριμος Αρης. 613
Αἰνείας δ᾽ ἄρα θυμὸν ἐχώσατο φώνησέν τε" 616

592. ἐχώρηςαν : ἐχώςαντο Κ΄.

ϑραςὺν : yp. φίλον T. || ἱερεὺς JR Lips.
607. anai L. ||
ἀνέπαλτο φίλον δέ οἱ ἧτορ ἰάνθη, Sch. 'T (omitted by Maass).
tr ἀςπίδα PQR. || προβιβῶντι [].

οὔατος Sch. BT on A 461.

609. Tevzacear GQRS Vr. b. ||
ckiugy GJ: ἐνὶ σκήφϑη Vr. A.

| πολεμίχϑη JQU.

599. πυκινὸν : ϑεινὸν (), yp. Lips. 6604.

606. τόν ῥ᾽ ἔβαλεν κεφαλὴν ὑπὲρ
ἔν τισιν ἐπεφέρετο μηριόνης ὃ᾽
608. μηριόνην 5S.
612. éni
613 om. Ar. in his first edition,

a0. in his second. || ἀφίη Mor. Bar. || ὄμβριμος C. || After this DPH™GJP™R add

° Ἂς 9 9 , ΄ Ἂν ΄

aiyH 0 αἰνείαο κραδαινομλένη κατὰ Γαίης 014
9, 2 9 ΄' es er ~ 9 \ X\ 47

ὥιχετ᾽, ἐπεί ῥ᾽ ἅλιον cTIBapAc ἀπὸ χειρὸς ὄρουςεν. 615

this is needless (Schulze Q. HZ. p. 278) ;
he raises a further objection against the
synizesis of -εων, but this may represent
-ἂν, the regular Aiolic form; cf. note
on -ew, 74.

595. “EANGO1,
B 683, I 447.

598. KaTémapnte, just as he was
catching him up. Compare the story
of Abner and Asahel, 2 Sam. li. 23.

600. ὥς, exclamative used subordin-
ately, and so = ‘when they saw how’ ;
Ἡ, Ο. 8. 261d

in the narrow sense,

602. Cf. E 506 of δὲ μένος χειρῶν ἰθὺς

φέρον.
604-05, see αὶ 77-78. Here also de
refers to the non-combatant father,

606-07 =N 671-72; 610=N 184; 610-
13=P 526-29; 613=N 444; 614-15
—N 504-05; 619=N 254. It will be
seen that 613 lay under grave suspicion
in ancient times. 614-15 are obviously
a needless repetition of the preceding
lines.

609. Unacnicra, see N
βῶντος. O 307.

158 ; προβι-

IAIAAOC Π (x1) 199

“MM / , ’ Ἁ ᾽ ’ Ξ 9,
Μηριόνη, τάχα κέν σε καὶ ὀρχηστήν περ ἐόντα

Ν / / ’ , ’
ἔγχος ἐμὸν κατέπαυσε διαμπερές, εἴ σ᾽ ἔβαλόν περ.

᾽ , vo
τὸν δ᾽ αὖ Μηριόνης δουρικλυτὸς ἀντίον ηὔδα"
ε ᾽ / / Ν » , ᾿ 2/
Αἰνεία, χαλεπόν ce καὶ ἴφθιμόν περ ἐόντα 620

/ , / ’ »" , Μ
πάντων ἀνθρώπων σβέσσαι μένος, ὅς κέ σευ ἄντα

/ \ , ‘ ,
EXOne ἀμυνόμενος: θνητὸς δέ vu καὶ σὺ τέτυξαι.
ΕῚ \ 5» / / \ / , δι -
εἰ καὶ ἐγώ σε βάλοιμι τυχὼν μέσον ὀξέϊ χαλκῶι,
’ Mi Ἢ
αἷψά κε καὶ κρατερὸς περ ἐὼν καὶ χερσὶ πεποιθὼς
5» o ΄
εὖχος ἐμοὶ δοίης, ψυχὴν δ᾽ “Aids κλυτοπώλωι.᾽" 625
Ὡς ΄ \ ἽΝ ay, AT , v er
ὡς φάτο, τὸν δ᾽ ἐνένιπε Μενοιτίου ἄλκιμος υἱός"

“M / / \ fal \ 2 6 Ns Ν > /
nplovn, TL σὺ ταῦτα καὶ ἐσθλος EwWY ἀγορεύεις ;

ὦ πέπον, οὔ τοι Τρῶες ὀνειδείοις ἐπέεσσι

νεκροῦ χωρήσουσι' πάρος τινὰ γαῖα καθέξει.

ἐν γὰρ χερσὶ τέλος πολέμου, ἐπέων δ᾽ ἐνὶ βουλῆι: 680
TO οὔ τι χρὴ μῦθον ὀφέλλειν, ἀλλὰ μάχεσθαι."

617. KEN: μέν Mor. Bar.
S Vr. d: 620 om. Ht.
om. R: te S.
ϑώςεις Lips.
629. καθέξει : καλύψει Mor.

618. Περ: re Ρ: δὴ Harl.a supr.
622. τέτευξαι Lips.

625. δώ(ι)ης GU Harl. a, Par. a e f j (supr. on), ἐν ἄλλω: A:
626. énénicne(n) HJST Vr. Ὁ:

618-20 om.

623. Kai: wh P. 624. KE

ἐνένειπτε (1. 628. οὔτι DGPQ.

631. οὔ τι: οὔ τοι P: οὐ JT.

617. ὀρχηστήν, a taunt directed at
Meriones’ agility, and containing per-
haps a special allusion to his Cretan
origin ; for Crete was celebrated for the
sword-dance (see on = 590). Compare
Patroklos’ banter in 745 ἢ μάλ᾽ ἐλαφρὸς
ἀνήρ, ws peta κυβιστᾶι. The thought of
the war-dance is doubtless at the bottom
of the expression, as in Hector’s words
δήιωι μέλπεσθαι " Ἀρηΐ H 241 (though these
contain no disparagement). See also Q
261 ψευσταί τ᾽ ὀρχησταί τε, χοροιτυπίηισιν
ἄριστοι.

θ18, διαμπερές, for good and all, ef.
K 89, 331, O 70, II 499, X 264. ef ..
nep, if indeed, if only. This is of course
not to be confused with the somewhat
commoner sense of εἴ περ, ‘even if.’
In the latter use the particles are always
together, in the former, since περ
emphasizes the clause rather than the
single word, they are generally separ-
ated ; but this is by no means an invari-
able rule ; compare A 580 εἴ περ γάρ x’
ἐθέληισι, if indeed he wish, N 464, ete.
(In A 391 καὶ εἴ x’ ὀλίγον περ ἐπαύρηι,
περ is to be taken with ὀλίγον, even if
it touch but a very little.)

620. ce for co, attracted by the strong
influence of the growing ace. cwin infin.
construction ; the remarkable point being

that the acc. is so far separated from its
infin. and is so close to the adj. which
naturally requires a dat.

623. Kai ἐγώ, J too, in allusion to ef
σ᾽ ἔβαλόν περ above. As so often it is
indifferent whether we take ef βάλοιμι as
an independent wish, or as a regular
conditional protasis.

625. See note on E 654.

626. €nénine, see on O 546.

629. TING, manyaman. rata καθέξει
as κάτεχεν φυσίζοος ala T 243.

630. The sense of this line is clear
enough though the expression is not
very accurate ; in might of hand lie the
issues of war, [not in words]; the time
Jor words is in the council. <A formally
balanced antithesis would require for
the second member ἐν ἔπεσιν δὲ (τέλος
βουλῆς, but this would lose in vigour
something of what it gains in accuracy.
In fact, τέλος ἐπέων, ‘the sum of words,’
isin itself little more than a periphrasis
for ἔπεα, cf. 83 μύθου τέλος, just as
θανάτοιο τέλος -- θάνατος often. The dis-
location of the sentence, such as itis, is
clearly due to the prevalence of the
feeling for the external form of the
favourite chiastic arrangement (dat.-gen.
—gen.-dat.) over that for the internal
form of the antithetic thought

IAIAAOC TT (xv1)

ἃ ’ \ ἐς \ i a) ξ 5 ω 2d « > / /

ὡς εἰπὼν ὁ μὲν ἦρχ, ὁ δ᾽ ἅμ᾽ ἕσπετο ἰσόθεος φώς.
τῶν δ᾽, ὥς τε δρυτόμων ἀνδρῶν ὀρυμαγδὸς ὄρωρεν
οὔρεος ἐν βήσσηις, ἕκαθεν δέ τε γίνετ᾽ ἀκουή"

ὡς τῶν ὦρνυτο δοῦπος ἀπὸ χθονὸς εὐρυοδείης, 635

lal id lal lal >’ » /
χαλκοῦ τε ῥινοῦ Te βοῶν τ᾽ ἐυποιητάων,

7 / 7 5 / 5
νυσσομένων ξίφεσίν τε Kal ἔγχεσιν ἀμφυγύοισιν.
δ᾽ ΕΝ 5» {ὃ > A τ δό OL
οὐδ᾽ ἂν ἔτι φράδμων περ ἀνὴρ Σαρπηδόνα δῖον

BA 2 \ / \ “ \ /
ἔγνω, ἐπεὶ βελέεσσι Kal αἵματι καὶ κονίηισιν
fel \ / /
ἐκ κεφαλῆς εἴλυτο διαμπερὲς ἐς πόδας ἄκρους. 640
,’ \ ¢ id “ lal
. οἱ δ᾽ αἰεὶ περὶ νεκρὸν ὁμίχεον, ὡς OTE μυῖαι

632. ἦρχεν PRU.

Par.a ef gj, ἔν τισιν A, yp. T: ὁρώρει Ar. OQ.
636 om. Ut. || ῥινοῦ : ἔν τισι ῥινῶν Sch.

ἀστή Aph. 635. ὄρνυτο ΠΩ 5.

A. || T om. Par. j: see the note of Did. below.

640. εἴλυτο : εἴρυτο 1).

633. dpuruadec CGHJPR. || ὄρωρε(ν) DGU Harl. a b,

634. rirner L. || GKOUH:

638. ςαρπηϑόνι Sion Ar. U.!

633. τῶν is taken up after the paren-
thetic simile by τῶν in 635. ὄρωρεν
has not much authority. ὀρώρει, ifright,
can only be taken as coming from a
present *dpwpw, analogous to other present
forms with perf. stem (e.g. γεγωνεῖν M
337), which has some support in the
forms ὀρώρεται, ὀρώρηται (H. Οὐ. ὃ 27).
It is more probable, however, that it is
a mere itacistic error for ὀρώρηι (see note
on A 483), and this Bekker, followed by
most edd., has introduced into the text.
Ar. appears to have understood τῶν δὲ
ὀρυμαγδὸς ὀρώρει ws (ὀρυμαγδὸς dpwpe)
δρυτόμων ἐν βήσσηις. But this is clearly
not Homeric.

634. ἀκουή is a word which recurs
only in the Od. in the phrase (ἔβη) μετὰ
πατρὸς ἀκουήν βὶ 308, etc. It means
hearing ; the phrase ἕκαθεν γίνετ᾽ ἀκουή
is thus the counterpart of τηλόσε δοῦπον
ἐν οὔρεσιν ἔκλυε ποιμήν A 455 (q.v.).
The ‘ hearing’ being regarded as a power
going out from the ear, the hearer hears
to a distance, his hearing comes to the
source of sound from a distance. See
also on 515 above.

635. etUpuodeiHc, here only in 7]. ;
three times in Od. In sense it is sub-
stantially the same as εὐρεῖα χθών. Cf.
εὐρυάγυιαν, εὐρύχορος, εὐρύπορος of the sea.
Plut. Mor. 485 c quotes a lyric verse
εὐρυόδου γ᾽ ὅσοι καρπὸν αἰνύμεθα χθονός.

636. ἄμεινον <av> εἶχε, φησὶν ὁ ᾿Αρί-
σταρχος, εἰ ἐγέγραπτο ““ βοῶν εὐποιητάων ᾿"
ἔξω τοῦ τέ συνδέσμου, Did. i.e. the noise
of bronze and of the leather of shields.
Ar.’s reading—for which it is clear that

he could find no authority—avoids the
obvious difficulty of a distinction be-
tween leather and shields, for it is hard
to see what other leather than that of
the shields is in question; and indeed
ῥινός means a shield in A 447, © 61 (see
also M 263). Schol. T can hardly be
right in thinking that ῥινοῦ means the
rough unworked λαισήϊα as opposed to
the carefully-worked ἀσπίδες (βόες εὐποίη-
ται). Ar. suggested as an alternative
ἐξ ἐπαναλήψεως νοητέον λέγεσθαι τὸ αὐτὸ ὡς
“ἐ πυκνοὶ καὶ Oauées” (μ 92) καὶ “πόλεμόν
τε μάχην Te” (Π 251) (An.). This would
be more satisfactory if there were not a
third term co-ordinated with the two
by re. Clearly χαλκοῦ includes weapons
of offence, and must not be restricted to
the metal facing of the shields. After
all the difficulty is insignificant, for
the slight redundancy of expression in
the text is easily pardonable. For βοῦς
in the sense of shield see H 238.

637= 26, q.v.

638. Ar. read Σαρπηδόνι Siw: οὐδὲ ὁ
πάνυ γνώριμος καὶ συνήθης τῶι Σαρπηδόνι
ἠδύνατο γνωρίσαι αὐτόν (Nikanor). Such
a use of φράδμων cannot be supported ;
and the text is perfectly simple, φράδ-
pwr being observant, shrewd ; οἵ. Q 354
ppadéos νόου ἔργα τέτυκται, Hes. Theog.
626 Lalns φραδμοσύνηισιν, by the cleverness
of Gaia. Οἱ ἂν... ἔγνω see H. (ὦ. § 324.

640. εἴλυτο, was wrapped up, a rather
bold metaphor to express ‘was hidden.’

641. For the simile compare B 469 ff.
(471=643 here). περιγλαγέας, overflow-
ing with milk.

on Ὁ

IAIAAOC Π (xv1) 201

“ » / / ‘ /
σταθμῶι ἔνι βρομέωσι περιγλαγέας κατὰ TEAS

ee nr ¢ / ” ,
ὥρηι ἐν εἰαρινῆι, OTE TE γλάγος ayyea Sever:

Δ ” \ \ Ν ΄ ,
ὡς apa τοὶ περὶ νεκρὸν ομίλεον.

506.» ΄ ‘4
OUOE ποτε Ζεὺς

τρέψεν ἀπὸ κρατερῆς ὑσμίνης ὄσσε φαεινώ, 645
> \ ’ > \ \ Cd ‘ ‘ -
ἀλλὰ κατ᾽ αὐτοὺς αἰὲν ὅρα, καὶ φράζετο θυμῶι
/ / ͵
πολλὰ μάλ᾽ ἀμφὶ φόνωι ἸΙατρόκλου μερμηρίζων,
ἢ ἤδη καὶ κεῖνον ἐνὶ κρατερῆι ὑσμίνηι

by

᾽ al Leek > / τι ,ὔ , “Υν
αὐτοῦ ἐπ᾽ ἀντιθέων, Σαρπηδόνι φαίδιμος “Ἰὰκτωρ
χαλκῶι δηιώσηι ἀπό τ᾽ ὦμων τεύχε᾽ ἕληται, 650
e sw \ , > / / 5 /
ἢ ἔτι Kal πλεόνεσσιν ὀφέλλειεν πόνον αἰπύν.

Φ , e / / , ΕῚ
ὧδε δέ οἱ φρονέοντι δοάσσατο κέρδιον εἶναι,
ὄφρ᾽ ἠὺς θεράπων IInrniddew ᾿Αχιλῆος

5 fa) as \ ΨΤᾺῚ \
ἐξαῦτις ρῶάς τε καὶ “Extopa χαλκοκορυστὴν

» \ ΝΜ / ? > \ \ ete
ὥσαιτο προτὶ ἄστυ, πολέων δ᾽ ἀπὸ θυμὸν ἕλοιτο. 655
“Ἕκτορι δὲ πρωτίστωι ἀνάλκιδα φύξαν évapoev:
ἐς δίφρον δ᾽ ἀναβὰς φύγαδ᾽ ἔτραπε, κέκλετο δ᾽ ἄλλους
Τρῶας φευγέμεναι: γνῶ γὰρ Διὸς ἱρὰ τάλαντα.

642. Eni: ἐπὶ ἃ. || βρομέουει U Lips. Vr. A: Bpeuéwer Harl. a, Cramer Epim.
50. 17. || éurAaréac Athen. xi. 495: moAurAar[r]éac Ap. Lev. δῦ. 1. 646.

αὐτὰς P. || Eppazeto 5.
ἃ Ὁ. 650. δη(ι)ώςει CQU.
alakidao (). 654. é=adeic C.

S (Lips. supr-) Cant. Mor. Bar. Vr. A:
θυμὸν ἐνῶρςεν Hust.

648. καὶ κεῖνον Ar. Ὡ : κἀκεῖνον DGJLOSU Ἠ 1].

651. ὀφέλλειεν : ὀφέλλει δὴ (i.
655. ἕληται () (supr. o1To).
QS Lips. (swpr. eumdn) Vr. b, Cant. Mor. Bar. Vr. A: eumon 2.
ENHKEN 1.
657. €rpene P Lips. Vr. ἃ.

653. nodwKeoc

656. φύζαν
EN@PCEN

φύξαν ENHKEN ἢ κατά τινας
658. rap: δὲ R.

650. For the subj. δηιώςηι, ἕληται
followed by the opt. ὀφέλλειεν, see 17.
G. ὃ 298 ad fin. δηιώσηι may represent
an original δηιώσει᾽ (ε), but the change
of ἕληται to ἕλοιτο would be more violent.
ὀφέλλειεν (also β 334) for the regular
ὀφείλειεν (H. G. ὃ 39. 3) is unique in H.
It is possible that the later (but not
Homeric) distinction of the pres. ὀφεί-
ew and ὀφέλλειν has reacted on the aor.
The subject of the verb is evidently
Patroklos.

653. The use of ὄφρα is to be com-
pared with A 465 λελιημένος ὄφρα τά-
Xora τεύχεα συλήσειε, Z 361 θυμὸς ἐπέσ-
συται ὄφρ᾽ ἐπαμύνω, where see notes.
The word has passed through the stage
of introducing an object-clause till it is
weakened to the modern ‘that,’ and
really takes the place of the infinitive.
Van L. however regards it as final,
taking 656 to explain ὧδε, as though
Ἕκτορι δὲ. . ἐνῶρσεν -΄ ἔκτορι ἐνόρσαι.
This is no doubt possible—perhaps best ;

but we should have expected μέν for
δέ in 656.

656. φύζαν ἐνῶρςεν, though not
strongly supported, seems preferable to
the vulg. θυμὸν ἐνῆκεν, which as Heyne
suggests may have been wrongly taken
from the line above ; cf. 0 62, 366. But
itis going too far to call the vulgate
‘intolerable’ with van L. The use of
θυμός in H. is elastic enough to permit
of such a phrase ; cf. 691. θυμὸν ἐνῶρσεν
is probably a transitional form which
was altered to ἐνῆκεν on the analogy of
μένος, θάρσος, etc. ἐνῆκεν.

657. ἔτραπε, sc. δίφρον or ἵππους.

658. τάλαντα, see Θ 69. Here the
word practically means little more than
will, The backward and forward move-
ment of the battle, which Hector per-
ceives, answers to the fluctuations of
Zeus’ will, which themselves are typified
by the figure of a balance swinging up
and down.

bo
Oo
bo

IAIAAOC Π (νι)

5 » 2 /

ἔνθ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ἴφθιμοι Λύκιοι μένον, ἀλλὰ φόβηθεν !

πάντες, ἐπεὶ βασιλῆα ἴδον βεβλημένον ἦτορ 660
3 lal

κείμενον ἐν νεκύων ἀγύρει' πολέες γὰρ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῶι

΄ "5. ν \ σε /
KAT TETOV, εὖτ ἔριδα κρατερὴν ἐτάνυσσε Κρονίων.
΄ δ᾽ Le .5 edt) ” s / ” ee
οἱ ap ἀπ᾿ ὦμοιιν Σαρπηδόνος ἔντε ἕλοντο

7 / \ \ \ a
χάλκεα μαρμαίροντα: Ta μὲν κοίλας ἐπὶ νῆας

δῶκε φέρειν ἑτάροισι Μενοιτίου ἄλκιμος υἱός. 665
/ > /
καὶ τότ᾽ ᾿Απόλλωνα προσέφη νεφεληγερέτα Ζεύς"

659. ἀλλὰ φόβηθεν DPR: ἀλλ᾽ ἐφόβηϑεν ©.
Cant. Bar. Mor. Lips. Par. ὁ e g: βεβληχμμένον DG:

660. βεβλημένον QU
βεβλαμμένον AC Par. a:

BeBAauénon S Harl. d, Par. ἃ f: βεβολημένον H: dedairuénon JPRT Mosc. 2,

Harl. a, Par. ἢ 1, yp. A: Sedatruénon ἢ βεβλημένον Eust.
663. cduoici ().

ἐπ᾿ : ἅμ᾽ Q Mor. Vr. 4, A.

661. rap: ὃὲ P. ||
666. ἀπόλλωνι D. || Kai τότ᾽ Gp’

ἔξ ἴϑης προςέφη Ζεὺς ON φίλον υἱόν Zen. (athetizing at the same time 666-83).

660. Both the reading and interpreta-
tion of this line involve difficulties.
Why do the Lykians only now perceive
that their king is stricken? The fight
over his body has been going on for
more than 100 lines ; yet the wording of
the sentence implies that the sudden
change is due not to the flight of Hector,
as we should expect, but to the recogni-
tion of Sarpedon’s fall. Two theories
seem possible: (1) The lines belong to
an earlier recension of the story, in
which the fight over the body was
described only summarily in 661-62 ;
659 originally followed immediately after
Sarpedon’s fall (perhaps after 505), all
the intervening lines being later ex-
pansion. (2) 661-62 are a later addition ;
βασιλῆα in 660 is Hector, not Sarpedon
(Paley). In favour of (1) it may be urged
that of the intervening lines we have
already had on other grounds suspected
a large portion as a later addition (see on
508, 555); while the rest from 569 on is
quite colourless ; the short battle-pictures
relating the deaths of unimportant war-
riors are of a type which could easily
be made to order, and in fact shew a
suspiciously large proportion of borrowed
lines (see e.g. the note on 604-05). If
this solution is adopted, as I think it
should be, then we must read either
δεδαϊγμένον or βεβλημένον : the balance
of authority is rather in favour of the
former, but the latter best explains the
variant βεβλαμμένον. If on the other
hand we adopt (2), the last form is right.
βεβλαμμένον τορ might indeed mean
‘brought to a stop in his life,’ but the
phrase is unique and by no means natural.
βλάπτω is commonly used (αὐ in the

literai sense, of impeding; (Ὁ) in the
metaphorical, of divine interference
causing mental blindness—O 724 βλάπτε
φρένας Ζεύς, X 15 ἔβλαψάς w exdepye,
ef. 1 507, 512, y 14, and note on O 484.
In this sense of course Hector is βεβλαμ-
μένος in heart, for Zeus has sent panic
upon him. We must then separate
πάντες from Λύκιοι, and take it to mean
all the (Trojan) army. This is not satis-
factory; and though Hector might
perhaps be called a βασιλεύς (cf. A 96
᾿Αλεξάνδρωι βασιλῆϊ, T 84 Tpawy βασι-
λεῦσι), as a matter of fact the title is
never applied to him ; least of all should
it be used here, where, after the (ex
hypothesi) ambiguous πάντες, it cannot.
but be referred to the king of the
Lykians. It is of course this ambiguity
which is held to explain the addition of
661-62; but it is much easier to suppose
that 506-658 are a later addition, and
that βεβλαμμένον is a mere corruption
of βεβλημένον (note the transitional
variants βεβλαμένον, βεβλημμένον).

661. ἐν νεκύων ἀγύρει, lit. in the
gathering of the corpses, a bold and
vigorous expression. ἄγυρις recurs only
in the phrase ἐν νηῶν ἀγύρει, Ὦ 141, and
in y 91-- ἀγορή. αὐτῶι emphatic, their
lord.

662. Note that εὖτε -- αὐ the time when ;
we cannot translate ‘nad fallen since.’
There is a sudden slaughter. €pida. .
éTdnucce, see on H 102, N 358.

666. See on 431. The saving of
Sarpedon’s body at least is indispensable ;
after all the fighting over it, we must
hear what becomes of the body itself.
Zen., who entirely expunged 431-61,
contented himself with an athetesis of

/

=e

IAIAAOC ΠῚ (xvi) 203

> 3 Uj “- , a ,
“εἰ δ᾽ aye viv, φίλε Φοῖβε, κελαινεφὲς αἷμα κάθηρον
\ , ἕῳ , , "
ἐλθὼν ἐκ βελέων Σαρπηδόνα, καί μιν ἔπειτα
\ > \ - -“ ΄ -
πολλὸν ἀποπρὸ φέρων λοῦσον ποταμοῖο ῥοῆισι,
““3.." > ? / \ > 4 / “
χρίισον τ ἀμβροσίηι, περι ὃ ἄμβροτα εἰματὰα ἔσσον" 670
/ / “-“ ° “-
πέμπε δέ μιν πομποῖσιν ἅμα κραιπνοῖσι φέρεσθαι,
ὧν Ν Θ ΄ ὃ ὃ ΄ σι... 2
πνωι καὶ Θανάτωι διδυμάοσιν, of pa μιν ὦκα
/ ,
θήσουσ᾽ ἐν Λυκίης evpeins πίονι δήμωι,
/ 4 Μ
ἔνθά ἑ ταρχύσουσι κασίγνητοί τε ἔται τε
4 / Ν , ”
τύμβωι TE OTHANL τε" TO yap γέρας ἐστὶ θανόντων. 675
A » 3 90> ν) \ > / ᾽ ,
ὡς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἄρα πατρὸς ἀνηκούστησεν ᾿Απόλλων.
~ \ ne , ey 2 > 2 a0 9
βῆ δὲ Kat ᾿Ιδαίων ὀρέων ἐς φύλοπιν αἰνήν,
/ 4 / a
αὐτίκα ὃ ἐκ βελέων Σαρπηδόνα δῖον ἀείρας,
\ ? \ / la “-“ « -
πολλὸν ἀποπρὸ φέρων λοῦσεν ποταμοῖο ῥοῆισι
ee as , \ > + “ “ ᾿
χρίισεν τ ἀμβροσίηι, περι ὃ ἄμβροτα εἰματὰα ἐσσε" 680
/ / lal ¢ lal ,
πέμπε δέ μιν πομποῖσιν ἅμα κραιπνοῖσι φέρεσθαι,
aon \ Θ ΄, ὃ 5 ΄ ΔῊΝ, =
mot καὶ Θανάτωι διδυμάοσιν, of pa μιν ὦκα
2 /
κάτθεσαν ἐν Λυκίης evpeins πίονι δήμωι.

668. μελέων () Harl. a, Vr. A. || ςαρπηδόνι Ar. P Par. οὔ, 670. xpicon ὃ᾽
(A supr.) JQST Lips.: yxpercon τ᾽ Syr. || GuSpociHn H. 671. KpainNoiciNn
€neceat (). 672. θιθυμάοςι: Toi PR. 673. excouci(N) λυκίης DGPR Vr. b,
yp. A. || ec(c)ouc’ εὐρείης λυκίης ἐν π. ὃ. ) Lips. 674. ταρχύςωει Vr. Ὁ :
ταρχήςωςει Vr. A: ταρχήσςουει JR Lips. 677. Znvddoros καὶ τοῦτον περιήιρηκε An.
680. xpicen ὃ᾽ (A supr.) HJRST Lips.: χρεῖςεν τ᾽ Syr. 682 om. Lips.
d1duudoci* Toi HPR. 683. θῆκαν λυκίης εὐρείης ἐνὶ π. ὃ. ().

666-83, combined with alteration of pressed Ar. (μήποτε Znvddotos ὀρθῶς

666 (he thought that Apollo was on
the battletield). The passage contains,
however, some internal difficulties. The
narrative in 676-83 is clear, but the
same can hardly be said of the prepara-
tion for it in 667-75. ἐλθὼν ἐκ βελέων
(668) is far less natural than ἐκ βελέων
ἀείρας (678) ; and in 667, 669 two cleans-
ings are sharply distinguished, though
there is no apparent reason for them,
and in 679 we hear of one only. This
rather suggests that originally Apollo
as god of Lykia intervened on his own
account to carry off the king of his land
—676 may have superseded τὸν δὲ ἰδὼν
ἐλέησε ἄναξ Διὸς vids ᾿Απόλλων or the
like—and that 666 ff., with the pre-
paratory scene in 431 ff. were added by
a poet who thought that Zeus ought
to take the initiative on behalf of his
son.—Zen. raised a general objection to
the whole passage, παράλογον yap τὸν
ἀπενθῆῇ τοιαῦτα diaxovetoGac—the bright
Apollo should not be defiled by dealings
with corpses. This seems to have im-

ἠθέτηκε τούτους, Did.), but it applies
only to the later Apollo, not to the
Homeric.

668. Ar. read Σαρπηδόνι, but the ace.
is regular, see Καὶ 572, Σ 345, Φ 122, Ψ 41.
For ἐλθών Bentley conj. ἕλκων, but this
word is used only of enemies. Some
take ἐκ βελέων as attributive to αἷμα,
the blood coming from the wounds,
which is not satisfactory. But the
variant ἐκ μελέων, cleanse from his limbs
is well worth consideration.

670. For ambrosia as ἃ purifying
agent see = 170.

671-75. See on 454-57. O1duudocin,
ef. Ξ 231 Ὕπνωι, κασιγνήτωι Θανάτοιο.

676-77 =O 236-37, 679--89 ΞΞ 669--79.

677. This is the only hint to indicate
that the gods are on Ida rather than
Olympos (see on 431). It may well
have been added after the introduction
of the Διὸς ἀπάτη, though even thus the
presence of Apollo on Ida is not less
unexpected than that of Hera before.
Zen. expunged the line.

204 IAIAAOC Π (xv1)

/
Πάτροκλος δ᾽ ἵπποισι καὶ Αὐτομέδοντι κελεύσας

[ἢ lal (beer. Seer

Τρῶας καὶ Λυκίους μετεκίαθε, καὶ μέγ. ἀάσθη 685
- /

νήπιος" εἰ δὲ ἔπος IIndniadao φύλαξεν,

9 5) “- , /

ἢ τ’ ἂν ὑπέκφυγε κῆρα κακὴν μέλανος θανάτοιο.

if /
ἀλλ᾽ αἰεί te Διὸς κρείσσων νόος ἠέ περ ἀνδρὸς"

5) a /
[ὅς τε καὶ ἄλκιμον ἄνδρα φοβεῖ καὶ ἀφείλετο νίκην

ῥηϊδίως, ὁτὲ δ᾽ αὐτὸς ἐποτρύνηισι μάχεσθαι") 690

“ © \ / \ Sak / > an
ὅς οἱ καὶ τότε θυμὸν evi στήθεσσιν ἀνῆκεν.

ἔνθα τίνα πρῶτον, τίνα δ᾽ ὕστατον ἐξενάριξας,

Πατρόκλεις, ὅτε δή σε θεοὶ θάνατόνδε κάλεσσαν ;

by n / ”
‘Adpnotov μὲν πρῶτα καὶ Δὐτόνοον καὶ ᾿Ιζχεκλον

καὶ Πέριμον Μεγάδην καὶ ᾿Επίστορα καὶ Μελάνιππον, 695

αὐτὰρ ἔπειτ᾽ "EXacov καὶ Μούλιον ἠδὲ ΠΙΟυλάρτην᾽

\\ ¢ ’ 7 / / A
Tous ἕλεν, of δ᾽ ἄλλοι φύγαδε μνώοντο ἕκαστος.

ἔνθά κεν ὑψίπυλον Τροίην ἕλον υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν

Πατρόκλου ὑπὸ χερσί: περιπρὸ γὰρ ἔγχεϊ Ovev-
εἰ μὴ ᾿Απόλλων Φοῖβος ἐυδμήτου ἐπὶ πύργου 700

», rn ’
ἔστη, τῶι ὀλοὰ φρονέων, Τρώεσσι δ᾽ ἀρήγων.

τρὶς μὲν ἐπ᾽ ἀγκῶνος βῆ τείχεος ὑψηλοῖο

686. πηληϊάδεω DHJQST Harl. a. || ἐφύλαξεν 71 Harl. a.

688. ἀεί U Vr. AS |

τε: re Syr. Bar. Mor. || τινὲς Kpeiccwo An. || ἀνὸρός A (yp. GNOpaN) HQTU Syr.

Lips. Harl. a, Vr. b A: ἀνϑρῶν 2.
οὐ κεῖνται Kust. 690 om. Ηΐ.

DGSU Syr. Harl. a, Vr. A, Mose. 2.

689-90 om. AD Syr.: ἔν τισι τῶν ἀντιγράφων
|| τότε: Aph., cf. P 178:
man. 1. || ἐποτρύνει CJTU: ἐποτρύνηςε H. || uayécacea Harl. a.

note Par. ὁ supr. by
691. ἐνῆκε(ν)

693. θάνατόν re (). 694. GNTINOON

Q Lips. || ἔχεκλον : ὀπίτην JTU Harl. a, Lips., yp. ἔχεκλον Harl. a, Lips.

697. ἕλες Zen. 699. Erxeci P.

|| euten AHU,

702. ἐπ᾽ ἢ ὑπ᾽ Eust.: ὑπ᾽ Mor.

684. It will be seen that this line is
hardly consistent with the will of Zeus
in 648-51.

685. ἀάςθη, see note on ἀάσατο A 340,

686. ἔπος, the μύθου τέλος of 83-96.

688. For the gnomic ΤΕ see 727. 4. § 332.
ἀνδρός, vulg. ἀνδρῶν. The change to
the plur. was evidently made to avoid
ambiguity when the following couplet
was interpolated.

689-90 are a mere interpolation from
P 177-78. €noTpuUNHict wdayecea is the
reading of mss. ; it cannot be construed,
but under the circumstances it is not
worth while to correct it to ἐποτρύνει
μαχέσασθαι, which is given by all mss.
in P 178. It is not easy to see how the
change came about.

692—E 708; cf. Virgil Aen. xi. 664
Quem telo primum, quem postremwum
aspera virgo Deicis ?

697. ἕλεν, Zen. ἕλες. But for the

change from apostrophe to narrative
cf. 586. φύτγαδε μνώοντο, turned their
thoughts to flight ; a pregnant expression
like μή τι φόβονδ᾽ ἀγόρευε, Ἐὶ 252.

698. The following passage (to 711)
is athetized by Payne Knight and others,
probably rightly, as the idea of an actual
assault upon the wall is quite unprepared,
and seems hardly consistent with the
attitude of Hector in 713. There are
several lines which appear elsewhere and
may be borrowed ; 698=®@ 544; 699=A
180 (where, however, see note) ; 703, cf. E
437; 705-06 = E 438-39; 710-11=E
443-44, The passage in E describing
Diomedes’ repulse by Apollo was evidently
before the poet of these lines. Compare
also the similar wording of T 445-48.

699. ὑπὸ yepci is elsewhere used only
with a passive, or a verb of quasi-passive
meaning (πεσεῖν, etc. ).

702. ἀγκῶνος, either the salient angle

5.

IAIAAOC Π (χνι) 205
Ud \ » ’ \ > / ᾽ ,
ἄτροκλος, τρὶς δ᾽ αὐτὸν ἀπεστυφέλιξεν ᾿Απόλλων,
/ > / ᾽ Ὁ ,ὕ
χείρεσσ ἀθανάτηισι φαεινὴν ἀσπίδα νύσσων. .
> aie ὦ \ \ / > ἡ o 7 *
αλλ, OTE δὴ τὸ τέταρτον ἐπέσσυτο δαίμονι ἧσος, 705

\ wu) Ὁ , ” , a
δεινὰ ὃ ομοκλῆσας ETT Ea πτερόεντα προσηνυόθα"

“χάζεο, διογενὲς Τ]ατρόκλεις" οὔ νύ τοι aica

a ig \ \ / ‘ la bl , ’ ,
σῶι ὑπὸ δουρὶ πόλιν πέρθαι 'Γρώων ἀγερώχων,

»Ὸ}7ὔ . » ? a “ \ ,
οὐδ᾽ ὑπ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλῆος, ὅς περ σέο πολλὸν ἀμείνων."

ὡς φάτο, ΤΙάτροκλος δ᾽ ἀνεχάζετο πολλὸν ὀπίσσω, 710

μῆνιν ἀλευάμενος ἑκατηβόλου ᾿Απόλλωνος.

Ν᾿

ΜΠ δὲ , a / yy , “
KTWP εν «Καίηισι πύληις EXE μωνυχας ἱππους"

, \ \ ΄, \ / = > ΄,
δίζε γὰρ ἠὲ μάχοιτο κατὰ κλόνον αὗτις ἐλάσσας,
\ -“ e / a
ἢ λαοὺς ἐς τεῖχος ὁμοκλήσειεν AVAL.
τῳ » e / cr ᾽
ταῦτ᾽ ἄρα οἱ φρονέοντι παρίστατο Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων 715

ἀνέρι εἰσάμενος αἰζηῶν τε κρατερῶι Te,
’ / a / 5 “ ΄ ,
Ἀσίωι, ὃς μήτρως ἣν “Extopos ἱπποδάμοιο,

103. ὑπεςτυφέλιξεν JJ.

104. χείρεςιν (1() : xeipeci τ᾽ S.

106. δεινὰ δ᾽:

ϑεινὸν PR. || ἔπεα πτερόεντα προςηύδα ACH Cant. Harl.a: προςέφη ἑκάεργος

ἀπόλλων 2, yp. A Harl. ἃ.

Ar. Par. a (supr. Toi and cot); NU τοι πω P: τι nw ἢ.
709. οὐδ᾽ : οὐχ H. || ὅπερ JPQR Lips. Vr. A.

711. ἁλευόμενος (A supr.) GH.
715. mapéctH P.
Q King’s Lips. : εἰϑόμενος Par. ἃ f (the variant implied by Did.).

τυτθὸν Zen. H.
aveic CPQ Cant. Bar.

707. xazeo: φράζεο Vr. d.

NU τοι: NU πω
708. népcai Ρ Harl. a.
710. Gnaydzeto (j. | πολλὸν:

712. 0 ἐν: ὃΣ 0. 113.
716. εἰςάμμενος Ar. 2: ἐεισάμενος
717. EHN JT.

of the tower itself, or the re-entering
angle where the tower abutted on the
main wall. Or the reference may be to
a construction such as that of the walls
at Hissarlik, where the lower part is on
a comparatively easy slope, the upper
vertical ; the angle where the two joined
may be the ἀγκών.

704, NUccooN seems here to imply no
more than a blow from the hand. Else-
where it means a stab with a pointed
instrument.

708. népeat, a non-thematic aor. for
πέρθ-σ-σθαι, related to ἔπερσα as δέχθαι
to ἐδεξάμην, ὄρθαι to Spoa; see H. G.
§40. The variant πέρσαι is also possible ;
it is not fated for thee to sack ete. Van
L. would read Τρώων πέρθεσθ᾽. needlessly
(Ench. ὃ 211. 9).

710. πολλόν, Zen. τυτθόν as E 443.
Ar. thought the difference justified
because Diomedes had the
Athene to urge him on, whereas Patro-
klos has the words of Achilles to hold
him back.

words of

711. Perhaps we should accept the
variant ἀλευόμενος (future) as elsewhere
(Ε 444).

713. ize, doubted, only here and in
an oracle, Herod. i. 65; no doubt from
δέι-, connected with δύο, dis, in the sense
to be of two minds; ef. dom (1 230
with note), διστάζειν. It is probably
not related to δίζημαι where the root is
ζη- and δι- is reduplication.

717. This Asios, who is not heard of
again, is of course not to be confused
with Asios, son of Hyrtakos, in M and
N. It appears from this that Hekabe
was herself daughter of Dymas ; whereas
the later tradition (traceable as far back

as Euripides) made her daughter of
Kisseus and sister of Theano. So

Virgil calls her Cisseis (Aen. vii. 320).
Apollodoros names Sangarios for her
father (see next line), while we have
choice between no less than six claimants
to the position of her mother. No
wonder the Emperor Tiberius wrote a
dissertation Quae mater Hecubae fuerit.

206 IAIAAOC Π (xv1)

αὐτοκασίγνητος ‘“ExaBns, υἱὸς δὲ Δύμαντος,
ὃς Φρυγίηι ναΐεσκε ῥοῆις ἔπι Σαγγαρίοιο"
n /
TOL μιν ἐεισάμενος προσέφη Διὸς υἱὸς ᾿Απόλλων"
/
“"Kxtop, τίπτε μάχης ἀποπαύεαι; οὐδέ τί σε χρή.
ai? ὅσον ἥσσων εἰμί, τόσον σέο φέρτερος εἴην"
TO κε τάχα στυγερῶς πολέμου ἀπερωήσειας.
b) > » t ” / “
arr aye [[ατρόκλων ἔφεπε κρατερωνυχας ἵππους,
ἐ a > 1 As
ai κέν πώς μιν ἕληις, Sone δέ Tor εὖχος ᾿Απόλλων. — 725
ἃ 2 ἊΝ ¢ \ ΠῚ ΝΜ, Ν > / >’ n
ὡς εἰπὼν ὁ μὲν αὖτις ἔβη θεὸς ἀμ πόνον ἀνδρῶν,
Sf /
Κεβριόνηι δ᾽ ἐκέλευσε δαΐφρονι φαίδιμος “Extrwp
/
ἵππους ἐς πόλεμον πεπληγέμεν. αὐτὰρ ᾿Απόλλων
΄ 5. ὦ ony, Ξ \ / 3. MY
δύσεθ᾽ ὅμιλον ἰών, ἐν δὲ κλόνον ᾿Δργείοισιν
2 / \ \ Lo A "
ἧκε κακόν, Τρωσὶν δὲ καὶ “Extope κῦδος ὄπαζεν.
"“Extwp δ᾽ ἄλλους μὲν Δαναοὺς ἔα οὐδ᾽ ἐνάριζεν,
, 3
αὐτὰρ ὁ ἸΙατρόκλωιν ἔφεπε κρατερώνυχας ἵππους.
5) 5 ee
Πάτροκλος δ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἀφ᾽ ἵππων arto χαμᾶζε
na » vy id / \ / 7
σκαιῆι ἔγχος ἔχων: ἑτέρηφι δὲ λάζετο πέτρον
.
μάρμαρον ὀκριόεντα, τόν οἱ περὶ χεὶρ ἐκάλυψεν" 735
- Ὁ) ΟῚ / 2 Ν \ “ ,
ἧκε δ᾽ ἐρεισάμενος, οὐδὲ δὴν ἅζετο φωτός,

720

718. & ἑκάβης Bar. 719. ppurinn G Syr. Harl. a, King’s Par. a fj. 720.
προςεφώνεε φοῖβος ἀπόλλων G. 721. Extwp JRSyr. 724. pene: ἔπεχε PR.
725. ἕλοις C Bar. Vr. ἃ. || δοίη Q: ϑῶιοι Bar. 726. αὖϑις C. || ἂν (Gn) πόνον
CJQR Lips. Cant. Vr. A. 728. én πόλεμον Vr. d. 731 om. ὃ. || énapize(n)
J Cant. Harl. a, Lips. Mosc. 2. 732. ἔφεπε : ἔπεχε GPR, ἐν ἄλλωι A. 730.
ὀκρυόεντα J Harl.a, Vr. d A. 736. G@zeTo: xazeto H (Par. j swpr.).

reference to the equally obscure A 539
μίνυνθα δὲ χάζετο δουρός (q.v.) ; and we
must either accept the Ms. reading or
find some better emendation than this.
So far as sense is concerned, we have no

723. cTurepac, 1.6. with grievous re-
sults to yourself; so @ 3874 τῶ ke τάχα
στυγερῶς Tw’ ἐγὼ πέμψαιμι νέεσθαι, after
a couplet closely resembling 722. Com-
pare also μὴ τάχα πικρὴν Αἴγυπτον καὶ

Κύπρον ἵκηαι, ρ 448.

724. ἔφεπε, see note on E 329,

735. μάρμαρον OKpidenta, M 380.
Bentley conj. ὀκριόενθ᾽, ὅν οἱ, which is
adopted by most edd., and is no doubt
right if the line is genuine. The second
part, however, is unusual, as it appears
to describe a stone of small size, whereas
those cast by heroes are elsewhere of
heroic dimensions.

736. Gzeto is the Ms. reading, with
one exception ; χάζετο, which most edd.
adopt, is doubtless only a conjectural
emendation, and has not even the merit
of giving good sense; after three lines
and a half have been describing Patro-
klos’ vigorous attack it will not do to
say that ‘he did not long yield before
his foe.’ Nothing is explained by a

need to go beyond the ordinary sense
of dgoua, to fear (the gods), to have a
scruple (with intin., Z 267, or μή, ΞΙ 261).
The only difficulty is the gen. in place
of the ace., and this is explicable, be-
cause ‘his foe’ is not the direct object
of the verb; the sense is not ‘he did
not long dread his foe,’ but he was not
long in awe for his foe. ἅζομαι is used
solely of terror or reverence of a religious
nature (except perhaps p 401; cf. ἅγιος,
ἁγνός); the word therefore here refers
to the divine panic inspired by Apollo ;
the supernatural awe thus due to Hector
has no long hold of Patroklos, and does
not make him hesitate in his onslaught.
The use of the gen. may be compared to
that with οἷδα when meaning ‘to know
about’ (see A 657), and with the double

- “ρον Ὁ ὖὔὐὐ νυν νον

IAIAAOC Π (χυι) 207

> εἰ "- ͵ / / 9 iT ΄ “-
οὐδ᾽ ἁλίωσε βέλος, βάλε δ᾽ “Exropos ἡνιοχῆα

, -
Κεβριόνην, νόθον υἱὸν ἀγακλῆος Ἰ]ριάμοιο,
A eo... fF » ’ > hve aw
ἵππων ἡνί᾽ ἔχοντα, μετώπιον ὀξέϊ Dai.
» rn ᾿ς / , ¢ v
ἀμφοτέρας δ᾽ ὀφρῦς σύνελεν λίθος, οὐδέ οἱ ἔσχεν 740
» / p \ \ ΝΛ / μι /
ὀστέον, ὀφθαλμοὶ δὲ χαμαὶ πέσον ἐν κονίηισιν

> “ ,ὔ “ e ᾽ vo? > “- ᾽ ‘
αὐτοῦ πρόσθε ποδῶν: ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἀρνευτῆρι ἐοικὼς
΄ αἱ ταν ..3 > / ΄, , Ἂ , ,
κάππεσ᾽ ἀπ᾽ εὐεργέος δίφρου, λίπε δ᾽ ὀστέα θυμός.
τὸν δ᾽ ἐπικερτομέων προσέφης, [Ιατρόκλεις ἱππεῦ"
co ἃ / 2 / » > ἣν > / ΄ tan “- μὴ εἰ
ὦ πόποι, ἢ μάλ᾽ ἐλαφρὸς ἀνὴρ, ws ῥεῖα κυβιστᾶι. 745
/ /
εἰ δή που καὶ πόντωι ἐν ἰχθυύεντι γένοιτο,
πολλοὺς ἂν κορέσειεν ἀνὴρ ὅδε τήθεα διφῶν,
\ > ,ὔ > \ / y
νηὸς ἀποθρώισκων, εἰ καὶ δυσπέμφελος εἴη,

138. πριάμοιο : μεγάθυμον C (ἀγακλῆος marked as a proper name). 742.

ἄρ᾽ om. Vr. A (ὅδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ νευτῆρι) 11. Mag. 146.51.
745. coc: ὃς G (dc) JPQRST Harl. a (Lips. supr.). 747.
Kopécu 8. || βέν R'™ with ref. to THeea: i.e. βένθεα.

ἱππεύς Vr. A’.

144. προςέφη J" Lips. Vr. A’.

constr. of μέμνημαι (H. G. ὃ 151 d) ; or
it may be ablatival, had no awe (to keep
him) from his foe, as with λείπεσθαι,
διώκεσθαι.

737. ἁλίωςε, so οὐχ ἡλίωσε τοὔπος,
Soph. Trach. 258; cf. Διὸς νόον
ἁλιῶσαι € 104, 138. :

739. μετώπιον (cf. A 95) on the ana-
logy of μεταμάζιον should mean between
the eyes; see note on E19. It is hardly
possible to say whether the word is a
neuter used adverbially, or a masc.
accus.

740. cUNeEN, συνέχεε καὶ els ὃν σὺυν-
ἤγαγεν Schol. T. But the use is a curious
one. The compound recurs in H. only
in v 95 χλαῖναν μὲν συνελών, gathering
up, and there seems to be no parallel
use in later Greek. ἔσχεν intrans., as
ἔσχεθε 340.

741. The ‘falling out of the eyes’ is
anatomically impossible as the result of
such a blow ; at most the eyeballs would
be burst. Such errors are not common
in H.

742. See note on M 385.

743. The synizesis in evepréoc is very
doubtful in so ancient a passage. Vari-
ous conjectures have been proposed ;
Christ’s edFpeyéos with the metathesis
which we find in péfw=Fpéyjw is in-
genious. He also suggests εὐπλεκέος,
van L. εὖ Fepxrod, Nauck ἐυξέστου,
Menrad evépyou (evepyos in pass. sense
is found in Herod. and Theokr. ; εὐεργός
in act. in Od.).

745. ὥς, see note on 600. κυβιοτᾶι

748. Oucneu@edoi εἶεν Zen.

may imply only ‘taking a header.’ It is
possible, however, that the metaphor is
in this line not from diving, but from
tumbling, as in = 605; from Kebriones’
skill in tumbling on land Patroklos
concludes that he would make a good
diver at sea as well (καί).

747. THeea, a ἅπαξ εἰρημένον in Greek,
though the form τήθυον occurs in Aris-
totle, where it is said to mean some
ascidian. We can only say that τήθεα
are some sort of food obtained by diving
in the sea; the recognized translation
‘oysters’ will do as well as any other.
Oipan is another rare word meaning to
seek ; it occurs in Hes. Opp. 374 and
occasionally in later Greek; e.g. ἐρε-
βοδιφῶσιν Aristoph. Nub. 192, The
scholion of An. is interesting ; (ἡ διπλῆ
ὅτι ἅπαξ εἴρηκε τήθεα. ἔστι δὲ εἶδος τῶν
θαλασσίων ὀστρέων. πρὸς τοὺς χωρίζοντας"
φασὶ γὰρ ὅτι ὁ τῆς ᾿Ιλιάδος ποιητὴς οὐ
παρεισάγει τοὺς ἥρωας χρωμένους ἰχθύσιν,
ὁ δὲ τῆς ᾿Οδυσσείας. φανερὸν δὲ ὅτι εἰ καὶ
μὴ παράγει χρωμένους, ἴσασιν, ἐκ τοῦ τὸν
Πάτροκλον ὀνομάζειν τήθεα. νοητέον δὲ
τὸν ποιητὴν διὰ τὸ μικροπρεπὲς παρηιτῆσθαι
(΄ declines’ to introduce them). καὶ μὴν
οὐδὲ λαχάνοις παρεισάγει χρωμένους. ἀλλ᾽
ὅμως φησὶ “" δμῶες ᾿᾽Οδυσσῆος τέμενος μέγα
κοπρήσοντες ᾽ (p 399).

748. δυςπέμφελος, sc. πόντος, stormy,
as Hes. Theog. 440 γλαυκὴν δυσπέμφελον,
Opp. 618 ναυτιλίης δυσπεμφέλου ἵμερος.
But in Opp. 722 μηδὲ πολυξείνου δαιτὸς
δυσπέμφελος εἶναι it probably means
Jastidious, hard to please, a sense which

908 IAIAAOC Π (νὴ

ὡς νῦν ἐν πεδίωι ἐξ ἵππων ῥεῖα κυβιστᾶι.

ἢ pa καὶ ἐν Tpwecot κυβιστητῆρες ἔασιν." 750
ὡς εἰπὼν ἐπὶ Κεβριόνην ἥρωϊ βεβήκει

οἶμα λέοντος ἔχων, ὅς τε σταθμοὺς κεραΐζων

ἔβλητο πρὸς στῆθος, ἑή τέ μιν ὥλεσεν ἀλκή:

ὡς ἐπὶ Κεβριόνηι, ΠΠατρόκλεις, ἄλσο μεμαώς.

"Extop δ᾽ αὖθ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἀφ᾽ ἵππων ἄλτο χαμᾶζε. 755

τὼ περὶ KeBpiovao λέονθ᾽ ὡς δηρινθήτην,

ὦ τ᾽ ὄρεος κορυφῆισι περὶ κταμένης ἐλάφοιο,

ἄμφω πεινάοντε, μέγα φρονέοντε μάχεσθον"

ὡς περὶ Κεβριόναο δύω μήστωρες ἀυτῆς,

Πάτροκλός τε Μενοιτιάδης καὶ φαίδιμος “Εκτωρ, 760

ἵεντ᾽ ἀλλήλων ταμέειν χρόα νηλέϊ χαλκώι.

Ἕκτωρ μὲν κεφαλῆφιν ἐπεὶ λάβεν, οὔ τι μεθίει"

Πάτροκλος δ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἔχεν ποδός: οἱ δὲ δὴ ἄλλοι

Τρῶες καὶ Δαναοὶ σύναγον κρατερὴν ὑσμίνην.

ὡς δ᾽ Εὖρός τε Νότος τ᾽ ἐριδαίνετον ἀλλήλοιιν 765

οὔρεος ἐν βήσσηις βαθέην πελεμιζέμεν ὕλην,

φηγόν τε μελίην τε τανύφλοιόν τε κράνειαν,

149. ὧς: dc J Mor.: yp. ὃς καὶ ὅςτις ὅπερ κάλλιον Harl. ἃ. 750. κυβιετῆρες
ΑἹ (t.w.a.) PTU: κυβηοτῆρεα J. 754. ἄλτο 112 Bar. 755. αὖθ᾽ : αὖ PQR
Lips. Vr. A. 756. OHpIeHTHN Par. j and ay. Eust. 757. © τ΄: ὥςτ᾽ Q.
762. οὔτι PQRS Lips. King’s: οὐχὶ Ὡ. μεθείη CS Bar. Vr. ἃ: μεθείει H.
765. ἀλλήλοιςειν ()S Mose. 2. 766. zaeéHN Bar. Mor. || πολεμιζέμεν DJPQ Vr. b.

explains Zen.’s reading δυσπέμφελοι εἶεν: P 42. On this analogy no doubt is

οἷον εἰ καὶ δυσάρεστοι elev οἱ συνεσθίοντες,
An.

752-54. Heyne, and others after him,
have objected with some force to this
simile that it is out of place as preceding
a second lion-simile ; and that Patroklos
should not be compared to a lion wounded
in ravaging the folds, but to one attack-
ing the huntsmen.

784. μεμαώς, the a is elsewhere found
long only when followed by o (μεμαότες
B 818, where see note, μεμαότε N 197).
The other passages all have -aw- (about
eighty-five times in H.). We may com-
pare τεθνηῶτα by τεθνεῶτι. See H. G.
§$ 26.1. Thea is naturally short (ua=pn,
weak form of μον- μεν-) The ἃ in μεμα-
ére may be due to metrical necessity,
and in μεμαώς here to the analogy of
that form. But see Schulze @. £. p.
366 note, where he assumes another root
μα: μᾶ, ef. wader.

756. OHpINeHTHN, here only ἢ but
δηρίσασθαι Ῥ 734 (?), 0 76, and ἀδήριτος

founded the variant δηριθήτην (δηριν θήτην
κατά τινας, μάλιστα δὲ δηριθῆναι δίχα
τοῦ ν, Eust.); but there seems to be
no analogy for such an aor. from an
-t- stem. The usual form of the verb
is Onpidoua, and MSS. are notoriously
untrustworthy with regard to the inser-
tion of ν before a dental (see on E 697).
For the double stem cf. τίνω beside τίω,
θύνω, δύνω beside θύω, δύω. δηρίομαι
(with Ὁ) is found in Pindar Ὁ. xiii. 44,
while Ap. Rhod. 11. 16 has δηρινθῆναι.

762. Compare O 716 with note. ot τι
has good support here.

766. Nauck gets rid of the short form
of the dat. by reading βήσσηισι βαθύν
(for βαθύν as fem. see H. 6΄. § 116. 4).

767. Tanu@hoion, with smooth bark.
TanuHKeac, elsewhere (like ταναήκηΞς)
only of edged weapons, here = with
slender points. The idea of ‘stretching
out’ may give rise equally to the mean-
ings ‘long,’ ‘thin,’ and ‘smooth.’ The
two last generally suit the compounds

IAIAAOC Π (xvi)

209

6 / v
ai τε πρὸς ἀλλήλας ἔβαλον τανυήκεας ὄζους

ἠχῆι θεσπεσίηι, πάταγος δέ
ὡς Τρῶες καὶ ᾿Αχαιοὶ ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλγισι θορόντες

τε ἀγνυμενάων,

δήιουν, οὐδ᾽ ἕτεροι μνώοντ᾽ ὀλοοῖο φόβοιο.
πολλὰ δὲ Κεβριόνην ἀμφ᾽ ὀξέα δοῦρα πεπήγει
ἰοί τε πτερόεντες ἀπὸ νευρῆφι θορόντες,

πολλὰ δὲ χερμάδια μεγάλ᾽ ἀσπίδας ἐστυφέλιξαν

/ ? ᾽ > / e ’ ᾿ 7 ,
μαρναμένων ἀμφ᾽ αὐτὸν" ὁ δ᾽ ἐν στροφάλιγγι κονίης

κεῖτο μέγας μεγαλωστί, λελασμένος ἱπποσυνάων.
ΕΣ \ 9s / Ε] Ν > /
ὄφρα μὲν ἠέλιος μέσον οὐρανὸν ἀμφιβεβήκει,
> 0 “-“ \ ,
Toppa μάλ᾽ ἀμφοτέρων βέλε᾽ ἥπτετο, πῖπτε δὲ λαός:
> ὌΝ Πα ἃ , ,
ἦμος δ᾽ ἠέλιος μετενίσσετο βουλυτόνδε,

/ / e? ς \ s 3 \ , Φ
καὶ τότε δή p ὑπὲρ αἶσαν ᾿Αχαιοὶ φέρτεροι ἦσαν.

ἐκ μὲν Κεβριόνην βελέων ἥρωα ἔρυσσαν

768. ταναηκέας () Ambr. Cant. Mose. 2.
114. €cTUMENIEAN Ar. 2: EctupéArze(N) DGQST Harl. a ἃ,
775. ὃ᾽ ἐν Ar. GPR Par. j:
μετενίςετο OT’,

iapia. Vr. Ὁ A.
King’s Par. e h j.
779. μετενείςετο DG (Harl. a supr.):
“μελέων (). || ἥρωες ἢ.

112. ϑοῦρ᾽ ἐπεπήγει (A supr.) CHJS

118. μάλ᾽: μὲν A.
180. ῥ᾽ om. 8. 181.

oe ὦ.

of τανυ- indifferently, but are preferable
to the first, which has, however, taken
sole possession of ταναός. ‘Long-barked,’
the traditional interpretation of τανύ-
poos, is meaningless. See notes on
TD 228, © 297.

776, μέγας μεγαλωςτί (also Σ᾽ 26), the
ady. seems to have little force except as
an emphatic reduplication of μέγας, and
is to be compared with οἰόθεν οἷος H 39,
αἰνόθεν αἰνῶς: H 97. For the plur.
innocuNdon, feats of horsemanship, see
note on I 700. So W 307 ἱπποσύνας
ἐδίδαξαν.

777. See A 84-86. With the explana-
tion there given, if the theory of the
expansion of the original Mjus be right,
there is no longer any reason to say that
we have ‘two noons on the same day.’
The narrative of A and II, with the short
μάχη ἐπὶ ταῖς ναυσίν from O, does not
require more than two or three hours,
at least for a poet ; and the expression
here gives room for even more ; for it
does not indicate a point of time, but a
period, ‘so long as the sun was high in
heaven,’ i.e. till some time not long after
noon. But the development of the
story at this point is involved in many
diffieulties, for which see Introd.

779=258. The time indicated is not
evening (we do not reach sunset till

_ VOL. 1

P

= 239), but early afternoon ; see Frazer
in C. &. ii. p. 260. The time is fixed,
at least for Attica, by Aristoph. Aves
1498 ff. where βουλυτὸς ἢ περαιτέρω is
consistent with σμικρόν τι μετὰ μεσημ-
βρίαν. It is common in many places,
as Frazer shews, to stop the day’s
ploughing at or soon after midday ;
hence the German Jorgen as a measure
of land=a day’s work (see on Καὶ 351).
For similar names for the time of day
taken from agricultural or pastoral opera-
tions see note on A 62, A 86, μ 439:
and cf. Hesiod Opp. 581 jas . . πολλοῖσιν
ἐπὶ ζυγὰ βουσὶ τίθησιν. Horace’s Sol
ubi . . tuga demeret bobus fatigatis (C.
ili. 6. 41) and Milton’s What time the
laboured ox In his loose traces from the

Surrow came, are of course familiar.

780. ὑπὲρ αἷςαν, beyond MeLASUTE, i.e.
beyond expectation; cf. I 59. The
phrase is to be distinguished from ὑπὲρ
Διὸς αἷσαν P 321, ὑπὲρ μοῖραν T 336,
ὑπὲρ μόρον T 30, 517, ὑπέρμορα B 155
(where see note). These all mean ‘con-
trary to destiny,’ but they are never
used of anything which is actually said
to have happened; they are applied
either to the future or to unrealized
possibilities in the past. Z 487 is the
only passage where ὑπὲρ alcay seems to
be used for ὑπὲρ Διὸς αἷσαν.

210

IAIAAOC Π (xv1)

ra ’ ©
Τρώων ἐξ ἐνοπῆς, καὶ ἀπ᾽ ὦμων τεύχε ἕλοντο,
Πάτροκλος δὲ Τρωσὶ κακὰ φρονέων ἐνόρουσε.
\ \ ” ΕῚ ΕῚ / rn ΕῚ 7 ” -
τρὶς μὲν ἔπειτ᾽ ἐπόρουσε θοῶι ἀτάλαντος “Apyi,

σμερδαλέα ἰάχων, τρὶς δ᾽ ἐννέα φῶτας ἔπεφνεν"
μερ χῶν, Tp

785

> J ὦ \ \ / ? / 7 5.

ἀλλ᾿ ὅτε δὴ TO τέταρτον ἐπέσσυτο δαίμονι ἶσος,
> » /

ἔνθ᾽ ἄρα τοι, Πάτροκλε, φάνη βιότοιο τελευτή"

ἤντετο γάρ τοι Φοῖβος ἐνὶ κρατερῆι ὑσμίνηι

δεινός.

¢ \ \ 7 \ / > Sank

ὁ μὲν τὸν ἰόντα κατὰ κλόνον οὐκ ἐνόησεν"
an /

ἠέρι yap πολλῆι κεκαλυμμένος ἀντεβόλησε'

στῆ δ᾽ ὄπιθε, πλῆξεν δὲ μετάφρενον εὐρέε T ὦμω
χειρὶ καταπρηνεῖ, στρεφεδίνηθεν δέ οἱ ὄσσε.

τοῦ δ᾽ ἀπὸ μὲν κρατὸς κυνέην βάλε Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων᾽
[6 \ / \ ” \ e 2) mts

ἡ δὲ κυλινδομένη καναχὴν ἔχε ποσσὶν Ud ἵππων

αὐλῶπις τρυφάλεια, μιάνθησαν δὲ ἔθειραι
πάρος γε μὲν οὐ θέμις ἣεν

oy \ /
αἵματι, και κονιυὴηϊνσι.

19%

CS / / /

ἱππόκομον πήληκα μιαίνεσθαι κονίηισιν,

5) 3) \ / / / ΄

ἀλλ᾽ ἀνδρὸς θείοιο κάρη χαρίεν τε μέτωπον

782. τρώων T Vr. b A.
καταφρονέων J. || Endpouce P.

Οἱ ΠΣ 789. ἐόντα Vr. d.
εὐρέα PS.
ἐστράφησαν). 194. ὑφ᾽ : ἐφ᾽ S.

183. δὲ : ὃ᾽ én Vr. d. || κακὰ τρωςὶ(ν) S Vr. A. |
784. ἐνόρουςε JRT Mose. 2.
791. πλῆξέν Te Mose. 2. || μεταφρένω PR. ||

788. Tolom. D:

792. cTpé€pe’ OiNHeEN ()R: στρεφεϑίνηςεν Harl. a (glossed ταραχθέντες
795. τριφάλεια QR. || δὲ : δὲ οἱ Lips.

784-86. Compare E 436-38 and 702-05
above. The passage is a fine climax in
preparation for the catastrophe, and
contrasts strongly with the meaningless
exaggeration of carnage in A 747—and
perhaps 810 below.

789. The position of ϑεινός produces
an effect almost unique in the J/iad. It
is a fine instance of the self-restraint of
the Greek artist that so simple and easy
a way of producing a cheap sensation
should have been banished except from
the few points where it is really justified.
Compare βάλλ᾽ " αἰεὶ δέ κιτ.λ. A 52,

792, καταπρηνεῖ, cf. χερσὶ καταπρη-
νέσσι Ο 114. But the contraction -εἴ is
not a form of the old epic dialect (see
Menrad Contr. pp. 71-75). There is no
probable correction ; the word may in-
dicate that the interpolation introducing
the reference to Achilles’ armour begins
with this line (see Introd.). cTpee-
ϑίνηθεν is a word of extraordinary
formation, which appears to postulate a
noun στρεφεδίνη (or -dtvos) in the sense
of ‘whirling.’ Quintus has στρεφεδίνεον
(with which compare the reading of
Harl. a). There appears to be no really

archaic word of which this might be
regarded as a mistaken imitation, and
it remains as a proof that the Greek
language in its most vital period was
capable of forming compounds beyond
the lines of its regular development.
As to the meaning of the word, it may
be either ‘ Patroklos’ eyes grew dizzy,’ or
‘ Apollo’s eyes rolled’ in fury. Of these
the latter is rather the preferable as
the effect upon Patroklos follows in 805.
The variant στρέφε" δίνηθεν is grammatic-
ally possible, but not attractive. Agar
(J. P. xxvii. 171) meets the difficulties
boldly with χερσὶ καταπρηνέσσιν ἐδίνη-
θεν δέ.

795. The variant δέ οἱ for dé is notice-
able ; it is very doubtful if ἔθειραι ever
had an initial F (X 315 is the only other
evidential passage, cf. T 382), and it is
quite possible that we ought in fact
to read δέ ῥ᾽ (οι) ἔθειραι, where Fo=
Πατρόκλωι as in 801.

798. ἀνδρὸς θείοιο, a unique phrase.
θεῖος is used as an epith. ornans of
Odysseus often, of Achilles in T 279,
297, and of other heroes N 694, = 290,
O 25, 333, T 145. With ἀνήρ it seems

IAIAAOC Π (xv1)

211

᾽ fol / \ ~
ῥύετ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλῆος" τότε δὲ Ζεὺς “Ἕκτορι δῶκεν
he κεφαλῆι φορέειν, σχεδόθεν δέ οἱ ἣεν ὄλεθρος. 800
πᾶν δέ οἱ ἐν χείρεσσιν ἄγη δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος,
βριθὺ μέγα στιβαρὸν κεκορυθμένον: αὐτὰρ ἀπ᾽ ὥμων
ἀσπὶς σὺν τελαμῶνι χαμαὶ πέσε τερμιόεσσα.
λῦσε δέ οἱ θώρηκα ἄναξ Διὸς υἱὸς ᾿Απόλλων.
τὸν δ᾽ ἄτη φρένας εἷλε, λύθεν δ᾽ ὑπὸ φαίδιμα γυῖα, 805
στῆ δὲ ταφών: ὄπιθεν δὲ μετάφρενον ὀξέϊ δουρὶ
Μ \ / / 7 > ,
᾿ὥμων μεσσηγὺς σχεδόθεν Bare Δάρδανος ἀνήρ,
Πανθοΐδης ᾿Εύφορβος, ὃς ἡλικίην ἐκέκαστο.

fhe >
éyyel θ᾽ ἱπποσύνηι τε πόδεσσί τε καρπαλίμοισι:"
\ \ \ / a »» A 309?) 8

καὶ γὰρ δὴ τότε φῶτας ἐείκοσι βῆσεν ἀφ᾽ ἵππων, 810

800, ἧι: ἐν 5.
803 om. G. 804. θώρακα J.

to be more than this, and to refer to his
divine parentage. It is only in virtue of
his divine birth that he can wear divine
armour without the nemesis which comes
on Hector (800).

801. The change from oi=Hector to
oi=Patroklos is violent, as P. has not
been mentioned for seven lines. οὕτω
(sc. Aristarchos) πᾶν δέ oi, ἐν δέ τισι τῶι
(τὸ ἢ) δέ οἱ, Did.; ὅτι τὸ πᾶν ἀντὶ τοῦ
ὅλον, An.

802. κεκορυθϑμένον, sc. χαλκῷι, which
is always added elsewhere. The heaping
up of epithets is remarkable.

803. Tepuidecca, a word recurring only
in τ 242 (and Hes. Opp. 537) τερμιόεντα
χιτῶνα. It probably means fringed.
As applied to the shield it may be=
θυσανόεσσα, adorned with pendants round
the edge; or more probably it refers
to the (leather?) apron which is often
represented as hanging from the lower
edge of the shield in vase-paintings.
But in neither case is the word applicable
to the old Mykenaean shield. θυσανό-
εσσα belongs only to the aegis (see on
B 447); pendants and apron alike are
incompatible with the shield reaching
to the feet. The author of this inter-
polation evidently conceived Patroklos
as carrying the small round buckler,
and therefore also of necessity a θώρηξ
(804). The shield carried on the
shoulder by a τελαμών can only have
fallen to the ground through a blow on
the back if the wearer leant his head so

801. NGN: ἔν τισι τῶι Did. || yeipecc’ Vr. A. || éarn P Vr. A.
806. δουρὶ : χαλκῶι Harl. a.
G (Up. ras.) Syr. and ap. Eust. || cxedon οὕταςε Zen. || λάβε R.

810. δὴ τότε Ar. HPQR Syr. King’s: 04 note 2. || BACEN .

807. μεςςηγὺ
808. ἡλικίηι Vr, A.
. ἢ Bacan Sch. U.

far forward that the strap could slip
over it. But the interpolator probably
adopted the τελαμών from the older
Epos without reflecting that it was not
needed with the round buckler.

805. ἄτη, stupor ; this purely physical
sense is hardly found again (cf. 2 480),
but it must have existed before the moral
connotation had been developed.

807. cyeddeen βάλε, with a cast from
close at hand. Zen. read σχεδὸν οὔτασε.
i.e. with a thrust ; but this contradicts
812, 819.

808. This is the Euphorbos who sub-
sequently inhabited the body of Pytha-
goras, the Panthoides iterum Orco demis-
sus of Horace, Carm. i. 28. 10.

810. δὴ τότε, the vulg. δήποτε is a
combination not found in H. except A
40, where ποτε belongs to εἰ: whereas
δὴ τότε is common, especially in Od.
(forty-seven times against fifteen in J/.).
τότε is explained by πρῶτ᾽ ἐλθών, now on
his first appearance in the war. Ar, is
said to have explained the couplet as re-
ferring to a sham fight for practice (διδα-
σκόμενος) which, oddly enough, would seem
to require ποτε, not τότε: ὅτι σύνηθες ἣν
τοῖς ἀρχαίοις ἁρματομαχεῖν, ἐσφαιρωμένοις
(tipped with ‘ buttons’) δόρασι χρωμένους,
kal ἀνατρέπειν ἐκ τῶν ὀχημάτων, An.
Such an idea is ludicrously out of place
in the midst of so grim a description ;
the intention evidently is to make out
that Euphorbos, though he has not been
heard of before, is no unworthy victor.

212

IAIAAOC Π (xvi)

πρῶτ᾽ ἐλθὼν σὺν ὄχεσφι, διδασκόμενος πολέμοιο"

δ lal a fe € ἴω
ὅς τοι πρῶτος ἐφῆκε βέλος, Latpoxrers ἱππεῦ,

ε 5 , A ye. ἢ
οὐδὲ Sdpaco’: ὁ μὲν αὖτις ἀνέδραμε, μῖκτο δ᾽ ὁμίλωι,

>
ἐκ χροὸς ἁρπάξας δόρυ μείλινον, οὐδ ὑπέμεινε

, , ϑς . an
Πάτροκλον, γυμνόν περ ἐόντ᾽, ἐν δηϊοτῆτι.

815

Ildtpoxdos δὲ θεοῦ πληγῆι καὶ δουρὶ δαμασθεὶς

3 nr /
dab ἑτάρων εἰς ἔθνος ἐχάζετο κῆρ᾽ ἀλεείνων.

“Ἕκτωρ δ᾽ ὡς εἶδεν ΤΠΙατροκλῆα μεγάθυμον
dy ἀναχαζόμενον βεβλημένον ὀξέϊ χαλκῶι,
ἀγχίμολόν ῥά of ἦλθε κατὰ στίχας, οὗτα δὲ δουρὶ 820

, > an \ δὴ Ν »
VELATOV ες KEVEWVA, διαπρὸ δὲ χαλκὸν ἐλασσε.

δούπησεν δὲ πεσών, μέγα δ᾽ ἤκαχε λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν.

id ? ἊΝ lal ’ / / 9. / /
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε σῦν ἀκάμαντα λέων ἐβιήσατο χάρμηυ,

ὥ τ᾽ ὄρεος κορυφῆισι μέγα φρονέοντε μάχεσθον
πίδακος ἀμφ᾽ ὀλίγης: ἐθέλουσι δὲ πιέμεν ἄμφω" 825
πολλὰ δέ τ᾽ ἀσθμαίνοντα λέων ἐδάμασσε Bindi:

ἃ / / f e\
ὡς πολέας πεφνόντα Μενοιτίου ἄλκιμον υἱὸν

Ἕκτωρ Πριαμίδης σχεδὸν ἔγχεϊ θυμὸν ἀπηύρα,

812. Tol: Tic J. || πρῶτον PR.
ἂψ δ᾽ H Syr.

uaxecea Lt) Syr. 825. πινέμεν G.

813. avec CG.
820. ῥά: dé H Syr.

816 om. Ht. 817.
824. co: τώ 6. || ἐν κορυφῆει P. ||

He has killed (or at least dismounted)
twenty enemies as a first lesson in the
art of war, a feat which closely resembles
Nestor’s in A 748-49. For the gen.
πολέμοιο see "7. G. ὃ 151 ὦ.

815 evidently refers to 799-804 ; it
can well be dispensed with. Possibly
814 should go with it, for we expect to
hear that the spear is plucked out after
a thrust, not after a cast.

817. This line is used here, as A 585,
of the wounded warrior; usually it
refers to the successful assailant, who is
more properly said κῆρ᾽ ἀλεείνειν. The
variant ay δ᾽ is no doubt a reminiscence
of the six other places where the line
recurs with the connecting particle,
rather than an intimation that 813-16
were ever omitted.

820. The poet has evidently forgotten
that when last we heard of Hector he
was holding on to Kebriones’ head, face
to face with Patroklos (762-63).

823. ἀκάμαντα, the epithet is else-
where in H. applied only to the river
Spercheios and to the sun. The fierce-
ness of the boar is not exaggerated when

he is made to fight the lion: a Mahratta
proverb says ‘a boar will drink between
two tigers’; compare also P 21-22, and

' Hes. Scut. 168 ff., where a fight between

boars and lions is represented on the
shield.

825. ἀμφί with gen. recurs in H. only
6 267, though the case is common with
the compound ἀμφιμάχεσθαι ; see note
on 526, and H. G. ὃ 184. πιέμεν with
τ only here and π 143, σ 3; in all other
cases the aor. has ¢ (thirty-three times).
It is easy here to adopt the variant πινέ-
μεν, but Schulze (Y. Δ. p. 360) would read
πίμεναι, from a non-thematic aor. *ér,
of which we have imper. πῖθι, and subj.
πίομαι used as fut., like ἔδομαι beside
ἔδμεναι.

826. For τ᾽ Brandreth
read F’,

827. Ar. and Mss. accent πέῴφνοντα,
apparently regarding it as a present.
3ut Herodianos and Tyrannio preferred
the regular aor. accentuation, and the
sense requires that tense. πολέας neg-
νόντα, as Paley remarks, answers to
ἀκάμαντι, both implying the hitherto
unconquered combatant.

and van L.

IAIAAOC Π (χνι)

΄ / » ‘oO
Kal οἱ ἐπευχόμενος ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα’
΄ » / «Es , ,
“ Πάτροκλ᾽, ἣ που ἔφησθα πόλιν κεραϊξέμεν ἀμήν, 880
Τρωϊάδας δὲ γυναῖκας ἐλεύθερον ἦμαρ ἀπούρας
ἄξειν ἐν νήεσσι φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν,
΄ ΄ \ , > A/T ’ , .“
νήπιε: τάων δὲ πρόσθ᾽ “Extopos ὠκέες ἵπποι
4 “ ᾽ ‘
ποσσὶν ὀρωρέχαται πολεμίζειν: ἔγχεϊ 6 αὐτὸς
Τρωσὶ φιλοπτολέμοισι μεταπρέπω, ὅ σφιν ἀμύνω 835
a ’ a ,
ἦμαρ ἀναγκαῖον: σὲ δέ τ ἐνθάδε γῦπες ἔδονται.
> 7
ἃ Seid’, οὐδέ τοι ἐσθλὸς ἐὼν χραίσμησεν ᾿Αχιλλεύς,
Ὁ / / \ / > , , 7
ὃς Tov τοι μάλα πολλὰ μένων ἐπετέλλετ LOVTL*
€ / \ ei , e /
μή μοι πρὶν ἰέναι, LlatpoxXers ἱπποκέλευθε,
lol » Is \ “ > ,
νῆας ἔπι γλαφυράς, πρὶν “Extopos ἀνδροφόνοιο 840
/ A of
αἱματόεντα χιτῶνα περὶ στήθεσσι bai~a.
« ’ὔ / \ \ , ” a ΕΣ)
ὥς πού σε προσέφη, σοὶ δὲ φρένας ἄφρονι πεῖθε.
Μι ᾽ > / / / ΄ “
τὸν δ᾽ ὀλιγοδρανέων προσέφης, Ἰ]ατρόκλεις ἱππεῦ"
sc " a “ sy? ” \ \ »
ἤδη νῦν, “Extop, μεγάλ᾽ εὔχεο" σοὶ γὰρ ἔδωκε
3 ’ i /
νίκην Ζεὺς Κρονίδης καὶ Απόλλων, οἵ pe δάμασσαν 845
- > A
ῥηϊδίως: αὐτοὶ yap ἀπ᾽ ὥμων τεύχε᾽ ἕλοντο.
τοιοῦτοι δ᾽ εἴ πέρ μοι ἐείκοσιν ἀντεβόλησαν,
΄ ΄ 3 Saye aes 3A Cel iN \ /
πάντές x αὐτόθ᾽ ὄλοντο ἐμῶι ὑπὸ δουρὶ δαμέντες.

829. πτερόεντ᾽ ἀγόρευε(ν) DGHRTU.
ἀμήν: ἄμμιν Harl. ἃ: ἁμῖν Cant.: αἰπὴν D supr.:

830. κεραϊξέμεν : κεραϊζέμεν ὥ.
ἐμήν P, 834. πολεμι-

zéuen Syr. 835. φιλοπολέμοιςι J Vr. A. || O: ὅς HP Syr. 837. οὐδέ τι
τοι D: οὔ τοι Vr. d. 838. τοι ACHPR Harl. a: cor (coi) 2. μένειν ἢ.
ἐπέτελ᾽ J: ἐπέτελλεν PQR Cant. Harl. a, Vr. A. 840. ἔπι: ἀνὰ (Gna

DGJSTU. || πρίν τ᾽ GPRSTU Syr. ἀνδροφόνοιο : innodauoio Syr. 842.
ce Ar. Q: cor DQ Syr. King’s. || 0€: ὃ᾽ οὐ Harl. a, Vr. A. 843. προςέφη ὦ.
844. ἕκτωρ D. 848. κ᾽: δ᾽ R. || αὐτόϑθ᾽ : αὐτίκ᾽ Q Cant. Vr. A. || ϑαμάντες J.

830. κεραϊΞξέμεν, MSS. κεραϊζέμεν, but 840. πρίν rather than πρίν γ᾽, see on

the fut. is imperatively required (see
ἄξειν 882). In this matter the Mss.
have little authority ; but the corruption
must be an early one. The correction
was made by Bekker. See note on N 644.

833. For the use by the speaker of his
own name in proud self-consciousness see
Η 75.

834. moccin ὁρωρέχαται, stride, cf.
τρὶς μὲν ὀρέξατ᾽ ἰών N 20, τανύοντο dé
μώνυχες ἵπποι IL 375.

836. ἀναγκαῖον, like δούλιον, ἐλευθερὸν
(831) ἦμαρ, the day of compulsion ; cf. ὦ
210 δμῶες ἀναγκαῖοι. ἀναγκαῖον is said
to have been a Boiotian name for prison
(Et. Mag.).

E 288.

841. See B 416, where this threat is
actually made, but under circumstances
very different from those imagined by
Hector. The irony of Hector’s sarcasm
and its falseness is heightened when we
find the same tone in Achilles’ words to
Hector himself when he lies dying in
X 331-36. The two passages are closely
parallel throughout ; note that 855-58
=X 361-64. In both cases the dramatic
effect of the contrast between the victor’s
taunt and the solemn prophecy of the
dying man is extraordinarily fine. αἷμα-
τόεντα is proleptic, like ῥωγαλέον in
B 417.

214

IAIAAOC Π (xv1)

ἀλλά με μοῖρ᾽ ὀλοὴ καὶ Λητοῦς ἔκτανεν υἱός,

ἀνδρῶν δ᾽ Εὔφορβος: σὺ δέ με τρίτος ἐξεναρίζεις. 850
ἄλλο δέ Tor ἐρέω, σὺ δ᾽ ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῆισιν"

οὔ θην οὐδ᾽ αὐτὸς δηρὸν βέηι, ἀλλά τοι ἤδη

ἄγχι παρέστηκεν θάνατος καὶ μοῖρα κραταιή,

χερσὶ δαμέντ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆος ἀμύμονος Αἰακίδαο."

ἃ / /
ὡς apa μιν εἰπόντα τέλος θανάτοιο κάλυψε"

850. é=enapizeic ᾧ (1 ὃ).
βαίηι C Vr. A.

855
ψυχὴ δ᾽ ἐκ ῥεθέων πταμένη "Αἱδόσδε βεβήκει,
ὃν πότμον γοόωσα, λιποῦσ᾽ ἀνδροτῆτα καὶ ἥβην.
Ν Ν lal ΄ὔ / “
τὸν καὶ τεθνηῶτα προσηύδα φαίδιμος “Ἐκτωρ"
4G , / / / 5 ΠΝ o
Πατρόκλεις, τί νύ μοι μαντεύεαι αἰπὺν ὄλεθρον ;
861. ΤΟΙ: cor PR. 852. βέηι: βίη U:
856. ἄϊθόςϑε κατῆλθεν Athen. xi. 507. 857. ἀδροτῆτα
858. τεθνηῶτα Ar. JPRT Mor.: τεθ-

G King’s: G®pothta Cant. Mor.
νειῶτα 2).

849, The singular ἔκτανεν shews that
uoipa and Λητοῦς υἱός are to be joined
in a sort of hendiadys, ‘fate by the hand
of Apollo’; compare Ζεὺς καὶ ᾿Απόλλων
above. There is therefore no reason to
take offence at τρίτος in the next line.
But many critics, from Heyne-onwards,
have suspected 849-50 as mere repeti-
tion. The latter at least could be well
spared.

852. βέηι, sce note on Ὁ 194. We
should of course read βέε᾽ (αι), or Bie’ (αι)
if βίομαι is the right form.

854. ϑαμέντ᾽ clearly for δαμέντι, which
Ar. accordingly wrote ἐκ πλήρους. Others
took it to be for δαμέντα, but we can
only explain this by some such violent
means as an ‘ellipse of @avety.’ See
HY, G. § 376. 3. For the dying man’s
power of prophecy Schol. A quotes
Artemo of Miletos ἐν τῶι περὶ ὀνείρων,
“ὅταν ἀθροισθῆι ἡ ψυχὴ ἐξ ὅλου τοῦ
σώματος πρὸς τὸ ἐκκριθῆναι, μαντικωτάτη
γίνεται.᾽᾿ καὶ ἸΙ]λάτων ἐν ἀπολογίαι Σω-
κράτους (39 Ο) ““ καὶ γάρ εἰμι ἐνταῦθα ἐν
ὧι μάλιστα ἄνθρωποι χρησμωιδοῦσιν, ὅταν
μέλλωσιν ἀποθανεῖσθαι. See also Cic.
Div. i. xxx. 63.

856. ῥεθέων᾽ ὅτι πάντα τὰ μέλη ῥέθη
Ὅμηρος προσαγορεύει, οἱ δὲ Αἰολεῖς μόνον
τὸ πρόσωπον, An. The word is of doubt-
ful origin, and we have no information
about it but this. It recurs X 68, 362,
and in the sing. =face, Soph. Ant. 529,
Eur. H. F. 1204. There is no reason

but tradition to shew that it means
limbs here; mouth would suit equally
well and explain how it came to mean
Jace ; cf. the double meaning of os. So
Ap. Rhod. uses ῥεθέων = face, 11. 68.

857. ἀνδροτῆτα, see note on B 651.
The word recurs only in X 3638, Q 6.
Here and in © there is some slight
evidence for ἀδροτῆτα or ἁδροτῆτα. The
former can be only another way of
spelling ἀνδροτῆτα. Neither ἁδροτῆτα,
ripeness, nor ἀρετῆτα, Bekker’s conjec-
ture, is at all likely. Still less can
Clemm’s λιποῦσα δροτῆτα (-Ξ- ἀνδροτῆτα,
on the analogy of Hesych. dpa: ἄνθρω-
mos), with the forbidden caesura, be
accepted. We have in fact no choice
but to acquiesce in the ordinary reading.
As to the meaning of the word Ar.
pointed out (on Q 6) οὐδέποτε ἀνδροτῆτα
εἴρηκε τὴν ἀνδρείαν, ἀλλ’ ἠνορέην, and on
this ground athetized Q 6-9. Schol. Β
shews what he thought the word did
mean: ἀνδροτῆτα ov τὴν ἀνδρείαν, ἀλλὰ
τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα, τὴν ἀνδρὸς φύσιν. ἀν-
δρείαν γὰρ οὐ καταλείπει, ἀρετὴν οὖσαν
ἰδίαν. This is too metaphysical for
Homer, but it is likely enough that
between ἠνορέη and ἀ(ν)δροτής there may
have been the vague difference of con-
notation which separates ‘manliness’
from ‘manhood’; the former being
specialized in the direction of physical
courage, the latter retaining the vaguer
sense.

IAIAAOC Π (xvi) 215
τίς δ᾽ οἷδ᾽ εἴ κ᾽ ᾿Αχιλεὺς Θέτιδος πάϊς ἠυκόμοιο 560

φθήηι ἐμῶι ὑπὸ δουρὶ τυπεὶς ἀπὸ θυμὸν ὠλέσσαι ;
ἃ ΕΣ / , 7 ᾽ > A
ὡς ἄρα φωνήσας δόρυ χάλκεον ἐξ ὠτειλῆς
" ‘ ΄ \ 93 # ae oie νὰ ’
εἴρυσε, λὰξ προσβάς, Tov δ᾽ ὕπτιον wa ἀπὸ δουρός.
αὐτίκα δὲ ξὺν δουρὶ pet Αὐτομέδοντα βεβήκει,
ἀντίθεον θεράποντα ποδώκεος Aiaxidao: S65
[2 \ / \ > ” > / »“
ἵετο γὰρ βαλέειν: τὸν δ᾽ ἔκφερον ὠκέες ἵπποι
ἄμβροτοι, ods ἸΠηλῆϊ θεοὶ δόσαν ἀγλαὰ δῶρα.

861. φθϑείη JS: φϑαίη(ι) () Cant. Harl. a: φϑήη ἤγουν φθϑαίη Eust. 863.
προβὰς CGQRSU Lips.: προβιβὰς Vr. A. 864. én’ ἢ μετ᾽ Enst. 861. ἄβροτο
LT. || τινὲς -- προσ --γράφουσιν ἤματι τῶι ὅτ᾽ ἔγημε Θέτιν λιπαροκρήϑεμνον Sch. T.

861. It might seem most natural to in H., and is so rare in later Greek
join φϑήηι with ddéccai, be first to lose as to oblige us to join φθήηι τυπείς,
his life. But the constr. with the taking ὀλέσσαι as consecutive, so as to
infin. instead of the part. is unknown 7086.

Pp

[INTRODUCTION

THE Seventeenth Book offers to the analyst a very difficult and complicated
problem. The weakness of the narrative az a whole is patent. A continual
want of clearness and grasp of the situation culminates in the four successive
‘false starts’ of 366-423. The larger part of the book is taken up with result-
less combats ; it is not till the heroes send Antilochos to bring Achilles the
news of Patroklos’ death and start off bearing the body to the camp that any
advance is made with the main story. Only two famous episodes occur in the
book—the ‘elegiac’ account of the mourning of Achilles’ horses over the body
of Patroklos (426-58), and the prayer of Aias, ‘Give but light, and slay
us, if thou wilt. The latter of these is found amid surroundings which
forbid us to regard it as very ancient; the former, beautiful though it is, —
betrays a sentimental tone foreign to the oldest Epic, and is moreover bound
up inextricably with one of the most languid and uninteresting battle-scenes
in the Iliad, The futile tactics of Automedon (459-65) may perhaps be
regarded as shewing the unnerving effects of grief, though we should have
expected to find this stated if it was in the poet’s mind. But the
following fight, in which heroes of the first class, like Hector and
Aineias, the two Aiantes and Menelaos, are brought together only to
walk away again after a couple of spear-casts, of which only one takes
effect, and that upon the otherwise unknown Aretos, is a near approach
to bathos.

The opening episode, the duel of Euphorbos and Menelaos, coheres
closely with the end of II ; indeed it really begins with ΠῚ 864, the last four
lines of the book being designed to clear the ground by removing Hector for
atime. But we saw reason in II for suspecting that Euphorbos had origin-
ally no hand in the death of Patroklos. This supposition is confirmed when
we examine the end of the duel in this book. Hector is expressly summoned
back by Apollo for the sake of Euphorbos, whom Menelaos is despoiling
(80-86). Hence when Menelaos finds that he must retreat (91), we
naturally suppose that the τεύχεα καλά to be abandoned are Euphorbos’s,
the κλυτὰ τεύχεα of 85. But in the sequel it appears that they are those
of Patroklos ; from this point the arms and body of Euphorbos are com-
pletely forgotten (see particularly 108, 113), and the body of Patroklos
alone is contended for through the rest of the book. The most reasonable

216

. [AIAAOC P (Χνπ) 217

conclusion seems to be that Il 8604- 124 are a single episode due to the
hand which introduced Euphorbos and Apollo in Il 787 ff. In the original
form of the story Hector alone slew Patroklos, and immediately proceeded
to take his armour,

But of this original fight over the body very little can have come down
to us unaltered. With the appearance of Glaukos in 140 we again come to
a later stratum, which has itself been much disturbed by the intrusion of
the idea of the change of armour. Hector’s sudden retirement from the
field in order to put on Achilles’s armour shocked even the ancient critics
(see note on 186). Some minor difficulties in the sequel of the Glaukos
episode (to 232) are mentioned in the notes. By the excision of 186-
228 the worst of them are avoided.

With 268 (see note there) we find incidental mention of a super-
natural darkness sent by Zeus, which never seems to make any difference to
the fighting. We have come across it before in O 668, IL 567 ; in both
cases it is mechanically introduced, and can be at once cut out. So here—
268-73 can go without any loss to the context. In 368 the ἀήρ may be
the same as this darkness—the passage is suspicious on other grounds—but
it may mean only the dust-cloud raised by the fighters, for where the fight-
ing is slack there is no dust (870-73). In 644—which has doubtless led
to the interpolation of 268—73—the latter interpretation is decidedly
preferable.

From 274 the narrative proceeds smoothly—though 356-65 are very
weak—till we reach 366, a line which seems to promise some new develop-
ment. But, after an account of the darkness, we only hear of the slackness
of Nestor’s sons, to be again pulled up by a line (384), which, though it con-
tains an untrue statement, once more promises some new episode. Again
we are disappointed to find nothing but a general account of the situation.
Twice again the same thing happens; the apparently introductory lines
400 and 412 only lead up to the statement that Achilles knew nothing of
Patroklos’s death, and to very vague descriptions of the spirits of the com-
batants. All these short sections contain strange expressions and other
difficulties which are referred to in the notes. It is only the fifth intro-
duction, 424, which actually leads to a new episode, that of the horses,
which has been already touched upon. This comes to an impotent
conclusion in 542, and we return once more to Patroklos. who has mean-
while been forgotten.

The concluding section of the book, from 543, seems to be all of a
piece. The mention of Phoinix in the opening announces it as very
late, and the language, especially towards the end, entirely confirms the
impression (see notes on 724, 727, 732-33, 739). The word γυμνός in 711
clearly implies the change of armour; but the whole passage appears to be
so late that we need not speak of interpolation here.

The logical conclusion seems to be that we have a narrative which has
developed by successive stages from a comparatively short combat over the
body of Patroklos between Hector on the one side and Aias and Menelaos
on the other. If any remains of the original fight have survived, they can
only be sought in 125-39, 233-365, mixed up in any case with later
additions. The false starts in 366—423 are presumably relics of various

218 IAIAAOC Ρ (χνπὴ»:

continuations of the main fight which have now been welded together to
form an introduction to the Οπλοποιΐα in the next book. Whether or no
the body of Patroklos was rescued at all in the original story it is no longer
in our power to say. We have reached a gap in the story of the Μῆνις
which can only be filled by useless guess-work.

* influence of the masc. εἰδώς.

IAIAAOC P

Μενελάου adpicteia.

οὐδ᾽ ἔλαθ᾽ ᾿Ατρέος υἱὸν ἀρηΐφιλον Μενέλαον
Πάτροκλος Τρώεσσι δαμεὶς ἐν δηϊοτῆτι.

βῆ δὲ διὰ προμάχων κεκορυθμένος αἴθοπι χαλκῶι,
ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ αὐτῶι Baiv ὥς τις περὶ πόρτακι μήτηρ

/ 7 A ΄
T PWTOTOKOS KLVUp)), οὐ πρὶν εἰδυῖα TOKOLO* Η

ὡς περὶ Ἰ]ατρόκλωι βαῖνε ξανθὸς Μενέλαος.

, , e / > v \ > / / ’ 4,1
πρόσθε δέ οἱ δόρυ 7 ἔσχε καὶ ἀσπίδα πάντοσ᾽ ἐΐσην,

\ / \ “ la) ᾽ > ΄ ”
TOV κτάμεναι μεμαὼς ὃς TLS τοῦ Ὑ ἀντίος ἔλθοι.
5» v / [δὶ 3 / > /
οὐδ᾽ apa ἸΙάνθου υἱὸς ἐυμμελίης ἀμέλησε
/ » ΄
Πατρόκλοιο πεσόντος ἀμύμονος: ἄγχι δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ αὐτοῦ 10
” \ Ie > oh ,
ἔστη, καὶ προσέειπεν ἀρηΐφιλον Μενέλαον"
“᾿Ατρεΐδη Μενέλαε διοτρεφές, ὄρχαμε λαῶν,
, a \ / ” ew: /
χάζεο, λεῖπε δὲ νεκρόν, ἔα δ᾽ ἔναρα βροτόεντα"
/ ΄, rn

ov yap τις πρότερος Τρώων κλειτῶν τ᾽ ἐπικούρων

1. οὐδ᾽ : οὐκ PR.
8, τοῦ Τ΄: τοῦ τ᾽ 5.
9. ἐὐμελἵος P.

7. of: οὐ Zen.
ἁντίον QR Vr. b d.
12-13 om. Q. 12.

diotpogec H.

δόρυ τ᾽: δόρατ᾽ Gi): Bovpar’ H.
ἔλϑθη(ι) ( Cant. Lips. Vr. Ὁ ἃ.
14. κλητῶν Harl. ἃ.

4. Compare E 299 ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ αὐτῶι
βαῖνε λέων ὡς ἀλκὶ πεποιθώς, 300-1 being
=7-8 below. The point of the simile
lies only in the affectionate care of the
mother for her young; we can hardly
read into it that she is warding off the
attack of a beast of prey.

5. elduia for ἰδυΐα : the short form
can be restored (see on A 365) every-
where but here and Hes. Zheog. 887.
The diphthong is of course due to the
See H. G.
§ 26. 3. The form may perhaps serve
to indicate the lateness of the whole
passage, but not to condemn the line
(van L.) or couplet (Fick). The ex-

219

pansion of πρωτοτόκος in οὐ πρὶν εἰδυῖα
τόκοιο is thoroughly Homeric (see note
on Θ 527), and the line is not in the

least like an interpolation. KiNupH,
οἰκτρόφωνος διὰ τὸ πολὺ τῆς στοργῆς
Eust., rightly no doubt. The word

does not recur in H. except in Zen.’s
reading of I 612, κινυρίζων.

7—8=E 300-1, where see notes.

9, Πάνϑου, read Πανθόου : so also 23,
40, 59. See note on Ὁ 522. ἑυμμελίης,
in this passage (also 23, 59) of the sons
of Panthoos, and y 400 of Peisistratos
son of Nestor; elsewhere only in gen,
and restricted to Priam.

220 IAIAAOC P (xv)

Ie
Πάτροκλον βάλε δουρὶ κατὰ κρατερὴν ὑσμίνην" 1ὅ
a ” / > \ IN , ’ /
τῶ με ἔα κλέος ἐσθλὸν ἐνὶ Τρώεσσιν ἀρέσθαι,
/ / \ / ¢ ”
μὴ σε βάλω, ἀπὸ δὲ μελιηδέα θυμὸν ἕλωμαι.
Ν
τὸν δὲ μέγ᾽ ὀχθήσας προσέφη ξανθὸς Μενέλαος"
“Ζεῦ πάτερ, οὐ μὲν καλὸν ὑπέρβιον εὐχετάασθαι.
ee) πὴ ὃ ΄ / / ” / «
οὔτ οὖν παρδάλιος τόσσον μένος οὔτε λέοντος 20
” \ / e /
οὔτε συὸς κάπρου ὀλοόφρονος, οὗ TE μέγιστος
\ 5. τ 7ὔ \ ees Ἢ
θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσι περὶ σθένεϊ βλεμεαίνει,
“ / : 5) , ΄
ὅσσον [[άνθου υἷες ἐυμμελίαι φρονέουσιν.
> \ \ > ἊΝ / € / id /
οὐδὲ μὲν οὐδὲ Bin Ὕπερήνορος ἱπποδάμοιο
e “ > / 3 “ Ε] » / 5 - /
ἧς ἥβης ἀπόνηθ, ὅτε μ᾽ @vaTO καί μ᾽ ὑπέμεινε 25
/ 2) 5 9h cd) 5) a ὃ. ἿΛ Ν
καί μα ἔφατ ἐν Δαναοῖσιν ἐλέγχιστον πολεμιστὴν
, -
ἔμμεναι" οὐδέ ἕ φημι πόδεσσί γε οἷσι κιόντα
rn f Ἢ f /
εὐφρῆναι adoyov τε φίλην Kedvovs τε τοκῆας.
͵
ὥς θην καὶ σὸν ἐγὼ λύσω μένος, εἴ κέ μευ ἄντα

16. Gpaceai R.
Harl. a, King’s Par.acfg'h.
nepi: μέγα Lips. Cant.
ap. Eust. and yp. Lips.
Pars Οἱ αἱ σ᾿ μὲ Cz.
cites it on lines 30, 37.)

20. παρϑάλιος Ar. 2: πορϑάλιος ADJSU Ambr. Mor.
21. wéricToc: μάλιςτα PR.
23. éUuediou R. || φορέουειν AJPTU Ambr. fr. Mose.,
25. anonae CR. ||
28-159 lost in D (2 leaves).
29. ΘΗΝ: OHS, || μεὺ : μὲν P'R.

22. ἐνὶ : πὰρ R. ||

27. ἔς: τά Ar:
(So La R.; who however

Unoueine R.

16. με ἔα, read μ᾽ éae with Payne
Knight. Cf. X 339. The tone of
Euphorbos’ speech evidently implies
that Patroklos’ armour is still on his body.

19. Ζεῦ πάτερ, not a mere expletive to
give force to his words, but a rhetorical
artifice to express contempt ; he ignores
the presence of Euphorbos, and affects
to address his remarks to a third party.

20. mapddAioc, see note on N 103.
On the Homeric use of otn see H. G.
§ 349. Here it is evidently nearly
allied to the ironical ἄρα.

21. μέγιστος, predicative. But the
variant μάλιστα is perhaps to be pre-
ferred: ὅς (οὗ, etc.) Te μάλιστα is a
very favourite ending to a line. For
the wild boar’s strength and courage
see on Π 823.

22. ceénet βλεμεαίνει, O 337; it is
pretty clear that the added nepi means
exceedingly (H. G. § 186), though Hoff-
mann thinks it implies ‘his strength
forms the centre, the kernel, of his
fury.’ This is hardly likely. Here
again we are tempted to read μέγα in
conjunction with μάλιστα in the pre-
ceding line; cf. & 399 ὅς τε μάλιστα
μέγα βρέμεται χαλεπαίνων. The sons

οἵ Panthoos are Euphorbos, Hyperenor,
Polydamas.

24, οὐδὲ μὲν οὐδέ Β 703, M 212.
The slaying of Hyperenor by Menelaos
is mentioned in = 516, but in a merely
cursory manner, with nothing to explain
the allusion here. Of course we may
take ἔφατο (26) to mean thought, but
even then we should have expected to
find in © some indication of the means
by which Hyperenor shewed his con-
tempt; unless Menelaos means to assume
it for rhetorical purposes here.

25. ἀπόνητο, cf. A 763 ᾿Αχιλλεὺς οἷος
τῆς ἀρετῆς ἀπονήσεται. NATO, made
light of me; a form found here only.
It is probably to be regarded as an
imperf. of ὄναμαι, a by-form of ὄνομαι ;
ef. ὄναται: ἀτιμάζεται, μέμφεται, Hesych.;
unless indeed we ought to read ὥνοτο -
with Brandreth, or ὠνόσατ᾽ ἠδ᾽ ὑπέμεινεν
with P. Knight. It would seem that
there has been some confusion in form
owing to the neighbourhood of the
similar but perfectly distinct ἀπόνητο.

27. ndédvecci re οἷςι, not on his own
feet, but on those of others (carrying his
body). Paley compares Eur. Bacchae
968 φερόμενος ἥξεις.

IAIAAOC P (xvi)

/ » / > Μ ’ ᾽ ΄ ,
στήηις: ἀλλά σ ἔγωγ ἀναχωρήσαντα κελεύω 30
ει \ a \ ’ > , ” > > a
és πληθὺν ἰέναι, μὴ δ᾽ ἀντίος ἵἴστασ᾽ ἐμεῖο,
πρίν τι κακὸν παθέειν: ῥεχθὲν δέ τε νήπιος ἔγνω.
Δ / ‘ > » Lad > / ‘ so
ὡς φάτο, τὸν δ᾽ ov πεῖθεν' ἀμειβόμενος δὲ προσηύδα"
“νῦν μὲν δή, Μενέλαε διοτρεφές, ἣ μάλα τίσεις
, / > /
γνωτὸν ἐμόν, Tov ἔπεφνες, ἐπευχόμενος δ᾽ ἀγορεύεις, 35
χήρωσας δὲ γυναῖκα μυχῶι θαλάμοιο νέοιο,
r /
ἄρρητον δὲ τοκεῦσι γόον καὶ πένθος ἔθηκας.
al /
ἢ κέ σφιν δειλοῖσι yoou κατάπαυμα γενοίμην,

Μ > \ / \ \ / , >, 7

εἴ κεν ἐγὼ κεφαλήν τε τεὴν καὶ τεύχε ἐνείκας

Πάνθωι ἐν χείρεσσι βάλω καὶ Φρόντιδι δίηι. 10
’ > > ΝὋ ΝΜ \ 5 , / v

ἀλλ᾽ ov μὰν ἔτι δηρὸν ἀπείρητος πόνος ἔσται

»Ὸ » » , » 3 5 a ” / ΕΣ)

οὐδέ τ᾽ ἀδήριτος, ἤ T ἀλκῆς ἤ τε φόβοιο.

30. ἔγωγ᾽ : ἐγὼ G.

om. R: ὃν J Harl. ἃ.
éni Lips.

31. iéuenai H. |
Biorpoptc HR. || μάλα : τάχα Ρ, ἔν τισι τῶν ὑπομνημάτων Sch. T.
37. ἄρητον ἈΠ) ᾺῺ ΤΩΤΊΙ.
41. ἔτι: κατ᾽ ἔνια τῶν ὑπομνημάτων ἐπί Did.
ir .. ἢ τε Nikanor A:: οὔτ᾽... οὕτε GHS Harl. b, Par. a: ἠδ᾽.

ἐμοῖο P(). 8... τι" τὰ Re 84.
35. τὸν
38. κέ: καί ΟΡ. 40. ἐν:

42. Gdxpicroc P.
. ἠδὲ Ar. 2.

32. The thought evidently is, ‘be
wise before you have come to harm ;
even a fool is wise after the event.’ Cf.
Hesiod Opp. 218 παθὼν δέ τε νήπιος ἔγνω,
Plat. Symp. 2228 κατὰ τὴν παροιμίαν
ὥσπερ νήπιον παθόντα γνῶναι. The word
παθέειν has evidently at once suggested
the proverb here and involved the slight
change of παθών to pexév. The clause
πρὶν. . παθέειν belongs strictly to ἰέναι,
μὴ δ᾽. . ἐμεῖο being parenthetical.

34. τίςεις, lit. thow shalt pay me back
my brother, i.e. his blood-price—in kind.

36. θαλάμοιο νέοιο, see note on Z 242.
In the ‘common house’ system, which
may be alluded to, the family grows
by the addition of new chambers, not
of new houses.

37= 741. Interpreters are divided
in both places between ἄρρητον and
ἀρητόν (Ms. testimony is indifferent).
The former occurs & 466 ἔπος ἄρρητον ΞΞ
unspoken ; from this to the sense wn-
speakable is an easy step, see note on
= 195-96 and cf. ἄσπετος. If we read
ἀρητόν it should mean prayed for, like
πολυάρητος ¢ 280, 7 404. But out of
this no reasonable sense can be got, in
spite of the desperate efforts of the
scholiasts (els τοῦτο αὐτοὺς κατέστησας
ὥστε εὐχὴν ἡγεῖσθαι τὸ θρηνεῖν τὸν ἑαυτῶν
παῖδα, καὶ ἔχειν ἐξουσίαν σχολάζειν γόοις
καὶ θρήνοις, Schol. A). Others therefore

take it in the sense ‘prayed against,’
i.e. accursed. This sense occurs in the
compounds ἐπαρή and καταράομαι, but
not in the simple ἀρή and dpdoua, which
merely mean prayer, pray, whether for
good or ill. We have therefore no right
to import it into the adj.; because an
ill may be prayed for against some one
else it does not follow that prayed for=
prayed against. At best we might say
that the sentence means thou hast
brought on his parents the woe for which
thou hast prayed (against them). Any
derivation from ἀρή (dpys? see M 334),
mischief, is excluded by the 4. °

42. The constr. of ἀλκῆς and φόβοιο
is not quite clear. It is possible to join
them with πόνος, the struggle for victory
or flight (battle for life or death, as we
say), but it is perhaps more natural to
take them with the neg. adjectives.
Nikanor connected them directly with
amelpntos, without trial of victory or
defeat, ἀδήριτος being parenthetical.
3ut the relation is in any case a vague
one, and we may combine both, the
struggle shall not be untried or unfought
of life or death. For ἁδήριτος cf. note

on Il 756.—H τ᾽... ἥ Te seems to be
equivalent to εἴτε... εἴτε. The com-
bination recurs only in I 276, A 410

(T 177] and is of doubtful authenticity
(see H. G. ὃ 340). On the other hand

IAIAAOC P (χνπ)

ἃ 2 \ yA ’ > if / 3 df.

ὡς εἰπὼν οὔτησε κατ᾽ ἀσπίδα πάντοσ᾽ ἐΐσην"
50.» yy / > / / e 2 \
οὐδ᾽ ἔρρηξεν χαλκός, ἀνεγνάμφθη δέ οἱ αὐχμὴ

> ANS] Seen ipl
ἀσπίδ᾽ ἐνὶ κρατερῆι.

ὁ δὲ δεύτερος ὦρνυτο χαλκῶι 45,

᾿Ατρεΐδης Μενέλαος, ἐπευξάμενος Avi πατρί,

ΕΝ ᾿] > / \ / /

ay δ᾽ ἀναχαζομένοιο κατὰ στομάχοιο θέμεθλα

se) ας τ > oN y” / NI /
vue, ἐπὶ δ᾽ αὐτὸς ἔρεισε, Bapeine χειρὶ πιθήσας"
> \ ’ c lal ’ > / v , > /
ἀντικρὺ δ᾽ ἁπαλοῖο δι’ αὐχένος HAVO ἀκωκή.
δούπησεν δὲ πεσών, ἀράβησε δὲ τεύχε᾽ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῶι" 50
αἵματί οἱ δεύοντο κόμαι Χαρίτεσσιν ὁμοῖαι

> e an

πλοχμοί θ, ol χρυσῶι τε καὶ apyipar ἐσφήκωντο.
a \ / ” 3 \ > \ > /

οἷον δὲ τρέφει ἔρνος ἀνὴρ ἐριθηλὲς ἐλαίης

χώρωι ἐν οἰοπόλωι, ὅ θ᾽ ἅλις ἀναβέβροχεν ὕδωρ,

44. χαλκός Ar. A (Η 5107.) PQRT (e corr.), yp. Eust.: χαλκόν Ω,

ἀνεγνάμφη HL.
ὄρνυτο () Bar. Mor.
ἐςφήκωνται CP.
Par. h: GnaBéBpuyen 2.

45. ἀςπίοι ἐνὶ ST Vr. d:
51. xapitecct μέλαιναι Zen.

54. ἀναβέβροχεν Zen., yp. Eust.: ἀναβέβρυκεν fr. Mosc.

enfar ἐν ACHJ (éx) U fr. Mose. ||
52. EcpHKonto JS Lips. :

76. . ἠδέ, though approved here by
Ar., is never found again; it must
be taken as=7muev . . ἠδέ. It makes
little difference to the sense whether
the conjunctive or disjunctive form or
the negative οὔτ᾽. . . οὔτε is adopted.

43-46=T 347-50.

47. θέμεθλα, cf. Ξ 493. οστολιάχοιο
(dimin. of στόμα), throat, asT 292. 48
=i 290:

51. Xapireccin ὁμοῖαι, brachylogy or
compendious comparison, cf. 6 121 ὁμοῖα
νοήματα ἸΠηνελοπείηι and Φ 191. Zen.
is said to have read χαρίτεσσι μέλαιναι
(ἀδιανόητον ποιῶν, as An. says). Make-
δόνες καὶ Κύπριοι χάριτας λέγουσι Tas συν-
εστραμμένας καὶ οὔλας μυρσίνας ἅς φαμεν
στεφανίτιδας, Schol. A. Notice the pecu-
liar effect produced by the asyndeton.

52. See Helbig H. H. 242; the hair
is pinched into locks by little spirals of
gold or silver such as have been found
lying beside the skull in graves in Etruria,
in Greece (Olympia, Boiotia, Mykene),
and Hissarlik. The habit is therefore
both very ancient and widely spread.
Cf. also B 872, and Virgil’s crines nodan-
tur in aurum, Aen. iv. 188.

58. Cf. 165, where Odysseus compares
Nausikaa to a φοίνικος νέον ἔρνος, and
Swinburne’s ‘Thy tender body as a tree
Whereon cool wind hath always blown,
Till the clean branches be well grown.’
Hehn, who—on very weak grounds—

holds that the wild olive alone was
known in early Homeric days, sees in
this mention of cultivation proof of the
lateness of the passage.

54. οἱἰοπόλωι, see note on N 473. We
must take GnaBéBpoxen as perf. of ἀνα-
Bpéx-w, referring 6 to ἔρνος, a shoot
which water moistens abundantly. This
may have been corrupted to the vulgate
ἀναβέβρυχεν by the analogy of ὑπόβρυχα,
which probably is not connected with
βρέχω. ἀναβέβρυχεν is quite impossible
as a perf. of Bpéxw, and the short form of
the root, if we assume a pres. ᾿βρύχω, is
practically unexampled (ZH. G. 8 25. 3).
The same reason forbids us to read
ἀναβέβρυκεν and refer to βρύω, teem (56),
which in late Greek=make to gush
forth (e.g. St. James iii, 11 μή τι ἣ
πηγὴ ἐκ τῆς αὐτῆς ὀπῆς βρύει τὸ γλυκὺ Kal
τὸ πικρόν ; cf. mod. Gk. Bptouw=spring),
though this sense is exactly what is re-
quired, Zen., the only authority for
avaBéBpoxev, probably took it to mean
‘a shoot which drinks in water abun-
dantly’; for he supported his reading by
a reference to « 240 ἀλλ᾽ ὅτ᾽ dvaBpbiee
θαλάσσης ἁλμυρὸν ὕδωρ. For 6 e& ἅλις
read ὃ βάλις with Bentley. Fick omits
the line and thus gets rid of the awk-
ward collocation of ὕδωρ with καλὸν
τηλεθάον, which of course belong to
épvos; but there is no reason for the
interpolation.

IAIAAOC P (χυπ) 223

καλὸν τηλεθάον: τὸ δέ TE πνοιαὶ δονέουσι 55
παντοίων ἀνέμων, καί τε βρύει ἄνθεϊ λευκῶι:
“ Ἁ Ἷ -
ἐλθὼν δ᾽ ἐξαπίνης ἄνεμος σὺν λαίλαπι πολλῆι
/ ’ > / \ > / ᾽ > 4 ,
βόθρου τ᾽ ἐξέστρεψε καὶ ἐξετάνυσσ᾽ ἐπὶ γαίηι"
τοῖον Πάνθου υἱὸν ἐυμμελίην ᾿Ιύφορβον
᾿Ατρεΐδης Μενέλαος ἐπεὶ κτάνε, τεύχε᾽ ἐσύλα. 60
e >? 0 / ,ὔ > / » \ , ᾿
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε τίς τε λέων ὀρεσίτροφος, ἀλκὶ πεποιθώς,
βοσκομένης ἀγέλης βοῦν ἁρπάσηι, ἥ τις ἀρίστη"
A ‘Jee 4 > ἘΝ \ -“ ᾽ -
τῆς δ᾽ ἐξ αὐχέν᾽ ἔαξε λαβὼν κρατεροῖσιν ὀδοῦσι
fal > » 7 ,
πρῶτον, ἔπειτα δέ θ᾽ αἷμα καὶ ἔγκατα πάντα λαφύσσει
lal / , » A
δηιῶν: ἀμφὶ δὲ τόν ye κύνες T ἄνδρές TE νομῆες 65
᾿] ,
πολλὰ μάλ᾽ ἰύζουσιν ἀπόπροθεν οὐδ᾽ ἐθέλουσιν
? / / 4 \ \ / ΄ r
ἀντίον ἐλθέμεναι: μάλα yap χλωρὸν δέος αἱρεῖ"
ὡς τῶν οὔ τινι θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ἐτόλμα
ἀντίον ἐλθέμεναι Μενελάου κυδαλίμοιο.
ἔνθά κε ῥεῖα φέροι κλυτὰ τεύχεα []ανθοΐδαο 70
> of! ΄, al /
Ατρεΐδης, εἰ μή οἱ ἀγάσσατο Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων,
eg Lay ee Ce ee - » ΄ ” “
ὅς pa οἱ “Extop ἐπῶρσε θοῶι ἀτάλαντον "Δρηὶϊ,
/ ΄
ἀνέρι εἰσάμενος, Κικόνων ἡγήτορι Μέντηι"
, /
καί μιν φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηΐδα"

“"Exrop, νῦν σὺ μὲν ὧδε θέεις ἀκίχητα διώκων, 75
56. Gneeci J, 58. ézécrpawe P. || γαίης JTU Vr. d and ap. Eust. 62.

ἁρπάςει CQ Lips. 63. τῆς TR.
Tonde C: TON Te U. || τ᾽ om. CPQRU.

δριμὺς χόλος Par. a (yp. XAwpoNn ϑέον sic) and ap. Eust.
70. péper : φέρεν Vr. A.

ἐλθέμεναι O77. ὦ.

73. Μέντηι : τινὲς yp. Πείρωι Sch. T.
νοέεις Ap, Lex. 20. 6.

64. λαφύςεηι G: Aagucn S.

65. TON γε:
67. χλωρὸν δέος:

μάλα. . (69
12. ϑοῶι: eed Vr. b.
75. ἕκτωρ U. || e€eic:

66. ἰύξουειν Q.

74 om. T.

55. For the supposed benefit of wind
ef. ἀνεμοτρεφὲς ἔγχος A 256, and Catull.
lxii. 39 μέ flos in septis secretus nascitur
hortis—quem muleent aurae, firmat sol,
educat imber.

58. βόθρου, the trench in which it is
planted, cf. Virg. Georg. ii. 50 scrobibus
mandet mutata subactis.

63-64= A 175-76.

66. iUzoucin, so o 162, and lvyuds Σ
572. It is applied to the dogs only by
‘zeugma,’ i.e. the dogs are virtually
forgotten.

70. φέροι where later Greek would
require the aor. indic., see note on E
311.—For the short syll. before ῥεῖα see
note on 462. According to the later
legend Panthoos was priest of Apollo

(Panthus Othryades, arcis Phoebique
sacerdos, Aen. ii. 319).

73. The Kikones have another leader
in B 846. Cf. a 105 εἰδομένη ἕείνωι,
Ταφίων ἡγήτορι Mévrm. Hence some
wrote Πείρωι, that being the name of
a Thracian in A 520.

75. ἀκίχητα in a vague sense, what
cannot be caught; cf. the proverbial τὰ
πετόμενα διώκειν. Acc. to Nikanor τὸ
ἀκίχητά φασι Ποσειδώνιον τὸν ᾿Αριστάρχοι
ἀναγνώστην τοῖς ἑξῆς προσνέμειν, καὶ τὸ»
᾿Αρίσταρχον ἀποδέχεσθαι. It appears
therefore that it had been usual to read
θέεις ἀκίχητα, διώκων ἵππους, taking
ἀκίχητα asadv. This same Poseidonios,
Ar.’s ‘reader,’ is mentioned again on
Z 511 (see App. Crit.) as an authority

IAIAAOC P (xvir)

ἵππους Αἰακίδαο δαΐφρονος: οἱ δ᾽ ἀλεγεινοὶ
> / n / ΩΣ > /
ἀνδράσι ye θνητοῖσι δαμήμεναι ἠδ᾽ ὀχέεσθαι,
A -) XN 5 ane \ 5 , / /
ἄλλωι γ᾽ ἢ ᾿Αχιλῆϊ, Tov ἀθανάτη τέκε μήτηρ.
τόφρα δέ τοι Μενέλαος ἀρήϊος ᾿Ατρέος υἱὸς
ΠΠατρόκλωι περιβὰς Τρώων τὸν ἄριστον ἔπεφνε, 80
nan »

Πανθοΐδην ᾿Εύφορβον, ἔπαυσε δὲ θούριδος ἀλκῆς."

ἃ 5 / r

ὡς εἰπὼν ὁ μὲν αὖτις ἔβη θεὸς ἀμ πόνον ἀνδρῶν,
of ’ omeN ” / / ’ \ /
Extopa δ᾽ αἰνὸν ἄχος πύκασε φρένας ἀμφὶ μελαίνας.
πάπτηνεν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔπειτα κατὰ στίχας, αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἔγνω
τὸν μὲν ἀπαινύμενον κλυτὰ τεύχεα, τὸν δ᾽ ἐπὶ γαίηι 85
κείμενον: ἔρρεε δ᾽ αἷμα Kat οὐταμένην ὠτειλήν.

a \ A / / ” nan
βῆ δὲ διὰ προμάχων κεκορυθμένος αἴθοπι χαλκῶι,
ὀξέα κεκληγώς, φλογὶ εἴκελος ᾿Ηφαίστοιο

>

acBéotwr: οὐδ᾽ υἱὸν λάθεν “Atpéos ὀξὺ βοήσας"
> / Sah 3. \ A / /
ὀχθήσας ὃ apa εὐπε προς ον μεγαλήτορα θυμον" 90
“@ μοι ἐγών: εἰ μέν κε λίπω κάτα τεύχεα καλὰ
Πάτροκλόν θ᾽, ὃς κεῖται ἐμῆς ἕνεκ᾽ ἐνθάδε τιμῆς,
μή τίς μοι Δαναῶν νεμεσήσεται, ὅς κεν ἴδηται.
εἰ δέ κεν “Extops μοῦνος ἐὼν καὶ Τρωσὶ μάχωμαι

9 / , ,ὔ > vA /
αἰδεσθείς, μὴ πώς με περιστείωσ᾽ ἕνα πολλοί: 9ὅ
Τρῶας δ᾽ ἐνθάδε πάντας ἄγει κορυθαίολος “Exrap.
ἀλλὰ τί ἢ μοι ταῦτα φίλος διελέξατο θυμός ;

82. αὖθις C. ἄμ: an JPQRS Cant. Lips. 86. ἔρρεε P: ἔρρει ©. ||
οὐταμένης ὠτειλῆς Ὁ Cant. 89. Ade’ Lips.: €dae’ ὦ. 90. 0 dpa:
μάλα Mor. 90. From this point Lips. is in another hand—Zips. 91. ἐγὼ P. ||
Kata: κλυτὰ H. 93. μοὶ: με () Vr. A. 94. Kal: κατὰ 7. 95.

nepictHwc Ar. CU (Η over εἰ) : mepictixac’ Mor. 97. ταῦτα : πάντα Mor.

on the division of words. For the
employment of professional readers cf.

ever, is intolerably harsh, especially with
a colon between. Bentley conj. ἀσπέτωι,

Cie. ad Att. i. 12, Plut. Alex. liv., Barnes more probably οὐδ᾽ via λάθ᾽.
Crass. ii. Possibly Ar. may have em- 90. See A 403. The following speech
ployed Poseidonios to illustrate his is formed on a regular scheme repeated

lectures by recitation.

76-78=K 402-04; 82=N 239; 88,
see 9124; and for ἀμφὶ μελαίνας A 103.
It is clear that 76-78 are interpolated
from K, where they are far more suitable
to the context.

86. κατά with acc. down along; but
it is a question if we should not prefer
the gen. (see App. Crit.), down from.
Compare — 518, and see A 140 ἐξ
ὠτειλῆς.

89, ἀςβέοστωι
three syllables by synizesis.

οὐδ᾽ must be read as
This, how-

in full in ® 552-70 and X 98-130, and
in arather briefer form A 404-10. There
come first two hopeless alternatives, in-
troduced by εἰ μέν xe. . εἰ δέ xe, and
both rejected in the formal line 97, the
final resolve being taken in words imply-
ing desperation.

92. τιιλῆς, recompense to be obtained ;
see note on A 159.

93, ἡ νεμεςήςεται, subj. as Σ 8;
HT, G. § 278 ὃ.

96. ἄγει : dyn. H. Stephanus, joining
it to the preceding line.

to
οι

τέ

IAIAAOC P (xvit)

¢ / , , , ‘ ,
ὁππότ᾽ ἀνὴρ ἐθέληι πρὸς δαίμονα φωτὶ μάχεσθαι,
ὅν κε θεὸς τιμᾶι, τάχα οἱ μέγα πῆμα κυλίσθη.
T μ᾽ οὔ τις Δαναῶν νεμεσήσεται, ὅς κεν ἴδηται 100
adr , > ᾽ \ > / ,
Extope χωρήσαντ᾽, ἐπεὶ ἐκ θεόφιν πολεμίζει.
> / » , \ » “ ,ὔ
εἰ δέ που Αἴαντός γε βοὴν ἀγαθοῖο πυθοίμην,
» s / ᾽ /
ἄμφω κ᾽ αὗτις ἰόντε ἐπιμνησαίμεθα χάρμης
καὶ πρὸς δαίμονά περ, εἴ πως ἐρυσαίμεθα νεκρὸν
> Φὰ οὦ - " ”
ΤΠηλεΐίδης ᾿Αχιλῆϊ: κακῶν δέ Ke φέρτατον εἴη. 105
e Lg rn « \ ‘ ,
ἕως ὁ ταῦθ᾽ ὥρμαινε κατὰ φρένα καὶ κατὰ θυμόν,
, » > \ nl / / ” > ᾽ vo» wT
τόφρα δ᾽ ἐπὶ Τρώων στίχες ἤλυθον: ἦρχε 6 ap “Extap.
αὐτὰρ ὅ γ᾽ ἐξοπίσω ἀνεχάζετο, λεῖπε δὲ νεκρόν,
/ εἰ
ἐντροπαλιζόμενος ὥς τε λὶς ἠυγένειος,
ὅν pa κύνες τε καὶ ἄνδρες ἀπὸ σταθμοῖο δίωνται 110
ἔγχεσι καὶ φωνῆι" τοῦ δ᾽ ἐν φρεσὶν ἄλκιμον ἧτορ
παχνοῦται, ἀέκων δὲ ἔβη ἀπὸ μεσσαύλοιο"
ἃ / /
ὡς ἀπὸ Πατρόκλοιο κίε ξανθὸς Μενέλαος.
στῆ δὲ μεταστρεφθείς, ἐπεὶ ἵκετο ἔθνος ἑταίρων,
παπταίνων Αἴαντα μέγαν, Τελαμώνιον υἱόν. 115
\ \ s~) ᾿Ξ ᾽ “ἢ , ’ > > \ /
Tov δὲ μάλ᾽ airy’ ἐνόησε μάχης ἐπ᾽ ἀριστερὰ πάσης
θαρσύνονθ᾽ ἑτάρους καὶ ἐποτρύνοντω μάχεσθαι:

98. ἐθέληςσι JT: ἐθέλοι GR: ἐθέλει ΟΡ Mor. 99. πῆμα: κῦμα C.
103. aveic C. || ἰόντε Zen.: ἰόντες Ar. Ὡ. || ἐπικνηςώμεϑα JT. 104. πως:
περ Ὁ. 106. φέρτερον CGHJQSTU Harl. a d, King’s Par. e h 1: φόρτατον
οὖς γράφεται δὲ καὶ péptaton, Ht. Mag. 798. 47. 106. Spuaine Vr. A. 109.
éUréneioc R. 110. dientai ap. Schol. A (see Ludwich). 111. ἔγχεϊ Cant. Mor.
112. 0€ ἔβη JT: δέ τ᾽ ἔβη ©.

98. πρὸς δαίμονα, deo invito as 104; ‘better than our present disasters.’
opposed to ἐκ θεόφιν 101 and σὺν δαίμοι Perhaps the poet means to suggest an

A792. The only other instance in H. etymology from φέρω, as if ‘most bear-

of πρός with acc. =against also occurs in able’ of evils.

this book ; πρὸς Τρῶας 471. 106-07=A 411-12; 108, cf. A 461;
99. κυλίεθη, see on A 347. Toavoid 109, ef. A 547, Σ 318.

the contracted tiudi Fick reads rinc. 108. This is the scene which most
100. κ᾽ -Ξ, μοι as Z 165, etc.; κ᾿ nearly approaches that of the well-

Brandreth. known Rhodian pinax in the British

101. ἐκ θεόφιν, cf. ὁρμηθεὶς θεοῦ @ Museum, representing Menelaos and
499. ἐκ is very commonly used of the Hector actually fighting over the dead
divine source ; cf. θεῶν ἐκ κήδεα πέσσει body of Euphorbos. See note on A 37.
Q 617, θεῶν GE ἔμμορε τιμῆς ε 335, ἐκ 112. παχνοῦται, lit. ὦ chilled, frozen ;
Διὸς ἠείδεις X 280, etc. so Hes. Opp. 360 ἐπάχνωσεν φίλον Frop,

103. ἰόντε, so Zen. The hiatus being isch. Cho. 83 πένθεσιν παχνουμένη. It
permissible in the caesura, the dual ob- is the opposite of lalver@ac (Ψ 598). δὲ
viously deserves the preference. ἔβη has Ms. authority, and has been

105. φέρτατον, a sort of meiosis for independently conjectured ; the vulg. δέ
‘least ill’; ὡς ἐν κακοῖς τοῦτ᾽ ἂν εἴη τ᾽ isa mere stopgap to save the hiatus.

φέρτατον, Schol. A. Cf. κύδιστ᾽ ἀχέων, 114=A 595.
Aisch. Supp. 14. The variant φέρτερον 116. μάχης én’ apictepa, see N 769.
is apparently an emendation to express Le =N’ 767.

VOL. II Q

IAIAAOC P (χνυπ)

rn /
θεσπέσιον γάρ σφιν φόβον ἔμβαλε Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων.
lel \ / Ss \ / ” 7
βῆ δὲ θέειν, εἶθαρ δὲ παριστάμενος ἔπος ηὔδα"
“Αἶαν, δεῦρο, πέπον, περὶ Πατρόκλοιο θανόντος 120
’ 5 ae
σπεύσομεν, al κε νέκυν περ Ἀχιλλῆϊ προφέρωμεν
5) ΄ 8} 5 / 3
γυμνόν: ἀτὰρ τά ye τεύχε᾽ ἔχει κορυθαίολος “Extap.’
ἃ » 3 ” \ at \ ”
ὡς ἔφατ᾽, Αἴαντι δὲ δαΐφρονι θυμὸν ὄρινε.
βῆ δὲ διὰ προμάχων, ἅμα δὲ ξανθὸς Μενέλαος.
“Ἕκτωρ μὲν Ἰ]άτροκλον, ἐπεὶ κλυτὰ τεύχε᾽ ἀπηύρα, 125
[oa ᾽ avy ’ 2 3 \ / >) In “-
ἕλχ; ἵν ἀπ ὠμοιίν κεφαλὴν τώμοι ὀξεὶ χαλκῶι,
τὸν δὲ νέκυν Τρωιῆισιν ἐρυσσάμενος κυσὶ δοίη"
Αἴας δ᾽ ἐγγύθεν ἦλθε φέρων σάκος ἠύτε πύργον.
Γ) οι ᾿] /
"Extop δ᾽ ἂψ és ὅμιλον ἰὼν ἀνεχάζεθ᾽ ἑταίρων,
ἐς δίφρον δ᾽ ἀνόρουσε: δίδου δ᾽ ὅ γε τεύχεα καλὰ 130
Τρωσὶ φέρειν προτὶ ἄστυ, μέγα κλέος ἔμμεναι αὐτῶι.
Αἴας δ᾽ ἀμφὶ Μενοιτιάδην σάκος εὐρὺ καλύψας
ἑστήκει ὥς τίς τε λέων περὶ οἷσι τέκεσσιν,
ὧι ῥά TE VAT’ ἄγοντε συναντήσωνται ἐν ὕληι
ἄνδρες ἐπακτῆρες" ὁ δέ τε σθένεϊ βλεμεαίνει, 135
πᾶν δέ τ᾽ ἐπισκύνιον κάτω ἕλκεται ὄσσε καλύπτων"
ἃ / ε “
ws Αἴας περὶ ἸΙατρόκλωι ἥρωϊ βεβήκει.

126. ἵν᾽ an’: ἵνα 7’ P. || ὥμοιει (). 129. dnaydzee’ 5,
133. ἑστήκει Ar. 2: εἰστήκει CH?L2R, yp. Harl. a.
134-36 om. Zen. Chia. 134. ευναντήςωνται AGH Cant. Vr. b, fr. Mose. :
CUNGNTHCONTAI (2. 135. ἀπακτῆρες Mor. 136. καλύπτων Ar. 2: καλύπτον
CHP?QRU! (or U??) (Harl. b supr.) King’s Par. h. 137. περὶ : ἐπὶ Harl. a.

119. ϑέων S.
131. αὐτῶι: GNOpan Mor.

118. φόβον, here apparently fear, not
Slight.

122=P 693, = 21. It is to be pre-
sumed that Menelaos takes it for granted
that Hector will have seized the armour
immediately upon his retiring. But the
line is clearly interpolated here. We
ought to hear first that the armour is
actually taken. ‘The real antithesis to
νέκυν περ is the live man, not the mere
armour.

125. Here it is clear that Patroklos
has not been previously despoiled of his
armour, as related in the suspected lines
at the end of II.

132. καλύψας, for the constr. cf. EH
315 πρόσθε δέ οἱ πέπλοιο φαεινοῦ πτύγμα
κάλυψεν.

134-36 παρὰ Ζηνοδότωι καὶ ἐν τῆι Χίαι
οὐκ ἦσαν, Did. The objection made to
them was that it is the lioness, not the
lion, who leads the cubs. Zen. no doubt

held that λέων was of common gender
in H., the form λέαινα not being found ;
but that we must then omit the lines
containing masc. pronouns. So also =
318, Φ 483, where see note. For the
variant συναντήσονται see note on Καὶ 183.

135. énaxtApec, huntsimen, ἀπὸ τοῦ
ἐπάγειν τοὺς κύνας, Schol. A; cf. τ 435,
445 (ws ἐπάγοντες ἐπῆισαν, of men and
dogs),

136. EnickUNION τὸ ἐπάνω τῶν ὀφθαλ-
μῶν μέρος, ἤτοι τὸ τοῦ δέρματος συνοφρύωμα
τοῦ μετώπου... ἱστόρηται τοῦτο ἐπὶ τῆς
ἀληθείας: φασὶ γάρ, ὅταν ἐμπέσηι λέων
ἔχων σκύμνους, μαχόμενον αὐτὸν πρὸς τοὺς
κυνηγοὺς κατανεύειν καὶ καλύπτειν τὰ Pan,
ὅπως μὴ θεωρῶν τὰ ἐπιφερόμενα βέλη
δειλιάσας καταλίπηι τὸ τέκνον. So also
Pliny H. WN. viii. 16. 19 qguwm pro
catulis feta dimicat, oculorum aciem
traditur defigere in terram, ne venabula
expavescat, κάτω recurs only in Ψ 91.

IAIAAOC P (xvi) 227

᾿Ατρεΐδης δ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἀρηΐφιλος Μενέλαος
ἑστήκει μέγα πένθος ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ἀέξων.
fa 3 / 7. ᾽ \ a ae.
Γλαῦκος δ᾽ “Ἱππολόχοιο πάϊς, Λυκίων ἀγὸς ἀνδρῶν, 140
“ , e / ΩΝ a ey Ὁ ,
Extop’ ὑπόδρα ἰδὼν χαλεπῶι ἠνίπαπε μύθωι:"
ε “A 3 uv 4 Μ \ >> /
“ETOP εἶδος ἄριστε, μάχης apa πολλὸν εδεύεο"
ἢ σ᾽ αὔτως κλέος ἐσθλὸν ἔχει φύξηλιν ἐόντα.
r ξ΄ / ᾽ὔ
φράζεο νῦν ὅππως κε πόλιν καὶ ἄστυ σαώσηις
\ -“ a /
οἷος σὺν λαοῖσι Tol ‘INiwe éeyyeyaacu: 145
/ / a
ov yap τις Λυκίων ye μαχησόμενος Δαναοῖσιν
, ,
εἶσι περὶ πτόλιος, ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἄρα τις χάρις HEV
» ΄ ‘ /
μάρνασθαι δήιοισι μετ᾽ ἀνδράσι νωλεμὲς αἰεί.
lal \ / la) , ξ'
πῶς κε σὺ χείρονα φῶτα σαώσειας μεθ᾽ ὅμιλον,
7 » > \ < 80 ΕἸ oe a \ ΄ “- -
. σχέτλι᾽, ἐπεὶ Σαρπηδόν᾽ ἅμα ξεῖνον καὶ ἑταῖρον 180
΄ 3. , τ \ ΄ /
κάλλιπες ᾿Αργείοισιν ἕλωρ Kai κύρμα γενέσθαι,

139. ἑστήκει Ar. AH'JQTU Cant. Mor. γι. Ὁ ἃ A: ἐκετήκει Harl. a (spr. εἰ) :
εἰςτήκει 2. 141 om. Αἵ. 142. ἕκτορ ὦ G: Extwp Pl) Vr. d. || ἐδεύου Vr. A.
143. c om. S. || φύληξιν P: px*Hzin R, 144. cawceic Ar. AQ), fr. Mose.
145. cUN Aaoici: γὰρ cUN rauBpoici H. 146. re om. C. || yp. μαχεςόμενος
Harl. a. 148. δηΐοισιν én’ Ar. (Did. on I 317). 149. ὅμιλον Ar. ©:
ὁμίλου Zen. 151. Gpreioicin: oiwnoicin S Harl. a.

3ut this misses

139. πένθος ἀέξειν is an Odyssean
phrase (A 195, p 489, w 231).

142. The synizesis of ἐθεύεο is rare,
and the few other instances which occur
in the /diad are of doubtful authenticity.
See H. G. § 378*, van L. Ench. p. 298,
and note on N 818. In A 264 (=T 139)
read ὄρσο for ὄρσευ. For εὔχευ Ὁ 290
see note there. All other instances occur
before vowels, where we can write -e’
for -eo. Here Fick reads μάχης ἄρ᾽
édeveo πολλόν (rather dpa deveo), but
there is no obvious reason why this
should have been changed. But the
Od. contains some nine cases where -ev
cannot well be avoided; so it is best
to acquiesce in the text, as another
indication that the language of this
passage is late, and similar to that of
the Od. rather than /7. There were those
who held that a dactyl was admissible
in the 6th foot ; see note on 2 269.—For
the phrase itself see note on N 310.

143. φύξηλιν, a curious word recurring
in Greek only in Lykophron and the
other imitative pedants. A more correct
form would be φυζηλός (Hesych.) from
φύζα like σιγηλός from ovya-, ἀπατηλός
from ἀπατα-, ef. the Homeric κατα-
ριγηλός from pryé-w. φυζηλόν is accord-

ingly read by van L.
the sting of the fem. term. -ἰς (᾿Αχαιΐδες,
οὐκέτ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοί).

144. ἄστυ seems here used in its
primitive sense dwelling, home (vas=to
dwell) ; while πόλις is the citadel, πόλις
ἄκρη. But there is no clearly marked
distinction, ef. ¢177, 0525. In 472-73
πόλις ἄστυ and τεῖχος go together. caw-
cHic, not σαώσεις, in spite of Ar., see
H. G. § 326. 4.

145. Cf. Z 493. Here Nauck reads
λαοῖς, οἵ K.7.A., to save the F of Fidian.

147-48. See I 316-17.

149. μεθ᾽ ὅμιλον, amid the press, like
μετὰ πληθύν B 143. Here also van L.
reads καθ᾽ ὅμιλον. According to the
scholia it would seem that Zen. read
μεθ᾽ ὁμίλου, which he must have taken

to mean from amid the press. This
gives much better sense, but Greek

knows no such use of μετά with the
(abl.) gen. Maass conjectures that Zen.’s
reading was μετὰ μῶλον, but for this
there is no ground. δι᾽ ὁμίλου (van L.)
is more likely.

151. ’Apreioicin, note the variant olw-
νοῖσιν, as y 271, cf. E 488. Evidently
Glaukos knows nothing of the rescue of
the body by Apollo.

bo

28 IAIAAOC P (xvi!)

ε / sh \ 3 UN
ὅς τοι πόλλ᾽ ὄφελος γένετο, πτόλεΐ τε καὶ αὑτῶι,
΄ rn / ”
ἕωὸς ἐών: νῦν δ᾽ ov οἱ ἀλαλκέμεναι κύνας ἔτλης.
rn ἴω 7 ’ lal
τῷ νῦν el τις ἐμοὶ Λυκίων ἐπιπείσεται ἀνδρῶν,
/ ᾽ \ / -
οἴκαδ᾽ ἴμεν, Τροίης. δὲ πεφήσεται αἰπὺς ὄλεθρος. 155
fal \ ’ ,
εἰ yap viv Τρώεσσι μένος πολυθαρσὲς ἐνείη,
e / \ \ /
ἄτρομον, οἷόν τ᾽ ἄνδρας ἐσέρχεται ol περὶ πάτρης
/ \ lal ”
ἀνδράσι δυσμενέεσσι πόνον καὶ δῆριν ἔθεντο,
Φ / / /
αἶψά κε Ἰ]άτροκλον ἐρυσαίμεθα Ἴλιον εἴσω.
> 5 - \ v / II / ” a
εἰ δ᾽ οὗτος προτὶ ἄστυ μέγα Τ]ριάμοιο ἄνακτος 160
- \ / 2 / =Q / =
ἔλθοι τεθνηὼς Kal μιν ἐρυσαίμεθα χάρμης,
> ΕῚ A / 7 \
aid κεν ᾿Αργεῖοι Σαρπηδόνος ἔντεω καλὰ
/ / ’ 5 Ν 2 / ” 7
λύσειαν, Kal κ᾿ αὐτὸν ἀγοίμεθα ἴλιον εἴσω"
/ IN / ff 2 ’ / A ιν yy
τοίου yap θεράπων πέφατ᾽ ἀνέρος, ὃς μέγ ἄριστος
/ /
᾿Αργείων παρὰ νηυσὶ καὶ ἀγχέμαχοι θεράποντες. 165
ἀλλὰ σύ
στήμεναι
>) IAN / ᾽ \ / / ᾽ 53
οὐδ᾽ ἰθὺς μαχέσασθαι, ἐπεὶ σέο φέρτερος ἐστι.
/ / “
τὸν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπόδρα ἰδὼν προσέφη κορυθαίολος “κτωρ᾽
A 5 a , , 3
“Τλαῦκε, τί ἣ δὲ σὺ τοῖος ἐὼν ὑπέροπλον ἔειπες ; 170
Gy / 5 5 5 / \ / »” BA
ὦ πέπον, ἢ τ᾽ ἐφάμην σε περὶ φρένας ἔμμεναι ἄλλων,
fal τ ig
τῶν ὅσσοι Λυκίην ἐριβώλακα ναιετάουσι"

3 7 / > > /

γ᾽ Δίαντος μεγαλήτορος οὐκ ἐτάλασσας
7 ’ ” > \ / 5 >? an
ἄντα, κατ᾽ ὄσσε ἰδὼν δήιων ἐν ἀυτῆι,

|| πόλεϊ JLR Vr. A. 153. κύνας: κύον Zen.
155. ἴμεν : ἴτω Dion. Sid. (Schol.T: ἴω Ms.).
157. ἐπέρχεται J: eicépyerar GPQ. 158. €eeNTO: éxoucin JT Cant. Harl. a,
Vr. b (yp. ἔθεντο) A. 160. ποτὶ S. 161. ἔλϑθη(ι) ( (supr. οἱ) RS fr. Mose. ||
τεϑονηὼς (τεθνηιὼς) Ar. AHJP*QT Vr. Ὁ, Cant. fr. Mosc.: τεθνειὼς 2 ||
χάρμη(ι) PS. 163. κ᾿ om. ὃ: O Ap. Lew. 65. 6. 171. πέπον Zen. 2:
πόποι (Ar.) ACGJT Vr. d, fr. Mose.

152. Tor: tic JR Lips.
(ἄλογον δέ, An.). 154 om. R.

163. λύςειαν, cf. on A 19.
the body, as opposed to the arms.

164-65. Cf. II 271-72.

171. ὦ πέπον, so Zen. (οὐ κακῶς Did.):
ὦ πόποι Ar. The reading of Zen. is
decidedly preferable, as ὦ πόποι is out
of place except at the beginning of a

155. ἴμεν is best taken as Ist plur., αὐτόν,
we will go home. It is possible to make
it an infin., if any of the Lykians will
hearken to me to go home, then (δέ in
apod.) shall sheer destruction, ete. Ar.,
thus jeining ἔμεν with ἐπιπείσεται, sup-
plied καλῶς ποιήσει as an implied apodosis,
taking Τροίηι δέ independently. Jf wy

will hearken to me to return, well ; and
destruction, ete. πεφήςεται from root
φα(ν) of φαίνω only here; cf. 244 ἡμῖν
δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ἀναφαίνεται αἰπὺς ὄλεθρος. Else-
where itis fut. pass. of ἔῴφένω to slay
(e.g. O 140) ; πέφανται, E 531, is equally
ambiguous in form. ¢de (ξ 502) is from
the same short form of the root.

158. ἀνὸράςσι, dat. as after simple
verbs of fighting. ἔθεντο as 2 402
θήσονται περὶ ἄστυ μάχην.

speech ; see on Ν 95,

172. Of this verse Aristonikos says
μεμείωκε τὴν ἔμφασιν, Kal Ta τοιαῦτα
εἴωθεν ἀθετεῖν ὁ ᾿Αρίσταρχος, but there is
no obelos appended in A. It appears,
therefore, that he was without definite
information, and concluded that Ar.
must have obelized it in accordance
with his usual practice of so treating
lines which appeared needlessly to limit
a general expression.

IAIAAOC P (xvi) 229

cal / > / / ,

νῦν δέ σευ ὠνοσάμην πάγχυ φρένας, οἷον ἔειπες,
“ / \ Y , ΄ ~

os τὲ pe pyis Alavta πελώριον οὐχ ὑπομεῖναι.

, ’ \ “ / > \ ig
οὔ τοι ἐγὼν ἔρριγα μάχην οὐδὲ κτύπον ἵππων" 175

ἀλλ᾽ αἰεί te Διὸς κρείσσων νόος αἰγιόχοιο,

ὅς τε καὶ ἄλκιμον ἄνδρα φοβεῖ καὶ ἀφείλετο νίκην
ῥηϊδίως, ὁτὲ δ᾽ αὐτὸς ἐποτρύνει μαχέσασθαι.

ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε δεῦρο, πέπον, παρ᾽ ἔμ᾽ ἵστασο καὶ ἴδε ἔργον,

ἠὲ πανημέριος κακὸς ἔσσομαι, ὡς ἀγορεύεις, 180
ἢ τινὰ καὶ Δαναῶν, ἀλκῆς μάλα περ μεμαῶτα,

/ » / \ / / »”
σχήσω ἀμυνέμεναι περὶ [Ιατρόκλοιο θανόντος.

ἃ » \
ὡς εἰπὼν
“Πρῶες καὶ
/
ἀνέρες ἔστε,

Τρώεσσιν ἐκέκλετο μακρὸν ἀύσας"
Λύκιοι καὶ Δάρδανοι ἀγχιμαχηταί,
/ a
φίλοι, μνήσασθε δὲ θούριδος ἀλκῆς, 185

" Lr ate N ’ a > / v ΄
ὄφρ ἂν ἐγὼν Αχιλῆος ἀμύμονος ἔντεα δύω

΄ \ ,
kara, Ta IlatpoxXovo βίην ἐνάριξα KataKtas.

,

173. ceu: ce Zen. T (yp. NON 0€ ceu) U.
175. οὔ τι 5 Ε 5 Harl. a, Vr. A.

we φῆις Alexio: μ᾽ ἔφης Ptol. Ask.

174. oc: ὥς U supy. ἢ ὃς U2):
ἐγὼ G.

176. αἰγιόχοιο: ἠέ περ ἀνδρὸς CJQT Bar. Mor. Harl. a, Vr. b A, yp. H.

178. ὁτὲ : τότε Aph.

λιάλα : μέγα G.

ἐποτρύνηςι () King’s.
μαχέεςθαι P Par.cd g: ἐποτρύνει μαχέςαςθαι ἢ ἐποτρύνηιςει μάχεςθαι Hust.
186. ὄφρ᾽ ἂν ἐγὼ ϑύω κατὰ τεύχεα Πηλείωνος “7. “ἡ εἰ, 154. 1.

|| μάχεσθαι QR King’s Par. f:
181.

173=2 95, q.v. The line is per-
fectly in place here, as NON 0€ has a
proper reference to the preceding imperf.
ἐφάμην. Here also Zen. read ce or ce’.

176-78. See I 688-90. For été mss.
generally have ὅτε, Aph. τότε. ὁτὲ δέ
tollows ἄλλοτε μέν A 568, but elsewhere
we have only ὁτὲ μέν followed by ἄλλοτε
δέ (A 64, 2599, Υ 49). Here it virtually
means ‘even as sometimes.’

179. ἔργον, as ἔργον μάχης Z 522, my
handiwork in battle.

181. ἀλκῆς with μεμαῶτα, see note on
N197. It is of course possible to join it
with σχήςω, J will make to cease from his
valour for fighting, ete. ; but this is less
probable in view of the order of the words.
There remains also the possibility of re-
garding ἀλκῆς as belonging both to
μεμαῶτα ἃπα σχήσω. The infin. afteréxew
is unique, in the sense of making to cease
From defending. Paley compares Eur. Or.
263 σχήσω σε πηδᾶν δυστυχῆ πηδήματα (uh
or μὴ οὐ being the common constr.in Attic).

186. We here, for the first time in
this book, come upon the idea that
Patroklos has been wearing the armour
of Achilles ; and it is in a passage which
is for many reasons suspicious. In the
first place, it is somewhat startling to find

Hector, after his great promises, and his
appeal to Glaukos to stand by his side
and watch, suddenly leaving the field of
battle: προσεδόκησεν ἄν τις αὐτὸν δυσω-
πηθέντα τοὺς λόγους καὶ κινηθέντα ἐπὶ τῶι
πράγματι οἷς αὐτὸς ἐπηγγείλατο ἐμμενεῖν.
ὁ δὲ ἐπιλέλησται μὲν ὧν αὐτὸς εἶπεν,
ἠμέληκε δὲ τῶν ὀνειδῶν, περὶ δὲ τὸ κο-
σμεῖσθαι γίγνεται, Schol. A. Nor is it
explained why the idea of changing his
armour should have thus occurred to
him, just after he has sent off Patroklos’
spoils to the city. After the passing
allusion in 214 we hear nothing more of
what we should suppose to be the start-
ling effect of the change ; the Greeks do
not seem to notice it at all. The μέγα
κράτος which Zeus gives him does not
avail him much; for he does not succeed
in gaining the body, his chief aim, but
only hangs upon the Greeks in their
successful retreat. The word μετασπών
in 190 is doubtful, and probably copied
from the Od. There can therefore be
little doubt that this is an interpolation
by the author of the ὀπλοποιία. The
original narrative is probably resumed
in 229, which joins on to 185 without
leaving a perceptible gap (Hentze).

187. See X 323, where also the line is

230

IAIAAOC P

(xvi)

« 5 / > /1
ὡς ἄρα φωνήσας ἀπέβη κορυθαίολος “Extwp

ὃ fh > / θέ δ᾽ . » id /
NLOU EK πολέμοιο, εων εκύχανεν ETALPOUS

> "
ὠκα μάν,

> nw lal /
οὔ πω τῆλε, ποσὶ κραιπνοῖσι μετασπῶων, 190

ot προτὶ ἄστυ φέρον κλυτὰ τεύχεα Πηλεΐδαο.
στὰς δ᾽ ἀπάνευθε μάχης πολυδακρύου ἔντε᾽ ἄμειβεν"
ἤτοι ὁ μὲν τὰ ἃ δῶκε φέρειν προτὶ Ἴλιον ἱρὴν
» / nr
Tpact φιλοπτολέμοισιν, ὁ δ᾽ ἄμβροτα τεύχεα δῦνε
Πηλεΐδεω ᾿Αχιλῆος, ἅ οἱ θεοὶ Οὐρανίωνες 195
\ / ” ς > ” e δὶ Μ
πατρὶ φίλωι ἔπορον: ὁ 6 ἄρα ὧι παιδὶ ὄπασσε

/ > 3 > [Δ > » = \ b] /
γηράς: ἀλλ᾽ οὐχ υἱὸς ἐν ἔντεσι πατρὸς ἐγ ae
> 5 7, 7
τὸν δ᾽ ὡς οὖν ἀπάνευθεν ἴδεν νεφεληγερέτα Ζεὺς

τεύχεσι Πηλεΐδαο κορυσσόμενον θείοιο,

ὝΠΟ. ῥα κάρη προτὶ ὃν μυθήσατο θυμόν"

ἃ δείλ᾽,

200

οὐδέ τί τοι θάνατος καταθύμιός ἐστιν,

τ 190 om. R. 191. ποτὶ S.

πολυδακρύου ADU:

μῦθον () (sup. θυμὸν).

πηλείωνος PR Bar., ἐν ἄλλωι A.
πολυϑακρύτου Q.
199. τεύχεει λαμπόμενον μεγαθύμου πηλείωνος H (=214).
201. οὐδέ τι: οὐκέτι S, yp. οὐκέ Harl. a.

192.
193. ποτὶ R. 194. τεύχε᾽ Edune G.
200. ποτὶ S. ||

probably interpolated. Ta .. βίην, the
usual double ace. after verbs of robbing ;
O 3843, Z 70, ete.

190. μεταςπών, catching them up.
This sense may be derived from the
primitive sense of ἕπειν, to handle; in
aor. to lay hands wpon in the sense of
attaining an end. But in & 33, the only
passage ‘where this aor. part. recurs, this
sense is hardly so suitable—ouBdrns ὦκα
ποσὶ κραιπνοῖσι μετασπῶών (sc. κύνας) ; the
sense required is not overtaking the dogs,
but rather, on the analogy of the other
uses of μεθέπειν, getting them under
control, by kicking them. If this ex-
planation is right it would seem that
the word here is copied and misunder-
stood, being taken for an archaic form
of ΝΣ (e.g. N 567). But the
act. and mid. of this verb seem never to
be interchangeable. Nauck marks the
line ‘spurius ?’ without giving reasons,
but probably as made up from 7 301 and

Σ 33. It could certainly be well spared.

192. The vulg. πολυδακρύτου is of
course metrically impossible (Ὁ) : πολυ-
ϑακρύου is defensible (δάκρυον by δάκρυ),
but no doubt Bentley is right in read-
ing πολυδάκρυος, cf. 544 ὑσμίνη ἀργαλέη
πολύδακρυς. ‘The same change should
perhaps be made in Tyrt. 11. 7 “Apnos

“Αιδαν Here.

πολυδακρύου ἔργ᾽ ἀΐδηλα, but πολυδακρύου
seems to have stood in the Homeric text
in Euripides’ time, see τὸν πολυδάκρυον
427 (with W.-M.’s note),
where again Mss. have πολυδάκρυτον,
against the metre. So also Ap. Rhod.
has πολυδάκρυον, 11. 916.

193. Observe ὁ μὲν... ὁ δέ used to
express the opposition of clauses, not of
persons (δῶκε μὲν τὰ ἅ, ἔδυνε δέ, κ.τ.λ.)
τὰ a, ἑξά P. Knight.

195. οἱ with πατρί, to his father; as
A 219, ete.

196. παιδὶ Snacce, the hiatus may be
due to the probably original length of
the -c of the dat. So we have βασιλῆϊ
᾿Ακάστωι & 336, μητρὶ ἔειπε π 469, and
in other parts of the line πατρὶ ἐμῶι
W 278, ἄξονι ἀμφίς E 723 (and other
instances in van L. Hnch. p. 80).

197. γηράς, probably a present part.
from the non-thematic conj. of ynpdw,
of which ἐγήρα is the imperf. (in H 148,
ει 510, € 67). So also γηράντεσσι Hes.
Opp. 188 (where it seems to be equivalent
to γηράσκοντας, 185). Schol. T compares
βροντάς in Korinna, Cobet M. C. 436
regards these forms as aor., which is im-
pr ‘obable. Compare γηράναι (or γηρᾶναι)
Aisch. Cho. 908, Soph. O. C. 870 (with
Jebb’s critical note).

-

IAIAAOC P (xvit) 231

φ / ' 4 \ ᾽ v , as
ὡς δή τοι σχεδὸν εἶσι, σὺ δ᾽ ἄμβροτα τεύχεα δύνεις
Ν a / \ v
ἀνδρὸς ἀριστῆος, τόν TE τρομέουσι καὶ ἄλλοι.
fal \ “ a
τοῦ δὴ ἑταῖρον ἔπεφνες ἐνηέα TE κρατερόν τε,
, , Ἁ ν
τεύχεα δ᾽ οὐ κατὰ κόσμον ἀπὸ κρατός τε καὶ ὥμων 205
“, “- ΄, > ,
εἵἴλευ: ἀτάρ τοι viv γε μέγα κράτος ἐγγυαλίξω,
lol \ ¢ » / /
TOV ποινὴν ὅ TOL οὔ TL μάχης ἐκ νοστήσαντι
, > / \ / af ᾽ν
δέξεται ᾿Ανδρομάχη κλυτὰ τεύχεα []ηλεΐωνος.
ἢ καὶ κυανέηισιν ἐπ᾽ ὀφρύσι νεῦσε ἸΚρονίων,
“ὝὝἭΜΠΙ δ «“ , ΝΘ σὸν ak a / » ,
κτορι δ᾽ ἥρμοσε Tevye ἐπὶ χροΐ, δῦ δέ μιν ἔλρης 210
\ > / a ’ »Μ ΄ / ᾽ > \
δεινὸς ἐνυάλιος, πλῆσθεν δ᾽ ἄρα οἱ μέλε᾽ ἐντὸς
ἀλκῆς καὶ σθένεος. μετὰ δὲ κλειτοὺς ἐπικούρους
fel ec / af. > / / Cc
βῆ pa μέγα ἰάχων, ἰνδάλλετο δέ σφισι πᾶσι

τεύχεσι λαμπόμενος μεγαθύμου ἸΤηλείωνος.

202. coc PR: ὃς 2.
εἷλες G. || αὐτὰρ U.
NnocTHcanToc Vy. b.
212. κλητοὺς H: κλυτοὺς L.

εἷει Ar. (A supr.) PR: ἐςτι ῶ.
207. ὅ Toi: ὅτι GH Cant. Vr. b A.
209. KuaNéoicin P().
213. cpici: cpin PR.
πηλείωνι Ar. AU Harl. d, Par. e: πηληϊάϑεω ἀχιλῆος Zen.

&Bpota Mor. 206.
NocTHcanTa Vr. A:
211. nAAee Vr. ἃ.
214. μεγαθύμωι

210. χροτὶ R.

202. ὧς, how, seems better than the
vulg. és, and efct than ἐστί: cf. uw 368
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ σχεδὸν Fea.

204, ἐνηέα, also Φ 96 (see note), Ψ 252,
and P 670 ἐνηείης, all of Patroklos ; and
6200. The der. is quite uncertain.

205. This line is clearly inconsistent

with the passage athetized at the end of

iI, where it is Apollo who takes the arms
ἀπὸ κρατός (793) and dm’ ὥμων (802).
That passage therefore is later even than
this probable interpolation. It is not
clear why it should be οὐ κατὰ κόσμον
to take off the armour of a slain foe—
perhaps because it is of divine origin.

207. For the use of 6 as a pure con-
junction cf. © 362 οὐδέ τι τῶν μέμνηται,
6 οἱ k.7.A., 1 493 τὰ φρονέων ὅ μοι κ.τ.λ.,
WY 545 τὰ φρονέων ὅτι of. Here the
preceding plural clearly shews that the
original use of the particle, as the acc.
of the relative pronoun, is forgotten. It
will be noticed that the above are all
late passages ; the other instances seem
to be confined to the Od. (Cf. H. G.
§ 270). The negative belongs in the first
place to NoctHcanTi, which we have to
render by the principal verb, thow shalt
not return for Andromache to receive at
thy hands. For the use of the dat. with
δέχεσθαι see on A 596.

209=A 528q.v. The line is evidently
inappropriate here, as Zeus only nods to
himself.

210. Hpmoce, sc. Zeus; see note on
Γ 333 and T 385. Though in all these
cases the intrans. use of the verb is
possible, yet the trans. being equally
possible is recommended by ε 247 πάντα
ἥρμοσεν ἀλλήλοισιν. This sense, too, as
illustrating the active interest of Zeus,
suits the context better. In later Greek
the verb is commonly used both trans.
and intrans. ; for the latter cf. Pind. P.
iv. 80. The scholia remark that the
divine armour appears to fit Peleus,
Achilles, Patroklos, and Hector equally
well. Asit probably included no breast-
plate, this would not be difficult.

211. énudAtoc is here only in H. a
mere epithet of Ares. The meaning of
the word, as of the evidently cognate
Ἐνυώ and ᾿Ἐνυεύς (I 668 only), is quite
unknown, and it is probably not Greek
(Thracian 3).

214. For μεγαθύμου Πηλεΐωνος Ar.
read the dat. and must therefore have
taken ἱνϑάλλετό σφισι to mean fe re-
sembled in their eyes. But this does
not suit the use of the word in the other
passages where it occurs ; Ψ 460 ἄλλος δ᾽
ἡνίοχος ἱνδάλλεται, y 246 ὥς τέ μοι ἀθά-
νατος ἰνδάλλεται εἰσοράασθαι, τ 224 αὐτάρ
τοι ἐρέω. ὥς μοι ἰνδάλλεται ἦτορ. In
all these ἰνδάλλεσθαι is equivalent to
φαίνεσθαι, and can be exactly translated
by appears (in τ 224 ἦτορ is ace. of
relation, as appears to me in my heart).

232 IAIAAOC P (xv)

ὦτρυνεν δὲ ἕκαστον ἐποιχόμενος ἐπέεσσι, 215
a /
Μέσθλην te ᾿λαῦκόν τε Μέδοντά τε Θερσίλοχόν τε,
τ al / ” . ἴς , :
Aaotepotratov te Δεισήνορά θ᾽ “Ἱππόθοῦν Te,
/ / Wn if Nf 9 /
Φορκύν τε Χρομίον τε καὶ ννομον οἰωνιστὴν"
ε / /
τοὺς ὅ γ᾽ ἐποτρύνων ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
ςς f / a / ) ΄ A
KEKAUTE, μυρία pura TTEPLETLOV@V ETTLKOUPWV 220
3 \ > \ \ / > \ /
οὐ yap ἐγὼ πληθὺν διζήμενος οὐδὲ χατίζων
> 7» » 5 id / / ” “
ἐνθάδ᾽ ἀφ᾽ ὑμετέρων πολίων ἤγειρα ἕκαστον,
> > Ψ , ? / \ / /
ἀλλ wa μοι 'Γρώων ἀλόχους καὶ νήπια τέκνα
προφρονέως ῥύοισθε φιλοπτολέμων ὑπ᾽ ᾿Αχαιῶν.

τὰ φρονέων δώροισι κατατρύχω καὶ ἐδωδῆι 225

\ /
λαούς, ὑμέτερον δὲ ἑκάστου θυμὸν ἀέξω.

a lal ’ i / xX > 2
τῶ τις νῦν ἰθὺς τετραμμένος ἢ ἀπολέσθω

ΥΝ / (2 Ν / 3 /
ne σαωθήτω: ἡ γὰρ πολέμου ὀαριστύς.

ὃς δέ κε Πάτροκλον καὶ τεθνηῶτά περ ἔμπης

215. ὄτρυνεν Zen. (2). || ἐποιχόμενος : παριετάμενος Q Vr. A:

Vr. b.

219 om. DtJPRT Lips.
p.ras. 224. Un’: an’ GH fr. Mosc.
τεϑθνεῶτά PR: τεθνειῶτά 2.

222. ὑμετέρων : ἀμφοτέρων ().

παριστάλιενον

216. uéceHn ἢ. || ϑεραίλοχόν : ὀρείλοχόν ()S Bar. Mor. 917:
δειεήνορά : δηΐνορα Vr. A: βιήνορα QS.

|| ἱππόνοόν Mor.: ἱππό όν (sic) J.
223. ol: μὴ P

229. τεθνηῶτά Ar. (A swpr.) HIT Cant. :

In this case therefore we must translate
he appeared (shewed himself—or perhaps,
to express the intensive verb, made his
appearance) to them all shining in the
armour of Achilles. It is true that we
should have expected a more marked
effect from the donning of the famous
arms; but that is a difficulty inherent

in the interpolation of the change of

armour, and not pecular to this pas-
sage. In later Greek the word is used
in both senses: fo resemble, Plato Rep.
981 Εὶ θεοί τινες περιέρχονται νύκτωρ πολ-
λοῖς ξένοις καὶ παντοδαποῖς ἰνδαλλόμενοι,
Theokr. xxii. 39 ἀργύρωι ἰνδάλλοντο:
to seem, Plato Theaet. 189 π τοῦτο γάρ
μοι ἰνδάλλεται διανοουμένη, Ar. Vesp. 188
ὥστ᾽ ἔμοιγ᾽ ἰνδάλλεται ὁμοιότατος κλητῆρος
εἶναι πωλίωι. Τ 15 probable therefore that
the double reading and interpretation
of the passage go back to a respectable
antiquity. Ap. Rhod. always uses the
word as= φαίνεσθαι, and therefore no
doubt read the gen. here (Seaton in ©. R.
XK (6):

216-18. These names are mostly taken
from the Catalogue, B 848-64. The

Solk.

mention of Glaukos among those who
are urged on is strange. On the form
Φόρκυν see 312.

220. περικτιόνων, a word which occurs
only in passages belonging to the ὁπλο-
moa (Σ 212, 1 104, 109), and in β 65.

221. γάρ introduces a long sentence
(to 226) giving in anticipation the reason
for the advice in 227; A. G. § 348. 2.
πληϑύν. m¢7e numbers, as retinue, or to
enhance the magnificence of Troy.

226. EUMON ἀέξω, 7Aise Your courage.
A similar picture of the economical diffi-
culties of the war is to be found in =
290 ff. δώροισι, by the exaction of gifts
and food for the allies; λαούς, my own
This idea seems hardly consistent
with the primitive poem, to which the
vast number of the allies as compared
with the native Trojans is strange. The
only allies known to the Μῆνις and the
other older portions of the J/iad are
the immediately neighbouring tribes of
the Troad itself, Dardans, Leleges, and
Kilikes.

228. dapicruc, see on A 502, N 291,
X 126.

“J

IAIAAOC P (χνυπ) 233

ry lal , ΄ ’ὔ > | / wv , ΄ "
Γρῶας ἐς ἱπποδάώμους ἐρύσηι, εἴξηι δέ οἱ Αἴας, 230
ἥμισυ τῶι ἐνάρων ἀποδάσσομαι, ἥμισυ δ᾽ αὐτὸς
ξ΄ 7 ᾿ / » ° , ”
ἕξω ἐγώ: τὸ δέ οἱ κλέος ἔσσεται, ὅσσον ἐμοί περ.
Δ ᾽ e ᾽ \ “ ver
ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, of δ᾽ ἰθὺς Δαναῶν βρίσαντες ἔβησαν,
4 ᾽ Ε / / / » ‘
Sovpat ἀνασχόμενοι: μάλα δέ σφισιν ἔλπετο θυμὸς
\ ΄ ,’ » / ΄
νεκρὸν vm Αἴαντος ἐρύειν ᾿Γελαμωνιάδαο" 235
͵ἅ = / ’ a Ν > /
νήπιοι, ἢ TE πολέσσιν ἐπ αὐτῶι θυμὸν ἀπηύρα.
\ έν vo? » 3 \ ’ \ 7,
καὶ tot ap ΔΑἴας εἶπε βοὴν ἀγαθὸν Μενέλαον:
ξιὶ 5 , δ᾿ M / ὃ / ᾽ / aA
ὦ πέπον, ὦ Μενέλαε διοτρεφές, οὐκέτι νῶϊ
ἢ. / /
ἔλπομαι αὐτώ περ νοστησέμεν ἐκ πολέμοιο.
Ua / / / /
ov τι τόσον νέκυος περιδείδια Ἰ]ατρόκλοιο, 240
e / r , / / ,
os κε τάχα Tpwwv κορέει κύνας ἠδ᾽ οἰωνούς,
ev ae a / / ΄,
ὅσσον ἐμῆι κεφαλῆι περιδείδια, μή τι πάθηισι,
Ν fol > \ / , , ,
Kal onl, ἐπεὶ πολέμοιο νέφος περὶ πάντα καλύπτει,

230. ἐρύςει ἃ Vr. " ἡ. εἴξει GH Vr. bd A.
GU) Vr. A Par. j, yp. T: τῶν 0.

γάρ HPR. || cgicin: cpin PR Harl. a.
HAnero DHU Bar. Mor.: ἤθελε ap. Sch. T.
241. Kopécer AHPQS: κορέςςει Harl. a:

CQTU fr. Mose.
κορέη L.

232. ἕξω: ἄξω Ο Vr. A.

231. T(t) Ar. (A supr.
234. δέ:
| ἔλπετο (Ar.? Mss. "Apioropdvns) Q:
236. ἀπῆρα G. 238. νῶϊν
KopécHi Mor. Bar. :

230. εἴξηι οἵ, consir. ad senswm, ὅς κε
being virtually equivalent to εἴ κέ τις,
and the Epic style being always im-
patient of a long-continued relative
construction. The variant εἴξει is per-
haps possible, the clause being taken as
a parenthetic expansion, not an essential
part of the protasis. Cf. I 324.

231. τῶι, vulg. τῶν, but the dat. is
the only Homeric constr. How a suit
of armour could be halved it is not easy
to see; a similar difficulty arises on Ψ
809. And the offer to divide seems
singularly out of place at the moment
when Hector has just clad himself in
the spoils. In the older form of the
story, of course, the latter difficulty did
not occur.

233. Bpicantec as M 346 ὧδε γὰρ
ἔβρισαν Λυκίων ἀγοί.

235. ἐρύειν future (but see 287) : ἔλ-
πομαι in the sense of hope always takes a
fut. infin., though in the sense of suppose
it may go with aor. or present.

236. νήπιοι, interjectional nom., see
A 231. ἀπηύρα, sc. Aias. πολέςειν,
the dat. with verbs of robbing is rare ;
cf. a 9 τοῖσιν ἀφείλετο νόστιμον ἦμαρ.

237. For εἶπε with the simple acc.
see note on M 60. It occurs twice again
in this book.

239. αὐτώ περ, by ourselves at any
rate, if we do not get help. This seems
to give a better sense than the alter-

natives, ‘we, whatever may happen to
others,’ or ‘we, even without the
corpse.’

240. νέκυος, ὅτι ἄδηλον πότερον περὶ
νέκυος Ἰ]Πατρόκλου ἢ περὶ ἸΙατρόκλου Toi
νέκυος γεγονότος, An. (i.e. whether Πα-
τρόκλου depends upon, or is in apposi-
tion with, véxvos). In 2 108 we have
Exropos ἀμφὶ véxu, which is in favour
of the first alternative; but see note
there.

241. κορέει, not κορέσει. is the correct
fut. ; see on A 29. κορέσηι would be
right as aor., cf. κορέσειεν IL 747; this
is the only case of the act., all other
aor. forms being mid. Compare also
6 379. For ὅς xe with fut. see on A 175.
The naive confession of fear is not un-
worthy of the Homeric hero, and indeed
heightens the glory of the subsequent
success.

294

IAIAAOC Ρ (ἀν)

ἽἝκτωρ, ἡμῖν δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ἀναφαίνεται αἰπὺς ὄλεθρος.

᾽ 4)....5 ’ a nq > ΄ 39

ἀλλ᾽ ἄγ᾽ ἀριστῆας Δαναῶν κάλει, ἤν τις ἀκούσηι. 245
« 5 5 Ν I
as ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησε βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Μενέλαος,

vv \ / “ ,
ἤυσεν δὲ διαπρύσιον Δαναοῖσι yeywves:

“ὦ φίλοι, ᾿Αργείων ἡγήτορες ἠδὲ μέδοντες,

“ 3 ah - 7
οἵ τε παρ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδηις ᾿Αγαμέμνονι καὶ Meverawe

7 ν if la
δήμια πίνουσιν Kal σημαίνουσιν ἕκαστος

a \ \ r > -
λαοῖς, ἐκ δὲ Διὸς τιμὴ καὶ κῦδος ὀπηδεῖ.

5 / f / ’ nan “
ἀργαλέον δέ μοί ἐστι διασκοπιᾶσθαι ἕκαστον

ἡγεμόνων: τόσση γὰρ ἔρις πολέμοιο δέδηεν.

“ , \ “
ἀλλά τις αὐτὸς ἴτω, νεμεσιζέσθω δ᾽ ἐνὶ θυμῶι

Πάτροκλον Τρωιῆισι κυσὶν μέλπηθρα γενέσθαι." 255

¢ 5 ’ > > “\ A
ὡς ἔφατ᾽, ὀξὺ δ᾽ ἄκουσεν ‘Oidhos ταχὺς Αἴας,

πρῶτος δ᾽ ἀντίος ἦλθε θέων ἀνὰ δηϊοτῆτα"

244. δ᾽ ἡμῖν 5. || 0’ om. DGPR Cant.: τ᾿ L. || αὖ L.
Harl. a, Cant. Vr. b A. || καὶ μενελάωι : ποιμένι λαῶν S Harl. a, Vr. A.
ἕκαστα Harl. a, ἔν τισι Did.: ἕκαετοι Vr. "Ὁ, Harl. Ὁ, Par. ο d gl.
253. ἡγεμόνα Ρ.

252. ἕκαςτα Harl. ἃ.

249. ἀτρείθηι 1)
250.

251. λαῶν Η.
256. ὧς φάτο τοῦ δ᾽ ἤκουςεν H.

244. Evidently a spurious line origin-
ating in the addition of the word “Extwp
as a gloss; for the last half of the line
see 1.174. Without the line the sense
is clear and simple; with it the con-
struction is very doubtful. We might
transl. Hector wraps a cloud of war
about everything, but such an expression
is not Homeric at all. The alternative
is to take “Ἕκτωρ in apposition with
νέφος (cf. A 347). This too is a bold
expression ; but it seems to have been
before Pindar when he wrote (NV. x. 9)
γαῖα δ᾽ ὑπέδεκτο. . μάντιν Οἰκλείδαν,
πολέμοιο νέφος (Λ΄. ix. 88 φόνου παρποδίου
νεφέλαν τρέψαι ποτὶ δυσμενέων ἀνδρῶν
στίχας is of course different), and led up
to Lueretius’ Scipiades, belli fulmen.
The harshness lies not so much in calling
Hector a νέφος as in saying that he wraps
everything about. The awkwardness is
diminished if (with one Ms.) we read
“Ἕκτωρ δ᾽ ἡμῖν. An interesting note on
cloud-metaphors in Greek will be found
in W.-M. Her. ii. p. 236: cf. dopds
χειμών Soph. Ant. 670.

245. For the non-Homeric HN read εἴ
with Brandreth.

250. δήλια adverbial, ‘at the public
cost’; cf. B 404, A 259 γερούσιον oivor,
A 343. The king has free gifts from

his people, and in return offers hospi-
tality to the chiefs; cf. I 73 πᾶσά τοι
ἔσθ᾽ ὑποδεξίη. See also on δημοβόρος
A 231, and note on B 547. ‘The change
of person from the 2nd to the 3rd is
strange ; so is the addition of a relative
clause to the formal line 248, and
Menelaos’ use of his own name. The
latter difficulty may be escaped by
adopting the variant ᾿Ατρεΐδηι “Ay.
ποιμένι λαῶν : we do not elsewhere find
Menelaos associated with his brother
as a public host. Hence Diintzer would
reject 249-51, but there is hardly justi-
fication for this, though 251 looks very
like ‘ padding.’

251. ἐκ Διός, cf. Hes. Zh. 96 ἐκ δὲ
Διὸς βασιλῆες, and note on 101.

252. Cf. διασκοπιᾶσθαι ἕκαστα K 388.
€xacTon : ἅπαντας Bentley.

254. αὐτός, without being named.
Neuecizécew with acc. ὁ. ifin. as B 296 ;
and so νεμεσσήθη, a 119, σ 227. 255=
= 179, cf. N 299:

256. ὀξύ, only here of hearing; the
power of hearing being regarded as
something which goes out of a man is
naturally called ‘keen’ when it pene-
trates to a long distance; A455. But
the converse use, of sound, not of hear-
ing, is of course the common one.

ὡς

e»

IAIAAOC P (xvii) 235

Ν 4 , ᾽ \ \ > / TS a
τὸν δὲ pet ᾿Ιδομενεὺς καὶ ὀπάων ᾿Ιδομενῆος

Μηριόνης, ἀτάλαντος ᾿ϑὕνυαλίωι ἀνδρεϊφόντηι.

“ 3 U / Φ \ > / ᾽ ν
τῶν δ ἄλλων τίς κεν Tot φρεσὶν οὐνοματ εἴποι, 200

ὅσσοι δὴ μετόπισθε μάχην ἤγειραν ᾿Αχαιῶν ;
Τρῶες δὲ προύτυψαν ἀολλέες, ἦρχε δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ “Exrwp.

ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἐπὶ προχοῆισι διιπετέος ποταμοῖο
/ / “ \ εξ > \ / > "»
βέβρυχεν μέγα κῦμα ποτὶ ῥόον, ἀμφὶ δέ τ᾽ ἄκραι

del / ’ / ig \ »
niovos βούωσιν ἐρευγομένης ἁλὸς ἔξω, 26:
τόσσηι ἄρα Τρῶες ἰαχῆι ἴσαν.

σὺ
οι

> \ > 4
αὐτὰρ Ἀχαιοὶ

ἕστασαν ἀμφὶ Μενοιτιάδηι ἕνα θυμὸν ἔχοντες,

φραχθέντες σάκεσιν χαλκήρεσιν. ἀμφὶ ὃ

,

ἄρα σφι

259. ἀνοριφόντηι GHT.

260-61 ἀθ. Zen.

260. Tic KEN HICl: Tic ἂν

fucin ἐνὶ Par. h: τίς χ᾽ icin ἐνὶ Par. a f, ἐν ἄλλωι A: Tic KEN Aicin Eni TU fr.
Mose. Vr. ἃ (ἐῆιςιν) : τίς ἂν ἧιςι Eust. || εἴπη HPS Mor. fr. Mose. Vr. A. 264.
βεβρύχηι Aph.: βεβρύχει PR. || notippdon CH: ποτιρρόον 1): notippdon I’:

noTippdon ‘Tl.
τρώων ἰαχὴ réneT (i.
Gpeéntec Zen.

265. ἠϊόνος J Mor. Bar., yp. Harl. a, Eust.: ἠἀϊόνες 2. 266.
267. UENOITIGOHN Mor.

268. PpayeéeNTEc :

258-59 = H 165-66. ᾿Ενυαλίωι GnNopet-
φόντηι, B 651.

260-61. This couplet was athetized by
Zen. with good reason. The phrase,
like that at the beginning of the Cata-
logue (B 488), is one which would appear
to imply that an extraordinarily large
number came to the rescue; but this
there is no reason whatever to suppose.
οὐνόματ᾽ εἴποι neglects the F, though
Bentley’s οὔνομα is perhaps sufficiently
supported by Τ' 235, ¢ 194, in both of
which οὔνομα refers to the names of a
number of people. “μετόπισθε seems to
mean ‘in the second rank,’ behind the
leaders ; but we should not expect to
hear the names of such. The variant
τίς x (or ἂν) ἧισιν ἐνὶ φρεσίν, which
would involve another violation of the
digamma, seems to be due to a natural
wish to mend the rhythm.

263. The scholia say that Solon burnt
his poems in despair of their ever bear-
ing comparison with this fine simile.
They tell the story equally of Plato, and
with more reason, as Solon’s poems
survived. The ancients held that the
simile referred to the Nile; but for
this there is no authority. ϑιιπετής (see
on II 174) is used of any river.

264. BéBpuye, roars, of waves also
ε 412, and of the wave-beaten rock
242: also of wounded warriors N 393,
If 486. There is no pres. in use in H.
Aph.’s βεβρύχηι is perhaps right.

265. ἠϊόνος of J and Eust. (ἰστέον
ὅτι οὐ μόνον πληθυντικῶς γράφεται ἠϊόνες
βοόωσιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν γενικῆι ἐνικῆι ἄκραι
ἠϊόνος) is recommended by the very
similar A 425 ἀμφὶ δέ 7’ ἄκρας κυρτὸν ἰὸν
κορυφοῦται. ἄκραι is a subst. also in &
36, ε 285; ἄκρον perhaps in © 293, T
229, y 278. The epithet, when a mere
epithet, is not to be separated from its
substantive by the end of the line ; see
on N 611. Here, if we read ἄκραι ἠϊόνες,
we must translate by the shores echo to
their farthest points, or the like. €peu-
γομένης, cf. ε 402-03 ῥόχθει γὰρ μέγα
κῦμα ποτὶ ἕερὸν ἠπείροιο δεινὸν ἐρευγόμενον,
438 κύματος ἐξαναδὺς τά τ᾽ ἐρεύγεται
ἤπειρόνδε. The verb perhaps expresses
only the idea of roaring, Lat. rug-io ;
see Ὁ 621. ἔξω, beyond its own limits,
on to the land. Bentley’s conj. εἴσω
(into the river) is hardly needed.

268. ppaxeéntec, cf. N 130 φράξαντες
δόρυ δουρί, O 566 φράξαντο δὲ νῆας ἕρκεϊ
χαλκείωι. Zen. ἀρθέντες, which is equally
Homeric ; cf. M 105 and Π 211 στίχες
ἄρθεν. But this passage (to 273) can
hardly be genuine. The interference of
Zeus, however kindly meant, seems to
have been singularly ill-judged ; for the
Achaiaus, for whose benefit the darkness
is intended, are the first to beg for its
removal; see 645-47. The fact is that
the darkness from which Aias prays to
be delivered is a purely natural pheno-
menon, due to the dust-clouds arising

286 ΙΛΙΑΔΟΟ P (χνπ)

lal \
λαμπρῆισιν κορύθεσσι Kpoviav ἠέρα πουλὺν
xed, ἐπεὶ οὐδὲ Μενοιτιάδην ἤχθαιρε πάρος γε, 270
ὄφρα ζωὸς ἐὼν θεράπων ἣν Δέακίδαο"
’ By
μίσησεν δ᾽ apa μιν δήιων κυσὶ κύρμα γενέσθαι
Τρωιῆισιν: TO καί οἱ ἀμυνέμεν ὦρσεν ἑταίρους.
> \ , A ἕν ἢ 5) ΄
ὦσαν δὲ πρότεροι 'Ῥρῶες ἑλίκωπας ᾿Αχαιούς"
Ν \ / ς / > / ’ > n Ἐ
VEK POV δὲ προλίποντες ὑπέτρεσαν, οὐδέ τιν᾽ αὐτῶν 275
Τρῶες ὑπέρθυμοι ἕλον ἔγχεσιν ἱέμενοί περ,
> \ / 5 / / \ \ lal 3) \
ἀλλὰ νέκυν ἐρύοντο. μίνυνθα δὲ καὶ τοῦ Αχαιοὶ
μέλλον ἀπέσσεσθαι: μάλα γάρ σφεας wn ἐλέλιξεν
5 ἃ > νὴ
Αἴας, ὃς περὶ μὲν εἶδος, περὶ ὃ ἔργα τέτυκτο
τῶν ἄλλων Δαναῶν μετ᾽ ἀμύμονα Πηλεΐωνα. 280
ἴθυσεν δὲ διὰ προμάχων συὶ εἴκελος ἀλκὴν
/ “ 5 b) ” / ΄ ’ ? \
καπρίωι, ὅς T ἐν ὄρεσσι κύνας θαλερούς τ᾽ αἰζηοὺς
€ - / ’ / ς / \ /
ῥηϊδίως ἐκέδασσεν ἑλιξάμενος διὰ βήσσας"
ὡς υἱὸς Τελαμῶνος ἀγαυοῦ, φαίδιμος Αἴας,

ῥεῖα μετεισάμενος Τρώων ἐκέδασσε φάλαγγας, 285

269. πουλὺν J Cant. and ap. Eust.: πουλὴν S: πολλήν ©. 270. HyeHpe
DGQSU: €xexpe PR: Exeaipe Ar. 271. τόφρα ὦ. 273. Kai: κέ 5:
κεν Cant. || ἑταίρους : ἐν ἄλλωι ἀχαιοὺς A. 277-577 lacuna in A; supplied
by man. rec. A. 279. Epr’ ἐτέτυκτο ADGHJQ (Epre’ ἐτ.) U Vr. Ὁ A. 280.
TON O RK.

from the struggle on the sandy plain. 277. €pvonto, began to draw away.
We have elsewhere found traces of a καὶ Tod is strange, and can hardly be
desire to produce a striking effect by right, though no variant is recorded ;
such supernatural darkness, in places we should rather expect καὶ τότ᾽, now
where the effort sadly damages the pic- «gain; as before, when Menelaos left
ture ; see notes on Ὁ 668, IL 567. The the body, the desertion is only momen-
gain to the story from the excision of tary. The text is explained by joining

the six lines is very obvious. καί with ᾿Αχαιοί, the Achaians in their
269. πουλύν is the regular Homeric fwrn; but the order of words is harsh.

form, though weakly supported here ; 278. ὥκ᾽ ἐλέλιξεν, read ὦκα βέλιξεν,

ef. Θ 50, K 27 and note on E 7716 πᾶ see note on A 580.

(Platt in J.P. xix. 42). 279-80=) 550-51: 280, οἵ, B 768.

272. uicHcen, with all other deriva- The F of Fépya is neglected in 279, and
tives from the same stem, is elsewhere cannot easily be restored, as is the case
unknown to H. The addition of Tpwifi- also in B751, A 703 (both late passages),
cin to the gen. OHMteN is hardlya Homeric Δ 470, ξ 228, 344, p 313. Various con-
construction ; the most similar instances jectures have been proposed, Bentley
are E 741 Ποργείη κεφαλὴ δεινοῖο πελώρου, περὶ δ᾽ ἄλλα, Heyne Αἴας ὃς εἶδός τ᾽ ἠδὲ
B 54 Νεστορέηι παρὰ νηὶ ΠΠυλοιγενέος βασι- περὶ ἔργα τέτυκτο, Brandreth περὶ δ᾽
λῆος, where the order of the words is ἔπλετο ἔργα, but none of these carries
more natural. The adj. may have been conviction, to say the least, and we
added as a gloss, the rest of the line have another piece of evidence for the
being filled up ina manner which hardly lateness of the book.

suits the lines immediately preceding, 283. διὰ Brccac is best taken with
where Zeus’ help is given in another ἐκέδασσε. ἑλιξάμενοςο, turning to bay.

way. But the whole couplet is probably 285. ῥεῖα goes with éxédacce, parallel
a feeble attempt to round off the pre- to ῥηϊδίως ἐκέδασσε above. For μετειςά-

ceding interpolation. uenoc see note on N 90, and for φάλαγ-

IAIAAOC P (xvi) 237

οἱ περὶ Πατρόκλωι BéBacav, φρόνεον δὲ μάλιστα

, / 4 \ κ“ο , ‘
ἄστυ πότι σφέτερον ἐρύειν καὶ κῦδος ἀρέσθαι.

ἤτοι τὸν Λήθοιο Ἰ]ελασγοῦ φαίδιμος υἱὸς

ε , \ \ \ ε ,
Ἱππόθοος ποδὸς εἷλκε κατὰ κρατερὴν ὑσμίνην,

δησάμενος τελαμῶνι παρὰ σφυρὸν ἀμφὶ τένοντε, 290
“Ἕκτορι καὶ Τρώεσσι χαριζόμενος: τάχα δ᾽ αὐτῶι

= , , ΄ ” ᾽ ΄ φ ‘
ἦλθε κακὸν, TO OL OV TLS ερύκακεν ἱεμένων περ.

τὸν δ᾽ υἱὸς Τελαμῶνος, ἐπαΐξας δι’ ὁμίλου,
lol ᾽ > / / \ /
πλῆξ᾽ αὐτοσχεδίην κυνέης διὰ χαλκοπαρήιου"
» » / / 5 “
ἤρικε δ᾽ ἱπποδάσεια κόρυς περὶ δουρὸς ἀκωκῆι, 295
πληγεῖσ᾽ ἔγχεΐ TE μεγάλωι Kai χειρὶ παχείηι,
ἐγκέφαλος δὲ παρ᾽ αὐλὸν ἀνέδραμεν ἐξ ὠτειλῆς

/
aipatoets.

τοῦ δ᾽ αὖθι λύθη μένος, ἐκ δ᾽ ἄρα χειρῶν

Πατρόκλοιο πόδα μεγαλήτορος ἧκε χαμᾶζε
κεῖσθαι" ὁ δ᾽ ἄγχ᾽ αὐτοῖο πέσε πρηνὴς ἐπὶ νεκρῶι, 800

τῆλ ἀπὸ Λαρίσσης ἐριβώλακος, οὐδὲ τοκεῦσι

θρέπτρα φίλοις ἀπέδωκε, μινυνθάδιος δέ οἱ αἰὼν
μ
΄ ,ὔ
ἔπλεθ᾽ ὑπ᾽ Αἴαντος μεγαθύμου δουρὶ δαμέντι.
“Extwp δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ Αἴαντος ἀκόντισε δουρὶ φαεινῶι"

289. ἕλκε PR.

ἱεμένων Ar. ©:
293. ἀπαΐξας PR.

295. Hpine T.

290. TENONTE AHSU fr. Mose.: τένοντας . 292.
ieuénoo(t) DH'PU Par. a f: ἱέμενον G:
301. AapicHe DT.

(ef. A478): epénta GJLQRIS Par. df, Lips. Vr. A.

ἱέλενός Harl. a.
_ _ 302. epenta Zen. ?
304. αὖτ᾽: αὖ C: ἀντ᾽ Vr. A.

yas οἵ cf. φάλαγγες ἐλπόμενοι IT 281 with
note. But here we can of course take
Τρώων as antecedent.

289. For Hippothoos see B 840-40.

290. τένοντε, vulg. τένοντας. But
the dual is regular; see on A 521, Il
587. Compare the manner in which
Achilles drags the body of Hector, X
396-97. τελαμκῶνι, with the baldrick
of his sword or shield detached for the
purpose. The word may mean ὦ strap
generally, but the regular word for that
is ἱμάς (e.g. & 30), and τελαμών is else-
where used only in the special sense.

291-92=0 449-50, where see note.

294. αὐτοςχεϑίην, M 192. ἥρικε, see
on N 411.

297. παρ᾽ αὐλόν is susceptible of two
quite different explanations. (1) The
spear-head sometimes ended in a hollow
tube into which the shaft was fixed ;
that this was called αὐλός appears from
the epithet δολίχαυλος in ¢ 156. The
meaning will then be the brain ran out
along the socket of the spear-head. The

Mykenaean spear-heads all have such
sockets, though those from Hissarlik
are of a different type (see Schuchh. pp.
63, 211 and note on N 162). (2) αὐλῶπις
probably implies that the opening in
the front of the helmet was called αὐλός :
see App. B, vii. 7. This also gives good
sense, the brain ran out past the vizor.
But the former is to be preferred, as the
scholia say. Another alternative which
they give, according to which αὐλός
means the jet of blood, has nothing to
recommend it here, though the word
occurs in that sense in x 18 αὐλὸς ava
ῥῖνας παχὺς ἦλθεν αἵματος ἀνδρομέοιο.
Another explanation, per conum galeae
(Heyne, the socket in which the crest
was fixed) implies an untenable explana-
tion of αὐλῶπις.

299. ἧκε Keiceat go together, let fall
and lie. Cf. A 493, & 120.

301. For this line and the difficulties
which it caused to Strabo see note on B
840.
302-03=A 478-79; 305=N 184, ete.

238

IAIAAOC P (χυπ)

Ls \ b) 7 / ”
ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν ἄντα ἰδὼν ἠλεύατο χάλκεον ἔγχος 305

/ e / / b) / εὖ
τυτθόν: ὁ δὲ Σχεδίον μεγαθύμου ᾿Ιφίτου υἱὸν,

, vo) 7 a > lal II ne
Φωκήων ὄχ᾽ ἄριστον, ὃς ἐν κλειτῶι Lavorni

/ 2) / ’ /
οἰκία ναιετάεσκε πολέσσ᾽ ἄνδρεσσιν ἀνάσσων,
2 / \ ᾽ > \ ”

τὸν Ban ὑπὸ KrAnida μέσην: διὰ δ᾽ ἀμπερὲς ἄκρη

7 / 3S > /
αἰχμὴ χαλκείη Tapa νείατον ὦμον ἀνέσχε.

810

/ \ ΄ > / δὲ / ’ ee > rn
δούπησεν δὲ πεσών, ἀράβησε δὲ τεύχε ET aUTOL.

; > . f
Alas δ᾽ αὖ Φόρκυνα δαΐφρονα, Φαίνοπος υἱόν,

Ν / /

Ἵπποθόωι περιβάντα μέσην κατὰ γαστέρα τύψε,
ῥῆξε δὲ θώρηκος γύαλον, διὰ δ᾽ ἔντερα χαλκὸς
bua: ὁ δ᾽ ἐν κονίηισι πεσὼν ἕλε γαῖαν ἀγοστῶι. 315
χώρησαν δ᾽ ὑπό τε πρόμαχοι καὶ φαίδιμος “Extwp:
᾿Αργεῖοι δὲ μέγα ἴαχον, ἐρύσαντο δὲ νεκρούς,

/ / ,’ «ς / ff / δὲ 7 > > 2) ΕΣ
Φόρκύν θ᾽ Ἱππόθοόν τε, λύοντο δὲ τεύχε᾽ ἀπ ὠμῶν.

5 fal “ Abe ae lal
ἔνθά κεν αὖτε Τρῶες ἀρηϊφίλων ὑπ Ayaiov

/ /
Ἴλιον εἰσανέβησαν ἀναλκείηισι δαμέντες,

920

᾿Αργεῖοι δέ κε κῦδος ἕλον καὶ ὑπὲρ Διὸς αἶσαν

ἐν Fc i > \ 5. /
κἀρτεϊ καὶ σθένεϊ σφετέρωι" ἀλλ᾽ αὐτὸς ᾿Απόλλων ‘

Αἰνείαν ὥτρυνε δέμας Ἱ]ερίφαντι ἐοικὼς

/ ’ J / “ ec \ \ /
κήρυκ᾽ ᾿Ηπυτίδηι, ὅς of mapa πατρὶ γέροντι

306. μεγάθυμον (1.

807. φωκείων ap. Kust. κλητῶι Vr. A.

308.

ναιετάεςκε J(): ναιετάεςκ᾽ U: ναιετάαςκε (2. || πόλεςειν J: πόλεειν D: πολέεες᾽ U.

| GnNdpac(c)in PR.
TU: μέγ᾽ Q. || ἐρύοντο H:
LRU Vr. A.
324. κήρυκι ().

314. δὲ : δέ of H. || ἔντεα 0.
εἰρύςατο G: ἐρρύςαντο fr. Mosc.
Θ᾽ om. A fr. Mose. || λύον Te δὲ Lips.

317. μέγα
318. φόρκυνά
320. ἀναλκίη(ι)ει 4 DH(y

316 om. T.

(S supr.) U.

306. Cyedion, see B 517-18, and note
on 0515. Note that the variant peyd-
θυμον is forbidden by ‘ Wernicke’s law.’

310. Gnécye by the side of the com-
moner διέσχε (E 100, etc.) seems to
mean stuck out.

312. Φόρκυνα is the natural form of
the acc., though we have Φόρκυν in 218,
318. In both places it has been pro-
posed to read Φόρκυνα for Φόρκύν τε (θ᾽),
but the analogy of épw-—épida, κόρυν---
κόρυθα and a good many others (17. G.
§ 97) shews that this is needless.
Phorkys is leader of the Phrygians,
B 862.

314. On this line see App. B, iii.
2(e). Pausanias in his excursus on the
γύαλα (x. 26. 6) says"Ounpos Φόρκυνα τὸν
Φρύγα οὐκ ἔχοντα ἀσπίδα ἐποίησεν, ὅτι
αὐτῶι γυαλοθώραξ ἣν. The absence of
the shield is seemingly only a deduction
a silentio, but it shews that Reichel’s

difficulty as to the compatibility of the
Mykenaean shield with the cuirass was
not unfelt in ancient times. Another
difficulty mentioned by Schol. T reads
like a sentence out of Ueber Homerische
Waffen: παράδοξον τὸ διὰ τῆς ἐπιφανείας
τοῦ σώματος προχυθῆναι ἔντερα, τὸ δὲ διὰ
τοῦ θώρακος πολὺ θαυμασιώτερον. See
note on N 507.

314-15=N 507-08; 316-17=A 505-
06 ; 319-20=Z 73-74.

321. ὑπὲρ Διὸς aican, see notes on B
155, If 780.

322. αὐτός, Bentley αὖτις, again: ef.
hi2e

324. κήρυκ᾽, so Turnebus and Barnes ;
but this is probably meant by κήρυκι of
Mss. Writing ἐκ πλήρους, which is uni-
versal in Latin, was common in Greek
also, as our MSS. even now shew, and
was expressly adopted by Ar. in many
cases ; see App. Crit. on A 441, 450, X

IAIAAOC P (χνπ) 239

κηρύσσων γήρασκε, φίλα φρεσὶ μήδεα εἰδώς" 325
a , Ἁ eX ᾽ ‘
TOL μιν ἐεισάμενος προσέφη Διὸς υἱὸς ᾿Απόλλων"

"Αἰνεία, πῶς ἂν καὶ ὑπὲρ θεὸν εἰρύσσαισθε

᾿ /
Ἴλιον αἰπεινήν ;

ὡς δὴ ἴδον ἀνέρας ἄλλους,

4 A / A / ᾽ 7,
κάρτεϊ τε σθένεί τε πεποιθότας ἠνορέηι τε

πλήθεϊ τε σφετέρωι, καὶ ὑπὲρ Δία δῆμον ἔχοντας. 330

Lal / 7
ἡμῖν δὲ Ζεὺς μὲν πολὺ βούλεται ἢ Δαναοῖσι

, > > > \ n°? v Ah , ᾽ν
νίκην" ἀλλ᾽ αὐτοὶ τρεῖτ᾽ ἄσπετον οὐδὲ μάχεσθε.

325. φρενὶ A.

eipucacee 4JS Mor. Vr. Ὁ A: ἐρύεςαςθε 7.
331. ὑμῖν AS, || Ζεὺς om. L. |) WEN om. AJLPQRT

C Vr. A). || ἔχοντες J.

326. O10c υἱὸς : ἑκάεργος γ΄. d.

327. elpucecoe DH -
330. ὑπὲρ dia: Unepdéa ἢ (-εᾶ

470, and note on II 854. The last may
indicate that he always wrote the elided
ει of the dat. in this way. Instances
from Mss. will be found in the App.
Crit. on A 259, E 5, A 544, Ψ 693, etc.,
and curiously enough, one with this very
word is found in an inscription (C.2.G.
2156) κηρυκι αθανατων epune στησαμ με
(Ξεστῆσάν μ᾽) ayopaux (van L. Ench. p.
64), where the second instance leaves
little doubt as to what is meant by the
first. Herodianos however preferred to
read κήρῦὔκι with hiatus, which is possibly
admissible at the end of the first foot.
This scansion is in fact as old as
Antimachos, κήρυκας ἀθανάτοισι φέρειν
μέλανος οἴνοιο (Athen. p. 475 Ὁ), but has
no other authority in Greek beyond a
single passage in the Anthology, and
the traditional accent κῆρυξ. “Hnutidu
is evidently a name formed from the
profession of the ἠπύτα κῆρυξ (H 384),
like ‘Apuovidys and Texrovidns of car-
penters, θ 114, E 60 (where see other
instances),

325. φίλα ppeci μήδεα εἰθώς, 1.6. an
attached retainer of the family. For
this extension of εἰδέναι from the intel-
lect to the feelings cf. φίλα εἰδότες ἀλλή-
λοισιν Ὕ 277, and note on A 361 ἤπια
δήνεα olde.

327. καὶ ὑπὲρ θεόν, tf god were against
you, Ξε ὑπὲρ Διὸς αἷσαν above. eipuccaicee,
see on A 210.

330. For ὑπὲρ Δία the unanimous
tradition has ὑπερδέα, but with very
different explanations. (1) Eust. τὸν
ἀπτόητον καὶ ὑπερκείμενον δέους, having
a host superior to fear. This entirely
spoils the force of Apollo’s appeal to the
Trojan chiefs. (2) Apoll. Lex. ὑπερδεόν-
Tws ἐνδεῆ, οἷον ἐλάσσονα κατὰ δύναμιν.
This gives a better sense, but ὑπερδεής =

excessively deficient is not at all in the
Epic style ; ἐνδεῆ is all that the context
requires. (3) The same objection may
be made to Déderlein’s excessively timid,
even if that sense could have been got
out of the word. As for the hyphaeresis
by which ὑπερδέα -- ὑπερδεέα, it may be
defended by νηλέα T 229, Geovdéa, and
the compounds of κλέος, H. G. ὃ 105. 4,
though these are extremely doubtful.
But apart from this the three interpreta-
tions given are all virtually impossible.
The passage is however ae up by
the really ‘palmary’ conjecture of Dr. E.
Brocks, ὑπὲρ Δία. We thus get at once
the required parallel to ὑπὲρ θεόν (327)
and the antithesis to ἡμῖν δὲ Ζεύς (331).
We no longer have to supply εἰρυομένους
after ἴδον, but the sentence runs smoothly
to theend. δῆμον is perhaps to be
taken in a local sense (see B 547), holding
their realm; for the pregnant sense of
ἔχειν see E 473 φῆς που ἄτερ λαῶν πόλιν
ἑξέμεν ἠδ᾽ ἐπικούρων. a precisely similar
passage ; though on the analogy of Q
730 q.v. (πόλιν) αὐτὴν ῥύσκευ, exes δ᾽
ἀλόχους καὶ νήπια τέκνα, δῆμος might
have its common personal sense. The
only question is how so plain and simple
a reading could have suffered a corrup-
tion which introduces nothing but con-
fusion and difficulty. The explanation
probably is that the phrase ὑπὲρ Ala
seemed impious, especially in the mouth
of a god, when used of an event which
he had actually seen. Such an ἀπρεπές
would weigh more heavily with a critic
than with a poet; indeed it is likely
enough that a poet would put into the
mouth of a god a phrase which he would
not use himself; such irreverence at
second hand is characteristic enough.
331. πολὺ βούλεται, see on A 112.

240

IAIAAOC P (xvi)

v ? « / 3. ΄
ὡς ἔφατ᾽, Αἰνείας δ᾽ ἑκατηβόλον Απολλωνα
» 5 ΄ > , / > ¢/ 5 / ;
ἔγνω ἐσάντα ἰδών, μέγα δ᾽ “Extopa εἶπε βοήσας
3, ’ if
“"Retép τ᾽ ἠδ᾽ ἄλλοι Τρώων ἀγοὶ ἠδ᾽ ἐπικούρων, 335
> \ an ᾽ - ig 9... lal
αἰδὼς μὲν νῦν ἥδέ γ᾽, ἀρηϊφίλων vm ᾿Αχαιῶν
Ἄ > na /
Ἴλιον εἰσαναβῆναι ἀναλκείηισι δαμέντας.
ἐ a ” /
ἀλλ᾽ ἔτι yap τίς φησι θεῶν, ἐμοὶ ἄγχι παραστάς,
Ε 5 / 5
Liv ὕπατον μήστωρα μάχης ἐπιτάρροθον εἶναι"
lal Ἑ lal > ’ “ “ 5
τῷ ῥ᾽ ἰθὺς Δαναῶν ἴομεν, μηδ᾽ οἵ γε ἕκηλοι 340
/ / n 39
Πάτροκλον νηυσὶν πελασαίατο τεθνηῶτα.
A ΄ ἘΠ id \ , es ” z
ὡς φάτο, καί pa πολυ προμώχων ἐξάλμενος εστη
οἱ δ᾽ ἐλελίχθησαν καὶ ἐναντίοι ἔσταν ᾿Αχαιῶν.

ἔνθ᾽ αὖτ᾽ Aivelas Λειώκριτον οὔτασε δουρί,

ς Ν -
υἱὸν ᾿Αρίσβαντος, AvKopndeos ἐσθλὸν ἑταῖρον. 345
, A /
τὸν δὲ πεσόντ᾽ ἐλέησεν ἀρηΐφιλος Λυκομήδης,
fol \ /~? > \ >\ \ b) / \ lal
στῆ δὲ μάλ᾽ ἐγγὺς ἰὼν Kat ἀκόντισε δουρὶ φαεινῶι,

/ Ψ / / rn
καὶ βάλεν ᾿ἸἹππασίδην ᾿Απισάονα ποιμένω λαῶν

- ἘΝ (ὃ 70 δ᾽ ἜΡΟΝ ΄ Ε oN
Tap ὑπὸ σρράπιοων, εὐσαρ UTO YOUVaAT ENUGED,

ὅς ῥ᾽ ἐκ Παιονίης ἐριβώλακος εἰληλούθει, 850
καὶ δὲ pet ᾿Αστεροπαῖον ἀριστεύεσκε μάχεσθαι.

τὸν δὲ
ἴθυσεν

ie ὩΣ > / ’ 7. 3 an
πεσόντ᾽ ἐλέησεν ἀρήϊος ᾿Αστεροπαῖος,
δὲ καὶ ὁ πρόφρων Δαναοῖσι μάχεσθαι"

333. 0: δὲ AS.
335. τ᾽ om. PR. || ἐπίκουροι L.
ACGHQR (ὃ supr.).
ἡ OH Harl. a(?).

343. ἐναντίον G.

334. ἕκτορι Vr. A

. || παραστὰς U (yp. Boricac 115) Harl. a.
336. ἥδέ r’: ἥδ᾽ PR.
338. tap P (altered to γάρ by P?).
|| ο γ᾽ LQ: οἵδε G.
Cant. Harl. a (swpr. el): Teeneidta 2.
344. λειόκριτον GPRT (swpr. w) Harl. a.

yp. kat φιλοπ --τ--όλεμος X. || AUKOMHOHC: μενέλαος PR.

337. ἀναλκίηιςι
340. JLHO οἵ:
341. τεθνηῶτα 4J (LS supr.) QT
342. προμάχων : πρὸ φίλων PR.
346. ἀρηΐφιλοοα:

346-51 om. Ht.

348. ἀπιςάονα : duuvedona G Vr. b, Harl. d, Par. ὁ ἃ g (yp. ἀπιςάονα), yp. T

(Gnieanon Ms., corr. Maass).

336. Hee for τόδε, by an attraction
similar to that of ἣ θέμις ἐστίν.

338. rap gives the reason for ἴομεν
(840) by anticipation, while ἀλλά puts
the whole sentence in opposition to what
precedes; H. G. § 348. 2, ἔτι, stild,
with ἐπιτάρροθον εἷναι, ‘Zeus has not
yet deserted us.’ For ἐπιτάρροθον cf.
E 808.

340. ἕκηλοι is the word which is em-
phatically negatived: ‘if they are to
bring P. to the ships, let them at all
events not do it at their ease.’ See
note on O 476.

344. Thename Λειώκριτον is Odyssean,

349. npanicin Harl. a.

352-53 om. P.

see B 242, x 294. Nauck points out
that it should be Ληόκριτον from Ands=
News, an Ionic form which has not else-
where ousted the old λαός. Cf. ληὸν
ἀθρήσας Hipponax fr. 88.

347-49, see A 577-79, where we have
Φαυσιάδην ᾿Απισάονα. Here the addition
of 3850-51 is very awkward ; P. Knight
rejects 349. The variant ᾿Αμυθάονα is
perhaps preferable.

351. Kai ὃέ, aye! and (he was no
mere common soldier, but). καί here has a
less emphatic connexion with a particular
word to be emphasized than is usual in
the phrase.

IAIAAOC P (χυπ) 241

ἀλλ᾽ οὔ πως ἔτι εἶχε. σάκεσσι γὰρ ἔρχατο πάντηι

ἑσταότες περὶ Πατρόκλωι, πρὸ δὲ δούρατ᾽ ἔχοντο. 8δῦ

Αἴας γὰρ μάλα πάντας ἐπώιχετο πολλὰ κελεύων"

οὔτέ τιν᾽ ἐξοπίσω νεκροῦ χάζεσθαι ἀνώγει

οὔτέ τινα προμάχεσθαι ᾿Αχαιῶν ἔξοχον ἄλλων,

ἀλλὰ μάλ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ αὐτῶι βεβάμεν, σχεδόθεν δὲ μάχεσθαι.

ὡς Alas ἐπέτελλε πελώριος, αἵματι δὲ χθὼν 860

δεύετο πορφυρέωι, τοὶ δ᾽ ἀγχιστῖνοι ἔπιπτον

νεκροὶ ὁμοῦ Τρώων καὶ ὑπερμενέων ἐπικούρων,

καὶ Δαναῶν: οὐδ᾽ οἱ γὰρ ἀναιμωτί γε μάχοντο,

παυρότεροι δὲ πολὺ φθίνυθον: μέμνηντο γὰρ αἰεὶ

ἀλλήλοις av’ ὅμιλον ἀλεξέμεναι φόνον αἰπύν. 365
ὡς οἱ μὲν μάρναντο δέμας πυρός, οὐδέ κε φαίης

οὔτέ ποτ᾽ ἠέλιον σόον ἔμμεναι οὔτε σελήνην"

ἠέρι γὰρ κατέχοντο μάχηι ἔνι ὅσσοι ἄριστοι

354. ἔρχετο Q. 4866. πολλὰ : τούςϑε 0. 357 om. Ut. || οὐδέ 1,. 358.
ἄλλων : ἄλλον (Ὁ. 359. δὲ : τε CHT Harl. a. 361. ἀγχιςτῖνοι 4C°)L
(supr. H over first1) ΤΊ (7) : ἀγχιστῆνοι U: ἀγχηστῖνοι 2. 363. ἀναιμωτεί PR.
364-65 ad. Zen. 364. μέμνοντο [, Lips.: waiuNoNTo P: μέμνητο G. || dei H.
365. GN GPR and ap. Eust.: Kae’ Q. || φόνον: πόνον GJQ Harl. b d, King’s
Par.a ὁ ἃ f gj and ap. Sch. T: χόλον D. 367. cOn PR, οὐδὲ ceh. 4.
368. "ιάχηι ἔνι Aph.: μάχη ἔπι θ᾽ (ἐπί θ᾽) 7) (λάχηκ) H'JP: μάχης ἐπί θ᾽ (ἔπι
e’) Ὡ (ἔπει G) : μάχην ἔπι ο᾽ Sch. B(?): μάχη" ἐπεὶ R. || ὅεςοι : Sccon Harl. a b,
Par. a, Mor. Sch. T. || ἐπὶ téccon Zen.

354. ἔτι εἶχε, ἔτι Fetxe Brandreth, he Aph., and for all we know to the con-
had no more any chance. See note on trary of Ar. also; in the absence of
H 217. ἔτ᾽ ἔχεν, σακέεσσι P. Knight Schol. A we cannot, however, be sure.
and van L. For épyato see note on If It has the merit of being perfectly plain,
481 ; it would be easy to read σάκεσσι δὲ and the (legitimate) hiatus in the bucolic
Fépxaro if the F really belonged to the diaeresis would account for a change.
word. Zen.’s μάχης ἐπὶ τόσσον makes no sense,

356. μάλα πάντας seem to gotogether; andin the vulg. μάχηι (or μάχης) ἐπί θ᾽
ef. N 741 and several timesin Od. πολλὰ ὅσσοι the θ᾽ is patently a stop-gap for

κελεύων is taken up by οὔτε. . ote, thesake ofthe metre. It is just possible
an ‘ explicative’ asyndeton. that we might read μάχης ἔπι, ὅσσοι
357. Cf. Nestor’s advice in A 303 ff. taking μάχης ἔπι to mean on the battle-
361. πορφύρεον is only here an epithet Ποιὰ ; for this quasi-local sense of μάχη

Hf blood οἵ, μάχης ἐπ᾽ ἀριστερά. But μάχηι ἔνι is

4 much more natural. Most edd. write
364-65 were athetized by Zen., and μάχης ἐπί θ᾽ ὅσσον, and explain it as=
deserve it. But so does the preceding ἐφ᾽ ὅσον τε μάχης, over so much of the
couplet, which is equally weak and fight ; but in the absence of evidence to
prosy. The elaborate military explana- ‘the contrary such a ‘displacement’ of
ore as by no eens Ὧι the mine Epic τε may be pronounced impossible. Nor
BoE Beis oe heroes: preferred to is there analogy to justify us in writing
5 5 ; : μάχης ἐπὶ ὅσσον with hiatus between the
366-83, a thoroughly weak passage ; preposition and its case. 3randreth
see Introd. writes μαχὴῆς ὑπερ, doco, Lachmann
968, μάχηι ἔνι Sccoi is the reading of μάχης ὅσσον τ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἄριστοι.

VOL. II R

942 IAIAAOC P (ἀνπ)

ἕστασαν ἀμφὶ Mevortiadne κατατεθνηῶτι.
nr 7} > \
οἱ δ᾽ ἄλλοι Τρῶες καὶ ἐυκνήμιδες ᾿Αχαιοὶ 870
> - 52 / / > Me ONS
εὔκηλοι πολέμιζον ὑπ᾽ αἰθέρι, πέπταωτο δ᾽ αὐγὴ
fal > / /
ἠελίου ὀξεῖα, νέφος 6 ov φαίνετο πάσης
/ \ /
γαίης οὐδ᾽ ὀρέων: μεταπαυόμενοι δὲ μάχοντο,
,ὔ 7 /
ἀλλήλων ἀλεείνοντες βέλεα στονόεντα,
» bs f 7 ’ ”
πολλὸν ἀφεσταότες. τοὶ δ᾽ ἐν μέσων aye ἔπασχον 375
/ \ 7. a
ἠέρι Kal πολέμωι, τείροντο δὲ νηλέϊ χαλκῶι,
, rn /
ὅσσοι ἄριστοι ἔσαν. δύο δ᾽ ov πω φῶτε πεπύσθην,
/ > 7, /
avépe κυδαλίμω, Θρασυμήδης AvTiroyos τε,
/ / > / 2 > See} ΝΜ
Πατρόκλοιο θανόντος ἀμύμονος, ἀλλ᾿ ET ἐφαντο
id / fe
ζωὸν evi πρώτωι opadar Τρώεσσι μάχεσθαι. 880
\ > » / / Ν Uf id Εν
τὼ δ᾽ ἐπιοσσομένω θάνατον καὶ φύξαν ἑταίρων
ὰ / /
νόσφιν ἐμαρνάσθην, ἐπεὶ ws ἐπετέλλετο Νέστωρ

’ / / / ΄ 2 \ a
OTPUVOV πόλεμόνδε μελαινάων ἀπὸ νηῶν.

fal /
τοῖς δὲ πανημερίοις
> / / δὲ
ἀργαλεέης" καμάτων ὃὲ
γούνατά τε κνῆμαί τε
ἴω Ἢ ᾽ ’ 77
χεῖρές T ὀφθαλμοί τε

ἔριδος μέγα νεῖκος ὀρώρει

καὶ ἱδρῶν νωλεμὲς αἰεὶ 385
/ > id / e ve

πόδες θ᾽ ὑπένερθεν ἑκάστου

παλάσσετο μαρναμένοιιν

369. κατατεθνηῶτι 4AGJPQST fr. Mose. Vr. b:
375. épectadrec ().
@ANONTOC: necéntoc CD Vr. d. || ἀλλ᾽ ἔτ᾽ : ἀλλά τ᾽ PR.
382. μαρνάςθην Vr. d.

371. nintato δ᾽ αὐγῆι G.

381. πόλεμον 7) (yp. Θάνατον).
385. ἀργαλέοις L. || δὲ : Te Bar. Mor.

κατατεθνειῶτι (2 (-τα U).
377. MUeeceHN S. 379.

380. ἐνὶ : ἐν PR.
384. πανημερίου 4.
386. Θ᾽ om. D: 2 J. 387. παλάς-

conto /). || uwapnauenoicin C() Cant. Mor. Harl. a, fr. Mose. Vr, ἃ.

371. Cf. ¢ 44 μάλ᾽ αἴθρη πέπταται
ἀνέφελος, Whence Naber would read
αἴθρηι for aieépi, but N 837 αἰθέρα καὶ
Διὸς αὐγάς supports the text. See App.
H. αἰθήρ is just ‘the air of heaven.’

373. For the local genitives γαίης and
ὁρέων see H. G. ὃ 149.1. μεταπαυό-
uenol, with intervals for rest; a truly
unheroic conception. ὀλίγη δέ τ᾽ ἀνά-
πνευσις πολέμοιο is the Epic idea; the
παυσωλὴ πολέμοιο of T 201 is another
matter.

377. These lines are evidently meant
to prepare the way for 651 ff.

381. ἐπιοσςομένω ἐπιβλέποντες, ἵνα
τῶν μὲν πιπτόντων ὑπερμαχοῖεν, τοὺς δὲ
φυγάδας προτρέποιντο. ἄλλως, προορώ-
μενοι καὶ προσδοκῶντες μήτε ἀποθνήσκειν
τοὺς ἑταίρους μήτε φεύγειν ἐπὶ τῆς αὐτῆς
ἔμενον τάξεως, Schol. T. The compound
does not occur again in H., and the use
of the simple éccoua is different (A
105). Cf., however, προτιόσσομαι ἡ 31,

X 356, which is somewhat more general
in sense. For the hiatus ef. ἐπιόψομαι
1167. As usual the tactical advice put
into the mouth of Nestor is prosy and
suspicious. See on A 303.

384. πανημερίοις is meaningless here ;
it can mean neither ‘all day’ nor, as in
A 472 (q.v.) etc. ‘all the rest of the day.’
Notice also τοῖς for τοῖσι.

385. καμάτωι καὶ dpa, with the sweat
of toil, hendiadys. But even so the idea
of ‘bespattered with sweat’ is a curious
one, and as Monro remarks, ‘in other
places where the phrase recurs (N 711,
P 745) κάματος is evidently the important
word’; ef. also καμάτωι ἀδηκότες ἠδὲ Kal
ὕπνωι K 98,

387. παλάσςετο, apparently a case of
the Schema Pindaricum ; it is hardly
possible to suppose, as is commonly
said, that the number depends on the
distant γούνατα, and Τ' 327 ἵπποι... καὶ
ποικίλα τεύχε᾽ ἔκειτο is obviously not

IAIAAOC P (xvi)

ἀμφ᾽ ἀγαθὸν θεράποντα ποδώκεος Aiaxidao.

ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἀνὴρ ταύροιο βοὸς μεγάλοιο βοείην

al / / “-
λαοῖσιν δώηι τανύειν, μεθύουσαν ἀλοιφῆι"

390

δεξάμενοι δ᾽ ἄρα τοί ye διαστάντες τανύουσι
κυκλόσ᾽, ἄφαρ δέ τε ἰκμὰς ἔβη, δύνει δέ τ᾽ ἀλοιφὴ
πολλῶν ἑλκόντων, τάνυται δέ τε πᾶσα διωαπρό"

ἃ “, 5» » \ » / ’ / > tan ,
ὡς οἵ γ᾽ ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα νέκυν ὀλίγην ἐνὶ χώρηι

/ ” /
εἵλκεον ἀμφότεροι: μάλα δέ σφισιν ἔλπετο θυμός, 395

Ah \ \ 5 ΄, No, > \ > “-“
ρωσὶν μὲν ἐρύειν προτὶ “INtov, αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχαιοῖς

νῆας ἔπι γλαφυράς: περὶ δ᾽ αὐτοῦ μῶλος ὀρώρει

ἄγριος: οὐδέ κ᾽ "Apns λαοσσόος οὐδέ κ᾽ ᾿Αθήνη

/ > rn > ᾽ U » 50» > / / “
TOV γε ἰδοῦσ᾽ ὀνόσαιτ᾽, οὐδ᾽ εἰ μάλα μιν χόλος Kol.

390. δοίη Η. Sol. O°: τ ἢ
T CDQR. || ἔβη : edu 0.
σφιν Lips. || HAnero AHS: ἔπλετο J.

ποτὶ S. || ἀχαιοῖς : yp. -- ἀχαι -- οἱ Harl. ἃ.

λιῶλος : νεῖκος C. 398. ἄγριον C.

eido0c’ Vr. Ὁ. || ἵκη D: ἵκει : ἥκει PR.

392. κύκλος Ar.: κύκλωι Zen. || Te:

395. ἕλκεον Ar.? see Ludwich. || 0€: γάρ G.

396. μέν ῥ᾽ ACHST fr. Mosc. Vr. b.
397. ἔπι : ἀνὰ HQ and wp. Eust.
399: re: r PQR Vr. Ὁ: δὲ 5: δ᾽ 4,

parallel. Even in the Schema Pindari-
cum the verb rarely follows its subjects.
(We find, however, μελιγάρυες ὑμνοὶ ὑστέ-
pwv ἀρχὰ λόγων τέλλεται, Pind. O. xi. 5.
See Kiihner Gr. §§ 367.1; 370. 4. The
use is only found with inanimate subjects,
and is evidently analogous to the con-
struction of the neuter plural with the
singular verb.) The line can hardly be
mended unless we write κνήμας, πόδας,
ἕκαστος, χεῖρας, and ὀφθαλμώ. μαρ-
ναμένοιιν, another curious piece οἵ
grammar; presumably the dual refers
to the two armies. ‘The variant μαρνα-
μένοισιν can hardly be supported against
the general consensus, in view of the
common tendency to substitute plur. for
dual. μαρναμένοιο Brandreth.

390. λαοῖσιν, his servants or retainers:
a use, however, for which there is no
parallel in H. The idea seems to be
that if the hide was soaked in fat and
then stretched, the natural moisture left
the pores, and allowed the grease to
enter in. <A similar rude process of
curing is still practised in India, doubt-
less from primitive times ; the hides are
pegged out or stretched, and grease is
rubbed into them. Indeed oil is still
used in place of tanning to produce
certain classes of leather in modern
Europe. meevoucan, drunk for drenched ;
an almost grotesquely violent metaphor,
to which there is no parallel in Greek ;

μεθύειν τῶι μεγέθει τῶν πεπραγμένων,
which Eust. quotes from Demosthenes,
is of course quite different. 1700 be drunk
is the primitive and only sense of μεθύειν,
coming from days older than the Greek
language: it never meant to drip or be
soaked.

392. KuKAdce, Ar. κύκλος, Zen. κύκλωι,
see on A 212. The adverb seems to go
equally with διαστάντες and τανύουσι,
they stand at intervals all round, so that
it is stretched equally in every direction.
ixudac ἔβη, the natural moisture of the
skin goes out of it, so that the grease
enters into the pores. This suits the
general use of ἱκμάς for natural juices
(see Lex.). Others take it of the oil
itself, which forthwith gocs its way,
spreads over the surface. In either case
we should expect a participle or adverb
to complete the sense of the verb.
Moreover, if ἰκμάς is rightly referred to
root sik (Curtius Hf. no. 24 b), we have
an hiatus illicitus. These two con-
siderations suggest that we should read
ἄφαρ δ᾽ ἐξ (van Herwerden), or ἄφαρ δέ
τ᾽ ἐπ᾿ (ἀπ᾽) ἱκμὰς ἔβη.

399. Compare A 539 ἔνθά κεν οὐκέτι
ἔργον ἀνὴρ ὀνόσαιτο μετελθών. TON, SC.
μῶλον. μιν is to be taken distributively,
either of them. Ares and Athene are
selected no doubt as the war gods of the
two opposing parties; each side would
gain the favour of their own patron.

244

IAIAAOC P (xvit)

a / lal J
τοῖον Ζεὺς ἐπὶ Ilatpoxror ἀνδρῶν τε καὶ ἵππων 400

nr \ /
ἤματι TOL ἐτάνυσσε κακὸν πόνον.

509 ” 7
οὐδ᾽ ἄρα πώ τι

ἤιδεε ἸΤάτροκλον τεθνηότα δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς:

πολλὸν γὰρ ἀπάνευθε νεῶν μάρναντο θοάων,

/ « ry /
τείχει ὕπο Τρώων.

/ ” » a
TO μιν ov ποτε ἔλπετο θυμῶι

/ / ΄
τεθνάμεν, ἀλλὰ ζωόν, ἐνυχριμφθέντα πύληισιν, 405
> \ \ 5, y
ay ἀπονοστήσειν, ἐπεὶ οὐδὲ TO ἔλπετο πάμπαν,

ΕῚ 72 / ΕΣ « of NX \ >) -“
ἐκπέρσειν πτολίεθρον ἄνευ ἕθεν, οὐδὲ σὺν αὐτῶι"

, \ / \ ? / id 5) Y
πολλάκι γὰρ TO YE μητρος ἐπεύθετο νόσφιν ἀκούων,
oe € > / \ 7 /

ἥ οἱ ἀπαγγέλλεσκε Διὸς μεγάλοιο νοημα"

\ / > " C39 \ , oa 5: ῈἘ7
δὴ ΤΟΤΕ Y OV Ol E€LTTE Κακὸν TOGOV Οοσσον ἐτύχθη

410

ε \ , ͵ bd -
μήτηρ, ὅττί ῥά οἱ πολὺ φίλτατος ὠὦλεθ᾽ ἑταῖρος.

c > Ξ.ῈΝ \ \ ’ / ΄ 3 ",
οι ὃ QLEl περι VEK POV AKAN [LEV δούρατ EXOVTES

400. ἐπὶ : περὶ 2).

ὅ A: τῶ D. || WIN: μὲν Ἡ. ||
énixpipeenta R (sup. χα) Vr. Ὁ.
ἐκπέρςαι 1).
410. γ᾽ om. Η. || oi: τοι L.

402. τεθνεότα CPR Cant. fr. Mosc.: tTeeneidta DU.
403. rap ῥ᾽ CHJQTU Harl. a, Vr. A, fr. Mosc.
euuon Vr. ἃ.

406. TO: TON (). || HAneto H. 407.
408. τό re: Téde AS. || μητρὸς τό τ᾽ R. || Néc@IN: χωρὶς Cant.
411. ἑταίρων L.

404-25 om. Zen. 404. τό:
405. ἐνιχριαφέντα P Vr. ἃ;

412. νεκρῶι U.

404. Znvddoros ἀπὸ τοῦ τείχει ὕπο
Τρώων ἕως τοῦ χάλκεον οὐρανόν (420)
οὐ γράφει. ᾿Αρίσταρχος μόνον ἀθετεῖ ὧς
dé Tic αὖ Τρώων (420, see note there),
Schol. T. The passage contains nothing
but a painfully conscientious endeavour
to explain just so much of the situation
as is already quite clear. 16, wherefore,
1.6. because they were so far away from
the ships Achilles had not yet grown
anxious (on account of their long ab-
sence). If we read τὸ μέν (with H),
we might explain ‘this he never sup-
posed, viz. that P. was dead.’ But this
anticipatory use of τό elsewhere occurs
only when the pronoun stands for a
relative clause (H. G. § 257. 4). Achilles
would hardly have expected P. to reach
the gates after his urgent charge in II
87-96.

407. αὐτῶι here seems to be reflexive.
This use is very rare, see H. G. ὃ 252 ad
fin. ; but it is very difficult to separate
αὐτῶι from the undoubtedly reflexive
ἕθεν, with which it is parallel; and
αὐτόν (μιν) is clearly reflexive in 6 244,
247. ‘The other instances of the re-
flexive use quoted by Ebeling (Lez. 1.
204 a) are susceptible of different ex-
planation. It is possible here to under-
stand ‘he did not expect that P. would
take Troy without himself, nor that he

(Achilles) would take it with him
(Patroklos)’; but the harshness of such
a construction is obvious. Perhaps the
explanation is found in the lateness of
the passage; the author may have
been familiar with the> reflexive σὺν
αὑτῶι.

408. νόςφιν, in secret; cf. IL 36-37,
and for other warnings from Thetis see
I 410, 2 9 ff. But the idea of a con-
tinued prophetical communication from
her is peculiar to this place. In fact
the prophecy as to the death of P. in =
9 would rather tend to increase than to
allay his anxiety here, and indeed almost
directly contradicts 410-11. The dis-
crepancy of course arises from difference
of authorship, and we need not try to
remove it by excision of lines. Compare
the similar difficulty in the note on
I 411.

410. δὴ τότε, ‘then indeed (it turned
out that) she had not told him; i.e. a
thing had come to pass that she had
never told him,’ Monro. δὴ τότε regu-
larly stands in antithesis to a stated time
in the past, and indicates that the poet
returns from it to his immediate narrative
(Hentze). See note on If 810.

411 has an obelos in U, which may
indicate that Ar, rejected it: Sehol. T
on 410 says οὔκ ἐστι περισσός.

IAIAAOC P (χυπὺὴ

/ ’ / ᾽ ,
νωλεμὲς ἐγχρίμπτοντο καὶ ἀλλήλους ἐνάριζον.
ὧδε δέ τις εἴπεσκεν ᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων"

Φ >
“ὦ φίλοι, ov μὰν ἧμιν ἐυκλεὲς ἀπονέεσθαι
-“ > -“ »" ,
νῆας ἔπι γλαφυράς, ἀλλ᾽ αὐτοῦ γαῖα μέλαινα
an / / \ 7, "
πῶσι χάνοι" TO κεν ἧμιν ἄφαρ πολὺ κέρδιον εἴη,
-“ ’ὔ / e /
εἰ τοῦτον Τρώεσσι μεθήσομεν ἱπποδάμοισιν
/ / / lal / ΕΣ
ἄστυ πότι σφέτερον ἐρύσαι καὶ κῦδος ἀρέσθαι.
Δ / a , / > / "
ὡς δέ τις αὖ Τρώων μεγαθύμων αὐδήσασκεν" 420
oc 9 , ἢ \ a 5) 4 5. ἢ A a
ὦ φίλοι, εἰ καὶ μοῖρα παρ᾽ ἀνέρι τῶιδε δαμῆναι
/ c “ / / , 5
πάντας ὁμῶς, μή πώ τις ἐρωείτω πολέμοιο."
ἃ Vi / » ΄ ΄,
ὡς ἄρα τις εἴπεσκε, μένος δ᾽ ὄρσασκεν ἑκάστου.
Δ e \ ΄ , ’ \
ὡς ol μὲν μάρναντο, σιδήρειος δ᾽ ὀρυμαγδὸς
΄, > \ - > 9547 > /
χάλκεον οὐρανὸν ἷκε δι’ αἰθέρος ἀτρυγέτοιο"
“ ᾽ > , / 5 / 5:
ἵπποι δ᾽ Αἰακίδαο μάχης ἀπάνευθεν ἐόντες

413. ἐγχρίπτοντο 4J, τινές ἐνχρίπτοντο Sch. T:
415. οὐ WAN: οὐκ ἂν AS: οὐ μὲν DG. :

Mor. Harl. ἃ b, King’s Par. ἃ ἃ ὁ fh.
Guin Q. || γράφουσί τινες...
HG.
αὖ Cant.(?): ὧϑε δέ τις αὖ G.
428. τίς τ᾽ AS. || ὥρςαςκεν CLS. |
424. dpuruadéc CGHJPU.

ἡμῖν εὐκλεὲς Eust. (so H Vr. A, Lips.).
419. ἐρύςειν Harl. a, Vr. b A.
422. μή πως PR: μήπου U.

€xpiuntonto ΡΩΝ Vr. Ὁ A,

418. εἶ:
(or 420-232). || ὧϑέ τις
πτολέμοιο ().
€xdctou: ἕκαςτος (: yp. ἑταίρου U.

420 ἀθ. Ar.

413. érypiuntonto, here only in the
sense pressed hard on one another. Cf.
H 272 ἀσπίδ᾽ ἐνιχριμφθείς.

414. For these expressions of the
common feeling of the army see note
on B 271.

415. This speech forms a single closely
connected whole, 418-19 completing the
thought of ἀπονέεσθαι. The sequence is
logically disturbed—though not rendered
obscure—by the insertion of the fresh
thought ἀλλ᾽ αὐτοῦ... εἴη. The relation
of the clause τό κεν. . εἴη to those
which immediately precede and follow
it is virtually that of an apodosis with
two protases—a not unfamiliar occur-
rence. That is, we may regard χάνοι,
a pure wish, as used conditionally,
‘may the earth open, that would be
far better’=‘if the earth were to open,’
ete. Then the second protasis εἰ μεθή-
σομεν is added as the foundation upon
which the whole sentence, with its sub-
ordinate parts, is based. Or we may
more simply make τό κεν... εἴη a paren-
thesis, may the earth gape for us—it were
best so—if we leave, ete.

416. rata χάνοι, i.e. may our graves
receive us; A 182, Z 282.

417. ἄφαρ, see note on A 418.
420. ὥς appears to be used for ὧδε
in the sense ‘as follows’; and it was

perhaps this which induced Ar. to athe-
tize the line (see on 404). If it were in
better company we might adopt the
variant ὧδέ τις αὖ, where αὖ is a con-
junction as in 478, A 104 (q.v.), ete.
But it is possible to regard ὥς as refer-
ring back ; ‘in the same manner (as the
Greeks) said the Trojans.’ It is not
much to the credit of the poetry that,
by omitting the line, 421-22 may be
read as part of the speech of the Greeks,
but such is evidently the case. (Ludwich
says it is ‘hardly credible’ that Ar. can
have omitted this single line, and holds
that the athetesis extended to 423 or 425.
This is possible, but surely not neces-
sary, and entirely without authority. )
424. For the repeated ὥς, marking a
break in the story, ef. Z 311-12, X 515-

WV 1. εἰϑήρειος, apparently = inflexible,
i.e. indomitable, unwearying ; cf. Ψ 177
πυρὸς μένος σιδήρεον, and T 372 ἔοικε

μένος αἴθωνι σιδήρωι. The juxtaposition
οἵ χάλκεον οὐρανόν is awkward, as it
seems to imply an antithesis of the two
metals, which of course does not exist.

246

IAIAAOC P (xvir)

cal b) \ \ lal / - /
κλαῖον, ἐπεὶ δὴ πρῶτα πυθέσθην ἡνιόχοιο
> , ic cd df 5 /
ἐν κονίηισι πεσόντος ὑφ᾽ “Extopos ἀνδροφόνοιο.

9 \
pav

πολλὰ

Ν
Αὐτομέδων Διώρεος ἄλκιμος υἱὸς
\ \ xX / “ 3 / hs
πολλὰ μὲν ap μάστιγι Gone ἐπεμαίετο θείνων,

480

δὲ μειλιχίοισι προσηύδα, πολλὰ δ᾽ ἀρειῆι"

pale a \ \ ¢ /
τὼ δ᾽ οὔτ ἂψ ἐπὶ νῆας ἐπὶ πλατὺν ᾿λλήσποντον

Sunes, / 3. S) ΄
ἠθελέτην ἰέναι οὔτ᾽ ἐς πόλεμον μετ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοῦς,
ΕῚ 3 / 7 la , /
ἀλλ᾽ ὥς TE στήλη μένει ἔμπεδον, ἥ T ἐπὶ τύμβωι

os as e / / \ /
QVEPOS ETTNKNL τεθνηότος NE YVVALKOS, 435
as μένον ἀσφαλέως περικαλλέα δίφρον ἔχοντε,
BA ? / / / /
οὔδει ἐνισκίμψναντε καρήατα" δάκρυα δέ σφι
\ \ / / Ue /
θερμὰ κατὰ βλεφάρων χαμάδις ῥέε μυρομένοιιν
ἡνιόχοιο πόθωι, θαλερὴ δ᾽ ἐμιαίνετο χαίτη

ζεύγλης ἐξερυποῦσα παρὰ ζυγὸν ἀμφοτέρωθεν.

440

’ , ra
μυρομένω δ᾽ ἄρα τώ γε ἰδὼν ἐλέησε Kpovior,

/ \ ΄ NDA ΄, ἢ
κινήσας δὲ Καρη TpoTl ον μυθήσατο Oujov:

427. Ta πρῶτα R.

428. πεςόντες R.
431. NpocHUOa: κελεύων Ap. Lex. 42. 16.

429. αὐτομέθων re ASU Vr. A.
434 om. Ht. 435. €CTHKHI:

εἱστήκει CG: οετήκει J: ἑστήκει 2. || Teeneidtoc CR: teeneitoc DQU Vr. A. ||

He: ἠδὲ U in ras.

436. €yonte CST fr. Mose. Vr. Ὁ d: ἔχοντες Q.

437.

énickHwante GU Vr. A (ἔνι ck.) and ap. Eust.: énickipyante (ἔνι cx.) ALS fr. Μοβο.":

énickiupantec J Vr. ἃ:
HS Vr. A: μυρομένοιςιν 0.

énickipantec (): ἐνιοκήψαντες 7).
439. ποϑῆι G Cant.

438. WLUPOENOIIN
440. ἀμφοτέρωςε 7)

(-oce) HPRT: ἀμφοτέροιει CGU (yp. ἀμφοτέρωθεν U*), yp. Harl. a, and ap.

Schol. T Eust.
over -ouc 0’).

441. WUpOUENOUC .

442. ποτὶ 405: πρὸς P

. τούς TU. || 0°: ὃ᾽ ὧδ᾽ T (from ὦ ὃ᾽ supr.
. || eon ᾧ (supr. θυμὸν).

427. Patroklos had left the chariot at
Il 733, but it is to be supposed that the
horses had been kept close behind him
while he was fighting; Hector pur-
sued them on P.’s death, II 864-67,
P 75-77.

431. ἀρειῆι, also T 109, Φ 339, both
times in similar phrases. Platt (C. R.
i. p. 280) takes it to mean entreaty here
and in ®, regarding the use in T as a
mistake on the part of the author of
that late passage. The sense of reviling,
however, is quite admissible in all pass-
ages ; and the first syll. of ἀρή, prayer,
is invariably long in H. (= ἀρβά 2).
apys—=bane, which offers a sufficiently
good basis for the sense reviling, is an
entirely different word ; see notes on
37, M 994.

435. ἑστήκηι G. Hermann, mss. ἑστή-
ket, a form which may perhaps have been
regarded as a secondary present, the
pluperf. being of course inadmissible.

See note on A 483.
a tomb cf. A 371.

437. énickiumwpante, a strong and pic-
turesque phrase to describe their attitude
with heads bowed down to touch the
ground.

439. The masc. πόθος occurs only
here in 71., though it is found in Od. ;
ποθή is commoner in both poems, and
Heyne reads ποθῆι here with slight Ms.
authority.

440=T 406, and cf. Ψ 283-84 (of the
same horses) πενθείετον, οὔδει δέ σῴι
χαῖται ἐρηρέδαται. Ζεύτλης, see App. Μ,
§ 5.
442. We can hardly say exactly what
KINHcac κάρη implies, whether indigna-
tion or pity ; cf. 200. In each case both
feelings are mingled in the following
speech. But in p 465 ἀκέων κίνησε κάρη
κακὰ βυσσοδομεύων it appears to be a sign
of anger. It may indicate no more than
profound thought, as with Lord Burleigh.

For the στήλη on

IAIAAOC P (χνπ) 247

, lo , aw »
“ἃ δειλώ, TL σφῶϊ δόμεν ΤΠηλῆϊ ἄνακτι
a ΄ -“ ᾽ ΄,
θνητῶι, ὑμεῖς δ᾽ ἐστὸν ἀγήρω τ᾽ ἀθανάτω τε;

4 JA / ᾽ » ὃ / ” ? ” ΄
ἢ ἵνα δυστήνοισι μετ᾽ ἀνδράσιν ἄλγε ἐχῆτον ; 445

> \ / / / ᾽ due , > e
Ov μὲν γὰρ TL TOU ἐστιν οϊζυρώτερον aVvopos

Ὁ“ / “ , ,ὔ \ ΄
πάντων, ὅσσά τε γαῖαν ἔπι πνείει TE καὶ ἕρπει.

ἀλλ᾽ οὐ μὰν ὑμῖν γε καὶ ἅρμασι δαιδαλέοισιν
“Ἑκτωρ [Πριαμίδης ἐποχήσεται" οὐ γὰρ ἐάσω.
ἢ οὐχ ἅλις ὡς καὶ τεύχε᾽ ἔχει καὶ ἐπεύχεται αὔτως; 40
ae / ᾽ \ A
σφῶϊν δ᾽ ἐν γούνεσσι βάλω μένος ἠδ ἐνὶ θυμῶι,
ὄφρα καὶ ΔΛυὐτομέδοντα σαώσετον ἐκ πολέμοιο
a ” / » / a » ,
νῆας ἔπι γλαφυράς: ἔτι γάρ σφισι κῦδος ὀρέξω
, τ A /
κτείνειν, εἰς ὅ KE νῆας ἐυσσέλμους ἀφίκωνται
,ὔ 3 97 \ aae\ / . Ν v ν᾽ ἌΣ
Sune T ἠέλιος καὶ ἐπὶ κνέφας ἱερὸν ἔλθηι. 455
A > \ 7 f / /
ὡς εἰπὼν ἵπποισιν ἐνέπνευσεν μένος NU"

3 5
τὼ ὃ ἀπὸ χαιτάων κονίην οὔδάσδε βαλόντε
ἘΠ δ \ a \ ma , >? /
piped ἔφερον θοὸν ἅρμα peta Tpdas καὶ Ἀχαιούς.
- ᾽ ΄ ,
τοῖσι δ᾽ ἐπ᾿ Αὐτομέδων payer’, ἀχνύμενός περ ἑταίρου,

΄ of δ ᾽ a
ἵπποις ἀΐσσων ὥς T αὐἰγυπιὸς μετὰ χῆνας" 460

(Ts \ \ / ig \ , 5 lal
ῥέα μὲν yap φεύγεσκεν ὑπὲκ Τρώων ὀρυμαγδοῦ,

445. ἔχητε PR: ἔχοιτον A.
ὀϊΖυρότερον HJU: ὀϊζΖυρώτερος ().

Harl. a (yp. οὐ rap ἐάςω), yp. Par. a, τινές Sch. T.

Ap. Lew. 170. 14. || ἄλλως Harl. a (yp. atitwe).
455 om. C! Par. ft. || ἔλθοι HS.

cpi(n) P).

446. nou: nor Plato Azxioch. 367d.
448. re om. PR.

449. οὐδέ Tic ἄλλος

450. ἐπεύχεται : ἀγάλλεται
451. γούνας(ς)ι GQRU. 453.
456. ἐπέπνευςε Vr. A. πμπένος

nokuveapcétc ἐνῆκεν Zen.: καὶ προστίθησιν αὐτὸς δ᾽ oUAUUNONOE μετ᾽ ἀθανάτοισι

βεβήκει (Jey. wet’ ἀθανάτους ἐβεβήκει), Sch. T.
401. ῥέα DHJTU Mor. Bar. and πᾶσαι
(Sch. T—so Ludwich): feta Q. || d6puruad0d CGHJIPR.

ἔφερον) fr. Mosc. 460. Ynnouc J.

458. piuga φέρον T (7p. piug’

444, Compare M 323, with uote.
Observe the hiatus at the end of the
first foot.

446. éizupwtepon, an exception to
the usual rule for the formation of com-
paratives. No doubt it is due to purely
metrical reasons, for it is obvious that
ὀϊζυρότερος could not be used in a hexa-
meter ; similarly κακοξεινώτερος (υ 376),
but Aapwraros (8 350) doubtless stands
for λα(ξ)ερώτατος, in which case the ὦ
will be regular. For the couplet com-
pare o 130-31 οὐδὲν ἀκιδνότερον γαῖα
τρέφει ἀνθρώποιο πάντων K.T.D.

450. A οὐχ ἅλις is elsewhere followed
by ὅτι, but ws=how is virtually equiva-
lent, as usually explained, to ὅτι οὕτως.
Brandreth omits A, see on E 349.
αὔτως, because his triumph is soon to
come to naught.

451. βάλω, so Menrad; vulg. βαλῶ,
but the Homeric form of the future is
βαλέω (8 403, 417, βαλέοντι X 608), and
the aor. subj. is practically equivalent
to the fut. indic. ; A 262, I 121, ete.

453. cpici, the Trojans, though they
have not been named since 420.

454-55 = A 193-94. . The fact that
they are borrowed from an earlier stage
of the fighting explains the inconsistency
with =, where the Trojans do not reach
the ships, or even the wall, but are
stopped by the moat some distance
off.

459. τοῖσι ὃ᾽ én’, apparently against
them, the Trojans. But for the next
line it would be more naturally taken
Ξε ἐπὶ Tots ἵπποις.

460. ἵπποις, sociative dative, charging
with the horses, airumidc, H 59.

948 IAIAAOC P (xvi)

econ sh > ει
ῥεῖα δ᾽ ἐπαΐξασκε πολὺν καθ ὅμιλον ὀπάζων.
ἀλλ᾽ οὐχ ἥιρει φῶτας, ὅτε σεύαιτο διώκειν"
> ΄ 5 5 5.1 θ᾽ ς a SN δί
οὐ γάρ πως ἣν οἷον ἐόνθ ἱερῶι ἐνὶ δίφρωι
4 ΩΣ an δ᾿ δι / > / ῬΑ
EYKXEL ἐφορμᾶσθαι καὶ ἐπίσχειν WKEAS ἱπποῦς. 465
ὀψὲ δὲ δή μιν ἑταῖρος ἀνὴρ ἴδεν ὀφθαλμοῖσιν
᾿Αλκιμέδων υἱὸς Λαέρκεος Αἱμονίδαο"
na 5 /
στῆ δ᾽ ὄπιθεν δίφροιο, καὶ Αὐτομέδοντα προσηύδα"
an \
“Αὐτόμεδον, Tis τοί vu θεῶν νηκερδέα βουλὴν
ἐν στήθεσσιν ἔθηκε καὶ ἐξέλετο φρένας ἐσθλάς ; 410
oe “ .ς
οἷον πρὸς Τρῶας μάχεαι πρώτωι ἐν ὁμίλων
“ nan 2 ὦ“
μοῦνος" ἀτάρ τοι ἑταῖρος ἀπέκτατο, τεύχεα δ᾽ “Exrop
> \ ” ” See > ͵ ΕΣ
αὐτὸς ἔχων ὦμοισιν ἀγάλλεται Αἰακίδαο.
5 , /
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ Αὐτομέδων προσέφη Διώρεος υἱὸς"
“«᾿Αλκίμεδον, τίς Tap τοι ᾿Αχαιῶν ἄλλος ὁμοῖος 47

Or

A , ἌΤΙ ,

ἵππων ἀθανάτων ἐχέμεν Sunoiv τε μένος τε,
\ / / ᾽ /

εἰ μὴ Ἰ]άτροκλος, θεόφιν μήστωρ ἀτάλαντος,

fal 5 A lal /
ζωὸς ἐών; νῦν av θάνατος καὶ μοῖρα κιχάνει.

462. ἐπαΐξεοεκε CH. 463. ὅτε ceUaITO: ὅτ᾽ ἐςςεύαιτο 4S: ὅτ᾽ éccevato
fr. Mose.: ὅτε τ᾽ éccevato (): ὅτ᾽ ἐςςεύοντο C: ὅτ᾽ EnecceUeTo 1) : ὅτ᾽ ἐς(ς)εύετο 2.
464. ἰόνοϑ᾽ G. || ἱρῶ Q. || Eni: ἐπὶ R. 465. énicynein G. 467. Gpuonidao
CT fr. Mose. 470. cTHeecci Téeeike 7). 472. αὐτὰρ (). 473. ὥλοιιν Vr. A.
475. Tap (τ᾽ ἄρ) T Harl. a: γάρ Q. 476. ἀθανάτων : ὠκυπόδων (), yp. U.
477. UHcTWP: yp. μῆνιν 115, yp. uATIN Schol. U. 418. δ᾽ αὖ DS. || κιχάνει :
κάλυψεν CDH Mor. Vr. A, yp. Harl. ἃ.

462. Compare E 334 with note. The — stands before peta in P 70, X 23, ῥηΐτεροι

Other

two forms ῥέα and ῥεῖα are here as in

Hesiod Opp. 5-6 brought into close
connexion. The former occurs ten times

in H. (72. only), the latter 38. Their
etymology is doubtful, but to judge
from Greek analogy neither can be right.
The root-vowei is clearly a, Ion. ἢ,
cf. py-td.o-s, py-trepo-s, Att. ῥάιων, ῥᾶι-
otros. This points to Lonic ῥῆτιο-ς, with
adverbial neuter p7-ca, in the old alphabet
PEIA, wrongly transliterated feta. ῥέα
is perhaps pa (which can always be sub-
stituted) from an older ῥᾶ-α with -a like
Gp-a, μάλ-α οἷο. ; cf. Alkman fr. 42
(from Apoll. Dysk.) τίς δ᾽ ἄν, ris ποκα pa
ἄλλω νόον ἀνδρὸς ἐπίσποι ; Strabo (p. 364)
quotes Soph. and Ion for the same form.
The grammarians also give βρᾶ and
βράιδιος as Aiolic forms, which would
point to an original root Fpa-. Of this
there may possibly be a reminiscence in
the lengthening of a preceding vowel
in Θ 179, T 101; but a short vowel

(-ταταὴ in & 258, τ 577, 75.
occurrences of the word prove nothing
(Knés Dig. p. 298). P. Knight reads
peta μὲν ἄρ in 461.

463. ὅτ᾽ ἐσσεύαιτο of MSS. represents
not a form of ἐσσεύασθαι (év-), for no
such compound exists, but ὅτε σσεύαιτο.
σεύασθαι is always treated as though it
began with two consonants, see note on
A 549 and compare the frequent forms
ἐνὶμμεγάροισιν, ποτὶρρόον etc. of. our MSS,
(especially papyri).

464. ἱερῶι, presumably as drawn by
steeds of divine origin. It does not
recur as an epitheton ornans, nor is this
a phrase in which we should expect
to find a primitive meaning strong.
Schulze however makes it mean active,
swift; App. D, 4 (1).

476. ἐχέμεν, to manage the control
and spirit of the horses, a slight zeugma.

478. νῦν Γ᾽ αὖ van L. αὖ is a con-
junction here.

IAIAAOC P (xvii)

249

> \ \ \ ΄ \ ΄ / ,

ἀλλὰ σὺ μὲν μάστιγα καὶ ἡνία συγαλόεντα

, wee ef ᾽ ΄ “ ΄, ”

δέξαι, ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἵππων ἀποβήσομαι, ὄφρα μάχωμαι. 180
Δ » > > / \ / “ > ’ ΄,
ὡς ἔφατ᾽, ᾿Αλκιμέδων δὲ βοηθόον ἅρμ᾽ ἐπορούσας

/ \ ΄ / / /
καρπαλίμως μάστιγα καὶ ἡνία λάζετο χερσίν,

Αὐτομέδων δ᾽ ἀπόρουσε.

νόησε δὲ φαίδιμος “Extwp,

ΒΕ Ὁ ᾽ ? , ΄ ᾽ \ »"
αὐτίκα δ᾽ Αἰνείαν προσεφώνεεν ἐγγὺς ἐόντα"
> / / ,
“Αἰνεία Τρώων βουληφόρε χαλκοχιτώνων, 485
“ ~ 9 7 ΄ AS /
ἵππω TWO ἐνόησα ποδώκεος AlaKidao
/ \ / “-“
ἐς πόλεμον προφανέντε σὺν ἡνιόχοισι κακοῖσι"
/ , e / ’ és r
τώ KEV ἐελποίμην αἱρησέμεν, εἰ σύ γε θυμῶι
a“ 5 / > \ > x > / / Aw
σῶι ἐθέλεις, ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἂν ἐφορμηθέντέ ye νῶϊ
a > / / / ” - 39
τλαῖεν ἐναντίβιον στάντες μαχέσασθαι “Apni. 490
A v ? »Ὸ» ᾽ ΄, 2\ fie ’ ,
ὡς épat, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησεν ἐὺς πάϊς ᾿Αγχίσαο.
\ > > \ / / / »Μ
τὼ δ᾽ ἰθὺς βήτην βοέηις εἰχλυμένω ὥμους

480. ἐπιβήσομαι AS.
(Sch. T). 483 om. Jt.

λιαχέςεςθαι R.

481. BoHedon Avr.:
488. τώ PQRST Eust.: TA&(i) 2.
(4 supr.) CHSU fr. Mose. || οὐκ GN: οὔ TIN’ D: οὔ Ken Vr. A.

βοῆι edon οἱ ἀπὸ τῆς σχολῆς
489. ἐθέλοις
490.

479-80, see E 226-27 with notes.
Here Automedon actually dismounts
immediately, so that there is no difficulty
in ἀποβήςομαι.

481. βοηϑόον, see note on N 477.
The word is curious as applied to the
chariot ; Peppmiiller conj. βοηθόος. Com-
pare however ἀσπίδα θοῦριν, where the
epithet is transferred from the warrior
to his gear.

487. προφανέντε, cf. Θ 378. ἡνιόχοιςσι,
the plur. evidently includes the παρα-
Barns, though he is now on foot. See
note on Θ 89.

488. τώ : Mss. generally accent τῶ or
τῶι, but the text is more in the Epic
style. We are left to guess how Hector
reconciles this hope with the words of
Apollo in 75 ff.

489. The authority of Mss. is in
favour of ἐθέλεις against ἐθέλοις, which
is adopted by many editors in order to
maintain the formal correspondence with
the apodosis ἐελποίμην.υ But Hector
should assume Aineias’ willingness, not
imagine it as if it were a matter of
doubt. In other words, Aineias’ willing-
ness is not really made a condition of
Hector’s hoping to take the steeds—
that condition is already implied in the
word κακοῖσιν (whether we read τώ or
7); the assumption that Aineias is

willing to help is added as a matter of
course. In Ψ 894, where a similar ques-
tion occurs, the circumstances are dif-
ferent; see note there. é€popuHeéNTe
νῶϊ may be taken in two ways: (1)
The participle and pronoun may be in
agreement, both standing in the ace.
In this we must assume a change in
the construction ; the sentence begins as
though τλαῖεν μεῖναι or the like were to
follow (cf. A 534), and the verb is then
changed for one which cannot govern
an accusative. There is no analogy for
construing νῶϊ τλαῖεν, face us. Or (2)
we may take ἐφορμηθέντε as governing
νῶϊ, they would not set upon us and dare
to stand and face us. This is obviously
involved; the dual part. has to be
separated from the dual pronoun and
put into awkward relation with the
plur. στάντες, thus making the sentence
very obscure ; the party assailing must
be opposed to, not identified with, those
who stand their ground. This explana-
tion is given by van L., who also reads
νῶϊν ; but ἐφορμᾶσθαι takes the acc., not
the dat., see O 691, T 461. Thus the
first explanation is to be preferred.

492. Boénic, shields, cf. E 452, M 296,
H 238, and ὃ 479 σάκεσιν εἰλυμένοι ὥμους.
The armour of Achilles which Hector is
supposed to have donned is here ignored.

280 IAIAAOC P (χνπ)

αὔηισι στερεῆισι, πολὺς δ᾽ ἐπελήλατο χαλκός.
a > vA ue / \ ” \
τοῖσι δ᾽ ἅμα Xpopios te καὶ ΆΑρητος θεοειδὴς

οι

“ / Ν
ἤϊσαν ἀμφότεροι: μάλα δέ σφισιν ἔλπετο θυμὸς 49
΄ > 5 / 4,
αὐτώ τε κτενέειν ἐλάαν τ᾽ ἐριαύχενας ἵππους"
/ > 3 fa) » ’ / /
νήπιοι, OVO ap ἔμελλον ἀναιμωτί ye νέεσθας
a ls ’ , ς > 5 25 2 \ \
αὖτις am Αὐτομέδοντος. ὁ δ᾽ εὐξάμενος Διὶ πατρὶ
n an ͵

ἀλκῆς καὶ σθένεος πλῆτο φρένας ἀμφὶ μελαίνας.
αὐτίκα δ᾽ ᾿Αλκιμέδοντα προσηύδα, πιστὸν ἑταῖρον" 500
Co / \ ΄ bs fA Ὁ / “,

Αλκίμεδον, μὴ δή μοι ἀπόπροθεν ἰσχέμεν ἵππω,
᾽ \ /~? ΕῚ / / 5, Ν ”
ἀλλὰ μάλ᾽ ἐμπνείοντε mEeTAPpEevwL? οὐ yap ἔγωγε
By Tl (ὃ Is lA fa] DIA

κτορα IIpiapidny μένεος σχήσεσθαι ὀΐω,

5...5 a y /

πρίν γ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλῆος καλλίτριχε βήμεναι
aw / lel / MA 5 rn
VOL KATAKTELVAVTA, φοβῆσαί τε στίχας ἀνδρῶν 505

C/
UTT TT ὦ

> / " 3 SiN ΣΕΊΩΝ ΄ ig [fe ob)
Ἀργείων, ἤ K αὐτὸς ἐνὶ πρώτοισιν ἁλοίη.

ὡς εἰπὼν Αἴαντε καλέσσατο καὶ Μενέλαον"

.

“Αἴαντ᾽ ᾿Αργείων ἡγήτορε καὶ Μενέλαε,
» ᾽
ἤτοι μὲν τὸν νεκρὸν ἐπιτράπεθ᾽ οἵ περ ἄριστοι,
᾽ > 3 π᾿ ΄ \ ᾽ ΄ , 5) na =
app αὐτῶι βεβάμεν καὶ ἀμύνεσθαι στίχας ἀνδρῶν, 510
νῶϊν δὲ ζωοῖσιν ἀμύνετε νηλεὲς ἣμαρ᾽

a \ Υ f / /
τῆιδε yap ἔβρισαν πόλεμον κάτα δακρυόεντα

493. cTepeoici P (eof in ras.) Lips. 495. HAnero ACHSTU. 496.
κτανέειν JR. || ἐλάειν P: ἐλέειν H. 497. re Néeceal: renéceai J: re
Ndxeceai(?) P: re nafeceai Lips. 498. aveic CD. || an’: én’ D (supr. a) R.
501. ἵππω CHT Harl. a, Vr. A, fr. Mosc.: ἵππους 0. 502. μετάφρενον (H
supr.) Harl. b, Par. ἃ, and ap. Eust.: μετὰ φρένα (). 503. μένος R: μάχης C. ||
cxricacear Bar. 504. rr: κα A. 505. κατακτεῖναί τε (QU. || Te: δὲ (Ar. 2)
G Harl. b, Par. cd gj. 505-10 om. Vr. A. 506. MpeoToIcIN: Tpweccin Lips. ||
ἁλοίη L (supr. w) R Lips. Harl. a: ἁλώην H: ἁλώ(ι)η OQ. 509. οἵ περ:
ὅς(ε)οι CDGPQTU. 510. Guunacear C Cant. Mor.: μύναςθαι (). 511.
νῶϊ DQ. || δὲ: 3 én 4. || ἀμύνατε Bar. Mor. 512. τῇ δὲ καὶ J.

497. νέεςθϑαι as fut., ΚΞ 221.

499. ἀμφὶ μελαίνας, see on A 103.

502. éunnefonte μεταφρένωι, cf. N
385, Ψ 381, with notes; and for the use
of μάλα with the whole phrase ef.
359.

is the common mood in which to put
the alternative for which the speaker
hardly dares to hope (see = 308). The
clause cannot be regarded as subordinate,
like the infin., to πρίν, as this particle
does not go with ἄν or κε in H. (the

504. ἵππω must here, as often, in-
clude the car, in spite of the specifi-
cally equine epithet καλλίτριχε.

506. The sentence passes, as usual,
from a subordinate to a principal con-
struction ; he will not be stayed till he
captures or 18 slain becomes till he
captures—or he might be slain. Most
Mss, give the subj. ἁλώη(ι), but the opt.

phrase πρίν γ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἄν is a different
matter: we cannot compare 8 374-75
πρίν γ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἂν. . γένηται, ἢ ποθέσα!).
509. οἵ περ, the omission of the ante-
cedent when it must be supplied in a
different case from the relative is rare.
Cf. however A 230, B 249, H 401, T 235,
265, 6 196, and note on = 81. But we
cannot here take οἵ περ as=el τινες.

IAIAAOC P (xvi) 251

“ > , ᾽ A mn , > \ v
Extwp Αἰνείας θ᾽, of Γρώων εἰσὶν ἄριστοι.
᾽ » r -“ ~
ἀλλ᾽ ἤτοι μὲν ταῦτα θεῶν ἐν γούνασι κεῖται"
“ \ \ > / \ / \ / ΄ ” Ἐπξν
How γὰρ καὶ ἐγώ, τὰ δέ κεν Διὲ πάντα μελήσει. 515
ἢ pa καὶ ἀμπεπαλὼν προΐει δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος,
Ν / -) / > » / / ᾽ “1
καὶ βάλεν ᾿Αρήτοιο Kat ἀσπίδα πάντοσ᾽ ἐΐσην"
e > > »Μ v Ν \ " ,
ἡ δ᾽ οὐκ ἔγχος ἔρυτο, διαπρὸ δὲ εἴσατο χαλκός,
᾽ “-“ ”
vevaipne ὃ ἐν γαστρὶ διὰ ζωστῆρος ἔλασσεν.
. δ. A >e\ ” ΄ Yue 7. > \ και
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἂν ὀξὺν ἔχων πέλεκυν αἰζήϊος ἀνὴρ 520
/ /
κόψας ἐξόπιθεν κεράων βοὸς ἀγραύλοιο
iva τάμηι διὰ πᾶσαν, ὁ δὲ προθορὼν ἐρίπηισιν,
ὡς ἄρ᾽ ὅ γε προθορὼν πέσεν ὕπτιος" ἐν δέ οἱ ἔγχος
/ /\~ > %H\ / ΄ fal
νηδυίοισι μάλ ὀξὺ κραδαινόμενον λύε γυῖα.
ἣν > , A
“Ἕκτωρ δ᾽ Αὐτομέδοντος ἀκόντισε δουρὶ pacwar:
> > e Ss ” > \ ’ / , 5
ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν ἄντα ἰδὼν ἠλεύατο χάλκεον ἔγχος"
Ld \ ,ὔ \ » 54. " / Ν
πρόσσω γὰρ κατέκυψε, τὸ δ᾽ ἐξόπιθεν δόρυ μακρὸν
» > / 2 \ 2 >) / /
οὔδει ἐνισκίμφθη, ἐπὶ δ᾽ ovplayos πελεμίχθη
ΝΜ, 4 a Oe, ’ > ΄ / ” ”
ἔγχεος" ἔνθα δ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽ ἀφίει μένος ὄβριμος Δρης.

σι
bo
vr

514. κεῖνται (). 518. χαλκός: καὶ

513. ἕκτωρ τ᾽ CR: ἕκτωρ oe’ Ρ.
τῆς Ὁ.

ἀλεύατο 7).
ὄμβρικος CPR.

524. λύε: λύςετ' γι. ἃ: λάβε : ace 0.
528. €nickHugH C: énickHpeH Vr. A. || πολεμίχϑη JQ. 529.

525. 0 om. L. 526.

514. ϑεῶν EN γούνασι κεῖται, a very
obscure phrase recurring in T 435, a 267,
and by no means explained by a reference
to the still obscurer proverb ἐν πέντε
κριτῶν γόνασι, mentioned by Suidas. It
is hardly possible to separate the phrase
from the custom illustrated in Z 92, of
dedicating gifts to the gods by placing
them upon the laps of the old-fashioned
seated statues. The idea perhaps was
that asa gift thus devoted was for ever
given up by man and passed into the
power of the gods, the phrase would
express by a general metaphor all that
was yielded by man to divine govern-
ment ; as though Automedon said, ‘ over
the disposing of such matters 1 claim
no longer any power.’ The resemblance
to Proy. xvi. 33, ‘The lot is cast into
the lap ; but the whole disposing thereof
is of the Lord,’ seems to be merely super-
ficial.

515. Cf. E 430. μελήςει is a clear
case of ken with fut. indic. ; no aor.
occurs in H. at all, so we cannot read
μελήσηι : van L. writes roe for κεν.

516-17 =T 355-56 ; 517-18 = E 538-39.

520. aizHioc only here and yu 83, also
with ἀνήρ. It may be an adj. from the
subst. alfnés, which however is itself
joined with ἀνήρ in IL 716, Ψ 432, and
in the former passage at least is clearly
used as an adj.

521. Compare the account of the sacri-
ficial slaughter in y 442-54 (πέλεκυς δ᾽
ἀπέκοψε τένοντας αὐχενίους, 449), where
the blow on the neck is first given, and
afterwards the throat is cut. In other
descriptions only the last part is men-
tioned (avépucay A 459, B 422), probably
as alone being ritually important; the
preliminary blow is given merely for
obvious reasons of convenience in the
case of the ox, and has no significance.

524, μάλ᾽ ὀξύ seems to be an epithet
of ἔγχος, not an adverbial use with κρα-
ϑαινόμενον. Though this adverbial use
is common enough, it is only found in a
metaphorical sense, of vision (νοῆσαι, etc.)
or sound ; whereas the adjective is con-
tinually used as a standing epithet of
ἔγχος δόρυ ξίφος, etc. κραϑαινόμενον is
predicative and goes with the verb.

526-29 =II 610-13 ; 530=H 273.

252 IAIAAOC P (xvi)

’ \ 4 /
καί νύ κε δὴ ξιφέεσσ᾽ αὐτοσχεδὸν ὡρμηθήτην, 530
εἰ μή ohw Αἴαντε διέκριναν μεμαῶτε,
v7 oO ® , 7 c , MA
οἵ p ἦλθον καθ᾽ ὅμιλον ἑταίρου κικλήσκοντος.
\ e , 77 5
τοὺς ὑποταρβήσαντες ἐχώρησαν πάλιν αὖτις
5 Ta /
Extwp Aiveias τ᾽ ἠδὲ Χρομίος θεοειδής,
Π Co - / 5
"Apntov δὲ κατ᾽ αὖθι λίπον δεδαϊγμένον TOP 535
an Vi -
κείμενον. Αὐτομέδων δὲ Bow ἀτάλαντος “Api
/ 7, / 4 ”
τεύχεά τ᾽ ἐξενάριξε καὶ εὐχόμενος ἔπος ηὔδα"
> /
“ἢ δὴ μὰν ὀλίγον ye Μενοιτιάδαο θανόντος
rn / / 39
κῆρ ἄχεος μεθέηκα, χερείονά περ καταπεφνών.
hi
ὡς εἰπὼν ἐς δίφρον ἑλὼν ἔναρα βροτόεντα ὅ40
“ιν Ν » i lal /
θῆκ᾽, ava δ᾽ αὐτὸς ἔβαινε, πόδας καὶ χεῖρας ὕπερθεν
αἱματόεις ὥς τίς τε λέων κατὰ ταῦρον ἐδηδώς.
xX 3 ἘΞ ν , , \ ς /
ay δ᾽ ἐπὶ Latpoxror τέτατο κρατερὴ ὑσμίνη
» a > /
ἀργαλέη πολύδακρυς, ἔγειρε δὲ νεῖκος Αθήνη
ΟῚ / an rn N 5 / VA \ 5
οὐρανόθεν καταβᾶσα' προῆκε yap εὐρύοπα Ζεὺς 45
5) fh > a
ὀρνύμεναι Δαναούς: δὴ yap νόος ἐτράπετ αὐτοῦ.

5 A 7
ἠύτε πορφυρέην ἶριν θνητοῖσι τανύσσηι

530. OpuHeHTHN Vr. ἃ:
μεμαῶτας H: ὡρμηθέντε J.

te J. || EANONTOC: ϑαμέντος Harl. a.
DHTU Mor. fr. Mose.: ἂν (ἀν) Q.

᾽

“ηνόδοτος ἀθετεῖ, τινὲς οὐδὲ γράφουσι Sch. T.

ὡρμήϑθηςαν H (yp. οὐτάΖζοντο) J()U. 531.
532. οἵ ῥ᾽: οἵο᾽ Vr Α΄
534 om. Dt, || ἕκτωρ τ᾽ PRU Bar. fr. Mose.

533. ateic C.
538. re: τι QU (in ras, 2) Vr. Ὁ A:
539. περ: τε J. 541. ἀνὰ (ἀνα)

543 om. Q. 544 om. Ut. 545.
547. Tanuccei C.

534. τ᾽ ἠδέ, so Mss. ; most edd. have
τε ἰδέ, which is the regular phrase and
is elsewhere generally given by Mss.
without variation.

535. Atop must be taken to mean the
life (cf. O 252) rather than the heart in
the physical sense, for a wound here
could not at the same time be ἐν νηδυίοισι.
Cf. note on IL 660. There is no doubt,
however, that Heyne’s conj. δεδαϊγμένοι
is more natural. δαΐξω is used in the
metaphorical sense distress in I 8, = 20,
O 629 ; in ν 320 we have αἰεὶ φρεσὶν ἣισιν
ἔχων δεδαϊγμένον ἦτορ ἠλώμην.

539. μεθέηκα, lit. 7 have dismissed, re-
laxed, my heart from grief ; a use which
has no exact parallel. We have, how-
ever, μεθέμεν χόλον A 283, Ο 138, a 77.
Others take it intrans., Z have ceased
Srom anger in my heart, cf. 6 877 μέθιεν
χαλεποῖο χόλοιο, with κῆρ as an ‘ace. of
respect’; and this is the commonest
use of κῆρ. καταπεφνών, see note on
II 827.

545, This line was athetized by Zen.

andjomitted by others—or according to
Ludwich’s probable restoration of the
corrupt Schol. T, was athetized by Ar.
and omitted by Zen. and others. The
rejection must have extended to 546;
the couplet is evidently an interpolation
intended to explain how Athene comes
to contravene the commands of Zeus in
0. There is no change whatever in the
designs of Zeus ; in 593 he continues to
help the Trojans, and he is steadily
carrying out his purpose of suffering
the Achaians to be again driven to the
ships. Besides, he is not in heaven but
on Ida. 546 looks like a reminiscence
of ἡ 263 ἢ Kat νόος ἐτράπετ᾽ αὐτῆς, where
αὐτῆς has its full sense, ‘her own mind,’
which is not the case here. The phrase
voov τρέπειν occurs twice again in Od.
(y 147, 7 479) but not elsewhere in J7.
547. In order to understand this simile
it must be remembered that to the Greek
the rainbow had no associations of hope
or comfort (Monro) ; it is a part of the
storm-cloud against which it is seen,

,.

IAIAAOC P (xvir)

Ζεὺς ἐξ οὐρανόθεν, τέρας ἔμμεναι ἢ πολέμοιο

ἢ καὶ χειμῶνος δυσθαλπέος, ὅς ῥά τε ἔργων

ἀνθρώπους ἀνέπαυσεν ἐπὶ χθονί, μῆλα δὲ κήδει, 550
ὡς ἡ πορφυρέηι νεφέλη. πυκάσασα ἃ αὐτὴν

/ 4“Φ lal »Μ v \ al -“
δύσετ᾽ ᾿Αχαιῶν ἔθνος, ἔγειρε δὲ φῶτα ἕκαστον.
πρῶτον δ᾽ ᾿Ατρέος υἱὸν ἐποτρύνουσα προσηύδα,
¢ ε . κ᾿
ἴφθιμον Μενέλαον, ὁ γάρ ῥά οἱ ἐγγύθεν ἣεν,

> / / / \ ᾽ / /
εἰσαμένη Φοίνικι δέμας καὶ ἀτειρέα φωνήν" 555

\ / / ,ὔ »
“σοὶ μὲν δή, Μενέλαε, κατηφείη καὶ ὄνειδος
> > a rn \ -
ἔσσεται, εἴ κ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆος ἀγαυοῦ πιστὸν ἑταῖρον

/ ee , / / € /
τείχει ὕπο Ῥρώων ταχέες κύνες ἑλκήσουσιν"

aQXn ἔχεο κρατερῶς, ὄτρυνε δὲ λαὸν ἅπαντα."

\ > 3 / \
τὴν δ᾽ αὗτε προσέειπε βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Μενέλαος" 560
a “ \ ’ I}
“Φοῖνιξ, ἄττα γεραιὲ παλαιγενές, εἰ yap ᾿Αθήνη
/ / > / / δ᾽ > 4 » /
doin κάρτος ἐμοί, βελέων δ᾽ ἀπερύκοι ἐρωήν'"
rn > /
TO Kev ἔγωγ ἐθέλοιμι παρεστάμεναι Kal ἀμύνειν

549. Oucrapnéoc 4.
552. ϑύςατ᾽ J(). | Greipe J.

550. Gnénaucen ().
553. atpewe JP Vr. d.

ἐπὶ : ἐνὶ R.

551. ἑωυτὴν Zen.
énotpunaca GPR.

558. τείχη Bar. Mor. || €AxUcoucin 4GJPQRST Mor. Vr. A, Harl. a (not ἑλκήςωςσει),

560. TONOd’ P. || λκκενέλαος : diouHdHc Bar. Mor.
563. mapicrauenai U Vr. A.

Ὑτ: Δ. 562. ἀπερύκει P.

561. παλαιγενές ; ϑιοτρεφὲς

and brings thoughts only of gloom and
disaster—the τέρας of A 28. Similarly
πορφύρεος conveys the idea not of bright
colour but of turbidity and doubt; ef.
πορφύρεος θάνατος, and κραδίη πόρφυρε Φ
551; it is especially the epithet of the
dark shifting sea, which grows black
(H 64 ete.) under the wind ; see note on
= 16. The point of the simile may be
given thus—‘/urid as is the rainbow-
cloud, so Zwrid was the cloud in which
Athene wrapped herself.’

551. ὃ αὐτήν, Zen. ἑωυτήν as usual ;
but Ar. denied the existence of the
compound reflexive pronouns in H. and
wrote the elements separately. The
difficulty here is the hiatus; ὃ αὐτήν Ξε
ἕξ’ αὐτήν from the emphatic form ἐξέ
(or rather éFé?), see note on = 162.
Two other similar cases occur, 0 396
Εὐρύαλος δὲ ὃ αὐτὸν ἀρεσσάσθω (οἱ αὐτὸν
G, μὲν αὐτόν U), ρ 387 τρύξοντα é αὐτόν.
The error is natural at a time when the
F had been lost and the hiatus before ἑ
had become a convention, though a very
strong one; the later poets had no
means of distinguishing e=Fe from e=

ε΄. Brandreth reads my αὐτήν from &
245, 318, Q 472 (which however are not
reflexive ; 6 244 αὐτόν μιν is more to the
point) and is followed by Nauck and
van L.; but this is unlikely. For
nuxdcaca cf. = 289.

555. The mention of Phoinix is clear
evidence of the lateness of all this passage.
ἀτειρέα hardly seems to be the epithet
for a very old man.

558. It is not easy to choose between
€\kHcoucin and ἑλκύσουσιν. The form
with v is found as a variant in X 62,
336, \ 580, and is implied by the deri-
vative ἑλκυστάζω. ἑλκέω occurs only in
P 395 without a variant, but from it
comes ἑλκηθμός, with variant ἑλκυθμός.
As the forms from ἑλκύω (and ἕλκω)
alone are known in later Greek, and
the sigmatic forms of the former always
preserve the primitive v, it is better
to accept the less familiar ἑλκήσω in
H. The evidence of itacistic Mss. is
worthless. For εἴ Ke with fut. indie.
see note on B 258.

561. See note on I 607; for 562 ef.
A 542,

254

IAIAAOC P (xvi)

Πατρόκλωι: μάλα yap με θανὼν ἐσεμάσσωτο θυμόν.

9 > γι \ 5. " ,ὔ pe > rw εἰ
ἀλλ᾽ “Extwp πυρὸς αἰνὸν ἔχει μένος, ovo ἀπολὴγ

565

χαλκῶι δηϊόων: τῶι γὰρ Ζεὺς κῦδος ὀπάξει."
ὡς φάτο, γήθησεν δὲ θεὰ γλαυκῶπις Αθήνη,
ὅττί ῥά οἱ πάμπρωτα θεῶν ἠρήσατο πάντων.
ἐν δὲ βίην ὦμοισι καὶ ἐν γούνεσσιν ἔθηκε,
καί οἱ μυίης θάρσος ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ἐνῆκεν, 570
ἥ τε καὶ ἐργομένη μάλα περ χροὸς ἀνδρομέοιο
ἰσχανάαι δακέειν, Napov δέ οἱ αἷμ᾽ ἀνθρώπου:
τοίου μιν θάρσευς πλῆσε φρένας ἀμφὶ μελαίνας,
βῆ δ᾽ ἐπὶ ΠΠατρόκλωι, καὶ ἀκόντισε δουρὶ φαεινῶι.

a \ > /
ἔσκε δ᾽ ἐνὶ Τρώεσσι Ἰ]οδῆς υἱὸς “Hetiwvos,

, > ΕῚ Ἢ
ἀφνειός T ἀγαθὸς Te:
/ e ΄ς Lal
δήμου, ἐπεί οἱ ἑταῖρος

τόν ῥα κατὰ ζωστῆρα βάλε ξανθὸς

σι
a
Ou

/
μάλιστα δέ μιν τίεν "Extwp
» >
ἔην φίλος εἰλαπιναστής"

Μενέλαος

ἔκπληξιν ἐνέβαλεν):

564. μάλα: μέγα R Bar. || éceBdccato 7), yp. Harl. a (ἀντὶ τοῦ εἰς σέβας καὶ
éneBdccato AS: éceudcceto H! Bar. fr. Mose.: ἐπεικάσςατο Cant.!
569. γούνας(ε)ιν COGHQR (T man. rec.) U (ain ras.) Vr. A.

570 om. Pt Lips.* ||

uufac C. || €NAKEN: ἔϑηκε(ν) JLK Bar. Mor. Vr. A Lips.™, and ap. Eust. 571.

eiprouénH GL: éeprouénn fr. Mose. || Gndpouedoio 7).
λαρότατον PR. || ὃέ J Eust.: te Q || ἀνθρώπων JP.
575. €cke 0 ἐνὶ : HIN ὃέ Tic ἐν U (yp. ἔεκε ὃ᾽ Eni) Harl. a. 578.

epdcouc ᾧ.
χωςτῆρ᾽ ἔβαλε H.

572. icyandei Cant. ||
573. edpcouc C:

564. €ceudccato, as we say touched
my heart. ‘She compound recurs only in
the same phrase T 425, in both cases
with the commoner ἐπεμάσσατο as a
variant. (Cf. ἐπεμαίετ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἵππους.)

567. Compare the similar pleasure of
the goddess at mortal worship in y 52-53;
and Eur. Hipp. 8 τιμώμενοι χαίρουσιν
ἀνθρώπων ὕπο.

570. For similes from the fly cf. B
469, A131, Π 641. It may be noticed
that this line rhymes with the pre-
ceding.

571. τε is omitted by Heyne and most
edd., rightly reading ἣ καὶ ἐεργομένη.
All forms of the pres. stem begin with
ée- except this, ἀποέργει (read ἀπεέργει)
and elpyovo. Ψ 72 (q.v.). (The saine is
the case with ἐεργάθειν : in A 437 read
χρό᾽ ἐέργαθεν with P: Agar in J. P.
xxvii. 185.) The first ἐ is dropped in
the aor. (@ 282, € 411) and perf. (see
note on II 481). For μάλα περ Agar
(J. P. xxv. 45) reads μάλ᾽ ἀπό, on the
ground that μάλα περ properly precedes
the participle instead of following it ;
and that with a single exception (N 525)

ἐέργειν =keep away from always requires
the preposition.

572. icyandai, persists, lit. “holds on
for biting,’ like éxeo above (559). This
verb is the familiar by-form of ἔχειν,
ἴσχειν, but very likely it has been con-
fused, as is done in all but the best mss.
in Ψ 300, with ixavday, to yearn, which
gives an equally suitable sense here.
λαρόν (λαξερόν #), delicious, as T 316,
conn. with λαύ-ω.

573. edapceuc, this contracted form
from an -es stem is very rare and
suspicious in H.; it is simple to read
θράσεος, this word being found in & 416.
Cf. on I’ 10. Similarly we can read
θράσεϊ for θάρσει Z 126.

575. ἔςκε 0’ éni, for the usual ἣν δέ τις
ἐν, which is here given by two ss. only.
This Eétion can hardly be the father of
Andromache, as her brothers are dead,
Z 421.

577. eikaninactHe (for the εἰλαπινή
see a 226), boon-companion. Zeus was
worshipped in Cyprus under the title
εἰλαπιναστής. δήμου, of the community,
rather than commonalty. Cf. A 328.

IAIAAOC P (xvi) 255

ἀΐξαντα φόβονδε, διαπρὸ δὲ χαλκὸν ἔλασσε:
δούπησεν δὲ πεσών. ἀτὰρ ᾿Ατρεΐδης Μενέλαος 580
νεκρὸν ὑπὲκ Tpwwv ἔρυσεν μετὰ ἔθνος ἑταίρων.

“Ἕκτορα δ᾽ ἐγγύθεν ἱστάμενος ὥτρυνεν ᾿Απόλλων
Φαίνοπι ᾿Ασιάδηι ἐναλίγκιος, ὅς οἱ ἁπάντων
ξείνων φίλτατος ἔσκεν, ᾿Αβυδόθι οἰκία ναίων"
[rae μιν ἐεισάμενος προσέφη ἑκάεργος ᾿Απόλλων"] 58
“"Extop, τίς κέ σ᾽ ἔτ᾽ ἄλλος ᾿Αχαιῶν ταρβήσειεν ;

o
qr

\ / ς / A \ ‘

οἷον δὴ Μενέλαον ὑπέτρεσας, ὃς TO πάρος γε
μαλθακὸς αἰχμητής: νῦν δ᾽ οἴχεται οἷος ἀείρας
νεκρὸν ὑπὲκ Tpwwr, σὸν δ᾽ ἔκτανε πιστὸν ἑταῖρον,
> Ν δ. να / a eX ’ , ᾽᾽ a
ἐσθλὸν ἐνὶ προμάχοισι, ἸΙοδῆν υἱὸν ᾿Ηετίωνος. 590

ὸ ’ »

ὡς φάτο, Tov δ᾽ ayeos νεφέλη ἐκάλυψε μέλαινα,
βῆ δὲ διὰ προμάχων κεκορυθμένος αἴθοπι χαλκῶι.

\ ee r / cs b) 3. “ἢ /
καὶ TOT apa Κρονίδης ἕλετ᾽ αἰγίδα θυσανόεσσαν
μαρμαρέην, Ἴδην δὲ κατὰ νεφέεσσι κάλυψεν,
> ΄ \ / GA OL, \ \ ΄ ae
ἀστράψας δὲ μάλα μεγάλ᾽ ἔκτυπε, τὴν δὲ τίναξε, 595
νίκην δὲ 'Γρώεσσι δίδου, ἐφόβησε δ᾽ ᾿Αχαιούς.

579. ἀΐξοντα J. 582. ExTopa ὃὲ φρένα δῖος ἄρης ὄτρυνε μετελθών Zen.
583. ἐναλίγγιος PR. πάντων J. 584. κείνων J, 585 om. AC!TtU Par. at,

fr. Mose. (and Zen., see on 582). || προςέφη d1dc υἱὸς ἀπόλλων H. 586. KE ς᾽ ἔτ᾽:
κέν ς᾽ Η. 587. re A Bar.: περ Q. 588. μαλακὸς ἢ. 589. CON: coi J.
595. THN: γῆν Zen.

582. ὅτι Znvddoros γράφει ‘*"Exropa δὲ

τὸν ᾿Αγαμέμνονα διαφερόντως ἀγαθὸν ἄνδρα
φρένα δῖος (θοῦρος Ὁ La R.) Ἄρης ὄτρυνε

τὰ πολεμικά, τὸν δὲ Μενέλεων μαλθακὸν

μετελθών.᾽᾿ πόθεν δὲ οὕτως ὁ Αρης ἐξαί-
guns πάρεστιν; An. The question is
justified, as Ares has not been on the
battlefield since the end of E, and is
dissuaded from returning in O 142;
whereas Apollo has been actively engaged
there at intervals during the recent
battles in =, O, and II, down to P 323 ff.

585. This line is omitted by several
mss., and was evidently, from the pre-
ceeding scholion, unknown both to Zen.
and An. It is repeated from 326.

587. πάρος re, not περ, because “πάρος
ve means before (not now), while πάρος
περ ineans before (not merely now),’ H. G.
§ 354.

588. Aristonikos remarks that the
description of Menelaos as a μαλθακὸς
αἰχμητής is placed in the mouth of an
enemy, and is not to be regarded as the
poet’s own; for he elsewhere calls him
ἀρηΐφιλος. This is no doubt in allusion
to Plato Symp. 1748 “Ὅμηρος ποιήσας

alyunrnv. It is, however, true that there
is often something disparaging in the
way in which Menelaos is spoken of,
though in action he always proves better
than his reputation.

589. ἀείρας νεκρὸν ἔκτανε, all
instance of hysteron proteron (cf. A 251,
Φ 537, etc.), which does not justify us
in taking νεκρόν of the body of Patroklos
as some have done; it evidently refers
to 581.

591. νεφέλη ἐκάλυψε, for the meta-
phor ef. 6 124, A 250.

593. αἰγίδα eucaNndeccan, see B 447,
A 167, E 738, Ο 229.

595. For THN of mss. Zen. read γῆν
which undoubtedly gives a better sense,
τήν being very weak. The oldest Homeric
form is γαῖα, not γῇ (see on I’ 104); but
the shorter form is not unlikely in a
passage like the present which is probably
late; and it would therefore be defensible
to adopt γῆν in the text.

256

IAIAAOC P (xvi)

πρῶτος Ilnvédews Βοιώτιος ἦρχε φόβοιο.
βλῆτο γὰρ ὦμον δουρί, πρόσω τετραμμένος αἰεί,
ἄκρον ἐπιλίγδην: γράψεν δέ οἱ ὀστέον ἄχρις
αἰχμὴ Πουλυδάμαντος: ὁ γάρ ῥ᾽ ἔβαλε σχεδὸν ἐλθών. 600
Λήϊτον αὖθ᾽ “κτωρ σχεδὸν οὔτασε χεῖρ᾽ ἐπὶ καρπῶι,
υἱὸν ᾿Αλεκτρυόνος μεγαθύμου, παῦσε δὲ χάρμης"
τρέσσε δὲ παπτήνας, ἐπεὶ οὐκέτι ἔλπετο θυμῶι
ἔγχος ἔχων ἐν χειρὶ μαχήσεσθαι Tpwecorr.
“Extopa δ᾽ ᾿Ιδομενεὺς μετὰ Λήϊτον ὁρμηθέντα 605
βεβλήκει θώρηκα κατὰ στῆθος παρὰ μαζόν"
ἐν καυλῶι δ᾽ ἐάγη δολιχὸν δόρυ, τοὶ δὲ βόησαν

Τρῶες.

ὁ δ᾽ ᾿Ιδομενῆος ἀκόντισε Δευκαλίδαο

,ὔ 5 / rn / ἘΣ ? \ \ ΦΨ
δίφρωι ἐφεσταότος" TOV μὲν Pp ἅπὸο τυτθὸν ἅμαρτεν,

3. πως ¢ NJ , 5 / ΄ θ᾽ Cua, /
avuTap oO Mnptovao oTaova ἡνίοχον TE, 610

597. Hpze GS.
p om. QU (p. ras.) Harl. a, Vr. A.
Harl. a and ap. Did.
eat Bar.

598. τετρωμένος J.
601. 0° ate’ C.
604. éryoc: ἕλκος Cant. || uayéccacear L: μαχήςας-
606. θώρακα R. || mapa: περὶ Mor.

599. ἄχρι U (p. ras. ὃ). 600.
603. HAneto GJQSU

607. θὲ BoHcan Ar. Q:

δ᾽ époBuoen DGJPQRS Vr. A, Harl. a (yp. ἐβόηςαν) b d, King’s Par. ἃ de fj, yp. g.

608. δευκαλίδαο : δουρὶ φαεινῶι Harl. a.

609 om. Harl. ἃ.

599. ἐπιλίγϑην, ἐπιψαύδην, ὅσον dv
ἐπιπολῆς ψαῦσαι, μὴ εἰς βάθος, Schol. A.
Cf. x 278 λίγδην. ‘The derivation of the
adverb is unknown. ἄχρις, cf. on A 522.
The force of the word is not very obvious
here, as the sense ‘utterly’ is hardly
consistent with grazing. That a super-
ficial wound on the shoulder should reach
the bone is, however, natural enough,
ἐστὶ yap ἣ ὠμοπλάτη ἀσαρκοτάτη, Schol.

600. ῥ᾽ here no doubt represents F’
(Heyne, Brandreth, and Bekker), as in
A 524,

602. The name ᾿Αλεκτρυών is note-
worthy, as H. seems not to be acquainted
with the cock. In fact the use of the
word here is evidence to that effect, for
no hero is ever called by the name of an
animal. So An. says ὅτι οὐκ εἴρηται
παρὰ τὸν ἀλεκτρυόνα TO ζῶιον τὸ ὄνομα"
οὐδέπω γὰρ ἔγνωστο. Fick connects it
with ᾿Αλέκτωρ for ᾿Αλεξ-τωρ like ᾽Ηλεκ-
τρυών beside ἠλέκτωρ: see note on Ζ ὅ18.

603. See note on A 546.

604. ἕλκος in Cant., if a conjecture,
is ingenious.

607. ἐν καυλῶι Ν 162. τοὶ δ᾽ ἐβόησαν
Ar., objecting to the variant τοὶ δ᾽
ἐφόβηθεν that the Trojans did not run
away but continued the pursuit; accord-
ing to his canon the verb could not mean

‘were frightened’ in H. ἐβόησαν may
mean ‘shouted for terror’ at seeing him
hit, or ‘for joy’ on seeing him safe.
For the clear allusion to the breastplate
see App. B, iil. 3, e.

610. The position seems to be this—
Idomeneus, who has of course been
fighting on foot, near Meriones, has made
his cast, and is therefore for the moment
disarmed before Hector. Meriones’
charioteer, who has been doing his duty
by hanging on the skirts of the fight
and watching his lords, drives up on
seeing Idomeneus thus pressed, and is
killed just as he has taken his king
into the chariot. The story is told in a
very involved way; αὐτῶι (611) for
instance must mean Idomeneus, not
Koiranos’ immediate master Meriones
as it should—or else we must assume
a very violent change of subject in the
next line, for πεζὸς ἤλυθε etc. clearly
refers to Idomeneus, who so nearly
‘presented a victory to the Trojans.’
We should have expected also to hear
that Idomeneus mounted the chariot
before being told that he was on it.
Most edd. find a further difficulty because
they assume that Idomeneus has not
merely mounted the chariot to escape—
for which purpose he might naturally

IAIAAOC P (xvii) 257

/ cd «> , , / ν᾽ / “ὕ , > lal
Κοίρανον, Os Pp εκ Λύκτου ευὐυκτιμενῆὴς ETET AUTO

\ \ \ a \ / > ,
πεζὸς γὰρ τὰ πρῶτα λιπὼν νέας ἀμφιελίσσας
A / [4 \ / / ᾽ /
ἤλυθε, καί κε Τρωσὶ μέγα κράτος ἐγγυάλιξεν,

> \ / 9 ΄ » a
εἰ μὴ Koipavos ὦκα ποδώκεας ἤλασεν ἵππους"

καὶ τῶι μὲν φάος ἦλθεν, ἄμυνε δὲ νηλεὲς ἦμαρ, 615
αὐτὸς δ᾽ ὥλεσε θυμὸν ὑφ᾽ “Extopos ἀνδροφόνοιο-

\ 4 » ΄ Ν fal \ ” > , vw? 20.)
τὸν βάλ᾽ ὑπὸ γναθμοῖο καὶ οὔατος, ἐκ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὀδόντας

= , / \ ‘ “ ΄, /
ὧσε δόρυ πρυμνόν, dia δὲ γλῶσσαν τάμε μέσσην.

” ? > 5 / \ 3 ἘΠῚ fal »

ἤριπε δ᾽ ἐξ ὀχέων, κατὰ ὃ ἡνία χεῦεν ἔραζε.

καὶ τά γε Μηριόνης ἔλαβεν χείρεσσι φίληισι 620
/ > / \ ᾽ “ /

κύψας ἐκ πεδίοιο, Kal ᾿Ιδομενῆα προσηύδα'

“μάστιε νῦν, elws κε θοὰς ἐπὶ νῆας ἵκηαι"

/, νι Ν .“ , / > ΄ ’
γινώσκεις δὲ Kal αὐτὸς ὅ τ᾽ οὐκέτι κάρτος ΛΑχαιῶν.

>

ὡς épat’, ᾿Ιδομενεὺς δ᾽ ἵμασεν καλλίτριχας ἵππους
a ” ΄, \ \ , » A . Spe
νῆας ἔπι γλαφυράς: δὴ yap δέος ἔμπεσε θυμῶι. 625
20> © > ” / \ ,
οὐδ᾽ ἔλαθ᾽ Αἴαντα μεγαλήτορα καὶ Μενέλαον

Ζεύς, ὅ τε δὴ Τρώεσσι δίδου ἑτεραλκέα νίκην.

τοῖσι δὲ μύθων ἦρχε μέγας Τελαμώνιος Αἴας"

ce Δ / πὸ / \ ἃ ΄ / / b)
@ πόποι, 107) μεν KE, και OS μάλα νήπιος εστι,

611. ἕπετ᾽ : Ender’ P! Lips.
ὀδόντων Harl. a.

613. KE on. Q: Te ἢ.
618 dia to 619 ἐξᾷ ὀχέων om. 1). 623 om. Vr. d.

γιγνώςκεια LQ. || ὅ τ᾽: ὅτι PR: ὅδ᾽ 0.

611. ἐκ : ἐν 0.

627. τρώεες᾽ ἐδίϑου OC. 629.

ἡ δὴ H. |) μέν κε: μέν re ὃ: μάλα κέν με J. μάλα : μέγα Mor.

take advantage of the presence of his
friend’s charioteer—but that he has been
fighting from it all the time, which is
far less intelligible. Hence many emen-
dations—Bentley γ᾽ ᾿Ιδομενῆος, Nauck
Δευκαλίδαο for Μηριόναο (610), Grashof
Μηριόναο (gen. after δίῴφρωι) for Δευκα-
λίδαο in 608. But it must always be
borne in mind that the Homeric hero
is fighting on foot, unless we are ex-
plicitly told the contrary—his chariot
is at hand for retreat or for rapid move-
ment to another point of the battle ; it
is not suited for wielding spear or
shield.

612. πεζός, because in N (240 ff.) we
are not told that Meriones and Ido-
meneus are driving; though in N 326
this seems to be intimated. Meriones
may have driven Idomeneus on to the
field, and then left his chariot to his
own θεράπων in order to fight himself.
The long parenthesis 612-16 seems to
have been added to meet this supposed
difficulty. If it were omitted there

VOL. II

would no longer be any difficulty in
referring αὐτῶι (611) to Meriones.

615. φάος, as salvation; Z 6 ete.

618. mpuunon, probably an ady., by
the root, see note on E 339. Diintzer conj.
πρυμνούς, Which comes to the same thing.
The word conveys no clear sense if taken
as an epithet of δόρυ, for the obvious
meaning butt-end does not suit.

620. Meriones is on the ground close
by. ἐκ πεδίοιο is to be taken with ἔλαβεν.

623. For 6 te the common reading is
ὅτε. This can be explained no doubt ;
the previous clause being equivalent to
ἔγνω Alas, ὅτε might introduce a temporal
object-clause, ‘Aias and Menelaos did
not fail to mark the moment when.’
But it is more natural to say ‘they did
not mark the fact that,’ and to take 6 τε
as=67rt. This use being admitted when
the final vowel is elided (e.g. 623, and
see A 244) must be admissible when
a consonant follows. See H. G. § 269.
3, O 468, Π 483, etc. ἑτεραλκέα νίκην :
see H 26.

258

/ Ὁ“ r / \ 7, Ν > \ > AA
γνοίη οὁτι Τρώεσσι πατὴρ Φεὺς αὑτὸς apnyel.

IAIAAOC P (χνπ)

630

/ / , ef or > /
τῶν μὲν yap πάντων βέλε ἅπτεται, OS TLS ἀφήηι,

x \ Ἃ > Qos:
ἢ κακὸς ἢ ayavos

Ζεὺς δ᾽ ἔμπης πάντ᾽ ἰθύνει"

a > a Σ , / ”
ἡμῖν δ᾽ αὔτως πᾶσιν ἐτώσια πίύπτει ἔραζε.
» , a » /
GAN ἄγετ᾽, αὐτοί περ φραζώμεθα μῆτιν ἀρίστην,
> δ 7 be ΝΑ \ 3 \
ἠμὲν ὅπως TOV νεκρὸν ἐρύσσομεν, ἠδὲ καὶ αὐτοὶ 635

/ / € / / 7
SE στήσαντε
χάρμα φίλοις ἑτάροισι γενώμεθα νοστὴ ς,

δ A ΄ 7 ’ 509 »“ \
οἵ που δεῦρ᾽ ὁρόωντες ἀκηχέδατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἔτι φασὶν

(, ἢ > “ by ΠΣ
‘Exropos ἀνδροφόνοιο μένος καὶ χεῖρας ἀάπτους

’ 5 Ν / /
σχήσεσθ᾽, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν νηυσὶ μελαίνηισιν πεσέεσθαι.

, Q δ 6 an / /
εἴη δ᾽ ὅς τις ἑταῖρος ἀπαγγείλειε τάχιστα

640

/. » Diels > \ /
Πηλεΐδηι, ἐπεὶ ov μιν ὀΐομαι οὐδὲ πεπύσθαι

630. αὐτὸς ἀρήκτει: κῦϑος ὁπάΖζει GPR, yp. Par. a. ||
631, Tic: nou (. || ἀφήηι : ἀφείη YJRT Harl. a Ὁ, Par. a:
p. ras.) Cant. Lips. Vr. Ὁ, Harl. ἃ, Par. f: agin S Par. g:

ἐν ἄλλωι ἀμύνει A,
ἀφίει HL (PU both
ἀφήει Bar. Mor.: ἐφίει

Vr. A: ἐφίηι A (the accent turned into ε, i.e. ἐφείηι) : ἐφείη CGQ Par. h: ἀφείει

Harl. a: διχῶς καὶ ἀφείη Ar.
χϑύνει U (supr. ἀπι over 5).
637. of: ἣ Harl. a. || δεῦρ᾽ Ar. QO:

641. nueécear (RT Harl. a.

632. πάντα CQ). || iever L Lips.: ievxer P:
634. περ:

τε τ eAe 636. γενοίμεθα (.

νῦν DHT Vr. b, Par. c! g (yp. ΘΕΩΡΕ j,
vp. U%. || οὐδ᾽ ἔτι : οὐδέ τι Ὡ : ODE τε Ρ.

to}
640. εἴη : Yor L. || ὥς Tic Cant.

631. ἀφήηι : the opt. ἀφείη is defended
by Delbriick (S. 7. i. 226) on the analogy
of Ψ 494, € 286 καὶ δ᾽ ἄλλωι νεμεσᾶτον,
ὅ τις τοιαῦτά γε ῥέζοι. There, however,
the opt. expresses a merely assumed
possibility, ‘you are ready to be angry,
supposing any man to do such things’ ;
and similarly ὅν τινά γ᾽ ὕπνος ἕλοι after
ἔσσεται, T 510. This does not suit the
present passage, where Aias is referring
not to imaginations but to present
realities. The Mss. virtually give us our
choice between ἀφ(ἐέφ-)είηι, -ίηι, nn. ἐφίηι
is the original reading of A, but the
quantity of the cis sufficient proof that
there is no pres. subj. in question: ἵημι
has ¢ except under very definite limita-
tions, see App. D, c. 3. Of the other
two -εἰηι is in accordance with the com-
mon practice of the mss. (H. G. p. 384),
but we have (ἀν)ήηι well attested in B
34, so that we can hardly be wrong in
writing it here, with La ἢ. For Gn-
tetai=hit the mark ef. A 85.

634. αὐτοί περ, though without the
help of Zeus.

635. TON νεκρόν, Bentley conj. νεκρόν
re, Which avoids the hardly Homeric use of
the article as well as the neglect of the Ε΄.

637. ἀκηχέθαται, an anomalous form

to be compared with ἐληλέδαται ἡ 86 (if
the reading is right), and ἐρράδαται
from ῥαίνω. If referred to ἀκαχίζω (ef.
the Herodotean κεχωρίδαται) the ε is
irregular. Buttmann would read ἀκη-
xéara with the editio princeps, and so
Schulze (ῷ. #. p. 248) who refers it to a
root aye beside dye (from which we have
ἀκαχείατο M 179 for ἀκαχέατο with purely
metrical lengthening); cf. ἀκηχέμενος
beside axaynuévos. For the double form
of the root cf. the instances in H. G.
88 22, 26. It must be admitted however
that the evidence for axe is very weak,
and lengthening of the reduplicated
stems has many analogies, see on = 29,
H. ὦ, § 23. ὃ.---δεῦρο in this pregnant
sense ‘looking in this direction’ does
not recur, the adverb being else only
used with verbs of motion.

639=I 285, where see note. Here
it is most natural to take “Ἕκτορος μένος
as the subject of πεσέεσθαι as well as of
σχήσεσθαι, that he will not be withheld,
but will fall wpon the ships. So N 742.
But the line comes in better if, with
Heyne, we reject 638 asa mistaken gloss,
and so understand deem that we shall

not hold out, but shall be hurled upon
the ships.

7

IAIAAOC P (xvii) 259

λυγρῆς ἀγγελίης, ὅτι οἱ φίλος ὥλεθ᾽ ἑταῖρος.
᾽ > BA / ’ / -“ > “
ἀλλ᾽ οὔ πηι δύναμαι ἰδέειν τοιοῦτον ᾿Αχαιῶν"
ἠέρι γὰρ κατέχονται ὁμῶς αὐτοί τε καὶ ἵπποι.
Ζεῦ πάτερ, ἀλλὰ σὺ ῥῦσαι ὑπ᾽ ἠέρος υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶν, 645
ποίησον δ᾽ αἴθρην, δὸς δ᾽ ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ἰδέσθαι:
> \ / \ ” ᾽ / , Μ " ”
ἐν δὲ φάει καὶ ὄλεσσον, ἐπεί νύ τοι εὔαδεν οὕτως.
Δ / \ \ \ > / , ΄
ὡς φάτο, τὸν δὲ πατὴρ ὀλοφύρατο δάκρυ χέοντα'
, \ rn
αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἠέρα μὲν σκέδασεν καὶ ἀπῶσεν ὀμίχλην,
΄ , 4 4
ἠέλιος δ᾽ ἐπέλαμψε, μάχη δ᾽ ἐπὶ πᾶσα φαάνθη. 650
\ | jy ee Μ 3 \ ᾽ \ /
καὶ tot ap Alas εἶπε βοὴν ἀγαθὸν Μενέλαον"
/ fal ᾿ »
“σκέπτεο νῦν, Μενέλαε διοτρεφές, αἴ κεν ἴδηαι
AS be 5 , / τ, er
ζωὸν ἔτ᾽ ᾿Αντίλοχον μεγαθύμου Νέστορος υἱόν,
᾽ re 7 Ps
ὄτρυνον δ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆϊ δαΐφρονι θᾶσσον ἰόντα
εἰπεῖν ὅττί ῥά οἱ πολὺ φίλτατος ὠλεθ᾽ ἑταῖρος." 655
ἃ ᾽
ὡς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησε βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Μενέλαος,

643. MHI: πω GJPQ Harl. b, King’s Par. d e: ποι Par. g! (πω g*): mou(?)
δ ἕξ >

τινές Sch. T. 644-45 om. J.
xexGAunta A. || Te: re ἢ.

épacear A.
Kédacen Lips.: κέθακεν PR,

652. ckénteo δὴ Mor.: cKenTéon αὖ Lips. || diotpopec H.

644. ἀέρι Lips. |
645. ὑπ᾽ : dn’ Vr. ἃ.
648. O¢: 0’ ὁ L Mor. Bar. Vr. A.
650. maca: nac Par. f, Plut. Mor. 948 Ε.

κατέχοντο Par. e: ἐν ἄλλωι
646. ἰδέςϑαι : ἐν ἄλλωι
|| ὀλοφύρετο JU. 649.

653. μεγάθυμον (i.

644, As has been remarked in the
note on 268 it is needless to suppose
that the ἀήρ here mentioned is a super-
natural phenomenon, or indeed anything
more than the thick cloud of dust stirred
up by the combatants. In 649 it seems
to be identical with ὀμίχλη, which is
used of a dust-cloud in N 336. So also
in 368 above, κατέχονται, ἐν ἄλλωι
κεκάλυπται, A. But the Schema Pin-
daricum is never used with animated
subjects ; see note on 387.

645. ἀλλά contrasts the thing prayed
for with the actual circumstances to
which it is tacitly opposed. The formula
is common enough at the beginning of
prayers in later Greek; e.g. Soph. £1.
415 λέγ᾽ ἀλλὰ τοῦτο, 411 ὦ θεοὶ πατρῶιοι,
συγγένεσθέ γ᾽ ἀλλὰ νῦν. In all these
cases ἀλλά emphasizes the following
word; here the thought seems to be
‘All is lost, unless thou, Father Zeus,
will save us—none other can.’

647. φάει: the contraction of the dat.
of stems in -es (and -as) is as rare in H.
as that of the gen. ; see on 578, and
H. G. ὃ 105. 1. Here we can read ἐν
φάεϊ καὶ ὄλεσσον. The asyndeton is not

only excusable, inasmuch as ἐν φάεϊ
takes up and repeats the thought of the
preceding line, but actually adds to the
force and effectiveness of the phrase.
For καί compare E 685, ® 274, ἡ 224,
where it is used, as here, of death which
is accepted if one thing be granted first
—‘(so it be but) in light, even slay us.’
eUaden, also Ξ 340. It is generally re-
garded as=éFade, the vocalization of F
between vowels being an Aiolic pecu-
liarity, e.g. Lesb. εὔιδον =F idov. Schulze
however (Q. £. p. 55 after Wackernagel)
prefers to derive it from ἔ-σξαδ-ε, with
assimilation of ¢ to F, through the forms
éFFade, εὔξαδε. It cannot be said, in
the absence of clear evidence of such
assimilation of of, that this is more
satisfactory than the ordinary explana-
tion. —olteoc, sc. to destroy us.

650. ἐπί, therewpon, perhaps with the
idea of suddenness often conveyed by
ἐπιφαίνεσθαι in Herod. and Attic (see
Lex.). Monro (H. G. ὃ 197) takes it in
the local sense, the fight was lighted up
all over ; but this seems less natural.

653. Antilochos is chosen as a friend
of Achilles and a good runner, 6 202.

260

IAIAAOC P (xvit)

fel % / / 5 \ /
βῆ δ᾽ ἰέναι ὥς τίς τε λέων ἀπὸ μεσσαύλοιο,

/ >

bs τ᾽ ἐπεὶ ἄρ κε κάμηισι κύνας τ
΄ fal a > rn

οἵ τέ μιν οὐκ εἰῶσι βοῶν ἐκ πῖαρ
e \ an

πάννυχοι ἐγρήσσοντες" ὁ δὲ κρειῶν

ἄνδράς τ᾽ ἐρεθίζων,
ς /
ἑλέσθαι

ἐρατίζων 660

ἰθύει, ἀλλ᾽ οὔ τι πρήσσει" θαμέες γὰρ ἄκοντες
ἀντίον ἀΐσσουσι θρασειάων ἀπὸ χειρῶν,
καιόμεναί τε δεταί, τάς τε τρεῖ ἐσσύμενός περ'
ἠῶθεν δ᾽ ἀπονόσφιν ἔβη τετιηότι θυμῶι"

7
ὡς ἀπὸ ἸΠατρόκλοιο βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Μενέλαος

665:

658 om. R. || ἂρ κεκάμηει P Cant. and ap. An.: ἄρχεκάμηει (). || κύνας τ᾽ :

κύνας ἢ. 659-60 om. Ct Mor. Bar.
661. ieUNe ap. Eust.

ἀντίον Eust.

660. €kpHccontec (ἃ : ἀγρήςσςοντες J.

662. ἀντίον Ar. DJQSU Mor. Vr. b: ἀντίοι Q: ἀντίοι ἢ,
664. τετικότι J() Lips. || ἐν ἄλλωι τετιημένος HTop A.

657-73 are rejected by Fick (reading
Ba δ᾽ dpa for πάντοσε in 674) and others,
and are certainly open to many objec-
tions. The simile 659-64 is borrowed
bodily from A 550-55 (q.v.). Here it is
pointless, as Menelaos is not being
driven back by his enemies, but is going
of his own will at Aias’ request. The
following simile of the eagle is much
more appropriate (674 ff.). 669-72 are
very weak; it is a point of honour to
rescue Patroklos ; his amiability (ἐνηείη)
is not in question ; the idea apparently
comes from Ψ 252, where the epithet
évnéos is admirable. SeAofo is taken
perhaps from Ψ 65, 105, 221, in each
case of ‘the ghost of poor Patroklos’ ;
δειλός does not recur as an_ epithet
except in these passages and Ψ 223, and
in the phrase δειλοῖσι βροτοῖσιν. τις (670)
seems hardly in place where only three
persons are addressed. There is no
doubt that the narrative is at once late
and poor. It is just possible that it
may have stood here from the first, as
the context is not markedly superior ;
but it would be more comfortable to
think that it is a later addition.

658. κε KGUHICI Or Kexdunior? See on
A168. The two relatives ὅς τ᾽ ἐπεί are
followed by only one verb. The apodosis
is indeed given by ἔβη in 664, but it is
too far off to be felt as such. Similarly
constructed sentences will be found in
Σ δῦ, Ὡ 42. In considering them we
must keep in view first, cases where ἐπεί
alone is not succeeded by any apodosis,
such as Z 333 (see the references there) ;
as Schol. T (An. ?) on = 101 remarks,
εἴωθε τῶι ἐπεὶ μὴ ἐπαγαγεῖν ἀνταπόδοσιν.

Secondly we have other sentences con-
taining only one verb to two relatives,
see note on ἃς ὁπότε 8 230. The Epic
poet, always intolerant of long sub-
ordinate clauses, seems to use his two
relatives at the beginning to indicate
the general drift of his sentence and
then does not attempt to follow out
the details. Here ὅς is the necessary
copula introducing the working out of
the simile, and ἐπεί proclaims that the
clause headed by it is preliminary and
does not contain the real comparison.
Having thus announced its subordinate
character, the clause can proceed in its.
(borrowed) development as though it
had begun (as in A 548-49) without
any parade of relatives. It is natural
to compare ws ὅτε in similes; but there
is an important difference in that the
ὅτε is to all intents and purposes re-
dundant—so far as can be seen ὡς dre=
ws, while ἐπεί has an essential function
here and in = 55. But in Q 42 the ἐπεί
seems to have lost even this, and to be
as otiose as ὅτε, It seems therefore that
the frequent elliptical use of ἐπεί in
independent sentences weakened the
sense of the relative use till in connexion
with another relative it came to be felt
merely as a notice that its clause was
secondary, so that we can translate by
Jirst ; and finally, on the analogy of ws
ὅτε, was regarded as part of a single
relative phrase ὅς τ᾽ érei=és.—A few
Mss. omit 659-60 so that (Ave can be
taken as the principal verb; but this
is a mere copyist’s error due to the
fact that 658 and 660 both end in

-ίζων.

Ἵ

IAIAAOC P (xvi) 26

Mine / , ss \ \ ,ὔ , , Ἢ
ἤϊε πόλλ᾽ ἀέκων: περὶ yap die μή μιν ᾿Αχαιοὶ

/ ce ,
apyaréov πρὸ φόβοιο ἕλωρ δήιοισι λίποιεν.

/ 4 ’ /
πολλὰ δὲ Mnpiovne te καὶ Αἰάντεσσ᾽ ἐπέτελλεν"

“Αἴαντ᾽ ᾿Αργείων ἡγήτορε Μηριόνη τε,

lal » / “-“ lal
νῦν τις ἐνηείης ἸΙατροκλῆος δειλοῖο 670

μνησάσθω: πᾶσιν γὰρ ἐπίστατο μείλεχος εἶναι

\ “- 2 a , ”
ζωὸς ἐών: viv αὖ θάνατος Kai μοῖρα κιχάνει.
Δ Y / / Ν
ὡς ἄρα φωνήσας ἀπέβη ξανθὸς Μενέλαος,
« / τ Cx
πάντοσε παπταίνων ὥς τ᾽ αἰετός, ὅν pa τέ φασιν

, / / ΄ -"»

ὀξύτατον δέρκεσθαι ὑπουρανίων πετεηνῶν, 675
.“ \ δ᾽ / / \ »

ὅν τε καὶ vod ἐόντα πόδας ταχὺς οὐκ ἔλαθε πτὼξ

θά . > > / / > / Ε] ea} ? a
duvet UT ἀμφικόμωι κατακείμενος, ἀλλά τ᾽ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῶι

μ᾿ / / fe \ 5 bh ,

ἔσσυτο καί TE μιν ὦκα λαβὼν ἐξείλετο θυμόν.

A / / ,

ὡς τότε σοί, Μενέλαε διοτρεφές, ὄσσε φαεινὼ

, , , \ » , ΡΝ
πάντοσε δινείσθην πολέων κατὰ ἔθνος ἑταίρων, 680

v Né ΔΑ, » / ”
εἴ που Νέστορος υἱὸν ἔτι ζώοντα ἴδοιτο.

666. UH: καὶ Ρ.

λιάχιμος P (supr. «λείλιχος man. rec.).
κάλυψεν H. 673. ἐπέβη ()R.
679. θιοτροφὲς Η.

668. aiantecci κέλευε G.

675. ἐπουρανίων J.
680. OINHceHN H (supr. et) 1, : Oin*ceHN P (ef ἐπ ras.).

670. πατρόκλοιο ()S. 671.
672. ὃ᾽ αὖ (: rap C. | κιχάνει:
πετεεινῶν 1.}1, Harl. a.

681. ἴδοιτο Ar. ACDQT Bar. fr. Mosc., yp. Harl. a: ἴϑηαι R: Wore P: ἴδοιο οἱ

ἀπὸ τῆς σχολῆς, Q:

ἴδοιντο ap. Schol. BLT.

667. πρὸ φόβοιο, a unique phrase,
explained by Diintzer to mean ‘ forward
in (on the path of) flight,’ like πρὸ ὁδοῦ
A 382 (H. G. § 225, where the gen. is
explained as partitive). But this cannot
be considered satisfactory, as we should
expect a verb of motion, not λίποιεν,
and the transition is violent to ‘having
betaken themselves to flight.’ It is
commonly compared with Lat. prae
timore ; our own ‘for fear’ shews how
closely the senses of before and by reason
of are connected. It seems therefore
necessary to recognize here a single
instance of a very ancient use, which
was entirely superseded in Greek by the
use of other prepositions, primarily by
the kindred πρός. The point of contact
between the two is marked by πρὸ ἄνακ-
tos Ὦ 734, ‘before the face of a king,’
where there is a distinct connotation of
causation, so that πρός might graminatic-
ally have been used. The remarkable
thing here is on this supposition the use
of φόβοιο in place of a personal sub-
stantive.

671, ἐπίστατο is used of disposition,
not of intellect, like εἰδέναι, see on 325.

672=478. But here nearly all mss.
have κιχάνει.

677. ἀμφικόμωι, here ἀμῴι- has clearly
been extended from the primitive sense
on both sides, and means a/l round ; see
note on ἀμφιδάσεια, Ὁ 308. For κόμη
used of foliage see ψ 195 ἀπέκοψα κόμην
τανυφύλλου ἐλαίης, and ὑψίκομος = 398.

681. οὕτως ᾿Αρίσταρχος ἴϑοιτο, τὰ ὄσσε
δηλονότι Sechol. A (Did.). ““ἴδοιντο᾽᾽ τὰ
ὄσσε" οἱ δὲ ἑνικῶς ““ ἴδοιτο, iv’ ἦι τὰ ὄσσεα
ἴδοιτο. . οἱ δὲ ἀπὸ τῆς σχολῆς ““ἴδοιο᾽᾽ γρά-
φουσιν, Schol. T. Of these three readings
the last has most Ms. support ; the only
reason against it is that it is obviously
the simplest and easiest, and is therefore
most likely to be an intentional altera-
tion. ἴδοιντο has no Ms. authority, and
the only Homeric form is idolaro. The
question remains as to the subject of
ἴδοιτο. If we take it to be Menelaos
we have a very harsh change from
apostrophe to narrative; in II 584-86,
692-94, P 702-05 the transition is made
with a fresh sentence, not in a sub-
ordinate clause. In the last instance it
is further softened by the interposition
of another subordinate subject in the

262 IAIAAOC P (xvit)

τὸν δὲ μάλ᾽ αἶψ᾽ ἐνόησε μάχης ἐπ᾽ ἀριστερὰ πάσης
θαρσύνονθ᾽ ἑτάρους καὶ ἐποτρύνοντα χε τ,
ἀγχοῦ δ᾽ ἱστάμενος προσέφη ξανθὸς MASHED IES
“"Aprinoy, εἰ δ᾽ ἄγε δεῦρο, διοτρεφές, ὄφρα πύθηαι 685
λυγρῆς ἀγγελίης, ἣ μὴ ὥφελλε γενέσθαι.
ἤδη μὲν σὲ καὶ αὐτὸν ὀΐομαι εἰσορόωντα
γινώσκειν ὅτι πῆμα θεὸς Δαναοῖσι κυλίνδει,
νίκη δὲ Τρώων: πέφαται δ᾽ ὥριστος ᾿Αχαιῶν
Πάτροκλος, μεγάλη δὲ ποθὴ Δαναοῖσι τέτυκται. 690
ἀλλὰ σύ γ᾽ ail’ ᾿Αχιλῆϊ, θέων ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν,
εἰπεῖν, αἴ κε τάχιστα νέκυν ἐπὶ νῆα σαώσηι Ὰ
γυμνόν: ἀτὰρ τά ye Tevye ἔχει κορυθαίολος “Ἑκτωρ.

ὡς ἔφατ᾽, ᾿Αντίλοχος δὲ κατέστυγε μῦθον ἀκούσας.
δὴν δέ μιν ἀφασίη ἐπέων λάβε, τὼ δέ οἱ ὄσσε 695
δακρυόφι πλῆσθεν, θαλερὴ δέ οἱ ἔσχετο φωνή.

682. αἶψα νόηςε P. 683. After this H adds eecnécion γάρ cgin φόβον
ἔμβαλε goiBoc ἀπόλλων (=118). 685. ei: ai AD: ἂρ P. || ϑιοτροφὲς GH.
688. γιγνώςκειν L(). 689. θὲ Gpicroc PR: δ᾽ ἄριετος G Lips. Eust. (yp.
ὥριετος). 690-91 om. Ut. 692. ς«αώςει () Vr. A. 693. aTap: énei L:
αὐτὰρ J (τά re erased) U. 695. ἀφαςίη CDST (U p. ras.): augacin ©. ||
λάβε: ἕλε R. 696. ἔεκετο Ar. ? (see Did. on ὃ 705): ἔχετο J.

relative clause. All this is in favour of

authority for the text, both here and in
making dcce subject to ἴδοιτο, thine eyes

δ 704. This is the only linguistically
ranged . . in hope to see. This involves justifiable form, as there is no other
a slight personification of the eyes—the instance of negative ἀν- before a con-
hope is of course Menelaos’, not theirs— sonant. The first syllable is lengthened
but under the circumstances this is by metrical necessity as in ἀθάνατος, and

hardly sensible.

686. ἢ. . renécea, the message is
put in place of its subject, by a natural
condensation of thought. On μή ef.
note on I 698; so 2 19, θ 312 μὴ γεί-
νασθαι ὄφελλον.

689. ὥριοστος, Brandreth ὃς ἄριστος,
P. Knight ὄχ᾽ ἄριστος as usual: A 288.

692. εἰπεῖν, fel/ all this. We might
make the clause αἴ κε. σαώσηι the
object, ‘say to A., we hope he will
save,’ ete. Cf. H 375 τόδ᾽ εἰπέμεναι
πυκινὸν ἔπος, αἴ κ᾿ ἐθέλωσιν xK.7.d., with
note. But this seems rather weak.

694. KatTécture as usual in H. ex-
presses horror, not loathing.

695. ἀφαςίη, only here and in ὃ 704
where the couplet recurs. Most mss.
real ἀμφασίη, but there is sufficient

the insertion of the w is evidently an
emendation, perhaps on the supposed
analogy of ἄμβροτος beside ἄβροτος (where
the w is of course part of the root).

696=W 397. Oaxpudgi, the instru-
mental, a use which in this connexion
was afterwards taken up by the gen.
According to Did. on 6 705 Ar. wrote
ἔσκετο in the sense became. This how-
ever makes nonsense, as θαλερή means
‘big’ or ‘full’; and there can be no
doubt that Ar. in fact read ἔσχετο as
against the variant ἔσκετο, which occurs
nowhere else. See Ludwich on 6 705,
and on the other side Schulze in K. Z.
xxix. 255. He connects eakep with
θολερός, and translates his voice grew
thick (with sobs). In view of the other
uses of the word this is highly im-
probable.

IAIAAOC P (xvi)

a \ / \ \ / > > / “-“ ΄ ,
βῆ δὲ θέειν, τὰ δὲ τεύχε᾽ ἀμύμονι δῶκεν ἑταίρωι
Λαοδόκωι, ὅς οἱ σχεδὸν ἔστρεφε μώνυχας ἵππους.

to
fa)
~

\ \ ΄, , , ΄, > , Ξ
TOV μεν δάκρυ χέοντα πόδες φέρον εκ πολέμοιο 700
ΤΠηλεΐδης ᾿Αχιλῆϊ κακὸν ἔπος ἀγγελέοντα᾽
»>>>? » ‘ Ἰ , / ” \
οὐδ᾽ dpa aol, Μενέλαε διοτρεφές, ἤθελε θυμὸς

τειρομένοις ἑτάροισιν ἀμυνέμεν, ἔνθεν ἀπῆλθεν

᾿Αντίλοχος, μεγάχη δὲ ποθὴ Πυλίοισιν ἐτύχθη"

ἀλλ᾽ ὅ γε τοῖσιν μὲν Θρασυμήδεα δῖον ἀνῆκεν, τοῦ
ἘΝ ° =
αὐτὸς δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ἐπὶ ἸΠατρόκλωι ἥρωϊ βεβήκει,
lal \ , ΜΝ / 53 \ /
στῆ δὲ παρ᾽ Δίάντεσσι θέων, εἶθαρ δὲ προσηύδα:

ce rn \ \ \ ᾽ Vs fal
κεῖνον μὲν δὴ νηυσὶν ἐπιπροέηκα θοῆισιν,

ἐλθεῖν εἰς ᾿Αχιλῆα πόδας ταχύν' οὐδέ μιν οἴω

Ξ , “ Ν
νῦν ἰέναι, μάλα περ κεχολωμένον “Extope δίωι" 710

οὐ γάρ πως ἂν γυμνὸς ἐὼν Τρώεσσι μάχοιτο.
ἡμεῖς δ᾽ αὐτοί περ φραζώμεθα μῆτιν ἀρίστην,
ἠμὲν ὅπως τὸν νεκρὸν ἐρύσσομεν, ἠδὲ καὶ αὐτοὶ
Τρώων ἐξ ἐνοπῆς θάνατον καὶ κῆρα φύγωμεν."

τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα μέγας Τελαμώνιος Αἴας"

“J
—
σι

“πάντα κατ᾽ αἶσαν ἔειπες, ἀγακλεὲς ὦ Μενέλαε:
ἀλλὰ σὺ μὲν καὶ Μηριόνης ὑποδύντε μάλ᾽ ὦκα

νεκρὸν ἀείραντες φέρετ᾽ ἐκ πόνου" αὐτὰρ ὄπισθε
voi μαχησόμεθα Tpwoiv τε καὶ “Extope δίωι,

698. τὰ : τάχα Ρ.
θυμῶι S (supr. ὃς).
707. δὲ παρ᾽:
ἕκτορι δίωι : ἀτρείωνι A™.

699. ἔστρεφε, was wheeling rownd, so
as to follow all his movements.

703. ἔνϑεν (at the place) whence. It
would be easier to make it=dq@’ ὧν (se.
ἑταίρων), but the use of the rel. adverb
with a personal antecedent is harsh. In
Q 382 ἄνδρας és ἀλλοδαπούς, iva περ τάδε
To σόα μίμνηι it is not certain that ἵνα is
local (see note). In y 319 ἄλλοθεν εἰλή-
λουθεν, ἐκ τῶν ἀνθρώπων ὅθεν κ.τ.λ.,
ἀνθρώπων practically=/and. The rela-
tive use of ἔνϑεν is purely Odyssean
(9 times) except here and Q 597.

705. τοῖσιν, ie. ‘for their benefit’
HG. § 148.

709. οὐδέ-- ἀλλ᾽ οὐ, as often. Von
Christ suggests as the original reading
οὐδέ F’ ὀΐω, and this is perhaps right, as
the contracted οἴω is rare in H. The
same alteration can be made in K 105,

700. φέρον : ἔκφερον P.
705. ἐνῆκεν J Vr.
δὲ wer’ Vr. A: 3° ἄρ᾽ én’ G. || θέων : κιὼν Vr. A, 710.
714. puromen CDHJQST.

702. diotpopec H.
A. 706. πάτροκλον Harl. ἃ supr.

718. ὀπίεςω G.

A 763, 2 727, but in Εἰ 252, I 315, O 298,
T 71, T 362, © 533, Ψ 310, ἐκ 198,
the correction is not so easy (see
Menrad, pp. 166-68, van L. Ezeh.
§ 2925).

712-13. See 634-35.

714. For φύγωμεν a good many Mss.
have φύγοιμεν --- utrumque recte’ La R.
But that is not the case; in the other
instances of change of mood the verbs
are separated by #—#, and not joined
as here. Besides the opt. should present
the wished-for but less likely alternative ;
here it would do exactly the op posite.

719. The trochaic caesura in the
fourth foot is irregular: Τρώεσσ᾽ ἠδ᾽ van
L. The scholia note that the cyclic
poets imitated this passage in describing
the death of Achilles; Aias carries his
body, Odysseus covers the retreat.

264

ἶσον θυμὸν ἔχοντες ὁμώνυμοι, οἱ τὸ πάρος περ
Ἄρηα παρ᾽ ἀλλήλοισι μένοντες.

μίμνομεν ὀξὺν ᾿

IAIAAOC Ρ (xvir)

720

ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα νεκρὸν ἀπὸ χθονὸς ἀγκάζοντο
ὕψι μάλα μεγάλως" ἐπὶ δ᾽ boxe λαὸς ὄπισθε
Τρωϊκός, ὡς εἴδοντο νέκυν αἴροντας ᾿Αχαιούς.
ἴθυσαν δὲ κύνεσσιν ἐοικότες, οἵ T ἐπὶ κάπρωι 725
βλημένωι ἀΐξωσι πρὸ κούρων θηρητήρων"
ἕως μὲν γάρ τε θέουσι διαρραῖσαι μεμαῶτες,
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δή ῥ᾽ ἐν τοῖσιν ἑλίξεται ἀλκὶ πεποιθώς,
iy 7 ἀνεχώρησαν διά τ᾽ ἔτρεσαν ἄλλυδις ἄλλος.
ὡς Τρῶες εἴως μὲν ὁμιλαδὸν αἰὲν ἕποντο 790
νύσσοντες ξίφεσίν τε καὶ ἔγχεσιν ἀμφιγύοισιν'
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δή ῥ᾽ Αἴαντε μεταστρεφθέντε Kat αὐτοὺς

121. μένοντε Aph.
ἴδον G.
Choiroboskos (Et. Mag. 38. 17):
εἴως HS. || diappdcar H (J swpr.):
Boup’ G. || ἑλίξεται : ἀἵΞξεται 5.
ay τ᾽: ἂψ ACQS: ἂψ δ᾽ H:
731. NuccanTec R.

124. €100NTO:
|| αἵραντας A Vr. d, Par. g: Geipantac Harl.
ἄραντες J Eust.
Siapdcai (): διαρρῆςαι J! (?).
729-61 lost in A:

aiya τ᾽ PR. |i

εἴδον τὸν 1). (ἴϑον) Q Harl. al:
a: ἄραντας U Par. e,
726. atzouci PR. 727.
728. OH ῥ᾽:
supplied by 4. 729.
oia 0’ H. || ἄλλοι G: ἄλλο J.

721. For μένοντες Aph, read μένοντε,
which probably implies that he had
ἔχοντε (ὁμωνύμω ὦ ) in the line before.
Macrobius (Saf. v. xv. 13) quotes ἔχοντε
ὁμώνυμοι, and the legitimate hiatus is of
course in favour of this reading, which
is adopted by Ahrens and others. For
the present suiuNouen with πάρος com-
pare A 553, Σ 386, Ψ 782, etc.

723. μάλα μεγάλως, apparently with
very mighty effort. Bothe’s con}. μέγαν
μεγάλως, on the analogy of κεῖτο μέγας
μεγαλωστί Il 776, is ingenious, but such
a phrase is hardly one likely to have been
corrupted.

724, αἴροντας, a form not elsewhere
found in H. for deipovras, though we
have ἀρθείς N 63 (q.v.), ε 393. Various
conjectures have been made, but none
is plausible. In Brandreth’s éFidov
νέκυν delpovras neither -ὕν nor ἅ- can be
defended. Brugmann defends αἴρω as=
Fatpw from Fr-jw, while delpw=4d-Fep-jw
(see Gr. ii. § 712). But it is more
probable that we have an Attic contrac-
tion in a late passage.

727. ἕως is scanned as a monosyllable
mly here in J., but five times in Od.,
another instance of late contraction.
Hence Brandreth conj. τεῖος μέν τε,
Nauck τῆος (rather jos) μέν pa, though

the asyndeton does
natural. For ἕως ““ ἀντὶ τοῦ réws,” as
Nikanor says, the other instances are
730, M 141, N 143, O 277, B 148, y 126
—all with μέν. The two uses are re-
lated as ὅτε and ὁτέ, and there is no
reason for doubting the tradition.

728. ἐλίξεται, aor. subj., whenever he
turns.

730-81=0 277-78.

732. κατ᾽ αὐτούς is not easy to
explain; Monro compares ἵκοντο κατὰ
στρατόν of a ship arriving ‘ off the camp,’
A 484, but there the verb of motion to
the point reached makes a great differ-
ence. See notes on N 737, O 384 κατὰ
τεῖχος. The sense required is over against.
This is nearly approached in 7 159 στῆ
δὲ κατ᾽ ἀντίθυρον κλισίης ᾿Οδυσῆϊ φανεῖσα,
where στῇ may be taken to imply
motion. For exact parallels we must
go to Attic; Aisch. Septem 505 ἀνὴρ
Kar’ ἄνδρα τοῦτον ἡιρέθη, Xen. Hell. iv.
2. 18 of μὲν ᾿Αθηναῖοι κατὰ Λακεδαι-
μονίους ἐγένοντο. The weak use οἵ
αὐτούς also suggests late origin. It is
perhaps possible, on the doubtful analogy
of σὺν αὐτῶι (407), to explain κατ᾽ αὐτούς
as=by themselves, independently of any
help, οἵ, μαχόμην κατ᾽ ἔμ᾽ αὐτὸν ἐγώ, A
271; but it would be a desperate resource.

not seem very

ee = eee:

IAIAAOC P (xvir) 265

/ r ‘ / , > / wv
σταίησαν, τῶν δὲ τρέπετο χρώς, οὐδέ τις ἔτλη

, >, \ a ,
προσσω ἀΐξας πέρι νεκρου δηρίσασθαι.

Δ “ , » lal / / > / 08
ὡς οἵ γ᾽ ἐμμεμαῶτε νέκυν φέρον ἐκ πολέμοιο 735

lol / /
νῆας ἔπι γλαφυράς: ἐπὶ δὲ πτόλεμος τέτατό σφιν

- ae a fal / > / / -
ἄγριος ἠύτε πῦρ, τό T ἐπεσσύμενον πόλιν ἀνδρῶν

ὄρμενον ἐξαίφνης φλεγέθει, μινύθουσι δὲ οἶκοι

᾽ / ” / \ > > / » > ,
ἐν σέλαϊ μεγάλωι: τὸ δ᾽ ἐπιβρέμει is ἀνέμοιο.

ὡς μὲν τοῖς ἵππων τε καὶ ἀνδρῶν αἰχμητάων 740
ἀζηχὴς ὀρυμαγδὸς ἐπήϊεν ἐρχομένοισιν"
. > Ὁ ᾽ ΓΟ, \ , ᾽ ,
οἱ δ᾽, ws θ᾽ ἡμίονοι κρατερὸν μένος ἀμφιβαλόντες
, /
ἕλκωσ᾽ ἐξ ὄρεος κατὰ παιπαλόεσσαν ἀταρπὸν

ἢ δοκὸν ἠὲ δόρυ μέγα νήϊον: ἐν δέ τε θυμὸς

τείρεθ᾽ ὁμοῦ καμάτωι τε Kal ἱδρῶι σπευδόντεσσιν' 745
ὡς of γ᾽ ἐμμεμαῶτε νέκυν φέρον. αὐτὰρ ὄπισθεν

Αἴαντ᾽ ἰσχανέτην, ὥς τε πρὼν ἰσχάνει ὕδωρ

733. τρέπετο (8° ἐτρέπετο) HJQTU: τράπετο (3° ἐτράπετο) 2. 734.

OxHpicaceai CDJQT Mor. Bar. Harl. a, fr. Mose. Vr. b ἃ A:
735. re μεμαῶτε AGS: γ᾿ éueuadte P (1, Lips. as text):
736. πόλεμος JU.
744, μέγα ddpu ( Vr. b.

Supidacea ὥ.
γ᾽ éuueuadtec C.

CGHJPRU.

Soupicacear G:

740. ἀςπιοτάων Τ᾿. 141. ὁρυγμαϑὸς
746. ὼς οἵ τ᾽ : οἱ μὲν ἄρ᾽ τινές,

Sch. T. || γ᾿ ἐμμιελκαῶτε Ar. ῶ: γε μεμαῶτε AGPSU: γ᾿ ἐμμεμαῶτες DIR.

747. ὥς περ PR.

733. «ταίηςαν, again a late form for
the Homeric craiev. There is no similar
instance in H.; H.G. ὃ 83. Tpéneto
ρῶς see N 279. We require the
imperf., not the aor., of repeated
action. For the rhythm see App. N § 3.

734. Notice the last syll. of npdcces
remaining long in the hiatus at the end
of the first foot. δηρίςαςθαι : see on 11
756. Most mss. have the commoner
δηριάασθαι; the two forms occur ἴο-
gether in θ 76-78.

735. €émueua®te, see on N 785, and
ef. 746, where the words are much better
in place. Here they would naturally
be taken to refer to the two Aiantes.
The conjunction of dual and plur. is
particularly harsh; but τώ is quoted
only from Heyne’s unknown ‘ Vat.’

736, τέτατο, see on H 102; the ropes
which govern the course of battle are
pulled tight for them, so as to make the
fight rage fiercely.

738. Cf. Φ 14 τὸ δὲ φλέγει ἀκάματον
πῦρ ὄρμενον ἐξαίφνης. Here also φλεγέθει
may be transitive, though πόλιν is more

likely governed by ἐπεσσύμενον. μινύ-
eouci intrans., II 392.

739. émBpéuei, roars upon, or possibly
makes to roar; the middle βρέμεται is
commoner than the act., which may
sometimes have had a transitive sense.
P. Knight conj. βρέμεται δ᾽ ἐπὶ Fis,
Brandreth βρέμεται δέ τε Fis, Bentley
ἐπέβρεμε Fis, but the imperf. has no
place in a simile. See Φ 356 καίετο δ᾽ is.
In a passage of this character we have
no right to condemn the line for such
an offence as a neglected F.

742. ἀμφιβαλόντες, lit. putting their
strength on both sides of the beam, ‘into
the work,’ as we say; as though their
strength were something with which
they actually clasped the thing they had
to pull. Cf. Ψ 97 ἀμφιβαλόντε ἀλλήλους
=embracing. Others transl. ‘clothing
themselves with strength,’ but in this
sense only ἀμφιβάλλομαι, as we should
expect, is found in H., and the use of
the act. is not sufficiently established by
Eur. Andr. 110 δουλοσύναν στυγερὰν
ἀμφιβαλοῦσα κάραι.

266 IAIAAOC P (xvi)

ὑλήεις, πεδίοιο διαπρύσιον τετυχηώς,

ὅς τε καὶ ἰφθίμων ποταμῶν ἀλεγεινὰ ῥέεθρα

ἴσχει, ἄφαρ δέ τε πᾶσι ῥόον πεδίονδε τίθησι 780
πλάξων: οὐδέ τί μιν σθένεϊ ῥήγνυσι ῥέοντες"

ὡς αἰεὶ Αἴαντε μάχην ἀνέεργον ὀπίσσω

Τρώων: οἱ δ᾽ ἅμ᾽ ἕποντο, δύω δ᾽ ἐν τοῖσι μάλιστα,

Αἰνείας 7 ᾿Αγχισιάδης καὶ φαίδιμος "Extop.

τῶν δ᾽ ὥς τε ψαρῶν νέφος ἔρχεται ἠὲ κολοιῶν, 755
οὖλον κεκλήγοντες, OTE προΐδωσιν ἰόντα

κίρκον, ὅ τε σμικρῆισι φόνον φέρει ὀρνίθεσσιν,

148. τετυχηὼς T (swpr. κ), Herakleides ap. Kust. : τετυχηκὸς Pit Par. j (supr.
751. Ti μιν (Ar.?) 4GJ Harl. ad, Par. a: τέ μιν ὥ : τι
μὴν Aph. (so Sch. T). 7156. Né€poc: rénoc H. 756. κεκληγότες JPR Vr. A

(κεκλήγοντες and κεκληγῶτες Ar. διχῶς ἢ Cf. M 125, I 430). ὅ

757. O TE:
ὅτις R: ὅς Tic PT(?): ὅς τε DG. || εμικροῖςι(ν) Q Bar. Mor. Cant.: μικροῖσι P:

ow): τετυχηκὼς ᾧ).

μικρῆιςι T ? (ScricuiKpAici). || φέρει φόνον Ρ.

748. τετυχηώς, though having very
slight Ms. support, is required by
Homeric analogy in place of the vulg.
τετυχηκώς, as the κ of the perf. hardly
ever appears in the participle. The only
other words in which it is found are
βεβρωκώς, δεδαηκότες, ἀδηκότες (H.C.
§ 26.4); while we have κεκμηώς by
κέκμηκα, τεθνηώς by τέθνηκα, and a num-
ber of forms like κεκοτηώς, etc. (H.G.
§ 22. 8). For the meaning of the word
οἵ, κ 88 ὃν πέρι πέτρη ἠλίβατος τετύχηκε,
is to be found, is there without man’s
interference. διαπρύσιον is elsewhere
used only as an adv. of sound, piercingly.
Here it seems to mean in a continuous
line, without breaks, πεδίοιο being the
ordinary local gen. The picture is
evidently that of a natural barrier pro-
tecting a village or cultivated field
behind it in time of flood.

751. πλάζων, driving out of their
course, as A 59, B 132 etc. The correct
accent is ῥήγνυσι. It is really for
ῥήγνυντι, an uneontracted form; and
so we should read ἵστασι, ride, ete.
ῥηγνῦσι was read by Ar., and is found
in almost every place, as though con-
tracted for ῥηγνύουσ. Cf. H. G. ὃ
87. 2.

755, τῶν ὃέ seems to stand for οἱ δέ by
a sort of attraction to the case of ψαρῶν,
as though to emphasize the comparison.

We may, however, understand τῶν νέφος
on the analogy of νέφος εἵπετο πεζῶν A
274. Cf. Π 66. Even so there is an
anacoluthon. Notice the older form
ψαρῶν beside the Ionic ψῆρες in IT 583.
J. Schmidt explains the two forms as
due to the original declension Yip, ψᾶρός,
the nom. and oblique cases having been
reduced to a common form in two differ-
ent ways.

756. κεκλήγοντες, constr. ad senswm
as though Wapes . . κολοιοί had preceded.
For the form see on II 430. οὖλον, a
very obscure epithet as applied to a
shout. There are three distinct words
of this form: (1) οὖλος Ξε ὅλος for ὅλος
(Skt. sarvas), p 348, ὦ 118; (2) οὖλος Ξξ
woolly (*FoXvo- conn. with vellus, etc.) ;
(3) οὖλος Ξ-- ὀλοός (*ddvo- 1), deadly, B 6,
Φ 536, etc. This division is established
by Buttmann, Zewil. s.v., in an article
which is still worth studying. He is
probably right in referring the present
passage to (3) in the sense shrieking a
cry of destruction, as we speak of a
death-shriek. Others refer it to (2), ‘a
confused, thick ery’ ; but ‘a woolly ery,’
as it would literally be, is by no means
in the Epic style.

757. εμικρῆιςι, only here in H. ; μικρός
is found only in E 801, y 296, the
regular Epic word for smad/ being
τυτθός.

IAIAAOC P (χνπ) 26

| ae ΄

-ἶ

Δ ᾽ > / \ wT ΄- > a
ὡς ap ὑπ᾽ Αἰνείαι τε καὶ “Extope κοῦροι ᾿Αχαιῶν
δ / Μ , Ν ΄,
οὖλον κεκλήγοντες ἴσαν, λήθοντο δὲ χάρμης.

᾽ ΄
πολλὰ δὲ τεύχεα καλὰ πέσον περί T ἀμφί τε τάφρον 740
φευγόντων Δαναῶν, πολέμου δ᾽ οὐ γίνετ᾽ ἐρωή.

758. Un’: én’ H. || aineian .

(cf. 756).

760. περί τ᾽ ἀμφί te, around the cir-
cuit, and on both sides, of the trench.
The distinction, however, cannot be
pushed too far, as it may be regarded
merely as an instance of the compound
prepositions which are not uncommon
in H., e.g. ἀμφὶ περί P10. See H. G.

. €ktopa 7.
760. τεύχη U. || τάφρω(ι) 1).

759. κεκληγότες PR Vr. A
761. γίγνετ᾽ L.

§ 227. The couplet seems out of place
here, as the fight never crosses the
trench, and indeed does not approach it
before Σ 150. It is perhaps only a tag
to round off the end of a rhapsody in
recitation.

761. ἐρωή, see on 11 302.

INTRODUCTION

Tue Eighteenth Book is on the whole remarkably free from internal
difficulties, and, if taken by itself, is one of the most varied and interesting
in the Iliad. It contains only two fairly clear interpolations, the Catalogue
of the Nereids (38-49) and the colloqay of Zeus and Hera (356-68),
neither of which has any organic relation to the story. Objections to a few
other lines will be found in the notes (see particularly on 168, 200, 288,
300, 429, 591-92); but they are not such as to mar our admiration for the
book. It is needless to dwell on such obvious beauties as the profound
truth of Achilles’ grief—note how he first receives the cruel blow in silence,
and only breaks out with groans (33) and wails (35) after the less-afflicted
slave-women have been roused to shrieks at the first word ;—or the superbly
dramatic action of the appearance at the trench; or the description of the
Shield itself, which has served as a model for all later time. Some purists
have ventured indeed to charge against the Shield a disproportionate length
which offends against ‘the laws of art’; but probably no one except
Zenodotos has been hardy enough to say that the description would have
been better left out. It is the business of the ‘laws of art’ to adapt them-
selves to great masterpieces like this.

When we come to the relation of this book to what precedes and follows,
however, the question is by no means so simple. We have reached the focus
of the disturbing force which we have recognized in the two preceding
books—the ὁπλοποιΐα which led to the change of armour in II and the
consequent dislocation of P. But in P we found evidence towards the end of
still further disturbance, and it is not strange therefore that the connexion
of the two books should be imperfect. It is clear that the description of the
bringing in of Patroklos’ body in 148-64 knows nothing of P 722 ff., where
the body is not dragged but carried. This however is a comparatively minor
matter, and is due rather to an alteration of the latter part of P than to any
fault of the author of >.

The main difficulty is in the relation of δ to the Μῆνις. We traced the
original work to the death of Patroklos (though with much expansion) at
the end of II, and a probable continuation in a brief account of fighting over
his body in P. Now ~& as it stands clearly cannot be a continuation of the
Mijves, for the wall and trench are inextricably involved in it, and we found
the motive of much disturbance to II and P in the desire to introduce the

268

IAIAAOC C (xvii) 269

idea of the ὁπλοποιΐα. We shall next find the Μῆνις in the sally of Achilles
from the camp at the end of T. How was the gap filled up in the original
story ?

The answer to such a question must of course be purely hypothetical.
But it is difficult to suppose that at least the bringing to Achilles the news
of Patroklos’ death did not belong to the tale from the first. How this may
have been followed up we can hardly even guess—perhaps Achilles may at
once have armed and attacked the Trojans, himself rescuing the body of
Patroklos. The remains of the δίηνις which we may possibly detect in the
following books are not inconsistent with such a hypothesis,

If this is right, then we may suppose it possible that the author of ~ has
worked up some of the old material which he has displaced. More than
this we can hardly assume. Many attempts have been made to piece
together out of the earlier part of the book a continuous narrative to bridge
the gap in the Μῆνις. All of these (including my own) I now regard as
quite unsatisfactory. It is wiser to recognize at once the existence of the
gap and the impossibility of closing it up. There are however three
pieces which may be from the original poem. These are (1) the opening,
Antilochos brings the news to Achilles ; (2) the bringing in of Patroklos’
body, 149-64, 231-42; (3) the Τρώων ἀγορά and lament over Patroklos,
243-353. Of these the third has probably sustained serious interpolation ;
if it is condemned entirely, we shall have to do the same with part of
Hector’s monologue in X 100 ff., where there is clear reference to Polydamas’
speech in 254 ff. It will be shown in the Introduction to X that this speech
contains other difficulties which tend to the same conclusion. If it is
retained, we must suppose that the Trojan assembly followed originally on a
sally of Achilles, in which no trench or wall was named.

The critical questions connected with the Shield itself are dealt with in
App. 1.

IAIAAOC C

ὁπλοποιΐα.

€ / \ > /
ds of μὲν μάρναντο δέμας πυρὸς αἰθομένοιο,
ΕῚ 7, es / \ / 5
Aptiroyos δ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆϊ πόδας ταχὺς ἄγγελος ἦλθε.
4 - / lal > /
τὸν δ᾽ εὗρε προπάροιθε νεῶν ὀρθοκραιράων,
\ / ea aN \ a \ / 2 ‘
τὰ φρονέοντ᾽ ava θυμὸν ἃ δὴ τετελεσμένα NEV
ΕῚ 7 5 \ a / / Ξ
ὀχθήσας δ᾽ ἄρα εἶπε πρὸς ὃν μεγαλήτορα θυμὸν 5
᾿ v » 93 / , \
“ὦ μοι ἐγώ, τί Tap αὗτε κάρη κομόωντες Ayatot
” / /

νηυσὶν ἔπι κλονέονται ἀτυζόμενοι πεδίοιο ;

\ / Le 6 \ Ni "ὃ θ lal
μὴ On μοι τελέσωσι θεοὶ κακὰ κήδεα θυμῶι,

“ f If
ὥς ποτέ μοι μήτηρ διεπέφραδε καί μοι ἔειπε

1. δέμας πυρὸς: πυρὸς μένος Η.
γὰρ Bar. 7. ἐπικλονέουςι Cant.
μήδεα HPQR. || ϑΘυμοῦ PR.

4, Ta: To Pap. ἐ supr. 6. Tap:

8. τελέωει J (cf. Eust. τελέηισι e€dc). ||

1=A 596; see also P 366. Here and
in A the line is properly used to mark
the beginning of a new episode.

3. ὀρθοκραιράων, of ships, as T 344 ;
used also in Θ 231, Σ 573 in the literal
sense, of oxen. λέγει δὲ διὰ TO τὰς
πρώιρας Kal πρύμνας ἀνατετάσθαι, ἐκ μετα-
φορᾶς τῶν βοῶν, Schol. A, rightly. The
oldest Greek ships, before the intro-
duction of the beaked prow, ran up into
vertical ἄφλαστα or κόρυμβα (see on I
241, O 717), which naturally suggested
the comparison to a cow’s horns. Cf.
Helbig H. £. 157. The word, like
ἐύκραιρος (Hymn. Mere. 209, Aisch. Supp.
300) and τανύκραιρος, both epithets of
oxen, and dixpacpos 11άν, must be referred
to κέρας, while ἡμίκραιρα, Ar. Thesn. 227,
evidently belongs to κάρα.

4. The hiatus at the end of the fifth
foot can hardly be right. It is easy
enough to read with Heyne τὸ. . ὃ

τετελεσμένον (note the variant of
Pap. ¢), or with Bentley τετελεσμέν᾽ ἄρ᾽,

7

0

but the cause of the corruption is left
unexplained ; the tendency is always the
exact opposite, viz. to remove the hiatus
even where it is legitimate. For other
cases see note on B 87. We may add
the common πότνια Ἥρη (Ἥβη A 2);
the a may have been originally long,
but if so the length was completely
forgotten before Homeric times, and
survives only in this phrase, possibly a
combination consecrated by antiquity
and therefore superior to the ordinary
rules of metre. There is some little
ground for attributing similar primitive
length to the a of the neut. plur., which
would explain both this line and N 22;
see H. G. ὃ 374 (cf. § 382).

5. See note on A 403; and for Tap (6)
A 8.

8. For μή with subj. in a principal
clause cf. A 26. euudi, locative as
often; but the variant θυμοῦ may be
right, cf & 197 λέγων ἐμὰ κήδεα
θυμοῦ.

=

IAIAAOC C (xvii) 271

Μυρμιδόνων τὸν ἄριστον ἔτι ζώοντος ἐμεῖο 10
χερσὶν ὕπο Τρώων λείψειν φάος ἠελίοιο.

ἢ μάλα δὴ τέθνηκε Μενοιτίου ἄλκιμος υἱός,

, ΠῚ ᾽ ᾽ / ᾽ / hoe ΄-
σχέτλιος" ἢ τ ἐκέλευον ἀπωσάμενον δήϊον πῦρ
fol vs "" 48 ΜΔ 53 ΄ ”
νῆας ἔπ᾽ ἂψ' ἰέναι, μηδ᾽ “Exrope ἶφι μάχεσθαι.
ἕως ὁ ταῦθ᾽ ὥρμαινε κατὰ φρένα καὶ κατὰ θυμόν, 1ὅ

Toppa οἱ ἐγγύθεν ἦλθεν ἀγαυοῦ Νέστορος υἱὸς
δάκρυα θερμὰ χέων, φάτο δ᾽ ἀγγελίην ἀλεγεινήν"
“ὦ μοι, Ἰ]ηλέος υἱὲ δαΐφρονος, ἢ μάλα λυγρῆς
, > , A \ oo» ,
πεύσεαι ὠγγελίης, ἣ μὴ ὠφελλε γενέσθαι.
-“ / / \ \ 3 /
κεῖται ἸΙΪάτροκλος, véxvos δὲ δὴ ἀμφιμάχονται 20
γυμνοῦ: ἀτὰρ τά γε Tevye ἔχει κορυθαίολος “Extwp.”
ὡς φάτο, τὸν δ᾽ ἄχεος νεφέλη ἐκάλυψε μέλαινα.
» / \ \ i? \ / > /
ἀμφοτέρηισι δὲ χερσὶν ἑλὼν κόνιν αἰθαλόεσσαν
χεύατο κακ κεφαλῆς, χαρίεν δ᾽ ἤισχυνε πρόσωπον:
νεκταρέωι δὲ χιτῶνι μέλαιν᾽ ἀμφίξανε τέφρη. 25

10-11 om. Rhianos Aph.

ϑὲ διαμφιλκάχονται TT’.
περὶ τὴν τέφραν).

10. ἐμοῖο Pt).
νῆας Yuen Aph. Ar. HT: [ἂψ ἐπὶ ν]ῆας ἵναι Pap. x.
21. αὐτὰρ U.

12. OH om. HQ. 14. ἂψ ἐπὶ
18. πηλέως ΟΝ. 20.

25. τέφρην J (so Hesych. ; ἐκαθέζετο

10-11 were omitted by Rhianos and
Aph., ἴσως ἐπεὶ οὐκ Fv Μυρμιδὼν ὁ ἸΤάτρο-
κλος, Λοκρὸς γὰρ ἣν ἐξ ᾿Οποῦντος, Did.
But for an oracle the prediction was
sufficiently near the fact, and there must
have been such an ambiguity or Achilles
would not have doubted. Cf. also P
410, T 328. With the former passage
there is a clear contradiction, see note
there.

13. σχέτλιος, headstrong ; cf. note on
K 164, and © 361, X 41, με 279. ἣ
τ᾽, and yet, although; H. G. ὃ 338.
Brandreth and van L. write ἢ F’. See
II 87.

14, νῆας En’ ἂψ ἱέναι ἐν ἐνίαις φαύλως,
says Did. But there is no obvious
reason for preferring the reading of Ar.,
ay ἐπὶ νῆας ἴμεν, unless on the ground
that it is more euphonious; compare
the similar variety in & 535 αὖτις ἐπ᾿ ay
θέμεναι. The doubts raised by van L.
against the validity of the form ἔμεν
(Ench. §126) appear to me entirely
fallacious. Note that wa, given by
Pap. x, is not a mere blunder ; reference
to the App. Crit. on ® 297 will shew
that it is a genuine variant. It is, on
the analogy of the later διδόναι ete. , more

correct than ἰέναι : but the only Homeric
forms| are those in which -vac (apart of
course from -wevar) is preceded by a long
vowel or diphthong (δοῦναι etc.). On
this ground van L. writes ἔμεναι for lévac.
vac is in fact found on an inscription
from Rhodes (παρίναι) and in a fragment
of Machon (Ath. 580c, ἐξίναι) ; and
appears to have been not uncommon
in the time of Phrynichos (Rutherford
p- 65, see G. Meyer Gr. p. 667).

OM Seen be O86. 21 P1122) 92—P
591, 22-24=w 315-17. It has been ob-
jected that κόνις aieaAdecca and τέφρη
both imply ashes, while, as Achilles is
outside his hut, he can only have had
dust to throw upon his head. But as
the hut is elsewhere regarded as a copy
of the house, it will probably have had
an altar to Ζεὺς ‘Epxetos in front; this
would afford a supply of wood-ashes.

25. νεκταρέωι, probably εὐώδεϊ, as fra-
grant spices were used to preserve gar-
ments. It has been thought that there
may be an allusion to II 223, and that
the cloak may be a present from Thetis,
νεκτάρεος implying divine origin; but
this does not suit I 385, the only other
passage where the epithet is found in H.

272

IAIAAOC C (xvii)

\ \
αὐτὸς δ᾽ ἐν κονίηισι μέγας μεγαλωστὶ τανυσθεὶς

κεῖτο,
δμωαὶ
θυμὸν

φίληισι δὲ χερσὶ κόμην ἤισχυνε δαΐζων.
δ᾽ ἃς ᾿Αχιλεὺς ληΐσσατο Πάτροκλός τε
ἀκηχέμεναι μεγάλ᾽ ἴαχον, ἐκ δὲ θύραζε

ἔδραμον ἀμφ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆα δαΐφρονα, χερσὶ δὲ πᾶσαι 80
στήθεα πεπλήγοντο, λύθεν δ᾽ ὑπὸ γυῖα ἑκάστης.

᾿Αντίλοχος δ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ὀδύρετο δάκρυα λείβων,

χεῖρας ἔχων ᾿Αχιλῆος: ὁ δ᾽ ἔστενε κυδάλιμον κῆρ᾽

δείδιε γὰρ μὴ λαιμὸν ἀποτμήξειε σιδήρωι.

σμερδαλέον δ᾽ ὦιμωξεν: ἄκουσε δὲ πότνια μήτηρ 35

c \ \ J,
ἡμένη ἐν βένθεσσιν ἁλὸς Tapa πατρὶ γέροντι,

΄ , 2 S/n \ / » 7
κώκυσεν Τ αρ ETTELTA® θεαὶ δέ μιν ἀμφαγέροντο,

27. φίληιςι O€: φίλην ὃέ Te Cant. || χερεὶν ἤσχυνε mpécwnon ϑαΐζων J.

28.01: τ Pap..c:
U (yp. as text). || exacroc Pap. ιἰ.
ἀπαμήςειε Ar. T.
ἀμφεμάχοντο J (yp. ἀμφαγέροντο).

31. πεπλήττοντο Vr. A.
33. yelpoc Pap. ει.
35. cuapdaheéon S.

|| ruta ἑκάστης: φαίϑιμα γυῖα
834. ἀποτμήξειε Zen. Ὡ :

37-38 om. S. 37. τὸς ὃ" ἜΠΗ |)

26. μέγας μεγαλωοτί, cf. IL 776.

29. ἀκηχέμεναι, a curious form beside
ἀκαχήμενος. The accent is vouched for
as Aiolic by Herod. on T 335. For the
long vowel cf. ὀδ-ώδυσ-ται, ἐλ-ήλα-ται,
ἀρ-ηρο-μένος, ἐδ-ήδ-οται. See note on
ἀκηχέδαται, P 637.

34. Various reasons have been urged
by Bentley and many others for rejecting
this line. It introduces violent changes
of subject in 33-35—éoreve Achilles,
δείδιε Antilochos, ἀποτμήξειε Achilles,
ὥιμωξεν Achilles. (Hence some ancient
critics actually thought that Antilochos
feared lest his own throat should be cut
by Achilles; or that Achilles feared lest
Hektor should cut off Patroklos’ head !)
It introduces the idea of suicide, which
is elsewhere unknown in the //iad, and
in Od. is mentioned only in a very late
passage, \ 277-78 (6 539, κ 50 are only
distant allusions). And it uses σίδηρος
to mean sword or knife, again a late
Odyssean use (see π 294), and implying
a longer familiarity with the use of iron
than the Jliad elsewhere admits (see
note on A 123). To the first of these
objections it may be replied that a
similar series of abrupt changes occurs
in H 186-89, to the last that a precisely
similar use of σίδηρος is found in Ψ 30,
cf. A 485; though weapons of iron are
practically unknown to the Ziad, tools
are not, and the word here and in Ψ 30
may be used of a knife. Still one would

be glad to think that Antilochos holds
Achilles’ hands in 34 out of affectionate
sympathy, and that this is an ex-
planatory line added by a man too dull
to understand such an action. —The
vulg. ἀποτακήξειε is simpler than Ar.’s
ἀπαμήσειε. The latter regularly means
to mow or reap (551, 2 451, ε 135, cf. A
67, T 223) and is used in @ 301 of
slicing off ears and nose. In all these
places it has a-. In I 359 (=H 2538)
διάμησε χιτῶνα it means cut through, and
has ἅ. aunoacbar=to collect (Q 165, ε
482, τ 247) is presumably a different
word altogether (conn. with ἅμα 3). And
the distinct variation in sense combined
with that of quantity makes it tempting
to separate διάμησε from audw. In that
case ἀπαμήσειε would be inappropriate
here, for shear off, however applicable to:
corn and ears, could hardly be applied
to the throat. But if it be only a
derivative of cut appearing in διάμησε,
it will be synonymous with ἀποτμήξειε,
and admissible. But then the difference
of quantity is hard to get over; Schulze’s
attempt to explain it (Q. #. p. 365 n.)
is wholly unacceptable. At best it might
be the result of a confusion of aujoac
and dujcacda. For adno- meaning
apart, not off, see Π 390. ϑείϑιε, plpf.
as in Q 358; ἔδιε van L., ἔδδιε Brandreth
as aor. (comparing εἴδειε. ἐφοβεῖτο,
Hesych.) ; so die=6Fle E 566 etc.
36=A 358 ; see also note on 141.

IAIAAOC C (xviit) 97

πᾶσαι ὅσαι κατὰ βένθος ἁλὸς Νηρηΐδες ἦσαν.
5 > ’ r ,
ἔνθ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔην Γλαύκη τε Θάλειά τε Κυμοδόκη τε,

Νησαίη

,ὔ / » 4 Ν ΄-
Σπειώ τε Θόη θ᾽ ᾿Αλίη τε βοῶπις,

10

Κυμοθόη τε καὶ ᾿Ακταίη καὶ Λιμνώρεια

καὶ Μελίτη καὶ Ἴαιρα καὶ ᾿Αμφιθόη καὶ ᾿Αγαυή,
Δωτώ τε Ipwre τε Φέρουσά τε Δυναμένη τε,
Δεξαμένη τε καὶ ᾿Αμφινόμη καὶ Καλλιάνειρα,

\ / \ /
Δωρὶς καὶ avon καὶ ἀγακλειτὴ Varateca,

45

Νημερτής τε Kal ᾿Αψευδὴς καὶ Καλλιάνασσα:'
” Ca meg = ΄ ἢ 7 7 \ 9 2

ἔνθα δ᾽ ἔην Κλυμένη ᾿Ιάνειρά τε καὶ ᾿Ιάνασσα,
Μαῖρα καὶ ᾿ΩὩρείθυια ἐυπλόκαμός τ᾽ ᾿Αμάθυια,
ἄλλαί θ᾽ αἱ κατὰ βένθος ἁλὸς Νηρηΐδες ἦσαν.

a \ \ δι “, a , ¢ b) “ rn
τῶν δὲ καὶ ἀργύφεον πλῆτο σπέος: αἱ δ᾽ ἅμα πᾶσαι

/ , ͵7ὔ ’ An ,ὔ
στήθεα πεπλήγοντο, Θέτις ὃ ἐξῆρχε γόοιο"
ςς a ’ NT sf ” 3. 95h A

κλῦτε, κασίγνηται Νηρηΐδες, ὄφρ᾽ ἐὺ πᾶσαι
» Ἂν > / ve 5» > “- »” / na
eldeT ἀκούουσαι ὅσ᾽ ἐμῶι ἔνι κήδεα θυμῶι.
»μ \ , bl /
ὦ μοι ἐγὼ δειλή, ὦ μοι δυσαριστοτόκεια,

τ XA , e\ ΄ ΄ ,
ἥ τ ἐπεὶ ἂρ τέκον υἱὸν ἀμύμονά τε κρατερόν τε,

ϑι
σι

» e ΄ ς > be ” = 5
ἔξοχον ἡρώων: ὁ δ᾽ ἀνέδραμεν ἔρνεϊ ἶσος"

ve \ 5) \ / \ aA “ » fal
Tov μὲν ἐγὼ θρέψασα, φυτὸν ὡς γουνῶι ἀλωῆς,

39-49 ἀθ. Zen. Ar.: ὁ δὲ Καλλίστρατος οὐδὲ ἐν τῆι ᾿Αργολικῆι φησὶν
φέρεσθαι Did.: the lines are marked with obelos in T as well as A.
γλαύκη τε: γλαύκεια P.

PU Pap. ε, Sch. X (yp. ἂρ ἔην).

ϑοὴ (adj.) ϑαλίη Te (with Hes. Zheog. 245) Sch. A.
52. καείγνητοι HPR.

48. Gudecia GH: duaeveia ().

αὐτοὺς
39. ἄρα AN
40. Some read
47 om. J. 1} €]Nedpa HN Pap. ι.
53. ἔνι : ἔπι Aph.

39-49. ὁ τῶν Νηρεΐδων χορὸς προηθέτη-
ται καὶ παρὰ Ζηνοδότωι ὡς ᾿Ησιόδειον ἔχων
χαρακτῆρα: “Ὅμηρος γὰρ κατὰ τὸ κοινὸν
Διούσας λέγει καὶ Εἰλειθυίας ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ὀνό-
ματα, Did. There can be no doubt that
this judgment is right ; the names seem
to be selected from the longer list in
Hesiod Theog. 243 ff. The repetition
of the greater part of 38 in 49 asa
‘eatchword’ is a familiar sign of inter-
polation.

50. καί ‘ belongs to the whole clause,
as in τοῖσι δὲ καὶ μετέειπε, Monro.
But in the latter phrase it introduces ἃ
fresh step, moreover. Here it seems
meaningless; we should perhaps read
τάων with Menrad and Fick.

4. OucapictoToKeia, ἐπὶ κακῶι τὸν
ἄριστον τετοκυῖα, ὡς ἄν τις εἴποι ἐπὶ δυσ-
τυχίαι εὔτεκνος, Schol. A. Cf. A 414.

55. The construction of this sentence
is rather involved, though the sense is
clear enough. It begins as though H Te

WOOL. Ut

T

were at once to receive its verb—as the
sentence stands οὐχ ὑποδέξομαι (59).
But in the course of utterance this is
expanded ; ὁ 0° ἀνέδραμεν is added as
though τέκον were the principal verb of
the sentence, and thus the whole is re-
sumed in a new principal sentence in two
clauses, antithetical in form (TON μὲν

. TON δέ), though the objects are
identical and only the verbs are con-
trasted. For all practical purposes
ἐπεί is redundant, and the sentence
would be clear if it were omitted. The
structure is thus exactly the same as in
P 658, where it is discussed at length.

56. Gnédpauen, a familiar metaphor
of a growing shoot in English also; so
Odysseus says of Nausikaa Δήλωι δή ποτε
τοῖον ᾿Απόλλωνος παρὰ βωμῶι φοίνικος
νέον ἔρνος ἀνερχόμενον ἐνόησα, ᾧ 162, and
P 53 th., €175 τὸν ἐπεὶ θρέψαν θεοὶ ἔρνεϊ
ἰσον.

γουνῶι ἁλωῆς, see on I 534.

o

274 IAIAAOC C (xviir)
νηυσὶν ἐπιπροέηκα κορωνίσιν Ἴλιον εἴσω
Τρωσὶ μαχησόμενον, τὸν δ᾽ οὐχ ὑποδέξομαι αὗτις
οἴκαδε νοστήσαντα δόμον Πηλήϊον εἴσω. 60

ὄφρα δέ μοι ζώει καὶ ὁρᾶι φάος ἠελίοιο,

ἄχνυται, οὐδέ τί οἱ δύναμαι χραϊσμῆσαι ἰοῦσα.

ἀλλ᾽ εἶμ᾽, ὄφρα ἴδωμι φίλον τέκος, ἠδ᾽ ἐπακούσω

ὅττί μιν ἵκετο πένθος ἀπὸ πτολέμοιο μένοντα."
ὡς ἄρα φωνήσασα λίπε σπέος: αἱ δὲ σὺν αὐτῆι 65

BRO, ἴσαν, περὶ δέ σφισι κῦμα θαλάσσης

ῥήγνυτο. ὶ δ᾽ ὅτε δὴ Τροίην ἐρίβωλον ἵκοντο,

ἀκτὴν er ie ἐπισχερὼώ, ἔνθα θαμειαὶ

Μυρμιδόνων εἴρυντο νέες ταχὺν ἀμφ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆα.

βαρὺ στενάχοντι παρίστατο πότνιω μήτηρ, 70

κωκύσασα κάρη λάβε παιδὸς ἑοῖο,

τῶι δὲ
ὀξὺ δὲ
καί ῥ᾽ ὀλοφυρομένη ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα.
/
‘réxvov, τί κλαίεις; τί δέ σε φρένας ἵκετο πένθος ;
A: \ / /
ἐξαύδα, μὴ κεῦθε. τὰ μὲν δή τοι τετέλεσται
ἐκ Διός, ὡς ἄρα δὴ πρίν γ᾽ εὔχεο χεῖρας ἀνασχών, 75

πάντας ἐπὶ πρύμνηισιν ἀλήμεναι υἷας ᾿Αχαιῶν

fa > 7 / 3 ? / ” »”
σευ ἐπιδευομένους, παθέειν Τ ἀεκήλια εργα.

59-60 om. Q. 59. αὖϑις C.
iodca: ὄλεθρον H.

ἴδω J: YOouu © (incl. A).

735. ςεἰ: τεῦ Κ.
75. ὧς: ὧ() 1, (Ρ p. ras.) 5.
μετρα Pap, εἰ

61. σώ(ι)γη(ι) CJT.
ἴδωμι DU Pap. @ (ecu man. 1):
64. NIN Pap. εἶ
ἀκτὴν ὃ᾽ J. || elcanéBucan A (yp. εἷς ἀνέβηςαν).
71. éfioc Cant. Par. a (supr. oo) f g' and ap. Eust. :

62. xpaicuAnai J. ||
Yowua GH :
66. cpici: coi PR. 68.
70. 0€ βαρὺ : ὃ᾽ ἐν dpa J.
ἐῆο Par.e. 72. ῥ᾽ om. Vr. ἃ.

14. Now ἵνα elOouen ἄμφω J (yp. τὰ WEN OH τοι τετέλεεται).
77. €mideouéenouc P. ||

T om. D. || αεκήρια

58. NHUCIN, sociative, with the fleet.
ἐπιπροέηκα, the ἐπι- seems to imply
‘against the foe.” We can hardly read
νηυσὶν ἔπι πρ., sent forth wpon the ships ;
for in this sense only σύν and ἐνί are
used ; ἐπὶ νηυσίν always means at or
towards the ships drawn up at the Greek
camp ; see P 708.

60. The scholia remark here and else-
where that H. does not know the later
legend which made Thetis leave the
house of Peleus soon after the marriage.

33. ἴδωμι, see on A 549.

68. Cf. Q 97; possibly Ar. read
ἐξανέβαινον here. ἐπιοχερώ, A 668.
eaueiai is predicate, not epithet, as is
shown by its place (N 611); were drawn
up tn close lines.

ῥ᾽. Γ᾽ Brandreth, rightly ; cf. κ 418
καί μ᾽ ὀλοφυρόμενοι κ.τ.λ..

73-74 are adapicd from A 362-63 ;
75, see on II 236: 76 on A 409, & 32.

77. ἀεκήλια, ee λεγόμενον, and ex-
plained by Ar. from ἕκηλος, οἷον rapax won,
ἐφ᾽ οἷς οὐχ οἷόν τε ἡσυχάζειν, ‘things not
of peace and quietness,’ or from ἀέκητι,
ἀκούσια, ἃ οὐκ ἄν τις ἑκὼν πάθοι. Neither
of these is plausible, and the word can
hardly be separated from ἀεικέλιος,
unseemly (Ξ 84 and Od., cf. ἀεικέα ἔργα
X 395, 2 733). The only way in which
they can be brought together is by
assuming them both to come from ἀξῖ-
κέλιος, with lengthening of two different
syllables from metrical necessity (ef.
μαχειόμενος---μαχεούμενος, App. D, A. 1).

IAIAAOC C (xvui) 275

τὴν δὲ βαρὺ στενάχων προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς:
“- ‘ Μ > / > ,
“μῆτερ ἐμή, τὰ μὲν ἄρ μοι Ολύμπιος ἐξετέλεσσεν"
»" \ / ΕΣ Ι] ΄ -
ἀλλὰ τί μοι τῶν ἦδος ; ἐπεὶ φίλος ὠλεθ᾽ ἑταῖρος 80
Πάτροκλος, Tov ἐγὼ περὶ πάντων Tiov ἑταίρων,
3 > A a \ > / / > Wa
ἶσον ἐμῆι κεφαλῆι: τὸν ἀπώλεσα, τεύχεα δ᾽ “Extwp
δηιώσας ἀπέδυσε πελώρια, θαῦμα ἰδέσθαι,
" ae \ / lal
καλά: τὰ μὲν ἸΙηλῆϊ θεοὶ δόσαν ἀγλαὰ δῶρα
Μ lal ev fal > / » > ~ 2
ἤματι τῶι OTE σε βροτοῦ ἀνέρος ἔμβαλον εὐνῆι. 85
> \ = ᾽ / ΄
αἴθ ὄφελες σὺ μὲν αὖθι pet ἀθανάτηις ἁλίηισι
,’ \ \ \ > / »
ναίειν, Πηλεὺς δὲ θνητὴν ἀγαγέσθαι ἄκοιτιν.
fal > “ \ \ / > \ \ ,ὔ »
νῦν δ, ἵνα καὶ σοὶ πένθος ἐνὶ φρεσὶ μυρίον εἴη
\ > / \ > e / “
παιδὸς ἀποφθιμένοιο, τὸν οὐχ ὑποδέξεαι αὗτις
/ ,’ > A \ »
οἴκαδε νοστήσαντ᾽, ἐπεὶ οὐδ᾽ ἐμὲ θυμὸς ἄνωγε 90
, > / , " © ὦ
ζώειν οὐδ᾽ ἄνδρεσσι μετέμμεναι, αἴ κε μὴ “Ἑκτωρ
cal -“ \ \ \ ,
πρῶτος ἐμῶι ὑπὸ δουρὶ τυπεὶς ἀπὸ θυμὸν ὀλέσσηι,
, 2 6 ’ »”
Πατρόκλοιο δ᾽ ἕλωρα Μενοιτιάδα᾽ ἀποτίσηι.
\ > / / 7
τὸν ὃ αὖτε προσέειπε Θέτις κατὰ δάκρυ χέουσα:
΄, , , , : -
“ὠκύμορος δή μοι, τέκος, ἔσσεαι, oi ἀγορεύεις" 95
,ὔ » £ / ΄ A
αὐτίκα yap τοι ἔπειτα μεθ “Extopa πότμος ἑτοῖμος."
\ \ a > / / / > \ > ͵ὕ
τὴν δὲ μέγ ὀχθήσας προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς Ἀχιλλεύς:
“ec pe» ,ὔ > \ > Vie 3 Sak e /
αὐτίκα τεθναίην, ἐπεὶ οὐκ ap ἔμελλον ἑταίρωι

80. φίλον ὥλες᾽ ἑταῖρον Vr. A. 81. πάτροκλον Vr. A. 83. ἀπέθηςε RF :
τινὲς anéAuce Sch. T. 86. aie’ ACDQ: ὡς (ὧς) 2, A™, 89. τὸν ὃ᾽ J.
Unodezai J (swpr. Η over al). || αὖϑις CDGJ. 90. ἀνώγει CDQ Bar. Mor. Vr. b, A.
92. Tuneic: ϑαμεὶς L. 93. μενοιτιάδα᾽ : ueNoITIGdao AS: wenoitiddew ὥ,

ἀποτίςει H. 94. ἐν ἄλλωι TON ὃ᾽ ἡμικείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα A. | attic Par. cd g. || Θέτις :
θέα Par. ἃ. 95. θήτοι (). 97. THN O° αὗτε προςέειπε noddpKHc δῖος ἀχιλλεύς

Aischines 7imarch. § 150.

In that case the correct form would
be ἀϊκείλιος.

80. Hoc, see on A 318.

83. πελώρια, see note on Καὶ 439.

88. The connexion of thought here
depends on the light in which we regard
the word εἴη. If it is really an opt. we
must supply an ellipse after viv dé, ‘ As
it is, they wedded thee to a mortal only
that,’ etc. τόν will then be a relative.
If, however, εἴη is for ety, a subjunctive
(for which see note on H 340), we obtain
avather simpler thought, τόν being taken
anaphorically, ‘As it is, that grief may
be thine for thy lost son, him shalt thou
not receive back again,’ ete.

91. GNOpecci μετέμμεναι adds to the
physical idea of ζώειν the ethical ‘ play my
partamongmen’; cf.A762,N 461(Hentze).

92. πρῶτος, in the first place, above all
other considerations. Cf. Π 861.

93. ἕλωρα in plur. only here (but
ἑλώρια A 4). The singular is always
used in a concrete sense, an object of prey,
generally to wild beasts or dogs, but in
ν 208 to robbers. Here it must be ab-
stract, pay (the penalty) for his preying
upon P., ὑπὲρ ὧν εἵλκυσεν iv’ ἀνθελκυσθῆι,
Schol. B. Μενοιτιάϑα᾽ is our way of
writing what the Mss. give as Meva-
Tiddao, ἐκ πλήρους. Cf. Φ 86.

95. οἷ᾽ ἀγορεύεις, else only an Odys-
sean phrase; ὃ 611, ete. It is our
vernacular ‘from what you say.’

98. αὐτίκα, his mother’s word taken
up and repeated with emphasis. ἄρ᾽
ἔμελλον, we ought probably to read
ἄρα μέλλον for the rhythm, as the text

IAIAAOC C (xvitt)

, lal e \ / / /
KTELVOMEVML ἐπαμῦναι" ὁ μὲν μάλα τηλόθι πάτρης

ἔφθιτ᾽, ἐμεῖο δὲ δῆσεν
a ’ 5 \ > / /
νῦν 6, ἐπεὶ οὐ νέομαι

»0ὺ / / ΄ "δ᾽ td ΄,
οὐδέ τι Πατρόκλωι γενόμην φάος οὐὸ ετάροισι
a », “Ὁ \ / δά aR) δί
τοῖς ἄλλοις, οἱ δὴ πολέες δώμεν κτορι OL@L,
» v > Ἢ
ἀλλ᾽ far παρὰ νηυσὶν ἐτώσιον ἄχθος ἀρούρης,

> 2 lal ,
τοῖος ἐὼν οἷος ov τις Αχαιῶν yadkoytT@var,

ἄρεω ἀλκτῆρα γενέσθαι. 100
γε φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν,
105

rn ΄ / 2 \ yA

ἐν πολέμωι, ἀγορῆι δέ τ’ ἀμείνονές εἰσι καὶ ἄλλοι.
rn / ’ /

ὡς ἔρις ἔκ τε θεῶν ἔκ τ᾽ ἀνθρώπων ἀπόλοιτο,

,

99. ὁ WEN κιτ.λ.: ὅ κοι πολὺ φίλτατος ἔσκεν Aischines ibid.
ἄρεω Ar. A supr., yp. Par. a: ἀρῆς ai εἰκαιότεραι, Q.

νηυςὶ κορωνίειν ἄχθος Plato Apol. 28 Ὁ.
καὶ Aristotle Eth. Hud. vii. 1.

introduces the forbidden caesura into
the fourth foot. Achilles says, Let me
die at once, since it was not my lot to
succour my comrade as he fell ; it was his
fault that he was not at hand in the
hour of need (οὐ γενόμην φάος 102), and
he will gladly expiate it by his death.
Platt (J. P. xxi. 41) translates, ‘Then
may I die immediately after, since other-
wise it appears I was not destined to
have avenged Patroclus.’ But the pres.
part. κτεινομένωι shews that there can
be no idea of avenging subsequently in
ἐπαμῦναι. This famous passage was
much quoted in ancient times, notably
by Plato Apol. 28c. For Aischines see
App. Crit.

100. OAcen is undoubtedly a wrong
form, unknown to Attic as well as to H.
The verb odcurs elsewhere in H. only
with the stem dev-, and always in the
mid. except c [483] 540 τυτθὸν ἐδεύησεν,
just missed. Thiersch and Dod, emend
ἐμεῦ δ᾽ ἐδέ( γησεν, others ἐδεύετ᾽, Menrad
ἔδευεν. Why not ἔδευσεν Ὁ The root is
δευσ- (of which the prefix δυσ- perhaps
shews the weak form; Schulze Q. δ.
p- 62). The regular Epic aor. of this is
édevoa for ἔδευσσα, and the change to
δέω in Attic, the v becoming a semi-
vowel and falling out, is equally in
order. The form δῆσεν is merely a mis-
taken attempt to assimilate the un-
familiar form to ἐδέησεν, on the supposed
analogy of the entirely unconnected δέω
to bind (root δε-). Gpeo, see notes on
M 334, = 485. Parmeniskos is said to
have read ”’Apys, and explained ὁ πόλεμος
τὴν ἐμὴν ἀφελόμενος πανοπλίαν ἔδησεν,

100. ἐμοῖο GP. ||
101. ὃ᾽ om. G. 104.
105. οἷος om. P. 107. & τὸ:

ἐνεπόδισέ, μου THY ἔξοδον, ὥστε ἀλκτῆρα
μὴ γενέσθαι Ἰ]ατρόκλου (ἢ).

101=W 150. νῦν δέ, the verb is for-
gotten in the course of the following
parenthetical clauses, and the thovght
is only resumed in 114, NON 0° εἶμι,
ὥσπερ els ὑπόμνησιν τῆς ἀρχῆς ἣν παρα-
λιπὼν παρεξέβη Nikanor. ὅτι εἴωθε τῶι
ἐπεὶ μὴ ἐπαγαγεῖν ἀνταπόδοσιν Sch. T
(An. 33, evidently in reference to 55
above and the passages there quoted.

104. A comparison of v 379, αὔτως ἄχθος
ἀρούρης, suggests that ἐτώσιον is to be
taken as an adverb rather than an epithet.

105. ἀλαζών, φασί, καὶ φορτικός. ῥητέον
δὲ ὅτι ἔθος ἣν πᾶσιν ἑαυτοὺς ἐπαινεῖν Schol.
A. So A 244 Achilles calls himself ἄριστον
᾿Αχαιῶν, and cf. note on H 75. P.
Knight and Heyne reject 105-06; so
also Fick, on the ground that the scansion
of οἷος as a pyrrhich is not Homeric.
(See, however, on N 275; Brandreth
conj. ws.) The objection from the poetical
point of view is evidently to 106 rather
than 105; the correction of the preced-
ing line is needless, and not like the
character of Achilles.

107, ὧς with opt. is used to express a
wish=wtinam also in X 286, and per-
haps p 243, φ 201; cf. also Z 281. It is
to be connected not with ὥς in wishes,
‘in like manner’ (e.g. & 142, Ψ 91, a
47), but with the common ws ὄφελον as
an exclamative, ‘how!’ Aristotle (2th.
Eud. vii. 1) tells us that Herakleitos,
having founded his physical theory on
ἔρις, blamed Homer for this wish, which,
if fulfilled, would bring all things to
confusion.

IAIAAOC C (xviit)

to
~JI
~J

, o » ’ 4 /
καὶ χόλος, ὅς τ᾽ ἐφέηκε πολύφρονά περ χαλεπῆναι,
“ \ ,’ὔ /
ὅς τε πολὺ γλυκίων μέλιτος καταλειβομένοιο

> lal , / "Δ >? ’
ἀνδρῶν ἐν στήθεσσιν ἀέξεται ἠύτε καπνός" 110

e > \ lal > / »Μ ᾽ a ? ,
ὡς ἐμὲ νῦν ἐχόλωσεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿ΔΑγαμέμνων.

> \ \ A ’ ΄ ᾽ / ,
ἀλλὰ τὰ μὲν προτετύχθαι ἐάσομεν ἀχνύμενοί περ,

\ x, \ / / 4 > /
θυμὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσι φίλον δαμάσαντες ἀνάγκηι"
νῦν δ᾽ εἶμ᾽, ὄφρα φίλης κεφαλῆς ὀλετῆρα κιχείω
Rn a > > \ , / ΄ , ‘
KTopa: κῆρα δ᾽ ἐγὼ τότε δέξομαι, ὁππότε Kev δὴ 115
Ζεὺς ἐθέληι τελέσαι ἠδ᾽ ἀθάνατοι θεοὶ ἄλλοι.
οὐδὲ γὰρ οὐδὲ βίη “Ἡρακλῆος φύγε κῆρα,
Ὁ“ , » \ r δ »Μ
ὅς περ φίλτατος ἔσκε Διὶ Κρονίωνι ἄνακτι,
| /
ἀλλά ἑ μοῖρ ἐδάμασσε Kal ἀργαλέος χόλος “Hpns:
΄, e lol
ὡς καὶ ἐγών, εἰ δή μοι ὁμοίη μοῖρα τέτυκται, 120
/ ’ » , ΄, fal \ ΄, > \ b ,
κείσομ᾽, ἐπεί κε θάνω: νῦν δὲ κλέος ἐσθλὸν ἀροίμην,
καί τινα ρωϊάδων καὶ Δαρδανίδων βαθυκόλπων
ἀμφοτέρηισιν χερσὶ παρειάων ἁπαλάων

108. περ: Te J.
προτέτυκται, ἢ. 116. ἐθέλοι (".
117. (Second) οὐδὲ om. PQ.
uoipa Oauacce GPR Syr.

109. καταλειβοκμένοιο perhaps alludes
to wild honey trickling down a tree, as
in the familiar story of Jonathan and
the honey in the wood which ‘ dropped,’
1 Sam. xiv. 26.

110. As smoke from a very small fire
will fill all the house, so anger from a
small beginning fills men’s hearts.

112. See II 60, T 65.

115-16=X 365-66.
accept (willingly).

117. The first οὐδέ belongs as usual
to the whole sentence, which is thus
brought into connexion with what pre-
cedes, while the second belongs to® βίη
"Hp. ; ‘for neither did even the mighty
ΒΕ οἴδ. βίη .. Sc, cf. A 690. It
will be seen that legend as yet knows
nothing of the apotheosis of Herakles,
which appears first in ἃ 602-04.

120. ὁμοίη, the same fate, as we are
of the same divine origin. Some com-
mentators have found a quite needless
difficulty in this, and have proposed to
explain ὁμοίη as ‘the common fate,’ on
the very uncertain analogy of ὁμοίιος
πόλεμος, or to read ὀλοίη (Nauck). This
is not to be approved.

δέξομαι, J wil/

109. μέλητος γλυκίων |).
| HO’: HT’ Pap. ὦ:

118. περ: Ke Q: Ken Porph. on Z 488. 119.
120. ἐγὼ J.

110. ἀΐξεται J. 11;
καὶ Bar. Mor. Vr. A.

122. dapdaniwn PR.

121. Keicomai in pregnant sense J shal/
lie idle, 178, B 688, I 556 and elsewhere.

122. BaeuxoAnown recurs in H. only
in 339 and Ὡ 215. Compare I 594 with
note; the word seems to be almost
identical in sense with βαθύζωνος there.
The κόλπος is either the bosom itself
or more commonly the upper part of the
peplos which covers it and hangs in a
deep fold over the girdle, see X 80 and
App. ἃ § 5. The epithet happens like
βαθύζωνος to be used only of Trojan
women, from which Ar., followed by
many modern archaeologists, supposed it
to mean some non-Hellenic form of dress.
3ut such national differences are almost
unknown to H., see note on II 419.
Later poets know nothing of any such
restriction ; see Hymn. Cer. 5 (of the
Okeanides), Ven. 257 (the nymphs),
Aisch. Sept. 864 (Antigone and Ismene).
Pindar uses it only of the deep-bosomed
earth. One may suspect that Ar. took
this view in order to strike a blow at
Zen.’s reading of B 484 μοῦσαι ᾿᾽Ολυμπιάδες
βαθύκολποι.

123. χείρεσσ᾽ ἀμφοτέρηισι van L. on
account of the harsh rhythm ; ef. M 382.

-o
278

IAIAAOC C (xvi)

, 5 ΕῚ / > \ a bp] / a
δάκρυ ὀμορξαμένην ἀδινὸν στοναχῆσαι ἐφείην

cal e Ν Ν » \ / 7
γνοῖεν δ᾽ ὡς δὴ δηρὸν ἐγὼ πολέμοιο πεπαυμαι.

12ὅ

7 5 , ΄ b / / 55
μηδέ μ᾽ ἔρυκε μάχης φιλέουσά περ' οὐδέ με πείσεις.
" \ / > / 5
τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα θεὰ Θέτις ἀργυρόπεζα
fal , / > / >
“val δὴ ταῦτά ye, τέκνον: ἐτήτυμον οὐ κακὸν ἐστι

΄, / > \ yi
τειρομένοις ἑτάροισιν ἀμυνέμεν αὐπὺυν ὄλεθρον"

, , \ \ Τὰ »
ἀλλά τοι ἔντεα καλὰ μετὰ Τρώεσσιν ἔχονται,

190

/ / Ν Ν θ / DN EA ὅν
γάλκεα μαρμαίροντα" Ta μὲν κορυθαίολος MxTop
4 SN » » > / 7
αὐτὸς ἔχων ὦμοισιν ἀγάλλεται" οὐδέ ἕ φημι

\ > won f b) / 3... Ο͵ον
δηρὸν ἐπαγλαϊεῖσθαι, ἐπεὶ φόνος ἐγγύθεν αὐτῶι.

124. aaa (A supr.) T Pap. «, Par. al f and ap. Did. || «τεναχῆςαι G.

125.

γνοίην JU. | OH δηρὸν : ϑηρὸν CQR: ϑηρὸν δὴ L. || πεπαύμην S Harl. a, Vr. d A.

126. περ: ue J.
Saxpuxeouca Pap. «.
re om. DJQ. 132 om. Pap. ut,
φθόνος J.

127. τὸν ὃ᾽ GnaueiBer’ Vr. A.
128. τοῦτο DJ (P supr.) RS Par. ἃ 6 ἢ, yp. U® Eust. ||
133. anarAateiceai PR. || φόβος Η (supr. Ν) :

|| ϑεὰ om. J. || eeric KaTa-

124, Gdinon, see on B 87 ; the variant
ἀδινά is more usual in similar phrases.
The application of the word to grief is
peculiar to Od. and the later books of 77.

125. γνοῖεν, a wish, like the preced-
ing optatives. But it expresses the
result of the main wish which precedes
it, and so becomes almost final, i order
that they may know. ϑηρόν, fifteen days
at most, according to the present chrono-
logy of the liad; but as Schol. A
remarks pia ἡμέρα ᾿Αχιλλεῖ πολὺ ἢν
ἀφεστῶτι.

128, ναὶ 0H ταῦτά re, yea, as thow
sayest. ταῦτα as usual refers to the
person addressed ; it is used as a sort
of exclamation without any strict con-
struction. This was probably a familiar
phrase, virtually equivalent to ‘yes,’
and only strengthened by vai 67. In
this use it is found in Attic comedy ;
e.g. Aristoph. Pax 276, Vesp. 142 ταῦτ᾽
ὦ δεσπότα, ‘yes, sir!’ Hg. 111 AHM.
τοὺς χρησμοὺς ταχὺ κλέψας ἔνεγκε
NIK. ταῦτ΄. Ach. 815 ταῦτα δή. 7765).
1008 ταῦτά νυν, ‘very well.’ The full
and formal phrase would be vai δὴ ταῦτά
ye πάντα, τέκος, κατὰ μοῖραν ἔειπες, but
the mother can use the contractions of
every-day life. ἐτήτυμον is an adv.,
verily it is not ill to save ete.—Various
other readings and punctuations have
been adopted, and the line has given
much trouble. Ahrens writes é€THtTuua,
thy words are true, supposing the altera-
tion to the sing. to arise from the desire

to avoid the legitimate hiatus. Whether
the change would be likely at such
serious cost to the intelligibility of the
words is, however, very doubtful. Cobet
reads τοῦτο, with some Ms. support,
but this looks like an emendation made
in order to simplify the construction.
Nikanor at all events read the passage
as in the text, and mentions no variant.
He says we may either put a stop after
ἐτήτυμον, and assume an ellipse of ἐστίν,
regarding ἐτήτυμον as an adverb, ταῦτα
ἀληθῶς ἐστίν : or we May join ἐτήτυμον
κακόν, these things are no real wl (2): or
again omitting the stop we may take
ἐτήτυμον as advy., these things are verily
not an ill matter. Of these the first is
just possible; ἐτήτυμον is commonly
used as an adv., A 558, N 111, 6 157,
and in the common Odyssean phrase
τοῦτ᾽ ἀγόρευσον ἐτήτυμον (seven times).
For an adv. used as a predicate with
ellipse of ἐστί cf. on A 416. But the
constr. is still very harsh. The third
alternative is better; but the best re-
source, if the explanation first given be
not accepted, is to regard ἐτήτυμον not
as an ady., but as a substantival neuter,
just as B 204 οὐκ ἀγαθὸν πολυκοιρανίη,
and οὗ Ξ 125 τὰ δὲ μέλλετ᾽ ἀκουέμεν, εἰ
ἐτεόν περ. ἐτεόν and ἐτήτυμον both mean
‘the truth.’ (See Kuhner Gram. ii.
53, with the quotations from Plato
there given, Parm. 160 Α ταῦτα δὲ ἀδύνα-
τον ἐφάνη, Soph. 252 τά ye δύο ἀδύνατον
εὑρέθη.)

‘ IAIAAOC C (xvii) 279

ἀλλὰ σὺ μὲν μὴ πω καταδύσεο μῶλον “Apnos,
» Ἀ 415 lal Ε] ΄- "
πρίν Y ἐμὲ δεῦρ ἐλθοῦσαν ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ἴδηαι: 135

» 5 \ “- “΄ἐλ > , ᾽ ,
ἠῶθεν γὰρ νεῦμαι ἅμ ἠελίωι ἀνιόντι
/ \ / 5 Ἐ / ” ”
τεύχεα καλὰ φέρουσα trap ᾿Ηφαίστοιο ἄνακτος.
e / / / / cn
ὡς ἄρα φωνήσασα πάλιν τράπεθ᾽ υἷος ἑοῖο,

\ en? ΄ , 7 ͵7
καὶ στρεφθεῖσ ἁλίηισι κασυιγνήτηισι μετηύδα:
lal \ la) lal / / /
“ὑμεῖς μὲν νῦν δῦτε θαλάσσης εὐρέα κόλπον 140
’ / , , > “ Ν / ,
ὀψόμεναί τε γέρονθ᾽ ἅλιον καὶ δώματα πατρός,
, . ΄ 3 > / bd ὩΛῈΝ as \ ”
καί ol πάντ ayopevoat* ἐγὼ ὃ ἐς μακρὸν ᾿Ολυμπον
“ > , " 3 a
εἶμι παρ “Hgaiotoy κλυτοτέχνην, αἴ κ᾽ ἐθέληισιν
nr / \ / /
vit ἐμῶι δόμεναι κλυτὰ τεύχεα παμφανόωντα.

᾿ > ΄ ’ ΄ a 7
ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, αἱ δ᾽ ὑπὸ κῦμα θαλάσσης αὐτίκ᾽ ἔδυσαν. 140
᾽ = > /
ἡ ὃ αὖτ᾽ Οὔλυμπόνδε θεὰ Θέτις ἀργυρόπεζα
»}.. ” , \ Ν / > > /
ἤϊεν, ὄφρα φίλωι παιδὶ κλυτὰ τεύχε᾽ ἐνείκαι.
\ \ get) , , , Fu IN > \
τὴν μὲν ap Οὔλυμπόνδε πόδες φέρον: αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχαιοὶ
θεσπεσίωι ἀλαλητῶι ὑφ᾽ “Ἕκτορος ἀνδροφόνοιο
φεύγοντες νῆάς τε καὶ ᾿Ελλήσποντον ἵκοντο. 160

οὐδέ κε Ἰ]άτροκλόν περ ἐυκνήμιδες ᾿Αχαιοὶ

136 om. D. || ἀῶϑι PR. || GNIGNTI: καταϑύντι D™,
139. καςιγνήτοιςι P. || προςηύϑα JJ.
143. αἴ Ke eeAHce: Vr. b d.
146. δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ : μὲν ap’ Syr.
ἐνείκη(ι) PRU Harl. a, Vr. b A, Bar.: ἐνῆκαι J: ἐνείκοι DG (T supr.).
150. ἱκέσθην Vr. d.

Pap. ¢, Syr., ἐν ἄλλωι A.
142. ἀγορεῦςαι Zen.
πανφανόωντα RK.

om. Ht: 149-51 om. fr. Mose.
οὐδ᾽ ἄρα A,

134. For the very rare use of the aor.
imper. with μή see H. G. δὲ 278, 328,
and A 410.

136. The contracted form νεῦμαι is
suspicious, νεῖσθαι o 88 being the only
other instance where the diphthong is
in arst and cannot be resolved. Nauck
conj. ἠοόθεν νέομαι yap, but yap occupies
the third place only when preceded
by μέν, περ, τε, and once (A 700) by
a preposition with its case (Bekker
H. B. i. 286. 28: Fick suggests that
the colon might be put after ἠῶθεν
instead of after ἴδηαι). Menrad conj.
vicoow’, which is better; the change
may have been made to avoid the un-
usual elision of -ac (cf. O 110, Σ 194).

138. πάλιν, with gen., back from, as
m 148, YT 439, cf. τείχεος ἂψ ὥσασθαι
M 420.

141. 6wouena, 1.6. fo visit, as in
English ; = 200, etc. Pausanias quotes
this and the preceding line (iii. 21. 9) in

138. ἑῆος (ἐῆος) DHJ
141. Tes rel.
144. υἷι H: υἱεῖ ©. |
141. Hier μὲν Syr. ||
149-50
151. οὐδέ KE: ἐν ἄλλωι

speaking of the marine divinity called
Ἰέρων, and worshipped at Gythion, whom
he identifies with Nereus. So Hes.
Theog. 234 Nnpéa . . καλέουσι γέροντα,
οὕνεκα νημερτής τε Kal ἤπιος, etc.

142, ἀγορεύςατ᾽, παρὰ Ζηνοδότωι ““ἀγο-
ρεῦσαι,᾽᾽ καὶ ὑποφαίνει τὸ Ὁμηρικὸν ἔθος,
Did.

144. υἷι, so H only, the rest having
viet, ἃ very suspicious contracted form ;
cf. 458, Φ 34. The only well-attested
forms of the dat. are υἱέϊ and vi. Here
we ought perhaps to read υἱέ᾽ ἐμῶι (υἱέϊ
μοι, Nauck).

151. The reference of Ke is obscure ;
166 forms a natural protasis, but is so
far off that a connexion is difficult.
Hence Diintzer and Nauck read οὐδ᾽ ἄρα,
a variant mentioned by Schol. A: ‘after
all it was not the Achaians who saved
him but Achilles alone.’ But 153-65
look like an interpolated description of
the fight over the body of Patroklos

280

IAIAAOC C (xvi)

/ > / 3.9 a Ε
ἐκ βελέων ἐρύσαντο νέκυν, θεράποντ Ἀχιλῆος
= 7, / \ “
αὗτις γὰρ δὴ τόν γε κίχον λαὸς TE καὶ ἵπποι
6 al 7] - \ 7 5 /
Ἄκτωρ te Ἰ]ριάμοιο πάϊς, φλογὶ eixedos ἀλκὴν. ᾿
, rn / / “
τρὶς μέν μιν μετόπισθε ποδῶν λάβε φαίδιμος “Ικτωρ — 155
΄ / / \ ͵ e lA :
ἑλκέμεναι μεμαώς, μέγα δὲ Ῥρώεσσιν ομοκλα
\ \ 79 ” θ la) > / iN, phen
τρὶς δὲ δύ᾽ Αἴαντες, θοῦριν ἐπιειμένοι ἀλκὴν,

νεκροῦ ἀπεστυφέλιξαν.

ὁ δ᾽ ἔμπεδον, ἀλκὶ πεποιθώς,

LY 3 of Χ / ” 3 3
ἄλλοτ᾽ ἐπαΐξασκε κατὰ μόθον, ἄλλοτε ὃ αὖτε

7 3 / 3 > / /
στάσκε μέγα ἰάχων, ὀπίσω δ᾽ ov χάξζετο πάμπαν.

160

e ᾽ \ , > / > / /
ὡς δ᾽ ἀπὸ σώματος οὔ τι λέοντ᾽ αἴθωνα δύνανται

/ ” / / Ol θ
ποιμένες ἄγραυλοι μέγα πεινάοντα δίεσθαι,
“ € \ ) 5 7 Τὰ » N
ὥς pa τὸν οὐκ ἐδύναντο δύω Αἴαντε κορυστὰ
“ΔΛ n /
‘Exropa Ἰ]ριαμίδην ἀπὸ νεκροῦ δειδίξασθαι.
καί νύ κεν εἴρυσσέν τε καὶ ἄσπετον ἤρατο κῦδος, 165

εἰ μὴ Πηλείωνι ποδήνεμος ὠκέα Ἶρις
ἄγγελος ἦλθε θέουσ᾽ ἀπ᾽ ᾿Ολύμπου θωρήσσεσθαι,
κρύβδα Διὸς ἄλλων τε θεῶν: πρὸ γὰρ ἧκέ μιν “Ηρη.

152. νέκυν : ἄνακτα P.

ποδῶν λάβε καὶ μέγ᾽ ἀύτει Zen.

153. aveic C. || TON re: TON Oe CT.
φλογὶ : cui Zen. || ἴκελος (ἴκ-) AGT Syr.!
156. μέγα : éniH: μετὰ Ht. Mag. 625. 22. ||

154,
155. nodec J): ὅς μιν τρὶς μετόπιςϑε

μέγα δὲ τρώεςειν ὁμόκλα : κεφαλὴν 9€ ἑ ουμὸς ἀνώγει πῆξαι ἀνὰ cKdAonac
οἵ (ςκολόπεςει Heyne) Taudne’ ἁπαλῆς ἀπὸ ϑειρῆς Zen. (from 176-77). 157.

OU’: δὴ Harl. a. || afante DH (Harl. a supr.) Lips.
160. μέγ᾽ POR. || ἰάχων : ἀχέων Zen.

αὕτως ().
164. deidizecoai VT Syr.

alternative to that at the end of P—the
two accounts can hardly be reconciled,
and the general picture has entirely
altered. Nothing is said here about
the carrying of the body by Menelaos
and Meriones with the Aiantes as a
rear-guard (P 715-61); the Greeks are
dragging it (ἐρύσαντο) by the arms, the
feet trailing in reach of Hector’s hand.
Yet αὖτις (153) must refer to a preceding
narrative in which Hector had been
beaten off for a time. περ seems to
imply that though they themselves had
reached the ships it was more than they
could do to save Patroklos.

154. Note the extensive variants of
Zen., partly taken from the speech of
Iris below, 176-77. Ar. objected that
Hector’s intention is not to mutilate the
body, but to exchange it for Sarpedon’s
(P 160-63, but ef. P 125-26); so that in
the mouth of Iris the words of 176-77
are a pious fraud intended merely to
arouse Achilles’ anger. But in all prob-

159 om. Vr. A. || αὖτε:
163. Kopuctai HPR Vr. A.

168. ἄλλων : πάντων Vr. ἃ. || Hpa J.

ability this passage is of quite in-
dependent origin from the earlier part
of P; such a discrepancy need cause no
surprise.

161. Compare Τ' 23 with note. Here
again we have the emphatic μέγα πεινά-
ovra, but there is no reason why σῶμα
may not mean the body of an animal
slain by the hon himself.

167. ewprcceceat, prepare for the
battle, without allusion to the breast-
plate, or indeed to any armour at all;
ef. A 715, N 301. So also we must
clearly take it in 189, where it answers
to καταδῦναι μῶλον “Apnos in 134. Cf.
also II 218, where Patroklos is already
armed.

168. This line is not free from sus-
picion ; it may have been added in view
of the opening of @ by a poet who
thought that Zeus would not permit
an open intervention by Iris and Hera
(184). It seems to assume that Zeus is
still on Olympos with the other gods,

IAIAAOC C (χνυνπι)

> ro ’ ΄ ,ὔ , / Ὁ
ἀγχοῦ δ᾽ ἱσταμένη ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα'"

“ὄρσεο, Ἰ]ηλείδη, πάντων ἐκπαγλότατ᾽ ἀνδρῶν, 170

/ , / a “ 7, Φι 4
IlatpoxXwe ἐπάμυνον, οὗ εἵνεκα φύλοπις αἰνὴ

, \ lal
ἕστηκε TPO νεῶν.

i , / , /
οἱ δ᾽ ἀλλήλους ὀλέκουσιν,

€ / -“
οἱ μὲν ἀμυνόμενοι νέκυος πέρι τεθνηῶτος,

[ \ > / \ Μ > ,
οἱ δὲ ἐρύσσασθαι προτὶ ἤϊλιον ἠνεμόεσσαν

fal \ t/ 1 a
Τρῶες ἐπιθύουσι' μάλιστα δὲ φαίδιμος “Extwp 176
€ / / \ if id \ »
ἑλκέμεναι μέμονεν: κεφαλὴν δέ ἑ θυμὸς ἄνωγε

-“ \ / ΄ fel \ r
πῆξαι ava σκολόπεσσι ταμόνθ᾽ ἁπαλῆς ἀπὸ δειρῆς.

ἀλλ᾽ ἄνα, pnd ἔτι κεῖσο' σέβας δέ σε θυμὸν ἱκέσθω

Πάτροκλον 'ρωιῆισι κυσὶν μέλπηθρα γενέσθαι"

\ / / / / ” na
σοὶ λώβη, αἴ κέν TL νέκυς ἠισχυμμένος ENOnL.” 180

170. εκπακλότατ᾽ Syr.: ἐκπαλότατ᾽ ().
113. τεθνηῶτος (A swpr.) HPQS (supr. εἰ) T: τεθνειῶτος 22.

171. πατρόκλου Ar. Par. c d g j.
174. 0€: δέ τ᾽ Cant.

épuccecear A (sup. a). || moti [G]. || HNeudeccan: αἰπὺ eéAontec Zen. (omitting

175-77 ; see on 156),

ἔλθοι C: ελθης Syr.

176. 0€ €: τέ € A Syr.: O€ re Cant. Harl. a. || ἀνώγει A
(ἐν ἄλλωι ἄνωγεν) CQTU Syr. Harl. a (supr. € man. rec.).
178. WHO’ ETL: μηκέτι U Harl. a. || ce

177. ano: ὑπὸ Η.
te Lips.1: τι Q. || ixécea J. 180.

instead of on Ida, though this is not
necessarily implied. In the sequel,
however, there is no talk of secrecy
when Athene (203) and Hera (239)
interfere personally, nor does Zeus com-
plain that he has been deceived or shew
any particular resentment, even if we
regard 357-59 as original. His object
has in fact been fully attained in the
defeat of the Greeks; he has no grudge
against the body of Patroklos (see P
270). Monro further notes that the
position of uN is irregular.

170. ἐκπαγλότατε, see note on A 146.
Here it seems to express amazement at
the incredible remissness of Achilles.

171. Πατρόκλωι nearly all Mss., as
Z 361, M 369, N 465, ete. ; Ar. Πατρόκλου.
The gen. is not found with the com-
pound, and is very rare with the simple
ἀμύνειν (see N 110, Π 522), though
common with ἀμύνεσθαι.

172. ἕστηκε, so \ 314 φυλόπιδα στήσειν.
and cf. = 533, N 333.

175. émevouci, for the transition from
the subordinate participial to the co-
ordinate construction ef. Τὸ 80 lotcly re
τιτυσκόμενοι λάεσσί τ᾽ ἔβαλλον. The verb
might be divided ἐπι- θύουσι, αἰ ὦ
lengthened by ictus ; but it is better to
take it ἐπ- wOvovor, cf. also 7 297 ὡς ἂν
ἐπιθύσαντες ἑλοίμεθα. The simple ἰθύω
is used similarly with an infin., x 408

ἴθυσέν ῥ᾽ ὀλολύξαι, NX 591 τῶν ὁπότ᾽ Bice’
ὁ γέρων ἐπὶ χερσὶ μάσασθαι, while there
is no analogous use of θύω or Give.
ἰθύω elsewhere always has ὕ in the
pres. ; the lengthening here is due to
metrical necessity (App. D, B (2) 8).
Zen., having transferred 175-77 to 155
above, ended 174 with προτὶ Ἴλιον αἰπὺ
θέλοντες, against the rule that H. has
only the fem. Ἴλιος. See on Ὁ 71.

177. ckoAénecct are explained (a) as
poles, to carry the head about—but the
plur. is against this ; (b) the palisades of
the Greek foss, H 441, I 350—but to fix
it there would be equivalent to surrender-
ing it to the Greeks ; (c) palisades along
the top of the Trojan wall. Though
these are not mentioned elsewhere, their
existence may fairly be concluded from
the fact that the wall of the model town
of Phaiakia is described as having them,
ἡ 45 τείχεα μακρά, ὑψηλά, σκολόπεσσιν
ἀρηρότα.

178, céBac, like αἰδώς, a feeling of
reverence before the communis sensus of
humanity. The subst. occurs only here
in this sense, but cf. σεβάσσατο Z 167,
417, and οὔ νυ σέβεσθε A 242. 179=P
255.

180. Ficxumuénoc, cf. 24, 2 418, imply-
ing defilement or mutilation. νέκυς is
generally taken as a nom. sing. ; but
Déderlein makes it an acc. plur. for

IAIAAOC C (xvirt)

\ Ε ye 3 ", a 5 / εν
τὴν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα ποδάρκης δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
> 7 , 7 fal / - »
“Tou θεώ, τίς Tap σε θεῶν ἐμοὶ ἄγγελον ἧκε;
\ 5 2 “ἢ 2
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπε ποδήνεμος ὠκέα [pus
" \ if
“"Hon με προέηκε, Διὸς κυδρὴ παράκοιτις"
»Ὸ» "»" , / =
οὐδ᾽ οἷδε Κρονίδης ὑψίζυγος οὐδέ τις ἄλλος 18ὅ
" , A Vf ’ / > / Ὁ»
ἀθανάτων, οἱ ᾿Ολυμπον ἀγάννιφον ἀμφινέμονται.
Ὁ > / / > \ 3 Vp
τὴν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς Ἀχιλλεύς"

“ ο Ν ” eA a 5
πῶς Tap ἴω μετὰ μῶλον;

» Ν J 5 3 rn
ἔχουσι δὲ τεύχε᾽ ἐκεῖνοι"

μήτηρ δ᾽ οὔ με φίλη πρίν γ᾽ εἴα θωρήσσεσθαι,

πρίν γ᾽ αὐτὴν ἐλθοῦσαν ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ἴδωμαι" 190
στεῦτο yap ᾿Πφαίστοιο παροισέμεν ἔντεα καλά. »

ἄλλου δ᾽ οὔ τευ οἶδα τεῦ ἂν κλυτὰ τεύχεα δύω,

ουτέ Syr.
rap H. μῶλον: μόθον C.

182. Tap ἡ ἑτέρα τῶν ᾿Αριστάρχου : τ᾽ ἄρ S Par. j: γάρ 0.
181. ἀπαμειβόμενος προςέφη : αὗτε npocéeine J.
192. ἀλλ᾽ οὐδ᾽ DPQU Vr. A, Ven. B. || οὔτ᾽ εὖ DR:

185: οὔτ᾿ --
188. Tap:

οὐδ᾽ εὖ Vr. A: οὐδέ τευ Ven. B: οὔ θην 6095. || τοῦ ἂν L: μὴ Gn H: τεῦ Q.

νέκυας, cf. w 417 ἐκ δὲ νέκυς οἴκων φόρεον,
and analogous forms in H. G. § 100 (-υς
for -vvs, not contracted for -vas). This
undoubtedly gives a better sense, thine
the dishonour if he come mutilated to the
dead; cf. O 251 ἐγώ γ᾽ ἐφάμην véxvas
καὶ δῶμ᾽ ᾿Αἴδαο ἤματι τῶιδ᾽ ἵξεσθαι. The
idea that a mutilation of the dead in-
volved a disabling of the ghost’s power
to avenge is well-nigh universal in
primitive belief, and is indeed the origin
of the custom of ‘arm-pitting’ (uacya-
λίζειν, see G. L. Kittredge in 4. J. P.
vi. 151 ff.). If the body of Patroklos is
given to the Trojan dogs, it is not easy
to see how it can in any way be said
to ‘come to the ships’ (on the ordinary
interpretation).

182. This is the first instance in the
1]. of speech in a single line; there are
several others in the subsequent books. —
If 168 is rejected, it is evident that
181-86 (or at least 185-86) must go with
it. Note the suspicious neglect of F in
οὐδ᾽ olde.

188. ἐκεῖνοι evidently implies dislike ;
see note on & 250, and compare the
Attic use=the enemy. The form (for
κεῖνοι) is late, but has probably always
stood here ; see on I 63-64. ᾿
ΟἸΘῚ, στεῦτο, a word which occurs six
times in J/., always in the sense ἴο
declare, whether by way of boast (B 597,
[ 241, Φ 455) or promise, as here and E
832, or simple declaration, T 83. The
latter sense also suits p 525. The only

other instance, ἃ 584, is in a very late
passage (κέχρηται τῆι λέξει ὁ διασκευαστὴς
παρὰ τὴν ποιητοῦ συνήθειαν, Schol. V),
and does not affect the question. Ar.
explained the word in all the other cases
by κατὰ διάνοιαν ὁρίζεσθαι, to have the
mind set upon athing. This interpreta-
tion, though of course defended by
Lehrs (47. 98), is less suitable to the
passages where the word occurs, with
the exception perhaps of I 83, The
word is probably not syncopated from
στεύομαι, but a genuine non-thematic
form with the long stem (H. G. ὃ 11).
napoicéuen is recommended by the
rhythm against πάρ᾽ οἰσέμεν, the reading
of Ar. (who wrote the accent with
anastrophe against the rule, in order to
shew clearly how he took the preposi-
tion). παραφέρειν does not recur, it is
true, in H., except possibly in tmesis in
the very similar A 97, q.v. ; but we may
compare the later παραδιδόναι, to hand
over, and it is better to accept an unusual
compound than to leave the line virtually
without any caesura.

192. The sense of the line is clear,
the grammar very puzzling. ἄλλου teu
might seem to be dependent on τεύχεα
in the next clause, as though the poet
meant to say ἄλλου δέ τευ οὐκ ἂν τεύχεα
δύω, and changed the form of the
sentence as it went on. But then the
use of the direct interrogative τεῦ instead
of ὅτευ is without a real parallel, and the
contraction is itself suspicious, recurring

4

IAIAAOC C (xviti) 283

42 \ v / ΄ [Δ ἃ , οι
εἰ μὴ Δίαντός γε σάκος ᾿ελαμωνιάδαο.

» \ \ > 4 “ ΕἸ Ta ᾽ 4, ΄, ΄ -
ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτὸς ὃ Y, ἔλπομ,, ἐνὶ πρωτοισιν ομιλεῖ

ἔγχεϊ δηϊόων περὶ Πατρόκλοιο θανόντος. 195

᾽ 4 ,ὕὔ »
τὸν δ᾽ αὗτε προσέειπε ποδήνεμος ὠκέα Ἶρις"

«ες δ᾽ \ ΄ cal “> ad \ ’ , Μ
εὐ νυ καὶ Ἠἡμεις ἐὃμεν ὃ τοι κλυτὰ τεύχε EXOVTAL*

ἀλλ᾽ αὐτὸς ἐπὶ τάφρον ἰὼν 'Γρώεσσι φάνηθι,

v , » ΄ / > / /
al κέ σ᾽ ὑποδδείσαντες ἀπόσχωνται πολέμοιο

Τρῶες, ἀναπνεύσωσι δ᾽ ἀρήϊοι υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν 200

, > / / , > / , 3)
τειρόμενοι" ὀλίγη δέ T ἀνάπνευσις πολέμοιο.
ς \ δι αν ey ) an? ’ / / > / 3
ἡ μὲν ap ὡς εἰποῦσ᾽ ἀπέβη πόδας ὠκέα ‘pis,
5 \ >
αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς ὦρτο διίφιλος: ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ᾿Αθήνη
ὦμοις ἰφθίμοισι βάλ᾽ αἰγίδα θυσανόεσσαν,
ἀμφὶ δέ οἱ κεφαλῆι νέφος ἔστεφε δῖα θεάων 205
΄ > ’ > lal a / /
χρύσεον, ἐκ δ᾽ αὐτοῦ δαῖε φλόγα παμφανόωσαν.
ξ ‘ » Ψ ἢ
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε καπνὸς ἰὼν ἐξ ἄστεος αἰθέρ᾽ ἵκηται,

194. πρώτοιςιν : τρώεςειν AC(T fr. Mosc., yp. Eust.

ὁμιλεῖν CJ Vr. Ὁ.

197. Ycuen GPR. || ὅ τοι: ὅτι CGJPTU, yp. Eust. || κλυτὰ : κατ᾽ ἔνια καλὰ
Sch. A. 198. αὐτὸς Zen. Aph. PR: αὕτως 0. 199. κέ ς᾽: Ken 6.

Unodeicantec (ἱ, || ἀπόςχονται P, 200-01 om. Syr. Pap. ει, Par. οὔ : 201 om. JST
fr. Mose. 201. ἀνάπνευεις : ἀνάπαυςεις Harl.a. 203. ἀμφὶ 0’: αὐτὰρ H Syr.

206. naugpaNndeccan (): παμφανόωςα L. 207. of περὶ Διονύσιον τὸν Θρᾶικά
φασιν ᾿Αρίσταρχον πρώτηι ταύτηι χρώμενον τῆι γραφῆι μεταθέσθαι καὶ γράψαι we ὃ᾽

ὅτε πῦρ ἐπὶ πόντον ἀριπρεπὲς αἰθέρ᾽ ἵκηται, Did.

only ἴῃ ο 509, w 257 (rev 610]. iscommoner,
but see van L. Ench. ὃ 99 ; τέο or Te’ can
be written in all places but B 388, 7 371, ὦ
257). It is perhaps better to take ἄλλου
rev (with Monro) as gen. after olda (cf.
A 657 οὐδέ τι olde πένθεος) and then to
assume a sudden change of thought—
With respect to any other I know not—
Whose arms can I wear? Compare Q
197 τόδε εἰπέ, τί τοι φρεσὶν εἴδεται εἶναι,
where the direct question takes the
place of the indirect. ἄλλον δ᾽ οὔ τινα
οἶδα, ὅτευ (Nauck) is too plain to be cor-
rupted.

193. Αἴαντος cdxoc, ἠύτε πύργον, H
219-23, © 267.

194. ἔλπομαι, 7 suppose. δμιλεῖ of
hostile ‘ converse’ like A 523 ὁμιλέομεν
Δαναοῖσι.

198. αὐτός Zen. Aph., καὶ οὐκ ἄλογός
ἐστιν ἡ γραφή, Did. A corruption of
αὐτός to αὔτως is far more probable than
the opposite, on account of the apparent
metrical difficulty. In either case the
sense is the same, as thow art, without
arms.

200-01 are

evidently interpolated

from A 800-01, through the similarity
of 199 to A 799. They are not in place
here ; Achilles is not to be roused into
action by any sympathy for the weariness
of the Greeks, but only by the desire to
save his friend’s body.

204. See B 447,

206. ἐκ δ᾽ αὐτοῦ, from the manhimsels,
from his very body. So of Diomedes E
4-7 τοῖόν οἱ πῦρ δαῖεν ἀπὸ κρατός Te καὶ
ὥμων. It is of course possible to refer
αὐτοῦ to νέφος, from it, but this is much
weaker.

207. The point of this fine simile
lies in the words ἅμ᾽ ἠελίωι καταδύντι,
210. The beacons are only fire by night,
and only smoke by day ; but as the sun
sets the fire flames out, and both smoke
and fire are visible together for a time ;
in like manner while the cloud is dark
over Achilles’ head the fire shines to
heaven. Van L. adopts Ar.’s variant on
the grounds given by Schol. T καὶ yap
ἄτοπόν φησι (sc. ᾿Αρίσταρχος) πῦρ εἰκά-
ἕεσθαι καπνῶι. It must be confessed (in
spite of Ludwich Av. ii. 92-94) that
this alteration looks very like a con-

84 IAIAAOC C (χυπι)

᾿ : ) ὴν Oni ἰμφιμάχονται"
τηλόθεν ἐκ νήσου τὴν δήϊοι ἀμφιμάχ

+ a / 7 ae
ol τε πανημέριοι στυγερῶι κρίνονται Apni

5 74 /
ἄστεος ἐκ σφετέρου: ἅμα δ᾽ ἠελίωιν καταδύντι 210

, / ᾽ ii ε , δ᾽ 3 WN
πυρσοί τε φλεγέθουσιν ἐπήτριμοι, ὑψόσε αὐγὴ
, / 07
γίνεται ἀΐσσουσα, περικτιόνεσσιν ἰδέσθαι,

, δ ft ’ fal os is
αἴ κέν πως σὺν νηυσὶν ἄρεω ANKTHPES ἴκωνται

40.959 A a DAL eH,
ὡς ἀπ Αχιλλῆος κεφαλῆς σέλας αἰθέρ ἵκανε.

ey ἜΣ bd \ =
στῆ δ᾽ ἐπὶ τάφρον ἰὼν ἀπὸ τείχεος, οὐδ ἐς Ayatovs 215

" \ \ ΕῚ / 2 > /
[LLOYETO* μῆτρος yap πυκινὴν ὠπίζετ ἐφετμὴν.
ἔ us ἤυσ᾽, ἀπάτερθε δὲ Παλλὰς ᾿Αθή
ἔνθα στας NUT ’ AT ATED € Ε a ας £ vn

7 9 /
hbéyEaT: ἀτὰρ Τρώεσσιν ἐν ἄσπετον ὦρσε κυδοιμόν.

a >
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἀριζήλη φωνή, ὅτε T ἴαχε σάλπιγξ

208. ἀμφιμάχωνται [ΗΠ].
περὶ (ποτὲ A, i.e. ποτὶ) σφέτερον Zen.
ἄρεω Ar.: ἄρεος CUS Lips. Vr. Ὁ:
éc: én’ ap. Eust.
219. ὅτε : ὅτι Lips.

209. κρίνωνται GH Syr. fr. Mose.

212. γίγνεται G Syr.
GpHoc Vr. A: ἄρεως (2. || ἵκονται P. 215.
218. αὐτὰρ G. || EN ἄσπετον : GNdcneton U Harl. a.

210. actu
213. NauciN (). ||

jecture—whether Ar.’s own or one which
he found in one of his Mss. we are not in
a position to say. Nor apparently was
Did., whose scholion gives important
evidence as to the uncertainty respecting
Ar.’s criticism which already prevailed
in his day. The difficulty as to the
comparison of smoke to fire is partly
met by the objection given above, though
the parallelism of ws . . καπνὸς... αἰθέρ᾽
ixnratand @s . . σέλας αἰθέρ᾽ ἵκανεν em-
phasizes the point. But we had much
the same trouble in P 547 ff. where a
dark cloud is compared to a rainbow ;
in both cases the mixture of light and
darkness conveys the idea of gloom ; the
fire here is depicted not as bright but as
lurid.

209. of Te, so Mss. This, however,
is hardly to be explained except of the
beleaguering force, as it is continuative
of what immediately precedes, while
ἄστεος ἐκ σφετέρου must refer to the
besieged (it cannot mean ‘far from their
own city,’ as that sense can only be
given by dé). Hence Heyne conj. οἱ
δέ, which has been adopted by most
editors ; this will mean the besieged, as
δέ gives the required change of subject,
and all is plain—they have been striving
all day in battle from their city-walls.
The picture is no doubt taken from a
sudden descent of pirates upon a small
island town. Zen.’s ἄστυ περὶ (or

ποτὶ) σφέτερον does not make things
clearer.

211. ἐπήτριλλοι recurs only in 552, T
226. In rows, one after another seems
to be the sense required in all three
places. So Ap. Rhod. i. 30; iv. 937,
1455—perhaps the only other instances
in Greek literature.

213. See note on 100.

215. ἀπὸ τείχεος, away from the wall,
which is separated from the foss by a con-
siderable distance ; see on H 342, © 213.

218. It is not clear whether the sub-
ject of @pce is Achilles or Pallas ; prob-
ably the former, ἀπάτερθε. . φθέγξατο
being parenthetical.

219. ἀριζΖήλῃ, see on B 318. ἴαχε,
aorist, the imperf. not being admissible
inasimile. The only forms of this verb
found in H. are ἴαχε, ἴαχον, and the
participle, ἰάχων, etc. The verb is thus
probably always an aor. except in the
part., which is=FiFdywy, and lengthens
a preceding short syllable, whereas ‘aye
and ἴαχον never (except in A 506=P 317)
shew F but elide a short syllable. Hence
the probability of Schulze’s proposal to
write Faxe, Faxov as aor. (here τε Faxe).
See note on B 316, and ZH. G. § 31. 1.
The trumpet is mentioned again only in
a metaphor in ® 388. ὅτι αὐτὸς olde
σάλπιγγας, χρωμένους δὲ τοὺς ἥρωας οὐκ
εἰσάγει, An. Compare the similar re-
marks on O 679, Φ 362.

IAIAAOC C (xviti) 285
» ΄ / e - ,
ἄστυ περιπλομένων δήιων ὕπο θυμοραϊστέων, 220
ἃ δε δ ΩΝ / \ , ’ ᾽ ΄ὔ
ὡς tot ἀριζήλη φωνὴ γένετ Δἰακίδαο.
ia , ΄ i Mae bd 4 , /
οἱ δ᾽ ὡς οὖν ἄϊον ὄπα χάλκεον Αἰακίδαο,
a » / , > \ / “4
πᾶσιν ὀρίνθη θυμός: ἀτὰρ καλλίτριχες ἵπποι
/ SY -“"
ἂψ ὄχεα τρόπεον: ὄσσοντο γὰρ ἄλγεα θυμῶι.
, r
ἡνίοχοι δ᾽ ἔκπληγεν, ἐπεὶ ἴδον ἀκάματον πῦρ 225

δεινὸν ὑπὲρ κεφαλῆς μεγαθύμου 1Τ]ηλεΐωνος

δαιόμενον" τὸ δὲ δαῖε θεὰ γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη.

τρὶς μὲν ὑπὲρ τάφρου μεγάλ᾽ ἴαχε δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς,

τρὶς δὲ κυκήθησαν Τρῶες κλειτοί τ᾽ ἐπίκουροι.

ἔνθα δὲ καὶ τότ᾽ ὄλοντο δυώδεκα φῶτες ἄριστοι 230

by) \ “ > , \ ” ΙΝ > \
ἀμφὶ σφοῖς ὀχέεσσι Kal ἔγχεσιν. αὐτὰρ Δχαιοὶ

220. ϑυμοραισοτάων PR Vr. A: οὕμοραϊοετῶν H. 221 om. Ut. || ἀρικήλη J.

riner’ JPR. 222 om. Tt Bar. Par. at. || χαλκέην Zen. || aiaKkidao: yp. avox-
cantoc Par. a™, 223. αὐτὰρ U. || KaAdAitpiyac ἵππους Bar. 225. ἔκπληγον
HS Vr. A: ἔπληγεν P. 226. ὑπὲρ : ὑπ᾽ ἐκ T. 227. TO: TON P. 228.
τάφρον (). 229. κλητοὶ Bar. 230-31. Ζηνόδοτος yp. ἔνθα ὃὲ κοῦροι ὄλοντο
ϑυώϑεκα πάντες ἄριςτοι ofcin Eni βελέεςειν An. 231. ὄχεςφι Par. 6: ἐν ἄλλωι

Ξιφέεςει (Ξίφεςςι Ms.) A. || ἔγχεσιν : ἔντεςιν Vr. ἡ.

220. ὕπο, by reason of death-dealing text, however, may be defended by the
foemen encircling a city, cf. If 591. analogy of φορέω beside φέρω. ScconTo
The position and sense of the part. A 105.
περιπλομένων are unique; the word is 225. €knAHren, sc. φρένας, N 394,
elsewhere used only of the revolving IL 403. So, without φρένας, σ 231 ἐκ
year (compare however περίπολος, i

yap με πλήσσουσι.
περιπολεῖν in Attic). The idea seems to
be that the trumpet is used by the
sentinels of a beleaguered town _ to
summon the citizens to the walls. Or
perhaps ἴαχε ὑπό ‘is sounded by the
besiegers,’ to give the signal for assault.
euuopaictéwn, N 544.

222. χάλκεον, i.e. unwearied, perhaps
with the added idea of ringing quality
suggested by the trumpet above; ef.
χαλκεόφωνος E 785, and χάλκεον Frop
B 490. On the form An. remarks
ἀμέτρως ὁ Znvddotos ὄπα χαλκέην, ov
συνεὶς ὅτι παραπλήσιόν ἐστι τὸ σχῆμα
τῶι ““κλυτὸς ‘Immodduea” (Β 742, q.v.)
καὶ ““ θερμὸς ἀυτμή" (Hym. Mere. 110).
The reading of Zen., though not necessary,
cannot be dismissed with a mere ἀμέτρως
while the text contains numerous forms
like χρυσέην, χαλκέωι ete., scanned with
synizesis.

224. tpdneon, here only. Perhaps we
should read τρόπαον, see on O 666; the
change may be due to the analogy of the
later Ionic ὁρέω, etc., aided by the dis-
appearance of tpordw into tpwrdw. The

230. To the reading of Zen. Ar. (ap.
An.) objects εἰσὶν οὔτε τῆι συνθέσει
ὋὉμηρικοί, οὔτε τὸ “οἷσιν βελέεσσιν ” ὑγιῶς
εἴρηται τοῖς ἑαυτῶν " ἔδει yap τοῖς ἀλλήλων.
The first of these objections is a matter
of taste ; for the second, viz. that οἷσι
cannot refer to a plural subject, in the
sense ‘their,’ see App. A. He may have
criticised with more ground the tauto-
logical βελέεσσι. . ἔγχεσιν. But there
is much to be said for Zen.’s reading,
which avoids the awkward καὶ τότε
(apparently to be taken as= ‘even in the
retreat’) as wellas the hardly intelligible
ἀμφὶ σφοῖς ὀχέεσσι. As this stands we
must translate ‘(by falling) beside their
own chariots and on their own spears ’—
an ungraceful zeugma, which no doubt
led to the presumably conjectural
ξιφέεσσι mentioned by A. It is probably
meant that the front rank in their
sudden flight impaled themselves on
the spears of those behind. But there
ought to be no chariots in the fighting
line. Monro compares Thue. vii. 84
περί τε Tots δορατίοις καὶ σκεύεσιν οἱ μὲν
εὐθὺς διεφθείροντο κτλ.

286 IAIAAOC C (xviir)
ἀσπασίως ΤΠ ΡΟ λον ὑπὲκ βελέων ἐρύσαντες
κάτθεσαν ἐν λεγε σου φίλοι δ᾽ ἀμφέσταν ἑταῖροι
μυρόμενοι: μετὰ δέ σφι ποδώκης εἵἴπετ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
δάκρυα θερμὰ χέων, ἐπεὶ εἴσιδε πιστὸν ἑταῖρον 235
κείμενον ἐν φέρτρωι δεδαϊγμένον ὀξέϊ χαλικῶϊ:
τόν ῥ᾽ ἤτοι μὲν ἔπεμπε σὺν ἵπποισιν καὶ ὄχεσφιν
ἐς πόλεμον, οὐδ᾽ αὖτις ἐδέξατο νοστήσαντα.
ἠέλιον δ᾽ ἀκάμαντα βοῶπις πότνιω Ἥρη
πέμψεν ἐπ᾿ Ὠκεανοῖο ῥοὰς ἀέκοντα νέεσθαι" 240
ἠέλιος μὲν ἔδυ, παύσαντο δὲ δῖοι ᾿Αχαιοὶ
φυλόπιδος κρατερῆς καὶ ὁμοιίου πολέμοιο.
Τρῶες δ᾽ αὖθ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἀπὸ κρατερῆς ὑσμίνης
ΧΡΉ σ ΠΡ ΤΟΣ ἔλυσαν ὑφ᾽ ἅρμασιν ὠκέας ἵππους,
ἐς δ᾽ ἀγορὴν ἀγέροντο πάρος δόρποιο μέδεσθαι. 245
ὀρθῶν δ᾽ ἑσταότων ἀγορὴ γένετ᾽, οὐδέ τις ἔτλη
ἕζεσθαι' πάντας γὰρ ἔχε τρόμος, οὕνεκ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
ἐξεφάνη, δηρὸν δὲ μάχης ἐπέπαυτ᾽ ἀλεγεινῆς.
τοῖσι δὲ Πουλυδάμας πεπνυμένος ἦρχ᾽ ἀγορεύειν
Πανθοΐδης" ὁ γὰρ οἷος ὅρα πρόσσω καὶ ὀπίσσω. 250

233. apéctan PM) Lips.: Gugéctacan AR. 236. φερέτρωι G. 238.

εἷς Vr. A. || ateic C. 239. ἐν: ἄλλωι ἠέλιον μὲν ἔπειτα A. 240. πέμπεν A()
Harl. ἃ. 242. πτολέμοιο CDGH(QTU Syr. 243. αὖθ᾽ : οὗν 1: αὖ A (swpr. 6)
Vr. A. [ἀπὸ κρατερῆς UcwiNHc: ἐν ἄλλωι ἐπὶ epwcudi nedioio A. 247,

ἔχε : ἕλε (A supr.) H Vr. b A. || τρόμος : φόβος Zen. 248. ἀπέπαυτ᾽ G.

is preceded by the aor.
Gildersleeve’s instructive remarks in
A. J. P. ii. 467. Monro suggests, how-
ever, that uédecear may be aor. of μή-
δομαι, H. αὐ. § 31. 2; no forms occur
which necessarily imply μέδομαι. ¢
246. In a regular assembly of course
all sat but the speaker; that all should

238. NocTHcanTa as usual implies safe
return and is virtually the principal verb,
he returned not safe for Achilles to wel-
come him.

240. ἀέκοντα, because before his time.
The only other instance in H. of a
divine interference with the course of
natural phenomena is in w 243 (᾿Αθήνη)

δόμεναι). See

νύκτα μὲν ἐν περάτηι δολιχὴν σχέθεν κτλ.
So ends the eventful day which began
with A. It is now so overburdened
with an accumulation of events through
the growth of the poem that one can
hardly think of this ending as ‘ prema-
ture’ without a smile.

244, ὑφ᾽ Gpuacin must be taken at-
tributively with ἵππους, τοὺς ὑπὸ τοῖς
ἅρμασιν ὄντας. The gen. is always used
elsewhere (except 22576, Ψ 72), and is
then naturally taken with the verb.

245. πάρος only here goes with the
pres. instead of the aor. infin. So with
mplv—the only exceptions to the rule
being τ 475, A 99 (where the pres. ἄγειν

stand is a mark of confusion and haste.

247. €zeceat, rather ἑζέσθαι, aor. of
ἵζεσθαι, see on N 285. For ἔχε we
should perhaps adopt the variant ἕλε
(Platt J. P. xix. 42), but the difference
between imperf. and aor. is very slight
here.

248. ϑηρόν, seeon 125. The clause is
simply co-ordinated by δέ, leaving the
connexion of thought, ‘although,’ or
‘after that,’ to be supplied by the hearer.

250. It is commonly said that in this
phrase npdécce refers to the past (as that
which is before our eyes), ὀπίσσω to the
future. It is however very doubtful if
this can be maintained. πρόσω in later

IAIAAOC C (xvitl) 287
Extopt δ᾽ ἦεν ἑταῖρος, ἰῆι δ᾽ ἐν νυκτὶ γένοντο"
ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν ἂρ μύθοισιν, 6 δ᾽ ἔγχεϊ πολλὸν ἐνίκα.
ὅ σφιν ἐὺ φρονέων ἀγορήσατο καὶ μετέειπεν"'
“ἀμφὶ para φράζεσθε, φίλοι" κέλομαι γὰρ ἔγωγε
ἄστυδε νῦν ἰέναι, μὴ μίμνειν ἠῶ ὃῖαν 255

> rx \ , rea > ᾽ ‘ , , ,
ἐν πεδίωι Tapa νηυσίν: ἑκὰς δ᾽ ἀπὸ τείχεός εἰμεν.
5» ,
ὄφρα μὲν οὗτος ἀνὴρ ᾿Αγαμέμνονι μήνιε δίωι,
, ΔΝ ε (κα ,, 2 ? ,
τόφρα δὲ ῥηΐτεροι πολεμίζειν ἦσαν Ἀχαιοί"
χαίρεσκον γὰρ ἔγωγε θοῆις ἐπὶ νηυσὶν ἰαύων,
ἐλπόμενος νῆας αἱρησέμεν ἀμφιελίσσας. 260
& > ae , , oe
νῦν δ᾽ αἰνῶς δείδοικα ποδώκεα []ηλεΐωνα"
“ / \ id / > > /
οἷος ἐκείνου θυμὸς ὑπέρβιος, οὐκ ἐθελήσει
¢ r r > ‘
μίμνειν ἐν πεδίωι, ὅθι περ Τρῶες καὶ Ἀχαιοὶ
,ὔ
ἐν μέσωι ἀμφότεροι μένος Ἄρηος δατέονται,
/ a =
ἀλλὰ περὶ πτόλιός TE μαχήσεται ἠδὲ γυναικῶν. 265

253. Sc cpin GP Syr.
nodeuizece’ ὃ. 260. νῆας τ᾽ G.
οὐκ: οὐδ᾽ HJ Vr. A.
χιαχέςςεται A.

255. ἄςτυ re J.
épuceuen J().
264. Gpeoc AC Harl. a, Ven. B.

256. ἐμπεδίωι H.
261. δέδοικα ()R.

258.
262.
265. ἐν ἄλλωι

Greek refers to the future, as with us;
it is not elsewhere in H. used in a
temporal sense. ὀπίσσω when temporal
is always used of the future (1) 160, 411,
A 37, and often). It seems therefore
that the words are rather to be taken
locally, of a man who takes a ‘wide
view,’ and does not fix his attention
solely on what is just in front of him.
The other instances are A 343, 1 109,
w 452. The same idea is repeated in
ἀμφὶ μάλα φράζεσθε, 254.

251. Cp. Virgil den. x. 702 Paridis-
que Mimanta Aequalem comitemque, wit
quem nocte Theano In lucem . . dedit
et face praegnans Cisseis regina Parin,
etc. For ifi=the same cf. μία Q 396,
etc. The contrast in character in spite
of the coincidence of nativity was a
difficulty, as appears from the scholia, to
those who sought in Homer the elements
of astrology, as well as of all other sciences.

254. ἀμφὶ . . φράζεσθε, cf. περι-
φραζώμεθα, a 76: ‘look at the matter on
both sides,’ as we say.

257. οὗτος ἀνήρ, it is needless to name
the great enemy.

258. ῥηΐτεροι πολεμίζειν, ‘easier to
fight with,’ as A 589, M 63, Ὡ 243, etc.

259. The iterative yaipeckon is hardly
to be explained, unless it be assumed to
refer to a period before the story of the

Iliad ; even this would be inconsistent
with passages shewing that the Trojans
remained in or near the city while
Achilles yet fought (I 353). The allu-
sion can only be to the previous bivouac
of the Trojans ἐπὶ θρωσμῶι πεδίοιο, after
their success in 0. ἰαύων, passing the
night, 5886 1 325. €rwre, emphatic, “1,
the same who used to delight . . am
now afraid,’ ete.

262. οἷος gives in anticipation the
reason for οὐκ ἐθελήσει, Cf. o 212 οἷος
ἐκείνου θυμὸς ὑπέρβιος, οὔ σε μεθήσει. p
514 of’ ὅ γε μυθεῖται, θέλγοιτό κέ τοι φίλον
ἦτορ. This is more Homerie than to
refer the clause to what precedes, though
it is of course possible todo so. In that
case we should adopt the variant οὐδ᾽
for οὐκ. ἐκείνου, so Mss. and in a late
book the form need not be doubted.
To read κείνου gives ἃ very harsh rhythm.

264. μένος ”Apxoc, cf. 7 269 ὁπότε...
μένος κρίνηται Apnos, the fury of battle.
ϑατέονται, share between them; a phrase
which appears to be unique.

265. περί, as the stake of the contest ;
in this sense ἀμφί with dat. or ace. is the
usual word, see note on II 526, περί
being generally used of the object only
as defended. Butcompare I’ 137, M 216,
and 279 below; and ἃ 403 περὶ πτόλιος
μαχεούμενον ἠδὲ γυναικῶν,

288

IAIAAOC C (xvitl)

Gdn ἴομεν προτὶ ἄστυ, πίθεσθέ μου" ὧδε γὰρ ἔσται.
νῦν μὲν νὺξ ἀπέπαυσε ποδώκεα Πηλεΐωνα
ἀμβροσίη" εἰ δ᾽ ἄμμε κιχήσεται ἐνθάδ covtas
αὔριον ὁρμηθεὶς σὺν τεύχεσιν, εὖ νύ τις αὑτὸν

, if \ ? / wv e /
γνώσεται" ἀσπασίως γὰρ ἀφίξεται "ἵλιον ιρὴν,

210

ὅς κε φύγηι, πολλοὺς δὲ κύνες καὶ γῦπες ἔδονται
Τρώων: ai γὰρ δή μοι ἀπ᾽ οὔατος ὧδε γένοιτο.

εἰ δ᾽ ἂν ἐμοῖς ἐπέεσσι πιθώμεθα κηδόμενοί περ,
νύκτα μὲν εἰν ἀγορῆι σθένος ἕξομεν, ἄστυ δὲ πύργοι

« / > 3. ΠΝ - 5) κ᾿
ὑψηλαί τε πύλαι σανίδες T ἐπὶ τῆις Apaputat

ΩΝ
“TI
On

Ε 3 /
μακραὶ ἐύξεστοι ἐζευγμέναι εἰρύσσονται"
nw ’ a if /
πρῶϊ ὃ ὑπηοῖοι σὺν τεύχεσι θωρηχθέντες

266, Lol: d€ uw’ L. || ὧδε γὰρ EcTal: yp. ὧς γὰρ ἄμεινον L.
οὐδ᾽ 5. || eontoc Syr.

273. meoiueea Harl. a, ἐν ἄλλωι A.
ὑπ᾽ ἠῶιοι Cant.: ὑπ᾽ Hot CLQR Vr. A: én’ ἠοῖ P Lips.

268. εἰ ὃ᾽ : AO ():
γένοιντο Harl. a.
277 om. H.

267 om. U.
272. ὥατος (). ||
275. τὸ: ὃ᾽ ὅγγ.

271. φύγοι 8.

266-83 are regarded as a later inter-
polation by Heyne, Diuntzer, Nauck,
Fick, ete. They contain two flagrant
‘violations’ of the digamma, ἀφίξεται
Τλιὸν and ἕξομεν ἄστυ, and several strange
expressions noted below. The latter
could all be removed by the excision of
272-76, leaving only one violation of F.
We are not dealing with an ancient
part; and it is indispensable to retain
266-71, 277-83, for the sake of the very
effective allusions in Hector’s reply to the
actual words of Polydamas (see on 303).

270. a&cnaciwc, Cobet ἀσπάσιος, which
may be right, as the adj. is always used
predicatively, never as an epithet. But
the change is quite unnecessary. So in
232 Nauck reads ἀσπάσιοι, cf. & 607.

272. an’ οὔατος, far from ny hearing ;
ef. X 454; there the phrase is more
natural with ἔπος, while here nothing
audible has been mentioned. The words
are perhaps a formula of deprecation of
unlucky words, rather than a prayer that
the thing mentioned may not happen :
‘let the word I have spoken be removed
from my ear,’ 1.6. let it be taken as
unsaid, so far as the omen is concerned.
In that case ae is less appropriate, and
probably is another sign that the phrase
is borrowed here. The emphatic position
of Τρώων, too, by no means corresponds
to the importance of the word.

274. ceénoc EzouEN, a very obscure
phrase explained by Ar. τῆι βουλῆι κρατή-

couev, in the assembly (se. by delibera-
tion) we shall find strength. 'This does
not suit the ace. of duration νύκτα, as
P. can hardly mean that they are to
debate all night long. Hence it is
generally taken to mean ‘through the
night we will keep our force (army) in
the place of assembly,’ instead of letting
them disperse to their homes. This
sense of σθένος is not Homeric ; the word
occurs only in the sense of physical force
or in periphrasis, σθένος ’Qpiwvos. It
is however found in Soph. 4j. 438 in
a remotely analogous phrase (ἐπελθὼν
οὐκ ἐλάσσονι σθένει). So in prose we
have παντὶ σθένει βοηθεῖν, and δύναμις
occurs in this sense in Herod. and Xen.
It is better to understand ‘we will keep
(husband) our strength (by resting) in
the agora.’ ‘lhe local use of ἀγορήΞε

forum may be defended by ¢ 266 and

05 Φαιήκων ἀγορήνδ᾽ ἥ opw παρὰ νηυσὶ
τέτυκτο. But the whole phrase smacks
of post-Homeric diction.

275. canidec, boards, perhaps an addi-
tional covering fastened on the doors
for extra security against assault; see
note on M 454.

276. ἐζευγμέναι, joined together, or
perhaps rather closed tight, taken predica-
tively with εἰρύσσονται. This seems to
be the only case in H. where the verb is
used in any but the literal sense of yoking
to a chariot.

277=90 580.

IAIAAOC C (χνπι)

στησόμεθ᾽ ἀμ πύργους.

289

Lal , / ᾿ ᾽ /
τῶι δ᾽ ἄλγιον, ai κ ἐθέληισιν

» Ν ᾽ lal \ / Μ ΄
ἐλθὼν ἐκ νηῶν περὶ τείχεος ἄμμι μάχεσθαι"

x / o ? Γαδ “ , , ᾽ > / Jd
aw πάλιν εἰσ €Tl νῆας, ἐπεὶ κα εριαύχενας ἵππους

280

/ / ” ΄ \ / ? /
παντοίου δρόμου acne ὑπὸ πτόλιν ἠἡλασκάζων"
y 3 " \ b a We
εἴσω δ᾽ ov μιν θυμὸς ἐφορμηθῆναι ἐάσει,

> / ’ > / / / > \ Td ,
οὐδέ TOT EXTTEPOEL* πριν μιν KUVES αργου ἔδονται.

’

> » > , 6 Ἢ

τὸν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπόδρα ἰδὼν προσέφη κορυθαίολος “Extap:
“ Tl ΄ \ \ ty τ | \ ! - 3 ᾽ ΄ ee

ουλυδάμα, σὺ μὲν οὐκέτ ἐμοὶ Pita ταῦτ ayopeEvEls, 285
¢ = ,
ὃς κέλεαι κατὰ ἄστυ ἀλήμεναι αὖτις ἰόντας.
5 ” / ? ΄ » /
ἣ ov πω κεκόρησθε ἐελμένοι ἔνδοθι πύργων;

/ »

πρὶν μὲν yap IIpudpowo πόλιν μέροπες ἄνθρωποι

πάντες
νῦν δὲ
πολλὰ

μυθέσκοντο πολύχρυσον πολύχαλκον"
δὴ ἐξαπόλωλε δόμων κειμήλια καλά,
δὲ δὴ Φρυγίην καὶ Μηϊονίην ἐρατεινὴν

290

΄ ΄ a, b] \ , ᾽ ΄ γ ΄
κτήματα περνάμεν᾽ ἵκει, ἐπεὶ μέγας ὠδύσατο Ζεύς.
a 3 φ , χα “- /
νῦν δ᾽, ὅτε πέρ μοι ἔδωκε Kpovou πάϊς ἀγκυλομήτεω

- » ’ ΕῚ " ΕῚ
κῦδος ἀρέσθ᾽ ἐπὶ νηυσί, θαλάσσηι T ἔλσαι Αχαιούς,

218. ἀμ : ἀν (ἂν) D°GPQR Syr. Vr. d: ἀπύργους 1)}.
285. πουλυϑάμαν ap. Sch. T (Zen.; οἵ, M 231).
287. Kexdpucee JR: κεκόρεςθε U: κεκόρηςθον Zen. || ἐερμένοι

291. OH: καὶ Syr.
294. ἔλςαι : ἔλαςαι CG:

281. ἄςει C. || GAuckdzoon ().
286. αὖοις C.
Vr. Ὁ: ἐεργμένοι Bar. Mor. Vr. A.

Vr.bA. 293. πέρ: δή PR.

279. νηὸς Mor.

292. ἥκει GPS Harl. a.
ὁὀλλές᾽ Bar. Mor.

281. AAackdzoon, apparently conn. with
ἀλά-ω and perhaps ἠλεός, ἠλίθεος, wander-
ing aimlessly about. Cf. note on O 128.
The word recurs only ¢ 457, in a different
sense; but cf. ἠλάσκω Β 470, Ν 104. The
suffix -afew seems often to convey an
unfavourable or contemptuous meaning ;
οἵ, μιμν-άζω, ῥιπτ-άζω, οἰνοποτ-άζω,
πτωσκ-άζω (Monro on ν 9).

282. For the weak ἐάςει we expect
ἐφήσει or ἐνήσει (Heyne ; ἀνήσει van L.).

284-85= M 230-31.

287. κεκόρηςθε, ὅτι Ζηνόδοτος γράφει
*“xexdpnabov,” συγχέων τὸ δυικόν, An. ;
see on A ὅθ7. This is an obvious cor-
ruption for metrical reasons due to
ignorance of the F of FeFedhuéva. (The
variant ἐεργμένοι is equally possible, but
may be due to the idea that the same
word should not be repeated in two lines,
even in different forms. But this is not
inconsistent with the Epic style.)

288. μέροπες, here in the nom., as B
285 in dat. ; elsewhere only μερόπων.
The lengthening by the ictus is rare at
the beginning of the fifth foot ; here it
is evidently due to the ending μερόπων
ἀνθρώπων, which might be adapted but

VOL. II

τ

was too firmly established to be shifted
in place. The five lines 288—92 are a
confusing element in the speech, and
seem to have no bearing whatever on
the situation ; they would certainly be
better away, for if we omit them the
connexion of thought is quite clear, but
as they stand, the loss of wealth would
appear to be an excuse rather for the
defensive than for the offensive attitude
which Hector is recommending. NUN dé
too is usedin two quite different antitheses
in 290 and 293, in the latter case having
no connexion whatever with what imme-
diately precedes. For the thought com-
pare 2 543-48, 1402, and for 291, I 401.

292. περνάμενα, probably to supply
payment fortheallies, cf. the δῶρα οἵ Ρ 225.
But the idea seems in advance of the
political economy of the poems generally.

294. The F of FéAcan is neglected.
Hence Heyne proposes to read καὶ ἀμφ᾽
ἅλα (from A 409) for θαλάσσηι τ΄. Such
a change is unlikely, though it might be
explained by the apparent hiatus. On
the other hand, there is no ground for
rejecting the lines; unlike what precedes
they cohere well with the rest of the

290

/ fal / an? > AN ΄ "
ἘΠ ει μηκέτι TAUTa ela oe Pe e€Vt δήμωι

IAIAAOC C (χνυπι)

295

οὐ γάρ τις Τρώων ἐπιπείσεται" οὐ γὰρ ἐάσω.

ἀλλ᾽ rye, ὡς ἂν ἐγὼ εἴπω,
νῦν μὲν δόρπον ἕλεσθε κατὰ

πειθώμεθα πάντες.
στρατὸν ἐν τελέεσσι,

καὶ φυλακῆς μνήσασθε καὶ ἐγρήγορθε ἕκαστος"

Τρώων δ᾽ ὃς κτεάτεσσιν ὑπερφιάλως ἀνιάζει, 800
συλλέξας λαοῖσι δότω καταδημοβορῆσαι"

τῶν τινὰ βέλτερόν. ἐστιν ἐπαυρέμεν ἤ περ ᾿Αχαιούς.

πρῶϊ δ᾽ ὑπηοῖοι σὺν τεύχεσι

θωρηχθέντες

νηυσὶν ἔπι SITE. ἐγείρομεν ὀξὺν "Apna.
εἰ δ᾽ ἐτεὸν παρὰ ναῦφιν ἀνέστη δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς, 305

ἄλγιον, αἴ κ᾿ ἐθέληισι, τῶι ἔσσεται.

οὔ fe) ἔγωγε

φεύξομαι ἐκ πολέμοιο δυσηχέος, ἀλλὰ μάλ᾽ ἄντην

στήσομαι, ἤ κε φέρηισι μέγα κράτος, ἢ aS Φερ μην
ξυνὸς ἐνυάλιος, καί τε κτανέοντα κατέκτα.

299. arpHropee J (supr. €).
TAN: ONR. || ἢ: εἴν: οὔ.
ναυσὶν (). || Greipouen Vr. A
uuou L,

|| ἕκαστοι P.

303. Un’
305. 0” om. H.
308. φέρηιςι : φέροιτο Syr. ||

300. Unep@idAoic Harl. a. 302.
H@oi Cant.: ὑπ᾽ ἠοῖ CGLQ. 304.
306. τῶι: TOP. 307. πολέ-
ἢ Ke: ἠὲ Vr. A

speech, and it is wisest to accept the
neglected F as another indication of the
date of all this part.

295. Monro points out that the proper
apodosis to 293-94 is ‘you wish to retire
to the city.’ This is rhetorically sup-
pressed, and in its place we have ‘do
not make such foolish proposals.’

299. érpHropee, see on Καὶ 67.

300-02 are very obscure in thought and
expression. The idea seems to be ‘if
any one (i.e. Polydamas) is nervous about
fighting far from the city, owing to the
possession of wealth, let him make a
present of it to the common store, instead
of handing it over to the Achaians, which
would be the result of such suicidal coun-
sels as P.’s.’ But this elaborate irony is
not like Homeric simplicity and directness
of thought; the lines would suitably
follow 288-92 above, but in another con-
text, viz. in a serious appeal to the Trojans
to surrender their private wealth for the
common good. The thought in any case
is one for an assembly in Troy, not for
a council of war in the open field.

301, καταϑηλοβορῆςαι for public food,
lit. to consume in eating from the
common stock. Compare δημοβόρος
βασιλεύς A 231, of the king who does
nothing but feast at the public cost.

303. Polydamas’ words (277) are sar-

castically repeated in order to emphasize
the contrast of the two conclusions ; and
so GArion, 306, is an echo of 278.

306. αἵ κ᾿ ἐθέληιςι, if he is determined
to have it so. Van Herwerden’s conj. αἴ
κ᾿ ἔλθηισι is ingenious but not necessary.

308. Cf. N 486, where the change of
mood is not found; Syr. here has φέροιτο
for φέρηισι, and this is adopted by Nauck
and von Christ, while Naber conj. φέρωμι
for φεροίμην. But the text is sufficiently
defended by passages like II 648-51, ὃ
692, μ 156-57, and see H. G. ὃ 275 ὃ.
The opt. cannot be used in a sense
derived from that of wish (as though=
‘or else would I might gain it’), for the
use of xe is inconsistent with the wish.
The mood must be potential, ‘it might
be that I should gain.’ The peculiarity
of the passage is that the alternative
thus hesitatingly put is not that which is
most remote in the speaker’s mind ; for
the whole speech, and especially this part,
is confident even to boastfulness. It can
only be said that the alternative given by
the opt. is logically thrown into the back-
ground because it is not the one necessary
to the leading thought: ‘I will face him,
even in the expectation that he will win’
is followed by ‘oron the other hand I might
win’ only as a subordinate correction.

309. The god of battle is impartial

IAIAAOC C (χυπ)

ὡς “Ἕκτωρ ἀγόρευ᾽, ἐπὶ δὲ Τρῶες κελάδησαν 810
νήπιοι" ἐκ γάρ σφεων φρένας εἴλετο Ἰ]αλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη"
Ἕκτορι μὲν γὰρ ἐπήινησαν κακὰ μητιόωντι,

Πουλυδάμαντι δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ οὔ τις, ὃς ἐσθλὴν φράζετο βουλήν.
᾽ ΄ \ \
δόρπον ἔπειθ᾽ εἵλοντο κατὰ στρατόν: αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχαιοὶ

παννύχιοι Ἰ]άτροκλον ἀνεστενάχοντο γοῶντες. 315
τοῖσι δὲ Πηλεΐδης ἀδινοῦ ἐξῆρχε γόοιο,
χεῖρας er ἀνδροφόνους θέμενος στήθεσσιν ἑταίρου,

\ / / [2 \ > /

πυκνὰ μάλα στενάχων WS TE ALS ηυγένειος,

oe (usa > ΄ Ν f > / ΄ / > \

ὧι pa θ᾽ ὑπὸ σκύμνους ἐλαφηβόλος ἁρπάσηι ἀνὴρ

ef b a bg / , ” “ 3 ,

ὕλης ἐκ πυκινῆς: ὁ δέ τ᾽ ἄχνυται ὕστερος ἐλθών, 320
\ / ᾽ a ’ » fol 3 > / ” ’ > A

πολλὰ δέ τ᾽ ἄγκε᾽ ἐπῆλθε μετ΄ ἀνέρος ἴχνι᾽ ἐρευνῶν,

Μ > / / \ \ / ΄ al

el ποθεν ἐξεύροι: μάλα yap δριμὺς χόλος αἱρεῖ"

311. φρενας εξελετο Ζευς Syr.

δ᾽ Gp’: rap Cant. || οὔ τι Epaphroditos, G.
317. ἀνὸροφόνου ap. Did.
319. οὗ ῥα Harl. a supr. || ἁρπάςει CLQ.

rodwntec (): βοῶντες PRS.
πολλὰ Syr.: ϑηϑὰ Et. Mag. 263. 27.

312. énX(1)Nec(c)an J (supr. x) PR. 313.

315. ἀναςτενάχοντο ( Pap. εἰ. |
318. πυκνὰ:

321. 0€ τ᾽: Te P: O ἔτι Lips. || ἀνέρι Harl. a (supr. oc): ἀνέρ᾽ Vr. A.

and slays him that would slay, cf.
νίκη ἐπαμείβεται ἄνδρας Z 899. κτανέ-
onta may be a secondary present, like
ἐπιτραπέειν K 421, used in a desiderative
sense. In Z 409 (where see note), = 481
it is clearly a future, and Cobet accord-
ingly would read xrevéovra here also ;
but such a use of the fut. part. is very
doubtful in H., see H. (ἡ. S$ 63 note*,
244.

311. σφεων, rather σῴι (van L.) ; see
Z 234, I 377 (note), T 137.

312. ἐπήινηςαν with dat. is very rare
in later Greek (ὑμῖν ἐπαινῶ γλῶσσαν
εὔφημον φέρειν, Aisch. Cho. 581). The
commoner use with the acc., however,
is only found once in H., μύθον ἐπαινή-
σαντες B 335, while we have οὔ τοι
ἐπαινέομεν A29 (=11 443, X 181), and the
dat. well suits the sense of the word,
‘to assent to.” The verb is most com-
monly used in H. absolutely, without
an object.

316. ἀδινοῦ, vehement, see on 124, B
87. This line recurs several times in
the later books of the J/., cf. Ψ 17-18.

317. Did. mentions an old variant
ἀνδροφόνου, but as epitheton ornans of a
warrior the adj. is almost confined to
Hector ; and the pathetic effect when it
is applied to Achilles’ hands is too
beautiful to be lost. The idea is even
more touchingly expanded in 2 478-79.

318. Aic ἠυτγένειος, ἐμπείρως πάνυ" al

yap θήλειαι κάλλιστον ἔχουσι γένειον, οἱ
δὲ ἄρσενες χαίτην. νῦν δὲ ἐπὶ θηλείας
ἄρσην γὰρ οὐ σκυμναγωγεῖ. τὸ δὲ λέαινα
νεώτερον ὄνομα, Schol. A. See P 184.
Evidently H. uses λέων in a generic sense
just as we use ‘horse’ to include ‘mare’
—or to speak more strictly, λέων is the
only word in his vocabulary for dion and
lioness, Néawva being a later formation.
The masc. form naturally calls for masc.
gender in adjectives, even when the
female is specially referred to.

319. ἐλαφηβόλος, ἡ διπλῇ ὅτι οὕτως
τοὺς κυνηγοὺς καταχρηστικῶς λέγουσιν οἱ
ποιηταί, An.; i.e. the passage shews
that the word is not to be restricted to
a hunter of deer.

320. Uctepoc, ὕστερον τῶν ἀναρπασάν-
των, Schol. T., i.e. too late.

321. ἐρευνῶν, ἐρεύων Fick, after ἔρευε
and ἐξερεύειν in Hesych., to avoid the
contraction.

322, ἐξεύροι is unusual, the aor.
ἐπῆλθε in a simile not being a historic
tense. There are however a few similar
cases of the opt. thus expressing a hope
after a present ; ἔτι τὸν δύστηνον ὀΐομαι,
el ποθεν ἐλθὼν θείη, v 224 (so β
351; ξ 496 is rather different as εἰ...
ἐποτρύνειε follows an opt. of wish. The
nearest case in J/. is A 792 τίς oi5 εἴ κέν
oi . . θυμὸν dpivats ;). It is possible that
the constr. may have been affected by
the use of εἰ with opt. as an independent

292 IAIAAOC C (xvii)

ὡς ὁ βαρὺ στενάχων μετεφώνεε Μυρμιδόνεσσιν"
“@) πόποι, ) ῥ᾽ ἅλιον ἔπος ἔκβαλον ἤματι κείνωι,
θαρσύνων ἥρωα Μενοίτιον ἐν μεγάροισι" ᾿

φῆν δέ οἱ εἰς Ὀπόεντα περικλυτὸν υἱὸν. ἀπάξειν
Ἴλιον ἐκπέρσαντα λαχόντά τε ληΐδος αἶσαν.

ἀλλ᾽ οὐ Ζεὺς ἄνδρεσσι νοήματα πάντα τελευτᾶι"
ἄμφω γὰρ πέπρωται ὁμοίην γαῖαν ἐρεῦσαι

αὐτοῦ ἐνὶ Τροίηι, ἐπεὶ οὐδ᾽ ἐμὲ νοστήσαντα 880
δέξεται ἐν μεγάροισι γέρων ἱππηλάτα 1]ηλεὺς
οὐδὲ Θέτις μήτηρ, GAN αὐτοῦ γαῖα καθέξει.

νῦν δ᾽ ἐπεὶ οὖν, Πάτροκλε, σεῦ ὕστερος εἶμ᾽ ὑπὸ γαῖαν,
οὔ σε πρὶν κτεριῶ, πρὶν “Extopos ἐνθάδ᾽ ἐνεῖκαι

τεύχεα καὶ κεφαλήν, μεγαθύμου σεῖο φονῆος" 335
δώδεκα δὲ προπάροιθε πυρῆς ἀποδειροτομήσω

Τρώων ἀγλαὰ τέκνα, σέθεν κταμένοιο χολωθείς.

τόφρα δέ μοι παρὰ νηυσὶ κορωνίσι κείσεαι αὔτως,

ἀμφὶ δέ σε Τρωιαὶ καὶ Δαρδανίδες βαθύκολποι

΄ Is
κλαύσονται νύκτάς TE καὶ ἤματα δάκρυ NEOVTAL, 340

323. μετεφώνει A (yp. μετεφώνεε) C() Harl. a. 326. Θέ: rap R. 327.
τε om. J: δὲ L. 329. ὁμοῖαν U. || ἐρεύςειν Harl. a: épeveecin Aischines Tim
8 144, 330. NocTHconTa P. 333. ἀλλ᾽ ἐπεὶ οὖν φίλ᾽ ἑταῖρε Aisch. ibid. 148. ||
ὑπὸ : ἐπὶ R. 334. πρὶν ἕκτορος ST Vr. A: πρίν τ᾽ ἕκτορος Ὡ. || ἐνείκω
PQR (8 supr.) Bar. Harl. a, Aisch. ibid. 335. coto P Harl. a: cio Pap. ε (swpr. ο).

338. κείςεται P. || αὔτως : οὕτως ap. Did. and Eust.

form of wish. 1.6. we may (as gram-
marians) imagine the lioness saying εἴ
ποθεν ἐξεύροιμι, would 7 could find.

324. Huati κείνωι, a peculiar use, as the
day meant is left to be understood from
the following context ; the phrase is else-
where found only in the mouth of the poet
himself, of the actual day of his narrative.

326. Patroklos had left Opus with
Menoitios on account of a homicide (Vv
88); it would seem therefore that banish-
ment for this cause was only temporary,
being compounded after a time with
blood-money.

329. ἐρεῦςαι, cf. A 394, Some scholars
adopt the variant ἐρεύσειν, but the fut.
is not defensible. Cf. Hes. Zh. 464
πέπρωτο δαμῆναι, Pindar O. viii. 36 ἣν

πεπρωμένον .. aumvetoa ete. The indie.
πέπρωται does not recur in H. ὁμοίην,
same, as 120.

335. celo, obj. gen. after φονῆος,

murderer of thee the noble-hearted - cf. Q
686 σεῖο ἄποινα, ransom of thee, 1 632

κασιγνήτοιο φονῆος ποίνην, blood-money
From the murderer of his brother. Bekker
and La R. read σοῖο ; but the change is
at least unnecessary, even if defensible,
as σὸς φονεύς for ‘thy murderer’ in the
objective sense is doubtful in H., while
μεγαθύμου is far more applicable to
Patroklos than to Hector in Achilles’
mouth. Moreover Goebel points out
that the order of words (epithet—poss.
pronoun—subst.) is unexampled. The
casual mention of “Extopoc τεύχεα seems
to ignore the change of armour.

336-37 =W 22-23, The lines may be-
long equally to both places, as the latter
is a confirmation of a promise already
made (and fulfilled in Ψ 175-76). The
converse supposition is equally possible,
viz. that the lines 336-42 were inserted
here to prepare the way for an episode
invented by the author of Ψ. Cf. the
Introd. to &,

338. αὔτως, as thou art, without fune-
ral rites.

IAIAAOC C (χνπι)

293

‘ > \ / , / / ΄
τὰς αὐτοὶ καμόμεσθα βίηφί τε δουρί τε μακρῶι,
/
πιείρας πέρθοντε πόλεις μερύπων ἀνθρώπων."
Δ > Ν e / > / lal ᾿ \
ὡς εἰπὼν ἑτάροισιν ἐκέκλετο δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεὺς

᾽ \ \ A , / Μ ,
ἀμφὶ πυρὶ στῆσαι τρίποδα μέγαν, ὄφρα τάχιστα

͵ὕ / ” / ΄ /
Πάτροκλον λούσειαν ἄπο βρότον αἱματόεντα. 84

οι

e \ / / > «7 > \ /
οἱ δὲ λοετροχόον τρίποδ᾽ ἵστασαν ἐν πυρὶ κηλέωι,

» ᾽ vy 3 iad »Μ

ἐν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὕδωρ ἔχεαν,

γάστρην μὲν τρίποδος
>? \ > \ \ ,

αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ δὴ ζέσσεν

/ \ ΄ , AP | ,
καὶ τότε δὴ λοῦσάν τε Kal ἤλειψαν λίπ᾽ ἐλαίωι,

ὑπὸ δὲ ξύλα δαῖον ἑλόντες.

-“ » / > a>
πῦρ ἄμφεπε, θέρμετο δ᾽ ὕδωρ"
ὕδωρ ἐιὶ ἤνοπι χαλκῶι,

350

fal / 7
ἐν δ᾽ ὠτειλὰς πλῆσαν ἀλείφατος ἐννεώροιο.

, » ͵7
ἐν λεχέεσσι δὲ θέντες ἑανῶι λιτὶ κάλυψαν

ἐς πόδας ἐκ κεφαλῆς, καθύπερθε δὲ φάρεϊ λευκῶι.

rd \ » / \ > ᾽ 5 An
παννύχιοι μὲν ἔπειτα πόδας ταχὺν ἀμῴ Ἀχιλῆα

/ “
Μυρμιδόνες ΤἸΠάτροκλον ἀνεστενάχοντο γοῶντες" 355

342. mepeontec Syr.
ἀποβρότου R.
Lips. (Pap. « supr.): χεῦθαν PR.
én H Harl. a: ἐπὶ C. || οἴνοπι ().

344. πυρῆ ().
346. Ecracan H (é-) ΡΩΝ.
ὑπὸ : ἀπὸ ().

345. πατρόκλου Harl. ἃ supr. |i
347. ἔχεον Vr. d: ἔχευαν GJ()
349. OM om. PR. || ἐνὶ :

341. Kauduecea, the mid. aor. recurs
only in ¢ 130, also in the sense of acqguir-
ing by labour, οἵ κέ σφιν νῆσον ἐυκτιμένην
ἐκάμοντο. ΑΒ applied to slaves it implies
perhaps that they are mere chattels.
The act. ‘to make’ by labour is of course
common enough in the act. ἔκαμον, It
is probable that this is the primitive
sense of the word, the sense ‘to grow
weary,’ which alone is found in classical
Greek, being secondary. It is curious
that modern Greek should have returned
to the original sense, κάνω being=to
do; τί xdvers;=how do you do? The
idea perhaps is that the enslaved women
are set to do the work of professional
mourners (Q 720) inasort of triumphant
mockery. ‘This, however, was not the
view of the author of T 282 ff.—a passage
probably suggested by these lines.

344—X 443, Ψ 40, 0 434; 345=V
41 ; 346-48 =6 435-37.

347. P. Knight conj. éxeov, to keep up
the sequence of imperfects. So also
Cobet.

348. Gugene, lit. clasped about, em-
braced, from the primitive sense of ἕπω,
to handle.

351. ἐννεώροιο, nine years old. We
should probably read ἐννώροιο: évy-=
évF- from *évFa, for which form see

Brugmann Gr. ii. § 173, G. Meyer Gr.
§ 405, and compare ἐνν-ῆμαρ: so also
read ἐννόργυιοι X 312. The -e- is due
only to the influence of the more
familiar ἐννέα. -wpos from ὥρα, @pos (see
Lex.), the same word as our year.
Apparently oil improved by keeping,
and we are to understand that nine-year
oil is the very best. The word recurs
also in κ 19 (δῶκε δέ μ᾽ éxdelpas ἀσκὸν
βοὸς ἐννεώροιο), 390 (σιάλοισιν ἐοικότας
ἐννεώροισιν), Ἃ 311 (ἐννέωροι yap τοί γε
καὶ ἐννεαπήχεες ἦσαν), τ 179 (Μίνως ἐν-
νέωρος βασίλευε Διὸς μεγάλου ὀαριστήΞ).
The last refers to the nine years’ cycle
or magnus annus of early Dorian
chronology (see Evans in J. H. S. xiv.
356 after Hoeck Avefai. 246 ff.). From
associations of this sort the word may
have grown into a round number
denoting full maturity (not however in
\ 311). Compare the ‘ninety cities’ of
Crete which come just before 7 179;
and for the βοῦς of κ 19, Hes. Opp. 436
βόε ἐνναετήρω τῶν γὰρ σθένος οὐκ
ἀλαπαδνόν. Any derivation from vé(F)os,
new, is forbidden by the synizesis with
neglect of F, as well as by other
difficulties. Herondas viii. 5 calls long
nights νύκτες ἐννέωροι, nine years (or
hours *) long.

294

/
Ζεὺς δ᾽ “Hpnv προσέειπε κασυγνήτην

IAIAAOC C (Χνιπ)

/
ἄλοχόν TE"

“ ἔπρηξας Kal ἔπειτα, βοῶπις πότνια Ἥρη,
ἀνστήσασ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆα πόδας ταχύν: ἢ ῥά νυ σεῖο
ἐξ αὐτῆς ἐγένοντο κάρη κομόωντες ᾿Αχαιοί."
τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα βοῶπις πότνια Ἥρη" 360
“ αἰνότατε Kpovidy, ποῖον τὸν μῦθον ἔειπες ;
καὶ μὲν δή πού τις μέλλει βροτὸς ἀνδρὶ τελέσσαι,
ὅς περ θνητός τ᾽ ἐστὶ καὶ οὐ τόσα μήδεα οἶδε:
πῶς δὴ ἔγωγ᾽, ἥ φημι θεάων ἔμμεν ἀρίστη,
ἀμφότερον, γενεῆι τε καὶ οὕνεκα σὴ παράκοιτις 365

/ fal ’ > / > ἊΝ
κέκλημαι, σὺ δὲ πᾶσι μετ᾽ ἀθανάτοισιν ἀνάσσεις,
ey / / \ ΕἾΔ Ξ 39
οὐκ ὄφελον Τρώεσσι κοτεσσαμένη κακὰ ῥάψαι ;
- a \ > / > / ;
ὡς οἱ μὲν τοιαῦτα πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἀγόρευον
¢ / / 5 /
Ἡφαίστου δ᾽ ἵκανε δόμον Θέτις ἀργυρόπεξα
” > i led 10 / 370
ἄφθιτον ἀστερόεντα, μεταπρεπέ ἀθανάτοισι,

356. Mpocéeine: ἐκάλεςςε Plut. Mor. 736 Ὁ.

356-68. Znvddwpos πειρᾶται

ἀποδεικνύναι διεσκευασμένον τοῦτον Tov τόπον Sch. BT (Porph. ? See Schrader p. 434).

357. Bodom ACHT Pap. «.
ADJPR. 364. ἔγωγ᾽:
369. Ag@aictoio GS.

ἐγὼν Zen.

360 om. Pap. ct.

361. ἔειπαα DH. 868. T om.
367. Payal: ῥέξαι (supr. Paya) HU.

356-68. Ζηνόδωρος πειρᾶταιἀποδεικνύναι
διεσκευασμένον (interpolated) τοῦτον τὸν
τόπον, Sch. BT. For the little that is
known of Zenodoros see Schrader Porph.
pp. 428 ff. In this case his judgment
is pretty certainly right. In the first
place the passage clearly alludes to the
suspected lines 168 and 181-86, and is
open to all the objections urged against
them. Again, of the thirteen lines seven
appear in other parts of the poems; 356
ΞΞῚ 482; (357, cf. O 49); 360-61=A
561-52 ; 363=v 46; 365-66=A 60-61 ;
368=E 274, etc. (the last being a
familiar note of interpolation); while
the six lines which are original contain
several curious expressions. The double
change of scene is violent, and not in
the Homeric style. The passage does
nothing whatever to advance the story
or to give any fresh insight into the re-
lations of Olympos, and would certainly
not be missed if it were omitted.

357. ἔπρηξας, ‘ you have accomplished
your end, had your way’; cf. A 562
πρῆξαι δ᾽ ἔμπης οὔ τι δυνήσεαι. The verb
is only here used without an object.
ἔπειτα, after all, but for Kai we should
rather have expected δή as Bentley conj.
kal may, however, be explained as mean-

ing ‘also’ in the sense of ‘ once more,’
an allusion to Hera’s earlier offences.
βοῶπις as voc., Ὁ 49. In both places
good Mss. have Bom, but it can hardly
be supposed that the -c was long by
nature in the voc. as ‘ Wernicke’s law
requires us to suppose that it was in the
nom. (App. N, § 18).

358. H ῥά Nu, ironical, swredy the
Achaians must be offspring of thine own.

362. μέλλει with aor. inf. is like to
have, i.e. in this case ‘commonly does.’
βροτός, ὦ mere man. tedéccai without an
object, like érpnéas above, to work his
will. Bentley conj. ἔπος for βροτός on
the analogy of A 108, Ξ 44, Ψ 543:
Brandreth κότον, but this is not much
gain.

367. κακὰ ῥάψαι, cf. kaxoppadin O 16,
δόλον ὑφαίνειν ete.

370, ἀςτερόεντα, probably ‘adorned
with star-like ornaments,’ see on Π 134.
Such a method of decoration seems to
have been employed in the great tomb
at Mykene called the ‘ Treasure-house
of Atreus.’ χάλκεον perhaps alludes
to the practice of coating the walls with
polished metal (see Helbig H. Z. p. 100,
ἡ 86, 6 73) ; though it may only be an
instance of the common Homeric custom

IAIAAOC C (xvitt)

295

, » ,’ 4 4 / ,
χάλκεον, ὅν ῥ᾽ αὐτὸς ποιήσατο κυλλοποδίων.

τὸν δ᾽ εὗρ᾽ ἱδρώοντα ἑλισσόμενον περὶ φύσας,

\ ἈΕΊ, /
σπεύδοντα: τρίποδας yap ἐείκοσι πάντας ἔτευχεν

cal / /
ἑστάμεναι περὶ τοῖχον ἐυσταθέος μεγάροιο"

χρύσεα δέ σφ᾽ ὑπὸ κύκλα ἑκάστωι πυθμένι θῆκεν, 375

v ᾽ e > / “ / , » al
ὄφρά of αὐτόματοι θεῖον δυσαίατ᾽ ἀγῶνα

HO αὖτις πρὸς δῶμα νεοίατο, θαῦμα ἰδέσθαι.

e ᾽ ΕΣ / \ » / ” ined ”
οι ὃ TOL τοσσον μὲν EX OV τέλος, ovaTa O οὐ πω

/ / ΄ eo ” / ‘ ,
δαιδάλεα προσέκειτο' Ta ῥ᾽ ἤρτυε, κόπτε δὲ δεσμούς.

wv , “΄ nr? > an > / ,ὔ
ὄφρ᾽ ὅ γε ταῦτ᾽ ἐπονεῖτο ἰδυίηισι πραπίδεσσι,

380

Toppa οἱ ἐγγύθεν ἦλθε θεὰ Θέτις ἀργυρόπεζα.

371. ἐποιήςατο ().
ἐϊεταθμέα Vr. A.

373. rap om. P: men Pap. ¢ (supr. [ra]p).
376. Oucafat’ AC fr. Mose. Par. h: ϑυςέατ᾽ I’: eucaiant’ Ο :

374.

δύεωνται PRU Par. j, Vr. b: ϑύςονται Ὡ, ἐν ἄλλωι A: ἐν ταῖς εἰκαιοτέραις Θεῖον

κατὰ δῶμα νέονται (νέοιντο 7) Sch. AT (ἢ).
380. ταῦτα πονεῖτο |’R (-eiT’).
381 om. AtDtU Pap. ει, Par. a:
He Lips.

έκειντο J. || Qecua Bar. Mor.
eideiHict Lips.
ἀπέστραπτο δέ A. || ἦλϑε om. P:

377. aveic C. 379. npoc-
| εἰϑυίη(ι)ει CH'R :

ἐν ἄλλωι καὶ οὗτος εὑρέθη,

of representing divine objects as of metal
instead of meaner human materials; as
the island of Aiolos is surrounded by a
τεῖχος χάλκεον (k 3), so the house of
Hephaistos is built of solid bronze
instead of mere stone.

371. κυλλοποδίων, only here and T
270, ® 331. It seems to be a hypocoristie
or pet form of *xi\oros, Little crook-foot,
and means the same as ἀμφιγυήεις as
explained on A 607. For the custom of
giving nicknames from bodily defects
out of pure affection Schulze (Q. 1. p.
308) aptly compares Horace Saf. i. 3.
43 ff. at pater ut gnati, sic nos debemus
amici Si quod sit vitium non fastidire,
etc., where Varus is a Roman parallel.

372. ἑλιςςόμενον, turning backwards
and forwards, i.e. busy, οἵ. versari.
ἕλιςς. is the chief predicate, to which
idpmonta is subordinate, while cneu-
Sonta is explanatory of both.

373. For the tripods with wheels see
Helbig H. £. pp. 108 (n. 13), 347, and
eompare the τάλαρος ὑπόκυκλος of Helen,
6131. The wheels are found in ancient
Phoenician monuments ; cf. also 1 Kings
vii. 27-38 every base had four brazen
wheels. The tripods are perhaps meant
to carry trays and serve as tables at the
feasts of the gods ; the μέγαρον and δῶμα
(377) are those of Hephaistos. mueuHn
is here=Zeg (cf. the use of the word in
A 635 and see App. E), he put golden
wheels (one) wnder cach leg.

374. €uctaeéoc μεγάροιο is elsewhere
a purely Odyssean phrase (also ἐυστ.
θαλάμου W 178).

376. of is, of course, ‘dat. commodi.’
θεῖον ἀγῶνα the assembly of the gods, see
note on H 298, 0428. It iscurious that
the un- Homeric δύσονται or δύσωνται
should have invaded nearly all Mss. It
is probably a reminiscence of H 298.
The variant θεῖον κατὰ δῶμα véowro
either involves the omission of the next
line, or may be corrupt, and mean that
κατά was read for πρός in 377. The
automatically travelling tripods may be
compared to the gold and silver dogs
made by Hephaistos which guarded the
palace of Alkinoos, 7 91-95, as well as
to the golden handmaids below, 418.
The very sparing use made of such marvels
even in Olympos is noteworthy.

378. Téccon μέν, cf. X 322, Ψ 454,
and on A130; ‘they were so far finished,
but the handles were not affixed’ is a
slight anacoluthon as easily intelligible
in English asin Greek. Secuovc, rivets
(elsewhere in the general sense ‘ bond’).
The oldest Greek bronze tripods found at
Olympia are thus fastened ; the welding
of bronze was a comparatively late dis-
covery. οὔατα, handles, ‘lugs,’ as A 632.

381. This line is omitted by such
respectable authorities that it must
needs be suspected. It is not absolutely
necessary, and may have been inter-
polated to supply the usual τόφρα after

296 IAIAAOC C (xvii)

\ \ ” fa Γ΄“ tf 16
τὴν δὲ ἴδε προμολοῦσα Χάρις λιπαροκρήδεμνος
/ \ » \ > / .
καλή, τὴν ὦπυιε περικλυτὸς appuyvI/ELs
/ ” e fal 14 ν » 5 BA 5 ’ / δ
ἔν τ᾽ ἄρα οἱ φῦ χειρί, ἔπος T ἔφατ εκ τ ὀνόμαζε
, / ; e / (3 / lal
«τίπτε. Θέτι τανύπεπλε, ἱκάνεις ἡμέτερον δῶ 885
+ » ip \ ” /
αἰδοίη te φίλη τε; πάρος γε μὲν οὔ TL Oapilers.
> > Ψ “ \ / / ΕΣ
ἀλλ᾽ ἕπεο προτέρω, ἵνα τοι πὰρ ξείνια θείω.
” / ” - /
ὡς dpa φωνήσασα πρόσω ἄγε δῖα θεάων.
5) - IRN J b) /
τὴν μὲν ἔπειτα καθεῖσεν ἐπὶ θρόνου ἀργυροήλου
fal / ς N a \ SN
καλοῦ δαιδαλέου: ὑπὸ δὲ θρῆνυς ποσὶν nev: 990
> , a: he na
κέκλετο δ᾽ “Ἥφαιστον κλυτοτέχνην εἶπέ τε μῦθον"
τ iQ Vd / rn te 43
“Ἥφαιστε, πρόμολ᾽ ὧδε: Θέτις νύ τι σεῖο χατίζει.
» Ν » Uh
τὴν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα περικλυτὸς ἀμφιγυήεις"
πο ΠΥ ΄ , \ 5. ἡ \ ” ὃ
“«“ἣ ῥά νύ μοι δεινὴ TE Kat αἰδοίη θεὸς ἔνδον,
, 3 ¢ a /
ἥ μ᾽ ἐσάωσ᾽, ὅτε μ᾽ ἄλγος ἀφίκετο τῆλε πεσόντα 395
\ 7 A a7 ΤΆ ὃ τ 3 θέ
μητρὸς ἐμῆς ἰότητι κυνώπιδος, ἥ μ᾽ ἐθέλησε
/ / 3 / I rn
κρύψαι χωλὸν ἐόντα: τότ᾽ ἂν πάθον ἄλγεα θυμῶι,

385. eétic τανύπεπλος Zen.: ϑέτις τανύπεπλε Bar. Mor. (eét1« Harl. a) Harl. b. |}

ἡμέτερον Oe Zen.
KaeAce(N) CL().

387. napa JPR.
392. céo QR: coito P.
κυνώπιδος : yp. Bowmidoc T. || éeéAecke G.

388. φωνήςας᾽ ἡγήςατο S. 389.
394. Te: re Pap. ιἰ. 396.
397. GN: yp. ἂρ U? Eust.

ὄφρα. If the line originally belonged to
this place there is nothing to explain
its omission. There appears to be no
other case of ὄφρα, in the purely tem-
poral sense, succeeded by δέ in apodosi ;
the only cases in the 74. where it is
not answered by τόφρα seem to be 61,
442, Εἰ 788, 1 352. But the use follows
immediately from the original parataxis ;
cf. O 547 ὄφρα μὲν (for a time) . . αὐτὰρ
ἐπεί.

382. Χάρις is made wife of Hephaistos
by a more transparent allegory than we
find elsewhere in H. ; ὅτι τῆι τέχνηι τὴν
χάριν προσεῖναι det, Schol. A. In @ 266-
366 Heph. is wedded to Aphrodite, whose
attendants are the Χάριτες ; but that
passage is later and un-Homeric. Ainapo-
KpHoOeunoc, see App. G, 8 11.

385. Zen.’s Θέτις τανύπεπλος, though
approved by Cobet (JZ. C. 333), is need-
less here, as the short ¢ of the voce.
has the ictus (see on 357), and the hiatus
in the caesura is common. ἡμέτερον
δῶ, see A 426 and note Zen.’s ἡμέ-
Tepovde (as we now accent it).

386-87 --ε 88 [91]; so 425-27 --ε 88-90.

For the favourite conjunction of aidotoc
and φίλος cf. Καὶ 114, © 210, ete. ; and
for πάρος with the present A553. With
προτέρω we may perhaps compare the
Italian Avanti /=‘ come in.’

392. ὧδε, hither, in spite of Ar.’s
arbitrary canon that it means only thus
in H. He explained it here οὕτως ws
ἔχεις, οὐδὲν ὑπερθέμενος (An.), cf. p 447
στῆθ᾽ οὕτως ἐς μέσσον. But this would
never be seriously maintained except for
the sake of a theory. See on K 537,
M 346, and the discussions in Lehrs 47.
70, 879, Bekker H. B. ii. 38. Plato,
when about to burn his poems (see on
P 263), is said to have apostrophized
the fire, Ἥφαιστε, πρόμολ᾽ ὧδε: Τ]λάτων
νύ τι σεῖο χατίζει. ᾿

395. For the legends of casting out
of heaven see on = 249, O 18-24; and
A 590-94 with the same application to
Hephaistos, though the details are dif-
ferent. Hephaistos and his mother are
generally represented as close allies.

397. τότ᾽ ἄν: to get rid of the ἄν
Brandreth conj. τότ᾽ ἄρ (with Eust.) or
τό κεν, van L. ἢ Kev.

IAIAAOC C (χνιπη) 297
εἰ μή μ᾽ Εὐρυνόμη τε Θέτις θ᾽ ὑπεδέξατο κόλπωι,
Εὐρυνόμη θυγάτηρ ἀψορρόου ᾿Ὡκεανοῖο.
τῆισι παρ᾽ εἰνάετες χάλκευον δαίδαλα πολλά, 100
πόρπας τε γναμπτάς θ᾽ ἕλικας κάλυκάς τε καὶ ὅρμους,
ἐν omni γλαφυρῶι, περὶ δὲ ῥόος ᾿ΩὩκεανοῖο
ἀφρῶι μορμύρων ῥέεν ἄσπετος: οὐδέ τις ἄλλος
ἤιδεεν οὔτε θεῶν οὔτε θνητῶν ἀνθρώπων,
ἀλλὰ Θέτις τε καὶ Εὐρυνόμη ἴσαν, ai με σάωσαν. 405

ἣ νῦν ἡμέτερον δόμον ἵκει" TH με μάλα χρεὼ

/ /
πάντα Θέτι καλλιπλοκάμωι ζωάγρια τίνειν.

398. Te om. L. || Θ᾽ om. ΤΊ : 0° A (supr. e’) Q.
πολλὰ: πάντα Zen. Aph. Bar. Harl. b, Par. ἃ κα.
rnantac TJ. |
404. Hoecen J: yp. Hiden Did.

406. ἥκει LRS. || χρεὼν C: χρὴ J Harl. a, Eust.: χρειὼ RU
ϑέτιοι P.

πόρπακας PR: nopnac LS. |
403 om. Dt.
ἧςαν S, yp. U*.

(supr. xpeia), Vr. A. 407. eeTIn 1):

399. Baeuppoou J. 400.
401. népnac Te:
τ᾽ ἔλικας 1). 402. d€ppdoc C.
405. Te om. PQR. || €can GJR:

τείνειν A Pap. ε, Bar.

398. For the singular ὑπεδέξατο with
two subjects compare A 255 ἢ Kev γηθή-
σαι IIpiawos ἸΙριάμοιό τε παῖδες, where the
constr. is less harsh, as the verb pre-
cedes the nominatives. Kiihner ii. p. 70.

399. The epanalepsis of the former of
two names is very unusual. It might be
accounted for on the ground that Thetis
does not require explanation ; but prob-
ably P. Knight is right in expelling the
line as a mere gloss. ἁψορρόου recurs
only in v 65 in the same connexion.
The ancients explained ‘flowing back
into himself,’ because he surrounds the
earth in a circle. Others have preferred
to see in it a vague rumour of the ‘re-
fluent’ tide.

400. χάλκευον, a violation of ‘ Wer-
nicke’s law.’ It is also one of the few
exceptions to the rule against the
molossus in this place. See App. N, 817.
Nauck χαλκεύων δαίδαλα μίμνον, which
does not meet the second objection.
einderec, for a nine years’ cycle, see note
on 351.

401. The πόρπαι are probably the
same as περόναι (see App. G, 9), fibulae,
brooches or buckles ; cf. Eur. Hee. 1170,
Phoen. 62, where the pin is used for
putting out eyes. For the rest of the
line οἵ, Hym. Ven. 86-89 πέπλον μὲν yap
ἕεστο φαεινύότερον πυρὸς αὐγῆς, εἶχε δ᾽
ἐπιγναμπτὰς ἕλικας κάλυκάς τε φαεινάς.
ὁρμοὶ δ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ἁπαλῆι δειρῆι περικαλλέες
ἦσαν, καλοί, χρύσειοι, παμποίκιλοι (cf. ibid.
162 ff.). No doubt the author of the
Hymn took his words from this passage ;

whether he had any clear idea of their
sense is doubtful, and it is rash to base
arguments on that passage. Helbig ex-
plains ἕλικες by some brooches of a very
ancient type found in Greece, Italy, and
Central Europe, and formed of two spirals.
(See the illustrations in 1. Z. pp. 279-82.)
This however makes thein only another
kind of πόρπαι, which is not probable.
We can only say that they are spirals:
this form is so common in early ornament
that we cannot specify more closely.
Very likely they were bracelets. Note
that the F of Fé\:cas is neglected. Of
the κάλυκες it can only be said that
they were bud-like ornaments. It is
very natural to give the name to the
gold rosettes found so abundantly in
Mykenaean graves, and used apparently
for fastening on to dresses as ornaments
(see Schuchh. p. 202); but comparison
with Mykene must be used cautiously
when we are dealing with women’s dress.
The Spuo1 were of course necklaces.

402. cnAi, a false form for σπέεϊ which
can always be restored; and so σπέεος
for σπείους. The only authority for the
longer stem is ε 194 ἷξον δὲ σπεῖος
γλαφυρόν, perhaps a corruption of [ov
δὲ σπέος és yN. (Nauck).

405. Ycan, knew, only here in 11. (three
times in Od.).

407. zwarpia, the price of my life, cf.
6 462 (Nausikaa to Odysseus) μνήσηι Ewer’,
ὅτι μοι πρώτηι ζωάγρι᾽ ὀφέλλεις. The
word (which is used in these two passages
only in H.) evidently signified in the

998 IAIAAOC C (χνπ)

ἀλλὰ σὺ μὲν νῦν of παράθες ξεινήϊα καλά,
ὄφρ᾽ ἂν ἐγὼ φύσας ἀποθείομαι ὅπλά τε πάντα."

ἢ καὶ ἀπ᾽ ἀκμοθέτοιο πέλωρ αἴητον ἀνέστη 410
χωλεύων: ὑπὸ δὲ κνῆμαι ῥώοντο ἁραιαί.
φύσας μέν ῥ᾽ ἀπάνευθε τίθει πυρός, ὅπλά τε πάντα
λάρνακ᾽ ἐς ἀργυρέην συλλέξατο, τοῖς ἐπονεῖτο"
σπόγγωι δ᾽ ἀμφὶ πρόσωπα καὶ ἄμφω χεῖρ᾽ ἀπομόργνυ
αὐχένα τε στιβαρὸν καὶ στήθεα λαχνήεντα" 415
δῦ δὲ χιτῶν᾽, ἕλε δὲ σκῆπτρον παχύ, βῆ δὲ θύραζε
χωλεύων: ὑπὸ δ᾽ ἀμφίπολοι ῥώοντο ἄνακτι
χρύσειαι, ζωῆισι νεήνισιν εἰοικυῖαι.
τῆις ἐν μὲν νόος ἐστὶ μετὰ φρεσίν, ἐν δὲ καὶ αὐδὴ
καὶ σθένος, ἀθανάτων δὲ θεῶν ἄπο ἔργα ἴσασιν. 420
αἱ μὲν ὕπαιθα ἄνακτος ἐποίπνυον: αὐτὰρ ὁ ἔρρων
πλησίον, ἔνθα Θέτις περ, ἐπὶ θρόνου ἷζε φαεινοῦ,
” ᾽ ” ΄ an 7 yy 3 ” ’ ” ’ ᾽ /
ἔν T ἄρα οἱ φῦ χειρί, ἔπος τ᾽ ἔφατ᾽ ἔκ T ovopate:

408. Ξυνήϊα JQ Harl. ἃ.
411. ῥώονται R.
ACJPS fr. Mose.

écTin ἐνὶ Vr. Ὁ. 421. noinNuon H.

410-12 om. ᾧ.
414. npdcwnon Bar. Vr. A. || Kai: ἴδ᾽ Bar. || ἀπεμόργνυ
418. ἐοικυῖαι DGHPQTU: ἐεικυῖαι J.

410. GNHTON R (yp. aiHTON).

419. ἐμ. Pap. i. ||

first instance the price paid to a warrior
who took a prisoner alive instead of slay-
ing him, see Z 46 ζύγρει, ᾿Ατρέος υἱέ, σὺ
δ᾽ ἄξια δέξαι ἄποινα. The use in these
two places is clearly a playful extension
of the word. but fixed the sense for later
Greek ; cf. Herod. iii. 36, and the mean-
ing ‘offerings to the gods for recovery
from sickness’ in Anthol., ete. Θέτι,
Nauck θεᾶι, the contracted -¢ for -w being
doubtful. Acc. to van L. (Ench. p. 224)
the only other places where this -c cannot
be thus resolved are Z 335, II 661, Ψ 891,
141, 706, and five in Od. Brugmann
however ((r. ii. p. 602) regards the -i as
the primitive instrumental -7, used from
early times as a dative.

410. αἴητον, a word of unknown
meaning found only here in Greek. It
is apparently connected with the equally
enigmatic dnrov Φ 395 q.v. πέλωρ too
is an odd word to be applied to
Hephaistos,

411. χωλεύων after πέλωρ, the usual
constr. ad senswm. ῥώοντο, see A 50:
ἁραιαί, E 425,

_ 418. εἰοικυῖαι, a very doubtful form
for the correct FeFixviar, which occurs
everywhere else in H. The best remedy
is to write venvicow FeFixviae with

Brandreth (venvideow P. Knight, which
will not do). If we condone the -a- on
the analogy of εἰδυῖα (P 5), we can
compare εἰληλουθώς 7 28, which Schulze
not very satisfactorily attributes to
metrical necessity (?) in an antispastic (?)
word; see vol. i. App. D, a2 and p. 597.
The animated handmaidens of gold are
a relic of the tradition which everywhere
attributes magical powers to the mythical
founders of metallurgy, e.g. the Telchines
of Rhodes, the Daktyloi and the bronze
man Talos of Crete, the Weyland Smith of
Teutonic mythology, ete. Thus Pindar
says of the Telchines in O. vil. 52 ἔργα
δὲ ζωοῖσιν ἑρπόντεσσί θ᾽ ὁμοῖα κέλευθοι
φέρον. The only analogy in H. is to
be found in the gold and silver dogs
(sphinxes?) which Hephaistos made,
ἀθανάτους ὄντας Kal ἀγήρως ἤματα πάντα,
to guard the palace of Alkinoos (η 91) ;
the χρύσειοι κοῦροι ἐυδμήτων ἐπὶ βωμῶν
(η 100) are to be regarded as statues
(Helbig H. £#. 390-92). See on
376.

421. ὅτι ἔρρων οὐ ψιλῶς πορευόμενος, -

ἀλλὰ διὰ τὴν χωλότητα φθειρόμενος, Aris-
ton. See on Θ 299.

423-25, see on 3884-86; 426-27=8
195-96.

IAIAAOC C (χνπ) 299
«ς , @é 4 e / id ’ δῶ

τίπτε, Θέτι τανύπεπλε, ἱκάνεις ἡμέτερον δῶ
αἰδοίη τε φίλη τε; πάρος γε μὲν οὔ τι θαμίζεις. 425

” Ὁ / / ,ὔ “ ‘ "
αὔδα 6 τι φρονέεις. τελέσαι δέ με θυμὸς ἄνωγεν,
εἰ δύναμαι τελέσαι γε καὶ εἰ τετελεσμένον ἐστί."

\ ᾽ ᾽ / ᾽ yA (- 7 \ / ΄

τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα Θέτις κατὰ δάκρυ χέουσα"

/ o , 9 7
“““Ἡφαιστ᾽, ἢ ἄρα δή τις, ὅσαι θεαί cia’ ἐν ᾿Ολύμπωιε,

’ὔ » 4.1 \ ? > / / / c
τοσσάδ᾽ ἐνὶ φρεσὶν How ἀνέσχετο κήδεα λυγρά, 480
.“ » > \ τι 7 / r \ » , »
ὅσσ᾽ ἐμοὶ ἐκ πασέων Kpovidns Ζεὺς ἄλγε᾽ ἔδωκεν ;

/ ᾽ a
ἐκ μέν μ᾽ ἀλλάων ἁλιάων ἀνδρὶ δάμασσεν,

Αἰακίδην ἸΤηλῆϊ, καὶ ἔτλην ἀνέρος εὐνὴν

πολλὰ μάλ᾽ οὐκ ἐθέλουσα: ὁ μὲν δὴ γήραϊ λυγρῶι

lal πως ΄ > , ” / Le) -
κεῖται ἐνὶ μεγάροις ἀρημένος, ἄλλα δέ μοι νῦν" 435

ev b] / lal / / /
υἱὸν ἐπεί μοι δῶκε γενέσθαί τε τραφέμεν TE,

ΝΜ e ΄ e ’ > / » a Ὁ
ἔξοχον ἡρώων: ὁ δ᾽ ἀνέδραμεν ἔρνεϊ ἶσος"

τὸν μὲν ἐγὼ θρέψασα φυτὸν ὡς γουνῶι ἀλωῆς

\ Uj 5
νηυσὶν ἐπιπροέηκα κορωνίσιν λιον εἴσω

Ah \ / \ δ᾽ > ε , =
pool μαχησόμενον, τὸν οὐχ ὑποδέξομαι αὗτις

οἴκαδε νοστήσαντα δόμον Ἰ]ηλήϊον εἴσω.
ὄφρα δέ μοι ζώει καὶ ὁρᾶι φάος ἠελίοιο,

494. ϑέτις Vr. A Par. f. ||

Pap. «, Syr. || cra: D!.
431. macdoon PR. || GeHKeN PR.

Θέτις TaNUMenAoc. .

ἀνώγει Ὁ Bar. Mor. Harl. Ὁ (suwpr. ΕΝ), Par. ec ἃ g, ἐν ἄλλωι A.

429. H: HO’ H.
432. ἁλίων CJ.

ἡμέτερον O€ Zen, 426.
427 om. HtU
430. τόεςα J. || ἀνέχετο G.

435. énuuuerdpoic H Pap. «.

440. ateic C Mor. Bar. 441 om. U Pap. ¢, ἔν τισιν οὐ κεῖται Sch. A. 442.
zo(i)H(1) CIT.
429. This speech of Thetis has given only omission, not mis-statement. The

rise to serious critical doubts. Ar. athe-
tized 444-56, like A 366 ff., on the
ground that the recapitulation is out of
place, and that the sending of Patroklos
did not result from the embassy, as
seems to be implied in 451. Toa modern
eritic the mention of the Presbeia is in
itself evidence of late origin. To this
may be added that a large part of the
speech is simply repeated from other
places ; 437-43 =56-62 ; 444-45=II 56,
58; 456=T 414; 457 --Ύν 92, ὃ 322; and
compare 448 with I 574, 449 with I 121,
515. There are several phrases which
are common in the Od. but do not recur
in the Iliad, see 435, 457. But this
proves only that the passage is late, not
that it is later than the context. The
whole of the ὁπλοποιΐα may be as late as
the Presbeia ; and though the reference
in 450-51 does not give the whole course
of events, it is near enough—there is

whole speech may well have been com-
posed for this place from the first.—
There is a certain dry humour in Schol.
T on 429; ἐμιμήσατο ἦθος θηλειῶν, ov
περὶ ὧν ἠρώτηται ἀποκρινομένη, ἀλλὰ περὶ
ὧν ἐλυπεῖτο.

434. πολλὰ μάλ᾽ seems to go with οὐκ
ἐθέλουσα, as in πόλλ᾽ ἀέκων.

435, ἀρημένος, worn out, weary, with
which Schulze (Q. £. 460) would connect
it etymologically, writing Fap-nyévos :
ef. note on Καὶ 98. The word is elsewhere
purely Odyssean: the only place in
which this sense is not quite suitable is
t 403 τίπτε τόσον, ἸΠολύφημ᾽, ἀρημένος
ὧδε βόησας ; where we might have ex-
pected a rather stronger word. ἄλλα
δέ μοι NON, we must it seems supply
ἄλγε᾽ ἔδωκεν or ἔστιν from 431.

436. τραφέμεν intrans., see on B 661.
The ἐπεί is virtually redundant (jirst) as
Mm 90,

300

IAIAAOC C (xvii)

> , e an b) Ses

ἄχνυται, οὐδέ TL οἱ δύναμαι χραισμῆσαι ἰοῦσα.
7 ἑ 5) ΄ - ? lal

κούρην ἣν dpa οἱ γέρας ἔξελον vies Ἀχαιῶν,

\ Xx > an -“μ / ~ /
τὴν ay ἐκ χειρῶν ἕλετο κρείων Αγαμέμνων.

445

9 a Dy \
ἤτοι ὁ τῆς ἀχέων φρένας ἔφθιεν: αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχαιοὺς
mn a > \ / > ΜΛ 5 \ /

Γρῶες ἐπὶ πρύμνηισιν ἐείλεον, οὐδὲ θύραζε

” > ,
εἴων ἐξιέναι.

\ \ / /
Tov δὲ λίσσοντο γέροντες

’ / Ate) 2 /
Ἀργείων, Kal πολλὰ περικλυτὰ δῶρ᾽ ὀνόμαζον"

" > > \ \ ” ’ > / \ ΕῚ rn
ἔνθ αὐτὸς μὲν ἔπειτ ἡναίνετο λοιγὸν ἀμῦναι,

450

» \ e€ ti \ \ N a / “
αὐτὰρ ὁ IlatpoxXov περὶ μὲν Ta ἃ τεύχεα ἔσσε,

,ὔ / / / \ ’ A \ ”
πέμπε δέ μιν πόλεμόνδε, πολὺν δ᾽ ἅμα λαὸν ὄπασσε.

A pena
πᾶν δ᾽ ἦμαρ μάρναντο περὶ
καί νύ

πολλὰ

J
κακὰ ῥέξαντα Μενοιτίου ἄλκιμον υἱὸν

Σκαιῆισι πύληισι"

a / Sy ,
κεν αὐτῆμαρ πόλιν ἔπραθον, εἰ μὴ Ἀπόλλων

455

” 2 ΞΟ / Na: a ”
EKTAV €EVL προμαχοίσι Kab Extopt κῦδος ἔδωκε.

7, a \ \ ΄ Do ον " 5. »47
τούνεκα νῦν τὰ σὰ γούναθ᾽ ἱκάνομαι, αἴ x ἐθέληισθα

Ξφ oe ale ᾽ / 5) / \ /
vi ἐμῶι ὠκυμόρωι δόμεν ἀσπίδα καὶ τρυφάλειαν

444-56 ἀθ. Ar. (the obelos is prefixed in I; and in U to 444-61).
446. ὃ om. C.

452. 0 Gua: δ᾽ ὅ reS Bar. Mor. Harl. a: δέ οἵ C.
455. pézonta H!: ῥέξοντα H”.

κούρην O° Harl. a.
ἠναίνατο (+: ἠνήινετο [],
453. udpnato GR.

444.
450. Gnaineto (): ἠνήᾳ(ινατο DS:

458. ul. ἐμῶι GS:

υἷι €ud H: viet ἐμῶι Vr. b A: uit ἐμ᾽ J: υἱεῖ ἔμ᾽ (ἐμ Q. || δόμεναι PR.

446. Epeien, a form which is found
here only. It is not clear whether it is
aor. or imperf., trans. or intrans. It
may come from a pres. φθίω related to
φθίνω as tlw to rivw: or it may be an
aor., ef. ἔπιον by πίνω. The former seems
the more probable; the imperf. gives
the better sense, and the aor. though
very common always has mid. or pass.
terminations: ἔφθιτο would of course
have been quite possible here. On the
same grounds ἔφθιεν is probably trans.,
with φρένας as direct object, like all
the other active forms of φθίνω, except
when used of the passing of time (φθί-
vovTos μηνός ὃ 162, etc., μηδέ τοι αἰὼν
φθινέτω ε 160, and others; all in the
Od.). Some doubt, however, is intro-
duced by the closely analogous use of
φθινύθω, as we have φθινύθουσι παρειαί
9 530 by the side of αἰῶνα φθινύθω σ 204,
and οἵ μευ φθινύθουσι φίλον κῆρ κ 485.
Compare the equally ambiguous A 491
φθινύθεσκε φίλον κῆρ, to which this
passage of course refers. The form
φθίηις (8 368) is certainly intrans. ; it
has ¢ either from metrical necessity, if
aor., for it obviously could not stand

otherwise in a hexameter (Schulze @. £.
p- 358), or ifa pres. because the -c- stands
for -vy- and is therefore primarily long
though capable of being shortened (H. G.
§ 51. 1: van L. would read φθίεαι).
Blass very ingeniously conj. ἔσθιεν, which
would solve all difficulties, but has no
support whatever in tradition (see 2
129).

453. πᾶν ἧμαρ is here open to the
same objection as πανημερίοις in P 384;
the fighting at the Skaian gates was
neither ‘all day ’ long nor ‘for all the rest
of the day’ (A 472); the latter would
ignore all the long fight over Patroklos,
extending to the Greek camp. But this
is not the place where we need expect
the accuracy of a chronicler.

457. Ta c& rounae’ ikadNouai, an
Odyssean phrase (y 92, ὃ 322; οἵ. ε 449,
7 147, ν 231),

458. Ar. read viet ἐμώκυμόρωι, which is
expressed by the ἔμ᾽ (éw’) ὠκυμόρωι of
most Mss. Such a crasis is without a
parallel in H., unless it be in Ar.’s
reading 1Πηλείδἤθελ᾽, A 277. There is
no reason why we should not accept
the reading ui’ éu@i—which may have

IAIAAOC C (χνι) 301

\ \ -“ ᾽ / > /
Kal καλὰς κνημῖδας, ἐπισφυρίοις ἀραρυίας,

\ > \ a ¢ / \ ΄ ΄-
καὶ θώρηχ᾽" ὃ γὰρ ἣν οἱ, ἀπώλεσε πιστὸς ἑταῖρος 460
AR; \ ὃ , e δὲ - > \ Q \ ‘ > 7,
ρωσὶ δαμείς. ὁ δὲ κεῖται ἐπὶ χθονὶ θυμὸν ἀχεύων.

\ > b / > » \ ᾽ ΄

τὴν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα περικλυτὸς ἀμφιγυήεις"

/ - \ ε ,
““θάρσει: μή τοι ταῦτα μετὰ φρεσὶ σῆισι μελόντων.
᾿ , / /
αἱ γάρ μιν θανάτοιο δυσηχέος ὧδε δυναίμην

/ » 4 μή / Ν e /
νόσφιν ἀποκρύψαι, OTE μιν μόρος αἰνὸς ἱκάνοι, 465
ef e / / a
ὥς οἱ τεύχεα καλὰ παρέσσεται, οἷά τις αὖτε
e 39
ὅς κεν ἴδηται.

ὰ > Ae a \ \ , > an a ons ae ΄,

ὡς εἰπὼν τὴν μὲν λίπεν αὐτοῦ, βῆ δ᾽ ἐπὶ φύσας,

\ ae J a ” , , ᾽ ΄
τὰς δ᾽ ἐς πῦρ ἔτρεψε κέλευσέ τε ἐργάζεσθαι.

r > / / r
φῦσαι δ᾽ ἐν χοάνοισιν ἐείκοσι πᾶσαι ἐφύσων, 470

» ΄ / /
ἀνθρώπων πολέων θαυμάσσεται,

/ » \ “-“
παντοίην εὔπρηστον ἀυτμὴν ἐξανιεῖσαι,
A \ 4 / ” , 5
ἄχλοτε μὲν σπεύδοντι παρέμμεναι, ἄλλοτε δ᾽ αὖτε,

459 om. Pap. εἴ, 460. ὃ : τινὲς ἃ Sch. T.

463. Tol: τὶ DJP:
464. WIN: μοι R Mor.

τι Tor CT

Lips. Vr. A. || μή τι τοιαῦτα Q.
Syr.: ἵκανε Lips.
τὰς fr. Mose. 469. ἐς : ἐπὶ H.
τινὲς εὔπρηκτον Did.

466. παρέεςςεται : παρέξομαι Zen. Aph.
ἔετρεψε P Vr. d. || Te:

465. ἱκάνει GPOR
468. THN:
oe PRU. 471.

been changed to avoid the comparatively
rare elision of the -.—unless it be thought
better to adopt Bentley’s vii μευ or
Nauck’s vid μοι. See note on 144.

460. The way in which the θώρηξ is
added to the rest of the panoply
obviously suggests an afterthought. We
can hardly expunge 460-61 altogether,
for we expect Thetis to state explicitly
that the armour has been lost ; but the
beginning of the line may easily have
been altered from viv yap τεύχεα καλά
or the like. oi is obviously in the
wrong position after the verb (for 6 yap
Fo ἦν. As the text stands we might
well adopt the variant ἅ for 6, referring
the rel. to τεύχεα, implied in what
precedes, and not to the breastplate
only.

464. This is the not uncommon for-
mula where the certainty of one event
is affirmed by contrasting it with the
impossibility of another: ‘he shall
have his armour as surely as I cannot
save him from death,’ the latter clause
taking the form of a wish and_ being
put first. ἱκάνοι is ‘attracted’ by the
preceding opt. ; ie. the event, though
certain, is included by the speaker in
the same category of pure imagination
as the wish with which it is connected.

466. napéccetal, παρέξομαι Zen. Aph.,
a more regular expression of the thought,
but not therefore necessarily to be pre-
ferred. The indefinite tic here, as
elsewhere, connotes the idea of ‘many’
(e.g. IL 629; the origin of this sense
may be seen in the ‘ τις of public opinion,’
cf. B 271 where tis=7 πληθύς of 278).
The addition of πολέων seems to be a
slight logical irregularity, though the
intention is evidently to emphasize the
ris; in other words, we should rather
have expected πολλοί τινες ἀνθρώπων.
But the required emphasis is given after
all by the sentence as we have it, as
will be felt if we translate ‘many a one
of the many men there be.’

469. The bellows, like the tripods,
are intelligent automata, obeying the
god’s will.

470. xodnoicin, crucibles, also in Hes.
Th. 863.

471. elnpucton, ‘well-puffed,’ see A
481. παντοίην, of every degree of
force.

472, ἄλλοτε 0" αὗτε is virtually equi-
valent to ‘and vice versa,’ αὖτε, on the
contrary, sufficiently summarizing the
opposite of the preceding clause. The
sense thus is ‘so as to be at his service

902

IAIAAOC C (xvit)

y}
ὅππως “Ηφαιστός τ᾽ ἐθέλοι καὶ ἔργον ἄνυτο.

ie /
χαλκὸν δ᾽ ἐν πυρὶ βάλλεν ἀτειρέα κασσίτερόὸν τε

a / > \ Ψ
καὶ χρυσὸν τιμῆντα καὶ ἄργυρον: αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα

475

θῆκεν ἐν ἀκμοθέτωι μέγαν ἄκμονα, γέντο δὲ χειρὶ

ῥαιστῆρα κρατερόν, ἑτέρηφι δὲ γέντο πυράγρην.
ποίει δὲ πρώτιστα σάκος μέγα τε στιβαρόν τε

πάντοσε δαιδάλλων, περὶ δ᾽ ἄντυγα βάλλε φαεινὴν

τρίπλακα μαρμαρέην, ἐκ δ᾽ ἀργύρεον τελαμῶνα.

480

413. τ᾽! r DGS Harl. a. || τ᾽ ἐθέλει Vr. b: τε ϑέλει Q. || ἔργ᾽ ἀνύοιτο Cram.

Ep. 16. 30. ||
TuuHaNTa Pap. εἰ.

κρατερόν Zen. (A supr.) CDGHJT Par. j: κρατερὴν ©.
480 om. Ht. || ἐκ : én HPR Mor. Vr. A.

μέγα P.

when he was working hard, and to cease
when he did not need it (the ἀυτμή).᾽
‘here is another case of this use in H.,
\ 303 of (Kastor and Polydeukes) ἄλλοτε
μὲν ζξώουσ᾽ ἑτερήμεροι ἄλλοτε δ᾽ αὖτε,
‘they live alternate days, and vice versa,’
i.e. die alternate days. (In this case
the usage has been obscured by the
interpolation of 304, which is entirely
in contradiction with the rest of the
passage ; see Bekker H. B. 11. 37, J. P.
xii. 287.) A similar case, but with the
verb of the second clause expressed, is
ὃ 102 ἄλλοτε μέν Te youn φρένα τέρπομαι,
ἄλλοτε δ᾽ αὖτε παύομαι. Compare also
Σ 169, 2 10.

473. The optatives are potential, ‘ac-
cording as H. might wish, and the work
be drawing to completion.’ ἄνυτο has
good authority ; it is the regular opt. of
ἄνυμι, of which the imperf. pass. ἤνυτο
is found in ε 243. The majority of mss.
give dvoro, but dverar, K 251, has a,
probably because ἄνω -- ἄνξω as φθίνω =
φθίνξω (cf. Pbwi-Aw). Besides, a rare
form like ἄνυτο is not likely to have
been wrongly invented ; it might indeed
be due to itacism, but that will be
equally true of ἄνοιτο.

475. τιλῆντα, a most suspicious con-
traction, seeon 1605. Various attempts
have been made to remove it by conjec-
ture (see Menrad, 84-88) ; the only one
which has any plausibility is Payne
Knight’s χρυσὸν τιμήεντα, where the
asyndeton is certainly harsh in a list
like this. It seems that we must accept
the contraction here as in I, and attribute
it to the lateness of both books.

ἄνυτο U? Cant. Bar. Lips. fr. Mosc. : ἄνοιτο 2.
476. ἐν : én’ (A supr.) CS Bar. Mor. and ap. Eust.

475. TiwHenTa H:
477.
478. μέγα Te:

476. γέντο, see on Θ 43.

477. κρατερόν, so Zen. ; κρατερήν Ar.
But a fem. in -ρ seems to be quite
without parallel (τύχη. . σωτήρ Soph.
Ο. T. 80-81 is naturally different) ; the
lengthening of the short syllable, though
common enough in this place, may have
caused the change. ῥαιστήρ is used in
Aisch. P. V. 56 of the hammer of
Hephaistos, but without indication of
gender.

478. For a general discussion of the
shield see App. I.

479. mantoce, carrying the
ment all over the surface.

480. The meaning of the triple ἄντυξ
is not clear. Loschcke (v. Helbig H. Δ".
385-86) takes it to mean triple woven,
and explains it by an ornament found on
the margins of many of the most ancient
Greek shields, consisting of an imitation
plaited work of three strands. It is,
however, more likely that ἄντυξ means
an actual part of the shield than a mere
ornament on the surface, and τρίπλαξ is
probably not derived from πλέκω, but is
only a secondary form of τριπλός (ef.
ἐριβῶλαξ by épiBwros). So δίπλαξ of fat
Ψ 243, though Τ' 126 μέγαν ἱστὸν ὕφαινε
δίπλακα might be claimed for the other
side. Perhaps three out of the five
layers of hide were turned up so as to
form a rim, the full thickness not being
needed at this part, or the rim may have
been formed by three flat metal bands
laid one upon the other. See note on
Δ 117. With the ἀργύρεος τελαμών
compare the χρύσεοι ἀορτῆρες of A
31.

adorn-

IAIAAOC C (χνι)

303

cal » / » 4 ΕῚ ,
πέντε δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἔσαν σάκεος πτύχες" αὐτὰρ ἐν αὐτῶι
δ ,ὔ
ποίει δαίδαλα πολλὰ ἰδυίηισι πραπίδεσσιν.
᾽ \ - ΝΜ > ? , ᾽ / ’ ΩΝ /
ἐν μὲν γαῖαν ἔτευξ᾽, ἐν δ᾽ οὐρανόν, ἐν δὲ θάλασσαν,

ἠέλιόν T ἀκάμαντα σελήνην τε πλήθουσαν,

> \ \ ,ὔ / / ᾽ > ‘ > ΄
εν δὲ Ta TELPEA TAVTA, Ta T ουρανος ἐστεφάνωται, 485

Πληϊάδας θ᾽ Ὕάδας te τό τε σθένος ᾿Ωρίωνος

481. ἐν : én’ JT, yp. U*.

483. Znvddoros ἠθέτηκε τὰ λοιπά (to 608? see App. I.

482. πόλλ᾽ P Syr. || εἰθυίηιει C Syr. Vr. A.

§ 14). τεῦξ᾽ Vr. Ὁ A.

485. 0€ τὰ : δέ Te P Harl. a. || οὐρανὸν ἐςτεφάνωκε Ar. (7): οὐρανὸν ἐςτήρικται

486. viddac PR.

(: εστηρικη Ms.) Zen.

481. It seems necessary to take αὐτοῦ,
on account of its combination with
σάκεος, in a different sense from αὐτῶι,
the former meaning ‘the shield 7¢se/f,’
i.e. the body as opposed to the surface,
while the latter is used in the weak
anaphoric sense ‘in it.’ That πτύχες
=layers of hide is clear from H 247
compared with 220.

483. From this point Zen. rejected the
whole description of the shield (App. I,
8 14). Fora Mykenaean representation
of the heavenly bodies see the great gold
ring from Mykene, Schuchh. fig. 281
(p. 277) where the sun and moon are at
the top, separated from the rest of the
field by a wavy line which may stand
for the horizon, or more probably for
clouds. Schol. T on this line quotes one
of the most curious ancient explanations
of the Shield, that of Agallis of Corcyra.
This lady held that it represented the
early history of Attica, the two cities
being Attica and Eleusis. Reference
must be made to the scholion for details
(see also Schol. A on 490 where the
name is wrongly given as ᾿Αγαλλίας).
Maximus Tyrius thought that the two
cities were Phaiakia and Ithaka, as types
of good government and anarchy.

485. τείρεα, ἅπαξ εἰρημένον in H.: ef.
ἐνὶ τείρεσιν Hymn. viii. 7. It is appar-
ently for répea, as τερέων is quoted from
Alkaios by Eust. (fr.155). Schulze (Q. Z.
p- 205) regards the -e- as purely metrical
lengthening in a tribrach. It is prob-
able that the word has nothing to do
with τέρας, but belongs to Skt. tara,
star. Cf. Curtius Μ΄. no. 205. éctepa-
nootai cf. EF 739, A 36, in both of which
passages the form is used in the sense
‘is set around’ (or ‘upon’); here of
course it means ‘has set around it asa
crown,’ the acc. being adverbial. The
phrase recurs in the similar line, Hes.

Theog. 382. Zen. read ἐστήρικται, and
acc. to Schol. A Ar. had ἐστεφάνωκε,
but this is hardly credible. The marked
alliteration with 7 only shews how rash
it is to assume that any particular
effect is intended in any case by such a
phenomenon ; here it is clearly accidental,

486. These lines, with the almost
identical ε 272-75, where Bootes is
named, tell us nearly all that is known
about Homeric astronomy (see Miss
Clerke Fam. Studies, 39 ff.). Πληϊάδες
and “Tdec are generally explained ‘the
sailing stars’ (as their heliacal rising in
May indicates the season when voyages
begin:to be safe; cf. Hes. Opp. 383
Πληϊάδων ᾿Ατλαγενέων ἐπιτελλομενάων
ἄρχεσθ᾽ ἀμητοῦ), and ‘the rainy stars’
of autunin. It is more probable, how-
ever, that the latter are the same as the
Lat. suculae, ‘the litter of pigs.’ Possibly
too the Pleiades are ‘the flight of doves’
(as if πελειάδες), fleeing, like the bear,
from before the hunter Orion; ἔστι δ᾽
ἐοικὸς ὀρειᾶν γε ἸΠελειάδων μὴ τηλόθεν
᾽Θαρίωνα νεῖσθαι, Pind. N. ii. 12 ; Πληϊά-
des σθένος ὄβριμον ᾿ΩὩρίωνος φεύγουσαι,
Hes. Opp. 619 ; Aisch. fr. 285 αἱ δ᾽ ἕπτ᾽
ἤΑτλαντος παῖδες... νυκτέρων φαντασμάτων
ἔχουσι μορφὰς ἄπτεροι πελειάδεςς. (They
are still the ‘seven dovelets’ in Sicily,
as they are the ‘hen and chickens’ in
England—Fam. St. p. 54.) This how-
ever may be a later interpretation ; the
name may be connected with πλεῖος, as
though=the crowd. The other names
(ἄρκτος, Bowrns ε 272) are taken from
the huntsman’s and shepherd’s life, not
from the sailor’s. P. Knight pointed
out that the correct form is not Ὡρίων
but ‘Qaplwy (perhaps for ’Oapiwy with
lengthening by metrical necessity) which
is found in Pindar (1 iv. 49, fr. 72),
Korinna and Kallimachos. The con-
tracted ‘Qpiwy has always ζ in later poets

904

IAIAAOC C (xvii)

/ /
ἄρκτόν θ᾽, ἣν καὶ ἄμαξαν ἐπίκλησιν καλεουσιν,
a / Lae} / J
ἥ τ᾽ αὐτοῦ στρέφεται Kat τ Ὡρίωνα δοκεύει,
v a ” / > lal "OK -
οἴη δ᾽ ἄμμορός ἐστι λοετρῶν LUxKeavoto.

/ ’ /
ἐν δὲ δύω ποίησε πόλεις μερόπων ἀνθρώπων

καλάς.

490

5 ’ /
ἐν τῆι μέν pa γάμοι T ἔσαν ethaTrwat τε,

A e /
νύμφας δ᾽ ἐκ θαλάμων δαΐδων ὕπο λαμπομενάων
» 3 Ὁ / 5 ip
ἠγίνεον ἀνὰ ἄστυ, πολὺς δ᾽ ὑμέναιος ὀρώρει,
a 5 / an
κοῦροι δ᾽ ὀρχηστῆρες ἐδίνεον, ἐν δ᾽ ἄρα τοῖσιν

αὐλοὶ φόρμιγγές τε βοὴν ἔχον" at δὲ γυναῖκες

495

e / 4 > \ θύ id /
ἱστάμεναι θαύμαζον ἐπὶ προθυροισιν εΚαστή.

489. οἴη : οἷος (2) Krates (see Ludwich δα loc.),
498. ἀνὰ : κατὰ JS.

Baton QR (yp. ϑαϊθων).

492. ἐς θαλάμους Zen. ||
496. npoeupHcin P().

(exc. once in Babrios); and in H. the
. never has the ictus to explain the
lengthening. As the open form is of
course the oldest and can always be
restored, it clearly is right, though there
is no authority for it in our Mss. of
Homer and Hesiod. For the legend of
Orion see ε 121—24.

487. The bear is in Arkadian myth-
ology connected with the story of
Kallisto, probably a relic of ancient
animal-worship (Paus. viii. 3. 6). The
name is, however, very ancient and
widely distributed, being found among
the North American Indians (see Frazer
Paus. iv. p. 191). The constellation is
of course still familiarly known by both
names, the Bear and the Wain; but of
these the former at least has in England
probably come from classical sources,

488. The idea seems to be that when
Orion is rising in the east, the Bear is on
the horizon—which he just touches in
North Greece; he then moves upward,
as though the coming of the great hunter
had scared him from taking his bath.
It must, however, be remembered that
the Great Bear lay in Homeric days
much nearer the Pole than he does at
present, owing to the precession of the
equinoxes. There was no obvious Pole
Star in the first millennium B.c. αὐτοῦ,
in the same place, never disappearing.

489, οἵη, no doubt because the few
other circumpolar constellations, Ursa
Minor, Draco, ete., none of which are
conspicuous, were creations of later astro-
nomy ; the Little Bear is said to have
been introduced to Greece from Phoenicia
by Thales of Miletos, Diintzer and

Nauck read αἰεί, which is quite needless.
See Aristotle Poet. xxv. 10 τὸ ‘‘oin δ᾽
ἄμμορος᾽᾽ κατὰ μεταφοράν, TO γὰρ γνωριμώ-
τατον μόνον. With λοετρῶν Ὠκεανοῖο
compare λελουμένος ’Qxeavoco of Seirios,
E 6; Ovid’s immunis aequoris Arctos,
Met. 13. 293.

491, καλάς, the emphatic position of
the word makes it equivalent to ‘how
beautiful!’ γάμοι ‘the plural of indefi-
niteness’ (Monro), expressing ‘marriage-
scene, one example standing for a
multitude. So νύμφας and ϑαλάμων
perhaps need not imply more than one
bride and chamber.

492. ἐκ θαλάμων, Ζηνόδοτος ‘és θαλά-

μους" καὶ ἔστιν οὐκ ἀπίθανος ἡ γραφή,
Did. There is not much to choose

between the two, as θάλαμος is used both
of the women’s apartments and of the
bridal chamber (see particularly y 192).
tno, accompanied by, generally of a
musical accompaniment. But the prep.
has a very wide range; see 7 48, y 290,
B 334, Σ 220, ete.

493. ἡϊγίνεον, perhaps rather ἤγινον
(like dp-w-ew), ef. ἀγινέμεναι v 213,
ἀγίνεσκον p 2943; ἀγινεῖς, ἀγινεῖ, x 198,
£105 may be accented to taste, and the
longer form, though universal in later
Greek (Herod. etc.), is certain in H. only
in 2784, «104. Ifwe keep it here we
must of course scan -εον as one syll., for
the -ἰ- is invariably long. πολύς is used
predicatively as in A 307 πολλὸν δὲ τρόφι
κῦμα κυλίνδεται, in full volume.

495, ὅτι ἐνθάδε μόνον καὶ ἐν τῆι K (19)
μέμνηται αὐλῶν, An. βοὴν ἔχον, cf. II
105 καναχὴν ἔχε. Nauck’s χέον is need-
less.

λαοὶ δ᾽ εἰν ἀγορῆι ἔσαν ἁθρόοι: ἔνθα δὲ νεῖκος

» , / ᾽ Μ > / “, fal
ὠρώρει, δύο δ᾽ ἄνδρες ἐνείκεον εἵνεκα ποινῆς

δήμωι πιφαύσκων, ὁ δ᾽ ἀναίνετο μηδὲν ἑλέσθαι"

ἄμφω δ᾽ ἱέσθην ἐπὶ ἴστορι πεῖραρ ἑλέσθαι.

ὌΝ \ δ᾽ » / » / > \ > ,ὔ

αοὶ ἀμφοτέροισιν ἐπήπυον, ἀμφὶς ἀρωγοί.
Ν ΄

κήρυκες δ᾽ ἄρα λαὸν ἐρήτυον: οἱ δὲ γέροντες

a » 4 \ lal / ΄ lal > \ /

elat ἐπὶ ξεστοῖσι λίθοις ἱερῶι ἐνὶ κύκλωι,

IAIAAOC C (xvitr) 305
> \ > / e x ” 4 ᾽ > "
ἀνδρὸς «αποκταμενου" ο μεν εὐχέτο ταντ ἀποδοῦναι,
500
499. ἀποκταμένου Zen. anid ἐν ταῖς πλείσταις : ano-

497. ἔνϑαγε L.
φοιλένου {).
emippauckon Pap. ει.
ἑλέςθϑαι : dpécear Zen.

501 om. L. ||

500. mippauckwn A: nigdckwn JPR Vr. A: €EnipdcKwn ():
netpac P: πεῖραν QSU Par. οὔ (j supr.). ||
502. ἀμφοτέρωθεν Zen. Aph. Mass. || énHtuon J :

éninnuon (ἐπήπυον Sch. ΤῊ) Mass. || ἀρωγῶι Mass. (Sch. T: ἀρωγοὶ Sch. A).

497. For the general discussion of this
passage see App. I, $§ 23-30.

499. Gnoxtauénou Zen. and αἱ πλεῖσται,
καὶ ἔστιν οὐκ ἀπίθανος ἡ γραφή, Did.
The word evidently brings out the sense
of homicide better than the vulg. ἀπο-
φθιμένου, though the latter is of course
possible.

500. m@auckon, making declaration,
probably by speech according to the
regular use of the word. It is however
thrice used of making manifest to the
sight, M 280 πιφαυσκόμενος τὰ ἃ κῆλα,
Φ 333 πιφαύσκεο δὲ φλόγα πολλήν, O 97
οἷα Ζεὺς ἔργα πιφαύσκεται. It is there-
fore possible to take πάντα as the object,
displaying the full price which the
slayer claims to pay (App. I, § 25).
MHOEN, Only here in H. (Δ. G. § 356).
If the mere denial of a fact were in
question we ought to have οὐδέν : the μή
implies that wil/ is concerned (H. G.
§ 361, J. and T. § 685).

501. iécoun, desired: the neglect of
the F is rare, see on A 138: βιέσθην δ᾽
ἄμφω Brandreth. {cropi, App. I, ὃ 26.
éni, at the hands of, a use which has
no exact parallel in H., but is closely
connected with the use of the prep. to
express attendant circumstances, H. CG.
§§ 197-98. In later Greek the use is
common enough (Lat. penes), e.g. τάδ᾽
οὐκ ἐπ᾽ ἀνδράσι κεῖται, Pind. P. vill. 76,
etc. πεῖραρ, wn issue, termination of
the matter; see note on H 102, and
compare also Ψ 350 ἑκάστου πείρατ᾽ ἔειπε,
Pindar P. i. 81 πολλῶν πείρατα συντα-
νύσαις ἐν βραχεῖ. The acc. πεῖραρ recurs
only in N 359 (see App. Crit.), ε 289
(‘etpay Z.’ Ludw.); all other forms are
in -τ- and would more naturally come

VOL. II

from a nom. πεῖρας (=Att. πέρας, for
mép-Fas?) which is found in Pindar ὦ.
ii. 31, and should perhaps be accepted
here on the authority of P. The other
variant πεῖραν is also worth consideration ;
though the subst. does not occur in H.,
it is implied in the verb πειράειν, and
the sense to take a trial suits perfectly ;
see the Attic use of πεῖραν λαμβάνειν in
L. ἃ S., and πεῖραν... ϑανάτου περὶ καὶ
ζωᾶς Pindar JN. ix. 28, 29.

502. ἐπήπυον, shouted assent, οἵ.
ἐπευφήμησαν, A 22. The Massaliotic
variant ἐπίπνυον must be taken as aor.
of ἐπι-πνέξ-ω (cf. ἄμ-πνυ-ε), in the sense
incited, inflamed the quarrel ; cf. Aisch.
Sept. 343 μαινόμενος δ᾽ émurvec . . “Apns,
Eur. Phoen. 789, 795 and other instances
in L. & 5. Gpowroi, partisans, as ¢ 232.
If Mass. read ἀρωγῶι, we must explain
incited a litigant on either side, i.e.
either one or other. The dpwyoi are
evidently much the same as the ‘com-
purgators’ of our old Jaw, the friends
and neighbours whom a litigant brought
to court nominally to swear to his
character, but in fact rather to make an
imposing display and overawe if possible
the opposite party. Compare Ψ 574 és
μέσον ἀμφοτέροισι δικάσσατε μηδ᾽ ἐπ᾽
ἀρωγῆι.

503. of δέ calls attention to a fresh
point, ‘there.’ So 495, 559. The
proclamation of silence by the heralds
opens the scene before the Areiopagos in
the Humenides also ; κήρυσσε, κῆρυξ, καὶ
στρατὸν κατειργάθου, 566.

504. ἱερῶι κύκλωι, a semicircular seat
of stone, sacred to the administration of
justice. So the Phaiakian ἀγορή is
purotow λάεσσι κατωρυχέεσσ᾽ ἀραρυῖα (¢

306

, 5 / ’ yy ’ ΄ Ε
σκῆπτρα δὲ κηρύκων EV χέερσ ἔχον ἠεροφώνων

IAIAAOC C (xvitt)

505

τοῖσιν ἔπειτ᾽ ἤϊσσον, ἀμοιβηδὶς δὲ δίκαζον.
κεῖτο δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐν μέσσοισι δύω χρυσοῖο τάλαντα,
τῶι δόμεν ὃς μετὰ τοῖσι δίκην ἰθύντατα εἴποι.
τὴν δ᾽ ἑτέρην πόλιν ἀμφὶ δύω στρατοὶ εἵατο λαῶν

΄
τεύχεσι λαμπομενοί.

δίχα δέ σφισιν ἥνδανε βουλή,

510

δ /
ἠὲ διαπραθέειν ἢ ἄνδιχα πάντα δάσασθαι,
e 3, 7 δ Ν ” ἜΣ
κτῆσιν ὅσην πτολίεθρον ἐπήρατον ἐντὸς ἐεργεν

506. TOTCIN: τοῖσι ὃ᾽ ( Vr. ἃ.

Vr. Ὁ A, Par. a2; ἀμοιβηϑίν J: ἀμοιβαδὶς Rk.
AHJQ (ἴποι) T Bar. Mor. Vr. b, fr. Mosc. :
510. Aaunouénew Harl. a (swpr. οἱ). || σφιν S.

haoin Pap. ιἰ.

|| GuoiBHOon (Ar.? see Ludwich) Harl. a,

507. δύο HPQR. 508. εἴποι
εἴπη() @ 509. δύο CHPR. ἢ
512. €€pren

A (supr. εἰ) (L supr.) PRTU Mor. Bar. Vr. b A: ἐέργει ©.

267), and polished stones are used for seats
in @ 6. Cf. E 499 for the application
of ἱερός to a place quasi-sacred by its
use. And in A 807 the place of
assembly and of justice is associated
with the altars of the gods. Agallis
(see on 483) took this to be a picture of
the Areiopagos itself.

505. The plur. cxfintpa seems to be
used loosely, to imply that they all had
the staff in turn. The herald’s staff is
handed to the speaker to give him
‘possession of the house,’ so that of
course only one can be in use at the

time; Ψ 567, A 234. (Cf. note on
γάμοι, 491.) ἠεροφώνων, acc. to
Doderlein from ἀείρω, lifting up the

woice, cf. pernop-os, ἠερέθεσθαι, ἀερσί-
modes, and ἐπάρας τὴν φωνήν, Dem. 323.
1; though the formation is at least
unusual. If derived from ἀήρ it would
mean ‘misty-voiced,’ from which no
good sense can be got. Schol. T’s
ἕωθεν συγκαλούντων (cf. A 497) is equally
unsatisfactory, even though it is true
that assemblies were generally called at
daybreak. Ahrens conj. ἱεροφώνων,
strong-voiced, which is found in Phot.
Lex, and Alkman fr. 26 (παρθενικαὶ
μελιγάρυες ἱερόφωνοι) and adopted by
Schulze Q. #. 211.

506. Hiccon, sprang up to speak. The
verb is used only of rapid rushes, such
as would hardly seem to accord with the
dignity of γέροντες. But it must be
remembered that the scene is more like
a political debate, with all its excitement,
than a judicial decision in our sense
(H. Sidgwick in C. R. viii. 8). τοῖσιν,

with the staves, comitative dat. as
φασγάνωι, ἔγχεϊ, ἵπποις ἀΐσσειν. Τὸ

would be simpler to refer ἤϊσσον with
Dod. to the litigants, ‘they rushed
before the judges’; but we must then
take δίκαζον as = δικάζοντο, pleaded,
λ 545 (a sense for which there is no
support in Homeric or later Greek ; the
act. always means to give judgment, see
also Ψ 579), or admit an abrupt change ;
‘before them rushed the litigants, and
they (the judges) gave judgment in turn.

507-08, App. I, §§ 28-30: 509 ff.,
§§ 16-19.

510. σφισιν, the besiegers. Otxa does
not of course say that one of the armies
takes one side, the other the other;
but it rather suggests that the poet takes
the division of the besiegers (for purely
pictorial reasons) into two groups as
implying, in connexion with the debate,
a division of opinion. Oiya . . βουλή
recurs in y 150, ef. T 382 δίχα θυμὸν
ἔχοντες, & 386 ete.

511. ἄνθιχα πάντα ddcaceai, to make
a division of the movable property of the
city, half being left to the citizens, half
taken as ransom by the besiegers. This
sense is clear from X 117-20, where
Hector thinks of proposing the same
terms to Achilles. (So Schol. A πρὸς τὸ
ἀρχαῖον ἔθος ὅτι οἱ πολιορκούμενοι ἐξίστα-
σαν τοὺς πολεμίους ἐπιμεριζόμενοι τὰ κτή-
ματα. The ἀρχαῖον ἔθος is, presumably
only a deduction from these two
passages. )

512. ἐέργει of most Mss. is evidently
due to the reflected influence of X 121,
which is itself interpolated from this

IAIAAOC C (χνπι)

307

5 / ΄
οἱ δ᾽ οὔ πω πείθοντο, λόχωι δ᾽ ὑπεθωρήσσοντο.
-“ ,ὔ .᾽ ” , , \ / ,
τεῖχος μέν ῥ᾽ ἄλοχοί τε φίλαι καὶ νήπια τέκνα
ῥύατ᾽ ἐφεσταότες, μετὰ δ᾽ ἀνέρες ods ἔχε γῆρας" 515

οἱ δ᾽ ἴσαν: ἦρχε δ᾽ ἄρα σφιν “Apns καὶ Παλλὰς

” / / \ “ a

ἄμφω χρυσείω, χρύσεια δὲ εἵματα ἕσθην,

καλὼ καὶ μεγάλω σὺν τεύχεσιν ὥς τε θεώ περ,
ἀμφὶς ἀριζήλω: λαοὶ δ᾽ ὑπ᾽ ὀλίζονες ἧσαν.

οἱ δ᾽ ὅτε δή ῥ᾽
ἐν ποταμῶι ὅθι

“ Ω , = fol Ξ

ἵκανον ὅθι σφίσιν εἶκε λοχῆσαι, 520
, lal

τ ἀρδμὸς ἔην πάντεσσι βοτοῖσιν,

» > > Ἰρ 5 ᾿ “-
ἔνθ᾽ ἄρα τοί γ᾽ ἵζοντ᾽ εἰχυμένοι αἴθοπι χαλκῶι.
- > αν ’ > / / \ “ a
τοῖσι δ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽ ἀπάνευθε δύω σκοποὶ εἴωατο λαῶν,
7, . , a > , \ eo “-
δέγμενοι ὁππότε μῆλα ἰδοίατο καὶ ἕλικας βοῦς.

“ \ / / / ᾽ .“ 5 Ὁ“ “
οἱ δὲ τάχα προγένοντο, δύω δ᾽ ἅμ᾽ ἕποντο νομῆες

525

513. Und ewprcconto Pap. « (Uno) Vr. d: Unoewprcconto H fir. Mosc.
ῥύετ᾽ J. || Gpectadtec T (p. corr. 1). || ἀνέρας 1).
520. εἶκε : εἶχε P: ἧκε ap. Eust. 522.
523. duo HPS Vr. A.

ἐςϑλὴν Lips. 518. θεός περ 1).
ἵΖον J. || ἵζονθ᾽ εἱλυμένοι C.

place—a curious example of the subtle
origins of corruption. ἢ

513. οἱ δέ, the besieged. οὔ no πεί-
@ONTO, i.e. were by no means thinking
of accepting terms. UneewprHcconTo,
were secretly arming for ambush. This
use of ὑπο- in composition does not
seem to recur in H.; and for λόχωι
we should have expected λόχονδ᾽. La
R. writes λόχωι δ᾽ ὑπὸ θωρήσσοντο, were
arming tor the fight wnrder (protected by)
an ambush. The objection to this evi-
dently is that they have not reached the
ambush at this stage (see 520).

515. Observe €pectadtec masc. κατὰ
σύνεσιν, though construed with fem. and
neuter; H. G. § 166. 2.

516. of δέ, the sortie-party on the
way to the ambush. For the mention
of Ares and Athene, the only distinc-
tively Hellenic touch in the shield, see
App. I, § 16. The sing. ἦρχε with two
subjects emphasizes the unity of com-
mand; cf. H 386 ἠνώγει IIpiauds τε
καὶ ἄλλοι Τρῶες ἀγαυοί, A 255 7 κεν
γηθήσαι ἸΠρίαμος ἸΤριάμοιό τε παῖδες, and
note on II 849.

519. Gugic, apart from their followers,
‘standing owt’ (Monro). Un’ 6Aizonec,
the people were of smaller size at their
feet; the vulg. ὑπολίζονες, ‘somewhat
smaller,’ would be poetically inadinis-
sible, and this force of ὑπο- incomposition
is not foundin H. That it isa reading

515.
517. ἥσθην DU: ἧςτο H:

525. duo PR.

of great antiquity here is proved, low-
ever, by the occurrence of ὑφήσσων in
the imitated Seut. Herc. 258.

520. εἶκε, it seemed likely, there was

opportunity, from Felxw, pres. of FéFo.xa.
Compare H 217, P 354, X 321, and the
Attic παρείκει, it is practicable. Rela-
tionship with Fetxew, yield, is improb-
able.
22. Yzont’, ifov Bentley (ξεξλυμένοι).
23. Two scouts have been thrown
out to warn the ambush of the expected
approach of the besiegers’ cattle to be
watered. toici, the ambushed warriors
from the city. λαῶν, from their own
hosts, or perhaps with ἁπάνευθε, ww
From the main body. (Van L. suggests
another explanation; the besieged citi-
zens lay an ambush, and send forward
herds of their own as a bait to lure the
besiegers. Then τοῖςι, προνόηςαν (526),
oi μέν (527) all refer to the besiegers.
This theory, however, breaks down when
we come to 530-32, which evidently do
not describe a sudden attack from a pre-
pared ambush—for whatever εἰράων may
mean, no chariots would be employed—
but a reinforcement from a distance. )

525. of δέ, the cattle; again a mase.
construed with a neut. and fem. (βοῦς in
plur., of a herd, is always fem. in H.),
In this case, however, the neuter would
be more regular (H. G. § 166.2). Bekker
reads ai.

308 IAIAAOC C (xvuit)

τερπομένω σύριγξι" δόλον δ᾽

e

by /
οὔ τι προνοησαν.

ὲ Ὶ ἰδό πέδραμον, ὦκα δ᾽ ἔπειτα
οἱ μὲν τὰ προϊδόντες ἐπέδραμον,

τάμνοντ᾽ ἀμφὶ βοῶν ἀγέλας καὶ πώεα καλὰ
πο ἢ Σ ae
ἀργεννῶν ὀΐων, κτεῖνον ὃ ἐπτὸ μηλοβοτῆρας. '
οἱ & ὡς οὗν ἐπύθοντο πολὺν κέλαδον παρὰ βουσὶν 530
εἰράων προπάροιθε καθήμενοι, αὐτίκ᾽ ἐφ᾽ ἵππων
βάντες ἀερσιπόδων μετεκίαθον, αἶψα δ᾽ ἵκοντο.
στησάμενοι δ᾽ ἐμάχοντο μάχην ποταμοῖο παρ᾽ ὄχθας,
βάλλον δ᾽ ἀλλήλους χαλκήρεσιν ἐγχείηισιν.
ἐν δ᾽ Ἔρις, ἐν δὲ Κυδοιμὸς opireov, ἐν δ᾽ ὀλοὴ Κὴρ 535

Vv \ ” / ” ”
ἄλλον ζωὸν ἔχουσα νεούτατον, ἄλλον ἄουτον,

526. τερπομένω Aph. Vr. A: τερπόμενοι ).

Et. Mag, 746. 43. || πῶῦ μέγ᾽ οἰῶν Zen. :
ἀργενάων Mor.
CH!PS fr. Mose. Ven. B.

530. napa: nepi PU

528. TGUNON O° J. || ἀγέλην
πώεα μήλων Ap. Lew. 150. 14. 529.
Bar. 531. ἱράων DG Lips.: Ἰράων

526. See K 13 for the only other
Homeric mention of cupirrec in this
sense. Aph. read τερπομένω, and there-
fore probably also νομῆε, which is restored
by Ahrens.

“527. οἱ μέν, the ambush; τά, sc.
μῆλα, or perhaps vaguely ‘the state of
things.’

528. TAUNONT Gugi, ἐμ! off, intercepted ;
as ἃ 402 βοῦς περιταμνόμενον ἠδ᾽ οἰῶν πώεα
καλά, Hymn. Mere. 74 πεντήκοντ᾽ ἀγέλης
ἀπετάμνετο βοῦς ἐριμύκους. Gigi implies
interception by an attack on both sides
(of the path to the watering-place ?) as
περί ἴηι Nimplies surrounding. For πώεα
καλά Zen. had πῶυ μέγ᾽ οἰῶν, and there-
fore clearly omitted 529. Fick follows
him in order to avoid the ‘IJonism’
ἀρτγεννῶν for -dwy.

530, οἱ δέ, the besieging armies, en-
gaged in debating the question of ]. 511.
The transition is very sudden, but seems
to be imperatively required.

531, εἰράων, a word occurring here
only, with the cognate e/péas (most edd.
elpats), in Hes. Theog. 804 elpéas ἀθανά-
των. It is said to be equivalent to
ἀγορά. Ht. Mag. has τὸ etpa, ὃ σημαίνει
τὴν ἐκκλησίαν καὶ τὴν μαντείαν, and An.
ὅτι εἴρας λέγει τὰς ἀγοράς, σχηματίζων
ἀπὸ τοῦ εἴρειν, 6 ἐστι λέγειν. But this
does not suit προπάροιθε, which demands
a more restricted sense, such as ‘speak-
ing-places,’ orators’ tribunes, which is
not a Homeric idea. Though the common
explanation is unsatisfactory, we have
no materials for improving upon it.
(Many mss. have tpdwy or ἱράων, forms

recognized by the old glossaries. Con-
nexion with εἴλη, ἴλη, crowd (see Curt.
it. no. 660), has been suggested, but is.
far from clear.)

533. μάχην is to be taken equally
With στηςάμενοι as object and éudyonTo:
as cognate accusative. For στήσασθαι
udxnv=to set battle in array, cf. φυλό-
mia στήσειν 314, θήσονται paxny Q
402, and στήσασθαι πολέμους in Herod.

535. These personified spirits of strife
cannot but recall the Valkyries of Teu-
tonic mythology. 535-88 occur almost
verbatim in Scut. Her. 156-59, and have
sometimes been considered as copied from
there. But they cannot be said to be
alien from Epic thought ; see A 440, A 3.
In what form the poet conceived the
personification we cannot guess, though
538 implies human shape. Probably
the Kyp at least was a winged demon
such as we see in the well-known Lykian
sarcophagus in the British Museum
carrying off a soul in her arms. For
the function of the K#pes—themselves
ghosts of the departed—in thus taking
souls to the Underworld see note on B:
302 and ξ 207 ἀλλ᾽ ἤτοι τὸν κῆρες ἔβαν
θανάτοιο φέρουσαι εἰς ᾿Αἴδαο δόμους. ὁμί-
λεον, joined in the fray, as 539. In
the same line in Hesiod the verb is.
ἐθύνεον.

536. ἄουτον here only; ἀνούτατος Δ
540, ἀνουτητί Χ 371, and νεούτατος here
and N 539 shew that the more correct
form would be ἄνουτον. The verbs οὐτ-

dw, -4fw never have initial F, which is.

regularly lost before ov-.

Y

IAIAAOC C (χνπι)

309

ἄλλον τεθνηῶτα κατὰ μόθον ἕλκε ποδοῖιν"

φΦ δ δ᾽ .5 > , ” Ἀ “ "Ἂς
εἷμα δ᾽ ἔχ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ὦμοισι δαφοινεὸν αἵματι φωτῶν.
᾿ ,, > .“ \ \ ’ \ ΄

@pirevy δ᾽ ὥς τε ζωοὶ βροτοὶ ἠδὲ μάχοντο,

᾽’ ’ -
νεκρούς T ἀλλήλων ἔρυον κατατεθνηῶτας. 540

> ? “7. Ν / / »
ἐν δ᾽ ἐτίθει νειὸν μαλακήν, πίειραν ἄρουραν,

> o / \ ᾽ > a > > fel
εὐρεῖαν τρίπολον: πολλοὶ δ᾽ ἀροτῆρες ἐν αὐτῆι

ζεύγεα δινεύοντες ἐλάστρεον ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα.

΄ > e / / e / / > /
οἱ δ᾽ ὁπότε στρέψαντες ἱκοίατο τέλσον ἀρούρης,

a a AS 5 > \ / / ” he
τοῖσι δ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽ ἐν χερσὶ δέπας μελιηδέος οἴνου 545

/ ies’ > ΄ \ \ / Fis 2 oa
δόσκεν «ΨΏΡρ €TL@MV* TOL δὲ στρέψασκον αν ογμους,

es - / ΄
ἱέμενοι νειοῖο βαθείης τέλσον ἱκέσθαι.

e \ , > ιν » ΄ NE 5...
ἡ δὲ μελαίνετ᾽ ὄπισθεν, ἀρηρομένηι δὲ" ἐώικει

/ lal \ fal
χρυσείη περ ἐοῦσα: τὸ δὴ περὶ θαῦμα τέτυκτο.

ἐν δ᾽. ἐτίθει τέμενος βασιλήϊον: ἔνθα δ᾽ ἔριθοι 550

537. TeenHi@ta Ar.: τεθνειῶτα ACGU Pap. ἐ κ.

Pont. All. 48. || nodotcin ὦ.
539, ὡμίλεον Harl. a, fr. Mose.

543. ἑλάτρεον S: ἐλάστρευον Lips. fr. Mose. :
546. Tol: of GJPRSTU Pap. ει, Harl. a, Vr. b d.
tpéwackon H Harl. a (-en), Pap. εἶ. || ὥγμους U.
549. Θαῦμα τέτυκτο Ar. (2: eadu’ ἐτέτυκτο JS* Pap. «

544. τρέψαντες Harl. a.

ἀντιγράφων Kust.

538. εἷλλα O°: εἶμά τ᾽ Mass.
540. Katateenei@tac A (supr. H) CGU Pap. «

JLG@ON : χϑονὸς Hleracl.
Sa@oinon JC).
ἐλάςτευον I: ἐλάεστεον Vr. d.

548. ἀρηρεμένηι A, τινὰ τῶν

550. βαειλήϊον AC!G Pap. ε, Ven. B, fr. Mose., Sch. T, yp. Sch. X: βαθυλήϊον

(βαθὺ λήϊον) 2, yp. A.

537. ἕλκε for ἕλκουσα, the usual Epic
lapse from the participial construction.

539. douideun, the soldiers. The con-
tracted form is late but cannot well be
removed.

541. For the scenes of country life
see App. I, § 20. The first, ploughing,
represents perhaps, as Ridgeway has sug-
gested (J. H. S. vi. 336), the ploughing
of the ‘common field.’ This was always
begun by all the members of the com-
munity on the same day (commemorated
in our ‘Plough Monday’); hence the
πολλοὶ ἀροτῆρες. The field is a fallow,
νειός, because no doubt primitive cultiva-
tion in Greece, as elsewhere, was on the
‘two-field’ system, half the land only
being tilled at a time, the other half
lying fallow in alternate years. τρίπολον
probably means that it was ploughed
thrice before being sown, the last plough-
ing probably taking place in early spring.
But our information is very scanty.
Hesiod Opp. 462-64 are very obscure
lines and out of place, but they clearly
speak of spring ploughing, ἦρι πολεῖν.
They say nothing of more than one
ploughing.

544. téAcon, headlands, the strip at
the end of the furrows where the plough
was turned ; see notes on K 351, N 707.
Cf. Hesych. τέλσας : στροφάς, τέλη, πέρατα.

545. The neglected F of οἴνου is rare;
H 467, I 224 are the only cases in J/iad
(twelve in Od.). Fick would cut out
544-46 altogether, as ‘curious, not to
say ridiculous’ lines. Bentley con}.
μέλανος οἴνοιο. Toi δέ may mean either
‘while others were turning,’ or, ‘and
then (after drinking) they turned.’

548. This undoubtedly indicates some
means of shading the bright colour of
the gold, whether by alloy or by some
sort of glaze. It is clear that the poet
was thinking of some actual work which
he had seen. GpHpouenni: thie variant
ἀρηρεμένηι, though it has the authority
of A and is as old as Ap. Rhod. (ἀρη-
ρεμένας i. 787, iv. 677), is a mere blunder,
as the stem dpo- could not lose its o.
Ap. Rhod. himself has ἀρήροτο, iii. 1343.

550. For βαειλήϊον most editors adopt
the vulg. βαθυλήϊον, in favour of which
is the imitated passage Scut. Here. 288
αὐτὰρ ἔην Badd λήϊον, and A 560 κείρει
τ᾽ εἰσελθὼν Badd λήϊον. Both readings

310 IAIAAOC C (xviir)

ἤμων ὀξείας δρεπάνας ἐν χερσὶν ἔχοντες.
δράγματα δ᾽ ἄλλα μετ᾽ ὄγμον ἐπήτριμα πῖπτον ἔραζε,
ἄχλα δ᾽ ἀμαλλοδετῆρες ἐν ἐλλεδανοῖσι δέοντο.

τρεῖς δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἀμαλλοδετῆρες ἐφέστασαν᾽ αὐτὰρ ὄπισθε
παῖδες δραγμεύοντες, ἐν ἀγκαλίδεσσι φέροντες,
βασιλεὺς δ᾽ ἐν τοῖσι σιωπῆι

σι
on
σι

ἀσπερχὲς πάρεχον. ; ONS i
σκῆπτρον ἔχων ἑστήκει ἐπ᾽ ὄγμου γηθόσυνος κῆρ.

κήρυκες δ᾽ ἀπάνευθεν ὑπὸ δρυὶ δαῖτα πένοντο,

βοῦν δ᾽ ἱερεύσαντες μέγαν ἄμφεπον: αἱ δὲ γυναῖκες
δεῖπνον ἐρίθοισιν λεύκ᾽ ἄλφιτα πολλὰ πάλυνον. 560

561. ἔν τισιν ἐγράφετο καρπὸν EheuciNiHc ϑημήτερος ἀγλαοθϑώρου Sch. T (on

a

483) Eust.

rap D.
HJPU Pap. «.
o om. Pap. lu.
H Pap. «. || πάλυναν 7).

9. “

552. ὥγμον U. || πίπτεν DHJ Pap. «

én EAA... (554) ἀκαλλοδετῆρες oi. HQU! (and D!?).
555. Oparmatevontec JS Mor.
| ὄγκον GQ): ὥγμους U.

553. eiAedanoici GPR. ||

554. 0 ἄρ᾽: δὲ GPR:
557. ἑστήκει Ar. Q: eictHKke 7) (ei-)
558. Taronto R (yp. πένοντο). 559.

560. πόλλ᾽ ἄλφιτα λεύκ᾽ ἐπάλυνον fr. Mosc. πόλλ᾽ ἐπάλυνον

are therefore equally possible and ap-
propriate. βασιλήϊον obtains fresh sig-
nificance if we suppose that the preceding
scene gives the ploughing of the common
field by the community, for we have
here the contrast, the reaping of the
royal demesne by hired labourers (ἔριθοι).
The royal lands, including those given
for great public services (Z 194, I 578),
are apparently the only form of private
property in land known to the J/iad,
and the only ones therefore which could
be cultivated in this way. So BacikeUc
in 556 is to be taken in its full sense,
not merely as=owner ; the cxAntpon is,
as usual, the badge of office, not a mere
walking-stick (Ridgeway l.c.; but his
statement that σκῆπτρον ‘is always a
symbol of office’ is incorrect ; see ν 437,
p 199, σ 103). ἔριθοι (also 560) do not
recur in H. except in the metaphorical
συνέριθος, ¢ 32. The word is generally
taken to mean hired labourers: in later
Greek, no doubt from its resemblance to
ἔριον, it is used of wool-workers. It will
be noticed that the Shield contains no
mention of slaves.

551. The added line mentioned by
Schol. T is due to Agallis, who quoted
or invented it in support of her view of
the bearing of the shield on old Attic
history (see on 483).

592. μετ᾽ Sruon, into the midst of
the furrow, between the ridges (H. G@.

>’
§ 195). énXtpiua, see note on 211,

The Opdruata (A 69) are the armfuls,
lit. graspings, taken by the left arm to
be eut with the sickle ; Oparuevontec=
picking wp these armfuls.

560. πάλυνον is explained by Hentze
(after Clemens) ‘were making porridge’
by sprinkling meal in water or other
liquid, as Hekamede thickens the κυκειών
in A 640. It is generally used of
sprinkling of meal on the roast flesh,
as & 77, 429; and it is by no means
clear that this is not the sense here.
The question depends on whether daita
is really to be taken as ‘banquet,’ and
therefore a meal too luxurious for the
ἔριθοι, in contrast to ϑεῖπνον. Were
such the case, it would of course follow
that the ox could only be meant for the
king—and, we must suppose, a circle of
retainers who are not mentioned. But
it is quite possible to hold that δαῖτα
means ‘a feast’ and expresses the abun-
dance of good cheer, while δεῖπνον indi-
cates the meal in relation to the day’s
work (see notes on Θ 53, A 86). There
is no contradiction in saying that a feast,
an unusually abundant meal, is being
prepared for the workmen’s Zunch. The
preparing the ox and the sprinkling of
the meat must be regarded as consecutive,
not coincident, scenes. This explanation
avoids the difficult pregnant use of παλύ-
νειν. O€IMNON, accus. in apposition, ‘as
a meal’; so w 215 δεῖπνον δ᾽ alfa συῶν
iepevoate ὅς τις ἄριστος.

—

(
.
ζ

IAIAAOC C (xvin) 311

ev δ᾽ ἐτίθει σταφυλῆισι μέγα βρίθουσαν ἀλωὴν
\ / , » oN / 2
καλὴν χρυσείην" μέλανες δ᾽ ἀνὰ βότρυες ἦσαν,
ἑστήκει δὲ κάμαξι διαμπερὲς ἀργυρέηισιν.
» \ \ / / ‘ » “Ὁ, »
ἀμφὶ δὲ κυανέην κάπετον, περὶ δ᾽ ἕρκος ἔλασσε
κασσιτέρου: μία δ᾽ οἴη ἀταρπιτὸς ἣεν ἐπ᾽ αὐτήν, 565

-“ -" ξ΄ ,ὔ
τῆι νίσσοντο φορῆες, ὅτε τρυγόωιεν ἀλωήν.
\ \ \ 4, > \ /
παρθενικαὶ δὲ καὶ ἠΐθεοι ἀταλὰ φρονέοντες
al ᾿ / / / /
πλεκτοῖς ἐν ταλάροισι φέρον μελιηδέα καρπόν.
-“ 3 - /
τοῖσιν © ἐν μέσσοισι πάϊς φόρμιγγι λιγείηι
/ ‘

ἱμερόεν κιθάριζε, λίνον δ᾽ ὑπὸ καλὸν ἄειδε 570

561. ἐν δ᾽ : Ene’ (i. | μεταβρίθουςαν H. | Beveoucan Pay). «.
563. eicthxer CJPRU Pap. «, fr. Mose. Vr. d:
ἘΠ]. a, sir:
énautA 1): én’ αὐτῆ(!) fr. Mosc. (‘adscripto @”) Par. f:
Niconto C Pap. ει, fr.

ἄρα Bar. Mor.
Gprupéoicin Zen. CS Bar.

566. NICCONTO
Neic(c)onTo ).
Par. a” e.
λίνον LU"),

(H supr.) Ὁ:

569. δ᾽ om. J.

Mose.

567. napeenixai τε U.
570. λίνον Ar. Q:

562. ἀνὰ:
εἱστήκει JH. ||
565. ἐς αὐτὴν Zen. Pap. xk:
én’ αὐτῶι Par. h.
Mose. : NHcconto G:
568. πλεκτοῖς €N: nmAexToicin Ar.
λίνος Zen.: ainon U (yp.

563. €cTHKel κάλιαξι, was set up with
poles (for the vines to climb upon) ; the
idea of uprightness conveyed by the
numerous poles is spoken of as a pro-
perty of the ἀλωή itself, conferred by
the poles. For aprupémicin Zen. had
ἀργυρέοισιν ; κάμαξ varies in gender in
later Greek.

564. KUGNEHN expresses the material,
as is clear from κασσιτέρου following,
though kyanos (see A 24) is not men-
tioned in 474-75.

565. αὐτήν, sc. ἀλωήν, opposing it to
the ditch and hedge. ‘‘és αὐτὴν ᾿ παρὰ
Znvodirur, καὶ ἔχει λόγον ἢ γραφή,
Did.

566. For the orthography of nicconto
see note on N 186.

567. Cf. NX 39 παρθενικαὶ ἀταλαί.
ἀταλὰ φρονέοντες, 17) childish glee ; trom
the vintage festival gravity was banished.
ἀταλός is a word which is regularly used
of children, cf. ἀταλάφρονα Z 400; the
der. is doubtful. The same idea is given
by ἀτάλλειν N 27.

570. For λίνον Zen. read Nivos, the
thread (i.e. the string of the lyre) sang
sweetly in unison with (ὑπό) his treble
voice. So also some translated the vul-
gate λίνον" ὁ δὲ ᾿Αρίσταρχος βούλεται μὴ
τὴν χορδὴν λέγεσθαι, ἀλλὰ γένος τι ὕμνου
τὸν λίνον, ὥσπερ εἰ ἔλεγε ‘‘ παιᾶνα dev”
ἤ τι τοιοῦτον, An. The last interpreta-
tion is now generally accepted, the boy

sang to (ὑπό) the harp the sweet Linos-song
with delicate voice. The Linos-song was
one of the ancient dirges which have been
traced to Semitic sources (the wailing
for Thammuz, etc.), and apparently were
originally laments for the departing
summer—so that they would be appro-
priate at the vintage-feast. The name
is probably from the refrain αἴλινον, so
familiar in the great chorus of the
Agamemnon, which was taken to mean
woe for Linos. Movers has ingeniously
suggested that it is the Phoenician ai
lenu, ‘woe to us.’ The loci eclassici on
Linos are Herod. ii. 79 (Λίνος, ὅσπερ ἔν
τε Φοινίκηι ἀοίδιμός ἐστι καὶ ἐν Κύπρωι καὶ
ἄλληι, ete.), and Hesiod, fr. 211 (from
Schol. T) Λίνον ὃν δὴ ὅσοι βροτοί
εἰσιν ἀοιδοὶ καὶ κιθαρισταὶ πάντες μὲν
θρηνεῦσιν ἐν εἰλαπίναις τε χοροῖς τε. Com-
pare also the fragment of a Linos-dirge
in Bergk P. 7.5 p. 1297 (corrected, from
Schol. B). Though this explanation
is the most satisfactory, the other is
not indefensible ; for the metaphor of
the string ‘singing’ may be paralleled
by ¢ 411 (of the bowstring) ἡ δ᾽ ὑπὸ
καλὸν dee, χελιδόνι εἰκέλη αὐδήν. The
use of a flax thread for the string of ἃ
lyre, improbable though it seems, is
accounted for thus by Schol. A; of
πρῶτοι τοῖς θεοῖς μετὰ ὠιδῆς ὑποκιθαρίζοντες
οὐκ ἐξ ἐντέρων κατεσκευάζοντο τὰς κιθάρας,
οὐχ ὅσιον οὐδὲ θεοῖς ἀρεστὸν εἶναι ὑπολαμ-

312

IAIAAOC C (xvii)

λεπταλέηι φωνῆι: Tol δὲ ῥήσσοντες ἁμαρτῆι
a »
μολπῆι τ᾽ ἰυγμῶι τε ποσὶ σκαίροντες ἕποντο.
> > > , , n 2 θ ΄ Ἂς
ἐν δ᾽ ἀγέλην ποίησε βοῶν ὀρθοκραιράων
€ a VA
ai δὲ βόες χρυσοῖο τετεύχατο κασσιτέρου TE,

al >] 5 Ν / > / / ὃ
μυκηθμῶι δ᾽ ἀπὸ κόπρου ἐπεσσεύοντο VOMOVOE

575

πὰρ ποταμὸν κελάδοντα, παρὰ podavoy δονακῆα.
χρύσειοι δὲ νομῆες ἅμ᾽ ἐστιχόωντο βόεσσι
τέσσαρες, ἐννέα δέ σφι κύνες πόδας ἀργοὶ ἕποντο.
σμερδαλέω δὲ λέοντε δύ᾽ ἐν πρώτηισι βόεσσι

ταῦρον ἐρύγμηλον ἐχέτην: ὁ δὲ μακρὰ μεμυκὼς

580

νομήν Oe Vr. A.

571. λεπτείηι Vr. A. || TON ϑὲ R (Toi Be R™). || δ᾽ Ap[H]ccontec Pap. «. ||
npriccontec Harl. a. || GuapTA(!) AD: ὁμαρτῆᾳι) ©.
576. Mapa: παραὶ CS Harl. a: περὶ GQ Par. h: διὰ Zen. ||

572. ποδὶ (). 575.

ῥοδανὸν : ῥαθαλὸν Zen. (οἱ δὲ ῥοανὸν, Sch. T, is apparently not a variant but

an etymology.
Dion. ap. Did.

Ar, and Aph. probably read padinén, see Ludwich). || ϑονακῆεν
578. nodackunec Pap. u. 579. cuapdahéw S: κυανέω ?

(Ms. κυάνεον) Zen. || δὲ : Te PR. || δύ᾽ EN: ϑύω PR: δ᾽ EN Q: ϑύο ἐν τῆι

ἑτέραι τῶν ᾿Αριστάρχου Did. || npotoict AD'S Bar. fr. Mosc. Vr. Ὁ.

Harl. a. || meuHKeoc () Pap. x.

580. ἔχετον

βάνοντες διὰ τὸ ἐκ νευρῶν πεποιῆσθαι ἀλλ᾽
ἐκ λίνου πεποιημένου. But it is likely
enough that this is a mere conjecture.
(The mase. λίνος has no authority except
in the old glossaries.) Heyne reads
λίνον δ᾽ ὕπο, ‘sang to the string.” But
Hymn. Merc. 501 clearly shews how the
line was taken in early times, 7 («i@apts)
δ᾽ ὑπένερθε σμερδαλέον κονάβησε" θεὸς δ᾽
ὑπὸ καλὸν ἄεισεν.

571. priccontec is to be connected
not with ῥήγνυμι but with a-pdoo-w, in
the sense of beating time (ἁμαρτῆι) ;
compare ἐπιρρήσσεσκον Q 454. And so
clearly Ap. Rhod. understood it, 1. 539
πέδον ῥήσσωσι πόδεσσιν. This, however,
makes a rather disagreeable tautology
with ποσὶ cxaipovres. It has been pro-
posed to translate breaking into song in
chorus. The phrase φωνὴν ῥηγνύναι is
common in later Greek, and it is quite
possible that the word may have been
occasionally used without an object in
the same way (Stephenson in C. &. 11].
72). Hymn. Ap. 516 ot δὲ ῥήσσοντες
ἕποντο Κρῆτες πρὸς Πυθὼ καὶ ἰηπαιήον᾽
ἄειδον may be taken either way. But
there are obvious phonetic objections
to connecting ῥησσ- with pny-. ΑΒ
usual Mss. vary between ἁμαρτῆι, ἁμαρτή
(see on E 656), ὁμαρτῆι, but on the
whole authority is in favour of du-.
The verb, however, is almost always

6uapréw — perhaps to avoid confusion
with the aor. of ἁμαρτάνειν.

572. iurudi, only herein H.; the verb
occurs in P 66, o 162 in both cases of
shouting to scare a wild animal. In
later Greek it seems to be confined to
cries of pain ; here we may take it either,
as ‘shouting’ in a neutral sense, or as
a participation in the Linos-dirge, prob-
ably of a purely conventional nature,
as the scene is on the whole evidently
joyous.

573. ὀρθοκραιράων, see note on 3.

575. κόπρου in a local sense, the byre,
see note on A 807. So also ἐς κύπρον
κ 411.

576. ῥοθανόν, so Mss. ; What Aph.
and Ar, read is uncertain, but may have
been padwiv. We must suppose that
ῥοδανόν, which does not recur in Greek,
is identical in sense with ῥαδινόν, and
means pliant, waving; so that the
question is not very important. One
ingenious scholiast reads παρὰ *‘ Ροδανόν---
ἔστι δὲ ποταμός (δονακῆα being taken as
adj. instead of subst.). Zen. derived
his padadov from κραδαλόν = εὐκράδαντον,
εὐκίνητον.

580. €pUruHAon comes from a subst.
ἐρυγμός, roaring (used by Aristotle and
Theophr. = vwcetatio) with suffix -ηλο-ς
like ἕκ-ηλος. But σιγηλός, ὑψηλός ete.
are oxytone. The word occurs here only.

IAIAAOC C (xvin) 313

ἕλκετο"
τὼ μὲν

\ \ A ‘ ’ ᾽ , /
τὸν δὲ κύνες μετεκίαθον ἠδ᾽ αἰζηοί.
> / Ν / /

ἀναρρήξαντε Boos μεγάλοιο βοείην

ἔγκατα καὶ μέλαν αἷμα λαφύσσετον, οἱ δὲ νομῆες

Δ 4
αὔτως ἐνδίεσαν ταχέας κύνας ὀτρύνοντες"

e ν᾿ Ψ ,ὔ Ν » -»" /
οἱ δ᾽ ἤτοι δακέειν μὲν ἀπετρωπῶντο λεόντων, 585

ἱστάμενοι δὲ μάλ᾽ ἐγγὺς ὑλάκτεον Ex τ᾽ ἀλέοντο.
ἐν δὲ νομὸν ποίησε περικλυτὸς ἀμφιγυήεις,

ἐν καλῆι βήσσηι, μέγαν οἰῶν ἀργεννάων,

σταθμούς τε κλισίας τε κατηρεφέας ἰδὲ σηκούς.

ἐν δὲ χορὸν ποίκιλλε περικλυτὸς ἀμφιγυήεις

581. εἵλκετο U and ap. Did.

585. of OH τοι HV (τι) Lips. fr. Mosc.

| TON O€: τοὺς δὲ Zen.
584. οὕτως Zen. || ἐν O° Yecan PR and Ptol. Ask. |

581. Zen.’s reading τούς for τόν is
perhaps preferable ; still better would be
τώ. The interposition of the sing.
ταῦρον. . ὁ δέ makes corruption easy.

583. For Aagucceron as an imperf.
see on Καὶ 364.

584. ἐνθίεςαν, tarred on the dogs,
from δίημι, which is elsewhere found only
inmid. δίεσθαι to chase (M 276, II 246,
etc.) or drive (Ὁ 681), and pass. to flee,
M 304, Ψ 475. Agar’s ἐννίεσαν (from
év-inut) is no doubt possible (cf. = 131)
but needless. The lengthening would
be excused by metrical necessity, cf.
ἐννεσίηισι (J. P. xxv. 48).

585. θακέειν μέν, ‘as for biting,’ they
avoided the lions. For this vague notion
of reference in the infin. see H. G.
$231. Thereis no trace here in the Mss.
of the probably original ἀπετροπάοντο
(see on O 666).

587-89. ‘Hi tres versus emblemati
aliunde illato perquam similes- sunt ;
sunt nimis nudi et ieiuni post superiores
tantopere ornatos,’ Heyne; a remark
with which it is hard not to sympathize.
The position of μέγαν is very unusual :
ὀΐων μέγαν, Heyne. ctTaeuoi seems to be
a general name like the modern ‘ sheep-
station,’ including both the κλιςίαι, huts
for the shepherds, and cHxof, folds for
the sheep. Note the unusual position
of i8€ (see on I’ 318).

590. .The description of the dance
stands apart from the rest of the Shield
notably in one respect—that while the
previous descriptions shew no local, and
hardly even a Hellenic, colouring, the

590

METAKIGOON | ar.
6tpunantec VU Pap. «, Mor.

dance is emphatically Cretan. Even
apart from the explicit words of 591-92,
the scholia tell us that the κυβιστητῆρε
(604) and the armed dance were peculiarly
Cretan institutions. It has been con-
fidently concluded that the whole episode
590-605 is an interpolation by a Cretan
poet. To me it seems that, though this
cannot be refuted, the evidence is quite
insufficient to enable us to assert it.
There is no doubt that Crete was to the
Greeks pre-eminently the home of the
dance, especially of the war-dance. For
this, in addition to Il 617, we may quote
the dances of the Korybantes, the state-
ment of the scholiast on Pindar ?. ii.
69 that the hyporcheme was of Cretan
origin, Soph. Ai. 700 Νύσια Κινώσι᾽ ὀρχή-
ματα and still more explicitly Lucian
περὶ dpx. 8. It is reasonable therefore
to suppose that a poet describing a
primitive dance would by preference lend
it Cretan characters. It must further
be remembered that Crete was to early
Greece far more characteristically national
and important than in historical times.
We are just learning (1901) to regard
Knosos as the very focus of early culture
in the ‘Mykenaean’ period; and the
prominence of Crete tends to lead us as
much to an early period as to any
thought of late interpolation. We must
indeed recognize that 591-92 are unique
in the Shield for their local and mytho-
logical allusion. If this is taken as a
ground for suspicion, as no doubt it may
reasonably be, it can apply to these two
lines only, not to what follows.

814 IAIAAOC C (xvut)

“- ” el 2 aan la) > /
τῶι ἴκελον οἷόν mot ἐνὶ Kywaae evpeine
» 4 5 ip
Δαίδαλος ἤσκησεν καλλιπλοκάμωι ᾿Αριάδνηι.
» \ «ἢ, 4
ἔνθα μὲν ἠΐθεοι καὶ παρθένοι ἀλφεσίβοιαι
fal » Ὁ Lal ,ὕ
ὠρχεῦντ᾽, ἀλλήλων ἐπὶ καρπῶι χεῖρας ἔχοντες.
a > ΄ \ \ ? , ” ς Ν lal
τῶν δ᾽ αἱ μὲν λεπτὰς ὀθόνας ἔχον, οἱ δὲ χιτῶνας 595
“ 5 ΠῚ / i , > /
εἴατ᾽ ἐυννήτους, Ka στίλβοντας ἐλαίωι"
, ΄ ΄ » . \ /
καί p αἱ μὲν καλὰς στεφάνας ἔχον, οἱ δὲ μαχαίρας
5 / ,
εἶχον χρυσείας ἐξ apyupewy Tehapovar.
΄ [ la
οἱ δ᾽ ὁτὲ μὲν θρέξασκον ἐπισταμένοισι πόδεσσι

591. KNooce(1) ACQ: KNecc(1) 2.
|| €xoucat Athen. iv. 181.

594. ὀρχεῦτ᾽ Q. || ἐπὶ : ἐνὶ H.
ἐν ἄλλωι καλάς A.
(2 see Ludwich).

.

597. στεφάνους 8.

596. εἴατ᾽ : εἶχον J Eust.

592. apidvAn ? Zen. (see below).
595. λεπτὰς :
597-98 a0. Ar.: om. Aph.

591. A few critics, ancient and modern,
have been scandalized that a god should
imitate a mortal’s work—though this is
evidently not involved in the words.
Some went so far as to put a full stop
at the end of 590, and read οἷον for οἷον,
‘the only thing ever made like it was
the dancing-floor of Daidalos.’ For the
nature of this dancing-floor or labyrinth
see App. I, §§ 21-22.

592. About the birth of the Daidalos-
legend we know nothing. It comes to
us almost entirely through Athenian
sources; even in ἃ 321-25 Ariadne is
found in connexion with Theseus ; but
we hear of her also at Delos and Naxos
in a way which seems to shew that she
was a local goddess in the islands, pre-
sumably a nature-goddess. In Cyprus
she was connected with Aphrodite. But
nothing of all this appears here. The
name ᾿Αριάθνη seems to be Cretan for
᾿Αριάγνη (ἀδνόν - ἁγνόν, ἹΚρῆτες Hesych. ).
She was also known there as ᾿Αριδήλα,
which Wilamowitz has ingeniously re-
stored in place of the ᾿Αριήδνηι attributed
to Zen. by Bekker’s conjectural emenda-
tion of the ἀριηδηι of A, ἁρπήδηι of T.

593. With this dance of youths and
maidens compare the interesting descrip-
tion of the dance called ὅρμος in Lucian
περὶ opx. S$ 12-13: ὁ δὲ ὅρμος ὄρχησίς
ἐστι κοινὴ ἐφήβων τε καὶ παρθένων, παρ᾽
ἕνα χορευόντων καὶ ὡς ἀληθῶς ὅρμωι ἐοικό-
των" καὶ ἡγεῖται μὲν ὁ ἔφηβος τὰ νεανικὰ
ὀρχούμενος καὶ ὅσοις ὕστερον ἐν πολέμωι
χρήσεται, ἢ παρθένος δὲ ἕπεται κοσμίως τὸ
θῆλυ χορεύειν διδάσκουσα, κτλ. ἀλφεεί-
βοιαι, ‘earning oxen’ as ἕδνα or bride-

price for their parents. adddvew is
always used in H. of a human chattel
‘realising’ a price; ® 79, o 453, v 383.
For the form ef. H. G. ὃ 124 ¢.

595. Both ὀθόναι and χιτῶνες seem
to be words of foreign origin ; the former
perhaps = Heb. @tan (Prov. vii. 16, transl.
‘fine linen’), the latter= Heb. k’thoneth.
kuttoneth, ‘tunic,’ though it is very
doubtful if either of these is really
Semitic. (See O. Schrader Handelsg. p.
192, Studniczka p. 15.) ὀθόνη recurs in
Τ' 141, 7 107, and rarely in later Greek.
30th words appear to have denoted dinen
garments.

596. It seems clear that oil was actually
used for giving clothes a gloss ; see 7 107
καιροσέων δ᾽ ὀθονέων ἀπολείβεται ὑγρὸν
ἔλαιον, and the commentators there. It
is said that a similar process is still used
in some parts of Germany (Studniczka
p. 49). ἧκα adapts στίλβοντες to the
idea of ‘gloss’ as opposed to literal
‘sparkling.’ ἐλαίωι has often been taken
to mean ‘shining as though with oil’
(so Ar, ὅτι ἐλλείπει τὸ ws), but such an
interpretation, even if possible, is not
necessary. ;

597-98. ἀθετοῦνται οἱ δύο, ὅτι οὐδέποτε
μάχαιραν εἶπε τὸ ξίφος. ἄλλως τε καὶ οὐ
πρέπον χορεύοντας μαχαίρας ἔχειν. οὗτοι
δὲ οὐδὲ παρὰ ᾿Αριστοφάνει ἦσαν, An.
Neither of these arguments carries weight.
When the poet says knives (daggers)
there is no reason why he should mean
swords ; and where dances are an acting
of war-scenes (see the quot. from Lucian
above) the carrying of arms is essential
to them.

eo

—_—

ae ee ee Se ee ee

IAIAAOC C (xviit)

can 4 , e Ὁ“ Ν Μ , /
ῥεῖα pur, ὡς OTE τις τροχὸν ἄρμενον ἐν παλάμηισιν

315

600

ἑζόμενος κεραμεὺς πειρήσεται, αἴ Ke θέηισιν"
ἄλλοτε δ᾽ αὖ θρέξασκον ἐπὶ στίχας ἀλλήλοισι.

πολλὸς δ᾽ ἱμερόεντα χορὸν περιίσταθ᾽ ὅμιλος
τερπόμενοι: δοιὼ δὲ κυβιστητῆρε κατ᾽ αὐτοὺς

fol , \ /
μολπῆς ἐξάρχοντες ἐδίνευον κατὰ μέσσους.

601. αἵ κε e€Anici(nN) PR ΠΡ. ε x, Vr. ἃ, Harl. ἃ (κ᾿ ἐθ.).

603. πολλὸν Cant.

604-05. Wolf, after Athenaios (see below), reads
τερπόμενοι: μετὰ DE cMPIN ἐμέλπετο ϑεῖος ἀοιδὸς 604

φορμίζων, δοιὼ δὲ KUBICTHTHPE κατ᾽ αὐτοὺς
λιολπῆς ἐξάρχοντος ἐδίνευον κατὰ μέςςους.

|| τερπόμενος Mor. Athen. 1.0.
Ἀριστοφάνειος ap. Athen. l.c.

KuBictHpec TI.
606. ἐξάρχοντε H.

605

606

Kae’ αὑτοὺς Diodloros ὁ

600. Remains of early Greek pottery
shew that the potter’s wheel was known
in prae-Mykenaean times, and was a
very ancient invention to the oldest
Epic poets. The attribution of it to
Anacharsis is the baseless figment of a
later age, as Strabo himself clearly saw,
vil. p. 303. ἄρμενον ἐν παλάμηιςι “Ὁ
together, as ε 294,

601. πειρήςεται with direct ace. is
unique, though the cognate ace. is some-
times found, e.g. 6 119 and compare @ 23
ἀέθλους, τοὺς Φαίηκες ἐπειρήσαντ᾽ ᾿Οδυσῆος.
See also note on M 47 στίχας ἀνδρῶν
πειρητίζων. The appropriateness of the
comparison to lines of dancers wheeling
round along the concentric circles of the
labyrinth is very striking. It appears
that from time to time the dancers leave
the maze and dance in long lines opposite
one another (ἐπὶ στίχας, used elsewhere
only of soldiers).

604-05. τερπόμενοι, construction ad
sensum, H. G. § 169. After τερπόμενοι
edd. since Wolf have all inserted a line
from 6 17 μετὰ δέ σφιν ἐμέλπετο θεῖος
ἀοιδὸς | φορμίζων, and have therefore been
obliged to change €=apyontec to ἐξάρχον-
τος. This is done on the authority of
Athenaios (v. 181 ὁ), ὁ δ᾽ ’Apicrapxos .
τοῦ ἹΚρητικοῦ χοροῦ τὸν ὠιδὸν ἐξεῖλεν,
ἐπιτεμὼν τὰ ποιήματα τὸν τρόπον τοῦτον,
“ πολλὸς. . τερπόμενος... μέσσους ᾿ (as
text), ὥστ᾽ ἀνίατον γίνεσθαι παντάπασι τὸ
“ἐἐξάρχοντες,᾽᾽ μηκέτι δυναμένης τῆς ἐπὶ
τὸν ὠιδὸν ἀναφορᾶς σώζεσθαι. Ludwich
has shewn that this evidence is absolutely
worthless. It is on a par with the
statement of Alexander of Kotyaia (T
77) that Ar. ‘interpolated’ a line which
we happen to know was read by Aph.

The one argument which might seem to
justify Athenaios—that Ar. denied to
μέλπεσθαι and μολπή the sense of music
(see on N 637)—he has himself excluded
by the further assertion that Ar. not
only expunged the line here, but inter-
polated it in 6. All this is in glaring
contradiction not only to all that we
know of Ar.’s method, but to the abun-
dant evidence of the slight effect which
his atheteses had upon the text. It is
of course quite possible that the line
may have been found in some of the
old erratic copies which we have learnt
to know through the earliest papyri, and
which were evidently dear to archaeo-
logists such as Athenaios and Plutarch
(who makes a precisely similar statement
on I 458 ff.) ; as these were doubtless
banished through the influence of the
Alexandrian school, in a sense Ar. may
be said to have ‘removed’ the line ; but
there is no ground for supposing that it
ever stood in a recognized text. Did.
knows nothing of it, nor does Lucian
περὶ 6px. 13; τοὺς ὀρχηστὰς τοὺς δύο, ods
ἐκεῖ ὁ ποιητὴς κυβιστητῆρας καλεῖ, ἡγου-
μένους τοῦ χοροῦ shews he read ἐξάρχοντες.
Further, the participle ἐξάρχοντος in the
gen. absol. without a noun agreeing with
it is very doubtful in H.; A 458 is the
only other case, and there Zen. read οὗ
for oi. The text as it stands is quite
intelligibie; the KuBictHTApe are two
‘leaders,’ perhaps professional posturers
and tumblers, who go through a dramatic
performance to which the youths and
maidens dance a sort of accompaniment.
Compare Bent’s description of modern
Greek dances (Zhe Cyclades p. 246)‘. .
the syrtos, a wavy line of five or six

316 IAIAAOC C (xvut)

’ an / ’ aA
ἐν δ᾽ ἐτίθει ποταμοῖο μέγα σθένος ᾿Ωκεανοῖο
/ “
ἄντυγα πὰρ πυμάτην σάκεος πύκα ποιητοῖο.
fal /
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ δὴ τεῦξε σάκος μέγα τε στιβαρον τε,
Ν >’ na
TevE ἄρα οἱ θώρηκα φαεινότερον πυρὸς αὐγῆς, 610
a Mf .ς / 7 / >: lal
τεῦξε δέ οἱ κόρυθα βριαρήν, κροτάφοις ἀραρυῖαν,
/ / -
καλὴν δαιδαλέην, ἐπὶ δὲ χρύσεον λόφον ἧκε,
aA , fe rn rn /
τεῦξε δέ οἱ κνημῖδας ἑανοῦ κασσιτέροιο.
» \ 5 \ / > .“ / \ > /
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ πάνθ᾽ ὅπλα κάμε κλυτὸς ἀμφιγυήεις,
fal n “ἢ
μητρὸς ᾿Αχιλλῆος θῆκε προπάροιθεν ἀείρας. 615
ς pees) ἃ 5 A
ἡ δ᾽ ipnE ws ἄλτο κατ᾽ Οὐλύμπου νιφόεντος
/
τεύχεα μαρμαίροντα παρ᾽ ᾿Ηφαίστοιο φέρουσα.

607. δὲ, τίθει J.

κυνέην (. || βριαρὴν om. PR: βαρὺν Lips.
|| ouAunou Pap. ε:
617. τεύχεα καλὰ φέρουςα nap Heaictoio ἄνακτος HJ

YpH= Pap. ¢ (supr. 9).
NH@oenToc ἢ) Pap. εἰ.

610. θώρακα P. || αὐγῆς : αὐτῆς H.

611. κόρυθα:
614. enei OH Pap. ι. 616. &
οὐλύμποιο ‘I. || NelpoeNtoc (or

(ἄφαιςτοι) T Pap. ει, fr. Mose. Vr. Ὁ A, Par. ἢ, yp. A Harl. a.

women, hand in hand, and led by a
pocket-handkerchief by one man, whose
acrobatic executions were wonderful to
behold. Then there was the rapid dance
performed by rows of men with their
arms round each others’ shoulders, four
steps backwards, four forwards, with
pointed toe, first slowly, with the pace
increased till I was almost dazzled by its
rapidity.’ These dances may be seen
every Easter Tuesday at Megara, and
seem to be among the most ancient
survivals in modern Greece.—The read-
ing of H, ἐξάρχοντε, is likely to be right.

608. GNTura πὰρ πυμάτην, running
along the extreme edge. Okeanos sur-
rounds the pictured as he surrounds the
real world.

610 must be a later addition, if Reichel

is right (App. B, iii. 2); the summary
way in which so important a piece of
the panoply is dismissed certainly gives
ground for suspicion. We must then
read τεῦξ᾽ ἄρα for τεῦξε O€ in 611.

613. Kaccitépoio, see note on A 24,
The difficulty involved in the use of so
soft a metal as tin, and emphasized by
the adj. €ano0 pliant, has been removed
by Reichel’s remark (see App. B, ii. 1)
that the κνημῖδες are really gaiters de-
signed to save the shin from injury
against the edge of the shield, not
from missiles.

614. For the use, very rare in H., of
onka=arms see note on Θ 55. It has
been observed that, to our notions at
least, it seems strange of Thetis to
depart without a word of thanks.

T
INTRODUCTION

In this book we still find ourselves, but for the last time, among some of
the difficulties which have attended our analysis of the three which precede
it. There are, however, two parts of it about which we need feel but little
hesitation—the beginning and the end. The first thirty-nine lines clearly
belong to and wind up the Making of the Arms; the division of books
would have been better placed here than at the end of Σ The end of the
book, probably from 356 τοὶ δ᾽ ἀπάνευθε νεῶν, breathes the true spirit of
the Mijvis, and there is no reason to doubt that from the first it introduced
Achilles’ career of vengeance. It is in all ways worthy of its place. No
doubts need be raised except as to the episode of the speaking horse, to
which we will recur.

It is in the intermediate portion that doubts arise. Was there a
Reconciliation in the original story? And if so, is it, or any of it, preserved
here? That it is not preserved untouched we can say with confidence ; the
allusions to the gifts in I must at least be as late as that book. The lament
of Briseis and the allusions to Neoptolemos are condemned by internal
evidence.

It is indeed possible, while leaving these out, to make a selection of short
passages which will give a reconciliation-scene such as may have stood in the
primitive story. But such a scheme is so artificial and uncertain that it is
not worth the pains. The speeches of Achilles and Agamemnon (54-153),
though they shew signs of expansion, are not in themselves unworthy of
such a place ; and the scene of the oath is at least equal, if not superior in
execution, to that in I’. But it is quite conceivable that the whole idea of
the Reconciliation is an afterthought. It is at least more needed after the
introduction of the Embassy than it was before; and it is not only con-
sistent with the character of Achilles, but materially adds to the movement
of the story, if we suppose that on hearing of the death of Patroklos he set
out to avenge it without more ado.

And of much that precedes and follows this kernel of the Reconciliation,
it is impossible to speak with admiration. The author of this part seems to
have dwelt with especial delight on the prosaic details of his scenes,
particularly where they have to do with eating and drinking—a characteristic
of this book at least as marked as is the love of dress in K. This note is
struck at once in 44 ; the point which, as we are carefully told, distinguishes

317

318 IAIAAOC T (xix)

this assembly from all others is that the ταμίαι, σίτοιο δοτῆρες were present.
The debate, with a certain dramatic propriety, soon adapts itself to this
novel element in the audience, and the greater part of it, 154-337, is
devoted exclusively to the question whether the army shall or shall not eat
before fighting. When Achilles returns to his hut, his first outburst of
passionate grief is devoted to the thought that his dear friend is no longer
there to serve the usual sumptuous repast (315 ff.) ; the question of his
appetite disturbs Olympos, and Zeus and Athene in person are bestirred
to make sure that he does not starve while his friends have gone to dinner,
This at least can only belong to the decadence of the “ great manner.”

There are moreover, scattered through the book, several episodes which
shew signs of later addition to the main work. One of these is the curious
and interesting story of the birth of Herakles in 95-136, which cannot be
said to add to the symmetry of the speech of Agamemnon, and shews internal
evidence of having been adapted from a Herakleia where the tale was told in
the person of the poet, not of an actor in the story. Another, the lament of
Briseis, though the idea has a pathos of its own, is largely made up of Epic
tags ; and linguistic offences, which are freely scattered through the book,
are here heaped up in reckless profusion. It is not impossible that the
allusions to the Embassy in 140-41, 175-77, and 192-95, which are
somewhat loosely inserted, may be due to a recension after the addition of I
to the corpus of the Ziad. The lines which speak of Neoptolemos are self-
condemned by the awkwardness of their introduction (326), as well as by
the prominence given to a personage who, though he played a leading part
in the later Cycle, is completely unknown to the older Epos.

It remains to consider the closing episode of the book, that of the
speaking horse (404-24), This is so unlike anything else in Homer that
it has naturally been doubted. Yet there is nothing but this uniqueness
against it. The speaking animal becomes familiar from Hesiod onwards
(Opp. 203 ff), and we have no right to say that such a world-wide element of
popular fancy belongs exclusively to any particular period. It is character-
istic of Greek reserve that the treatment of it here should be so free from
exaggeration, and that it should not have been repeated or imitated, easily
though it lends itself to the art of the inferior poet. The prophecy coming
at this moment has a particularly solemn effect. It would seem that two
lines (407, 418) have been added with the idea of softening the miracle. As
a matter of fact they have rather the opposite result; the wonder is less
startling if taken as a simple matter of course in a steed of divine origin than
if special machinery has to be introduced in order to explain it.

IAIAAOC T

Μήνιδος ἀπόρρηεις.

» \ \ , eee) 0 ra εἰ ἃ
Ηὼς μὲν κροκόπεπλος ἀπ Ὠκεανοῖο ῥοάων
ὥρνυθ᾽, iv ἀθανάτοισι φόως φέροι ἠδὲ βροτοῖσιν"
ἡ δ᾽ ἐς νῆας ἵκανε θεοῦ πάρα δῶρα φέρουσα.
εὗρε δὲ Πατρόκλωι περικείμενον ὃν φίλον υἱὸν
2 / if δ᾽ > >, 5 \ ΄ lal
κλαίοντα ALyEwWs* πολέες app αὑτὸν ἑταῖροι 5
pvpovd. ἡ δ᾽ ἐν τοῖσι παρίστατο δῖα θεάων,
» ’ ” ¢ a / y I ὙΔ 9, » 2 ᾿ς κι
ἔν T ἄρα οἱ φῦ χειρί, ἔπος T ἔφατ ἔκ T ὀνομαζε-
““πέκνον ἐμόν, τοῦτον μὲν ἐάσομεν ἀχνύμενοί περ
rot rf r /
κεῖσθαι, ἐπεὶ δὴ πρῶτα θεῶν ἰότητι δαμάσθη:
τύνη δ᾽ Ἡφαίστοιο πάρα κλυτὰ τεύχεα δέξο 10
A 7 2 a?) ” , > A » / ”
καλὰ μάλ᾽, of οὔ πώ τις ἀνὴρ ὠμοισι φοόρησεν.
“Ὁ BA / θ \ \ , > ἔθ
ὡς ἄρα φωνήσασα θεὰ κατὰ τεύχε ἔθηκε
a 3 /
πρόσθεν ᾿Αχιλλῆος: τὰ δ᾽ ἀνέβραχε δαίδαλα πάντα.
΄ o / ”
Μυρμιδόνας δ᾽ ἄρα πάντας ἕλε τρόμος, οὐδέ τις ἔτλη

1. Gn: ἐπὶ Harl. a. 2. Spnue’ ὦ. || φέρει DGIP (2): φέρη(ι) 1, Harl. a,
Lips. 9. ϑεῶν ἰότητι : yp. θεοῦ ὑπὸ χειρί T. 12. κατὰ : καλὰ Bar. Mor.:
κλυτὰ Harl. a! (altered to κλειτὰ : yp. κατα). 13. ἀναβέβραχε U: anedpaue
PR. || dafdadka: φαίϑιμα Bar. Mor. 14. ἕλεν φόβος Zen.

1. Cf. © 1, @ 695; 2=A 2. The

Achilles’ mouth, = 112. τοῦτον, as

bringing of the arms to Achilles was a
favourite subject of Greek art, from the
chest of Kypselos onwards, especially in
the later stages. The Nereids are always
associated with it, and it became a
favourite excuse for representing a
number of female figures in graceful
movement.

4, περικείμενον, cf. ἀμφὶ χυμένη with
dat. 284, @ 527. Heyne con]. χύμενον
περὶ ὅν, on account of the F, Bentley
Πατροκλῆϊ φίλον περικείμενον υἱόν, Brandr.
ἀγλαόν for ὃν φίλον.

8. Compare the

similar words in

distinct from τόνδε, ‘implies some degree
of impatience’ (Monro).

9. πρῶτα, once for all; let us take
this as a starting-point, and not go be-
hind it. Cf. A 235.

10. δέξο, compare λέξο (I 617, with
note) and see H. G. § 40, where it is
regarded as an old form of the sigmatic
aor. before the -a- had found its way
into all persons from the 150 sing. and
3rd plur., and had thus become a the-
matic vowel; so that λέξο. δέξο repre-
sent not λέχ-σο, déx-co but λεχ-σ-σο,
δεχ-σ-σο.

19

390 IAIAAOC T (χιχ)

ἄντην εἰσιδέειν, ἀλλ᾽ ἔτρεσαν. αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς 15

ὡς εἶδ᾽, ὥς μιν paddov ἔδυ χόλος, ἐν δέ οἱ ὄσσε

δεινὸν ὑπὸ βχεφάρων ὡς εἰ σέλας ἐξεφάανθεν"

τέρπετο δ᾽ ἐν χείρεσσιν ἔχων θεοῦ ἀγλαὰ δῶρα.

αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ φρεσὶν ape"

αὐτίκα μητέρα ἣν ἔπεα
“ μῆτερ ἐμή, τὰ μὲν ὅπλα θεὸς πόρεν οἷ᾽ ἐπιεικὲς

ἔργ᾽ ἔμεν ἀθανάτων, μηδὲ βροτὸν ἄνδρα τελέσσαι"

νῦν δ᾽ ἤτοι μὲν ἐγὼ θωρήξομαι" ἀλλὰ μάλ: αἰνῶς

δείδω μή μοι τόφρα I Μενοιτίου ἄλκιμον υἱὸν

μυῖαι καδδῦσαι κατὰ χαλκοτύπους ὠτειλὰς

εὐλὰς ἐγγείνωνται, ἀεικίσσωσι δὲ νεκρόν---

ἐκ δ᾽ αἰὼν πέφαται---κατὰ δὲ χρόα πάντα σαπήηι."
τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα θεὰ Θέτις ἀργυρόπεζα"

«πέκνον, μή τοι ταῦτω μετὰ φρεσὶ σῆισι μελόντων.

τῶι μὲν ἐγὼ πειρήσω ἀλαλκέμεν ἄγρια φῦλα,

μυίας, at ee τε φῶτας ἀρηϊφάτους κατέδουσιν"

We το γὰρ κεῖταί γε τελεσφόρον εἰς ἐνιαυτόν,

τετάρπετο δαίδαλα λεύσσων,
20

πτερόεντα προσηύδα :

25

30

16. eid’: een τ 17. βλεφάροις (A supr.) Bar. Harl. a: βλεφάρον G. ||
ἐξεφάανθεν Ar. &: ézepadnen ἄλλοι (Did.) DH (supr. €) JS Ven. B, fr. Mosc.,
Harl. a (supr. en) b, Par.c deg: ésepaanee CQU. 18. EN χείρεςειν ἔχων :

yp. ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ὁρῶν T. 19. ficin ἑἐτάρπετο GL! Par. ὁ gj: ἧιςι τ᾽ ἑτέρπετο
Cant.: ἧςιν τετράπετο Par. 6. 24. ἄλκιμιον : τινὲς ἀγλαὸν 7. 26.
ἐγγίνωνται Zen. P: ἐγγίγνωνται L (6 corr.): ἐγγίνονται Lips.: ἐγγείνονται QR.

27. canHHI Ar. Ὡ : ςαπείη(ι) CGHJLU. 29. ΤΟΙ : μοι C fr. Mose. 30.
πειρήςομαι G. || ἀλαλκέμεν Aph. DT Bar. Par.c g: ἀλαλκεῖν 0. 31. κατ-
έϑονται (). 32. ἮΝ : εἴ Harl. a. || κῆταί A.

10. coc! - ὥς he Υ 424, see on ἃ In strict grammar the acc. is governed

512, Ξ 294. ἐν, therewith (or perhaps by Kadddcai, but logically the word is
literally ‘in him’; ef. the phrase πόδες _ entirely subordinate.

καὶ χεῖρες ὕπερθεν for the localisation of 27. The life is slain out of him: for
parts of the body). this use of αἰών see E 685, ε 160, ψυχή

17. Cf. the similar phrase in 865. L.
Lange regards σέλας in both cases as
‘accus. of the inner object,’ ‘shone as
it were with ὦ flame.’ For ἐξεφάανθεν
there is a variant ἐξεφαάνθη, which is

equally possible, as all three numbers of

the verb are joined with dace.

21. οἷα, the subject of ἔμεν, must be
supplied as object to τελέσσαι.

2: 2. GNOpa, Naber’s ἀνδρί istempting ;
ef. Σ 362 μέλλει βροτὸς ἀνδρὶ τελέσσαι.

24, ἄλκιμον υἱόν is virtually governed
by ἀεικίσσωσι, the principal ‘verb in
the speaker’s thoughts when he begins ;
though the constr. is slightly disturbed
by the interposition of εὐλὰς ἐγγείνωνται.

τε καὶ αἰών IL 453, αἰῶνος orepet Aisch.
P. V. 862, etc. Hymn. Merce. 42 αἰῶν᾽
ἐξετόρησεν ὀρεσκώιοιο χελώνης IS a More
doubtful instance. The word αἰών had
another meaning in Hippokrates, ‘ spinal
cord’ ; and some of the scholia actually
explain here ‘ his spinal cord is visible’ ! !
πέφαται is of course=7é-dv-rac from
gev- to slay. After this parenthetical
explanation the constr. reverts to the
subj. καταςαπήηι, sc. ὁ νεκρός, χρόα
being acc. of the part affected.

32. tin should probably make room
for the poorly attested ef: but in a
late book the question is doubtful.
κεῖται, a subj. form recurring in (X 163 ?,)

2.

IAIAAOC T (χιχ) 321

a2 A ’ ” \ » » \ > /
αἰεὶ τῶι γ᾽ ἔσται χρὼς ἔμπεδος ἢ Kai ἀρείων.

» Ἁ / > = > \ / id > /
ἀλλὰ σύ γ᾽ εἰς ἀγορὴν καλέσας ἥρωας Ἀχαιούς,

A > r
μῆνιν ἀποειπὼν Ayapéuvove ποιμένι λαῶν 35

> /

αἶψα μάλ᾽ ἐς πόλεμον θωρήσσεο, δύσεο δ᾽ ἀλκήν.

ὡς ἄρα φωνήσασα μένος πολυθαρσὲς ἐνῆκε,

/ 6) \
Πατρόκλωι δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ἀμβροσίην καὶ νέκταρ ἐρυθρὸν
στάξε κατὰ ῥινῶν, ἵνα οἱ χρὼς ἔμπεδος εἴη.
ς “-“ al rf \
αὐτὰρ ὁ βῆ παρὰ θῖνα θαλάσσης δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεὺς 40
5 τ ?
σμερδαλέα ἰάχων, ὦρσεν δ᾽ ἥρωας Ἀχαιούς.
’ f lal lal

καί ῥ᾽ οἵ περ TO πάρος γε νεῶν ἐν ἀγῶνι μένεσκον,

» fel AS fal
οἵ τε κυβερνῆται καὶ ἔχον οἰήϊα νηῶν

\ / \ ,ὔ a
καὶ ταμίαι Tapa νηυσὶν ἔσαν, σίτοιο δοτῆρες,

\ \ e / > > > \ "» A 4. | \
καὶ μὴν OL ΤΟΤΕ Y ELS ἀγορὴν LOaV, OVVEK Ἀχιλλεὺς 45
5 / \ ἣΝ / > / ’ 5 a
ἐξεφάνη, δηρὸν δὲ μάχης ἐπέπαυτ᾽ ἀλεγεινῆς.

\ ,
τὼ δὲ δύω σκάζοντε βάτην “Apeos θερώποντε,

33. τῶι τ᾿ GHPRSU Harl. a, fr. Mose.: τῶι 3° OQ. 34. εὖ rs rap D.
ἐς J. || Gropan Vr. A. 36. εἰς D. 39. After this add A μὲν Gp’ dc Epzac’
ἀπέβη eétic ἀργυρόπεζα HU*™ Harl. a, fr. Mose. (and Sch. T, see Ludwich).

40. mapa: περὶ (. || eaAdccHc: ἐν ἄλλωι ποθάρκης A. 41. cuapdahéa S. |
ἥρωας : ἐρίηρας Aph. Rhianos. 42. ῥ᾽ : θ᾽ H. || μένεςκον : γένοντο C:

Nécckon U. 43. Kai: καὶ of GPRS. 45. ἐςσ T. 47. ϑύο P. |) ἄρεως ΑΠΗΤ.

554, B102, (e395) 3, 7147. Theregular 42. νεῶν ἐν ἀγῶνι, cf. note on Ὁ
form from indic. κεῦται would be xel-e-rar, 428.

which seems to have passed through 43. of τε κυβερνῆται, sc. ἔσαν, the
κέεται into κέεται (the -c- becoming semi- _ subst. verb being omitted as so often in

yocalic and falling out, as often). This a relative clause. oiHia, steering-oars,
form can be generally restored (see on 2 only here in J/., see M. ἃ R. Od. p.
554). The contracted κεῖται naturally 544. Ifit were not for the predominant
arises from the influence of the indic., interest in questions of feeding shewn
while κῆται is a further corruption due throughout the book, one would suppose
to the general tendency to assimilate 43-44 to bea later gloss. As it is, the
the vowel of the non-thematic subj. to author seems to have thought it right that
that of the thematic. See H. G. ὃ 81. the all-important commissariat depart-
τελεςφόρον, bringing completion of the ment should not lack its bard. He there-
eycle of the seasons and growth of the fore explains that the non-combatants are
crops—elsewhere a purely Odyssean word. employed as helmsmen when at sea and

38. ἐρυθρόν perhaps as supplying the 85 superintendents of supply on shore.
place of blood. Heyne has suggested They are usually too much engaged in

that there is a reminiscence of the prac- official duties, it seems, to waste time in
tice of making mummiesin Egypt; with attending assemblies.

κατὰ ῥινῶν cf. Herod. ii. 86 διὰ τῶν 46=2 248 ; cf. 2 125.

μυξωτήρων ἐξάγουσι τὸν ἐγκέφαλον... 47. It was only the day before that

τὰ δὲ ἐγχέοντες φάρμακα. Eust. takesit these two had been wounded, Only
to be from ῥινός, through the hides—a Diomedes’ limp can be accounted for by
scholiastic masterpiece. a wound in the foot, see A 377, 437.

39. The line here added by a few Mss. Next day both of them take part in the
may possibly have survived from atime funeral games in Ψ. But the rapid
when the rhapsody of the ὁπλοποιίαΑ healing of wounds is a privilege of the
ended here, instead of at the end of =. heroic age.

VOL. II ¥

399

aa

IAIAAOC T (x1x)

Τυδεΐδης τε μενεπτόλεμος καὶ δῖος ᾿Οδυσσεύς,

ἔγχει ἐρειδομένω" ἔτι γὰρ ἔχον ἕλκεα λυγρά'

Kad δὲ μετὰ πρώτηι ἀγορῆι ἵζοντο κιόντες. 50
αὐτὰρ ὁ δεύτατος idee ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων,

ἕλκος ἔχων: καὶ γὰρ τὸν ἐνὶ κρατερῆι ὑσμίνην

οὗτα Κόων ᾿Αντηνορίδης χαλκήρεϊ δουρί.

αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ δὴ πάντες ἀολλίσθησαν ᾿Αχαιοί,

τοῖσι δ᾽ ἀνιστάμενος μετέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς" δῦ
“᾽Ατρεΐδη, ἢ ἄρ τι τόδ᾽ ἀμφοτέροισιν ἄρειον

ἔπλετο, σοὶ καὶ ἐμοί, ὅτε νῶϊ περ ἀχνυμένω κῆρ
θυμοβόρωι ἔριδι μενεήναμεν εἵνεκα κούρης ;

τὴν ὄφελ᾽ ἐν νήεσσι κατακτάμεν "Άρτεμις LOL,

ἤματι τῶι ὅτ᾽ ἐγὼν ἑλόμην Λυρνησσὸν ὀλέσσας" 60
τῷ K οὐ τόσσοι ᾽Αχαιοὶ ὀδὰξ ἕλον ἄσπετον οὖδας
δυσμενέων ὑπὸ χερσίν, ἐμεῦ ἀπομηνίσαντος.

Exrope μὲν καὶ Τρωσὶ τὸ κέρδιον: αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχαιοὺς

δηρὸν ἐμῆς καὶ σῆς ἔριδος μνήσεσθαι ὀΐω.

ἀλλὰ τὰ μὲν προτετύχθαι ἐάσομεν ἀχνύμενοί περ, 65
θυμὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσι φίλον δαμάσαντες ἀνάγκηι"

νῦν δ᾽ ἤτοι μὲν ἐγὼ παύω χόλον, οὐδέ τί με χρὴ

/ 3 , ἴω
ἀσκελέως αἰεὶ μενεαινέμεν: ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε θᾶσσον

49. ἕλκεα : ἄλγεα DL (yp. ἕλκεα) Q Bar. Mor.
ἀγορὴν (). || κιόντε 1, Vr. b A. 51. δεύτερος P. 53. κόων : KUNON
Pherekydes (ap. Sch. T). 54. ἀχαιῶν H. 56. τόδ᾽ : τό τ᾽ Bar. Mor. ||
ἄρειον : ἄμεινον Mass.: ὄνειαρ Chia. 58. ϑυμοβόρου ἔριδος Harl. a supr.
62. ἐμοῦ (). || Gno wHNicantoc Nikias: €nmwHNicantoc Chamaileo: ὑποιηνί-
cantoc ἢ. 67. ἤτοι : HOH Ap. Lex. 168. 20. || παύω μὲν ἐγὼ CQ. || παύεω J.
68. ἀεκαλέως JPR.

50. Kaddéue TON πρώτην

50. For Yzonto we ought perhaps to
read the aor. ἕζοντο (N 285, note).

51, ϑεύτατος also a 286, w 342. It
appears to be a superlative to δεύτερος
from the strong form of root du-, two
(G. Meyer Gr. p. 497); the sense will
then be derived from the secondary sense
of δεύτερος, later (e.g. K 368, X 207), on
the analogy of ὕστατος by ὕστερος. Brug-
mann connects both with dev-oua, fall
behind, in the sense follow, ef. sec-wndus ;
but the root of that verb is Aaa)
deus (see on Σ 100). In Gr. il. p. 656
he admits the possibility of connexion
with δύω.

53. For the wounding of Agamemnon
see A 248,

56. ἡ ἄρ τι is interrogative as in N
446, v 166 (and so ἢ pa τι A 93, etc.),

giving an ironical colour to the question :

‘was this (se. what we did) after all the
better course?’ Others take it affirma-
tively, ‘this (sc. reconciliation) was the
better course for us to have taken,’ but
this is much weaker and does not suit
the use of the particles. ὅτε may be
either temporal, or 6 τεξεὅτι : in the
latter case the rel. explains τόθε.

60. For Lyrnessos as the home of
Briseis vide B 690.

62. GnouHNicantoc, see on B 772.
Nikias wrote ἄπο μην., ‘apart from me
in my anger,’ but the aor. does not suit
this. The text, because I had given way
to wrath, is quite satisfactory.

65-66 == 112-13, where see note.

68, ackeAéwc only here ; but ἀσκελὲς
αἰεί a 68 (in both cases of wrath), μηκέτι

IAIAAOC T (χιχ)

323

v / / / / > ͵
ὄτρυνον πόλεμόνδε κάρη κομόωντας Ἀχαιούς,

Μ ’ v \ , / > / > ΄ r=
ὄφρ᾽ ἔτι καὶ ρώων πειρήσομαι ἀντίον ἐλθών, 70

,
αἴ κ᾽ ἐθέλωσ᾽

> \ \ > /
e€7rl 7 aad LaveLY*

,
ἀλλά tw’ οἴω

ἀσπασίως αὐτῶν γόνυ κάμψειν, ὅς KE φύγηισι

δηΐου
ὡς ἔφαθ᾽,
μῆνιν

ἐκ πολέμοιο ὑπ᾽ ἔγχεος ἡμετέροιο.
οἱ δ᾽ ἐχάρησαν ἐυκνήμιδες
ἀπειπόντος μεγαθύμου Τ]ηλείΐωνος.

᾿Αχαιοὶ

-
on

“-“ \ \ ͵7 ” > lal ’ /
τοῖσι δὲ καὶ μετέευιπεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων

> / b] A 50) > / > /
αὐτόθεν ἐξ ἕδρης, οὐδ᾽ ἐν μέσσοισιν ἀναστάς"

70. ἀντίον Ar. ACDQT Mor.
72. αὐτὸν DS. || αἴ xe JPR Harl. Ὁ,

73. δηΐου : φεύγων A (yp. δηΐου) (Ὁ.
16. τοῖςι ὃ᾽ ἀνιστάλιενος μετέφη κρείων ἀγαμέμνων Zen. Mass.

Zen. || μῆνιν ἀναστενάχων καὶ ὑφ᾽ ἕλκεος ἄλγεα πάςχων
| αέςςοισι παραςτάς S.

HU Par. eh.
Chia. 77 om.
Mass. Chia. || ewtdeen Par. e ἢ.

Harl.
Par. c d g and ap. Eust.:

ἐλθεῖν ὃ.
ὅς re King’s.
ἀποειπόντος

a, fr. Mose.: ἀντίος ὦ,

75. ἀπειπόντος Ar. 2:

. . πολὺν χρόνον ἀσκελὲς οὕτω κλαῖε ὃ 543,
Here the sense must be wnrelentingly or
the like. But in κ 463 doxedées καὶ
ἄθυμοι it must = worn out or discowraged.
The two are usually combined by refer-
ence to σκέλλω, dried up=(a) rigid like
dried wood (cf. σκληρύ5), (6) withered.
The ἀ- is explained as ‘intensive’; it
may perhaps be sem of ἅμα ete., in the
sense withered up (shrunk together) ; see
on ἄβρομοι, Ν 41.

70. ἔτι, once more, asin old days. The
sense of Kai is however not very obvious ;
ἔτι καί together regularly mean as wel/,
moreover, etc., a sense which does not
suit this place. To attack the foe is
Achilles’ only object, not an addition to
anything else. ἰαύειν, I 325.

72-73=H 118-19. τινα, many ὦ one,
see = 466.

75. The omission of the F of an(oF )e1-
πόντος is strange after the emphatic
trace of it in 35. Heyne therefore conj.
ἀποειπόντος ἀγαυοῦ Il. Bentley preferred
to reject the line, which is quite super-
fluous. Cf., however, a 91 μνηστήρεσσιν
ἀπειπέμεν, and παρείπηι A 555.

76-77. Znvddoros τοῦτον μὲν (77) οὐκ
ἔγραφε, τὸν δὲ mpd αὐτοῦ μόνον οὕτως
“τοῖσι δ᾽ ἀνιστάμενος μετέφη κρείων ᾿Αγα-
μέμνων᾽᾽ An, οὕτως (as text) καὶ παρὰ
᾿Αριστοφάνει, ἐν δὲ τῆι Μασσαλιωτικῆι καὶ
Χίαι ““τοῖσι δ᾽ ἀνιστάμενος μετέφη κρείων
᾿Αγαμέμνων, μῆνιν ἀναστενάχων καὶ ὑφ᾽
ἕλκεος ἄλγεα πάσχων ᾿᾿ Did. The question
is complicated by the interpretation of
79-80, which has been the subject of
a lively and voluminous controversy
(especially between Boeckh and G. Her-

mann), owing most of its importance
to the light ‘that the use of ὑββάλλειν
might throw on the sense of ἐξ ὑποβολῆς
in a well-known passage of Diog. Laertios
(see Prolegomena, vol. i. p. xvii.). We
must first distinguish two main lines of
interpretation. (1) 77 is omitted, 79-80
mean ‘it is well to listen to the speaker,
and it is not fair to interrupt him ; for
that (sc. to be interrupted) is a difficulty
even fora skilled orator.’ This is free
from difficulty, ἐσταότος being as we say
‘him who is on his legs.’ Such an ex-
planation is not possible when we have
the preceding line to say that Ag. was
mot on his legs. (2) 77 is retained ;
Agamemnon is unable to stand up, and
will not speak through the mouth of a
third party deputed to repeat his words
to the assembly; he means therefore
‘though one ought to speak standing,
yet | “will do my best to speak sitting
down rather than put words in another’s
mouth: for that is hard to the most
skilled.’ This second explanation is so
obscure, farfetched, and indeed perverse,
that it is hard to believe, though the
scholia assert, that it was supported
by Ar. ; except the existence of 1. 77
there is nothing in its favour. Even so
there still remains the obvious difficulty
that Agam.’s wound was in the arm,
and thus could be no reason why he
should not stand up, Yet that this is
the idea is shewn by the emphasis laid
on the wound in 52-53. With regard
to ὑββάλλειν it is clear that it simply
means ‘to throw in’ a word, and thus
may equally well be ‘to interrupt’

994 IAIAAOC T (xix)

2 2 ,
«ὦ φίλοι ἥρωες Δαναοί, θεράποντες “Apnos,

c / \ \ 3 / Oe ”

ἑσταότος μὲν καλὸν αὐρουε HEU: οὐδὲ EOLKEV

ὑββάλλειν" χαλεπὸν γὰρ ἐπισταμένωι περ ἐόντι. 80
ἀνδρῶν δ᾽ ἐν πολλῶι ὁμάδωι πῶς κέν τις ἀκούσαι

ἢ εἴποι ;

βλάβεται δὲ Auyus TEP ἐὼν ἀγορητής.

Πηλεΐδης μὲν ἐγὼν ἐνδείξομαι' αὐτὰρ οἱ ἄλλοι

σύνθεσθ᾽ ᾿Αργεῖοι, μῦθόν τ᾽ εὖ γνῶτε ἕκαστος.

fal \ la) /
πολλάκι δή μοι τοῦτον ᾿Αχαιοὶ μῦθον ἔευπον, 85

/ / ,ὔ Seen ’ ’ ” / >
καὶ TE με VELKELETKOV* ἔγὼ δ᾽ οὐκ αἴτιὸς εἰμι,

an rn /
ἀλλὰ Leds καὶ μοῖρα καὶ ἠεροφοῖτις ἐρινύς,

19. éctadtec J:
ἁκούειν Ar. AU Bar. Par. ὁ g.
περ ἐόντα ῷ. 81. Ο᾽ om. P.
86. NeIxefoucin Aph. Chia.

ἑσταότως (R supr.), τινές Sch. T. || wen: rap Ap. Lew. 156. 23. ||
80. EMICTaUENCOL περ ἐόντι Ar.:

83. ἐγὼ AQ.
87. ἧι ἐροφοῖτις and elaponétic ap. Herod. (Sch. T),

ἐπιστάχλιενόν
85. κκῦθον ἀχαιοὶ τοῦτον H.

or ‘to prompt, dictate’

often in Attic, see Lex.).
best suits ὑποβλήδην A 292. (But this
adverb was taken otherwise by Ap.
Rhod. i. 699, iii. 400, where there is no
question of interrupting , and the only
possible sense is ‘replying.’) The diffi-

culty with (1 ) is how to account for the
existence of 77.. Alexander of Kotyaia
(in Schol. A) asserted that it had been
interpolated by Ar. in order to support
his view of the passage. This statement
is demonstrably false, as we know from
Did. that Aph. had the line (compare
note on Σ 604). It is clearly of respect-
able antiquity and older than Zen., and
apparently arises from an early and
mistaken attempt to explain 79-80. As
a last resource it is just possible to
retain 77 consistently with explanation
(1), by taking ἐν wuéccoiciIN as paren-
thetic, and joining αὐτόθεν ἐξ ἕδρης
with Gnactac, standing up where he was
sitting, and not in the midst. We must
then suppose, though with no warrant
elsewhere, that it was usual for the
speakers to leave their seats and come
forward to some sort of rostrwin in the
midst. Agamemnon, we may imagine,
was too nervous to do this—see Lendrum
in C. R. iv. 47.

80. The vulg. ἐπιστάμενόν περ ἐόντα
can be explained by taking χαλεπὸν γάρ
as a parenthesis, ‘nor is it right that a
man should interrupt (for that is hard
upon the speaker), even though he be
wise”; or better by the attraction of
the ace. cum infin. constr., due to the

(so ὑποβάλλειν
The former

jective.

neighbouring ὑββάλλειν, as in IL 620,
where see note. Either alternative is
very harsh. Note the rare combination
of the two participles; ἐπιστάμενος is
treated as though it were a mere ad-
Agamemnon is mortified and
hampered by the loud applause called
forth by Achilles’ speech; it both
humiliates him and renders it hard for
him to make himself heard.

82. βλάβεται, also 166 and ν 34. one
of the rare instances of a short stem
with a instead of a strong form in the
thematic present, H. G. § 30. λιγύς,
loud-voiced.

83. éndeizouai, 7 will open my mind ;
cf. ἐνδείκνυσθαι τὴν γνώμην Herod. viii.
141.

84. cUNeecee, mark my words, A 76.

85. τοῦτον, that of thine, refers to
Achilles’ opening words. The disjointed
character of all the exordium of Agamem-
non’s speech seems designedly to portray
the embarrassment of his position, and
indeed vividly expresses the peevish ner-
vousness of a man who feels that he is
in the wrong and is under the disadvan-
tage of following a speaker who by his
frank admissions has won the sympathy
of the audience. He makes various
attempts to start, but does not fairly see
his way till 1. 86.

87. Hepogoitic, see 1571. The variant
elapom@ris was explained blood-drinking,
elap being=blood in the Salaminian
dialect (in Cyprus): ἐροφοῖτις, παρὰ τὴν
ἔραν, ἡ ἐν τῆι γῆι φοιτῶσα. Erinys is
said to bring ἄτη also in ο 233.

IAIAAOC T (χιχ)

“ ,ὔ ᾽ ’ ‘el ‘ ” v wv

of τέ μοι εἰν ἀγορῆι φρεσὶν ἔμβαλον ἄγριον ἄτην,
", lal pe Ὰ fal / FX ᾽ /

ἤματι τῶι OT Αχιλλῆος γέρας αὑτὸς ἀπηύρων.

ἀλλὰ τί κεν ῥέξαιμι ;

A \ , r
θεὸς διὰ πάντα τελευτᾶι" 90

/ \ , v «A / If
πρέσβα Διὸς θυγάτηρ “At, ἣ πάντας ἀᾶται,
> / a , ᾽ ΄ \ , > \ > ?» wo
οὐλομένη: THe μέν θ᾽ ἁπαλοὶ πόδες" οὐ γὰρ ἐπ οὔδει
t ᾽ ὙΦ.) “ ’ > a ΄ ,
πίλναται, ἀλλ apa ἢ Ye κατ ἀνδρῶν κράατα βαίνει
΄ » , \ a 3 ,
βλάπτουσ᾽ ἀνθρώπους: κατὰ δ᾽ οὖν ἕτερόν γε πέδησε.

\ \ , , myn? v , ” +
καὶ yap δή νύ ποτε Ziv acato, Tov περ aptoTov 95

88. ein: én U.

ἄτην : ἄρην J,

90. yp. Kar’ ἔνια θεοὺς διὰ πάντα

τελευτᾶι, ἐν δέ τισι θεοὺς διὰ πάντα τέτυκται Did. || eedcdia Hellanikos p.

Schol. T: eedc ὃ᾽ ἴα Lesbokles ἐδία.

(J supr.) PQRS Harl. a (yp. τῆι) King’s Par. ὁ e g j, Plato Symp. 195d. |

Plato ibid. 94 a0. Ar.

92. TAI Aph. Ar. Q: τῆς ἄλλοι (Did.
οὔϑεος

96. ZAN’ ἔν τισι τῶν εἰκαιοτέρων (Did.), Ὡ : Ζεὺς Ar.

88. ἄτην cannot here be resolved into
ἀξάτην, as is usually possible. See notes
on A 412, I 100. ‘The variant ἀρήν,
curse, if a conj., is ingenious but not
convincing.

89. αὐτός, ‘on my own authority,’ as
A 356.

90. διὰ. . τελευτᾶι, ‘brings to their
issue,’ διατελεῖ. Θεός, divine power, is not
to be taken as identical with "Ary. There
is an old variant θεούς with which
τελευτᾶι must be taken as intrans., or
τέτυκται read (so Did.). A stranger read-
ing is that of Hellanikos, θεόσδια = θεόσ-
dora! θεὸς δ᾽ ia, one goddess (Ate), is
a more ingenious arrangement of the
letters.

91. The similarity of this personifica-
tion of Ate to the allegory of the Λιταί
in I 502-12 is very striking; and it
seems necessary to class them together
among the very latest parts of the

oems. In this connexion it is interest-
ing to note that Plato (Symp. 195 Ὁ)
quotes 92-93 as Ὅμηρος in a tone which
clearly shews that in his day there was
no consciousness of any difference of
authorship. In Hes. Theog. 230 Eris
among other offspring brings forth Δυσ-
νομίην "Ατην τε, συνήθεας ἀλλήλοισιν. Cf.
also Solon fr. 13. 75 ἄτη δ᾽ ἐξ αὐτῶν ἀνα-
φαίνεται, ἣν ὁπόταν Ζεὺς πέμψηι τισομένην,
ἄλλοτε ἄλλος ἔχει. ἀᾶται (also 129), the
only form of the verb which cannot be
referred to a(F)dfw: see note on Θ 237,
It is also the only form of the mid.
used transitively, except probably dcato
in 95. Perhaps therefore we ought to
read ἄασσεν with Brandreth.

92. οὐλομένη, @ curse upon her!
See A 2. The idea of the ἁπαλοὶ nddec
is worked out in a fragment of Rhianos ;

ἡ δ᾽ "Arn, ἁπαλοῖσι μετατρωχῶσα πόδεσσιν
ἄκρηις ἐν κεφαλῆισιν, ἀνώϊστος καὶ ἄφαντος
. . Ζηνὶ θεῶν κρείοντι Δίκηι 7 ἐπὶ ἦρα
φέρουσα. ‘Walking over the heads of
men’ expresses the mysterious and
silent infliction from above. See also
Plato Symp. 195 p. ‘

93. The hiatus ἄρα | ἢ re is dlicitus
in this place. Bentley conj. ἀλλὰ γάρ,
and other remedies have been proposed.
It is more reasonable to regard the
‘license’ as a false archaism dating
from the time when the feeling for the
primitive rhythm had died out. Cf. .
notes on 194, 288.

94 ἀθετεῖται ws περισσὸς Kal κακοσύν -
θετος. . οὐχ ὑγιῶς δὲ οὐδὲ τὸ ἕτερον
τέτακται᾽ ἔδει γὰρ ἄλλον An. It is
doubtful whether these objections are
valid in a passage shewing so many
linguistic peculiarities, and some explicit
mention of the bane wrought by Ate
seems required. ἕτερον may be ex-
plained ‘either party’ to a quarrel, cf.
E 258. For BAdntouca see I 507.

95-136. This long episode, which the
last few lines (from 88 or 90) are de-
signed to introduce, has all the appear-
ance of having been worked into the
story from an independent Herakleia.
It is needless to point out how unsuitable
such a digression is at this point ;
though indeed many speakers with a
bad case take refuge in telling stories. —
It will be seen that the doings and even
the very words of the gods are narrated
by an actor in the story ; elsewhere they
aretold only by the poet himself, who
knows them of course by direct inspira-
tion. This no doubt was the case in the
original Herakleia.

95. Both the Ζῆν᾽ of our mss. and

326 IAIAAOC T (xrx)

μη

an 5 >} 5) BA \ \
ἀνδρῶν ἠδὲ θεῶν pac ἔμμεναι" ἀλλ᾽ ἄρα καὶ τὸν
r Fe > /
“Ἥρη θῆλυς ἐοῦσα δολοφροσύνηις ὠπάτησεν,
» al ¢ » / « /
ἤματι τῶι ὅτ᾽ ἔμελλε βίην ᾿Ηρακληείην
5» / 7 5 if SEN Θηβ
Αλκμήνη τέξεσθαι ἐυστεφάνωι evi Onpye.
/ / lal Σ
ἤτοι ὅ γ᾽ εὐχόμενος μετέφη πάντεσσι θεοῖσι 100
AN la) / /
“κέκλυτέ μευ, πάντές τε Geol πᾶσαί τε θέαιναι,
/ \ / > 7
ὄφρ᾽ εἴπω τά με θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ἀνώγει.
/ / > /
σήμερον ἄνδρα φόωσδε μογοστοκος εἰλείθυια
/ > /
ἐκφανεῖ, ὃς πάντεσσι περικτιόνεσσιν ἀνάξει,
“- > rn n “ θ᾽ “ 5) > an > 799 105
TOV ἀνδρῶν γενεῆς, Ob αἵματος ἐξ ἐμεῦ εἰσί.
/ / “
τὸν δὲ δολοφρονέουσα προσηύδα πότνια Ἥρη"
5 7, / ΟῚ /
“ψευστήσεις, οὐδ᾽ αὖτε τέλος μύθωι ἐπιθήσεις.
re > ΄, δ oa
εἰ δ᾽ ἄγε νῦν μοι ὄμοσσον, ᾿Ολύμπιε, καρτερὸν ὅρκον,
> / b) /
ἣ μὲν τὸν πάντεσσι περικτιόνεσσιν ἀνάξειν,
a 5 a Ἂς \ Ν
ὅς κεν ἐπ᾿ ἤματι τῶιδε πέση. μετὰ ποσσὶ γυναικὸς 110
- > an Δ a ? “ , 2 LO. ”
τῶν ἀνδρῶν οἱ σῆς ἐξ αἵματος εἰσι γενέθλης.

fr. Mosc. (κελεύοι A™),

ἐν ἄλλωι αἱ A. || NON: OH Vr. d.

96. pac’: φαμὲν Chia. || ἀλλά Nu Aph.
SoAoppocuNHN Cant. 100. 6 τ΄: ὅδ᾽ R.

105. of e: of δ᾽ 6:
Did. 107. weuctHceic Ar.: others ψεύστης εἴς. || μύθου D.

97. SohkoppocUNH(1) Ὁ Vr. b A:
102. cTHeecci κελεύει GJST Vr. b A,
of Aph. || ἐμεῦ : ἐμοῦ ἔνιοι
108. εἰ:

“Ζεύς of Ar. are defensible. The trans.
use of the mid. is supported by the two
cases of ἀᾶται in the context, without
which we should be bound to read either
dace (Brandreth) or Ζεύς. Did. thinks the
latter ποιητικώτερον, but the epithet may
with at least equal justice be applied to
the acc., as more directly expressing the
subjection of Zeus to this external power.

96. For φασι of a thing universally
admitted see 416, B 783, Q 615, ¢ 42.
The variant φαμεν is more natural to our
ideas, but hardly so idiomatic.

97. θῆλυς ἐοῦςα, though a mere
female. θῆλυς, fem. as K 216, ete.

99. ἐυστέφανος, only here of a city in
H. ; in β 120 it is used of Μυκήνη as a
heroine, not a town. But it is applied
to Thebes in Hes. Theog. 978, Scut. 80,
and to ἀγυιαί, Pind. P. 11. 58. It means
‘well crowned with walls’; cf. κρήδεμνα
TI 100, ete.

101-2=0 5-6: 103, see on A 270.
Note the F of Feirw neglected (αὐδῶ
Bentley, ἔσπω van L., ws for ὄφρ᾽ Heyne).

104. The contracted ἐκφανεῖ is a late
form (though we can read ἐκῴφανέει, ds
πᾶσι, Menrad, p. 144, or ἐκφανέει πάντεσσι
περικτιόνεσσιν ἀνάσσειν, Agar).

105. The accumulation of genitives is
rather harsh, one of the race of those men
who are of me by blood; but the only
serious difficulty is the constr. of aYuatoc,
which seems to be combined with ἐμεῦ
by a mixture of two constructions, οἵ
αἵματος ἐμοῦ εἰσίν, the gen. as in T 241
ταύτης Tor γενεῆς TE Kal αἵματος εὔχομαι
εἶναι, 6 611 αἵματός εἰς ἀγαθοῖο : and οἵ
ἐξ ἐμεῦ εἰσίν, as Φ 189 ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ Αἰακὸς ἐκ
Διὸς ἢεν. Alkmene was granddaughter
through Elektryon, and Sthenelos was
son, of Perseus son of Zeus. ‘hus
Herakles and Eurystheus were both of
the dineage of Zeus, while Herakles was
his own son as well.

107. weuctHceic, thou shalt prove a
liar; so Mss. with Ar, Others appear to
have read ψεύστης εἴς, which is adopted
by Brandreth, Nauck (ψεύστης ἐσσ᾽), and
others. atte, hereafter, when the time
comes, as A 340, E 232 etc. τέλος,
authority. This is perhaps the primary
sense of the word, cf. note on K 56.

110. én’ ἥματι, cf. K 48. πέςηι μετὰ
nocci γυναικός, a naive expression =e
born.

111. It has been supposed that Hera’s
guile lies in substituting cc γενέθλης

¥

IAIAAOC T (xix)

é ᾽ » ,
ὡς ἔφατο' Ζεὺς δ᾽ οὔ τι δολοφροσύνην ἐνόησεν,

, 4 ,
ἀλλ᾽ ὄμοσεν μέγαν ὅρκον, ἔπειτα δὲ πολλὸν ἀάσθη.
Ἥρη δ᾽ ἀΐξασα λίπεν ῥίον Οὐλύμποιο,

καρπαλίμως δ᾽ ἵκετ᾽ "Ἄργος ᾿Αχαιικόν, ἔνθ᾽ ἄρα ἤιδη

ἰφθίμην ἄλοχον Σθενέλου Ἱ]ερσηϊάδαο.

ἡ δ᾽ ἐκύει φίλον υἱόν, ὁ δ᾽ ἕβδομος ἑστήκει pels:
» > »Μ \ / \ > / 4"

ἐκ δ᾽ ἄγαγε πρὸ φόωσδε καὶ ἠλιτόμηνον ἐόντα,
᾿Αλκμήνης δ᾽ ἀπέπαυσε τόκον, σχέθε δ᾽ εἰλειθυίας.

αὐτὴ δ᾽ ἀγγελέουσα Δία Κρονίωνα προσηύδα"

oe lal / > / » / > \ /
Zed πάτερ ἀργικέραυνε, ἔπος τί τοι ἐν φρεσὶ θήσω.
/ a 7
ἤδη ἀνὴρ γέγον᾽ ἐσθλὸς, ὃς ᾿Αργείοισιν ἀνάξει,
\ 4 “ “.
Evpvcbedts Σ θενέλοιο πάϊς Τ]ερσηϊάδαο,

112. ϑολοφροούνης J.

HP (οἴ, IL 188). 119. ἐπέπαυςε J.

115. ἀχαϊκὸν GPQRS. |
ἑστήκει APQT Vr. Ὁ, fr. Mose.: eicthxer ©.
191. ζεῦσ' a.

327
115
120
ἔνϑ᾽ : én ὃ᾽ J, Ἐς

“κείς : ure Chia.
Tol: co H.

118. πρὸ om.
ἐν : ἐνὶ DP.

for σεῦ, answering to the ἐμεῦ of 105.
The oath is thus made to include all
Zeus’ descendants as well as his imme-
diate offspring. But γενεῆς (105) seems
to shew that Zeus meant his words to be
taken in the wider sense; ἐξ ἐμεῦ εἰσίν
does not necessarily imply actual father-
hood. It is simpler and sufficient to
suppose that the ἄτη lies in Zeus’ rash-
ness in swearing an unconditional oath,
limited to a single day, forgetting that
Hera’s functions gave her some control
in these matters. The rhythm seems to
shew that we must construe ἔξεισιν αἵμα-
Tos ons γενέθλης, are sprung of the blood
of thy stock. Cf., however, v 130 Φαίηκες,
τοί πέρ Te ἐμῆς ἔξεισι γενέθλης, which is
in favour of taking αἵματος by itself, as
in 105. In the same way we have ἔξειμι
in Z 100, 2 377, 387, 397, note.

118. ἔπειτα, therein rather than
thereafter ; the use is analogous to that
of ἐπί to express concomitant circum-
stances. So we have the common use in
apodosis, in such a case, e.g. K 243.

114. λίπεν ῥίον Οὐλύμποιο: ἔδει δὲ
Nar’ οὐρανὸν ἀστερόεντα Sch. A (Ar. 3).
This apparently means that Agamemnon
knows too much for a mortal of the ways
of the gods—a difficulty inherent in the
whole passage. See on 95-136.

115. Ἄργος ᾿Αχαιικόν, the Argolic
plain in Peloponnese, as I 141, opposed
to “Apyos Πελασγικόν B681. Eurystheus’
towns were Mykene and Tiryns rather

than the later fown of Argos: see on
A 52.

116. ἄλοχον, anticipated subject, as
though ὡς ἐκύει were to follow instead
of ἡ δ᾽ ἐκύει. This Sthenelos is of course
not to be confused with the son of
Kapaneus. The mythographers give us
free choice between several names for
his wife.

117. ἑστήκει, had begun, lit. *
foot’ ; οἵ. ξ 162 τοῦ μὲν φθίνοντος μηνὸς
τοῦ δ᾽ ἱσταμένοιο, τ 519 ἔαρος νέον
ἱσταμένοι. μείς for *uyvs through
*uévs, a form found also in Herod.,
Hesiod, and Pindar; in the latter it
may be Boiotian. μής, the reading of
the Xia, looks like the older form (v.
G. Meyer Gr. § 37).

118. πρὸ φόωςδε 85 IL 188. Here Ar.
took πρό as= ‘before his time,’ πρὸ
τῶν μηνῶν, which is clearly indefensible.
HAITOUHNON, lit. fuwiling in (the due
number of) months. Cf. Scut. Here.
91 ἀλιτήμενον Ἐὐρυσθῆα, which Bentley
corrected into Εὐρυσθῆ᾽ ὀἠλιτόμηνον.
Fick suggests that the origin of the
error there was the old AAITEMENON
wrongly transliterated ἀλιτήμενον, instead
of Aiol. ἀλλιτέμηννον, which hereads here.

119. For a similar case of Hera’s in-
terference with the e/Ae/@ucac compare the
legend in Hymn. Ap. 99.

120. arreAéouca, this use of the fut.
part. without a verb of motion is not
Homeric (see H. G. ὃ 244). It is of
course easy toemend ἀγγέλλουσα.

Was on

328 IAIAAOC T (xrx)

\ / ” ¢e > ἣν , / aA / ν᾽
σὸν γένος" οὔ οἱ ἀεικὲς ἀνασσέμεν ᾿Αργείοισιν.
ὡς φάτο, τὸν δ᾽ ἄχος ὀξὺ κατὰ φρένα τύψε βαθεῖαν. 125
αὐτίκα δ᾽ eid’ Λτην κεφαλῆς λιπαροπλοκάμοιο
χωόμενος φρεσὶν ἧισι, καὶ ὥμοσε καρτερὸν ὅρκον
μή mot ἐς Οὔλυμπόν τε καὶ οὐρανὸν ἀστερόεντα
αὗτις ἐλεύσεσθαι "ATnv, ἣ πάντας ἀᾶται.
A > \ ΝΜ > 3 > lal ’ /
ὡς εἰπὼν ἔρριψεν ἀπ οὐρανοῦ ἀστερθεῦτος 180
χειρὶ περιστρέψας, τάχα δ᾽ ἵκετο ἔργ᾽ ἀνθρώπων.
τὴν αἰεὶ στενάχεσχ᾽, ὅθ᾽ ἑὸν φίλον υἱὸν ὁρῶιτο
ἔργον ἀεικὲς ἔχοντα ὑπ᾽ Εὐρυσθῆος ἀέθλων.
ὡς καὶ ἐγών, ὅτε δ᾽ αὖτε μέγας κορυθαίολος ἡ "Ἕκτωρ
᾿Αργείους ὀλέκεσκεν ἐπὶ πρυμνῆισι νέεσσιν, 135
οὐ δυνάμην λελαθέσθ᾽ ἄτης, ἣν πρῶτον ἀάσθην.
) ΄
ἀλλ᾽ ἐπεὶ ἀασάμην Kat μευ φρένας ἐξέλετο Ζεύς,
a» > , > / / / nD > Ἢ 3. BA
ay ἐθέλω ἀρέσαι, Sopevat τ᾽ ἀπερείσι ἄποινα"

124. Gpreioicin : GNnepoonoicin U, κατ᾽ ἐνίας τῶν ἐκδύσεων Did., Ht. Mag. 21. 53.
126 326 lacuna in A, supplied by A. 126. κεφαλῆι L. 129. ateic C. 131.
nepitpéwac Harl. a. || ταχέως Lips. || ἵκετ᾽ PQR Lips. 132. ὁρᾶτο R. 133.
Un’: πρὸς AS. 135. @Aecken ACT Par.af: SAecken S: ὀλέςεςκεν fr. Mosc. :
éhécacken King’s: OAéecken J Harl. b, Par. dj: 6A€Aecken Par. c g: ὀλόχεςκεν H.
136. AeAaeécons ACHIJR: eee P. || mt: ἢ L: AN D fr. Mosc., Par. a f h:
THN J Harl. Ὁ, Vr. A: τῆι Vr. b, Par. d. 137-41 a0. Ar. ? (see below). 137.
μευ : μοι U: ue Date 347. I See ἘΣ Ge on 1 119:

124. The je “cannot be restored to
ἀνάσσειν without some violence; ἐν
᾿Αργείοισι Εανάσσειν Bentley ; ᾿Αργείοισι 135. 6Aéxecken, one οὔ several
Favaccéuer οὔ Fou adFecxés Brandreth. forms between whieh the Mss. give us

126. It would be needless to say that our choice. ἀπολέσκετο ἃ 586 is in
κεφαλῆς means by the hair of the head, favour of ὥλεσκε, but verbs in -cxw
but for the amusing commentary of rarely take the augment. There is no
Schol. B, ‘some explain that he took objection to the text, asthe pres. ὀλέκειν

134. a” are = δὴ αὖτε (see note on A
340), now again, in this second instance.

Ate from his own head, because ἀνδρῶν
καὶ θεῶν κράατα βαίνει (sic).’ Ainapo-
nmAokduo1o, here only, evidently refers
to an abundant use of unguents.

130. ὧς εἰπών elsewhere always
follows the actual words of a speaker,

ot a Summary of them by another as
nere.

131. ἔργ᾽ ἀνθρώπων, a strange phrase
in this connexion, apparently = the
world of men. In Homeric language it
could only mean ‘tilled fields’; cf.
note on II 392, ἀνδρῶν πίονα ἔργα M 283,
and P 549,

153. See note on 9 363. The canoni-
cal number of twelve labours is traced
by Wilamowitz (Introduction to Her.)
to a (purely conjectural) poem by a
Dorian of Argolis living not later than
the 8th cent. B.c

is well established (A 10 ete.).

136-40 are obelized in U (A is de-
fective here, see above). If we suppose
with Nicole (Scol. Gen. p. xliv.) that
the obeli really refer to 137-41, there is
much to be said in favour of the rejection
—the reference of χθιζός (141), the
double mention of the gifts (140, 143),
the copying of 137-38, with the repeti-
tion ἀάσθην---ἀασάμην, the contradiction
of 139 and 142, all suggest that T was at
one time independent of I and that
these lines have been added to harmonize
them.

137-88. See on 1 119-20. For μευ D
and others have με, but there is no clear
case of the ace. after ἐξελέσθαι. O 460,
P 678 prove: nothing. We usually have
the gen. (1 377, = ; 311), or dat. (Z 234,
and U here).

== =

IAIAAOC T (χιχ) 329

ἀλλ᾽ dpoev πόλεμόνδε, Kal ἄλλους ὄρνυθι λαούς.
al ᾽ ᾿ , . ‘
δῶρα δ᾽ ἐγὼν ὅδε πάντα παρασχέμεν, ὅσσά τοι ἐλθὼν 110
θ Ν a / id / ΄“- ᾽ ,
χθιζὸς ἐνὶ κλισίηισιν ὑπέσχετο δῖος ᾿Οδυσσεύς.
> ᾽ va ’ ᾽ ’ > / / »
εἰ δ᾽ ἐθέλεις, ἐπίμεινον ἐπειγόμενός περ Δρηος"
δῶρα δέ τοι θεράποντες ἐμῆς παρὰ νηὸς ἑλόντες
οἴσουσ᾽, ὄφρα ἴδηαι 6 τοι μενοεικέα δώσω."
τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς:
“ "A - ΄ » > a ᾽ , ;
τρεΐδη κύδιστε, ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγάμεμνον, 146
δῶρα μὲν αἴ κ᾽ ἐθέληισθα παρασχέμεν, ὡς ἐπιεικές,
ἤ τ᾽ ἐχέμεν, πάρα σοί.
> 4‘? > \ \ / > 79 7
αἷψα μάλ᾽. οὐ γὰρ χρὴ κλοτοπεύειν ἐνθάδ᾽ ἐόντας

νῦν δὲ μνησώμεθα χάρμης

» \ , ” \ / Μ BA ἀν
οὐδὲ διατρίβειν: ἔτι γὰρ μέγα ἔργον ἄρεκτον" 150
ὥς κέ τις αὖτ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆα μετὰ πρώτοισιν ἴδηται

140. ὅδε : τάϑε H! Syr. || παραςχέμεν P Syr.: napecyéuen R: napacyein ὥ.
143. napa: ἀπὸ T Syr. Vr. A. 144. ὅ τοι: ὅτι (). 145. τὸν ὃ᾽ ημείβετ᾽
eneita noddpkHc δῖος αχιλλεὺυς Syr. 147. παράςχεν J (yp. mapacyéuen).

148. H τ᾽: εἴ r CG Harl. a. 151 om. R*. || κέ : δέ H e corr.

140. ἐγὼν 60€ . . mapacyéuen, J win
here to offer, as we also say ; the offering
of gifts is the object of my presence ; so
εἰσὶ καὶ olde εἰπέμεν 1 688. The use may
be compared with the infin. after τοῖος,
ete., H. G. ὃ 231; ὅδε being used pre-
dicatively as in x 367 ἐγὼ μὲν ὅδ᾽ εἰμί, ᾧ
207 ἔνδον ὅδ᾽ αὐτὸς ἐγώ, etc.

141. χϑιζός (as 195), really ‘the day
before yesterday,’ though late at night.
Such an inconsistency is too slight a
matter to bear the theories that have
been raised upon it (e.g. that the heroic
Greeks began to reckon the day from
sunset; or that, as Bergk argues, before
the interpolation of the Shield, which
required a night for its manufacture,
Achilles killed Hector on the very day
of Patroklos’ death). The word is prob-
ably no more than a piece of carelessness
on the interpolator’s part.

147. It is hard to say how this line
is best punctuated and construed, though
all the alternatives come to the same in
the end. We may take the infinitives
as dependent either (α) on ἐθέληισθα or
(4) on πάρα σοι (αἴ κ᾿ ἐθέλ. being paren-
thetical), or (c) regard them as impera-
tives, πάρα coi being either (1) taken as
a principal clause or (2) written παρά
σοι and taken with ἐχέμεν. The only
impossible combination will be found to

΄

be b 2. With c 1 ἃ semicolon must be
put after ἐχέμεν. With a 2, which is
preferred by Monro, we must assume an
ellipse of the apodosis, whether thou wilt
offer the gifts or keep them by thee (it is

well). Compare H 375 and note on Z
150. Nikanor adopts c 1. For ἥ τε

Ξε ἢ see H. G. § 340.

149. κλοτοπεύειν, a word not recurring
in all Greek, and of unknown origin and
meaning. The context points to some
such sense as chatter: τινὲς καλολογεῖν
Schol. T.

150. Gpexton, only here and Simon.
fr. 69 (111). We should have expected
Gppexrov, cf. ἔρρεξε (I 536, Καὶ 49), but
the initial F has left no other traces, and
ἔρεζε, ἔρεξε are the usual forms (some
fifty times).

151. As punctuated, ὧς and de are
correlative: ‘as each man shall see A.
fighting so let him fight himself’ (so
Nikanor). This is easier than to take
ὥς xe as final (with a full stop after
gadayyas), as we must then join it with
μνησώμεθα χάρμης, which is too far off,
and 153 becomes a very awkward ad-
dition. The most satisfactory form of
the speech would be gained by either
omitting 149-50, or placing them after
153 with Peppmiiller. Heyne omits the
tautological 153.

380 IAIAAOC Τ (τ)

ἔγχεϊ χαλκείωι Τρώων ὀλέκοντα φάλαγγας,
ὧδέ τις ὑμείων μεμνημένος ἀνδρὶ μαχέσθω."
τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πολύμητις Ὀδυσσεύς:

“un δ᾽ οὕτως, ἀγαθός περ ἐών, θεοείκελ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεῦ, 155

νήστιας ὄτρυνε προτὶ "ἵλιον vias ᾿Αχαιῶν

Τρωσὶ μαχησομένους, ἐπεὶ οὐκ ὀλίγον χρόνον ἔσται

φύλοπις, εὖτ᾽ ἂν πρῶτον ὁμιλήσωσι φάλαγγες

ἀνδρῶν, ἐν δὲ θεὸς πνεύσηι μένος ἀμφοτέροισιν"

ἀλλὰ πάσασθαι ἄνωχθι θοῆις ἐπὶ νηυσὶν ᾿Αχαιοὺς 160

σίτου καὶ οἴνοιο: τὸ γὰρ μένος ἐστὶ καὶ ἀλκή.

οὐ γὰρ ἀνὴρ πρόπαν ἦμαρ ἐς ἠέλιον καταδύντα

ἄκμηνος σίτοιο δυνήσεται ἄντα μάχεσθαι:

εἴ περ γὰρ θυμῶι γε μενοινάαι πολεμίζειν,

ἀλλά τε λάθρηι γυῖα βαρύνεται, ἠδὲ κιχάνει 165

δίψά τε Kai λιμός, βλάβεται δὲ τε γούνατ᾽ ἰόντι.

ὃς δέ κ᾽ ἀνὴρ οἴνοιο κορεσσάμενος καὶ ἐδωδῆς

ἀνδράσι δυσμενέεσσι πανημέριος πολεμίζηι,

θαρσαλέον νύ οἱ ἦτορ ἐνὶ φρεσίν, οὐδέ τι γυΐα

πρὶν κάμνει, πρὶν πάντας ἐρωῆσαι πολέμοιο. 170

ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε λαὸν μὲν σκέδασον καὶ δεῖπνον ἄνωχθι

ὅπλεσθαι, τὰ δὲ δῶρα ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων

οἰσέτω ἐς μέσσην ἀγορήν, ἵνα πάντες ᾿Αχαιοὶ

ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ἴδωσι, σὺ δὲ φρεσὶ σῆισιν ἰανθῆις.

ὀμνυέτω δέ τοι ὅρκον, ἐν ᾿Αργείοισιν ἀναστάς, 175

μή ποτε THs εὐνῆς ἐπιβήμεναι ἠδὲ μυγῆναι,
153. ὧδε: ὧς δέ DPHJTU: ὡς δέ Ὁ). || μάχεςθαι ᾧ. 155. UH O: μὴ 1:
μὴ δὴ Eust. 157. μαχηςόμενος Cant.: μαχηςαμένους 1). 159. πνεύςει Bar. ||
ἀμφοτέρηιςειν Cant. 163. ἔκμηνος P. 164. πτολεμίΖειν CJ. 169. oi:
τοι T. 170. ἐρωῆςθαι R. 171. Kédacon Harl. a. 173. oicdtoo U. || ἐν

μέςηι GropAi H. 174. ppecin ἧιειν GPRT Vr. A. 175. ToL: ἤγουν coi U%, ||
ὅρκον : ἔργον D.

155=A 131, with the same thought: 172. ὅπλεςθαι, a form recurring in ¥
‘do not thou, because thou art very 159, without any variant in either case.
mighty, expect all men to do what thou It must be an erroneous transcription of
canst.’ 0’, 1.6. δή, as 134. ΟΠΛΕΣΘΑΙ -- ὁπλεῖσθαι, cf. ὥπλεον § 73

165. ἄκμηνος, only four timesin H., (so P. Knight); ἐκ τοῦ ὁπλέεσθαι συγ-
allin the next 200 lines; ἄγευστος rapa κέκοπται Schol. T. The common form
τὴν ἄκμην. οὕτω δὲ τὴν ἀσιτίαν Αἰολεῖς [15 ὁπλίζειν.
λέγουσι Schol. A. There is no indepen- 174. Note the well-attested variant
dent evidence for such an Aeolic word. ἥισιν for cAicin, thine own (App. A, vol.
The derivation is not known. ἀκμηνός i. 564). ianefic is a late form (for
(W 191) is a different word. ἄντα, in ἰανθήηις).

face of the foe. os 176-77=I1 275-76. The couplet (or
170. ἐρωῆςαι, doubtless intransitive, rather 176, for 177 is omitted by many
mut see N 57.

Mss.) is evidently borrowed here, τῆς

IAIAAOC T (χιχ)

331

[ἢ θέμις ἐστίν, ἄναξ, ἤ τ᾽ ἀνδρῶν ἤ τε γυναικῶν")

καὶ δὲ σοὶ αὐτῶι θυμὸς ἐνὶ φρεσὶν ἵλαος ἔστω.

αὐτὰρ ἔπειτά σε δαιτὶ ἐνὶ κλισίηις ἀρεσάσθω

πιείρηι, ἵνα μή τι δίκης ἐπιδευὲς ἔχηισθα" 180
᾿Ατρεΐδη, σὺ δ᾽ ἔπειτα δικαιότερος καὶ ἐπ᾿ ἄλλωι

» > \ / \ r
ἔσσεαι' ov μὲν yap τι νεμεσσητὸν βασιλῆα

Μ » 5 / “ / / »
ἄνδρ᾽ ἀπαρέσσασθαι, ὅτε τις πρότερος χαλεπήνηι.

Ν > 5 / ” ? “ » /
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾽Αγαμέμνων"

“χαίρω σεῦ, Λαερτιάδη, τὸν μῦθον ἀκούσας" 185

oe

> / \ / / \ /
ἐν poipne yap πάντα διίκεο Kal κατέλεξας.

fa) / /
ταῦτα δ᾽ ἐγὼν ἐθέλω ὀμόσαι, κέλεται δέ με θυμός,

50» 2 / \ /
οὐδ᾽ ἐπιορκήσω πρὸς δαίμονος.

αὐτὰρ ᾽Δ χιλλεὺς

, i / > / / ”
μιμνέτω αὖθι τέως περ ἐπειγόμενός περ ἴΔρηος,

177 om. ADHPRU Syr. Harl. a, fr. Mosc.

noe CST Cant.™ 178. ἔςται PR.
Vr.b A. 187. κέκλεται ().

r L: τέως καὶ Vr. Ὁ A.

179. KAiciH Lips.
189. τέως περ: τέως δίχα τοῦ περ Ar. (but see
Ludwich) J Ven. B: τέως 0€ Harl. b, Par. ἃ f: τέως re GPR Harl. a:

HoT: ἠδ᾽ C Cant.™ | A Te:
183. énapéc(c)acear P)

τέως

having no reference, as Briseis has not
been named or even remotely alluded
to; whereas in I she is the subject of
the preceding line.

180. émidevec, the neuter used as a
sort of abstract subst. Ξξε ἔνδειαν, ‘that
thou mayst have no lack of justice’ (cf.
note on I 225). In Attic it would of
course be regarded as an adverb and
taken with ἔχηισθα -- ἐπιδευὴς tus, but
that construction is practically un-
known to H. The very late w 245,
ἐύ Tor κομιδὴ ἔχει, is the only instance
of it.

182-83. The sense of these lines is by
no means clear, on account of tic. They
would naturally be taken thus, ‘it is no
disgrace for a king to appease a man
who has been the first to quarrel’; and
this is clearly the construction of the
similar line Q 869 (=7 72, φ 133), τις
there being the same person as ἄνδρα.
But here this does not suit the context ;
for it is Agamemnon who πρότερος χαλέ-
mnve, as he has distinctly admitted. We
must therefore understand ‘it is no dis-
grace for a king to make atonement to a
man, when any (king) has been the first
to quarrel,’ etc. ; i.e. a king need not
feel ashamed to admit when he has done
wrong. Ameis- Hentze join βασιλῆα
ἄνδρα, as object to ἀπαρέσσασθαι, ‘it is
no disgrace to make atonement to a man

of royal rank (sc. Achilles) when one has
been the first to quarrel’; cf. βασιλῆϊ
yap ἀνδρὶ ἔοικε Τ' 170. This gives the
best sense, but the separation of βασιλῆα
ἄνδρα by the end of the line is excessively
harsh, as it intensifies the natural am-
biguity of the accusatives, and almost
forces us to take them apart. But the
whole couplet is evidently a not very
skilful development of a conventional
line. It would be made clearer by
3entley’s ὅν τε for ὅτε Tic, but there is
no authority for a trans. use of χαλε-
παίνειν.

186. ἐν μοίρηι, also x 54, for the
regular κατὰ μοῖραν.

188. πρὸς δαίμονος, before the face of
god, as Π 85, and compare A 239, Z 456.
From this sense of πρός comes that of
swearing by a god.

189. τέως as an iambus is a sign of
lateness ; it recurs only in 2 658, σ 190.
The regular scansion is —vU or — —(=
Thos): it is monosyllabic by synizesis four
times in Od. ; compare note on éws, A
193. For nep it will be seen that there is
a variant ye with strong support. The
scholia simply say that Ar. omitted περ,
which is of course metrically impossible :
the fact that P has ye makes it very
probable that this was Ar.’s reading, περ
and xal-being alterations to avoid the
hiatus in the principal caesura.

333 IAIAAOC T (χιχ)
μίμνετε δ᾽ ἄλλοι πάντες ἀολλέες, ὄφρά κε δῶρα 190

» \ 4 \ ie
ἐκ κλισίης ἔλθηισι καὶ ὅρκια πιστὰ τάμωμεν.
’ a I 2Q\ 7 ᾿
σοὶ δ᾽ αὐτῶι τόδ᾽ ἐγὼν ἐπιτέλλομαι ἠδὲ κελεύω

κρινάμενος κούρητας ἀριστῆας Παναχαιῶν

δῶρα ἐμῆς παρὰ νηὸς ἐνεικέμεν, ὅσσ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆϊ

χθιζὸν ὑπέστημεν δώσειν, ἀγέμεν τε γυναῖκας. 195:
Ταλθύβιος δέ μοι ὦκα κατὰ στρατὸν εὐρὺν ᾿Αχαιῶν

, eo] , /, ”
KAT pov ἑτοιμασάτω, ταμέειν Διί τ Ἠελίωι τε.
J, Ὁ ’ \ ’ 72
τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς Ἀχιλλεύς"
«« mA / Α vy > ὃ lal aN ͵7ὔ
Ατρεΐδη «κύδιστε, ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν Λγάμεμνον,

ra lal 7
ἄλλοτέ περ καὶ μᾶλλον ὀφέλλετε ταῦτα πένεσθαι,

200

€ / \ / /
ὁππότε TLS μετὰ TAVTWAN πολέμοιο γένηται

ΝᾺ \ / ΘᾺ lal
καὶ μένος οὐ τόσον How ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ἐμοῖσι.

ῬΞ > ς NY , ὃ “. 7 ἃ δά
νυν ὃ Ol μὲν KEATAL δὲ aALyPEVOL, OVS εὐοαμᾶσσεν

"Extwp Πριαμίδης, ὅτε οἱ Ζεὺς κῦδος ἔδωκεν,

΄ al 5 > Ν 5 /
υμεις ὃ €S βρωτὺν οτρυνετον.

ἢ τ᾽ ἂν ἔγωγε 205

la - 2 ἴω
νῦν μὲν ἀνώγοιμι πτολεμίζειν υἷας Αχαιῶν

/ > / “ δὲ 5) / δύ
νήστιας ἀκμήνους, ALA ηελίων KATAOUVTL

τεύξασθαι μέγα δόρπον, ἐπὴν τισαίμεθα λώβην.

190. ὄφρά κε: εἰςόκε Mor.: oppa ta Syr.

192. τό! ΠΣ 194. θῶρ᾽ QR:

δῶρα 3° JTU? Syr.? Par. ἔ 1, yp. Eust. || ἐμῆς: eofic Strabo x. 467. || éner-

Keven HJPRT Syv. :
ibid. Gnéctucan J. || Te: δὲ DT.

202. cicin P Harl.a: ἐςτὶν L: ὅεςον ().
206. noAeuizein PRT Syr. fr. Mose.

ἐνεγκάμενος () : ἐνεγκεῖν Strabo cbid.

195. χϑιζοὶ Strabo

200. ταῦτα : πάντα Bar. || γτενέςϑαι H.

205. δ᾽ ἐσ: κατ᾽ ἔνια δὲ, Schol. Athous.

208. TeU=aceal (4 supr.) R Cant. Bar. Mor.
Harl. a, Ven. B: τεύξεςϑαι 0. || «κλέγα : of δὲ μετὰ, ἀντὶ τοῦ μετὰ τὸ νικῆσαι Sch. T.

193. κούρητας -- κούρους, another pecu-
liarity of this book, οἵ, 248 (in I 539 it
is a proper name). Diintzer compares
γυμνής beside γυμνός.

194. ϑῶρα ἐμῆς looks like a false
archaism on the model of χεῖρα ἑήν I 420,
which is capable of explanation (App. D,
c 2). There are various emendations,
some of them ancient ; δῶρά τ᾽ (Heyne)
is possible, and evidently better than
δῶρα δ᾽ of Syr.?, ete.; Strabo (x. 467) has
δῶρα θοῆς, Peppmiiller 6p’ ἀμῆς, Nauck
ἡμετέρης, Agar δῶρ᾽ ἔμ᾽ ἐμῆς. ἐνεικέμεν,
the only form of this aor. in H. which
is not from the -a stem (ἐνεῖκαι Σ 334,
σ 286). ἐνεγκέμεν has good support here,
but neither ἤνεγκον nor ἤνεγκα is found
in H. (except as a variant on x 493),
though Pindar uses both stems in-
differently (Schréder P.L.G.° p. 40;
and see the mass of authorities in
Veitch, pp. 591 ff.).

197. κάπρον, the animal on which
the competitors at the Olympian games
swore to Ζεὺς “Ὅρκιος to observe the con-
(ditions (Paus. v. 24. 9, quoting this
passage). “Hédtoc is a party to the
oath in Τ' 277; as seeing all things
he was qualified to watch the observance
of a promise.

201. κκετὰ naucwAK, commonly printed
as one word: but cf. B 386 οὐ yap:
παυσωλή γε μετέσσεται.

202. ἧισιν only here (and @ ὅ80 2) for
Homeric ἔηισιν, cf. ὦσι for wou 274.

205. The dual ὀτρύνετον must mean
Odysseus and Agamemnon. It may,
however, have supplanted from supposed
metrical reasons an older ὀτρύνετε, as
La R. suggests.

208. It seems necessary to read τεύ-
zaceai for the vulg. τεύξεσθαι : MSS.
carry little weight here. The fut. is
defended by Hentze as representing a

IAIAAOC T (χιχ)

\ ᾽ ” δ » / \ \ 2. 2
“πρὶν δ᾽ ov πως ἂν ἔμοιγε φίλον κατὰ λαιμὸν ἰείη
/ “-“ ,ὔ lal
ov πόσις οὐδὲ βρῶσις, ἑταίρου τεθνηῶτος, 210
μή bk, / - / ’ low a
ὅς μοι ἐνὶ κλισίην δεδαϊγμένος ὀξέϊ χαλκῶι
lal \ / / \ > ΄ -
κεῖται, ἀνὰ πρόθυρον τετραμμένος, ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἑταῖροι
4 / » \ \ “
μύρονται" τό μοι οὔ τι μετὰ φρεσὶ ταῦτα μέμηλεν,
b) \ / \ e \ > / / J Wy ε ᾽ν
ἀλλὰ φόνος τε καὶ αἷμα καὶ apyadEeos στόνος ἀνὸρῶν.
\ , εἰ / / / > ,ὔ
τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πολύμητις Odvacers:
r r cys , P rn
“ὦ ᾿Αχιλεῦ Πηλῆος υἱέ, μέγα φέρτατ᾽ ᾿Αχαιῶν,
/ / > ,
κρείσσων εἷς ἐμέθεν καὶ φέρτερος οὐκ ὀλίγον περ
/ “ / /
ἔγχει, ἐγὼ δέ κε σεῖο νοήματί ye προβαλοίμην
/ \ , / ,ὔ 53
πολλόν, ἐπεὶ πρότερος γενόμην καὶ πλείονα οἶδα.

to
_
on

a > / / / > “
τῶ TOL ἐπιτλήτω κραδίη μύθοισιν ἐμοῖσιν. 220
/ ,ὔ /
aia τε φυλόπιδος πέλεται κόρος ἀνθρώποισιν,

209. πρίν γ᾽ ὦ. | ἰείη : ἱείη AGI:
210. Teenei@toc CDG Syr. :
ὀξέϊ : αἴθοπι 1).
«τόνος: πόνος P (7p. στόνος).

φέρτατος RK Bar. || mep: re U.
Ke(N) ©. 221. Te: Oe Syr.: Ke Q.

ἱείηι T: Yer (): TH U: ἰῆιναι C: Ye Η',
τεθνεῶτος U,
212. προθύροισι S.

211. 6c: ὥς J. KAicinic Syr.
214. φόνος : πόνος PR Hari. a.

216. MHAHoc: πηλέως DGH(Q Syr.: πηλέος 22.
φέρτατ᾽ : φίλτατ᾽ Vr.d: κῦδος Plut. Mor. p. 35 8.

217. εἷς : ἧς U (supr. εἰ).

218. re PRT Syr. Harl. ἃ (p. ταβ.), Vr. A:

‘jussive’ or permissive τεύξεσθε (like
μαχήσονται H 30, συλήσετε Δ 71, and
cf, ἐεισάσθην . . συλήσειν Ὁ 545). We
must then suppose that Gnedrouu is for-
gotten, and that there is a change of
thought from commanding to simple
saying. So far this is intelligible. But
when we come to the end of the line we
find ticaimeea, where the opt. is only
explicable as ‘attracted’ to ἀνώτγοιμι,
which must therefore still be uppermost
in the speaker’s thought ; otherwise the
vaguer mood would be quite unsuitable
to Achilles’ confidence. It follows that
we must read either τεύξασθαι.. τισαί-
μεθα or τεύξεσθαι τισώμεθα (with
Heyne).

209. ἱείη, a form of the opt. not else-
where found in H. (ἴοι © 21), but suffici-
ently attested by an inser. from Delphi
(Collitz 2501. 18) αἱ δὲ μὴ περιιεῖεν κτλ.
It is probably analogical, after forms
like τιθείη (: lein : : τιθέναι : ἰέναι), H. (ἡ.
§ 83. There was a variant ἱείη, appar-
ently based on the supposed intrans.
use of tyju. But this is found only in
the case of rivers, etc., where we must
supply ὕδωρ, e.g. 7 150, 239.

212. ἀνὰ πρόθυρον τετραμμένος, with
his feet turned to the door as a symbol

of departure. This indicates an ancient
funeral custom ; Persius iii. 105 in portain
rigidos calces extendit, Pliny N. H. vii.
46 ritu naturae mos est pedibus efferri.
3ut the origin of the custom was not so
much a ritus naturae as a belief that
the position made it more difficult for
the ghost to come back (so the Pehu-
enches of Chili explain it, Rohde Psyche
p. 22 note); see Schol. B διὰ τὸ ἐξερχο-
μένους τοῦ ἀνθρωπίνου βίου μηκέτι ἀναστρέ-
φειν εἰς τοὺς οἴκους.

216. All Mss. have Πηλέος or Πηλέως,
but see A 489, II 21.

218. προβαλοίμην, e2ce7, here only,
but cf. περιβάλλειν Ψ 276, 0 17; ὑπέρ-
βάλλειν and ὑπερβάλλεσθαι are common
in this sense in Herod. and Attic. We
may perhaps also compare (ππους) πρόσθε
βαλεῖν Ψ 572.

220. ἐπιτλήτω with dat., acquiesce in,
only here; cf. Ψ 591.

221. Battle is a labour in which men
must be kept up te the mark ; for there
is plenty of hard work and little reward
—as with a farmer who should reap
abundant haulm, and find but little
grain to harvest. The toil of slaughter
is compared to the cutting of the straw
with the sickle, but there the likeness

994

IAIAAOC T (xIx)

- / \ / θ MN N \ ” .

ἧς τε πλείστην μὲν καλάμην χθονὶ χαλκὸς ἔχευεν,
\ / /

ἄμητος δ᾽ ὀλίγιστος, ἐπὴν κλίνηισι τάλαντα

Ζεύς, ὅς T ἀνθρώπων ταμίης πολέμοιο τέτυκται.

γαστέρι δ᾽ οὔ πως ἔστι νέκυν ΠΕ} ἴσαι ᾿Αχαιούς: 22

Or

λίην γὰρ πολλοὶ καὶ ἐπήτριμοι ἤματα πάντα

πίπτουσιν τ

πότε κέν τις ἀναπνεύσειε πόνοιο;

ἀλλὰ χρὴ τὸν μὲν καταθάπτειν ὅς κε θάνηισι,
νηλέα θυμὸν ἔχοντας, ἐπ᾽ ἤματι δακρύσαντας"

ὅσσοι δ᾽ ἂν πολέμοιο περὶ στυγεροῖο λίπωνται,

290

μεμνῆσθαι πόσιος καὶ ἐδητύος, ὄφρ᾽ ἔτι Ee
ἀνδράσι δυσμενέεσσι μαχώμεθα νωλεμὲς αἰεί,

ἑσσάμενοι χροὶ χαλκὸν ἀτειρέα.

μηδέ τις ἄλλην

an he > /
λαῶν ὀτρυντὺν ποτιδέγμενος ἰσχαναάσθω"

ἥδε τω} aes κακὸν ἔσσεται, ὅς KE λίπηται

235

223. δλιποξτοὲ Η.
ἐθωθῆς Vr. A.
npoTideruenoc UU.

228. KaTeanTeIN 8.
232. νωλεμὲς : νηλεὲς D.

229. fimaci LPL 231. ἐδητύος:
233. ἄλλην : ἄλλος (). 234.

ends ; ‘pro frugibus sunt funera’ (Valeton
in Mnemos. 28. 389 ff.: Lendrum in Οἱ Α΄.
iv. 46). Soldiers require strengthening
with food for such thankless work.
Possibly there may be a thought also
of the spoil which is not to “be had
after a battle as after a siege; but this
is not essential. There is another com-
parison of battle to reaping in A 67 ff.
αἷψά te, the τε is clearly gnomic or
generalising; H. G. § 332, and see a
392 ala τέ of δῶ ἀφνειὸν πέλεται.

223. ἄμητος, gathering in, harvesting ;
and so Hesiod Opp. 384 and Herod.
OMirictoc, ‘an ironical understatement

it is a harvest that is all cutting
down, no storing up’ (Monro). κλίνηιςι
τάλαντα, i.e. has decided the battle, ef.
Θ 69.

224=A 84. Possibly the word ταμίης
has a special significance here: Zeus is
a steward, but not of food, no ταμίης
σίτοιο δοτήρ, 44 (Lendrum wt supr.).

225. Odysseus having shewn the mili-
tary advantage of a good meal, goes on
to deduce the absurdity of fasting as a
way of mourning the dead in war-time,
as Achilles had urged (203-05, 209-10).
γαστέρι is evidently used to make the
idea ridiculous.

226-29. Cicero Tusc. 111. 27. 65 trans-
lates these lines, ee nimis multos
atque omni luce cadentes Cernimus, ut
nemo possit maerore vacare. Quo magis

est wequom tumulis mandare perenvptos
Firmo animo, et luctum lacrimis finire
diurnis. πόνοιο is hardly given by
maerore, it evidently means ‘toilsome
fasting.’ Monro takes it to mean tod/
of battle, a parenthetical dwelling on
πολλοὶ καὶ ἐπήτριμοι : but this breaks the
connexion of thought.

228. καταθάπτειν includes burning,
see μ 11-13.

229. ἐπ᾽ ἤματι, within a day's space,
as Καὶ 48, q.v. ; ἐπ᾽ ἡμέρηι Herod. ν. 53.

230. The remainder of the speech
seems quite out of place here, as it con-
tains a recommendation to eat when the
battle is over, and a summons to im-
mediate action. It would only be in
place in Achilles’ mouth after 214.
There is, however, little or no evidence
of such transposition of lines in H.
μεμνῆσθαι would then represent an
imper. of the 3rd person, as Z 92. As it
stands it is taken with χρή, though that
word is at unusual distance. περὶ . .
λίπωνται, wre left over, cf. πόλεμον περὶ
τόνδε φυγόντε M 322.

235. The colon after ὀτρυντύς is clearly
right (so Cauer), this is the summons,
which I am now giving. It is in fact
found in T; editors all omit it, explain-
ing ‘this summons will be a bad thing,
etc., in which case ἤθε must mean ‘this
other summons of which I speak,’ which
will take the form of a summons to

IAIAAOC T (χιχ) 335

,’ ΄ ΄ ,

νηυσὶν ἐπ᾽ ᾿Αργείων: ἀλλ᾽ ἁθρόοι ὁρμηθέντες
ΠΝ \ ΚΖ. ΄ ieee er " »

ρωσὶν ἐφ᾽ ἱπποδάμοισιν ἐγείρομεν ὀξὺν “Apna.

ἢ καὶ Νέστορος υἷας ὀπάσσατο κυδαλίμοιο
Φυλείδην τε Méynta Θόαντά τε Μηριόνην τε
καὶ Κρειοντιάδην Λυκομήδεα καὶ Μελάνιππον. 240
\ “ ἂν BI / 3 / ᾽ oh
βὰν δ᾽ ἴμεν ἐς κλισίην Ayapéuvovos Arpeidao.

>? χ᾽. Μ ᾽ [4 fa) »Μ , \ Μ
αὐτίκ᾽ ἔπειθ᾽ ἅμα μῦθος ἔην τετέλεστο δὲ Epryov:
ἑπτὰ μὲν ἐκ κλισίης τρίποδας φέρον, οὕς οἱ ὑπέστη,
αἴθωνας δὲ λέβητας ἐείκοσι, δώδεκα δ᾽ ἵππους"
> 3 ” > A b] / » ,’ ? / 3
ἐκ δ᾽ ἄγον αἶψα γυναῖκας ἀμύμονα ἔργ᾽ eldvias 245
“ > “ana > , ws ΄
ἕπτ᾽, ἀτὰρ ὀγδοάτην Βρισηΐδα καλλιυπάρηιον.
χρυσοῦ δὲ στήσας ᾿Οδυσεὺς δέκα πάντα τάλαντα

τ -“ A

ἦρχ. ἅμα δ᾽ ἄλλοι δῶρα φέρον κούρητες ᾿Αχαιῶν.
καὶ τὰ μὲν ἐν μέσσην ἀγορῆι θέσαν, ἀν δ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνων

ἵστατο: Ταλθύβιος δὲ θεῶι ἐναλίγκιος αὐδὴν 250
κάπρον ἔχων ἐν χερσὶ παρίστατο ποιμένι λαῶν.

᾿Ατρεΐδης δὲ ἐρυσσάμενος χείρεσσι μάχαιραν,

ἥ οἱ πὰρ ξίφεος μέγα κουλεὸν αἰὲν ἄορτο,

κάπρου ἀπὸ τρίχας ἀρξάμενος, Avi χεῖρας ἀνασχὼν

236. νηυςὶ παρ᾽ CPQRU Bar. Mor. Harl. ἃ. 237. areipouen JP!. 239.

uérHN Te Zen. Par. a f.
240 om. C.

(supr. Cc).
γυναῖκας Zen. (An. on I 131).

| JLHPIONHN TE: διήπυρόν Te (sic) (): καὶ μελάνιππον C.

242. ἔπειθ᾽ Gua: ἔπειτά re Plut. Mor. p. 782c. || μῦθον H
243. ἐς κλιςίην Vr. ἃ. || οὕς: oc Syr. 245. ἐκ 0° Gren ἑπτὰ
| ἀμύμονας DGH'PR. 246. ἕξ ἁτὰρ ἐβϑομάτην
Zen. 248. ἀχαιοὶ Vr. ἃ, Strabo x. p. 467. 249. ἄν : ἐν Ὁ Bar. 250.
ἐναλίγτγιος (). || ἄντην T (yp. αὐδήν man. rec.). 251. yepci GPR: χεροῖν ὦ:
χειρὶ Ὡ (and Lips.). 253. Gopto DGPQ: ἄωρτο 2 (see on I’ 272).

247 =0 232. cricac=weighing, as X
350. This shews that the Homeric
talent was a known and recognized
weight of gold. But it is most probable
that the talents were in the form of

punishment (see B 391-935). This does
violence to the use of ὅδε, and gives
a much weaker sense. On ὀτρυντύς
Schol. B says ἔστιν ἡ λέξις ᾿Αντιμάχειος -
χαίρει δὲ καὶ ᾿Ερατοσθένης ταῖς τοιαύταις

ἐκφοραῖς (derivatives), ὡς τὸ ““ πολλὴ ἀντι-
μαχητύς." For 6c representing an un-
expressed antecedent in another case, so
that it virtually =e? τις, see note on & 81.

238. éndccato, as K 238, ‘took as
colleagues.”
242. ‘No sooner said than done.’

For δέ Passow suggests re, which is
better as bringing out the «lose con-
nexion of the clauses. Cf. Hymn. Merc.
46 ὡς ἅμ᾽ ἔπος τε Kal ἔργον ἐμήδετο κύδιμος
Ἑρμῆς, Ap. Rhod. iv. 103 ἔνθ᾽ ἔπος ἠδὲ
καὶ ἔργον ὁμοῦ πέλεν ἐσσυμένοισιν, Herod.
111. 135 ταῦτα εἶπε, καὶ ἅμα ἔπος τε καὶ
ἔργον ἐποίεε.
244=1 128; 245, see I 128.

wedges or bars which required counting
only, not weighing. Moreover, the
stress laid on the weighing by Odysseus
would seem to imply that ten talents
formed a very large sum, whereas we
know that it was but small. This may
be an indication of a later period, when
the talent had become large.

252-58=T' 271-72, q.v.

254. Gn-ap=duenoc, cutting off as
ἀπαρχή, the ‘‘first-fruits” of the victim :
see note on I’ 273, where the sense is
clearly given. The constr. of ἀπάρχεσθαι
with acc. is bold; in € 422 τρίχας is
presumably to be taken with βάλλεν.
In y 445, however, we have the similar

336

IAIAAOC T (xrx)

εὔχετο: τοὶ δ᾽ ἄρα πάντες ἐπ᾽ αὐτόφιν εἴατο σιγῆι 255
᾿Αργεῖοι κατὰ μοῖραν, ἀκούοντες βασιλῆος.

εὐξάμενος δ᾽ ἄρα εἶπεν ἰδὼν εἰς οὐρανὸν εὐρύν"

ἴστω νῦν Ζεὺς πρῶτα, θεῶν ὕπατος καὶ ἄριστος,

γῆ τε καὶ ἠέλιος καὶ ἐρινύες, ai θ᾽ ὑπὸ γαῖαν

ἀνθρώπους τίνυνται, ὅτις κ᾽ ἐπίορκον ὀμόσσηι, 260
μὴ μὲν ἐγὼ κούρηι Βρισηΐδι χεῖρ᾽ ἐπένεικα,

οὔτ᾽ εὐνῆς πρόφασιν κεχρημένος οὔτέ τευ ἄλλου"

ἀλλ᾽ ἔμεν ἀπροτίμαστος ἐνὶ κλισίηισιν ἐμῆισιν.

255. ἄρα : ἅμα Vr. ἃ, Syr. || én’: ὑπ᾽ HPRU.
260. τίνονται H : τίννυνται (): τοίνυν ο᾽ R.

259. ai: τινὲς οἵ T. || ταίηι C.

ὅς τίς CGHJPRTU: ὅς Q. || κ᾿ om. PR Harl. a.

257. εὐχόμενος Sch. T.

|
261. UH WEN: ἢ MA μὲν

ἀντὶ τοῦ ποῦ U2 || ἐπένεικα DHP?R Harl. al: ἐπενῆκα U: ἐπινεῖλκαι () : ἐπενεί-

και L: ἐπανεῖκαι J: ἐπενεῖκαι (2.
κεκτημένος (), || οὔτέ: οὔτι H: εἴ
éuoicin Lt. Gud. 94. 45; 621. 45.

262. OUT’: εἴ T ἢ οὔτ᾽ Eust.

KEYPHUENOC :
263. ἐνὶ μεγάροιςιν

ἢ οὔτε Eust.

χέρνιβά 7 οὐλοχύτας τε κατήρχετο, though
κατάρχεσθαι is regularly construed with
gen. in later Greek. The ritual word is
so intimately connected with the act
implied in it that it becomes in sense
equivalent to dmorduvew. The whole
scene should be carefully compared with
that in IT, as well as with the ritual in
Eur. 51. 791 ff.

255. én’ αὐτόφιν, if right, must be
like ἐφ᾽ ὑμείων H 195, to themselves,
withdrawn into themselves. But the
reflexive use of αὐτός is very rare (see on
P 407), and the phrase is a strange one.
Bekker conj. αὐτόθι, so that ἐπί goes with
εἴατο, sat by.

258. See the formula in Τ' 276 ff., with
notes. In order to bring the two pass-
ages into closer harmony, ‘some,’ acc.
to Schol. T, read of @ for αἵ e’, taking
τε as connective and referring the rela-
tive not to the Erinyes, but to Aides
and Persephone. This would support
Nitzsch’s explanation of Und γαῖαν, as
an attributive to the relative, who dwel/-
ing beneath the earth, so that the gods
of the underworld punish living men.
But the words naturally imply that the
punishment is inflicted after death.

259. ΓΗ͂ for γαῖα is late Epic. We
may easily read γαῖα καὶ ἠέλιος with
Brandreth, as asyndeton is not un-
frequently found in such lists of names ;
e.g. N 791, O 214, 302, T 311, ete.
This, however, does not explain the
corresponding γῆι τε καὶ ἠελίωι Τ' 104,
Cf. O 24, P 595, Φ 63.

261. ἐπένεικα : for the indic. with μή
in oaths see note on K 330. The infin.
ἐπενεῖκαι has found its way into most
Mss., but the nom. ἐγώ with it seems
quite indefensible, and the text is abun-
dantly supported.

262. οὔτε after μή shews a change of
mind from the form of swearing to simple
asseveration. The meaning of πρόφαςιν
is not clear. It recurs in H. only in
302, where it is generally taken in the
familiar sense, by way of pretext (but see
note there). But this does not suit the
context; as this particular treatment of
Briseis was the worst that could be ex-
pected, it could not be alleged as an ex-
cuse for anything else. πρόφασις in fact
means a profession, without necessarily
implying that it is a false one ; and it
is in fact often used of a real cause, as
the Lexica will shew. We can therefore
take εὐνῆς πρόφασιν together, for the sake
of my bed (κοίτης χάριν Sch. B), when
κεχρημένος will mean desiring her.
This is of course the regular sense of
the word in H., but it must be admitted
that in this context there is some sus-
picion of the later phrase χρῆσθαι γυναικί
a constr. strange to H. except in the
single Odyssean phrase φρεσὶ yap κέχρητ᾽
ἀγαθῆισιν. Monro joins εὐνῆς κεχρ. to-
gether, desiring her bed, and πρόφασιν
as an adverb = professedly (‘of a true
ground’). But it is hard to see what
sense the addition of the word gives; at
best it is ambiguous and reduces the
oath to nothing. :

IAIAAOC T (χιχ)

εἰ δέ τι τῶνδ᾽ ἐπίορκον, ἐμοὶ θεοὶ adyea δοῖεν

πολλὰ μάλ᾽, ὅσσα διδοῦσιν ὅτις σφ᾽ ἀλίτηται ὀμόσσας.᾽" 265
ἢ καὶ ἀπὸ στόμαχον κάπρου τάμε νηλέϊ χαλκῶι"

τὸν μὲν Ταλθύβιος πολιῆς ἁλὸς ἐς μέγα λαῖτμα

ῥῖψ᾽ ἐπιδινήσας, βόσιν ἰχθύσιν: αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς

ἀνστὰς ᾿Δργείοισι φιλοπτολέμοισι μετηύδα"

“Ζεῦ πάτερ, ἢ μεγάλας ἄτας ἄνδρεσσι διδοῖσθα.

οὐκ ἂν δή ποτε θυμὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ἐμοῖσιν

270

, nA ” / > / /
Ατρεΐδης ὥρινε διαμπερές, οὐδέ κε κούρην
ΓΙ ᾿ mats 2 ᾽ / ᾽ ΄, oy
ἣγεν ἐμεῦ ἀέκοντος ἀμήχανος: ἀλλά ποθι Ζεὺς
᾽ al
ἤθελ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοῖσιν θάνατον πολέεσσι γενέσθαι.
a > ἊΡ > pee a a ΄ ” »” pa
νῦν δ᾽ ἔρχεσθ᾽ ἐπὶ δεῖπνον, wa ξυνώγωμεν “Apna. 275
A ee a Reed “An 3.28 \ 5) s
ὡς ap ἐφώνησεν, λῦσεν δ᾽ ἀγορὴν αἰψηρήν.
οἱ μὲν ἄρ᾽ ἐσκίδναντο ἑὴν ἐπὶ νῆα ἕκαστος,
A \ i , , » ,
δῶρα δὲ Μυρμιδόνες μεγαλήτορες ἀμφεπένοντο,
» “ > an
βὰν δ᾽ ἐπὶ νῆα φέροντες ᾿Αχιλλῆος θείοιο"
\ \ \ > , , ΄ \ a
Kal Ta μὲν ἐν κλισίηισι θέσαν, κάθεσαν δὲ γυναῖκας, 28
“ > ᾽ ΓΝ 2 , > ,
ἵππους δ᾽ εἰς ἀγέλην ἔλασαν θεράποντες ἀγαυοί.

fora)
Oo

265. ὅτις : ὅτι (ὅ Ti) CJL'QTU!: ὅς τις AGHR: άτι Syr. 266. «τόμαχον :
cpaparon Paus. v. 24. 11. 269. aGnactac CORT. || φιλοπολέμοιςι Lips. 272
ὥρινε: ὥτρυνε CQU. 213. ἄκοντος PR Vr. A. || of δὲ ἁμήχανον (θάνατον
Sch. T. 276. Adcan (AUcan) Suidas, Ap. Lev. 17. 20 al. λαιψηραν D:
λαιψηρὴν U Vr. d: λαιψηρῶς (). 277. ἄρα ckidNanto P: ἄρ᾽ éckidNonTo G.
ἐπὶ: κατὰ U. 280. Kdeecan PR: xdeican 0.

270. d180tcea (here only) is evidently
an analogical formation from the the-
matic conjugation διδοῖς (cf. δίδου) for
the more correct δίδωσθα (cf. τίθησθα
ι 404, etc.); so opt. βάλοισθα O 571
and subjunctives in -ηισθα (ΗΠ. G. ὃ 5,
G. Meyer Gv. § 450).

273. Observe the protasis added para-

265. ὅτις ΞΞ εἴ τις, the constr. being
the same as in 235, 260. ςφε, τοὺς θεούς.
For the ace. see on I 375. This form
elsewhere always refers to two persons
(A 111, 115, @ 271, @ 192, 206).
Whether it was originally a dual (see
van L, Ench. p. 253), later extended to
plur. (and in Attic to sing.), or a plural

with a tendency to restriction to the
dual on the analogy of ἄνδρε, etc. (and
so dupe, ὕμμε: G. Meyer Gir. §§ 420-22)
is still disputed; but the balance of
argument is perhaps in favour of the
former. (Van L. prefers to take cp’=
opt, comparing μοι ὄμοσσον A 76, θεοῖς
ἀλιτήμενος 6 807.)

267. The oath victim is not burnt nor
eaten, but devoted to the nether gods ;
IT 310. Pausanias (v. 24) tells us that
he forgot to ask what was done with
the boar on which the competitors swore
at Olympia, but he supposes, on the
strength of ancient custom, that it was
not eaten. λαῖτμα is elsewhere purely
Odyssean.

VOL. II

tactically by ἀλλά, instead of εἰ μή.

276. aiyHpHn must be taken predica-
tively (=alynp@s Ar.), ‘quick to dis-
perse at his word.’ ‘The expression
points to the fact that the quality
‘*readiness to disperse” is more or less
inherent in the subject. Cf. αἰψηρὸς δὲ
κόρος Kpvepoto γόοιο ὃ 103, αἰψηρὰ δὲ
γούνατ᾽ ἐνώμα K 358’ (M. ἃ R. on
β 257). But in the last passage the Ms.
reading is λαιψηρά, though Ap. Lez.
quotes αἰψηρά. λαιψηρήν occurs as a
variant here and β 257, but αἰψηρός is
metrically established in 6 103.

280. Kdeecan is doubtless the right
form; see note on ἀνέσαντες N 657.
The aor. is é-ced-ca=eloa, and without

998

IAIAAOC T (xrx)

Ses τ fel /
Βρισηὶς δ᾽ dp ἔπειτ, ἰκέλη χρυσῆι ᾿Αφροδίτηι,
ὡς ἴδε Πάτροκλον δεδαϊγμένον ὀξέϊ χαλκῶι,
r > ’ / \ rl ”
ἀμφ᾽ αὐτῶι χυμένη iy ἐκώκυε, χερσὺ δ᾽ ἄμυσσε

7 \ iN IO\ \ /
στήθεά T ἠδ᾽ ἁπαλὴν δειρὴν ἰδὲ καλὰ πρόσωπα.

285

Ss » \ 5... a rn 5
εἶπε δ᾽ ἄρα κλαίουσα γυνὴ εἴκυΐα θεῆισι

n n I, a
“Tldtpoxn ἐμοὶ δειλῆι πλεῖστον κεχαρίσμενε θυμῶι,

’ \ / oy Ins
ζωὸν μέν σε ἔλειπον ἐγὼ κλισίηθεν ἰοῦσα,

a / lal / ” ἌΝ, lal
VUV δέ σε τεθνηῶτα κυχάνομαιυ, opXape aw),

nr ¢ / \ 5 n 8. /
ἂψ' ἀνιοῦσ᾽- ὥς μοι δέχεται κακὸν EK κακοῦ αἰεί.

290

χὰ 5 \ \ If /
ἄνδρα μέν, ὧι ἔδοσάν pe πατὴρ καὶ ποτνιῶ μήτηρ,

εἶδον πρὸ πτόλιος δεδαϊγμένον ὀξέϊ χαλκῶι,

a fe / / / /
τρεῖς τε κασιγνήτους, τούς μοι μία γείνατο μητήηρ,
, > Say,
κηδείους, of πάντες ὀλέθριον ἦμαρ ἐπέσπον.

Ε] ” δ » \
οὐδὲ μὲν οὐδέ μ᾽ ἔασκες, ὅτ᾽ ἄνδρ᾽ ἐμὸν ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεὺς 295

282. ἔπειθ᾽ AHJPS. || ἱκέλη AGHJPS.
286. θεοῖσι () (swpr. H).
288. ς᾽ ἔλιπον 4QR Vr. ἃ A: ce ἔλιπον DHPS.
292. πόλιος G(JU: πόληος J.
294. KHdeiouc e J. || ἐπέεππων CHP Harl. a, Vr. Ὁ:

καὶ (H ὃ) Vr. d.
λαῶν : Gndpan U.

Ar. 2? (they are obelized in TU).

284. λίγα κώκυε PR. 285. ἰδὲ :
281. πλεῖστον : πάντων H.
289. τεϑθνειῶτα CDGU. ||
293. τοὺς : oUc PR.
€penon ὦ. 295-300 ad.

augment ἕσ(σ)α. We should therefore
read καθέσσας in I 488, κάθεσον in I 68,
H 49, καθέσασα p 572, if the text is
to be reduced to scientific uniformity.
See van L. Ench. ἃ 220. 2. The
assonance θέσαν κάθεσαν is probably
intentional.

282. For the lament of Briseis see
Introduction. Apart from the question
of style and other difficulties, it contains
many non-Epic expressions; ἰκέλη for
FixéXn, σε ἔλειπον with hiatus clicitus,
εἶδον (292) which cannot be resolved into
éFidov, ἑκάστη for Fexaorn. πρόφασιν,
302, is also doubtful. Tearing the skin
(285) is not elsewhere found as a sign of
erief ; heroic mourners do not go farther
than tearing their hair. But this may
possibly be meant for a ‘barbarian’
custom.

285. The position of id€ is irregular ;
see on Τ' 318.

287. The ordinary reading is Πάτρο-
κλέ μοι, but as there is a slight pause after
the voc., the enclitic would virtually
stand at the head of the clause, and it
is therefore better to divide as in the
text. There remains however the
‘Attic’ shortening of o before xd, and

there is no obvious reason for the
emphatic ἐμοί.

288. ce ἔλειπον, the hiatus is intoler-
able ; see notes on Τ' 46, A 542, and 194
above. It is easier to read σέ γ᾽ or σ᾽
ἄρ᾽ than to see what the particles mean
or why they should be lost.

290. ὡς ‘introduces a reflexion founded
on the fact just mentioned . . showing how
evil waits on evil,’ Monro. It is simpler
to take it as exclamative, How! ϑέχεται
seems to be used intransitively, succeeds ;
so Hes. Th. 800 ἄλλος δ᾽ ἐξ ἄλλου δέχεται
χαλεπώτερος ἄθλος.ς The Lexx. give no
other instance in Greek. Compare II
111 κακὸν κακῶι ἐστήρικτο, and in another
sense κακὸς κακὸν ἡγηλάζει p 217. Agar
conj. μ᾽ (οι) ἐκδέχεται, comparing the in-
trans. use of the compound in Herod.
(iv. 39, 99)=come newt.

294. It is more Epic to read oi than
οἵ. The construction is changed, the
participial (ἐπισπόνταΞς) being turned into
the direct. κηδείους dear, here only ;
with κήδεος Ψ 160 and the superl. κήδι-
otros. Jor ἐπισπεῖν see note on Z 321.

295. οὐδὲ μὲν οὐδέ, nay, thow didst
not let me even weep (much less despair).
See Σ 117.

*)

IAIAAOC T (x1x) 339

/ 4
ἔκτεινεν, πέρσεν δὲ πόλιν θείοιο Μύνητος,
κλαίειν, ἀλλά μ᾽ ἔφασκες ᾿Αχιλλῆος θείοιο
, v / Μ ᾽ p \
κουριδίην ἄλοχον θήσειν, ἄξειν δ᾽ ἐνὶ νηυσὶν
ἐς Φθίην, δαίσειν δὲ γάμον μετὰ Μυρμιδόνεσσι.
τῶ σ᾽ ἄμοτον κλαίω τεθνηότα, μείλιχον αἰεί." 800
» ,ὔ ’ a
ὡς ἔφατο κλαίουσ᾽, ἐπὶ δὲ στενάχοντο γυναῖκες,
/ lal lal ’ ΄ 7
Πάτροκλον πρόφασιν, σφῶν δ᾽ αὐτῶν κήδε᾽ ἑκάστη.
ἜΝ > » \ / Ty a > /
αὐτὸν δ᾽ ἀμφὶ γέροντες ᾿Αχαιῶν ἠγερέθοντο
/ “- e a
λισσόμενοι δειπνῆσαι" ὁ δ᾽ ἠρνεῖτο στεναχίζων'
ςς / v ” » ] / ᾽ ΄ / a
λίσσομαι, εἴ τις ἔμοιγε φίλων ἐπιπείθεθ᾽ ἑταίρων, 305
μή με πρὶν σίτοιο κελεύετε μηδὲ ποτῆτος

296. MépceN δὲ : ἐκ δ᾽ εἷλε Harl. a.
ἐν ὕ.

δ᾽ DGHS: τ᾽ Ω. || Ent: ἐπὶ Bar. :

291. ἀλλά ww’: ἀλλ᾽ ἐμ᾽ G. 298.
299. θώςειν J. 300. ἄτομον U

(supr. ἢ ἄμοτον U*). || τεθνειότα CGT: τεϑνη(ιῶτα PR: teenei@ta DU Vr. A:

τεθνηκότα Cant. 301. φάτο POR.
303. AUTON: αὐτίκα ().

éuoi Lips.: ἐμεῖο H: ἐμοῖο Vr. d.

296. Mynes was husband of Briseis
according to the tradition (see B 690) ;
though there is nothing in H. to

rove that he was anything but her

ing.

298. The idea of a marriage between
Achilles and a captive is alien not only
to the rest of the J/iad but to all the
manners of the heroic age. This no
doubt led Ar. to athetize 295-300, as
we may safely conclude that he did
from the obeli appended in T and U (see
Nicole Scol. Gen. i. p. xliv). The lines
may be due, as van L. suggests, to the
prevalent misunderstanding of I 336
{where see note). But considering the
character of the context we have no
right to leave them out. κουριδίη
ἄλοχος again is always used elsewhere
of τὰς ἐκ παρθενίας yeyaunuévas (Schol.
Von ν 45). The non-Homeric character
of this passage weakens the argument
of Buttmann ZLexi/. s.v. to the contrary.
Compare the Latin use of virgo; quae tibi
virginum, sponso necato, barbara serviet,
ore Osi 29.15, etc. ἄξειν, ‘that
he (Achilles) should take me.’ This
explanation is necessary, as otherwise
ϑαίςειν also would have Patroklos as
subject. But it would not be his busi-
ness to give the wedding-feast. Most
Mss. have ἄξειν τ᾽, which would not
admit this explanation ; but 8 has good

304. «τοναχίζων JL Mor.
306 om. H*. || uH we: μήτε PR.

0” EcTONGXONTO (): ὃὲ cTONdyoNTO U.
305. ἔμοιγε: μοι PR:

authority. For the constr. daicew γάμον
see y 309 δαίνυ τάφον.

302. This passage has often been
admired as an instance of truth to
nature— apretended lamentation for a
stranger covering the expression of a real
sorrow. Heyne, however, is not without
justification in calling this ‘acumen a
poeta nostro alienum.’ He is inclined
therefore to take πρόφαςιν in the sense
attributed to it in 262, of a real cause ;
the grief for Patroklos is not a mere
blind to cover what the women dare not
express otherwise, but a grief really felt
which arouses other and deeper sorrows
of their own, exactly as in 338-39 and
Q 167 ff. The passage thus gains in
dignity and beauty, and the explanation
of npdégacin is supported by and supports
the proposed explanation of 262. The
word here implies occasion, i.e. to begin
with. Compare the lamentations of the
women for Patroklos in = 28 ff., which
we are evidently meant to take as genuine.
Note αὐτῶν for the older αὐτάων.

305. ἐπιπείϑεθ᾽ (-erar), if any of you
will yield to my wishes.

306. πρίν, as though πρὶν ἠέλιον δῦναι
were to follow in 308. The form of the
sentence is forgotten and changed. Cf.
II 62 ov πρὶν . ἀλλ᾽ ὁπότ᾽ av δή.
(Edd. place a full stop at the end of
307, which obscures the connexion. )

840 IAIAAOC T (χιχ)

ἄσασθαι φίλον ἥτορ, ἐπεί pw ἄχος αἰνὸν ἱκάνει,
δύντα δ᾽ ἐς ἠέλιον μενέω καὶ τλήσομαι ἔμπης.
ὡς εἰπὼν ἄλλους μὲν ἀπεσκέδασεν βασιλῆας,
δοιὼ δ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδα μενέτην καὶ δῖος ᾿Οδυσσεύς, . 810
Νέστωρ Ἰδομενεύς τε γέρων θ᾽ ἱππηλάτα Φοϊνιξ,
τέρποντες πυκινῶς ἀκαχήμενον᾽ οὐδέ τι θυμῶι
τέρπετο πρὶν πολέμου στόμα δύμεναι αἱματόεντος.
μνησάμενος δ᾽ ἀδινῶς ἀνενείκατο φώνησέν τε"
“ἢ ῥά νύ μοί ποτε καὶ σύ, δυσάμμορε, φίλταθ᾽ ἑταίρων, 315
αὐτὸς ἐνὶ κλισίηι λαρὸν παρὰ δεῖπνον ἔθηκας
αἶψα καὶ ὀτραλέως, ὁπότε σπερχοίατ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοὶ
Τρωσὶν ἐφ᾽ ἱπποδάμοισι φέρειν πολύδακρυν "Apna.
νῦν δὲ σὺ μὲν κεῖσαι Sedaiypévos, αὐτὰρ ἐμὸν κῆρ
ἄκμηνον πόσιος καὶ ἐδητύος, ἔνδον ἐόντων, 820
σῆι ποθῆι. οὐ μὲν γάρ τι κακώτερον ἄλλο πάθοιμι,
οὐδ᾽ εἴ κεν τοῦ πατρὸς ἀποφθιμένοιο πυθοίμην,
ὅς που νῦν Φθίηφι τέρεν κατὰ δάκρυον εἴβει
χήτεϊ τοιοῦδ᾽ υἷος. ὁ δ᾽ ἀλλοδαπῶν ἐνὶ δήμωι
εἵνεκα ῥιγεδανῆς “EXévns Τρωσὶν πολεμίζω" 325

310. atpeidar DGHU. 311. néctwp τ᾽ PR Harl. a. || Θ᾽ om. ἢ. 312.
οὐδέ τι: οὐδ᾽ ὅ re PR. 314. ἀνενήγκατο Zon. Lex. 216: ἀνενήκατο Αγ.
Lex. 34, 28. 316. KAicin(i)ci JT, fr. Mosc. and ap, Eust.: ϑαλίηισι Harl.
319. ἐμὸν : ἐμοὶ 1: ἔμοιγε ἡ. 821. κακώτερον : ἢ κατώτερον U®. 828.
φϑίηιϑθι Lips. 325. τρωςὶ πτολεμίζω Η.

313. For the phrase πολέμου στόμα 322. τοῦ πατρός, read οὗ πατρός, mine
see note on Καὶ 8. own father: see App. A (vol. i. p. 563).

314. ἀνενείκατο, cf. Herod. i. 86 εἴ Ken with opt., H. G. § 313. Diintzer
ἀνενεικάμενόν τε καὶ ἀναστενάξαντα, 116 reads εἰ καί, but the καί is clearly not
ἐπὶ χρόνον ἄφθογγος ἢν: μόλις δὲ δή Kore in place after οὐδέ, and the change is
ἀνενειχθεὶς εἶπε. The word seems to in no way needed.
mean draw breath, ἀδινῶς being used 324. 6 used of the Ist person is an
as in ἀδινὰ στενάχων. Ap. Rhod. seems extension of the adversative use of the
to take it to mean lifted up his voice article with connecting particles (17. G.
(ἀδινὴν δ᾽ ἀνενείκατο φωνήν 111. 635); ἃ 257. 1), facilitated by A. having just
while medical writers make it = con- spoken of himself virtually in the 3rd
valesce, pick up strength. person. Cf. a 359 μελήσει πᾶσι, μάλιστα

320, ENOON ἐόντων, Of the store that δ᾽ ἐμοί. τοῦ yap κράτος ἔστ᾽ ἐνὶ οἴκωι,
is in my hut, i.e. ‘abundance though and similarly ἃ 352. But the phrase

there be.’ Compare the Odyssean χαρι-
ζομένη παρεόντων and δόρπον δὲ ξείνωι
ταμίη δότω ἔνδον ἐόντων ἡ 100. The gen.
is partitive, the participle being used
almost as a subst.

321. For τι Madvig (Adv. Cr. i. 186)
proposes κε, but this is not necessary

with the potential opt.; AH. G. §
299 f.

is undeniably harsh.

325. Hentze remarks that this is the
only passage in the J/iad, as ξ 68 is the
only one in the Odyssey, where Helen
is mentioned by a Greek (other than
herself) with words of anger. piredanfic,
horrible, a thing to shudder at; οἵ.
(ὀγκρυοέσσης, Z 344. For the form ef.
ἠπεδανός, οὐτιδανός.

as

IAIAAOC T (x1x) 341

es

ἠὲ τὸν ὃς Σκύρωι μοι ἔνι τρέφεται φίλος υἱός,
» Μ , / ,
el που ἔτι ζώει ye Νεοπτόλεμος θεοειδής.

\ ‘ 4 \ >’ \ / s/
πρὶν μὲν yap μοι θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ἐόλπει
> pe. / » ey ὦ ΄ ,
οἷον ἐμὲ φθίσεσθαι ἀπ᾽ “Apryeos ἱπποβότοιο
αὐτοῦ ἐνὶ Τροίηι, σὲ δέ τε Φθίηνδε νέεσθαι, 330
ὡς ἄν μοι τὸν παῖδα θοῆι σὺν νηὶ μελαίνηι

/ 5 Y / e / “

Σκυρόθεν ἐξαγάγοις καί οἱ δείξειας ἕκαστα,

-“ 5 \ CoN PTA Ν e \ / lal
κτῆσιν ἐμὴν δμῶάς τε Kal ὑψερεφὲς μέγα δῶμα.
ἤδη γὰρ ἸΠηλῆά γ᾽ ὀΐομαι ἢ κατὰ πάμπαν

w
co
σι

΄ A Ν Μ / > > /
τεθνάμεν, ἤ που τυτθὸν ἔτι ζώοντ᾽ ἀκάχησθαι
ynpai Te στυγερῶι καὶ ἐμὴν ποτιδέγμενον αἰεὶ
\ » / fe J > / / 33
λυγρὴν ὠγγελίην, OT ἀποφθιμένοιο πύθηται.
A ΝΜ, / ’ \ \ / /
ὡς ἔφατο κλαίων, ἐπὶ δὲ στενάχοντο γέροντες,

μνησάμενοι τὰ ἕκαστος ἐνὶ μεγάροισιν ἔλειπε.

327 ἀθ. Ar. Aph.: τεκμήριον δὲ τῆς διασκευῆς τὸ καὶ ἑτέρως φέρεσθαι τὸν στίχον

εἴ που ἔτι Ζώει re Πυρῆς ἐμὸς ὃν κατέλειπον Did. |
330. ΤΕ: ποῦ ().

ἐόλπει JOT: ἐώλπει ©.

ἐν (). 332. ἐξαγάγηις Bar.
γ᾽: δ᾽ 0. || πάντα Q (yp. naunan).
μενον [1] Syr.: ποτιϑέγμενος ἢ.
339. μνηςάμενος ©. || ἔλειπον J.

335. τεθνάναι Vr. A.
337. πύθοιτο GH.

ζώ(ι)η(ι) CT’. 328.
331. CUN: én A (yp. CUN):
333. Upipepec C°PR: ὑψηρεφὲς C'DG. 334.

336. προτιϑέγ-
338. 30° éctonayonTo ἢ.

326. τόν must be referred to πυθοίμην
in 322 which is very distant, and is only
rarely found with a personal accus. ; E
702, Z 50, A 135. The position of μοι
is against the Homeric rule (Monro).

327. This line was athetized by Ar.
and Aph. on the ground that Achilles
should not be in doubt as to the life of
his son, since Skyros is near to Troy ;
and that the epithet ϑεοειϑής is unsuit-
able. Did. adds another ground—that
there was a variant giving the name
Πυρῆς (the later Pyrrhos?), see above.
But the suspicion attaches to the whole
passage from 326-33 (or 337), for the
Iliad knows nothing of any son of
Achilles, except in the equally doubtful
Q 467. The loose construction of τόν
above is therefore probably a sign of
interpolation, due to a desire to bring
into the J//iad so prominent a hero of
the later Cycle.

331. TON is again suspicious, and we
should perhaps read ὅν (see on 322).
But the use of the article is more de-
fensible here, as it may be resumptive,
him, even my son.

332. The legend of the bringing of
Neoptolemos from Skyros, where he was
reared by his grandfather Lykomedes, is

given in ἃ 506 ff. There, as in the later
Cycle, he brings about the end of the
siege of Troy; here he is evidently
regarded as too young to travel alone,
much less to fight. The discrepancy is
inherent too in the conception of Achilles
as quite a boy when he left home for
Troy ; see I 437-43, A 783 ff. But such
anachronisms are a small matter to a
poet seeking for pathos.

334-37. These lines might be joined on
to 325, but they would still shew the
obvious inconsistency between ὀΐομαι τε-
θνάμεν and 322. It is more probable that
they are intended to reconcile the patent
difficulty in the words κτῆσιν ἐμήν, if
Peleus be still alive.

335. TuTedn is to be taken with ζώοντα,
‘barely alive.’ For the ‘ Aeolic’ accent
of ἀκάχηςθαι see note on E 24.

336. noTidéruenon, collateral with γή-
pat as a cause of grief. ἐμήν, about me,
cf. ἀγγελίην πατρός a 408, a. στρατοῦ β
30, ἀ. ἑτάρων κ 245; and Zen.’s reading
σῆς ἕνεκ᾽ ἀγγελίης Τ' 206. So also σῆι
ποθῆι 321, longing for thee.

337. ὅτε is the usual temporal adv.
after verbs of expectation, and is co-
ordinate with ἀγγελίην.

339. ἔλειπε is the ms. reading. The

342 IAIAAOC T (x1x)

5 /
μυρομένους δ᾽ ἄρα τούς γε ἰδὼν ἐλέησε Κρονίων, 840
> / 74
αἶψα δ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίην ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
\ Ca
“réxvov ἐμόν, δὴ πάμπαν ἀποίχεαι ἀνδρὸς ἑοῖο.
3 \ ΄ 3... ΄,ὔ
ἢ νύ τοι οὐκέτι πάγχυ μετὰ φρεσὶ μέμβλετ Αχιλλεὺς ;
Σ a > ,
κεῖνος ὅ γε προπάροιθε νεῶν ὀρθοκραιράων
= ω \ 7
ἧσται ὀδυρόμενος ἕταρον φίλον: οἱ δὲ δὴ ἄλλοι 345
lal e 5 \ /
οἴχονται μετὰ δεῖπνον, ὁ δ᾽ ἄκμηνος καὶ ἄπαστος.
’ ς Ds \
ἀλλ᾽ ἴθι οἱ νέκτάρ Te καὶ ἀμβροσίην ἐρατεινὴν
/ Sian / ’ “ / Ν “ 55
στάξον ἐνὶ στήθεσσ᾽, ἵνα py μιν λιμὸς ἵκηται.
« 5 a 2 Uf
Os εἰπὼν ὥτρυνε πάρος pewaviay ᾿Αθήνην"
΄ ς “. n y
ἡ δ᾽ ἅρπηι ἐϊκυῖα τανυπτέρυγι λυγυφώνωι 350
> la BI) / ὃ 3, [θέ > \ ἮἌ \
οὐρανοῦ ἐκκατέπαλτο δι’ αἰθέρος. αὐτὰρ Axatot
ΞΕ / \ / - Ε ὮΝ ae
αὐτίκα θωρήσσοντο κατὰ otpatov: ἡ δ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆϊ
\
νέκταρ ἐνὶ στήθεσσι καὶ ἀμβροσίην ἐρατεινὴν
/ ge? / / Ν > \ / θ᾽ 2
στάξ᾽, ἵνα μή μιν λιμὸς ἀτερπὴς γούναθ ἵκηται,
» \ \ \ \ 5 θ / \ δῶ
αὐτὴ δὲ πρὸς πατρὸς ἐρισθενέος πυκινὸν δῶ 355

ΕΣ \ ’ > / n 5] / ig
WLYVETO. TOL ὃ ἀπάνευθε VEWV ENV EOVTO θοάων.

~

|| ἑοῖο Zen.: ἐῆο Par. e: ἐῆος (ἐῆος) 0.
345. ἧστο L. || HOE ON ἄλλον ὦ.

342. παιδὸς U (supr. ἀνδρὸς U?),
343. ΤΟΙ : TI (). 6

344. O re: ὅθε ().
348. JUIN: NIN P,

355. δὲ : ἐν ἄλλωι ὃ᾽ αὖ A.

350. τανυπτέρύτω H (sawp. 1).

351. ἐγκατέπαλτο U.

plur. ἔλειπον however is generally adopted
by editors, as the more usual construc-
tion, when a plur. verb has preceded,
though here it has practically no support.
See ἃ 233-34 ai δὲ... ἐπήϊσαν ἠδὲ éxd-
στη . . ἐξαγόρενεν.

942, é€ofo, thine own, so Zen. only ;
App. A, vol. i. p. 562.

343, μέμβλετ᾽, generally explained as
μέμβλεται, but it is much better to take
it as=péuBreTo (ᾧΦ 516, χ 12), for μέ-μλ-
ero, a reduplicated thematic aor. like κέ-
κλ-ετο, etc. In Hes. Vheog. 61 read
μέμβλετ᾽ ἐνὶ for μέμβλεται ἐν. There is
no good evidence for such a form as
μέμβλεται at all, until we come to Ap.
Rhod. and Kallim. who invented a pre-
sent μέμβλομαι, through a misunder-
standing of the text.

344. Cf. 23; 347-48, cf. T 38-39.

350. ἅρπη : presumably from its name

a bird of prey, but of course incapable of

identification. Aristotle (H. A. ix. 2. 4)
appears to have applied the name to
some sea-bird. For other references see
Thompson Goss. s.v.

351. We must divide €k-Kat-én-aATo,
as is clear from κατεπάλμενος A 94, not,
as some have proposed, ἐκ-κατ-έπαλτο from
πάλλομαι (which does not mean to leap
but fo shake) ; see on Ὁ 645.

354. ἵκηται, so all mss. ; edd. since
Wolf have generally read ἵκοιτο from
conjecture. In B 4, N 649, O 598, II
650, where the subj. is used in narrative
of an event which is past for the narrator,
it always occurs after a verb implying
doubt or inquiry, and may thus be taken
to vividly present the thought as it is
in the mind of the character represented.
In this case no such verb of doubting
or seeking precedes ; but the mood may
with some violence still be explained
as a direct presentation of Athene’s
thought, put, as we might almost say,
between inverted commas ; and the close
neighbourhood of the direct statement
in 348 may have contributed to this.
But here, as in the cases mentioned, it
is more probable that the opt. is original,
and that later usage has produced an
alteration of the text. See H. G. § 298
and notes on = 165, O 23.

IAIAAOC T (χιχ)

343

ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε ταρφειαὶ νιφάδες Διὸς ἐκποτέονται
ψυχραί, ὑπαὶ ῥιπῆς αἰθρηγενέος Bopéao,

/
ὡς τότε ταρφειαὶ κόρυθες λαμπρὸν γανόωσαι

fal ’ / \ > / “ /
νηῶν ἐκῴφορέοντο καὶ ἀσπίδες ομφαλόεσσαι

900

θώρηκές τε κραταιγύαλοι καὶ μείλινα δοῦρα.

αἴγλη δ᾽ οὐρανὸν ἷκε, γέλασσε δὲ πᾶσα περὶ χθὼν

fal \ nr ΄ \ \ / v
χαλκοῦ ὑπὸ στεροπῆς" ὑπὸ δὲ κτύπος ὥρνυτο ποσσὶν

ἀνδρῶν: ἐν δὲ μέσοισι κορύσσετο δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς.

a i EIN: \ \ , \ , εν Et in
τοῦ Kal ὀδόντων μὲν καναχὴ πέλε, τὼ δέ οἱ ὄσσε 365

λαμπέσθην ws εἴ τε πυρὸς σέλας, ἐν δέ οἱ ἦτορ
Bu (ἢ » e Sw, \ ,ὕ

Sov’ ἄχος ἄτλητον: ὁ δ᾽ ἄρα Τρωσὶν μενεαίνων
δύσετο δῶρα θεοῦ, τά οἱ “Ἤφαιστος κάμε τεύχων.

357. Nipddec . . (359) ταρφειαὶ om. J.

Syr. Bar. Mor.: ὑπὸ ἢ ὑπαὶ Eust.

popéonto Lips. || LPR place this line after 361.
After this Bar. Mor. Vr. A add ἐκ νηῶν ἐχέοντο, βοὴ 3° GcBectoc ὀρώρει.
Ike: ἧκε Q. || réNace δὲ χϑὼν nauuttwp Schol. Theokr. i. 31.

365-68 ad. Ar. (see below).

tn’ ἀςτεροπῆς 1).
PR. || of om. D.

ὄρνυτο AC).

|| ἐκπετέονται Vr. b A. 358. Und
360. ἐκ νηῶν ἐφέροντο P: ἐκ νηῶν
361. ϑοῦρα: ϑῶρα PR.
362.
363. ὑπαί ().
368. θεοῖο

357. Διός here shews clear evidence of
a primitive meaning ‘sky.’ So N 837.

358=O0171, q.v. 359. Cf. N 265.

360. ἐκφορέοντο, were borne forth by
the wearers; a rather curious phrase,
but more Epic in its simplicity than the
periphrases designed to conceal its bald-
ness: ‘prodibant, ut arma dicta sint
pro armatis’ Heyne.

361. κραταιγύαλοι, with solid plates,
here only. The θώρηξ was composed of
a solid breastplate and backplate; O
530, and Pausan. x. 26. 5. But the
line by its awkward position, which one
family of mss. has corrected, clearly
betrays itself as a late interpolation
(App. B, iii. 3 ¢).

362. The ideas of laughing and shining
pass so naturally into one another that
we can hardly confine the word réAacce
here absolutely to the latter sense, though
it is no doubt the original one; the
former must have been prominent also in
the poet’s mind. Cf. Lucr. ii. 325 totaque
circum Aere renidescit tellus, Hor. C. iv.
11. 6 ridet argento-domus. (Root γλασ,
to shine, according to Ahrens Beitr. 140,
ef. ἀ-γλα-ός, γλήνεα = γλάσνεα.)

365-68. ἀθετοῦνται στίχοι τέσσαρες
γελοῖον γὰρ τὸ βρυχᾶσθαι τὸν ᾿Αχιλλέα,
h τε συνέπεια οὐδὲν (nret διαγραφέντων
αὐτῶν. ὁ δὲ Σιδώνιος ἠθετηκέναι μὲν τὸ
πρῶτόν φησιν αὐτοὺς τὸν ᾿Αρίσταρχον,

ὕστερον δὲ περιελεῖν τοὺς ὀβελούς, ποιη-
τικὸν νομίσαντα τὸ τοιοῦτος ὁ μέντοι
᾿Αμμώνιος ἐν τῶι περὶ τῆς ἐπεκδοθείσης
διορθώσεως (the second edition of Ar.’s
recension) οὐδὲν τοιοῦτο λέγει Did. The
scholion is important as shewing the
uncertainty of the tradition as to some
points of Ar.’s doctrine in the time of
Didymos. For Ammonios see note on
K 398. To reconcile his silence with
the words of Dion. Sidonios, Lehrs
suggests that Ar. may have ‘removed
the obeli’ in his lectures after the pub-
lication of his second edition. The
question turns mainly on two points,
first whether the lines are ‘grotesque,’
as Ar. thought, and secondly on the
apparent reference to the ὁπλοποιΐα in
368. As to the first modern critics may
hesitate as Ar. did —a sympathetic reader
may find in them barbaric grandeur like
that of O 607-09, where others only see
turgid exaggeration. A reference to
the ὁπλοποιΐα will of course exclude them
from a place in the original poem ; it is
just possible that the Mis may have
known of a divine panoply made by
Hephaistos for Achilles before = existed,
as we have no reason to doubt Cheiron’s
Pelian spear. My own feeling is that
the passage may be retained as primitive,
but that 368 has been altered after the
addition of >.

344 IAIAAOC T (x1x)

κνημῖδας μὲν πρῶτα περὶ κνήμηισιν ἔθηκε
καλάς, ἀργυρέοισιν ἐπισφυρίοις ἀραρυίας" 370
δεύτερον αὖ θώρηκα περὶ στήθεσσιν ἔδυνεν.
ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ap’ ὦμοισιν βάλετο ξίφος ἀργυρόηλον
χάλκεον: αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα σάκος μέγα τε στιβαρόν τε
εἵλετο, τοῦ δ᾽ ἀπάνευθε σέλας γένετ᾽ ἠύτε μήνης.
5

iz 5) 7 / /
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἂν ἐκ πόντοιο σέλας ναύτηισι φανήηι 375

/
καιομένοιο πυρός: τὸ δὲ καίεται ὑψοθ᾽ ὄρεσφι
a % / U
σταθμῶι ἐν οἰοπόλωι' τοὺς δ᾽ οὐκ ἐθέλοντας ἄελλαι
͵ δ bat) , , » , θ ΄ Υ
πόντον ἐπ ἰχθυόεντα φίλων ἀπάνευθε φέρουσιν
rn >
Os am ᾿Αχιλλῆος σάκεος σέλας αἰθέρ᾽ ἵκανε
rn /
καλοῦ δαιδαλέου. περὶ δὲ τρυφάλειαν ἀείρας 380
\ / / €. 3 > \ \ > A
κρατὶ θέτο βριαρήν: ἡ δ᾽ ἀστὴρ ws ἀπέλαμπεν
’
ἵππουρις τρυφάλεια, περισσείοντο δ᾽ ἔθειραι
χρύσεαι, ἃς “Ἥφαιστος ἵει λόφον ἀμφὶ θαμειάς.
Ο lal ’ 3 a 5 Fz
πειρήθη δ᾽ ἕο αὐτοῦ ἐν ἔντεσι δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς,

315. φανείη CGJPQSU Harl. a. 376. τὸ δὲ: τό τε Ar. T. 818. φέρωει

Wary, ok 379. an’: ὑπ᾽ 5. || cakeoc: κεφαλης Syr.
® €00 Zen.:

9. 27

χρύςειαι (ΗΟ. 384. 0 ἔο Ar. ©:
Par. j}: δέ of GST! (ὁ corr.) U Par. e

381. Bpiapan H. 383.
ὃὲ of Ptol. Ask.: δ᾽ éoi T

369-73=T 330-32, 334- 371 is
later, as usual.

874. This line has been suspected from
the days of Hermann and Heyne, as it
does not go well with the following
simile; in other cases where comparisons
are accumulated they illustrate different
aspects of the subject (see on B 455) ;
but this is not the case here. The com-
parison to the moon, too, shews that the
poet was thinking of a round shield (ef.
Ψ 455) which we have no ground for
thinking that Achilles bore. The line
is of the familiar type where a rhapsode
thought a verb necessary or apt to com-
plete the sense of a phrase, and added
it at the beginning of a line, which he
then filled out as best he could.

375. The comparison depends on the
distance at which a light on a hich hill
can be seen at sea. Perhaps it is also
meant to suggest the additional thought
that the sight of Achilles in his shining
armour cheers his men as the sight of a
shepherd’s fire cheers mariners who have
been driven out of their course and do
not know where they are. ἐκ πόντοιο,
an instance of the frequent idiom by
which the source of a perception is re-

garded as being in the percipient, not in
the thing perceived ;
appears to sailors (seeing it) from the
sea’ means only ‘appears to sailors on

the sea.’ See on JI 634. ὅτ᾽ Gn, ὅτε κ᾽
Brandreth. But there is some ground

for doubting ἄν or ke in similes: see H.G.
§ 289. 2a.

377. οἷοπόλωι, Jonely, see N 473, with
note. ‘The sense ἐν ὧι ὄϊες πωλοῦνται
given by the scholia happens to suit here
but not elsewhere. cTaeuai, steading,
very likely implies a sheep-station, see
Σ 589.

382. This line is evidently interpolated
from X 315, where Achilles is in rapid
motion, so that nepiccetonto has a special
force which is lost here. The addition
involves a very awkward repetition of
τρυφάλεια. It is not clear whether
ἔϑειραι had an initial F (If 795, X 516).
383 is in both places an interpolation
(see App. Crit. on X 316) designed to
bring in an allusion to the ὁπλοποιΐα.

384. 0° Eo, 1.6. δὲ Fé’(o) (Heyne) or
rather δ᾽ éFé(o), where éFéo is the em-
phatic reflexive form. (See on N 495,
= 162.) This is substantially Zen.’s
reading δ᾽ ἑοῦ.

thus ‘the gleam’

ν᾽

IAIAAOC T (χιχ)

> > / \ > / ᾽ A “
εἰ οἵ ἐφαρμόσσειε καὶ ἐντρέχοι uyNaa γυΐα" 385
“- ᾽ \ , , U -
τῶι δ᾽ εὖτε πτερὰ γίνετ᾽, ἄειρε δὲ ποιμένα λαῶν.

ἐκ δ᾽ ἄρα σύριγγος πατρώϊον ἐσπάσατ᾽ ἔγχος

βριθὺ μέγα στιβαρόν'

Ν \ > / 5» » ᾽ -
τὸ μὲν οὐ δύνατ᾽ ἄλλος ᾿Αχαιῶν

> / a >
πάλλειν, ἀλλά μιν οἷος ἐπίστατο πῆλαι ᾿Αχιλλεύς,
/ \ \ / , r
Πηλιάδα μελίην, τὴν πατρὶ φίλων πόρε Χείρων 390
fel / ,
ἸΤηλίου ἐκ κορυφῆς, φόνον ἔμμεναι ἡρώεσσιν.
“, > > / \ αὖ > /
ἵππους δ᾽ Αὐτομέδων τε καὶ “AdXKipos ἀμφιέποντες
4 \ \ / ’ τ > ‘
fevyvuov: ἀμφὶ δὲ καλὰ λέπαδν᾽ ἕσαν, ἐν δὲ χαλινοὺς
fal » \ , ΄ / -“ Ἂ /
γαμφηλῆις ἔβαλον, κατὰ δ᾽ ἡνία τεῖναν ὀπίσσω

κολλητὸν ποτὶ δίφρον.

΄ \ 4 Bs
ὁ δὲ μάστιγα φαεινὴν 395

\ \ > lal 999 50 b) /
χειρὶ λαβὼν ἀραρυῖαν ἐφ᾽ ἵπποιιν ἀνόρουσεν
Αὐτομέδων: ὄπιθεν δὲ κορυσσάμενος βῆ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
τεύχεσι παμφαίνων ὥς T ἠλέκτωρ Ὑπερίων.
/ ? Cs , / \ ς »
σμερδαλέον δ᾽ ἵπποισιν ἐκέκλετο πατρὸς ἑοῖο"

\ /

— / / \ /, 7,
“Ξάνθέ τε καὶ Βαλίε, τηλεκλυτὰ τέκνα Llodapyys, 400

385. ἐντρέχει Bar.
Ar. Ὡ:

ruta: ϑῶρα GHPS Harl. a (yp. ruta).
αὖτε ai ἀπὸ τῶν πόλεων Harl. a, Par. g(?):

386. εὖτε
τε GHQ Par. j: ηὗτε AS:

ἐὼτε J: Ate Vr. A: ὥςτε Aph. ‘Vat. 10’: πρότερον γράφων ὁ ’Aplorapyos TAI

δ᾽ εὖτε μετέγραψεν ὕστερον τῶι ὃ᾽ αὗτε Schol. A (Did. ? see Ludwich). |

387. ἐςπάςατ᾽ ἔγχος : ἔγχος gpuccen Ap. Lew. 147. 6.
ἐνταῦθα μὲν αὐτοὺς ZAnvddoros καταλέλοιπεν ἐπὶ δὲ τοῦ ἸΠατρόκλου (II 141-44)
890. πόρε A™PR Syr.: τάμε Q (Ar. διχῶς, Did. on Π 143).
392. ἀμφιέποντε C.
394. τεῖνον Ii: τεῖνεν CC).

L Syr.
ἌΧ. «

ἠθέτηκεν An.
391. ἐν κορυφῆις Ar. A 8η7.
Ζεύγνυςαν (G Harl. b, Par. d 1.
ἐπὶ Harl. a. 396. ἵπποιςιν CQ) Harl. a.
399. cuapdadéon S.

385. épapudcceie, the aor. seems to
require the trans. sense, whether he had
fitted them on well. If we took it as
intrans., whether they fitted, we should
expect ἐφαρμόζοι. See note on P 210.

386. etUTe, see note on Τ' 10. There
is no choice but to accept this (or 7ire)
in the sense as; Ar., if it is true that
he adopted αὖτε on second thoughts,
held that we could ‘understand’ ws as
in his interpretation of ὁ δὲ φῆ κώδειαν
ἀνασχών & 499. But the supposition
is untenable in both cases. In Epic
language τῶι δ᾽ αὖτε πτερὰ yivero could
only mean ‘they became (literal) wings
again to him,’ which is not to be believed.
Geipe itself shows that a particle of com-
parison is required, unless we are to
imagine Achilles soaring in the following
scenes. When the particle precedes we

γίγνετ᾽
388-91 ἀθ.

393. Ζεύγνυον Ar. ὥ:
395. προτι Syr. :
398. παχλιφαίΝων : Aaunduenoc DST.

400. τέκνα : Opa ἢ (τέκνα R™),

see that it covers ἄειρε δέ, like wings to
lift him.

387. cupirroc, a pipe, i.e. evidently a
socket in which to set a spear (in this
sense only here). Compare the doupoddxy
ἐύξοος of a 128, which stands against a
pillar in the house of Odysseus.

388-91=II 141-44, where see note.
There is no reason to doubt their authen-
ticity here.

392. “AAkwusoc, the familiar short form
of ᾿Αλκιμέδων (II 197, ete.) ; so also Q

474, 574.
393. €can, sctiled, aor. of ifw, see on
280. Aénadna, see App. M, ὃ ὃ.

394. See on I’ 261.

398. ἡλέκτωρ “Tnepioon, see notes on
Z 513, Θ 480.

400. See on Π 149-50; and cf. ©
185.

846 IAIAAOC Τ (xrx)

ἄλλως δὴ φράξεσθε σαωσέμεν ἡνιοχῆα
avy Δαναῶν ἐς ὅμιλον, ἐπεί x” ἕωμεν πολέμοιο,
μηδ᾽ ὡς ΤΙάτροίλον λίπετ᾽ αὐτόθι τεθνηῶτα."
τὸν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπὸ ξυγόφι προσέφη πόδας αἰόλος ἵππος
Ξάνθος, ἄφαρ δ᾽ ἤμυσε καρήατι, πᾶσα δὲ χαίτη 405
ζεύγλης ἐξεριποῦσα παρὰ ζυγὸν οὖδας ἵκανεν"
αὐξήεντα δ᾽ ἔθηκε θεὰ λευκώλενος “Hen:
“Kal λίην σ᾽ ἔτι νῦν γε σαώσομεν, ὄβριμ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεῦ"
ἀλλά Tor ἐγγύθεν ἦμαρ ὀλέθριον: οὐδέ τοι ἡμεῖς
αἴτιοι, ἀλλὰ θεός τε μέγας καὶ μοῖρα κραταιή. 410
οὐδὲ γὰρ ἡμετέρη. βραδυτῆτί τε νωχελίηι τε
Τρῶες ἀπ᾽ apouv Ἰ]ατρόκλου τεύχε᾽ ἕλοντο"

401. HNIoyHa ΔΙΟΗΤΙΕ :
χ᾽ ἕωμεν A™H (supr. 0) 5: χ᾽
yp. Par. j: τινὲς χέομεν Sch. U:
yp. C: τ ἐῶμεν 2,
CDGPTU Syr.
οὐδέ τι GPR:
ὥμοιςει ὦ.

407 ad. Ar. 408.
ἀλλ᾽ οὔ τοι H.

ἡνιοχῆας ).
ἕομεν JPR Harl. a:
κ᾿ ἐῶμεν Vr.
403. αὐτοῦ A (γρ. autdée!) GPR Syr. || τεθνειῶτα A (supr. H)
ὄμβρια᾽ CHLR.
411 (first) Te om. PR Vr. A: re U. 412.

402. δαναῶν : ἐν ἄλλωι λαῶν A. ||

χέωμεν 1): χεῶμαν Q,
A Lips.™: κ᾽ €ouen Et. Gud. 8. 23,

409. ἀλλ᾽ ἢ τοι PR. ||

401. ἄλλως, zn other (i.e. better) wise
than before. cawcéuen, aor. as I 230.
ἡνιοχῆα, the sing. is more forcible,
though the plur. is of course possible.

402. The Mss. variants point to ἕωλιεν
formed by Ionic metathesis of quantity
from ἥ-ομεν, subj. of 7-=sd- meaning
satiate (see on N 315), so that the sense
is ‘when we have had our fill of fighting.’
The form has doubtless been influenced
by oréwuev for στήομεν, and has thus
exchanged the original a- for e- (so also
κτέωμεν beside κτάμεναι), retaining it
however in the infin. ἄμεναι (a-) & 70.
It is natural to write ἅομεν (ἅ-) as a
restoration of the original form, but
here as with στέωμεν the & is a difficulty;
see note on A 348 (H. G. § 81). &70
shews that the verb is intrans., and is
not to be taken as=give them their fill.
Whether we should write ἅμεναι there
or x’ ἔωμεν here is not clear ; the tradi-
tion is not consistent in its treatment
of Ionic psilosis; ef. the doubts as to
ἀδινός or ἁδινός, ἄδην and ἅδην, ἀθρόος
and ἁθρόος, ἄμαξα and ἅμαξα, and others.

403. μηδέ rejects the thought con-
veyed by the ws-clause, and be it not
as (it was when) ye left P. αὐτόθι, on
the field.

404. nédac aiddoc, here only. αἰόλος
is applied to worms, wasps, and the gad-

fly in H. ‘The ideas of rapid movement
and sparkling light pass easily into one
another, and it is not always easy to see
which the adj. implies. See Buttmann,
Lexil. s.v. Here it is to be compared
with μαρμαρυγαὶ ποδῶν 6 265, the spark-
ling, glancing, of feet in rapid movement.
Cf. κύνες ἀργοί A 50.

405. ἤμυςε, bowed down, cf. B 148.

406=P 440,

407. αὐδήεντα, vocal, with human
voice. Compare the commentators on
€ 334 βροτὸς αὐδήεσσα, κ 186 θεὸς αὐδή-
εσσα. Galen on Hippokrates says that
animals have φωνή but men alone αὐδή :
but this is not borne out by ᾧ 411, Hes.
Scut. Herc. 396. The line was athetized
by Ar. as superfluous and contradicting

418, because the same god who gave

the voice ought to have taken it away ;
which is perfectly true by mythological
rules of etiquette, but speaks equally
against 418. Why Hera should have
worked the miracle it is not easy to see.

The information given to Achilles is no:

more than his mother has told him, with
the single exception of the detail of his
fate in 417.

411. νωχελίηι does not recur in Greek
before Iamblichos, though Eur. and a
few later poets have zwxeijs=sluggish.
The origin of the word is unknown.

-- ὦ

Ss Pp ae TP ὁ

IAIAAOC T (χιχ) 347

, \ lal ” Δ a / ,ὕ
ἀλλὰ θεῶν ὥριστος, ὃν ἠύκομος τέκε Λητώ,

ΝΜ ΓΙ 35 / Ν Ὁ “- »
ἔκταν᾽ ἐνὶ προμάχοισι καὶ “Exrope κῦδος ἔδωκε.

a \ / “ “ iy / / =
νῶϊ δὲ καί κεν ἅμα πνοιῆι Lepvporo θέοιμεν, 415
7 > ΄ ον σὰν > \ ‘ > A
ἥν περ ἐλαφροτάτην dao ἔμμεναι" ἀλλὰ σοὶ αὐτῶι
μόρσιμόν ἐστι θεῶι τε καὶ ἀνέρι ἶφι δαμῆναι."

ὡς ἄρα φωνήσαντος ἐρινύες ἔσχεθον αὐδήν.

ν \ [aes / / / : \ > ΄
τὸν δὲ μέγ ὀχθήσας προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς"
af Ξάνθε, τί μοι θάνατον μαντεύεαι ; οὐδέ τί σε χρή. 420
εὖ νύ τοι οἷδα καὶ αὐτὸς 6 μοι μόρος ἐνθάδ᾽ ὀλέσθαι,
νόσφι φίλου πατρὸς καὶ μητέρος"

> / \ an
ov λήξω πρὶν Τρῶας

\
ἀλλὰ καὶ ἔμπης
/ ᾽
ἅδην ἐλάσαι πολέμοιο."
, » He
pa καὶ ἐν πρώτοις ἰάχων ἔχε μώνυχας ἵππους.

413. Gpicroc G.
THN Syr.
422. κητρὸς PRU.

416-17. Athetized by Ar. as needless ;
‘we know that wind is the swiftest,
but φασί is used of a report about some-
thing not certainly known; nor is it
suitable in the mouth of a horse.’ These
reasons are not convincing. φασί is often
used of things well known, and indeed
to emphasize “the fact that they are well
known (see for instance 96). It is here
a naive way of bringing a natural fact
into relation with mankind, as we should
say, ‘ Zephyros has the swiftest flight
known to man.’ A somewhat more
serious difficulty might be raised upon
II 149 f. ; the poet here clearly does not
know that Zephyros is Xanthos’ own
father. αὐτῶι, to contrast Achilles with
the speaker ; 3 as we might say ‘on your
own account,’ apart from us.

418. The Erinyes elsewhere have purely
moral functions. They seem here to
have developed almost into an abstrac-
tion of the law which orders the universe,
physical as well as moral (see note on

415. e€wuen (A supr.) C.
|| TON περ ἐλαφρότατον Schol. Ap. Rhod. ii. 276.

416. HN:
421. ὅ μοι: ὅτι ().

416-17 ἀθ. Ar.

423. Tp@ac: τρωςὶν Bar. || ἐλάςω ‘ Vat. 10’ and ap. Eust.

I 454). This however is obviously a
very refined conception; we are not
surprised to meet it in Herakleitos
ἔξ γὰρ οὐχ ὑπερβήσεται μέτρα, φησὶν

ὁ Ἡράκλειτος" εἰ δὲ μή, ᾿Ερινύες μιν Δίκης
ἐπίκουροι ἐξευρήσουσιν, Plut. de Evil. 11,
Ῥ. 604 A), but it cannot belong to the
early Epic age. The explanation of
Schol. A πάντα τὰ παράλογα καὶ τεράστια
δοκεῖ ὑπὸ ᾿Ερινύων γίνεσθαι, only shews
that he fully felt the difficulty. This
line could be more easily dispensed
with than 407. (Compare Aen. ili. 379
prohibent nam caetera Parcae Scire
Helenum farique vetat Saturnia Iuno,
where the Parcae are intelligible enough.)
€cxeeon 15 here best taken as an aor. ;
N 163.

421. τοι, Brandreth’s τό is doubtless
right.
423. For ἅδην ἐλάςαι πολέμοιο see

note on N 315.
424. Bentley conj. ἐν πρώτοισιν ἐών,
comparing A 341, M 315.

x

INT RODU CLLON

Ir is evident that the traditional title of this book, Θεομαχία, is a complete
misnomer. There is in Φ a real battle of the gods; but all that we have
here is a bombastic introduction (1-74) which leads to nothing whatever, and
is in quite ludicrous contradiction to the peaceful mood of 133 ff. It is
likely enough that the prologue here really belongs to the battle in ® ; for
Φ 385 or 387 might follow on Y 74 with much gain to the significance of
55-74. We have, in fact, a repetition of the phenomenon of N—3Z, where
we found the prologue of the Διὸς ᾿Απάτη detached from the main story of
= and prefixed to the quite independent narrative of N.

The cause of the dislocation can be perceived. The Theomachy of ® has
been blended into a continuous story with the fight with the River. Its
prologue therefore was dropped. The fight with the River, and indeed
the greater part of the battles with which we have now to deal, involve
constant intervention by the gods. But after O had been brought into the
corpus of the Jliad, such intervention was only permissible when the veto
of Zeus in O 1-27 had been formally removed. For this purpose the
discarded prologue of the Theomachy, with its direct recantation of the
veto (24, 25), was placed before the fight with Aineias, which concludes with
the direct interference of Poseidon. That the otherwise incredible change
from tumultuous frenzy to peaceful indifference in the attitude of the gods at
large should have been left untouched does more credit to the pious
conservatism than to the skill of the editor.

The second section of the hook, 76-352, is well marked, and has all the
appearance of an independent “ Aeneid.” Far from having any special
appropriateness to this point of the war, it is glaringly inconsistent with its
context. Achilles issues from the camp burning with the fury of insatiable
revenge ; yet his advice to his very first adversary is to go away “ lest, some
harm befall him” (196). In the whole of this speech (178-98) there is not
one word belonging to the situation. Achilles is in a merciful and, indeed,
bantering mood, and long-suffering enough to listen to the wearisome
repetitions, like those of an opera chorus, “let us have no more talk,” where-
with Aineias adorns the lengthy Trojan pedigree which he asserts that
Achilles well knows already (200-58). When they come to blows Achilles
is actually “afraid” at his adversary’s cast (262), and his own return blow
fails of its effect. Finally, after hearing of what “might have been,” we find

348

IAIAAOC T (xx) 349

Poseidon suddenly coming forward as a champion of the Trojans, in con-
tradiction of all his policy, and saving Aineias for the future glory of his
family.

There can, in short, be little doubt that we have here a separate poem
with a distinct object. That object must undoubtedly be the glorification of
Aineias—an apology perhaps for the other episode twice alluded to, when he
ran away from Achilles at Lyrnessos without a blow. Here he attributes his
previous weakness to Zeus (242), and makes up for it by facing his enemy
with not unequal courage ; he rather than Achilles is throughout the hero.
And the curious allusion to his descendants in 307 clearly gives the reason of
the interpolation—a desire to bring into some sort of harmony with the [liad
a later local legend of the kingship of the family of Aineias in the Troad, and
perhaps even to explain a Poseidon-cultus among them.

The “ Aeneid” seems to be a complete whole ; doubts arise only as to
the “prologue in heaven” 76-155, and to some passages in the Trojan
genealogy. The latter are discussed in the notes on 215 and 219; with
regard to the prologue we can only say that it may well be a later introduc-
tion, but that it must have become firmly attached before the wild con-
tradiction with 48—74 could have been allowed to stand.!

That the last section (353-503) partly consists of the story of the
primitive Mavis, the beginning of Achilles’ career of vengeance, is highly
probable. The main question is as to the point where the old work begins.
Between 407 and 503 suspicion can attach only to a few short passages (see
on 445, 463, 499). But the words of Achilles in 354-63 are, as Hentze
has remarked, ‘‘ weak and colourless,” and below the level required by the
situation, shewing less energy even than those of Hector (366-72). It is
therefore probable that 353-80 form a transition passage due to the
diaskeuast who interpolated the “ Aeneid.” With 381 the original opening
of the battle may have begun. Still there are traces which seem to betray
a later hand in the following passage. The apparent allusion to the Panionic
festival of the Helikonian Poseidon in 404 has caused suspicion in some
quarters. But those who believe in the origin of the Mijvis in Greece
proper may take this as a trace rather of the Achaian worship of the god in
the Peloponnesian Helike. They will regard with more doubt the description
of Iphition’s origin in 384 ff., which betrays more knowledge of Asia Minor
than we find elsewhere in the older portions of the Iliad, and is evidently in
close connexion with a passage in the Catalogue (B 865-66). I should
regard 383—94 as interpolated—here again the taunt of Achilles seems
meaningless, and very different from the intense passion of his other short
speeches, 429, 449 ff. The family history is only enough to delay the
action at a moment where rapidity is needed, without giving any particular
importance to the victim, or significance to the strong word ἐκπαγλότατε.
But the point is one for the scholar’s private judgment.

1 Tt is, however, permissible to conjecture, with Erhardt, that 1-40, 75 ff. formed the
original prologue of the Aeneid, and that only 41-74 belong to the Theomachy ot Φ.

IAIAAOC T

Ocouayia.

“ fe ,

Os οἱ μὲν Tapa νηυσὶ κορωνίσι θωρήσσοντο

) \ 7 5 / es / 5 , ὮΝ ty

ἀμφὶ σέ, Ἰ]ηλέος υἱέ, μάχης ἀκόρητοι Ἀχαιοί,

mon ’ ΝΣ τ ἡ ΔΈΟΝ lal OL

[pies δ᾽ αὖθ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἐπὶ θρωσμῶι πεδίοιο"

Ζεὺς δὲ Θέμιστα κέλευσε θεοὺς ἀγορήνδε καλέσσαι
N eee) > / / ς hy ip

κρατὸς ἀπ Οὐλύμποιο πολυπτύχου: ἢ δ᾽ ἄρα πάντηι 5

φοιτήσασα κέλευσε Διὸς πρὸς δῶμα νέεσθαι.

9, 5 n / 2 3 a

οὔτέ τις οὖν ποταμῶν ἀπέην, νόσφ ‘OQKeavoto,

οὔτ᾽ ἄρα νυμφάων, ai τ᾽ ἄλσεα καλὰ νέμονται

nr I Uh
Kal πηγὰς ποταμῶν καὶ πίσεα ποιήεντα.

2. ἀκόρητοι HQ (T supr.) Vr. A Par. ἃ (6 supr.) fj, and ap. Nik. : ἀκόρητον Q

(Ar. διχῶς ?).
μετὰ MPWTOICIN ἐόντι.

δὲ eéuicr’ ἐκέλευςε pseudo-Plut. 152. 36. || eéuicts GST. || κέλευε C.
9. nefc(c)ea CGH (supr. 1) P?QR Syr. Lips. Cant. Vr. A

τὶ GHJPRST Syr.

Mose. 2: πήςεα LP!: niccea Harl. a.

3. ave’: αὖ L. || After this (C man. rec.) J add ἕκτορι ewpricconto
4, δ᾽ ἐκέλευςε eeuicta P: O° ἐκέλευςε eéuicti Lips. :

8. ταί

2. ἀκόρητοι is more in accordance
with the usual rhythm (cf. κάρη κομό-
wvtes), than ἀκόρητον, though less sup-
ported. And it is Achilles’ men, not
he himself, who might be supposed to
have had a surfeit of battle.

3. epwcudli nedioio, see note on A 56,
whence the line is no doubt copied.
The line added in CJ is a good illus-
tration of the constant tendency to
supply verbs, which in this instance has
not prevailed.

4. So in β 69 it is Themis who ἀνδρῶν
ἀγορὰς ἠμὲν λύει ἠδὲ καθίζει. The ap-
propriateness of the function is obvious,
The goddess reappears in H. only in O
87, 93.

5. κρατός, only here for mowntain-
top, instead of κάρηνον, see on A 809.
It is however used three times in Od.
in a metaphorical sense, in the phrase
ἐπὶ κρατὸς λιμένος.

7. The scholia assign various reasons
for the absence of Okeanos ; but Heyne
justly remarks that this is less strange
than the presence of nymphs and rivers
in a council of the gods. He thinks
that 7-9 may have been interpolated to
account for the presence of the River
Skamandros in the Theomachy as one of
the gods. It has been also suggested
that as Hestia, the personification of the
fixed dwelling, alone stays away from
the solemn procession of the gods in the
Phuedrus (247 A), so Okeanos is absent
because he is the bond that holds the
world together.

8-9. Compare ¢ 123-24 νυμφάων at
ἔχουσ᾽ ὀρέων αἰπεινὰ κάρηνα καὶ πηγὰς
ποταμῶν καὶ πίσεα ποιήεντα, and Hymn.
Ven. 91-.-99. There is mention of nymphs
in general in Q 616, ν 350, ἕ 485, p 211;
of νηΐδες Z 22, % 444, T 384, ὀρεστιάδες ὦ
420 (where they are daughters of Zeus,

350

IAIAAOC T (xx)

351

ἐλθόντες δ᾽ ἐς δῶμα Διὸς νεφεληγερέταο 10
μ YEP
lal ’ / « \ 4
ἕξεστῆις αἰθούσηισιν evifavov, ἃς Aw πατρὶ
“Ἥφαιστος ποίησεν ἰδυίηισι πραπίδεσσιν.

“Ὁ e \ \ » ᾽ / ’ 70} > ,ὔ
ὡς οἱ μὲν Διὸς ἔνδον aynyépat: οὐδ᾽ ἐνοσίχθων

al > e 5 J 7
νηκούστησε θεᾶς, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξ ἁλὸς ἦλθε μετ᾽ αὐτούς,
es
ife δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐν μέσσοισι, Διὸς δ᾽ ἐξείρετο βουλήν' 1ὅ
᾽ 4" > ΄
“πίπτ᾽ αὗτ᾽, ἀργικέραυνε, θεοὺς ἀγορήνδε κάλεσσας ;

Φ \ , | a ,
ἢ τι περὶ Τρώων καὶ ᾿Αχαιῶν μερμηρίζεις ;
τῶν γὰρ νῦν ἄγχιστα μάχη πόλεμός τε δέδηε."
Ν » ᾽ , , , r ΄
τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη νεφεληγερέτα Ζεύς"
ra) > , Saw > / 7, -
ἔγνως, ἐννοσίγαιε, ἐμὴν ἐν στήθεσι βουλήν, 20

e “ ,ὕ 7ὕ ,ὕ > 7, ,
ὧν ἕνεκα ξυνάγειρα: μέλουσι μοι ολλύμενοί περ.

> »
GAN ἤτοι μὲν ἐγὼ μενέω πτυχὶ Οὐλύμποιο
>’ e / ΄ \ »
ἥμενος, ἔνθ᾽ ὁρόων φρένα τέρψομαι: οἱ δὲ δὴ ἄλλοι
" »ν ΒΝ “, \ moa se “5 /
ἔρχεσθ ὄφρ᾽ av ἵκησθε μετὰ Tpdas καὶ ᾿Αχαιούς,

| / ᾿] >’ / ᾽ ee / > \ . /
ἀμφοτέροισι δ᾽ ἀρήγεθ᾽, ὅπηι νόος ἐστὶν ἑκάστου.

τῷ
or

εἰ yap ᾿Αχιλλεὺς οἷος ἐπὶ Τρώεσσι μαχεῖται,

οὐδὲ μίνυνθ᾽ ἕξουσι ποδώκεα IInrelwva.

11. ἐνίζανον Ar. ACU Harl. d, yp. X: ἐφίζανον Zen. Ὡ:
12. ποίης᾽ eiduinics Par. g Syr. and ap. Did.
αὖ GJ: ἄρ᾽ R.
26. ἐπὶ : ἐνὶ Vr. Ὁ A.

Sch. AT.
Bar. Mor.
ἐν : ἑνὶ PR.

16. αὖτ᾽:
23. τέρπομαι ().

τινὲς ENIOPANON
15. ἐξήρετο CPQR
18. τῶν μὲν J: Twrap Syr. 20.
|| uayHta C},

see note), ἀγρονόμοι ζ 106. nicea, water-
meadows. Compare the name Pisa in Elis.

11. énizanon, not ἐφίζανον, is obviously
right ; αἴθουσαι are colonnades, not
benches, as Zen. and others seem to have
held (τινὲς δὲ yp. ‘‘évidpavov,” καθέδρας
οἰηθέντες εἷναι Tas αἰθούσας Sch. AT).

13. The Schol. remarks that the
special mention of Poseidon may allude
to the bad terms on which he had last
parted from Zeus, O 173-218. But of
course Poseidon was the chief rival of
Zeus, and his obedience to a summons
would not be always a matter of course.

18. ἄγχιετα ϑέϑηε, a difficult phrase
here. The obvious sense is ‘has come
to very close quarters’—a singularly
inappropriate expression to use in the
midst of the only pause in the battle
since the beginning of A. But if we
remember that this introduction really
belongs to the Theomachy at the end of
# which takes place in heaven just as
the great crisis, the death of Hector, is
being accomplished on earth, the words

gain their proper significance, and it is
needless to seek for any other, such as
‘is on the point of bursting out’ or ‘is
kindled very nigh Olympos (?),’ or ‘has
come to a crisis,’ or ‘now most nearly
concerns us’ (the gods, Agar in C. R.
xi. 101). There are obvious objections
to all these interpretations.

21. ὧν is of course neuter, and epexe-
getic of βουλήν. ὀλλύμενοι may by a
god be used of either party, but shews
that the Trojans are uppermost in Zeus’
thoughts.

23. φρένα τέρψομαι, wil] take my
ease ; the phrase seems rather inconsist-
ent with 21, but is developed to exaggera-
tion in Φ 389-90.

26. ofoc, without interference of the
gods. Zeus seems to forget that Achilles
will rather gain than lose by such inter-
vention, the Greek gods being the more
powerful. μαχεῖται, a contracted form
of the future not elsewhere found in H.
It is wiser to accept it as evidence of
lateness than to read μάχηται with van L.

352 IAIAAOC T (xx)

/ e an
καὶ δέ τέ μιν Kal πρόσθεν ὑποτρομέεσκον ορῶντες"
,ὔ > lal
νῦν δ᾽, ὅτε δὴ καὶ θυμὸν ἑταίρου χώεται αἰνῶς,
, a / Me ΡΣ
δείδω, μὴ καὶ τεῖχος ὑπὲρ μόρον ἐξαλαπάξηι. 80
“Ν » 7 / / δ᾽ 5 i ”
ὡς ἔφατο Κρονίδης, πόλεμον ἀλίαστον ἐΕγειίρε.
λον . / \ Yj 5
βὰν δ᾽ ἴμεναι πόλεμόνδε θεοί, δίχα θυμὸν ἔχοντες
n - \ 2 if
"Hon μὲν μετ᾽ ἀγῶνα νεῶν καὶ Παλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη

> \ / / 3 > /
ἠδὲ Ποσειδάων γαιήοχος ἠδ᾽ ἐριούνης
Ἑρμείας, ὃς ἐπὶ φρεσὶ πευκαλίμηισι κέκασται" 35
“ b A al / θέ - BX y
Hgaiotos δ᾽ ἅμα τοῖσι κίε σθενεὶ βλεμεαίνων

/ ς n CL € /
χωλεύων, ὑπὸ δὲ κνῆμαι ῥώοντο apaLat:

Nee 5) ¢ 3 -
ἐς δὲ Τρῶας Αρης κορυθαίολος, αὐτὰρ ἅμ᾽ αὐτῶι

lal > / 3 ’ ” ’ if

Φοῖβος ἀκερσεκόμης ἠδ᾽ ᾿Άρτεμις ἰοχέαιρα

, »;; / 1) ΠῚ ΔΎ δ
Λητώ τε Ξάνθός τε φιλομμειδής τ᾽ ᾿Αφροδίτη. 40

98. καὶ δέ: οὐδέ (). || τέ: τί Ar. JST Par. 6:

τὸ Paley 29 om. Lips.*

30. τινὲς γράφουσιν οὐ μέντοι uoip’ ἐςτὶν ἔτι Ζωιοῦ ἀχιλῆος ἱλίου ἐκπέρςαι
εὐναιόμενον πτολίεθρον᾽ πέρςει (ἔπερεε MS.) ϑουράτεος ἵππος καὶ μῆτις ἐπειοῦ

Scha i.

31. dreipe Vr. d: ἤγειρε Q.

32. ἱέναι U, yp. Harl. a. 35.

ἐπὶ A[C]JQ Syr. Vr.b: ἐνὶ ἢ. || Kéxacrat Ar. HPRU Vr. b, Mose. 2: κέκαοτο ().

36. Gua: ἄρα Cant.

40. piAoMMElOHC: yp. ϑιὸς euratip Sch. 1.

28. καὶ dé τε. . Kal, yea, and even;
aremarkable heaping up of conjunctions.
Compare οὐδὲ. . οὐδέ Σ 117 ete. The
combination καὶ δέ τε does not recur in
H. This probably induced Ar. to write
τι for re, but the pronoun is insufferably
weak. :

29, ἑταίρου, because of his friend, as
Κύκλωπος κεχόλωται a 69: H. GL 8 151.

30. It is an old question whether we
should read ὑπὲρ μόρον or ὑπέρμορον.
Most of the grammarians, Aph., Ar. (4),
Ptol. of Askalon ete. preferred the latter,
on account of ὑπέρμορα B 155 (q.v.).
Herodianos hesitated (La R. H. 7. 371).
The familiar ὑπὲρ αἷσαν, however, is in
favour of division. The sense is of
course precisely the same.—The lines
recorded by Sch. Tare a mere conjecture,
unless they come from one of the erratic
texts recorded in the earliest papyri.
They were substituted for 29-30 because
the omniscient god ought not to fear
what might happen.

34. ἐριούνης, a title of Hermes re-
curring in @ 322, with ἐριούνιος in T 72,
four times in Q, and frequently in the
Hymns. The common derivation from
ἐρι- and ὀν-ίν- μι is subject to the ordi-
nary uncertainty of divine titles. In
view of the pastoral character of Hermes
(see on = 491), a derivation from ἔριον,

making wool to grow, is equally possible.
Cf. on ἀκάκητα 11 185.

35. ἐπὶ. . κέκαοσται, tmesis; and so
also perhaps in Q 535 πάντας ἐπ᾽ ἀνθρώ-
mous ἐκέκαστο. It is true that ἐπί there
may be taken as a real preposition, on
the analogy of Y 742 κάλλει ἐνίκα πᾶσαν
ἐπ᾽ aiav, ὦ 509 κεκάσμεθα πᾶσαν ἐπ᾽ alav,
and in Od. we elsewhere find κεκάσθαι
intrans. with ἐν or μετά (with dat.). On
the other hand in J/. the verb takes
either the direct acc. of the object
excelled (= 124) or the gen. of comparison
(Q 546), and, as van L. remarks, the
name ’Emxdory offers some support to
the compound ἐπικεκάσθαι, which is not
elsewhere found. Rhythm and _ sense
alike forbid us to take ἐπὶ ppect together.
κέκαστο of most Mss. is probably a
reminiscence of Q 535. There is some
support for évé in place of ἐπί, but this
does not help. Hermes, Hephaistos,
Artemis and Leto are all new to the
war, in which, outside this and the
next book, they take no part whatever.

36. ceénet βλεμεαίνων, Θ 337. 37=
= 411.

38. κορυθαίολος is only here applied
to any but Hector.

39. ἀκερςεκόμησ, elsewhere only post-
Homeric (Hymn. Ap., Pindar and
later).

|
|
|

to
ζι
Co

IAIAAOC T (xx)

“, / ©? > / \ -“ » ᾽ a “
εἴως μέν p ἀπάνευθε θεοὶ θνητῶν ἔσαν ἀνδρῶν,
/ > \ \ “9 ᾿ / “ eA. ‘
τέως ᾿Αχαιοὶ μὲν μέγ᾽ ἐκύδανον, οὕνεκ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
> / \ \ / ’ / ) > a
ἐξεφάνη, δηρὸν δὲ μάχης ἐπέπαυτ᾽ ἀλεγεινῆς"
Τρῶας δὲ τρόμος αἰνὸς ὑπήλυθε γυῖα ἕκαστον,
, SAD. Ke an ΄ 7
δειδιότας, ὅθ᾽ ὁρῶντο ποδώκεα Ἰ]ηλεΐωνα
τεύχεσι λαμπόμενον, βροτολουγῶι ἶσον Λρηϊ.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ μεθ᾽ ὅμιλον ᾿Ολύμπιοι ἤλυθον ἀνδρῶν,
ὦρτο δ᾽ "Epis κρατερὴ λαοσσόος, ave δ᾽ ᾿Αθήνη,
στᾶσ᾽ ὁτὲ μὲν παρὰ τάφρον ὀρυκτὴν τείχεος ἐκτός,
᾽ ᾽ Ν 7,
ἄλλοτ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἀκτάων ἐριδούπων μακρὸν ἀύτει'
5 ΟΝ 6 Ἢ » fal , be ς
ave δ᾽ “Apns ἑτέρωθεν, ἐρεμνῆι λαίλαπι ἧσος,
5φσαν ’ » / / r , /
ὀξὺ Kat ἀκροτάτης πόλιος Tpwecou κελεύων,

50

\ , ΄ ΄

ἄλλοτε πὰρ Σιμόεντι θέων ἐπὶ Καλλικολώνηι.
ἃ \ b

ὡς τοὺς ἀμφοτέρους μάκαρες θεοὶ ὀτρύνοντες

σύμβαλον, ἐν δ᾽ αὐτοῖς ἔριδα ῥήγνυντο βαρεῖαν.

σι
σι

41. ἕως α. || ῥ᾽ om. T.

44-46 om. Syr.t
éntoc A Bar.

soos.) δ2. ΚΌΤ᾽ : μετ᾽ J.
ὀτρύναντες A (swpr. 0) CDQU.

50. axTéwn U. |

42. τείως Syr.:
δ᾽ A. || μέγα κύϑανον CJPQR Syr. Harl. a, Vr. b A.
44. ἐπήλυθε Ci) Mosc. 2.
EpirdoUnwn POR.
πόλεως DJS.

55. ἐν 0: ἐν J: ἐκ δ᾽ R.

τέως δ᾽ GS: ἐν ἄλλωι τόφρα
43. απέπαυτ᾽ Syr.
46. icoc U. 49. ἐκτός:
51. ave: ὦρτο Strabo
54. τούς τ᾽ U. || μάκαροι S.

42. τέως as trochee=7jos, see note

θεῶν, adopted by Ar., i.e. ‘ Kallikolone

on T 189. ἐκύδανον, intrans., were of the gods,’ meaning ‘where the gods
triumphant. ‘The verb recurs only in Ξ were,’ is hardly credible. An, indeed

73, in the trans. sense. For the rest of
the couplet see = 247-48. 44=H 215.

48. It is most natural to suppose that
the apodosis begins with ὥρτο δέ, as the
end of a line suggests the break in the
sentence. Ar., however, placed it at
the bucolic diaeresis, as Aristonikos says
ὁ ὃέ σύνδεσμος περισσός ἐστιν ἐν τῶι
‘Sate δ᾽ ᾿Αθήνη,᾽ and the antithesis with
ave δέ in 51 is thus made slightly more
effective.

49. See I 67. παρά with acc. shews
that crdca is, as so often, to be taken
pregnantly, ‘coming up to the trench.’

50. For the lapse from the participial
to the direct construction in ἀύτει cf. Τὶ
80. Here, however, the change is not
due to the wish to supply a more appro-
priate verb, but seems merely to arise
from the tendency to relieve the suspense
of the long participial sentence. ἄκτάων,
sea-shores, as always.

53. θέων is apparently to be taken
with the following words, or we should
need the acc. map Σιμόεντα. The ex-
pression is an odd one, but the alternative

VOL. II 2

says τόπος οὕτως καλεῖται ἐπὶ τῆς “dns,
θεῶν Καλλικολώνη, but that of course is
only a deduction from the present pass-
age. Nothing will evade the difficulty
of the sudden naming, as though it were
well known, of this locality, which recurs
again only in 151. It is needless to say
that the attempts which have been made
to identify the spot are perfectly futile
(see Schliemann J/ios 71). ‘Tradition
made it the scene of the judgment of
Paris; but whether the name ‘ Beauty
Hill’ caused or arose from the identifica-
tion we cannot say. A similar ambiguity
as to the accent of θεων occurs in Q 74.
55. cUuBadon, commiserunt, as T 70.
In II 565 the word is intrans., and might
be so taken here. ἐν 0° αὐτοῖς, and
among men. It is more natural to ex-
plain among themselves at the same time,
and 66 seems to assume that the out-
break among the gods has been already
announced. But the reflexive use of
αὐτός isso doubtful in H. that we must
hesitate to adopt this rendering. -It has
indeed been proposed to omit 66-74 as

354 IAIAAOC T (xx)

δεινὸν δὲ βρόντησε πατὴρ ἀνδρῶν τε θεῶν τε
ὑψόθεν" αὐτὰρ ἔνερθε Ποσειδάων ἐτίναξε

γαῖαν ἀπειρεσίην ὀρέων τ᾽ αἰπεινὰ κάρηνα"
πάντες δ᾽ ἐσσείοντο πόδες πολυπίδακος Ἴδης

καὶ κορυφαΐί, Τρώων τε πόλις καὶ νῆες ᾿Αχαιῶν. 60

ἔδδεισεν δ᾽ ὑπένερθεν ἄναξ ἐνέρων ᾿Αϊδωνεύς,

δείσας δ᾽ ἐκ θρόνου ἄλτο καὶ ἴαχε, μή οἱ ὕπερθε

γαῖαν ἀναρρήξειε ἸΤοσειδάων ἐνοσίχθων,

οἰκία δὲ θνητοῖσι καὶ ἀθανάτοισι φανείη

σμερδαλέ' εὐρώεντα, τά τε στυγέουσι θεοί περ. 65

τόσσος ἄρα κτύπος ὦρτο θεῶν ἔριδι. ξυνιόντων.

ἤτοι μὲν γὰρ ἔναντα Ποσειδάωνος ἄνακτος

ἵστατ᾽ ᾿Απόλλων Φοῖβος ἔχων ἰὰ πτερόεντα,
ἄντα δ᾽ ᾿Ενυαλίοιο θεὰ γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη"
“Ἥρηι δ᾽ ἀντέστη χρυσηλάκατος κελαδεινὴ 70

57. ἔνερθε: νέρϑε Ar. Syr.
Harl. a (supr. oc) Ὁ, Par. acdefgh.
νῆες: τεῖχος S.
DHJPQT Syr. Mosc. 2, Harl. a:

59. πολυπίδακος Ar. 2

62. GATO: ὥρτο Mass.
φανήιηι A Vr. b d.

πολυπιθάκου DGHJS
60. nodeic A (πόλιες A™) R? Vr. b. ||
64. δὲ: δ᾽ én R. | φανήηᾳι)

an interpolation, so that the actual
conflict of the gods will be postponed to
the Theomachy in the next book, and
the fight between them here, which is
announced with so much circumstance in
order to end in nothing, will disappear.
But 75 prevents this, and shews that the
whole introduction to the book hangs
together. ῥήγνυντο, caused to break
out, a quite unique phrase; the nearest
analogies are ῥῆξαι (rarely ῥήξασθαι)
φωνήν from Herod. onwards, δακρύων
ῥήξασα νάματα Soph. 77. 919, ἀναρρήξει
κακά Ο. Τ. 1075, and closest of all
ἐκρήξει μάχη At. 775. ῥήγνυσθαι is
common in M, N, and O of breaking
through an enemy’s line or wall.

64, Compare Virgil’s regna
Pallida, dis invisa, Aen. viii. 245.
εὐρώεντα, dank, occurs also κ 512, Ψ
322 ᾿Αἴδεω δόμον εὐρ., ὦ 10 εὐρώεντα
κέλευθα, and, always in similar phrases
of the underworld, Hes. Opp. 153, Theog.
731, 739, 810, Hym. Cer. 482, τάφον
εὐρώεντα Soph. Av. 1167 (where see
Jebb’s note). Déderlein, Ahrens, and
others have proposed to read αὐερόεντα
(αὐήρ-ε ἀήρ) or ἠερόεντα, gloomy; but
there is no reason for departing from the
traditional derivation from εὐρώς, mould,
Virgil’s loca senta sitw (Aen. vi. 462).

Cf. Simonides fr. iv. 4 ἐντάφιον δὲ
τοιοῦτον οὔτ᾽ εὐρὼς οὔθ᾽ ὁ πανδαμάτωρ
ἀμαυρώσει χρόνος. Scholiasts and late
poets (Oppian and Nonnos) took the word
to mean spacious, as though from evpis.
But this weakens every passage where
it occurs, and in that from Soph. is
ee

67. There is no apparent principle in
She. pairing of the gods, except in the
antagonism of Hephaistos and Skaman-
dros, fire and water. The scholia give
long disquisitions on the hidden meaning
supposed to be conveyed; the only
point of interest in them is that one,
which makes Athene an allegory of wis-
dom, Aphrodite of desire, ete., is said by
Porphyrios to be ἀρχαῖος πάνυ καὶ ἀπὸ
Θεαγένους τοῦ 'Ρηγίνου, ὃς πρῶτος ἔγραψε
περὶ ‘Ounpov. Of this Theagenes we
know only that he is called the first
Greek grammarian, and that acc. to
Tatian he was contemporary with
Kambyses (529-522 B.c.). See Senge-
busch Hom, Diss. Prior pp. 210-13,
Schrader Porph. p. 384. ἔναντα and
id for ἰούς are both ἅπαξ λεγόμενα in
H.; the latter form seems not to
recur in Greek. ἄνακτος, the F is
neglected.

70. See note on II 183.

IAIAAOC T (xx)

"i ΄ ΄
Ἄρτεμις ἰοχέαιρα, κασιγνήτη ἑκάτοιο"

C7 ral
Epps,
ἄντα δ᾽ ap Ἡφαίστοιο μέγας ποταμὸς βαθυδίνης,

lal » re a /
Λητοῖ δ᾽ ἀντέστη σῶκος ἐριούνιος

ὃν Ξάνθον καλέουσι θεοί, ἄνδρες δὲ Σκάμανδρον.

“J

σι

ὡς οἱ μὲν θεοὶ ἄντα θεῶν ἴσαν: αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
“Ἄκτορος ἄντα μάλιστα λιλαίετο δῦναι ὅμιλον
Πριαμίδεω: τοῦ γάρ pa μάλιστά ἑ θυμὸς ἀνώγει
αἵματος ἄσαι “Apna ταλαύρινον πολεμιστήν.
᾿Απόλλων
ἀντία Ἰ]ηλεΐωνος, ἐνῆκε δέ οἱ μένος Hv: 80

Αἰνείαν δ᾽ ἰθὺς λαοσσόος ὦρσεν

υἱέϊ δὲ ΤΙριάμοιο Λυκάονι εἴσατο φωνήν'

>

Ἀπόλλων:
/ lal

“Αἰνεία Γρώων βουληφόρε, ποῦ τοι ἀπειλαί,

Ὁ 3, / / \ eX
τῶι μιν ἐεισάμενος προσέφη Διὸς υἱὸς

ἃ / lal id / > /
as Τρώων βασιλεῦσιν ὑπίσχεο οἰνοποτάζων,
Πηλεΐδεω ᾿Αχιλῆος ἐναντίβιον πολεμίξειν ;” 85
5 /
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ Αἰνείας ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέειπε:
““Πριαμίδη, τί με ταῦτα καὶ οὐκ ἐθέλοντα κελεύεις,
> ,ὕ ΤΣ c / 7
ἀντία InXeiwvos ὑπερθύμοιο μάχεσθαι ;
3 r
Αχιλῆος
στήσομαι, ἀλλ᾽’ ἤδη μὲ καὶ ἄλλοτε δουρὶ φόβησεν 90
bd » “ \ b) / € /
ἐξ Ἴδης, ὅτε βουσὶν ἐπήλυθεν ἡμετέρηισι,

\ \ nr “- 7 »”
οὐ μὲν yap νῦν πρῶτα ποδώκεος ἄντ᾽

14. κάμανορον [,() Harl. ἃ. 77. πριαμίδου Vr. A. || € Ar.C Ven. B Mose. 2,
Harl. Ὁ (supr. re) Par. ἃ h, yp. Harl. a: re Q. 78. ταλαύριον JR. 84, Tac
J Syr. || Unicyeo Ar. Q: Unécyeo GPRS Syr. Harl. a: ὑπέσχετο J. 85.
πολεμίξειν : πτολεμίξειν A: ntoAeuizein U: πολεμίζειν 2. 89. NUN o7.
Syr.: δὴ DG. || πρῶτον CQ. 91. ὑμετέρηιειν U.

72. c@Koc, here only (but as a proper 289 ; for ταλαύρινος see note

name in A 427). The rare verb cwxety

(Trag.) seems to indicate that it means ὑπ ΤῈ ΠΕΣ ες 219-20, Θ 229-33.

strong, but this of course is uncertain.
"Epufic, the contracted form is found
four times in Od. but not elsewhere in
Zl. Cf. Ἑρμέαι E 390 ; elsewhere only
“Ἑρμείας.

74. For the language of the gods
see note on A 403. As there suggested
it is possible that both forms may be
attempts to Hellenize a foreign name of
difficult pronunciation like ” Ksamnd- ;
and in that case it might be See
that Σιμοεντ- was also another rendering
of the same stem.

77. €,so Ar.; most Mss. γε, and it may
be questioned if this is not right, as the
pronoun, though it seems to be needed,
is in the wrong place (H. G. p. 337.
yap Fe μάλιστά γε 2).

85. The fut. πολεμίξειν is on the whole
superior to πολεμίζειν, as the fut. is
usual after verbs of promising (e.g. N
366). The present is however quite
defensible, see note on I’ 28, and the
very similar Κα 39-40 ὑπόσχηται τόδε
ἔργον . . σκοπιαζέμεν: in both these
instances the infin. is epexegetic of the
subst. and therefore less directly de-
pendent on the verb. See also Lendrum
in C. R. iv. 100.

90. This story is alluded to again by
Achilles, 187-94. It was related in the
Kypria, as appears from the abstract of
Proklos (Dind. Schol. in 11. i. xxxvi.
12), κἄπειτα (᾿Αχιλλεὺς) ἀπελαύνει Tas
Αἰνείου βόας, καὶ Λυρνησὸν καὶ Πήδασον
πορθεῖ.

356 IAIAAOC T (xx)

\ \ > N "ry ΝΥ
πέρσε δὲ Λυρνησσὸν καὶ Πήδασον: αὐτὰρ ἐμὲ Ζεὺς
fa lal 7 4 lal
εἰρύσαθ᾽, ὅς μοι ἐπῶρσε μένος λαυψηρά TE γοῦνα.

ἢ κ᾽ ἐδάμην ὑπὸ χερσὶν ᾿Αχιλλῆος καὶ ᾿Αθήνης,

ἥ οἱ πρόσθεν ἰοῦσα τίθει φάος ἠδὲ κέλευεν 95
ἔγχεϊ χαλκείωι Λέλεγας καὶ Τρῶας ἐναίρειν.

τῷ οὐκ ἔστ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆος ἐναντίον ἄνδρα μάχεσθαι"

αἰεὶ γὰρ πάρα εἷς γε θεῶν, ὃς λοιγὸν apuver.

καὶ δ᾽ ἄλλως τοῦ γ᾽ ἰθὺ βέλος πέτετ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπολήγει

πρὶν χροὸς ἀνδρομέοιο διελθέμεν.

εἰ δὲ θεός περ 100

ἶσον τείνειεν πολέμου τέλος, οὔ κε μάλα ῥέα
νικήσει’, οὐδ᾽ εἰ παγχάλκεος εὔχεται εἶναι."

τὸν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπεν ἄναξ Διὸς υἱὸς ᾿Απόλλων:
“ἥρως, ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε καὶ σὺ θεοῖς alevyevérnicw
εὔχεο: καὶ δὲ σέ φασι Διὸς κούρης ᾿Αφροδίτης 105
ἐκγεγάμεν, κεῖνος δὲ yepelovos ἐκ θεοῦ éotiv-
ἡ μὲν γὰρ Διός ἐσθ᾽, ἡ δ᾽ ἐξ ἁλίοιο γέροντος.
ἀλλ᾽ ἰθὺς φέρε χαλκὸν ἀτειρέα, μηδέ σε πάμπαν
λευγαλέοις ἐπέεσσιν ἀποτρεπέτω Kal ἀρειῆι."

ὡς εἰπὼν ἔμπνευσε μένος μέγα ποιμένι λαῶν, 110
βῆ δὲ διὰ προμάχων κεκορυθμένος αἴθοπι χαλκῶι.

93. ἐνῶρςε T.

95. HO éxéAeucen LD) Mor. Mose. 2.

98 om. D. 99.

ἄλλων G. || TOD γ᾽: Todd’ CQ. || ἰϑὺς ACGQU Syr.: ἐν ἄλλωι ied χωρὶς τοῦ o A. ||

netar P.

100. διελθεῖν A (yp. διελϑθέμεν) CG().

101. τείνειε CDPR. ||

πτολέμου R. || Ke ACTU Harl. a: ue καὶ P: με κε R: με Q, yp. Harl. a. ||

peia GPR.

énneuce U. μέγα μένος P.

103. ανρων GraUEUNON Syr. (spr. exaeproc απολλων.). 110.

93. Van L. reads ἐνῶρσε with T, com-
paring ἐν μένος ὦρσε O 3353 similarly
= 522, > 218, 1110.

95. φάος, salvation ; see Z 6, Π 39.

96. Λέλεγας, the inhabitants of
Lyrnessos Ssee Καὶ 429, ® 86.

98=E 603. See note there, and add
Fick’s conj. πάραι εἷς.

99. καὶ ἄλλως, ‘even without the
assistance of a god,’ just as in I 699,
where see note. It thus has a specific
instead of a general reference, and differs
from the same phrase in A 391, which
should be compared.

101. For the metaphor in τείνειεν see
on H 102, N 358. τέλος instead of
πεῖραρ seems to shew that the physical
idea of ‘rope-end’ is passing into the
abstract ‘issue.’ οὔ κε is rather better
supported than οὔ we. In either case it

is best to read νικήςει᾽ with Bentley,
not νικήσει, as the whole tone of Aineias’
words requires the opt. in the apodosis,
while the mood can be used without κε,
H. G. § 299 7. The confidence of the
fut. indic. is not in place here as in I
386 (q.v.). οὐδ᾽ ef (102) is not to be
considered a second conditional protasis
at all; it is added independently, and
does not affect the question of νικήσει.
P. Knight reads οὔ κέ με ῥεῖα ; cf. P 462.
The elision of the ε of -ee, which is
practically forbidden in Attic, is rare
in H.; but see ἃ 585, 591 and note
on Β 4. παγχάλκεοο, i.e. invulnerable.
The metaphor in χάλκεον ἦτορ B 490 is
different.

109. Aeurahéoic, sorry, contemptible,
asI 119. ἀρειῆι, see on P 431. Here
there is no question that the word
meas ‘abuse.’

a as

“-
ee
on
~J

IAIAAOC T (xx)

οὐδ᾽ ἔλαθ᾽ ᾿Αγχίσαο πάϊς λευκώλενον ” Hpnv
> / oh “Ὁ > \ ᾽ - > -
ἀντία ἸΙηλεΐίωνος ἰὼν ἀνὰ οὐλαμὸν ἀνδρῶν'
΄ , Μ / ‘ \ a) »
ἡ δ᾽ ἄμυδις καλέσασα θεοὺς μετὰ μῦθον ἔειπε'
“ φράζεσθον δὴ σφῶϊ, Ἰ]οσείδαον καὶ ᾿Αθήνη,
ἐν φρεσὶν ὑμετέρηισιν, ὅπως ἔσται τάδε ἔργα.
Αἰνείας ὅδ᾽ ἔβη κεκορυθμένος αἴθοπι χαλκῶι
fal - /
ἀντία IInrelwvos, ἀνῆκε δὲ Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων"
΄ lal / /
ἀλλ᾽ aye? ἡμεῖς πέρ μιν ἀποτροπόωμεν ὀπίσσω
» / ” ” \ e , > A NL 9
αὐτόθεν: ἤ τις ἔπειτα Kal ἡμείων ᾿Αχιλῆϊ 120
παρσταίη, δοίη δὲ κράτος μέγα, μηδέ τι θυμῶι
/ “, INA A / A
δευέσθω, ἵνα eldne 0 μιν φιλέουσιν ἄριστοι
’ 95 ¢ ,
ἀθανάτων, οἱ δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ἀνεμώλιοι of TO πάρος περ
/ oe fal

Τρωσὶν ἀμύνουσιν πόλεμον καὶ δηϊοτῆτα.

or

πάντες δ᾽ Οὐλύμποιο κατήλθομεν ἀντιόωντες
τῆσδε μάχης, ἵνα μή τι μετὰ Τρώεσσι πάθηισι
σήμερον: ὕστερον αὖτε τὰ πείσεται ἅσσά οἱ αἶσα
γεινομένωι ἐπένησε λίνωι, ὅτε μιν τέκε μήτηρ.

114. A δ᾽ ἄμυδις καλέςαςα θεοὺς ῥεῖα Ζώοντας Zen. || καλέςαςα: «τήςαςα Ar. |
λιετὰ : κατὰ Par. 6. 115. φράζΖεςθϑε (). || ποςειδϑάων PR Harl. a Cant. 116.
ἡμετέρηιςιν JP! Eust.: Auetépoicin Ὁ. 117. aineiac δ᾽ ἡ. 119. ἀποτροπόωλλιεν
S: Gnotpon®uen GJ : ἀποτραπῶμεν () : ἀποτρωπῶμεν 2. 120. H: εἴ (J supr.)
RS (supr. Η) Vr. Ὁ. 125-28 a6. Ar. 195. 07: στὸ U, 126. πάθητε Lips.
127. Gced: Scca L.

114. Ar. rightly objected to Zen.’s

492 = in need) takes the gen. ; hence

reading of this line (see above) that 4
Ξε ἔφη is used only after the speech to
which it refers, not as an introduction.
θεούς from what follows can refer only
to the Greek gods, Poseidon and Athene.
The insertion of the prologue to the
Theomachy (see Intr.) has probably
suppressed some - passage which made
this clear. We should naturally suppose
it to mean all the gods with whom
we were dealing in 67-74. Cf. also
149.

117. ὅδ᾽ ἔβη, here cometh, as E 175.

119. ἀποτροπόωμεν (for -ἀωμεν), see
on O 666. Notice the different tones of
command in παροταίη . . devécew: /et
us turn back . . or one might stand by
. . he must not fail.

120. αὐτόθεν, from the spot, as we say
‘on the spot’ ; the local meaning carry-
ing with it the temporal, as is shewn by
ἔπειτα, thereafter (as an alternative).

122. Bevécew, fail, elsewhere always
(except in the part. devduevos A 134, X

Koppen’s θυμοῦ for θυμῶι is highly prob-
able ; see Τ' 294, N 786, η 78 ete.

125-28 were athetized by Ar. as con-
tradicting the words of Zeus in 26; the
danger is not that Achilles may be de-
feated, but that he may be irresistible.
There is some ground for this as the
text stands ; but the difficulty disappears
when we recognise that this part is
entirely independent of 1-74 in origin,
and that the πάντες here are the gods
on the Greek side only. If we took it
to mean the whole army of 67-74, it
would of course be untrue to say that
they had all come down to help Achilles ;
and 123-24 would, in the presence of
the opposition, be intolerably rude and
provocative. There is a marked re-
semblance in phraseology, though none
im content, between the whole passage
and ἡ 195-201.

128. For the metaphor of the thread
of lifecf. 2 210, 7198 ; and for γεινομένωι
ΞΞ- γενομένωι, at birth, note on K 71,

358

εἰ δ᾽ ᾿Αχιλεὺς οὐ ταῦτα θεῶν ἐκ πεύσεται
ὅτε κέν τις ἐναντίβιον θεὸς

δείσετ᾽ ἔπειθ᾽,

IAIAAOC T (xx)

ὀμφῆς,

ἔλθηι 130

ἐν πολέμωι" χαλεποὶ δὲ θεοὶ φαίνεσθαι ἐναργεῖς."
τὴν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα ἸΙοσειδάων ἐνοσίχ toys ay
oy Ἥρη, μὴ χαλέπαινε παρὲκ νόον" οὐδέ τί σε χρή.
οὐκ ἂν ἔγωγ᾽ ἐθέλοιμι θεοὺς ἔριδι Evvehacoar
[ἡμέας τοὺς ἄλλους, ἐπεὶ ἢ πολὺ φέρτεροί εἰμεν" 135
ἀλλ᾽ ἡμεῖς μὲν ἔπειτα καθεζώμεσθα κιόντες
ἐκ πάτου ἐς σκοπιήν, πόλεμος δ᾽ ἄνδρεσσι μελήσει.
εὖ δεν K ᾿Άρης ἄρχωσι μάχης. ἢ Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων,
) ᾿Αχιλῆ᾽ ἴσχωσι καὶ οὐκ εἰῶσι μάχεσθαι,

αὐτίκ᾽ ἔπειτα καὶ ἄμμι παρ᾽ αὐτόθι νεῖκος ὀρεῖται 140
130. ἐναντίβιος Q: ἐναντίον P. || ἔλθοι P. 131. χαλεπὸν D. 135 om.

CDtPQRT Vr. Ὁ ἃ, Lips.t Cant.t Harl. at:
1317. ἐςκοπιὴν JL (supr. c) R:

ayiAAT R. || ἀχιλῆα cydci U.

νόθος (τὸ,
εἷς ckomiHNn Ρ.
ἄρχηᾳ(ι)ει Zen. A™JPR(S 2)U? Harl. ἃ (supr. w) Cant. Par.a ὁ f g
H: ἰδὲ S. || yp. εἰ ϑέ κεν ὧς ἄρχωειν ἄρης καὶ φοῖβος ἀπόλλων Sch. T.
οὐκ: oUx P (κ i ras.).

αὐτόφι Q. || ὀρεῖται : ὄρηται ap. Eust. :

136. Kkaeezmucea GPORU.
|| μελήςη Ὁ (supr. εἰ). 138.
g j and ap. Did. ||
1.59.
140. αὐτόθι C:

ss

yp. ETUXOH Schol. P (iy ἢι, εὐθέως ἐκείνων

ἀρξαμένων τῆς μάχης, καὶ ἡμῖν ἐγένετο μάχη).

129. On εἰ. . οὐ, with indic., see
note on A 160. ὀμφῆς does not neces-
sarily mean an open communication ;
it implies perhaps rather mspiration, an
unconscious impulse or feeling, in y 214—
15 ἢ σέ ye λαοὶ ἐχθαίρουσ᾽ ava δῆμον,
ἐπισπόμενοι θεοῦ ὀμφῆι, with M. and R.’s
note. Such inspiration in the form of
a dream is called an ὀμφή in B 41.
There is however no mention of any-
thing of the sort here till we come to the
explicit words of Φ 288 ff.

131. χαλεποί, dangerous, hard to en-
dure. The infin. φαίνεσθαι is added
loosely, for their appearing openly, ct.
@ 482, A 589 ἀργαλέος γὰρ ᾿Ολύμπιος
ἀντιφέρεσθαι, and other instances in A.
G.§ 232. ἐναργεῖς, cf. y 420 ᾿Αθήνην, 7
μοι ἐναργὴς ἦλθε θεοῦ és δαῖτα θάλειαν,
π 161 οὐ γάρ πως πάντεσσι θεοὶ φαίνονται
ἐναργεῖς, ἡ 201, and Virg. Aen. iv. 358
ipse dewm manifesto in lumine vidi.
Fick, to avoid the contracted termination,
writes ἐναργές, assuming a wrong trans-
literation of the original -E>.

188. παρὲκ ΝόοΝ, see on {2 494.

5. The evidence of mss. shews that
this Ὑπὸ was adapted from © 211 at ἃ
very late date ; though the presumption

in the case of that book is generally the
opposite.

136. ἔπειτα, ‘in consequence of what
I have said,’ cf. Q 290.

137. ἐκ πάτου, the beaten track, as
πάτον ἀνθρώπων ἀλεείνων Z 202. For
the second half of the line see note on
Z 490-93, where ἄνδρεσσι is opposed not,
as here, to gods, but to women.

138. Gpxeci, the σχῆμα ᾿Αλκμανικόν,
for which see note on E774. The constr.
is however particularly harsh here as
the two nominatives are connected by
the disjunctive ἢ instead of the καί
which we should have looked for. This
may be implied as a variant in the
statement of An. that Ar. had ἤ. It
is however a question if we should not
read ἄρχηισι with Zen. This may have
been altered to suit the following lines,
where the plur. verbs are more natural
as they follow both nominatives. The
variant ἰδέ is not very probable.

139. Here again οὐκ follows εἰ, but
in this case goes closely with εἰῶσι, as in
the other instances where the verb is in
the su hjunctive ; H. G. § 316 ad fin.

140. nap’ αὐτόοι, see note on M 902.
Here αὐτόφι has almost universal support.

-

IAIAAOC T (xx) 359

φυλόπιδος: μάλα δ᾽ ὦκα διακρινθέντας ὀΐω
ἂψ ἴμεν Ovrvptrovde, θεῶν μεθ᾽ ὁμήγυριν ἄλλων,
ἡμετέρηις ὑπὸ χερσὶν ἀναγκαίηφι δαμέντας."
ὡς ἄρα φωνήσας ἡγήσατο κυανοχαίτης
τεῖχος ἐς ἀμφίχυτον Ἡρακλῆος θείοιο, 145
e r ,
ὑψηλόν, τό pa of Τρῶες καὶ Ἰ]αλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη
ποίεον, ὄφρα τὸ κῆτος ὑπεκπροφυγὼν ἀλέαιτο,
wf
ὁππότε μιν σεύαιτο ἀπ᾽ ἠϊόνος πεδίονδε.
ἔνθα Ποσειδάων κατ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἕζετο καὶ θεοὶ ἄλλοι,
: \ ’ v9 » , v “ ΙΣ
ἀμφὶ ὃ ap ἀρρήῆκτον νεφέλην ὠμοισιν ἐσαντο" 150
οἱ δ᾽ ἑτέρωσε καθῖζον ἐπ᾽ ὀφρύσι ἹΚαλλικολώνης
ἀμφὶ σέ, ἤϊε Φοῖβε, καὶ “Apna πτολίπορθον.
ὡς οἱ μέν ῥ᾽ ἑκάτερθε καθείατο μητιόωντες
if 9 / \ / /
βουλάς: ἀρχέμεναι δὲ δυσηλεγέος πολέμοιο
» > , γχν > “ , Ὅν
ὦκνεον ἀμφότεροι, “Ζεὺς δ᾽ ἥμενος ὕψι κέλευε. 155

141. diaxpineentec J: SiakpieéNntac CDPQRTU Cant. Mor. 142. wee’:

καθ᾽ J. 143. ὑμετέρηις᾽ U.
ἶφι Harl. a supr.:

anarkaingi H, yp. A:
ἀναλκίηισι Par. a f: ἀνάγκηι) ἶφι 2.
Unek ῥα φυγὼν R. || ἀλέοιτο DGT: ἀλέηται Bar. Mor. :

ἀνάγκηφι J: ἀνάγκης
θαμέντες 1). 147.
ἀλέατο C: ahécaito ἢ

ἀλέοιτο Eust. 148. ςεύετο DQR: ςεύοιτο Harl. a, Vr. A: cevato U. 150.
éuoict νεφέλην UPHKTON (). 151. én’: tn’ Ὁ. 152. cé, Hie: yp. ς᾽ ἰήϊε Χ.

153. ἑκάτερθε : ἀπάνευθε S Vr. d: ἀπάτερϑε J.
155. ὄκνεον T and κατ᾽ ἔνια Did.

154. Gpyouénou 0€ OucHAuréoc ().

KaeHato PRS Bar. Mor.

141. diaxpineentac, separating: the
regular word to express the end of a
decisive battle. See 212 below, I’ 98,
102, σ 149 ete.

143. ἀναγκαίηφι, though it has hardly
any support, is clearly preferable to the
vulg. ἀνάγκηι ἴφι, of which ἀνάγκης Ide
is doubtless a conjectural improvement.
It is a question however if ἀναλκ(ε)ίηισι
is not better than both, beaten by their
own feebleness, as Z 74, P 320, 337.

145. The legend, which is evidently
a familiar one, is quoted by Schol. A
and Apollodoros (ii. 5. 9) from Hella-
nikos. Poseidon, when defrauded by
Laomedon of his hire for building the
walls of Troy (Φ 446-57) sent a sea-
monster to ravage the land. Laomedon,
in obedience to an oracle, exposed his
daughter Hesione to be devoured by the
monster, but promised his immortal
horses (E 640) as a reward to any who
should slay it. This was done by
Herakles, with the protection of a wall
built for him by Pallas ; but Laomedon
deceived him, giving him only mortal
horses. This is of course a version of the

Perseus legend. Gugixuton, of heaped-
up earth, cf. χυτὴ γαῖα Z 464, ete.

147. τὸ κῆτος, this use of the article
to denote ‘well known’ is very rare in
H., except with a very few nouns. In-
stances such as this are confined to late
passages in the 77]. ; see H. G. § 261. 3.

148. win, Herakles; the subject of
cevaito being κῆτος. For the trans. use
of the aor. mid. cf. T 26, A 549, O 272.

149. eeoi ἄλλοι here evidently in-
cludes only the Greek party, cf. 114.

152. Hie, see on O 365.

154. OucHAeréoc here and y 325 only
in H. (Hes. Theog. 652, Opp. 506).
Like τανηλεγέος (for which see note on Θ
70) it is best referred to ἄλγος, with the
e developed from the liquid as in ἀλε-
γεινός. The ἢ is an instance of the
vowel-lengthening which is peculiarly
common at the joint of a compound ;
as in δυσηχής, which is identical in sense
(see note on B 686).

155. κέλευε is best taken, with Hentze,
absolutely, was supreme over them, as
ταμίης πολέμοιο. Cf. the use of κελεύων
in A 65, N 91. The ordinary explana-

360 IAIAAOC T (xx)

> 4 rn
τῶν δ᾽ ἅπαν ἐπλήσθη πεδίον, Kal λάμπετο χαλκῶι,
3 a /
ἀνδρῶν ἠδ᾽ ἵππων' κάρκαιρε δὲ γαῖα πόδεσσιν

ὀρνυμένων ἄμυδις.

δύο δ᾽ ἀνέρες ἔξοχ᾽ ἄριστοι

nr 4
ἐς μέσον ἀμφοτέρων συνίτην μεμαῶτε μάχεσθαι,
an ΄ "
Αἰνείας τ᾽ ᾿Αγχισιάδης καὶ δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς. 100
lal /
Αἰνείας δὲ πρῶτος ἀπειλήσας ἐβεβήκει
/ “ evar SEEN ’ ὃ fa} a
νευστάζων κόρυθι βριαρῆι" ἀτὰρ ἀσπίδα θοῦριν
/
πρόσθεν ἔχε στέρνοιο, τίνασσε δὲ χάλκεον ἔγχος.
> J ἃ
Πηλεΐδης δ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ἐναντίον ὦρτο, λέων ὡς
σίντης, ὅν τε καὶ ἄνδρες ἀποκτάμεναι μεμάασιν 165
- fal ¢ an \ 5 /
ἀγρόμενοι, πᾶς δῆμος: ὁ δὲ πρῶτον μὲν ἀτίζων
» >) Σ ec / 5 - / ’ lal
ἔρχεται, ANN OTE KEV τις ἀρηϊθόων αἰζηῶν
΄ > \ > /
δουρὶ Bary, ἐάλη τε χανών, περί T ἀφρὸς ὀδόντας
γίνεται, ἐν δέ τέ οἱ κραδίην στένει ἄλκιμον ἧτορ,
οὐρῆι δὲ πλευράς τε καὶ ἰσχία ἀμφοτέρωθεν 170

156. λάμπετο Ar. [Η]: ἐλάμπετο 0.
ἵν᾽ Fe, ὁμοῦ δὲ δύο ἄνδρες ἐξεναντίας ἀλλήλων Schol. X.
placed before 159 in Syr. Cant. || T om. PR. ||
162. κόρυθα βριαρὴν Zonar. Lev. || αὐτὰρ CQ).

ὡρμαῶτε U. 160 om. Bar. :

ἀχιλλεύς : ὀδυςςεύς Ὁ.

168. Tinacce δὲ : yp. TINGccwN Schol. PX.

+ 158. yp. καὶ ἄμυδις δὲ OU’ ἀνέρες"
159. ἀμφοτέρω G. ||

164. ἐναντίος ἦλθε (). 166.

arpotepoi ἢ. || κρειῶν Epatizwn PR: yp. ὁ 8€ πρῶτον μὲν ἀτίζων P (man. rec.) ;

ep. A551.

169. γίγνεται L Syr. || ἄλκιλλον : οβριμον Syr.

170. οὐρή τε R:

οὐρὴ τὲ P. || ἰσχίον Longin. de Sub/, 15. 3. || yp. ἀμφοτέρωςε ἔν τισιν οὐ φαύλως

Did.

tion, though Zeus enthroned on high had
bidden them (to fight), is unsatisfactory,
because it requires us to take ἥμενος ὕψι
as a standing epithet=tWifvyos, which
it can hardly be (cf. π 264 ὕψί περ ἐν
νεφέεσσι καθημένω) ; and also because
Zeus had not commanded thein to fight
one another.

156. καὶ Aduneto χαλκῶι, a paren-
thesis, the following words being in
apposition with τῶν. κάρκαιρε, only
here in Greek ; an imitative word (like
our ‘creak’) of the same class as Bap-
βαίνω, μορμύρω, yapyaipw.

158-60. Cf. N 499-500, Z 120. It
will be noticed that the combat is in-
troduced as though it were a casual
meeting, and had not been prepared in
79-110.

161. ἀπειλήςας, notice the force of the
aor. ; ‘strode on with (a word or gesture
of) defiance’ (Monro).

164. It has been justly remarked that
the following long simile is the most
finished, as it is certainly one of the

finest, in Homer. It stands out from
the context as do some of the remark-
able similes in M,

165. he καί continues the emphasis
on cintHe (cf. A 481), and the sense is
fairly given by ‘consequently’; it is
thus very similar to the καί in A 249,
q.v.
166. Gtizwn, heeding not, here only in
H. and quite an exception to the ordinary
formation of compounds with a-. It is,
however, not to be condemned on that
ground, as it is freely used by the
Tragedians. Compare also ἀτίω in the
same sense. OAuoc, vilkuge, see note on
δήμου ἀρίστω A 328. For the concord of
the plur. part. with the collective sing.
cf. = 604 ὅμιλος τερπόμενοι.

170. Schol. B records the old belief
that the lion ἔχει ὑπὸ τῆι οὐρᾶι κέντρον
μέλαν, ὡς κεράτιον, δι᾿ οὗ ἑαυτὸν μαστίζει
ὑφ᾽ οὗ νυττόμενος πλέον ἀγριοῦται. So
also Scut. Her. 430-31 γλαυκιόων δ᾽ ὄσσοις
δεινὸν πλευράς τε Kal ὥμους οὐρῆι μαστιόων
ποσσὶν γλάφει.

IAIAAOC T (xx) 361

/ er > > ἈΝ κι / /
μαστίεται, ἑὲ δ᾽ αὐτὸν ἐποτρύνει μαχέσασθαι,

/ > AN / / ” /
γλαυκιόων δ᾽ ἰθὺς φέρεται μένει, ἤν τινα πέφνηι
ἀνδρῶν ἢ αὐτὸς φθίεται πρώτωι ἐν ὁμίλωι:"
ὡς ᾿Αχιλῆ᾽ @Tpuve μένος καὶ θυμὸς ἀγήνωρ

ἀντίον ἐλθέμεναι μεγαλήτορος Δίνείαο. Ι

᾿ \ \ , ,
οἱ & ὅτε δὴ σχεδὸν ἦσαν ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλοισιν ἰόντες,

Ν / / / -“ » 7

τὸν πρότερος προσέειπε ποδάρκης δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς"
/ ΄

“Αἰνεία, τί σὺ τόσσον ὁμίλου πολλὸν ἐπελθὼν

io / Ν ΄
ἔστης ; ἢ σέ γε θυμὸς ἐμοὶ μαχέσασθαι ἀνώγει
, .
ἐλπόμενον Τρώεσσιν ἀνάξειν ἱπποδάμοισι 180

τιμῆς τῆς []ριώμου ;

2 \ ΝΜ ἌΡ. 5 τι ,
ἀτὰρ εἴ κεν ἔμ᾽ ἐξεναρίξηις,

” 4 / , 4 5 \ /

ov τοι Tovvexa ye IIpiapwos γέρας ἐν χερὶ θήσει"
> \ ΄ . rn ΄ > » ™) > ,
εἰσὶν γάρ οἱ παῖδες, ὁ δ᾽ ἔμπεδος οὐδ᾽ ἀεσίφρων.

171. καςτίετ᾽ RS. || €€: € Q: aig D: αἰὲν (P supr.) RS: αἰεὶ Vr. A.

mayéecoar ACP( Harl. a, Bar. :
PR. || ἀπελθὼν (A supr.) P Harl. a.

181. TAc: cfc P (supr. τ). || αὐτὰρ, JR. || Gu’: uw’ Vr. A.

Bar. Mor.: ἐξεναρίΖζηις Vr. A.

udxecear RST.
180-86 ἀθ. Ar.

172-73 om. \). 178. Ti NU
180. yp. καὶ GNazéuen X.
| ἐξεναρίξεις JS

4’ ΕἸ

171. On ἕέ, the emphatic form used in
reflexive sense, see N 495.

172. γτλαυκιόων, so also Seut. Here.
430 γλαυκιόων ὄσσοις δεινόν, evidently =
glaring, with bright eyes, cf. A 206.
But Quintus seems to have taken it to
mean OGlinded (cf. γὙλαύκωμα = opacity
of the eye-ball), xii. 408 ὀφθαλμοὶ.
δυσαλθέα γλαυκιόωντες, in a gory descrip-
tion of the blinding of Laokoon.

178. Téccon πολλόν must go together,
in the sense so much. This use of τόσσον
with adjectives (which is regular in
modern Greek) is rare, except in the
ease of comparatives. There are, how-
ever, a few cases, cf. ο 405 οὔ τι περιπλη-
Ons λίην τόσον, not so very populous, ὃ
371, & 275, 370 τόσον αἴτιος. τοσοῦτο
is similarly used by later writers. ‘The
peculiarity of the phrase is that πολλόν
is pleonastic, as τόσσον itself includes
the idea of quantity. But this pleonasm
serves to emphasize the idea of the very
great distance, and so heightens the
sarcasm. ὁμίλου may be construed in
two ways—(1) as an ablative, sallying
against me so far forth from the throng ;
(2) as gen. after τόσσον πολλόν, traversing
so large a part of the army. For the use
of the gen. in (1) οἵ. σταθμοῖο δίεσθαι M
304, and o 8 there quoted. This gives
the most vigorous sense (cf. ἐρχόμενον
προπάροιθεν ὁμίλου I’ 22), and suits the
common use of ἐπελθεῖν ; but the constr.

would be more natural if we read ἀπελθών
with P. This regularly takes the gen.
in H. (OQ 766, B 186, τ 223, w 310).
ἐπελθεῖν in most cases Means come upon,
attack; but the sense traverse can be
supported by Σ 321 dyke’ ἐπῆλθε, δ 268
ἐπ. γαῖαν.

179. ἔετης, hast taken thy stand, as
P 342 πολὺ προμάχων ἐξάλμενος ἔστη.

180--86 were athetized by Ar. ὅτι
εὐτελεῖς εἰσὶ τῆι κατασκευῆι καὶ τοῖς
νοήμασι, καὶ οἱ λόγοι οὐ πρέποντες τῶι
τοῦ ᾿Αχιλλέως προσώπωι. But the same
objections might be urged against the
whole of this dialogue.

180. Aineias’ pretensions to the crown
are explained in 213-41. See also note
on N 460. Tpweccin is locative, as
usual, the gen. TuuHe being used of the
thing ruled over, e.g. ὦ 30 τιμῆς ἧσπερ
ἄνασσες (see H. G. §§ 145. 7, 151);
to be master of Priam’s dignity among
the Trojans. τιλῆς τῆς Πριάμου is a
late construction; see H. G. ὃ 2604;
the other instances are all in Od. or I,
K, W. ‘

183. Gecippwn, also Ψ 603, ¢ 302,
Hes. Opp. 335, and ἀεσιφροσύνη o 470,
Hes. 7h. 502. The word has generally
been referred, since Buttmann, to ddw,
from @ 302 where φρεσὶν ἀασθείς and
ἀεσίφρονι θυμῶι occur together. It should
then be ἀασίῴφρων, which is given in Ap.
Lex, 2. 7. Buttmann explains ¢ for a

362 IAIAAOC T (xx)

ἢ νύ τί τοι Tpaes τέμενος τάμον ἔξοχον ἄλλων,

καλὸν φυταλιῆς καὶ ἀρούρης, ὄφρα νέμηαι, 185
αἴ κεν ἐμὲ κτείνηις ; ; χαλεπῶς δέ σ᾽ ἔολπα τὸ ῥέξειν.

ἤδη μὲν σέ γέ pais καὶ ἄχλλοτε δουρὶ φοβῆσαι:

ἢ οὐ μέμνηι ὅτε πέρ σε βοῶν ἄπο, μοῦνον ἐόντα,

σεῦα κατ᾽ ᾿Ιδαίων ὀρέων ταχέεσσι πόδεσσι

καρπαλίμως ; ; τότε δ᾽ οὔ τι μετατροπαλίξεο φεύγων. 190
ἔνθεν δ᾽ ἐς Δυρνησσὸν ὑπέκφυγες" αὐτὰρ ἐγὼ τὴν

πέρσα μεθορμηθεὶς σὺν ᾿Αθήνηι καὶ Διὶ πατρί,

ληϊάδας δὲ γυναῖκας, ἐλεύθερον ἦμαρ ἀπούρας,

ἦγον: ἀτὰρ σὲ Leds ἐρρύσατο καὶ θεοὶ ἄλλοι.

ἀλλ᾽ οὐ νῦν σ᾽ ἐρύεσθαι ὀΐομαι, ὡς ἐνὶ θυμῶι 195
βάλλεαι: ἀλλά σ᾽ ἔγωγ᾽ ἀναχωρήσαντα κελεύω

ἐς πληθὺν ἰέναι, μηδ᾽ ἀντίος ἵστασ᾽ ἐμεῖο,

πρίν τι κακὸν παθέειν: ῥεχθὲν δέ τε νήπιος ἔγνω."

184. Tol: cor L. || ἄλλον J. 185. KANON: écohdn A (yp. καλὸν) CQ

Bar. Mor. 186. κτείνεις Di). || TO: τόδ᾽ L Bar.: τόδε P Lips. || ῥέξαι H*:
ῥέξειν (): Epdein 1, : ἔρξειν Bar. 187. φόβηςα ACG()T. 188. méuNnHc’ Bar. ||
ὅτι H. ἄπο: ἔπι Aph. Rhianos Chia. 190. WEeTATPONAAIZeo A[HJPR:

uetetponahizeo 2. 191. ἔνϑεν : κεῖθεν Strabo xiii. 607. 192. καθορμηθεὶς ().
195-98 a0. Ar. 195. ς᾽ épueceat PQR: éptecea Ar. S King’s: ς᾽ épuece’ D:
ce puceceat Par. Ὁ: ce ῥύεςθαι 22 (2). 197. ἐμοῖο PQ) Vr. b. 198. TL: Te R.

as an analogical formation due to forms only, Z 25 ποιμαίνων ἐπ᾽ decor, ete.
like ἀλφεσίβοιος, Tapecixpoos, φαεσίμ- MEMLNHI, i.e. μέμνη᾽, see on Ὁ 18. _ The
Bporos. But here the derivation hardly variant μέμνησ᾽ is also defensible. Ἡ οὐ,
suits the sense, as φρεσὶν ἀασθείς should οὐ Brandreth, see H 349.

imply a definite ‘blinding’ of the mind,
hardly a state of incapacity, which the
context requires. It is therefore quite
possible that the old derivation from
ἄημι may be right, cf. Φ 386 δίχα δέ σφιν
ἐνὶ φρεσὶ θυμὸς ἄητο, and φρένες ἠερέθον -
ται 1 108. The word will then mean
‘blown about,’ ‘volatile,’ in mind,
weakened in will by old age. (The
weak stem d-Fe-, root 72, is not else-
where found, but must have existed, €
Meyer ΟὟ. § 34. 1.)

184-85. See Z 194-95,

186. δέ ς᾽ ἔολπα sins against F and
rhythm (7. G. ὃ 368. 2); σε FéFoNra
however corrects both offences.

187. φόβησα has strong Ms. support,
and may be defended from post-Homeric
use: see on I 329.

188. See note on 90. ἡ Ριανοῦ καὶ (ἡ)
᾿Αριστοφάνους ‘‘ βοῶν em,” οὐκ ἀχαρίτως

. ἐν τῆι Χίαι ““ βοῶν ἔπι᾽᾽ Did. But
in this sense ἐπί seems to take the dat.

198=II 851.

194. Heyne justly remarks on the
lightness with which the names of gods
are used as mere forms of speech; in
three lines Achilles asserts that Aineias
was attacked ‘with Zeus’ aid,’ and that
‘Zeus saved’ him.

195-98 were athetized by Ar. on the
ground that the last three lines are
wrongly borrowed from P 30-32; he
rightly urged that there Menelaos ‘tells
E uphorbos to retire because his only aim
is to get the body of Patroklos, whereas
here Achilles has come into battle to
wreak his vengeance, and should not be
willing to let his first antagonist escape.
But here again the vice is inherent in
the whole scene. €pUeceai is perhaps
best taken as fut., though the pres. is
quite possible, 7s now protecting thee ;
ef. I 248, Καὶ 44. It is practically in-
different whether we read ce ῥύεσθαι or
the text, as ῥύεσθαι has both v and ov.

IAIAAOC T (xx)

363

᾽ ’ ,ὔ /
τὸν δ᾽ avr Aiveias ἀπαμείβετο φώνησέν Te:

“ Ἰ]ηλείδη, μὴ δή μ᾽’ ἐπέεσσί γε νηπύτιον ὡς

200

ἔλπεο δειδίξεσθαι, ἐπεὶ σάφα olda καὶ αὐτὸς
i , 5 Ὁ Μ /

ἠμὲν κερτομίας ἠδ᾽ αἴσυλα μυθήσασθαι.
ἴδμεν δ᾽ ἀλλήλων γενεήν, ἴδμεν δὲ τοκῆας,
πρόκλυτ᾽ ἀκούοντες ἔπεα θνητῶν ἀνθρώπων,

” ᾽ eee | Μ \ > \ “ we 2 Vis ᾽ \ ,
ὄψει δ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ἄρ πω σὺ ἐμοὺς ides οὔτ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐγὼ σούς.

φασὶ σὲ μὲν ΠΠηλῆος ἀμύμονος ἔκγονον εἶναι,
μητρὸς δ᾽ ἐκ Θέτιδος καλλιπλοκάμου ἁλοσύδνης"
αὐτὰρ ἐγὼν υἱὸς μεγαλήτορος ᾿Αγχίσαο

εὔχομαι ἐκγεγάώμεν, μήτηρ δέ μοί ἐστ᾽ ᾿Αφροδίτη"

-" -“ ΔΛ) " “- /
τῶν δὴ νῦν ἕτεροί ye φίλον παῖδα κλαύσονται

210

σήμερον οὐ γάρ φημ᾽ ἐπέεσσί ye νηπυτίοισιν
ὧδε διακρινθέντε μάχης ἐξαπονέεσθαι.

fal ’ A
εἰ δ᾽ ἐθέλεις Kal ταῦτα δαήμεναι, ὄφρ᾽ ἐὺ εἰδῆις

Γι , / \ / ΝΜ »
ἡμετέρην γενεήν" πολλοὶ δέ μιν ἄνδρες ἴσασι"

Δάρδανον ἂρ πρῶτον τέκετο νεφεληγερέτα Ζεύς,

215

200. uw’ om. 8.

205-09 aé. Ar. 205. πως U.

CDR: ἕτερόν U. || κλαύςηται ().
διακριθέντες HPR!: diaxpineéntec Lips.

201. de1dizaceai (A supr.) Vr. Ὁ.
207. 0°: τ᾽ ACJPU Mor. (P! had te ϑέτιϑος.
altered to τ᾽ ἐκ ©. man. rec.). || ἁλοάδνης Harl. a (yp. GNocUaNuc).
211. re: te Bar.

202. uuexHcecea ἢ.

210. €rapoi
212. diaxpieénte CGIQR?:
215. Gp (A supr.) PS Vr. ἃ : αὖ 2.

200. NHnUTIOc = tn-fans (νη-, ἠπύ-ωλ) ;
a word occurring eight times in T and ®,
and else only in Ν 292=TY 244.

202=433. ἡμὲν . . HO€ imply an anti-
thesis. αἴσυλα therefore can hardly be
the right word ; we want αἴσιμα (Diintzer),
as well abuse as seemly specch. The
phrase thus becomes a dignified rebuke.
For αἴσυλος see note on ἀήσυλος E 876;
the word recurs in Εἰ 403, ® 214, β
232, ε 10, always in the sense ἄδικος.
Ruhnken long ago conjectured αἴσιμα for
αἴσυλα (ἄρμενα M) in Hymn. Mere. 164.

204. πρόκλυτα, heard in old times;
or perhaps lit. heard forwards=handed
onward by oral tradition, and so wide-
spread.

205-09 were athetized by Ar. ὅτι οὐκ
ἀναγκαῖα τὰ δι᾽ αὐτῶν λεγόμενα, κατὰ τὴν
γενεαλογίαν ἀμφοτέρων γιγνωσκομένων.
This is insufficient ground for condem-
nation in a passage like the present.

207. Gdocuenuc, a word recurring only
6 404 φῶκαι vérodes καλῆς ἁλοσύδνης, a
passage which throws no light on the
present. Hesych. has ὕδναι: ἔγγονοι,
but that is probably only an attempt to

explain the word, which was presumably
written as two, ἁλὸς ὕδνης. It was,
however, accepted in Alexandrian times,
as Kallim. has Ὑδατοσύδνη as the name
of a Nereid. It is possible that -vév-
may be the same as the stem υδα-τ for
υδη-τ (G. Meyer Gr. ὃ 335). The word
will then mean ‘daughter of the sa/t-
water,’ the patronymic force residing
only in the noun-termination -7.

208-09 = E 247-48.

210. ἕτεροι, one pair or the other.

213-14=% 150-51, q.v.

215. With great hesitation I have
read Gp for αὖ of the vulgate, which
may have slipped in from 219. αὖ
cannot introduce a narrative, and if
correct is evidence of some dislocation.
But it cannot be used as evidence that
215 is the beginning of a genealogy
imported bodily from some extraneous
source, as has sometimes been done, for
it seems clear that wherever it stands
it can never have been anything but
an introduction; the ascending line
can have gone no higher, and πρῶτον
shews that it cannot have been one of

364 IAIAAOC T (xx)

, Y " ΘΝ
κτίσσε δὲ Δαρδανίην, ἐπεὶ οὔ πω ᾿ἴλιος ἱρὴ
5 ,ὔ / / > ,
ἐν πεδίωι πεπόλιστο πόλις μερόπων ἀνθρώπων,
> > vf)? e / + ἊΝ, ὃ CS
ἀλλ᾽ ἔθ᾽ ὑπωρείας ὠικεον πολυπίδακος lons.

/ 93 - 3 / rn
Δάρδανος αὖ τέκεθ᾽ υἱὸν ᾿ξριχθόνιον βασιλῆα,
“Δ \ ᾽ / / θ lal ’ θ 7 ᾿ 9920)
ds δὴ ἀφνειότατος γένετο θνητῶν ἀνθρώπων

a , 4 ε 7 7,
τοῦ τρισχίλιαι ἵπποι ἕλος κάτα βουκολέοντο

7, , / 5 a
θήλειαι, πώλοισιν ἀγαλλόμεναι ὠταλῆισι.

7, ig
τάων καὶ Βορέης ἠράσσατο βοσκομενάων,

ἵππωι

Ἂ ΄ /
εἰσάμενος παρελέξατο κυανοχαίτηιν" ἱ

216. κτίΖε G.
supr.): πολυπιϑάκου ὦ, A™,
Vr. Ὁ: Gnadfici G: anadoicin Q Vr. A.

218. πολυπίδακος (Ar. ? cp. on 59) AC'PRU Mor. (Harl. a
222. moAncin Harl. a. || ἀταλοῖσι(ν) PR Bar.

223. ἠρήςατο S. || After this line Cant.

Harl. a add ἐν μαλακῶι λειμῶνι Kai GNeeEcIN ElapiNoicin (=Hes. Theog. 279):

this is added by C (man. rec.) S™U™ after 224.

ἐμίγη φιλότητι Kai εὐνῆι Sch. A.

224, τινὲς yp. ἵππωι ὃ᾽ εἰσάμενος

a series of genealogies of sons of Zeus.
On the whole it seems probable that the
speech was composed as we now have
it, and that the genealogy is the kernel
of this ‘ Aeneid,’ to which the rest is
written up. The wearisome repetitions
of ‘let us not waste time on words’ in
200-2, 210-12, 244-58 can only be ex-
cused by the existence of some such
long digression as 215-41. This does
not exclude the possibility of the genea-
logy being taken from some earlier
‘Hesiodean’ source; but the existence
of 219 ff. makes this unlikely.

217. The strongly-marked alliteration
only shews how little stress can be laid
upon any supposed design in such
phenomena.

218. ὑπωρείας, a word used several
times by Herod., and quoted by Plato,
Legg. 681 £, 702 4 τὰς τοῦ Δαρδάνου ὑπω-
petas Te Kal τὴν ἐπὶ θαλάττηι κατοίκισιν.
We cannot say whether it embodies a
real local tradition, or is merely an
ancient speculation as to the develop-
ment of cities. It must in any case be
taken to mean the low hill-country which
fringes Ida, not as we should expect the
point at which the mountains first rise
from the plain; for the latter was the
actual site of Ilios and is therefore ex-
pressed by ἐν πεδίωι. But even this
phrase does not seem quite natural. It
certainly suits Hissarlik better than
sounarbashi, for at the former site the
lower town at least, as distinguished
from the Akropolis, may have extended
to the actual plain. Monro aptly quotes
a parallel from the action of the Sikel

Duketios in Sicily: τὰς μὲν Νέας, ἥτις
ἣν αὐτοῦ πατρίς, μετώικισεν εἰς τὸ πεδίον,
Kat. . ἔκτισε πόλιν ἀξιόλογον, ἣν ..
ὠνόμαζε ἸΤαλικήν (Diod. Sic. xi. 88. 6).

219. The appearance of the purely
Attic hero Erichthonios in a ‘Trojan
genealogy .is startling. Fick has sug-
gested with great probability that the
passage is of Attic origin, and dates from
about 610 B.c., when the Athenians were
endeavouring to gain a footing at
Sigeion ; we know from Strabo (xiii. p.
604) that they claimed kinship with the
Trojans on the ground of this com-
munity of mythical ἀρχηγέται, and it
is quite possible that political considera-
tions may have brought this passage
into the text. Fick therefore joins 219
to 230, reading Δάρδανος αὖ τέκετο Tpda
Τρώεσσι βάνακτα, and remarking that
the divine horses were given ace. to E
265 not to Erichthonios but to Tros.
But it is quite conceivable that the
whole genealogy is of a piece, and was
introduced whole with the remainder of
the ‘ Aeneid.’

221. ἵπποι βουκολέοντο, a mixture of
metaphor like οἰνοχόει νέκταρ A 598°
(and 234 below); so ἱπποβουκόλοι Eur.
Phoen. 28.

223. The idea that mares could actu-
ally become pregnant by the wind was
widely spread in antiquity ; cf. note on
It 150. Here, however, it is not
necessary to see more than a mythologi-
cal form of words to express extreme
speed.

224, κυανοχαίτηι, elsewhere of Poseidon
only, see N 563. It seems to have no

.

IAIAAOC T (xx) 365

ao
ai &

΄, , Io ,

ὑποκυσάμεναι ἔτεκον δυοκαίδεκα πώλους. 225
»“ \ lal , \ / v

OTE μὲν σκιρτῶιεν ἐπὶ ζείδωρον ἄρουραν,

vv , ’ , / 4 / + | ,
ἄκρον ἐπ᾽ ἀνθερίκων καρπὸν θέον οὐδὲ κατέκλων"

Ψ : \ fal 5 , “- ,
ἀλλ ὅτε δὴ σκιρτῶιεν ἐπ᾽ εὐρέα νῶτα θαλάσσης,

"“ 4 e “ ΄ \ - /
ἄκρον ἔπι ῥηγμῖνος ἁλὸς πολιοῖο θέεσκον.

Τρῶα δ᾽ ᾿ριχθόνιος τέκετο Τρώεσσιν ἄνακτα" 230)

mp \ ᾽ = a a ᾽ ΄, ᾽ ,
Τρωὸς δ᾽ αὖ τρεῖς παῖδες ἀμύμονες ἐξεγένοντο,

"Tes τ᾽ ᾿Ασσάρακός τε καὶ ἀντίθεος Τανυμήδης,

ὃς δὴ κάλλιστος γένετο θνητῶν ἀνθρώπων.

\ \ ’ / \ \ , /
Tov καὶ ἀνηρείψαντο θεοὶ Διὶ οἰνοχοεύειν

“ “Ὁ
κάλλεος εἵνεκα οἷο, ἵν ἀθανάτοισι μετείη.

to

> » ΄
Ἶλος δ᾽ αὖ τέκεθ᾽ υἱὸν ἀμύμονα Λαομέδοντα,
μύμ μ

Λαομέδων δ᾽ ἄρα Τιθωνὸν τέκετο Τ]ρίαμόν τε

225-26 om. Ut.

226. wen: δὴ (A supr.) Schol. Ap. Rhod. i.

184. 227.
καρπῶν 8. 228. OH: δὲ Ar. 231. ἀμύμονος HP Vr. b A, Mose. 2. 232.
ἴλλος GPRS Vr. ἃ. 234. Kai: κατ᾽ ἔνια μὲν Did. || ἀνειρίψαντο P: ἀνηρί-
wanto U. 235. εἵνεκ᾽ ἐοῖο (). 236. ἴλλος GPRS Vr. d. || Aaodaduanta U.

special significance for a horse. Hence
no doubt the variant (see above) which
is even less suitable.

227. Cf. Hes. fr. 148
Iphiklos, ἄκρον ἐπ᾽ ἀνθερίκων καρπὸν
θέεν, οὐδὲ κατέκλα, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ πυραμίνων ἀθέ-
ρων δρομάασκε πόδεσσι . . καὶ οὐ σινέ-
σκετο καρπόν (ap. Eust., and cf. Schol.
T). GNeepikwn is commonly explained
ears of corn like ἀθέρων (so Schol. A τῶν
ἐν τοῖς στάχυσι λεπτῶν ἀθέρων). In later
Greek ἀνθέρικος is used of the stalk or
plant of the asphodel, and there is no
reason why it should not be the same in
this passage.

229. For ἔπι mss. have ἐπί, taking
ἄκρον apparently as an adverb, for which
there is no analogy. It must be a sub-
stantive as ἃ 597, Ψ 339; but even so
the use is doubtful, as neither of these
passages supports the use of the gen.
Hence Ahrens’ reading, ἄκρον ἐπὶ pny-
piva, is very probable ; the change will
have been made to avoid the hiatus.

This is of course the regular Greek use of

ἄκρος. The gen. was evidently read by
Ap. Rhod. i. 182 κεῖνος ἀνὴρ καὶ πόντου
ἐπὶ γλαυκοῖο θέεσκεν οἴδματος κτλ.
Virgil's application of the thought to
Camilla hardly needs. quotation (Aen.
vii. 808-11). For pxruinoc= surf with-
out the usual connotation of shore cf.
μ 214 κώπηισιν ἁλὸς ῥηγμῖνα βαθεῖαν
τύπτετε.

(Rzach) οἵ

231. Cf. 2 115, where a dat. is used
in place of the gen. Τρωός.

234. Kai refers to κάλλιστος, ‘con-
sequently,’ as 165. Notice the variant
μέν. ἀνηρείψαντο is the reading of Mss.,
but, as Doderlein has pointed out (Goss.
ili. 244), should be ἀνηρέψαντο, from
ἀρεπ- Ξε ἁρπί(-ἀ ζω) by anaptyxis. For this
form we have the authority of one Ms.
(Νὴ) of Hes. Theog. 990, ἀναρεψαμένη for
ἀνερειψαμένη or ἀναρειψαμένη of the rest
(see Rzach ad loc.). Hence with the aid
of the cognate form ᾿Αρέπυια (for which
see note on II 150) Fick has convincingly
restored in υ 77 (a 241, ξ 371) ᾿Αρέπυιαι
ἀνηρέψαντο, a clear case of the favourite
Jigura etymologica, for the vulg.” Apmucac
avnpetWavro. The word recurs also in 6
727. The sense snatch wp can by no
means be got from ἐρείπω. Whether
ἐρέπτεσθαι is cognate is another matter.
For a rather different form of the legend
ef. Hym. Ven. 203-05. Aristotle (Poet.
xxv. 14) notices the slight extension of
meaning by which oinoxoevein is applied
to nectar.

235=0251. The line may be borrowed
here, as the first half is tautological, and
the second very weak after the more
specific words of the preceding line. Ar.
rejected the line in ο, and upheld it here.
In both cases ofo refers to the object of
the principal verb, not the subject, as
it should.

366 IAIAAOC T (xx)

; -- , .Ὶ vy
Λάμπόν te Κλυτίον θ᾽ “Ἱκετάονά τ᾽ ὄζον “Apnos.

5
᾿Ασσάρακος δὲ Κάπυν, ὁ ὃ

ἄρ᾽ ᾿Αγχίσην τέκε παῖδα"

\ 5 ’ Y > ΤΠ a
αὐτὰρ ἔμ᾽ ᾿Αγχίσης, Upiapyos δ᾽ étey “Exropa δῖον. 240
fal \ “ BA By
ταύτης TOL γενεῆς TE Kal αἵματος εὔχομαι Elvat.
» > 7 /
“Ζεὺς δ᾽ ἀρετὴν ἄνδρεσσιν ὀφέλλει τε μινύθει τε,
ε ς \ / Φ 4
ὅππως Kev ἐθέληισιν" ὁ γὰρ κάρτιστος ἁπάντων.
rn 74 ,ὔ ce
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε μηκέτι ταῦτα λεγώμεθα νηπύτιοι ὡς,
ἑσταύότ᾽ ἐν μέσσηι ὑσμίνην δηϊοτῆτος. 245
»” \ > / ’ [ὃ Qn fa}
ἔστι yap ἀμφοτέροισιν ὀνείδεα μυθήσασθαι
3 - ͵ y y
πολλὰ μάλ᾽: οὐδ᾽ ἂν νηῦς ἑκατόζυγος ἄχθος ἄροιτο"
rn an / 5 Μ ἴω
στρεπτὴ δὲ γλῶσσ᾽ ἐστὶ βροτῶν, πολέες δ᾽ Eve μῦθοι
- 5; / Ν \ \ 4 θ \ + θ
παντοῖοι, ἐπέων δὲ πολὺς νομὸς ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα.

995. Θ΄: τ Ε᾿

7 “ul oy

243. Kpdticroc DHR: κ᾽ dy’ Gpictoc AtCQ Harl. ἃ King’s,

ἐν ἄλλωι A (as though the text had Kdptictoc, which is given in the margin).

245. ἑςταῶτ᾽ ().
τρεπτὴ H. || δὲ : δέ Te DT.

247. ékaténzuroc PR Harl. a Ὁ, Par.b ὁ ἃ g h. 248.

238--΄ 147; it is likely enough that
it may be borrowed here to systematize
the genealogy of the house of Priam.
The idea is carried out in O, where each
of the three brothers is provided with a
son (419, 526, 546, 576).

240. It will be seen that Hector and
Aineias are both fourth in descent from
‘ros ; i.e. they are ‘ third cousins.’

242. This evidently alludes to Achilles’
sareasm about Aineias’ flight at Lyr-
nessos,

243. ὁ yap ox’ ἄριστος Heyne, to ex-
plain the variant yap κ᾽ ὄχ᾽ ἄριστος,
where the κ᾿ is meaningless. The
lensthening of γάρ will be parallel to
that of κεν just before—unless two
such licenses in the line are considered
too much (πᾶσιν, ὅπως κ᾽ ἐθέληισιν
van L.).

244—N 292, and see note on B 435.

245. Heyne remarks that the junction
of UcuiNH with a gen. is quite unique
in H.

247. The epithet ἑκατόζυγος (the
variant ἑκατόνζυγος is excluded by the
analogy of σύζυγος) evidently implies
‘a ship bigger than was ever seen.’
We hear indeed of ships carrying 120
men (B 570), but it is not to be sup-
posed that each of these occupied an
oarsman’s bench. So far as we can judge,
Odysseus’ comparison of the Kyklops to
the mast νηὸς ἐεικοσόροιο (ι 322) implies
that even this must have been a large
size. So in Pind. P. iv. 245 vats πεν-

τηκόντορος is a type of huge bulk. For
fuyad=rowers benches see 1 99, v 21, νηὶ
πολυζύγωι B 298, M. and R. p. 540.
ἄροιτο, bear, only here; ἄρνυμαι else-
where always=win. It looks as though
there were a late confusion with aipew
(Hom. ἀείρειν).

248. cTpentH, exactly our voluble,
capable of turning easily this way or
that, and therefore of uttering words of
every sort. For the other metaphorical
use of the word see I 497, O 203.

249. The sense of νομός is obscure,
and is not explained by the Hesiodean
ἀχρεῖος δ᾽ ἔσται ἐπέων νομός (Opp. 403),
nor by Hym. Ap. 20 πάντηι γάρ τοι,
Φοῖβε, νομοὶ βεβλήαται ὠιδῆς (2). This
may point to the ‘field of words’ as
the sense, lit. the pasture- ground, the
region in which they can find sustenance.
With this metaphor Fasi compares ἔπεα
πτερόεντα, Where words are conceived as
winged creatures flying from man to
man. ‘The idea will then be that there
is a wide region (of insulting thoughts)
wherein words may be reared for the
tongue—the range of insults is very
wide. The scholiasts prefer to explain
by νέμησις, ‘the portioning out of words
is abundant on either side,’ which leads
to the same result. But there is no
trace of any sense of the noun in H.
except pasture. The more familiar νόμος
(law) is not Epic at all. (νέμειν = to
divide ; véwec0ac=to get divided, of land,
to get as ὦ lot; hence to inhabit, of men

ξὺν «

==)’ l= |

IAIAAOC T (xx) 367
e al ᾽ v » al ᾽ ᾽ , OE
ὁπποῖόν κ᾽ εἴπηισθα ἔπος, τοῖόν κ᾽ ἐπακούσαις. 250

bd \ + » \ / lod ᾽ /
ἀλλὰ τί ἢ ἔριδας καὶ νείκεα νῶϊν ἀνάγκη

lal > / > / “ ΄-
νεικεῖν ἀλλήλοισιν εναντίον, ὡς τε γυναῖκας,

αἵ τε χολωσάμεναι ἔριδος πέρι θυμοβόροιο

fal » > / / > » > lal
νεικεῦσ αλλήληισι μέσην ἐς ἄγυιαν ιοῦσαι,

,ὔ / / 4 συν
πόλλ᾽ ἐτεά τε καὶ οὐκί: χόλος δέ τε καὶ τὰ κελεύει. 255

» fol , » ᾽ > / > / a
ἀλκῆς δ᾽ ov μ᾽ ἐπέεσσιν ἀποτρέψεις μεμαῶτα

πρὶν χαλκῶι μαχέσασθαι ἐναντίον: ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε θᾶσσον

γευσόμεθ᾽ ἀλλήλων χαλκήρεσιν ἐγχείηισιν."

io ε \ > an / » ” ”
ἢ pa καὶ ἐν δεινῶν σάκει ἤλασεν ὄβριμον ἔγχος,

250. einoicea LP. || τοῖον καὶ LP.
ἐν ἄλλωι καὶ ὀνείδεα A.

252. γυναῖκες Vr. A.

251. καὶ νείκεα:
255. πόλλ᾽ ἐτεά τε:

251-55 ἀθ. Ar.

πολλά τά Te At(C!?) Ven. B, Harl. ἃ, King’s: πολλά τ᾽ ἐόντα Ar. (see Ludwich).

καὶ : τὰ 0° ap. Schol. A? || οὐχὶ R.

256. énéecct uetatpéweic AC King’s:

énéecci κατατρέψαις (). || ἀποτρέψηις Vr. A: Gnoctpéweic JT Cant. Mose. 2 (Harl.

asupr.), Par.abcefghj, yp. A.

259. dina: A (Ar. ὃ.
Mose. 2, Par. h. || HAace χάλκεον DPRTU Par. e. |

ςἀκεϊ ἔλας᾽ Ar. |) caKe’

ὄμβριλιον (".

οἴο., asin 1. 8 above, or cultivate land,
and of animals fo graze, trans. as ε 449,
intrans. as O 631. A further extension
is to conswine B 780, Ψ 177, where the
idea of land has completely vanished.
Thus we have a wide range to choose
from, and either apportionment or pastur-
age is in itself possible. )

250. Cf. Hesiod Opp. 721 εἰ δὲ κακὸν
εἴποις, τάχα κ᾿ αὐτὸς μεῖζον ἀκούσαις. For
ἐπακούςαιςα with the rare term. -αἰς van
L. reads “ἐπακούσηις from [Plut.] Vi.
Hom.173. Heyne remarks that the ab-
sence of any conjunction makes the line
look like an independent gnomic tag.

251-55. ἀθετοῦνται στίχοι πέντε, ws
ἄκαιροι καὶ ὀχληροὶ προειρημένου τοῦ “ ἀλλ᾽
ἄγε μηκέτι ταῦτα Neywueba” (244). τοῦτο
δὲ περιγράφοντός ἐστι τὸν λόγον. . καὶ
τὰ λεγόμενα ἀνάξια τῶν προσώπων. καὶ
παρὰ βαρβάροις δέ ἐστι τὸ τὰς γυναῖκας
προερχομένας λοιδορεῖσθαι ws παρ᾽ Δἰγυπ-
τίοις An. The first part of this criticism
is justified, but these lines are not the
only ἄκαιροι καὶ ὀχληροί in the speech ;
even if we expel them asa later recen-
sion, with Ar., the repetitions are still
far too numerous. The comparison to
the women in the streets is indeed the
most vigorous passage in the speech, and
is quite as consonant with the manners
of the heroic age, when women were
comparatively: free, as with those of the
Egyptians. But the contracted νεικεῦσι

must be late ; and ἔριδος πέρι eunoBdpoio
is almost like a travesty of the other
passage where it occurs, H 301, II 476,
cf. H 210, T 58.

252. γυναῖκας, after the dat. νῶϊν, is
‘attracted’ by the absorbing influence
of the acc. cum infin. construction. Cf.
H. G. §§ 237, 240. The variant γυναῖκες
may be right.

255. πόλλ᾽ ἐτεά τε καὶ οὐκί, though
ace. to Did. only the reading of inferior
MSsS., 15 obviously better than Ar.’s πολλά
τ᾽ ἐόντα καὶ οὐκί with its clumsy order
of words, which is only slightly improved
if we read τὰ δ᾽ for καί, as one of the
confused scholia seems toimply. Besides,
édvta=true things is a phrase not to be
paralleled in H. For the lengthening
of the a of ἐτεά see on Σ 4. The word
recurs in H. only as an adv. ἐτεόν. καὶ
τά, the false as well as the true.

258. reucdueoa, make trial, as ® 61
δουρὸς ἀκωκῆς . . γεύσεται, v 181 χειρῶν,
φΦ 98 ὀϊστοῦ. But the word is more
naturally used with a weapon than a
man for its object. Cf. Pind. P. ix. 35
γεύεται δ᾽ ἀλκᾶς ἀπειράντου.

259. The scholia mention a reading
δινῶι for ϑεινῶι, and explain it δινωτῶι,
absurdly (cf. N 407); they give little
warrant for attributing it to Ar., who
however read σάκεϊ €\ac’, The very
harshness of this may be evidence of its
originality.

368 IAIAAOC T (xx)

σμερδαλέωι" μέγα δ᾽ ἀμφὶ σάκος μύκε δουρὸς ἀκωκῆι. 260
Πηλεΐδης δὲ σάκος μὲν ἀπὸ ἕο χειρὶ παχείηι

ἔσχετο ταρβήσας" φάτο γὰρ δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος

ῥέα διελεύσεσθαι μεγαλήτορος Αἰνείαο,

νήπιος, οὐδ᾽ ἐνόησε κατὰ φρένα καὶ κατὰ θυμον,

ὡς ov pide ἐστὶ θεῶν ἐρικυδέα δῶρα : 265

ἀνδράσι γε θνητοῖσι δαμήμεναι οὐδ᾽ ὑποείκειν.

οὐδὲ τότ᾽ Δίινείαο δαΐφρονος ὄβριμον ἔγχος

ῥῆξε σάκος: χρυσὸς γὰρ ἐρύκακε, δῶρα θεοῖο:

ἀλλὰ δύω μὲν ἔλασσε διὰ πτύχας, αἱ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔτι τρεῖς
ἦσαν, ἐπεὶ πέντε πτύχας ἤλασε κυλλοποδίων, 270

7) > /
τὰς δύο χαλκείας, δύο δ᾽ ἔνδοθι κασσιτέροιο,
ἊΝ , an a ©? / ”
τὴν δὲ μίαν χρυσῆν, τῆι p ἔσχετο μείλινον ἔγχος.

460. εμερϑαλέον (ἱ (Η sup.) Cant. Vr. A: σμαρϑαλέον S, ἀκωκὴ ΟσΡΩΙΒΊ,

and ap. Schol. PX.

261. δὲ : wen T’. || anal Par. 6. || ἕο: οὗ Zen. 263.

ῥέα dieheUceceat Ar. P: ῥέα dr EheUceceai Lips.: ῥεῖα dieheUcecear RST Par.

(c supr.) f: ῥεῖα 0° ἐλεύςεςθαι ().
aineidao P. || duBpiuon CHPR.

σοφιστῶν, ἐν ἐνίοις δὲ οὐδὲ ἐφέροντο Schol. T.
ap. Eust., Par. Ὁ supr. || ὃ᾽ Gp’: rap PR.
χάλκεον DGPRT (U!?) Aristotle Poet. 25.

265. δῶρα : ἔν τισι ἔργα Schol. A. 261.
269-72 ἀθ. Ar.: προηθετοῦντο παρ᾽ ἐνίοις τῶν

269. ἔλαςςε : eAdcce Autochthon
271. ἔνϑοϑεν (). 272. μείλινον :

260. cuepdadéon in this emphatic
place after δεινῶι is very weak. Perhaps
we should read σμερδαλέον as adv.,
though with little support. Heyne
conj. σμερδαλέον δὲ μέγ᾽, which should
be taken together, as in ὁ 395 σμερδαλέον
δὲ μέγ᾽ ὥιμωξεν, terribly loud. μέγα is
in any case to be taken as adv. with
μύκε. ἀκωκή is of course ἃ possible
variant for ἀκωκῆι, but it is the larger
body from which the noise should come.

263. ῥέα dieheUceceal, see N 144.

266. For ὑποείκειν Diintzer conj. ὑπο-
εἰκει, as οὐ pytdu ἐστὶν ὑποείκειν is evidently
not a very natural expression. The
slight irregularity is, however, quite in-
telligible after δαμήμεναι, and the analogy
of K 403, P 77 is all in favour of the
two infinitives.

268=@ 165. Cf. Scut. Her. 415
οὐδ᾽ ἔρρηξεν χαλκός: ἔρυτο δὲ" δῶρα θεοῖο.
The gold stands, as the most precious
constituent, for the whole metallic facing
of the shield. The plural δῶρα may be
explained as referring to the collective
sense of χρυσός, the parts of gold, as we
might talk of a man possessing ‘ plate,
presents from friends.’ (The reference
to the use of the plural of abstract words,

H. G. § 171. 4, hardly suits here, as
δῶρα is used in its most concrete sense. )

269-72. These lines are spurious, as
was perceived by Ar.; and Schol T
says προηθετοῦντο δὲ kal map’ ἐνίοις τῶν
σοφιστῶν, ἐν ἐνίοις δὲ οὐδὲ ἐφέροντο (the
‘Sophists’ are only here mentioned as
Homeric critics, and the reading is
suspicious). They are evidently inserted
by some one who thought that the πέντε
πτύχες of Σ 481 were formed by the
different metals, whereas they were no
doubt of hide. Even if the πτύχες were
of metal the arrangement here given
would be absurd, for the gold is hidden
away in the middle where it would be
neither useful nor ornamental. 268, as
appears from ® 165, needs no further
expansion, Ar.’s explanation of the in-
terpolation is curious. ἀθετοῦνται στίχοι
δ΄, ὅτι διεσκευασμένοι εἰσὶν ὑπό Twos τῶν
βουλομένων πρόβλημα ποιεῖν. μάχεται δὲ
σαφῶς τοῖς γνησίοις" ἄτρωτα γὰρ τὰ
ἠφαιστότευκτα συνίσταται (An.); the
passage was interpolated to support the
views of some of those who had made
a problem of the arrangement of the
metals in =-—a favourite ¢rua mentioned
by Gellius (xiv. 6), and discussed at

So a δίς

: IAIAAOC T (xx)

369

/ a > 9 \ oh / »
δεύτερος aut Ἀχιλεὺς προιει δολιχόσκιον εγχός,
\ ͵ ᾽ ,ὕ ᾽ ᾽ 4 ΄ ΓΕ,
καὶ βάλεν Αἰνείαο Kat ἀσπίδα πάντοσ εἰσὴν,

” ᾽ “ , Φ , , / i
ἄντυγ᾽ ὕπο πρώτην, HL λεπτότατος θέε χαλκός, 270
/ / id \ , ΄ \
λεπτοτάτη δ᾽ ἐπέην ῥινὸς Boos: ἡ δὲ διαπρὸ
Moe , ’ ΄ ᾽ σι
Πηλιὰς ἤϊξεν μελίη, λάκε 6 ἀσπὶς ὑπ᾽ αὐτῆς.

τ >
Αἰνείας δ᾽ ἐάλη καὶ ἀπὸ ev ἀσπίδ᾽ ἀνέσχε

δείσας" ἐγχείη δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπὲρ νώτου ἐνὶ γαίηι

ἔστη ἱεμένη, διὰ δ᾽ ἀμφοτέρους ἕλε κύκλους

280

ἀσπίδος ἀμφιβρότης" ὁ δ᾽ ἀλευάμενος δόρυ μακρὸν
ἔστη, κὰδ δ᾽ ἄχος οἱ χύτο μυρίον ὀφθαλμοῖσι,

ταρβήσας ὅ οἱ ἄγχι πάγη βέλος.

αὐτὰρ "Ay irre US

273-74. δεύτερον αὗτ᾽ ἀχιλεὺς μελίην ἰθυπτίωνα (μελίηι iounTtion: Heyne)

ἀςπίϑα NU= εὔχαλκον ἀμύμονος aineiao Zen. (Sch. AT).
281. ἀλευόμενος U.

276. ἡ δὲ: ἠδὲ 0.

274. aineidao P.

length by Porphyrios in Schol. B, and
probably by Aristotle in his Homeric
Problems (see below). Porphyrios held
that the gold was the middle, Ar. that
it was the outer, of the layers; and the
latter, that he might not be accused of
athetizing the lines because he could not
reconcile them with his view (ἵνα μὴ
δοκῆι λύσεως ἠπορηκέναι Kal διὰ τοῦτο ἠθε-
τηκέναι), gave as an explanation of the
lines as they stood that the spear was
stopped by the outer layer, not piercing
it, but bending back the next layers, so
that ἐγένετο κοιλότης, οὐ τρῶσις, and two
layers were ‘driven through,’ though
the outer one stopped the point! Aris-
totle quotes 272 in an extremely obscure
passage of the Poetics (xxv. 15), which is
practically unintelligible, but probably
points to a λύσις of the same sort.

273. Ar. objected to Zen.’s reading of
the couplet (see above) that νύσσειν is
only used of thrusting, not of casting.

275. πρώτην, at the beginning, i.e.
extreme edge, of the rim. Cf. Z 118,
where πυμάτη means the same thing
proceeding from the centre outwards,
instead of as here from the circumference
inwards. χαλκός here must mean the
metal facing, like χρυσός above. ‘This,
like the hide, is made thinner at the
edge, which is of less importance than
the centre for defensive purposes.

276. pindc Bodc, the body of the
shield ; ἐπέην, ἐπι- implies ‘to back it
up, not of course that the hide was in
front of the metal.

280. ἔστη ἱἰεμένη,
eager course; so O

VOL LL

was stopped in its
543, T 399. The

2B

word usually requires a complement
(gen., infin., or adv.), to indicate the
object aimed at, as Φ 70 ἔστη ἱεμένη
χροὸς ἄμεναι. Butitis not safe to found
any conclusions on this slight discrepancy.
Oia... ἕλε, separated; this sense of
διαιρεῖν is familiar in later Greek, but
does not recur in H. ἀμφοτέρους, τὸν
χαλκοῦν καὶ τὸν βύρσινον Schol. A,
rightly no doubt—the metal facing and
leather backing, which a blow at the
edge would inevitably tear apart.
κύκλους may be used of the ‘ figure-of-
8’ shaped Mykenaean shield (see App.
B, i. 1); but in so late a passage it is
more probable that the author was think-
ing of the round shield. In any case this
can have no bearing on the shape of
Achilles’ shield as described in 2.

282. The expression grief poured over
his eyes is unusual, but may be paralleled
by 6716 τὴν δ᾽ ἄχος ἀμφεχύθη θυμοφθόρον :
compare also P 591 ἄχεος νεφέλη ἐκάλυψε
μέλαινα. The neglect of the F of Fa
is more suspicious ; hence van L. and
Platt conj. καδ δέ F’(o) ἄχος χύτο (Kad
δ᾽ dp’ G. Hermann), leaving us still to
ask why sorrow should be the feeling of
the moment. Bentley well suggested
ἀχλύς for ἄχος oi, thus restoring a quite
Homeric metaphor, cf. E 696, IL 344, T
321. We must then write μυρίη with
Cobet, or take μυρίον as an adverb, οἵ. ®
320. Possibly the latter may be right,
in which case the apparent harshuess
of the construction may have led to the
corruption of the passage. ‘The whole
clause is parenthetical, ταρβήςας re-
curring to the construction of ἀλευάμενος.

370 IAIAAOC T (xx)

ἐμμεμαὼς ἐπόρουσεν, ἐρυσσάμενος ξίφος ὀξύ,
σμερδαλέα ἰάχων' ὁ δὲ χερμάδιον λάβε χειρὶ 285
Αἰνείας, μέγα ἔργον, ὃ οὐ δύο yi ἄνδρε φέροιεν,
οἷοι νῦν βροτοί εἰσ᾽- ὁ δέ μιν ῥέα πάλλε καὶ οἷος.
ἔνθά κεν Aivetas μὲν ἐπεσσύμενον βάλε πέτρωι
ἢ κόρυθ᾽ ἠὲ σάκος, τό οἱ ἤρκεσε λυγρὸν ὄλεθρον,
τὸν δέ ΤῈ Πηλείδης σχεδὸν ἄορι θυμὸν ἀπηύρα, 290
εἰ μὴ ἄρ᾽ ὀξὺ νόησε Ἰ]οσειδάων ἐνοσίχθων.
αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἀθανάτοισι θεοῖς μετὰ μῦθον ἔειπεν"
«ὦ πόποι, ἢ μοι ἄχος μεγαλήτορος Αἰνείαο,
ὃς τάχα []ηλεΐωνι δαμεὶς ᾿Αἰδόσδε κάτεισι,
πειθόμενος μύθοισιν ᾿Απόλλωνος ἑκάτοιο, 295
νήπιος, οὐδέ TL οἱ χραισμήσει λυγρὸν ὄλεθρον.
ἀλλὰ τί ἣ νῦν οὗτος ἀναίτιος ἄλγεα πάσχει,
\ “ > 4 / 5. ΄ ᾽ 3X
μὰψ ἕνεκ᾽ ἀλλοτρίων ἀχέων, κεχαρισμένα δ᾽ αἰεὶ
δῶρα θεοῖσι δίδωσι, τοὶ οὐρανὸν εὐρὺν ἔχουσιν;
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγεθ᾽ ἡμεῖς πέρ μιν ὑπὲκ θανάτου ἀγάγωμεν, 800
μή πως καὶ Kpovidns κεχολώσεται, αἴ κεν ᾿Αχιλλεὺς

284. dndpoucen Η.
om. At.
λυγρὸν : λοιγὸν T. 292. μετὰ:
Cant. 296. Tl: Tic S. ||
κε Harl. a. || εἴ ken D: ef περ Mor.

286. QUO τ΄: ϑύω Bar.: δύ᾽ Q. || ἄνδρες PR. 287
288. éneccUuenoc ()S (ὁ corr.) T (supr. N) Cant., yp. Mose. 2. 289.
κατα 5S.
χραιομήςη ().

293. wol: μέγα J.
300. eandtoio J.

295 om.
301. Kai:

285-87 =E 302-04, where see notes.

289. It is not clear whether τό οἱ...
ὄλεθρον is an independent clause descrip-
tive of the shield (which had saved him,
viz. 268 above), or is to be included under
the idea of contingency in the preceding
and following clauses, κε being virtually
supplied foi them, which ἘΣ ΙΣ have
in that case warded off. The former
seems preferable, as the relative τό is
regularly used to introduce such sub-
ordinate descriptive touches. But the

whole sentence, with its long chain of

unrealised possibilities, is by no means
in the Homeric manner.

293. The speech and action of Poseidon
are as glaringly inconsistent with his
attitude in the Πα in general, and his
recent speech (133-48) in particular, as
are the words of 306 with that of Zeus.
If Aineias is to be saved it should natur-
ally have been by Apollo who urged him
on, and is still in the field, or by his
mother Aphrodite, as in E. But it

is impossible to separate the action
of Poseidon from the whole episode,
which may have been introduced not
only for the glory of Aineias, but to
explain some form of Poseidon-worship
among the families who claimed descent
from him.

298. say, without aim or object, so
far as heis concerned. ἀχέων, astrange
expression ; apparently ‘he takes part
in the war because of sorrows which do
not concern him.’ But this use of ἄχος
is hardly in the Homeric style. Déoder-
lein takes ἀχέων as a participle, ob res
alienas dolens, which willnotdo. Bent-
ley reads ἀτέων, which would remove all
difficulty, but is too familiar a word to
have been corrupted. There is a curious
schol. of Aristonikos, suggesting that
Priam’s suspicion of Aineias (see N 461)
was due not to his pretensions to the
Trojan crown, but to the fact that he
had no personal interest in the war (οὐ
συνεπεγράφη τῶι τῶν ἸΙριαμιδῶν πολεμῶι).

πα.

IAIAAOC T (xx) 371

, ,ὔ ΄ , v7 9 3 > ,
τόνδε κατακτείνηιν" μόριμον δέ οἵ ἐστ᾽ ἀλέασθαι,

wv \ » \ \ v "
ὄφρα μὴ ἄσπερμος γενεὴ καὶ ἄφαντος ὄληται
Δαρδάνου, ὃν Κρονίδης περὶ πάντων φίλατο παίδων,

“ Ψ, ? / rn ΄
οἱ ἕθεν ἐξεγένοντο γυναικῶν τε θνητάων. 305
v \ / \ ” r /
ἤδη yap Ipiapov γενεὴν ἤχθηρε Κρονίων"
νῦν δὲ δὴ Αἰνείαο βίη ρώεσσιν ἀνάξει

\ , a ΄, , ,
καὶ παίδων παῖδες, τοί κεν μετόπισθε γένωνται.

”

’ a ξ΄
τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα βοῶπις πότνια “Ἥρη:

‘wc? , > AK \ \ \ a /
ἐννοσίγαι, αὐτὸς σὺ μετὰ φρεσὶ σῆισι νόησον 310
,ὔ / / Φ
Αἰνείαν, ἤ κέν μιν ἐρύσσεαι ἢ κεν ἐάσεις. 811
\ \ Aw rn / 0
ἤτοι μὲν γὰρ νῶϊ πολεῖς ὠμόσσαμεν ὅρκους 318

πᾶσι μετ᾽ ἀθανάτοισιν, ἐγὼ καὶ ἸΙαλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη,

΄ ays’ , 5 / \ 5
μή ποτ ἐπὶ Tpmecow ἀλεξήσειν κακὸν ἦμαρ, 315

μηδ᾽ ὁπότ᾽ ἂν Tpoin μαλερῶι πυρὶ πᾶσα δάηται

,ὔ ΄, > > 7. Φ: > a »
δαιομένη, Saiwor 6 ἀρήϊοι vies ᾿Αχαιῶν.

302. WOpPLLON J: μόρειμον 22.

303. Gcmepuoc . . ἄφαντος : ἄφαντος (7)

γενεὴ OuHeéNToc Ar. ap. Schol. P. || ὥς κε μὴ Gcnepuoc γενεὴ uetoniceen ὅληται

Maxeebyr. 22ss. xxvi. 9.
ἤχϑαιρε Aph.

305. τε ϑθνητάων : θηλυτεράων [1]. 306.
307. τινὲς yp. aineiao γένος πάντεςςιν ἀνάξει Strabo xiii. 608:
μεταγράφουσί τινες αἱνείω γενεὴ NMGNTECCIN ἀνάξει An.

308. naidec παίδων

D'GHJPRST Strabo ἰδία. (and A in lemma; in the text // and / are written over
the two words. || KEN: Kai Mose. 2. γένωνται : λίπωνται Syr. and αἱ διὰ τῶν

πόλεων. 309 om. J}.

311. εἴ κέν μιν Harl. a.

ἐάςη(ι)ς C (supr. et) GL

Vr. A Mosc. 2: €dccue R. || After this C?GQR Vr. d™, Har] a™ insert
Πηλεΐδηι ᾿Αχιλῆϊ δαμήμεναι Ecedon ἐόντα. 912

316-17 om. Syr.*

317. καιομένη" καίωςι A spr.

302. μόριμον, here only in H. ; but
found also in Pindar and Aischylos.
The unmetrical μόρσιμον has almost
eutirely supplanted it in Mss.

306. ἤχθαιρε Aph.; but the imperf.,
as expressing a continued state, is in too
flagrant contradiction with the conduct
of Zeus. The aor. may be explained as
a petulant expression, has come to hate,
with particular reference to the recent
decision of Zeus to let the war take its
course.

307. Strabo and the scholia say that
the variant πάντεσσιν (see above) was in-
vented to flatter the Romans. It issig-
nificant of the honesty of the tradition
that no trace of it should appear in the
mss. This famous prophecy, which is
repeated in a similar form in Hyzin.
Ven. 197, is of course the foundation of
the legend of Virgil’s Aeneid, and is
translated there (iii. 97-98), hic domus
Aeneae cunctis dominabitur oris et nati

natorum et qui nascentur ab illis. Virgil
therefore read γένωνται, not λίπωνται.

311. See K 44. We can quite well
read ἐάσηις here and take ἐρύσσεαι as
aor. subj.

312. It is obvious from ms. evidence
that this line has been interpolated, like
Q 558 (q.v.) in order to supply a verb to
€dceic, which is quite capable of stand-
ing by itself, det him alone. Compare
note on E 848, and x 444.

313. The plur. ὅρκους (here only)
means ‘oaths by many different objects,’
i.e. of the most solemn sort ; see B 755,
O 36, and Buttmann Levil. p. 436.

315-17 ῷ 374-76, except that there
καιομένη, καίωσι is the best attested
reading. Syr. omits 316-17 but ‘there
are traces of writing in another hand
on the upper margin; probably one or
more of the omitted lines.’ 317 is
rejected by Bentley and P. Knight,
316-17 by Bekker, Nauck, Christ, Fick,

873 IAIAAOC T (xx)

> / / > /
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ τό γ᾽ ἄκουσε Loceddwr ἐνοσίχθων,

@

Ap ¢ WwW T ί ὶ ἀνὰ κλόνον ἐγχειάων
ἢ ῥ᾽ ἴμεν ἄν τε μάχην καὶ ava κλον YN ᾿

ἷξε δ᾽ ὅθ᾽ Αἰνείας ἠδὲ κλυτὸς Hev ᾿Αχιλλεύς. 820
Sees a \ » > 93 Q lal 7 3 ΔΝ
αὐτίκα τῶι μὲν ἔπειτα Kat ὀφθαλμῶν χέεν ἀχλὺν

Πηλεΐδης ᾿Αχιλῆϊ' ὁ δὲ μελίην ἐύχαλκον

5 2 /
ἀσπίδος ἐξέρυσεν μεγαλήτορος Αἰνείαο"

\ lal ? fal oo
Kal τὴν μὲν προπάροιθε ποδῶν Αχιλῆος ἔθηκεν,

See) ieee,
Αἰνείαν δ᾽ ἔσσευεν ἀπὸ χθονὸς ὑψόσ᾽ ἀείρας. 325

c \ \ \ 4
πολλὰς δὲ στίχας ἡρώων, πολλὰς δὲ καὶ ἵππων

fa fal rn \ \ 5 ie
Αἰνείας ὑπερᾶλτο θεοῦ ἀπὸ χειρὸς opovaas,

- Ἂ 7. /
ἷξε δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἐσχατιὴν πολυάϊκος πολέμοιο,

r / / ve
ἔνθά τε Kavewves πόλεμον μέτα θωρήσσοντο.

τῶι δὲ μάλ᾽ ἐγγύθεν ἦλθε Ἰ]οσειδάων ἐνοσίχθων, 880

/ / 7
καί μιν φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα:

- an > / 12
“ Αἰνεία, τίς © ὧδε θεῶν ἀτέοντα κελεύει

ἀντί ᾿Αχιλλῆος πολεμίζειν ἠδὲ μάχεσθαι,

aA an ed / \ / > /
ὃς σεῦ ἅμα κρείσσων καὶ φίλτερος ἀθανάτοισιν;

320. ἧξε Q. || ἠδὲ PU: ἠδ᾽ ὁ Q.

321. ὀφϑοαλμὸν D. 322-24 ad. Ar.

325. δ᾽ éméceven GPR: Sanécceven L: yp. καὶ αἰνείαν 9° Ecceuen P. 326.

ἡρώων : ἀνδρῶν ().
CDJPQU Syr.: ἔνϑά Ke(n) ST Harl. a:
331. καί μιν νεικείων Zen. :

327. ϑεῶν "Ὁ.

328. écxaTian J. 329. Enea δὲ

ἔνϑα Kai R. || uwetTeewprcconto P Hazrl. a.
TON Kal νεικείων Rhianos.

332. c¢ om. P (space

left blank). ἀτέοντα Q, ἐν ἁπάσαις Did.: ἀπεόντα U: χατέοντα PR Mor. Bar.
Harl. a (6 cor7.: yp. Gtéonta, glossed ἀφροντιστοῦντα Harl. a™) Par. a? (yp.
χατέον --τα-- χρείαν ἔχοντα Par. a!): ἀέκητι G, yp. C (man. rec.): ἄέκοντα Cant.
333. ἀντία πηλείωνος ὑπερϑύμοιο μάχεσθαι AJ() Harl. a, Vr. b A, Mose. 2: ἐν

ἄλλωι ἀντὶ τοῦ (sic) ἀχιλῆος κτλ. A.

etc. Both lines ‘are perhaps more in
place in ® The triple repetition of
forms of daiw is disagreeable; but a
reference to 2 227 (whence a splendid
effect has been badly copied) would
suggest that the remedy is to be found
rather in changing δάηται, a form not
elsewhere found, into κάηται. (Hesych.
δάηται: καίεται.) μαλερῶι, see note on
I 242.

319=E 167.

322-24, ἀθετοῦνται στίχοι τρεῖς, ὅτι οὐκ
ἐνέσχηται τῆι ἀσπίδι τὸ δόρυ τοῦ ᾿Αχιλλέως,
ἀλλὰ “διὰ πρὸ Inds ἤϊξεν pwedrin” (276)
καὶ “ἐγχείη δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπὲρ νώτου ἐνὶ γαίηι "
(279). πῶς οὖν ὁ Ποσειδῶν ἐκ τῆς ἀσπίδος
ἤρυσε τὸ δόρυ; An. The difficulty may
be evaded if we suppose that the spear-
shaft had carried the shield with it;
but this is not the simple sense of
276-79, and the lines are quite needless.

329. For the Kaukones see K 429.
They are not found among the Trojan
allies in the Catalogue, and later tradi-
tion knew little or nothing of them.
Another tribe of the same name is men-
tioned as living in Elis, y 366 (see
Herod. i. 147). So Pelasgians are found
both in Greece and in Asia Minor.
eWwpPHCcONTO, were entering the fight ; οἵ.
N 301, = 189.

332. ἀτέοντα, d@povtictovvTa: Καλλί-
paxos ““ Μουσέων Keds ἀνὴρ arée” Sch.
A. The word recurs in Herod. vii. 223
where it duly represents the normal ἀτᾶν
(cf. opéw), but in Homer it can hardly

be right. It is presumably —— wv with
synizesis. But we should perhaps ac-
cept the variant xaréovra, joining

it with θεῶν, lacking the aid of the
gods; cf. y 48 πάντες δὲ θεῶν χατέουσ᾽
ἄνθρωποι. ᾿

.

—————————

—"

eel ὐὐὐῤρροῃᾳ«ψ«ἕώς-.

᾿ ὦ

IAIAAOC YT (xx) 373

> Pe A “ ῃ γ» “5 a
aXX avaxywpijcat, ὅτε κεν συμβλήσεαι αὐτῶι, 990
\ e -“ , » “"
μὴ καὶ ὑπὲρ μοῖραν δόμον ᾿Αἴδος εἰσαφίκηαι.
> \ / » » \ / / ᾽
αὐτὰρ ἐπεί x ᾿Αχιλεὺς θάνατον καὶ πότμον ἐπίσπηι,

/ \ » \ , /
θαρσήσας δὴ ἔπειτα μετὰ πρώτοισι μάχεσθαι"

οὐ μὲν γὰρ τίς σ᾽ ἄλλος ᾿Αχαιῶν ἐξεναρίξει.᾽"
“a > Ν / > / , > \ / 7
ὡς εἰπὼν λίπεν αὐτοθ, ἐπεὶ διεπέφραδε πάντα. 340
> » ’ A > > rn ᾽ ᾽ ‘
αἶψα δ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽ Αχιλῆος ἀπ᾿ ὀφθαλμῶν σκέδασ᾽ ἀχλὺν
, ¢ ΒΥ | ey es > A
θεσπεσίην: ὁ 5 ἔπειτα μέγ ἔξιδεν ὀφθαλμοῖσιν,
᾽ ,ὔ J »“ 3 \ Δ / ,
ὀχθήσας δ᾽ ἄρα εἶπε πρὸς ὃν μεγαλήτορα θυμόν'
co Ἃ / Ss / an γῶν > cr ΄ aA
ὦ πόποι, ἢ μέγα θαῦμα τόδ᾽ ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ὁρῶμαι:
/ lal “
ἔγχος μὲν τόδε κεῖται ἐπὶ χθονός, οὐδέ TL φῶτα 345
nr / ΄,
λεύσσω, τῶι ἐφέηκα κατακτάμεναι μενεαίνων.
/ / “
ἢ pa καὶ Αἰνείας φίλος ἀθανάτοισι θεοῖσιν
“' > / v \ v > /
hev* ἀτάρ μιν ἔφην parr αὔτως εὐχετάασθαι.
/ e \ cr » fel
ἐρρέτω" οὔ οἱ θυμὸς ἐμεῦ ἔτι πειρηθῆναι
Ν a \ a 4 » > / ἐ
ἐσσεται, OS καὶ νυν φύγεν ἄσμενος ἐκ θανάτοιο. 550
>? \ a
ἀλλ aye δὴ Δαναοῖσι φιλοπτολέμοισι κελεύσας
a Ui , , ”
τῶν ἄλλων Τρώων πειρήσομαι ἀντίος ἐλθών.
io \ ΦοταΝ / 3 , \ \ c /
ἢ Kal ἐπὶ στίχας ἄλτο, κέλευε δὲ φωτὶ ἑκάστωι"
“ ΄ a r ΄ ice N 4 cal 3 /
μηκέτι viv Γρώων ἑκὰς ἕστατε, δῖοι Axaroi,

> | » » ’ > > / \ 4 -
ἀλλ ἄγ ἀνὴρ ἄντ᾽ ἀνδρὸς ἴτω, μεμάτω δὲ μάχεσθαι. 35

Ou

> / / / 4 \ > / ONE
ἀργαλέον δέ μοί ἐστι, Kal ἰφθίμωι περ ἐόντι,

> lal
τοσσούσδ᾽ ἀνθρώπους ἐφέπειν καὶ πᾶσι μάχεσθαι"

335. KEN: ON CD. || ευμβλήςεαι AGQT: cuuBscea S:

Ξυμβλήςεται P: Ξυμβλήςεαι 02.

Ξυμβήςεαι Mor. :

, 7

338. eapprcac Harl. a. || OM ἔπειτα : ὃ᾽ ἔπειτα

JPQ: 9 ἥπειτα (ϑήπειτα, ὃ᾽ Hneita etc.) Ὡ. || MpeToici: τρώεςει (YT Syr. Mor. Bar.

339. ¢ om. DHPRT Syr.
xeoni Bar. 849. ἐμεῦ γ᾽ Uz
ἐλϑεῖν U.

341. ἀπ᾿: én’ HP.
350. Oc: ὧς Harl. a.
357. Téccouc H() Harl.a, Mor. Mose. 2, Vr. bd A.

344. dpdceai 0). 345.
352. ἀντία L.
| ἀνθρώπων Harl. ἃ.

335. As between ουμβλήςεαι and συμ-
βήσεαι there can be little question ; the
former is the regular word for meeting
(ef. IL 565, Φ 578), while συμβαίνειν does
not occur in H. But there is no analogy
in Greek for such an aor. subj. as βλήσεαι,
no sigmatic aor. occurring at all. Neither
can it be fut. indic. We must therefore
read συμβλήεαι with Dindorf ; this is the
correct subj. of which the 3rd_ person
βλήεται is found in p 472. The cor-
ruption has no doubt arisen from the
influence of the probably early variant
συμβήσεαι.

342. Cf. Ο 668. μέντ᾽ ἔξιδεν, ‘stared
with all his might,’ as we say, as though

it required a great exercise of force ; μέγα
asin μέγα κρατέειν, etc. Compare ὑπόδρα
ἰδών, ἀχρεῖον ἰδών (B 269). ἐξ also
implies the putting forth of effort, as
κεφαλῆς ἐκδέρκεται ὄσσε Ψ 477; οἴ.
μάκιστον ἐξιδοῦ Soph. Phil. 851. The
phrase is a curious one, but we have no
right to say that it is corrupt.

343=A 403. 344=N 99,

350. It is a question if the ὡς of one
MS. is not to be preferred, as more
Homeric, to the vulg. ὅς.

357. €génein, to control, manage, as
we say, with the additional connotation
of ‘driving,’ the enemy. See note on
A 496. ἐφέπειν is often used in later

914

IAIAAOC T (xx)

é POD ,
οὐδέ κ᾽ ΓΔρης, ὅς περ θεὸς ἄμβροτος, οὐδέ kK Αθήνη
τοσσῆσδ᾽ ὑσμίνης ἐφέποι στόμα καὶ πονέοιτο"

P ,
GAN ὅσσον μὲν ἐγὼ δύναμαι χερσίν τε
\ / ἔς 6 / δὲ
καὶ σθένει, οὐκέτι φημι μεθησέμεν, οὐ
Ν 3 / /
ἀλλὰ μάλα στιχὸς εἶμι διαμπερές, οὐδέ
Τρώων χαιρήσειν, ὅς τις σχεδὸν ἔγχεος

ὡς har’ ἐποτρύνων: Tpwecor δὲ φαίδιμος “Extwp

> « 3 5 a
κέκλεθ᾽ ὁμοκλήσας, φάτο δ᾽ ἴμεναι ἄντ ᾿Αχιλῆος"

“Τρῶες ὑπέρθυμοι, μὴ δείδιτε Ἰ]ηλεΐωνα.

5 /
Kal Kev ἐγὼν ἐπέεσσι καὶ ἀθανάτοισι μαχοίμην"

ἔγχεϊ δ᾽ ἀργαλέον, ἐπεὶ ἢ πολὺ φέρτεροί εἰσιν.
>»? 2 \ / I / > /
οὐδ᾽ ᾿Αχιλεὺς πάντεσσι τέλος μύθοις ἐπιθήσει,

\ \ ft
ἀλλὰ TO μὲν τελέει, TO δὲ καὶ μεσσηγὺ κολούσει.

ποσίν τε 360
ἠβαιόν,
τιν οἴω
ἔλθηι."
365
370

358. ὥς περ (). || GBpotoc Mor.
Vr. Ὁ ἃ. || ἐφέποιτο PRU.
PR: Getic κεν (A supr.) C:
JL Bar. Vr. b A, Mose. 2.
369. muUeoic: τέλος πάντεςς᾽ PR.

359. ToccHc Syr. Harl. a, Mor. Mose. 2,

361. οὐκέτι P: οὔ μ᾽ ἔτι ἢ.
ὅςτις μὲν Ὁ. || ἔγχεος : ἀντίος PQR. || ἔλθοι (A 8:7.)
365. Yuen ΟἿ.
370. κολούςει TU: κολούει (2.

363. Oc TIC: dc κε

368. πολυφέρτερος ἐςτὶν D.

Greek of a general ‘controlling’ his own
men, but the idea of hostility is generally
connoted in H., and the parallelism of
πᾶσι μάχεσθαι indicates that the same
is the case here ; otherwise it would be
possible to translate i¢ is hard for me to
command so great an army and (at the
same time) to fight with all the enemy.

359. The exact metaphor of the word
ctoua is uncertain ; see Καὶ 8 with note,
T 313. We can hardly go further than
to regard UcuinHe cTéua as a periphrasis
for ὑσμίνη. But the use of ἐφέπειν which
forms the transition between the primi-
tive idea of ‘managing’ and the derived
metaphor ‘chasing,’ namely the sense of
‘driving’ horses (see Θ 126), suggests
that ‘managing the mouth’ here may
be a figure from the bit and bridle. καὶ
πονέοιτο is used by a sort of hendiadys
for movovmevos, by dint of labowr; the
word having as often a special reference
to the toil of battle.

361. οὐκέτι, Naber (with P) for οὔ μ᾽
ἔτι of 2; the pronoun is not usually
expressed in such phrases. ᾿

362. The sing. στιχός recurs in II
173, only the nom. and acc. plur.
being found elsewhere. στιχῶν is of
course impossible in a hexameter (μάλ᾽
ἀν στίχας Barnes, κατὰ στίχας Axt). It

evidently means ‘the enemies’ line of
battle.’ διαμπερές, right through, as M
429 διαμπερὲς ἀσπίδος αὐτῆς.

365. ἴμεναι, the vis quite unexplained ;
ἵμεν, ἴμεναι and ἱέναι occur about 130
times in H., elsewhere always with ¢
Compare note on f¢evyviwey IL 145.
Transposition has been suggested, ἔμεναι
δ᾽ épar’, or φάτο δ᾽ ἄντ᾽ ἴμεναι (Schulze
Q. E. p. 377) but is not very probable.
φάτο δ᾽ ἂψ ἵμεν Nauck. It is a question,
however, if φάτο itself is the right word.
It should according to usage mean
thought rather than proclaimed,

370. κολούςει is clearly necessary if
the line is to stand; the ambiguous
τελέει may have led to κολούει, which
nearly all Mss. give. The present, after
ἐπιθήσει, turns the line into a weak
platitude. As an alternative we may
regard it as a gnomic interpolation
referring originally to Zeus. In this
connexion κολούει is suitable, being equi-
valent to ἐνικλᾶν Θ 408, ἐπικείρειν II 120.
It is used again=make to fail in 6 211
ἕο δ᾽ αὐτοῦ πάντα κολούει. The clause
τὸ WEN τελέει is only introduced for the
sake of antithesis, to set off the other
alternative on which stress is laid ;
‘though he will sometimes succeed, yet
at other times he shall fail.’

IAIAAOC T (xx) 37

or

cal » \ / “- \ , ~ ν
τῶι δ᾽ ἐγὼ ἀντίος εἶμι, καὶ εἰ πυρὶ χεῖρας ἔοικεν,

> \ - Μ / > Μ / ν᾽
εἰ πυρὶ χεῖρας ἔοικε, μένος δ᾽ αἴθωνι σιδήρωι.

Δ ae Te / ΄ ᾽ ᾽ / Μ) a, ae

ὡς hat ἐποτρύνων, of δ᾽ ἀντίοι &yxe ἄειραν

r a , > , /
Τρῶες: τῶν δ᾽ ἄμυδις μίχθη μένος, Opto δ᾽ ἀυτή.

> 3 ΄ a ᾽ /

καὶ τότ᾽ ἄρ᾽ “Extopa εἶπε παραστὰς Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων" 375
“"Extop, μηκέτι πάμπαν ᾿Αχιλλῆϊ προμάχιξε,
ἀλλὰ κατὰ πληθύν τε καὶ ἐκ φλοίσβοιο δέδεξο,

/ 4 Ψ ᾽»Ν / aX \ » / ᾽ν
μή πώς σ᾽ ἠὲ βάληι ἠὲ σχεδὸν ἄορι τύψηι.

Δ " Ὁ > 5 5 > \ 2 WA

ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, “Εκτωρ δ᾽ αὖτις ἐδύσετο οὐλαμὸν ἀνδρῶν

΄ Ὁ 5 ΝΜ fa) Μ i
ταρβήσας, ὅτ᾽ ἄκουσε θεοῦ ὄπα φωνήσαντος. 380
ἐν δ᾽ ᾿Αχιλεὺς Τρώεσσι θόρε, φρεσὶν εἱμένος ἀλκήν,

/ x7 “ > , /

σμερδαλέα ἰάχων: πρῶτον δ᾽ ἕλεν ᾿Ιφιτίωνα
ἐσθλὸν ᾿Οτρυντεΐδην, πολέων ἡγήτορα λαῶν,
a / / A 5 ae /
ov νύμφη τέκε vis ᾿Οτρυντῆϊ πτολιπόρθωι
Τμώλωι ὕπο νιφόεντι, Ὕδης ἐν πίονι δήμωι: 385
τὸν © ἰθὺς μεμαῶτα Bar’ ἔγχεϊ δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
μέσσην κακ κεφαλήν: ἡ δ᾽ ἄνδιχα πᾶσα κεάσθη.

371. TA(I) AC'LQ: τοῦ Ω, ἐν ἄλλωι A.

ἔγχε᾽ ἄειραν : yp. ἔσταν ἀχαιῶν A.

378. WH πώς ςε᾽ : μήπως H Vr. A:
CGHQST Syr.
Warp:
ὕδης Ar. 2:

381. EN ὃ᾽ : ene’ Syr.
384. ON: TON ἔν τισι TOY φαύλων ἀντιγράφων Schol. A.
auc Q: ὕλης R Vr. A, Mose. 2, Harl. Ὁ ἃ, Par. ἢ and ap. Did.

373, ποὶ 0° PR; GNTION ().

375. ἕκτορι S (supr. a). 377. Te: re Q.
uHnw c J.
| edpec Vr. b.

379. aveic CH. || éducato
382. πρῶτος (A supr.)
385. Unai LR.

386. τόν ῥ᾽ G.

371. tai, for the dat. cf. 422, H 20,
O 584; as the rarer form it is less likely
to have been corrupted than the normal
τοῦ of the vulg. The epanalepsis of a
whole phrase (εἰ πυρὶ χεῖρας ἔοικεν, for
χεῖρε Βέξοικεν Ἵ is found again only in
X 128, Ψ 642.

375. Cf. M 60 with note.

377. ἐκ φλοίεβοιο, the surging mass
of warriors opposed to the πρόμαχοι. ΞΞ
οὐλαμός In 379. Cf. H 469 ἐκ φλοίσβοιο
σαώσομεν.

381. This line may well be the open-
ing of Achilles’ career: in the original
Μῆνις. But it is immediately succeeded
by an episode which betrays later origin,
383-95. The thrice-repeated short o of
Ὀτρυντεΐδης (Οτρυντῆϊ), though common
in later poetry, is against the Homeric
rule, and not metrically necessary ; it is
never found in the frequent ὀτρύνω (cf.
Schulze ᾧ. 15. p. 100 note). The allusion
to the Catalogue (B 865) is very obvious
—some actually read 385 after B 866

(see App. Crit. there)—and the familiarity
of the poet with Asiatic localities is
itself suspicious. We may perhaps add
the short form of the dat. plur. ἐπισσώ-
zpos (394), while the phrase πάντων
ἐκπαγλότατ᾽ ἀνδρῶν, twice used of Achilles
himself (A 146, = 170), is meaningless
when applied to an unknown warrior.
It is quite possible that the lines have
been inserted to glorify a local Otrynteid
family by making one of their number
participate in the Trojan war. We can
read (382) πρῶτον δ᾽ ἕλε (395) Δημολέοντα,
with νύξας κακ for vite κατά in 397
(Schulze), but it is simpler to remove
383-95 and the borrowed 397-402

together. Iphition is not elsewhere
named.

385. “Youn was identified by some
with the later Sardis ; but Strabo (xiii.
626) is incredulous. The variant "TAs
is evidently wrong ; see E708. Tmolos

and the Gygaian lake (390) are mentioned
again in B 865-66, q.v.

376 IAIAAOC T (xx)

, a 2 7
δούπησεν δὲ πεσών, ὁ δ᾽ ἐπεύξατο δῖος Αχιλλεύς:
/ 3 > Qn
“κεῖσαι, Otpuvteidy, πάντων ἐκπαωγλότατ᾽ ἀνδρῶν"
/ ie 5 >) 3 \ 7
ἐνθάδε τοι θάνατος, γενεὴ δέ τοί ἐστ᾽ ἐπὶ λίμνην ον
ει fol >
Tuyainu, ὅθι τοι τέμενος πατρώϊον ἐστιν,
“ 5. 3. (5 / \ "RK ὃ / ΕΝ
ὕλλωι ἐπ᾽ ἰχθυόεντι καὶ ἴὥρμωι ὀινὴεντι.
ἃ ov > > \ δὲ i 7 ir
ὡς ἔφατ᾽ εὐχόμενος, τὸν δὲ σκότος ὄσσε κάλυψε.
- fd
τὸν μὲν ᾿Αχαιῶν ἵπποι ἐπισσώτροις δατέοντο
lal /
πρώτηι ἐν ὑσμίνηι' ὁ δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῶι Δημολέοντα, 395
5 Ν > a ΄ ~ ἘᾺΝ Bh Cah
ἐσθλὸν ἀλεξητῆρα μώχης, ντήνορος υἱὸν,
/ \ /
νύξε κατὰ κρόταφον, κυνέης διὰ χαλκοπαρήιου.
\ 3 ’ an
οὐδ᾽ dpa χαλκείη κόρυς ἔσχεθεν, ἀλλὰ δι’ αὐτῆς
» \ ς / cn > 3 7 > / Dy δὲ
αἰχμὴ ἱεμένη ῥῆξ᾽ ὀστέον, ἐγκέφαλος δὲ
[ fe nr
ἔνδον ἅπας πεπάλακτο: δάμασσε δέ μιν μεμαῶτα. 400
ς vA oy ” > 4 3.0}
Ἱἱπποδάμαντα δ᾽ ἔπειτα καθ᾽ ἵππων ἀΐξαντα
/ “ Us / 7 ὃ Te
πρόσθεν Elev φεύγοντω μετάφρενον οὔτασε δουρί"
αὐτὰρ ὁ θυμὸν ἄϊσθε καὶ ἤρυγεν, ὡς ὅτε ταῦρος
v i He € / 3) \ ”
ἤρυγεν ἑλκόμενος ᾿λικώνιον ἀμφὶ ἄνακτα,
7 « Ms le an b] /
κούρων ελκόντων" γάνυται δέ τε τοῖς ἐνοσίχθων" 405
ε 3 \ =
ὡς ἄρα τόν γ᾽ ἐρυγόντα λίπ᾽ ὀστέα θυμὸς aynvep:
an ~)
αὐτὰρ ὁ βῆ σὺν δουρὶ pet ἀντίθεον Iodvswpov
Πριαμίδην. τὸν δ᾽ οὔ τι πατὴρ εἴασκε μάχεσθαι,
πὸ /
οὕνεκά οἱ μετὰ παισὶ νεώτατος ἔσκε γόνοιο,

389. κεῖς᾽ ( Syr. 393. φάτ᾽ ἐπευχόμενος P Syr. Par. Ὁ gh: ἔφατ᾽ ἐπευχό-
uenoc () Par. c. 394. dmiccwtpoic A Syr. 395. δημιολέοντα Ar. (2:
θημολόεντα Mose. 2: τινὲς OHTA€oNTa Did. 396 om. D. 401. dicconta
DGHJST, yp. A. 406. TON γ΄: TON T. || EpUoNTaQ. 409. παιςὶ : naci DGH:
τρωςὶ Cant.

390. reneH, birthplace, as a 407 ποῦ
δέ νύ οἱ γενεὴ καὶ πατρὶς ἄρουρα; The
lake is here purely geographical, not a
mythological personification (B 865).

392. Hyllos, a feeder of the great
Lydian Hermos.

394. δατέοντο, divided in the sense
tore to pieces, a strange phrase. (ἐπισσώ-
τροισι δατεῦντο! Cf. Ψ 121.) ἐπιςςώ-
tpoic, EH 725.

396. ἀλεξητῆρα, ἅπ. Ney. in ΗΠ. Cf.
πόλεμον ἀλαλκών 1 605.

397.-.400--Μ 183-86, ef. A 95-98.

401=A 423. 402=E 56.

403, φυμὸν Gicee, see 11 468. Heure,
bellowed, cf. Σ 580 ἐρύγμηλον.

404. dui seems to be used in the
literal sense, dragged round (the altar of)
Poseidon. ᾿Ἐλικώνιον, apparently from

Helike in Achaia, a seat of Poseidon-
worship, see Θ 203. From Hymn. xxii.
3 ὅς θ᾽ Ἑλικῶνα καὶ εὐρείας ἔχει Alyas,
it would seem that Helikon was another
form of Helike, and distinct from the
Boiotian mountain. The most famous
cult of the Helikonian Poseidon was,
however, the Panionian festival held
near Priene. If that be referred to here,
it will be proof of the later origin of
the passage. Schol. A says of the bellow-
ing, δοκεῖ δὲ ἐπὰν θύωσι βοησάντων τῶν
βοῶν προσδέχεσθαι τὸ θεῖον τὴν θυσίαν "
σιγῶντα δὲ λυποῦνται, μηνίειν νομίζοντες.

409. νεώτατος γόνοιο, the youngest of
his offspring. This collective use of
γόνος is peculiar, the word elsewhere in
H. being apparently used only of a single
person, or in the abstract sense.

j

IAIAAOC T (xx) 377

Kal οἱ φίλτωτος ἔσκε, πόδεσσι δὲ πάντας ἐνίκα" 110
δὴ τότε νηπιέηισι, ποδῶν ἀρετὴν ἀναφαίνων,
θῦνε διὰ προμάχων, εἴως φίλον ὥλεσε θυμόν.
τὸν βάλε μέσσον ἄκοντι ποδάρκης δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς,
νῶτα παραΐσσοντος, ὅθι ζωστῆρος ὀχῆες
/ > ,
χρύσειοι σύνεχον Kai διπλόος ἤντετο θώρηξ' 115
ἀντικρὺ δὲ διέσχε Tap’ ὀμφαλὸν ἔγχεος αἰχμή,
γνὺξ δ᾽ ἔριπ᾽ οἰμώξας, νεφέλη δέ μιν ἀμφεκάλυψε
/ \ φΦ ? » > » \ ,
κυανέη, προτὶ of δ᾽ ἔλαβ᾽ ἔντερα χερσὶ λιασθείς.
ie wl , ¢ "ΔῸΣ ὁ , /
Extwp δ᾽ ὡς ἐνόησε κασίγνητον ΤΙολύδωρον
/ “
ἔντερα χερσὶν ἔχοντα λιαζόμενον ποτὶ γαίηι, 120
/ Cie € 5 lal / ἊΝ > / > » vw? δι: »Μ
Kap ῥά οἱ ὀφθαλμῶν κέχυτ᾽ aydvs: οὐδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔτ᾽ ἔτλη
δηρὸν ἑκὰς στρωφᾶσθ᾽, ἀλλ᾽ ἀντίος ἦλθ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆϊ
ὀξὺ δόρυ κραδάων, φλογὶ εἴκελος. αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
id 30. «Ὁ » / \ > / v ”
ὡς εἶδ᾽, ὡς ἀνέπαλτο, Kal εὐχόμενος ἔπος ηὔδα"
ἃ / , ΄
“ἐγγὺς ἀνὴρ ὃς ἐμόν γε μάλιστ᾽ ἐσεμάσσατο θυμόν, 425
ὅς μοι ἑταῖρον ἔπεφνε τετιμένον: οὐδ᾽ ap ἔτι δὴν
- / , > \ / / ”
ἀλλήλους πτώσσοιμεν ἀνὰ πτολέμοιο γεφύρας.
> \ e / ON ΄ “1. r
ἢ καὶ ὑπόδρα ἰδὼν προσεφώνεεν “Extopa δῖον"
μ᾿ ΜΩ» “ a 2 / / \ a yf ”
daoov ἴθ᾽, ὥς Kev θᾶσσον ὀλέθρου πείραθ᾽ ἵκηαι.

oe

410. nddecci τε Harl. a. 414. napatcconta ΗἼ Vr. b (-cont’) A Mosc. 2,
King’s Par. a (supr. oc) ἃ 1, and ap. Did.: mapaicconton Par. e, 418. προτὶ:
ποτὶ CH(). 420. διαζόμενον G. || προτι Syr. 421. κέχυτο χλόος PR Syr.

κέχυτο χόλος Harl. a. 422. ἀχιλ(λ)ῆος DHJPRSTU Harl. a, Vr. A Mose. 2.
424. εἶο᾽ : ἴδ᾽ U: ἴϑεν αρ. Eust. 425. ἐμοί J. | émeudccato Mor. 426. ἄρ᾽:
ἂν Ar. P Harl. a. 427. ἀλλήλωι G.

414. For this passage (= A 132-33) here (iv. 1279 χύτο δὲ χλόος ἀμφὶ παρειάς).
see App. B, vi. 2. παραΐσσοντα agreeing There is however no independent instance
with τόν would be the more regular οὗ it at any early date, and the eyes are
constr., and the hiatus would not be hardly the seat of pallor.

against it; but the immediately preced- 492. ᾿Αχιλῆϊ, for-the dat. cf. 371.
ing νῶτα suits ill with it, and the change ϑηρόν : δηθά Bentley. ctpwedace’, i.e.
of case is common with participles, στροφάεσθ᾽, O 666. ἡ
eg. & 26 σφι νυσσομένων (H. G. eat , rot

es a io 424. ὡς... ὥς, see note on Ξ' 294.

5) > γ ἢ PANS
e OG reso Bee ty giaLralle: 425. €ceudccato, see note on P 564.

421. The length of the v of ἀχλύς 426. tTeTusénon, the participle has
in thesi before the diaeresis is one become a pure adj. like ἐπιστάμενος in
of many indications that this is the TT 80. ἄρ᾽ is more forcible than Ar.’s
original quantity of the feminine ter- ἄν. The opt. is potential; so can ‘we
mination in substantives (ΗΠ. G.§ 116. πὸ longer shirk, without any suggestion
3-4, and ef, notes on K 292, 436). But of condition such as is conveyed by ἄν.

the variant κέχυτο χλόος is worth con- The trans. use of πτώσσειν recurs in x
sideration ; it is found in good mss., it 904 only. πτολέμοιο γεφύρας, A 371.
gives better rhythm, .and the fact that 429=Z 143 (cf. H 102); 431-33=

‘Ap. Rhod. thrice uses χλόος in the sense 200-02 above; the lines are no doubt
of pallor makes it likely that he read it original here.

378 IAIAAOC T (xx)

τὸν δ᾽ οὐ ταρβήσας προσέφη κορυθαίολος ἡ Ἕκτωρ’ 480
“ἸΠηλείδη, μὴ δή μ᾽ ἐπέεσσί γε νηπύτιον ὡς
ἔλπεο δειδίξεσθαι, ἐπεὶ σάφα οἶδα καὶ αὐτὸς
ἠμὲν κερτομίας 76 αἴσυλα μυθήσασθαι.
οἶδα δ᾽ ὅτι σὺ μὲν ἐσθλός, ἐγὼ δὲ σέθεν πολὺ χείρων"
ἀλλ᾽ ἤτοι μὲν ταῦτα θεῶν ἐν γούνασι κεῖται, 435
ai κέ σε χειρότερός. περ ἐὼν ἀπὸ θυμὸν ἕλωμαι
δουρὶ βαλών, ἐπεὶ ἢ καὶ ἐμὸν βέλος ὀξὺ πάροιθεν."
ἢ pa καὶ ἀμπεπαλὼν προΐει δόρυ: καὶ τό γ᾽ ᾿Αθήνη
πνοιῆι ᾿Αχιλλῆος πάλιν ἔτραπε κυδαλίμοιο,
ἧκα μάλα ψύξασα: τὸ δ᾽ a ἵκεθ᾽ τ δῖον, 440
αὐτοῦ δὲ προπάροιθε ποδῶν πέσεν. αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
ἐμμεμαὼς ἐπόρουσε, κατακτάμεναι μενεαίνων,
σμερδαλέα ἰάχων" τὸν δ᾽ ἐξήρπαξεν. ᾿Απόλλων
ῥεῖα μάλ᾽ ὥς τε θεός, ἐκάλυψε δ᾽ ap née πολλῆι.
τρὶς μὲν ἔπειτ᾽ ἐπόρουσε ποδάρκης δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεὺς 445
ἐγχεὶ χαλκείωι, τρὶς δ᾽ ἠέρα τύψε βαθεῖαν.
[ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ τὸ τέταρτον ἐπέσσυτο δαίμονι icos,|
δεινὰ δ᾽ ὁμοκλήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
“ἐξ αὖ νῦν ἔφυγες θάνατον, κύον: ἢ τέ τοι ἄγχι
ἦλθε κακόν: νῦν αὖτέ σ᾽ ἐρύσατο Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων, ~ 450

430. ὃ᾽ ou: 9 ὦ. 432, dedizacom H! eas: deidizecear J.
ἐπὶ Mor. Bar. || κεῖνται PQ: Keicew (yp. κεῖται) Mor. Bar. 440. =Ucaca C (yp.
ψύξαςα min. Tréc.). 442. ἐκμεμαὼς (). || ἀπόρουςε S. 443. é=Hpnacen P.
445. yp. ἐπόρουςε κατακτάμεναι μενεαίνων X. 447 habent ACD™GJQ: om. Q.
449. ἐξ aU: αὖ δὴ Vr.d. 450. ¢: τ᾽ P.

435. ἐν :

434. The scholiasts lose the whole 444—T 881. 445-48, ef. ἘΠ 436-39,
significance of this line by taking it as II 703-06, 784-86. 447 is omitted by
spoken ironically. Itis needless to point most mss. As it occurs in all the three

out the dignity given to Hector’s char-
acter by his facing Ἶ contest which, with
heroic frankness, 1 1e admits to be un-
equal.

435. Seeon P 514. ταῦτα, these words
of thine.

436. at xe, to decide whether.

437. πάροιθεν may be taken in the
local sense, before my face (cf. Z 319

πάροιθε δὲ λάμπετο δουρὸς aixun); or

possibly in the temporal, of o/d time,
with a reference to the death of Patro-
klos (Schol. T and Eust.).

439. ᾿Ἄχιλλβος, ablative gen., with
ir as 2 138, etc. ἧκα ‘dha, the
same idea as in 444 peta μάλ᾽ ὥς τε Beds,
a very gentle breath from a goddess’
mouth is enough to drive back the
Spear.

parallel passages, it is more likely to be
interpolated from them than wrongly
omitted. It is less suitable here, as in
the other places the fourth onset is the
signal for an interference from the divine
opponent, and so merits special mention ;
here it is only the occasion for a violent
speech from Achilles himself, and leads
to nothing at all. The passage clearly
gains by the omission, but it is not

improbable that we should regard 445-48:

as a copy of a familiar scheme which has
supplanted a line such as δουρὶ δ᾽ ἐπαΐσ-
σων προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς (Fick,
from A 361).

449-54—=A 362-67, except for the

slight variant in 367. There can be little

doubt that they are in their own place
here and copied in A (see note on A 366).

IAIAAOC T (xx)

a / ” >\ > a > ,
ὧι μέλλεις εὔχεσθαι ἰὼν ἐς δοῦπον ἀκόντων.
ΕῚ 7, 2) Τὴ ΄ Ce > ,
ἢ θήν σ᾽ ἐξανύω ye καὶ ὕστερον ἀντιβολήσας,
/ » -“ /
εἴ πού τις καὶ ἔμοιγε θεῶν ἐπιτάρροθός ἐστι.
r , Μ / > / " , ᾽ν
νῦν δ᾽ ἄλλους Ῥρώων ἐπιείσομαι, ὅν κε κιχείω.

“Ὁ > \ / > 5 ᾽ » ΄ 7 Μ
ως εὐπὴὼν Apvor OUTa KaT avVeVva μεσσον AKOVTL*

ἤριπε δὲ προπάροιθε ποδῶν.

455

΄ 4 4 \ »).
ὁ δὲ τὸν μὲν ἔασε,

Δημοῦχον δὲ Φιλητορίδην ἠύν τε μέγαν τε

Kay γόνυ δουρὶ βαλὼν ἠρύκακε.

\ Ἁ /
τὸν μὲν ἔπειτα

οὐτάζων ξίφεϊ μεγάλωι ἐξαίνυτο θυμόν"

αὐτὰρ ὁ Λαόγονον καὶ Δάρδανον, υἷε Βίαντος,

460

ἄμφω ἐφορμηθεὶς ἐξ ἵππων ace χαμᾶζε,

τὸν μὲν δουρὶ βαλών, τὸν δὲ σχεδὸν ἄορι τύψας.
Τρῶα δ᾽ ᾿Αλαστορίδην---ὁ μὲν ἀντίος ἤλυθε γούνων,
εἴ πως ev πεφίδοιτο λαβὼν καὶ ζωὸν ἀφείη

id
μηδὲ κατακτείνειεν ὁμηλικίην

ἐλεήσας, 465

΄ὔ >? \ \ aA »
νήπιος, οὐδὲ τὸ ἤιδη, ὃ οὐ πείσεσθαι ἔμελλεν:

οὐ γάρ τι γλυκύθυμος ἀνὴρ ἣν οὐδ᾽ ἀγανόφρων,

ἀλλὰ μάλ᾽ ἐμμεμαώς.

¢e \ 4 / /
O μεν 1TTTETO HKELPETL γουνων

453. Tic re ϑεῶν καὶ ἐμοὶ U.

ἐςτι : εἴη PR Vr. b A: ἔλοοι 1.

454.

ὃ᾽ ἄλλους τρώων : αὖ τοὺς ἄλλους Harl.a, Vr. b A Mose. 2: αὐτοὺς ἄλλους J

(yp. ὃ᾽ ἄλλους τρώων), yp. A: 3 ἄλλους τρῶας PS Par. ο.

ὅν re U.
Harl. a, Mose. 2.
τῶν ἀντιγράφων Eust.) :

ἔτι A™,

456. ποδῶν : πεσὼν 0.
464. εὖ : οἱ PR, yp.
ἀφίη C. 466.

ON κε Ar. {):
458. kar: κακ DJ (supr. r) PT Syr.
Harl. a. || Ggpier U: ἀφήηι J (and τινὰ
Hoe P. 467. Tl: τοι JPR: tic and

458. For κατ γόνυ some good mss.
read κακ γόνυ. This is no doubt meant
to express, what is clearly the fact, that
the first y is not the nasal but the mute,
being completely assimilated to the
second, as in κάββαλε. The Greek
alphabet has no unambiguous means of
representing gg. (The variant κάμβαλε
for κάββαλε, often given by Mss., might
be quoted for the nasalized y here if it
were better attested or linguistically
justified.) The apocope of xara before
Ύ happens to occur here only.

463. For the suspended acc. Tpda
compare Z 510. It depends only on the
general sense resumed in φασγάνωι otra
469. From ὁ μέν to ἐμμεμαώς (468)
iS a passage open to serious suspicion
on internal grounds. The description
of Achilles in the poet’s own words in
467 is wholly alien to the Epic style ;
and rAuKUeuuoc is a strange com-
pound, as γλυκύς is always used of

things which give pleasure (song, sleep,
ete.), and never of the mind _ itsel!,
‘gentle’ or ‘kindly.’ It looks as though
the five lines were an expansion of 468-
69. 466=~7y 146, whence it may be
borrowed.

464. λαβών is by some taken with
γούνων, catching him by the knees, as A
407, Z 45, ¢ 142, κ 264 (cf. Φ 71). But
the order of the words makes this almost
impossible, and Hentze remarks that the
imperf. ἥπτετο (468) is evidently ‘cona-
tive,’ and implies that he did not suc
ceed. Hence λαβών must=taking hini
prisoner, as A 106, γούνων being con-
strued with ἀντίος. Even this is not
without harshness, as ἀντίος is generally
used with a gen. of a person (see, how-
ever, on X 195. We may also quote th
use of ἀντιάζω, ἀντιάω, which are freely
applied to things, but in a different
sense, πολέμοιο, etc. ).

466. ὃ οὐ, 6 F(a) οὐ van L.

380

IAIAAOC T (xx)

3 > 5
ἱέμενος λίσσεσθ᾽, ὁ δὲ φασγάνων οὗτα καθ᾽ ἧπαρ'

ἐκ δέ οἱ ἧπαρ ὄλισθεν,
τὸν
ὁ δὲ

κόλπον ἐνέπλησεν"
-“ /
θυμοῦ Sevopevov.

2 \ ΄ -π ’ ΕῚ a
ἀτὰρ μελαν Alfa KAT αὕτου
, " /
δὲ σκότος ὄσσε κάλυψε
3 δι
Μούλιον οὗτα παραστὰς

470

5 5 > 3, 2 /
δουρὶ κατ᾽ οὖς" εἶθαρ δὲ δι οὔατος AO ἑτέροιο

αἰχμὴ χαλκείη.

/ A /
μέσσην κακ κεφαλὴν ξίφει ἤλασε κωπῆεντι,

ὁ δ᾽ ᾿Αγήνορος υἱὸν "EyexXov

475

πᾶν δ᾽ ὑπεθερμάνθη ξίφος αἵματι. τὸν δὲ Kat ὄσσε
ἔλλαβε πορφύρεος θάνατος καὶ μοῖρα κραταιή.
Δευκαλίωνα δ᾽ ἔπειθ᾽, ἵνα te ξυνέχουσι τένοντες
ἀγκῶνος, τῆι τόν γε φίλης διὰ χειρὸς ἔπειρεν

> a / ¢ / If - i}
αἰχμῆι χαλκείη" ὁ δέ μὲν μένε χεῖρα βαρυνθεὶς; ,
ὁ δὲ φασγάνωι αὐχένα θείνας

/ > Ὁ / θά
πρόσθ᾽ ὁρόων θάνατον.

480

n a , ΄ \ 5
THN αὐτῆι πήληκι κάρη Bare: μυελὸς αὖτε
. ΟῚ \ n /
σφονδυλίων ἔκπωλθ᾽, ὁ δ᾽ ἐπὶ χθονὶ κεῖτο τανυσθείς.
5 Ny ς a [2] ” 3 , ΄ Il / ΓΝ
αὐτὰρ ὁ βῆ ῥ᾽ ἰέναι μετ ἀμύμονα []είρεω υἱὸν

“Ῥίγμον, ὃς ἐκ Θρήικης ἐριβώλακος εἰληλούθει"

485

> > fu /
τὸν βάλε μέσσον ἄκοντι, πάγη δ᾽ ἐν νηδύϊ χαλκός,

410. αὐτὰρ ().
παρ᾽ A (κατ᾽ A™) CQ). 475. κέεςον H.
478. Ténonte [)} Vr. b A.
χαλκείη PQ Syr.

(χωρὶς τὸ θ πρός θ᾽ ὁρόων conj. Ludwich) Schol. T.
484. ῥ᾽ om. PR: τ᾽ Lips. || ἰέμεναι H. || πείρεως Zen.

471. ἐνέπρηςεν Ar. (A supr.) HT Par. a f. ©

479. mecHc Oia χειρος eAaccen Syr.
481. npdéce’ ὁρόων : Ζηνόδοτος χωρὶς τοῦ O πρός᾽ ὁρόων

473. κατ΄:
476. ὑποθερμάνϑθη J: Unepeepudnen P.
480. aiyuh

483. cnonouAion GU!.
485. ϑράκης J Harl. a.

486. ἐν : ἐνὶ RS Vr. b A. || NHOUT: πνεύμονι ACJQ Syr. Harl. a, Mor. Vr. Ὁ

A, Mose. 2: ἐν ἄλλωι NHOUT A.

470. ἐκ. . OAIcoeN means of course
only that the edge of the liver projected
through the wound, not that the whole
organ slipped out, which would be im-
possible. Kat’ αὐτοῦ, κατὰ τοῦ ἥπατος
ἐκκρουνίζον, Schol. B, rightly as it seems,
though αὐτοῦ is used in its weakest sense.

471. For Ar.’s reading ἐνέπρησεν puffed
out the loose breast of the chiton, see on
A 481, If 508. Virgil evidently read
the text, transtit . . mucro . . tunicam

. tmplevitque sinum sangwis, Aen. x.
819.

473. The contracted otc is suspicious ;
see on Λ΄ 109. δούρ᾽ ofas van L., κατ᾽
otas: ἄφαρ P. Knight.

475-77. See IL 332-34,

478. =uNéxouci, join, intransitively
(cf. on 414); the point meant seems to
be the insertion of the muscles of the
forearm into the elbow joint. The
variant τένοντε for τένοντες is perhaps

right; see on A 521, IL 587. χειρός,
arm, not hand ; see A 252, ® 166, Ψ 627.

481, mpdce’ ὁρόων, beholding before
his face. It is probable (see above) that
Zen. wrote προσορόων. The lengthening
in the first arsis is defensible (App. D,
c 1), but the compound προσοράειν does
not occur in H. The phrase is in any
case unique.

483. ἔκπαλτο, apparently throbbed
forth, perhaps by some confusion with
the spirting of blood from a severed
artery; cf. X 452 πάλλεται ἦτορ ava
στόμα. πάλλομαι is not simply =leap.
See note on O 645.

484. Πείρεω is not a Homeric form ;
it is presumably to be referred to a nom.
Tleipews, cf. Πείρως A520,525. But Brand-
reth’s Ilecpdov is doubtless right, see B
844, where ITe/poos is the Thrakian leader.

486. There is strong authority for
πνεύμονι against NHOUT: but μέςσςον

IAIAAOC T (xx) 381

ἤρυπε δ᾽ ἐξ ὀχέων.

ὁ δ᾽ ᾿Αρηΐθοον θεράποντα,

f . Pag a
ἂψ ἵππους στρέψαντα, μετάφρενον ὀξέϊ δουρὶ
/ > 9 ΄ aa
vue, ἀπὸ δ᾽ ἅρματος wae: κυκήθησαν δέ οἱ ἵπποι.

ὡς δ᾽ ἀναμαιμάει βαθέ ἄγκεα θεσπιδαὲς πῦρ 190
οὔρεος ἀξαλέοιο, βαθεῖα δὲ καίεται ὕλη,
πάντηι τε κλονέων ἄνεμος φλόγα εἰχυφάζει,
ὡς ὅ γε πάντηι θῦνε σὺν ἔγχεϊ δαίμονι ἶσος

/ > / Crs ᾿] “, - /
κτεινομένους ἐφέπων: ῥέε δ᾽ αἵματι γαῖα μέλαινα.
τ a ΄ / / ,
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε Tis ζεύξην. βόας ἄρσενας εὐρυμετώπους 495
lal Ν / fel
τριβέμεναι κρῖ λευκὸν ἐυκτιμένηι ἐν ἀλωῆι,

es / / ’ > / lal ΄ \ , ? > ,
υ a Te λέπτ ἐγένοντο OWV UTO πΠποσσ᾽ ερίιμυκῶὼν,
μ

ὡς ὑπ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλῆος μεγαθύμου μώνυχες ἵπποι

lal e lal / / \ > / “, , v
στεῖβον ὁμοῦ νέκυάς τε Kal ἀσπίδας: αἵματι δ᾽ ἄξων

/ 4 id \ ” Ὁ \ / 5
νέρθεν ἅπας πεπάλακτο καὶ ἄντυγες al περὶ δίφρον, 500
᾽ > id
ἃς ap ἀφ᾽ ἱππείων ὁπλέων ῥαθάμιγγες ἔβαλλον

“ > > ’ 5. ΄ὔ
αι Τ AT ἐπισσώτροων.

ὁ δὲ ἵετο κῦδος ἀρέσθαι

Πηλεΐδης, λύθρωι δὲ παλάσσετο χεῖρας ἀάπτους.

488. τρέψαντα [.

(w altered to H?) Par. ἃ.

490. Grrea CR.
ἐυκτιμένηι : ἐυτροχάλωι J Syr. Harl. a, Vr. b, Par. h, yp. A Par. ἃ:
500. δίφρων P.

495. Ζεύξει C. || ἄρρενας H. 496.
ἐυκτιμένω

502. αἱ ὃ an οπιςςτώτρων Syr.

means the abdomen, not the chest;
compare N 397, T 413 ff, with A 528.
πνεύμονι has probably been introduced
here through a reminiscence of the latter
passage.

490. ἀναμαιμάει, rages through, here
only. The simple μαιμάω is used only
in the sense to be eager, but we have
σκόπελον περιμαιμώωσα μι 95. For the
simile compare A 155 ff.

494. κτεινομιένους ἐφέπων, Arriving
his victims. The use of the part. κτεινο-
μένους, those who were being slain, is
curious. Compare ἔφεπε.. . αἰὲν ἀπο-
κτείνων A 177.

495-503. This passage is rejected by
many edd. (Heyne, Bekker, Diintzer,
Franke, etc.), partly on the ground that
499-502 are a repetition of A 534-37
(q.v.), and 503 of A 169, but more
because Achilles, who has hitherto been
fighting on foot, suddenly appears in his
chariot. ‘The first objection is weakened
by the fact that the passage in A is in

the immediate vicinity of others of
doubtful authenticity (see on A 522,
540), so that it is probable that the
borrowing is there and not here. As to
the second, it is eutirely in accordance
with heroic practice to have the chariot
close at hand and to mount and dis-
mount as the needs of the moment
dictate ; this is constantly taken as a
matter of course needing no explicit
mention ; as for instance in O 352, II 411.
Achilles having slain his most prominent
opponents on foot simply drives over the
rank and file, who are not worth the
trouble of a combat on equal terms.
There is thus no cogent reason for re-
jection; and the simile in 495-97 is
certainly in the best Epic style.

496. The variant ἐυτροχάλωι
from Hes. Opp. 599.

497. λεπτά, here with the original
verbal force, shelled out from the husk
(λέπω). The transition to the ordinary
adjectival use is easy.

comes

Φ

INTRODUCTION

BrFore one portion only of this book the critic can feel but little difficulty.
The Theomachy (385-513) is one of the very few passages in the J/aad which
can be pronounced poetically bad. Unlike the really Homeric episodes, it
does not come ata break in the main story, but interrupts meaninglessly
Achilles’ career of vengeance. In place of the imposing conflict of the
divine powers which we were led to expect at the beginning of Y, we are
presented only with a ridiculous harlequinade, having no reference to the
story, poverty-stricken in expression, and owing what little interest it has to
the reminiscences of the wounding of Aphrodite in EK, on which it is doubt-
less founded. The best excuse which can be made for it is to regard it as
an early parody, a precursor of the Battle of the Frogs and Mice. To attribute
such work to any of the older poets of the Epos is to deny the possibility of
any rational criticism in this field. It is noteworthy however that the
episode is remarkably free from linguistic offences such as ‘‘violations of the
digamma” and other signs of late composition. The author of it must have
had an accurate sense of the old Epic language.

The rest of the book falls into a prologue (1-33) and four scenes: the
deaths of Lykaon (34-138), and of Asteropaios (139-202), the fight with the
river (203-384), and the pursuit and rescuing of Agenor (514-611). Of
these the last has the best claim to a place in the original Μῆνις. If we
regard 514-39 as a transitional piece added to bring back the story to the
original scene on the plain, we find that 540 fits on perfectly to the end of
Y, and the career of Achilles is described in terse and vigorous lines; the
individual conflicts of the early part of the book tend rather to weaken the
effect than to enforce it.

The Lykaon episode is one of the very highest beauty and pathos, but
these qualities are not in themselves enough to prove its antiquity ; we have
often found them in passages of the later class. It may be questioned
moreover whether its very pathos does not separate it from the oldest Epic
style. This is perhaps a question of feeling, which is difficult to express
definitely, and must be left to the judgment of capable scholars. The
allusion to the Argonautic legend in 41 seems, however, to be a definite mark
of comparative lateness; and the familiarity with the topography of the
Troas throughout the whole passage points in the same direction.

But however we may judge of this episode, we must clearly distinguish

382

IAIAAOC Φ (χχι) 383

it from the prologue (1-33). Here there are many causes of suspicion. The
ford of the Skamandros is known only in late parts of the poems. The
description of 6—8 is very obscure, and in 17—33 we cannot even make out
on which side of the ford Achilles brings out his prisoners ; if on the Greek
side, as we should suppose, the whole of the later scenery is unintelligible.
The prisoners themselves are taken in preparation for the funeral of
Patroklos, which, as we shall see, is later than the Myjvis. This is no doubt
the motive which led to the insertion of the passage.

With the Asteropaios episode less scruple need be felt; there is no
denying the justice of the criticism that this scene is but a weaker echo of
the death of Lykaon. The bandying of genealogies contrasts unfavourably
with the vivid pathos and force of the preceding passage, and is far too like
the meeting of Achilles and Aineias in Y. Whether it was introduced with
special reference to some family claiming descent from the River Axios, or is
merely a rhapsodist’s variation on the theme which he found before him, we
cannot pretend to say. The borrowing from the episode of Glaukos and
Diomedes in Z is obvious. But much may be forgiven for the sake of the
fine lines with which it ends (194-99). If the death of Lykaon had not
preceded, that of Asteropaios would have taken a far higher place in our
estimation,

It is however in the Fight with the River, from which the book takes
its name, that we find the real crux. As to the wild grandeur of this
splendid scene there cannot be two opinions. Yet our complete enjoyment
is somewhat marred by a want of clearness in the motives, which may be
focussed at two points. The first of these is at the beginning, 211-27,
where Skamandros bids Achilles, if he must slay the Trojans, to slay them
on the plain ; and Achilles replies “it shall be done as thou biddest, but I
will not stop till I have driven them to the city”; ὥς εἰπὼν Τρώεσσιν
ἐπέσσυτο δαίμονι ἶσος. So far all is simple ; we imagine that Achilles, true
to his promise, has left the river and attacked the fleeing Trojans in the
plain ; if the narrative continued with 540 we could not find anything to
object to. But instead of this we first have a passionate appeal from the
River to Apollo (228-32), and then to our surprise find that Achilles, instead
of carrying out his promise, leaps into the middle of the stream (933). This
undoubtedly contradicts the plain sense of what has gone before. Attempts
have been made to explain it in two ways—by supposing either that
Skamandros does not mean what he says, but is laying a trap for Achilles ;
or that Achilles does not mean what he says, but speaks in irony (see note on
223). But both these alternatives are mere special pleading and quite alien
to the spirit of Epic poetry. There can be little doubt in fact that 227 was
originally followed by 540 or something equivalent, and that the Fight with
the River was added as an afterthought. It would seem in fact as though
228 were originally meant to follow 204 or 208, to the exclusion of the
short colloquy in 211-27, and that both versions had been awkwardly
amalgamated when the corpus of the J/iad was formed However this may
be, we must recognise the existence of an awkward joint.

Another occurs, as we are led to expect, at the end of the Fight with the
River. In 284 Poseidon and Athene come to Achilles’ aid. But they
confine themselves to empty promises. They tell Achilles that the River

384 IAIAAOC Φ (χὴ

“ will soon assuage” (292), and up to 304 we seem to see Achilles in a fair
way to escape. But in 305, instead of assuaging, Skamandros grows “still
more wroth,” and all but overwhelms the hero, till Hera herself, evidently
ionorant of her friends’ intervention, is “sore afraid” for Achilles (828), and
takes the practical step which the others have so unaccountably omitted ;
Hephaistos soon does what Poseidon and Athene have neglected. Here then
we have again a double recension. In the first form of the fight Poseidon
and Athene of course made their intervention effective; the passage
describing this has been dropped in favour of Hera and Hephaistos, in order
to introduce the Theomachy—as is made plain by the allusion in 332.

We seem then to recognise the following stages in the building of the
book. (1) The chasing of the Trojans by Achilles, a part of the Μῆνις
(540-end) ; (2) to this is prefixed the Lykaon episode—though we may
admit the possibility that this belonged to the Μῆνις from the first ; (3) the
Asteropaios episode (to 227) is imeerted between them ; (4) the Fight with
the River is inserted (228-304) ; some lines preceding it (say 909. 27) are
wrongly retained, and there was a conclusion meant to fit on to 540, which
is now lost; (5) the Theomachy is inserted, with a new ending to the Fight
with the River. At what point the prologue (1-33) came in we can hardly
say ;. but it was late.

Note on THE APPARATUS Criticus To ® anpD X

The critical materials for this book and the next are more abundant than
for any other part of the Iliad. There is ground for thinking that Φ was
chosen at an early date as the subject of a critical commentary which
embodied a great deal of Alexandrian learning omitted from the excerpts of
the “quartet” preserved for us in Schol. A. Nicole’s publication of the
Genevese Scholia (Schol. U) shewed that those which referred to these books
were entirely different from the rest ; they are disastrously mutilated, but
even in their present condition they have distinctly enlarged our knowledge
of Alexandrian criticism. Nicole’s publication has been followed by that of
the papyrus scholia in Grenfell and Hunt’s Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Part ii. pp.

2-85, which also refer to &. These, though not actually the source of
Schol. U, are very closely related (see G. and H. p. 56, Allen in C. R. xiv.
p- 15); they are connected, though in what way it is not easy to say,
with one Ammonios ἢ ΒΕ ΠΕ the author of a work περὶ διαφορᾶς
ovopatwv—and date from about 100 a.p. They are cited in the App. Crit.
as “Amm.” It has been remarked also that P and X (=Ven. 458) have
some unusually well-informed scholia on this book; and it has been
concluded that a special commentary on it existed in antiquity (whether the
work of Ammonios or another) which was freely drawn upon by succeeding
scholiasts. P however does not strictly confirm this view, as scholia of the
better class extend through Y and X as well, nor does Schol. T, who is un-
doubtedly indebted to the same source, shew any very marked superiority in
his information respecting , It must, I think, be provisionally held that
the coincidence in the range of Ammonios and Schol. U is purely accidental.

1 Between cols. x and xi are the words, written at right angles to the text, ᾿Αμμώνιος
᾿Αμμωνίου ὁ γραμματικὸς ἐσημειωσάμην.

IAIAAOC Φ (xx1) 385

It is certainly accidental that Φ and X should again have been taken for
a special critical study by Hoffmann, who published his Linuwndzwanziystes
und Zweiundzwanzigstes Buch (P und X) der Ilias in 1864, long Vefore
anything was known of these new authorities. His work is elaborate and
thorough ; but the readings of his mss (A, Ven. B, C, D, H, L, Lips.) so
constantly differ from those given by La Roche as to drive an unfortunate
editor to despair. La Roche had Hoffmann before him, and in case of
differences the presumption should be in his favour: but his standard of
accuracy is too low to allow of confidence. I have therefore thought it
necessary in various places to quote Hoffmann’s readings when differing froim
La Roche’s, placing them for distinction’s sake between brackets } 1. But
I have not attempted to indicate all occasions of difference.

Finally, X was selected by Tollius for a collation of eleven Paris mss.
He handed his notes to Heyne (vol. iii. p. eviii), who published a selection
from them, but without giving any clue as to their identification. His
readings are repeated by La Roche. It appears that Heyne’s Par. A, K, C
are my P, Q, R respectively. The rest it is not easy or important to
identify.

ΟΠ a'¢

IAIAAOC Φ

Μάχη παραποτάμιος.

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ πόρον ἷξον ἐυρρεῖος ποταμοῖο,
ἃ /
Ξάνθου δινήεντος, ὃν ἀθάνατος τέκετο Ζεύς,
,ὔ
ἔνθα διατμήξας τοὺς μὲν πεδίονδε δίωκε
\ , ial > \ ’ / VA
πρὸς πόλιν, ἧι περ ᾿Αχαιοὶ ἀτυζόμενοι φοβέοντο
5 ° , “
ἤματι τῶι προτέρωι, ὅτ᾽ ἐμαίνετο φαίδιμος Extop: 5
ms ΠῚ oA J / 3» δ᾽ "HH
τῆι p ol ye προχέοντο πεφυζότες, ἠέρα pn
lal 7 Ν
πίτνα πρόσθε βαθεῖαν ἐρυκέμεν: ἡμίσεες δὲ
an /
ἐς ποταμὸν εἰλεῦντο βαθύρροον ἀργυροδίνην.
ΞῚ ᾿] ", / jf / δ᾽ > \ Cas. θ
ἐν δ᾽ ἔπεσον μεγάλων πατάγωι, βράχε αἰπὰ ῥέεθρα,
ὄχθαι δ᾽ ἀμφὶ περὶ μεγάλ᾽ ἴαχον" οἱ δ᾽ ἀλαλητῶι 10

1. πόρον : ῥόον Aph. ||
Zen. || τέτοκε Par. suppl. grec. 144.

ἴω

ἐύρ(ρ)ῆος PR (yp. καὶ εὐρεῖος Sch. Ρ).
eC. 4. ἀχαιοὶ : οἱ ἄλλοι CHJLQRST Harl. a,
Ven. B Vr. b A, Mosc. 2, yp. A: ἄλλοι Ῥ.

2. ἀθάνατον

7. πίλνα U.

1-2=& 433-34, Q 692-93, q.v.

3. SlaTuUH=ac, evidently severing into
two bodies. Bentley however took it to
mean crossing as in € 409 τόδε λαῖτμα
διατμήξας ἐπέρησα.

4. For ᾿Αχαιοί most Mss. have οἱ ἄλλοι,
a reminiscence of the same phrase in Z 41,
554. There isno record of the Achaians
having passed the ford in the previous
battles ; indeed the ford itself is named
only here and in the passages quoted
from = and Q, always in the same formal
line, and like other topographical points
seems to be a mere poetical invention for
occasional use. The oldest battle-scenes
know nothing of it, often though the
fight shifts from the city to the camp.

6. πεφυζότες, in ὦ state (perf.) of rout,
a word recurring only in this book (528,
532) and X 1. For the formation see
H. G. § 26. 5. The isolated perf. part.,
without any trace of the other parts of

tense, may be paralleled in modern
Greek, where the perf. pass. has entirely
disappeared, with the exception-of the
participle which is in common use.—The
mist spread by Hera is forgotten again
immediately, the usual fate of super-
natural darkness in a well-marked class
of interpolations ; see P 268, etc. We
are not even told whether it is Achilles
or the Trojans who are to be checked :
probably we must understand it to be the

latter. Diintzer omits ἠέρα. . ἐρυκέμεν
altogether.

8. The idea as shewn by the contrast
of medion (3) seems to be that above the
ford hills came down to the river and cut
off the retreat in that direction. The
scene so far corresponds to the modern
reality that the Mendere is fordable in
two places, and is elsewhere deep enough
todrowna man. Baevppooc is elsewhere
applied only to Okeanos.

386

IAIAAOC Φ (xx1) 387

» Μ \ v e / 4 /
évveov ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα, ἑλισσόμενοι περὶ divas.
e , » ᾽ ΄ \ id a“ Ἁ » / > /

ὡς δ᾽ ὅθ᾽ ὑπὸ ῥιπῆς πυρὸς ἀκρίδες ἠερέθονται

, ῃ \ \ ῃ ᾽ , a
φευγέμεναι ποταμόνδε' τὸ δὲ φλέγει ἀκάματον πῦρ
ὄρμενον ἐξαίφνης, ταὶ δὲ πτώσσουσι καθ᾽ ὕδωρ:

ῃ ΄ -“ ,ὔ

ὡς ὑπ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλῆος Ξάνθου βαθυδινήεντος 15
A ees / > \ “ \ > iN “

πλῆτο poos κελάδων ἐπιμὶξ ἵππων τε Kal ἀνδρῶν.

αὐτὰρ ὁ διογενὴς δόρυ μὲν λίπεν αὐτοῦ ἐπ᾽ ὄχθηι
κεκλιμένον μυρίκηισιν, ὁ δ᾽ ἔσθορε δαίμονι ἶσος
φάσγανον οἷον ἔχων, κακὰ δὲ φρεσὶ μήδετο ἔργα,
τύπτε δ᾽ ἐπιστροφάδην: τῶν δὲ στόνος ὦρνυτ᾽ ἀεικὴς 20

ἄορι θεινομένων, ἐρυθαίνετο δ᾽ αἵματι ὕδωρ.

ὡς δ᾽ ὑπὸ δελφῖνος μεγακήτεος ἰχθύες ἄλλοι
φεύγοντες πιμπλᾶσι μυχοὺς λιμένος ἐυόρμου,
δειδιότες: μάλα γάρ τε κατεσθίει ὅν κε λάβηισιν'

“Ὁ a “- \ a cs
ὡς Τρῶες ποταμοῖο κατὰ δεινοῖο ῥέεθρα 25
ὁ δ᾽ ἐπεὶ κάμε χεῖρας ἐναίρων,

4 \ /
πτῶσσον ὑπὸ κρημνούς.

11. ἔννεον : ἔνιαι τῶν κατὰ πόλεις νήχοντ᾽ Did.
12. ὑπαὶ CGJLRS Harl. ἃ.
17. εν όχϑη Syr.: én’ ὄχϑαις G.
yp. A: .éxeope G Par. a f, yp. T: €eope Harl. b, King’s. |

κατὰ (2, yp. A.
D Harl. a (yp. Baeu).

nepi ACGQ Ven. B:
15. ὑπὸ OINKENTOC
18. ἔνϑορε D/H},

ἔνιοι δὲ yp. αὐτὸς ὃ᾽

| ἠερέθοντο "Ὁ.

αἷψ᾽ ἐπόρουςεν --ἀχιλλεὺς δαίμονι ἴσος Heyne?> Sch. AT: probably this refers

to 33 below. 22. 0° om. Syr.
Bar. 24. Te: κείν) JU Bar. Mor.
A™) DHQS Vr. b, and τινές Eust.

23. πιπλᾶει L (supr. uw): ἐπιπλᾶςι T.
ὅν Te Τ : ηνκε G.

εὐόρμους
25. ϑινοῖο A (ϑεινοῖο

11. ἔννεον, prob. for ἔ-σνεξ-ον, root
snu, H. G. § 67; cf. ἔλλαβε. It may
also be explained as=éy-(é)veov, swam
therein ; cf. ἐνστρέφομαι E 306, ἐντρέχοι
T 385, ἔγκειμαι X 513, though as a rule
compounds with ἐν imply not zm but
into, except in the perf. (ἐγγεγάασιν, etc.).
For περί cf. A 317 (dat.), Σ 372.

12. pinfic, the rush of fire, as of the
wind, O 171. Hepéeontai, take wing.
This mode of dealing with locusts is said
by the scholia to be characteristic of
Cyprus, and has indeed been practised
there till recent years. Strabo says
that the same device was used by the
locust-eating tribes in Aithiopia (xvi.
p. 772).

13. φλέγει may be either trans. or
intrans. ; it recurs only in. the pass.
φλέγετο, 365, which is in favour of
the first alternative. But φλεγέθειν
is found in both uses, cf. P 738 with
Φ 358.

17. ὁ διογενής, a very rare use of the
article in H., to be compared with ὁ

yepacds and a few similar expressions in
H. G. § 261. 3.

19. See note on Ψ 176.

20-21=K 483-84 ; but ὕδωρ in place
of γαῖα leaves an hiatus at the end of the
fifth foot. The « of the dat. is rarely, if
ever, left unelided. Bentl. conj. κῦμα.
αἵματος is also a possible alternative (cf.
πρῆσαι πυρός and similar phrases in H. G.
§ 151 e).

22. μεγακήτεος, see note on O 222.
For the metaphor compare the picture
of the λιμὴν eVopuos in Hes. Scut. 207
ff., in which ἀργύρεοι δελφῖνες ἐθοίνων
ἔλλοπας ἰχθῦς. Hence van L. conj. ἐλλοί
for ἄλλοι, cf. ἐλλοῖς ἰχθύσιν Soph. Ai.
1297 (see Jebb’s note), ἐχθύες ἐλλοί ap.
Ath. 277pD (‘Eumelos or Arktinos or
whatever his name is’). The suggestion
is ingenious but needless; the poet of
course regards the dolphin as a fish.
Cf. N 64.

25. The variant δινοῖο implies the
absurd interpretation eddying, δινήεντος.
See on T 259.

388 IAIAAOC Φ (xx1)

ζωοὺς ἐκ ποταμοῖο δυώδεκα λέξατο κούρους
ποινὴν Πατρόκλοιο Μενοιτιάδαο θανόντος.
τοὺς ἐξῆγε θύραξε τεθηπότας ἠύτε νεβρούς,
δῆσε δ᾽ ὀπίσσω χεῖρας ἐυτμήτοισιν ἱμᾶσι, 80
τοὺς αὐτοὶ φορέεσκον ἐπὶ στρεπτοῖσι χιτῶσι,
δῶκε δ᾽ ἑταίροισιν κατάγειν κοίλας ἐπὶ νῆας.
αὐτὰρ ὁ ἂψ ἐπόρουσε δαϊξέμεναι μενεαίνων.
ἔνθ᾽ υἷι ἸΙριάμοιο συνήντετο Δαρδανίδαο
ἐκ ποταμοῦ τ Λυκάονι, τόν ῥά ToT αὐτὸς 35
ἦγε λαβὼν ἐκ πατρὸς ἀλωῆς οὐκ ἐθέλοντα,
ἐννύχιος, προμολῶν' 0 0 ἐρινεὸν ὀξέϊ χαλκῶι
τάμνε νέους ὄρπηκας, iv’ ἅρματος ἄντυγες εἶεν"
τῶι δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἀνώϊστον κακὸν ἤλυθε δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς.
καὶ τότε μέν μιν Λῆμνον ἐυκτιμένην ἐπέρασσε 40
νηυσὶν ἄγων, ἀτὰρ υἱὸς ᾿Ιήσονος ὦνον ἔδωκε"
κεῖθεν δὲ ξεῖνός μιν ἐλύσατο, πολλὰ δ᾽ ἔδωκεν,
Ἴμβριος ᾿Ηετίων, πέμψεν δ᾽ ἐς δῖαν ᾿Αρίσβην-

v ig ἣν 7. [κέ lal
ἔνθεν UTEKT pOpuywv TAT PW@LOV LKETO δῶμα.

29. τοὺς ὃ᾽ () Harl. a 33. ἔνιοι αὐτὸς ὃ᾽ αἷψ᾽ ἐπόρουςε 566 on 18. || ἂψ:
αὖτ᾽ T. || yp. καὶ ἐνόρουςε Χ. || ϑαϊΖζέμκεναι Ar. Ὡ : ϑαϊξέμεναι Vr. ἃ : κατακτά-
μεναι J Par. b, yp. A. 34. υἷι S: υἱεῖ 2. 38. GnTurec ἅρματος (). 40.

ἐπέρηςε G(). 41 is marked with an obelos in U, and may have been athetized
by Ar. (Nicole p. xlv.). 43. ὄμβριος ().

28. noinHN, blood-price, as D 498.

31. crpentoici, see note on E 119.
The ἱμάντες are no doubt merely the
leather belts with which the tunics
were girt about the waist (App. B, v.,
vi.). It is evident that the victims
wore no θώρηξ.

37. ἐρινεὸν... ὅρπηκας, a ‘ whole-

and-part’ figure, rarely found except of
i ἕξ 3

persons. But cf. A 286. Agar con).
ἐρινεοῦ, for it is evident that Lykaon can
only have been cutting the branches
into shape: he can hardly have been
cutting them off the tree by night, as the
acc. would imply (J. P. xxv. 308). The
young branches are chosen for their
flexibility to make the curved ἄντυγες.
Theokritos ignorantly imitates the pas-
sage (xxv. 247) when he makes such
shoots used for the felloes of wheels.

40. énépacce, sold, a verb occurring
only in this book of the J/iad (58, 78,
102, 454) and in € and o. The forms
found are the perf. part. (58) and the
aor. (ἐπέρασσα or ἐπέρασα as if from
περάζω). It is to be distinguished from

περάω to pass which makes ἐπέρησα only ;
but the two verbs are evidently closely
akin, through the sense ‘to make to pass
over,’ which is indeed quite admissible
here. Cf. πρί-αμαι (in a ἕξ o only) and
πι-πρά-σκω (not Homeric).

41. For Euneos son of Jason and Hip-
polyte see H 469. He appears to have
bought Lykaon as a slave. The ὥνος
according to Ψ 746 was the silver cup
there described. Bergk rejects the line
as interpolated from the Argonautic
legend, which is found in the J/iad only
in late passages (see w 70). If Ar.
athetized (see above), it may be that

he took offence at the repetition of

ἔϑωκεν.

43. This Eetion does not appear else-
where.. The epithet ”IuBpioc distin-
guishes him from the father of Andro-
mache (Z 395, etc.). Arisbe, a town on
the Hellespont, B 836. The πολλά given
for him consisted of 300 oxen, 79-80.

44, Gnexnpoguroon shews that the in-
tention was to keep him in custody for
his own safety.

IAIAAOC Φ (xx1) 389

ἕνδεκα δ᾽ ἤματα θυμὸν ἐτέρπετο οἷσι φίλοισιν 45
ἐλθὼν ἐκ Λήμνοιο' δυωδεκάτηι δέ μιν αὗτις
χερσὶν ᾿Αχιλλῆος θεὸς ἔμβαλεν, ὅς μιν ἔμελλε
πέμψειν εἰς ᾿Αΐδαο καὶ οὐκ ἐθέλοντα νέεσθαι.
΄ “ > \
τὸν δ᾽ ὡς οὖν ἐνόησε ποδάρκης δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
’ / / Μ Μ
γυμνόν, ἄτερ κὀρυθός τε καὶ ἀσπίδος, οὐδ᾽ ἔχεν ἔγχος, ὅ0
> \ \ / σὺ ’ \ / \ / A \ re ‘
ἀλλὰ Ta μέν p ἀπὸ πάντα χαμαὶ βάλε’ τεῖρε yap ἱδρὼς
lal »
φεύγοντ᾽ ἐκ ποταμοῦ, κάματος δ᾽ ὑπὸ γούνατ᾽ ἐδάμνα"
> / ,’ », 5 Ν Δ / ‘
ὀχθήσας δ᾽ apa εἶπε πρὸς ὃν μεγαλήτορα θυμόν'
εἰ Ἃ , 2 , A ™ 9» a CA
ὦ πόποι, ἢ μέγα θαῦμα τόδ᾽ ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ὁρῶμαι:

ἢ μάλα δὴ Ἱρῶες μεγαλήτορες, οὕς περ ἔπεφνον, 5D
αὗτις ἀναστήσονται ὑπὸ ζόφου ἠερόεντος,

οἷον δὴ καὶ ὅδ᾽ ἦλθε φυγὼν ὕπο νηλεὲς ἦμαρ,

Λῆμνον ἐς ἠγαθέην πεπερημένος" οὐδέ μιν ἔσχε

/ cx IN a Δ val as: > ef
πόντος aos πολιῆς, ὃ πολεῖς ἀέκοντας ἐρύκει.

ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε δὴ καὶ δουρὸς ἀκωκῆς ἡμετέροιο 80

γεύσεται, ὄφρα ἴδωμαι ἐνὶ φρεσὶν ἠδὲ δαείω

xX »μ 5» [ὦ -“ \ “-“ + , 9 ΕῚ /
ἢ ap ὁμῶς καὶ κεῖθεν ἐλεύσεται, 7 μιν ἐρύξει

γῆ φυσίζοος, ἥ τε κατὰ κρατερόν περ ἐρύκει."

46. αὖθις C Vr. A.
| πεπαρημένοο ().

45. euudc G.
58. ἀγαθϑέην J.
ερύκει Syr.

63. rH: rata Harl. Ὁ (supr. rf).
eeghj, Harl.a. || κατὰ om. DHPQRU King’s Par.c ghj: καὶ Ο.

51. rap: δὲ Harl.a. 56. αὖϑις C.

62. κἀκεῖθεν JPQR Harl. b ἃ, Vr. ἃ (Kax.).

pucizwoc CDJPQRTU Par.
|| mep: te R.

45. φίλοισι may be a locative dat.,
among his friends; but H 61, v 61 (rép-
meo τῶιδ᾽ ἐνὶ οἴκωι παισί τε Kal λαοῖσι)
are in favour of regarding it rather as
instrumental or comitative (HW. G. § 145,
n. 4).

48. néecear is best taken with πέμψειν,
οὐκ ἐθέλοντα standing by itself as in 36.
But this is one of the few cases in which
νέεσθαι means simply go, and has lost
the true Homeric sense return home
(happily) which is equally marked in
the cognate νόστος. Acc. to van L. the
only other cases are Ψ 51 (see note), δ΄ 8,
ξ 261 (=p 430), 498, σ 186 (=x 434,
496), x 484, out of nore than 100 places.
So also Hes. Opp. 237.

50. The sentence is interrupted for a
time by the explanation of how Achilles
recognised Lykaon ; it is because he is
disarmed, without a helmet or shield.
This again is expanded by the independ-
ent addition of the clause οὐδ᾽ ἔχεν ἔγχος,
and 51-52 are a further explanation of
how he came to be in this defenceless

state. In 53 we have at last the apodosis
to 49. The sentence is a good instance
of the way in which the Epic narrator,
without losing his main idea, lets himself
be carried away by the thoughts which
suggest themselves as he goes on.

54=N 99. 56, cf. O 191.

57. οἷον OH, see note on N 633.

58. πεπερημένος, a form objected to
by Leskien, who reads πεπρημένος, which
is supported by Ionic inscriptions ; Fick
suggests also πεπερασμένος, as if from
περάζω, like περάσσαι. See note on 40.

59. πόντος ἁλός, the deep of the sea;
imitated by Virgil, maris magna claudit
nos obice pontus, Aen. x. 377. The
primary meaning of πόντος is not clear.

62. κεῖθεν, fromthe other world ; prob-
ably a euphemism, as it has no distinct
antecedent.

63. The vulgate text is given above ;
but it may be seriously questioned if we
ought not to read with Brandreth γαῖα
φυσίζωος, ἥ τε κρατερόν περ ἐρύκει, to
which the variants point. The advan-

390 IAIAAOC Φ (xx1)

‘Os ὥρμαινε μένων, ὁ δέ οἱ σχεδὸν ἦλθε τεθηπώς,
γούνων ἅψασθαι μεμαώς, περὶ δ᾽ ἤθελε θυμῶι 65
ἐκφυγέειν θάνατόν τε κακὸν καὶ κῆρα μέλαιναν.
ἤτοι ὁ μὲν δόρυ μακρὸν ἀνέσχετο δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
οὐτάμεναι μεμαώς, ὁ δ᾽ ὑπέδραμε καὶ λάβε γούνων
κύψας" ἐγχείη δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπὲρ νώτου ἐνὶ γαίηι
ἔστη, ἱεμένη χροὸς ἄμεναι ἀνδρομέοιο. 70
αὐτὰρ ὁ τῆι ἑτέρηι μὲν ἑλὼν ἐλλίσσετο γούνων,
τῆι δ᾽ ἑτέρηι ἔχεν ἔγχος ἀκαχμένον οὐδὲ μεθίει:"
καί μιν φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"

“γουνοῦμαί σ᾽, ᾿Αχιλεῦ, σὺ δέ μ᾽ αἴδεο καί μ᾽ ἐλέησον'

5 (ee / 3 / =
ἀντί τοί εἰμ’ ἱκέταο, διοτρεφές, αἰδοίοιο" 75

67. ἀνέςχεθε J Vr. Ὁ, Mosc. 2 and ap. Eust.
70. Guuenar GHJPRT Par. a (yp. ἔδμεναι, yp. Gcaceal): Guuwenal

νῶτον H().

68. λάβε: βάλε G. 69.

S Vr. A (glossed ἅψασθαι): ἥμεναι Cant. Bar. (yp. ἄμμμκεναι) : ἔμμεναι (): acai δὴ

εὐ αὐ ΤΟΣ

13. τοῦτον προστιθέασί τινες οὐ φερόμενον ἐν ταῖς ᾿Αριστάρχου, Did. ||

καί ῥ᾽ ὀλοφυρόμενος H and ἔν τισι Did. || φωνήςας ACQU Syr. Ven. B Bar.

Mor. : Arccéuenoc ὥ. yp. A.

tages of this reading are obvious. It is
needless to point out the improvement in
the rhythm. γῆ for γαῖα is suspicious
(see Τ' 104). The first syllable of φυσί-
foos is properly short, cf. φύσις, ἐρυσ-
άρματες, τανυσίπτερος etc. And if the
word is derived from ζωή, we ought to
have -wos, not -oos. The main difficulty
is the fact that in T 243, \ 301 we have
φῦσίζοος. Schulze has shewn how the
originally short ὕ of this and similar
verbs (Avw etc.) has gradually succumbed
to the analogy of the verbal forms with
-ug- till in later Greek lengthening 15
almost invariable (App. D, B (2), a).
Hence we need not be surprised to find
a variation of quantity in Homer. And
possibly in T 243, \ 301 we should read
φυσίζωος with ὦ shortened as in ἥρωος
(—vv) £303. The apparent inappropri-
ateness of the epithet itself (see note on
I’ 243) is pointed out by Schol. T (οὐ
καλὸν τὸ ἐπίθετον ἐπὶ νεκρῶν καὶ τύμβων
ταττόμενον). To avoid this difficulty
Fick has ingeniously proposed to derive
it from *¢oF és a masc. form (Skt. yavas) of
ζεξά-- ζεία, so that φυσί- ζοος = ζεί-δωρος.
This, if correct, would of course be de-
cisive in favour of φυσίζοος.

67. In 17 Achilles has laid down his
spear ; but as 1~83 are in all probability
of different authorship the discrepancy
is not surprising.

68. Both tnédpaue and the words of
69-70 seem to shew that the spear is
cast, in spite of the rule of Ar. that
οὐτάμεναι is used only of thrusting.

70. See T 279-80. ἄμεναι, apparently
a primitive non-thematic form from d-w
(root sa) satiate. See notes on N 315, T
402. For the personification of the
spear cf. 168, A 574 λιλαιόμενα χροὸς
doa. “

{ΘΖ

73. The statement that this line νναβ᾽

not found in the editions of Ar. is
accepted as Didymean by Ludwich.
There is however no trace of omission in
the mss., and the beginning of the
speech without it is hardly Homeric.
See however 480 below.

75. The mere breaking of bread under
another man’s roof entitles to the position
of a suppliant, even though the intention
to protect be absent. This is the rule
among the Arabs to the present day (see
Robertson Smith, Kinship and Marriage
in Early Arabia, p. 41: ‘even the thief
who has surreptitiously shared the even-
ing draught of an unwitting host is safe’).
Thus though Lykaon is not actually a
ἱκέτης, because he has not been accepted
as such by Achilles, he yet claims to be
‘as good as’ one. For this sense of
ἀντί cf. Θ 546 ἀντὶ κασιγνήτου ξεῖνός θ᾽
ἱκέτης τε τέτυκται, and Θ 163.

IAIAAOC Φ (xxi) 39]

Tap yap σοὶ πρώτωι πασάμην Δημήτερος ἀκτήν,

ἤματι τῶι ὅτε μ᾽ εἷλες ἐυκτιμένηι ἐν ἀλωῆι,

καί μ᾽ ἐπέρασσας ἄνευθεν ἄγων πατρός τε φίλων τε
Λῆμνον ἐς ἠγαθέην, ἑκατόμβοιον δέ τοι ἧλφον.

νῦν δὲ λύμην τρὶς τόσσα Topwv: ἠὼς δέ μοί ἐστιν 80
ἥδε δυωδεκάτη, ὅτ᾽ ἐς Ἴλιον εἰλήλουθα

πολλὰ παθών: νῦν αὖ με τεῆις ἐν χερσὶν ἔθηκε

μοῖρ᾽ ὀλοή᾽ μέλλω που ἀπεχθέσθαι Διὶ πατρί,

ὅς μὲ σοὶ αὗτις ἔδωκε: μινυνθάδιον δέ μὲ μήτηρ

γείνατο Λαοθόη, θυγάτηρ Λλταο γέροντος, 85
"Αλτα᾽, ὃς Λελέγεσσι φιλοπτολέμοισιν ἀνάσσει,

Πήδασον αἰπήεσσαν ἔχων ἐπὶ Σατνιόεντι.

τοῦ δ᾽ ἔχε θυγατέρα IIpiapos, πολλὰς δὲ καὶ ἄλλας:

18. énépacac PQT Harl. ἃ, ἐν ἄλλωι καί
ras.) : ἑκατόμβοιος () (swpr. N).

ἐϊκτιμένω ἢ.
19. ἑκατόνβοιον LP (yp.

11. eldec JU.
ue nepacac A,

ἦλθον (). 82. aU με τεῆις : αὖτε με cH Syr. 84. αὖθις Cl). || d@xe Ar.
85. Aaoddéxn Vr. b. Gta’: GAtao C{D!: ἄλταω G: ἄλτεο Par. Ὁ:
ἄλτεω ©. || Gnacce PRS Syr. King’s? Par. afh, and ἔνιαι τῶν κατὰ πόλεις Did.

Und ὦ (the text of T has ὑπὸ, in spite of Maass’s express
88. δ᾽ : ῥ᾽ P. πολλῶν Te καὶ ἄλλων Mass.

81. ἐπὶ Strabo xiii. 605:
statement to the contrary).

and as it gives the epyanalepsis in the
correct form, it should be accepted. For
the elision of -o of the gen. see note on
A 35. ἀνάςςει, the variant ἄνασσε looks
like an emendation to bring the passage
into harmony with T 92 where we hear
of the sack of the town by Achilles.
But Z 35 seems to imply that the place
was still inhabited, and we are not
told of Altes’ death. Nor need we be
troubled to harmonize passages which

76. πρώτωι, first among Greeks. This
seems to make the personal relation
closer, as putting the actual protector
in a special position. So Odysseus says
to Nausikaa σὲ yap. . ἐς πρώτην ἱκόμην,
€ 175, and similarly ἡ 301, 6 462.
ἀκτήν. A 631.

79. éxatéuBoion expresses the value
of the cup (see on 41), not the actual
substance of the ransom. Cf. Ψ 703-05.

80. λύμην aor. indic., with NON ὃέ

because he has in his mind his present
state, which he presently resumes with
NON αὖ in 82. It is probably through
not seeing this that the ancient com-
mentators generally took the word as an
opt., ‘I should like to be ransomed
again.’ The short v is of course quite
decisive against this (cf. daivuro 2 665,
and II 99). τρὶς τόεςα, the πολλά which
Eetion gave to Euneos, 42. This is
evidently meant to shew Achilles how
valuable he will be if again sold.

85. Aaoedn, see note on X 46-51.

86. “AAta’ is the reading of C and
virtually of G, writing ἐκ πλήρους in
place of elision being common enough
in Mss. This form of the gen. is the
older and more likely to be. ‘corrupted,

may probably be of different authorship
and date.

87. ἐπί, the ὑπό of the vulg. is a
curious instance of a corruption which
has invaded all Mss.; they are, however,
notoriously careless ‘about prepositions.
There can be little doubt which is right,
for Satnioeis is a river in Z 34, = 445.
Cf. Schol. T, ἐπὶ rots ποταμοῖς φαμεν
κεῖσθαι Tas πόλεις (Dut with lemma ὑπό);
Strabo xiii. 605 γράφουσι δέ τινες οὐκ εὖ
ὑπὸ Σ.᾿᾿ αἱπήεεςαν, here only ; formed
from aimés as μεσήεις from μέσος (see
note on M 269).

88. ἔχε, imperf., although from X 53
she is still alive, because it refers back
to the time of the verb yelvaro. For the
polygamy of Priam see X 48,

392 IAIAAOC Φ (xx1)

> / /

τῆς δὲ δύω γενόμεσθα, σὺ δ᾽ ἄμφω δειροτομήσεις.

ἤτοι τὸν πρώτοισι μετὰ πρυλέεσσι δάμασσας, 90
᾽ fue ,ὔ

ἀντίθεον Πολύδωρον, ἐπεὶ βάλες ὀξέϊ δουρί:

rn \ \ ΕῚ yo > \ Ν » > \ ple Az

νῦν δὲ δὴ ἐνθάδ᾽ ἐμοὶ κακὸν ἔσσεται" ov yap οἴω

\ a ΄ 2 ee ee ἜΣ πες ΄ 8 ,
σὰς χεῖρας φεύξεσθαι, ἐπεί p ἐπέλασσέ γε δαίμων.
ἄλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω, σὺ δ᾽ ἐνὶ φρεσὶ βάλλεο σῆισι:"

an ς / (oA / >’
μή με κτεῖν, ἐπεὶ οὐχ ὁμογάστριος “Extopos εἰμι, 95

“ - a / hi ”
ὅς τοι ἑταῖρον ἔπεφνεν ἐνηέα TE κρατερὸν Te.
aA v 2 "ὃ [ὃ e\
ὡς ἄρα μιν Τ]ριάμοιο προσηύδα φαίδιμος υἱὸς
’ ry 2) /
λισσόμενος ἐπέεσσιν, ἀμείλικτον δ᾽ Om ἄκουσε"
᾿ ΄ 2 ΟΣ /
“νήπιε, μή μοι ἄποινα πιφαύσκεο μηδ᾽ ἀγόρευε"
πρὶν μὲν γὰρ Ἰ]άτροκλον ἐπισπεῖν αἴσιμον ἦμαρ, 100
\ , Ὦ
Toppa τί μοι πεφιδέσθαι ἐνὶ φρεσὶ φίλτερον ἣεν

89. τῆς: τοῦ J.

Harl. ἃ.
95. οὐκ iordctpioc Zen.

Eust. | mipdacxeo GJPQ (ἢ e corr.).

90. πρυλέεςει : πολέεςςι PR™.

92. ἔεςεαι PR Harl. (a sup.) Ὁ, ἐν ἄλλωι A.
96 om. Vr. b.
wr cu uadicta yoAwal ENI @PECIN οιϑα καὶ αὐυτος.
100. αἴσιμον : μόρειμον G.

Oe H, ἐν ἄλλωι A. || φίλτερον: βέλτερον ().

91. Ooupi: yp. χαλκῶ

95: Fes) we Vir, A;
|| ὅς τις J Cant. || After this Syr. adds
99. ἄποινα : ταῦτα «ap.
101. τί:

89, δειροτομήςεις, slaughter like ἃ
helpless victim at the altar; so 555, x
349. The word gives the same idea as
our ‘ butcher.’

92. It is hard to say whether we
should read ἔσσεται or ἔσσεαι. “The
latter has strong though not wide
support, and finds sufficient analogies in
39, β 166, 7 103 κακὸν πάντεσσι γενοίμην.

93. énéAacce, see on O 418.

94-96 are condemned by Bayfield
on good grounds. Two of them are
borrowed, 94 from A 297, 96 from P 204.
The mention of Patroklos as ‘amiable’
is not in place in an enemy’s mouth ;
94 is quite unsuitable for a petition ;
and it is useless for Lykaon to appeal
for mercy on the ground that he is not
‘of the same womb’ with Hector, when he
has just reminded Achilles of the slaying
of his own brother Polydoros. Achilles
makes no allusion to the argument in
his reply.

95. Guoractpioc, Zen. ἰογάστριος, ef.
(47. The only objection to this read-
ing is that no other compounds of ia
are found in Greek. It has been argued
that the word shews a trace of the
ancient way of reckoning kinship through
the mother only, especially in the taking
up of blood-feuds. (See M‘Lennan,
Studies in Ancient History, pp. 201 ff.)

The foundation for such an inference is,
however, extremely slight. In a poly-
gamous household the children of the
saine mother would naturally feel a closer
tie among themselves than with half
brothers and sisters; and all that Lykaon
can urge is that his relationship to
Hector is not as close as it might have
been. In any case the passage would
prove nothing for the Greek practice.
(See Z 205 for a trace of female kinship
among the Lykians.) The line added
in Syr. is curious, as yé\wa is not a
Greek form.

98. See A 137. ἀμέλικτον δὲ For’
ἄκουσεν, Fick. But there is no clear
case of Fow in H. ; the F was lost at a
very early date, as in other words where
it was followed by o or ὦ (H. Gt. 8 595).

99. πιφαύςκεο, perhaps fender, see on
= 500.

100. The position of πρίν, as a con-

junction, is very rare; the primary

clause almost always precedes. But see
Σ 229. It is nowhere else correlative to
τόφρα.

101. For the qualifying τι see I 645.
It is so rare in affirmative sentences that
we ought perhaps to adopt the variant
τόφρα δέ. But τι gives some little colour
of reluctance to make such an admission.
Déderlein conj. τόφρ᾽ ἔτι.

ΙΔΛΙΑΔΟΟ Φ (χχι) 393

Τρώων, καὶ πολλοὺς ζωοὺς ἕλον ἠδὲ Tépacca:
a . ’ ” δον ΄, / “ ,
νῦν & οὐκ ἔσθ ὅς τις θάνατον φύγηι, ὅν κε θεός γε
3 / / > A » \ ,
Ihiov προπάροιθεν ἐμῆις ἐν χερσὶ βάληισι,
καὶ πάντων ρώων, πέρι δ᾽ αὖ Ἰ!ριάμοιό γε παίδων. 105
ἀλλά, φίλος, θάνε καὶ σύ: Ti ἢ ὀλοφύρεαι οὕτως ;
/ \ / A / \ > /
κάτθανε Kal Πάτροκλος, Ὁ περ σέο πολλὸν ἀμείνων.

΄ Γ /
οὐχ ὁράαις οἷος καὶ ἐγὼ καλός TE μέγας τε;
Ν > vy? ᾽ a \ / / s
πατρὸς δ᾽ εἴμ᾽ ἀγαθοῖο, θεὰ δέ με γείνατο μήτηρ᾽
ἀλλ᾽ ἔπι τοι καὶ ἐμοὶ θάνατος καὶ μοῖρα κραταιή. 110
3 ! δ 4
ἔσσεται ἢ ἠὼς ἢ δείλη ἢ μέσον map,
΄ ’ wv > a Ν᾽, 3 ’ \ [
ὁππότε τις καὶ ἐμεῖο "Apy ἐκ θυμὸν ἕληται,

DY

ἢ ὅ ye δουρὶ βαλὼν ἢ ἀπὸ νευρῆφιν ὀϊστῶι."

‘ A > a a
ὡς φάτο, Tov δ᾽ αὐτοῦ λύτο γούνατα Kal φίλον Top:
ἔγχος μέν ῥ᾽ ἀφέηκεν, ὁ δ᾽ ἕζετο χεῖρε πετάσσας 115

ἀμφοτέρας.

᾿Αχιλεὺς δὲ ἐρυσσάμενος ξίφος ὀξὺ

/ \ ” τ 2. / lal / e »Μ
τύψε κατὰ κληΐδα παρ᾽ αὐχένα, πᾶν δέ οἱ εἴσω

γε 6.
ἐνὶ Vr. A.

103. τις :
ἐμαῖς ().
Pars bh, yp. A.
καὶ ἐγὼ Syv.:

φύγοι DJPQRST Syr. Harl. a, Vr. A, Ven. B.

105. καὶ πάντων : cuundnton GJ Harl. a (yp. Kai).
106. οὕτως Ar. 2: οὕτω ὦ: αὕτως G Harl. a b.
ἐγὼ () : κἀγὼ (Kare, κἀγὼ) (2.
111. δείλης AHPRSTU Syr. Harl. ἃ d, Par. ce g hj: ϑήλης J.
CPQ Bar. || ἄρης G: ἄρει JL Syr.: ἀρῆι Hermapias ap. Amm. (τινές, Sch. T).

104,

108.
κάμοι (7.
112. ἐμοῖο

110. ἐπί coi Harl. ἃ.

104. ᾿Ιλίου, i.e. ᾿Ιλίοο (Ahrens). See
note on B 518, and O 66, X 6.

105. καί emphasises πάντων, even all,
i.e. ‘I will go so far as to say all,’ in
order to accentuate the following ‘but
chiefly.’ καί and δέ cannot be taken as
correlative (καὶ. . καί both . . and is
very rare in H.; perhaps only N 260,
636 ?, Q 641).

106. In φίλος the scholia see a mock-
ing allusion to the claim of hospitality.
But it clearly marks a sudden change of
Achilles’ impulsive mood to a real pity
for his victim—a far finer touch. It is
not necessary to do more than mention
the punctuation after θάνε, which found
some favour in antiquity: my friend
died; so why dost thou, ete. It is a
question if instead of οὕτως we should
not, in spite of ms. authority, read
αὔτως, as more Homeric.

107. This is a famous line. Plutarch
(Alex. liv. p. 695 Ε) says that Kallisthenes
used it to warn Alexander in the height
of his glory ; on hearing which Aristotle
remarked ὅτι Καλλισθένης λόγωι μὲν Fv

δυνατὸς καὶ μέγας, νοῦν δὲ οὐκ εἶχεν.
Still better known is Lucretius’ adapta-
tion 7956 Epicurus obit . . tw vero
dubitabis et indignabere obire? (iii. 1054).

111. ϑείλη is metrically doubtful ; see
App. N, ὃ 20. The variant δείλης is
meaningless. The word occurs only here
in H., though common in later Greek ;
but we have in p 606 δείελον ἦμαρ, and
in 232 below deieXos, which (or δείελον,
Nauck) we ought perhaps to read here.
For €ccerai . . ὁππότε cf. A 164. The
scholia generally (but not Ar.) entirely
spoil the sentence, putting a stop after
ἔσσεται which they take with the pre-
ceding line, and making ἢ jas . . ἦμαρ
a clumsy parenthesis.

112. Apu’, i.e. “Api. So we must
read in 431, but in E 757 (q.v.) and
θ 276 the contracted “Apec or “Apne is
fixed and is evidence of lateness. The
only other form of the dat. is Αρεῖ

113. For the very rare shortening of
H see note on 576.

115-16. Cf. Ξὶ 495-96. 119=N 655.

994

IAIAAOC Φ (xxi)

’ e ͵ \ > \ ,͵
δῦ ξίφος ἄμφηκες" ὁ δ᾽ ἄρα πρηνὴς ἐπὶ γαίηι
3 - (172 “ \ -»
κεῖτο ταθείς, ἐκ δ᾽ αἷμα μέλαν ῥέε, Seve δὲ γαῖαν.

τὸν δ᾽ ᾿Αχιλεὺς ποταμόνδε λαβὼν ποδὸς ἧκε φέρεσθαι, 120

7 if ’ 5 /
Kal οἱ ἐπευχόμενος ἔπεα πτερόεντ ἀγόρευεν"

> a a κι δ > θύ ie? ’ 5 nv,
“ἐνταυθοῖ νῦν κεῖσο μετ ὑχθυσιν, οἱ © ὠτειλὴν

ἊΣ /
αἷμ᾽ ἀπολιχμήσονται ἀκηδέες: οὐδέ σε μήτηρ

ἮΝ

Ν /
ἐνθεμένη λεχέεσσι γοήσεται, ἀλλὰ Σκάμανδρος

4, € Ν By / /
οἴσει δινήεις εἴσω ἁλὸς εὐρέα κόλπον. 125

n FN Ὁ oh
θρώισκων τις κατὰ κῦμα μέλαιναν φρῖχ ὑπαΐξει

118. ταίης JQU Harl. a.
Mose. 2, yp. A.

Ar. AD: ὠτειλῆς ὦ.

121. πτερόεντα npocHuda J Bar. Vr. Ὁ A, Harl. a,
122. κεῖςο : Aco Amm. (lemma), Sch. 1 ; διχῶς Ar. || ὠτειλὴν
124. κάμανορος LR Harl. a. |

Between γοήςεται and

ἀλλὰ C inserts H τὸ πάρος περ γείνατο κοῦρον ἐόντα -- καὶ ἔτρεφεν conj. La R. >

125. ἁλὸς efcw Vr. A.

KOANMON : πόντον C.

126. φρῖκ᾽ (A swpr.) Syr. ||

Onatze Ar. (Aph.?) Q: ὑπαλύξει Philetas, Kallistratos (An.), ἄλλοι (Did.), DHJ

(-λίξει), QRST Harl. a (yp. dizer), Par. Ὁ ¢ ἃ e g j! (λ erased, j?):

υναλύξει Syr.

But ace. to Schol. BT, Ar. read φρῖκ᾽ ἐπαΐξει, the ‘Chia’ uehainn φρῖχ᾽ (μελαίνηι

pix’ conj. Heyne) ὑπαΐξει.

120. ἧκε pépecea, sent him off (as πᾶν
δ᾽ ἦμαρ φερόμην A 592, ἧκα πόδας καὶ
χεῖρε φέρεσθαι μ 442, ‘let go,’ τ 468
πόδα προέηκε φέρεσθαι). φέρεσθαι means
no more than to go his way, drift, ex-
pressing not so much the motion as the
absence of guidance, and therefore of any
care, on the part of the thrower. It is
the passive equivalent of the pleonastic
infin. in βῆ ἰέναι.

122. Cf. σ 105 ἐνταυθοῖ viv foo: the
whole passage ¢ 101-05 resembles this
in tone. ς᾽ is perhaps best taken as=
σοι. But the sequence of accusatives
σε ὠτειλὴν αἷμα, though unusual, is not
indefensible ;! σε ὠτειλήν may be a ‘whole-
and-part’ construction, ὠτειλὴν αἷμα ace.
of ‘near and remote object,’ as ¢ 224
xpia vivero δῖος ᾽Οδυσσεὺς ἅλμην. The
gen. ὠτειλῆς, though found in most Mss.,
is probably only a correction ; super-
ficially it looks easier, but it is less
idiomatic.

123. ἀκηϑέες, careless of thy fate (ef.
Q 526, of the gods), or with a reference
to the more special sense of κῆδος, without
mourning rites (Monro). 'The adj. means
negligent in p 319, elsewhere neglected
(2554, ¢ 26, 718, v 130, ὦ 187). Hence
ἀκηδέα has been conj. here to agree with
o(€), rightly perhaps but needlessly. The
same variation in sense occurs in ἀκή-
δεστος (-ws) Z 60, X 465.

126. Many a fish leaping through the
waves shall dart wp to (or beneath) the
black ripple, to eat Lykaon’s fat. μέλαινα

φρίξ is the darkening of the surface of
water by the ripple of a breeze, as is
described at length in H 63-64; ef.
also Ψ 692, 6 402 πνοιῆι ὕπο Ζεφύροιο,
μελαίνηι φρικὶ καλυφθείς. The idea then
is that the corpse after a time will float
on the surface, and that the fish will
dart up from beneath to eat it. Whether
ὑπο- means ‘up to’ or ‘ (along) beneath ἡ
it is hardly possible to say, as there
seem to be but few parallel com-
pounds of intransitive verbs of motion.
ὑπέρχομαι, however, takes an accus. of
the point reached (e 476, μ᾽ 21, σ 150),
and so ὑποδύομαι. The most natural
meaning, ‘will dart under the ripple
(from above)’ is excluded by the sense
of the passage. So far the text is in-
telligible, though strange in expression ;
but it contains an apparently false
quantity in Gnatzei, for in all the other
forms of ἀΐσσω the a is invariably long.
ἀΐσσω is generally taken to be=aitcow
from Fac-Fix-jw (cf. davddddw ete.). In
that case we may compare for the
variation of quantity dei from aiFeé (see
note on M 211). Anyhow this reading
is better than the alternative ὑπαλύξει.
The old explanation of this is many a

Jish will avoid a chill by eating the

fat (!). This incredible interpretation
is ascribed by Ariston. to Philetas and
Kallistratos, λέγοντες ὅτι οἱ πίονες τῶν
ἰχθύων καὶ εὔτροφοι τὸ ψῦχος ὑπομένουσι
καὶ οὐ φθείρονται. They must therefore
have taken ὅς κε φάγηισι to mean ‘ who

IAIAAOC Φ (xx)

395

> 4 “ / ΄ > / ,
ἰχθύς, ὅς κε φάγηισι Λυκάονος ἀργέτα δημόν.

φθείρεσθ᾽,

? “ » , ? , tow
εἰς ὁ κεν ἄστυ κιχείομεν Ιλίου ιρὴς,

6 “ \ / , b » ΕΣ mt
ὑμεῖς μὲν φεύγοντες, ἐγὼ δ᾽ ὄπιθεν κεραΐζων.
᾽ id lal / ’ ,
οὐδ᾽ ὑμῖν ποταμός περ ἐύρροος apyupodivns 130
ἀρκέσει, ὧι δὴ δηθὰ πολεῖς ἱερεύετε ταύρους,

\ ᾽ » / / / 7
ζωοὺς ὃ €V δίνηισι καθίετε μωνύυχαᾶς “77 7TTOVUS.

> \ \ μὰ > / \ , ? “ ΄ὕ
ἀλλὰ καὶ ὡς ὀλέεσθε κακὸν μόρον, εἰς ὅ κε πάντες

/ / \ r
ticete Ἰ]ατρόκλοιο φόνον καὶ λοιγὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν,

Δ δ ἢ Ν fol 2 / / > no?
ods ἐπὶ νηυσὶ θοῆισιν ἐπέφνετε νόσφιν ἐμεῖο. 1:

—
σι

ὡς ἄρ᾽ ἔφη, ποταμὸς δὲ χολώσατο κηρόθι μᾶλλον,

“ ᾿ > \ \ ae / ,
ὥρμηνεν δ᾽ ava θυμὸν ὅπως παύσειε πόνοιο

127. 6c:
πολέας Ar. :

ὥς Aph. P Par. b.
πολλοὺς ©. ixpevete J:

130-35 ἀθ. Aph.

(Ar. ? see below).

iepeucate (). 135. ἐμοῖο P.

φόνοιο {0} 0 Syr. Ven. B Harl. a, Vr. b A, Mose. 2 , (see on 249).

shall have eaten.’ By doing this we
may make ὑπαλύξει mean ‘he shall
avoid the surface (i.e. dive to the
bottom) after his meal’; but this of
course will satisfy nobody. Or again
we may thus explain ὑπαΐξει, shall dart
(away) beneath the ripple after eating,
which is better, but not Epic in its
indirectness. μέλαιναν again involves a
violation of Wernicke’s law (App. N,$ 16),
which may indeed be avoided by adopt-
ing the variant μελαίνηι and reading
φρίχ᾽ =gpixi. But it may be questioned
whether the whole passage has not
undergone some grave corruption now
irremediable. The reading ἐπαΐξει
ascribed to Ar. by Schol. Bi’ makes no
difference to the interpretation.

127. ixevc, the v is apparently long
by nature, cf. H. G. § 116. 4. 6c Ke
parnict who shall eat, with a prophetic
colouring (H. Οὐ. ὃ 282), and also a
suggestion of intention. This alone is
conveyed by the variant ὥς κε, which,
though well attested, is hardly so good.
The objection that ὅς κε φάγηισι must
mean shall have eaten is sutticiently
refuted by Θ 33, I 165, 2 119, κ ne ν
399, and other passages in 27. (ἡ. ὃ 282,

128, pocipecee, a phrase more familiar
in Attic thanin H. The neglect of the
F of Ριλίου is a ground for suspecting the
antiquity of the line. Perhaps we should
read κιχήετε with Brandreth. The verb
is found only here with a local object.

180-35. ᾿Αρίσταρχος διὰ τῶν ὑπομνημά-
των ᾿Αριστοφάνη φησὶ στίχους ἕξ ἠθετη-
κέναι ὡς παρεμβληθέντας ὑπὸ τῶν ἀπορούν-
των διὰ τί ὁ ποταμὸς ὀργίζεται, καίτοι
σαφῶς αὐτοῦ λέγοντος τὴν αἰτίαν (sc. 146).

καὶ τὸ “ δηθά" ὡς οὐχ Ὁμηρικῶς κείμενον
αἰτιῶνται. μήποτε μέντοι καὶ ὁ ᾿Αρίσταρχος
συγκατέθετο τῆι ἀθετήσει, μηδὲν ἀντειπὼν
τῶι ᾿Αριστοφάνει, Did. These arguments
do not seem strong, and the passage can-
not be judged except in connexion with
the whole episode of the fight with the
river.

131. OHed,
Schol. B,
ficing bulls’
pres., not impf.

ἐκ πολλοῦ δηλονότι καιροῦ,
“you have long been sacri-
; lepevere and kaeiete being
Cf. a 49 ὃς δὴ δηθὰ

φίλων ἄπο πήματα πάσχει, ‘has long
been suffering.’ The use is not so harsh
as to afford a ground for athetesis. For

the sacrifice ofa bull toa river cf. A 728 ;
it is connected with the common per-
sonification of a river in the form of a
bull or bull-headed man. The sacrifice
of live horses in the next line has no
parallel in H., and is perhaps mentioned
by Achilles contemptuously as a barbar-
ouscustom. Soit appears also in Herod.
iv. 61, vii. 113. See however Greek
instances in Paus. viii. 7. 2, and Frazer’s
valuable note on the passage (with Hehn
p- 42). The sacrifice is invariably made
to water-gods.

135. Schol B takes νόσφιν as an
adverb, and supplies ἐόντος with ἐμεῖο as
gen. absolute, no doubt on the analogy
of ἐμεῦ ἀπονόσφιν ἐόντος, σ 268, and O
548, cf. X 332. But there is nothing
against the simple prepositional use far
away from me=when I was far away ;
T 422 ὀλέσθαι νόσφι φίλου πατρὸς καὶ
μητέρος, ete.

137. πόνοιο in special reference to
martial exploits as A 601 and often.
But φόνοιο is rather more suitable here.

390

IAIAAOC Φ (xx)

δῖον ᾿Αχιλλῆα, Τρώεσσι δὲ λοιγὸν ἀλάλκοι.

τόφρα δὲ ἸΠηλέος υἱὸς ἔχων δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος
᾿Αστεροπαίωι ἐπᾶλτο κατακτάμεναι μενεαίνων, 140
υἱέϊ ἸΠηλεγόνος- τὸν δ᾽ ᾿Αξιὸς εὐρυρέεθρος ;

γείνατο καὶ Περίβοια, ᾿Ακεσσαμενοῖο τ ον
πρεσβυτάτη: τῆι γάρ ῥα μίγη ποταμὸς βαθυδίνης.

TOL ῥ᾽ ᾿Αχιλεὺς ἐπόρουσεν, ὁ δ᾽ ἀντίος ἐκ a

ἔστη ἔχων δύο δοῦρε: μένος δέ οἱ ἐν φρεσὶ θῆκε 145
Ξάνθος, ἐπεὶ κεχόλωτο δαϊκταμένων αἰζηῶν,

τοὺς ᾿Αχιλεὺς ἐδάϊζε κατὰ ῥόον οὐδ᾽ ἐλέαιρεν.

οἱ δ᾽ ὅτε δὴ σχεδὸν ἦσαν ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλοισιν ἰόντες,

τὸν πρότερος προσέειπε ποδάρκης δῖος Αχιλλεύς"

t lal ef 4 ’ / 5 lal 4
“cis πόθεν eis ἀνδρῶν, 6 μευ ἔτλης ἀντίος ἐλθεῖν;

150

r a / ’ / ”
δυστήνων δέ TE παῖδες ἐμῶι μένει ἀντιοωσι.
\ 5) = ᾿ / OP
τὸν © av ΠΠηλεγόνος προσεφώνεε φαίδιμος υἱός
Λ 7 > ΝΝ 5] ΄ aa
“TInreldn μεγάθυμε, τί ἢ γενεὴν ἐρεείνεις ;
,ὕ , Δ᾽ Σ vf
εἴμ᾽ ἐκ ἸΠαιονίης ἐριβώλου, τηλόθ᾽ ἐούσης,
, » 5, / 4 / ‘ la)
Παίονας ἄνδρας ἄγων δολιχεγχέας: ἥδε δέ μοι νῦν ΤῸ Ὁ
\ / “ /
ἠὼς ἑνδεκάτη, ὅτ᾽ ἐς λιον εἰλήλουθα.
> \ ᾽ \ \ 5, 7A nr 3 \ Cy
αὐτὰρ ἐμοὶ γενεὴ ἐξ ᾿Αξιοῦ εὐρὺ ῥέοντος,

138. ουμὸν P (sup. λοιγὸν).
ῥ᾽ ACPQR Syr. Bar. Vr. b, Mose. 2:
147. ἐδάϊΞξε P. || καταῤῥόον CDHTU.
τινὲς mou T.
(ἄγων A™) C,

143. pa «μίγη : ἐν ἄλλωι ῥ
δ᾽ ὦ.
148 om. Syv.
ἀντίον (A swp7.) Mose. 2.
157. ἐμοὶ : ἐμὴ J Vr. A, Mosc. 2.

“5

ἐμίγη A. 144.
|| ἀπόρουςεν R. 145. éu@peci A.
150. εἶς : ἧς Q. || μευ:

152. προςεφώνει C, 155. ἔχων A

141. Πηλεγόνος, no doubt a Thracian
eponymos, as we hear of a tribe of
Pelagones there. The name, like ’Axec-
σαμενός, does not recur in H., but we
hear of another Periboia in 7 as honoured
with a similar divine Ziaison.

140, ϑαϊκταμένων, here and 301 only.
A writes, with Herodianos, δαὶ κταμένων,
as also “Apni κτάμενος. See on A 74,
N 477.

148-49=7Z% 121-22, 148 is hardly in
place here after 144, and should be
omitted asin Syr. Cf. note on T 158-60.

150, τίς πόθεν εἷς GNOPAN, also a170;
for similar instances of the blending
of two questions into one οἵ, Eur. Hel.
86 τίς πόθεν, Hl. 779, Soph. Phil. 243
τίνι στόλωι. . πόθεν πλέων, 1090 τοῦ ποτε
τεύξομαι σιτονόμου μέλεος πόθεν ἐλπίδος
(and Jebb’s note on 220). It is possible
that πόθεν means not ‘from what place ?’
but ‘ of what father 2’

SSSA WA
153, cf. Z 145. The dialogue is

evidently modelled upon that between
Glaukos and Diomedes.

154. For ‘distant Paionia’ see B 848—
50 where Asteropaios is not mentioned
among the leaders—though by a strict
reckoning of time eleven days take us:
back beyond the point at which the
Catalogue is inserted, as the scholia point
out. ‘To remedy this defect a line was
inserted (ἐν πολλαῖς τῶν ᾿Ιλιάδων Sch. T,
ἐν τῆι κατ’ Εὐριπίδην Amm. by Blass’s
certain conj.) after B 848 (q. v.) IIm\eyévos
θ᾽ vids περιδέξιος ᾿Αστεροπαῖος. Another
difference is that in the Catalogue the
Paionians are archers, ἀγκυλότοξοι, not
spearmen (θολιχεγχέες only here); but
in A 533 δολίχ᾽ ἔγχεα χερσὶν ἔχοντες is:
used of Thrakians.

156. This line is an echo of 81.

IAIAAOC Φ (χχι) 397

a « CAN \ - “
[Αξιοῦ, ὃς κάλλιστον ὕδωρ ἐπὶ γαῖαν ἵἴησιν,)
< ,ὔ Ἁ » o ‘ a? > ,
ὃς τέκε Ἰ]ηλεγόνα κλυτὸν ἔγχεϊ; τὸν ὃ ἐμέ φασι

“συν

γείνασθαι: νῦν αὗτε μαχώμεθα, φαίδιμ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεῦ. 100
΄ ᾽ , , “- > - ‘
ὡς hat ἀπειλήσας, ὁ 6 ἀνέσχετο dios Λχιλλεὺς
͵ ¢ > ΄ A ΄, ᾽ \
Πηλιάδα μελίην: ὁ δ᾽ ἁμαρτῆι Sovpacw ἀμφὶς
ἥρως ᾿Αστεροπαῖος, ἐπεὶ περιδέξιος ἣεν"
, .? ΄ ,ὕ \ \ / / Β δὲ Ὁ ‘
καί ῥ᾽ ἑτέρωι μὲν δουρὶ σάκος βάλεν, οὐδὲ διαπρὸ
ῥῆξε σάκος: χρυσὸς γὰρ ἐρύκακε, δῶρα θεοῖο" 165
al ’ . / “ ᾽ / ΄ : \
τῶι δ᾽ ἑτέρωι μιν πῆχυν ἐπιγράβδην βάλε χειρὸς
δεξιτερῆς, σύτο δ᾽ αἷμα κελαινεφές- ἡ δ᾽ ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ
γαίηι ἐνεστήρικτο, λιλαιομένη χροὸς σαι.
, a> 9 \ , > ,
δεύτερος αὖτ᾽ ᾿Αχιλεὺς μελίην ἰθυπτίωνα
᾿Αστεροπαίωι ἐφῆκε κατακτάμεναι μενεαίνων" 170
rn £ Ὁ ΄ \ ᾿
καὶ τοῦ μέν p ἀφάμαρτεν, ὁ δ᾽ ὑψηλὴν βάλεν ὄχθην,

C Ven. B. || "A. --Ἠὁὅὗ-- κάλλ. ὕ. ἐπικίδναται aia Eudoxos: see on B 850 (where for

“Schol. A 239” read ‘‘ Porph. on A 239”).
162. ὁμαρτῆ HORS Syr. |
énirpauBoun R (γραύϑην ἐπιξεστικῶς R™) Ap. Lew. 72. 27:
167. cUTo: χύτο U Vr. A. || A 0’: ἠδ᾽ 0.
169. ieuxTiwna Zen.: yp. ieunteiwNna διὰ διφθόύγγου X.

Ven. B. || νῦν 0’ T Harl. a.
émirpavoun JP Vr. b:
ἐπιχραύδων Vr. A.

168. énctHpixto CH.

160. reineceat A (reinaceat ΑἸ") C
ἄμφω Mass. 166.

αὐτῇ ().

172. uecconakec Ar. AC Syr. Ven. B, Mose. 2', Par. h (supr. r): swecconakréc

Harl. Ὁ: μεςςοπακὲς U (r in ras.).

158 is evidently a late interpolation
or adaptation from B 850, where see
note.

162. ἁμαρτῆι, see note on E 656.
Soupacin augic, with both spears at
once. The verb (βάλεν) is kept in
suspense while the sentence branches off
into two co-ordinate clauses, each apply-
ing to one hand ; ἐπεὶ περιδέξιος ἦεν being
parenthetical, yet causing the following
clause to begin with καί.

163. nepidezioc evidently = ambidex-
trous ; the more natural ἀμφιδέξιος does
not suit the hexameter. The alternative
περὶ (very) δεξιός mentioned by the Schol.
is less pointed, and open to the objection
that H. never uses δεξιός in the meta-
phorical sense clever.

165=T 268, q.v.

166. émrpaBoun, cf. ἐπέγραψε A 139,
and ἐπιλίγδην P 599. χειρός, the fore-
arm, cf. A 252, 1479. As this is raised
for the cast, the spear in touching it
goes ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ, over his body.

167. Note the sudden change of gender
in A; the poet evidently has the familiar

&

αἰχμή in his mind. Cf. μ 75 vepé&n. .
TO μέν (SC. νέφος).

168. Cf. O 317.

169. ieuntiona here only (but cf. App.
Cr. on T 273); explained by T 99 ἰθὺ
βέλος πέτεται, though there is no complete
analogy for the suffix -iwy (see Schulze
ῳ. E. p. 309). Zen. ἐθυκτίωνα, said to
mean straight-grained, and derived from
κτηδών or κτιδών, the fibre of wood,
which is impossible.

172. uecconaréc, planted up to the
midst ; Ar, μεσσοπαλές, explained (a)
brandished by the middle (ὅτι πᾶν δόρυ ἐκ
μέσου πάλλεται) --- 616. a meaningless
epithet ; (b) quivering up to the middle,
in contrast, acc. to Hoffmann, to the
commoner phrase ἐπὶ δ᾽ οὐρίαχος πελε-
μίχθη, Where only the butt-end quivers.
This was Ar.’s interpretation, but it is
obviously unsatisfactory, as πάλλεσθαι
does not mean fo quiver, and a spear
which quivered up to the middle must
quiver throughout its length ; unless we
are meant to suppose that it is fixed up
to the middle in the earth. In that case

398 IAIAAOC Φ (xxt)

Πηλεΐδης δ᾽ ἄορ ὀξὺ ἐρυσσάμενος παρὰ μηροῦ
Grr’ ἐπί οἱ μεμαώς: ὁ δ᾽ ἄρα μελίην ᾿Αχυλῆος
οὐ δύνατ᾽ ἐκ κρημνοῖο ἐρύσσαι χειρὶ παχείηι.
τρὶς μέν μιν πελέμιξεν ἐρύσσεσθαι μενεαίνων,
τρὶς δὲ μεθῆκε βίηι" τὸ δὲ τέτρατον ἤθελε θυμῶι
ia ἐπιγνάμψας δόρυ μείλινον Αἰακίδαο,

ἀλλά ἑ πρὶν ᾿Αχιλεὺς σχεδὸν ἄορι θυμὸν ἀπηύρα.
γαστέρα γάρ μιν τύψε παρ᾽ ὀμφαλόν, ex & ἄρα πᾶσαι 180

χύντο χαμαὶ χολάδες" τὸν δὲ σκότος ὄσσε κάλυψεν

1γῦ

ἀσθμαίνοντ᾽. ᾿Αχιλεὺς δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ὀρούσας
Bae τ᾽ ἐξενάριξε καὶ εὐχόμενος ἔπος ηὔδα"

‘Keio’ οὕτω" χαλεπόν ToL ἐρισθενέος Κρονίωνος
παισὶν ἐριζέμεναι, ποταμοῖό περ ἐκγεγαῶτι. 185
φῆσθα σὺ μὲν ποταμοῦ γένος ἔμμεναι εὐρὺ ῥέοντος,
αὐτὰρ ἐγὼ γενεὴν μεγάλου Διὸς εὔχομαι εἶναι.
τίκτέ μ᾽ ἀνὴρ πολλοῖσιν ἀνάσσων Μυρμιδόνεσσι
Πηλεὺς Alaxidns: ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ Αἰακὸς ἐκ Διὸς ἦεν.

a / lal e /
τῷ κρείσσων μὲν Ζεὺς ποταμῶν ἁλιμυρηέντων, 190

176. ἐρύς(ο)αοϑαι DGHPRTU. 178. αἴξαι (). || émrnawyac LRT. 179.

ἀλλά ἑ 5: ἀλλὰ ©. 180. ractépi Mosc. 2. 182. 0’ ἄρ᾽: rap Ὁ Bar.:
3° C. || ὁρούων (A supr.) DHPR Vr. b? A. 183. é=endpize ἐν ἐνίαις Did.
184. οὗτος (): οὕτως C{HL}. 185. ἐκγεγαῶτα GPR King’s (swpr. 1). 189.
ἐκ d10c αἴακος Vr. A. 190. ἰτῶ : ὧι Ci. || Ζεὺς μὲν Q. || ἁλιμοιρηέντων

C{D} Ven. B, Mose. 2, Schol. B.

we only get by an artificial and far-
fetched conceit what we are told in direct
words by swecconaréc, which is therefore
to be preferred.

176. €pUccecea,
on H 36.
Bint (or Bin, which is the same
thing) is the reading of all Mss., so far
as we know; but there can be little
doubt that Bekker is right in restoring
Bins from ¢ 126 (176=¢@ 125), relaxed
his effort. This is the common
constr. of μεθίημι used intransitively ;
it is also found with infin. (N 234, Ψ
1534), part. (Ὡ 48), and absolutely (A 516
ete.), but never with dat. We may
indeed translate ‘relaxed in his effort,’
but this does not make the constr. more
probable.

179. € is more likely to have been
wrongly omitted than wrongly inserted.
The double ace. is normal : ; 2. v 270.

for the fut. see note

ΤῈ

trom

180-81, see A 525-26.
183 = N 619.
185, naicin, plur. because the state-

ment is general; so ἀλόχοισι Διός 499
(H. Ο. § 170). éxreraém, the dat. is
to be preferred to the acc. as it stands
in a clause independent of the infin.
ἐριζέμεναι, and is no part of the pre-
dication. It therefore follows the constr.
of τοι (H. Gt. § 240).

186. pAcea, imperf. (or aor.?), the
present being φῆισθα (so ξ 149), according
to the grammarians ; but this is probably
mere fancy. Tyrannio wrote φήσθα as
pres., φῆσθα asimperf. Either tense suits
equally well. γένος. is to be taken by
itself, by race, the genitives being directly
dependent upon ἔμμεναι, and so ΓΕΝΕΗ͂Ν
in the next line (cf. = 113, ὁ 225).

190, τῶ, therefore Ἃ am stronger than
thou ; for) as Zeus is stronger than rivers,
the children of Zeus are stronger than the
children of rivers (Platt in J. P. xxiii.

213). The alternative is to write τῶι
as rel., by what (by how much) Zeus is

greater than rivers, (by so much) the
offspring of Z. is greater than a river's
(offspring). For this use cf. Plato

IAIAAOC Φ (xx!) 399

, ’ 4 ‘ r ,
κρείσσων ὃ αὗτε Διὸς γενεὴ ποταμοῖο τέτυκται.
καὶ γὰρ σοὶ ποταμός γε πάρα μέγας, εἰ δύναταί τι
ral > ᾽ >? » \ r / /

χραισμεῖν: ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἔστι Διὶ Κρονίωνι μάχεσθαι,

A > \ / , fw , /
τῶι οὐδὲ κρείων ᾿Αχελώϊος ἰσοφαρίζει,
οὐδὲ βαθυρρείταο μέγα σθένος ᾿Ωκεανοῖο, 195
ἐξ οὗ περ πάντες ποταμοὶ καὶ πᾶσα θάλασσα
καὶ πᾶσαι κρῆναι καὶ φρείατα μακρὰ νάουσιν"
ἀλλὰ καὶ ὃς δείδοικε Διὸς μεγάλοιο κεραυνὸν
δεινήν τε βροντήν, ὅτ᾽ ἀπ᾽ οὐρανόθεν σμαραγήσηι."

ἢ pa καὶ ἐκ κρημνοῖο ἐρύσσατο χάλκεον ἔγχος, 200
A \ > > / a ΕῚ \ / a > 7
τὸν δὲ κατ᾽ αὐτόθι λεῖπεν, ἐπεὶ φίλον ἦτορ ἀπηύρα,

/ κ᾿ ff / / / ef
κείμενον ἐν ψαμάθοισι, δίαινε δέ μιν μέλαν ὕδωρ.

Ν \ Tae > / / \ 5 / ΕῚ /
Tov μὲν ap ἐγχέλυές τε Kal ἰχθύες ἀμφεπένοντο,

.

191. δ᾽ om. Ar. {CD} [6].
194. οὐδὲ : δ᾽ οὐδὲ Vr. A:
(A supr.) PR.
Néouci Cant. 198. 6c: ὡς DQU.
200. χάλκεον : SuBpwioNn L.
{TON : ὃν C. || ap’ . . δημὸν om. ΟἹ.

192. μέγας πάρα G.
οὔτε (Ar. ?) HPR.
196. ndcai te edAaccai Vr. A.

Ti: TOMS: Tic. Vr. ἃ.
195 om. Zen. || οὐδὲ : οὔτε Ar.
197. φρέατα D (Q supr.).

199. cuaparHcer CRS Mor. Bar. Vr. A.
201. Gnovpa Par. suppl. grec. 144. 203.

Theaet. 179 D τῶι τοι μᾶλλον σκεπτέον by
so much the more must you consider,
and ὅσωι with comparatives throughout
Greek. But this leaves the difficulty
that the forward reference of τῶι, cor-
relating two clauses, is against the rule
for the rel. use of ὁ (see H. G. ὃ 262).
ἁλιμυρήεις, only here and ε 460: in the
latter case it has a more special and
appropriate sense, for it is used of the
mouth of a river where it ‘murmurs
against the brine.’

191. ποταμοῖο, i.e. the offspring of a
river; brachylogy as P 51 ete. For
ὃ᾽ autre Ar. read αὖτε, which may indicate
that he took τῶι as a relative co-ordinat-
ing the clauses; or that αὖτε is itself
a conjunction=autem answering to μέν
as A 237, I 241, etc.

192. πάρα would seem to indicate that
the river meant is the Skamandros ;
though from the context it should rather
be the Axios.

194. ᾿Αχελώϊος, mentioned only here
in H. (also Hesiod, Theog. 340), that of
Q 616 being quite different. As the
only large river of S. Greece, and also
probably from its connexion with Dodona,
it was regarded with special veneration ;
διὸ καὶ πᾶν ὕδωρ τῆι τούτου προσηγορίαι
καλεῖται (Schol.), ἃ fact of which the
Lexica will furnish the examples. The

worship of Acheloos was wide-spread ;
see Paus. i. 41. 2 with Frazer’s note.
icopapizei, Bentley conj. ἀντιφερίζει on
account of the F; Dawes ᾿Αχελῶος,
which is open to the same objection
as Tirapnody in B 751, a curiously
similar case. But as the passage is not
certainly ancient no change need be
made.

195. Ar. read οὔτε for οὐϑέ, and there-
fore must have done the same in the
preceding line; Zen. omitted 195 al-
together, and therefore must have had
οὐδέ in 194. There can be no doubt
as to the superior force of οὐδέ, and it
is notclear why Ar. did not admit it.
His objection to Zen.’s athetesis—that in
H. Okeanos, not Acheloos, is the parent
of rivers—is quite sufficient to save one
of the most majestic lines ever written.

199. cuaparHcHi may refer either to
light or sound ; see on B 463.

203. Gugenénonto, attended to hiin ;
an ironical expression as Ψ 184, the word
being properly used of tending a wounded
man ; A 220, If 28. The eels are sepa-
rated from the fish because they were
regarded as snakes, as indeed the name
shews (if conn. with ἔχιδνα, ἔχις, Curt.
Et. no. 172). The explanation of the
Schol. ‘eels and other fishes’ is therefore
wrong. (So also 353.)

400

IAIAAOC ® (xx!)

/ / :
δημὸν ἐρεπτόμενοι ἐπινεφρίδιον κείροντες

» \ e lo “ «> \ , Ὁ 7
αὐτὰρ ὁ βῆ p ἰέναι μετὰ Ilavovas ἱπποκορυστᾶς,

τε ἡ \ δ oBnato δινήεντα
οἵ ῥ᾽ ἔτι πὰρ ποταμὸν πεφοβὴ ᾿

\ , \ rn ne: /
ὡς εἶδον τὸν ἄριστον ἐνὶ κρατερὴν υσμινὴν
, » “ mA \ ” 3 / Ἶ
χέρσ᾽ ὕπο 1Ἰ]ηλεΐδαο καὶ ἄορι ἶφι δαμέντα. ᾿
Z , ἢ " ΄
ἔνθ᾽ ἕλε Θερσίλοχόν τε Μύδωνά τε Αστύπυλον τε

f Ν A or IN? 2 i Ά
Μνῆσόν τε Θρασίον τε καὶ ΔΑἴνιον ἠδ᾽ ᾿Οφελέστην
, v / τῚ \ 5 ͵ὔ
νύ κ᾽ ἔτι πλέονας κτάνε Παίονας ὠκὺς Ἀχιλλεὺς,

και

᾽

210

εἰ μὴ χωσάμενος προσέφη ποταμὸς βαθυδίνης,

, ΓΙ > , / > > 7 if ;
ἀνέρι εἰσάμενος, βαθέης δ᾽ ἐκφθέγξατο δίνης"
a 5 lal \ Ν ᾿ς 9 c/s
** ay Ἀχιλεῦ, περὶ μὲν κρατέεις, περί ὃ αἴσυλα ῥέζεις

᾽ A > / \ =) / 9
ἀνδρῶν" αἰεὶ yap τοι ἀμύνουσιν θεοὶ αὐτοί. 215

lal » an ͵ 3 7]
εἴ τοι Τρῶας ἔδωκε Kpovov παῖς πάντας ὀλέσσαι,
᾽ μ᾽ > / f / sg Η
ἐξ ἐμέθεν γ᾽ ἐλάσας πεδίον κάτα μέρμερα ῥέζε

, \ / , > \ eel)
πλήθει yap δή μοι νεκύων ἐρατεινὰ ῥέεθρα,

204. κείραντες , (swpr. ON).
ἕλετ᾽ ὁρείλοχον Vr. b. ἀςτύπαλόν
zaneoc Syr. (supr. moTauoc nian. 2).
Amm. )
ἐφθέγξατο {?.

205. p om. APRU Ambr. Ven. B.
J: ἀςτύλοχόν ().
213. eidéuenoc Ainbr., yp. A:
δ᾽ om. PR and ap. Did. (Ar. ἢ). || €kpeérzato PR Ambr.: ἐκφέγξατο L:
216. ἤτοι (): εἴ cor G.

209.
212. moTauoc:
Ar. διχῶς

217. Γ᾽ ἐλάςας Ar. Q: éAdcac JU:

neAdcac τινές (Did.), Aph. (Amm.), ‘ Vat. 26.’ |; ῥέξε ΗἸῷ : ῥέξαι H?: ῥέζειν DU

Par. a! f.

204. The relation of the two participles
is obscure; neither seems sufficiently
different from the other to be subor-
dinated in the usual way, as the special
to the general. κείρειν in A 560 (ὄνος
κ. εἰσελθὼν βαθὺ λήϊον) is hardly to be
further distinguished from ἐρέπτεσθαι
(λωτὸν ἐρεπτόμενοι) than ‘biting’ from
‘munching.’ Thus it is hard to say
which verb here defines the other. We
can only translate feeding on the fat by
biting i or the like. ἐπινεφρίϑιον also
is not like an Epic word. It shews an
accurate knowledge of nature, however,
as the fat in this spot seems to be a
particular delicacy to carnivora ; the New
Zealand parrots kill sheep by sitting on
their backs and biting it out, and the
word acquires a special significance when
we find that the kidneys are regarded as
the centre of life not only by Australian
cannibals, but by the Semitic nations
(‘the fat of the kidneys is particularly
selected by the Arabs, and by most
savages, as the special seat of life’
Robertson Smith quoted by Platt in J. P.
x1x. 46, q.v.).

206. nepoBHato, were in (a state of)

218. ἐρατεινὰ : αἰπεινὰ Vi. A.

yout. These Paionians have not been
mentioned before ; itis to be presumed
that they were with their leader Astero-
paios, and were among those who were
driven into the river in 1. 8.

213. ἐκφϑέγξατο, though preserved in
only one family of Mss., is obviously
right. For the constr. compare Ψ 477
κεφαλῆς ἐκδέρκεται dace. No adequate
parallel can be adduced for ἐφθέγξατο
δίνης in the sense spoke from the eddy ;
none of those given in H. Οὐ. ὃ 152, is
quite like this. Hence most edd. have
followed Isaac Casaubon in reading the
compound. Ar, seems to have omitted
Θ᾽ and presumably put a colon at the
end of 212, thus producing a harsh
asyndeton, and unduly separating προσ-
έφη from the speech which it introduces.
Heyne suspects the line, not without
reason, ‘quod otiosus est, et quod in fine
ingrata repetitio est: βαθυδίνης et δίνης.᾽

215. ἀνδρῶν, with περί, a construction
elsewhere found only in the phrase περὶ
πάντων (I 38, etc.). The position of
ἀνδρῶν is awkward enough to suggest
that the line is interpolated as a gloss on
περί. atcuda, T 202.

==

IAIAAOC Φ (xx)

401

» / / / / er » “ -
οὐδέ τί πηι δύναμαι προχέειν ῥόον εἰς ἅλα δῖαν

/ if \ \
OTEWOMEVOS νεκύεσσι, σὺ δὲ
> > v \ \ » »
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε δὴ καὶ ἔασον" ἄγη

κτείνεις ἀϊδήλως. 220
ἈΦ Α ’ 7 Wt
μ᾽ ἔχει, ὄρχαμε λαῶν.

τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς:
“ ἔσται ταῦτα, Σκάμανδρε διοτρεφές, ὡς σὺ κελεύεις.
Τρῶας δ᾽ οὐ πρὶν λήξω ὑπερφιάλους ἐναρίζων,
πρὶν ἔλσαι κατὰ ἄστυ καὶ “Extope πειρηθῆναι 225

> / v / Pd ” > \ / 3»
ἀντιβίην: ἢ κέν με δαμάσσεται ἤ κεν ἐγὼ τόν.

ἃ EN r , ἄν Τῇ , 53
ὡς εἰπὼν Τρώεσσιν ἐπέσσυτο δαίμονι ἶσος.

καὶ τότ᾽ ᾿Απόλλωνα προσέφη ποταμὸς βαθυδίνης"

“@) πόποι, ἀργυρότοξε, Διὸς

/
τέκος, οὐ σύ γε βουλὰς

/ ¢ / >
εἰρύσαο Kpoviwvos, 6 Tot μάλα πόλλ᾽ ἐπέτελλε 230

223. κάμανοδρε LR Harl. a: yp. καὶ
ἐλάςαι ()S Harl. a.
Jemma.

220. cTeinduenoc, crowded, as ce 219
στείνοντο δὲ σηκοὶ ἀρνῶν ἠδ᾽ ἐρίφων.
ἀϊϑήλως, destroyingly, see on B 318.

221. Schol. IT’ mentions a reading
ἕασον, supposed to mean sate thyself ;
ef. T 402. There seems to have been a
prejudice against the use of édw without
a following infinitive ; see 2 558.

223. It is not easy tosay what Achilles
promises in ἔσται ταῦτα. Skamandros
has asked him to drive the victims away
out of his bed. It has been suggested
that this is a ruse on the river’s part in
order to get Achilles into his power.
Achilles falls into the trap, promises to
do what he is asked, and in 227, 233
leaps into the river, not in order to slay
the Trojans who are there, but to drive
them out into the plain. This un-
doubtedly gives a dramatic and con-
sistent scene ; but it involves reading a
great deal into the text, as we should cer-
tainly have expected to have been warned
expressly of the god’s deceit. The
phrase of 227 also would lead us to sup-
pose that Achilles was again slaying the
Trojans, not merely clearing the river.
As an alternative we may suppose that the
River’s whole speech is ironical—he bids
Achilles in 217 do what is obviously
impossible (Monro). Achilles meets irony
with irony, and while answering ‘I will
do as you bid,’ proceeds to do precisely
the reverse, adding mockingly ‘I will
do it—when I have them all cooped up
in the city.’ But this also makes severe

VOL. II ᾿

226. εἴ κέν με 10.

225. ἔλςαι :
230. εἰρύςας U: ἐφράςαο Amin. in

ckGuanope (as text) P.

demands upon a hearer’s imagination,
and the real explanation must be sought
elsewhere (see Introduction).

225. πειρηθῆναι ἀντιβίην as Εἰ 220 ;
the dat. Ἕκτορι goes with ἀντιβίην as
with ἀντίος T 422, πειρηθῆναι meaning
‘to try conclusions,’ cf. Ψ 553.

226. With the punctuation and accent-
uation of the text ἢ... ἢ give the two
alternatives paratactically, as A 410, q.v.
It is possible to put a comma after ἀντι-
βίην and take the #-clauses as subordi-
nate indirect questions, ‘to try whether

. or.’ In this case we must according
to the rule write ἢ for the second #
(H. G. §§ 340-41). The sense in that
case is rather weaker than with the
text.

229. This speech has been generally
condemned, on the ground that Apollo
is not present to hear the appeal, and
that as a matter of fact it remains en-
tirely fruitless and unnoticed. But as
a mere expression of reproach, not as a
ery for aid, it is by no means out of
place, and no further effects would be
expected: from it. It is true that we
know nothing of any such commands of
Zeus as are spoken of in 230; but this
may be regarded as a passionate outburst
in which the exact presentation of fact
is not poetically indispensable. It is
sufficient that Zeus should have per-
mitted (and encouraged) Apollo to help
the Trojans for an angry partisan to take
it as a command.

D

409 IAIAAOC Φ (χὴ

Τρωσὶ παρεστάμεναι καὶ ἀμύνειν, εἰς ὅ κεν ἔλθηι
δείελος ὀψὲ δύων, σκιάσηι δ᾽ ἐρίβωλον ἄρουραν.

ἢ, καὶ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς μὲν δουρικλυτὸς evOope μέσσωι
κρημνοῦ ἀπαΐξας, ὁ δ᾽ ἐπέσσυτο οἴδματι θύων, ;
πάντα δ᾽ ὄρινε ῥέεθρα κυκώμενος, ὦσε δὲ νεκροὺς 285
πολλούς, οἵ pa κατ᾽ αὐτὸν ἔσαν ἅλις, ods κτάν Ἀχιλλεύς"
τοὺς ἔκβαλλε θύραζε, μεμυκὼς ἠύτε ταῦρος,
χέρσονδε" ζωοὺς δὲ σάω κατὰ καλὰ ῥέεθρα,
κρύπτων ἐν δίνηισι βαθείηισιν μεγάληισι.
δεινὸν δ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆα κυκώμενον ἵστατο κῦμα,
ὥθει δ᾽ ἐν σάκεϊ πίπτων ῥόος, οὐδὲ πόδεσσιν
ὁ δὲ πτελέην ἕλε χερσὶν

240

εἶχε στηρίξασθαι.
> f ΄ ς δ᾽ 2 € Yn > a
εὐφυέα μεγάλην: ἡ δ᾽ ἐκ ῥιζῶν ἐρυποῦσα

\ .“ a 2 / δὲ λὰ es 6
κρημνὸν ἅπαντα διῶσεν, ἐπέσχε δὲ καλὰ ρέεθρα

rn 4 / τ > Ν

ὄζοισιν πυκινοῖσι, γεφύρωσεν δέ μιν αὐτὸν

- lal e 4 > /
εἴσω πᾶσ᾽ ἐριποῦσ᾽" ὁ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐκ δίνης avopovaas

la /

ni€ev πεδίοιο ποσὶ κραιπνοῖσι πέτεσθαι,

231. napicrauenai ACGJQT Ven. B. || ἔλθοι C Vr. A. 232. cxiacer DQ).
234. ἐπαΐξας (A supr.) QS Mor. Bar.: tnatzac PR Harl. a: dnatccon G, yp. X. ||

evion AT Amm. 236. €caN ἅλις J Harl. a, Mosc. 2: ἅλις Ecan ©. 237.
ἔκβαλλε : ἐν ἄλλωι ἐξῆγε A. 239 om. C. 240. κῦμα: ῥεῦμα 5. 242.

εἶχε: εἴα PR Par. h, yp. Par. a. || «τηρίζεεθαι P. || yp. καὶ εἶχε cTHpizaceai,
iv’ Fu οὐδὲ τοῖς ποσὶν εἶχε δύναμιν ὁ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς ὥστε στῆναι Schol. PX. || ἕλε : ἔχε Η“".
244, ἀπέςχε Q. 245. μιν αὐτὸν : ἐν ἄλλωι κέλευθον A. 246. ἐκ:
ἐν Vr. A. |) δίνης Ar. (Did.: διχῶς An.) Ὡ : λίμνης DHPRT Ven. B Par. de fj

yp. Harl.a: τινὲς ῥιπῆς Sch. T.

241. πεδίοιο Ar. 2: medionde Amm., yp. A. ||

nétaceai King’s: @épeceai Harl. a swpr. and ἐν ἄλλωι A.

232. deteAoc, evening (cf. note on 111),
perhaps properly the evening star, or
the setting sun—the epithet ὀψὲ δύων
seems to imply something of the sort,
cf. ὀψὲ δύοντα Bowrny, ε 272. In p 606
we have δείελον juap=declining day.
‘The word may even be 6eF-eXov from
δύω (Brugmann); but this is far from
clear.

236, see 344. ἔςαν ἅλις, though poorly
supported, must be preferred to the vulg.
ἅλις ἔσαν, as the F of βάλις is hardly
ever neglected (P 54, where see note,
is the only other case). Brandreth conj.
αὐτά for αὐτόν.

237. μεμυκὼς ἠύτε ταῦρος probably
explains the common personification of
rivers in the form of bulls.

238. xépcoc is elsewhere used only of
the shore of the sea, not of a river (so
ψάμαθος is always sea-sand except 202,
319). cdoo, as Π 363.

239. Forasimilar miraculous hiding in
a river cf. \ 244, with M. and R.’s note.

242. εἶχε, Fecxe Brandreth, ef. H 217,
+520. The variant εἴα is not acceptable
as the contraction cannot be resolved.

243. ἡ δ᾽ ἐκ ῥιζῶν, ἐκ ῥιζάων δ᾽ van L.,
to avoid the contraction.

245. τεφύρωςεν, perhaps rather dan-
med than bridged in our sense ; see note
on E 89. The latter meaning is, how-
ever, evidently admissible here. αὐτόν,
the very river, seems to imply ‘wide
though it was.’

246. δίνης rather than λίμνης because
the latter implies a large open sheet of
water ; hence it is properly used in 317
of the inundation covering the plain, but
not here while the river is still within its
banks.

247, nedioio is to be taken with πέ-
τεσθαι, Hitev πέτεσθαι being like βῆ ἰέναι,
ete.

IAIAAOC Φ (xx!) 403

s Os ’ Ν , κ᾿ oe? >» » 4. δ
δείσας. οὐδέ τ᾽ ἔληγε θεὸς μέγας, ὦρτο ὃ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῶι
/ / ,ὔ
ἀκροκελαινιόων, ἵνα μιν παύσειε πόνοιο
»“" -“" \ ιν
δῖον ᾿Αχιλλῆα, Τρώεσσι δὲ λοιγὸν ἀλάλκοι. 250
ξ΄ > \ ,
Πηλεΐδης δ᾽ ἀπόρουσεν, ὅσον τ᾽ ἐπὶ δουρὸς ἐρωή,
lal > » / fal -
αἰετοῦ οἴματ᾽ ἔχων μέλανος τοῦ θηρητῆρος,
, f lal
ὅς θ᾽ ἅμα κάρτιστός TE καὶ WKLOTOS πετεηνῶν"
-“ Das \ Mw » Ἶ ‘3 \ \
τῶι ἐϊκὼς Hikev, ἐπὶ στήθεσσι δὲ χαλκὸς

σμερδαλέον κονάβιξεν: ὕπαιθα δὲ τοῖο λιασθεὶς 255

φεῦγ᾽, ὁ δ᾽ ὄπισθε ῥέων ἕπετο μεγάλωι ὀρυμαγδῶι.

248. μέγας θεὸς {D}GPQR Harl. b. || αὐτῶι : αὐτὸν {CD}JU Syr. 249.
πόνοιο Ar. Ὡ : φόνοιο Aph. Syr. 250 om. Ht. 251. éndpoucen (). ἐρωὴν

252. otuar Ar. 2:

ADGJU Lips.

Amma. 3). 254. «τήϑεςφι 1).

249. ἀκροκελαινιόων, dz. λεγ., with
black surface. For the rest of the couplet
ef. 137-38. For uin Bentley conj. μέν,
but this is needless, cf. wy. . Ναυσικάαν,
ᾧ 48, and the common use of ὁ as a
pronoun in apposition with ἃ proper
name. Still the redundant pronoun
suggests that 250 has been interpolated
from 138.

251. €pwH, the well supported ἐρωήν
may be defended bye 321 τὸ μὲν ἄμμες
ἐΐσκομεν εἰσορόωντες ὅσσόν θ᾽ ἱστὸν νηός,
325 ὅσον τ᾽ ὄργυιαν ἐγὼν ἀπέκοψα, κ 113
γυναῖκα εὗρον ὅσην τ᾽ ὄρεος κορυφήν, 167
πεῖσμα δ᾽ ὅσον τ᾽ ὄργυιαν πλεξάμενος.
These differ, however, either in having
the object of the verb in the principal
clause expressed in the ace., which makes
the attraction explicable, or in the
relative clause being itself the object of
a transitive verb (ι 325). As neither of
these conditions is present here, it is
simpler to supply γίνεται or ἐστίν, as so
often with relatives (H. α΄. ὃ 271); ef. Ὁ
358 where the same phrase has γίνεται
expressed (possibly, however, by an in-
terpolator). So also K 351, Ψ 327. It
is very probable that the acc. is a mere
error due to the preceding ἐπί, as though
=as much as over a spear-cast. But
all Homeric analogy is in favour of
joining ὅσον éri=éd ὅσον, see Τ' 12,
H 451, O 358, Ψ 251. The accent is
not thrown back, because of the inter-
posed 7’.

252. οἴματα, see note on Θ 349; here
Philetas read ὄμματα. τοῦ eHpHTApoc,
the great hunter. Cf. Q 316 μορφνὸν
θηρητῆρ᾽ ὃν καὶ περκνὸν καλέουσιν. The
use of the article is late. Perhaps for

Suuar’ Philetas. |
μέλανός Tou Ar.?: μελανόστου Aristotle Par. e:
256. dpuruada: GIHJPR: ἀλαλητῶ OC.

uéXanoc τοῦ Herod. :
τινὲς μελανόςςου Sch. T (and

this reason Ar. is said by Eust. to have
read μέλανός του, a certain black hunter
—which is so patently un-Homeric as to
deserve no credence. In fact from a
very imperfect schol. U it seems more
likely that Ar. opposed this reading on
the ground that τοῦ for rev is not
Homeric. Aristotle is said to have read
μελανόστου, black-boned—aryvoet δὲ ὡς οὐ
δεῖ ἀπὸ τῶν ἀφανῶν ποιεῖσθαι τὰ ἐπίθετα,
Schol. T. It may be added that the
contracted form is not Homeric, and
the epithet is zoologically false. From
Porphyrios on 2 315 it seems probable,
however, that this theory is due not
to Aristotle but to Demokritos. Others
(perhaps Philetas) read μελανόσσου, black-
eyed, which is better. But still more
plausible is Ahren’s conj. μελανόρσου,
black-tailed. This at once recalls the
famous passage of Aischylos about the
two eagles ὁ κελαινὸς 6 τ᾽ ἐξόπιν apyaus.
Aristotle himself distinguishes (H. A.
ix. 32) the γνήσιος as the largest eagle,
but the μελαναίετος or λαγωφόνος as
the ‘swiftest and strongest.’ So also
Porph. on Q 315 εἴωθε δὲ καὶ ὁ ᾿Αρχί-
λοχος μελάμπνγον τοῦτον τὸν ἀετὸν καλεῖν,
“un τευ μελαμπύγου τύχηις.᾽᾿ It seems,
however, that it is not possible confi-
dently to appropriate these epithets to
any of the rather numerous species of
eagles found in Greece (Thompson, Gloss,
S.V. ἀετός).

254, ἐϊκώς only here in the masc.,
though it is the old form, and the
fem. FeFixvia is common. In ἐοικώς the
strong stem is due to the analogy of the
indicative. G. Meyer, Gr. ὃ 552, H. G.
§ 26, 2.

404 IAIAAOC Φ (xx1)

ὡς 8. ὅτ᾽ ἀνὴρ ὀχετηγὸς ἀπὸ κρήνης μελανύδρου

ἀμ φυτὰ καὶ κήπους ὕδατι ῥόον ρος

χερσὶ μάκελλαν ἔχων ἀμάρης ἐξ ἔχματά βάλλων"

τοῦ μέν τε προρέοντος ὑπὸ ψηφῖδες ἅπασαι ᾿ 260
ὀχλεῦνται" τὸ δέ τ᾿ ὦκα κατειβόμενον κεχαρύζει

χώρωι ἔνι προαλεῖ, φθάνει δέ τε καὶ Tov ἀν τοὶ

ὡς αἰεὶ ᾿Αχιλῆα κιχήσατο κῦμα ῥόοιο

καὶ λαιψηρὸν ἐόντα" θεοὶ δέ τε φέρτεροι ἀνδρῶν.

ὁσσάκι δ᾽ ὁρμήσειε ποδάρκης δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεὺς 265
στῆναι ἐναντίβιον καὶ γνώμεναι εἴ μεν ἅπαντες

ἀθάνατοι φοβέουσι, τοὶ οὐρανὸν εὐρὺν ἔχουσι,

τοσσάκι μιν μέγα κῦμα διιπετέος ποταμοῖο

Trae ὥμους καθύπερθεν: ὁ δ᾽ ὑψόσε ποσσὶν ἐπήδα

θυμῶι ἀνιάξων: ποταμὸς δ᾽ ὑπὸ γούνατ᾽ ἐδάμνα 270
λάβρος ὕπαιθα ῥέων, κονίην δ᾽ ὑπέρεπτε ποδοῖιν.

Πηλείδης δ᾽ ὥιμωξεν ἰδὼν εἰς οὐρανὸν εὐρύν"

«Ζεῦ πάτερ, ὡς οὔ τίς με θεῶν ἐλεεινὸν ὑπέστη

258. au: an H Cant. Vr. A. || ὕϑατος GPS Syr. || ἀγεμονεύει CGPQRS :
259. κκάκελλαν : dikeAAan Heliodoros (or Duris ? ἡδροδοῦρις,
260. Te: τοι HR. || mpoppéontoc ἔνια τῶν ἀντι-

262. φθανέει Zen. Lysanias Duris. 263. dei
271. ὑπέριπτε PR: yp.

Hreuonevoi Vr. A.
Sch. U). || ἐξ : ὃ εξ Syr.
γράφων (with synizesis) Eust.
{C}H. 265. ὁρμήςειε : yp. καὶ oiurcere Did.
Unépenten ἀντὶ τοῦ ἀφήρπαζεν, Sch. P.

257. The practice of irrigation does
not seem to be elsewhere alluded to in
H., unless possibly in ἡ 129f. The
simile is particularly vivid and striking.

258. ὕϑατι ῥόον ἡγεμονεύηι, on the
analogy of ὁδὸν ἡγεμονεύειν τινί, e.g. ὦ
225 (the same construction is found with
ἡγεῖσθαι also, see Lex.). Good authorities
have ὕδατος, but the gen. cannot be
used with the ace. ; ἡγεμονεύειν τινός is
another thing.

259. ἔχματα, impediments, see % 410.
ἔχων is subordinate to βάλλων, meaning
no more than with a mattock in his hand.

260. τοῦ μὲν. . τὸ δέ, the subject
is the same in both clauses, and there is
no opposition even of the verbs. Thus
the particles do not really correspond as
in later Greek, μέν as often in H. merely
emphasizing the preceding word, here
marking the change of subject from ἀνήρ.
So far from any opposition being implied,
the repeated τε actually points out the
three clauses in 260-62 as being parallel
and corresponding, δέ being in each case
purely continuative.

262. προαλεῖ, evidently sloping; the
origin of the word is unknown, and it
does not recur before Ap. Rhod. φθάνει,
the α is always long in H. (as it stands
for p@av-F-) ; see notes on I 506, K 346,
H. G.§ 47. @avée, the reading of Zen.
and others, was presumably taken as a
collateral present stem, admitting the
more familiar @ of Attic. τὸν ἄγοντα,
the man who is leading it, a very rare
use of the article in H., see note on T°
138.—The Duris who is quoted by Schol.
U here (and perhaps on 259) is not else-
where known as a Homeric critic.

269. maze, beat wpon, root may of
πληγ-ἡ (cf. πλήσσω ete.) ; in this sense
only here, M 285, and perhaps ε 389.
It is just possible to take it here to
mean drove aside, the usual sense, but
the use of ὥμους makes this unlikely.

273. wc, exclamative, ‘to think that!’
(Monro), as with ὄφελον. So also mr 364
ὡς τόνδ᾽ ἄνδρα θεοὶ κακότητος ἔλυσαν.
This seems to be the only case where
it is used in a negative sentence (with
the possible exception of 8 233). The

IAIAAOC Φ (χχὴ 405

ἐκ ποταμοῖο σαῶσαι" ἔπειτα δὲ καί τι πάθοιμι.
» ᾽ ” , ‘ » ᾽ ΄ ΕῚ
ἄλλος δ᾽ οὔ τίς μοι τόσον αἴτιος Οὐρανιώνων, 275
δ / »
ἀλλὰ φίλη μήτηρ, ἥ με ψεύδεσσιν ἔθελγεν,
ἥ μ᾽ ἔφατο Τρώων ὑπὸ τείχεϊ θωρηκτάων
lal ,ὔ

λαιψηροῖς ὀλέεσθαι ᾿Απόλλωνος βελέεσσιν.
ὥς p oper “κτωρ κτεῖναι, ὃς ἐνθάδε γ᾽ ἔτραφ᾽ ἄριστος"

lol , > \ \ » > > \ / ? /
τῶ κ᾽ ἀγαθὸς μὲν ἔπεφν᾽, ἀγαθὸν δέ Kev ἐξενάριξε, 280
νῦν δέ με λευγαλέων θανάτωι εἵμαρτο ἁλῶναι
> / > b] 4 lal ΄ a /
ἐρχθέντ᾽ ἐν μεγάλωι ποταμῶι, ὡς παῖδα συφορβόν,
ὅν ῥά T ἔναυλος ἀποέρσηι χειμῶνι TEPaVTA.”

ὡς φάτο, τῶι δὲ μάλ᾽ ὦκα Ἰ]οσειδάων καὶ ᾿Αθήνη

3. / 3 5 oh. nT

στήτην ἐγγὺς ἰόντε, δέμας δ᾽ ἄνδρεσσιν ἐΐκτην, 285

\ \ “ ΄ > , Sgt oy
χειρὶ δὲ χεῖρα λαβόντες ἐπιστώσαντ ἐπέεσσι.

τοῖσι δὲ μύθων ἦρχε !ΙΠοσειδάων ἐνοσίχθων"

Φι ὧν

279. au. om. J. ἐνθάδε γ᾽ ἔτραφ᾽ AD Mor. yp. X (ἐτράφ᾽ -- ἐτράφη Herod.) :

ἐνθάδ᾽ ἐτράφ᾽ I’: ἐνθάδε τέτραφ᾽ (2, ἐν ἄλλωι A.
281. ἁλῶναι : ὁλέεθαι H (and Dem. Ixion in ε 312).

εἰρχϑέντ᾽ Mass. :
Schol. Ὁ.
285. ἔϊκτον Vr. b.

280. ἀγαθὸν... ἀγαθὸς J Eust.
282. ῥεχϑέντ᾽ Par. h:

εἰλϑέντ᾽ Krates: ἐρϑέντ᾽ Alexion. || τινὲς ἐρχϑέντες μεγάλωι
283. ἀποέρςει (-ερςεῖ) CGPR.

284. TOI: τῷ C, yp. X: τοῦ Q.

predicate also generally contains an ad-
jective or adverb with which ὡς might
be taken. See note on = 294.

274. τι mdeow seems to be used in
the familiar Attic sense, perish: ‘if I
be but saved from shameful death by
drowning, then let come what may.’
Cf. A 470 δείδω μή τι πάθηισιν, and for
the thought P 647 ἐν δὲ φάει καὶ ὄλεσσον.

276. ἀλλά, a very natural change in
the form of the sentence for ὅσον. cf.
340, Z 335-36, ete.

278. Compare Hector’s dying prophecy
in X 359-60. The slight discrepancy
from 113 is hardly worth notice. Cf.
Soph. Phil. 334-36 NE. τέθνηκεν (᾿ Αχιλ-
λεύς), ἀνδρὸς οὐδενός, θεοῦ δ᾽ ὕπο, τοξευτός,
ὡς λέγουσιν, ἐκ Φοίβου δαμείς. PI. ἀλλ᾽
εὐγενὴς μὲν ὁ. κτανών τε χὠ θανών, where
the last line seems to be ἃ reminiscence
of 280 below.

279. τ᾿ here looks like a metrical
stop-gap; in the bucolic diaeresis it
might be omitted. There is no objection
to the vulg. τέτραφ᾽, except that it is
not elsewhere found; see, however, Ψ
348. For the intrans. érpadgoy cf. B 661.
Herod. accented ἐτράφ᾽ for ἐτράφη, but
such an elision is quite impossible.

282. The position of ac before a sub-
stantive without a finite verb, instead of
after it (ὥς), is very rare. The simile is
clearly taken from the practice of send-
ing swine to fatten in the oak-woods on
the mountains in autumn, and driving
them home as winter comes on ; wvidus
hiberna venit de glande Menalcas, Virg.
HR 3 ΔῸΣ ᾿

283. ἔναυλος, a gully, mountain
torrent. ἀποέρςηι, see on Z 348, and
cf. 329 below. According to the scholia
on the latter passage the verb is Kyprian.
For the lengthening of the -o- cf. ἀπο-
Ferwy T 35. It is generally considered
that Fep is the strong form of the root
of which the weak is Fpa in ἀπουράς
(amro-Fpa-s), etc. But the sense sweep so
exactly suits the sigmatic forms that it
is hard to separate them from Lat. verro
(root vers-); in that case ἀπουράς must
be distinct in origin, as there is a clear
difference in meaning.

287. τοῖσι is evidently due to a
mechanical reminiscence of a favourite
line (H 445, ete.) ; it is not appropriate
here, as Poseidon speaks to Achilles only.
‘Ammonios’ appropriately compares ε
202; see also ἡ 47.

406 IAIAAOC © (χὴ

3 a} ἈΠ ὦ , , ae. , :
“ἸΠηλεΐδη, ent ap τι λίην TPEE μῆτε τι τάρβει
,ὔ / “ον lal b] / ᾽ /
τοίω yap Tor νῶϊ θεῶν ἐπιταρρόθω exper,
Ξ \ \ \ ᾽ ΤΕΣ
“Ζηνὸς ἐπαινήσαντος, ἐγὼ καὶ Παλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη 290
5 fal / » , 3
ds οὔ τοι ποταμῶι γε δαμήμεναι αἴσιμον ἐστιν,
> ev \ \ / ’ / Η͂
ἀλλ᾽ ὅδε μὲν τάχα λωφήσει, σὺ δὲ εἴσεαι αὐτὸς
> ΄ lal (2 / > » / 5
αὐτάρ τοι πυκινῶς ὑποθησόμεθ᾽, αἴ Ke πίθηαι
\ a e / /
μὴ πρὶν παύειν χεῖρας ομοιίου πολέμοιο,
, / \ bas
πρὶν κατὰ Τλεόφι κλυτὰ τείχεα λαὸν ἐέλσαι 295
la Bl “. / fod 4 Ξ \ δ᾽ “AB 6 ΩΝ ΕῚ ,
Γρωϊκόν, ὅς κε φύγηισι" ov κτορι θυμὸν ἀπούρας
> rn " / i) 5 /
ἂψ' ἐπὶ νῆας ἴμεν: δίδομεν δέ τοι εὖχος ἀρέσθαι.
\ Ω ld ’ ? Vf 5 /
τὼ μὲν ap ὡς εἰπόντε pet ἀθανάτους ἀπεβήτην,
> \ id lal / / e θ “ " 9 IZ
αὐτὰρ ὁ βῆ, μέγα yap pa θεῶν ὠτρυνεν edeTpn,
) Ξ Εν Ὁ ,
ἐς πεδίον: τὸ δὲ πᾶν πλῆθ ὕδατος ἐκχυμένοιο, 800
\ - J 3 lal
πολλὰ δὲ τεύχεα καλὰ δαϊκταμένων αἰζηῶν
fa \ ΄ a "] Ὁ / / > > ὃ
πλῶον καὶ νέκυες. τοῦ δ᾽ ὑψόσε γούνατ᾽ ἐπήδα
\ e sh hea Wwe / 7
πρὸς ῥόον ἀΐσσοντος av ἰθύν, οὐδέ μιν ἴσχεν
\ c / \ / , » 5 /
εὐρὺ ῥέων ποταμός: μέγα yap σθένος ἔμβαλ᾽ ᾿Αθήνη.

288. τρέε: τρέμε T and ap. Sch. U. μήτέ: μὴ δέ J Eust. 289.
ἐπιτάρροθϑοί [) Vr. A. 290 ἀθ. Ar.: 290-92 ἀθ. Seleukos, om. Cret. (Amm.),.
291. aicion Rh. 293. Tol: coi (Asupr.) C Syr. Ven. B: τοι coi D. || Gnoertcoud
D: Unoercow’ (). 294. παύςειν SU: ψαύειν PR. || πτολέμοιο DGHT. 296.
ἀπηύρας Harl. a. 297. ἴμεν : ἵναι P: inai ἀπὸ τοῦ ἰέναι κατὰ συγκοπήν,
Schol. PRX; οἷ Σ 14. 299. wera: μαλα Syr. 800. κεχυμένοιο Ο:
ἐκκεχυμένοιο 0. 808. ἴσχεν Ar. ST Par. e: ἔςχε(ν) Q. 304. μέγα :

μάλα T. || rap: δὲ S.

288. τρέε, shrink, not a mere synonym
of rapBer. “τρεῖ ille qui periculo per-

false archaism, the original locative or
instrumental foree of the termination

cepto vel vero vel ficto, celeri corporis
motu retractat,’ Lehrs.

289. See A 390, E 828.

290 ἀθετεῖται, ὅτι ἀπίθανον els ἀνδρὸς
μορφὴν ὡμοιωμένον λέγειν “ ἐγὼ καὶ Παλ-
λὰς ᾿Αθήνη.᾽᾽ τίς γάρ ἐστιν, οὐ μὴ νοήσηι,
An. But the objection would apply to
the whole scene; Achilles has to know
that the support given him is divine.
The assumption of a human disguise is
sufficiently explained by the danger to
mortal eyes of a god’s appearance in his
proper brightness ; χαλεποὶ δὲ θεοὶ φαί-
νεσθαι ἐναργεῖς Ὑ 131.

291, ὥς, so Cauer: vulg. ὡς, which
may be right but expresses the same con-
nexion of thought less clearly (seeing that).

292. λωφήνςει, will give respite, in H.
only in ¢ 460, but familiar in Attic, both
prose and poetry.

295. ᾿Ιλιόφι seems to be used as a pure
gen. after τείχεα. It must then be a

being forgotten when the functions of
the old locative had been divided among
the other cases. See on Τ' 3, Θ 561
(where ᾿Ιλιόθε πρό may have assisted
the misuse), A 350, and H. G. § 158. It
is more probable, in so late a passage,
that this mistake was made than that we
should restore ’INioo with L. Meyer ; this
would have been changed to ᾽Ιλίου as in
104, q.v. ἐέλςαι with prothetic ε before
F also suggests the mistaken analogy of
ἐελμένος (FeFedu.), but can be paralleled
by ἐεισάμενος, ἐέλδομαι, ἐείκοσι, and others.

296. ὅς Ke, a sort of ‘ whole-and-part’
apposition with λαόν. “Extopi, we should
have expected the ace. as the usual con-
struction with verbs of robbing ; but ef.
P 236.

902. nA@on, were floating, expresses
the violence of the flood which could lift
even armour off the ground. For the
form cf. € 240 τά οἱ πλώοιεν ἐλαφρῶς.

IAIAAOC Φ (χχι)

οὐδὲ Σκάμανδρος ἔληγε τὸ ὃν μένος, ἀλλ᾽ Ere μᾶλλον — 305

΄ fh, / “ ΄
χώετο []ηλεΐωνι, κόρυσσε δὲ κῦμα ῥόοιο

. (ier > / -' , δὲ / , te
ὑψοσ᾽ ἀειρόμενος, Σιμόεντι δὲ κέκλετ᾽ ἀύσας"
6c , / / > / > , ,
φίλε κασίγνητε, σθένος ἀνέρος ἀμφότεροί περ
lal / / , »
σχῶμεν, ἐπεὶ τάχα ἄστυ μέγα Ἰ]ριάμοιο ἄνακτος

>, / La al “ \ ‘ / > /

ἐκπέρσει, Τρῶες δὲ κατὰ μόθον οὐ μενέουσιν. 310
᾽ re | , , ἈΠ 33 / e7

ἀλλ ἐπάμυνε τάχιστα, Kal ἐμπίπληθι ῥέεθρα

« /

ὕδατος ἐκ πηγέων, πάντας δ᾽ ὀρόθυνον ἐναύλους,

[ \ / rf \ ᾽ , \ v

ἵστη δὲ μέγα κῦμα, πολὺν δ᾽ ὀρυμαγδὸν ὄρινε

φιτρῶν καὶ λάων, ἵνα παύσομεν ἄγριον ἄνδρα,

A \ lal ’ὔ / , oe 3 -“ εν
ὃς δὴ νῦν κρατέει, μέμονεν δ᾽ ὅ γε ἶσα θεοῖσι. 315
, » /
φημὶ yap οὔτε βίην χραισμησέμεν οὔτέ τι εἶδος
vv \ / / s / / /
οὔτε τὰ τεύχεα καλά, τά που μάλα νειόθι λίμνης
/ > Ψ > >» ἴω / / J \
κείσεθ᾽ ὑπ᾽ ἰλῦος κεκαλυμμένα: Kad δέ μιν αὐτὸν

εἰλύσω ψαμάθοισιν, ἅλις χέραδος περιχεύας

305. κάμανοδρος LR Harl. ἃ.
Geipéuenon Vr. b. || κέκλυτ᾽ R.
κατὰ λιόθον : 7p. κακὸν θεὸν Τὶ
6puruaden CGHJPRU.
uéuHNe 0 6 γ᾽ L.

TO ON: τεὸν GJ.
310. éxnépcH J: ἐκπέρςαι H (svpr. εἰ) Vr. ἃ.
311. éxniunAne: ©: éninAnoe L. 918.
314. παύςομαι G.
316. οὔτι βίην J.

306. χώςετο U. 307.

315. μέμηνεν (P22) Lips. |
319. eiAUcoo: iAUcw ap. Sch. AT

(διχῶς ἡ γραφή). || χέραδος Ar. 2: χεράϑος HIPR: cxépadoc τινές, Schol. U.

305. ἔληγε trans., see on N 424.

307. For Simoeis see note on E 774.
The mention of him seems purely per-
functory, as we should expect from the
rareness of his appearances in the J7iad.
it will be observed that the appeal re-
mains absolutely unanswered, like that
to Apollo in 229.

308. For the scansion of φίλε see A155.

313. ἵστη, for this form of the imper.
οἵ, daivi, and various post - Homeric
instances in G. Meyer, Gr. ὃ 573. It is
explained as the simple strong present
stem without personal ending, whereas
καθίστα (I 202) is a contracted form for
the thematic καθίσταε, like ἵει, δίδου.
H. G. §§ 5, 18.

315. μέμονεν ica eeoici, cf. E 440
μηδὲ θεοῖσιν ἴσ᾽ ἔθελε φρονέειν (ἴσον ἐμοὶ
φρονέουσα O 50 is different), and in the
same sense ἶσον ἐμοὶ φάσθαι A 187, O 167.

317. τὰ τεύχεα καλά, the order of the
words shews that τά is not an article in
the Attic sense, but a real pronoun,
those his fair arms. Cf. τὸν Χρύσην...
ἀρητῆρα A 11, τοῦ βασιλῆος ἀπηνέος A
940, νειόϑι, cf. νειόθεν ἐκ κραδίης K 10.
λίμνης, see on 246.

318. αὐτόν, as opposed to his armour.

iAGoc, the v is a relic of the original
length of the fem. suffix -vs.

319. The readings of this line are an
old crua. There is something to be said
for ἰλύσω: the verb is not found else-
where, but may be a ‘ nonce-word’ coined
with reference to /Ados above, as though
‘I will slime him down with sand.’
εἰλύςω itself is not free from difficulty.
It must come from ἔελυ-, FeAF-=volv- ;
but the εἰ- seems to be due to error.
For the Homeric forms εἰλέωσιν, εἰλό-
μενοι, εἰλεῦντο we should probably read
ξέλλωσι, βελλόμενοι, ξέλλοντο, and for
the perf. εἰλυμένος, οἴο., ξεξλυμένος from
Ελῦ- (οἵ. σρῦ- beside cepv-). εἰλύω will
then be a later analogical formation from
the perf., the only tense which recurs
in H., or indeed in any but late authors
with the exception of εἰλύομαι -- ἐγατοῖ in
Soph. Phil. 291, 702 (see van L. Ench.
p. 493). εἰλυφαζει Ὑ 492, εἰλύφόων A 156
are further offshoots. yépadoc, shingle,
neut. acc. The variant xepddos as fem.
gen. is due to the later constr. of ἅλις
with gen., which is not found in H.
There is no good evidence for the fem.
now that xepade is read for χεράδι in
Pind. P. vi. 13 on the express authority

408 _ IAIAAOC Φ (xx1)

μυρίον, οὐδέ οἱ dare ἐπιστήσονται ᾿Αχαιοὶ 820
ἀλλέξαι: τόσσην οἱ ἄσιν καθύπερθε καλύψω.
αὐτοῦ οἱ καὶ σῆμα τετεύξεται, οὐδέ τί μιν χρεὼ
ἔσται τυμβοχόης, ὅτε μιν θάπτωσιν ᾿Αχαιοί.᾽"
ἢ καὶ ἐπῶρτ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆϊ κυκώμενος ὑψόσε θύων,
μορμύρων ἀφρῶι τε καὶ αἵματι καὶ νεκύεσσι. 325
πορφύρεον δ᾽ ἄρα κῦμα διυπετέος ποταμοῖο
ἵἴστατ᾽ ἀειρόμενον, κατὰ δ᾽ ἥιρεε ΤΠΠηλεΐωνα.
Ἥρη δὲ μέγ᾽ ἄυσε περιδδείσασ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆϊ,
μή μιν ἀποέρσειε μέγας ποταμὸς βαθυδίνης,
αὐτίκα δ᾽ “Ἄφαιστον προσεφώνεεν ὃν φίλον υἱόν" 580
“ὄρσεο, κυλλοπόδιον, ἐμὸν τέκος" ἄντα σέθεν γὰρ

321. ἀνλέξαι Ar. || GcHN P.
Ti: τέ U. || χρεὼν {H}.

ϑυίων AT.
nepideicac’ PR (περὶ 3.) || ἀχιλῆος (Ὁ.

325. jaiuati: οἴδματι Ven. B.}

322. αὐτῷ R. || cHsua: μοῖρα Ht. Mag. 169. 18. ||
323. edntoucin CJPR Harl. a, Mose. 2. 324.

327. deipduenon D. 328.
331 a0. Ar. ? see below.

of Sch. T here. The neut. is further
attested by Sch. U from Alkaios, and
by Sch. Ap. Rhod. i. 1123 from Sappho
(corruptly however, see Ht. Mag. 808.
35). The variant oxépados rests on a
quotation from Euphorion, τύμβος ὑπὸ
κνημοῖσι πολυσχεράδος Μυκόνοιο.

320. Friedlinder has suggested that
320-21 and 322-23 are two distinct
variants wrongly combined ; in the first
Achilles’ bones cannot even be found,
while in the second they are to be buried
by the Achaians. If this suggestion be
admitted, it seems to follow that the
second form (322-23) is the older and the
first interpolated, as μυρίον comes in
awkwardly after ἅλις. But it is certainly
not necessary, and 823 does not involve
finding the bones (see next note) even if
it is consistent with it.

323. τυμβοχόης, so Krates read, while
Ar. made the word τυμβοχοῆσ᾽ (for -ῆσαι,
aor. infin.). The question is of course
one of interpretation only, not of Ms.
tradition. It seems clear that Ar. is
wrong, and the only difficulty is to
understand how he came to adopt an
explanation which seems so perverse.
τυμβοχόη it is true does not recur in
Greek, while τυμβοχοέειν is used by
Herodotos; but the formation is quite
regular (cf. olvoxén), and the verb im-
plies the subst. Against τυμβοχοῆσ᾽ it
must be objected (1) that the -ac of the
aor. infin. is nowhere else elided ; (2) that
the constr. τυμβοχοῆσαί μιν is very harsh,

and cannot be supported by νέκταρ
οἰνοχοεύειν, Where the acc. is cognate.
(Herod. uses the word without an object.)
On the other hand the constr. xpew μιν
ἔσται with gen. is sufficiently attested
by ὃ 634 ἐμὲ δὲ χρεὼ γίνεται αὐτῆς,
I 607 οὔ τί με ταύτης χρεὼ τιμῆς.
edntwcin may mean ‘perform funeral
rites,’ setting up a σῆμα, even in the
absence of the body. Such a cenotaph
is not mentioned in H., but naturally
follows from the importance attached to
the formalities of burial, and is hinted
at in X 512-14, α 291. But it is equally
possible to regard ὅτε μιν θάπτωσιν as
covered by the negative; ‘he will need
no mound at his burial, because he will
have no burial’ (Monro).

331 ἀθετεῖται ὅτι ἄκαιρον τὸ ἐπίθετον
Schol. A (Hera should not allude to her
son’s deformity when asking a favour).
But the line is obviously indispensable.
Cobet suggests that the scribe has mis-
taken the paragraphos, a dash a little
above the line at the beginning of a
speech answering to our inverted commas,
for the obelos, a dash at the side of the
line. In his copy the diple which really
belonged to the line may have been
accidentally omitted, so that seeing as
he supposed the obelos, and having a
note referring to a critical mark, he
inserted the word ἀθετεῖται on his own
responsibility. Schol. U has in fact
᾿Αριστόνικος in place of ἀθετεῖται. For
KuAAonodioon cf. Σ 371.

IAIAAOC Φ (xx1)

409

=| / / / 5,1 2
Ξάνθον δινήεντα payne ἠΐσκομεν εἶναι"

ΤᾺ. » / / / \ / /
a ἐπάμυνε τάχιστα, πιφαύσκεο δὲ φλόγα πολλήν.

> \ ’ \ / a
αὐτὰρ ἐγὼ Lepvpoto καὶ ἀργεστᾶο Νότοιο

= b] ΄ / \ » 4
εἴσομαι ἐξ ἁλόθεν χαλεπὴν ὄρσουσα θύελλαν, 335
a4 > \ ἊΝ ,’ \ \ ΄ ’ὔ

ἢ κεν ἀπὸ Τρώων κεφαλὰς καὶ τεύχεα κήαι

φλέγμα κακὸν φορέουσα.

ΗΠ Ἢ »-; "
σὺ δὲ Ξάνθοιο παρ᾽ ὄχθας

SZ ὃ ἢ ~ > ~ ΦὉ ἙΝ “ , , ΄
Εν Pea Kat, εν QUTOV LéEb TUpt* μηδέ σε πάμπαν

/ / . A
μειλειχίοις ἐπέεσσιν ἀποτρεπέτω Kal ἀρειῆι"

A \ ’ / Ν e ey
μηδὲ πρὶν ἀπόπαυε τεὸν μένος, ἀλλ᾽ ὁπότ᾽ ἂν δὴ 340
/ > 5» \ 77 / a ΄“ ᾽
φθέγξομ᾽ ἐγὼν ἰάχουσα, τότε σχεῖν ἀκάματον πῦρ.
“ », Ἰ “ “
ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, “Ἥφαιστος δὲ τιτύσκετο θεσπιδαὲς πῦρ.

-“ \ ΄σ » \
πρῶτα μὲν ἐν πεδίωι πῦρ δαίετο, καῖε δὲ νεκροὺς

/ “, ΄ ᾽ > \ 2 , ,
πολλούς, οἵ pa KAT αὐτὸν ἅλις ἔσαν, οὺς KTUV ᾿Αχιλλεύς.

πᾶν δ᾽ ἐξηράνθη πεδίον, σχέτο δ᾽ ἀγλαὸν

ὕδωρ. 345

. ’ a? , , ’

ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ὀπωρινὸς Βορέης veoapd? ἀλωὴν

3 » » / / / [4 > /

aify ἀνξηράνηι" χαίρει δέ μιν ὅς τις ἐθείρηι"

“Δ 5) / An ie »

ὡς ἐξηράνθη πεδίον πᾶν, cad δ᾽ ἄρα νεκροὺς

Lal ¢ > /

κῆεν" ὁ δ᾽ ἐς ποταμὸν τρέψε φλόγα παμφανόωσαν.

332. udayHN [}.
{Plut.] Vit. Hom. 129. 15.
339. Kai: H Harl. a.
Ware Ἂς
346. νεοαρϑέ᾽:

341. ἐγὼ R.

333. πιφάςκεο P(): nipacxe J.
336. H KEN: ἥ κεν Zen. |

|| καῖε: Oate J Vr. Ὁ A Mose. 5
ἔνιοι νεοαλϑέα νεοαύξητον Ap. Lew. 116. 5.

335. ὄρςαςα Zen.: épéouca
KA(i)e (C Ssupr. ) AMA dey

343. δαΐετο : καίετο
344. αὐτὸ- ©.
347. αἷψ᾽ ἂν

342 om. Bar.
καῖε ἢ date Hust.

Ξηράνηᾳι) A (ἀν,) DGJ Vr. bd Mosc. 2: αἶψα Ξηράνηι Vr. A: aip’ ἀνξηράνει C :

aiy’ ἐξαυαίνηι Aph. || χαίρη ().
D (e corr.) {H} PR. 348 om. U.

332. Aickouen, the ironical imperf.
implying ‘it seems we were wrong.’
The reference is evidently to the pairing
of the gods in Υ 67. The symbolic
allusion to the enmity of fire and water
is obvious.

334. Gprectdo, see on A 306.

335. efcoua, i.e. Ficoua, 1 will
hasten (Είεμαι). Zen. took it to mean
‘T shall know,’ and for # (336) read %,
whether, with dpcaca for ὄρσουσα. Hera
takes no steps to fulfil her promise.

336. Τρώων is of course to be taken
with κεφαλάς, and .. KHal going to-

gether. The opt. expresses the remoter
purpose. κεφαλάς virtually = persons,

ef. κάρηνα A 158.

338. én. . Yer πυρί, almost literally
our ‘set on fire.’ WY 45 ἐνὶ Ἰ]άτροκλον
θέμεναι πυρί is nearly the same. For
the rest of the couplet ef. T 108-09.

δέ: re Vr. b.
349. GN ποταμὸν II.

WIN: μὲν Mosc. 2. ἐθείρει

343. πρῶτα μέν is answered by the
simple δέ in 349, instead of ἔπειτα δέ.

344. This line is probably a mere
interpolation from 236, where αὐτόν has
its proper reference. Here also we must
take it to mean the River, though the
only subst. to which it can belong is
πεδίον. Of course we could read ἔσαν
ἅλις, or αὐτό with Bentley, as Fads keeps
the F (an objection to Wolf's καταυτόθ᾽
which many edd. adopt). But it is
better simply to reject the line and not
trouble about emending it. It happens
also that αὐτό is never found in H.

347. ἐθείρηι, a word recurring in Greek
only in Orph. Arg. 932 χρυσέαις φολί-
deco ἐθείρεται, which explains nothing.
The der. and meaning are unknown ; the
context suggests ¢z//s.

349. KAen Hephaistos: ὁ 0€ indicating
a change of action, but not of subject.

410 IAIAAOC Φ (xx!)

καίοντο πτελέαι καὶ ἰτέαι NOE pUpPiKaL, 350

καίετο δὲ λωτός TE LOE θρύον HOE κύπειρον,

τὰ περὶ καλὰ ῥέεθρα ἅλις ποταμοῖο πεφύκει"

τείροντ᾽ ἐγχέλυές τε καὶ ἰχθύες οἱ κατὰ δίνας,

οἱ κατὰ καλὰ ῥέεθρα κυβίστων ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα"

πνοιῆι τειρόμενοι πολυμήτιος Ἡφαίστοιο. 355

καίετο δ᾽ ts ΓΟ πα "Ὁ 0: ἔπος τ᾽ ἔφατ᾽ ἔκ τ᾽ ὀνόμαζεν"
“Ἤφαιστ᾽, οὔ TUS. σοί ye θεῶν δύνατ᾽ ἀντιφερίξειν,

οὐδ᾽ ἂν ἐγὼ σοί γ᾽ ὧδε πυρὶ φλεγέθοντι μαχοίμην.

MY ἔριδος, Τρῶας δὲ καὶ αὐτίκα δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεὺς

ἄστεος τος mb μοι ΤΟΣ καὶ ἀρωγῆς; 360
φῆ πυρὶ καιόμενος, ἀνὰ δ᾽ ἔφλυε καλὰ ῥέεθρα.
δὲ λέβης ζεῖ ἔνδον, ἐπειγόμενος πυρὶ πολλῶι,

κνίσην μελδόμενος ἁπαλοτρεφέος σιάλοϊο,

τε καὶ 2. || HOE: αἴϑε P. 351. τε ἠδὲ GP. || κύπαιρον αἱ ἐκ
353. ςείροντ᾽ G. 355. ΠΝΟΙΗ͂Ι : ἔν τισι ῥιπῆι Did.: pinu
356. καί € τόθ᾽ Yc Ptol. Pind. 357. icopapizein

350. καὶ P:
τῶν πόλεων, Did.
δὲ ἡ κ[ρητικη Blass] Amm.

J Harl. a, Mose. 2 and ap. Eust. 360. ἀρωγῆς : autuc Syr. 361. ἀνὰ:
an Vr. b. 363. KNiCHN Ar. Kallistratos Q: KNiccHN GQ Par. f Syr.: κνίσης
(2 KNicHt) ἄλλοι Did. : KNicHt Hermogenes U: xnich HJT Par. KNiccH PRS

Harl. a Ὁ, King’s Par.abedghj. || μελϑομένου Krates (Amm.), ‘‘ Πεισίστρατος
6 ᾿Εφέσιος ᾿ and Hermogenes (Sch. U). || ἁπαλητρεφέος L.

350. For καί the vulg. has τε καί.

361. pH is only here used after a
But the F of Firéac is preserved in x 510

speech in place of the regular ἢ.

μακραί τ᾽ αἴγειροι καὶ ἰτέαι ὠλεσίκαρποι :
cf. vit-ev, our withy. According to
3arker Webb, quoted by Schliemann
Ilios 116-18, all the trees and plants
here named are still to be found in the
Trojan plain—so far at least as we are
justified in identifying them.

352. For the lengthening of τά in the
first arsis see App. D, ¢

353. ἐγχέλυες, see note on 208. οἵ,
sc. ἦσαν. See H. Οὐ. 8 271 and note
on A 535.

356. The periphrastic use of fc, though
common in Od., does not recur in J1.,
where βίη is used instead. The only
other place where the F of Fis is neglected
is P 739. Heyne reads καίετο Fis. Ptol.
Pindarion’s καί ἑ τόδ᾽ is κτλ. is an
amusingly ingenious word-puzzle, but
can hardly have been taken seriously
even by its author.

358. @pAeréeonti agrees with coi, πυρί
being an instrume tal dat. , fight against
thee thus blazing with fire.

360. τί μοι Epidoc, for this use of the
partitive gen. cf. H. G. 8 151 6.

362. ὅτι oldev ἕψησιν κρεῶν, χρωμένους
δὲ τοὺς ἥρωας οὐ παρεισάγει, An. See
similar remarks on 388, O 679, Σ 219.
There is however a want of point here, for
it is not the boiling of flesh but the
melting of lard which is described. Pre-
sumably Ar. considered that the habit
of boiling flesh was implied in the exist-
ence of caldrons. Ζεῖ, read ζέει : the
contracted form is not only un-Homeric
but unmetrical. So τρεῖ for rpée A 554.
The verb is used with λέβης just as we
say ‘ the kettle boils.’

363. meNOduenoc, melting the fat.
The verb is evidently not a passive, as
some have taken it. It recurs only in
late imitative poets, in the act. Of the
variants given above there is something
to be said for κνίσης, if we read
μελδομένης. On μελδομένου there is a
remarkable scholion in U: Πεισίστρατος
ὁ ᾿Εφέσιος καὶ ‘Eppoyévns ἐν τῶι περὶ
προβλημάτων: “ἐγέγραπτο μελδομενο, καὶ
δέον ἣν --τὸ v> προσθεῖναι, κακῶς δέ τις τὸ
σ προσέρραψεν. ὁ yap νοῦς τῆι κνίσσηι
τηκομένου τοῦ συός. 6 μὲν ποιητὴς μέλδε-

IAIAAOC Φ (xx1)

41}

πάντοθεν ἀμβολάδην, ὑπὸ δὲ ξύλα κώγκανα κεῖται,

ὡς τοῦ καλὰ ῥέεθρα πυρὶ φλέγετο, ζέε δ᾽ ὕδωρ: 365

oer

οὐδ᾽ ἔθελε προρέειν, ἀλλ᾽ ἴσχετο' τεῖρε δ᾽ ἀυτμὴ

Ἡφαίστοιο βίηφι πολύφρονος.

αὐτὰρ ὅ γ᾽ “Ἥρην

\ / vo ,ὕ ,
πολλὰ λισσόμενος ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα:

oc

ἐξ ἄλλων;

, ‘ eX , \ εὖ » /
Ηρη, τίπτε σὸς υἱὸς ἐμὸν poov ἔχραε κήδειν
Η , 4 , “2
οὐ μέν τοι ἐγὼ τόσον αἴτιός εἰμι, 370

.-“ [2 » , -“ r , > /
ὅσσον οἱ ἄλλοι πάντες, ὅσοι Γρώεσσιν apwyot.
> > Vv Ν > \ > / > \ /
αλλ ἤτοι μὲν ἔγων aTroTTaVcOpmal, εἰ σὺ κελεύεις,

,ὔ \ \ A
παυέσθω δὲ Kal οὗτος.

3. ἃ a \ in 9 a
ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἐπὶ καὶ TOO ὀμοῦμαι,

, » ’ \ r , > / \ 9S
μή ποτ᾽ ἐπὶ Tpwecow ἀλεξήσειν κακὸν ἦμαρ,

’ ε Ἐν ἃ [4 ,ὔ a \ a ,
μηδ᾽ ὁπότ᾽ ἂν Tpoin μαλερῶι πυρὶ πᾶσα δάηται 375

, , > 9 fies e , nD
καιομένη, καίωσι δ᾽ ἀρήϊοι vies ᾿Αχαιῶν.
᾽ \ > \ / > ’ \ , “
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ τὸ γ᾽ ἄκουσε θεὰ λευκώλενος “Hpn,
» ν oS tf , “Δ , ev
αὐτίκ᾽ ap Udaictov προσεφώνεεν ov φίλον υἱόν"
“Ἥφαιστε, σχέο, τέκνον ἀγακλεές" οὐ γὰρ ἔοικεν
ἀθάνατον θεὸν ὧδε βροτῶν ἕνεκα στυφελίζειν.᾽" 380
' > 7 ‘ -
ὡς ἐφαθ᾽, “Hdatatos δὲ κατέσβεσε θεσπιδαὲς πῦρ,

” > »Μ - / \ Cs
ἄψορρον δ᾽ ἄρα κῦμα κατέσσυτο καλὰ ῥέεθρα.

365. Ζέε : yp. καὶ εχέτο |’.
367. ἥβην J. S725 ἐπῶν Ν᾿ ἢ]
τόδ᾽ PR.
Mose. 2, Ven. B: Oaiouci C.

366. οὐδ᾽ : ἠδ᾽ L. | npoxéew J Harl. a, Mose. 2.
ἀποπαύομαι [".

376. ϑαιομένη C{D}J Harl. a, Mosc. 2, Ven. B. || ϑαίωσι {D}J Harl. a,
380. crupeAizein HS Vr. A.

373. Kal τόδ᾽ : τοῦτο L:

382. KaTécyeTo

yp. Sch. PX, and so Sch. D in lemma (yp. KatéccuTo).

σθαί φησι τὰ ἑψόβενα, of δὲ πεποιήκασι
τὸν λέβητα τηκόμενον. The schol. goes
on to repeat at further length that
μελδόμενος is merely a conjecture of
tle μεταχαρακτηρίσαντες, who did not
‘understand that MEAAOMENO = μελδο-
μένου. The reading κνίσηι μελδομένου.
‘with the fat of a hog being melted down,’
is quite possible. Nothing more is known
of this Peisistratos. For Hermogenes
see Schrader Porph. p. 440. Ammonios
attributes the same theory to Krates.

364. GuBoAGOHN, spurting wp; cf.
ὑποβλήδην. κάγκανα, also σ 308, dry;
ef. πολυκαγκέα δίψην A 642.

366. οὐδ᾽ geeke, he had no mind to
flow on. ἐθέλειν implies ‘a wish in
which there lies a purpose or design,
consequently a desire of something the
execution of which is, or at least appears
to be, in one’s own power’ (Buttmann
Lexil.). It thus comes to mean δύνασθαι,
but with a very clear touch of sarcasm.
So I 353, N 106.

367. βίηφι seems to be a pure gen.,
‘the breath of H.’s might.’ The order
of words is against translating ‘H.’s
breath wore him down perforce.’ See
note on ᾿Ιλιόφι, 295.

369. ῥόον Expae KHOEIN, laid hands
on my stream to vex it; so ᾧ 69 τόδε
δῶμα ἐχράετ᾽ ἐσθιέμεν. The dat. is also
found, στυγερὸς δέ of ἔχραε δαίμων, ε
396, οἵ, IL 352. ἔχραε is an aor. from
root xpav, which with its cognates χρ-αίνω,
χρ-ίω (Brugm. Gr. ii. p. 990) means
touch, stroke, graze, and has thence
developed into day hands on in a hostile
sense. The regular sigmatic aor. is
χραύσ-ηι (E 138) ; there is little ground
for the proposed separation of the two
words alluded to in the note there.
The two co-existent aorists are exactly
parallel to λόε--λοῦσε. ἐξ GAAWN=
ἔξοχον ἄλλων.

374-76=T 315-17, except for the
transfer of Ms. authority from δαιομένη,
δαίωσι to καιομένη, καίωσι.

413 IAIAAOC Φ (xx!)

5» — / (4 Ν ”
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ Ξάνθοιο δάμη μένος, ol μὲν eTerTa
, 6 Γ / / n
παυσάσθην: “Ἥρη yap ἐρύκακε χωομένη περ
, Mv “Ὁ 5, [2 Lal -
ἐν δ᾽ ἄλλοισι θεοῖσιν ἔρις πέσε BeBpiOvia 385
᾽ f a/ 7 x, \ Ν θ Ν v
ἀργαλέη, δίχα δέ σφιν evi φρεσι θυμὸς ano. ;
, / / , > lal ie
σὺν δ᾽ ἔπεσον μεγάλωι πατάγωι, βράχε δ᾽ εὐρεῖα χθών,
\ / / 5)... \ 7 \
ἀμφὶ δὲ σάλπιγξεν μέγας οὐρανὸς. aie δὲ Ζεὺς
e > ’ Seas, / € /- 3
ἥμενος Οὐλύμπωι: ἐγέλασσε δέ οἱ φίλον nTop
“ CA ’ /
γηθοσύνηι, ὅθ᾽ opato θεοὺς ἔριδι ξυνιόντας. . 990
, > 6 5 5 \ Μ
ἔνθ᾽ οἵ γ᾽ οὐκέτι δηρὸν ἀφέστασαν' ἦρχε γὰρ Apns
. a 2 / 5 “
ῥινοτόρος, καὶ πρῶτος ἈΑθηναίην ἐπόρουσε
χάλκεον ἔγχος ἔχων, καὶ ὀνείδειον φάτο μῦθον"
a 5 ͵
“cint αὖτ᾽, ὦ κυνόμυια, θεοὺς ἔριδι ξυνελαυνεις
» 5 \ > an
θάρσος ἄητον ἔχουσα, μέγας δέ σε θυμὸς ἀνῆκεν; 395
5 , - A ’ n
ἢ οὐ μέμνηι ὅτε Τυδεΐδην Διομήδε᾽ ἀνῆκας
τ 7 > \ δὲ / 5 ὅλ, rn
οὐτάμεναι, αὐτὴ δὲ πανόψιον ἔγνος ἑλοῦσα

385. ἐν : ἀν (). 381. πατάγωι : ὁμάδω(ι) DG{H}JPSTU Ven. B, yp. A.
388. cdAnizen U. 390. ὅθ᾽ : ὅ δ᾽ J. || ὁρῶ(ι")το G Vr. bl. 8391. Οἵ ne:
οἵ δ᾽ Ω : οὗτοι C. || rap: δὲ Vr. A. 894. αὖτ᾽ : αὖ CGH Ven. B. || κυνόμυια
JPQR Harl. a b, King’s Par. a d f h: κυνώμυια Par, e: κυναμυα Pap. Δ:
κυνάμυια Ὡ : κινάμυια Νεοπτόλεμος ὁ ΠΠαριανός (Sch. U) and ap. Sch. T Eust. ||
θεοὺς: cet L. 395. ἄητον : ἀήττητον PR. || ἀνῆκεν : ανώγει Syr. 896.
τυ[ϑε]δηι διοκηϑει αἀνώγας Pap. A. 397. ouTawenH Ambr. || πανόψιον Ar. Q:
παρόψιον P (supr. NN): Unonédcpion Antimachos, Pap. \ supr. (unoNno[c]@).

386. ἄητο, either mid., breathed in goes beyond a smile, like the Zeus of the
two directions, or pass., was blown about hymn to Hermes (389), who ‘laughs
by gusts of passion (cf. € 131 ὑόμενος καὶ loud’ at the tricks of his naughty son.
ἀήμενος, in the literal sense). The latter 394, κυνόμυια, dog-fly : ὁ μὲν yap κύων
wives the better sense, and is supported ἀναιδής, 7 δὲ μυῖα θρασεῖα (cf. P 570), An.
by ἀεσίφρων T 183, Ψ 603; cf. Τ 108 The compound (here and 421 only) has
ὁπλοτέρων ἀνδρῶν φρένες ἠερέθονται. For - ΠΟ parallel in H. ; we can only compare
the former the nearest analogy is perhaps a few such words 885 ἱππαλεκτρυών,
the phrase μένεα πνείοντες. In Scut. ἰατρόμαντις in later Greek. Many ss.
Herc. 8, Hymn. Cer, 276, the word and all edd. have κυνάμυια, but the -a-
seems to be used of the wafting of [5 indefensible.

fragrance. 395. ἄητον, a doubtful word ; see on
388, caAnirzen, ὅτι αὐτὸς μὲν οἷδεσάλ- ainrov Σ 410. It may perhaps be

πιίγγα, χρωμένους δὲ τοὺς ἥρωας οὐκ εἰσάγει, related to ἄητο above, in the sense
Ar., see on 962, Σ 219. The metaphor ‘blown about,’ flighty. Another inter-
is tragic rather than epic. The idea pretation is insatiable, as if from sa, dw,
seems to be that the noise of the fighting which is barely possible. Qu. Smyrn.
echoed back from the vault of heaven, has θάρσος darov, which may therefore
not that thunder accompanied the have been an old variant here, though
battle; for Zeus, the thunderer, is pas- it would be no clearer than the text,
sive. Cf. Hes. Theog. 679, of the battle ἀήττητον in P is of course an etymology
with the Titans, ἐπέστενε δ᾽ οὐρανὸς εὐρὺς which has displaced the word it was
σειόμενος. meant to explain. For the last part of
390. Zeus appears to have a just the line see note on H 25.

appreciation of the whole combat as a 396. A οὖ, οὐ Brandreth. μέμνηι,
parody of serious fighting. It is only rather μέμνη᾽, see O 18.
here and in 508 that Homer’s Zeus ever

397. πανόψιον, a strange word, ap-

IAIAAOC Φ (χχὴ 413

ἰθὺς ἐμεῦ ὦσας, διὰ δὲ χρόα καλὸν ebarvas;

τῶ σ᾽ αὖ νῦν ὀΐω ἀποτισέμεν ὅσσα Eopyas.”
Os εἰπὼν οὔτησε κατ᾽ αἰγίδα θυσανόεσσαν 400

σμερδαλέην, ἣν οὐδὲ Διὸς δάμνησι κεραυνός"

τῆι μιν "Άρης οὔτησε μιαιφόνος ἔγχεϊ μακρῶι.

ἡ δ᾽ ἀναχασσαμένη λίθον εἴλετο χειρὶ παχείηι

κείμενον ἐν πεδίωι, μέλανα, τρηχύν τε μέγαν τε,

τόν p ἄνδρες πρότεροι θέσαν ἔμμεναι οὖρον ἀρούρης" τ10ῦ

τῶι βάλε θοῦρον “Apna κατ᾽ αὐχένα, λῦσε δὲ γυῖα.

ἑπτὰ δ᾽ ἐπέσχε: πέλεθρα πεσών, ἐκόνισε δὲ χαίτας,

τεύχεα δ᾽ ἀμφαράβησε: γέλασσε δὲ Madras ᾿Αθήνη,

καί οἱ ἐπευχομένη ἔπεα πτερύεντα προσηύδα"

““νῃπύτι͵, οὐδέ νύ πώ περ ἐπεφράσω ὅσσον ἀρείων 410

εὔχομ᾽ ἐγὼν ἔμεναι, OTL μοι μένος ἀντιφερίζεις.

οὕτω κεν τῆς μητρὸς ἐρινύας ἐξαποτίνοις,

398. O1a: εμε (3) Pap. A, supr. da. 399. ἀποτινέμεν Vr. b. |) Occa Ambr.*
{01} : ὅςςά μ᾽ O. 400. αἰγίδα {C}GHJPQR Harl. a Ambr., yp. A: denida ©.
401. HN: THN Vr. A. Odunuict ADT Ambr. 402. ΜΙΝ: μὲν A supr.
οὕταςε © (swpr. H) (P supr.) R: &cruce P!. 403. χειρὶ παχείηι : παλλὰς ἀθϑήνη
Ambr. ‘ Vat. 10,’ ἐν ἄλλωι A. 404. τραχὺν ΕἾΝ. 405. τὸν O° Par. suppl. grec.
144, Ap. Lew. 125. 4. || πρότερον Ap. Lew, ibid. 407. μέλαθρα L (sup. πελεὶ "Ὁ
(supr. mn) Lips. 408. 0 Ambr., yp. X: τ᾽ 2. 409. of : μιν A (yp. of) QU
Mor. Vr. A, yp. X. 410. ἐπέφραςο 1. 411. icopapizeic A (ἐν ἄλλωι ἀντιφαρίζΖεις)
JQ Bar. Mor. Harl. a, Vr. b A Mosc. 2.

parently meaning visible to al/, as opposed
to the goddess who was invisible. The
allusion is to E 856. Antimachos read
ὑπονόσφιον, either as ady. secretly, or
adj. the surreptitious spear (cf. νοσφίδιος,
Hes. fr. 4); and the variant has actu-
ally turned up in a papyrus. Bentley
conj. πανίψιον. 398, cf. EB 858.

399. Scca Eoprac has little support,
but is preferable as recognising the
F, which, as Brandreth remarks, is
generally preserved throughout the θεο-
μαχία.

401. ὅτι ἰδίως ἐπὶ τῆς αἰγίδος τοῦτό
φησιν, ἣν Διὸς ὅπλον παραδίδωσιν, An.,
i.e. the expression is ἃ curious one (ἰδίως)
by which to describe the shield of Zeus
himself. It is perhaps for this reason
that most Mss. give ἀσπίδα for αἰγίδα.
But eucandecca is only used as an epithet
of the aegis.

403-04=H 264-65. From Schol. U on
424 it appears that objection was taken
to παχείηι used of the hand of a god-
dess; some would read βαρείηι, others

Παλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη. but see ᾧ 6, Hymn.
Ap. 340.

405. Cf. Ψ 332, and note on M 421.

407. For πέλεθρα see note on A 354.
So Tityos lies spread over nine πέλεθρα
in ἃ 577. The only other equally ex-
aggerated picture of divine stature is in
E 860 (and 744 2); all, it will be noticed,
in passages of apparently late origin.
Compare also N 20. Homer's gods,
though ‘divinely tall’ (= 518), are not
such monsters as this.

410. νηπύτιε as a form of address is a
peculiarity of this book (441, 474, 585).
Cf. note on T 200.

412. τῆς, thy; read ἧς (App. A, vol.
i. p. 563). Ares’ desertion of his mother
Hera’s side is denounced in E 832. The
épinvec here can hardly mean more than
curses, and have entirely lost the moral
significance of the avengers of parental
wrongs. Compare ἃ 280 ὅσσά τε μητρὸς
ἐρινύες ἐκτελέουσι, Aisch. Hum. 417 ᾿Αραὶ
δ᾽ ἐν οἴκοις γῆς ὑπαὶ κεκλήμεθα, Hes.
Theog. 472 τίσαιτο δ᾽ ἐρινῦς πατρὸς ἑοῖο.

414 IAIAAOC Φ (xx1)

ἥ τοι χωομένη κακὰ μήδεται, οὕνεκ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοὺς ἢ
κάλλιπες, αὐτὰρ Τρωσὶν ὑπερφιάλοισιν ἀμύνεις.
ds ἄρα φωνήσασα πάλιν τρέπεν ὄσσε φαεινώ. 415
τὸν δ᾽ aye χειρὸς ἑλοῦσα Διὸς θυγάτηρ Ἀφροδίτη
πυκνὰ μάλα στενάχοντα, μόγις δ᾽ ἐσαγείρετο θυμὸν.
τὴν δ᾽ ὡς οὖν ἐνόησε θεὰ λευκώλενος “Ἥρη,

4 » / if 3
αὐτίκ ᾿Αθηναίην ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα
/ x / > /
“a πόποι, αἰγιόχοιο Διὸς τέκος, ἀτρυτωνή, 420
> 3 / ” \ ”
καὶ δ᾽ αὖθ᾽ ἡ κυνόμυια ἄγει βροτολοιγὸν “Apna
fh, ) , \ Wi δ *rAXo / r.0 ”
δηΐου ἐκ πολέμοιο κατὰ κλόνον" adda μετελῦε.

Ν

ὡς pat, ᾿Αθηναίη δὲ

« / \

Kal ῥ᾽ ἐπιεισαμένη πρὸς

μετέσσυτο, χαῖρε δὲ θυμῶι,
στήθεα χειρὶ παχείηι

~ > lal / \ / ὯΝ ‘
ἤλασε" τῆς δ᾽ αὐτοῦ λύτο γούνατα καὶ φίλον HTOP. 425

al Ν "
τὼ μὲν ἄρ᾽ ἄμφω κεῖντο ἐπὶ χθονὶ πουλυβοτείρηι,

΄ voy / ” , ᾽ 5) / Η
ἡ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐπευχομένη ἔπεα πτερόεντ ἀγόρευε

rn r / “ Λ) > /
“ τοιοῦτοι νυν TAVTES, OOOL Τρώεσσιν apwyot,

5 0 " / / / lel
εἶεν, ὅτ᾽ ᾿Αργείοισι payoiato θωρηκτῆισιν,

ὧδέ τε θαρσαλέοι καὶ τλήμονες, ὡς ᾿Αφροδίτη 430

i » > 2 a) / ᾽ / ς
ἦλθεν "Αρη ἐπίκουρος, ἐμῶν μένει ἀντιοωσα

“ / /
τῶ Kev δὴ πάλαι ἄμμες ἐπαυσάμεθα πτολέμοιο,

” / / 39
ἴλιον ἐκπέρσαντες ἐυκτίμενον πτολίεθρον.

[ὼς φάτο, μείδησεν δὲ θεὰ λευκώλενος “Ηρη.]

414. ἀμύνεις : ἀρήγεις Harl. a, Vr. b A, Mosc. 2, Par. h, yp. AX: ἀρήτει J.

415. tpanen CGHAST.
Mose. 2, Par. b h, yp. A: φιλομήθης U.
Harl. d: écareipato (2 (incl. T).
yp. THN κυνάμυιαν (7) A,
(Sch. U).
TA O° H!: τὴν δ᾽ Vr. Ὁ.
πολυβοτείρη(ι) HPT.
Par. b) hy yp. A.

Lips. :
432. πολέμοιο JP.

416. διὸς Θυγάτηρ : φιλομμειδής J Harl. a, Vr. b A,

417. μόλις H. || écareipeto Ar. A{D}

421. κυνόμυια JPQR: KuNduuia Q (2). ||
424. ἐπιειςακένη Ar. 2:
| MayeiHl: πρέπει τῆι παρθένωι χειρὶ βαρείηι, Sch. U.

énepercauenH Dem. Ixion
425. THC O°:

426. κεῖτο ©. || ἐπὶ : ποτὶ CDHPRST Ven. B, yp. A. ||
427. πτερόεντα npocHda JP Vr. b A, Mose. 2, Harl. a b,
429 om. Vr. bl. || ewpHKTotcan PQS Mor. Bar.
ἄρηϊ S Harl. a: Gper CJ: ἄρη(ι) Q. || ἐπίκουρος : ἐν ἄλλωι Enioupoc A.
433. ἵλιον (Ar. ? cf. B 133) PR, yp. A: ἱλίου Q, yp. Schol. X.

431. ἄρη᾽

434 om. ACDH* Ven. b, Harl. a, Vr. bd, Mose. 2. || ὧς €pae’ ἡ δ᾽ érédac(c)e H@ISTU,

416. ὅτι of xwpifovrés φασι τὸν τῆς
᾿Ιλιάδος ποιητὴν εἰδέναι συνοῦσαν ra” Aper
τὴν ᾿Αφροδίτην, τὸν δὲ τῆς ᾿Οδυσσείας
διαφώνως ᾿Ηφαίστωι (i.e. in the lay of
Demodokos in θ᾽ the amour with Ares is
carried on secretly, while here it appears
to be public). λέγειν δὲ δεῖ ὅτι οὐχ οἱ
αὐτοὶ χρόνοι ἦσαν τῆς συμβιώσεως, An.

417. ἐςαγείρετο, cf. O 240 and θυμη-
γερέων, ἡ 283.

119-20 -Ξ Ὲ 713-14.

421. καὶ 0 (δὴ) atte there again, ar
expression of vexation. See note on A
202. SoA=that, in contempt. _

426. κεῖντο, the regular form is κείατο.
3ut the hiatus shews that the text
should not, be altered. So ἐπέκειντο
Gilg:

429. ssaxoiato, opt. by ‘attraction,’
as usual after a wish ; = 107 ete.

431. "Ἀρη᾽ ("Apni), see note on 112.

434 is evidently interpolated from A

IAIAAOC Φ (xx1)

\ > / ,
αὐτὰρ ᾿Απόλλωνα προσέφη κρείων ἐνοσίχθων" 435
al / \ aA / > \ Μ
“Φοῖβε, τί ἢ δὴ νῶϊ διέσταμεν ; οὐδὲ ἔοικεν
ἀρξάντων ἑτέρων: τὸ μὲν αἴσχιον, αἴ K ἀμαχητὶ
» » , Ἀ 4 a
ἴομεν Οὔλυμπόνδε, Διὸς ποτὶ χαλκοβατὲς δῶ.
ἄρχε: σὺ γὰρ γενεῆφι νεώτερος" οὐ γὰρ ἔμοιγε
/ > , / \ / in
καλόν, ἐπεὶ πρότερος γενόμην καὶ πλείονα οἶδα. 140
> ΄ > , -
νηπύτι᾽, ὡς ἄνοον κραδίην Exes: οὐδέ νυ τῶν περ
/ e \ 4 \ » > \
μέμνηαι, ὅσα δὴ πάθομεν κακὰ Ἴλιον ἀμφὶ
lal ae “-“ te /
μοῦνοι vai θεῶν, ὅτ᾽ aynvopt Λαομέδοντι
\ \ , / > , Ν
πὰρ Διὸς ἐλθόντες θητεύσαμεν εἰς ἐνιαυτὸν
lal ΝΜ « a e \ / ’ /
μισθῶι ἔπι ῥητῶι, ὁ δὲ σημαίνων ἐπέτελλεν. 145
\ , “- "»
ἤτοι ἐγὼ Τρώεσσι πόλιν πέρι τεῖχος ἔδειμα
> 4 \ ΄ , a7) ” / "
εὐρὺ τε καὶ μάλα καλὸν, W ἄρρηκτος πόλις εἴη"
-“ \ 5 δ r
Φοῖβε, σὺ δ᾽ εἰλίποδας ἕλικας βοῦς βουκολέεσκες

Ἴδης ἐν κνημοῖσι πολυπτύχου ὑληέσσης.

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ μισθοῖο τέλος πολυγηθέες ὧραι 150

436. OIECTALLEN: yp. ἀφέεταμεν Vr. b.
442. ἀμφὶς {CD}T Cant.
446. πόλει Aph. H.
ἤτοι μὲν γὰρ ἐγὼ πόλεως περὶ τεῖχος Edema Schol. U.
449. KNHJLOICL: κρηλινοῖσι ().

πρῶτος T. 441. &cyec GRU.
DHTU Cant. (breathings on pp vary).

Zoilos (Schol. U).
Par. g and ap. Eust.

437, ἀρξόντων "ἢ. 440. πρότερος:
445. ἐπὶῤῥητῶι
|| ᾿Αριδίκης προφέρεται
441. καλόν: μακρὸν

450. noAurHeéoc Vr. bh,

595, to soften the rather harsh transition
to a fresh scene.

436. d1écrauen, stand apart from one
another. But the variant ἀφέσταμεν
may be preferable; it is the regular
word for standing aloof from battle (391,
N 738, O 672, etc.), and the hiatus may
have caused the change. ‘This bellicose
Poseidon hardly seems to be the same
god as in T 138-43,

440=T 219, and cf. N 355. For the
compliment of allowing an enemy to
begin cf. H 235.

442. κέμνηαι, a form not elsewhere
found in full, though μέμνη (αι) should
always be restored for μέμνης (Ὁ 18,

Ὑ 188, 6396). The later μέμνησαι occurs
in Ψ 648. The legend of the servitude

of Poseidon and Apollo to Laomedon is
again mentioned in H 452-53 (see note).
The reason of the humiliation is not
given, though πὰρ Διός might be thought
toimplya punishment. The later myth-
ologists said that it was in order to
display to the full the ὕβρις of Laomedon.

444. exTevcauen, the verb recurs in
H. only in ἃ 489 βουλοίμην x’ ἐπάρουρος

ἐὼν Onrevéwev ἄλλωι, o 357; θῆτες are
distinguished from δμῶες in 6 644. That
the word implies hired service is clear
from σ 358 ἢ ἄρ κ᾽ ἐθέλοις θητευέμεν.
μισθὸς δέ τοι ἄρκιος ἔσται, and this sense
remained in later Greek. It is, however,
going too far to conclude from the word
ἐπάρουρος that θητεύειν implied the status
of a serf adscriptus glacbae.

445, cCHUGINWN, giving orders; see A
289, and p 21 ἐπιτειλαμένωι σημάντορι
πάντα πιθέσθαι.

446. For the legend of the building
of the wall of Troy by Poseidon see note
on Z 433-39. The discrepancy between
this and H 452, where both gods are
made to join in building, was one of the
grounds for Ar.’s athetesis of H 443-64.
—Aridikes (see above) is again named by
Schol. U on 474 and by ἡ. Gud. on X
328 (s.v. dog@dpayos) ; nothing is known
about him.

450. τέλος, thetermof hire. nodkurHeéec
by Epic usage must be a general epithet,
‘bringing the glad changes of the year,’
rather than special, ‘bringing our glad
release.’

410

IAIAAOC Φ (xxi)

, , Ae / Ν «
ἐξέφερον, τότε νῶϊ βιήσατο μισθὸν ἅπαντα
» / = > > f
Λαομέδων ἔκπαγλος, ἀπειλήσας δ᾽ ἀπέπεμπε.
\ ξ΄ / \ fal eo
σὺν μὲν ὅ γ᾽ ἠπείλησε πόδας καὶ χεῖρας ὕπερθε

, / / » / Ξ
δήσειν, καὶ περάαν νήσων ETL τηλεδαπάων

στεῦτο
νῶϊ δέ
μισθοῦ
τοῦ δὴ

, , i nr
δ᾽ ὅ γ᾽ ἀμφοτέρων ἀπολεψέμεν οὔατα χαλκῶι. 455
/ an
τ᾽ ἄψορροι κίομεν κεκοτηότι θυμῶι,
᾿ je \ > > Ly.
χωόμενοι, Tov ὑποστὰς οὐκ ετέλεσσε.
r lal / / ἠδὲ θ᾽ e Ἢ
νῦν λαοῖσι φέρεις χάριν, οὐδὲ μεθ᾽ ἡμέων

ral © r nr / >} /
πειρᾶι ὥς κε Τρῶες ὑπερφίαλοι ἀπόλωνται

᾿ Ἄ ὶ ὶ ὶ αἰδοί ἀλόγνοισι.᾽
πρόχνυ κακῶς σὺν παισὶ καὶ αἰδοίηις χοιίσι.

460

\ > > / / ’ / .
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπεν ἄναξ ἑκάεργος ᾿Απόλλων

2 ,ὔ ΕΣ ’ yA / θ /
EVVOOLYAL , OUK ἂν μὲ caoppova bu no ato

» Las “ fy
ἔμμεναι, εἰ δὴ σοί ye βροτῶν ἕνεκα πτολεμίξω

Ξ ᾿ ᾽ , ” /
δειλῶν, οἱ φύλλοισιν ἐοικοτες ἄλλοτε μὲν TE

ζαφλεγέες τελέθουσιν, ἀρούρης καρπὸν ἔδοντες, 465

ἄλλοτε δὲ φθινύθουσιν ἀκήριοι.

ἀλλὰ τάχιστα

, ,ὔ Ἐς Ὁ ἣν : \ ὃ ΄ θ 39
παυώμεσθα μαχῆς" οι αυτοι ηριαασ @V.

ndoon Ar. Ὡ: θηλυτεράων ai ἀπὸ τῶν πόλεων (Did.).
PR Par. a2, yp. A: ἀποκόψειν AQ Bar. Par. c:
456. ὃέ τ᾽: δὲ Ῥ: δ᾽ DLR. || yp. Κεκοτηότε X.
459. πειρᾶ(ι)α PQRU Harl. a, Vr. Ὁ A.

ἄλλοι ap. Eust. and Schol. Par. a.
458. ἡμῶν U.
461. ἑκάεργος: d1dc υἱὸς O Ven. B.

ἀποκοψέμεν (2: ἀπολουςέμεν

460. πρόγνυ ().

463. πολεμίξω J() Bar. Vr.d: πολεμίζω GPRU.

466. δὲ; δ᾽ αὖ DGHJSTU, yp. A. || GANG τάχιετα : οὐϑέ τις ἀλκή Plut. Mor. 104 f.

(omitting 467).

467. naucue(c)ea CDHPQRTU Mor. Vr. A: naucwuecea ὦ

451. ἐξέφερον, brought to completion
(ἐξ). Cf. the phrase τελεσφόρος ἐνίαυτος.
βιήςατο uicedn, destituit deos Mercede
pacta Laomedon, Hor. C. 111 “9. ile
βιήσατο is only here construed with two
accusatives as a verb of robbing.

153. For cUn the printed vulg. has
σοί, with some mss. ; this, however, is
in every way inferior, as it introduces an
entirely false antithesis with ἀμφοτέρων ;
there is no reason why Apollo should be
singled out for special punishment.

454. mepdan, seeon 40. THAEdandoon :
the θηλυτεράων of the ‘city’ editions
was probably understood to mean ‘fertile,’
cf. θῆλυς ἐέρση, and θηλύτατον πεδίον in
Kallimachos.

155. credto, see on 1191. Ars ἀπο-
λεψέμεν is obviously more vigorous than
the vulg. ἀποκοψέμεν : Laomedon is made
to speak contemptuously as though the
divine bodies were mere tree-trunks to
be ‘lopped’ (A 236). |

458. ἡμκέων, for the gen. with μετά see
note on A 51; van L. suggests ἡμῖν.

459. neipGi, i.e. πειράε᾽ (αι): the alterna-
tive πειρᾶις cannot of course be resolved.
See on Q 390.

460. πρόχνυ, see note on 1 570.

464. An obvious reminiscence of the
famous simile in Z 146, though far from
improved by the totally imcongruous
clause ἀρούρης καρπὸν ἔδοντες, and by the
ludicrous confusion of metaphor in za-
φλεγέες, ‘like leaves are full of fire, eating
the fruit of the earth.’ It is hard to
believe that any poet could have written
such a medley except in deliberate
parody.

466. ἀκήριοι, see H 100.

467. παυώμεςθα is to be preferred to
the παυσώμεσθα of most edd., as the
-w- is out of place in the subj. of the
sigmatic aor. ; cf. H 290. αὐτοί, by them-
selves, without our interference.

IAIAAOC Φ (xx1)

417

a v ‘ / / > 7 ᾽ AN , ΄
ὥς apa φωνήσας πάλιν εἐτράπετ' αἴδετο γάρ pa

/ / ’ /
πατροκασιγνήτοίο μύγημεναι ἐν παλάμηισι.

Ν \ ’ὔ ’ ΄-
τὸν δὲ κασιγνήτη μάλα νείκεσε, πότνια θηρῶν, 470

” > / \ >? / / ‘al
Ἄρτεμις aypotépn, καὶ ὀνείδειον φάτο μῦθον

“φεύγεις δή, ἑκάεργε, Τ]οσειδάωνι δὲ νίκην

πᾶσαν ἐπέτρεψας, μέλεον δέ οἱ εὖχος ἔδωκας:

, / ‘ v > ,
νηπύτιε, TL νυ τοξον ἔχεις ἀνεμώλιον αὔτως ;

“ / \ \ / /
μή σεὺυ νῦν ETL πατρὸς ἐνὶ μεγάροισιν ἀκούσω 475

΄ , -“"

εὐχομένου, ὡς τὸ πρίν, ἐν ἀθανάτοισι θεοῖσιν,
wv / 5» / / »”
ἄντα [Ἰοσειδάωνος ἐναντίβιον πολεμίξειν.

δ \ > > ΄ ,

ὡς φάτο, τὴν δ᾽ οὔ τι προσέφη ἑκάεργος ᾿Απόλλων,
᾽ \ / \ > / 7 =
ἀλλὰ χολωσαμένη Διὸς αἰδοίη παράκοιτις" 479
‘ r \ r / / a] rat 4
‘mas δὲ σὺ νῦν μέμονας, κύον ἀδδεές, ἀντί ἐμεῖο 481

/
στήσεσθαι;

\
χαλεπή Tor ἐγὼ μένος avtipéper bar

/ > 4 ᾿ / / \
τοξοφόρωι περ ἐούσηι, ἐπεί σε λέοντα γυναιξὶ

468. ἄρα: ἂρ U.

ἀθ. Ar. || GrpoTépH: ἰοχέαιρα Vr. b.

469. WWIFHUWENAI: τινὲς yp. ϑαμήμεναι Sch. T. 471

473. εὖχος: ἔγχος J: καῦχος L.

474. GNEMCKION αὔτως : ᾿Αριδίκης Kai τειρέας οἷςτούς: φησὶ δὲ κακῶς φέρεσθαι

ἀτειρέας Sch. U. 475-77 ad. Ar.

ntoAeuizein JtU: πολεμίζειν 2 (7).
Syr. || After this GHJS Vr. Ὁ ἃ A add

477. πολεμίξειν A(): πτολεμίξειν DJ™-
478. THN: TON Syr.

479. χωςαμένη

NEIKECEN ἰοχέαιραν ὀνειϑείοις ἐπέεςει. 480

481. ἀδεὲς (). | ἐμοῖο P.

ap. Eust.

482. Gntipepizein Vr. b d A, Sch. T (lemma) and

469. μιγήμεναι ἐν παλάμηιςι, a
strange phrase apparently founded on
the familiar μιγήμεναι ἐν dat λυγρῆι with
the ἐν παλάμηισιν of H 105, 2 738. Cf.
= 386.

471 ἀθετεῖται ὅτι περισσὸς μετὰ τὸν
“ἐτὸν δὲ, , θηρῶν.᾽᾽ τίς δὲ κυνηγετικὴ
θεὸς εἰ μὴ ἡ "Ἄρτεμις; An. ‘The line
‘may be ἃ gloss, but is quite inoffensive.

473. μέλεον, adv. as Καὶ 480, IL 336,
for nothing, without a struggle. So also
ἀνεμώλιον αὕτως may be taken together
as μὰψ αὔτως. Compare Pandaros of his
bow, E 216 ἀνεμώλια yap μοι ὀπηδεῖ.

475-77. ἀπὸ τούτου ἀθετοῦνται στίχοι
Ὑ ov δύναται γὰρ ὁ αἰδούμενος ‘‘ πατρο-
κασιγνήτοιο μιγήμεναι ἐν παλάμηισιν ᾽᾿ ἀεὶ
προκαλεῖσθαι τὸν Ἰ[οσειδῶνα ἐν τῶι ᾿Ολύμ-
πωι πρὸς μάχην. ἄλλως τε οὐδὲ πολεμικός
ἐστιν, ἀλλὰ χοροῖς καὶ φόρμιγγι τέρπεται,
An. But the speech can hardly end
with 474, and self-contradiction is not
inconceivable in the author of the Theo-
machy.

[480]. This line is unknown to Eust.,

VOL. II 2

and was interpolated later than Aristo-
nikos, who says that we must supply
προσέφη in 479 from 478, κοινὸν δεῖ
δέξασθαι τὸ προσέφη. Such a construe-
tion is harsh and un-Homerie, but not
therefore to be rejected in the Theo-
machy. The line is adapted from B 277.
Compare note on 434 above, which was
added for similar reasons, but has found
its way into most Mss.

481. κύον Gddeé€c, as Θ 423.

482. crHceceai after μέμονας, see note
on H 36. ἀντιφέρεςθαι, cf. A 589 dpya-
λέος yap ᾿᾽Ολύμπιος ἀντιφέρεσθαι. μένος
recalls μένος ἀντιφερίζειν or ἰσοφαρίζειν
(411, 488, Z 101, ef. I 390) where the
verb means ἕο rival, not as in A 589 fo
oppose. It appears therefore that we
must here take it in the former sense,
if indeed we ought not to adopt the
variant ἀντιφερίζειν. If it meant oppose
we should require μένει.

483. γυναιξί is the emphatic word,
‘even if you have a bow, it was only
given you to use against women, not

E

418

IAIAAOC Φ (xx1)

» i 4 4) 53 ,
“Ζεὺς θῆκεν, καὶ ἔδωκε κατακτάμεν ἣν K ἐθέληισθα.

v > ” na b /
ἤτοι βέλτερόν ἐστι κατ᾽ οὔρεα θῆρας ἐναίρειν

485

Ὰ 5 /
ἀγροτέρας τ᾽ ἐλάφους ἢ κρείσσοσιν ἶφι μάχεσθαι.
Ὗ , > / Yj > \ αὶ
εἰ δ᾽ ἐθέλεις πολέμοιο δαήμεναι, ὄφρ᾽ ἐὺ εἰδῆις
» ty / ’ / ”
ὅσσον φερτέρη εἴμ᾽, ὅτι μοι μένος ἀντιφερίζεις.
n na ”
ἢ pa καὶ ἀμφοτέρας ἐπὶ καρπῶι χεῖρας ἐμαρπτε
fal rn ’ v9 > > ” ” i}
σκαιῆι, δεξιτερῆι δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἀπ’ ὥμων aivyto τόξα, 490

΄
αὐτοῖσιν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔθεινε παρ᾽ οὔατα μειδιόωσα

Dae /
ἐντροπαλιζομένην: ταχέες δ᾽ ἔκπιπτον ὀϊστοί.
, ¢ 7 7 /
Saxpvoecca δ᾽ ὕπαιθα θεὰ φύγεν ws τε πέλεια,

od es > (hoe cy / ΘΙ /
ἢ pa θ᾽ ὑπ ἴρηκος κοίλην εἰσέπτατο TETPHY,

5 a ΄, y 5
χηραμόν" οὐδ᾽ ἄρα The γε ἁλώμεναι αἴσιμον ἢεν᾽"

495

/
ὼς ἡ δακρυόεσσα φύγεν, λίπε δ᾽ αὐτόθι τόξα.

\ - /
Λητὼ δὲ προσέειπε διάκτορος apyetpovTns:

- / > / \
“Λητοῖ, ἐγὼ δέ τοι οὔ TL μαχήσομαι" ἀργαλέον δὲ

πληκτίζεσθ᾽ ἀλόχοισι Διὸς νεφεληγερέταο"

ἀλλὰ μάλα πρόφρασσα μετ᾽ ἀθανάτοισι θεοῖσιν

500

εὔχεσθαι ἐμὲ νικῆσαι κρατερῆφι Bindu.”

486. T om. JQ.

488. φέρτερος Vr. A. || icopapizeic ().

489. ἔμαρπε(ν)

JQ. 492. ἐντροπαλιΖζομένην Ar. 2: ἐντροπαλιζομένη SU Syr. Harl. a, Mose. 2
Ven. ΒΖ and ap. Did.: πολλὰ AiccoméNnHe Cypr. Chia: ἐντροπαλιΖομλένης Ptol. ?

(Sch. U).
CICLULON : μόρειλιον ().
yp. δὲ) QU Syr. Mor. Vr. A.

against goddesses.” The masc. λέοντα
is strange, but the fem. does not occur
in H. (see on P 134, Σ 318), and the
masc. may therefore be taken as of
common gender, especially as it appears
to be a borrowed (Semitic) word. Death
is commonly personified under the form
of a lion in Semitic mythology, and some
traces of this appear even in Greek
symbolism, of which the present passage
is the clearest. For Artemis as a death-
goddess see Z 205, 428, etc. She is said
to have been worshipped in Ambrakia in
the form of a lioness.

485. Ar. remarked that ἐναίρειν,
literally despotl (ἔναρα), is not properly
used of slaying animals. See, however,
Soph. Az. 26, and τ 263 μηκέτι viv χρόα
καλὸν évalpeo.

487. See Z 150 for possible construc-
tions of the passage. We may here
regard 489 as supplying a very practical
apodosis to the ei-clause, as in H 242.
So Nikanor suggests, ἢ καὶ κομματικὸν
ἀπέλιπε τὸν λόγον ἐπίτηδες ὁ ποιητής,

493. ὕπαιθα : ἔπειτα JPR Harl. ab, Par. ἃ b' ἃ hj, yp. A.

495.

498. uaxéc(c)oua J) Harl. a, Mose. 2. || 0€: rap A
501. nikHcein © Ven. B.

τῆς θεοῦ διὰ τῶν ἔργων τὸ λεῖπον ava-
πληρωσάσης. For the gen. πολέμοιο, to
learn about war, see H. G. 8 151 d.

490. τόξα, from the mention of arrows
in 492, seems to mean ‘weapons of
archery,’ including the quiver ; though
this is not a Homeric use, ef. A 45.
αὐτοῖσιν in the emphatic place cannot
mean less than ‘those very weapons,’
i.e. her own bow and arrows.

492. ἐντροπαλιΖομένηνΝ, turning aside
her head to avoid the blows. The variant
ἐντροπαλιζομένη is evidently inferior, as
there is no reason why Hera should turn
aside. Schol. U is very corrupt but
seems to point to a variant ἐντροπαλι-
ζομένης as well as πολλὰ λισσομένης, both
of which are possible.

495. xHpaudn, a cleft, a word recur-

ring in Aristotle and later writers. Yeu
is used in the same sense in X 93.
499. mA\HKTizeceat, to bandy blows.

ἀλόχοισι, plur. because the sentiment is
general (cf. 185), containing also an
evident allusion to the triumph of Hera.

IAIAAOC Φ (xx1) 419

vw?

ὡς ap ἔφη, Λητὼ δὲ συναίνυτο καμπύλα τόξα
πεπτῶτ᾽ ἄλλυδις ἄλλα μετὰ στροφάλιγγι κονίης.
΄ \ , fal / / / ?
ἡ μὲν τόξα λαβοῦσα πάλιν κίε θυγατέρος ἧς"
ἡ δ᾽ ap

/ \ \ » / / /

δακρυόεσσα δὲ πατρὸς ἐφέζετο γούνασι κούρη,
> \ > vo? ᾿ / ΄ \ / \ ΩΝ ‘ ?
ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἀμβρόσιος éavos τρέμε: τὴν δὲ προτὶ oi
> \ / \ > / ΄ \ 7,
εἷλε πατὴρ Κρονίδης, καὶ ἀνείρετο ἡδὺ γελάσσας"

» “, \ \ ‘ aan ae
Ὄλυμπον ἵκανε, Διὸς ποτὶ χαλκοβατὲς δῶ. 505

“τίς νύ σε τοιάδ᾽ ἔρεξε, φίλον τέκος, Οὐρανιώνων ;” — 509
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπεν ἐυστέφανος κελαδεινή: 511
“σή μ᾽ ἄλοχος στυφέλιξε, πάτερ, λευκώλενος “Ἡρη,

» \ lal “
ἐξ ἧς ἀθανάτοισιν ἔρις καὶ νεῖκος ἐφῆπται."
Δ e \ lal \ > / > /
ὡς οἱ μὲν τοιαῦτα πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἀγόρευον,

αὐτὰρ ᾿Απόλλων Φοῖβος ἐδύσετο ἤϊλιον ἱρήν" 515

μέμβλετο yap οἱ τεῖχος ἐυδμήτοιο πόληος,

/ > /
μὴ Δαναοὶ πέρσειαν ὑπὲρ μόρον ἤματι κείνωι.

503. πεπτῶτ᾽ PR™ Vr. A Par. ὁ g, yp. A: πεπτεότ᾽ CRS King’s Harl. d, Par. f j
πεπταῶτ᾽ Mosc. 2:
504 om. U.

πεπτηότ᾽ Par. b: nentH@t’ Vr. Ὁ:
wet’ GeaNaToici θεοῖσιν J.
507. ποτὶ (. 508. ἀνήρετο COGJP.

“ιετὰ κτλ. :
οὔλυμπόνϑ᾽ "Ὁ.

πεπτεῶτ᾽ ῶ,
505. οὔλυμπον © Syr.:

509. After this D™GJTU Vr. A add

ta e 4 \ Z Φ ~ -
»καψιδίως, aoc Εἰ ΤΙ ΚαΚΟΝ ῥέζουςαν ΕΝΟΟΠΗ͂Ι. 510

513. νεῖκος : Neike(a) Ar., yp. X: Neike’ ἐτύχϑη Sch. T.

οἷος Amm. on 232.

515. poiBoc:

502. καμπύλα applies properly only
to the bow though τόξα plainly means
the arrows; an instance of the purely
mechanical use of a familiar standing
epithet. So μετὰ crpopdAirri κονίης is
tastelessly borrowed from the fine passage
Π 775. Here it can only mean that she
raises the dust by running away. πεπ-
τῶτα: the correct form of the perf. part.
in H. is doubtful ; Mss. invariably con-
fuse it with the commoner πεπτηώς,
crouching, from πτη- (πτήσσω), and the
mistake is as old as Ap. Rhod. who has
ἄτηι ἐνιπεπτηυῖαν 111. 973 (but περὶ γούνασι
πεπτηυῖαν iv. 95. isambiguous). It recurs
in H. only x 384, where Mss. have πεπτε-,
WENTY-, πεπτει-ῶτας, WENTY-, πεπτε-ότας,
of which only the first and last will scan.
The Attic form is πεπτώς (Soph, Az. 829,
Ant. 697), and this is presumably right
for H. also. The weak form of the stem
is πτ-, not mre-, and πε-πτ-ς thus
corresponds to βε-βα-ώς, Fe-Fix-ws, ete.
The only alternative would be πεπτωώς,
on the analogy of πέπτωκα, a difficult
form. (Cf. Brugm. Gr. ii. p. 1206,
where an intermediate πε-πτ-α- ὡς from
πε-πτ-ώς is assumed. )

504. This line looks as though it were
formed on Σ 138 ὡς dpa φωνήσασα πάλιν
τράπεθ᾽ υἷος ἑοῖο, but the constr. must be
different, as πάλιν evidently cannot here
be taken with the gen., back from (see
YT 439). We must either make euratépoc
depend on τόξα or regard it as a gen. of
the point aimed at or attained (ΗΠ. G. ὃ
151 ὁ, c). Neither of these alternatives
is satisfactory.

509-10 =E 373-74, as indeed the
whole scene is clearly founded on remi-
niscences of the wounding of Aphro-

dite. 510 is omitted here by almost all
MSS.

511. KeAadeinH as subst., see II
183.

513. νεῖκος ἐφῆπται, cf. B15. But
νείκε᾽ ἐτύχθη would be a more suitable
phrase—the quarrel is no longer ‘im-
pending,’ but has come to a head. It
is likely that this was the reading of
Ar. (Ludwich ad loc.).

515. ‘Ammonios’ in his schol. on 292
has οἷος for Φοῖβος. This suits the con-
text well, as emphasising the contrast
with of ἄλλοι 518, but looks very like a
conjecture.

430 IAIAAOC Φ (xx!)

e ined » Ν Μ[ ” θ \ aN Ξόντες
οἱ δ᾽ ἄλλοι πρὸς ᾿Ολυμπον ἴσαν θεοῦ αἰέν €0 ;

e , « \ / /
of μὲν χωόμενοι, οἱ δὲ μέγα κυδιόωντες,

cad δ᾽ ἷζον παρὰ πατρὶ κελαινεφεῖ.

αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς 520

mia ε an 7 > / \ , A
Γρῶας ομῶὼς αὐτούς T ὄλεκεν καὶ μωνυχᾶς ὑπποῦυς.

δὰ >) \ ¢ /
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε καπνὸς ἰὼν εἰς οὐρανὸν εὑρὺν ικώνει
» la / e Δ > lal
ἄστεος αἰθομένοιο, θεῶν δέ ἑ μῆνις ἀνῆκε,
a / lal \ tf 5 ᾿Σ Φ
πᾶσι δ᾽ ἔθηκε πόνον, πολλοῖσι δὲ κήδε᾽ ἐφῆκεν,

γ΄" , if n
ὡς ᾿Αχιλεὺς Τρώεσσι πολύστονα κήδεα θῆκεν. 525
/ id / > \ Us
ἑστήκει δ᾽ ὁ γέρων IIpiapos θείου ἐπὶ πύργου,
Ξ > >t >> i , ΟΝ CLs ᾽ a
és δ᾽ ἐνόησ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆα πελώριον: αὐτὰρ ὑπ αὑτοῦ
fal > I IQs 5) \
Τρῶες ἄφαρ κλονέοντο πεφυζότες, οὐδέ τις ἀλκὴ
a] id \ / na n
yived ὁ δ᾽ οἰμώξας ἀπὸ πύργου βαῖνε χαμᾶζε
Ta \ 4
ὀτρύνων Tapa τεῖχος ἀγακλειτοὺς πυλαωροὺς" 530

520. napa: nap A{CD}U Harl. ἃ, Par. eg. || πατρὶ : Ζηνὶ A{CD}QU Mor.

Harl. d, Par. ὁ g (yp. παρὰ πατρὶ ΑἸ).

yp. ἵκηται A (cf. Σ 207). 524 om. L.

521. αὐτός Vr. b. 522. ἱκάνει :
525 om. Tt (add. Rhosos, T™): placed

after 526 in Syr. || πολύστονα PR: φόνον kai AU Harl. a, Mor.: πόνον καὶ ©. ||
κήδεα θῆκεν PR: κήϑε᾽ ἐφῆκεν H (ἔφηκεν) (): κήϑε᾽ ἔϑηκεν (2: yp. ἔτευξεν A.

526. ἑστήκει AU Vr. A: ictHKel Syr. :

εἰςστήκει ὦ.

529. γίγνεθ᾽ L. 530.

ὀτρύνων Ar. ADJQ Harl. d: ὀτρυνέων ἄλλοι (Did.), 2. | τεῖχος : πύργους J. ||

yp. πυλαο-υ:- ρούς X.

522. Adapted from = 207, ποῦ success-
fully. The disasters caused by Achilles
seem to be compared to the disaster of
a burning city; but according to the
actual words they are compared to the
rising smoke. This is very pointless.

523. θεῶν... ἀνῆκε may be taken
as a parenthesis, indicating perhaps that
the fire is accidental, and not due to
an enemy ; then καπνός will be the nom.
to ἔθηκε and ἐφῆκεν, and the unity of
the simile is at least superficially saved.
Still this is very harsh. It is almost
equally unsatisfactory to make μῆνις the
subject of the three following verbs, as
the comparison to the smoke is entirely
lost sight of. We may, however, take
it to be ‘‘the conflagration,” or more
generally ‘‘the state of things,” which
causes misery like that of Achilles’
progress. Bothe by omitting 524 cer-
tainly improves the passage, and gets
rid both of the sham antithesis πᾶσι...
πολλοῖσι, and of the fourfold assonance
of yxe, which is disagreeable to our ears,
though we cannot be sure that it was so
to the Greeks (there are three rhyming
lines in Ψ 152-54). It is thus possible

to regard Achilles’ progress over the
plain as likened to the slow but unceas-
ing advance of a great column of smoke,
putting aside all question of the misery
caused by the fire. No stress can be
laid on the omission of the line by L;
it is due merely to homoioteleuton, which
has not affected the other mss. of the
same family (P Lips.). The same cause
has led to the omission of 525 in T and
presumably to its displacement in Syr.

525. If 524 is omitted, moAUcTona is
obviously better than the vulg. πόνον
καί, which merely reinforces the false
antithesis of 524.

526. eeiou, probably as built by
Poseidon. θεῖος is not used as a mere
synonym of ἱερός, the common epithet
of citadels. So θεοδμήτων ἐπὶ πύργων
Θ᾽ 519.

528. ἄφαρ, see on A 418, N 814.
Here it is no more than μάλα, were
chased amain.

530. ὀτρύνων is better than ὀτρυνέων.
The future part. is out of place in
introducing a speech which is to be
regarded as the actual representation
in words of the action of the verb.

IAIAAOC Φ (xx1)

“ee / > \ 4 Ε] ᾿] "“ ‘
πεπτάμενας EV χερσὶ πύλας EXET, εἰς O KE λαοὶ

ἔλθωσι προτὶ ἄστυ πεφυζότες: ἣ γὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς

.} \ “ / -“ v / > v
ἐγγὺς ὅδε κλονέων: νῦν οἴω Roly. ἔσεσθαι.

> \ > , , > “ > / , /
αὐτὰρ €7TEL K ες TELYOS QAVaATTVEVO MOLY AXEVTES,

/ / -
αὗτις ἐπανθέμεναι σανίδας πυκινῶς ἀραρυίας" 535

δείδια γὰρ μὴ odAOS ἀνὴρ ἐς τεῖχος ἅληται."

A Μ > ΄ > » ,ὕ / \ > -“ , -
ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, of δ᾽ ἄνεσάν te πύλας Kal ἀπῶσαν ὀχῆας:

αἱ δὲ πετασθεῖσαι τεῦξαν φάος.

αὐτὰρ ᾿Απόλλων

ἀντίος ἐξέθορε, Tpawy ἵνα λοιγὸν ἀλάλκοι.
οἱ δ᾽ ἰθὺς πόλιος καὶ τείχεος ὑψηλοῖο, 540
δίψηι καρχαλέοι, κεκονιμένοι ἐκ πεδίοιο

“ e \ \ ” , ” “. / , ΄ a
φεῦγον: ὁ δὲ σφεδανὸν ἔφεπ᾽ ἔγχεϊ, λύσσα δέ οἱ κῆρ

533. κλονέει C Ven. B, Vr. A.

539. ἀλάλκοι : ἀνάλκοι Par. 1:
at) ST Ven. B King’s: ἀμύνη Par. 6.

535. aveic C. | émaneéuenal Ar. {C},
ἐν ἄλλωι A: En’ ἂψ (ἐπὰψ) e€uena τινὲς τῶν κατὰ πόλεις, 2.
ἀλάλκη L (svpr. οἱ) :
540. evetc H.

καρφαλέοι G (J supr.) Vr. A: καρχαρέοι R (καρχαλέοι Ἐπ).
Ar. ALR™T (e corr.) Ven. B Syr. : cpedandc C (supr. on).

538-39 ἀθ. Zen.
ἁμύναι CH (supr. Η over
541. dive: J Bar. Vr. A.

542. cpedan@n

531. πύλας refers presumably to the
Skaian gate, the only one of which we
hear on the side towards the plain.

533. κλονέων, the variant κλονέει is
equally good. Aofria, as A 518.

535. οὕτως ᾿Αρίσταρχος, ἐπανθέμεναι
διὰ τοῦ ν, οἷον ἀναθεῖναι. τινὲς δὲ τῶν
κατὰ πόλεις ἐπ᾽ ay θέμεναι, Did. So in
Σ 14 Ar. read ἂψ ἐπὶ νῆας ἴμεν for νῆας
ἐπ᾽ ἂψ ἰέναι of Mss. It is not easy to de-
cide between the two readings. Against
ἐπ᾿ ay θέμεναι the only argument seems
to be the sound. ἐπιτιθέναι is the
Homeric word for closing a gate (e.g.
E 751), while ἐπανατιθέναι is not else-
where found. Compounds with ézava-
are common in later Greek, but the only
Homeric instance is ἐπανέστησαν B 85.
But as these arguments are by no means
strong, we may be content to let Ar.
decide the matter for us.

536. μή left long in thes? before a
vowel is a very rare license in this place ;
ef. A 505, A 412, X 199. ἅληται, aor.
subj. from ἅλλομαι, here only ; in A 192
we have ἅλεται (ἄλεται 1) the correct form
answering to the non-thematie Gro.
The scholia all refer the word to ἀλῆναι,
like ἀλέντες above.

537. G@necan, loosed, relaxed, the fast-

enings ; cf. 6 359, X 80 for this sense of

ἀνίημι.
538. φάος, safety for the fugitives, as
Z 6, = 102, and elsewhere. Znvddoros

τοὺς στίχους ἠθέτηκε, γελοῖον ἡγούμενος διὰ
πύλης φωτίζεσθαι τὴν πόλιν, τοῦ παντὸς
τόπου ἐναιθρίου ὄντος, An. It is not
easy to believe that this silly reason
was Zen.’s real ground for the athetesis ;
the criticism is more in the style of
Zoilos, for whose name Zen.’s may have
been accidentally substituted.

539. It is not easy to decide between
ἁλάλκοι and ἀμύναι. ΑΒ arule ἀμύνειν
takes ace. and gen., ἀλαλκεῖν ace. and
dat. On the other hand, λοιγὸν ἀλαλκεῖν
comes twice besides in this book (138,
250), and we have φάρμακον... 6 κέν
τοι κρατὸς ἀλάλκηισιν κακὸν ἦμαρ, K 288,
and οὐκ ἔσθ᾽ ὃς ofs γε κύνας κεφαλῆς
ἀπαλάλκοι X 348. The balance is thus
slightly in favour of the text. There are
two possible alternatives, if we accept it,
which evade the unusual constr. ; we
may take Τρώων with ἀντίος, putting the
comma after it, or we may make it de-
pend as a possessive gen. upon λοιγόν, cf.
λοιγὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν, 134. But neither of
these is natural ; and ἀντίος is generally
used of hostile meeting.

541. καρχαλέοι, here only before Ap.
Rhod. It is presumably connected with
καρχαρ-όδους, and means rough, Virgil's
asper siti (G. iii. 434). But καρφαλέοι,
dry, would be defensible if it had better
support.

542. cpedanon, as A 165, IL 372.
But there is weighty evidence for σφε-

429 IAIAAOC © ᾳχὴ

αἰὲν ἔχε Kpatepy, μενέαινε δὲ κῦδος ἀρέσθαι.
ἔνθά κεν ὑψίπυλον Τροίην ἕλον υἷες ᾿Αχαιῶν,
εἰ μὴ ᾿Απόλλων Φοῖβος ᾿Αγήνορα δῖον ἀνῆκε, 545
a 5 ’ eV > / I.
hat ᾿Αντήνορος υἱὸν ἀμύμονά τε κρατερὸν TE.
> / e / / aN \ δέ ¢ > \
ἐν μέν οἱ Kpacine θάρσος βάλε, Tap o€ οἱ αὑτὸς
A e - 2 /
ἔστη, ὅπως θανάτοιο βαρείας χεῖρας ἀλάλκοι,
lal 7 / > CYA ΤῸ. bite n
φηγῶι κεκλιμένος" κεκάώλυπτο δ᾽ ap ἠέρι πολλῆι.
αὐτὰρ ὅ γ᾽ ὡς ἐνόησεν ᾿Αχιλλῆα πτολίπορθον, 550
yy \ / id / / /
ἔστη, πολλὰ δέ οἱ κραδίη πόρφυρε μένοντι"
2 / ’ » 53 a /
ὀχθήσας δ᾽ dpa εἶπε πρὸς ὃν μεγαλήτορα θυμὸν"

547, αὐτὸς : αὐτῶ R.
τινὲς ἀχιλλέα πηλείωνα Sch. AT.
ἂρ JL.

548-550 om.
551. μένοντι :

T’. 550. ἀχιλλῆα πτολίπορθον :
κιόντι Bar. 552. ἄρα:

δανῶν, and this was the reading of Ar. ;
ὅτι σφεδανῶν σφόδρως διώκων, An., οὕτω
σφεδανῶν, ὑπερρωμένος τῶι θυμῶι καὶ
σφόδρος ὑπάρχων, καθάπερ ἀπὸ τοῦ φονᾶν
τὸ φονῶν, Did. Of these the latter
explanation is the more correct, as
σφεδανῶν would be intrans., though
coming from σῴφεδανέων rather than
σφεδανάων. The contraction is in itself
suspicious, and the participle is not
demanded by the analogy of O 742,
Ω 326.

544-45, cf. IL 698-700. 546, ef.
A 194.

548. The reading of the text is that of
all mss., so farasis known. It is true
that Hoffmann quotes A C, and La R.
A only, for κῆρας instead of χεῖρας ; but
the facsimile shews that this can only be
due to some strange hallucination. A,
like the rest, has χεῖρας, as is correctly
printed by Villoison. As κῆρας is found
as early as Eust., MS. support may yet be
discovered for it ; but this will not alter
the fact that χεῖρας is the only authentic
reading. la θανάτοιο is not an un-
common phrase in H., and in view of the
similarity of sound we might expect to
find it sporadically here as the result of
mere error. Its absence is thus the more
significant. We must, therefore, accept
the bold personification of ‘the heavy
hands of Death,’ which after all hardly
goes beyond Ὕπνωι κασιγνήτωι Θανάτοιο
in= 231. This line and the ms. reading
of A 97, Nomoto βαρείας χεῖρας ἀφέξει,
mutually support one another, and the
reading Δαναοῖσιν ἀεικέα ΧΟ ἀπώσει
should be rejected. (For the personifi-
cation of λοιμός in later poetry ef. Soph.
Ὁ. T. 27 ὁ muppopos θεὸς . . λοιμὸς

ἔχθιστος and Simon. Amorg. fr. 7. 101
οὐδ᾽ aiva λοιμὸν οἰκίης ἀπώσεται, ἐχθρὸν
συνοικητῆρα, δυσμενέα θεόν). It is note-
worthy, however, that the metaphorical
uses of yelp are curiously rare in H.; v 267
ὑμεῖς δὲ μνηστῆρες ἐπίσχετε θυμὸν ἐνιπῆς
καὶ χειρῶν is looseness of expression
rather than metaphor. Even ἐπιχειρεῖν
and ὑποχείριος appear only in the most
literal sense.

549. φηγῶι, presumably the oak by
the Skaian gate ; see note on E 693.

550. πτολίπορθον ὅτι πλεονάζει ἐπ᾽
᾿Οδυσσέως τὸ πτολίπορθος, νῦν δὲ ἅπαξ
ἐπ᾿ ᾿Αχιλλέως. πρὸς τοὺς χωρίζοντας"
τούτοις γὰρ χρῶνται. τινὲς δὲ ᾿Αχιλλέα
Πηλείωνα ποιοῦσι, ξενισθέντες πρὸς τὸ ἐπί-
θετον, An. We find πτολίπορθος as an
epithet of Achilles, however, in Θ 372,
Ο 77, 2108, so that An.’s ἅπαξ cannot
be justified. Apparently the chorizontes
argued that Achilles was πτολίπορθος in
Zi., Odysseus in Od., to which Ar.

replied that the epithet as used of

Achilles was unique (or rare at least).
Odysseus is also πτολίπορθος in J/., B 278
(see note), K 363, so the argument does
not come to much.

551. πόρφυρε, see notes on A 103,
= 16.

552—A 403, where it introduces a
speech very similar in construction to
Agenor’s, though shorter. The scheme
of Hector’s deliberation, X 99-130, is
still closer to the present. In all these
cases two alternatives are discussed and
rejected, with the identical line A 407=
Φ 562=X 122, in favour of the more
heroic course. Between Hector’s speech
and Antenor’s there is the further re-
semblance that (1) the most obvious

IAIAAOC Φ (χχι)

ε"» ΡΥ, > , ἽΕΙ a? a
ὦ μοι ἐγών" εἰ μέν κεν UTO κρατεροῦ Ἀχιλῆος
7 a ΄ ΝΜ > , ,

φεύγω, τῆι περ οἱ ἄλλοι ἀτυζόμενοι κλονέονται,

(rey \ ra \ τ, ,
αἱρήσει μὲ Kal ὡς καὶ ἀνάλκιδα δειροτομήσει.

an
οι
οι

᾽ ᾽ A τι Ν 4 \ e / "7
εἰ δ᾽ ἂν ἐγὼ τούτους μὲν ὑποκλονέεσθαι ἐάσω

Πηλεΐδης ᾿Αχιλῆϊ, ποσὶν δ᾽ ἀπὸ τείχεος ἄλληι

, Ν , 3 fae » ’ Δ A
φεύγω πρὸς πεδίον IAniov, ὄφρ᾽ av ἵκωμαι

Ἴδης τε κνημοὺς κατά τε ῥωπήϊα δύω:

e / ᾽ A » / cal
ἑσπέριος δ᾽ ἂν ἔπειτα λοεσσάμενος ποταμοῖο

σι
σὺ
-

ἱδρῶ ἀποψυχθεὶς προτὶ “Dov ἀπονεοίμην.
lol ,
ἀλλὰ τί por ταῦτα φίλος διελέξατο θυμός ;
/ /
μή μ᾽ ἀπαειρόμενον πόλιος πεδίονδε νοήσηι
/ pe / /
καί pe μεταΐξας μάρψηι ταχέεσσι πόδεσσιν"
δι νυ > » / \ fel ’ ΄ sot ad
οὐκέτ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽ ἔσται θάνατον καὶ κῆρας ἀλύξαι: 565

553. ὑπὸ : andG.
ται 2, yp. A. 556. τούτοις R.
idHion Krates.

561. ποτὶ CGQR.
udpwei S. 565. ἔςεται Bar.

554. κλονέονται AG()U Syr.: poBéonto PR: poBéon-
ἀποκλονέεςϑαι I.
559. κνημοὺς : κρημνοὺς U.
563. ἀπαειρόμενος () : ἀπαειράμενον A 81}.

558. IAHTON Ar. ©:
560. GN: ἂρ Dt) Vr. A (&p’).
564.

means of escape, direct flight, is sum-
marily rejected ; (2) a more circuitous
evasion is first entertained and then
dropped, after both sides have been con-
sidered ; (3) resistance is decided upon
with some faint hope.

555. ἀνάλκιϑα, not ‘helpless,’ ‘un-
armed,’ as some have taken it, but a
coward with all the contemptuous con-
notation of the word, as will be seen by
referring to the other instances, e.g. A
390 ἀνδρὸς ἀνάλκιδος οὐτιδανοῖο, Ὁ 62
ἀνάλκιδα φύζαν, etc, δειροτομήςει con-
tinues the same thought ; see note on 89.

556. ei, ‘suppose I leave’; no apo-
dosis is required ; cf. A 581. So in 567
and the corresponding line X 111.

558. This line seems hopeless as it
stands. The meaning of “IAHion we
cannot guess at; it is the adj. of an
unknown name ᾿Ιλεύς. It is commonly
taken to be from “IXos or Ἴλιος, and
explained to mean ‘near the tomb of
llos’ (Schol. B, ef. K 415) or ‘the plain
of Tlios.’ But even if the form admitted
this, no πεδίον other than the Τρωϊκόν
(K 11, ete.) or Σκαμάνδριον (B 465), the
plain between the city and the ships,
appears elsewhere in the poems. Nothing
is gained by adopting Krates’ reading
᾿Ιδήϊον : the correct form of the adj. is
᾿δαῖος, and there is no plain near Troy
which can be called ‘the plain of Ida,’

for: Ida is twenty miles away across
entirely hilly country. There must
therefore be something wrong with the
text. Bothe’s évAjiov is a step in the
right direction, as substituting a general
epithet fora proper name. But by far
the most ingenious and convincing
emendation is that of van L. and M. da
Costa, φεύγω πρὸς πεδίον λεῖον, ὄφρ᾽ ἄγκε᾽
ἵκωμαι. They suppose that ἄγκε᾽
(ANKE) was mistaken for ἄν xe, and
the second particle dropped as redundant,
the defective metre being filled out by
turning λεῖον into Ἰλήϊον (IAEION). For
λεῖον medlov=level plain see Ψ 359; it
is opposed to the ascent to Troy on which
Agenor finds himself. He proposes to
turn aside to the plain of the Scamander
SW. of the city, and follow it up till
he reaches the ‘ glades’ (the natural aim
of the fugitive, cf. X 190, 6 337) and
‘foot-hills of Ida’—a perfectly intelligible
plan. The te after Ἴδης in 559 thus
gains a meaning which in the existing
text it entirely lacks.

561. ἱδρῶ anowuyeeic, cf. K 572, A 621.

563. ἀπαειρόμενον, our colloquial
‘taking myself off.’ The act. ἀπαίρειν
is familiar in this sense in Attic prose
and verse, e.g. Eur. Cycl. 131 ὡς ἀπαί-
ρωμεν χθονός : the mid. seems not to recur.
For the independent subj. with μή οἵ.
notes on A 26, Π 128.

434

IAIAAOC Φ (xx1)

λίην yap κρατερὸς περὶ πάντων ἔστ᾽ ἀνθρώπων.
εἰ δέ κέν οἱ προπάροιθε πόλιος κατεναντίον Ea:
καὶ γάρ θην τούτωι τρωτὸς χρὼς ὀξέϊ χαλκῶι,
ἐν δὲ ἴα ψυχή, θνητὸν δέ ἕ φασ᾽ ἄνθρωποι

e Zr r \ lal ’ / ”
ἔμμεναι: αὐτάρ οἱ Κρονίδης Ζεὺς κῦδος ὀπάζει.

Or
“I
o

a > Li ¢ aa
ὼς εἰπὼν ᾿Αχιλῆα ἀλεὶς μένεν, ἐν δέ οἱ ἦτορ
ἄλκιμον ὡρμᾶτο πτολεμίζειν ἠδὲ μάχεσθαι.
WZ ΄ 3 / > /
ἠύτε πάρδαλις εἶσι βαθείης ἐκ ξυλόχοιο
ἀνδρὸς θηρητῆρος ἐναντίον, οὐδέ τι θυμῶι

a a ig \ ᾽ /
ταρβεῖ οὐδὲ φοβεῖται, ἐπεί Kev ὑλαγμὸν ἀκούσηι"

εἴ περ γὰρ φθάμενός μιν ἢ οὐτάσηι ἠὲ βάληισιν,
> ΄ /
ἀλλά τε Kal περὶ δουρὶ πεπαρμένη οὐκ ἀπολήγει
Ψ n / , SEN / »>\ ὃ ΝΣ %
ἀλκῆς, πρίν γ᾽ ne ξυμβλήμεναι He δαμῆναι

ὡς ᾿Αντήνορος υἱὸς ἀγαυοῦ, δῖος ᾿Αγήνωρ,

9. 9 n
οὐκ ἔθελεν φεύγειν, πρὶν πειρήσαιτ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆος,
γ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἀσπίδα μὲν πρόσθ᾽ ἔσχετο πάντοσ᾽

.] ω
ἀλλ᾿ ὃ

δ80
ἐΐσην,

566. λίαν {H}PR.
Katenantioc {H'PR (κατ᾽ ἐν).
ὅὁρμᾶτο JQ. || πολεμίζειν ST Syr.

567. O€ KEN Of: δ᾽ αὐτὼ H {2° ἂν ἐγὼ, Hoffm.}. |
570 aé. Ar.

573. πάρδαλις Ar. 2: πόρϑαλις ACD.JST
Syr. Harl. a, Vr. d A, Mose. 2 (see note on N 103).
᾿Αρίσταρχός τινάς φησι γράφειν κυνυλαγμόν: οὕτω καὶ Znvddoros Did.

571. ἀλεὶς : adic Syr. 572.

575. KEN ὑλαγμὸν :
576.

κτάμενός Vr. Ὁ. || MIN: Tic ai ἀπὸ τῶν πόλεων, P. || ἢ om. Syr. || οὐτάςει C().

578. Γ᾽ om. J. 579. υἱὸν Ri.

Vr. b.

|| ἀγαυὸς J.

580. φυγέειν Ven. B. | πειρῆςαι

567. The apodosis is again omitted,
as in 556. The synizesis of πόλιος is
very rare (only B 811 in the same
phrase): Menrad conj. πρόσθεν πόλιος.

568. It will be noticed that the in-
vulnerability of Achilles is a purely post-
Homeric legend.

569. For the hiatus see on I 319.
Here Fick conj. ἔννι δ᾽ ἴα, 1.6. ἔνι with
lengthening in the first ictus, Agar ἐν
δέ F’(o) ia.

570 ἀθετεῖται ὅτι ws ἐλλείποντος τοῦ
λόγου ἐνέταξέ τις αὐτόν. δεῖ δὲ τῶι
“θνητὸν δέ ἕ pac’ ἄνθρωποι᾽᾽ προσυπακούειν
τὸ εἶναι. καὶ ὅτι ἐπιφερόμενον τὸ ““ αὐτάρ
οἱ Kpovidns Ζεὺς κῦδος ὀπάζει᾽᾽ ἐναντίον ἐστὶ
τῶι προτρέποντι τὸν ᾿Αγήνορα ἀντιστῆναι
τῶι ᾿Αχιλλεῖ, An. The objection is well
founded ; the desire to supply a verb
which is not needed has been a fruitful
source of interpolation, cf. A 295. The
meaning of the last clause is that the
line directly contradicts the hope of
victory which has just been expressed.
It is from Θ 141.

575. ταρβεῖ, read ταρβέει: so also
M 46. ᾿Αρίσταρχός τινάς φησι γράφειν
“ἐ κυνυλαγμόν. καὶ Στησίχορος δὲ ἔοικεν
οὕτως ἀνεγνωκέναι. φησὶ γοῦν “ ἀπειρέσιοι
κυνυλαγμοί," Herod. The reading is
worth consideration, among other
reasons because it avoids the trochaic
caesura in the fourth foot ; though this

-is not uncommon after ἐπεί κε (ce etc.),

cf. 483 and van L. Ench. p. 20. But
the compound is certainly a startling
one,

576. The shortening of ἢ (from Fé)
is very rare; the only other cases in //.
are Καὶ 451 (read ἢ ἀντίβιον), (IL 515 if we
read evi,) Φ 113, Ψ 724. Here win is
out of its proper order (H. G. p. 337)
and is better omitted (the same objection
applies to reading F’ for μιν). The
alternative τις may indicate that both
words are mere stop-gaps.

580. neipricaito, the only instance in
H. of the opt. after πρίν (except πρίν γ᾽
ὅτε. . ἄσαιμι 1 489).

or

IAIAAOC Φ (xxi) 42

éyxeine δ᾽ αὐτοῖο τιτύσκετο, Kal μέγ᾽ ἀύτει:"
“ἢ δή που μάλ᾽ ἔολπας ἐνὶ φρεσί, φαίδιμ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεῦ,
ἤματι τῶιδε πόλιν πέρσειν ρώων ἀγερώχων
/ , = Ε] » \ / »Μ ᾽ , ᾽ ᾽ ε "“
VnTUTL, ἦ τ᾽ ἔτι πολλὰ τετεύξεται aNyE ἐπ᾽ αὐτῆι. 585
ἐν γάρ of πολέες τε Kal ἄλκιμοι ἀνέρες εἰμέν,
“δ \ ζ΄ ’, / ᾽ / 4 fa
οἱ καὶ πρόσθε φίλων τοκέων ἀλόχων τε καὶ υιῶν
Ἴλιον εἰρυόμεσθα. σὺ δ᾽ ἐνθάδε πότμον ἐφέ ψεις,
ὧδ᾽ ἔκπαγλος ἐὼν καὶ θαρσαλέος πολεμιστής."
ἢ pa καὶ ὀξὺν ἄκοντα βαρείης χειρὸς ἀφῆκε, 590
/ > » / 6 \ / » , > ,
καί ῥ᾽ ἔβαλε κνήμην ὑπὸ γούνατος οὐδ᾽ ἀφάμαρτεν'
ἀμφὶ δέ οἱ κνημὶς νεοτεύκτου κασσιτέροιο
σμερδαλέον κονάβησε: πάλιν δ᾽ ἀπὸ χαλκὸς ὄρουσε
βλημένου, οὐδ᾽ ἐπέρησε, θεοῦ δ᾽ ἠρύκακε δῶρα.
Πηλεΐδης δ᾽ ὡρμήσατ᾽ ᾿Δγήνορος ἀντιθέοιο 595
4 > , ᾽ » ’ / - > ΄
δεύτερος: οὐδέ T ἔασεν ᾿Απόλλων κῦδος ἀρέσθαι,

585. H T ἔτι:
ἔτ᾽ Vr. b.

583. H ON: yp. ἤδη A, τινές Herod. 584. πέρςαι U Vr. A
A μάλα A (yp. ἣ τέ τι) QU. || τετεύξεαι HPR Harl. a (p. ras.). | én’:

avtac Lips. 586. γάρ ῥ᾽ oi C Ven. B, Mosc. 2: γάρ τοι D°-HPRST. ἄνδρες
PR: ἐν ταῖς πλείοσιν ἄνδρες ENEIMEN, Kal μήποτε οὐ κακῶς, Did. 587. ol καὶ
Ar.: of Ke(N) Q and ἔν τισι τῶν εἰκαιοτέρων Schol. B. || τεκέων R Lips. | ἀλόχων

‘TOKEN τε ἔν τισιν ἀντιγράφοις Eust. 588. eipucduecea CG Ven. B (La R.’s
eUpucduecea is probably a misprint): eipucdueea J (supr. coa): εἰρυόμεθα PU :
ipuduecea ἢ εἰρυςόμεθα Hust. 590. βαρείης : παχείης CD.) (πευ-) Harl. a,
Vr. Ὁ, Mose. 2, yp. A. 592. of HJ: μιν ὥ. 593. KondBize 1): κονάβιςςε |J.
594 0m. At. ἐρύκακε JPR. 595. dpurcat’(), 596. {τ᾿ oi. CD}.
acen ἄναξ θιὸς υἱὸς ἁπόλλων A.

ἐν ἄλλωι

583. ἔολπας, the neglect of the F is for which see on Z 321), the aor. being

rare, cf. fT 186, and see H. G. p. 376. elsewhere the only tense used.

Bentley conj. ἐξέλπε᾽, thesimplest change 591. καί ῥ᾽ ἔβαλε, καί F’ ἔβαλε Bran-
of several that have been pr oposed (Audra dreth.

δή τι ξέξολπας Cobet ; ἢ δή που σὺ FéF on- 592. οἷ, so La R., for the vulg. μιν.

mas Brandreth). p

587. οὕτως ai ᾿Αριστάρχου οἱ καὶ
'πρόςϑε᾽ ἔν τισι δὲ τῶν εἰκαιοτέρων οἵ κε
πρόσθε, Did. All our Mss. read κε or
κεν, which involves taking εἰρυόμεσθα
as a future; but there is no meaning
in the particle, which is purely otiose.
καί isused with the rel. precisely as in
Tf 165, where see note. It marks the
clause as a consequence of the preceding
words, and may be expressed by ‘there-
fore.’ τοκέων, a non-Homeric form for
τοκήων, see note on Ὁ 660. τεκέων is
obviously inadmissible here, and there
is no satisfactory correction.

588. Epeweic and ἐφέψειν w 471 are the
only instances of the future in this phrase

As he points out, the dat. is the only
case used in similar phrases, e.g. M 396,
N 805, Σ 205, where it means upon him.
When ἀμφί is used with acc. it means
round about, Π 414, 2 588, ete. If wy
be read it must therefore mean κνήμην.

594 looks like an addition intended
to bring in an allusion to the ὁπλοποιΐα :
the fact that A omits it may be signi-
ficant.

596. οὐδέ τ᾽ €acen, most Mss. ; but the
7 is meaningless, and if it is true that
CD omit it (Hoffmann), we have valuable
Ms. testimony to the reading οὐδέ ῥ᾽
ἔασεν, which in any case is clearly right
Brandreth). So in the next line read
δέ F’ for & ἄρ᾽ (Brandreth).

436 IAIAAOC Φ (xx1)

, / ’ Oe ΞΟ 3. iA
ἀχλά pw ἐξήρπαξε, κάλυψε δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἠέρι πολλῆι,
c , 7 /
ἡσύχιον δ᾽ ἄρα μιν πολέμου ἔκπεμπε νέεσθαι.
Li oh iZ aA
αὐτὰρ ὁ IInreiwva δόλων ἀποέργαθε λαοῦ
lal . / 3 / 2 \
αὐτῶι yap ἑκάεργος ᾿Αγήνορι πάντα εοἰκῶς 600
, / lal id \ ,
ἔστη πρόσθε ποδῶν, ὁ δ᾽ ἐπέσσυτο ποσσὶ διώκειν.
id ΄ ,
ἕως ὁ τὸν πεδίοιο διώκετο πυροφόροιο,
Ξ ὃ θυδινή Σκάμανδ
τρέψας παρ ποταμὸν βαθυδινήεντα “ικάμανόρον,
ς ,ὔ ’ Se eas), b /
τυτθὸν ὑπεκπροθέοντα: δόλωι δ᾽ ἄρ ἔθελγεν Απόλλων,
ε > \ im
ὡς αἰεὶ ἔλποιτο κιχήσεσθαι ποσὶν οἷσι" 605
» ny / i € i,
τόφρ᾽ ἄλλοι Τρῶες πεφοβημένοι ἦλθον ομίλωι
> / \ yA hi on ” ὯΝ, "λέ εξ
ἀσπάσιοι προτὶ ἄστυ, πόλις ἔμπλητο ἀλέντων
» ΟΣ ” / 5 » \ » ΕῚ x
οὐδ᾽ dpa τοί γ᾽ ἔτλαν πόλιος καὶ τεύχεος ἐκτὸς
A Ps) 7, \ , or ΄
μεῖναι ἔτ᾽ ἀλλήλους, καὶ γνώμενᾶι ὃς TE πεφεύγοι
¢ 3 x > > / b] /
bs τ᾽ ἔθαν᾽ ἐν πολέμωι: ἀλλ᾽ ἐσσυμένως ἐσέχυντο 610
ΟῚ / -“ lal / \ lal /
és πόλιν, ὅν τινα τῶν γε πόδες καὶ γοῦνα σάωσαν.

597. ἐξήρπαςε U.

|
599. anoépraee Ar. 2: dneéprace wp. Did.
601. Moccl: tpwcci P! (swpr. no). διώκων Vr. Ὁ.

rap ἐ J.
GJU Harl. a. || κάμανϑρον LR Harl. a.
πάντες C Ven. ἢ.

κάλυψε 0 ἄρ᾽ : yp. καὶ καλύψας A.

598 om. L.
600. rap ῥ᾽ GHS:
603. «τρέψας
606. Tpdec:

had PR.

604. 0° ἄρ᾽: rap GH.

607. πόλιες: πύλαι Antim. Rhianos, yp. A. || GumAHcTo PQR
Mor. Bar.: ἔπληστο L: ἔπλητο Par. be: ἔμπληντο Antim. Rhianos.

608. ἄρα:

dp P. 609. μεῖναι ἐπαλλήλους H Vr. b. || oc κε Pap. λ. || πεφεύγει DJ.
610. ἐς(ε)υμένωος A (yp. ἀεπαείως) () Bar. Mor. : ἀσπαείως 0. || énéxunto U Vr.

A: ἐκέχυντο {H}R.

611. re om. PR. || γοῦνα caccai Ar. : γοῦν᾽ ἐςάωςαν 1).

604. ϑόλωι nocin οἷςι, a paren-
thesis, ἕως being answered by τόφρα.
δέ F’ ἔθελγεν (rather δέ Fe θέλγεν, because
of the caesura) Brandreth.

609. γνώμεναι dc, a case where the
rel. pronoun comes very near the indirect
interrogative, cf. on H 171. neqeurot,
this thematic perf. opt. is very rare (see
note on Θ 270), and it is a question if
we should not read πεφεύγει-- ἴπ such a
question Mss. hardly count. But we
may perhaps see a special vividness in
the opt., which expresses the mere
possibility only of any particular man
having survived: ‘to discover the man
who might have escaped and him who
had fallen.’

610. €ccuunénwe though not strongly
supported, seems better than the

vulg. ἀσπασίως after ἀσπάσιοι just
above.

611. For cdecan Ar. read σαώσαι,
which is defensible on much the same
grounds as πεφεύγοι above. The use of
the sing. verb, even though nddec is one
of the nominatives, is sufficiently sup-
ported by B 339, Τ' 327, ἕξ 291, ef. P 387.
Bekker has ingeniously but needlessly
conjectured that both readings spring
from an older σαώσαιν Ξκεσαώσειαν, of
which he finds another instance by read-
ing ἄλφοιν for ἄλφοι in v383. This form of
the 3rd pl. opt. is sufficiently established
by inscriptions from Delphi for the the-
matic tense (-o.v), and we should there-
fore be justified in assuming its existence
in the aor. form, if there were any need.
See G. Meyer Gr. ὃ 589, H. G. ὃ 83.

Χ
INTRODUCTION

Tue story of the slaying of Hector is simple and straightforward ; its place
in the Δῆνις is incontestable. It is closely connected with the end of the
preceding book—so closely that Φ 526 would seem to be a more natural
point for the division of the rhapsodies.

The whole book has an unquestionable claim to a place in the very front
rank of all Epic poetry. It occupies a peculiar place in the Iliad, as no
single Greek hero other than Achilles and Patroklos is so much as named
from beginning to end. The artistic effect of this reticence is an ample
justification for it, and rebuts any suggestion thereon founded of separate
authorship. Even Patroklos is not named till 323, an interpolation ; whence
some critics have argued that the ‘Patrokleia’ did not form part of the
original Mijvis, as Achilles ‘could not have failed’ to mention his dead
friend in his colloquy with Hector before the fight. But most readers will
find in the burning fury of 261—68 a more vivid allusion to Achilles’ special
grief than could well be given by words.

This book has had, however, to pay the penalty of antiquity and fame,
and has not remained free from accretions. We shall find abundant reason
for holding that the Ransoming of Hector in 22 is a late part of the Iliad ;
the last scene of this book, 405-575, is an introduction to 2, and may
almost be called a part of it. Certainly it loses half its significance if
there is to be no ransoming to follow. On the other hand, 404 forms an
admirable and dramatic close to the Mjvis, while the ὥς of 405 is the usual
opening of a new canto. The beautiful scene 437-515 may well be from
the hand which gave the parting scene of husband and wife in Z. It is
unfortunately disfigured by the interpolation of 487-507 ; for though the
description of the sorrows of orphanage has a pathos of its own, it is entirely
unsuited to the context, as Aristarchos long ago perceived, and is fitted into
its place by a most frigid stop-gap in 500-7.

Serious doubt has been thrown also on parts of the speeches of Priam
and Hector, 38-76 and 99-130. To deal with the latter first, it has been
urged that the repetition after so short a space of the exact scheme on which
the speech of Agenor in ® 552-70 is framed must be regarded as a fault.
To this it might be replied that the objection tells equally against the speech
of Agenor. But it is strange that Hector should not make even a passing
allusion to the moving appeals of his parents ; and still more strange that he

427

498 IAIAAOC X (Χχχπ) ΄

should thus entertain the thought of surrender after the vigorous description
of his heroic attitude in 92-97. His reflexions certainly show anything but
ἄσβεστον μένος. The use of ὑπό in 102, and the curious epanalepsis in
128 may possibly be notes of late origin, though the latter could be easily
removed by excision of the line. The other objections can be met by
nothing short of the excision of 98-130, reading in 131 τόφρα δέ of σχεδὸν
ἦλθε ποδάρκης δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς, or the like. !

The portion of Priam’s speech to which objection has been made is
46. δῦ. If the death of Lykaon in the preceding book is an addition, these
lines must of course go with it, and most readers will probably feel that the
tone of them rather weakens than enforces the passionate appeal of the
preceding passage. The balancing of the grief of the parents and that of the
people for Lykaon and Polydoros, and of the loss of both against that of
Hector, is the thought rather of a dispassionate bystander than of a chief
actor. And the gratuitous exaggeration of horror in 69- 76 combines with
other considerations pointed out in the notes to stamp these lines too as
not original.

It must be said at once, however, that all these suspicions rest on some-
what general grounds which will carry different cogency to different minds.
The additions, if such they are, are so skilfully made as not to betray any
glaring contradiction, or even confusion of motive. But the same can
hardly be said of one very troublesome passage, 166-207. The difficulties
of the latter part of it are sufficiently discussed in App. K. The conclusion
there arrived at is that 199-207 must go; the same verdict can be claimed
against 166-198. There can be no doubt that the whole passage most
seriously interrupts the story at the moment when our feelings are being
strung to the highest pitch by the nearness of the climax. The rapidity of the
best Epic style demands that the τέταρτον of 208 should follow immediately
on the τρίς of 165.1 The colloquy of Zeus and Athene, 167-185, resembles
closely that which precedes the death of Sarpedon ; it is open not only to
the doubts which affect so many of these scenes in Olympos, but to the more
serious objection that it anticipates and seriously weakens the solemn
weighing of the fates which follows (209 ff.) ; when that comes, we ask why
it should be required merely to register a decision which has been already
given, though with extreme indifference, by Zeus. It seems, then, that the
passage 166-207 is made up (1) of the colloquy in Olympos, added first ;
(2) of the similes 189-193, 199-201, which may well be old variants of
that which precedes in 162-66 ; (3) of various explanatory passages ; 202—4 to
explain how Apollo can be said to ‘leave’ Hector in 2i3—the original poet
conceived Apollo watching his friends as at the beginning of the book ;
205-7 to explain why the other Greeks did not interfere. The one
intervening piece of narrative, 194. 98, is at least extremely obscure, but it
may fairly be classed with the other two explanatory or scholiastic additions ;
it certainly does not help the story.

Splendid though the book is in its directness, speed, and pathos, the
effect which it produces on a modern reader is probably very different from
that which was aimed at by the original poet. For us it is Hector who is

' See E 436, Π 702, 784, T 445, ᾧ 176 (= 125); cf. also A 462, > 155
(Erhardt).

IAIAAOC Χ (χχπ) 429

throughout the object of sympathy and admiration. Fighting a hopeless
fight against gods as well as the mightiest of heroes, he presents himself
in a far nobler light than Achilles, who enjoys the divine aid denied to his
enemy, and whose overmastering passion is not patriotism, but the gratifica-
tion of a private revenge. It is in the last scene of all that we feel this
most keenly—first in the treacherous interference of Athene, at once so
revolting and so needless ; and secondly, in the brutal ferocity with which
Achilles refuses to agree with Hector that the victor shall give the vanquished
honourable burial. One might think that the poet had purposely done all
in his power to exalt the Trojan at the expense of the Greek.

But it is not to be believed that such was really his intention ; and it is
possible to see how an ancient Greek audience may have viewed the matter
in another light. To them the presence of the gods on Achilles’ side was
not so much a mere extraneous aid as a tangible sign that Achilles was after
all fighting the great fight of Hellenism against barbarism ; it is a reminder
that the action on earth is but a reflexion of the will of heaven, and it
exalts rather than belittles those to whom help is given. The moral
superiority of Achilles being thus warranted from the point of view of
national and religious feeling, to him redounds all the exaltation of his
adversary.! It is because it is difficult, or even impossible, for a modern
reader to realise the supreme importance of the religious aspect of the
situation, and its predominating influence on the relative position of the two
characters, that the death of Hector must always produce on us an effect
different from that which we may be sure was originally designed. Other-
wise we must admit that the poet of the Mjris was guilty of a serious artistic
mistake in allowing our sympathy to go out only in favour of that one of his
characters who cannot, either poetically or patriotically, be his real hero.

1 Against this, however, see the suggestive criticism of Professor Lewis Campbell,
Religion in Greek Literature, pp. 56-7.

IAIAAOC X

“Extopoc GNaipecic.

Lt ” / Sih ,
ὡς οἱ μὲν κατὰ ἄστυ, πεφυζότες ἠύτε νεβροι,
e rn ΟῚ ΄ 7) Ε > ͵ i OL
ἱδρῶ ἀπεψύχοντο πίον T ἀκέοντὸ τε δίψαν

/ an 3) if > \ ΤᾺΣ \
κεκλιμένοι καλῆισιν ἐπάλξεσιν: αὐτὰρ Ἀχαιοὶ
5 ΄ ’ » /
τείχεος ἄσσον ἴσαν σάκε᾽ ὦμοισι κλίναντες.

¢ an an \ a /
‘Extopa δ᾽ αὐτοῦ μεῖναι ὀλοιὴ μοῖρ ἐπέδησεν, 5

᾿Ιλίου προπάροιθε πυλάων τε

/
Σκαιάων.

αὐτὰρ Πηλείωνα προσηύδα Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων'

€ / ,
“rimté με, Πηλέος υἱέ, ποσὶν ταχέεσσι διώκεις,

᾽ \ \ +\ \ ” >’ f / ,
αὐτὸς θνητὸς ἐὼν θεὸν ἄμβροτον ; οὐδέ νύ πώ με

2. ἀπεψύχοντο : ἀνεψύχοντο (A supr.) Vr. A, yp. PX Lips., διχῶς Ar. 5.
ὁλοὴ CD (p. ras.) HPQRT Ambr. Syr. Harl. a, Ven. B: ὁλωὴ Vr. A. || yp. καὶ

λιοῖρα πέϑηςεν X.
T (swpr. a) Syr. Bar.

7. αὐτὰρ ὁ H Ambr. Syr.

8. πηλέως R. 9. ἄβροτον

1. nepuzdtec, see on Φ 6.

2, GNEWUXONTO, διχῶς, καὶ ἀνεψύχοντο
καὶ ἀπεψύχοντο: χαριεστέρα δὲ ἢ διὰ τοῦ
ν, Did. (A); but ὁ δὲ ᾿Αρίσταρχος ἀνεψύ-
χοντοὸ γράφει. χαριέστερον δὲ τὸ ἀπεψύ-
xovro, B (the last sentence also in T).
Both these contradictory statements are
suspicious ; ἀπό 15 clearly the preposition
required, and there is no hint of a
variation where the word recurs (A 621,
Φ 561). In E795, K 575 dva- isin place.
GKEONTO, a unique use. The word is
regularly used of healing wounds; but
is found also of patching up ships &
383, and repairing an error N 115,
κ 69,

4. ςάκε᾽ ὥμοιει κλίναντες, see A 593,
N 488. In both these cases the for-

mation is destined to receive a charge of

the enemy. How it could serve in an
advance is by no means clear, as the

soldiers’ right arms would be impeded.
It may mean that the approach to the
walls is a mere reconnaissance carried
out with all defensive precautions. But
even so we should rather have expected
the ὑψόσ᾽ ἀνασχόμενοι of M 138. Platt
(J. P. xix. p. 48) suggests that the
same phrase may indicate two different
manceuvres. Here it might possibly
imply throwing the shield back, so that
the whole weight lay on the shoulders,
as the Homeric warrior did when no
attack was likely (Θ 94, A 545). But
this is not satisfactory.

5. ὁλοιή for the usual ὀλοή only here,
A 342, Hymn. Ven. 224; ef. ὀλώϊος Hes.
Theog. 591, and οὔλιος (A 62) beside
οὖλος.

6. Ἰλίου, i.e. ᾿Ιλίοο, see on Φ 104.

7. Apollo is still in the guise of
Agenor, Φ 600.

IAIAAOC Χ (xxi)

431

” ΄ / > \ > \

ἔγνως ὡς θεός εἰμι, σὺ δ᾽ ἀσπερχὲς peveaivers. 10
5 , ” , r , , A iri ar

ἢ νύ τοι ov τι μέλει ρώων πόνος ods ἐφόβησας,

οἱ δή τοι εἰς ἄστυ ἄλεν, σὺ δὲ δεῦρο λιάσθης.

> ΄ , ᾽ \ " , , ᾶ >

οὐ μέν με κτενέεις, ἐπεὶ οὔ TOL μόρσιμός εἰμι."
\ \ | ae ae ΄, , aN > \ ᾽ ΄,

τὸν δὲ μέγ᾽ ὀχθήσας προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς:
ow , , ory - > ΄ ,

ἔβλαψάς μ᾽, ἑκάεργε, θεῶν ὀλοώτατε πάντων, 15
᾽ / fal / ᾽ Ν , = ᾽ » ‘
ἐνθάδε viv τρέψας ἀπὸ τείχεος: ἢ κ᾽ ἔτι πολλοὶ

rf γ᾽ \ Μ ’ /
γαῖαν ὀδὰξ εἷλον πρὶν λιον εἰσαφικέσθαι.

fal ᾽ ᾽ \ \ / a » / \ \ ,
νῦν δ᾽ ἐμὲ μὲν μέγα κῦδος ἀφείλεο, τοὺς δὲ σάωσας

€ Ὁ] » \ ” / » » > ,
ῥηϊδίως, ἐπεὶ OU τι τισιν YY ἔδδεισας οπισσω"

5

’ Ἂ / Μ , / , ”
ἢ σ᾽ ἂν τισαίμην, εἴ μοι δύναμίς γε παρείη. 20

“Ὃ , \ \ ” / Sf, » /

ὡς εἰπὼν προτὶ ἄστυ μέγα φρονέων ἐβεβήκει,

/ cd > ᾽ / \ Μ
σευάμενος ὥς θ΄ ἵππος ἀεθλοφόρος σὺν ὄχεσφιν,

“ ἘΠ ern. / / /
ὅς ῥά τε peta θέηισι τιταινόμενος πεδίοιο"

ὡς ᾿Αχιλεὺς λαιψηρὰ πόδας καὶ γούνατ᾽ ἐνώμα.

\ e lal > “
τὸν δ᾽ ὁ γέρων [Πρίαμος πρῶτος ἴδεν ὀφθαλμοῖσι 2:

/ 3 2 ’ > 5 > ΄,
παμφαίνονθ ὥς T ἀστέρ ἐπεσσύμενον πεδίοιο,

10. After this Syr. adds ᾿λίου ἐξαλαπάξαι εὐκτιενον πτολίεθρον.

ἐλίασϑης AHPQRST Vr. A, Harl. a.

τινὲς BodowrTatTe (/. δολιώτατε) Schol. BT.

Ambr. Harl. a, Par. h and ap. Sch. T.

19. e€ddeIcan Ambr.
23. pa om. D ‘‘ Vat. 1,” yp. ὅς Te ῥεῖα ἐκτεταμένου τοῦ τε, Sch. X.

12. deUp’
15. ὀλοώτατε:
18. ἀφείλαο
22. ceuduenoc H.
25. πρῶτον (),

13. κτανέεις (:.
11. πρὶν : προτι 1).

26. ὥς τ᾽: ὡς R. || ἀπεςςεύμενον R: ἐπιςςεύμενον Sch. X (lemma).

10. εὺ δέ, the opposition is only be-

tween the actions, not the subjects, of

the two clauses, as A 191, etc. The
interposition of the subordinate ws θεός
εἰμι makes the expression natural, though
not logical. For the last half of the line
ef. A382 (Syr. adds A 33 here also, though
it is clearly out of place). μενεαίνεις,
art striving, cf. note on IL 491.

11. Τρώων, a curious case of the
objective gen., ‘labour concerning the
Trojans,’ i.e. the slaughtering of them.
τὸ περὶ τοὺς Τρῶας πονεῖν, An.; cf. note
on Ἑλένης ὁρμήματά τε στοναχάς τε, Β
356. It evidently cannot mean ‘the
distress of the Trojans.’ mss. do not
give here the usual variant φόνος, which
would seem a more natural expression,

13. For the personal use of udpcinoc,
predestined, cf. π᾿ 392 (= 162), ὅς κε
πλεῖστα πόρηι Kal μόρσιμος ἔλθηι. Else
we have only μόρσιμον ἣμαρ and μόρσιμον
ἣεν (ἔσται).

15. ἔβλαψας, hast foiled me; in this

metaphorical sense used only of divine
agency in H. (e.g. I 507, O 724), except
ᾧ 294 oivos καὶ ἄλλους βλάπτει, see note
on Π 660. Bentley conj. βλάψας με,
Fexdepye. Others have proposed to
transfer uw’ to the next line (τρέψας μ᾽
ἀπὸ τείχεος). ὁλοώτατε as I’ 365.

19. Cf. A 515 ἐπεὶ οὔ τοι ἔπι
ὁπίςςω, hereafter.

20. Cf. 8 62. It appears from Sch. T
that some read ἧι (sc. τίσει) for ἧ.

23. ὅς Te peta may be right, but see
note on P 46%. Cf. Ψ 517-18, Z 507,
and for τιταίνειν also B 390, M 58.
It is simplest to take nedioio with
θέηισι.

24=O 269. λαιψηρά may be either
an adverb or a (predicative) epithet. In
the latter case it comes from the familiar
λαιψηρὰ δὲ γοῦνα Καὶ 358, T 93, X 144,
204, in spite of the interposed πόδας,
For the adj. agreeing with a noun from
which it is separated by another of
different gender cf. O 344.

δέος.

432 IAIAAOC X (χχπὶ)

“ / 3 5 > / , . > \
ὅς pa τ᾽ ὀπώρης εἶσιν, ἀρίζηλοι δέ οἱ avyat

fal ’ > / Ν > n
φαίνονται πολλοῖσι MET ἀστράσι νυκτὸς ἀμολγώῶε,
ὅν τε κύν᾽ ᾿Ωρίωνος ἐπίκλησιν καλέουσι"

λαμπρότατος μὲν ὅ γ᾽ ἐστί, κακὸν δέ τε σῆμα τέτυκται, 80
καί τε φέρει πολλὸν πυρετὸν δειλοῖσι βροτοῖσιν"

ὡς τοῦ χαλκὸς ἔλαμπε περὶ στήθεσσι θέοντος.

ὥιμωξεν δ᾽ ὁ γέρων, κεφαλὴν δ᾽ ὅ ye κόψατο χερσὶν
ὑψόσ᾽ ἀνασχόμενος, μέγα δ᾽ οἰμώξας ἐγεγώνει

λισσόμενος φίλον υἱόν: ὁ δὲ προπάροιθε πυλάων 35
ἑστήκει, ἄμοτον μεμαὼς ᾿Αχιλῆϊ μάχεσθαι"

τὸν δ᾽ ὁ γέρων ἐλεεινὰ προσηύδα χεῖρας opeyvus:

“"RKetop, μή μοι μίμνε, φίλον τέκος, ἀνέρα τοῦτον

οἷος ἄνευθ᾽ ἄλλων, ἵνα μὴ τάχα πότμον ἐπίσπηις
Πηλεΐωνι δαμείς, ἐπεὶ 7 πολὺ φέρτερός ἐστι, 40
σχέτλιος: αἴθε θεοῖσι φίλος τοσσόνδε γένοιτο

27.- ὁπώρηι Η.
Syr. Ven. B: οἱ D!: 60° 2.
ὅ re λάζετο P: ὅ τ᾽ ἐλάζΖετο R.
Syr.: εἰστήκει 2. 39. ἄνευ L.

30. λαμπρότερος J Lt. Mag. 484. 44. || & τ᾽ CD>GJPSTU
32. ἔλαμπεν Eni 1). Sos
36. €ctHKel Ar. AQ Harl. a, Vr. Ὁ:

er

re κόψατο:
ICTHKE!

27. The star that goes forth in harvest-
time, Sirius, is the ἀστὴρ ὀπωρινός of
E 5, where see note (and cf. A 62, N 244—
45). Itis strange that the shining ‘in
the darkness of night’ should be brought
into connexion with the Aeliacal rising
(i.e. the first perceptible appearance in
the dawn) of the star in summer, the
time of fever ; Sirius is, of course, seen
at night only in winter and_ spring.
We must either say that the combina-
tion of brightness and deadliness which
renders this such a splendid simile, is
poetically legitimate, though astronomic-
ally impossible; or, which is perhaps
more reasonable, admit that we do not
rightly understand νυκτὸς ἀμολγῶι.
The precisely similar difficulty in 317
(q.v.) suggests that the words really
mean 7 the twilight, whether of morning
orevening. There is nothing in any of
the other passages where the phrase
recurs (A 173, O 324, 6 841), to make
this explanation impossible, and it is in
fact given by Eust. But it still leaves
the difficulty that it is only in the
depth of night that Sirius ‘shines
bright amid the host of stars.’

29. The name of the ‘dog’ (Canis

maior) has now been transferred to the
constellation of which Sirius is the
brightest star. It follows close upon
Orion. “Optenoc, rather Qapiwvos, see
on 486. énikAHcin in > 487 means
‘asa second name.’ It may be so here
if we can assume that the preceding
description is in itself enough to suggest
the first name Sirius.

31. onpelwoa ὅτι ἅπαξ ἐνταῦθα ὁ πυρε-
τός, καὶ ὅτι πυρετὸν κυρίως λέγει, οὐχ ὥς
τινες δέχονται τὴν διάκαυσιν τοῦ ἀέρος
(i.e. in the special sense fever, not heat
generally), An. So Virg. den. x. 274
Sitim morbosque ferens mortalibus aegris,
and cf. Soph. 0. 17. 27, with Jebb’s
note.

34, ἀνασχόμενος, sc. χεῖρας, cf. Ψ 686.
The word indicates the violence of his
gesture.

41. εχέτλιος, hard of heart, of Achil-
les; so of Herakles σχέτλιος, ὀβριμοερ-
vos, Ε 408, @ 28. If it were not that
the preceding and following verbs both
referred to Achilles, it would be more
natural to apply the adj. to Hector,
rash, in the tone of friendly but shocked
remonstrance, which so often belongs to
it ; see 86, Καὶ 164, Σ 19, ete.

IAIAAOC Χ (xx!)

ξ΄ ’ὔ lol v
ὅσσον ἐμοί: τάχα κέν ἑ κύνες Kai γῦπες ἔδοιεν
/ > ͵ὕ Φι Ν > ‘ , “
κείμενον: ἣ κέ μοι αἰνὸν ἀπὸ πραπίδων ἄχος ἔλθοι"
“ » tan lol \ ,’ ” < v
ὅς μ᾽ υἱῶν πολλῶν τε Kal ἐσθλῶν εὖνιν ἔθηκε,

/ \ \ ’ὔ » ͵ὔ
κτείνων καὶ περνὰς νήσων ἔπι τηλεδαπάων.

καὶ γὰρ νῦν δύο παῖδε, Λυκάονα καὶ Πολύδωρον,

οὐ δύναμαι ἰδέειν Γρώων εἰς

, , , a
τούς μοι Λαοθόη τέκετο, κρείουσα γυναικῶν.
> > > Ν , \ a 2 a
ἀλλ᾽ εἰ μὲν ζώουσι μετὰ στρατῶι, ἢ τ ἂν ἔπειτα

- ra) ? »
χαλκοῦ τε χρυσοῦ τ᾽ ἀπολυσόμεθ᾽- ἔστι yap ἔνδον"

433
45
ΕΣ » vs
ἄστυ ἀλέντων,
50

πολλὰ yap ὦπασε παιδὶ γέρων ὀνομάκλυτος Λλτης.
> s ὰὼ a \ > ΜΠ ΠῚ τα ,
εἰ δ᾽ ἤδη τεθνᾶσι καὶ εἰν ᾿ΛΑΐδαο δόμοισιν,

42. ἔδοιεν Ar., yp. Χ : ἔϑονται {2 (ἔϑωνται C spr.) :
4

43. ἔλθηι Ηλι]. ἃ, Vr. ἃ, Mosc. 2.
θηλυτεράων Sch. T (cf. on Φ 454).
AaoeéH Bar.

48.

Gnoducéuee’: ἐν ἄλλωι ἀπολύςομεν Δ.

49. crpaton J Par. j and ap. Eust. || A: εὖ Pap. X.

τινὲς ἔδοιντο (Ὁ Sch. B.

4. ὅς ο᾽ J. 45. τηλεδαπάων : τινὲς
τούς Ar. AD Vr. b, ““γαΐ. 10”: otic Q.
50.

51. παιδὶ rap ὥπαςε πολλὰ Aph. /

(see Ludwich). γέρων : ai ἀπὸ τῶν πόλεων φίληι, Did.

42, ἔδοιεν is the reading of Ar. only,
Mss. all giving ἔδονται. ‘That the opt.
is not necessitated by the sense is seen
from T 54, A 386, q.v. But it is
evidently better, both as followed by κε

. ἔλθοι, and because Priam certainly
does not mean to express any confident
hope that the dogs will soon eat Achilles.
For the use of κεν and ἄν with the fut.
indic. see on 66 below.

48, κείμενον, sc. unburied. ἔλθοι
is to be taken with ἀπό. Cf. 2514. A
. . ἔλθοι is a parenthesis, ὅς referring
to ἐ,

45. Οἵ. Φ454. The variant θηλυτεράων
is mentioned here also by Schol. T.

46. For the deaths of Lykaon and
Polydoros see YT 407 ff., Φ 34 ff. ; for
Laothoe Φ 85 ff.

48. Kpeiouca (here only) evidently
implies that Laothoe was a real wife
and not-in any subordinate position.
Thus we have a genuine case of polygamy,
but among the Trojans only ; nothing of
the sort is even hinted at among the
Homeric Greeks. ‘This is one of the few
hints of a recognised difference of custom
dividing the two nations.

50. Gnoducéuee’, aor. subj. or fut.
indic. ? ἐν ἄλλως ἀπολύσομεν A ; a Wrong
reading, as the act. is used only of him
who accepts the ransom (see on A 13).
But perhaps we should read ἀπολύσομαι.

51. Thisgiving of gifts to the daughter,

VOL. II 2,

~

if genuine, again shows that Laothoe can
hardly have been in an inferior place,
or one of which the father disapproved.
Sut van L. is probably right in omitting
the line as a lateaddition. The practice
of giving gifts to a daughter at marriage
dates only from the end of the Homeric
period (see note on I 146); and Priam
can hardly be expected to proclaim that
he looks to his wives’ dowries for the
ransom of his sons. Hoffmann rejects
46-55, Naber 46-53.

52. As Nikanor points out, this line
may be punctuated in two ways: (a) as
in the text; (b) with the comma after
τεθνᾶσι instead of δόμοισιν. The latter
has the advantage of giving a better
antithesis to μινυνθαδιώτερον, ‘we shall
indeed carry our grief to the grave (οἴ.
the same idea in 389), but the people
will the sooner be consoled.’ On the
other hand the line occurs four times in
the Od. (6834, ο 350, v 208, w 264), and
there we must always take the two
halves together, supplying εἰσίν (ἐστίν).
This consideration is decisive, unless we
are prepared to suppose that the poets of
the Odyssey borrowed the line without
noticing or understanding how it was to
be taken. This is not absolutely im-
possible, as there are a good many cases
where lines are taken from earlier
portions with a slight change of con-
nexion ; but it is certainly not necessary.

F

434 IAIAAOC X (xx)

» > a a , \ / ϑ
ἄλγος ἐμῶι θυμῶι καὶ μητέρι, τοὶ τεκόμεσθα
a 5 ΄ ὦ
λαοῖσιν δ᾽ ἄλλοισι μινυνθαδιώτερον ἄλγος
” 3 \ 5, na By
ἔσσεται, iv μὴ Kal σὺ θάνηις ᾿Αχιλῆϊ δαμασθείς. 55
> > - \ / v iy.
ἀλλ᾽ εἰσέρχεο τεῖχος, ἐμὸν τέκος, OPpa σαώσηις
min \ y in i
Todas καὶ Tparas, μηδὲ μέγα κῦδος ὀρέξηις
lal > an
Πηλεΐδης, αὐτὸς δὲ φίλης αἰῶνος ἀμερθῆις.
» / 2 be /
δύστηνον ἔτι φρονέοντ᾽ ἐλέησον,
/ “ \ σ΄ (ὃ b] \ / OO
δύσμορον, OV pa πατὴρ Kpovt ἧς ETL γήραος OvowL 60
v > 5 / / \ / > 3 δό
aione ἐν apyarent φθίσει, κακὰ πόλλ ἐπιδόντα,
- , = ΄
vids T ὀλλυμένους ἑλκηθείσας τε θύγατρας,
, “ / \ / /
καὶ θαλάμους Kepaifopévous, καὶ νήπια τέκνα
Ζ > lol - a
βαλλόμενα προτὶ yainu ἐν αἰνῆι δηϊοτῆτι,
td / \ 2 an e ἊΣ X ἘΝ rn a
ἑλκομένας τε νυοὺς ὀλοῆις ὑπὸ χερσὶν Αχαιῶν. 65
ἡ J / ΄
αὐτὸν δ᾽ ἂν πύματόν με κύνες πρώτηισι θύρηισιν

Ν ’ ’ \ \
πρὸς δ᾽ ἐμὲ TOV

56. τέκος: τινὲς θάλος Schol. T. 58. αὐτός τε R. 59. φρονέων PR™;
τινὲς ZOONT Sch. I’. || ἐλέαιρε CPRS. 61. αἴςηι : νούςωι [pseudo-]Plut. 119. 7:
OuUHI Stob. for. 104. 1. 62. ἑλκυθϑείςας CHJPQR: éAxueetcai Vr. A: ἑλκηςθείςας
Cant. Mose. 2. 64. ποτὶ DGHST. || γαΐηι : cru ““ Vat. 10,” Stob. Flor. 104. 1.

66. με: Te T.

53. For éu@i van L. suggests ἐμοί,
which answers better to μητέρι.

59. φρονέοντα, before I have lost my
φρένες in extreme old age. This absolute
use occurs here only. Schol. T mentions
a variant ζώοντα, which may, however, be
no more than a gloss.

60. ἐπὶ γήραος οὐδῶι, a phrase which
recurs also in 2 487, 0 246, 348, W 212.
To us the ‘threshold of old age’ suggests
merely the beginning, and this meaning
the phrase may have in the Odyssean
passages as well as in Herod. 11. 14.

3ut in both places of the Jliad it is
essential that it should mean, or at
least be consistent with, advanced age.
Some have thought that as a room is
left, as well as entered, by the threshold,
it may mean the extreme end, as wellas
the beginning. Perhaps it is better to
remember that in the Homeric house the
οὐδός is not merely a line to be crossed,
it is a place in the hall where people
habitually sit ; see 6718, κ 62, and more
particularly p 339, where a man ἐπὶ
οὐδοῦ is ἔντοσθε θυράων. It would seem
therefore that the position is that of an
inmate of the chamber; a man ἐπὶ
γήραος οὐδῶι is one who has taken up his
abode in the halls of eld. (The proposal
to take οὐδῶι -- ὁδῶι as in p 196 dar’ ἀρι-
σφαλέ᾽ ἔμμεναι οὐδόν is refuted by ψ 212

γήραος οὐδὸν ἱκέσθαι : though a man may
be said to be ‘upon the path of old
age,’ we should not speak of reaching the
path. Moreover the lengthening in
οὐδός = ὁδός seems to be purely metrical
—permissible in the 6th foot but not
in the 5th (App. Ὁ, © 3). In ovd6s=
threshold the first syllable is long even
in thesis, and therefore by nature.)

61. πόλλ᾽ ἐπιϑόντα, πολλὰ βιδόντα
Bent]. ἐφορᾶν in H. means ‘to see to,’
‘visit,’ or ‘oversee’; not elsewhere as
in later Greek (chiefly in aor.) ‘live to
see’ (except perhaps υ 233).

62. ἑλκηθείςας, probably no more than
‘dragged into slavery,’ though the
scholia see in it a more specific refer-
ence to the fate of Kassandra (as in ἃ
580). Cf. ἑλκηθμοῖο Z 465.

65 is suspected with some reason by
Diintzer and Nauck as a weak and tauto-
logical addition.

66. ἂν... €pvoucin, a clear case of fut.
indic. with ἄν if the text is right. The
real suspicion attaches not to the mood,
but to dy itself, for which we can here
easily read ἂρ (van L.) or αὖ (Heyne).
The case against κεν with fut. indic.
is stated by van L. ποι. p. 310. It
depends entirely first on the assumption
(generally made tacitly) that because ἄν
with fut. is not found (after a certain

IAIAAOC Χ (χχπ)

435

> \ ’ / > / / ’ 7. -
ὠμησταὶ ἐρύουσιν, ἐπεί κέ τις ὀξέϊ χαλκῶι
τύψας ἠὲ βαλὼν ῥεθέων ἐκ θυμὸν ἕληται"
ods τρέφον ἐν μεγάροισι τρωπεζῆας θυραωρούς,

67. ἐρύς(ο)ουςι(ν) PR Vr.
68. ἕληται : ἐν ἄλλωι ἕλοιτο A.
πυλαωρούς {).

A: €pucwcin Plut. Mor. p.
69. eUupawpouc Ar. Syr.,

114 Α. κέ: με Bar.

τινές Sch. P:

amount of gentle violence to the tradition)
in Attic, therefore it must be forbidden
in Homer ; ; secondly on the fact that in
most places where the construction is
found in H. it can (again with more or
less gentle violence) be ‘conjectured away.
A ye or te can generally take the place
of κε, μέν of κεν, dp of ἄν. In cases
where the fut. stem is identical with
that of a known sigmatic aorist, we can
always change -εἰς, -εἰ, τουσιν, -εσθε, -ονται,
into -ms, -m, -wow, -ησθε, -ωνται; the
other cases are always ambiguous because
of the short vowel of the Homeric aor.
subj. There remain only verbs of which
we can say with confidence that they
have no aorist stem identical with the
future. And as the number of these is
even smaller in H. than later Greek (e.g
we have ἀξέμεν, οἰσέμεν, and perhaps
ὀψέσθαι as aorists) we are almost reduced
for crucial instances to the comparatively
small number of futures which have not
a sigmatic stem, with the addition of a
few like κείσονται in 71, which we feel
confident cannot be aorists. There are
at least three such crucial passages—
δώσω = 267, ἐρέει A 176 (cf. ὥς ποτέ
τις ἐρέει 182), κείσονται X 71. These
passages, taken in conjunction with the
general Ms. tradition, undoubtedly make
a strong prima facie case in favour of
the construction ; the stronger because
it is hard to understand what can
possibly haye made copyists or μετα-
χαρακτηρίζοντες conspire to foist into the
text a construction which, ex hypothesi,
was never known to Greek ; they cannot

have been under the influence either of

classical example or of a tendency to
false archaism. We should more reason-
ably expect to find the fut. indic. regu-
larly corrupted into the aor. subj., which
to the classic period was doubtless an
archaic construction (Pind. NW. vii. 68
μαθὼν δέ τις ἂν ἐρεῖ looks like a remin-
iscence of A176). It certainly cannot be
said that the fut. indic. is inconsistent
with the meaning of κεν ; on the contrary
it seems so natural that surprise may
be felt that it should have been allowed

to drop out of use. There is therefore
no ground for altering the ordinary tradi-
tion, which is consistent, and furnishes
a large number of examples. On the
use of the constr. see H. G. § 326. 1.
πύματον, after living to see all my
family slain. mpeotHict eUpHicIN, at the
street-door leading into the αὐλή.

69. TpanezAac, Ψ 173. eupawpouc,
not πυλαωρούς as vulg. because πύλη Ξε
city-gate, while the sense requires house-
door, O0épn.—The connexion of the line
with the context is none too clear. The
text is punctuated so that otc refers
forward, oi being the demonstrative, not
the relative. But it is equally possible
to remove the colon at the end of 68
so that ots may refer backwards, and to
take οἵ as relative and co-ordinate with
os. Inany case the sequence is awkward,
and is one of various difficulties which
lead us to suspect this line at least, if
not the whole passage 69-76. Though
to be devoured by dogs (i.e. the half
wild pariahs of an Eastern town) is the
common fate of the heroic dead, yet
that a man should be eaten by his own
house-dogs is an exaggeration of horror
unlike the true Epic style. This may
be remedied by excising 69; but much
the same may be said of the details in
75, and of the over-violent ἀλύσσοντες.
There is too a neglect of F in ἐπέοικεν
(cf., however, A 126 etc.). Now this
passage closely resembles a well-known
fragment of Tyrtaios (x. 21-28) :

αἰσχρὸν yap δὴ τοῦτο, μετὰ προμάχοισι
πεσόντα

κεῖσθαι πρόσθε νέων ἄνδρα παλαιότερον,

ἤδη λευκὸν ἔχοντα κάρη πολιόν τε γένειον,

θυμὸν ἀποπνείοντ᾽ ἄλκιμον ἐν κονίηι,

αἱματόεντ᾽ αἰδοῖα φίληις ἐν χερσὶν ἔχοντα---

αἰσχρὰ Tay ὀφθαλμοῖς καὶ νεμεσητὸν ἰδεῖν --

καὶ χρόα γυμνωθέντα: νέοισι δὲ πάντ᾽
ἐπέοικεν,

ὄφρ᾽ ἐρατῆς ἥβης ἀγλαὸν ἄνθος ἔχηι.

This is commonly supposed to be copied
by Tyrtaios from H. ; but the opposite
theory, that the interpolator of 69-76
copied from Tyrtaios, is more probable ;

436 IAIAAOC X (xx)
6, / \ lal
οἵ κ᾽ ἐμὸν αἷμα πιόντες ἀλύσσοντες περὶ θυμῶι 70
> / , 3 > t
κείσοντ᾽ ἐν προθύροισι. νέων δέ TE πᾶντ ἐπέοικεν,

ἀρηϊκταμένωι, δεδαϊγμένωι ὀξέϊ χαλκῶι
κεῖσθαι: πάντα δὲ καλὰ θανόντί περ, ὅττι φανήηι"
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ πολιόν τε κάρη πολιόν τε γένειον
in ͵ ΄ 5:
αἰδῶ τ᾽ αἰσχύνωσι κύνες κταμένοιο γέροντος, 75
nan lal ”
τοῦτο δὴ οἴκτιστον πέλεται δειλοῖσι βροτοῖσιν.
> «5 ς / \ ’ 3), Ὁ aN / ef \
ῥ᾽ ὁ γέρων, πολιὰς ὃ ap ava τρίχας ἕλκετο YEPTL
ΩΣ »
τίλλων ἐκ κεφαλῆς" οὐδ᾽ “Εκτορι θυμὸν ἔπειθε.
, ᾽ ΩΝ ὁ ἢ AY δώ 7
μήτηρ δ᾽ αὖθ᾽ ἑτέρωθεν ὀδύρετο δάκρυ χέουσα,
΄ ’ / (tees γ δὲ \ 5. εὖ Ἢ
κόλπον ἀνιεμένη, ἑτέρηφι δὲ μαζὸν ἀνέσχε 80
5) / /
καί μιν δάκρυ χέουσ᾽ ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
(vats / > / (ὃ J ἴὸ a ? 3 VA
Exrop, τέκνον ἐμόν, τάδε τ᾽ aideo καί μ᾽ ἐλέησον
’ / ” , / \ b] 4
αὐτήν, εἴ ποτέ τοι λαθικηδέα μαζὸν ἐπέσχον"
fol rn I / ” A Ont ” ὃ
τῶν μνῆσαι, pire τέκνον, ἄμυνε δὲ δήϊον ἄνδρα
/
τείχεος ἐντὸς ἐών, μηδὲ πρόμος ἵστασο τούτωι" 85
b] ’
σχέτλιος: εἴ περ γάρ σε κατακτάνηι, οὔ σ᾽ ET ἔγωγε

70-71 om. Dt. ΠῚ:
κτεινομένω(ι) ( Bar.
CS Vr. A Ven. B. Ute

npoeupHici JS. 72. GPHIKTAUENON J):
73. φανήηι Ar. 2: φανείη CGLQSU. 75. aicyUNnouct
ap’ om. CHQ Vr. A. 79. ἑτέρωθι J. 81. δακρύςας᾽
Je 83. Tol: coi ap. Did.: τι PQ Par. ὁ g. || ἀνέσχον U Par. b, τινὰ τῶν
ἀντιγράφων Eust. 84. φίλον GJPQR Vr. A 85. ἐὼν Ar. AC Ven. B Bar.
Mor. Harl. a, King’s Par. g?, yp. X: ἰὼν Q. 86. rap om. Syr. || κατακτείνη(!)

Oo
CJ: κατακτείνει U Harl. a: κατακτάνει (). || οὔτε ς᾽ R.

ἄρει (ἄρηϊ ())

the lines οἵ Tyrtaios certainly run more doubtful if we should write it in one
smoothly than those of ‘Homer,’ and word or two; ἀρηΐφατος is in favour of
they are in all probability older than the former alternative. See notes on -
the Attic redaction. A 74, N 477, ® 146.

70. GAuccontec, here only ; apparently 73. φανήηι, befall him; as φάνη βιότοιο

a longer form of ἀλύω, maddened by
drinking human blood—though this does
not agree very well with κείσονται. περὶ
euudi, H. G. § 186. 2.

71. πάντα, any fate, even mutilation,
if it come upon him in war; ἀρηϊκταμένωι
being concessive, and the clause de6. . ,
κεῖσθαι being in apposition with πάντα
as the most extreme of all cases. πάντα
is again taken up in 73 and enforced by
nep which belongs to the whole clause,
yea, everything tis honourable to him in
death. The sing. ὅττι is again in apposi-
tion with πάντα in a very similar way to
the preceding κεῖσθαι, as implying the
extreme conceivable.

72. ἀρηϊκταμένωι, here only. As
with similar dative compounds it is

τελευτή 11 787.

80. κόλπον ἀνιεμένη, see App. α, ὃ 5;
for the use of the verb ef. ἄνεσαν πύλας
® 537, and aiyas ἀνιεμένους (slitting
open), β 300.

83. ἐπέσχον, held to thy lips, 494,
I 489.

84. φίλε, masc. πρὸς τὸ σημαινόμενον,
like θάλος ὅν 87.

85. ἐών is preferable to ἰών, as it is
the position within the wall whence
the defence is to be conducted, not
the coming to it, on which stress is laid.

86. εχέτλιος, ‘ambiguous precisely as
in 41. If referred to Achilles it is an
exclamative nom. as A 231 δημοβόρος
βασιλεύς. If the reference is to Hector,
we should rather expect σχέτλιε.

IAIAAOC Χ (xxm) 437
κλαύσομαι ἐν λεχέεσσι, φίλον θάλος, ὃν τέκον αὐτή,
>? » 4 Μ ΄ / A
οὐδ᾽ ἄλοχος πολύδωρος: ἄνευθε δέ σε μέγα νῶϊν
᾿Αργείων παρὰ νηυσὶ κύνες ταχέες κατέδονται."
ὡς τώ γε κλαίοντε προσαυδήτην φίλον υἱὸν 90

» “ἷ »
πολλὰ λισσομένω: οὐδ᾽ “Extope θυμὸν ἔπειθον,
» ᾽ "“ ’ὔ ᾽ » fal , a ὍΝ
ἀλλ᾽ 6 γε μίμν ᾿Αχιλῆα πελώριον ἄσσον ἰόντα.
ὡς δὲ δράκων “ἐπὶ yeu ὀρέστερος ἄνδρα μένηισι,
Ν \ / ’ »Μ / / / > ἡ
βεβρωκὼς κακὰ φάρμακ᾽. ἔδυ δέ τέ μιν χόλος aivos,
, \ U e / \ “
σμερδαλέον δὲ δέδορκεν ἑλισσόμενος περὶ χειῆι" 95
, ΄ ,
ὡς “Extap ἄσβεστον ἔχων μένος οὐχ ὑπεχώρει,
πύργωι ἔπι προύχοντι φαεινὴν ἀσπίδ᾽ ἐρείσας.
᾽ / ’ Μ 3 \ a / /
ὀχθήσας δ᾽ ἄρα εἶπε πρὸς ὃν μεγαλήτορα θυμόν:
, /
“ὦ μοι ἐγών: εἰ μέν κε πύλας Kal τείχεα δύω,
Πουλυδάμας μοι πρῶτος ἐλεγχείην ἀναθήσει, 100
oe > mds \ \ / ΄ /
ὅς mw ἐκέλευε Τρωσὶ ποτὶ πτόλιν ἡγήσασθαι
/ > cA / ’ τ / .“ , ” a , 7)
νύχθ ὕπο τήνδ᾽ ὀλοήν, ὅτε τ ὥρετο δῖος Αχιλλεύς.
το / > ‘
ἀλλ ἐγὼ ov πιθόμην: T ἂν πολὺ κέρδιον ἦεν.
r » , \ » Ν ἊΝ / » lal
νῦν δ᾽, ἐπεὶ ὥλεσα λαὸν ἀτασθαλίηισιν ἐμῆισιν,
αἰδέομαι Ῥρῶας καὶ Tpwiadas ἑλκεσιπέπλους, 105
μή ποτέ τις εἴπηισι κακώτερος ἄλλος ἐμεῖο"

81. θάλος: : τέκος A (yp. θάλος) Par.cg. 88. πολύδωρος: πολύεδνος Mor.
93. 6péctepoc: A has Ν supr. over c: ἔνιαι τῶν κατὰ πόλεις SpécTepON GNOpa
δοκεύηι Did. 95, cuepdadeoc Syr. 100. πρῶτον J and ap. Eust. || ἀναθϑήςει :
καταχεύει “1. Eust. 101. προτὶ JPR. | ἡγήςεςθϑαι JJ. 102. νύχϑ᾽ Und AuraiHN
(ΞΞσκοτεινήν) Et. Mag. 571. 22. 103. κέρδιον : καὶ κάλλιον διχῶς, Sch. T.
106. ἐμοῖο P Bar.

87. eddoc, so ζ 157 λευσσόντων τοιόνδε tion of nature, as a snake under the

θάλος χορὸν εἰσοιχνεῦσαν, where it is
treated as if fem.

88. πολύϑωρος, see note on Z 394,
μέγα viv ἐπὶ τόπου, Schol. B, i.e. with
ἄνευθε, very far away. This does not
seem very natural, but is better than the
alternative of joining it with κατέδονται,
shall eat amain. We should, however,
have expected μάλα.

94. The poison of snakes was supposed
to be derived from herbs which they ate.
μέλλοντες δέ τινα ἐλλοχᾶν ἢ ἄνθρωπον ἢ
θῆρα θανατηφόρους ῥίζας ἐσθίουσι καὶ τὰς
πόας τοιαύτας, Aelian H. A. vi. 4. Cf.
coluber mala gramina pastus, Virg. Aen.
li. 471 in a passage imitated from this.

95. €Aiccomenoc περὶ χειῆι, coiling
round (inside) the hole, cf. A 317. The
description is due rather to human

nervousness than to accurate observa-

circumstances would certainly prefer to
retire into the hole.

98. For the scheme of the following
speech compare that of Agenor, Φ 552 ff.
and see the remarks in the Introduction.

100. The allusion is to Polydamas’
speech in Σ 249 ff., q.v. ἀναθήςει ἀντὶ
τοῦ περιάψει, Schol. B. Cf. ἐλεγχείην
καταχεῦαι Ψ 408, ὃ 38; μῶμον ἀνάψαι
β 86.

102. ὕπο, temporal, see note on II
202; or perhaps in a local sense under
cover of the night (‘regarded as a space
of darkness,’ H. G. ὃ 203; as in θοὴν διὰ
νύκτα μέλαιναν, etc.). Cf. ὑπηοῖος. The
use if temporal slightly differs from
that in II and approaches that of later
authors, as it implies only in the course
of, not during.

103=E 201. 105=Z 442.

438

IAIAAOC X (xxit)

" - ” , 2
“"Extop nde βίηφι πιθήσας ὦλεσε λαον.
A 53. ἢ Ε] \ δὲ , ΕΝ ΔΝ / ὃ yy
ὼς épéovow* ἐμοὶ δὲ τότ᾽ ἂν πολὺ κέρδιον εἰη
> an / /
ἄντην ἢ ᾿Αχιλῆα κατακτείναντα νέεσθαι,
a fal Ν /
ἠέ κεν αὐτῶι ὀλέσθαι ἐυκλειῶς πρὸ πόληος. 110
/ ’ /
εἰ δέ κεν ἀσπίδα μὲν καταθείομαι ὀμφαλόεσσαν
Ν / / / δὲ Ν a > }
καὶ κόρυθα βριαρήν, δόρυ δὲ πρὸς τεῖχος ἐρείσας
n / > / 5.
αὐτὸς ἰὼν ᾿Αχιλῆος ἀμύμονος ἀντίος ἔλθω,
/ tne. / «Tp / \ / θ᾽ (ΝΣ τὴ) 3. 5 'ξὰ
καί οἱ ὑπόσχωμαι ᾿λένην καὶ κτήμαθ ἅμ αὐτῆι
° I SEN \
πάντα pan, ὅσσά τ᾽ ᾿Αλέξανδρος κοίχηις ἐνὶ νηυσὶν 115
ΕΣ / r / > ef ’ ” / > /
ἠγάγετο Tpoinvd, ἥ τ᾽ ἔπλετο νείκεος apxn,
/ > lf ” Ψ δ ᾽ \ ἮΝ -
δωσέμεν ᾿Ατρεΐδηισιν ἄγειν, ἅμα ὃ ἀμφὶς ᾿Αχαιοῖς
/ , /
GAN ἀποδάσσεσθαι, ὅσσα πτόλις ἥδε κέκευθε"
> ΄ “ ε
Τρωσὶν δ᾽ αὖ μετόπισθε γερούσιον ὅρκον ἕλωμαι

107. ἦἧφι: ἧι Ὁ: igi Ap. Lex. 87. 8.
109. κατακτείναντι {CD} Harl. a, Mose. 2, Par.
110. αὐτὸν {C}PR Harl. a, Mosc. 2, Vr. A: ἢ αὐτὸν U™,

κάλλιον Did.: διχῶς Sch. T.
bi h: Ar. διχῶς.

111. wen om. GPR. || ὀμφαλόεςςαν : οπλά Te παντα Syr.
éc(c)’ PR. || ἐνὶ : ἐπὶ A (supr. νι) DR. 116.
117. ἅμα tT DH (1, supr) PSU Ven. B.

Ven. B Vr. A. 115. ὅεςά τ΄:

τροίην (om. ὃ᾽) (Ar. ὃ PR.

108. κέρδιον : αἱ κατ᾽ ἄνδρα πολὺ

113. ἀντίον C

118.

Gnoddccecear Ar. CJU Ven. B: Gnoddccece’ Q: dnoddc(c)aceai ©. || Seca: dca τε

DH Vr. bd A, yp. A: Scca Te (). || πόλις JPRU.

119. ἕλωμαι : yp. ὀμοῦμαι A.

108. τότ᾽ Gn, τό κεν (Brandreth) is
probably right.

109. The reading of the text, κατα-
κτείναντα . . αὐτῶι, is by far the best
attested, though the natural tendency
to assimilate the case has left marks on
the mss. The dat. αὐτῶι seems neces-
sary to keep up the connexion with ἐμοί:
the acc. would be ambiguous, as it might
refer to Achilles. But the part. κατα-
κτείναντα has yielded as usual to the
influence of the infin. with which it is
closely connected (to slay and return),
and is undoubtedly more Homeric (7. (.
243. 3d) than the dat. which Ar. read
as an alternative. The harshness of the
ace. interposed between the two datives
ismore apparent thanreal. The proposal
to take αὐτῶι -- ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ, suggested by
An., is not admissible. It would be
better to read αὐτοῦ on the spot, with
Heyne (αὐτόθ᾽, van L.). ἄντην, man
to man, with κατακτείναντα. It takes
the emphatic place to point the contrast
with 99. Néeceai, fo retwrn home, with
the idea of happy return which belongs
to the verb and its derivative νόστος.

110. This is the only instance of Ken
with the infin. in H. ; cf. I 684. The
addition of the particle to the second of

two disjunctive clauses is found also in
A 431-83, 6546. It is more commonly
added to both clauses, H. G. ὃ 363. 2 ὃ.
It seems to serve here as a reinforcement
of the ἄν above, which colours with its
contingent tone the subordinate clauses
depending on it. But we should cer-
tainly have rather expected the familiar
ἠὲ καί.

111. For the construction of the εἰ-
clause without an apodosis see Φ 556.

113. αὐτός, by myself, without my
arms.

115-16. Cf. H 389-90. His perhaps
for 6, ‘attracted’ to the gender of ἀρχή,
the antecedent being the whole preceding
clause as in ἣ θέμις ἐστίν ; though it may
with some violence be referred to Ἑλένην.
The variant Τροίην for Τροίηνθ᾽ is very
likely right, though it does not appear
in the parallel passage. Compare K 268
with note.

117. augic, apart from Helen’s pro-
perty, which is surrendered in its entirety.
It is hardly so well taken ἃ5-- ἄνδιχα,
in half.

119. Tpoocin, at the hands of the
Trojans, the dat. as with δέχομαι, ete. ;
ΤΠ. G. § 143, 2. 2. repovcion, sworn by
the γέροντες in the name of the people.

IAIAAOC X (xx)

439

μή τι κατακρύψειν, GAN ἄνδιχα πάντα δάσεσθαι 120
[κτῆσιν, ὅσην πτολίεθρον ἐπήρατον ἐντὸς ἐέργει].

ἀλλὰ τί ἣ μοι ταῦτα φίλος διελέξατο θυμός ;

μή μιν ἐγὼ μὲν ἵκωμαι ἰών, ὁ δέ μ᾽ οὐκ ἐλεήσει

οὐδέ τί μ᾽’ αἰδέσεται, κτενέει δέ με γυμνὸν ἐόντα

φι ad / , \
αὔτως ὥς TE γυναῖκα, ἐπεί K ἀπὸ τεύχεα δύω. 12!

> / la) ” ᾽ \ \ »9? » \ /
οὐ μέν πως νῦν ἔστιν ἀπὸ δρυὸς οὐδ᾽ ἀπὸ πέτρης

120. Odceceai Ar. ? Sch. T: ϑάςαςθαι 2.
122. Ti ἧ (τίη) Ar. χωρὶς τοῦ 5: others τί δὴ ἢ

om. PR: μιν D. || ἐλεήςηι Vr. ἃ",

120. ϑάςεςθαι, so Stephanus and Heyne
for δάσασθαι of Mss., which cannot be
right. The aor. infin. might stand by
itself, lit. an oath for dividing, as 6 253
ὥμοσα μὴ μὲν ἀναφῆναι without statement
of time (Lendrum in (΄. 10. iv. 100) ; but
when the fut. has already preceded, the
constr. would be very harsh. Schol. T
μέλλοντός ἐστι" διὸ διὰ τοῦ o (debuit esse
διὰ τοῦ εἰ, Heyne) implies that the read-
ing is old; and the variation in 118
shews how little trust can be reposed on
Ms. testimony in such a matter. See
note on Σ 511-12, where we see the
origin of the aor., and whence 121 has
been interpolated. It is an objectionable
tautology after 118.

123. Ykwuai, approach as ἱκέτης. So
also = 260 τὴν ἱκόμην φεύγων. μή with
subj. expresses apprehension, which is
followed by an assertion (fut. indic.) as ε
415 μή πώς μ᾽ ἐκβαίνοντα βάλης... μελέη
δέ μοι ἔσσεται ὁρμή (M. and T. ὃ 261).
The parallel Φ 563-65 is also similar (μή
με. . vonon . . μάρψηι. . οὐκέτ᾽ ἔπειτ᾽
ἔσται).

124. αἰϑέςεται, vespect my character,
as suppliant and therefore aldotos ( 75).

126. It is impossible to explain with
any confidence the phrase ἀπὸ dpudéc οὐδ᾽
ἀπὸ πέτρης. It recurs, with variations,
several times in Greek, but not in a way
to throw much light on the present
passage. The other instances are τ 163
οὐ yap ἀπὸ δρυός ἐσσι παλαιφάτου οὐδ᾽ ἀπὸ
πέτρης : quoted by Plato Apol. 34D καὶ
yap αὐτὸ τοῦτο τὸ τοῦ Ὁμήρου, οὐδ᾽ ἐγὼ
ἀπὸ δρυὸς οὐδ᾽ ἀπὸ πέτρης πέφυκα, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξ
ἀνθρώπων : Rep. ὅ44 Ὁ ἢ οἴει ἐκ δρυός
ποθεν ἣ ἐκ πέτρας τὰς πολιτείας γίγνεσθαι:
Hesiod Theog. 35 ἀλλὰ τίη μοι ταῦτα
περὶ δρῦν ἣ περὶ πέτρην : Platt (J. P. xix.
48) adds Cic. ad Att. xiii. 28, Ovid A7s
Am. ii. 541, and Nonnus xlviii. 504 τίς
Oput μῦθον ἔλεξε... Kal els γάμον ἤγαγε

121 om. ADH. || €epre Vr. b.
123. ἐγὼν R Vr. A. || μὲν

πέτρην. It seems that there must have
been some familiar connexion between
the two words which permitted them to
be used together in various contexts by
some virtue of allusiveness now lost.
How common this is with proverbial
expressions in ordinary conversation
hardly needs to be pointed out. A
homely analogy may be found in the
phrase ‘cock and bull,’ the French
cog-a-V'dne, which starting from some
old witch-story of the turning of a cock
into a bull originally implied aimless
discursiveness, but is now used to express
gross incredibility. So the phrase here
used seems to mean idle talk; in τ and
Plato it refers to mythical origin, the
line in Hesiod sharing both connota-
tions ; it ends in Nonnus with the idea
of inexorability (cf. our ‘stocks and
stones’ with the same sense, and also
with that of idolatry). All may
naturally spring from some primitive
folk-tale of the origin of mankind from
stones or trees. We might here put
ἀπὸ δρυὸς οὐδ᾽ ἀπὸ πέτρης in inverted
commas, croon him the tale ‘from oak
or tree. In any case we must not seek
in the words a rustic background to the
lovers’ seat—such an idea is neither Epic
nor Greek. A. B. Cook in C. 2. xv.
322 (where a review of previous attempted
explanations is given) seeks a more
definite reference in ὀαριζέμεναι, which.
he holds to be properly used not only of
lovers’ dalliance, but of the boastful
challenge of the warrior, beginning
commonly with a proclamation of his
ancestry, so that there is no ‘ grim irony’
or oxymoron in the πολέμου ὁὀαριστύς, but
the straightforward ‘challenge of battle’
(N 291, P 228). Cook therefore explains
that it will be no use for Hector to face
Achilles with boasts of his fabulous
ancestry ‘from stock or stone,’ and

440

IAIAAOC X (xxi!)

a “ ,
τῶι ὀαριζέμεναι, ἅ Te παρθένος ἠϊθεὸς τε,
/
παρθένος ἠϊθεός τ᾽ ὀαρίζετον ἀλλήλοιιν.
lol δ /
βέλτερον ait ἔριδι ξυνελαυνέμεν ὅττι τάχιστα"

v > iL 5 ᾿ / 35
εἴδομεν ὁπποτέρωι κεν Ολύμπιος εὖχος ὀρέξηι.

ὼς ὥρμαινε μένων, ὁ δέ οἱ σχεδὸν ἦλθεν ᾿Αχιλλεὺς

ἶσος ἐνυαλίωι, κορυθάϊκι πτολεμιστῆι,

σείων Πηλιάδα μελίην κατὰ

δεινήν: ἀμφὶ δὲ χαλκὸς ἐλάμπετο εἴκελος αὐγῆι

ΕΥ̓ \ > 7ὕ το Ὁ ͵,
ἢ πυρὸς αἰθομένου ἢ ἠελίου

Ἕκτορα δ᾽, ὡς ἐνόησεν, ἕλε τρόμος" οὐδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔτ᾽ ἔτλη
αὖθι μένειν, ὀπίσω δὲ πύλας λίπε, βῆ δὲ φοβηθείς.
Πηλείδης δ᾽ ἐπόρουσε ποσὶ κραυπνοῖσι πεποιθώς.

ἠύτε κίρκος ὄρεσφιν, ἐλαφρότατος πετεηνῶν,

¢ .0ἡ " N iy Ψ.
ῥηϊδίως οἴμησε μετὰ τρήρωνα πελείαν"

130
δεξιὸν ὦμον
ἀνιόντος. 135
140

΄ εξ κ᾿ ig 9 / ’ \
ἡ δέ θ᾽ ὕπαιθα φοβεῖται, ὁ δ᾽ ἐγγύθεν ὀξὺ λεληκὼς
25 ? ah CNS, Lae N ᾽ ΄

ταρφέ ἐπαΐσσει, ἑλέειν τέ € θυμὸς ἀνώγει"

ἃ ΣΟ Ties 5 > \ Ar / / δ᾽ OA

ὡς dp 6 γ᾽ ἐμμεμαὼς ἰθὺς πέτετο, τρέσε KT@P
- “ / \ ΄ὔ 5 ΄ὔ

τεῖχος ὕπο Τρώων, λαιψηρὰ δὲ γούνατ᾽ ἐνώμα.

128. ἀλλήλοιςοι(Νν) CDHPS Ven. B,
Tayxicta A.
PT. || πολεμιστῆ(ι) CQU.
the letters Ἰναμί.

τρόμος: ἢ τρόμωι U sup. 137.
πετεεινῶν SS. 140 om. U*. 143.
(supr.) R. || τρέςε : τρέε Mor. 144.

Bar.: τείχεος Vr. b. || λαιθϑηρὰ GH,

translates ‘by no means now may one
parley with him (of descent) from stock
or stone, as lad and lass, lad and lass
parley each with the other.’ But this
is very harsh, and the mention of ‘lad
and lass’ seems expressly to exclude
any martial connotation.

128. The epanalepsis was greatly ad-
mired by ancient critics, but has offended
the moderns, who maintain that -the
moment is not suitable for such artificial
flowers of speech. Heyne and others
accordingly reject the line.

129. Ξυνελαυνέμεν, the act. is only
here used intrans. ; ef. σύμβαλον IL 565.
ὅττι τάχιςτα : if we adopt the variant
ὄφρα τάχιστα. the colon should be placed
before the word ὄφρα, as in N 326, ete.
Reading ὅττι the punctuation must be
as in the text, as I 659, O 146, Ψ 403,
414, ef. 71 ; e¥Somen being added asyn-

130. ὀρέξοι PR: ὀρέξει Harl. a.
133. In Pap. ἃ this is preceded by a line containing
135. αἰθομένοιο P.

129. ὅττι τάχιςτα : ἐν ἄλλωι ὄφρα
132. eicoc H, and τινές Sch.

136. EkTOpa: ἢ ἕκτωρ U supr. ||
μένων 1... 139. ἐλαφρότερος Ρ. ||
ὅ re μεμαὼς S. || πέτετο: τρέπετο P
τείχει (A supr.) C Ven. B: τείχη Mor.

detically as in 6 532. (The use of ὅττι
with superl. occurs in H. only in this
phrase.) Paley compares Aisch. Cho.
890 εἰδῶμεν ἢ νικῶμεν ἢ νικώμεθα.

132. Kopuediki only here, in sense=
κορυθαιόλωι. Compare the doubtful τρι-
χάϊκες, τ 177.

134. ἀμφί, to right and left, of the
armour generally. Cf. N 245 χαλκὸς
ἔλαμπε περὶ στήθεσσι.

140. οἴμηςε, swoops; also 308, 311,
w 538. Cf. otua Φ 252, and note on
N 64.

141. ὕπαιθα, before him, as ® 493.

143. Tpéce, fled, not feared: ὅτι τὸ
τρέσαι οὐ THY πτόησιν σημαίνει, ἀλλὰ
συνήθως αὐτῶι φεύγειν. ἐπήνεγκε γοῦν
“ἐτεῖχος ὕπο Τρώων,᾽ An. For this
remark see on N 515, © 288.

144. λαιψηρά, see note on 24.

a

IAIAAOC X (xxi1) 441

οἱ δὲ παρὰ σκοπιὴν Kal ἐρινεὸν ἠνεμύεντα 145
τείχεος αἰὲν ὑπὲκ Kat ἀμαξιτὸν ἐσσεύοντο,
Ν πε «a si iF. » Α ‘
κρουνὼ δ᾽ ἵκανον καλλιρρόω: ἔνθα δὲ πηγαὶ
δοιαὶ ἀναΐσσουσι Σκαμάνδρου δινήεντος"
ἡ μὲν γάρ θ᾽ ὕδατι λιαρῶι ῥέει, ἀμφὶ δὲ καπνὸς
γίνεται ἐξ αὐτῆς ὡς εἰ πυρὸς αἰβόμεγοία: 150

145. [ἡνεμόε)ζεςαν A supr.
καλ(λ)ιρ(ρ)όωι Cl’.

149. χλιαρῶι P 150. γίγνεται L.

145. Where the cxont4 was we cannot
say. It can hardly be, as the scholia
think, the tomb of Aisyetes where
Polites is posted as σκοπός in B 793, for
that must have been far from the wall.
The ἐρινεός is named as a landmark
again in Z 433, A 167.

"146. The idea seems to be that a
wagon-track ran round the town at a
short distance from the wall, and that
both keep away from under the wall in
order to secure the better going of this
road. duazitéc does not recur in H.
Cf. κ 103 λείην ὁδόν, Fe wep ἄμαξαι...
καταγίνεον ὕλην.

147. ἔνϑα δέ Mss., ἔνθα τε Hermann
and most edd. See ποΐθ on N 21. The
two springs are of necessity at the root
of all speculations on the question whether
or no the poet is describing an actual
locality with which he was personally
acquainted. Lechevalier thought that
he had discovered them at the foot of
the hill of Bounarbashi, which therefore
for many years held an unquestioned
claim to be the siteof Troy. But further
investigations shewed, firstly, that there
were at this spot not two springs but
very many—the Turks call the place
‘the Forty Eyes’ (i.e. springs) ; secondly,
that to the thermometer all the springs
were of the same temperature, whatever
they might be to the fancy. Virchow
(Beitraége zur Landeskunde der Troas,
13-45) has tested all the springs round
the plain of Troy, and finds that there
are but trifling differences of temper-
ature between them. There are hot
springs in the Troad, but they lie far
away to the SW. (at Tuzla and Lidja
Hammam) and are quite out of the ques-
tion. It is, however, remarkable that
the Menderé, which we are bound to
identify with the Skamandros, rises in
Ida from two very large springs notably
differing in temperature. Clarke in 1801
found them to be 34° and 69° Fahr.

146. ee ὑπὲρ (i.
148. anaicxouci PR:

147. κρουνῶι

Gnaicyouci (). | kaudndpou |, Harl. a.

τ Parker Webb in 1819 43
and 70°, Virchow in 1879 84“ and 15-8”
Cent. {47:12 and 60°44” F.), the
differences depending doubtless on the
amount of melting snow which probably
supplies the cold spring. This admirab ly
suits the words of the text ; the more so
as πηγαὶ Σκαμάνδρου must mean sources
of Skamandros, not merely ‘springs
flowing into Skamandros.’ But the
sources in question, so far from being
close under ‘Troy, whether we place it at
Hissarlik or Bounarbashi, are some
twenty miles away to the SE., close
under the top of Ida. The conclusion is
inevitable ; the topography of the Μῆνις
is a fancy picture, composed of fragments
of real geography known by hearsay to
a poet not personally acquainted with
the locality. The piece of information
about the springs is just such as might
have been brought home to Greece by
campaigners in the Troad ; not only is
the spot itself, according to the descrip-
tions, one eminently calculated to impress
the imagination, but it wasin all likeli-
hood the seat of the worship of the
διιπετὴς ποταμός in connexion with the
ancient cultus of Zeus upon Gargaros.
Whether from confusion of the tradition
or from merely poetical motives, the
poet transfers the source of the river
bodily to the foot of the hill of Troy.

148. Ar. endeavoured to evade the
difficulty of the expression πηγαὶ Cxa-
uadnopou above mentioned by assuming
an ellipse of a preposition, ἐξ or ἀπό, as
though ‘springs fed by Skamandros.’
This is quite indefensible.

150. The ‘steam’ from the water
may be understood to apply to ,winter
only, as the following @épe¢ may imply.
Such a phenomenon has not been ob-
served at the source of the Skamandros,
but would be quite possible in very cold
weather with water ata constant tempera-
ture of over 60° F.

449 IAIAAOC Χ (xxi!)

ἡ δ᾽ ἑτέρη θέρει mpopéer ἐϊκυῖα χαλάζηι

ἢ χιόνι ψυχρῆι ἢ ἐξ ὕδατος κρυστάλλωι.
ἔνθα δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ αὐτάων πλυνοὶ εὐρέες ἐγγὺς ἔασι
καλοὶ λαΐνεοι, ὅθι εἵματα σιγαλόεντα

» / /
πλύνεσκον Τρώων ἄλοχοι καλαί τε θύγατρες 1:

On
Or

7, an e Ὁ) lal
τὸ πρὶν ἐπ᾽ εἰρήνης, πρὶν ἐλθεῖν vias ᾿Αχαιῶν.
a € / e ? ” a a
τῆι pa παραδραμέτην, φεύγων, ὁ δ᾽ ὄπισθε διώκων
\ / mee ’ /
πρόσθε μὲν ἐσθλὸς ἔφευγε, δίωκε δέ μιν μέγ ἀμείνων,
ie ’ \ /
καρπαλίμως, ἐπεὶ οὐχ ἱερήϊον οὐδὲ βοείην
Upvu ἵ iy ἀέθλ Ί Ἰνδρῶ 160
ἀρνύσθην, ἅ τε ποσσὶν ἀέθλια γίνεται ἀνὸρῶν,
> rn 7 e /
ἀλλὰ περὶ ψυχῆς θέον “Extopos ἱπποδάμοιο.
ς fa ΓΑ “
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἀεθλοφόροι περὶ τέρματα μώνυχες ἵπποι
cs 7 ra \ δὲ / lal vv Or
ῥίμφα μάλα τρωχῶσι' τὸ δὲ μέγα κεῖται ἀεῦθλον,
ἢ τρίπος ἠὲ γυνή, ἀνδρὸς κατατεθνηῶτος᾽

152. wuxpwi Pap. A (sup. H).
πρὶν P.

υἱὸς πριάμοιο, δίωκε dE δῖος ἀχιλλεύς, Did.
162. Tépuaci C.

ὅτε 1). || γίγνεται L.
κεῖται μέγα P: κεῖται μέγ᾽ L Lips.
τεθνειῶτος A (sup. H) CDGQT.

154. ὅθι : τόϑι Pap. 2.
158. WIN om. PR. || ἐν ἐνίοις φέρεται στίχος ὑπὸ τοῦτον εὐτελής, peor”

156. τὸ πρὶν:
159. ἱρήϊον γι. b. 160. ἅ τε:
163. τροχῶει T Vr. A. || δὲ : δὴ L. ||

\

164. ἢ Tpinoc: ἵππος Mose. 2. || κατα-

152. €= Ueatoc, the prepositional
phrase is used attributively, ice formed
From water.

153. πλυνοί, washing-troughs, ef. ¢ 40,
86. Schliemann has found such basins
at the foot of Hissarlik, but they are of
Roman brickwork. They would be, of
course, a necessity to any ancient city.
In the same passage of ¢ (26) we also find
ciraddenta used of dirty clothes. It is
an epitheton ornans expressing probably
the natural gloss of linen (Studniczka,
p- 50). The princess Nausikaa herself
washes the clothes as the wives and
daughters of the Trojans do here.

157. φεύγων, ὁ δὲ... διώκων is
better Greek than ὁ μὲν φεύγων which
we should be inclined to expect. Pindar
7. vi. 60 νίκας τρεῖς, ἀπ᾽ ᾿Ισθμοῦ, τὰς δ᾽ ἀπ᾽
εὐφύλλου Νεμέας. “Τύ 15. usual, when an
expression which denotes a sum is
followed by the items, that only the
second should be marked as such,’ W.-
M. Her. 11. 144, where other instances
will be found. So H 420 ὀτρύνοντο νέκυς
τ᾿ ἀγέμεν, ἕτεροι δὲ μεθ᾽ ὕλην, and see
note on Q 527.

158 is rejected by Bekker, Diintzer,

and Nauck as a weak and tautological
addition. The further line given by
Did. (see above) is still worse.

159. BoeiHn, perhaps a shield, as P
492, q.v. A mere hide seems too cheapa
thing for a prize, though Schol. T says καὶ
νῦν Οἰταῖοι Ἡρακλεῖ πενταετήριον ἀγῶνα
ποιοῦντες βύρσας διδόασι. ἱερήϊον : an
animal for sacrifice, probably an ox, οἵ.
W 260. So also in & 250, p 600.

162. Heyne suspects 162-65 as a later
addition ; the chariot-race with ‘tripod
or woman’ for a slave seems to belong
toa later stage of society than the prinii-
tive βοείη and ἱερήϊον of 159—a thought
which has suggested expansion. But 165
at least is indispensable: see below.

163. Tpwydci, for τροχάουσι or rather
τροχάωσι, see on Ὁ 666. τὸ δέ marks the
opposition, ‘and ὧν that case a great
prize is set.’

164. ἀνὸρὸς κατατεθνηῶτος is best
taken with ἄεθλον, on the analogy of Ψ
631 βασιλῆος ἄεθλα. Cf. An., ὅτι ἀμφί-
βολον πότερον ἀνδρὸς τεθνεῶτος γυνή, ἢ
ἐπὶ τεθνεῶτι ἀνδρί, ὃ καὶ ὑγιές: οὐκ οἷδε
γὰρ ἄλλους ἢ τοὺς ἐπιταφίους ἀγῶνας

“Ὅμηρος.

——

IAIAAOC X (xxii) 143

ὡς τὼ τρὶς I pudporo πόλιν πέρι δινηθήτην 165

, , \ ᾽ bd / fo»
καρπαλίμοισι πόδεσσι: θεοὶ δ᾽ ἐς πάντες ὁρῶντο.

A \ , = \ > a a
τοῖσι δὲ μύθων ἦρχε πατὴρ ἀνδρῶν τε θεῶν TE:
co ἃ / 5 , Μ ,ὔ Η κι

ὦ πόποι, ἣ φίλον ἄνδρα διωκόμενον περὶ τεῖχος
ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ὁρῶμαι: ἐμὸν δ᾽ ὀλοφύρεται Atop

μ ρῶμαι: ἐμ ρεται ἦτο,

“ “ \ “ Son % ” » ΕΞ
Exrtopos, ὅς μοι πολλὰ βοῶν ἐπὶ μηρί ἔκηεν 170
Ἴδης ἐν κορυφῆισι πολυπτύχου, ἄλλοτε δ᾽ αὖτε

/ e lal Ss / e cal > Ἁ
ἐν πόλει ἀκροτάτηι᾽ νῦν αὖτέ ἑ δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεὺς

ἄστυ πέρι Τ]ριάμοιο ποσὶν ταχέεσσι διώκει.
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγετε φράζεσθε, θεοί, καὶ μητιάασθε,
née μιν ἐκ θανάτοιο σαώσομεν ἦέ μιν ἤδη 175
κι Cine , \ ,

Πηλεΐδη, ᾿Αχιλῆν δαμάσσομεν ἐσθλὸν ἐόντα."

Ν > S / \ lal 3 /

τὸν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπε θεὰ γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη"
“ὦ πάτερ ἀργικέραυνε κελαινεφές, οἷον ἔειπες"

/
ἄνδρα θνητὸν ἐόντα, πάλαι πεπρωμένον αἴσηι,
ἂψ ἐθέλεις θανάτοιο δυσηχέος ἐξαναλῦσαι ; 180
» > 3... N 7 4 > / \ ” ”
ἔρδ᾽. ἀτὰρ ov τοι πάντες ἐπαινέομεν θεοὶ ἄλλοι.
> /
τὴν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη νεφεληγερέτα Zevs:

166. δ᾽ ἐς AQRS Vr. Ὁ A, yp. X: 0€ € νι. ἃ: δὲ DHJP: 2€ τε Q. 168.

τεῖχος : cru Plato Mep. iii. 388 c.
om. AQ. 178. €einac DU.

165. Aristotle (Poe/. 24) quotes the
pursuit thrice round the city as an ab-
surdity (ἄλογον) for the stage, but
permissible to an Epic poet. ‘The sup-
posed impossibility of it was apparently
the motive which induced some critics, in
defiance of the plain and only possible
sense of the words, to take πόλιν πέρι
δινηθήτην to mean ‘make a circuit hard
by the city’; comparing περὶ πτόλιν
μαρνάμενοι Z 327 and similar phrases.
Heyne, who adopted this idea, sub-
sequently abandoned it, pointing out
that the addition of τρίς removed all
doubt as to the meaning of the words,
which cannot be taken otherwise than in
Q 16 τρὶς ἐρύσας περὶ σῆμα Μενοιτιάδαο.
A triple circuit of the hill of Hissarlik,
though a severe course, is by no means
an absurd impossibility for a strong man ;
see Schliemann, J/ios, p. 142. So Virgil
understood the words, while varying the
application ; ter circum Iliacos rapta-
verat Hectora muros, Aen. 1. 483.
Erhardt suggests that the ὥς originally
opened a new section of the tale, being
followed by 208 immediately ; only

171. Kopugoict L: κνημοῖσςι J).

when the connexion had been severed
by the long interpolation was the simile
162-64 added, and ὥς made to refer back
to it. See Introd.

166. For & ἐς the ordinary reading
is δέ te. This gives the usual dactyl
before the bucolic diaeresis, but the
text is better supported and suits the
sense better, as ἐσορᾶν is the regular
verb for looking on, A 4, 9, 2 23 ete.

171. In © 48 Zeus has an altar on
Gargaros, the highest peak of Ida (5806
feet above the sea). Schliemann found
there a slab of marble which he believed
to have been an altar; 7γογα, 332-37.

174-76. Compare the similar passage
concerning Sarpedon, II 435-38 ; so also
179-81=II 441-438.

182-84=0 38-40. (οἱ ἀστερίσκοι) ὅτι
ἐνταῦθα ὑγιῶς λέγονται, κατὰ δὲ τὴν πρὸ
τῆς κόλου μάχης ἀγορὰν τῶν θεῶν οὐκέτι,
An. There is no doubt that the lines
are far more intelligible after the hesitat-
ing speech of Zeus here than when
alluding to his very uncompromising
threats in 6 5-27. He may be supposed
now to recognize, in spite of his proposal

444

, /
“θάρσει, τριτογένεια, φίλον τέκος"

IAIAAOC Χ (χχπ)

"ἢ ie a
ov νύ τι θυμῶι

πρόφρονι μυθέομαι, ἐθέλω δέ τοι ἤπιος εἶναι"

ἔρξον ὅπηι δή τοι νόος ἔπλετο, μηδ᾽ ἔτ᾽ ἐρώει.᾽"

185

ὡς εἰπὼν ὥτρυνε πάρος μεμαυῖαν ᾿Αθήνην"
βῆ δὲ κατ᾽ Οὐλύμποιο καρήνων ἀΐξασα.

“Ἕκτορα δ᾽ ἀσπερχὲς κλονέων ἔφεπ᾽ ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς.
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε νεβρὸν ὄρεσφι. κύων ἐχάφοτο δίηται,

ὄρσας ἐξ εὐνῆς, διά T ἄγκεα καὶ διὰ βήσσας:"

190

τ ie - \ /
τὸν δ᾽ εἴ πέρ τε λάθηισι καταπτήξας ὑπὸ θάμνωι,

΄ > (? A
ἀλλά τ᾽ ἀνιχνεύων θέει ἔμπεδον, ὄφρά κεν εὕρηι"
ὡς “Extap οὐ λῆθε ποδώκεα []ηλεΐωνα.

ὁσσάκι δ᾽ ὁρμήσειε πυλάων Δαρδανιάων

, , 9.7; Ε / tg \ /
ἀντίον ἀΐξεσθαι, ἐυδμήτους ὑπὸ πύργους,

195

» 7 7
εἴ πώς οἱ καθύπερθεν ἀλάλκοιεν βελέεσσι,

/ / ’ / \
τοσσάκι μιν προπάροιθεν ἀποτρέψασκε παραφθὰς

Ν 7 5 Ἂς Ν \ / VA 5 Ca A
προς πεδίον, αὐτὸς δὲ ποτὶ πτόλιος πέτετ᾽ αἰεί.

Ὁ > 5 ’ / > / / ἢ
ὡς δ᾽ ἐν ὀνείρων οὐ δύναται φεύγοντα διώκειν"

188. τριπτογένεια G.
μένος Cant. 188. ὠκὺς:
194. ὁρμήςαιτο P.

érruc J.

(Ar. ?) H Syr.
in T): διχῶς καὶ παρατρέψαςκε Ar.
198. nedion γ᾽ G. || προτι [).

195. ἀντίος H.
ἐπὶ Cl eee (ἐπὶ πύργους éUTuHTtouc R) :

185. ὅποι P.

|| Gizecoat DU: ditzacea Ώ.

186. ὄτρυνε R Vr. d. πάρος:
192. ἐξιχνεύων Η. || εὕροι P Vr. b.
|| ὑπὸ:
ποτὶ Waite ΤΠ

|| παραστὰς GPR.
199-201 ἀθ. Ar.

to save fein that ae fated ae nee
come, and he ’ cannot resist. In Θ he
still has a free hand.

188. Cf. on A 496. The analogy of T
492, ® where κλονέων is used ab-
solutely, leaves no doubt that “Exropa
is to be taken as the object of pene
alone.

194. The only explanation of this
passage seems to be that Hector is still
running along the wagon-track (146),
but that Achilles is taking the shorter
but rougher course immediately under
the walls. Thus though he eannot over-
take Hector, he can eut him off when-

522
VV0,

ever he attempts to reach the gate. For
the Dardanian gate see on EH 789. The

fact that the Skaian gate is not named
is in favour of Ar.’s identification of the
two. This part of the description evi-
dently applies to the whole of the first
three circuits.

195, ἀΐΞξεσθαι, as we have ἐφορμᾶται
ποιησέμεν, p 399; the fut. is similarly
used after wéuova (H 36), etc. Besides,

τρατᾷ we find both ἀΐξαι and ἀϊχθῆναι,
the aor. mid. does not recur (see on V

773), whereas the fut. of intrans. verbs is

commonly in the mid. (Bekker, H. B. i.
196). The aor. or pres. infin. is usual
after ὁρμᾶν (8 511, K 359, Ν 188, Φ 265,
572, 6 282), which may account for the
change. For a@ntioc=in the face of an
inanimate object cf. O 694 ἴθυσε veds . ,
ἀντίος ἀΐξας, and TY 463. It is possible
of course to take πυλάων directly with
ὁρμήσειε, dashed for the gate.

196. For the dat. οἱ with ἀλάλκοιεν
cf. Τ' 9, E779, Z 109.

197. προπάροιθεν may be taken either
in a local or temporal sense ; cf. K 476.
dnotpéwacke seems more suited than
ἀποστρέψασκε to express the idea turn-
ing him aside. The latter would rather
mean ‘making him wheel round.’ ποτὶ
πτόλιος, on the city side of him.

199-201. ἀθετοῦνται στίχοι τρεῖς ὅτι Kal
τῆι κατασκευῆι καὶ τῶι νοήματι εὐτελεῖς" καὶ
γὰρ ἀπραξίαν δρόμου καὶ τὸ ἀπαράβατον
σημαίνουσιν, ἐναντίως τῶι “ὡς δέ 7

197. ἀποτρέψαςκε
: Gnoctpépacke {2 (Maass wrongly gives Unoctpewacke as lemma
(napacrpewacke Bekk.).
πέτατ᾽ Syr. and ap. Did.

“θα,

IAIAAOC Χ (χχπ) 445

vw ”

od] e Ν ,ὔ ΄ , vy ΄ ,

οὔτ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὁ τὸν δύναται ὑποφεύγειν οὔθ᾽ ὁ διώκειν" 200
“4 ε \ ’ , ΄ Ἀ »ΟΥ A , ‘
ὡς ὁ Tov ov δύνατο μάρψαι ποσὶν οὐδ᾽ ὃς ἀλύξαι.

aA / a ΄ ΄
πῶς δέ κεν “Extwp κῆρας ὑπεξέφυγεν θανάτοιο,

΄ / , ei »
εἰ μή of πύματόν τε Kal ὕστατον ἤντετ᾽ ᾿Απόλλων
᾿ ε a , , ~

ἐγγύθεν, ὅς οἱ ἐπῶρσε μένος λαιψηρά τε γοῦνα ;
ἄλλοισιν δ᾽ ἀνένευε καρήατι δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς, 205
»Ὸ» » es » \ ΜῈΝ \ /
οὐδ᾽ ἔα ἱέμεναι ἐπὶ “Extope πικρὰ βέλεμνα,

a , , ΄ x
μή τις κῦδος ἄροιτο βαλών, ὁ δὲ δεύτερος ἔλθοι.

> ’ -“ \ Ν / > \ \ Ε ,
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ TO τέταρτον ἐπὶ κρουνοὺς ἀφίκοντο,

,’ \ ,’ὔ \ 4

Kal τότε δὴ χρύσεια πατὴρ ἐτίταινε τάλαντα,

> Bu ef , a ΄, ΄
ἐν δ᾽ ἐτίθει δύο κῆρε τανηλεγέος θανάτοιο, 210

200. ἀποφεύγειν ().

ὡὧς 6 TON A. || ϑύναται JL (P man. rec.) R (X lemma).

Syr., yp. TX.
(“παρὰ τοῖς νεωτέροις ᾿ X).

ἀεθλοφόροι περὶ τέρματα μώνυχες Ura”
(162). Against the latter objection it
may be pointed out that there is every
poetical justification for one simile to
introduce the chase by the notion of
speed, and another to close it by a repre-
sentation of helpless fatigue. Indeed
Virgil’s imitation in Aen. xii. 908 shews
that no poetical objection can be made,
while the vividness of the feeling de-
scribed is one which will come home to
every one. The main difficulty lies in
200, which seems tautological and awk-
ward, though quite intelligible, in ex-
pression. It may be a mere gloss. The
difference between διώκειν and μάρψαι
will be noticed ; the inability to catch
in reality is not compared to the inability
to catch in a dream, which would be
commonplace enough, but to the feeling
of inability even to move in pursuit—
a far more effective point. Achilles’
powerlessness to overtake Hector is de-
picted with the utmost vividness when
compared to the dreamer’s feeling that
he has to move and yet is rooted to the
ground. For the omission of τις as sub-
ject cf. N 287. The length of the -w of
ὀνείρωι is suspicious, but v. A 484, E
215; and so -y remains long in A 412.
Various emendations have been proposed,
but are too violent to command assent.
The whole question of the genuineness
of the lines is to some extent involved
in those which follow. See therefore

App. K, § 7.

205. ἄλλοιειν ADH!P Syr. Bar. Mor., yp. Harl. a:
|| ἀνένευςε ἢ].
βαλὼν : ἑλὼν S. || ἔλθη(ι) JQ (spr. οἱ) U Vr. Ὁ.

201. ὡς ὁ: ὥς pa ACJU Syr. Ven. Β Vr. Ὁ: ἐν ἄλλωι
202. ὑπεξέφερε(ν) Ar.

Aaoicin 2?

206. εἴα ἕμεναι Eust. 207.

209 om. Ht.

202-4. For a discussion of this much
disputed passage see App. K.

206. Note the hiatus ἐπὶ Ἕκτορι:
there seems to be no explanation—cer-
tainly not in the initial s of (c)é-w.

207. Compare K 368, which may be
imitated from this, though the converse
is not impossible.

208. TO τέταρτον, after completing
three circuits they are just beginning
one more, the springs being near thie
starting-point.

209-10=6 69-70, 212=0 72, where
see notes. ὅτι ἐντεῦθεν ἡ Ψυχοστασία
Αἰσχύλου πέπλασται, ὡς τοῦ Διὸς τὰς
Ψυχὰς ἱστάντος, οὐ θανατηφόρους μοίρας,
An. Compare Plutarch de aud. poet.
(p. 17 B) τραγωιδίαν ὁ Αἰσχύλος ὅλην τῶι
μύθωι περιέθηκεν, ἐπιγράψας Ψυχοστασίαν.
καὶ παραστήσας ταῖς πλάστιγξι τοῦ Διὸς
ἔνθεν μὲν τὴν Θέτιν ἔνθεν δὲ τὴν *HO,
δεομένας ὑπὲρ τῶν υἱέων μαχομένων. The
latter passage, like the schol. quoted on
Θ 70, shews that the Ψυχοστασία dealt
with the death of Memnon, not of Hee-
tor. Apparently Aischylos took the idea
of the weighing and transferred the scene,
with the characteristic determination of
the Greek artist to have a free hand with
his materials, which has led to the general
avoidance by the tragedians of the few
opportunities offered by the J/iad and
Odyssey for dramatic treatment. The
weighing of souls after death is a familiar
symbol in Egyptian religion, and may
also have had its influence on Aischylos.

440

IAIAAOC Χ (xxi)

rn 9. Cs: e /
τὴν μὲν ᾿Αχιλλῆος, τὴν δ᾽ “Ἕκτορος ἱπποδάμοιο,
er \ 7 , εν s 5) ” 5
ἕλκε δὲ μέσσα λαβών: ῥέπε κτορος αἴσιμον nmap,
, an te /
auyeto δ᾽ εἰς ᾿Αἴδαο, λίπεν δέ € Φοῖβος Ἀπόλλων.

΄, fal , /
ἸΠηλείωνα δ᾽ ἵκανε θεὰ γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη,

“- / /
ἀγχοῦ δ᾽ ἱσταμένη ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"

215

> 2) 3) rt
“νῦν δὴ val γ᾽ ἔολπα, διίφιλε φαίδιμ. ᾿Αχιλλεῦ,
» lal lal Ν a
οἴσεσθαι μέγα κῦδος ᾿Αχαιοῖσι προτὶ νῆας,

δ / ” / 5."
‘Extopa δηιώσαντε μάχης aaTov περ ἐόντα.
> ΄ cr > fd LA Uy
οὔ of νῦν ἔτι γ᾽ ἔστι πεφυγμένον ἄμμε γενέσθαι,

> 7 f ’ /
οὐδ᾽ εἴ κεν μάλα πολλὰ πάθοι ἑκάεργος ᾿Αποόλλων

220

/ \ \ > (2
προπροκυλινδόμενος πατρὸς Διὸς αὐγιοχοιο.
5 nr a bY / ’ b) ΄
ἀλλὰ σὺ μὲν νῦν στῆθι καὶ ἄμπνυε, τόνδε δ᾽ ἐγώ τοι

> / / 5 / / ”
οἰχομένη πεπιθήσω ἐναντίβιον μαχέσασθαι.
ὡς φάτ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίη, ὁ δ᾽ ἐπείθετο, χαῖρε δὲ θυμῶι,

στῆ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐπὶ μελίης χαλκογλώχινος ἐρεισθείς.

225

911. οἷ: 6᾽ Ὁ.
215. μετηύδα 0.
218. ϑηώςαντα PR (U supr.). ||

Bar. Mor. Mose. 2: [πάϑ]ει A supr.

212 om. At. «Λέεςα : ῥῦμα Chrysippos. αἴσιμον ἕκτορος H.
216. νῶϊν Zen. Par. b.
Gaton Bar. Mor. Vr. b, yp. X: ἅτόν Q. 219.
oi: τοι H. ἄμαλε ANGHJQTU Syr. Ven. B: ἄμμι Q.
222. Tonde τ᾽ D Syr. Vr. A: τόνδ᾽ JP.

217. ayaiotcin ποτὶ HQ) (-c1) STU.

220. ndex(1) DHPR

Virgil has a well-known imitation of the
passage in Aen. xii. 723 ff. The rise
and fall of the scales, too, is a natural
metaphor to express the vicissitudes of
battle; it is but a step from the metaphor
itself to the belief that there is in heaven
a pair of scales which move up and down
in a sort of magic sympathy as the
fortunes of war change. In other words
—for primitive man confounds cause
and metaphor—the scales guide the war
and so become a material expression for
the will of fate.

212. Χρύσιππος “pia” γράφει" τὴν yap
ῥοπὴν Tot ζυγοῦ ῥύμην καλεῖσθαι, Schol. T.

213. ὥιχετο, the subject may be αἴσιμον
ἦμαρ, Hector’s fate descended to the
yrave, symbolizing his death ; or better,
Hector himself, who is proleptically said
to have gone to Hades when his fate was
decided. For the latter Monro compares
I 413 ὥλετο μέν μοι νόστος my return is
(as good as) lost, N 772 νῦν ὥλετο πᾶσα
κατ᾽ ἄκρης Ἴλιος : but points out that
both these occur ‘in speeches, where such
a boldness of expression is more natural.’
Diintzer and Nauck suspect the line.

216. The vulg. νῶϊ γ᾽ and Zen.’s νῶϊν
are evidently two attempts to avoid the
supposed hiatus in νῶϊ ξέξολπα.

217. ᾿Αχαιοῖσι may be a proper dat.,
shall bring the A. glory, or a locative,
shall bring ourselves great glory in the
Achaians’ eyes to the ships as in phrases
like ἀριπρεπέα Τρώεσσιν Z 477, and others
quoted on A95, q.v. The peculiarity of
the phrase lies in the addition of προτὶ
νῆας, which shews that οἴσεσθαι means
bring, not merely win as in the common
κράτος φέρεσθαι, etc.

219. See note on Z 488.

221. προπροκυλινϑόμενος recurs “in p
525 of a wanderer rolled on and on away
from his home ; a context which makes
the reduplication seem more natural than
it does here, where it strengthens the
meaning of the verb, rolling violently,
i.e. grovelling, rather than of the preposi-
tion. The gen. Διός seems to depend on
one mpo-, but the whole phrase is strange.

222. Gunnue, from an aor. ἄμπνυον,
which though quite regular in formation
(cf. ἔκλυον) is not elsewhere found, unless
in the variant ἐπίπνυον Σ 502, q.v. ; ef.
πίε (by πῖθι), etc. Cobet’s conj. ἄμπνυο,
to suit ἄμ-πνῦτο, is wrong, the two verbs
being apparently distinct (see note on
E 697).

225. χαλκογλώχινος, the spear is not
elsewhere represented as having barbs

IAIAAOC Χ (xxi) 447
¢ , v 4 \ » 7 » sr ae
ἡ δ᾽ dpa τὸν μὲν ἔλειπε, κιχήσατο δ᾽ “Exropa δῖον
Δηϊφόβωι ἐϊκυῖα δέμας καὶ ἀτειρέα φωνήν'
al » /
ἀγχοῦ & ἱσταμένη ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
“ἠθεῖ, ἣ μάλα δή σε βιάξεται ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς,
ἄστυ πέρι ἸΠριάμοιο ποσὶν ταχέεσσι διώκων' 280
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε δὴ στέωμεν καὶ ἀλεξώμεσθα μένοντες.
τὴν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπε μέγας κορυθαίολος “Ἰὰκτωρ'
“Δηΐφοβ᾽, ἢ μέν μοι τὸ πάρος πολὺ φίλτατος ἧσθα
a RS c s "δὰ Tl ΄ ͵ κῷ
γνωτῶν, ods “ExaBn noe Ιρίαμος τέκε παῖδας"
lal ’ vv \ r / \ / =
νῦν δ᾽ ἔτι Kal μᾶλλον νοέω φρεσὶ τιμήσασθαι, 235
ὃς ἔτλης ἐμεῦ εἵνεκ᾽, ἐπεὶ ides ὀφθαλμοῖσι,
r >
τείχεος ἐξελθεῖν, ἄλλοι δ᾽ ἔντοσθε μένουσι.
Ν » io / \ “ τ /
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπε θεὰ γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη"
«29 5 \ \ \ \ , ,
ἠθεῖ, ἢ μὲν πολλὰ πατὴρ καὶ πότνια μήτηρ
/ e lal =
λίσσονθ᾽ ἑξείης youvovpevor, ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἑταῖροι, 240
αὖθι μένειν: τοῖον yap ὑποτρομέουσιν ἅπαντες"
ἀλλ᾽ ἐμὸς ἔνδοθι θυμὸς ἐτείρετο πένθεϊ λυγρῶι.
la lal 4 / /
νῦν δ᾽ ἰθὺς μεμαῶτε μαχώμεθα, μηδέ τι δούρων
Ἀ ΄ ’ >
ἔστω φειδωλή, iva εἴδομεν εἴ κεν ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
nw / / a 5
νῶϊ κατακτείνας ἔναρα βροτόεντα φέρηται 245
rn > “- , ΕΣ
νῆας ἔπι γλαφυράς, ἢ κεν σῶι δουρὶ δαμείη.

226. ἂρ T. 227. δηιφοβωι ὃ Syr. 228. ueTHUdd (). 229. Biazero [,
Lips. Cant.: Biazet’ P. 231. créouen CJ'PR Ven. B Harl. a, Mosc. 2, Vr. Ὁ:
cT@uen J2: craiwuen Vr. A. || ἀλεξώμεθα GHOT: ἀλεξόμεθα P. 232. TON ὃ᾽
DS Vr. A. 236. Oc: ὡς CH (supr. ο) JTU Ven. B, Vr. A™. 237. EnToce I.

240. Aiccont’ ἐξείης (). 246. H: εἴ C. | ϑαμείηι AH: ϑαμήη P.

(cf. τανυγλώχινας of arrows, O 297);
possibly Ὑλωχίς may imply no more than
blade or point.

229. ὅτι νεωτέρου πρὸς πρεσβύτερον
σεπτικὴ προσφώνησίς ἐστι τὸ Heete, Aris-
ton. Seeon Καὶ 37. The variant βιάζετο,
was (just now) pressing thee, does not
look like a mere error; it is a really
ancient variant, as good as the text,
perhaps better.

231=A 348, where see note.

234. γνωτῶν, cf. note on N 697. τέκε,
sing. where we should expect plural, as
= 398.

235. TusHcaceai Mss. ; Stephanus, with
Eust., reads -ec@a. The future looks
more natural, 7 ween that I shall honour
thee in the future; but the aor. is at
least equally good in the sense J infend,

am minded, to honour thee, as Ὡ 560 νοέω
δὲ καὶ αὐτὸς "Exropd τοι λῦσαι, and 1 98
φρονέω δὲ διακρινθήμεναι ἤδη (see note
there).

236. For $c lengthened in the first
arsis see App. D, 61. ὡς, seeing how, is
equally good, but for want of ms. support,
and the probability that corruption would
be from ὅς to ὡς, not vice versa.

244. φειδωλή only here for the com-
moner φειδώ, cf. H 409. For the peri-
phrasis οἵ, Θ 181 μνημοσύνη τις ἔπειτα
πυρὸς δηΐοιο γενέσθω.

245. φέρηται OaueiH, for the
change of mood see the very similar =
308. It is of course easy to write δαμήηι,
but in similar cases the use of the same
mood in the two alternatives seem to be
avoided.

448

ὡς φαμένη καὶ κερδοσύνηι TAT

IAIAAOC X (χχπ)

᾿Αθήνη.

i δ᾽ ὅτε δὴ σχεδὸν ἦσαν ἐπ᾿ ἀλλήλοισιν ἰόντες,
τὸν πρότερος προσέειπε μέγας κορυθαίολος ἡ “Ἑκτωρ'

‘ov σ᾽ €Tt, Πηλέος υἱέ, φοβήσομαι, ὡς τὸ πάρος περ 250
τρὶς περὶ ἄστυ μέγα Πριάμου δίον, οὐδέ ποτ᾽ ἔτλην

μεῖναι ἐπερχόμενον" νῦν αὖτέ με θυμὸς ἀνῆκε
στήμεναι ἀντία σεῖο: ἕχοιμί κεν ἤ κεν ako
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε δεῦρο θεοὺς ἐπιδώμεθα: τοὶ γὰρ ἄριστοι
μάρτυροι ἔσσονται καὶ ἐπίσκοποι ἁρμονιάων: 255
οὐ yap ἐγώ σ᾽ ἔκπαγλον ἀεικιῶ, αἴ κεν ἐμοὶ Ζεὺς
δώηι καμμονίην, σὴν δὲ ψυχὴν ἀφέλωμαι"
ἀλλ᾽ ἐπεὶ ἄρ KE σε συλήσω κλυτὰ TEDXE > ᾿Αχιλλεῦ,
νεκρὸν ᾿Αχαιοῖσιν δώσω πάλιν: ὡς δὲ σὺ ῥέξειν."

τὸν © ἄρ᾽ ὑπόδρα ἰδὼν προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς:
ἣν “Ἕκτορ, μή μοι, ἄλαστε, συνημοσύνας ἀγόρευε. 261
ὡς οὐκ ἔστι λέουσι Kal ἀνδράσιν ὅρκια πιστά,

247, τινὲς πληθυντικῶς κερϑοούνηις Sch. A (so A swpr.).

250. πηλέως Cant.

Bar. 251. SION: Ofec ai χαριέστεραι (Did.), ““ Vat. 10.” 252. NUN: NUN O°
QR Vr. b. 253. «τῆναι Vr. "Ὁ. || coto P. || ἁλοίΐην : EAoiuHN Vr. ἃ ; ἀλοίμην
L Lips. 254. ἐπιδώμεθα᾽ Tol: ἐπιϑωςόμεθ᾽ οἵ H (supr. βω over ϑω) Vr. d (oi).

255. μάρτυρες R (Zen.? Cf. Β 302).
259. ῥέξειν PQS Bar. Mor. Vr. b A.
Jwcie... a4.

261. cuNHuocUNac T DS: μεθημοςύνας Vr.

251. Owcer H. 258. ap: ἄν ().

260 is preceded in ον λ by a line ending

A: CUNeHuMocGNaC ().

262. This line is followed in Pap. ἃ by another ending .. oxo... . oc

247. τὸ ἑξῆς ἐστὶν ὡς ἡγήσατο φαμένη
καὶ κερδοσύνηι (so Fried]. ; Ms. ἐστὶ καὶ
ἡγήσατο), οἷον οὐ μόνον διὰ λόγων αὐτὸν
ἠπάτησεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ διὰ τοῦ προσελθεῖν
ἀξιοπίστως, Nikanor: so she said, and
led him moreover (did not merely talk)
with guile. But it is simpler to take
Kai as expressing the consequence of her
words, see on T 165,

251. ton, fled, apparently conn. with
diewar, and distinct from 6(F)ie, feared
(see Curtius, ᾿ξ. no. 268). γράφεται καὶ
θίες: καὶ οὕτως εἶχον ai χαριέστεραι, Did.
Both forms are equally isolated ; the
doubt as to the trans. or intrans. use
may be paralleled by δίεμαι, which=
fugio M 304, Ψ 475, and =/fugo passim
(see on 2 584).

253. ἕλοιμί KEN ἢ KEN GAOIHN, whether
7 slay or be slain, stated paratactically,
‘I may slay or I may be slain.’ Both
optatives are potential. Hentze less
simply takes the first as potential, the
second as concessive, ‘I might kill
you, or, I grant, I might be slain,’
while Monro, H. G. § 300 n, takes

them both
willingness.’

254, ἐπιϑώμεθα, from ἐπιδόσθαι, lit. let
us give one another our gods, each offering
to the other the guarantee of his own
gods as guardians of his oath, as is done
in the formula of I’ 276 ff (see note).
In the more similar circumstances of H
76 ff., however, Zeus alone is called upon

as concessive, ‘ expressing

to guard the oaths of both parties. ἐπι-
implies thereover, thereto, aS in ém-

μάρτυρος H 76 (2), a 273, and ἐπίσκοποι
in the next line. The use of the verb is
quite isolated, the nearest analogy being
περιδώμεθα Ψ 485 ; but no good sense can
be got if we divide the word ἐπ-ιδώμεθα.
Note the variant ἐπιδωσόμεθ᾽ οἱ yap, a
correction no doubt suggested by K 463,
where see note. This is perhaps alluded
to in οἱ δὲ ““ ἐπικαλεσώμεθα," Sch. T.

257. καμμονίην, power to outlast, i.e.
victory, as in Ψ 661.

261. GAdacte, see note on M 163.
cuNHuMocUNaC, the ἁρμονίαι of 255 ; ef.
συνώμεθα N 381. Herod. would write
συνὴμοσύνας, With interaspiration.

IAIAAOC X (xx) 449
29 ΄ Ν ” e ’ \ Μ
οὐδὲ λύκοι τε καὶ ἄρνες ὁμόφρονα θυμὸν ἔχουσιν,
ἀλλὰ κακὰ φρονέουσι διαμπερὲς ἀλλήλοισιν,
“ > v ᾽ ᾽ \ \ \ / > / au εκ“
ὡς οὐκ ἔστ᾽ ἐμὲ καὶ σὲ φιλήμεναι, οὐδέ τι νῶϊν 65

ὅρκια ἔσσονται πρὶν ἢ ἕτερόν ye πεσόντα

αἵματος doar “Apna ταλαύρινον πολεμιστήν.

παντοίης ἀρετῆς μιμνήσκεο' νῦν σε μάλα χρὴ

αἰχμητήν τ᾽ ἔμεναι καὶ θαρσαλέον πολεμιστήν.

οὔ τοι ἔτ᾽ ἔσθ᾽ ὑπάλυξις, ἄφαρ δέ σε ἸΙαλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη 210
ἔγχει ἐμῶι δαμάαι: νῦν ἁθρόα πάντ᾽ ἀποτίσεις

κήδε᾽ ἐμῶν ἑτάρων, ods ἔκτανες ἔγχεϊ θύων."

ἢ ῥα καὶ ἀμπεπαλὼν προΐει δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος"
καὶ τὸ μὲν ἄντα ἰδὼν ἠλεύατο φαίδιμος “EKTwp:
ἕζετο γὰρ προϊδών, τὸ δ᾽ ὑπέρπτατο χάλκεον ἔγχος,
ἐν γαίηι δ᾽ ἐπάγη: ἀνὰ δ᾽ ἥρπασε ᾿Ιαλλὰς ᾿Αθήνη.
ay δ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆν δίδου, χάθε δ᾽ “Extopa ποιμένα λαῶν.
Extwp δὲ προσέειπεν ἀμύμονα 1]ηλεΐωνα-"
“ἥἤμβροτες, οὐδ᾽ ἄρα πώ τι, θεοῖς ἐπιείκελ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεῦ,

263. ἄρνες : ἄνδρες ΟἹ Bar. Mor. 265. οὐδέ τι (Α supr.) DP Bar. Vr. ἃ:
οὐδ᾽ ἔτι Vr. Ὁ: οὔτέ τε CJU: οὔτε τι Ω. 266. ὅρκιά τ᾽ D. || πρὶν ἢ Syr.
(supr.r): πρίν rH. || ἕτερόν τε R. 267. ταλαύριον ἢ. 269. θαρραλέον J).
270. ἔτ᾽ om. CGPQR Ven. B (yp. καὶ χωρὶς τοῦ ἔτι X). || ce: τε T. 27h.
δαμάςηι Bar. Mor. || NON PR Bar.: NON δ᾽ 2. 272. ϑυΐίων A: ϑυϊικὼν Harl. a.
274. ἀλεύατο D. φαΐδιλιος ἕκτωρ : χάλκεον Eryoc (). 275. ἕζετο:
azeto Cant. || χάλκεον : ἐν ἄλλωι μείλινον A.

263. τε καί, καί Heyne, on account of your oaths,’ as we should put it. On

Fapves.

265. It will be seen that Ms. authority
is for οὔτε rather than οὐδέ. The latter
is of course the regular correlative to ov,
but we find οὐ. . οὔτε in « 146 (see M.
and R.), \ 483. It has been said that
οὔτε joins the two clauses more intimately,
as though the second were included as a
matter of course in the former (Hoffmann) :
but the Odyssean passages hardly bear
this out, and it is better to read οὐδέ
and neglect the ms. tradition which
on such a point counts for little or
nothing.

266. The hiatus after ὅρκια is very
doubtful, as the word is closely con-
nected with éscovra.—all the more
closely by the pause before πρίν. Itis
a question if we should not read ὅρκιά γ᾽
with D; ye would be in place, giving
the emphasis of contempt —‘none of

VOL. II 2

the other hand γ᾽ after πρίν may well be
omitted with Syr. ; see note on E 288,
where the rest of the line and 267 are
repeated.

268. παντοίης, illustrated by H 237 ff.

269=E 602.

271. Compare a 43 viv δ᾽ ἁθρόα πάντ᾽
ἀπέτισεν (Αἴγισθος), ‘his death was the
one lump sum paid as the price of his
adultery and assassination’ (M. and R.).
Here the δέ after NON is omitted on
Platt’s suggestion (J.P. xxiii. 214); the
clause is clearly more vigorous without
it, being an expansion of the preceding,
not a contrast such as viv δέ expresses
with special emphasis.

275. €zeto, crouched, in the Mykenaean
posture of defence (note on A 593), for
the usual ἐάλη. Cant. reads ἄζετο, an in-
genious emendation based on II 736 q.v.,
and to be taken as=took care (ηὐλαβήθη).

G

450 IAIAAOC X (xxi!)

ἐκ Διὸς ἠείδης τὸν ἐμὸν μόρον: ἤτοι ἔφης yer 280
ἀλλά τις ἀρτιεπὴς καὶ ἐπίκλοπος ἔπλεο μύθων,
ὄφρά σ᾽ ὑποδδείσας μένεος ἀλκῆς τε λάθωμαι.
οὐ μέν μοι φεύγοντι μεταφρένωι ἐν δόρυ πήξεις,
ἀλλ᾽ ἰθὺς μεμαῶτι διὰ στήθεσφιν ἔλασσον,
εἴ τοι ἔδωκε θεός: νῦν αὖτ᾽ ἐμὸν ἔγχος ἄλευαι 285
χάλκεον: ὡς δή μιν σῶι ἐνὶ χροὶ πᾶν κομίσαιο"
καί κεν ἐλαφρότερος πόλεμος 'Γρώεσσι γένοιτο
σεῖο καταφθιμένοιο: σὺ γάρ σφισι πῆμα μέγιστον."

ἢ pa καὶ ἀμπεπαλὼν προΐει δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος,
καὶ βάλε Πηλείδαο μέσον σάκος οὐδ᾽ ἀφάμαρτε: 290
τῆλε δ᾽ ἀπεπλάγχθη σάκεος δόρυ. χώσατο δ᾽ Ἕκτωρ,
ὅττί ῥά οἱ βέλος ὠκὺ ἐτώσιον ἔκφυγε χειρός,
στῆ δὲ κατηφήσας, οὐδ᾽ ἄλλ᾽ ἔχε μείλινον ἔγχος.
Δηΐφοβον δ᾽ ἐκάλει λευκάσπιδα μακρὸν ἀύσας"

280. HeidHc GQ Ven. B:

€hacce(n) PR.
yp. X: ἐν Q.
coio GP. || κατακταμένοιο ().
énenAdryeH J: dnenmAdyeH CO Vr. d.
ἐβόα Did.

HMiderc Vr. A:
281. ἀρτιεπὴς : ἀρτιπτὴρ J. || μύθοις A sup. :
282. μένεός T Vr. A. || AaeotuHN CGU Syr. Ven. B.

285. ἄλευαι AHQT Syr. Ven. B:
287. καί KEN: ἐν ἄλλωι καί cin A. || ἐλαφρότατοα D. 4288.
290. WMECON: μέγα R.

Heideic (ἠιείϑεις, ἠεΐϑεις, ἠϊϑεις) (2.
uueoic ἢ μύϑωι ἢ μύθων Hust.
284. κεμαῶτα PR. ||

ἄλευε ©. 286. ἐνὶ S,

291. GnenAdren P:
294. ἐκάλει : αἱ --ἀπὸ-- τῶν πόλεων

280. ἠείϑης, a form which recurs in ε
206 only. 7- is the temporal augment,
arising from the prothetic ε so often
developed by F ; cf. ἤϊσκον, ἤϊκτο, from
é-Fix- (G. Meyer, Gr. § 475 ¢, Η. G.
§ 68).—Offence has been taken at the use
of the article in τὸν ἐμόν. This has
abundant analogies in H., and it is
doubtful if we can hope to expel it even
from the most ancient passages. The
best suggestion here, if that end is
desired, is ἠείδησθα (εὐείδησθα Naber)
ἐμόν : compare ἤιδησθα τ 93. ἤτοι ἔφης
re sarcastic, yet you thought you did.
The imperfect ἔφης and the equivalent
plpf. ἠείδης are both used, as often, to
contrast performance with promise.

281. ἀρτιεπής, glib of tongue (cf. ἀρτί-
mous aprippwr), i.e. a mere chatterer, not
adoer. So inthe next clause αύϑων is
the emphatic word. énixAonoc, wily, as
λ 364, ν 291, and with the same con-
struction ᾧ 397 ἐπίκλοπος ἔπλετο τόξων,
cunning in bows. The evolution from
κλέπτω of the purely mental sense, cozen,
conceal, do secretly, goes very far in later
Greek, see L. and S. The transitional

steps κλέπτειν νόον and véu are Homeric,
& 217, A 132, ete. Cf. the ἐπίκλοπον
ἦθος of women, Hes. Opp. 67.

282. Compare Z 265. For λάθωμαι
a few MSS. give λαθοίμην, but the subj. is
more in place as indicating the intended
effect as still continuing. 283, cf. Θ 95.

284. στήθεσφιν is probably a gen.,
but may be explained as a real locative,
lit. through in my breast.

285. The variant deve is purely
itacistic. No verb ἀλεύω exists in good
Greek ; the few sigmatic forms in Trag.
are aor. from *d)é(F)w, and trans. in
sense (avert).

286. éni, though poorly attested, is
necessary for metrical reasons. For the
shortening of -a in this place cf., e.g.,
A 30; and for ὧς in wishes Σ 107.

293. KaTH@Hcac, downcast ; see on II
498. GAX(o) (a rare elision), it was usual
to carry two spears.

294. λευκάεςπιϑα, dz. εἰρ. in H. The
only case where λευκός is connected with
a shield is A 35, where on Agamem-
non’s shield are dugadol . . κασσιτέροιο
λευκοί (or rather λευκοῖ᾽, see note there).

ΙΛΙΑΔΟΟ Χ (χχπὶ)

" / , , . > " , a) ΄ 2
ἤιτεέ μιν δόρυ μακρόν: ὁ δ᾽ ov Ti οἱ ἐγγύθεν ἧεν. 295

7 ‘ s
“Extop δ᾽ ἔγνω iow evi φρεσὶ φώνησέν τε"
/ /
“a πόποι, ἢ μάλα δή με θεοὶ θάνατόνδε κάλεσσαν"
sf 3 ¢ a
AnipoBov yap ἔγωγ ἐφάμην ἥρωα παρεῖναι"
> ᾽ ¢e \ >’ , , \ ’ , / > /
ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν ἐν τείχει, ἐμὲ δ᾽ ἐξαπάτησεν ᾿Αθήνη.
a \ \ b] / / \ 29> νον Μ
νῦν δὲ δὴ ἐγγύθι μοι θάνατος κακὸς οὐδ᾽ ἔτ᾽ ἄνευθεν, 800
» /
οὐδ ἀλέη: ἢ γάρ pa πάλαι TO γε φίλτερον ἦεν
/ YY ͵
Ζηνί τε καὶ Διὸς vie ἑκηβόλωι, οἵ μὲ πάρος γε
/ / rf 3 rn ΄,
πρόφρονες εἰρύατο' νῦν αὖτέ με μοῖρα κιχάνει.
\ fal ,
μὴ μὰν ἀσπουδί ye Kal ἀκλειῶς ἀπολοίμην,

» \ / / ᾽᾽
ἀλλὰ μέγα ῥέξας τι καὶ ἐσσομένοισι πυθέσθαι. 305

"\ » , 3. ὦ ΄ gs
ὡς apa φωνήσας εἰρύσσατο φάσγανον ὀξύ,
δ e ig X / / / /
TO οἱ ὑπὸ λαπάρην τέτατο μέγα τε στιβαρὸν τε,
yy \ > \ A ᾽ ? \ ΄ ,
οἴμησεν δὲ ἀλεὶς ὥς T αἰετὸς ὑψιπετήεις,

ὅς T εἶσιν πεδίονδε διὰ

νεφέων ἐρεβεννῶν

e & I Μ 3 > ἣν Δ fal /
ἁρπάξων ἢ apy’ ἀμαλὴν ἢ πτῶκα λαγωόν' 310

297. ec θάνατον 2° éxddecce Lips.
ndpoieé re ““ Vat. 1,” yp. Sch. X (1 ἢ). | τό re: τότε JQT Bar. Mor.
302. υἷι CJPQRSTU Ven. B: υἱεῖ 2.

φέρτερον Vr. A.

303. προφρονέως DH. || εἰρύαται GPR Syr.

ἀςπουδεί {). 305. ἑςπομένοιςι ().

308. οἴμηςέ τε ().

The adjective may mean no more than
resplendent, see on Ξ 185. In Trag. it
is the characteristic epithet of the
Argives ; Aisch. Sept. 90, Soph. Ant. 106,
Eur. Phoen. 1099. White shields are
among the votive offerings recorded in
the recently-discovered inventory of the
temple at Aegina; they are attributed
by Xenophon (fed/. iii. 2. 15) to the
Karians, and by Plutarch (Cleom. 23) to
Macedonians.

295. The rather harsh asyndeton is
due to the fact that Hitee is explicative
of ἐκάλει. οὔ Ti of: οὐκέτι Ε᾽(οι) Platt
(Hep xxiii, 214).

299. Hector knows who has deceived
him, as in f 450 Achilles knows that it
is Apollo who saves Hector. The rare
and late τείχει (for τείχει) cannot be
corrected without violence (πύργωι van
L., τείχεσσ᾽ Rohl).

300. οὐδ᾽ ἔτ᾽, so Monro for vulg.
οὐδέτ᾽ : H. G. p. 304. τε has no mean-
ing here, the sentence not being general.

301. The reference of τό re is vague ;
we may understand ‘that I should die
after all.’ φίλτερον, the comparative

309. τινὲς ἀπὸ νεφέων Sch. T.
Syr. Harl. a: ἁρπάζων 2. ἁπαλὴν PRU (supr. ἁμαλὴν).

πάλαι τό re:
φίλτερον :
πάρος περ OH).
304. Gcnoudi A Syr. Ven. B:
306. εἰρύατο Vr. b. 307. ὑπαὶ LQ.
310. ἁρπάξων AGL

301. ἀλέειν ().

expresses ‘rather than what they seemed
to mean.’

303. εἰρύατο, some Mss. have εἰρύαται,
which is preferred by Heyne and de-
fended by Cobet (Mf. C. 371). But, to
say nothing of the weight of testimony
and the analogy of the preceding je,
the present perf. here would give a
wrong sense. It is of course common in
H. (A 553 ete.) with πάρος, but only
when the emphasis is laid on a habit
having been continued to the present
time ; here the emphasis is on the fact
of the change. In this sense the use
with the imperf. is regular (N 102 and
often). For the same reason πάρος re
is right and πάρος περ wrong (note on P
587).

304. Gcnoudi, without an effort, as O
512, O 476.

307. τό lengthened in the first arsis,
see on 236. τέτατο, extended ; elsewhere
only of objects which can be said strictly
to be stretched, as capable of being short-
ened : e.g. I’ 372, and cf. E 728.

310. πτῶκα ἐπιθετικῶς Ap. Lew., 1.6.
timid. But in P 676 and later Greek

452 IAIAAOC X (xx)

΄ ’ 2 /
ὼς “Exrwp οἴμησε τινάσσων φάσγανον ὀξύ.
Α , \
ὡρμήθη δ᾽ ᾿Αχιλεύς, μένεος δ᾽ ἐμπλήσατο θυμὸν
, /
ἀγρίου, πρόσθεν δὲ σάκος στέρνοιο κάλυψε
Ν / / J 5 / lol
καλὸν δαιδάλεον, κόρυθι ὃ ἐπένευε φαεινῆι
»»
τετραφάλωι: καλαὶ δὲ περισσείοντο ἔθειραι 315
/ \ /
[χρύσεαι, as “Πφαιστος ἵει λόφον ἀμφὶ θαμειάς].
> ἣν 3 \ lal
οἷος δ᾽ ἀστὴρ εἶσι μετ᾽ ἀστράδι νυκτὸς ἀμολγῶι
τ ᾿ a “ 5) /
ἕσπερος, ὃς κάλλιστος ἐν οὐρανῶν loTAaTaL ἀστήρ,
ΟῚ > A 5 , Eh eye 2 Ἃ ie ΑΛ λλεὶ
ὡς αἰχμῆς ἀπέλαμπ᾽ ἐυήκεος, ἣν ἄρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς '
fel \ “ /
πάλλεν δεξιτερῆν φρονέων κακὸν ᾿ἴἄκτορι δίωι, 820
oe /
εἰσορόων χρόα καλόν, ὅπηι εἴξειε μάλιστα.
“ \ \ of Ik \ ” / / /
τοῦ δὲ Kal ἄλλο τόσον μὲν EXE KPOa χάλκεα τεύχη,
, τ / , eZ, ΄
καλά, τὰ Ἰ]ατρόκλοιο βίην ἐνάριξε κατακτάς,
- a snes ie)
φαίνετο δ᾽, ἧι κληΐδες ἀπ᾿ Opwv αὐχέν᾽ ἔχουσι,

λαυκανίην, ἵνα τε ψυχῆς ὥκιστος ὄλεθρος" 325

311. οἴμηςε : dpunce H.

CU. 315. καλαὶ : αἱ πλείους ϑειναί Did.
320. πάλλων QT (supr. € man. γο0.}). 322.

τὰς (). 319. ἀπέλαμπεν HPR.

τεύχεα Vr. b.

AT Syr. Mor. Bar. Harl. d, Par. e:
Par. cfg hj: λαυκανίης 0.

312. ὁρμήθη ὦ. || émAHcaTo ().

323. éndpize (): ἐξενάριξε DPR.
ὑπομνημάτων φαῖνεν Did. (Schol. A): ἔν τισι φαῖνον Schol. T.
λευκανίης C? (p. ras.) QS Vr. b A, Mose. 2,

314. énéneuce
316 om. AtDtH. || χρύςειαι PQR. ||

324. φαίνετο : ἔν τισι τῶν
325. λαυκανίην

it is ἃ subst., and so it is better to
take it here on the analogy of ἴρηξ κίρκος,
Tpnpwves πελειάδες, etc.

313. ἀγρίου, i.e. ἀγρίοο ; Φ 104 etc.
For the constr. of κάλυψε cf. E315, P
132, Φ 321.

315-16=T 382-83, where see note.
The second line is out of place in the
old part of the poems where the ὁπλοποιία
is unknown.

317. Cf. 28. The Evening Star is
hardly the one which we should expect
to find in the gloom of the night, if that
be the meaning of νυκτὸς ἀμολτγῶι.
But in certain circumstances Venus is
a brilliant object in winter to a compara-
tively late hour. See however note
on 27.

319. ἀπέλαμπε, there was a gleam.
We must supply σέλας (cf. T 379) or the
like as subject from the general idea of
the verb itself; a very curious use, and
hardly to be paralleled in H., if in
Greek. There is no similar instance
given in H. Οὐ. 8 161 or Kihner, § 352,
phrases like ἐκήρυξε (sc. ὁ κῆρυξ), ete.,
all having personal subjects. The most
analogous is the idiom ἣν ἀμφὶ ἡλίου

δυσμάς, ete., sc. ἢ ἡμέρα. The only
other instance of an impersonal verb
quoted from H. is « 143 οὐδὲ προὐφαίν τ᾽
ἰδέσθαι, there was no light to see by, and
here ἰδέσθαι in a way takes the place of
the subject (as with δεῖ πρέπει, etc.). In
the case of βροντᾶι ὕει, etc., the subject
is Ζεύς, and in H. is always expressed.

921. εἴξειε, it gave him an opening.
See Σ 520 εἶκε λοχῆσαι.

322. ἄλλο τόςον μέν, for this ad-
verbial phrase cf. = 378, Ψ 454. The
καί however is curious and has not been
satisfactorily explained. τεύχη, see on

H 207. Here van L. reads τεύχεα καλά,
χάλκε᾽, ἅ κτλ.
323=P 187. Ti ἘΘΕΟΣ, τα

Achilles’ arms in the original poem, it
is almost incredible that the fact should
not be mentioned here. That it should
not be is perhaps rather in favour of
the genuineness of the line, which is
obviously open to suspicion.

324-25, Though the sense of the pass-
age is clear enough, it is critically one
of extreme difficulty. The only im-
portant Ms. variation is between Aau-
κανίην and λαυκανίης or Nevkavins. The

IAIAAOC Χ (χχπ) 453

a ΓΦ Ε] \ “--ἢ » ’ ” a“
THe ῥ᾽ ἐπὶ ol μεμαῶτ᾽ ἔλασ᾽ ἔγχεϊ δῖος

᾿Αχιλλεύς,

ἀντικρὺ δ᾽ ἁπαλοῖο δι᾿ αὐχένος ἤλυθ᾽ ἀκωκή.
+N? + es , ᾽ » / / / ,
οὐδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ am ἀσφάραγον μελίη τάμε χαλκοβάρεια,
ὄφρά τί μιν προτιείποι ἀμειβόμενος ἐπέεσσιν.
» δ. ,ὔ ε Oe | 4 fal > ,
ἤριπε δ᾽ ἐν κονίηις" ὁ δ᾽ ἐπεύξατο δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς: 380
“Ἕκτορ, ἀτάρ που ἔφης Ἰ]ατροκλῆ᾽ ἐξεναρίζων

»" ΕΣ »
σῶς ἔσσεσθ᾽,

ἐμὲ δ᾽ οὐδὲν ὀπίξεο νόσφιν ἐόντα,

νήπιε" τοῖο δ᾽ ἄνευθεν ἀοσσητὴρ μέγ᾽ ἀμείνων

326. μεμαώς GHST. || ἔγχεϊ : tropa D.
h and τινὲς τῶν παλαιῶν, Eust. || μελίηι
προτιείπηι Vr.
331. ἀτάρ: ἄφαρ ap. Schol. Τ (7).

329 ἀθ. Ar. |) ποτιείποι S:
κονίηιειν CJU. || ἐπεύ]χε[το A supr.

328. ἀπὸ ςφάραγον King’s Par.
χαλκοβαρείηι LY. May. 160. 50.
A Mose. 2: προτὶ εἵπη KR. 330.

evidence of Did. is ἔν τισι τῶν ὑπομνημά-
των φαῖνεν (φαῖνον, Schol. T) δ᾽ ἧι κληΐδες,
ἵν᾽ ἧι ἐπὶ τῶν τευχέων " τὰ τεύχη οὐκ
ἐκάλυπτε τὴν λαυκανίην, ἀλλ᾽ ἐποίει φαίνε-
σθαι. It appears then (1) that Ar. in his
editions had the text ; (2) that the κοινή
had λαυκανίης ; (3) that in ‘some of his
notes’ Ar. read φαῖνον or gaivev—in
either case agreeing with τεύχη, the
armour exposed the gullet. The text
will mean the skin (χρώς, from 322) was
exposed (or perhaps with a vaguer refer-
ence it was exposed = there was an
opening), where the collar-bones from the
shoulders clasp the neck, even the gullet,
λαυκανίην being in ‘whole -and- part’
apposition with αὐχένα. Those who
read λαυκανίης made the gen. depend
either on κληΐδες (Schol. T) or on χρώς,
the subject supplied to φαίνετο (Eust.).
Monro suggests that it may be a local
gen. ‘in the part of the gullet where’
comparing P 372 νέφος δ᾽ οὐ φαίνετο
πάσης γαίης (but the negative there
makes a difference). Nauck reads dav-
κανίη asnom. to φαίνετο. T. 1). Seymour
in Οὐ. R. xv. 28 suggests that the poet
‘had λαυκανίη in mind from the first,’
but allowed the nom. to be attracted to
the ace. by the construction of αὐχένα
in the intervening rel. clause. For \av-
κανίη οἵ. also @ 642. It is possible that
here it may mean ¢hroat generally rather
than gullet, though the more special
sense is recommended by the antithesis
with ἀσφάραγος, wind-pipe, in 328. an
ὥλμων is to be taken as a prepositional
attribute to κληΐδες, cf. 447 οἰμωγῆς ἀπὸ
πύργου, K 371 ἐμῆς ἀπὸ χειρὸς ὄλεθρον.
It is possible, but less pointed, to take
am ὥμων with the verb, hold the neck
apart from the shoulders, cf. the similar
phrase in Θ 325, with note.

929. ἀθετεῖται ὅτι γελοῖος, ef ἡ mea
ἐπετήδευσε μὴ ἀποτεμεῖν τὸν ἀσφάραγον,
ἵνα προσφωνήση τὸν ᾿Αχιλλέα. ἀπολογού-
μενοι δέ φασιν ὅτι τὸ ἐκ τύχης συμβεβηκὸς
αἰτιατικῶς ἐξενήνοχεν, An. Even if we
supposed that ὄφρα indicated the pur-
pose of the spear, this would not be a
more violent personification than phrases
like ἔγχεα λιλαιόμενα pods doa,
But it is easy, and more reasonable, to
suppose that the intention indicated
is that of fate, for which the scholia
compare ¢ 154, w 427-28. Still it must
be confessed that 328-29 look some-
what like an early rhapsodist’s answer
to the difficulty ‘how can Hector
speak with the spear through his
throat?’ The reply that it went through
the gullet but not the wind- pipe
is courageous but hardly convincing.
The poet in this great climax of pathos
has higher matters to think of than
anatomical realism.

331. ἁτάρ indicates the contrast of
what follows with the actual circum-
stances: he might have begun with
κεῖσαι, but leaves it to be expressed by
the grim reality. The taunt is_ pur-
posely made to resemble that of Hector
on slaying Patroklos, II 830.

332. σῶς, this is the only passage
where the open form σάος or céos cannot
be at once restored (see on A 117, I 424,
N 773). Hence Nauck conj. fs (Ε 887,
II 445), which is not a very suitable
word. It is more likely that we should
read σάος ἔσεσθ᾽ with P. Knight, and
take it as a case of lengthening in the
first arsis: App. D, c 1.

333. τοῖο goes with ἄνευθεν, repeating
νόσφιν ἐόντα. GueinwNn may mean either
‘better than he’ or ‘better than thou.’
The former seems more natural.

454

IAIAAOC X (xxi)

νηυσὶν ἔπι γλαφυρῆισιν ἐγὼ μετόπισθε λελείμμην,

“ / 2) OF
ὃς TOL γούνατ ἐλυσα.

\ \ ΄ ἮΝ > \
σε μὲν κυνες ἢ OL@VOL

335

ἑλκήσουσ᾽ ἀϊκῶς, Tov δὲ κτεριοῦσιν ᾿Αχαιοί."

τὸν δ᾽ ὀλιγοδρανέων προσέφη κορυθαίολος “Ἐκτωρ'
«χίσσομ᾽ ὑπὲρ ψυχῆς καὶ γούνων σῶν τε τοκήων,
μή με ἔα παρὰ νηυσὶ κύνας καταδάψαι ᾿Αχαιῶν,

Ε / ἢ
ἀλλὰ σὺ μὲν χαλκόν τε ἅλις χρυσόν τε δέδεξο,

‘ \ / /
Tot δώσουσι πατὴρ καὶ TOTYLA μήτηρ,
" ἈΝ ΘΝ , ΄, ” if.
οἴκαδ᾽ ἐμὸν δόμεναι πάλιν, ὄφρα πυρὸς με

δῶρα τά
fal \
σῶμα δὲ

940

Τρῶες καὶ Τρώων ἄλοχοι λελάχωσι θανόντα."
τὸν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπόδρα ἰδὼν προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς"

7 / \ J
“un pe, κύον, γούνων γουνάζεο μηδὲ τοκήων"

345

Δ ΄ , \ \ 2 /

αἱ yap πως αὐτόν pe μένος καὶ θυμὸς avein

> / / ͵ el ΕΣ ”

Om -aTroTapvopevov κρέα ἔδμεναι, οἷά pm ἔοργας,

ς » ὃ Qn / nan ’ /

ὡς οὐκ ἔσθ᾽ ὃς σῆς ye κύνας κεφαλῆς ἀπαλάλκοι.

335. Oc: we Syr.
€AkUccouc’ Par. ἢ. ||

336. ἑλκύςους᾽ CHJP!QRSU Mor. Bar. Vr. A Par.defg:

ἑλκήςουςει κακῶς οἱ περὶ ᾿Αντίμαχον, Did. (see Ludw.). ||

ἀεικῶς H Syr. Bar. Mor. Vr. A Eust. || κτερεοῦσιν L Mor. Harl. a, Mose. 2.

340. ypucon Te αλις χαλκον Te ὅτ. || ϑέϑεξαι J: déxecear H.
εν JAAa[ Pap. ἃ (TaAAG ο᾽ G, Grenfell-Hunt). || Tor: cor P.
346. ανείηι Syr.: ἀνήη(ι) AJ U Harl. a, Mosc. 2, Vr. A Ven. B.

ὃ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος A.

341. ἀποτεμλνόμενον DP Mor. Bar. || οἷά: Scca H.

341. Opa:
844. ἐν ἄλλωι TON

348. coc Ar. (not ὧς) Schol. P.

336. ἀϊκῶς, adverb of ἀεικής : the
weak stem is found only here in H.,
but is supported by numerous analogical
formations, for which see H. G. § 125. 2.
It is probable that the weak stem was
once normal when the last syllable bore
the accent, the strong coming in through
the analogy of the barytone compounds.
The contracted forms αἰκής, αἰκῶς are
found in Attic. But it was no doubt
this apparent irregularity which in-
duced Antimachos to read ἑλκήσουσι
κακῶς ““ ἐπὶ τὸ γνωριμώτερον ” (as the more
familiar). A stronger argument in
favour of his reading is the contraction
-@s from -έως.

339, UH we Ea, read μή μ᾽ eae (see
notes on B 165, 2 17); or if the leneth-
ening of the -e be objected to, μή μ᾽ ἐάειν.

342-43 =H 79-80.

345. roundzeo: ‘the verb, lit. to clasp
the knees (in supplication), came to
mean generally to supplicate, but retained
the construction of a verb of taking hold:
and this was extended to anything ap-
pealed to by the suppliant. Here of
course actual clasping is not intended’
(Monro). Cf. I 582 with note.

346. αὐτόν, emphatic, as opposed to
the dogs. For the wish compare A 34,
Q 212. So far from the expression in-
volving, as some have thought/ a re-
miniscence of a stage of cannibalism, it
is meant, while conveying hatred enough,
to express that which is inconceivable ;
see on ὥ 212. The idiom by which a
certainty is thus expressed, by contrast-
ing-it with an impossibility in the form
of a wish, is familiar ; see Θ 538, N 825,
= 464; Lange, EI 329-32, and 504.
The punctuation of the whole speech is
Lange’s, and is clearly right, from the
analogy of I 379-87, where we have the
same climax of repudiation in the two
asyndetic clauses with οὐδ᾽ εἰ, followed
by οὐδ᾽ ὥς. Others put a comma after |
ἀπαλάλκοι and colon after ἄλλα (350), thus
joining the first οὐδ᾽ εἰ clause with what
precedes, the second with what follows.
This entirely emasculates the sentence.

348. Some read ὡς (Ξε οὕτως) for ὧς,
after Nikanor, thus taking 346-47 by
themselves, and making 828 an inde-
pendent line—very badly. ἀπαλάλκοι,
a potential opt. (Nauck conj. σῆς κε for
σῆς γε).

IAIAAOC X (xxi) 455

»>Q> » / \ / , Μ
οὐδ᾽ εἴ κεν δεκάκις τε καὶ εἴκοσι νήριτ᾽ ἄποινα
/ ’ ? ANG ” e / \ Ν Μ
στήσωσ᾽ ἐνθάδ᾽ ἄγοντες, ὑπόσχωνται δὲ καὶ ἄλλα, 350
> » \ “ ,
οὐδ᾽ εἴ κέν σ᾽ αὐτὸν χρυσῶι ἐρύσασθαι ἀνώγοι
/ ’ὔ 50» e , ,
Δαρδανίδης ἸΠ]ρίαμος, οὐδ᾽ ὡς σέ γε πότνια μήτηρ
, / a
ἐνθεμένη λεχέεσσι γοήσεται, ὃν τέκεν αὐτή,
> A 4 \ > \ \ / / ”
ἀλλὰ κύνες TE καὶ οἰωνοὶ κατὰ πάντα δάσονται.
Ν \ / / / ie wr) ,
τὸν δὲ καταθνήισκων προσέφη κορυθαίολος “Extwp: — 355
5 > \ , / 20) ΕΝ, »
ἢ σ ἐὺ γινώσκων προτιόσσομαι, οὐδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔμελλον
/ 9S \ / /
πείσειν: ἢ γὰρ σοί γε σιδήρεος ἐν φρεσὶ θυμός.
fol , , a
φράζεο νῦν, μὴ τοί Te θεῶν μήνιμα γένωμαι,
lal δ 4 al >
ἤματι τῶι OTe κέν σε Ilapis καὶ Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων

\ , > /
ἐσθλὸν ἐόντ᾽ ὀλέσωσιν evil Σ

fal / ᾽
καιῆισι πύληισιν. 360

/ / 7
ὡς ἄρα μιν εἰπόντα τέλος θανάτοιο κάλυψε,
’ AAs,
ψυχὴ δ᾽ ἐκ ῥεθέων πταμένη ᾿Αἰδόσδε βεβήκει,
,ὔ / (ee A ¢i
ὃν πότμον γοόωσα, λιποῦσ᾽ ἀνδροτῆτα καὶ ἥβην.

350. ὑπόσχονται Bar. Vr. A.
Vr. b. || ἀνώγη(ι) P: ἀνώγει ( Vr. d.
γιγνώσκων L. || οὐδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ : οὐ rap H.
ab, Par. bee g hj, yp. X Par. 83.

349. With efxoct we must supply

the idea times from the termination of
δεκάκις, a rather violent resource, but
apparently the best. Cf. Theokr. xv.
129 ὀκτωκαιδεκέτης ἢ ἐννεακαίδεχ᾽ ὁ
γαμβρός. The tradition reads εἰκοσινή-
pera in one word, A adding the ‘hyphen.’
This may be explained (a) εἰκοσιν-ήριτα,
twenty-counted, where -ἤριτα is to be
taken as an equivalent of -άκις ; (bd)
εἰκοσι-νήριτα, twenty-cowntless, which
hardly makes sense. νήριτος occurs also
in Hes, Opp. 511 νήριτος ὕλη, and Ap.
Rhod. iii. 1288 in the sense countless,
and it is easy to connect it with ἀριθμός
(Curt. #f. no. 488). Compare the very
similar I 379.

350. ctHcooci, weigh out, compare note
on ἀποστήσωνται N 745.

351. ς᾽ αὐτὸν χρυςῶι EpUcaceal, p77
thy weight in gold, lit. weigh thy body (see
A 4) with gold; cf. Theognis 77 πιστὸς
ἀνὴρ χρυσοῦ τε Kal ἀργύρου ἀντερύσασθαι
ἄξιος. This settles the meaning of the
verb ; to take it merely as to ransom with
gold reduces the sentence to a ridiculous
anticlimax. Though it is not easy to
see how the transition of meaning comes
in, we may at least compare the use
of ἕλκειν in weighing, see 212. ὁ δὲ
Αἰσχύλος ἐπ᾽ ἀληθείας ἀντίσταθμον χρυσὸν
πεποίηκε πρὸς τὸ Ἕκτορος σῶμα ἐν Φρυξίν,

351. ς᾽ αὐτὸν : ςεαυτῶι D.

ἐρίςαςϑθαι Lips.
355. τὸν O° 6AIrodpanéwn H. 356.
357. EN φρεεὶ : ENdoe1 JOST Harl.

363 om. Dt.

An. For ἀνώγοι Bekker and others
read ἀνώγηι, with a few Mss., to suit the
preceding στήσωσι. But the change is
quite natural ; that a large ransom will
be offered is likely, but that it should
be equal to Hector’s weight in gold is
an impossible exaggeration and is there-
fore expressed by the mood of imagina-
tion. In I 379-85 the opt. is used in
both the clauses, because both are equally
imaginary and impossible.

356. The similarity between the deaths
of Hector and Patroklos is evidently
intentional. Both have the dying man’s
insight into the future (see II 854). npoti-
6ccoual, ὅτι ἀπὸ τῶν ὄσσων ἡ μεταφορά
(i.e. not from ὄσσα, see on A 105), προ-
βλέπω τῶι vot. The phrase has been
very variously explained ; the best sense
is got by translating Verily I know thee
well and behold thee as thou art, or, with
a closer adherence to the use of ὄσσομαι,

Sorebode my fate.

358. The words μή τοί τι ϑεῶν μήνιμα
γένωμαι recur in the speech οἵ Elpenor’s
shade when asking burial for his body,
X 73, and evidently imply vivid belief
in the ‘ghost theory’ (App. L, § 9).
Cf. Eur. Phoen. 934.

359. Compare the prophecy of Xanthos
in less specific terms, T 417.

361-64=IT 855-58 where see notes.

450

IAIAAOC Χ (Χχπ)

τὸν καὶ τεθνηῶτα προσηύδα δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς"
“«χσέθναθι" κῆρα δ᾽ ἐγὼ τότε δέξομαι, ὁππότε κεν δὴ 365
Ζεὺς ἐθέληι τελέσαι ἠδ᾽ ἀθάνατοι θεοὶ ἄλλοι."
ἢ ῥα καὶ ἐκ νεκροῖο ἐρύσσατο 'χάλκεξου ἔγχος,
καὶ τό γ᾽ ἄνευθεν ἔθηχ᾽, ὁ δ᾽ ἀπ᾽ ὦμων τεύχε᾽ ἐσύλα

αἱματόεντ᾽"

ἄλλοι δὲ περίδραμον vies ᾿Αχαιῶν,

οἱ καὶ θηήσαντο φυὴν καὶ εἶδος ἀγητὸν 870

“Extopos:

0 ” “ b) / U
οὐδ apa οἱ τις ἀνουτητί YE παρεστήη.

ὧδε δέ τις εἴπεσκεν ἰδὼν ἐς πλησίον ἄλλον"
«ᾧὦ πόποι, ἢ μάλα δὴ μαλακώτερος ἀμφαφάασθαι
“Ἕκτωρ ἢ ὅτε νῆας ἐνέπρηθεν πυρὶ κηλέωι.᾽"
ὡς ἄρα τις εἴπεσκε καὶ οὐτήσασκε παραστάς. 375

Tov © ἐπεὶ ἐξενάριξε ποδάρκης tos ᾿Αχιλλεύς,

στὰς ἐν ᾿Αχαιοῖσιν ἔπεα πτερόεντ᾽ ἀγόρευεν᾽"

“ὦ φίλοι, ᾿Αργείων ἡγήτορες ἠδὲ μέδοντες,

ἐπεὶ δὴ τόνδ᾽ ἄνδρα θεοὶ δαμάσασθαι ἔδωκαν,

ὃς κακὰ πόλλ ἔρρεξεν, ὅσ᾽ οὐ σύμπαντες οἱ ἄλλοι, 880

364, τεθνηῶτα (A supr.) JPQRS Mone
|| τελέςειν J.
371. ἀουτητί Lips.:

ἐθέλει J Vr. A: ἐθέλοι ὦ.
οἵ Kal: οἵ κέ ἐ CJU Ven. B.
D (T supr.) U.

Vr. A Mose. 2,
προσηύδα Mor.
τε καὶ ἄλλοι Gpicthec παναχαιῶν Zen.

373. ἀμφιφάαςθαι Ike
Bar. : ENEMPHCEN Q.

380. éppezen A Mor. Bar. Harl. a, yp. X: ἔρεξεν Q:

375. οὐτήςεςκε JU!.
378. ὦ φίλοι ἥρωες Banaoi eepdnontec ἄρηος CJU: ἀτρείϑη

τεϑθνειῶτα ἃ).
368. τό τ᾽:

|| κετηύϑα (). 366.
τόδ᾽ P Mose. 2. 370.
GNnoutHcTi(?)Q. 372. ἄλλων
374. énéripHee(N) (A supr) Q Harl. a,
377. πτερόεντα

379. ON om. DR. || ϑαμάαςθαι Cant.

Epdecken (2, yp. A.

365. Téenael, Jie dead, cf. O 496

τεθνάτω. The rest of the couplet==
115-16.
370. The admiration felt for the

beauty of the corpse recalls Herodotos’
description of the finding of the body of
Masistios at Plataiai (ix. D5). A parallel
to the taunting words of 373-74 may be
found in Sir G. Dasent’s Burnt Njal, 11.
194, ‘All men said that it was better to
be near Skarphedinn dead than they
weened, for no man was afraid of him.’
As for the stabbing of the dead body
(alluded to again in Q 421), we may say
in palliation of this apparently insensate
brutality (which the poet evidently re-
gards as quite natural) that there is a
widespread belief that a dead man’s
ghost is maimed and harmless to his
enemies if the body be mutilated. For
this superstition see note on 2 180; the
old English custom of running a stake
through the body of a suicide is equally
due to it. It has also been suggested

that each Myrmidon may have claimed
his individual right to a share in revenge
for kindred blood shed by Hector.

371. For Ἕκτορος G. Hermann plaus-
ibly conj."Exropa, cf. E787. ἀἄνουτητί,
without wounding him. Cf. ἀνούτατος
(A 540), dovros (= 536), both in pass.
sense. Here van L. conj. ἀνουταστί.
For the suffix see 77. G. § 110.

o(2—B 2171: Civ.

374, énémpHeen, the imperf. seems
obviously superior to the aor. of the
vulg.

378. Zen. read ᾿Ατρείδη τε καὶ ἄλλοι

ἀριστῆες Παναχαιῶν. But Agamemnon is
still wounded in his tent, and all Greek
heroes except Achilles are absolutely
ignored in this book.

379. For the scansion of ἐπεί see AY
D,cl. It is found again in Ψ 2 and
four times in Od. It is possible that
the license may have been assisted by
the supposed ua of ὅπως : ὅππως.
See also van L. “nch. § 22.

IAIAAOC Χ (xxtr) 457

> δ᾽ ” ᾽ ᾽ \ / \ / -
εἰ ἄγετ᾽ ἀμφὶ πόλιν σὺν τεύχεσι πειρηθῶμεν,
, 7 > » lal / “ ζ v
ὄφρά κ᾽ ἔτι γνῶμεν ‘Tpwwy νόον, ὅν τιν᾽ ἔχουσιν,
x ,ὔ / , “- ,
ἢ καταλείψουσιν πόλιν ἄκρην τοῦδε πεσώντος,
4 / ΄΄ “ἢ "7
He μένειν μεμάασι καὶ “Kixtopos οὐκέτ᾽ ἐόντος.
3 x / lal /
ἀλλὰ Ti % μοι ταῦτα φίλος διελέξατο θυμός; 385
κεῖται Tap νήεσσι νέκυς ἄκλαυτος ἄθαπτος
fal 7 / ’ »
Πάτροκλος" τοῦ δ᾽ οὐκ ἐπιλήσομαι, ὄφρ᾽ ἂν ἔγωγε
a / / / / ᾽ ,
ζωοῖσιν μετέω καί μοι φίλα γούνατ᾽ ὀρώρηι.
> \ , , > > hy ἡ
εἰ δὲ θανόντων περ καταλήθοντ᾽ εἰν ᾿Αἴδαο,

ΟΝ, πο 8 \ a , , > ΄ ,
αὐτὰρ ἐγὼ καὶ κεῖθι φίλου μεμνήσομ᾽ ἑταίρου. 390

fol ’ »ἴἤ 5 Ἄν / a b] ral
νῦν δ᾽ ἄγ᾽ ἀείδοντες παιήονα, κοῦροι Ἀχαιῶν,

νηυσὶν ἔπι γλαφυρῆισι νεώμεθα, τόνδε δ᾽ ἄγωμεν.

381. cUN: ἐν Τ᾿

383. καταλείψωειν HH,
ἄκλαυτος ADJLU Lips. Vr. ἃ : ἄκλαυετος °.

| kataAeiwouct πτόλιν PR. 386.
388. zwoc ἐν Gpreioici φιλο-

ntoAéuoict μετείω CJU Ven. B Vr. b A, King’s Par. a™ b, and ap. Schol. A, Eust.

|| ὁρώρει DOS.

381. εἰ δ᾽ ἄγετ᾽ in apodosis as 6 832,
and see Q 407. neipHeduen, a late
contracted form for πειρηθήομεν (through
-ἐωμεν). We may admit the possibility
that πειρηθῆτον (K 444), and perhaps
dmepOjs (X 58), ἰανθῆις (T 174), χολωθῆις
(I 33) and even φανῆι (1 707) may be
instances of the primitive subj. with
long stem-vowel (though the lateness of
the books in which most of them are
found is against this); but the same
cannot be said of δαῶμεν (B 299), μεθῶ-
μεν (K 449), συνώμεθα (N 381). For
νεμεσσηθῶμεν, © 53, see note there.
There are no other instances from -e
stems in Jliad (7 in Od.). Thus there
is very strong ground for doubting the
antiquity of the form; and though
γνῶμεν in the next line is much less
suspicious in itself (H. G. ὃ 81), it is
not in good company, noris either capable
of emendation without violence : Brand-
reth’s πειρηθείω (-ἤω) . . γνώω is perhaps
the best suggestion. The proposed evolu-
tion, too, is curious and hardly suits the
situation ; it seems to be a sort of ‘re-
connaissance in force,’ Jet us make trial
in arms round about the city. But this
rather suits the temper of the tactical
interpolator whom we already know (see
on B 362, A 303, etc.) than of Achilles.
The words will not bear the sense ‘let
us try to storm the city,’ nor do 382-84
suit this. Hence Hoffmann, von Christ,
Fick and others have good reason for re-
jecting 381-90. Moreover in the ΔΙ ῆνις

390. KaxeTtor DGH().

392. TON ὃέ τ᾽ H.

it seems that the body of Patroklos was
not originally brought back to the ships
at all (see Introd. to P). Other diffi-
culties are noted below.

382. ἔτι, 1.6. we may not rest content,
but goon to learn. The vulgate reading
is ὄφρά κέ 71,where the τι is painfully weak.

385. This formal line is found else-
where only in monologues introduced by
the phrase εἶπε πρὸς ὃν μεγαλήτορα θυμόν,
and is very unsuitable to the present
context. Heyne thinks that the passage
is of importance, as reconciling the
obvious duty of Achilles to follow up
his success with the economy of the
poem, which requires that he should not
assault the city. This is precisely the
view of the tactical interpolator. It
does not follow that the original poet
troubled himself much about Achilles’
duty as general.

388. Note the unusually well-attested
alternative line—for which compare 47.

389. Nay, even if in the grave men

Sorget their dead, yet will I even there be

mindful of my dear comrade. This is
the most forcible explanation, but it is
somewhat strained. But the same may
be said of the alternative, Hven if men

Forget those who are dead in the grave, yet

will I remember my friend even when he
is there ; this is not only obscure, but is
an anti-climax after the preceding line,
whereas the first alternative is a fitting
culmination to 388. καταλήθονται is
used with a vague subject like φασίν. ete.

458 IAIAAOC X (xxi!)

ἠράμεθα͵ μέγα κῦδος" ἐπέφνομεν ᾿ἣ Ἕκτορα Cit,
ὧι Ῥρῶες κατὰ ἄστυ θεῶι ὡς εὐχετόωντο."
ἢ ῥα καὶ “KxTopa δῖον ἀεικέα μήδετο ἔργα. 395
ἀμφοτέρω μετόπισθε ποδῶν τέτρηνε τένοντε
ἐς σφυρὸν ἐκ πτέρνης, βοέους δ᾽ ἐξῆπτεν ἱμάντας,
ἐκ δίφροιοϊ δ᾽ ἔδησε, κάρη δ᾽ ἕλκεσθαι ἔασεν"
ἐς δίφρον δ᾽ ἀναβὰς ἀνά τε κλυτὰ τεύχε᾽ ἀείρας
μάστιξέν ῥ᾽ ἐλάαν, τὼ δ᾽ οὐκ ἀέκοντε πετέσθην. 400
τοῦ δ᾽ ἦν ἑλκομένοιο κονίσαλος, ἀμφὶ δὲ χαῖται
κυάνεαι πίτναντο, κάρη δ᾽ ἅπαν ἐν κονίηισι
κεῖτο πάρος χαρίεν" τότε δὲ Ζεὺς δυσμενέεσσι
δῶκεν ἀεικίσσασθαι ene ἐν πατρίδι γαίηι.
ὡς τοῦ μὲν κεκόνιτο κάρη ἅπαν ἡ δέ νυ μήτηρ 405

393-94 ἀθ. Ar. || οὗτος ἐστὶν ὁ παιάν Vr. A™.
ἀμφοτέρω PR: ἀμφοτέρων 2. || τένοντας DH. 397. Ὁ -om. Harl. a.
399. ana δὲ U. 400. udctizen 0° GHSTU Vr. A. || ἀέκοντε J Harl. a, Mor.
Cant.: G@éonte ὦ : ἄκοντε ἃ). 402. πίτναντο (Ar.?) JPRST Par. al: πίλναντο'
ACQU Ven. B Vr. b, Harl. a d, King’s Par. a? ce g h, τινές Sch. T: niunkanto DH
Vr. A Harl. b, Par. ἃ f j, ἔν τισι, A: πίλαντο Par. Ὁ: ninnanto G. 403.
OUCUENEECCI: τερπικέραυνος ‘‘ Vat. 16,” ἐν ἄλλωι A, 405. kekonicto H.

395. μήςατο D. 396.

393-94. One MS. (Vr. A) notes in the contained some truth; ὁ δὲ Καλλίμαχός

margin οὗτος ἐστὶν ὁ παιάν, these lines
give “the actual song which Achilles puts
into the mouth of his men—an ingenious
observation which has been widely ac-
cepted. Ar. athetized the lines ὅτι παρὰ
τὴν ἀξίαν ᾿Αχιλλέως οἱ λόγοι, 1.6. they
are too boastful to be dignified. This is
hardly true in any case: if Achilles
puts the words into the mouths of the
Greeks, the objection loses all force.
For Apdueea we should read ἠρόμεθα
(Brandreth) ; the regular phrase is κῦδος
ἀρέσθαι.

396. τένοντε, the ‘ Achilles tendons,’
so called from this passage. I owe to
Prof. A. Macalister the following note.

Vesalius [16th cent.] says of it [the
tendon]cui Homerus Achillem in Hectoris
crure funem traiecisse, ilumque adcurrum
religatum circum Troiae moenia traxisse
cecinit. This is the first reference to
the tendo Achillis.’ The statement that
the name refers to Achilles’ vulnerable
point in the heel is therefore incorrect.
The belt given by Hector to Aias does
not play the part here which it did in
the tragedians ; see note on H 305. As
to the dragging, Schol. A has an inter-
esting note, which looks as though it

φησιν ὅτι πάτριόν ἐστι Θεσσαλοῖς τοὺς τῶν
φιλτάτων φονέας σύρειν περὶ τοὺς τῶν φο-
νευθέντων τάφους. Σίμωνα γάρ φησι, Θεσ-
σαλὸν τὸ γένος, ΕΠὐρυδάμαντα τὸν Μειδίου
ἀποκτείναντα Θράσυλλον τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ
ἄρξασθαι τοῦ νόμου πρῶτον τοῦτον γὰρ
ἐξάψαι τοῦ δίφρου τὸν φονέα καὶ περὶ τὸν τοῦ
τετελευτηκότος τάφον ἕλκειν - ὅθεν καὶ τὸν
᾿Αχιλλέα ὡς Θεσσαλὸν πατρίωι ἔθει τοῦτο
ποιῆσαι καὶ δῆσαι τὸν Ἕκτορα. This is
confirmed by Porph. on 2 15, who quotes
from Aristotle καὶ viv ἐν τῆι Θετταλίαι
περιέλκουσι περὶ τοὺς τάφους. Similarly
Ap. Rhod. i. 1059 τρὶς περὶ χαλκείοις σὺν
τεύχεσι δινηθέντες τύμβωι ἐνεκτερέϊξαν.

401. τοῦ... ἑλκομένοιο form a sort
of abstract compound, of his dragging.
For the gen. Monro compares κύματα
παντοίων ἀνέμων B 397.

402. The variants πίλναντο, πίμπλαντο'
can only be construed by assuming a
violent ellipse of κονίηι, κονίης respec-
tively ; when the following clause be-
comes a mere tautology.

404. éf is loosely used, referring to
Hector, though he has not grammatically
been the subject in any of the immediate
clauses. See App. A, vol. i. p. 561.

IAIAAOC Χ (xxi) 459

»ὄἍ / \ 4 Ἁ »
τίλλε κόμην, ἀπὸ δὲ λιπαρὴν ἔρριψε καλύπτρην
/ \ / eo -
τηλύσε, κώκυσεν δὲ μάλα μέγα παῖδ᾽ ἐσιδοῦσα.
v , \ , ᾽ 4
ὠιμωξεν δ᾽ ἐλεεινὰ πατὴρ φίλος, ἀμφὶ δὲ λαοὶ
» , \ » “
κωκυτῶι T εἴχοντο καὶ οἰμωγῆν κατὰ ἄστυ.
τῶι δὲ μάλιστ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔην ἐναλίγκιον, ὡς εἰ ἅπασα 110
v 5» / ‘ / »
Ιλιος ὀφρυόεσσα πυρὶ σμύχοιτο κατ᾽ ἄκρης.
© , » ͵
λαοὶ μέν pa γέροντα μόγις ἔχον ἀσχαλόωντα
al lal / /
ἐξελθεῖν μεμαῶτα πυλάων Δαρδανιάων.
/ 4 ,
πάντας δὲ λιτάνευε κυλινδόμενος κατὰ κόπρον,
» / ’ ’ v “’ ~
ἐξονομακλήδην ὀνομάζων ἄνδρα ἕκαστον 415
“ / ,, ’, > 3 ». , ,
σχέσθε, φίλοι, καί μ᾽ οἷον ἐάσατε, κηδόμενοί περ,
, / σῷ Ε rn ? “-“
ἐξελθόντα πόληος ἱκέσθ᾽ ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν"
,ὔ to A fa) > / > ,
λίσσωμ ἀνέρα τοῦτον ἀτάσθαλον ὀβριμοεργόν,
BA e ’, > / > , /
ἤν πως ἡλικίην αἰδέσσεται ἠδ᾽ ἐλεήσηι

γῆρας.

\ ΄, a \ , Ξ
Kal δέ νυ τῶι γε TTaT1)p τοιόσδε τέτυκται, 420

/ e » a
Πηλεύς, ὅς μιν ἔτικτε καὶ ἔτρεφε πῆμα γενέσθαι
, , / »Μ ϑ Μ
Τρωσί" μάλιστα δ᾽ ἐμοὶ περὶ πάντων ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε"

406. ἔριπτε J. καλύπτραν |’.
ὥχοντο Mor.
Schol. A.
μόγις AGU Mor. Vr. Ὁ: μόλις ©.
Ar. Q:
417. πόλιος (10 Ven. B.
ὀμβριμοεργὸν CPR Mor. Bar.
ὃ) DHJU Vr. Ὁ: τῶ(ι)ϑε ©.

407. énidoUca J.
410. ἄρ᾽ ἔην : ἀεὶ P: αἰεὶ L.
411. cUUYOITO Ar, Q: ομήχοιτο DGP(): μύχοιτο Vr. b. 412.
414. 3° ἐλιτάνευςε Vr. A.
KHOOMENON ACDJ (P!?) QU Ven. B Vr. A Harl. a b ἃ, King’s Par. δ"
418. Miccouai ST Vr. Al: Aiccou’ GHJQU Vr. Ὁ A®
419. ἐλεήςει R Liys.!
422. ἄλγεα eAke(N) CJU Ven. B.

, “ 7
τόσσους γάρ μοι παῖδας ἀπέκτανε τηλεθάοντας.

409. εἴχοντο:

ἐναλίγγιον (). || εἶ: τινὲς ἵ.

416. κηδόμλιενοί

420. τῶζ(!) re A (supr.

406. AinapHn seems to denote linen
shining with oil, cf. = 382, 596. Helbig
H. E. 165. καλύπτρη, see App. G,
811.

409, κωκυτός of women, οἰμωγή of
men, as in the preceding couplet.

410. The subject of ἔην is vague, ‘the
state of things’ as we might say: 17. (ἡ.
8 161. τῶι represents the following εἰ-
clause, cf. H. Οὐ. ὃ 257. 4, and note on
A 467. So in x 420. The curious
variant ὃ for εἰ was taken to mean αὐτή,
a nom. to ἕο, oi, é.

411. éppudecca, here only ; for ὀφρύς
= brow of a hill see T 151.

414. See (2 164, 640, in which passages
κόπρος is more in place, as the scene is
in the courtyard of the palace, where
dung was regularly collected from the
animals stalled there; see p 296-99,
where the fact is plainly stated.

415, ἐξονομακλήδθην. as uv 250; so we

have éfovouaivw. In δ 278 it occurs with
tmesis, ἐκ δ᾽ ὀνομακλήδην.

416. The nom, κηϑόμενοί περ, though
anxious for me, seems better than the
equally well supported ace. in my great
trouble.

418. Aiccwua, 7 will beseech. This
paratactic use of the subj. when intro-
duced by the modal adverb ὡς or ὅπως
becomes hypotactic, and produces the
developed final sentence which is here in
embryo. So also 450, Ψ 71.

419. Cf. Π 808, where ἡλικίη = ὁμκηλι-
κίη in the concrete sense, equals in years.
It is best to take it in the same way here,
if he may perchance have shame before his
equals, may feel disgraced among young
men if he does not respect the aged. If
we take it to mean my age the next
clause becomes purely tautological. Hn,
εἴ Brandreth (but see note on H 39);
αἴ κέ ποθ᾽ van L.

400

IAIAAOC Χ (χχπ)

τῶν πάντων οὐ τόσσον ὀδύρομαι, ἀχνύμενός περ,
ὡς ἑνός, οὗ μ᾽ ἄχος ὀξὺ κατοίσεται “Aidos εἴσω, 425
"Extopos' ὡς ὄφελεν θανέειν ἐν χερσὶν ἐμῆισι"
τῷ κε κορεσσάμεθα κλαίοντέ τε μυρομένω τε,
μήτηρ θ᾽, ἥ μιν ἔτικτε δυσάμμορος, ἠδ᾽ ἐγὼ αὐτός."
ὡς ἔφατο κλαίων, ἐπὶ δὲ στενάχοντο πολῖται.
Τρωιῆισιν δ᾽ “ExaBn ἀδινοῦ ἐξῆρχε γόοιο" 480
“réxvov, ἐγὼ δειλή" τί vu βείομαι αἰνὰ παθοῦσα,

σεῦ ἀποτεθνηῶτος ;

ε \ >
ὅ μοι νύκτάς TE καὶ wap

> \ \ ” ΄ fo, i? ae ty?
εὐχωλὴ κατὰ ἄστυ πελέσκεο, TAGCL τ OveLap

na / “ \ A
Τρωσί te καὶ Τρωιῆισι κατὰ πτόλιν, οἵ σε θεὸν ws

δειδέχατ᾽" ἢ γὰρ καί oft μάλα μέγα κῦδος ἔησθα 435

la) ἫΝ \ a) / 2)
ζωὸς ἐών νῦν αὖ θάνατος καὶ μοῖρα Kiyaver.

¢ » f > V4 yA /
ὡς ἔφατο κλαίουσ᾽, ἄλοχος ὃ οὔ πώ τι πέπυστο

ἽΒκτορος" οὐ γάρ οἵ τις ἐτήτυμος ἄγγελος ἐλθὼν

» 5... Ψ / Cw ¢ / ” / ΄
NYYELN OTTL Pa οἱ πόσις ἔκτοθι μίμνε πυλάων,

» aid 3 ς a / ς a
ἀλλ᾽ ἥ γ᾽ ἱστὸν ὕφαινε μυχῶι δόμου ὑψηλοῖο

440

425. aidoc de CU Ven. B.
γυναῖκες 1): yp. répontec A (Ar. ὃ).

427. κορεςςόμεθα Vr. A.

429. πολῖται:

431. TEKNON: ἕκτορ Ef. Mag. 198. 8. |

€kTop, τέκνον ἐμόν, Ti NU 1]. Mag. 196. 17. || Ti NU: τίνι PQ. || Befouan (Ar. 1

see Ludwich) Q:
τεκοῦςα ap. Sch. T (Ar. ? see Sch. B).
(-6Toc) PQRU Vr. Ὁ:

ἡ " ips.

Biouai DH (supr. ει) PR? Cant. Mor. Vr. A.

κα -- τα --τεθνηῶτος Lips.: ἀποτεθνειῶτος ῷ.
πελέςκετο C(): medéckexo T. || πᾶςι δ᾽ J.

435. καί DJPR Bar. Mor.: κέ Q.

|| maeouca :

432. ἀποτεθνηῶτος A (supr. εἰ) J

433.

434: πόλιν D. || οἵ : ἧι P (supr. of) :
436. δ᾽ αὖ PR Vr. A.

425, Katoicetat, exactly Jacob’s ‘will » δείλη is right.

bring down my grey hairs with sorrow
to the grave.’

429. arévaxov πολιῆται Agar (J. P.
xxv. 314) on the ground that this is the
more archaic form of the subst. The
contrary seems to be the case. πολί-της
is exactly similar in formation to αἰχμή-
TNS, κορυνή- της, πρεσβύ- της (cf. also
ὁδίτης) While πολιήτης can be explained
only as due to the analogy of the more
numerous substantives in -ἤτης. πολίτης
recurs also in O 558, 7 131, p 206 and as
a proper name; πολιήτης only Β 806—
it is the regular late Ionic (Herodotean)
form.

430. Compare Σ 316, 2 747. Accord-
ing to Schol. T, Ar. read ἁθρόου for
ἀδινοῦ, but this must have been only an
explanation.

431. For the exclamative nom. ἐγώ
see 477, which shews that the colon after

Beiouai or βίομαι, see
note on Ὁ 194. It is clearly a subj. here,
οἵ, τί πάθω, lit. what (life) am I to live?
—The variant τεκοῦσα perhaps deserves
preference.

432. We should probably read with
van L. cet’ ἄπο τεθνηῶτος, far away from
thee in death. ἀποθνήισκειν seems to be
a late compound ; it does not recur in
It. See however ἃ 424, μ 393, ¢ 88.

435. de1déxaTo, used to welcome, see
note on A 4 and cf. ἡ 71 λαῶν οἵ μίν pa
θεὸν ὡς εἰσορόωντες δειδέχαται μύθοισιν ὅτε
στείχηισ᾽ ἀνὰ ἄστυ. καί 15 explicative of
what precedes, as 1165 etc. The variant
κε is intolerably flat.

437. It is not clear whether “Extopoc
is to be taken closely with ἄλοχος or with
πέπυστο; the absence of a participle
(θανόντος) is in favour of the former,
though we have the simple gen. in 6 12
ὄφρα ξείνοιο WUONoOe. ,

IAIAAOC Χ (xxi)

461

δίπλακα πορφυρέην, ἐν δὲ Opova ποικίλ᾽ ἔπασσε.

κέκλετο δ᾽ ἀμφιπόλοισιν ἐυπλοκάμοις κατὰ δῶμα

ἀμφὶ πυρὶ στῆσαι τρίποδα μέγαν, ὄφρα πέλοιτο

“Extopt θερμὰ λοετρὰ μάχης ἐκνοστήσαντι,

νηπίη, οὐδ᾽ ἐνόησεν .ὅ μιν μάλα τῆλε λοετρῶν 440
χερσὶν ᾿Αχιλλῆος δάμασε γλαυκῶπις ᾿Αθήνη.

“- ᾽ J a Ν
κωκυτοῦ δ᾽ ἤκουσε καὶ οἰμωγῆς ἀπὸ πύργου"
a ᾽ / a \ , e Μ ,
τῆς δ᾽ ἐλελίχθη γυῖα, χαμαὶ δέ of ἔκπεσε κερκίς.
᾽ = a ΄
ἡ δ᾽ αὖτις ὃμωῆισιν ἐυπλοκάμοισι μετηύδα"

( a / μή qo a “εν , oY ,
δεῦτε, δύω μοι ἕπεσθον' ἴδωμ᾽ ὅτιν᾽ ἔργα τέτυκται. 450
> fe e n > Ν ΝΜ > / δ ve
aidoins ἑκυρῆς ὀπὸς ἔκλυον, ἐν δέ μοι αὐτῆι
, ΄ δ᾽ 2 ON / / \ -
στήθεσι πάλλεται TOP ἀνὰ στομα, νέρθε δὲ γοῦνα
/ x /
πήγνυται" ἐγγὺς δή τι κακὸν Πριάμοιο τέκεσσιν.

x \ pe LA v bd a 5 \ 7 7 > A
al yap am οὔατος εἴη ἐμεῦ ἔπος: GANA μάλ αἰνῶς

441. πορφύρεον JU!: μαρμαρέην GH) Harl. b, Par. ἃ 1, yp. Schol. T.
443. πυρὴν Mosc. 2
DP: ἅτιν᾽ U Vr. b (‘duevov,"’ Sch. T).

epoa CPRS Ven. BL.
ἐὐπλοκάμηει R. 450. ὅτιν᾽ : ὅτι
454. ἔπος ἐμεῦ Vr. b.

. || πέλοντο J. 449. αὖϑις (.

441. See [ 125-26, with notes there.
epona ἄνθη καὶ τὰ ἐκ χρωμάτων ποικίλματα
Κύπριοι, Hesych. Θεσσαλοὶ μὲν τὰ πε-
ποικιλμένα ζῶια. Κύπριοι δὲ τὰ ἀνθινὰ
ἱμάτια: Αἰτωλοὶ δὲ τὰ φάρμακα, ὥς φησι
Κλείταρχος - Ὅμηρος δὲ τὰ ῥόδα παρὰ τὸ
ἄνω θορεῖν ἐκ τῆς γῆς, Schol. on Theokr.
li. 59—one of the few other passages
where the word occurs (also Lykophron
and Nonnos, and possibly Sappho’s ποι-
κιλόθρον᾽") ; so that beyond these tradi-
tions there is nothing to fix the sense
of the word. Helbig H. #. 192-93
suggests that the word must here be
taken in a wide sense, ornaments, as
vegetable patterns are not found in the
oldest representations of figured dresses,
the ornamentation being almost entirely
‘geometrical.’ Studniczka, however, has
shewn (p. 54) that this is too general
a statement; there are a few cases of
floral decoration on garments, e.g. on
the Francois vase. €nacce is a word of
general import, and may mean that the
patterns were actually inwoven. No
reliance can be placed on the statement
of the scholia that in Cyprus πάσσειν =
ποικίλλειν.

448. ἐλελίχϑη, A 530. Here it seems
to belong to ἐλελέζω, quivered. κερκίς is
generally explained as the weaver’s rod
by which the threads of the woof were
driven home (Lat. pecten); others take

it to mean shuttle, and so Eur. Tro. 198
οὐχ ἱστοῖς. Kepxida δινεύουσ᾽. ἐξαλλάξω.
The word recurs in H. only ε 62 χρυσείηι
κερκίδ᾽ imawev. See note on Ψ 760,

450. The F is twice neglected. We
might possibly adopt the variant ὅτι for
étin’, comparing « 44 ἰδώμεθα ὅττι τάδ᾽
ἐστίν, X 73 πάντα. . ὅττι, and Σ 128

(q.v.).

sing. and plur. joined as subject of the
verb. ὅττι τάδ᾽ ἔργα τέτυκται would be
possible, as then ὅττι would be part of
the predicate. Hoffmann’s translation,
‘what the facts are,’ which he supports
by 354, is not likely to be accepted.
Thus, if the F is to be restored, Hoff-
mann’s earlier conj. (adapted by Bekker)
ἴδω τίνα deserves the preference. (For
τίς virtually=éo7:s in indirect questions
cf. Σ 192, Ω 197, 0 423 εἰρώτα... τίς
εἴη.) The F of ἔδωμε (or ἴδωμαι) may
easily be restored by reading ἔπεσθε with
Bentley.

452. πάλλεται Gna croua, exactly as
we say ‘my heart is in my mouth.’
Cf. K 94.

454. Cf. = 272. From that passage
Menrad would read ἐμοί for éued0—cer-
tainly a more natural constr., apart
from the suspicious character of the
contracted ἐμεῦ. ἔπος, the thing which I
say. The identification of a real thing

169 IAIAAOC Χ (xxt1)

/ a > \
δείδω μὴ δή μοι θρασὺν “Extopa δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεὺς 455
r > / / δί ὃ δί
μοῦνον ἀποτμήξας πόλιος πεδίονδε δίηται,
/ / τὶ an
καὶ δή μιν καταπαύσηιν aynvopins ἀλεγεινῆς,
5) » la / 5 n
ἥ μιν ἔχεσκ᾽, ἐπεὶ ov ποτ᾽ ἐνὶ πληθυΐ pévev ἀνδρῶν,
> Ν τὰ s > ον y ”
ἀλλὰ πολὺ προθέεσκε, τὸ ὃν μένος οὐδενὶ εἴκων.
ἃ / / 7”
ὡς φαμένη μεγάροιο διέσσυτο μαινάδι ἴση, 460
Ξ ᾽ ὕ dA
παλλομένη κραδίην: ἅμα 5 ἀμφίπολοι κίον αὐτῆι.
\ lal - .“
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ πύργόν τε καὶ ἀνδρῶν ἷξεν ὅμιλον,
» ae \ \ /
ἔστη παπτήνασ᾽ ἐπὶ τείχεϊ, TOV δὲ νόησεν
/ / / / Cs
ἑλκόμενον πρόσθεν πόλιος" ταχέες δέ μιν ἵπποι
¢ \ na 5 ω
ἕλκον ἀκηδέστως κοίλας ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν. 46
lal \ \ 5 ΄ὔ΄
τὴν δὲ Kat ὀφθαλμῶν ἐρεβεννὴ νὺξ ἐκάλυψεν,
» bd 3 / > \ \ N δ /
ἤριπε δ᾽ ἐξοπίσω, ἀπὸ δὲ ψυχὴν ἐκάπυσσε.
fel / /
τῆλε δ᾽ ἀπὸ κρατὸς βάλε δέσματα σιγαλόεντα,

μέν᾽ AGHPQRT: μένε 1). 459. τὸ
Mose. 2, yp. X. 462. πύργων DJRU.
cxée S: χέε αἱ κοιναί, Q.

456. μόνον P. || πεϑίοιο Vr. d. 458.

nAHeUt ACDGHPQRT: πλήθει S Mor. ||
ON: τεὸν DH. 461. Kpadin(!) DQ
464 om. Ht. 468. βάλε Ar. PR:

with the words which name it is a
common phenomenon of primitive psy-
chology, and is indeed the foundation of
the whole system of omens from words.

457. ἀγηνορίης ἀλεγεινῆς, the fatal
pride which possessed him; an echo of
Andromache’s last words to Hector,
δαιμόνιε, φθίσει σε τὸ σὸν μένος Δ 407.
So M 46 ἀγηνορίη δέ μιν ἔκτα, and II
753.

458. It will be seen that most Mss.

read πληθύϊ (rather πληθῦϊ) μέν᾽ ἀνδρῶν.
This may be defended from ἐλῦος Φ 318,
but has no claim to supplant the text
which is regular (II 526, 2 108, ε 231
etc.; and see particularly ἃ 514-15
which are nearly identical with 458-59
here. The masc. οὐδείς occurs only in
these two passages).
—460. uainddi, mad woman, like μαι-
νομένηι ἐϊκυῖα in similar circumstances,
Z 389. The word has evidently none
of the associations of maenad.

465. GKkHOécTwe, rithlessly, and so ἢ
417, like ἀκηδέες Φ 123. In Ζ 60 ἀκήδε-
στοι has a passive sense.

466. ὀφθαλμώ van L., rightly no
doubt. See on E 659.

467, €kanucce, dz. Ney., see on κεκα-
φηότα E 698.

-468. It is by no means clear whether
this line means that Andromache merely
lets fall her head-dress involuntarily, or

tears it off as a sign of grief. yée of the
vulg. of course expresses the former view,
but this does not seem consistent with
τῆλε, which demands the stronger βάλε,
Ar. himself thought that 468-72 would
come better after 476; but the trans-
position would involve an awkward sepa-
ration of ἔειπε from the actual words.
It is not impossible to suppose that βάλε
refers to the moment before the faint,
by such a ὕστερον πρότερον as we occasion-
ally find ; if transposition were admitted,
we might place 467 after 472. But this
is not psychologically true or poetically
effective—the faint should come at the
moment of the shock. We must then,
while reading βάλε, still refer it to the
unconscious violence of her action even
in the moment of fainting (cf. 406).
Oécuata is a general ‘name for the
articles of the head-dress named in the
following lines. Helbig (H. 1. 219-26)
explains these as follows. The ἄμπυξ
is a metal diadem over the forehead, the
στεφάνη of = 597: ef. χρύσαμπυξ of
horses E 358 etc. and of the Muses, Hes.
Theog. 916. κεκρύφαλος is a hood, or
rather a high stiff cap, apparently of
oriental origin. The KpHOeuNON is a
sort of mantilla thrown over the head
(App. G, § 11). The meaning of the,
πλεκτὴ aNnadécun is doubtful ; Helbig
identifies it with a roll, apparently of

IAIAAOC X (xxi)

163

v 4 / ᾽
ἄμπυκα κεκρύφαλόν τε ἰδὲ πλεκτὴν ἀναδέσμην

16 / ? ov GZ e a ~ ? ,
κρήδεμνόν θ᾽, ὅ pa οἱ δῶκε χρυσῆ ᾿Λφροδίτη 170
ἤματι τῶι ὅτε μιν κορυθαίολος ἠγώγεθ᾽ “Extwp

,ὔ ‘
ἐκ δόμου ᾿Ηετίωνος, ἐπεὶ πόρε μυρία ἕδνα.
> \ / / \ > / ad Μ
ἀμφὶ δέ μιν γωλόωι τε καὶ εἰνατέρες ἅλις ἔσταν,
ΔΤ ἃ Ν / 3 3 / ᾽ /
ai ἑ peta σφίσιν εἶχον ἀτυζομένην ἀπολέσθαι.
. δ᾽ > \ δ ΝΜ \ > / ‘ > ,
ἡ ἐπεὶ οὖν ἄμπνυτο καὶ ἐς φρένα θυμὸς ἀγέρθη, 175
/ a »

ἀμβλήδην γοόωσα μετὰ Tpwijicw ἔειπεν"
“ ἰὴ Ἦν > 4 δύ Jan » / » "

κτορ, ἐγὼ δύστηνος" ine apa γεινόμεθ᾽ αἴσηι
» Ῥ \ \ > a / / 4 -
ἀμφότεροι, σὺ μὲν ἐν Tpoine Τ]ριάμου κατὰ δῶμα,
αὐτὰρ ἐγὼ Θήβηισιν ὑπὸ ἸΪλάκωι ὑληέσσηι

, ¢ “-
ἐν δόμωι ᾿Ηετίωνος, 6 μ᾽ ἔτρεφε τυτθὸν ἐοῦσαν, 180
4 / ΄ »
δύσμορος αἰνόμορον: ὡς μὴ wpedre τεκέσθαι.
nr \ \ \ ey / ΄ \ / ,
νῦν δὲ σὺ μὲν ‘Aidao δόμους ὑπὸ κεύθεσι γαίης

» ᾽ Ν > \ fal 2S / - /
ἔρχεαι, αὐτὰρ ἐμὲ στυγερῶι ἐνὶ πένθεϊ λείπεις

413. γταλόων DD.

470. Θ᾽ : ἐκ πλήρους τε, οὕτως ἅπασαι Did.: so D. ECTAN :
€cracan R: fican Par. j, yp. A: €can J Harl. b, Vr. ἃ A, yp. X. 474.
cpicIn: cpfc’ P: cpAcin C. || ἀπολέςϑαι ἢ ὁλέεςθαι Eust. 475. ἡ ὃ᾽:
ἀλλ᾽ Ἡ. || ἔμπνυτο Ar. J Par. δ. 476. yp. rodouca X. || τρωιῆιειν :
BuwA(i)cin DPR. 477. Up éreinduce’ H. | rinduce’ G Vr. A. 478. KaTa
Odua: Eni οἴκωι αἱ κοινότεραι (Did.), “γαῖ. 10.” 479. ϑήβηφι L. 480.

6: ὅς D°HQ. || ἐοῦςαν : ἐόντα C.
Sucuope R. || ainduopoc U.

481. QUcuopon J Harl. a (supr. c), Mose. 2:
(There seems from Did. to have been a variant

ϑύσμορον ainéuopoc: but the preceding readings merely exemplify the common

tendency to assimilate neighbouring words) || ὥφειλε P.
wen: μέν ῥ᾽ ACJQU Ven. B Harl. a, Mor. Mose. 2.

éni: én Vr. A.

482. NUN: πῶς H.
ὑποκεύθϑεο 7. 483.

some twisted stuff, which in Etruscan
tomb-pictures is found in connexion with
an obvious ἄμπυξ and κρήδεμνον, sur-
rounding just such a high stiff cap as the
κεκρύφαλος has been assumed to be. Stud-
niczka (pp. 128-81) sees in the κεκρύφαλος
a kerchief fastened on the head by a
band round the hair, the ἀναδέσμη, identi-
cal with the μίτρα of the classical age.
Of the two explanations Helbig’s seems
most consistent with a sudden pulling
off ; but we have no evidence that any
Greek woman ever wore such ἃ head-
dress.

473. See Z 378.

474. GTUZOUENHN Gnohéceal, distraugh!
even unto death, to the point of perishing.
The context evidently shews that the
words imply no idea of self-destruction.

475. G@unnuto, Ar. ἔμπνυτο, see on
E 697.

476. GuBAHOHN, lifting up her voice,

like ἀνεβάλλετο καλὸν ἀείδειν a 155,
ὑποβλήδην, interrupting A 292 (Monro).
But ἀμβολάδην of the boiling cauldron
(Φ 364) suggests rather with a deep sob :
cf. also ἀνενείκατο T 314.

477. τεινόμεθ᾽ for γενόμεθα with
metrical lengthening (though γενόμεσθα
is available) ; see note on K 71. atcm
seems to be a locative use, like ἐν lie
τιμῆι 1 319.

479. Cf. Z 396. This is the only
case where this Θήβη has a plur. form,
but it naturally follows the example of
its better known namesakes.

481. μή : van L. writes μή μ᾽, perhaps
rightly.

482. ὑπὸ Keveeci γαίης, a prepositional
phrase used attributively with δόμους,
ef. 324, and Σ 244. ὑπό with dat. does
not seem ever to be used of motion ¢o a
point under; 6 297 δέμνι᾽ ὑπ᾽ αἰθούσηι
θέμεναι is clearly different.

46: IAIAAOC Χ (χχπ)

, 5 ΄ Poe > + / ”
χήρην ἐν μεγάροισι: πάϊς δ᾽ ETL νήπιος αὔτως,
ὃν τέκομεν σύ T ἐγώ τε δυσάμμοροι" οὔτε σὺ τούτωι
ἔσσεαι, “Extop, ὄνειαρ, ἐπεὶ θάνες, οὔτε σοὶ οὗτος.
ἤν περ γὰρ πόλεμόν ye φύγηνι πολύδακρυν ᾿Αχαιῶν,
αἰεί τοι τούτωι γε πόνος καὶ κήδε᾽ ὀπίσσω
ἔσσοντ᾽. ἄλλοι γάρ οἱ ἀπουρήσουσιν ἀρούρας.
ἥμαρ δ᾽ ὀρφανικὸν παναφήλικα παῖδα τίθησι"
πάντα δ᾽ ὑπεμνήμυκε, δεδάκρυνται δὲ παρειαΐί,

485,

490

484, 0 ἔτι: 0€ Te RST: δέ Toi Q: ὃέ οἱ J. 485. cur’ J. || τούτου J:
τοῦτο" D. 487-99 a0. Ar. 487. Hn rap δὴ A (yp. HN περ rap) H?: ἤν περ
rap oh Ὁ. || πόλεμόν τε PU Vr. d: πολέμου D?. || φύγοι Mor. Bar. 488.
ἀεί P: ἐν ἄλλωι GAN’ ἤτοι A. || Tol om. H Par. 1: περ J: OM Harl. Ὁ, Par. ἃ,
489. GnoupHcoucin CJU Ven. B Harl. a, Mosc. 2: Gnoupic(c)oucin Ar. Q. 491.
ὑπομνήμαυκε Harl. a, Mose. 2: ὑπεμνύμηκε R (λνήμυκε R™), yp. P. || παρειὰ Ar.
C Ven. B Harl. a (glossed οὐδετέρως) Mosc. 2, Par. ἢ.

487. Ar. athetized 487-99 on the
grounds that the destitution predicted
is absurd for a son of the royal race
while Priam and Hector’s brothers are
still alive; and that the whole passage

is a commonplace on the sorrows of.

orphanage with no application to the
case of Astyanax. Of the justice of this
criticism there can be no doubt ; but it
is clear that the athetesis does not reach
farenough. 500-4 are pointless, except
as a contrast to the preceding picture of
starvation; 506-7 area very clumsy
addition, and frigid in the extreme. ~On
the other hand, it is not clear that 487-
88 may not belong to the original
passage; €cconT (489) is a familiar
touch of the interpolator, who is always
anxious to supply a verb where it is not
needed. 508 will follow 488 well enough.
It will be noticed that the rejected
passage contains ἅπαξ λεγόμενα of a sort
quite unfamiliar in Epic poetry ; ἀπου-
pnoovow, παναφήλικα, ὑπεμνήμυκε, ὑπ-
ερώιην, ἀμφιθαλής.

489. ἀπουρήσουειν, shall take away, for
ἀπο-βρή-σουσιν, fut. of the verb-stem
amo-Fpa-, of which we have the aor. (see
A 430), and perhaps the strong form in
ἀπόερσε etc., see & 283. If this view
(that of Ahrens and others, see van L.
Ench. p. 379) is right, it follows that
we must regard the supposed verb
ἀπαυρᾶν as a fiction and write ἀπεύραν
(=ar-éF pa-v), -as, -a for ἀπηύρων, -as, -a,
and ἀπεύρασαν for ἀπηύρων (pl.). If we
do not accept this view, we must read
ἀπουρίσσουσιν with Ar. (our MSs. are
hardly capable of distinguishing the

two)=Attic ἀφοριοῦνται, strangers shall
jix the landmarks of his fields, i.e. shall
encroach upon them, the idea of robbery
being only suggested by ἄλλοι. The
analogy of a few compounds of ἀπό, e.g.
ἀποτιμᾶν to slight, is hardly enough to
justify the translation remove the land-
marks of his fields—¥or the frequency
of disputes as to the boundaries of lots
in the ‘common field’ see note on M 421.

490. παναφήλικα, apparently cut off
Srom his equals in years; a strange
phrase. The simple ἀφῆλιξ is used by
Herod. in quite another sense, advanced
in years.

491. The wonderful form GneuntuuKke
is entirely inexplicable. Thescholia may
speak for themselves : πάντα αὐτῶι κατα-
πέπτωκε καὶ κατακέκλιται, παρὰ τὸ ἠμύω
ἐμήμυκα καὶ περισσὸν τὸ ν, ἢ πάντα αὐτὸν
εἰς ἀνάμνησιν ἄγει τοῦ δυσφορεῖν (as if
from μνήμη). (2) καταμέμυκε. κατ-
εστύγνακε, κάτω βλέπει. ὁ δὲ ᾿Αρίσταρχος
ἐπὶ τοῦ κατανένευκεν ἐκδέχεται. οἱ δὲ
ἀντὶ τοῦ εἰς ἀνάμνησιν ἔρχεται τοῦ πατρός.
The only reasonable sense is that given
by ἠμύω, of which the perf. with ‘ Attic’
reduplication should be ἐμήμυκα. How
the v crept in it is beyond our power to
say. Schulze (Q. Δ΄. p. 266) sees in it a
metrical device to adapt the ‘anti-
spastic’ word to the metre (ef. εἰλήλουθα
ete., App. D, a 2); others would read
ὑπ-ημ-ήμυκε: then the first 7 must be
due to the false analogy of words like
ἦρ - ἤρειστο (temporal augment). The
translation will be in everything his
head is bowed down, he finds humiliation
everywhere.

IAIAAOC Χ (xxi)

465

/ > v “. Ν ΄ ,
δευόμενος δέ T ἄνεισι πάϊς ἐς πατρὸς ἑταίρους,

ἄλλον μὲν χλαίνης ἐρύων, ἄλλον δὲ χιτῶνος"

fal > , / 4 > ,
τῶν δ᾽ ἐλεησάντων κοτύλην τις τυτθὸν ἐπέσχε"

χείλεα
\ \
τὸν δὲ

χερσὶν

/ ’ Ὁ. , ΄ ΄ ᾽ > 0: ἐν
μέν τ ἐδίην᾽, ὑπερώιην δ᾽ οὐκ ἐδίηνε. 195
Kal ἀμφιθαλὴς ἐκ δαιτύος ἐστυφέλιξε,
πεπληγὼς καὶ ὀνειδείοισιν ἐνίσσων"

"ἔρρ᾽ οὕτως" οὐ aos γε πατὴρ μεταδαίνυται ἡμῖν.

/ / » vv Sine , / /
δακρυόεις δέ T ἄνεισι πάϊς ἐς τέρα χήρην,
μητέρα χήρη

’ ἣ Δ \ \ e lal ’ \ / ‘ -
Αστυάναξ, ὃς πρὶν μὲν ἑοῦ ἐπὶ γούνασι πατρὸς 500
\ te cal /
μυελὸν οἷον ἔδεσκε καὶ οἰῶν πίονα δημόν:
SCN “a ὦ δ / f ,
αὐτὰρ ὅθ᾽ ὕπνος ἕλοι παύσαιτό τε νηπιαχεύων,

491. énicnwn Π᾽ Vr. b A:
οὗτος CDH. 499, ἐς: πρὸς Vr. A

492. The force of the preposition in
Gneict is not clear. Perhaps it may be
used as in dv’ ὅμιλον, ἀνὰ δώματα, going
through, ‘going the rounds,’ as we might
say ; cf. φάτις ἀνθρώπους ἀναβαίνει ¢ 29.
Or it is possible that it may imply
entering a house from the road ; though
for this there seems to be no analogy.
In 499 it means simply returns. For
ἐς used with a person cf. H 312 εἰς
᾿Αγαμέμνονα δῖον ἄγον, and Ψ 36.

494, ἐλεηςάντων is of course to be
kept apart from τῶν : one of them, if
they take pity. Cf. note on 1 138.
énécxe, holds to his lip, as 83.

495, ὑπερώιην, polate, used also by
Hippokrates and Aristotle.

496. ἀμφιθαλής, one who has both
parents alive ; cf. Ar. Aves 1737, Plat.
Legg. 927. The word was closely
connected in early days with the all-
important idea of /uck. It was thought
that an orphan was proved by his mis-
fortune to be no favourite of the gods ;
hence, ace. to the Schol. on Pind. ὦ.
li. 60, the boy who led the Daph-
nephoria had to be ἀμφιθαλής. In
Roman ritual patrimi et matrimi had
similar privileges (e.g. Livy, 37. 3. 6;
Tac. H. iv. 53). In modern Albania,
at the baking of the marriage-loaf, ‘the
first to touch the dough “must be a
virgin who has both parents living, as
well as brothers, the more the better ;
for such a one is considered lucky, how-
ever poor she may be, and she wishes
the married couple equal luck’ (von
Hahn, Alb. Stud. i. 144). ‘The same
thought underlies the following phrase,

VOL. II

ἄμεινον €Nintwn Sch. T.

498. οὕτως:
500. γούνατα (A supr.) H.

which an orphan will say to one whose
parents are both alive, ‘‘ You are lucky,
you may well talk, the black ox has not
yet trodden on you”’’ (ibid. p. 196, n. 9).

498. οὕτως is generally explained in
a local sense, the correlative of the local
ὧδε, indicating that which, though re-
garded as within the speaker's sphere, is
the farther from him, and nearer to the
person addressed ; οὗτος being related
to σύ as ὅδε to ἐγώ. It may thus be
rendered ‘go thy way.’ Similar pass-
ages are ζ 218 ἀμφίπολοι στῆθ᾽ οὕτω ἀπό-
προθεν, p 447 στῆθ᾽ οὕτως ἐς μέσσον. Ar.,
denying the local sense to ὧδε, doubtless
did the same with οὕτως, and here with
the additional reason that the adverb
remained purely modal in later Greek.
It is preferable so to take it here also,
regarding it as virtually equivalent to
αὔτως, sc. οὕτως ws ἔχεις, ‘ go as thou art,’
without more ado. This is the sense in
which it is used by Soph. Ant. 315
(where see Jebb’s note) ἢ στραφεὶς
οὕτως tw; Phil. 1067 ἀλλ᾽ οὕτως ἄπει :
and other instances from Attic writers
which will be found in L. and S. It is
however very tempting to adopt the
variant οὗτος, the contemptuous vocative
sense familiar in Attic, Be off, fellow!
There is no instance of this in H., but
in such a passage as the present this
matters little. The passage seems to
imply public συσσίτια, which were re-
garded as peculiarly Doric. This would
be very strong evidence of lateness.

500. The awkwardness with which
the name of Astyanax is introduced is
outdone six lines later.

2H

466 IAIAAOC X (xxi)

/ /
εὕδεσκ᾽ ἐν λέκτροισιν, ἐν ἀγκαλίδεσσι τιθήνης,

εὐνῆι ἔνι μαλακῆι, θαλέων ἐμπλησάμενος κῆρ.

νῦν δ᾽ ἂν πολλὰ πάθηισι, φίλου ἀπὸ πατρὸς ἁμαρτών, 505
᾿Αστυάναξ, ὃν Τρῶες ἐπίκλησιν καλέουσιν"

οἷος γάρ σφιν ἔρυσο πύλας καὶ τείχεα μακρά.

νῦν δὲ σὲ μὲν παρὰ νηυσὶ κορωνίσι, νόσφι τοκήων,

αἰόχλαι εὐλαὶ ἔδονται, ἐπεί κε κύνες κορέσωνται,

γυμνόν: ἀτάρ τοι εἵματ᾽ ἐνὶ μεγάροισι κέονται 510

/ \ lal
λεπτά TE Kal χαρίεντα, τετυγμένα χερσὶ γυναικῶν.
/ \ /
ἀλλ᾽ ἤτοι τάδε πάντα καταφλέξω πυρὶ κηλεωι,

x > > 7 ’ Qn
οὐδὲν σοί γ᾽ ὄφελος, ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἐγκείσεαι αὑτοῖς,

eo 5S 3
ἀλλὰ πρὸς Τρώων καὶ Τρωϊάδων κλέος εἶναι.

᾽ r
as ἔφατο κλαίουσ᾽, ἐπὶ δὲ στενάχοντο γυναῖκες. 515

503. εὕδεςεκ᾽ EN: εὕϑεεκε (): eUdecken Mosc. 2.
506. Tp@ec: πάντες Mor. Bar. (yp. Tp@ec).

πόλιν Plato Crat. 3925.
Ven. B.

504. ἔνι : yp. ἐν Χ.
507. cpIN: μιν Ὁ. || πύλας:

509. κορέςονται CPQRU Harl. a, Vr. d, Mose. 2,
510. εἴλκατ᾽ ἐνὶ: yp. εἵματα ἐν X. || κέοντο H.

513. Γ᾽ om. D. ||

ὄφελος : ὄφελος T Ven. B*. || οὔ κεν κείςεαι (). || ἐγκείςεται J (swpr. at over Τὴ).

504. ϑαλέων, good cheer; neut. plur.,
οἵ, δαῖτα θαλεῖαν. Kp seems to shew
that it is used in the metaphorical sense,
and does not refer to the marrow and fat.
To judge from their views of a suitable
diet for children, the authors of this
passage and I 487-89 might be identical.

505. ἀπὸ... ἁμαρτών, like σεῦ dda-
μαρτούσηι Z 411.

506. “Actudnaz, for the etymological
introduction of the name ef. Z 402-3,
with note there. The hyperbaton by
which the name is put in the nom., as
though it belonged to the principal
clause, is curious ; and is evidently not
to be compared with the common idiom
by which the subject of the rel. clause is
made the object of the principal (ἤιδεε
ἀδελφεόν, ws ἐπονεῖτο, etc.). It is easy
enough to conjecture ᾿Αστυάναχθ᾽, but
this is no better.

509. αἰόλαι, wriggling rather than
variegated ; see on M 167.

510, κέονται, a form recurring also in
341, π 232. The verb has passed into
the thematic conjugation. (See Schulze,
Q. E. p. 436.)

513. ὄφελος, an accus. ‘in apposition
with the sentence,’ i.e. expressing the
sum of the action ; see H. Οὐ. § 136. 4.
The idea seems to be that, as Hector is
not to be burnt with the garments, they
will not go with him to the other world ;
his soul will wander naked on the hither
side of the river (see App. L, § 8).
Still, the ceremony will be a funeral rite
to do him honour, and will at least
console the survivors. Lehrs (47. p.
436) thinks that 510-14 contain two
recensions, the first consisting of 510—
1-2-3, the second of 510-1-3—4.
But the preceding explanation obviates
the necessity of this very artificial sup-
position. αὐτοῖς is very weak ; Nauck
conj. αὖτις, but αὐτός (Hoogvhet) is
incomparably better.

-

ΤῊ

INTRODUCTION

SCHILLER says that the man who has read the twenty-third book of the
Iliad cannot complain that he has lived in vain. The justification of this
somewhat exaggerated praise is to be sought in the wide range of human
feeling which the book covers, from the questions of immortality called up
by the vision of the dead Patroklos to the delight in living strength and
stress of combat which inspires the games.

The first portion, the funeral (1-257), maintains throughout a high level
of beauty and pathos. There is, however, at times a want of clearness in
the narrative, which has given rise to suspicions. For instance, after the
preparations in 234-34, we hardly expect to find Achilles taken away to
supper by the chiefs, and the feast to his men forgotten, in spite of the dop-
πήσομεν ἐνθάδε πάντες of 11. Evidently 35-54 may be a later expansion ;
the lines have a suspicious resemblance to parts of T (e.g. 303-8). But the
two books differ in their general view of the scene (see note on 13), and there
can be little doubt that T is the later.

Another weakness in narrative will be found in 140 ff. We hear how
the solemn procession of Myrmidons brings the body of Patroklos, sets it
down, and “heaps up the wood” (139) ; we presume that the host is to join
in the last rites where they ‘‘sit awaiting” (128). It is a surprise to hear
that Achilles sends them all away, and that only a few mourners remain,
and again “heap up the wood ” (163), which has already been done. There
ean be no doubt that the scene gains in dignity if we omit at least 144-63,
and keep the whole host present to the end. Possibly 140-63 may form
the addition, marked by the return of the catchword νήεον ὕλην (Erhardt).
But it is hard to see what can have been the motive for sending the army
away.

It has generally been recognised that 184-91 are a later addition, and
are unsuitable to this place, where there is no question of the dragging of
Hector’s body (see note there). Erhardt would reject also 178-83. 178—
81 are mere repetitions, and the solemn farewell to Patroklos (177) at least
should not be used more than once. 182-83 evidently go with the following
passage to prepare the way for the ransoming of Hector.

To the errand of Iris objection has been also taken. Iris elsewhere is
messenger of the gods, and does not act, as here, on her own account. There

467

468 IAIAAOC Ψ (xxiir)

is a touch of comedy in the feast of the Winds in the house of Zephyros.
The journey of the gods to Aithiopia (206) is used elsewhere (in A and a)
to explain why for a length of time they take no notice of human affairs.
Here it is a mere empty phrase. We might cut out 198 ὠκέα. . . to 212
ἀπεβήσετο, reading ot for τοί, and so remove this difficulty. On the whole
it must be said, however, that in this portion of the book there are no
glaring flaws; and such difficulties as exist may if we prefer be put down
to the poet’s weakness in narration, rather than to expansion in the course
of time. It is what we have learnt of the general character of the Iliad
which makes the latter explanation more tenable.

The second part of the book, 257-897, opens in a way which seems to
shew that it is added purely mechanically, and has no organic connexion
with what precedes. It ends in the same way; the αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεύς of
257 is repeated in {2 3, and may be a catchword marking the beginning and
end of this most brilliant and famous episode. By far the largest part of it
is devoted to the chariot-race, a piece of narrative as truthful in its characters
as it is dramatic and masterly in description. The final scene between
Menelaos and Antilochos may fairly rank among the most lifelike and de-
lightful in the Iliad.

Here, however, we can again confidently point to later expansion.
The most obvious of these additions is the long didactic speech of Nestor to
Antilochos, 306 (or rather 303) —3850, The unskilful manner in which this
is thrust into the list of competitors is obvious. It is full of difficulties and
obscurities of the most un-Epic sort ; it bears no relation to the subsequent
incidents of the race, and is quite of the stamp of the other didactic
prosings put into Nestor’s mouth—always with unfortunate results to the
context.

Objection has been taken to the whole scene of the dispute between Ido-
meneus and Aias, 446-98, which can be cut out without injury to the
context. It contains at least one very serious difficulty in 462-64 (see note),
and the whole conception of the race-course is full of obscurity. At the
same time it must be admitted that the scene is admirably conceived to vary
the continuous description of the race by leading us to see it from the spec-
tators’ point of view as well as from the charioteer’s,

Doubts have been thrown upon the presence of Meriones among the com-
petitors. He alone of the five plays no individual part in the description,
but merely starts fourth and arrives fourth. He, like Idomeneus who
is honoured in 446—98, is one of the heroes who are evidently a some-
what late introduction into the Iliad, and plays a part in passages which
seem composed for the Cretans’ special benefit (e.g. in N); and in this
book he is once before dragged in by head and shoulders in a passage where
he could be well dispensed with (see 113, 124). If we attempt to cut him
out entirely we are forced to make a change wherever five prizes are men-
tioned. One of these places, however, 614—15, can well be spared, as it
introduces another Nestor-episode containing more than the usual share of
unintelligible expressions. If 614-52 be omitted, then Meriones disappears
with the athetesis of 351 and 528~31, and the expulsion of Μενέλαος

. ἐλαυνέμεν (reading δουρικλυτός for δουρικλειτός) in 355—6—by which
the disagreeable repetition of Ady’ ἐλαυνέμεν is avoided. The remaining

IAIAAOC Ψ (χχπι) 409

difficulty is the list of prizes in 269-70, and this may be got over by
simply rejecting 270, for the ἀμφίθετος φιάλη reappears only in 616, which
is already condemned.

Finally we may mention as worthy of consideration Erhardt’s suggestion
that the whole end of the race has been materially altered ; that Eumelos
was originally, as we expect after the praise of his skill in 289, the winner ;
and that he has been displaced by the rather awkward device of 389. 400,
in order to make room for Diomedes, who with Odysseus is the most favoured
hero of one period of expansion—that to which we owe the existence
of KE.

With 798 we begin a long addition absolutely devoid of any poetical
merit, and standing in the harshest contrast with its surroundings. The
three contests contained in 798-883 rival each other in absurdity and
obscurity, as is pointed out in the notes. The final scene, 884-97, has
weaknesses of its own, but still does not incur so severe a sentence, and may
stand with the original games,

After making these rather considerable deductions, the ἄθλα proper form
a brilliant whole, the model for countless imitators, who have never suc-
ceeded in outdoing this source of all descriptions of sport. It remains to
consider how the two parts of the book are related to each other and to the
Iliad as a whole.

It has already been remarked that the Games are very loosely attached to
the story both at beginning and end. The language is marked by the free
use of the developed article, which would place the whole episode at quite
as late a date as K (see 265, 267, 269, 275, 295, 303, 324-25, 336, 348,
376, 465, 525, 538, 656, 663, 702, 733, 842, 877). This conclusion is
strengthened by the use of Odyssean words, ἀπόπροθι (832), ἀληθείη (361,
and 2 407), ἀτέμβω (445, 834, see note on A 705), ὑγρὸν ἔλαιον (281),
ἠεροειδέα πόντον (744), περιπλομένους ἐνιαυτούς (833). The digamma is
neglected, but not so abundantly as to enable us to lay any great stress
upon the fact.

We note too that the actors in many cases belong to the later strata—
Epeios, Leonteus, Polypoites, Eumelos, Phoinix. On the other hand, the
favour shewn to Odysseus, especially at the cost of the two Aiantes, is very
marked, and may be a further link with the Odyssey. Erhardt remarks that
the way in which the Salaminian Aias is defeated by the Lapith Polypoites
(836 ff.) may well be a mark of influence exerted by the prominence of the
Lapiths in Attic legend.

While the Games thus stand by themselves as very late, the Funeral coheres
more closely in spirit and language with 2, Both have Odyssean tendencies
—observe the use of the formal Odyssean phrase ἔνθ᾽ αὖτ᾽ GAN ἐνόησε (140,
193), in a way which shews that it had already become no more than a
stereotyped formula of transition, and see notes on 10 and 246. The
general conclusion must be that the Funeral and {2 form a later conclusion to
the Jliad, and that into this conclusion the still later Games have been some-
what mechanically incorporated ; but that both came into existence long
enough before the final redaction of the Jliad to leave time for a certain
amount of further expansion under Attic influence. Here as elsewhere
tle process has been one of constant complicated growth. But what lends

470 IAIAAOC Ψ (xxii)

especial interest to WV is the proof it gives that lateness is by no means
evidence of badness. With two or three exceptions the whole of the book
shews how the high inspiration of the Epos survived almost till the decline,
and how in a somewhat different way “interpolators” might fairly claim to
match their prototypes in originality and skill.

IAIAAOC Ψ

deka ἐπὶ Πατρόκλωι.

a e \ ΄ \ , page ’ αι"
ὡς οἱ μὲν στενάχοντο κατὰ πτόλιν" αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχαιοὶ
3 ἣν \ As \ ΠΣ ᾿ Γ,᾿ 4
ἐπεὶ δὴ νῆάς τε καὶ ᾿λλήσποντον ἵκοντο,
΄ \ Te} / \ fol ΄
οἱ μὲν ἄρ᾽ ἐσκίδναντο ἑὴν ἐπὶ νῆα ἕκαστος,
, ? /
Μυρμιδόνας δ᾽ οὐκ εἴα ἀποσκίδνασθαι ᾿Αχιλλεύς,

ἀλλ᾽ ὅ γε οἷς ἑτάροισι φιλοπτολέμοισι μετηύδα"

“MM 86 / ? ν 5 ε “
υρμιδόνες ταχύπωλοι, ἐμοὶ ἐρίηρες ἑταῖροι,

\ δή ἘΞ χνὸ τυ» , θ , A
μὴ δή πω ὑπ᾽ ὄχεσφι λυώμεθα μώνυχας ἵππους,
> > tad “, " -
ἀλλ᾽ αὐτοῖς ἵπποισι καὶ ἅρμασιν ἄσσον ἰόντες

/ e /
Πάτροκλον κλαίωμεν: ὃ yap γέρας ἐστὶ θανόντων.

᾽ \ ᾽ / 3 Ε] al , ,
αὐτὰρ ἐπεί K ὀλοοῖο τεταρπώμεσθα γόοιο,

10

[4 / 4 / , / ΄ ”
ἵππους λυσάμενοι δορπήσομεν ἐνθάδε πάντες.
ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ ὠὥιμωξαν ἀολλέες, ἦρχε δ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεύς.

),

1. CTONGXONTO () 7 OT ΕἸ;

ἐπεὶ τ᾿ L.

Ἐς
un:

cal

: 9. ὃ: τὸ Q. 10.

2. ἐπεί, for the scansion see X 379.

7. Un’ ὄχεσφι, apparently in an
ablatival sense, from under; H. G. § 156.
It is perhaps possible to take the pre-
positional phrase as attributive to ἵππους,
the horses in the chariots; but this is
less likely.

9. ὅ may be a rel. even with γάρ,
which is the due; see note on K 127,
and the similar phrases in M 344, w 190.
But the phrase occurs five times with
76, and it is difficult not to believe that
ὅ was here meant to be identical with
76. The relative use of the article and
the similarity in Greek between the two
stems (rel.) vos (ὅς 7 6) and (dem.) sos
(ὁ ἡ τό) must have made such a confusion
easy—at least when the use of the

471

article as a rel. had become archaic.
See Delbriick Go. v. p. 311, Brugmann
Griech. Gramm. § 203 Anm.

10. Tetapnwuecea γόοιο, one of thie
phrases peculiar to Ψ (also 98), 2 (513),
and the Od. (six times). The same is
the case with the similar ἵμερος γόοιο,
and γόου ἐξ ἔρον εἴην 2227. The word no
doubt expresses satiety (cf. κορεσσάμεθα
κλαίοντε X 427), but certainly has not
lost the sense of satisfaction. (In o 400
μετὰ γάρ Te Kal ἄλγεσι τέρπεται ἀνήρ the
idea is different, as the reference is to
past sorrow—haec olim meminisse wu-
vabit.) Schol. B quotes from Aischylos
of τοι στεναγμοὶ τῶν πόνων ἰάματα. So
est quaedam flere voluptas, Ovid Trist.
iv. 3. 37.

413 IAIAAOC Ψ (χχιπ)

οἱ δὲ τρὶς περὶ νεκρὸν ἐύτριχας ἤλασαν ἵππους

μυρόμενοι" μετὰ δέ σφι Θέτις γόου ἵμερον ὦρσε.

δεύοντο ψάμαθοι, δεύοντο δὲ τεύχεα φωτῶν 1ὅ
δάκρυσι: τοῖον γὰρ πόθεον μήστωρα φόβοιο.

τοῖσι δὲ Πηλεΐδης ἀδινοῦ ἐξῆρχε γόοιο,

χεῖρας ἐπ᾽ ἀνδροφόνους θέμενος στήθεσσιν ἑταίρου

“«χαῖρέ μοι, ὦ Πάτροκλε, καὶ εἰν ᾿Αἴδαο δόμοισι"

, \ / ig / Σ
πάντα γὰρ ἤδη τοι τελέω τὰ πάροιθεν ὑπέστην, 20

\ /
“Extopa δεῦρ᾽ ἐρύσας δώσειν κυσὶν ὠμὰ δάσασθαι,
an /
δώδεκα δὲ προπάροιθε πυρῆς ἀποδειροτομήσειν
/ if 3.9
Τρώων ἀγλαὰ τέκνα, σέθεν κταμένοιο χολωθείς.

> - / ”
ἢ pa καὶ “Extopa δῖον ἀεικέα μήδετο ἔργα,

πρηνέα παρ λεχέεσσι Μενοιτιάδαο τανύσσας 25

,ὔ
ἐν κονίηις.

’
οἱ δ᾽ ἔντεε ἀφωπλίζοντο ἕκαστος

χάλκεα μαρμαίροντα, λύον δ᾽ ὑψηχέας ἵππους,

cad δ᾽ ἷζον παρὰ νηὶ ποδώκεος Αἰακίδαο

14. γόου eétic C.
ap. Did.
26. ἕκαςτοι GJST Harl. a, Vr. A, yp. A.
Vr. A, yp. A.

18. én’: an’ G.
20. Tol: cor G. || Tedécoo H supr.

| ἀνδροφόνους Ar. 2: ἀνδροφόνου
22. anodeipotourice Vr. d.
27. λύοντο δὲ μώνυχας ἵππους GOST

13. Cf. Q 16 and note on Χ 396 for the
practice of driving round the dead man’s
tomb. In T 211 the body of Patroklos
was in the hut, ἀνὰ πρόθυρον τετραμμένος.
Here it is evidently conceived as being
out in the open, on the shore, where the
Myrmidons and Achilles sleep round it.

14. Heyne suspects this line as a
needless expansion; for Thetis is not
among the Myrmidons. Cf. Σ 51.

15. Spargitur et tellus lacrimis, spar-
guniur et arma, Virg. Aen. xi. 191.

17-18=2 316-17.

19. καί, even in Hades, where there is
but little rejoicing indeed.

20. τελέω, better taken as a present
than as a future ; already Lam fulfilling,
ie. this is an earnest of the complete
fulfilment of my word. ὑπέστην, see >
334 ff., Φ 27-32, X 354.

21. dud, o 87 μήδεά 7 ἐξερύσας δώηι
κυσὶν ὠμὰ δάσασθαι, where the neut.
plur. is natural ; cf. ὠμὸν βεβρώθοις ἹΠρί-
αμον A 35. Here, where there is no
subst. for it to agree with, it may either
be due to the implied notion of κρέα (Sw
ἀποταμνόμενον κρέα ἔδμεναι X 347) which
might be omitted when ὠμὰ δάσασθαι
had coalesced into a single phrase ; or

more probably it is analogous to the
ordinary adverbial use of the neut. plur.
as In ὀξέα κεκληγώς, ete. The difference
here evidently is that the adj. expresses
a quality of the object of the verb, and
does not qualify the meaning of the verb
itself. But the logical inaccuracy though
real is not unnatural. P. Knight and
others regard 21-3 as an interpolation to
explain what Achilles refers to, made up
from = 336-37 with a reminiscence of o
87. This is quite possible. Note the
neglect of F in ἐρύσας (Fepts Schulze ;
see App. D, vol. i. p. 594).

24. The double acc. is evidently ana-
logous to κακὸν ῥέζειν τινά (H. G. § 141),
“Extopa being governed by the complex
of the verb with its ace. of the ‘ Internal
Object.’ The ἀεικέα ἔργα seem to imply
no more than leaving the body naked
and neglected—which is somewhat of an
anticlimax after what has preceded.

27. Gwuyéac, see on E772. Here we
have our choice of the variant λύοντο δὲ
μώνυχας ἵππους. The mid. is used of
unyoking horses only in 7 and 11 above.
The act. is the regular voice, even where
a driver unyokes his own horses (e.g.
E776).

IAIAAOC Ψ (xxii)

μυρίοι: αὐτὰρ ὁ τοῖσι τάφον μενοεικέα δαίνυ.
πολλοὶ μὲν βόες ἀργοὶ ὀρέχθεον ἀμφὶ σιδήρωι 30

σφαζόμενοι, πολλοὶ δ᾽
πολλοὶ δ᾽ ἀργιόδοντες

ὄϊες καὶ μηκάδες αἷγες"
ὕες, θαλέθοντες ἀλοιφῆι,

εὑόμενοι τανύοντο διὰ φλογὸς ᾿Πφαίστοιο"

/ > » \ /
πάντηι δ᾽ ἀμφὶ νέκυν

> \ / v 4 mA
αὐτὰρ Tov ye ἄνακτα ποδώκεα [|Ἰηλεΐωνα 35

Us »
κοτυλήρυτον ἔρρεεν αἷμα.

29. μενοειδέα KR,
τῶι πολιῶι Sch. T.

29. uupio, very many, see A 2. The
actual number of Myrmidons is 2500
from II 168 ff. (a late passage however).
τάφον δαίνυ (also y 309) like γάμον
δαινύναι T 299, 63. τάφος never means
tomb in H., only funeral.

30. Gproi λευκοί" ἀλλ᾽ οὐ θύεται λευκὰ
τοῖς τεθνεῶσι" δῆλον γὰρ ἐκ τοῦ ““ἔνθ᾽ ὄϊν
ἀρνειὸν ῥέζειν θῆλύν τε μέλαιναν ᾿ (κ 527)
καὶ “ὄϊν ἱερευσέμεν οἴωι maupéNava” (Kk 524)
Sch. T, who suggests ὅτι οὐ τῶι ἸΤατρόκλωι
ἀλλ᾽ εἰς τὸ δεῖπνον τῶν ζώντων τοὺς βόας
ἔθυον. The remark has weight, especially
as ἀργός is not a standing epithet of the
-ox as it is of the dog (obviously in another
sense). The only other animal to which
it is applied is the goose, o 161, and
there as well as here it may mean not so
much white as glistening, ‘sleek.’ Cf.
ταῦρον apyavra Pind. O. xiii. 69. The
variant ἀργῶι (σιδήρωι) is evidently a
mere con]. ὀρέχθϑεον, ἅπαξ εἰρημένον
in H. and obscure in meaning. Three
explanations are given by tradition: (@)
κατὰ μίμησιν ἠχοῦ τραχέος πεποίηται τὸ
ῥῆμα, ἀντὶ τοῦ ἔστενον ἀναιρούμενοι, Schol.
‘'T (so Hesych. Ap. Lex. etc.) ; bellowed
upon (when pierced by) the knife; (b)
«ἀναιρούμενοι ὠρέγοντο, ἤτοι ἐξετείνοντο.
Eust. ἐξετείνοντο ἀποθνήισκοντες, ὡς τὸ
“ἐ κεῖτο μέγας μεγαλωστί,᾽ Schol. T;
stretched themselves out, plunged. ‘This is
sometimes compared with τανύοντο (33) ;
but that word evidently means were ex-
tended on spits (of wood); if the same
sense be assumed here, we shall have to
suppose that spits of iron large enough to
roast an ox were known in Homeric days,
whichis not likely ; (ὦ) οἱ δέ, διεκόπτοντο.
ἀπὸ τούτου καὶ ἐρεγμός. ὁ ἀποκεκομμένος
κύαμος, Schol. B and Eust. who quotes
ε 83 θυμὸν ἐρέχθων (cf. also Ψ 317),
rending his soul. Of these (Ὁ) seems the
most defensible etymologically, 6-pex-0é-
w being related to 6-pey- to stretch as
yn-9é-w to yaF (see Ourtius, Vb. ii.

30-31 a0. τινές Sch. T. 30. ἀργοὶ" ἢ ἀργῶι εἰϑήρωι,
834. ἔρρεεν : ῥέεν 1. 35. αὐτὰρ : auTap ο I’ap, μ.

343). (α) is due to the similarity of
poxdéw to roar, and in this sense
Theokritos took the verb, θάλασσαν éa
ποτὶ χέρσον ὀρεχθῆν xi. 43. Linguistic-
ally the connexion is at least improbable,
as initial p in Greek implies a lost con-
sonant (cp or Fp-), while the 6- indicates
an originally initial 7, The connexion
with épeixw generally assumed for (c)
is improbable on account of the root-
vowel (reik, weak rik); and even if this
were admitted it would require a purely
passive sense for the active form. Schol.
T has a curious note on the line, τινὲς
ἀθετοῦσιν, ws οὐκ ὄντος σιδήρου τότε.
Many atheteses would be needed to expel
iron from the text in the later passages ;
cf. A123. It may be noted that ont of
twenty-three places where iron is men-
tioned in the //iad five are found in this
book (see 177, 261, 834, 850). The present
case is in harmony with the usual use, by
which the metal is confined to tools of
small size (see Helbig H. Ε΄. pp. 329-32).
This and Σ 34 happen to be the only
places where.a knife of iron is mentioned.

32-3, see I 467-68.

34. ὅτι ψιλῶς προενεκτέον KOTUAHPUTON
(i.e. κοτυλἤρυτον, not κοτυλήῤυτον), οὐ yap
ἀπὸ τῆς ῥύσεως ἀλλ᾽ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀρύσαι
᾿Αρίσταρχος πολύ, ὥστε κοτύληι ἀρύσασθαι
(deep enough to be taken up in cups),
An. This explanation is needlessly
artificial. It is more natural to suppose
that the blood of the victims was caught
in cups and then poured out, so as to
make it a direct gift from the mourner
tothedead. Blood is given to the shades
as a food to strengthen them in the
curious ritual of Odysseus’ journey to
Hades, x 535 ff., \ 89, 96, 153, ete. Cf
Eur. Hee. 534 ff. (Neoptolemos sacri-
ficing Polyxena) ὦ παῖ Πηλέως, πατὴρ δ᾽
ἐμός, δέξαι χοάς μοι τάσδε κηλητηρίους,
νεκρῶν ἀγωγούς" ἐλθὲ δ᾽, ὡς wins μέλαν
κόρης ἀκραιφνὲς αἷμα. See App. L, ὃ 8.

414 IAIAAOC Ψ (xxl)
εἰς ᾿Αγαμέμνονα δῖον ἄγον βασιλῆες ᾿Αχαιῶν,

“- / / fol
σπουδῆι παρπεπιθόντες, ἑταίρου χωόμενον κῆρ.
¢ > ὦ \ f ? / - 5.0
οἱ & ὅτε δὴ κλισίην ᾿Αγαμέμνονος ἵξον ἰοντες,
, ie
αὐτίκα κηρύκεσσι λυγυφθόγγοισι κέλευσαν
> a > /
ἀμφὶ πυρὶ στῆσαι τρίποδα μέγαν, εἰ πεπίθοιεν 40
΄, / ty /
Πηλείδην λούσασθαι ἄπο βρότον αἱματόεντα.
> δ , n lal ’ ce ,
αὐτὰρ ὅ γ᾽ ἠρνεῖτο στερεῶς, ἐπὶ δ᾽ ὅρκον ὄμοσσεν"
᾿Ξ 5 A A Ww
“ot pa Ζῆν᾽, ὅς tis τε θεῶν ὕπατος Kal ἄριστος,
5 ξ τὴ
οὐ θέμις ἐστὶ λοετρὰ καρήατος ἄσσον ἱκέσθαι,
/ 3 ὌΝ / / \ ig) if an
πρίν γ᾽ ἐνὶ Πάτροκλον θέμεναι πυρὶ σῆμά τε χεῦαι 45
> > » ΄ a
κείρασθαί τε κόμην, ἐπεὶ οὔ μ᾽ ἔτι δεύτερον ὧδε
“ 3 yd , ” a ,
ier ἄχος κραδίην, ὄφρα ζωοῖσι μετείω.
5 la) nan ΄ Υ /
ἀλλ᾽ ἤτοι νῦν μὲν στυγερῆν πειθώμεθα Sart:
XR , v ΕΣ 5 lal - 7
ἠῶθεν δ᾽ ὄτρυνον, ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγάμεμνον,

ec > > / ͵ - oe ΕῚ ΕῚ \
ὕλην τ ἀξέμεναι Tapa TE σχεῖν OTT ETTLELKES 50
38. izon D: ἷζον G. 39 om. Pap. wl. || κέλευςε(ν) DGHJPRU Par. bd fj

er 9

42. 0 r: 6 DQ Βαρὺ 6: ||
45. Γ᾽ : T Pap. pl. || χεῦςαι CGJPR.
ἐν ἄλλωι οὔ τί με A. 48. ἀλλ᾽
᾿ Νῦν μὲν: μὲν NONG Ραν. 1: 7“ μὲν" νῦν R, || Melecoueedt

(supr. a) and ap. Did. 40. Gu@inepictHcai J.
cTeped@e :. cturep@c PQR: creppac Mor.
46. Keipecoat H. | oU mw ἔτι: οὐδέ με H:

ἤτοι: ἀλλά re δὴ Ὁ.

Ar. @: τερπώμεθα Pap. μ' and ap. Did.: ταρπώμεθα ‘Vat. 1.” 49.0:
Oana: 50. T om. PR. |! 6c(c)’ CD (p. ras.), yp. X: ὥς

36. εἰς “Ar., fo the hut of A., as H 312.
37. cnoudaAl, hardly, as A 562, ete.
40-1. Compare = 344-45,

43. The use of ὅς tic with a definite

46. For the shaving of the hair as a
sign of mourning cf. note on 135. μ᾽,
1.6. we as A 362.

47. μετείω, see note on H 340, and

particular antecedent is almost unique,
and is rendered stranger by the addition
of the generalising Te which is nowhere
else joined to és τις. Evenin Εἰ 175 and
p 53, the only other cases where és τις
refers to a particular antecedent, the use
is intelligible, as there the actual person
is unknown to the speaker, and may
thus be thought of as one of an in-
definite number. ‘The line, however,
is evidently an old formula. The mean-
ing may be ““ Zeus, or by whatever name
the highest of the gods is to be called” ;
cf. Aisch. Ag. 160 Ζεύς, ὅστις ποτ᾽ éotiv’

(Monro) ; and so Eur. H. F. 1263 Ζεύς,

ὅστις ὁ Ζεύς, Tro. 885 ὅστις ποτ᾽ εἶ
᾿ - ͵ 5 ὼ 7 qj / ἢ
σὺ δυστόπαστος εἰδέναι, “Ζεύς. Grashof

has ingeniously conj. ὅς 7 ἐστί, the
objection to which is, apart from the
absence of authority, that in similar
phrases ἐστίν is regularly omitted (e.g. N
313, IL 271). See however Hymn. Ven.
37 Ζηνὸς... ὅς τε μέγιστός τ’ ἐστί, κτλ.

App. D, ὁ 3.

48. πειθώμεθα, cf. 645 γήραϊ λυγρῶι
πείθεσθαι. The phrase is not very exact,
as ‘the feast’ must mean ‘the necessity
of eating.” But this seems hardly
ground enough for concluding that the
line is a reminiscence of Θ 502 (=I 65)
πειθώμεθα νυκτὶ μελαίνηι (cf. H 282 ἀγαθὸν
καὶ νυκτὶ πιθέσθαι). There is a peculiar
appropriateness when Achilles speaks of
food as an inevitable power. ‘The variant
τερπώμεθα is quite out of place in his
mouth. Compare ἡ 216 οὐ γάρ τι
στυγερῆι ἐπὶ γαστέρι κύντερον ἄλλο, σ
53 ἀλλά με γαστὴρ ὀτρύνει κακοεργός,
whence Peppmiiller conj. γαστρί for
δαιτί here.

49. ὄτρυνον : ὄτρυνε Bentley.

50. ἀΞξέμεναι, aor. as usual, For ὅες᾽
nearly all Mss. give ws. This is probably

merely a reminiscence of the phrase ws
ἐπιεικές Which so often ends a line, e.g.
537. If an independent reading it

IAIAAOC Ψ (xxi) 47

or

Ν Μ ,ὔ ΄ Ν / , /
νεκρὸν ἔχοντα νέεσθαι ὑπὸ ζόφον ἠερόεντα,
vv | Μ Lal A , / > / A
opp ἤτοι τοῦτον μὲν ἐπιφλέγηι ἀκάματον πῦρ
» ω] Ψ , “ Ἁ » , \ vv , ”
θᾶσσον am ὀφθαλμῶν, λαοὶ δ᾽ ἐπὶ ἔργα τράπωνται.
᾿ » ΄ -“ ? \ ,
ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ & dpa τοῦ μάλα μὲν κλύον ἠδ᾽ ἐπίθοντο.
/ ao
ἐσσυμένως δ᾽ ἄρα δόρπον ἐφοπλίσσαντες ἕκαστοι δὅ
δαίνυντ᾽, οὐδέ τι θυμὸς ἐδεύετο δαιτὸς ἐΐσης.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ πόσιος καὶ ἐδητύος ἐξ ἔρον ἕντο,
οἱ μὲν κακκείοντες ἔβαν κλισίηνδε ἕκαστος,
,
Πηλείδης δ᾽ ἐπὶ Owt πολυφλοίσβοιο θαλάσσης
κεῖτο βαρὺ στενάχων πολέσιν μετὰ Μυρμιδόνεσσιν θ0

» a -“ 4 ’ 4. def ΄
ἐν καθαρῶι, ὅθι κύματ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἠϊόνος κλύζεσκον.

LS \ e ” / ΄ “-
εὖτε τὸν ὕπνος ἔμαρπτε, λύων μελεδήματα θυμοῦ,
/ » / / \ , , “-“-
νήδυμος ἀμφιχυθείς" μάλα γὰρ κάμε φαίδιμα γυῖα
"Extop ἐπαΐσσων προτὶ "λιον ἠνεμόεσσαν"
ἦλθε δ᾽ ἐπὶ ψυχὴ Ἰ]ατροκλῆος δειλοῖο, 65
πάντ᾽ αὐτῶι μέγεθός Te Kal ὄμματα KAN ἐϊκυῖα

\ ‘ \ ral \ AW “ od
Kal φωνὴν, καὶ τοιᾶα περι χροι ELLLATAaA εστο"

52. ἐπιφλέγει TU Bar,
55. ἐφοπλίςαντο 1).
KAICIHSEN ().

54. μάλα μὲν : μᾶλλον KR:
58. yp. οἱ μὲν ON κείοντες, Χ.
61. Set: oo: δὴ Syr.: ὅτι OH Ὁ. | ἐπ᾽:

WEN μάλα P: μάλα J.
KAICIHNOE: οἵκονθε 1):
crn, Pap. 4, Vr. A.

ἡϊόνας Pap. uw”, Vr.b ἃ. || xAUzecxen CJ Harl. a, King’s Par. h (A supr.: διχῶς A™) :

éxAUzeckon Lips.: τινὲς énéxAuzon T (perhaps a gloss).

κάλ᾽ : μάλ᾽ ©. | καλὰ oixuia H.

64. ποτὶ P. 66.

would require the omission of the next
line, which is needless enough ; but even
then ὅσσα would be better. In favour
of leaving out 51 is the use of Néecea
=go simply ; see on Φ 48.

55. For €ponXiccantec bentley to save
the F of ἕκαστοι would read ἐφοπλίσσαντο
with D, omitting the next line, which
may well have been interpolated from
the other passages where it precedes 57
(A 468, ete.). Moreover the act. ἐῴ-
οπλίσσαι is used only of preparing for
others, the mid. of preparing for one’s self :
see 9 503, I 66 (van L.).

58. Cf. A 606.

62=v 56; ct. Ww 342 ὅτε οἱ γλυκὺς
ὕπνος λυσιμελὴς ἐπόρουσε, λύων μελεδήματα
θυμοῦ. ὕπνος éuapnre, also 22 679. The
apodosis begins with 65.

63. νήϑυμος ἀμφιχυθείς as = 253.

64, “Extop’ ="Exrop., as ἐπαΐσσειν
takes the dat., Κίρκης κ 322, μοι ξ 281,
and cf. O 579, P 725. τεῖχος, μόθον
ἐπαῖξαι (M 308, H 240) seem rather
different. προτί is used pregnantly with

the acc., assailing Hector (till he came)
even unto Ilios.

65. ἦλθε O° ἐπὶ ψυχή, a phrase occur-
ring four times in the Odyssean véxua
(X 84, 90, 387, 467). The ἐπέ is more
significant there, as the phrase is not
used of the first ghost, but only of those
which succeed, closely following upon one
another. But ἐπελθεῖν is often used like
our come upon, of unexpected approach
(e.g. Καὶ 40, O 84, Υ 91, 2 651), which
is evidently expressed here. See also
note on ἐπιφαίνεσθαι P 650.

66. This (apart from the spurious € 337)
is the only place where we cannot read
FeFixvia for εἰκυῖα. The word here may
represent Fixvia, on the false analogy of
Fidvta, which mss. almost invariably turn
into εἰδυῖα (see note on A 365). Bran-
dreth puts a colon after 65 and reads
éFéFixro, Fick καλὰ FeFolxer. αὐτῶι,
the real (living) man. The thought
here implied gives the reference to Tota,
such as the living man wore.

67. περὶ xpot εἵματα €cto, another
Odyssean phrase (four times).

416

IAIAAOC Ψ (xx!)

a \ a \ o ΝΜ,
στῆ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπὲρ κεφαλῆς καί μιν πρὸς μῦθον ἔειπεν"
¢ - / 5 ἴω
«εὕδεις, αὐτὰρ ἐμεῖο λελασμένος ἔπλευ, ᾿Αχυλλεῦ.

οὐ μέν μευ ζώοντος ἀκήδεις, ἀλλὰ θανόντος" 70

θάπτέ με ὅττι τάχιστα: πύλας ᾿Αἴδαο περήσω.
τῆλέ με εἴργουσι ψυχαί, εἴδωλα καμόντων,
οὐδέ μέ πω μίσγεσθαι ὑπὲρ ποταμοῖο ἐῶσιν,
GAN αὔτως ἀλάλημαι ay εὐρυπυλὲς "Αἴδος . δῶ.

καί μοι δὸς τὴν χεῖρ᾽, ὀλοφύρομαι" οὐ γὰρ ἔτ᾽ αὗτις 75

68 om. H. 69. ἐμοῖο PQ Bar. Vr. Ὁ. 70. μευ: με C. || ἐκήϑεις PI.
71. περῆςαι G. 73. moo: πως G: προ J. || uirecear H. 75. καί : εἴ H. ||
aveic CL.

69. NeNacuénoc ἔπλευ like λελασμένον
ἔμμεναι N 269.

70. ἀκήθεις, i.e. ἀκήδεες, imperf. ; see
on © 427. The present is of course to
be supplied with ἀλλὰ eanonToc.

71. For the construction of this line
see X 129-30. περήςω added asyndetic-
ally = ὅπως περήσω, but the archaic
parataxis can dispense with the sub-
ordinating relative adv. The subj. itself
indicates will; ‘I will pass the gates
of Hades’ means ‘I bid you let me
pass them.’ 97-98, Z 340, Χ 418 are pre-
cisely similar in the addition of the sub-
junctive to the imper. Cobet, offended
by the ‘immanis hiatus,’ would read
θάπτε μ᾽ ὅπως ὦκιστα (7. C. 370). This
-receives some, but by no means con-
vincing, support from the line of Theog-
nis, φύντα δ᾽ ὅπως ὦκιστα πύλας ’Atédao
περῆσαι : the hiatus is allowable at the
end of the first foot. It would be much
less harsh if, with van L., we put the
stop after με, taking ὅττι τάχιστα with
the following words, but with the ex-
ception of A 193 ὅττι τάχιστα always
stands at the end of a clause.

72. The need of funeral rites to give
access to the underworld (followed by
Virg. Aen. vi. 327 ff.) differs from Elpe-
nor’s story in ἃ 51-83; for he, though
unburied, is not separated from the
shades by the river. So in w 186 ff.
the ghosts of the suitors come among
the shades while their bodies are still
uncared for (see App. L, ἃ 9). On
account of this discrepancy Nitzsch was
inclined to athetize 72-74. But we have
no right whatever so to manipulate the
evidence. On this point, as on so many
others, the Homeric poems represent
differences of age and place. eYprouci,

read (μ᾽) ἐέργουσι.
T 278.

73. The river is presumably the Styx,
as in Θ 369; though the crossing of the
river, so prominent in the later Hades
legends, is not elsewhere alluded to as
necessary to the departed. (Acheron,
Pyriphlegethon, and Kokytos in κ 513
are evidently later additions to the Styx.)
It is possible, however, that ποταμός may
be Okeanos, which Odysseus has to pass
in A 13-23, and the souls of the suitors
in w 11-14, in order to reach Hades.
ἐῶειν, 1.6. (ποταμοῖ᾽) ἐάουσιν.

74. It is not easy to see how, if the

soul has not passed the πύλας ᾿Αἴδαο,
it can be said to wander ἀν᾽ εὐρυπυλὲς
Αἴδος δῶ (see App. L, ὃ 9). The phrase
recurs in ἃ 571, and may there, as here,
be taken to mean only the threshold of
the realm of Hades; for Odysseus does
not penetrate farther than this. Doder-
lein took it closely with the preceding
line, regarding ἀλλ᾽ αὔτως ἀλάλημαι as
a parenthesis. This avoids the diffi-
culty, but is very harsh and artificial.
The form εὐρυπυλές for εὐρύπυλον is
irregular.
75. ὀλυφύρομαι was taken by Ar. as
aor. subj., following the imper. as in
71; give me that hand, let me (=that I
may) lament. It is more commonly
taken as pres. indic. in pregnant sense,
I wail (to thee)=I1 beseech thee. For
this ef. B 290 ὀδύρονται οἵκόνδε νέεσθαι.
THN, apparently deictic, like ἥ τε κόμη
τό τε εἶδος 1155. If we take it to mean,
thine, as in Attic, it would be a very late
use (see H. G. p. 231). It is of course
easy to read either ἥν or σήν --- [Π8
former for choice, as more likely to be
corrupted.

καμόντων, see on

IAIAAOC Ψ (χχπὴ 477
, ΡΝ ‘ ,
νίσσομαι ἐξ ᾿Αἴδαο, ἐπήν pe πυρὸς λελάχητε.
> \ \ / / > ΄ ΄ ,
οὐ μὲν γὰρ ζωοί γε φίλων ἀπάνευθεν ἑταίρων
\ / 4 ’ ‘ ‘
βουλὰς ἑζόμενοι βουλεύσομεν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐμὲ μὲν κὴρ
> / / / ,
ἀμφέχανε στυγερή, ἥ περ λάχε γεινόμενόν περ᾽
\ \ \ > Cal -“ »" , , , , ~
καὶ δὲ σοὶ αὐτῶι μοῖρα, θεοῖς ἐπιείκελ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεῦ, 80
/ 0 [4 /
τείχει ὕπο Tpawy ἐνηγενέων ἀπολέσθαι.
» / ᾽ / \ > / “ /
ἄλλο δέ τοι ἐρέω καὶ ἐφήσομαι, αἴ Ke TiOnac:
τ J \ A > / / > ΓΑ] > -
μὴ ἐμὰ σῶν ἀπάνευθε τιθήμεναι ὀστέ᾽, ᾿Αχιλλεῦ,
» > e lal ἧς > / ’ e / /
ἀλλ᾽ ὁμοῦ, ὡς ἐτράφημεν ἐν ὑμετέροισι δόμοισιν,

76. νίεςομαι GH°PRS: νειςςομαι Syr.: νείςομαι () : njéiouai Pap. μ᾿: νείομαι
Mose. 2, yp. Χ : neiou’ Η 81]. ἃ : νίςομαι 92. || ἐπῆν : ἐπεί Vr. A. 77. μὲν γὰρ:
rap ἔτι Aischines contra Tim. ὃ 149, yp. A, and ἔν τισι τῶν πολιτικῶν Did. 79.
ἀμφέλαχε T (Gupéxane lemma). 81. τείχε᾽ L: τείχη DU. | εὐηφενέων Aph.
Rhianos. || After this Aischines adds μαρνάμενον ϑηίοις ἑλένης ἕνεκ᾽ ἠυκόμοιο.
82. Kai κτλ.: cU 0° ἑνὶ gpeci βάλλεο cAiciIn Aisch. || at: εἴ Mor. Bar.
πίθοιο (). 83. Tieeluenai PR: Tieéuen (): Tieeiuen’ J: τιϑήμεν᾽ (". 84.
ἐτράφημιεν : ἐτράφην περ A (yp. ἐτράφημεν) DHST Vr. A Harl. Ὁ ἃ, yp. X:
ἐτράφη (). || ἡμετέροιςι (). || ἀλλ᾽, ἵνα πέρ ce καὶ αὐτὸν ὁμοίη γαῖα κεκεύθηι,
χρυςέωι ἐν ἀμφιφορεῖ τόν τοι πόρε πότνια μήτηρ, dc ὁμοῦ ἐτράφεμέν περ ἐν

ὑμετέροιςοι Bdu0icIn Aisch.

76. Niccomal, a pres., not necessarily
with fut. sense; by translating I come
back no more we see how closely the two
are connected. The idea that νίσσομαι
is pres., νίσομαι fut., seems to have no
foundation. Cf. N 186. The variant
νείομαι will represent νέομαι, with length-
ening ἴῃ first arsis. Observe the
pathetic effect of the verb which, with
its derivative νόστος, is regularly used
of happy returning home, as though
from banishment.

77-91 are quoted by Aischines with
large variations (see App. Crit.), which
give us a valuable glimpse into the
popular texts of his day. For 84, which
happens to be quoted as in our texts by
Plato, Aischines has three lines which
are in all respects worse ; grammar and
thought are alike confused, and ἀμφιφορεῖ
is a non-Epic form for -7%. Generally
speaking the quotation—the longest
from H. in any classical writer—may
console us for the loss of these corrupt
texts, and warn us against setting our-
selves too high an ideal in restoring
fragments of new lines such as we find
in the oldest papyri. The fortunate
coincidence of the citation from Plato
answers once for all the suggestion that
our present vulgate was made up by
Alexandrian critics from these ‘praes
Aristarchean ’ texts.

79. ἀμφέχανε, κατέφαγε καὶ κατέπιε,
Schol. B. γεινόμενόν περ, at my veri
birth, cf. K 71, Υ 128. Zenodotos of
Mallos (see N 731) concluded from this
line that Homer was a Chaldaean (i.e.
astrologer) !

81. ἐυηγενέων, read ἐυηφενέων : see
on A 427. But the reading with Ὑ is
as old as Aischines. The line added by
him seems to be a reminiscence of I 327,
339.

83. τιϑήμεναι, sce note on Καὶ 34,

84. Both Ms. variants, ἐτράφημεν
and ἐτράφην περ, are apparently wrong.
The shortening of the ε of the augment
before zp is quite without a parallel in
H. ; such a license is found only under
different and well-marked conditions ;
H. G. § 370. Buttmann’s conj. ὡς
τράφομέν περ is therefore almost certainly
right, the other two variants being
designed to get rid of the intrans. aor.
érpagov, which must have become un-
familiar in very early times; a fact
which has produced Ms. variations,
though less important ones, in B 66]
(where see note), Φ 279. The conj.
receives some support from the quotation
in Aischines. Buttmann conj. ὡς δ᾽
ὁμοῦ ἐτράφομέν περ. which is also possible,
but less likely to have given rise to the
MS. readings. ὧς of course corresponds
to ὥς 91.

478

IAIAAOC Ψ (xxit1)

εὖτέ με τυτθὸν ἐόντα Μενοίτιος ἐξ ᾿Οπόεντος 85
ἤγαγεν ὑμέτερόνδ᾽ ἀνδροκτασίης ὕπο λυγρῆς,
ἤματι τῶι ὅτε παῖδα κατέκτανον ᾿Αμφιδάμαντος
νήπιος, οὐκ ἐθέλων, ἀμφ᾽ ἀστραγάλοισι χολωθείς"
ἔνθά με δεξάμενος ἐν δώμασιν ἱππότα Inrevs
ἔτρεφέ τ᾽ ἐνδυκέως καὶ σὸν θεράποντ᾽ ὀνόμηνεν" 90
ὃς δὲ καὶ ὀστέα νῶϊν ὁμὴ σορὸς ἀμφικαλύπτοι
χρύσεος ἀμφιφορεύς, τόν TOL πόρε πότνια μήτηρ."
τὸν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς:
“ πίπτέ μοι, ἠθείη κεφαλή, δεῦρ᾽ εἰλήλουθας
καί μοι ταῦτα ἕκαστ᾽ ἐπιτέλλεαι ; αὐτὰρ ἐγώ τοι 95
πάντα μάλ᾽ ἐκτελέω Kal πείσομαι ὡς σὺ κελεύεις.

86. ὑμέτερόνο᾽ :

ἀλεγεινῆς U (supr. ὑπὸ λυγρῆς, also [1}}). ;
88. νήπιον DQR (supr. c) Vr. d. || ἀετραγάλοιο Par. ἃ΄. || αἱ πλείους

Earls a.

τῶν κατ᾽ ἄνδρα ἀμφ᾽ actpardAnicin Epiccac Did.
érpepé AMGJPQSU Aischines: ἔτρεφ᾽ C (om. τ᾽ ) :
94. ἠθϑείη : Χαμαιλέων yp. ὦ θείη A.
96. ὡς cU: ὥς ue PR, ἐν ἄλλωι A.

ἐν πάσαις οὐκ ἣν ὁ στίχος, T.
cor Q Vr. A.

ὑμέτερον () : ὑμέτερον 0 Vr. A: Huétepdnd’ DJ (ΤΊ ἢ). ||

87. Gugidauanta J(): ipidduantoc
89, δεξάμενον P!. 90.
ἔτραφέ 02. 92 a0. Ar.:
95. TOL:

87. This is an instance of exile for
unpremeditated homicide in place of the
commutation by fine, which seems to
have been the usual practice in Homeric
times (see I 632-36). That exile was
also familiar, however, we know from Q
480-81 (see also J. H. S. vill. pp. 124-
25). We do not know enough to say
how the two penalties were chosen in
particular cases (here, for instance, we
do not know whether Amphidamas was
akin to Patroklos or no); but it is
evident that of the two exile was the
earlier. The idea seems to be introduced
here in order to reconcile A 765 ff.,
where Patroklos is living in Peleus’
house, with Σ 324 ff., where Achilles
promises Menoitios to bring his son
‘back to Opus,’ from which we naturally
suppose that he started.

88. The game of knuckle-bones, so
popular in later Greece, is mentioned
only here in H.

90. ἐνθυκέως, kindly (cf. ἀδευκής,
harsh), occurs elsewhere in 71. only in
Q; it is very common in Od. ἔτρεφε,
not érpage, which is intrans. The
only trans. aor. is ἔθρεψα.

92. ἀθετεῖται, ὅτι εἰ σορὸν δέδωκεν, ἣν
ἐν ἄλλοις λάρνακα καλεῖ (Q 795), πρὸς τί

καὶ ἀμφιφορῆα ; μετενήνεκται οὖν ἐκ τῆς
δευτέρας νεκυίας (w 74) . . τὸ γὰρ οἴκοθεν
ἐπάγεσθαι δυσοιώνιστον, An. ἐν πάσαις
δὲ οὐκ ἣν ὁ στίχος, Schol. T. The
decision that the line is interpolated
from w is unquestionably right. There
the ἀμφιφορεύς for the funeral of Achilles
is brought after his death by Thetis ;
here we must understand that she gave
it him when leaving for the war—an act
of incredible ill-omen. Besides, the σορός
or λάρναξ can hardly have been identical
with an ἀμφιφορεύς. It may be noticed
that this last objection does not apply
to the quotation from Aischines given
above, though the interpolation of the
ἀμφιφορεύς is as early as his day ; it is
doubtless due to the fame acquired by
this vessel in later mythology. The
scholia tell us, after Stesichoros, that
it was a gift from Hephaistos to
Dionysos, who passed it on to Thetis
in return for her protection recorded
in Z 136.

94, HeeiH, προσφώνησις νεωτέρου πρὸς
πρεσβύτερον, Schol. A. Patroklos was
older than Achilles, see A 787 and Plato,
Symp. 180 A. Χαμαιλέων γράφει “ ὦ θείη
κεφαλή᾽᾽. γελοῖον δὲ ἐπὶ νεκρῶι τὸ ὦ
θείη " δίο ἡ διπλῆ, An.

IAIAAOC ¥ (Χχιπ) 479

ἄλλα μοι ἄσσον στῆθι" μίνυνθά περ ἀμφιβαλόντε
> / νυ » ,’ / ᾽ν»
ἀλλήλους ὀλοοῖο τεταρπώμεσθα γόοιο.
.«" ” 4 » / \ /
ὡς apa φωνήσας ὠρέξατο χερσὶ φίληισιν,
᾽ ’ ‘
οὐδ᾽ ἔλαβε: ψυχὴ δὲ κατὰ χθονὸς ἠύτε καπνὸς 100
» cal / ‘
w@uyeTo τετριγυῖα. ταφὼν δ᾽ ἀνόρουσεν ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
χερσί τε συμπλατάγησεν, ἔπος δ᾽ ὀλοφυδνὸν ἔειπεν"
co ἃ / 9? ΧΑ " Ν > ,’ “| /
ὦ πόποι, ἢ pa τι ἔστι καὶ εἰν “Aidao δόμοισι
\ \ Μ ποῖα ’ > v4 ,
ψυχὴ καὶ εἴδωλον, ἀτὰρ φρένες οὐκ ἔνι πάμπαν"
παννυχίη γάρ μοι ἸΙατροκλῆος δειλοῖο 105
/
ψυχὴ ἐφεστήκει yoowod τε μυρομένη τε,
Ni “ > > ἧς Wen \ / > ε ”
καὶ μοι ἕκαστ ἐπέτελλεν, ELKTO δὲ θέσκελον αὐτῶι.
“Ὁ / a \ a ot ny 5 /
ὡς φάτο, τοῖσι δὲ πᾶσιν ὑφ᾽ ἵμερον ὦρσε γόοιο:
, \ lal / e / >
μυρομένοισι δὲ τοῖσι φάνη ῥοδοδάκτυλος ἠὼς

P| Ν » / > \ / P| ,
ἀμφὶ νέκυν ἐλεεινόν. ἀτὰρ κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων 110

97. ἀμφιβαλόντες CJPRSTU Harl. a, Mose. 2, Vr.d: ἀμφιχυθϑέντες Harl. a sup.
98. ὀλοοῖο : ἐν ἄλλωι κρυεροῖο A. 102. ευμπατάγηςεν 8 Lips. Mor. Vr. b A.
0’: τ᾽ Syr. D. |) dAopudpon Lips. 103. τι PQR Vr. A: τις ῶ. || ein: ἐν 10",
104 ἀθ. Aph.? || αὐτὰρ CJ, πάμιπαν : yp. πᾶςαι T.

AQT: ep’ictHKe Syr.:
107. ἔεικτο H: ἐΐςκτο ().
KIN *

106. ἐφεςτήκει Ar.

ἐφείςτηκε D: ἐφειστήκη J: ἐφειστήκει (2. || yp. rodouca X.
108. ὑφ᾽: ἐφ᾽ Aristotle Rhet. i. 11, Q.
muéhac ἐπὶ ἕσπερος ἦλθε (=a 423) Plut. Mor. 114 Ε.

109. φάνη
110. αὐτὰρ CJ.

97. In the sense embracing ἀμφιβαλεῖν
elsewhere always has χεῖρας. which has
to be supplied here. ἀλλήλους is best
taken with it as governed by the pre-
position (like ἀμφιχυθεὶς πατέρ᾽ ἐσθλόν, 7
214), though the division of the line
would prima facie refer it to τεταρπώ-
μεσθα. But this mid. aor. is never else-
where used transitively.

101. τετριγυῖα, the voice is as weak a
copy of the living voice as is the εἴδωλον
of the αὐτός. The idea is carried out in
w 6-10 (of the souls of the slain suitors),
ws δ᾽ ὅτε νυκτερίδες μυχῶι ἄντρου θεσπεσίοιο
τρίζουσαι ποτέονται. . ὡς αἱ τετριγυῖαι
ἅμ᾽ ἤϊσαν. Similarly in Hamlet, ‘The
sheeted dead Did squeak and gibber in
the Roman streets.’ For similar ideas
among modern savages οἱ, Tylor, Primz-
tive Culture, i. 452.

103. The interest of this line to
students of historical psychology is ob-
vious, especially to the school of anthro-
pologists who find in dream-appearances
of the dead—which often have a peculiar
vividness—the origin of the belief in
life after death. A full discussion of
it will be found in App. L, §§ 12-14. τι

has very respectable authority, and
must have been the reading Propertius
had before him when he wrote sunt
aliquid manes. The meaning required
is not to be got from the vulg. τις, there
is some soul and wratth in Hades; the
right sense is that of the text, the soul
is something even in Hades; it is not
entirely annihilated. For hiatus after
τι compare E 465, Ὡ 593, @ 136, c 339,
κ 246, and the common τί ἢ (τίη).

105. γάρ refers to the clause ἢ ῥά τι

. εἴδωλον, the intervening words being
parenthetical.

107. Various emendations have been
proposed to save the F of €kacta: πάντ᾽
Bentley, ἅπαντ᾽ Brandreth. τὰ ἕκαστα
Fick (οἵ, ταῦτα ἕκαστα 95), καί μ᾽(οι)
ἐπέτελλε ἕκαστα Hoffmann. But we
must beware of making the text more
antique than it ever was. e€cKedon,
Γ΄ 130.

109. Here again we have a quotation
with a large variation from Plutarch,
who as a professed antiquarian seems to
have cherished a preference for ‘ prae-
Alexandrine’ texts, though in his day
the present vulgate was long established.

480

ΙΛΔΙΆΔΟΟ Ψ (xxirr)

DLA. , ” \ bY) / 5 / ὕλ,
οὐρῆάς T @Tpuve καὶ ἀνέρας ἀξέμεν ὕλην

, A \ \ See,
πάντοθεν ἐκ κλισιῶν: ἐπὶ δ᾽ ἀνὴρ ἐσθλὸς ὀρώρει,

/ ’ n
ΔΙηριόνης θεράπων ἀγαπήνορος ᾿Ιδομενῆος.
ς ᾿ ς / \ ”
οἱ δ᾽ ἴσαν ὑχλοτόμους πελέκεας ἐν χερσὶν ἔχοντες
f J , 2 > fal / > lal
σειράς τ᾽ εὐπλέκτους: πρὸ O ap οὐρῆες κιον αὐτῶν" 115
» / i ͵7 , 5
πολλὰ δ᾽ ἄναντα κάταντα πάραντά τε δοχμιά τ΄ ἦλθον.
»> > {0 \ \ / nN [ὃ ὙΠ
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ κνημοὺς προσέβαν πολυπίδακος loys,
> , > in ς / / sie an
αὐτίκ᾽ ἄρα δρῦς ὑψικόμους TavanKe’ χαλκῶν
΄ ᾽ \ / /
Tapvov ἐπευγόμενοι: Tal δὲ μεγάλα κτυπέουσαι

πῖπτον.

τὰς μὲν ἔπειτα διαπλήσσοντες ᾿Αχαιοὶ 120

ἔκδεον ἡμιόνων" ταὶ δὲ χθόνα ποσσὶ δατεῦντο

, \ ς /.. 4
ἐλδόμεναι πεδίοιο διὰ ῥωπήϊα πυκνά.

112. κλιειίέων DGHJQU: κλιςέων AS.
Eust.

| πολυπιϑδάκου DST Par. a? and ap. Did.

111. T om. κατὰ πολλὰ τῶν ἀντιγράφων Schol. A. || ἀξέμεν : ἐξέμεν 6.

111. κρημνοὺς JU™ Harl. a, and ap.
118. τανυήκεϊ J. 120.

dia}nAiccontec Syr. and ap. Did.: ϑιαπλήσςαντες Par. be: ἕτεροι δὲ διαρρήςσςοντες

Eust.: yp. ϑιαταήτοντες, Χ.

112. éni ὁρώρει, watched, as Ὕ
471, ὃ 104 ἐπὶ δ᾽ ἀνέρες ἐσθλοὶ ὄροντο
(-τα). The verb is ἴο, be conn. not
with dp- to vise, but with οὖρος, ἐπίουρος,
τιμάορος, root ὁρ from Fop (opdw) which
must have lost the F at a very early
date —so early that the reduplicated
perf. could be formed exactly as if the
initial vowel were primitive. In fact
the formation seems to shew that con-
fusion with ὄρτνυμι had already begun.
Other traces of this use of the verb are
to be found in Hesych. ὅρει: φυλάσσει
and ὠρεῖα : φυλακτήρια (also in a Cretan
inser., see Schulze ᾧ. #. p. 17 note).—
Fick rejects 112-13 and 123-24; the
thrusting in of Meriones and Idomeneus
is at least needless, and looks like a
special attempt to give prominence to
Cretan heroes as in N.

116. The three curious adverbs are ἅπαξ
λεγόμενα in Greek—evidently ‘nonce-
words’ formed for the sake of the jingle
on the analogy of ἔσαντα and évayta,
and meaning no more than avd, κατά,
παρά. The first two have, however, the
corresponding adjectives ἀνάντης and
κατάντης in Classical Greek. Uphill,
downhill, along-hill, and across will give
the sense —we need not* inquire too
closely into the difference between the
last two. The line has attained a fame,
perhaps beyond its merits, as an imita-
tion of the sound of the stamping feet.

118. Gerlach suggests that the special
mention of oaks may be significant, as

121. HuidNouc 1).

122. ἑλκόμεναι D (κ p. ras.) Ὁ.

the ritual use of that wood is found
both among Greeks and Germans. The
latter acc. to Tacitus burnt their famous
dead certis lignis. It is safer to see no
more than an allusion to the fact that,
if we may judge from modern times,
the forests of the Troas were almost
exclusively of oaks. ‘The road from
Bounarbashi to Alexandria Troas leads
through an almost uninterrupted forest
of these [valonea] oaks,’ Barker Webb
in Schliemann J//ios p. 116, where three
other species are mentioned.

120. O1anAHiccontec, splitting ; οὕτως
᾿Αρίσταρχος, ἄλλοι δὲ “ διαπλίσσοντες ᾽᾿ διὰ
τοῦτ, Did. This is evidently in allusion
to ¢ 318 ἐὺ δὲ πλίσσοντο πόδεσσιν of the
ambling gait of mules; but it could
hardly be used of men. (Heyne with
Schol. T takes it to mean setting their

Jeet apart, εὖ διαβάντες, for the effort.)

121. ϑατεῦντο, tore up in the violence
of their efforts, as f 394. The explana-
tion of the scholia ἐμέριζον βαδίζουσαι,
measured by their paces, is gratuitously
artificial and does not suit the Homeric
use of the verb.

122. ἐλϑόχκεναι with gen., eager for
(to reach) the plain, as & 276, € 210,
ξ 42. Cf. ἐπειγόμενος “Apnos etc., H. G.
§ 156] ὦ. The variant ἑλκόμεναι πεδίοιο
dragging across the plain would be worth
consideration, were it not for the re-
stricted use of the mid. ἕλκεσθαι, which
is used only of pulling out with the
hand (one’s own hair or sword).

IAIAAOC Ψ (χχπὴ 481

πάντες δ᾽ ὑλοτόμοι φιτροὺς φέρον: ws γὰρ ἀνώγει
Μηριόνης θεράπων ἀγαπήνορος ᾿Ιδομενῆος.

καδ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἀκτῆς βάλλον ἐπισχερώ, ἔνθ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
φράσσατο llatpoxrwe μέγα ἠρίον ἠδὲ οἵ αὐτῶι. 126
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ πάντη. παρακάββαλον ἄσπετον ὕλην,
αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
αὐτίκα Μυρμιδόνεσσι φιλοπτολέμοισι κέλευσε
χαλκὸν ζώννυσθαι, ζεῦξαι δ᾽ ὑπ᾽ ὄχεσφιν ἕκαστον

[7 ΄ ,’ v » ’ / »
ἱππσπτοὺυς" Ob ὃ ὠρνυντο και ἐν τευχεσσιν ἔδυνον,

ia » Ss /
εἴατ᾽ ἄρ᾽ αὖθι μένοντες ἀολλέες.

ἀν δ᾽ ἔβαν ἐν δίφροισι παραιβάται ἡνίοχοί τε.
πρόσθε μὲν ἱππῆες, μετὰ δὲ νέφος εἵπετο πεζῶν,
μυρίοι: ἐν δὲ μέσοισι φέρον Πάτροκλον ἑταῖροι.
θριξὶ δὲ πάντα νέκυν καταείνυον, ἃς ἐπέβαλλον
κειρόμενοι" ὄπιθεν δὲ κάρη ἔχε δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
"Αὐδόσδε.

δ᾽ ὅτε χῶρον ἵκανον ὅθί σφισι πέφραδ᾽ ᾿

ἀχνύμενος: ἕταρον γὰρ ἀμύμονα πέμπ'

ees

125. Kad: καὶ P. 127. παρακάμβαλον GRSTUt Syr.
περικάββαλον (): περικάμβαλον Vr. A.
Wir-2ib: 130. χαλκῶι Vr. A and ap. Eust.
131. ὄρνυντο PR: ὄτρυνον Lips. 132. GN:
L Lips. Mose. 2. 133. μετὰ : μέγα ().
Ar. ““γαΐ. 1”’: καταείλυον ἔν τισι (Did.), Vr.

137. rap: o ἂρ (ἢ). || Gidec δῶ HJ Syr.

LA

Harl. a, Mosc.
129. κέλευε C() Mor. Bar.: μετηύδα
| 0’: Θ᾽ A (supr. ὃ.) CHST Syr.
én L. || ἐν: Gn D. || παραβάται
134. ἑταῖρον J. 135, KaTaeinucan
A Par. f. 136. ἔχε : cxéoe ST.
Vr. b, Par. e, and ἄλλοι Sch. A.

138.

ἵκανον : ἵκοντο A (yp. ἵκανον) H.

126. Apion, barrow, also in later prose
and poetry. Der. unknown.

against six instances of thematic forms
(ὥμνυε, -ov) ; while ὄρνυμι takes thematic

131. ἐν TeUxeccIN ἔϑυνον as Καὶ 254. formsin the imperf. active non-thematic
The verb is used also with és, xy 201, inthe mid. For the custom of cutting
w 498, and κατὰ τεύχεα A 222. off locks of hair and laying them on the

132. παραιβάται; here only; zap- corpse cf. 141 and 6 198. The women

BeBaws is used in a different sense in

of Albania still cut off their hair at the

A 522 (see note there). It is used as death of a near relative—but not, it
here of the fighting man in the chariot would seem, the men (von Hahn, 4/A.
by Eur. and Xen. (see Lex.). Stud. i. 150). A part cut straight from

135. Kataeinuon, clothed, a hyper- the living body represents the whole

bolical expression. The variant κατα-
είλυον wrapped up comes to the same
thing, cf. & 319 εἰλύσω ψαμάθοισιν. The
form. eivu- for ἕννυ- (Feo- vu) is late Ionic

man, who thus offers himself as an escort
to the shades. So when the witch got
possession of a fresh-cut hair or nail-
paring she had the victim in her power.

(ἐπείνυσθαι Herod.) and is not found For other instances of the custom see
again in H., though εἱμένος is very near. Tylor, Prim. Culture ii. 364; Rohde,
The long stem in fact occurs only in Psyche, p.16; Frazer, Paws. iv. p. 136.—
ἕννυσθαι. ἕννυτο, three times and twice In 135-39 and 166-70 we have two
respectively in Od. As between the sequences of five purely dactylic lines,
thematic -είνυον and non-thematic the longest in the J/iad. If any effect

-elvucay there seems to be little choice ;
but in the similar ὀμνυ- we have the
non-thematic ἀπώμνυ once only (8 377)

VOL. If

is consciously aimed at, it is that of the
marching, not the galloping or dancing,
rhythm. See on Z 511.

482 IAIAAOC Ψ (xxi)

κάτθεσαν, αἶψα δέ οἱ μενοεικέα νήεον ὕλην.
ἔνθ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ἄλλ᾽ ἐνόησε ποδάρκης δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς" 140
στὰς ἀπάνευθε πυρῆς ξανθὴν ἀπεκείρατο χαίτην,
τήν pa Σπερχειῶι ποταμῶι τρέφε τηλεθόωσαν"
ὀχθήσας δ᾽ ἄρα εἶπεν ἰδὼν ἐπὶ οἴνοπα πόντον᾽
ὡ Σπερχεί᾽, ἄλλως σοί γε πατὴρ ἠρήσατο Τ]ηλεὺς
κεῖσέ με νοστήσαντα φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν 145
σοί τε κόμην κερέειν ῥέξειν θ᾽ ἱερὴν ἑκατόμβην,
πεντήκοντα δ᾽ ἔνορχα παρ᾽ αὐτόθι μῆλ᾽ ἱερεύσειν
ἐς πηγάς, ὅθι τοι τέμενος βωμός τε θυήεις.
ὡς ἠρᾶθ᾽ ὁ γέρων, σὺ δέ οἱ νόον οὐκ ἐτέλεσσας.
νῦν δ᾽, ἐπεὶ οὐ νέομαί γε φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν, 150
Πατρόκλωι ἥρωϊ κόμην ὀπάσαιμι φέρεσθαι."
ὡς εἰπὼν ἐν χερσὶ κόμην ἑτάροιο φίλοιο
θῆκεν, τοῖσι δὲ πᾶσιν ὑφ᾽ ἵμερον ὦρσε γόοιο.
καί νύ κ᾽ ὀδυρομένοισεν ἔδυ φάος ἠελίοιο,
εἰ μὴ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς αἷψ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνονι εἶπε παραστάς" 1δ

\

139, NHNEON Mosc. 2, Eust. 143. eine fee ὃν μεγαλήτορα θυμὸν () Vr. τὶ
144. ἠράςατο (). 141. αὐτόφι PRSTU Par. ace g: αὐτίκα 1), yp. Par. ἃ,
ἐν ἄλλωι A: aver Vr. Ὁ. 148. narac J. || Boone le “βωμός Pm), 152 om.

Dt Lips.t 153. Up’: ἐφ᾽ H. 154 om. J.

140. This is a characteristically ἄλλος, see note on Ὁ 128. It may here

Odyssean phrase, recurring in J/. only
in 193 below.

141. Compare Aisch. Cho. 6-7 πλόκα-
μον ᾿Ινάχωι θρεπτήριον, τὸν δεύτερον δὲ
τόνδε πενθητήριον, where the mourning
lock and nurture lock are distinct. The
πλόκαμος θρεπτήριος was usually cut off
on ‘coming of age.’ Achilles still wears
it because he left his home while quite
young. Cf. Pausan. 1. 37. ὃ ἀγάλματα
δὲ ἐπὶ τῶι ποταμῶι, Μνησιμάχης, τὸ δὲ
ἕτερον ἀνάθημα κειρομένου οἱ τὴν κόμην
τοῦ παιδὸς ἐπὶ τῶι Κηφισῶι. καθεστάναι
δὲ ἐκ παλαιοῦ καὶ τοῖς πᾶσι τοῦτο “Ελλησι
τῆι ‘Ounpov τις ἂν τεκμαίροιτο ποιήσει,
ὃς τὸν Πηλέα εὔξασθαί φησι τῶι Σπερχειῶι
κερεῖν ἀνασωθέντος ἐκ Tpolas ᾿Αχιλλέως
τὴν κόμην. See also vill. 20. 3; 41. 8,
and for further instances, ancient and
modern, Frazer’s note on the last passage.
The scholia shew that the meaning of the
act was quite obscure to the authorities
on which they are based.

144. ἄλλως = μάτην as the scholia
observe, quoting Eur. Med. 1030, Ar.
iiqu. 11; the usage is common in Attic
prose as well as poetry. Fick refers the
word in this sense to *ddvos = ἠλεός, Aeol.

be referred to the ordinary use of ἄλλος,
in other wise than what proves to be the
reality ; but it is equally likely that
from passages like this a confusion be-
tween the two words was established.
147. nap’ αὐτόθι, see note on M 302.
ἔνορχα. τέλεια, ‘males without blemish ’
of the Jewish ritual. ἱερεύςειν ἐς πηγάς,
ef. X 35 τὰ δὲ μῆλα λαβὼν ἀπεδειροτόμησα
ἐς βόθρον. The phrase mayimplyan actual
dropping of the victims into the water, cf.
132, but need not necessarily mean more
than that the blood is allowed to run in.
148. πηγάς, here waters, as often in
later Greek (e.g. Aisch. Pers. 311), not
sources ; for Phthia lies "ΕΝ on the
lower part of the Spercheios (W.-M. on
Eur. Here. 390). This of course does not
apply to X 147, as ἀναΐσσουσι proves.
151. éndcauu, the opt. expresses a
wish, representing a more deferential
mood than ὀπάσω, ‘I should like to give
it,’ ‘may I be allowed to give it’ (ef.
H. G. ὃ 299 d). é€peceai, to go tts way,
a pleonastic use, see note on Φ 120.
154. For the use of the dat. with €du
cf. B 413. The line recurs 7 220, ¢ 226,
ef. y 241.

IAIAAOC Ψ (xxi) 183

“᾿Ατρεΐδη, σοὶ yap τε μάλιστά ye λαὸς ᾿Αχαιῶν

πείσονται μύθοισι" γόοιο μὲν ἔστι καὶ σαι,

νῦν δ᾽ ἀπὸ πυρκαϊῆς σκέδασον καὶ δεῖπνον ἄνωχθι

ὅπλεσθαι" τάδε δ᾽ ἀμφὶ πονησόμεθ᾽ οἷσι μάλιστα

κήδεός ἐστι νέκυς" παρὰ δ᾽ οἵ τ᾽ ἀγοὶ ἄμμι μενόντων. 160
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ τό γ᾽ ἄκουσεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Λγαμέμνων,

αὐτίκα λαὸν μὲν σκέδασεν κατὰ νῆας ἐΐσας,

κηδεμόνες δὲ παρ᾽ αὖθι μένον καὶ νήεον ὕλην,

ποίησαν δὲ πυρὴν ἑκατόμπεδον ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα,

ἐν δὲ πυρῆι ὑπάτηι νεκρὸν θέσαν ἀχνύμενοι κῆρ. 165

156. γάρ: uén CDHJPRU Harl. a, Vr. b, Mose. 2. || re: re ἢ. 159. τὰ
ὃέ τ᾽ G. || ἀμφιπονηςάμεθ᾽ U. 160 followed in Pap. ἃ by a line containing
Jeutoneccked[. ΠΟ τὸ π΄: τόθ Vr.. A. 162 followed in Pap. ἃ by a line
containing Jantexata κλιας κ[ (svpr. ct over 1a). 163. ἡγεμόνες Vr. A.
παρ᾽ αὖϑι : καταυθι Pap. λ. 164. ἑκατόλιποδον (H supr.) LRS (Lips. supr.):
ἑκατόνπεδον P. 165. Pap. ἃ has]———[ ]expo[: the faint letters marked
—-—-—are read aku by Grenfell-Hunt, nat by van L. || The line is followed by
another containing Jatayepcinaunca{. ᾿

156. col . . μύθοιςοι, cf. A 160 ro to the same suspicion as ὠκέα, βαθέη

. ἐπέεσσιν, which differs, however, be- (from WxeFia, βαθεξιη). Some, ace. to
cause the weak ro. may be regarded as Herodianos, regarded it as a gen., ‘is
virtually a possessive, thy words. This a matter of grief,’ but this predicative
cannot be the case with coi, which is use of the gen. is Latin rather than
in apposition with μύθοισι by a sort of | Homeric (H. G. ὃ 148). of τ᾽ adroi, se.
. ‘whole-and-part’ figure. λαὸς... nei- εἰσίν, of being the rel. Ar. (καὶ σχεδὸν
cONTal, as B 278, ete. ἅπαντες, Did.) understood the letters to

157. γόοιο . . acai, the connexion is stand for οἱ rayol, but apart from the
“they may, for me (καί), take their fill hardly Homeric use of the article the
of lament; but for the moment,’ etc.; word ταγός does not occur in H., and
i.e. I do not wish to cut their mourning where it is found in Attic it always has

short, but now is not the time for it. a. (We have τἄγοῦχος however, Aisch.
The idea is expanded in T 155 ff. (T 171 Hum. 296.) The fragment of an addi-
=158 ; for ὅπλεσθαι see on T 172). tional line in Pap. has been variously

159. ἀμφὶ nonHcéuce’, not dudirovn- restored; ἠδ᾽ of xndeudves: σκέδασον δ᾽

σόμεθ᾽ as La R. and others write, on ἀπὸ λαὸν ἅπαντα, or van [8 οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα
account of the caesura. Gu@iisadverbial, κηδεμόνες σκεδασάντων λαὸν ἅπαντα will
all round expressing carefulness, as in give something like the original, unless
ἀμφὶ μάλα φράζεσθε Σ 254, just our‘look 100 ended differently.

at the question all round.’ Cf. v 307, 162. The added line in Pap. X is
where ἀμφεπονεῖτο may equally well be evidently κάπνισσάν τε κατὰ κλισίας Kal
ἀμφ᾽ ἐπονεῖτο. δεῖπνον ἕλοντο (=B 399).

160. κήδεος -- κήδειος, a family grief ; 164. ἑκατόμπεδον, not ἑκατόμποδον

the notion of grief, which prevailsin the as some editors read, in deference to
subst. (see N 464), is in the adj. develop- the supposed demands of analogy. πεῦ-
ing that of family tie, though always _ is the original weak stem (G. Meyer Gr.
in connexion with mourning. So xKHde- ὃ 10, n. 3), as we see from πεζός, dpyupé-
“χιόνες (163)=kindred mourners. For πεῖα, Lat. ped-, as well as from inscrip-
the double form of the adj. cf. χρύσεος tions and the best Ms. tradition of Pindar
by χρύσειος. But the dropping of the. ; and Herod. The temple at Athens
(after passing into a semi-vowel) is ~ which preceded the Parthenon was called
curious where it does not form part of — the ἑκατόμπεδον.

an original diphthong; the primary 165. The restoration of the added line
form being κήδεσ-ιο-ς. Itis thussubject in Pap. ἃ is not clear. κατὰ χερσὶν

484

IAIAAOC Ψ (xx)

πολλὰ δὲ ἴφια μῆλα καὶ εἰλίποδας ἕλικας βοῦς

πρόσθε πυρῆς ἔδερόν ake; καὶ ἄμφεπον᾽ ἐκ δ᾽ ἄρα πάντων

δημὸν ἑλὼν ἐκάλυψε νέκυν μεγάθυμος ᾿Αχιλλεὺς

ἐς πόδας ἐκ κεφαλῆς, περὶ δὲ δρατὰ σώματα νήει.
ἐν δ᾽ ἐτίθει μέλιτος καὶ ἀλείφατος ἀμφιφορῆας, 170
πρὸς λέχεα κλίνων: πίσυρας δ᾽ ἐριαύχενας ἵππους

ἐσσυμένως ἐνέβαλλε πυρῆι μεγάλα στεναχίζων.

ἐννέα τῶι γε ἄνακτι τραπεζῆες κύνες ἧσαν"

καὶ μὲν τῶν ἐνέβαλλε πυρῆι δύο δειροτομήσας,

δώδεκα δὲ Τρώων μεγαθύμων υἱέας ἐσθλοὺς 1

~I
an

χα SEY δηϊόων" κακὰ δὲ φρεσὶ μήδετο ἔργα.

ἐν δὲ πυρὸς “μένος ἧκε σιδήρεον, ὄφρα νέμοῦτον

τον τ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔπειτα φίλον. δ᾽ ὀνόμηνεν ἑταῖρον"

“ χαῖρέ fel, ὦ Πάτροκλε, καὶ εἰν ᾿Αἴδαο δόμοισι"

πάντα γὰρ ἤδη τοι τετελεσμένα ὥσπερ ὑπέστην. 180

δώδεκα μὲν Τρώων μεγαθύμων υἱέας ἐσθλοὺς

τοὺς ἅμα σοὶ πάντας πῦρ ἐσθίει"

δώσω

“Ἕκτορα δ᾽ οὔ τι

Πριαμίδην πυρὶ δαπτέμεν, ἀλλὰ κύνεσσιν."

δ ’ ΄, Ἢ
ὡς hat ἀπειλήσας: τὸν δ᾽ οὐ κύνες ἀμφεπένοντο,

ἀλλὰ

κύνας μὲν ἄλαλκε Διὸς θυγάτηρ ᾿Αφροδίτη

185

169. ὁρατὰ:
114. πυρὶ CPU

184. ἀμφεγένοντο J.

τὰ πολλὰ τῶν ὑπομνημάτων Opera, Did.
Vr. bd. || μεγάλως P. || cronayizwn CD (p. ras.) JL (ΡῚ Ὁ.
178. ὥμωξεν ὃ᾽ ἢ. || φίλον T CDQ.
ὥεπερ ST Syr. Par. a? e f, ἐν ἄλλωι A: τελέω τὰ πάροιθεν 2.

172. nupi CPSU
173-74 om. Dt.
180. τετελεςλιένα
182. Tes τοῦ ΟἿ:

ἀμησάμενοι OY -ἥσαντο agrees with (2 165
(κόπρος) THY pa κυλινδόμενος καταμήσατο
χερσὶν ἑῆισ. Van L. completes καὶ
κονίην. . ἀμησάμενοι κεφαλῆφι, but the
καί joining the two participles is not
satisfactory. Perhaps καὶ κονίην κατὰ
χερσὶν ἀμήσαντ᾽ αἰθαλόεσσαν (cf. Σ 28).

166=I 466, q.v.

168. See App. L, § 7.

171. κλίνων evidently implies the
pointed amphora, meant to be stuck
into the ground or leant against a wall.
This practice survived in the Attic
funeral λήκυθοι, small pointed jars ranged
round the bier of the dead.

176. Compare ® 19. It is not to be
supposed that by the word κακά the
poet means to pass any ethical criticism
on his Achilles. Such a judgment would
be quite against the Epic style (see note
on T 463). The word means only that
what he did was ill work for his victims ;
in H 478 κακὰ μήδετο μητίετα Ζεύς there

is certainly no moral condemnation of
Zeus.

177. ciOHpeon,
ID 52: 28 901:
B 780.

179-80=19-20, but for the change
to Tetehecuéna ὥσπερ from τελέω τὰ
πάροιθεν, which circumstances seem to
demand. The recurrence of most Mss.
to the former phrase may be due both
to a reminiscence and to the desire to
avoid the hiatus.

184-91 are rejected by Fisi and
Diintzer, chiefly because they anticipate
the events of the next book—the drag-
ging of Hector in 187 and the ransoming
which is indicated by the πρίν of 190.
Other difficulties are the appearance of
Aphrodite, who nowhere else has any
special regard for Hector, the effect ap-
parently attributed to the oil of prevent-
ing the skin from being torn, and_the
curious idea that the spot on which

relentless, cf. P 424,
νέμοιτο, feed wpon,

IAIAAOC Ψ (xxi) 485

v \ / e , \ a . ,
ἤματα καὶ νύκτας, ῥοδόεντι δὲ χρῖεν ἐλαίωι

ἀμβροσίωι, ἵνα μή μιν ἀποδρύφοι ἑλκυστάζων.
lol ΄ » ΄
τῶι δ᾽ ἐπὶ κυάνεον νέφος ἤγαγε Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων
> / / 4 \ “-“ “
οὐρανόθεν πεδίονδε, κάλυψε δὲ χῶρον ἅπαντα,
ὅσσον ἐπεῖχε νέκυς, μὴ πρὶν μένος ἠελίοιο 190
, ? > \ \ / y OX /
σκήλει᾽ ἀμφὶ περὶ χρόα ἴνεσιν ἠδὲ μέλεσσιν.
O\ \ “ > / “- Μ
οὐδὲ πυρὴ Ι]ατρόκλου ἐκαίετο τεθνηῶτος
/ -“
ἔνθ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ἄλλ᾽ ἐνόησε ποδάρκης δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς"
στὰς ἀπάνευθε πυρῆς δοιοῖς ἠρῶτ᾽ ἀνέμοισι,
Bopéne καὶ “Ζεφύρωι, καὶ ὑπίσχετο ἱερὰ καλά: 195
πολλὰ δὲ καὶ σπένδων χρυσέωι δέπαϊ λιτάνευεν
ἐλθέμεν, ὄφρα τάχιστα πυρὶ φλεγεθοίατο νεκροί,

186. χρεῖςεν H.

TEONEI@TOC ὥ.

νεκρόν CGJPRT Syr. Harl. a.

191. cxHAer (ckHAer) ADT Syr.: ςκύλει J:
192. καίετο CGJPRSTU Harl. a, Vr.
195. Unicyeto ACPRTU:
in Pap. ἃ by one ending JNeKkatapun (?).
197. €Xeein CJTU Harl. a, Mosc. 2, Vr.

cKHAH(1) 9).

A. τεθνηῶτος JPQRSU (A supr.):

Unécxeto 2. || This line is followed
196. xpuc® J. || ἐλ(λ)ιτάνευεν DH.
A, yp. A. || πυρῆ J Mose. 2, Harl. a.

Hector’s body lies should be hidden,
though no such miracle is noticed in
Q 15 ff. On the other hand, von Christ
remarks that the emphatic Πατρόκλου in
192 implies that some one else has been
the subject of the preceding lines. The
appearance of Aphrodite does not imply
any special regard ; she acts with Apollo
because these two are the leading patrons
of Troy. The cloud in 188 is perhaps a
way of saying that Phoibos, as sun-god,
prevents the sun from shining on the
body, and does not oblige us to suppose
that the poet conceived a dense fog as
filling the hut. The case then is not
very strong except against 187, which is
indefensible ; but the lines. with their
unexplained anticipations of ©, rather
interrupt than help the narrative, and
would be better away.—dGugenénonTo,
see note on Φ 203.

186. Huata καὶ νύκτας, this order of
words is found only here and κ 142;
elsewhere night always comes first. po-
ϑόεντι May mean only fragrant; or there
may be an allusion to the ancient idea
that oil of roses was an antiseptic ; see
Pausan. ix. 41. 7 τὸ δὲ ἐκ τῶν ῥόδων
ποιούμενον (μύρον), εἰ καὶ ἀγάλματα εἰρ-
γασμένα ξύλου χρίοις, ῥύεται καὶ ταῦτα
σηπεδόνος. As with λειριόεις H. uses
the adj., though the substantive from

which it is derived is not mentioned
in the poems, but makes its first ap-
pearance in Greek literature in the
Hymn to Demeter.

187. aGnodpu@oi seems to be an aorist,
δρύπτω being the only known form of the
pres. It does not recur in Greek. The
pres. would, however, suit the sense
better, as the dragging is a continuous
action.

191. Fick remarks that for ckHder’ we
should read σκείλει᾽, the regular form
from σκέλλω, as there is no trace of a
pres. σκάλλω. The mistake may have
arisen from misunderstanding a primitive
SKEAEI. Gugi περί, adverbial, ἵνεςιν
being a loc. dative to be taken with χρόα,
the flesh upon the sinews.

195. Βορέηι, see on I 5. For the
new line in Pap. ἃ Ludwich conjectures
πολλὰ μὲν εὐχόμενος μάλα τοὺς ὥτρυνε
κατ᾽ ἀρήν. But the state of the fragment
is such that to judge from the facsimile
(in Grenfell and Hunt, Greek Papyri τι.
Pl. 111.) Menrad’s ἀρνῶν πρωτογόνων ῥέξειν
κλειτὴν ἑκατόμβην is by no means im-
possible.

197. If there were any authority for
the trans. use of φλεγεθοίατο, the variant
νεκρόν would be preferable to Nexpoi, as
it would be natural that the body of
Patroklos alone should be noticed.

480 IAIAAOC Ψ (Χχχιπ)

ὕλη τε σεύαιτο καήμεναι. ὠκέα δ᾽ Ἶρις
ἀράων ἀΐουσα μετάγγελος HAO” ἀνέμοισιν.
οἱ μὲν ἄρα Ζεφύροιο δυσαέος ἁθρόοι ἔνδον 200
θέουσα δὲ Ἶρις ἐπέστη

τοὶ δ᾽ ὡς ἴδον ὀφθαλμοῖσι,

εἰλαπίνην δαίνυντο"
βηλῶι ἔπι λιθέωι.
πάντες ἀνήϊξαν κάλεόν τέ μιν εἰς ἕκαστος"

ἡ δ᾽ αὖθ᾽ ἕξεσθαι μὲν ἀνήνατο, εἶπε δὲ μῦθον"
“ovy ἕδος" εἶμι γὰρ αὖτις ἐπ᾽ ᾿Ὠκεανοῖο ῥέεθρα, 205
Αἰθιόπων ἐς γαῖαν, ὅθι ῥέξουσ᾽ ἑκατόμβας

ἀθανάτοις, ἵνα δὴ καὶ ἐγὼ μετωδαίσομαι ἱρῶν.

ἀλλ᾽ ᾿Αχιλεὺς Βορέην ἠδὲ Ζέφυρον κελαδεινὸν

an a ie ς \ /
ἐλθεῖν ἀρᾶται, καὶ ὑπίσχεται ἱερὰ καλά,

" / a ” nr
ὄφρα πυρὴν ὄρσητε καήμεναι, ἣν ἔνι κεῖται

210

/ > 499
Πάτροκλος, τὸν πάντες ἀναστενάχουσιν Αχαιοί.

198. τε ςεύαιτο (Ar.
(supr. ε) RST (Par. Ὁ g supr.):

co)

2) Syr., ἐν ἄλλωι A:
τ᾿ écceveto D*L Par. g!:
Harl. a, Mose. 2 (swp7. or over a) Par. b' ἢ :
(τε ceuainto Heyne) ap. Did. || ὠκέα δ᾽: wKa Ve Pap. 2.

Teccevaitro P: τ᾽ éccevaito AGQ
τ᾽ éc(c)eUato CHJU
|| ὕλην τ᾽ ἐεςεύοντο

200-02 om. Vr. Ὁ.

T ἐςςεύοντο [D!,

201. UnéctH HQS. 202. τοὶ O: οἵ ὃ᾽ Q. 204. ave’: au Syr. || εἶπέ τε
ΡΈΕΙ συ 1: Ἃ 205. ateic CGQ: ate: A (yp. attic) Η. || ἐπ᾽ : an’ 6. ||
ῥοάων Ὁ. 206. ἐς γαῖαν : γρ. ἐς OAUON, ὡς αἱ ἀπὸ τῶν πόλεων, Did. || ῥέξους᾽
Mose. 2. 209. Unicyeto Lips.

198. The variants τ΄ ἐσσεύαιτο and then follow that the wrong form ὠκέα

τ᾿ ἐσσεύατο are relics of an original τε
coevaito. This verb is always treated
metrically as if it began with a double
consonant, and this was expressed graphi-
cally. ἐσσεύατο is evidently the correc-
tion of a grammarian who was offended
that an aor. opt. should have what he
thought was an augment. If Heyne
is right in conjecturing that there was
a variant ὕλην τε σεύαιντο, it would mean
start the wood a-burning; the aor. is
both trans. and intrans. This would
naturally go with νεκρόν in 197. For
ὠκέα δ᾽ Ἴρις Bentley conj. ὦκα δὲ Εἴρις,
which is strikingly confirmed by the
reading of Pap. \. But it is clear that
the name, though it probably had the
F, lost it at a very early period. The
only passage which requires it is Θ 409
(=2 77, 159); in all other cases where
a hiatus precedes, it is in the diaeresis
after the first or fourth foot. ‘The very
common ὠκέα Ips at the end of a line is
rather an argument against the F ; for
ὠκέα is a most suspicions form for ὠκεῖα
(ὠκέξια), and practically without analogy.
It would seem that we should rather
read ὠκέϊ᾽ Ἴρις. (It would, however,

had crept in early enough to enable it
to be introduced here.) In E 353, 365,
the F is inadmissible; cf. also A 27.
This is the only case where Iris goes on
an errand without being sent by a god.

200. Zepupoio Endon, like Διὸς ἔνδον
Y 18. Zephyros is invariably spoken of
as a stormy and dangerous wind in H.,
except in 6 567, where its coolness is
alluded to. It must be admitted that
this scene falls below the dignity of its
surroundings; there is an unmistakable
touch of humour in the party of the
winds and their behaviour to the goddess.
This may be an intentional relief to the
gloom of the funeral, or may possibly
betray the hand of an interpolator.

205. οὐχ ἔθος, cf. A648. For ῥέεθρα
C has ῥοάων, a possible reading, see Τ' 5.

206. For the feasts of the gods in
Aithiopia cf. A 423. We must suppose
that Iris heard Achilles from Aithiopia,
and has come thence.

207. ueTadaicoual ἱρῶν, share the
sacrificial feast. Properly μεταδαίνυμαι
= dine among (X 498), and ἱρῶν is a
sort of abl. gen., on the sacrifices, the
constr. being that of μεταλαμβάνειν etc.

φ'

IAIAAOC Ψ (xxirr) 487

ς \ Tin “ἐδ > a? > / \ ᾽ σον ἃ
ἡ μὲν ἄρ ὡς εἰποῦσ ἀπεβήσετο, τοὶ δ᾽ ὀρέοντο
» -“ / / /
ἠχῆι θεσπεσίηι, νέφεα κλονέοντε πάροιθεν.
5 / A / \ ΄“-
αἶψα δὲ πόντον ἵκανον ἀήμεναι, ὦρτο δὲ κῦμα

te
-
οι

a « a 7 eer.
πνοιῆι ὕπο λυγυρῆι᾽ Τροίην δ᾽ ἐρίβωλον ἱκέσθην,
a ᾽ ‘ -
ἐν δὲ πυρῆι πεσέτην, μέγα δ᾽ ἴαχε θεσπιδαὲς πῦρ.
> fal »
παννύχιοι δ᾽ ἄρα τοί γε πυρῆς ἄμυδις φλόγ᾽ ἔβαλλον
φυσῶντες λιγέως: ὁ δὲ πάννυχος ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
χρυσέου ἐκ κρητῆρος, ἔχων δέπας ἀμφικύπελλον,
f , n -“
οἶνον ἀφυσσόμενος χαμάδις χέε, δεῦε δὲ γαῖαν, 220
\ / lel “
ψυχὴν κικλήσκων []ατροκλῆος δειλοῖο.
ὡς δὲ πατὴρ οὗ παιδὸς ὀδύρεται ὀστέα καίων,
νυμφίου, ὅς τε θανὼν δειλοὺς ἀκάχησε τοκῆας,
"nN ᾽ \ c / ΕῚ ΄ > / ,ὔ
ὡς ᾿Αχιλεὺς ἑτάροιο ὀδύρετο ὀστέα καίων,
ἑρπύζων παρὰ πυρκαϊὴν ἀδινὰ στεναχίζων. 225

212. ἀπεβήςατο DJR Bar. Harl. a Lips.! Vr. Ὁ: GneBricato §. 213
πνοιῆι ὑπὸ λιγυρῆι νέφεα κλονέοντες SniceeN Pseudo-Plut. 129. 18. 216
πυρὶ CD'PQSU Syr. Vr. A. 219. χρύςεον R. || κρατῆρος J. ἔχων JPRSTU
ἐν ἄλλωι A: ἑλὼν OQ. 220. G&puccdmenoc (A supr.) DG: d@uccduenoc 2.
|| χεῦε 6. 222. ὀδύρετο (). 223. ὥς τε Ὁ. 224. This is preceded in
Pap. ἃ by χηρωςενοϊ[ὲ γυναῖκα μυχῶι θαλάμοιο νέοιο] αρη[τὸ]νϑετ[οκεῦςι γόον
καὶ πένθος ἔθηκεν) ; cf. P 36-7. ‘The second line is quoted in this place by Plut.
Cons. ad Ap. 30, p. 117 c, adding also μοῦνος τηλύγετος, πολλοῖσιν Eni κτεάτεςειν

(see I 482). 225. mapa: περὶ ὦ. |

= = = = = — —-

«τοναχίζων CP.

213. κλονέοντε, as T 492.

214. The use of the infin. ἀήμεναι is
far from clear. The sense seems to re-
quire ἀήμενοι, which is actually found in
Ap. Lex. The infin. can hardly be de-
fended by phrases like βῆ ἰέναι, ὦρτο
πέτεσθαι, etc., where the infin. repre-
sents the beginning of an action (stepped
to go, started to fly, etc.), cf. y 176 ὦρτο
δ᾽ ἐπὶ λιγὺς οὖρος ajuevac. We can only
understand they came to the sea so as to
blow wpon τί.

216. A comparison of M 177, 441, O
597, Ὑ 490 shews that eecmdaéc has no
peculiar significance here as indicating
the divine power which has raised the
flames It is a standing epithet of πῦρ,
evidently based on the habit which
fire has of overcoming all human efforts.

217. ἄμυδις may either mean in
concert, or, with ἔβαλλον, beat the flame
together by blowing from different sides.
If the former is preferred, φλόγ᾽ ἔβαλλον
seems rather bare—‘ beat wpon, lit. threw
at, as though the blasts were missiles,’
Monro.

220. The pres. apuccéuenoc, indicating
a series of acts, is preferable to ἀφυσσά-

μενος. Cf. Τ' 295, Καὶ 579. For the same
reason ἔχων (219) is better than ἑλών.

221. ὅτι δωδεκασύλλαβος καὶ ἐκ σπον-
δείων, An. It is not legitimate to
conclude that any particularly solemn
effect is aimed at; for in the first place
the original forms were certainly Πατρο-
k\éFeos and possibly δεελοῖο ; and in
the second there is no lack of solemnity
in dactylic lines—see note on 135.

223. νυμφίου, cf. 7 65 ἄκουρον
νυμφίον ἐν μεγάρωι, μίαν olnv παῖδα λιπόν -
τα. We may conclude from this that
a man was called νύμῴφιος, bridegroom,
after his marriage until he had a son;
until he had thus provided for the con-
tinuance of his house he retained the
name which indicated that his marriage
had not yet attained its fulness. Thata

father should thus be deprived of male de-

scendants at the moment when he might
reasonably expect them would naturally
add to the poignancy of his grief.

225. ἑρπύζων evidently expresses the
weary movement of a broken-hearted
man. The verb is used again only of
Odysseus (vy 220) and Laertes (a 193)
with the same connotation.

488 IAIAAOC Ψ (xx)

7 / 5 / De 3 sh “-

ἦμος δ᾽ ἑωσφόρος εἶσι φόως ἐρέων ἐπὶ γαΐαν,
e / ld / Ψ ΘΝ
ὅν τε μέτα κροκόπεπλος ὑπεὶρ ἅλα κίδναται ἠώς,

τῆμος πυρκαϊὴ ἐμαραίνετο, παύσατο δὲ φλόξ.

οἱ δ᾽ ἄνεμοι πάλιν αὗτις ἔβαν oixovde νέεσθαι

Θρηΐκιον κατὰ πόντον: ὁ δ᾽ ἔστενεν οἴδματι θύων. 280
Πηλεΐδης δ᾽ ἀπὸ πυρκαϊῆς ἑτέρωσε λιασθεὶς

κλίνθη κεκμηώς, ἐπὶ δὲ γλυκὺς ὕπνος ὄρουσεν.

οἱ δ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐωνα ἀολλέες ἠγερέθοντο"

τῶν μιν ἐπερχομένων ὅμαδος καὶ δοῦπος ἔγειρεν,

ἕζετο δ᾽ ὀρθωθεὶς καί σφεας πρὸς μῦθον ἔειπεν" 235

“᾿Ατρεΐδη τε καὶ ἄλλοι ἀριστῆες Παναχαιῶν,

a \ \ ss fi J 10 ”
T P@TOv MEV κατα πυρκαιὴν σβέσατ αἰιἰσοπι OlVWL

ψ- - ͵7ὔ \ , Ὁ) \ 54
Tacay, ὁπόσσον ἐπέσχε συρος μενος" αὐτὰρ ETTELTA

if
ὀστέα Ἰ]ατρόκλοιο Μενοιτιάδαο λέγωμεν

221. ὑπὲρ R.

Mor. Vr. A.
236. ἀτρεῖθαι Harl. a, Mose. 2.

234. repeen Vr. A (yp. Ereipen): ὄρωρεν C.
237. αἴθοπα οἶνον 1).

229. ateic Ol). || ἕκαετος (8:7. Neeceat) Mor. Bar. 230.
κατὰ : μετὰ A supr. || evion AT: θείων PR.

232. κεκμηκὼς P Harl. a,
235. cpac R.

226. ἑωσφόρος is not an Epic but an
Attie form ; and if correct is a proof of
the lateness of this passage. The only
Epic form for ἕως is ἠώς (ἠώς), and the
synizesis is very violent (Pindar J. iv.
24 has ᾿Αωσφόρος as a dactyl however).
Hence Menrad (p. 170) conj. εὖτ᾽
joopopos εἷσι, and is followed by Fick
(avécpopos), and others. (Similarly in
Hes. Theog. 381 Rzach corrects τίκτ᾽
ἠοσφύρον for τίκτεν ἑωσφόρον of MSs.)
The change is less arbitrary than it
appears, for we find the sequence εὖτε

τῆμος With asyndeton also in ν 93
εὖτ᾽ ἀστὴρ ὑπερέσχε φαάντατος, ὅς τε
μάλιστα ἔρχεται ἀγγέλλων φάος ἠοῦς ἠρι-
γενείης, τῆμος δή, κτλ. Brandreth conj.
ἦμος δ᾽ ἀστὴρ εἷσι, supposing that ἑωσ-
φόρος is a gloss which has crept into the
text; this has been again conjectured
by Peppmiiller, van L., and finally
Agar. ici, cf. X 27; φόως ἐρέων,
B 49.

227. Much speculation as to the place
of origin of the Homeric poems has been
based upon this line and Q 13, which
seem always to be taken to mean that to
the poet the sun rises out of the sea; so
that he must have lived on an eastward
coast. But there is nothing of the sort
in the words; the dawn spreads over
the sea to any observer on the shore,
whether he looks N., E.,8., or W. The

addition of ἠϊόνας in Q 13 is enough to
prove this; evidently the dawn cannot
rise out of sea and land at once. Toa
dweller by the sea the glinting of the
early light on the waves is naturally the
most prominent phenomenon of dawn.
0 1= 695 “Has μὲν κροκόπεπλος ἐκίδνατο
πᾶσαν ἐπ᾽ alav would of course on the
same system prove that the poet did not
live on the sea at all. Compare T 1,
where Dawn ‘arises from the streams
of Ocean,’ a very different matter from
rising from the sea.

230. OpHikion κατὰ πόντον, on their
way to their home in Thrace; I 5 (see
note). οἴδματι evan, Φ 234,

232, éni. . Spoucen, leapt upon him,
a strong metaphor to express the over-
mastering power of sleep on the worn-
out man. So also w 343 (see note on 62).

233. A new day begins. of ἀμφ᾽
᾿Ατρεΐωνα, see on 1" 146.

237. The practice ef quenching the
pyre with wine was common in Rome as
in Greece; the provision NE-SVMPTVOSA-
RESPERSIO- is mentioned by Cicero (Legg.
ii. 24) among those which were borrowed
by the XII. Tables from the laws of Solon.
See also Virgil, den. vi. 226. It was an
innovation on the primitive use of milk
for ritual purposes. The law of Numa
was (Plin. xiv. 88) VINO-ROGVM-NE-
RESPARGITO.

lll

IAIAAOC Ψ (χχιμπ) 489
,
εὖ διαγινώσκοντες" ἀριφραδέα δὲ τέτυκται" 240
ἐν μέσσηι γὰρ ἔκειτο πυρῆι, τοὶ δ᾽ ἄλλοι ἄνευθεν
ἐσχατιῆι καίοντ᾽ ἐπιμίξ, ἵπποί τε καὶ ἄνδρες.
\ \ \ > , , ‘ ,ὕ -
καὶ τὰ μὲν ἐν χρυσέη: φιάληι καὶ δίπλακι δημῶι
θείομεν, εἰς ὅ κεν αὐτὸς ἐγὼν “Atde κεύθωμαι.
τύμβον δ᾽ οὐ μάλα πολλὸν ἐγὼ πονέεσθαι ἄνωγα, 245

> > > ΄ - » \ ‘ ‘ ᾽ ‘
ἀλλ᾽ ἐπιεικέα τοῖον: ἔπειτα δὲ καὶ τὸν ᾿Αχαιοὶ
εὐρύν θ᾽ ὑψηλόν τε τιθήμεναι, οἵ κεν ἐμεῖο

/ > / Ae / ”
δεύτεροι ἐν νήεσσι πολυκλήϊσι λίπησθε.

> ΄ se of

ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, of δ᾽ ἐπίθοντο ποδώκει Inrelwve.
πρῶτον μὲν κατὰ πυρκαϊὴν σβέσαν αἴθοπι οἴνωι, 250
ὅσσον ἐπὶ φλὸξ ἦλθε, βαθεῖα δὲ κάππεσε TéEbpy:

243 om. Ut. 244 oi. Rt. ἐγὼ OJP

240. διαγιγνώσκοντες AL, Syr.
Vr. A Par. ἃ 1: ἐν ἄλλωι ἰὼν A.
κεύϑωλιαι, οὐκ εὖ, Sch. T). 241. θ᾽
248. θεύτερον 1.

supr.) D. || ἐν ἄλλως κάππεςεν ὕλη A.

ἄϊοος Mose. 2.
γι. ἡ. ὑψηλά T.
250. κατὰ : rap I’.

KAevecoua Ar. A (τινὲς δὲ
ἑμοῖο GP) Vr. d.
πυρκαϊὰν (). 251. δὲ : Te (A

243. The φιάλη seems to be the same
as the ἀμφιφορεύς of (the spurious) 92 ;
for ἀμφίθετος in 270, 616 in all prob-
ability means fwo-handled (see Helbig,
H, E. p. 365 note). In any case it can
have borne no resemblance to the shallow
saucer-like φιάλη of classical art, for such
a vessel is quite unsuitable for keeping
bones in, nor could it be used on the fire
as the Homeric could—see ἀπύρωτος, 270.
The practice of keeping the ashes of the
dead in jars is common in several classes
of ancient tombs in Italy (Helbig, l.c.).
OinAaki ϑηχιῶι, a double layer of fat to
keep out air and moisture.

244, “Avo: kevewua, cf. μητρὸς δ᾽ ἐν
“Αἰδου καὶ πατρὸς KexevOdrow Soph. Ant.
[911], παρ᾽ “Acdac κεύθων Aj. 635, ὁ δὲ
θανὼν κεύθει κάτωθεν γῆς O. T. 968.
Were not the act. in H. always used
transitively, it would be tempting on
the analogy of these passages to read
κεκύθωμι: Bentley’s κεκύθωμαι may be
right. The local use of "Αἴδι seems to
indicate a later origin; seeon ἃ 8. A
has the curious variant κλεύθωμαι.,
which ace. to An. was supported by Ar.
and explained ἀντὶ τοῦ κελεύθωμαι, οἷον
πορεύομαι. This may perhaps have been
to avoid the purely local use, as with it
“Aide might be personal. But except in
Hesych. there is no other trace of such a
verb. A further mentions a variant ἰών
for ἐγώ, perhaps with the same object.

246. τοῖον qualifying an adj. or adverb
is found elsewhere only in Od. (θάμα
τοῖον a 209; σιγῆι τοῖον ὃ 776, ἡ 30;
θάνατος. . ἀβληχρὸς μάλα τοῖος ἃ 135,
y 282: πέλαγος μέγα τοῖον Ὕ 321; κερ-
δαλέον δὴ τοῖον o 451; σαρδάνιον μάλα
τοῖον υ 302). In all these cases the
general intention seems to be to leave
the qualification to the hearer, as in
our colloquial ‘as much as you like,’ or
‘ever so’—either because the speaker
does not care, or because he wants to
hint that he cannot find a word strong
enough. Here the sense is ‘as seemly
as you will—but not extravagant.’ The
same seems to be the case with σιγῆι,
but the other passages clearly imply
that the adjective is to be vaguely

intensified. Compare the use of τόσον
A 130 (with note). ἔπειτα, after my
death.

247. τιθήμεναι, infin. for imper. of 2nd
person, as is shown by λίπησθε. For the
form see 83. ᾿Αχαιοί may be taken as
ἃ voc., or better as a nom. in apposition
with the subject of the imper. (ὑμεῖς),
ἐμεῖο δεύτεροι, behind me. The constr.
with gen. is found also in Herod. i. 23
κιθαρωιδὸν τῶν τότε ἐόντων οὐδενὸς δεύτερον,
and occasionally in later Greek, always
in the metaphorical sense, inferior.

251. βαθεῖα is best taken as part of
the predicate, where the ash had fallen
deep.

490

IAIAAOC Ψ (Χχιπηᾳ)

, 5 € / > / 3 / Ν
κλαίοντες 6 ἑτάροιο ἐνηέος ὀστέα λευκὰ
, , [2
ἄλλεγον ἐς χρυσέην φιάλην καὶ δίπλακα δημὸον,
" lal /
ἐν κλισίηι δ᾽ ἐνθέντες ἑανῶι λιτὶ κάλυψαν.

τορνώσαντο δὲ σῆμα θεμείλιά τε προβάλοντο 255

» Ν / 5 \ N > \ la 54
ἀμφὶ πυρήν" εἶθαρ δὲ χυτὴν ἐπὶ γαῖαν ἔχευαν,

/ \ ‘ “ 4 J
χεύαντες δὲ TO σῆμα πάλιν κίον.

αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς

> a \ ov Nis oy Sieur
αὐτοῦ λαὸν EPUKE Kat ἵζανεν ευρυν ὠγῶώνα,

νηῶν δ᾽ ἔκφερ᾽ ἄεθλα,
ἵππους θ᾽ ἡμιόνους τε
ἠδὲ γυναῖκας ἐυζώνους

lal 5 " /
βοῶν τ᾽ ἴφθιμα κάρηνα
πολιόν τε σίδηρον.

λέβητάς τε τρίποδάς τε

260

e = \ A ΕΣ “5... ἢ
ἱππεῦσιν μὲν πρῶτα ποδώκεσιν aya ἄεθλα

a - 5 / f 2 2 an
θῆκε γυναῖκα ἄγεσθαι ἀμύμονα ἔργ᾽ εἰδυῖαν

Ἅ , /
Kal τρίποδ᾽ ὠτώεντα δυωκαιεικοσίμετρον

253. εὐλλεγον Mor. :
HPR: κλιείηιςσι 2,
oé A (supr. τ) RR. 256. ἔχευςαν Lips.!
262. immeUcin: τινὲς Ynnoici Sch. T. ||

ἔλλεγον Vr. A.
ὃ᾽ ἐνθέντες PR: δὲ θέντες 0.

254. ἐς κλισίην Vr. A. || KAIciH(t)
255. θεμέλια (). || TE:
259-61 ἀθ. Ar. Aph. 260. Θ᾽ om. T.

ἀγλαὰ δῶρα T.

254. The mound is evidently only a
cenotaph ; the bones are not to be laid
in it, like those of Hector who is in his
own land, but are kept in the hut to be
taken with those of Achilles to Thessaly.
The reading ἐν κλιςίηι 0° ἐνθέντες is on
the whole preferable to the vulg. ἐν
κλισίηισι δὲ θέντες. The corruption is a
very easy one (cf. ἐφθέγξατο for ἐκφθέγ-
ξατο Φ 213); and though the generaliz-
ing plur. is quite possible where only one
hut is meant, yet it gives an unsuitable
colour of indifference (almost ‘some hut
or other’).

255, τορνώςαντο, made round (ε 249),
i.e. drew the circle of the mound. ee-
χείλια, a circle of upright stones forming
a facing to the foot of the mound (hence
προβάλοντο)ῆ. We have an excellent
specimen of this construction in the
circle of upright stones surrounding the
site of the graves at Mykene, and
evidently intended as the revetment of
a tumulus which has since disappeared
(Tsountas-Manatt, pp. 108 ff.). Compare
also Herodotos’ description of the tomb
of Alyattes, i. 93 ἡ κρηπὶς μέν ἐστι λίθων
μεγάλων, τὸ δὲ ἄλλο σῆμα χῶμα γῆς.

257. κίον looks like an imperf., they
were going when Achilles stopped them.
In 2 801 it is, in the same connexion,
an aor., and so all the forms found in H.
may he (κιών, κιεῖν are the traditional
accents, and no pres. indic. κίω, ete., is

ever found before Aisch. Cho. 680). It
is not unlikely that before the addition
of the funeral games this line was con-
tinued by 2 3, αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεύς being the
catchword just as in A 664-762. Then
κίον gains its usual force.

258. ἀγῶνα, assembly, see O 428.

259-61 were athetized by Ar. and
Aph., but the scholia give no explanation.
Probably they were considered tauto-
logical, as the objects are all mentioned
again in the following lines, while other
prizes subsequently given are omitted
here. Only one horse (265), one mule
(268), and one ox (750) subsequently
appear. And no doubt the application
οἵ éx@epe to the larger animals in 260-61
was objected to, just as Schol. A on
263 objects to the application of ἄγεσθαι
to a tripod.

260. ἴφθιμα, A 3. κάρηνα, I 407:
houm . . capita, Virg. Aen. v. 61.

262. With ἱππεῦσιν the first part of
the compound nodexkecin must be taken
to have lost its significance. The variant
ἵπποισιν avoids this difficulty, but makes
the next line rather absurd.

263. Cf. I 128. γυναῖκα 4dreceai,
hiatus ilicitus. Either Bentley’s conj.
γυναῖκ᾽ ἀγαγέσθαι or Heyne’s γυναῖκά τ᾽
is probably right.

264. ὡτώεντα, with handles, see D378.
The correct form is doubtless οὐατόεντα,
as Heyne conjectured. This adj. is

IAIAAOC ¥ (xxii) 491

r / aA / “
TOL πρώτωι" ἀτὰρ αὖ τῶι δευτέρωι ἵππον ἔθηκεν 265
e 49 » / / e / /
ἑξετέ᾽ ἀδμήτην, βρέφος ἡμίονον κυέουσαν"
lal ; / /
αὐτὰρ τῶι TpiTaTwL ἄπυρον κατέθηκε λέβητα
/ / \ ΠΣ 7
καλόν, τέσσαρα μέτρα κεχανδότα, λευκὸν ἔτ᾽ αὔτως"
- nw ΄ r
τῶι δὲ τετάρτων θῆκε δύω χρυσοῖο τάλαντα,
πέμπτωι δ᾽ ἀμφίθετον φιάλην ἀπύρωτον ἔθηκε. 270
lal “ ’ »
στῆ δ᾽ ὀρθὸς καὶ μῦθον ἐν ᾿Λργείοισιν ἔειπεν"
,
““Arpeidn te καὶ ἄλλοι ἐυκνήμιδες ᾿Αχαιοί,
e a sy Μ) / n_? > » -
ἱππῆας τάδ᾽ ἄεθλα δεδεγμένα κεῖτ᾽ ἐν ἀγῶνι.
> \ ἴω ᾽ \ ” > rf > /
εἰ μὲν νῦν ἐπὶ ἄλλωι ἀεθλεύοιμεν ᾿Αχαιοΐ,
φ 3 x a \ fal \ / , =
ἢ τ ἂν ἐγὼ Ta πρῶτα λαβὼν κλισίηνδε φεροίμην" 275
¢ “A 4
ἴστε γὰρ ὅσσον ἐμοὶ ἀρετῆι περιβάλλετον ἵπποι:
> / , , > ΄ \ 5» ALN
ἀθάνατοί τε yap εἰσι, Ἰ]οσειδάων δὲ πόρ᾽ αὐτὸς
fa Aa. ΄ os
πατρὶ ἐμῶι Τ]ηλῆϊ, ὁ δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ἐμοὶ ἐγγυάλιξεν.
᾽ > 7 \ \ , , Jd
ἀλλ᾽ ἤτοι μὲν ἐγὼ μενέω καὶ μώνυχες ἵπποι:
/ \ / Ε] \ > / ΄ ,ὔ 7
τοίου yap κλέος ἐσθλὸν ἀπώλεσαν ἡνιόχοιο, 280
? / Ὁ - / / ce \ ”
ἡπίου, ὃ σφωῖν μάλα πολλάκις ὑγρὸν ἔλαιον

265. ἀτὰρ aU: αὐτὰρ CR: αὐτὰρ αὖ HP. 271. ἔθηκεν P (ἔειπεν P™).
272. atpetdai POR Syr.: atpeida Lips. || ἀριετῆες παναχαιῶν DT Harl. a, Cant.
Mosc. 2, Vr. b, yp. A. 273 om. Syr. || ἱππῆας : τινὲς inneda A. | τά τ᾽ Η.
OederueNa καὶ dedexueéna Ar. διχῶς. 277. αὐτὸς R Vr. A: αὐτοὺς 2. 280.
κλέος : ceénoc DGJPQRSTU Syr. Harl. a, yp. A. 281. 6: Sc A (Ὁ supr.
GJPRTU Syr. Harl. a, and ap. Did.

quoted from Kallimachos, and is found 192. αὔτως, as it was, i.e. in its

also in Simonides, 77. 245. In ϑυωκαιει-
Kociuetpon the μέτρον is evidently a
definite fluid measure, cf. 268, 741.
Hultsch identifies it with the Phoenician
standard, the saton.

266. GOuHTHN seems to imply that an
unbroken spirit was a recommendation
to the heroic cavalier. Naber and C.
Nauck have pointed out that we may
equally well read ἑξετέα δμητήν, and it
would be supposed that a six-year-old
would no longer be susceptible of break-
ing. In 655 we have the same phrase
with the addition of #7’ ἀλγίστη δαμάσα-
σθαι, which is most naturally taken as
exegetic of ἀδμήτην, and meaning that
this is the hardest age for breaking.
If we read δμητήν there, the line must

mean that the mule is the hardest of

animals to tame; this is possible, but
less Homeric.

267. ἄπυρον -- ἀπύρωτον 270, see on
1129;

268. Kexanddta, an anomalous form
for κεχονδότα, for which see note on 2

natural brightness.

269. For the small value of the
Homeric talent see App. I, § 28.

273. Whether we read dederuéna or
δεδεχμένα, the use of the verb awaiting
is unusual as applied to inanimate

things. Schol. T mentions a variant
ἱππεῦσι, with which δεδεγμένα was

taken as from δείκνυμι, on the analogy

of the Herodotean (not Epic) forms
ἔδεξα, ἐδέχθην (but see X 435).
274. ἐπὶ ἄλλωι, hiatus illicitus. Fick

follows Bothe in reading ἄλλωι ἔπ᾽.

277. αὐτός is evidently superior to
αὐτούς, and was conj. by Déderlein (ef.
499). This is the only passage in H.
where Poseidon is brought into any
special relation with the horse ; see on
Θ 433, Ψ 307, 584.

280. κλέος ἡνιόχοιο, glory of (con-
sisting in) α charioteer. The well-sup-
ported variant σθένος will be another
form of the familiar periphrasis with
Bin.

281. Cf. Θ 185 fff.

492 IAIAAOC Ψ (χχιπ)

χαιτάων κατέχευε, λοέσσας ὕδατι λευκῶι.

/ / v Sc; /
TOV τώ γ᾽ ἑσταότες πενθείετον, οὔδει δέ σφι

“ / rn
χαῖται ἐρηρέδαται, τὼ δ᾽ ἕστατον ἀχνυμένω κῆρ.
» \ / a , a
ἄλλοι δὲ στέλλεσθε κατὰ στρατόν, Os τις ᾿Αχαιῶν 285

ig ,ὔ / \ “ a 22
ἵπποισίν τε πέποιθε καὶ ἅρμασι κολλητοῖσιν.

ὡς φάτο Πηλεΐδης, ταχέες δ᾽ ἱππῆες ἔγερθεν.

a ἐς a TT
ὦρτο πολὺ πρῶτος μὲν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿᾿ύμηλος,

ΕῚ , A « , Sah
Aduntou φίλος υἱός, ὃς ἱπποσύνηι ἐκέκαστο"

τῶι δ᾽ ἐπὶ Τυδείδης ὦρτο κρατερὸς Διομήδης, 290

“, \ \ “ , ef » > /
ἵππους δὲ ρωιοὺς ὕπαγε ζυγον, οὕς ποτ ἀπηύρα

΄ , /
Αἰνείαν, ἀτὰρ αὐτὸν ὑπεξεσάωσεν ᾿Απόλλων.

τῶι δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδης ὦρτο ξανθὸς Μενέλαος

/ «- Ν \ \ 7 > , oS
διογενής, ὑπὸ δὲ ζυγὸν ἤγαγεν ὠκέας ἵππους,

Αἴθην τὴν ᾿Αγαμεμνονέην τὸν éov τε Ἰ]όδαργον" 295
\ 2 f ἌΣ Ὁ / , ΄

τὴν ᾿Αγαμέμνονι δῶκ᾽ ᾿Αγχισιάδης ᾿᾿χέπωλος

dap, ἵνα μή οἱ ἕποιθ᾽ ὑπὸ “Tov ἠνεμόεσσαν,

> 3 > lal / ἦν “ / ες as,

ἀλλ᾽ αὐτοῦ τέρποιτο μένων" μέγα yap οἱ ἔδωκε
ig \ + a 8 “ 2 > > / Ss a
Ζεὺς ἄφενος, ναῖεν oy ἐν εὑρυχόρωῶι Σικυῶνι"

283-84 om. Syr.*
285. ἄλλοι OE: ἀλλ᾽ Gre δὴ POR.
Par. b?: Grepeen 0.
innocUNHN R. 290. 0 om. PR.
299. Gpenon P.

288. πρότερος (.
291. ὃὲ: Te P.

284. ἐρηρέαται PR: ἐρειρέϑαται OF ἐρηράϑαται Harl. ἃ.

281. €repeen Ar. GJPR Harl. a b d,
289. εὐδμήτου (): ἀδρήςτου D. |
293. ém’: ὑπ᾽ Vr. A.

283. πενθείετον, formed from the
noun-stem πενθεσ- (πενθεσ-ίω), cf. τελείω,
νεικείω. For the rest of the couplet
compare P 436-40. ἐρηρέθαται, vest on
the ground, cf. οὔδει ἐρείσθη H 145 ete.

285. κατὰ στρατόν goes with ἄλλοι,
the rest of you throughout the host take
place. Nikanor preferred to join it with
the following words, which is more
natural in sense, but against the order.
The variant ἀλλ᾽ dye δὴ perhaps deserves
preference over the vulg. ἄλλοι δέ.

287. As usual tradition confuses
érepeen lestirred themselves and ἄγερθεν
gathered. Here there is little to choose
between the two, but the text is sup-
ported by ὦρτο 288 and ἀνέσταν 886.
Ar. took tayéec as predicative, Ξε ταχέως,
but it may be an epithet like ποδώκεσιν
262.

288. Cf. H 162. Eumelos is named
elsewhere only in the Catalogue, B 714
f., 763 ff. For πρῶτος «κέν Bentley conj.
πρώτιστα (Favaé),

291. See E 323 ff., 8108. The severe
wound received by Diomedes in A is
henceforth forgotten.

297, O@pa, the use of the plur. is
harsh ; cf. f 268. For payment in lieu
of personal service see note on N 669.
Schol. A drily remarks, after Plutarch,
χρησιμώτερον ἐνόμιζε πολεμικὸν ἵππον ἢ
ἀστράτευτον ἄνδρα λαβεῖν.

299. The city of Sikyon or Sekyon
(see B 572) lay in a fertile plain between
the Peloponnesian mountains and the
Corinthian gulf; it was only in the
time of Demetrios Poliorketes (303 8.0.)
that it was removed to the slopes of the
hills (see Frazer, Paus. iii. 43 8). The
great wealth of Echepolos is due to the
richness of his soil. Hence εὐρυχόρωι,
with spacious dancing places, properly
the epithet of a town. But it seems
early to have been confused with εὐρύ-
xwpos, or at least to have dropped the
significance of its second element ; when
applied to Ἑλλάς (I 478) or Elis (6 635)
it can hardly mean more than spacious,
and in this sense it is used by Pindar
(δ. viii. 55) and Euripides (Bacch. 87)
in the phrase evpuxdpous ἀγυίας : see also
Pindar O. vii. 18 ᾿Ασίας εὐρυχόρου, P.
iv. 43 Λιβύας εὐρ. ~

\

ϊ

IAL AOC ¥ (xxi) 493

\ , Δ» ΄ \ \ 2 ‘ , ΕῚ ͵
τὴν τόθ᾽ ὑπὸ ζυγὸν Aye μίγα δρόμου ἰχανόωσαν. 800
/ \ / ΄ > 7
Ἀντίλοχος δὲ τέταρτος ἐύτριχας ὡπλίσαθ᾽ ἵππους,
/ \ \ Ἢ "
Νέστορος ἀγλαὸς υἱὸς ὑπερθύμοιο ἄνακτος
τοῦ Νηληϊάδαο: ἸΤυλουγενέες δέ οἱ ἵπποι
’ / / oe \ / ΄ Ψ ‘
ὠκύποδες φέρον ἅρμα. πατὴρ δέ οἱ ἄγχι παραστὰς
μυθεῖτ᾽ εἰς ἀγαθὰ φρονέων νοέοντι καὶ αὐτῶι" 305
“ "Δ, , ’ » , / / δ γε Δ
ντίλοχ᾽, ἤτοι μέν σε νέον περ ἐόντ᾽ ἐφίλησαν
Ζεύς τε Ἰ]οσειδάων τε, καὶ ἱπποσύνας ἐδίδαξαν
fal / » 7 ,
παντοίας" τῶ καί σε διδασκέμεν οὔ τι μάλα χρεώ-
“. \ S \ / ? € a > ΄ “
οἶσθα γὰρ εὖ περὶ τέρμαθ᾽ ἑλισσέμεν: ἀλλά τοι ἵπποι
/ “ ᾽ »
βάρδιστοι θείειν᾽ τῶ T οἴω λοίγι᾽ ἔσεσθαι. 510
r δ᾽ “4 οὗ », » / > \f \ > ‘
τῶν δ᾽ ἵπποι μὲν ἔασιν ἀφάρτεροι, οὐδὲ! μὲν αὐτοὶ
/ “
πλείονα ἴσασιν σέθεν αὐτοῦ μητίσασθαι.
> γ᾿ »Μ \ ,ὔ , fal , ΄-
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε δὴ σύ, φίλος, μῆτιν ἐμβάλλεο θυμῶι
/ 4 /
παντοίην, ἵνα μή σε παρεκπροφύγηισιν ἄεθλα.
/ / 4 ‘
μήτι Tor δρυτόμος μέγ᾽ ἀμείνων ἠὲ βίηφι: 315
/, > 5 / /
μήτι δ᾽ αὖτε κυβερνήτης ἐνὶ οἴνοπι πόντωι

μέγα : μετὰ H. ἰχανόωςαν
303. πυλοιγενέες AHJU Syr. :
306. ἐόντα φίληςαν |). | ἐφίληςε Hi).

“

300. τόθ᾽ (), ἐν ἄλλωι A: noe’ G: Or Ω.
AD Syr. (ἢ ἄνευ τοῦ σ, U™): icyanéewcan 0.
πυληγενέες (2: τινὲς παλαιγενέες Sch. T.
307. Kai ἀθάνατοι ecoi ἄλλοι Harl. b'. | édidaze(n) Ar. AU Par. e. 308. καί:
κέ(ν) GHJQRS. χρὴ J: χρέων () Cant. Vr. A. 309. Tépuae’ DJU :
τέρματα R: tépu’ P: τέρματ᾽ © (reading éAiccéuen). 310. Το: x" P Harl. a,
Mose. 2: γ΄ Syr. 311. ἀφέρτεροι Vr. b. || οὔτε μὲν PT Vr. b: οὐϑέ κεν ὦ:
οὔ re μιν R. 316. ἐνὶ : ἐπὶ Vr. A.

300. iyandwean, see note on P 572.
It should be read also in @ 288 for icy-,
and may possibly have survived in the
txavac8 of Herondas vii. 26. It is fully
recognized by Hesych., Suidas, and £7.
Mag. τόθ᾽ is evidently preferable to 6
7, which has probably slipped in from
the preceding line.

303. TluAoirenéec as B 54. The
variant παλαιγενέες is evidently suggested
by ἀτέμβονται νεότητος 445.

804, @KkUnod_ec* ὅτι κοινότερον κατα-
κέχρηται τῶι ἐπιθέτωι ἐπιφέρει γοῦν “ Bap-
διστοι Belew” (310), An. The use οἵ the
epitheton ornans, though very harsh,
hardly justifies Bentley’s conj. λευκό-
Toes.

305. εἰς ἀγαθά is best taken with
μυθεῖτο as in I 102, leaving φρονέων to
point the antithesis with νοέοντι.

307. €didazan, Ar. preferred ἐδίδαξε,
on the ground that Poseidon alone had
to do with horsemanship. This is ob-
viously ugtenable here, the fact being

that Poseidon has no special connexion
with the horse in H. (see on 277), and
teaches the Neleid race useful arts only
because he is their ancestor. Zeus is
probably joined with him as having a
general interest in διογενεῖς βασιλῆες (cf.
f 192) and being the ultimate source of
all divine gifts.

309, τέρματα, the meta, 333, 358.
Bentley conj. τέρμα (ξελισσέμεν).

310. Aoiria, A 518. οἵω for ὀΐω is
rare ; hence Ahrens would read τῶ ὀΐω,
Menrad τό γ᾽ (therefore) ὀΐω (Syr. has
Tay ow). But see Φ 533. τ᾽ may be
for τοι.

311. ἀφάρτεροι, the adjectival form
occurs only here. Compare τῶν ἄφαρ
εἰσὶ πόδες Theogn. 716. The origin of
the word is still obscure ; it hardly seems
likely that the meaning fleet should have
developed from the adverbial straightway.

314. napexnpoguruicin, s/ip just, as
though accompanying the successful com-
petitors in the race.

494

IAIAAOC Ψ (ἃ x11!)

τι \ 17 > θ ,ὕ OY, A
νῆα θοὴν tOvver ἐρεχθομένην oc έἐμοίσι
. , ¢e ,
μήτι δ᾽ ἡνίοχος περυγίνεται ἡνιόχοιο.
> 0 Ἂν ef Ὁ \
ἄλλος μέν θ᾽ ἵπποισι καὶ ἅρμασιν οἷσι πεποιθὼς
/ > \ »,

ἀφραδέως ἐπὶ πολλὸν ἑλίσσεται ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα, 320
¢ / \ / >Q\ , Ρ
ἵπποι δὲ πλανόωνται ἀνὰ δρόμον, οὐδὲ κατίσχει
Δ / / >) na > / Ὁ “
ὃς δέ κε κέρδεα εἰδῆι ἐλαύνων ἥσσονας ἵππους,

΄ / / / > / id /
αἰεὶ τέρμ᾽ ὁρόων στρέφει ἐγγύθεν, οὐδέ ἑ λήθει
ee an / Λ e ἴω
ὅππως τὸ πρῶτον τανύσηι βοέοισιν ἱμᾶσιν,

317. ἐριχϑοχλιένην Apio Par. ὁ 5:
ap. Schol., A (Did. ?).
and κατά τινας Eust.
Mose. 2. || τανύςει Q.

323. ἐγγύϑι S.

318. περιγίγνεται L() Syr.
324. TON πρῶτον AC Bar.: τοι πρῶτον

ςπερχολιένην Orion Anth. 1. 23: éeprouéNHN

319. nénoiee(N) JU Par. 10],

317. épexeouennn, else only in the
metaphorical sense, θυμὸν ἐρέχθων ε 83,
ὀδύνηισιν ἐρεχθομένη Hymn. Ap. 358.
The der. is unknown, ef. on ὀρέχθεον 30.

319. ἄλλος μέν, like A 636 ἄλλος
μὲν μογέων ἀποκινήσασκε.. . Νέστωρ δέ,
κτλ. ; virtually = ‘an ordinary man.’
It emphasizes by anticipation the con-
trast with the crafty driver. The mss.
generally have ἀλλ᾽ és: but that is a
difference of interpretation, not really
one of reading: the two forms were a
matter of discussion among the ancient
critics. With the rel. it is impossible
to get a good sense; 321 cannot be
taken as apodosis, as it is evidently a
mere expansion of 320. We are driven
either to suppose that the apodosis is
suppressed altogether as sufficiently im-
plied in the whole rel. sentence 319-21 ;
or to adopt πέποιθε for πεποιθώς (which
has the appearance of ἃ. conj.); or to
take ὃς μέν demonstratively with Ar.,
for which there is no Homeric parallel.
With all these there is the further
difficulty that ἀλλά, instead of marking
a contrast, as it should, has to introduce
a mere development of the previous
thought.

320. Carelessly wheels wide to right
and left, i.e. in making the turn he
pulls his horses first one way and then
the other, thus covering a great deal of
needless ground (ἐπὶ πολλόν). This is
the proper sense of €Nea καὶ €Nea: as
the race appears to take place only out
and in (see on 373) the phrase can
hardly mean at both ends of the course
(Agar in Ji, 2. xxv. 316 ἢ:): It is
clear from 309, 466 that ἑλίσσειν implies
the actual turn; there is no use of the
word which would justify the translation
swerve (in the straight). It is opposed

to στρέφει ἐγγύθεν (323). For πολλόν
Bentley conj. πολλά, van Herwerden
πουλύ.

521. ἀνὰ dpduon, all over the course ;
the words may include the turn as well
as the straight.

323-24, This couplet contains several
difficulties. The sense of TanUcHi is
clear from IL 375 τανύοντο δὲ μώνυχες
ἵπποι, 475 ἐν ῥυτῆρσι τάνυσθεν : we see
that, as horses at full speed stretch thein-
selves, so the driver who causes them to
do so is said to stretch them, just as in
modern racing speech. But the relation
of ὅππως is far from clear. Monro takes

᾿οὖδέ € λήθει as parenthetical, forming a

clause by itself as in A 561, K 279 (Q
56372). Then we must take ὅππως as=
ws, ‘just as he has pulled them straight.’
To this there are serious objections. In
the first place ἀλλά (325) is in opposition
to the negative in οὐδέ, which therefore
covers the intervening clause ; 325 be-
comes meaningless when οὐδέ ἑ λήθει is
taken out of the sentence. Again, the
instances of ὅπως with subj., not in the
indirect constr., are very rare ; the only
instances seem to be ὅπως ἐθέληισι (of
Zeus) howsoe cer he will, a 349, ᾧ 189 (ef.
ὅππως κεν ἐθέληισιν T 243). This would
require us to translate ‘however he has
stretched them at first’—i.e. ‘however
badly he starts, he drives well after-
wards,’ which is hardly the sense required.
If ὅππως is to be joined in this way to
στρέφει, we should at least read τάνυσεν,
cf. ἔρξον ὅπως ἐθέλεις. But in any case
this use of ὅππως is very rare, and the
gain from assuming it is not enough
to induce us to give up the ordinary
explanation, according to which it intro-
duces as usual an indirect question after
οὐδέ ἑ λήθει (which virtually = φράζεται) :

IAIAAOC Ψ (χχπι)

» > +
ἀλλ ἔχει ἀσφαλέως καὶ τὸν προύχοντα δοκεύει. 325
n , ἘΞ 4 4‘? > ΄ 0.2) ,
σῆμα δέ τοι ἐρέω μάλ᾽ ἀριφραδές, οὐδέ σε λήσει.
" ,’ » ΄ \ v
ἕστηκε ξύλον αὖον ὅσον T ὄργυι᾽ ὑπὲρ αἴης,
x / »
ἢ δρυὸς ἢ πεύκης" TO μὲν ov καταπύθεται ὄμβρωι"
λᾶε δὲ τοῦ ἑκάτερθεν ἐρηρέδαται δύο λευκὼ

ἐν ξυνοχῆισιν ὁδοῦ, λεῖος δ᾽ ἱππόδρομος apis:

330

” a “ a

ἤ τευ σῆμα βροτοῖο πάλαι κατατεθνηῶτος,

x / ΄ ᾽ ,

ἢ TO γε νύσσα τέτυκτο ἐπὶ προτέρων ἀνθρώπων:
\ fal / > v ΄ “-“ ? 7,

καὶ νῦν τέρματ᾽ ἔθηκε ποδάρκης δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς.

τῶι σὺ μάλ᾽ ἐγχρίμψας ἐλάαν σχεδὸν ἅρμα καὶ

326 om. Vr. Ὁ. || ἀριζηλὲς R: ἀριθηλὲς P. |
329. ToU:
331. KATATEONHOTOC (A sup.) JPQRU Cant.

333. ποθώκης S.

ἑνὶ raimt Did. |) γαίης Dt).

ἢ zudoxAicin U™, || Gui PR.
Mor. Vr. A: κατατεθνειῶτος 22.

ὑπσπους,

327. ἔν τισιν ὄργυι᾽
330. ZSUNOYHICIN :

λήθει ().
τοῦδ᾽ L.

᾿Αρίσταρχος yp. HE cKipoc

ἔην, NON aU ϑέτο Tépuat ᾿Αχιλλεύς Did. (v. Ludw. ad loc.): ace. to Eust. this

line took the place of 332-33.
ἐγχρείψας (): érxpipecic PR.

he is not forgetful how to stretch his
horses at the first; i.e. he does not leave
it to them to ‘make their own pace,’
but from the very start controls them
(ἔχει ἀσφαλέως). οὐδέ ce λήθω thus takes
up and continues the sentence in 649,
and perhaps 2 563. For λήθω followed
by a rel. clause cf. P 626, and ν 92
λελασμένος ὅσσα membv0er.—Heyne would
reject 324 as a gloss to give a complement
to λήθει.

325. TON προύχοντα, apparently ‘ the
leading competitor,’ as it can hardly be
meant to apply to either horse of the
pair. The use of the article with the
part. is in any case late (I 198).

326. cHua, sign; but it seems to refer
rather to ἃ mental note which Antilochos
is to make than to the actual τέρμα
itself. The regular Homeric word would
be ἄλλο. The line seenis to be taken
without thought from ἃ 126, where
Teiresias tells Odysseus of a ‘sign,’ in
the proper sense, which he is to encounter.
In any case σῆμα, monument, in 331 is
quite different. The whole passage is
hopelessly obscure, and can only be
explained by the violent assumptions
(1) that Nestor has private information
of the course which Achilles means to
fix (in 358) ; and (2) that he happens to
know that the ground near the τέρματα
is smooth, so that Antilochos may drive
boldly ; the other competitors being
ignorant of the course will have to ap-
proach the turn more cautiously.

334. ἐγχρίψας DJS Harl. a, Mor. Mose. 2. Vr. A:

328. Anirrelevant line, and totally un-
like Homer. It appears from Aristotle
(Poet. xxv., Soph. El. iv. 8) that the
critics of his day held it to be unnatural
that a stump of wood should not rot,
and ‘solved the difficulty’ by reading οὐ
for οὐ, ‘part of it decays.’ This must
mark the low water of Homeric criticism.

329. ἐρηρέϑαται, Jean against it, to
support it.

330. ἐν SUNOXAICIN ὁδοῦ «7/ fie joinings
of the road, whatever that may mean ;
whether a place where two roads meet
(then why not ὁδῶν 3), or where the two

‘laps’ of the davies join (why not
δρόμου ἢ. innddpouoc, ground fit for
horses; a strange use. It evidently

cannot mean a regular racecourse, as
the doubt expressed in the following line
shews.

331. Heyne observes—and the remark
seems still to hold good—that there is
no evidence whatever in antiquity for
wooden posts having been used for sepul-
chral monuments.

333. ᾿Αρίσταρχος γράφει “née σκῖρος Env,
νῦν αὖ θέτο τέρματ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεύς." σκῖρον
δὲ τὴν ῥίζαν διὰ τὸ ἐσκιάσθαι, Schol. T;
a quite incredible statement.

334. érypiuwpac, trans. as in the other
famous docus classicus on the chariot
race, Soph. £7. 721 ἔχριμπτ᾽ ἀεὶ σύριγ-
ya. The verb implies only bringing
near, and does not involve, though of
course it is consistent with, the idea of
actual contact.

4960 IAIAAOC Ψ (Χχιπ)

an ,
αὐτὸς δὲ κλινθῆναι ἐυπλέκτωι ἐνὶ δίφρωι 335
A = \ “
AK ἐπ᾽ ἀριστερὰ Tol: ἀτὰρ τὸν δεξιὸν ἵππον

/ id / 5S / / δ, (τ Uf /
κένσαι ὁμοκλήσας, εἶξαί TE οἱ ἡνία χερσίν.
5 / / / , \ > Je
ἐν νύσσηι δέ τοι ἵππος ἀριστερὸς ἐγχριμφθήτω,
e » 7 ΄ ” pe /
ὡς ἄν τοι πλήμνη γε δοάσσεται ἄκρον ἱκέσθαι
/ an ,ὔ 2 > / 5 lal
κύκλου ποιητοῖο" λίθου δ᾽ ἀλέασθαι ἐπαυρεῖν, 840
7 / ΄ / > «“ ”
μή πως ἵππους τε τρώσηις κατά θ᾽ ἅρματα ἄξηις:
/ \ val », > ’, δὲ \ 3 Qn
χάρμα δὲ τοῖς ἄλλοισιν, ἐλεγχείη OE σοὶ αὑτῶι
" / / 5
ἔσσεται: ἀλλά, φίχος, φρονέων πεφυλαγμένος εἰναι.
τ 7 > / / ,
εἰ yap κ᾽ ἐν νύσσηι ye παρεξελάσηισθα διώκων,
> ” 2 “ ο / 3, \ /
οὐκ ἔσθ᾽ ὅς κέ σ᾽ ἕληισι μετάλμενος οὐδὲ παρέλθηι, 345

a > n ἊΝ
οὐδ᾽ εἴ κεν μετόπισθεν ᾿Αρίονα δῖον ἐλαύνοι,
5) a 7 \ WA A > / / 5
Δδρήστου ταχὺν ἵππον, ὃς ἐκ θεόφιν γένος rev,
3 ε ’ ,,
ἢ τοὺς Λαομέδοντος, οἱ ἐνθάδε γ᾽ ἔτραφεν ἐσθλοί."

335. κλινϑῆναι δὲ καὶ αὐτὸς Plato Jon 537 4. || ἐυξέεστωι D Plato 1.1. || ἐυξέετου

ἐπὶ δίφρου Xen. Symp. iv. 6.

μή Plato Jon 5378. || πλήμη L Lips. (ῬῚ Ὁ.
343. EcceTal: τινὲς δίχα τοῦ τ (ἔεςεαι) Sch. T.

10. 90,
παρέλθοι {).

(οἱ πλείους καὶ ἀκριβέστεροι, Eust.). || OTON: yp. πῶλον U.

338. ἐγχριφϑήτω DJPQRU Vr. b A.

339. GN:
342. ἐλεγχείη : Gein Ap. Lex.
245. napéAeH(1) ΕΗ :

346. ἀρίονει AHPR (ἔν τισι τῶν ἀντιγράφων Eust.): ἀρείονα 2

348. Γ᾽ ἔτραφεν:

τέτραφεν DGJSU Harl. ab, Par.abdfhj: τράφεν QT: τρέφεν Η : γ᾽ ἔτρεφεν

Ο (supr. a): (ἐνθάδ᾽) ἔτραφεν Vr. A.

335. ἐυπλέκτωι, only here of the chariot
(and so ἐυπλεκέας 436) in place of the
common ἐύξεστος. The word may refer
to a woven floor to the car, see on EH 727.
ἐύξεστος shews that the body of the
chariot itself was of wood, not of basket-
work like the Egyptian chariots.

336. totin, the horses. But Heyne’s
conj. τοῖον (to be taken with 7a) can
hardly be wrong. See on 246. Again
compare Soph. Hl. 721 δεξιόν τ᾽ ἀνεὶς
σειραιον ἐππὸον εἰργε TOV προσκείμενον.

339. ἄκρον must be taken substan-
tively, the extreme surface of the νύσσα,
see on Tf 229. κύκλου is gen. after
πλήμνη. The order of the words is hardiy
Homeric.

340. This line is well illustrated by
the catastrophe of the race in the Electra.

343. πεφυλαγμένος, on the watch.

345. παρέλθηι has practically no Ms.
authority, but considering what our Mss.
are we may regard τοι and -y as inter-
changeable. The text is undoubtedly
the natural construction. If we read
παρέλθοι we can no longer take the two
verbs together, as, though οὐκ ἔσθ᾽ ὅς
is followed by the opt. in X 348, the

change of mood would be intolerably
harsh. We must therefore make ovdé
παρέλθοι [πὸ beginning οἵ ἃ fresh sentence ;
there is no man that shall catch thee ;
neither (i.e. much less) could he pass thee,
even if, etc. The omission of xe with
παρέλθοι is exactly paralleled by T 321
οὐ μὲν yap Te. . πάθοιμι, οὐδ᾽ εἴ κεν.
πυθοίμην.

346. This horse, Adrasti vocalis Arion
(Prop. ii. 84. 37), was a favourite char-
acter in the Theban cycle, but is quite
outside the Homeric myth-world. He
was endowed with reason and speech,
and was connected with the Arkadian
worship of Poseidon and Demeter under
equine forms; Paus. vill. 25. 5, where
quotations from the Thebais and Anti-
machos are given. He was also woven
into the Herakles-myths, Seut. Here.
120, etc. Mss. vary between “Aptona
and ᾿Αρείονα : the local form at Thelpusa
was Βρίων (Head, Hist. Numorum, p.
382).

348. See f 221. The line has all the
appearance of an interpolation. Notice
the developed article with the gen. The
last half seems to be modelled on Φ 279.

IAIAAOC Ψ (xxii)

ὡς εἰπὼν Νέστωρ Νηλήϊος ay ἐνὶ χώρηι
ἕζετ᾽, ἐπεὶ ὧι παιδὶ ἑκάστου πείρατ᾽ ἔειπε. 800
Μηριόνης δ᾽ ἄρα πέμπτος ἐύτριχας ὡπλίσαθ᾽ ἵππους.
ἀν δ᾽ ἔβαν ἐς δίφρους, ἐν δὲ κλήρους ἐβάλοντο"
marr’ ᾿Αχιλεύς, ἐκ δὲ κλῆρος θόρε Νεστορίδαο
᾿Αντιλόχου: μετὰ τὸν δὲ λάχε κρείων ᾿ϑύμηλος,

τῶι δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδης δουρικλειτὸς Μενέλαος,

QF F.
ὁδῷ

“- Ι] ᾽ ᾿΄'

τῶι δ᾽ ἐπὶ Μηριόνης λάχ᾽ ἐλαυνέμεν: ὕστατος αὗτε

Τυδεΐδης, dy’ ἄριστος ἐών, λάχ᾽ ἐλαυνέμεν ἵππους.
\ \ / / \ ,ὔ ΕΣ: ‘

στὰν δὲ μεταστοιχί, σήμηνε δὲ τέρματ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
/ » / / \ A \

τηλόθεν ἐν λείωι πεδίωι: Tapa δὲ σκοπὸν εἷσεν

ι} / , > / \ can
ἀντίθεον Φοίνικα, οπαάονα TATPOS εοίο,

360

id / / A > / ’ ,
ὡς μεμνέωιτο δρόμου καὶ ἀληθείην ἀποείποι.

352. ἄν: ἐς ". 352-57 om.

να Ὁ:

355. θουρεικλειτὸς Η : δουρικλυτὸς

(ϑουρὶ κλυτὸς) 2 (δουρικλειτός appears to be a conjecture of Barnes, but may

possibly come from S Cant.).

croixi U: μεταςτοιχὸν |): μεταςτοιχεὶ £2.

356. ὕετατον C.

358. aeTacTolxyi A: μετὰ

cHuaine Τ Vr. b A: cHunce ὃ.

361. μεμνόωτο Harl.a, Mosc. 2: μεμνοῖτο H svpr. δρόμους Ar. Lt. Mag. 578. 54.

The re is even more out of place here
than there. Here also D and others
have τέτραφεν (for rétpapov? It can
hardly be meant to come from τετράφην).
Buttmann’s conj. ἔτραφον is doubtless
the right form.

350. πείρατα, the swim, like μύθου τέλος
II 83.

352. ἐν, into a helmet; see Η 176, 182.
Cf. Soph. El. 709 στάντες δ᾽ ὅθ᾽ αὐτοὺς
οἱ τεταγμένοι βραβῆς | κλήρους ἔπηλαν καὶ
κατέστησαν δίφρους.

358. μεταςτοιχί, in dine; Antilochos
naturally takes the inside (left-hand)
place. Ar. and the other ancient critics
took it to mean in file; ὅτι ἀντὶ τοῦ
ἐπὶ στίχων" οὐ yap ἀπὸ ταὐτοῦ τέρματος
ὥσπερ ἐπὶ τῶν δρομέων ἡ ἄφεσις γίνεται"
διὸ καὶ κληροῦνται περὶ τῆς στάσεως. οὐ
δεόντως οὖν ἐπὶ τῶν δρομέων μετάκειται
ὁ στίχος ἐντεῦθεν (757), An. Such an
arrangement seems so absurd as to be
ineredible, especially as the race is run
on the open plain (ἐν λείωι πεδίωι), with
a narrow place at one point only (419),
so that there is no excuse in want of
room.

360. The appearance of Phoinix, late
comer though he is in the J/iad, might
be excused in so late an episode, if he
were more than a dumb person and
appeared again in the sequel. As it is,
various critics have rejected the line,

VOL. II 2

not without reason. Others, with more
justification, have extended their con-
demnation to 359-61. The appointment
of the cxonéc, Phoinix or not, is useless.
If we read δρόμου in 361 with mss., and
understand merely that he is to ‘keep
the running in mind’ and see fair play,
he evidently ought to appear in the
sequel when a question of fairness is
actually raised (566 ff.), but is referred,
not to a σκοπός, but to the ordeal of
an oath. If with Ar. we read δρόμους,
and understand that he is merely to
count the laps, we have the difficulty
that there seems to be only one lap
(see 373). Either way the lines seem
indefensible. Possibly they were added
by some one who concluded that there
were several laps, with δρόμους, which
was then altered to δρόμου by those who
held this interpretation of 373 wrong.
361. μεμνέωιτο, a ‘ghastly’ form ace.
to Fick, but perhaps defensible in a late
passage, as derived from μεμνήοιτο with
metathesis of quantity; cf. μεμνῶιο,
μεμνῶιτο in Xen. (-wi-=-not-). μεμνήιμην
2 745 points to Bekker’s μεμνῆιτο here
(found also in Ar. Plut. 991). Krates (Zt.
Mag. 579. 1) read weuvotro (or μέμνοιτο),
which agrees with the variant μεμνοίμην
in 2 745, and leads to a form μέμνομαι,
otherwise unknown (H. G. ὃ 27). The
difference of case is not decisive as

K

498

IAIAAOC Ψ (ἀχιπ)

e 2 [2 / 5 > Cs , ”
οἱ δ᾽ ἅμα πάντες ἐφ ἵπποιιν μάστυγας ἀειίρᾶν,
/ / > ae € /; / ’ > /
πέπληγόν Θ ἱμᾶσιν omokrnoay T ἐπέεσσιν

, 9 , /
ἐσσυμένως" οἱ ὃ WKa διέπρησσον πεδίοιο

/ an / c Ν \ / /
νόσφι VE@V ταχεῶς" UTTO δὲ OTEPVOLOL KOVLY)

ἵστατ᾽ ἀειρομένη ὥς τε νέφος ἠὲ θύελλα,

χαῖται δ᾽ ἐρρώοντο μετὰ πνοιῆις ἀνέμοιο.

ἅρματα δ᾽ ἄλλοτε μὲν χθονὶ πίλνατο πουλυβοτείρηι,
ἄλλοτε δ᾽ ἀΐξασκε μετήορα" τοὶ δ᾽ ἐλατῆρες

iy \ \ id ie
ἕστασαν ἐν δίφροισι, πάτασσε δὲ θυμὸς ἑκάστου

910

νίκης ἱεμένων" κέκλοντο δὲ οἷσιν ἕκαστος
ἵπποις, οἱ δ᾽ ἐπέτοντο κονίοντες πεδίοιο.

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ πύματον τέλεον δρόμον ὠκέες ἵπποι
aw ἐφ᾽ ἁλὸς πολιῆς, τότε δὴ ἀρετή γε ἑκάστου

362. ἅμα GJPQRTU, yp. A: ἄρα ©. || ἵπποιςι(ν) PRS Vr. A Harl. b, Par. ad fj.

364 om. Ut.
éctan S.

368. πολυβοτείρηι DJT Vr. A’.
373. τέλεον Ὀρόμον : Spdu0N ἔτρεχον C.

369. Tol: τῆι Cant. 370.
374. ἐφ᾽ Ar. Ὡ : aq’

(A supr.) TU Harl. a, Mose. 2, Par. Ὁ and ai πλείους, καὶ μήποτε λόγον ἔχει Did. |

re: Te ΠῚ b:

between Opduou and δρόμους (see last
note) ; though the gen. is far commoner
in H., there are a few instances of the
ace. ; see Z 222, 1 527, ξ 168, ὦ 122,
and compare note on E 818.

362. ἅμα, vulg. dpa, a much weaker
reading. See Hl. 711 οἱ δ᾽ ἅμα | ἵπποις
ὁμοκλήσαντες ἡνίας χεροῖν | ἔσεισαν, where
the dual χεροῖν ‘each with his two hands’
is parallel to ἵπποιιν here, each on his
pair of horses.

363. ἱμᾶσιν, undantia lora Concussere
iugis Virg. Aen. v. 146. The i- is long
in thesis, as K 475, ¢ 46, w 201 (in arsis
Θ 544); see Schulze QY. H. 181, 466.

964, @Ka, without delay, is here to be
distinguished from ταχέως, fleetly.

366. evehAa, cf. ἄελλαι, of dust, N
334, and κονίσαλος ἀελλής Τ' 13.

367, «κετὰ πνοιῆις, ainong (upon) the
blasts of the wind; not identical with
the more usual ἅμα πν., for that would
imply that the manes were blown away.
In β 148 τὼ (αἰετὼ) δ᾽ ἐπέτοντο μετὰ mv.
ἀν. (the only other instance of the
phrase) ἅμα would be better.% ἐρρώοντο,
A 529.

368. Lamque humiles, iamque elati
sublime videntur Aera per vacuum ferri
atque adsurgere in auras, Virg. G, iii.
108-9.

"

373. πύματον OpduoN, fe last part of
the course, 1.6. that after the turn. The
total silence as to any previous laps
prevents our translating ‘the Jast lap,’
and the race must have been a simple
δίαυλος. The course stretched straight
inland over the plain (ἐν λείωι πεδίωι
359), so that ἐφ᾽ ἁλός means towards the
sea, see I. 5. The variant ἀφ᾽ ἁλός is
probably a conjecture to suit the theory
that the course was entirely inside
the fortification, from the wall to the
sea and back again. This theory is
attributed to Ar. by Eust. If this is
right Ar. must have taken ἐφ᾽ ἁλός (as
he read) to mean by the side of the sea,
ie. just at the turn. But the sup-
position is inconsistent with the whole
tenor of the description; even if the
wall were conceived far enough from
the sea to admit of an open course
estimated by Ar., on grounds which
we cannot guess, at five stadia in length
—the words ἐν λείωι πεδίωι and νόσφι
νεῶν give sufficient refutation. The fact
is that in the whole description the
existence of the wall is completely
ignored.—It will be noticed that no
mention is made of the actual turn, in
spite of the stress laid on it by Nestor.
It is barely alluded to in 462.

IAIAAOC Ψ (χχιπὴ

, ᾽ Μ 4, v
φαίνετ᾽, ἄφαρ δ᾽ ἵπποισι τάθη δρόμος" aKa δ᾽ ἔπειτα 375
αἱ Φηρητιάδαο ποδώκεες ἔκφερον ἵπποι.
\ \ > Fs , ” J
τὰς δὲ μετ᾽ ἐξέφερον Διομήδεος ἄρσενες ἵπποι
Τρώϊοι, οὐδέ τι πολλὸν ἄνευθ᾽ ἔσαν, ἀλλὰ μάλ᾽ ἐγγύς"
» Λ
αἰεὶ γὰρ δίφρου ἐπιβησομένοισιν ἐΐκτην,
lol > ry je! / / > / Φ »
πνοιῆι δ᾽ ὐμήλοιο μετάφρενον εὐρέε τ᾽ ὥὦμω 380

’ -
θέρμετ᾽" ἐπ᾿ αὐτῶι γὰρ κεφαλὰς καταθέντε πετέσθην.

, / x , 3 x > ΄, »
Kalb VU κεν ἢ παρέλασσ ἢ ἀμφήριστον ἔθηκεν,

εἰ μὴ Τυδέος υἷι κοτέσσατο Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων,

Ὁ 6. ΄ ΕῚ fal » a ΄
ὃς ῥά οἱ ἐκ χειρῶν ἔβαλεν μάστιγα φαεινήν.

τοῖο δ᾽ ἀπ᾿ ὀφθαλμῶν χύτο δάκρυα χωομένοιο, 385

A \ \ 7 ΝΜ \ \ rn eee)
OUVEKA τᾶς μὲν OPA ETL καὶ πολὺ μᾶλλον Lovaas,
Ὁ , (ens > / v / /

οἱ δ᾽ ἑοὶ ἐβλάφθησαν ἄνευ κέντροιο θέοντες.

375. (ἄφαρ) 0°: δέ οἱ T.
379. θίφρωι A supr.

_ 375. Here, as elsewhere, there is diffi-
culty in translating ἄφαρ straightway
(see note on A 418), for there is no
definite point of time for it to refer to;
at best we must suppose that πύματον
δρόμον implies the turn, and that ἄφαρ
means ‘directly they had turned.’ It
seems better to recognize once more a
vaguely intensifying sense, ‘the pace
was forced indeed.’ For tden Spdmoc
in this sense see 758.

376. PHpHTIddao, Eumelos, B 763.
ἔκφερον intrans., shot out of ‘the ruck.’
So 759, and y 496 ὑπέκῴφερον ὠκέες ἵπποι.

378. Tpootoi, see E 222.

379. €mBHcoueénoicin, see on E 46,
The form must be future here, as in ἃ
608 αἰεὶ βαλέοντι ἐοικώς (a very late
passage), though the use without a
verb of motion is against the Homeric
rule. The translation ‘seemed to have
mounted ’ is hardly compatible with αἰεί.

381. e€pueto agrees only with the
moére distant subject; see on Φ 611.
kxataeente, leaning their heads upon his
very body, a strong hyperbole. ὁμοῦ yap
ἀμφὶ νῶτα καὶ τροχῶν βάσεις | ἤφριζον,.
εἰσέβαλλον ἱππικαὶ πνοαί H/. 718-19;
umescunt spumis flatuque sequentwin
Vargs ΟἹ in. 111.

382. Gu@Hpictron is best taken as
neut., ‘made it a dead heat’; the object
being a vague notion, ‘the state of
things’ (H. G. § 161). It is possible
but less natural to make it mase. (sc.
made him, Eumelos, disputed in his

376. nodwkeoc |’.
382. παρέλας(ς)εν HPR Vr. A.

-those of another. In

378. οὐδ᾽ ἔτι RT Vr. b.

victory). Cf. Virg. den. v. 325 transeat
clapsus prior ambiguumve relinquat.

383. The partiality of Apollo for the
horses of Eumelos is explained by the
fact that he himself had bred them ;
B 766. Thus the horse is at least as
closely connected with Apollo as with
Poseidon.

387. of & ἐοί, so Ptol. of Askalon ;
vulg. οἱ δέ oi, which is taken in the same
sense, those of his. But though the dat.
oi is constantly to be translated by his,
it could hardly be used to represent the
emphatic pronoun, Ais own opposed to
500 of δέ οἱ is
quite possible, for the emphasis is on
ἵπποι, not oi. The κέντρον is evidently
identical with the μάστιξ of 384. This
most likely indicates a whip, or perhaps
rather a goad, like that represented on
the Burgon amphora, where the driver
holds in his hand a long rod, evidently
meant to be represented as pliant, bearing
at the end two little points of the shape
and size of arrow-heads. Such an imple-
ment would doubtless prove an efficient
means of exhortation, combining the
advantages of the whip and the spur.
The significance of the word μαστίεται
used in Υ 171 of the lion’s tail with the
sharp bone at the end is thus greatly
enhanced. The ancient Oriental type
of whip is more like the modern, a short
handle with an actual lash; see for
instance the Assyrian chariot in Helbig,
H. E. p. 134, and the Phoenician, p. 136.

500

IAIAAOC Ψ (xx)

οὐδ᾽ ap ᾿Αθηναίην ἐλεφηράμενος NAP? ᾿Απόλλων
Τυδείδην, μάλα δ᾽ ὦκα μετέσσυτο ποιμένα λαῶν,

“ ΄ ͵7 ’ Γ , ΤῸ
δῶκε δέ οἱ μάστιγα, μένος ὃ ἵπποισιν ἐνῆκεν.

990

ἡ δὲ pet ᾿Αδμήτου υἱὸν κοτέουσα βεβήκει"
ἵππειον δέ οἱ ἦξε θεὰ ζυγόν" αἱ δέ οἱ ἵπποι
ἀμφὶς ὁδοῦ δραμέτην, ῥυμὸς δ᾽ ἐπὶ γαῖαν ἐλύσθη.
αὐτὸς δ᾽ ἐκ δίφροιο παρὰ τροχὸν ἐξεκυλίσθη,

> lal ΄, / / ta /
ἀγκῶνάς Te περιδρύφθη στόμα τε pivas τε,

395

θρυλίχθη δὲ μέτωπον ἐπ᾽ ὀφρύσι" τὼ δέ οἱ ὄσσε
δακρυόφι πλῆσθεν, θαλερὴ δέ οἱ ἔσχετο φωνή.
Τυδεΐδης δὲ παρατρέψας ἔχε μώνυχας ἵππους,
πολλὸν τῶν ἄλλων ἐξάλμενος" ἐν γὰρ ᾿Αθήνη

ἵπποις ἧκε μένος καὶ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῶι κῦδος ἔθηκε.
ἐπ᾿ ᾿Ατρεΐδης εἶχε ξανθὸς Μενέλαος.

Ἄγ 9

τῶι δ᾽ ap

400

390 om. H.

Harl. a, Mose. 2, Vr. b A: κοτέους᾽ éBeBHKe 2.

ἐλύθη CP! Vr. b.

ἔϑωκε CPR. 401. 0° dp’: rap J.

396. WETOOMION : πρόςωπον Ap. Lex. 88. 21.

391. wet’: kat’ Mor. |) KoTéouca βεβήκει (A™) DHJQSTU

392. H=e: ῥῆξε Vr. A. 393.
400. ἔθηκε :

It is from the combination of whip and
goad that the use of μάστιξ in the
Tragedians must be explained ; e.g. the
two points make clear the διπλῆ μάστιξ
δίλογχος ἄτη of Agam. 642 (see particu-
larly for other cases Verrall’s note on
Sept. 595). The word is presumably
der. from mas root of μαίομαι, to touch,
the regular Homeric word of touching
up horses (see E 748, P 430). The only
difficulty in the way of explaining the
μάστιξ as a rod rather than a lash proper
is the use of ἱμάσθλη (ῥαδινή Ψ 582) in
the same sense. This might appear to
imply a thong of leather ; cf. also ἵμασεν
ἵππους μάστιγι λιγυρῆ A 531. The
weight of this argument is removed by
the epithet χρυσείη in Θ 43, N25. The
explanation doubtless is that the Oriental
form of whip with a lash was also known
to the Greeks, and that a word properly
referring to it only was also generically
extended to their own type. The words
KNive μάστιγα ποτὶ ζυγόν in 510 well suit
the long rod, but could not be used of
the Assyrian whip with a handle not
two feet long.

388. ἐλεφηράμενος, cheating, a word
which recurs in H. only in τ 565, of the
deceitful dreams which come through
the gate of ivory (ἐλέφας). The only
other instance of the word in Greek

appears to be Hesiod Theog. 330 ἔνθ᾽ ἄρ᾽
ὅ γ᾽ οἰκείων ἐλεφαίρετο φῦλ᾽ ἀνθρώπων (of
the Nemean lion), evidently in the sense
ravaged. The origin of the word is un-
known. Tudetdun is of course governed
by ἐλεῴ., “AeHNaiHN by λάθε.

392. Hze (also in 7 539), a late form
for €Fage, but possibly original in so late
a book ; we may read either ἵππειόν ἔοι
ἔξαξε with Heyne, or better ἵππειον δέ

᾿Ε᾽ (οι) ἔξαξε with van L.

393. The horses are harnessed only by
the yoke, without traces. ἀμφὶς ὁδοῦ,
‘sideways from the road,’ Buttm. But
Grashof objects that there was no definite
path for them to swerve from, and takes
duis adverbially, ‘ran apart (separ-
ately) on their way’; the gen. ὁδοῦ
being the same as in θέειν πεδίοιο, πρήσ-
σειν ὁδοῖο (2 264). So also Helbig, H. ἢ.
146, n. 4. €AUceH, see 2 510 ἐλυσθείς,
and ὁ 433 λασίην ὑπὸ γαστέρ᾽ ἐλυσθείς.
It must be referred to ἐλύω, εἰλύω -Ξ-
vol-v-o (Curtius, Ht. no. 527), though all
three passages ‘violate’ the F. This,
however, is the case with almost all
forms of the root (Knés, Dig. p. 72).
The meaying must be swung to the
ground, though this is rather different
from the ordinary sense.

397 = P 696, where see note.

IAIAAOC Ψ (xxii) 501

> + , 4 can
Avtiroyos δ᾽ ἵπποισιν ἐκέκλετο πατρὸς ἑἕοῖο᾽
“ἔμβητον καὶ σφῶϊ" τιταίνετον ὅττι τάχιστα.
ἤτοι μὲν κείνοισιν ἐριζέμεν οὔ τι κελεύω,
Τυδεΐδεω ἵπποισι δαΐφρονος, οἷσιν ᾿Αθήνη 105
νῦν ὥρεξε τάχος Kal ἐπ᾽ αὐτῶι κῦδος ἔθηκεν"
” ay A ΄ \ \ ,
ἵππους δ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδαο κιχάνετε, μὴ δὲ λίπησθον,
καρπαλίμως, μὴ σφῶϊν ἐλεγχείην καταχεύηι
Αἴθη θῆλυς ἐοῦσα" τί ἣ λείπεσθε, φέριστοι;
ὧδε γὰρ ἐξερέω, καὶ μὴν τετελεσμένον ἔσται" 110
» “. δὴ \ Né / ~
ov σφῶϊν κομιδὴ παρὰ Νέστορι ποιμένι λαῶν
3.» ἃ - a a
ἔσσεται, αὐτίκα δ᾽ ὕμμε κατακτενεῖ ὀξέϊ χαλκῶι,
» ae” ay ΄ ΄ a »
αἴ κ ἀποκηδήσαντε φερώμεθα χεῖρον ἄεθλον.
’ a τ ΄
ἀλλ ἐφομαρτεῖτον καὶ σπεύδετον ὅττι τάχιστα"
- >
ταῦτα 8 ἐγὼν αὐτὸς τεχνήσομαι ἠδὲ νοήσω, 415
lal ¢ fal >?
στεινωπῶι ἐν ὁδῶι παραδύμεναι, οὐδέ με AoE.”
ἃ ” ᾽ e \ » iC / ΄ Ἢ
ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δὲ ἀνακτος ὑποδδείσαντες ὁμοκλὴν
nr >? »
μᾶλλον ἐπιδραμέτην ὀλίγον γχρόνον᾽ αἶψα δ᾽ ἔπειτα

402. ἐῆος 1)".
405-06 ἀθ. Ar. 406. ἔδωκεν CL:
Vr. A. || AimHcoe P!(?) R Pap. μ.
«κὴ οὐ (). 411. ἔν τισι βιοτή Did.
τεῖτον. Par. 1 (supr.o): Ar. διχῶς.
Ar. GS Lips.

404. WEN: γὰρ (supr. μὲν) PR: μὲν rap L Vr. Δ.
é«xKEN P (eH in ras.).

418. énedpauetHN DR.

407. κιχάνετον H

408. Kataeein () Harl. a. 410. μὴν:
412. κατακτανεῖ Vi. A. 414. ἐφαμαρ-
417. ὁμοκλήςαντες ἀπειλὴν (ἡ. | Unodeicantec

403. ἔμβητον. a word which recalls
our familiar ‘go in and win,’ though
the latter is no doubt pugilistic, ‘close
with your man.’ The origin of the ex-
pression here is not so clear; the mean-
ing evidently is spurt. This, for one
who is behind his competitors, is ex-
pressed by ἐμβῆναι, as by ἐξάλλεσθαι
(399) for one who is level with (among)
them. Cf. éu8a=hasten, Eur. El. 113,
Ar. Ran. 377, Eccl. 478.

405-6. ἀθετοῦνται οἱ δύο" πῶς yap τὸ ἐκ
τῆς ᾿Αθηνᾶς γενόμενον οἷδεν ὁ ᾿Αντίλοχος ;
καὶ τὸ ““Τυδείδεω ἵπποισι --περισσόν.
καὶ γὰρ ἄνευ τούτου-- δῆλον ὅτι περὶ
--τῶν ἵππων > τοῦ Διομήδους ἐστὶν ὁ λόγος.
An. (completed by Friedlander). These
grounds are insufficient ; the poet is not
troubled by such trifles as Antilochos’
knowledge of the author of the accident
he had seen, and the notorious friend-
ship of Athene for Diomedes might
in any case suggest the words.

412. κατακτενεῖ, again a late form
for -ée, but not one which we can alter
with confidence in a passage of this
character. Von Christ’s αὐτίκα δὲ xrevéec

ὕμμ᾽ is evidently bad. Agar with reason
condemns the whole line, as added in
order to supply the verb €ccerai to 411,
remarking that the threat of killing the
horses if they do not win is absurd—as
no doubt it is (C. &. xiv. 4).

413. The meaning of the line is ‘If
you two lose heart and so we fail to win.’
The expression is not exact, as the dual
applying to the horses only is gram-
matically in concord with the three
parties who form the subject of the verb;
but the phrase is most natural, and has
a familiar and colloquial turn. It is
hardly correct to say that Antilochos
thus associates himself with his team
(Monro) ; he associates himself only in
the success, but expressly dissociates
himself from the failure—as others since
his time have been known to do. An.’s
ὅτι ἔδει ἀποκηδησάντων ὑμῶν is substanti-
ally correct, but the alternative ἣ ἀποκη-
δήσαντε ἐγώ τε Kal ὑμεῖς, which makes
Antilochos speak as though he were one
unit and his team another, is too far-
fetched.

414. See Θ 191, and M 412 with note.

502

Or

IAIAAOC Ψ (χη)

στεῖνος ὁδοῦ κοίλης ἴδεν ᾿Αντίλοχος μενεχάρμης.
ῥωχμὸς ἔην γαίης, ἧι χειμέριον ἀλὲν ὕδωρ
ἐξέρρηξεν ὁδοῖο, βάθυνε δὲ ep ἅπαντα"

τῆι ῥ᾽ εἶχεν Μενέλαος ἁματροχιὰς ἀλεείνων.

420

᾿Αντίλοχος δὲ παρατρέψας ἔχε μώνυχας ἵππους
ἐκτὸς ὁδοῦ, ὀλίγον δὲ παρακλίνας ἐδίωκεν.
Pee δ᾽ ἔδδεισε καὶ ᾿Αντιλόχωι ἐγεγώνει" 425
“᾿Αντίλοχ᾽, ἀφραδέως ἱππάζεαι: ἀλλ᾽ ἄνεχ᾽ ἵππους"
στεινωπὸς γὰρ ὁδός, τάχα δ᾽ εὐρυτέρη παρελάσσαι"
μή πως ἀμφοτέρους δηλήσεαι ἅρματι κύρσας."
ὼς ἔφατ᾽, ᾿Αντίλοχος δ᾽ ἔτι καὶ πολὺ μᾶλλον ἔλαυνε
κέντρωι ἐπισπέρχων, ὡς οὐκ ἀΐοντι ἐοικώς. 430

5 5 , 2
ὅδσα δὲ δίσκου οὖρα κατωμαδίοιο πέλονται,

419. «τεῖνον [].
énepeen Aph. 422. τῆι:
Kt. Mag. 145. 17.
Par. f: ἐν ἄλλωι napaxAineeic A.
and ap. Sch. T
Par. d:

neAdcceic J: περ ἐλάςςεις A:

420. pwruoc Ap. Lex.
ἧι Ar. | εἶχεν : ἦρχεν T (p partly erased 2) :
423. napactpewac () (Par.

napeAdccaic P Par. h:

139. 421. ἅπαντα:
ἔεχε
424. παρεκκλίνας P

27, Herod.

a supr.).

427. rap: περ Mor. || παρελάεςαι Pap. μ
napeAdccH(i)c Mor.
napeddcceic {?.

Par. g: mapeAdccu

420. The way back to the starting-
point leads through a ravine, the dried
bed of a stream, one of the ἔναυλοι of IL
71. It is common enough in primitive
countries for such cullies to serve in
turn as roads and watercourses accord-
ing to the weather. The road zs the
stream-bed, and does not lie beside it.
Antilochos proposes to spurt up level
with Menelaos at this point, where there
is room for only one chariot, and thus
force him either to give way or to face
the certainty of a collision. fpwyude,
a break or sudden dip in the ground,
which had been cut through by a flood.
The form ῥωγμός is, perhaps, linguistic-
ally preferable, though the text can be
supported by the analogy of forms like
TOX LOS, ἰωχμός.

421. ὁϑοῖο, partitive or ablative gen.,
had carried away some of the road.
Baeune, lowered, again refers to the
depth of the whole ravine.

422, τῆι ῥ᾽ εἶχεν, that way was 7].
steering, that point he was approaching ;
he keeps to the middle of the road to
prevent Antilochos coming alongside
(ἁματροχιὰς ἀλεείνων), except by turn-
ing off the track altogether.

424, The variant παρεκκλίνας

may
probably be right.
427, εὐρυτέρη παρελάςςαι, though

poorly supported, must be right. παρ-
e\dooes (with dat. εὐρυτέρηι) is not a
Homeric form, the fut. elsewhere being
ἐλάω (ἐλόω), nor does εὐρυτέρηι παρελάσ-
σεις suit the sense; Menelaos does not
mean to promise Antilochos that he
‘shall drive past in a wider place,’ but
only that the road will be wider for
driving past. The opt. παρελάσσαις
might drive past is better, but less
natural and idiomatic than the text.
eUpuTépH and εὐρυτέρηι are practically
identical for our mss.; even Pap. μ'
has evputepne παρέλασσαι, which must
be wrong.

428. ἅρματι either with κύρσας, catch-
ing my car (for which οἵ, 2 530 κακῶι
κύρεται, Τ' 28 ἐπὶ σώματι κύρσας, Ψ 821
ἐπ᾽ αὐχένι κῦρε) ; or instrumental, catch-
ing (me) with your car. The first seems
best. The above with ἐνέκυρσε N 145
and συγκύρσειαν below (4385) are the
only instances of the verb in H. The
longer form κυρήσας first occurs in Hes.
Opp. 755.

430. ὧς. . ἐοικώς seems to be a
mixture of the two forms ws οὐκ ἀΐων
and οὐκ ἀΐοντι ἐοικώς.

481. οὖρα, see Καὶ 351 with note.
κατωμαθίοιο, swung from the shoulder,
see on Ὁ 3852 κατωμαδὸν ἤλασεν ἵππους,
and for the next line O 359, II 590.

-

IAIAAOC Ψ (χχιπ) 503

Ὁ 3 ᾽ Ν > a aN ΄ “
ov T αἰζηὸς ἀφῆκεν ἀνὴρ πειρώμενος ἥβης,
/ J ΄ ,
τόσσον ἐπιδραμέτην: ai δ᾽ ἠρώησαν ὀπίσσω
CA. [ὃ p aes," \ Bio ἢ , ,
τρεΐδεω: αὐτὸς yap ἑκὼν μεθέηκεν ἐλαύνειν,
/ / e -“ ΄
μή πως συγκύρσειαν ὁδῶι ἔνι μώνυχες ἵπποι, 435
δί 2». » / > , \ ’ ᾽ ‘
ippovs τ ἀνστρέψειαν ἐυπλεκέας, κατὰ δ᾽ αὐτοὶ
/ / /
ἐν κονίηισι πέσοιεν ἐπευγόμενοι περὶ νίκης.
\ \
τὸν Kal νεικείων προσέφη ξανθὸς Μενέλαος:
> , 2 4 » lal al / »
“᾿Αντίλοχ᾽, ov τις σεῖο βροτῶν ὀλοώτερος ἄλλος.
»Μ ’ » \ ” Cp / / tal ᾽ ,
ἔρρ᾽, ἐπεὶ οὔ σ᾽ ἔτυμον γε φάμεν πεπνῦσθαι ᾿Αχαιοί. 440
5 , > \ »9) ᾿ » e Μ Μ ”
ἀλλ᾽ ov μὰν οὐδ᾽ ws ἄτερ ὅρκου olan. ἄεθλον.
A > Ν “, iA
ὡς εἰπὼν ἵπποισιν ἐκέκλετο φώνησέν τε"
.
/ 5 4 ’ ry a
“pn μοι ἐρύκεσθον μηδ᾽ ἕστατον ἀχνυμένω Kip:
/ / / fal
φθήσονται τούτοισι πόδες Kal γοῦνα καμόντα
Xx ec a ” \ > / / >
ἢ ὑμῖν: ἄμφω yap ἀτέμβονται νεότητος." 445
A ” θ᾽ e Ne Lo G / e \
ws ἔφαθ, οἱ δὲ ἄνακτος ὑποδδείσαντες ὁμοκλὴν
r > ὃ / / / Vv /
μᾶλλον ἐπιδραμέτην, Taya δέ σφισιν ἄγχι γένοντο.
> r ᾽ > al ,
Ἀργεῖοι δ᾽ ἐν ἀγῶνι καθήμενοι εἰσορόωντο
(vg \ ’ / ,
ἵππους" τοὶ δ᾽ ἐπέτοντο κονίοντες πεδίοιο.
lal tee) \ ra a ΄
πρῶτος ὃ ᾿Ιδομενεὺς Κρητῶν ἀγὸς ἐφράσαθ᾽ ἵππους" 450
a \ ΠΝ a δέ
ἧστο γὰρ ἐκτὸς ἀγῶνος ὑπέρτατος ἐν περιωπῆι"
a > , t .
toto δ᾽ ἄνευθεν ἐόντος ὁμοκλητῆρος ἀκούσας
» ΄ > ἢ;
ἔγνω, φράσσατο δ᾽ ἵππον ἀριπρεπέα προύχοντα,
ἃ \ \ » / a > bd \ ,
ὃς τὸ μὲν ἄλλο τόσον φοῖνιξ ἣν, ἐν δὲ μετώπωι

433. ai 0°: τοὶ δ᾽ Sch. T. 434. ἐλαύνων Pap. mu (supr. εἰ). 435.
ευγκέρςειαν CG. 436. ἀνατρέψειαν J Vr. A: Gnactpéweian JT (U! supr.).
439 om. Vr. Ὁ. || coto P. 441. WAN: μὲν P. || ὅρκου τ᾽ Vr. b. || οἴςει PR.
444. peicontar DHJPQRSU Vr. b: geiccontar Vr. A. || καμόντε Pap. μ. 446.
Gnodeicantec G. 447. cpin PRS. || Gry’ ἐγένοντο Ὁ). 449. Toi: οἱ (οἵ, of)
DHQT Pap. μ, Bar. Vr. b A. 452. ἰόντος D Pap. μ. ἀκούων Pap. μ. 454.
τόςον : ὅςον T!: déuac Ap. Lev. 164. 29.

larities in the surface of the plain, though
it is described as λεῖον in 359. When
last the competitors were seen on their
way to the turn Eumelos was in front.

439. ὁλοώτερος, more malicious, as Τ᾿
365, X 15, υ 201.

440. Eppe, go thy mad way, Θ 239.
φάμεν, imperf. as the accent shews.

441. ὅρκου, rather épxo.’(o) or ὅρκοο:
App. N, § 20. The oath is actually
claimed in the sequel, 581-85. οἴςηι --
οἴσε᾽ (αι).

445, ἁτέμβονται, an Odyssean word
recurring only in 834 and the equally
late A 705 in 77.

451. We have to suppose that the
further part of the course is entirely
hidden from the spectators by irregu-

Idomeneus from a place of outlook can
see further than the rest, but not so far
as the turn.

452. See M 273. τοῖο anticipates
ὁμοκλητῆρος, hearing him while yet afar,
the shouter to wit. In sense this of
course comes to the same thing as if we
had ὁμοκλήσαντος.

454. técon, see Σ 378, X 322. We
use ‘so far’ colloquially in a very similar,
though inexact, manner.

504

“- 3ϑ.»' ΄
λευκὸν σῆμα τέτυκτο περίτροχον ἠύτε μηνή.

IAIAAOC Ψ (xxi)

455

στῆ δ᾽ ὀρθὸς Kat μῦθον ἐν ᾿Αργείοισιν ἔειπεν"
“ὦ φίλοι, ᾿Αργείων ἡγήτορες ἠδὲ μέδοντες,
οἷος ἐγὼν ἵππους αὐγάζομαι ἣε καὶ ὑμεῖς ;
ἄχλοί μοι δοκέουσι παροίτεροι ἔμμεναι ἵπποι,

e / > r
ἄλλος δ᾽ ἡνίοχος ἰνδάλλεται" at δέ που αὐτοῦ

400

ἔβλαβεν ἐν πεδίωι, αἱ κεῖσέ ye φέρτεραι ἦσαν.
ἤτοι γὰρ τὰς πρῶτα ἴδον περὶ τέρμα βαλούσας,
νῦν δ᾽ οὔ πηι δύναμαι ἰδέειν. πάντηι δέ μοι ὄσσε
Τρωϊκὸν ἀμ πεδίον παπταίνετον εἰσορόωντι.

ἠὲ τὸν ἡνίοχον φύγον ἡνία, οὐδὲ δυνάσθη

465

> ͵ \ / \ > rh as Cut be

εὖ σχεθέειν περὶ τέρμα, καὶ οὐκ ἐτύχησεν ἑλίξας
/ of ΄ “ 5

ἔνθά μιν ἐκπεσέειν ὀΐω σύν θ᾽ ἅρματα a€at,

455. εῆμα τέτυκτο Ar. JP!RU Harl. a, Mosc. 2, Vr. A: cA’ ἐτέτυκτο {. |

uHNHc Vr. d.

TSyr. 462. Tac: crac P: τὰ G.
HPR: πρῶτον LQS Vr. A. ||

460. ἡνιόχω (). || ai.
461. Keice: κεῖθι Zen. Aph.: ἐκεῖςε Vr. A. |

> αὐταὶ Mose. 2: of . . αὐτοὶ Vr. A.

re om. CR: τε Pap. wu}. || φέρτεροι

πρῶτα 0 Liys.: np@tac (sic) T: πρώτας
κολούςας Vr. A.
(A supr.) JLQRT (U!2) Pap. μ, Harl. a, Mose. 2, Lips.: neo ὥ.
nantaineto J Par. b.
467. cUN: κατά JQST Harl. a, Mose. 2, yp. A. ||

463. 0° om. Lips. || mx(t) Aph.
464. du:
|| εἰεορόωντε Vr. Α΄".

ἂν Ὁ Syr. || παπταίνεται Ar. Q:
465. φύγεν A Bar. Vr. d.
ἅρματι P.

455. mepitpoxon, circular, so that

μήνη, Which recurs in H. only T 374,
must be the fwl/ moon; it seems more
natural to us to associate the moon-shape
with the crescent (like Horace, C. iv. 2.
57 Fronte curvatos imitatus ignes Tertium
lunae referentis ortum, Qua notam duxit
-niveus videri, Cetera fulvus. Compare
also Moschos Jd. 2. 84 τοῦ δ᾽ ἤτοι τὸ
μὲν ἄλλο δέμας EavOdxpoov ἔσκεν, κύκλος
δ᾽ ἀργύφεος μέσσωι μάρμαιρε μετώπωι).

458. αὐγάΖζομαι, discern, not again in
H. ; but Hes. Opp. 478 and in Attic
(also αὐγάζω). H. does not use αὐγή in
the sense of eye, but the ideas of light
and sight are almost interchangeable, see
note on © 345.

459. παροίτεροι (also 480), formed
directly from a locative adv. *rdpo (cf.
πάροιθε), as μυχοίτατος (@ 146) from
*ubyor, apaprepa from ἄφαρ. It is not
used again before Ap. Rhod.

460. ἰνϑάλλεται, comes in sight, see on
P 214.

461. κεῖςε, up to that point (referring
to αὐτοῦ, there). Here, as in A 528,
M 368, Zen. read κεῖθι.

462-64 are rejected by Kurtz and
many others. They contradict the

whole scene, which assumes that the
distant turn was invisible to the spec-
tators, as indeed is distinctly implied
in 466. Perhaps they were added by
a rhapsodist who thought that several
laps were run, and was anxious to intro-
duce an allusion to the nearer turn ; in
that case the τέρμα of 462 will be different
from that of 466, which must mean the
distant end. τάς is best taken as de-
monstrative, those (of which I speak).
It can hardly be relative with δέ in
apodosis, as this is found only when
the relative clause is hypothetical.
βαλούςας, intrans.; as in 639(?) and
A 722 of a river. This particular use
seems to be unique in Greek, and doubt-
less exemplifies the tendency which
exists in sport of all kinds, to create a
special vocabulary or ‘slang’ by a per-
version of the ordinary use of words.
Other instances may perhaps be found
in ἔμβητον 403, ἀνασχομένω 660, etc.

465. OundceH, only here and e 319 in
H.; the regular form is ἐδυνησάμην, while
ἐδυνήθην is not found at all.

466. cxeeéein (drive) looks here like
an aor, ; see on N 163. οὐκ ἐτύχηςεν.
Suiled.

IAIAAOC Ψ (χχπι)

αἱ & ἐξηρώησαν, ἐπεὶ μένος ἔλλαβε θυμόν.

5) \ ” \ Μ ᾽ εν» > \ wv

ἀλλὰ ἴδεσθε Kai ὕμμες avactadov* οὐ yap ἔγωγε

εὖ διαγινώσκω" δοκέει δέ μοι ἔμμεναι ἀνὴρ 170

> \ / A > > / > ΄
Αἰτωλὸς γενεήν, μετὰ δ᾽ ᾿Αργείοισιν ἀνάσσει,
rr ΄ ΄ ΄ er \ IAN ”
Γυδέος ἱπποδάμου υἱὸς, κρατερὸς Διομήδης.
‘ > > - . 7 ,Χ,Λ. Ἃ 7 ‘ v 1
τὸν δ᾽ αἰσχρῶς ἐνένιπεν ᾿Οἱλῆος ταχὺς Alas

““Ἰδομενεῦ, τί πάρος λαβρεύεαι;
ἵπποι ἀερσίποδες πολέος πεδίοιο δίενται. 473

΄ Ι] 4? ,
ai δ᾽ ἔτ᾽ ἄνευθεν

on

, LU ᾽ la
οὔτε νεώτατός ἐσσι μετ᾽ ᾿Αργείοισι τοσοῦτον,

ae 2 , a b] ΄ » Ἃ
οὔτέ τοι ὀξύτατον κεφαλῆς ἐκδέρκεται ὄσσε
ἀλλ᾽ αἰεὶ μύθοις λαβρεύεαι" οὖδέ τί σε χρὴ
,
λαβραγόρην Ewevar’ πάρα yap καὶ ἀμείνονες ἄλλοι.

468 om. H: precedes 467 in Vr. ἃ.
ie 471 ἀθ. Ar. || andccein RU.

Θ᾽ ἔτ᾽ Monro: ὃέ τ᾽ 2.
S Harl. Ὁ: διέντε Par. c σ

ἐκϑέρκετον PR: καταϑέρκεται Bachmann 47. ii. 314.

a0. Ar. || T ἔμλιεναι T.

470. diarirNwckw L: diareinwcKkw !’a)).
472. innouayou Vr. A.
473. énénicne(n) CJPQRSU Syr.: ἐνένιπτεν Cant.: ἐνέειπεν T Vr. A.
475. πολέες Vr. d.

g. 477. TOL:

innodauoio πάϊς PR.
474.
θίωνται (A supr.) QR (supr. €)

a@uuuonec Harl. a.

471 a@eretrat, ὅτι τὸ ἐπεξηγεῖσθαι
ποιητικόν, οὐχ ἡρωϊκοῦ προσώπου, An. ;
i.e. the description should be given by
the poet himself, not put into the
mouth of one of his characters. The
line certainly seems out of place here.
For ἀνὴρ . . υἱός, an unusual expres-
sion which may have caused the interpo-
lation, οἵ. φῶτ᾽ ᾿Ασκληπίου υἱόν A 194
and other passages quoted there.

473. aicypac, insultingly, see note
on T 38.

474. τί πάρος λαβρεύεαι, lit. why Jost
thou brag of old? i.e. why hast thou been
always a braggart? This use of πάρος
alone with the pres. recurs only @ 36
ὅσοι πάρος εἰσὶν ἄριστοι (cf. A 264), but
with τὸ πάρος, πάρος ye and πάρος περ
it is of course common enough, to express
a state of things lasting to the present
time. This givesa perfectly good sense ;
it is hard to see why commentators take
it in the artificial and un-Homeric mean-
ing ‘why dost thou boast before the
time,’ i.e. hastily (Dod. compares Soph.
Trach. 724 τὴν δ᾽ ἐλπίδ᾽ οὐ χρὴ THs τύχης
κρίνειν mdapos).—AdBpos (rather λαβρός
from \aB-epés, W.-M. Herc. ii. 65) is used
in H. of rushing wind or water (Ζέφυρος

nm HR. τινὲς ὀξύτερον Sch. Ὁ.
418. uveoic J). 479
B 148, κῦμα O 625, ποταμὸς. . λάβρος

ὕπαιθα ῥέων & 271, οὖρον o 293, and
λαβρότατον χέει ὕδωρ Π 385 are the only
other passages). It seems therefore to
imply a ‘torrential flow’ of words here
(‘reden wie ein Wasserfall’ W.-M. ut
supra, showing at the same time that
the later use had also another sense,
greedy, grasping); λάβρος στρατός the
chattering herd, Pindar, P. ii. 87 ; 0. ii.
86. Schol. A remarks the irony by
which Aias accuses Idomeneus of that
very fault of boastfulness which was in
the end his own ruin, ὃ 499-510.

475. déntai, are racing: the verb is
elsewhere trans. See on Σ 584.

476. Idomeneus is μεσαιπόλιος, N 361.

479 ἀθετεῖται, ὅτι οὐκ ἀναγκαῖος " πρό-
κειται γὰρ τὸ “᾿ἀλλ᾽ αἰεὶ μύθοισι λαβρεύεαι.᾽"
καὶ τὸ “πάρα γὰρ καὶ ἀμείνονες ἄλλοι ᾿᾿ οὐ
δεόντως ἐπιλέγεται" οὐ γὰρ ἀμεινόνων ἔργον
τὸ λαβρεύεσθαι, An. The last argument
is evidently wrong; the words simply
mean ‘do not let your tongue run in
the presence of your betters.” The line
can certainly be dispensed with, but
there is nothing to condemn it more
than this. The expansion of λαβρεύεαι
is in the Epic style.

506 IAIAAOC Ψ (xxi!)

, τ Ν ig
ἵπποι δ᾽ αὐταὶ ἔασι παροίτεραι al τὸ πάρος περ, 480
7 2)
Εὐμήλου, ἐν δ᾽ αὐτὸς ἔχων εὔληρα βέβηκε.
\ \ ΄ A SN > , "δ ς
τὸν δὲ χολωσάμενος Κρητῶν ἀγὸς ἀντίον ηὔδα
ΡῈ 5 A ” δε : NON ,
Aiav νεῖκος ἄριστε, Kaxoppadces, ἀλλὰ TE πάντα
΄ ε , \ : /
Sevear ᾿Αργείων, ὅτι τοι νόος ἐστὶν ἀπηνής.
a 3 JN /
δεῦρό νυν, ἢ τρίποδος περιδώμεθα ἠὲ λέβητος, 485
5 3 4h > / /
ἴστορα δ᾽ ᾿Δτρεΐδην ᾿Αγαμέμνονα θείομεν ἄμφω,
ὁππότεραι πρόσθ᾽ ἵπποι, ἵνα γνώηις ἀποτίνων."
ὡς ἔφατ᾽, ὥρνυτο δ᾽ αὐτίκ᾽ ᾿Οὐλῆος ταχὺς Αἴας

, a ᾽ / 2 7
χωόμενος χαλεποίσιν ἀμείψασθαι ἐπέεσσι.

, , \ , CARS) Μἷ » ’ > /
καί νύ κε δὴ προτέρω ET ερίς γένετ ἀμφοτεροίσιν, 490

480. αὐταὶ: αὖτε CDJQS. || παροίτεροι APQRS. || ai: of S.

Vr. b A.
Harl. a, Mose. 2: νείκει ὥ.
Ach. 771, Nub. 744.
ibid.: περιϑώμεθον 02.
γνόης Pap. μὶ (swpr. 1): τγνοίη(ι)ς 2.
on I 192.

481. βεβήκει

483. νεῖκος Ar. PR Syr. Bar. Mor. Vr. A Par. h: νείκη (U -supr.)
485. NUN ἢ: re NON Schol. Aristoph. Hqu. 788,
περιδώμεθα PT Harl. ad, Par. οἱ 6, Bar. Schol. Aristoph.

487. ὁππότεροι (Ρ 7) QR Vr. d. || γνώηις H Bar, (γνώιησ):
490. κε OH: K emt Pap. μ: κ᾽ ἔτι Sch. T

480. αὐταί the same, without the
article as M 225 (q.v.), @ 107, κ 263, 7
138, φ 366 ; see also E 396. The rarity
of the use no doubt led to the variant
αὖτε, with illicit hiatus, perhaps through
an intermediate αὖ ταί, which may have
led to the eccentric accents of Mss.
(αὖται A, αὗται, αὔται, attrac others). See
lath 1π οὐὲ Pe: xx 50:

481. eUAHpa, reins, a word which re-
appears in Greek only in two passages of
Quintus; but αὔληρα is quoted as a Doric
form from Epicharmos. Cp. Lat. dora.

483. νεῖκος, like εἶδος ἄριστε: it is
more idiomatic than the vulg. νείκει.
ἄλλά τε: the τε may be explained in
two ways: either it connects ἄλλα with
what precedes, a verbal construction
being substituted for the vocative, as
though ἄριστε were ἄριστος ἐσσί (sb
Monro); or it may look forward, as
though καὶ viv were to follow ἀπηνής
with a special enforcing of the general
accusation. But for καὶ viv ϑεῦρό NUN
is substituted with a change of thought.
If this be too violent, we can read with
Nauck καί for ὅτι. Idomeneus’ natural
resentment cools down even while he is
speaking, and he contents himself with
a mere challenge instead of returning
the insult with interest.

485, nepidoucoa, vulg. περιδώμεθον.
The only other instances in classical
Greek of the Ist pers. dual in -θον

are Soph. £7. 950 μόνα λελείμμεθον,
Phil. 1079 νὼ μὲν οὖν ὁρμώμεθον (where
see Jebb), in both cases with MS.
authority for -μεθα, which can be sub-
stituted without damage to the metre ;
Elmsley first pronounced in favour of
the change, and is followed by Nauck.
Though in Skt. the 1st dual is distinct
from the 2nd, the two coalesce in Greek,
and the form in -θον has no etymological
support ; it can only be explained as due
to analogy of the 2nd pers., -weBov : -μεθα
: : τσθον : -cHe. The usual desire to
avoid the hiatus will have been the
motive here for introducing a form which
looks like a figment of the grammarians.
Moreover we ought perhaps to read
περιδωόμεθ᾽ with van L. For περιδόσθαι
=to wager cf. w 78 ἐγὼν ἐμέθεν περιδώ-
σομαι αὐτῆς, L will wager my life.
Several instances from Aristophanes
will be found in Lexx. The use is
evidently conn. with that of ἐπιδόσθαι
X 254, but the origin of it is obscure.
For the gen. see H. G. § 153. The
shortened NUN recurs in H. only in Καὶ
105: vv Brandreth. é

486. ἴετορα, winpire, see Σ 501 (App.
I, § 26).

487. rNwuxic is poorly supported but
necessary ; the vulg. γνοίης is a corrup-
tion which to our mss. is inevitable.

490. προτέρω γένετ᾽, proceeded further,
as 526.

IAIAAOC Ψ (xxii) 507

> A 2 \ \ bY , “-
εἰ μὴ Ἀχιλλεὺς αὐτὸς ἀνίστατο καὶ φάτο μῦθον"
/ lal »“
“ μηκέτι νῦν χαλεποῖσιν ἀμείβεσθον
3 ? lal “
Αἶαν ᾿Ιδομενεῦ τε, κακοῖς, ἐπεὶ οὐδὲ

ἐπέεσσιν,
ἔοικε.

\ > » “- τ - ΄, ΄
καὶ ὃ ἄλλωι νεμεσᾶτον, ὅτις τοιαῦτά γε ῥέζοι.

’ » e€ lal > a ΄,
ἀλλ ὑμεῖς ἐν ἀγῶνι καθήμενοι εἰσοράασθε 495
JA ¢ \ 4 A" ‘
ἵππους: οἱ δὲ τάχ᾽ αὐτοὶ ἐπειγόμενοι περὶ νίκης
> aN) ΄ , \ , ne
ἐνθάδ᾽ ἐλεύσονται: τότε δὲ γνώσεσθε ἕκαστος
a , / “Ὁ / 6; , ”
ἵππους Apyeiwv, οἱ δεύτεροι οἵ τε πάροιθεν.

“δ / Fh \ ͵, ‘ > ,

ὡς φάτο, Τυδεΐδης δὲ μάλα σχεδὸν ἦλθε διώκων

/ δ᾽ ὟΝ ἔλ, , ¢ / e “
μάστι δ᾽ αἰὲν ἔλαυνε κατωμαδόν: οἱ δέ οἱ ἵπποι
΄ Ὧ τὰ > ΄, ey 7,
ὑψοσ᾽ ἀειρέσθην ῥίμφα πρήσσοντε κέλευθον.

SEN δ᾽ Cs / . 7 »,
αἰεὶ ἡνίοχον κονίης ῥαθάμιγγες ἔβαλλον,
ov \ lal /
ἅρματα δὲ χρυσῶι πεπυκασμένα κασσιτέρωι TE
4 > / 4
ἵπποις ὠκυπόδεσσιν ἐπέτρεχον' οὐδέ TL πολλὴ

500

491. Kai φάτο μῦθον : ἐν ἄλλωι Kai κατέρυκε A.

ἀμείβεςθ᾽ J: dueiBecee Harl. a:

re om. P: τε (Ὁ. || ῥέζει () : ῥέζηι H: ῥέξοι ὃ.
ἕκαςτοι Vr. A. 498. δεύτατοι (). | TE:
Vr. A: χιάστιγα C. || of δέ: ai δέ Vr. A.

te Vr. Ὁ: 0’ αὖ Plut. Mor. 7418.
mie. Te ὦ.

493 was rejected by Heyne, and is
painfully weak. The position of κακοῖς
is unexampled, and κακῶς is hardly
better. The ἄναξ of Sch. T is not put
forward as more than a conjecture to
meet the difficulty. (Agar would adopt
it however, reading ἄναξ (1) as dat. pl.,
for princes it is not seemly: J. P. xxv.
319. This is perhaps possible, though we
have ἀνάκτεσι, 0 557.) The metre halts
too, the first foot being a trochee instead
of a spondee ; the arguments in favour
of such lengthening being permissible
here are wholly insufficient (App. D, ὁ
2). There are no traces of F in ᾿Ιδομενεύς:
Knos (Dig. 111) says ‘loci Homerici
consonam initialem obstinatissime re-
spuunt,’ and there can of course be no
doubt that the last syll. of Avav is short.
The simplest remedy would be to read
Aidy τ᾽, with Barnes ; Alas ᾿Ιδομενεύς τε
Wackernagel.

494. So ζ 286 καὶ δ᾽ ἄλληι νεμεσῶ, ἥ τις
τοιαῦτά γε ῥέζοι, and cf. a 47. The use
of the opt. after the pres. is rare; it
‘avoids assuming that the case will ever

aueiBecoat Pap. μ (sur. ON over al).
κακῶς Vr. A: ἄμεινον γράφειν ἄναξ Sch. T.

το G Pap. μ.

χαλκῶι Plut. ibid.

492. ἀμείψαςθαι 1) :
493.

494. ἄλλον (). || ὅςτις CDQT.
495. eicopaaceon |’R. 497.
500. μάςτιγι J PORSTU
501. κέλευθα Vr. A. 503. δὲ:
504. énérpeyen op. Did.

oceur,’ H. G. ὃ 305¢; and compare note
on P 631.

500. udeti from the stem μαστῖ- of
which μαστιγ- Ξε μαστὶ-(γ- is a derivative.
It recurs in Greek only o 182 μάστιν.
The verbs μαστίω (P 622, T 171) and
μαστίζω answer to the two stems. Cf.
bpvis beside ὄρνϊς Ξε ὄρνι-ιθ-ς : and for the
form of the dat. κνήστι A 640, Σ 407.
κατωμαῦδόν as O 352.

501. deipéceHn, bownded under the
strokes of the lash ; so also » 83..,

502. paeduurrec, sprinklings, cf. A 536,
where the word is used more naturally
of blood.

503. nenuxacuéna, covered up; this is
the only sense in which the word occurs
in H., and must be a hyperbolical ex-
pression ; see B 777. For the use of
metal facings for the wood-work of cars
see Καὶ 438 and A 226; Helbig, H.£. p.
143. In Hymn. ix. 4 this was further
developed into a παγχρύσεον ἅρμα. Kac-
citépoor, A 24.

504. énétpeyon, van on their heels, as
if overtaking them.

508 IAIAAOC Ψ (xxi!)

γίνετ᾽ ἐπισσώτρων ἁρματροχιὴ κατόπισθεν 505
ἐν λεπτῆι Kovinur τὼ δὲ σπεύδοντε πετέσθην.
“τι δὲ μέσωι ἐν ἀγῶνι, πολὺς δ᾽ ἀνεκήκιεν ἱδρὼς
ἵππων ἔκ τε λόφων καὶ ἀπὸ στέρνοιο χαμᾶζε.
αὐτὸς δ᾽ ἐκ δίφροιο χαμαὶ θόρε παμφανόωντος,
κλῖνε δ᾽ ἄρα μάστιγα ποτὶ ξυγόν. οὐδὲ μάτησεν 510
ἴφθιμος Σθένελος, ἀλλ᾽ ἐσσυμένως λάβ᾽ ἄεθλον,
δῶκε δ᾽ ἄγειν ἑτάροισιν ὑπερθύμοισι γυναῖκα
καὶ τρίποδ᾽ ὠτώεντα φέρειν: ὁ δ᾽ ἔλυεν ὑφ᾽ ἵππους.

τῶι δ᾽ dp ἐπ᾽ ᾿Αντίλοχος Νηλήϊος ἤλασεν ἵππους,
κέρδεσιν, οὔ τι τάχει γε, παραφθάμενος. Μενέλαον" 515
ἀλλὰ καὶ ws Μενέλαος ἔχ᾽ ἐγγύθεν ὠκέας ἵππους.
ὅσσον δὲ τροχοῦ ἵππος ἀφίσταται, ὅς ῥά T ἄνακτα
ἕλκηισιν πεδίοιο τιταινόμενος σὺν ὄχεσφι"
τοῦ μέν τε Wavovow ἐπισσώτρου τρίχες ἄκραι
οὐραῖαι" o 66 T ἄγχι μάλα τρέχει, οὐδέ τι πολλὴ 520
χώρη μεσσηγύς, πολέος πεδίοιο θέοντος"
τόσσον δὴ Μενέλαος ἀμύμονος ᾿Αντιλόχοιο
λείπετ᾽" ἀτὰρ τὰ πρῶτα καὶ ἐς δίσκουρα λέλευιπτο,
ἀλλά μιν αἶψα κίχανεν: ὀφέλλετο γὰρ μένος HU

505 om. Q. || rirnet’ L. || ὀπιεεώτρων 1). 506. METECOHN: ἐν ἄλλωι
néTecoon A. 509. naugandentoc Ρ. 511. AGB’: Bad’ QT" (2). 515. re
om. Q: τε H. 515-16 om. Vr. Ὁ. 517. Sccén τε H. || T om. Eust. 519.

ὁπιεςώτρου A. 521. μεςςηγὺ H Vr.
οὖρα QS Par. Ὁ, and ap. Did.

b. 522. OH: Ve Ambr.

523. Oickou

505. This line again is hyperbolical,
like T 227 ; the cars go so fast as hardly
to leave any rut (ἁρματροχιή) in the fine
dust.

510. οὐδὲ κάτηςεν, see II 474.

512. Grein, the act. because it is for
another ; in 263 the mid. is used because
the winner is himself subject of the
verb.

513. ὠτώεντα, see on 264. ἔλυεν,
read ἔλυσεν with Barnes and Brandreth ;
non-sigmatic tenses have ὕ (App. D, p.
594).

514. Νηηλήϊος, from his grandfather,
as Achilles is Αἰακίδης. The adj. is
elsewhere used only of Nestor.

515. τι τάχει : τάχεΐ Menrad.

517. The front of the wheel of the
Greek chariot is represented as either in
line with the front of the car or a little
in advance of it ; see the illustrations in
Helbig, H. £. ch. ix. He concludes

mo

from uss passage, in connexion with B
390, X 22, that one-horse chariots were
know n to H. (A. #. p. 128); but the
words do not require this inference.

518. Cf. the similar passage X 23.
The order of the words here confirms the
belief that πεϑίοιο and τιταινόμενος need
not be taken together.

521. So πολέος πεδίοιο θέουσαι A 244.
πολέος adds the idea of an open un-
hindered course in which the highest
possible speed may be obtained.

523, Oickoupa, see 431. The com-
pound occurs here only, and appears to
have offended some of the ancient critics,
who read δίσκου οὖρα with synizesis or
dick’ οὖρα with elision.
composition is unusual but not un-
paralleled ; cf. δημογέρων -- δήμου “γέρων.
éc=as much as, analogous to the
common temporal use as long as to,
until,

The form of

IAIAAOC ¥ (xxi)

4 a ᾽ /
ἵππου τῆς Αγαμεμνονέης, καλλίτριχος Αἴθης. 525
> , ᾽ »Μ
εἰ δέ K ἔτι προτέρω γένετο δρόμος ἀμφοτέροισι,
TO κέν μιν παρέλασσ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ἀμφήριστον ἔθηκεν.
Χο Ν , cs I > TS a
αὐτὰρ Μηριόνης θεράπων ἐὺς ᾿Ιδομενῆος
’ a ‘

λείπετ᾽ ἀγακλῆος Μενελάου δουρὸς ἐρωήν'

a / C4 ΄“
βάρδιστοι μὲν yap οἱ ἔσαν καλλίτριχες ἵπποι, 580

" δ᾽ ᾿ > \ / .“ > >? ’ -
ἤκιστος δ᾽ ἣν αὐτὸς ἐλαυνέμεν ἅρμ᾽ ἐν ἀγῶνι.

[Δ ,’ / / »

υἱὸς δ᾽ ᾿Αδμήτοιο πανύστατος ἤλυθεν ἄλλων

“ “ ΄ > ΄ ῃ “
ἕλκων ἅρματα καλά, ἐλαύνων πρύόσσοθεν ἵππους.
Ἁ \ 5 \ , lal ͵
τὸν δὲ ἰδὼν ὠικτειρε ποδάρκης δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς,

στὰς δ᾽ ap ἐν ᾿Αργείοις ἔπεα πτερόεντ᾽ ἀγόρευε"
ρ ΡΎ ; ρ γορευε

on
ceo
σι

KEY, r θ ’ \ [4 9. / / s
οἶσθος ἀνὴρ ὥριστος ἐλαύνει μώνυχας ἵππους"
> Tn τῳ , ΄ a , ΄

ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε δή οἱ δῶμεν ἀέθλιον, ὡς ἐπιεικές,

» lal r / er
δεύτερ᾽' ἀτὰρ τὰ πρῶτα φερέσθω Τυδέος υἱός.

»”

“Ὁδ vv > ΄ > " ΄ , ΄
ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα πάντες ἐπήινεον ὡς ἐκέλευε.

,ὔ , , € / “, ΡῚ / \ > /
Kal VU KE Ol πόρεν ἵππον, ETHWHTAaVY yap ᾿Αχαιοί, 540

527. KEN: Kai HPR Bar.: κέ Ὁ.
Bapoicrai Syr. Vr. A.

npéceen Vr. A, Par. g: ὠκέας Zen.

Gpreioicin GQ Syr. | πτερόεντα προςηύϑα DHJTU Vr. b.

533. πρόςςοθεν Ar. ἢ : npdcwoen PR :

οὐδ᾽: A Zen.: 8 3° Par. g. 530.
πρόςςωο᾽ Lys. :
ἄρ᾽ om. CGT.

538. ἔν τισιν ὑποτάσ-

535. «τὰς: τοὺς J.

σονται τούτωι τὰ τρίτα ὃ᾽ ᾿Αντίλοχος, τέτρατα =anedc Μενέλαος, πέμπτα δὲ

Μηριόνης, ϑεραπὼν ἐὺς ᾿Ιϑοχλιενῆος An.
Syr. Vr. A Par. e, ἐν ἄλλωι A: ὡς ἐκέλευον Vr. d.
ἐπήινεον Vr. A.

énxX(t)Necan DJ() Lips. :

-
=

525. For the use of the article see
H. G. § 260 (7).

526. ef κε with indic. occurs only
here in H.; but Monro (H. G. § 324)
compares the oracle in Herod. i. 174
Zeds γάρ κ᾽ ἔθηκε νῆσον εἴ x’ ἐβούλετο
(εἴ γ᾽ Steger), Aristoph. Lys. 1099 αἴ x’
εἶδον ἀμέ (Spartan), and Erinna iv. 4
(where, however, we shouldread αἱ καὐδάν,
not ai x’ αὐδάν). These are perhaps the
only instances in Greek, till we come
to the late Hellenistic use of ἐάν with
indic., and are inadequate to defend such
an exceptional use here. We can read εἰ
δὲ κ᾿ (αἰ), but the elision is doubtful (see
note on Z 260) and the καί has no special
significance. The couplet looks like a
poorinterpolation made up of 490 and 882.

530. βάρϑιετοι, an honour assigned to
Autilochos’ team in 310.

531. Hxicroc from ἦκα, the opposite
of ἀφάρτερος as ἄφαρ is of ἧκα. It is
the same word as Att. ἥκιστος, as indeed
some read here, rightly perhaps, for we
have ἥσσονας in 322. Cf. σ 92 Fx’ ἐλάσειε.

539. ἐπήνεςαν |’. ἠδ᾽ ἐκέλευον H
540. of : δὴ Vr. A.
ἀχαιοί : ἐν ἄλλωι of ἄλλοι A.

532. manuctatoc ἄλλων, cf. ὠκυμορώ-
τατος ἄλλων, A 505.

533. mpdccoeen, dz. λεγόμενον, ap-
parently before him, though the sense
is not easily reconciled with the form of
the word, which should moreover be
mpi(c)owbev. Ar. explained ‘leading
the horses by the reins and whipping
them from the front’ (hardly a likely
way to make them come). Van Her-
werden conj. πρὸ ἔθεν, with πρό length-
ened before (oF)é@ev as in ἀπὸ
Z 62 ete. Brandreth reads καὶ ἵππους
πρόσθεν ἐλαύνων, van L. πρόσθε Fé'(o).
Bentley, Heyne, and Nauck regard the
line as spurious. Zen. read ὠκέας ἵππους.
The chariot could easily be dragged, for
it can even be carried, by a single man ;
K 505.

536. Bentley’s ingenious conj. ἐλαύνειν
for ἐλαύνει has been adopted by Nauck
and von Christ.

537. The apposition of ἀέϑλιον . . δεύ-
tepa is harsh, but not impossible. Bothe’s
conj. ἀέθλια is, however, very probable.

ἕθεν

510 IAIAAOC Ψ (xx)

εἰ μὴ ἄρ᾽ ᾿Αντίλοχος μεγαθύμου Νέστορος υἱὸς

Πηλεΐδην ᾿Αχιλῆα diene ἠμείψατ᾽ ἀναστάς"

“ὦ ᾿Αχιλεῦ, μάλα τοι κεχολώσομαι, αἴ κε τελέσσηις
τοῦτο ἔπος: μέλλεις γὰρ ἀφαιρήσεσθαι ἄεθλον,

τὰ φρονέων ὅτι οἱ BrAaBev ἅρματα καὶ ταχέ ἵππω 545
αὐτός τ᾽ ἐσθλὸς ἐών. GAN ὦὥφελεν ἀθανάτοισιν
εὔχεσθαι: TH K οὔ τι πανύστατος ἦλθε διώκων.
εἰ δέ μιν οἰκτείρεις καί τοι φίλος ἔπλετο θυμῶι,
ἔστί τοι ἐν κλισίηι χρυσὸς πολύς, ἔστι δὲ χαλκὸς

\ \ oe “
καὶ πρόβατ᾽, εἰσὶ δέ τοι δμωαὶ καὶ μώνυχες ἵπποι" 550
- Ὁ “ AN tal BA
τῶν ol ἔπειτ᾽ ἀνελὼν δόμεναι Kat μεῖζον ἄεθλον,

JN \ 3. Ὁ a Ωγ" > > / oy NC /
ἠὲ καὶ αὐτίκα νῦν, ἵνα σ᾽ αἰνήσωσιν Axavot.

\ > ’ AN b] ὃ y \ δ᾽ > an fA) μὰ
τὴν δ᾽ ἐγὼ οὐ δώσω: περὶ αὐτῆς πειρηθήτω
> “ “ ,’ 52 2 \ / / θ 3»)
ἀνδρῶν ὅς κ᾽ ἐθέληισιν ἐμοὶ χείρεσσι μάχεσθαι.

« a ? \
ὡς φάτο, μείδησεν δὲ ποδάρκης δῖος Αχιλλεὺς 555
/ > / “ e , > c aA
χαίρων Αντιλόχωι, OTL οἱ φίλος nev εταΐῖρος"
/ /
καί μιν ἀμειβόμενος ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα:
“ἸΑντίλοχ᾽, εἰ μὲν δή με κελεύεις οἴκοθεν ἄλλο
lal /
Εὐμήλωι ἐπιδοῦναι, ἐγὼ δέ κε Kal TO τελέσσω.

543. ταλάςςηις Vr. ἡ. 547. τῶ κ᾽: τῶ(ι) κεν C (supr. 0) PQS Mosc. 2:
τό KEN ὥ. || ἤλυθεν ἄλλων D (cf. 532). 548. φίλος AGJT Harl. a Syr. and
πᾶσαι Did.: φίλονς᾽ (sic) C: φίλον ©. 550. ΤΟΙ om. H: of D Pap. mu (supr. T).

553. πειραϑθήτω J. 557. πτερόεντ᾽ Gropeven Mosc. 2. 558. Kai οἴκοθεν J
Harl. a.

542. ϑίκηι, perhaps in modern phrase
‘made a formal appeal,’ lit. ‘answered
by the custom,’ i.e. in accordance with
the ‘rule’ which is the intermediate
step between the senses of ‘custom’
and ‘legal judgment.’ As Antilochos,
though in his right as against Eumelos,
is yet in the wrong towards Menelaos,
the word can hardly mean ‘ with justice,’
though this is the later sense of δίκηι
(rag ΦΆΡΟΝ

546. αὐτός is added by an_after-
thought, the preceding οἱ being for-
gotten ; his chariot was overthrown and
his horses—and himself for all his skill.
The difficulties which have been found
in the words are imaginary. Nagelsbach
on I’ 211 would read αὐτός γ᾽, taking
the nom. as absolute; but there is no
instance of nom. absolute in H. which
cannot be explained by an anacoluthon,
see on I’ 211. Déderlein appears to
take a similar view, though he includes

ταχέ᾽ ἵππω in the absolute constr. ; nan
equi Eumeli non sunt laesi. But βλάβεν
only implies ‘stopped in their course,’
as 571, Z 39. The efficacy of a com-
batant’s prayer is proved by Odysseus
(770) and Meriones (872); and by Pan-
daros (A 101).

547. τῶ κ᾽, so Bentley, most Mss.
having τό κεν. This gives the wrong
sense, therefore, while Tro=in that case,
B 250 and often (o 402-3 is precisely
similar).

551. ἔπειτα hereafter, opposed to αὐτίκα
νῦν, as v 63.

553. For the absolute use of meipH-
ϑήτω, ‘try conclusions,’ οἵ, Φ 225"Exrope
πειρηθῆναι ἀντιβίην.

558. οἴκοθεν, from my store; so 592,
H 364, 391. οἷκος in this sense is else-
where peculiar to the Od., e.g. p 455
οὐ σύ γ᾽ ἂν ἐξ οἴκου oat ἐπιστάτηι οὐδ᾽
ἅλα δοίης. ;

IAIAAOC Ψ (χχπι) 511

, ΄ > cal
δώσω οἱ θώρηκα, τὸν ᾿Αστεροπαῖον ἀπηύρων, 560
χάλκεον, ὧι πέρι χεῦμα φαεινοῦ κασσιτέροιο
ἀμφιδεδίνηται" πολέος δέ οἱ ἄξιος ἔσται."
> ΄ \ Ad ὃ IX ? aN E e ,
ἢ pa καὶ Αὐτομέδοντι φίλωι ἐκέλευσεν ἑταίρωι
> , ΄ ’ v ΄ "
οἰσέμεναι κλισίηθεν: ὁ ὃ ὠιχετο καί οἱ ἔνεικεν.
> ΄ 3 ο \ / e \ , ,
[Ππὐμήλωι δ᾽ ἐν χερσὶ τίθει" 0 δὲ δέξατο yaipwr.| 565
° \ \ , + I \ > ΄,
τοῖσι δὲ καὶ Μενέλαος ἀνίστατο θυμὸν ἀχεύων,
/ ᾽ » “-
᾿Αντιλόχων ἄμοτον κεχολωμένος: ἐν δ᾽ ἄρα κῆρυξ
χειρὶ σκῆπτρον ἔθηκε, σιωπῆσαί τε κέλευσεν
"A , Ξ ε δ᾽
ργείους" ὁ
, / a »
“᾿Αντίλοχε, πρόσθεν πεπνυμένε, ποῖον ἔρεξας ; 570
” \ 38 > , ἮΝ ΄ δέ “
ἤισχυνας μὲν ἐμὴν ἀρετήν, βλάψας δέ μοι ἵππους,
\ \ , ΄ ξ΄ >
τοὺς σοὺς πρόσθε βαλών, οἵ τοι πολὺ χείρονες ἦσαν.
» 5 ne > "A t ¢e / »O\ ,
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγετ᾽, ᾿Αργείων ἡγήτορες ἠδὲ μέδοντες,
/ ΄ “
ἐς μέσον ἀμφοτέροισι δικάσσατε, μηδ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἀρωγῆι,

ἔπειτα μετηύδα ἰσόθεος φώς:

560. ἀπηῦρον GQ Cant.: ἀπαύρων J (spr. HU over αὖ). 561. nepiyuua Vr. A.
562. οἵ : τοι C Mosc. 2. || ἄξιον ACDJSTU Mor. Vr. ἃ. 563. ἐκάλεςεν |).
565 om. ACHQT Pap. μ, Syr. Vr. b A. || εὐμήλου S. || χειρὶ PR. 567. €N:
an ὦ. 568. χειρὶ ACHP Bar. Mor. Ven. B: yxepci 2, yp. A. | T° ἐκέλευεν
LR Lips. Bar.: 0° ἐκέλευεν P. 570. τοῖον 1". 572. ἧςαν : εἰσιν Syr.
574, ἀμφοτέρων S. || ϑικάεςετε 1) Vr. A. | WHO: μὴ P.

mean that the sheath was adorned with
ivory rings.

562. ἄξιος: the reading ἄξιον may have
come from @ 405, where it agrees with
ἄορ, but it is defensible here in the
sense it will be a precious thing for him.

565. Interpolated from 624 as Ms.
evidence shews.

568. For the significance of the
CKANTpoN see on A 294. χειρί, not
χερσί, is the natural form in this con-

560. For the taking of Asteropaios’
armour see ® 183. Nothing was said
there, however, as to his wearing a
breastplate, though if he had one he
must have been wounded through it
with a sword (180). The whole episode
of the Games seems therefore to belong
to the period when the corslet had come
to be an essential part of the panoply
(App. B, iii.).

561. χεῦμα: ἐδήλωσε τὸν ἐκκεχυμένον

τε καὶ πεπηγμένον τῶι θώρακι κασσίτερον,
Schol. T. The word χεῦμα must imply
a knowledge of some process of covering
a metal surface with tin ; see App. I, ὃ 9,
and compare the use of κασσίτερος to
adorn the breastplate of Agamemnon,
A 24. Gu@idedinHtar is obscure. [Ὁ
might perhaps mean 7s set around, im-
plying that the glaze of tin entirely
covered the surface of the plate. But
we may equally well translate swrrownds
in circles, i.e. in strips running round ;
the οἷμοι of A 24. See note on δινωτοῖσι
I 391, The whole line 562 recurs in 6
405, where it is used of the scabbard of
a sword, κολεὸν δὲ νεοπρίστου ἐλέφαντος
ἀμφιδ. κτλ. This may perfectly well

nexion, see B 37, σ 103, but we have
χερσί in K 328, and the plur. is used
when gifts or prizes are in question, e.g.
[565], 624, 797, A 441, @ 406, o 130.
But when a cup is offered Ar. preferred
the singular ; see A 585 compared with
596 (La R. H. 7. p. 378).

571. ἀρετήν, evidently sii//; but T
411 ποδῶν ἀρετήν and Ψ 276, 374 in
the different sense of speed, while in 578
it must be taken as in I 498 of dignity,
rank.

572. βαλών, cf. 462.

574. ἐς μέςον impartially between us;
ἐπ᾽ ἀρωγῆι, by way of partisanship, acting

as dpwyoi in a public trial. See on >
502.

on
_
bo

/ /
μή ποτέ τις εἴπηισιν

IAIAAOC Ψ (xxtir)

᾿Αχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων : 575

“᾿Αντίλοχον ψεύδεσσι βιησάμενος Μενέλαος
οἴχεται ἵππον ἄγων, ὅτι οἱ πολὺ χείρονες ἦσαν
ἵπποι, αὐτὸς δὲ κρείσσων ἀρετῆι τε βίηι Te.

εἰ δ᾽ ἄγ᾽ ἐγὼν αὐτὸς δικάσω, καί μ᾽ οὔ τινά φημι

ἄλλον ἐπιπλήξειν Δαναῶν: ἰθεῖα γὰρ
᾿Αντίλοχ᾽, εἰ δ᾽ ἄγε δεῦρο, διοτρεφές,

\ “ / \ e » Ν ε ΄ fA)
στὰς ἵππων προπάροιθε καὶ ἅρματος, αὐτὰρ ἱμάσθλην
’ π / ᾿
χερσὶν ἔχε ῥαδινήν, ἣν περ τὸ πρόσθεν ἔλαυνες,
/ c /
ἵππων ἁψάμενος γαιήοχον ἐννοσίγαιον

” δὴ \ «ον \ ON 60 “ δῇ ”
ὄμνυθι μὴ μὲν ἑκὼν TO ἐμὸν δόλων ἅρμα πεδῆσαι.

ἔσται. ὅ80
ΩΣ / > /
ἣ θέμις ἐστί,

585

581 ad. Ar.
ἔχεν Vr. ἡ.

578. αὐτός Te T.
Eust.: ἔχον T (swpr. €) :

| at δ᾽ (CDPR:
584.
uHOeN P Paus. vii. 21. 8. || ἅρμα ddkw DP:

ai 0’ T.
ἵππων 0 Vr. A
θόλωι om. C.

583. ἔχων ()
585. UH UEN:

577. ὅτι oi, κτλ., a good instance of
primitive parataxis, two clauses being
merely set side by side, the hearer having
to supply the connexion of thought.
Here the meaning is ‘Menelaos takes
the prize because, though his horses were
beaten, yet he himself had the advantage
in rank and power.’

579. It is indifferent whether we take
OiKdcw as fut. indic. or aor. subj. 7
myself will decide by bringing the matter
to the test of an oath. (The translation
I myself will plead my cause gives a less
vigorous sense, and does not suit the use
of the verb.) μτξ μοι, see M 211 det μέν
πώς μοι ἐπιπλήσσεις ἀγορῆισιν.

ὅ80. ae sc. δίκη implied in δικάσω.
See App. I, § 29.

581 ἀθετεῖται, ὅτι ἀκαίρως λέγει “* διο-
Tpepes,” ὀργιζόμενος αὐτῶι, Ariston. If
this was Ar.’s only ground of athetesis,
it is a singularly inadequate one. Such
formal epithets of honour are used even
by mortal foes, e.g. δῖος of Paris by
Menelaos I’ 352, of Achilles by Andro-
mache X 455. H θέμις écti, as ts the
custom at races, 1.6. with all the for-
malities of the next line. This recalls
the oath taken by each competitor in
the races at Olympia.

583. ἔχε mss.; edd. generally read
ἔχων from Hust., but that is not likely
to have been corrupted, and it is more
in the Homeric style to revert from the
participial to the direct constr. - The
peculiarity here is that crdc is co-ordin-
ate with ἁψάμενος and belongs to ὄμνυθι,
not to the preceding ἄγε δεῦρο. This

makes αὐτὰρ... ἔλαυνες a parenthesis
grammatically, but it does not follow
that the poet felt it as such; to him
ards though subordinate in form was in
feeling an imper. The dislike of the
primitive linguistic instinct to a long-
continued subordination of clauses is
expressed by the interpolation of a
single independent term in the series.
(It “might be suggested that ards is an
imper. like δός, θές, lengthened by ictus;
but the difficulties of such a supposition
are obvious, as there is nothing to prevent
the use of στῆθι.) Though Eust, reads
ἔχων (in the lemma only, not in the
text), his explanation evidently refers to
ἔχε. ἐν δὲ τῶι “αὐτὰρ ἱμάσθλην χερσὶν
ἔχων ᾿᾿ δοκεῖ περιττὸς εἶναι ὁ σύνδεσμος
τεθεὶς ἀντὶ τοῦ δή. This is intelligible
only if we read ἔχε and put a colon
after ἔλαυνες, as his text has.

584. ταιήοχον €NnNociraion, I 183.
This passage has frequently been quoted
as shewing that Poseidon was to Homer,
as to later Greece, god of: horses, Ἵππιος
(see Pausan. vii. 21. 8). But other
indications of this function are so doubt-
ful that no stress can be laid on it (see
also on 277, 307). Poseidon 15 the
natural god for Antilochos to swear by,
as being the god of his race, and father
of his grandfather Neleus.

585. The neglected F of Fexoon has
given rise to sundry conjectures, of which
the most plausible is suggested by Heyne
μὴ μὲν ἐμὸν σὺ (γε Brandreth) βεκὼν.
This also avoids the hiatus τὸ ἐμόν (for
τοὐμόν Ὁ or dudv? see O 360). Other

IAIAAOC Ψ (χχπι)

513

> < , /
τὸν δ᾽ adr ᾿Αντίλοχος πεπνυμένος ἀντίον ηὔδα"

ἐς " a \ \ » , , >

ἄνσχεο νῦν: πολλὸν yap ἔγωγε νεώτερός εἰμι

“ Ἁ , ‘ /
σεῖο, ἄναξ Μενέλαε, σὺ δὲ πρότερος Kal ἀρείων.

3 > / > \ e ’ a
οἷσθ᾽ olat νέου ἀνδρὸς ὑπερβασίαι τελέθουσι"

,ὔ / -

κραιπνότερος μὲν γάρ τε νόος, λεπτὴ δέ TE μῆτις’ 590

a > / / if , > \
τῶ TOL ETLTANTHO κραδίη" ἵππον δέ τοι αὐτὸς

δώσω, τὴν ἀρόμην: εἰ καί νύ κεν οἴκοθεν ἄλλο

μεῖζον ἐπαιτήσειας, ἄφαρ κέ τοι αὐτίκα δοῦναι

βουλοίμην ἢ σοί γε, διοτρεφές, ἤματα πάντα

ἐκ θυμοῦ πεσέειν καὶ δαίμοσιν εἶναι ἀλιτρός." 595

ge ¢ Wi? » ΄ τ "
ἢ ῥα καὶ ἵππον ἄγων μεγαθύμου Νέστορος υἱὸς

ἐν χείρεσσι τίθει Μενελάου: τοῖο δὲ θυμὸς

4 e » \ / ~ Ts
ἰάνθη ὡς εἴ TE περὶ σταχύεσσιν ἐέρσηι

ληΐου ἀλδήσκοντος, ὅτε φρίσσουσιν ἄρουραι"

586. αὖτ᾽ : αὖ P.
ἴσχεο A: ἄςςχεο Dem. Sid.
ἁράμην HH.

587. Gcxyeo King’s: ἀνάςχεο (): aicyeo Par. e:
588. coio I’.
693. ἁπαιτήςειαα AJQRTU Pap. μ, Harl. a, Par.abedfg (La ΒΕ.

ἐν ἄλλωι

589. οίου 1). | τελέουει (). 592.

gives no MS. evidence for this reading, not even A—presumably through careléssness).

594. διοτρεφὲς : iaunepéc R Bar. Mor.

alterations (μή τι, μή με, Fexwv) are highly
improbable, as they lose the characteristic
μέν of the oath. But in the Games
we must not seek anxiously to restore
ancient forms.

590. λεπτὴ 0€ Te μῆτις, Καὶ 226, where
see note. For the general sense compare
Τ' 108.

591. ἐπιτλήτω κραδίη as T 220. φιλο-
τίμως τὴν μὲν νίκην προσποιεῖται, τοῦ δὲ
ἀθλίου ἐξίσταται ἑκών - ὁ γὰρ λέγων ““αὐτὸς
δώσω" κατασκευάζει ὅτι ἐμὴν οὖσαν λήψηι.
τούτωι δὲ συνάιδει καὶ τὸ “εἰ καί νύ κεν

οἴκοθεν ἄλλο,᾽᾽ Schol. T.

593. ἄφαρ . . αὐτίκα, like πάλιν αὖτις,
ἂψ πάλιν, etc. βουλοίμην H, see A
wT,

595. ἐκ θυμοῦ necéein, another form
of the phrase ἀπὸ θυμοῦ εἶναι, A 562.
ἁλιτρός, a confession that he cannot
take the oath demanded of him.

598. His heart was gladdened as (the
heart) of growing corn (is gladdened) with
the dew upon the ears. Most edd. read
éépon: MSS. are no authority on such
a point, though T at least has ἐέρσηι,
which Heyne suggested and Lange has
defended at length. The nom. gives no
good sense; it is absurd to say that
Menelaos’ heart ‘ was comforted like the
dew’; it is obviously the dew which

VOL. II

“599. ppiccwan T Pap. μ, Vr. b.

comforts the corn, not vice versa.
Various attempts have been made to ex-
plain the nom. ; e.g. Fiisi would supply
γίγνεται to ἐέρση and understand the
clause καὶ οὕτω τὸ λήϊον ἰαίνεται. Heyne
thinks ἰάνθη means ‘became warm’ or
‘melted,’ ‘as the dew on the corn be-
comes warm or melts.” This will not
do, because though the heart of Menelaos
may be said to become warm, and perhaps
even the dew to melt (evaporate), yet
Menelaos’ heart does not evaporate nor
the dew become warm ; so that the com-
parison fails. Besides ἰαίνω does not
mean me/t, but only warm; melting is
only implied, not expressed, in « 175
lalvero κηρός. Ap. Rhod., however, seems
to have read ἐέρση, and imitates the
simile, while avoiding this difficulty by
applying it to a case where the heart
does melt (iii. 1019); laivero δὲ φρένας
εἴσω, τηκομένη οἷόν τε περὶ ῥοδέηισιν ἐέρση
τήκεται ἠώιοισιν ἱἰαινομένη φαέεσσιν.
Aischylos gives the idea οἵ the passage
almost exactly in Ag. 1391-92 χαίρουσαν
οὐδὲν ἧττον ἣ διοσδότωι γάνει σπορητὸς
κάλυκος ἐν λοχεύμασιν.

599, @piccoucin, spicea iam campis
cum messis inhorruit Virg. G. i. 314.
The variant ¢piccwow is equally good,
but not necessary.

ZA

514 IAIAAOC Ψ (xxu1)

« \ δ, nN 40
ὡς ἄρα σοί, Μενέλαε, μετὰ φρεσὶ θυμὸς ἰάνθη. 600
» / /
καί μιν φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα"
lal Nt ς / ’ \
“᾿Αντίλοχε, νῦν μέν τοι ἐγὼν ὑποείξομαι αὐτὸς
/ > / 50 ? /
χωόμενος, ἐπεὶ οὔ τι παρήορος οὐδ᾽ ἀεσίφρων
5 rn 5 / / /
ἦσθα πάρος" νῦν αὖτε νόον νίκησε VEOLN.
, 5 9 ΕΣ / 5) / » 4
δεύτερον αὖτ᾽ ἀλέασθαι ἀμείνονας ἡπεροπεύειν. 605
> / / / >’ ” > \ / 3) fal
ov yap κέν pe τάχ᾽ ἄλλος ἀνὴρ παρέπεισεν ᾿Αχαιῶν᾽
/ 9 3, \ / ’ 5 /
ἀλλὰ σὺ yap δὴ πόλλ᾽ ἔπαθες Kal πόλλ ἐμογησας
7 \ > \ \ > \ “ 3) Ὁ ᾿Ξ
σός τε πατὴρ ἀγαθὸς καὶ ἀδελφεὸς εἵνεκ ἐμεῖο"
- / 3 \ N ts
τῷ τοι λισσομένωι ἐπιπείσομαι, ἠδὲ καὶ ἵππον
/ 5 Ke 5 fal vA / Ν ζὸ
δώσω ἐμὴν περ EOVTAV, LVA γνωῶσι καὶ OLOE 610
ς > \ ΕΣ \ < / N ’ y ”
ὡς ἐμὸς ov ποτε θυμὸς ὑπερφίαλος Kal ἀπηνῆής.
5 € \ 5 td N / δῶ € /
ἢ pa καὶ ᾿Αντιλόχοιο Nonpove δῶκεν ἑταίρωι
2 Ὁ ie « /
ἵππον ἄγειν: ὁ © ἔπειτα λέβηθ᾽ ἕλε παμφανόωντα.
/ > ᾽ / J a ΄
Μηριόνης δ᾽ ἀνάειρε δύω χρυσοῖο τάλαντα
e 9, > / 3 Ul
TETPATOS, WS ἔλασεν. πέμπτον δ᾽ ὑπελείπετ᾽ ἄεθλον, 615
\ ti a 3 \
ἀμφίθετος φιάλη: τὴν Νέστορι δῶκεν Ἀχιλλεὺς
, fal / ss 7
Αργείων av ἀγῶνα φέρων, καὶ ἔειπε παραστάς"
an nr lal / / /
“TH νῦν, καὶ σοὶ τοῦτο, γέρον, κειμήλιον ἔστω,
mae, N ys
Πατρόκλοιο τάφου μνῆμ᾽ ἔμμεναι: ov yap ἔτ᾽ αὐτὸν
3 ) , ~ »
One ἐν “Apyeloucr: δίδωμι δέ τοι τόδ᾽ ἄεθλον . 620
> he \ /
αὔτως: ov yap πύξ ye μαχήσεαι οὐδὲ παλαίσεις,

600. cot: τοι (A supr.) T Pap. wu. 602. Tol: coi L: Ken Pap. μ. || ἀποεί-
zoua J. 604. νεοίη : of περὶ ᾿Αντίμαχον νόημα γράφουσι, Did. 605.
δεύτερον : βέλτερον GPRS Par. j: βέλτιον Par. b: yp. ὕστερον A. || ἀμείνους
(J): ἀμύμονας Vr. Ὁ: auewonac Pap. μ. 608. ἐμοῖο PC). 609. énineieouai
T Vr. b. 611. ἐμὸς : ἐμοὶ Cant. 615. ὑπολείπετ᾽ 1]. 616. THN: τὸν ().
617. ἀν᾽ : IN Pap. μ (supr. a). 619. AUTON: αὐτοὶ Ὁ : αὖ T (τὸν add. inan. rec.).
620. ὄψηι AD Pap. μ: ὄψει ©. 621. οὕτως H.

603. χωόμενος, the participle is like
that after παύεσθαι, etc. mapHopoc,
Highty, see note on H 156 and compare
Γ 108 ὁπλοτέρων ἀνδρῶν φρένες ἠερέθονται.
So also Archil. fr. 94 τίς σὰς παρήειρε
φρένας ; and fr. 56. 5 νόον παρήορος,
Theokr. xv. 8 πάραρος. Gecippoon, T 183.

604. of περὶ ᾿Αντίμαχον “‘vinua” γρά-
govot, Did., i.e. probably νέον νίκησε
νόημα, though the sense of the words is
far from clear. NeoiH itself is a strange
form which does not reappear in Greek.
Can it represent veF-in, with « lengthened
by ictus in the last foot? As Monro
points out, the alliteration suggests that
the phrase is a proverbial one.

610. ἄκρως ἐλέγχει “Ὅμηρος τὰς φύσεις
τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ὅτι καὶ νέοις καὶ πρεσβυτέ-
ροις ἐνέστακται τὸ φιλότιμον. ὅρα γὰρ
μεθ᾽ ὅσους λόγους ἀντιποιεῖται τῆς νίκης,
καὶ παραχωρεῖν τοῦ ἰδίου ἀέθλου φησὶν
ἑκών, Schol. 1.

611, cf. Ο 94.

618. TA, see on = 219.

620. Both ὄψηι and ὄψει -- ὄψε᾽ (αι).

621. αὔτως, ‘as it is,’ without a con-
test. The following enumeration seems
to indicate that the Epic pentathlon con-
sisted of the chariot-race, foot-race, box-
ing, wrestling, and javelin-casting ; and
this list appears again in 634-38. In
the Phaiakian games (θ 103) leaping is

IAIAAOC Ψ (xxiit) 515
> , "ee 5» \ ’ / ᾽ \ ’
οὐδ᾽ ἔτ᾽ ἀκοντιστὺν ἐσδύσεαι οὐδὲ πόδεσσι
4 » \ a ’
θεύσεαι" ἤδη yap χαλεπὸν κατὰ γῆρας ἐπείγει."
“Ν ’ \ \ . \
ὡς εἰπὼν ἐν χερσὶ τίθει: ὁ δὲ δέξατο χαίρων,
4 / » , ,
καί μιν φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα: 625
\ r ΄ / -“ Μ
“ναὶ δὴ ταῦτά γε πάντα, τέκος, κατὰ μοῖραν ἔειπες"
» \ vos ἂοΚ ὃ al I ὃ ᾽ / ~
ov yap ἔτ᾽ ἔμπεδα γυῖα, φίλος, πόδες, οὐδέ τι χεῖρες
” > / ᾽ oh > /
ὥμων ἀμφοτέρωθεν ἀπαΐσσονται ἐλαφραί.
“Δ᾽ ἃ e / , / » "
εἴθ᾽ ὡς ἡβώοιμι βίη τέ μοι ἔμπεδος εἴη,
e / , » / Ὕ \
ὡς ὁπότε κρείοντ ᾿Αμαρυγκέα θάπτον *Ezrecoi 630
’ “-“ fal
Βουπρασίωι, παῖδες δὲ θέσαν βασιλῆος ἀεθλα-
»Μ > " / e -“ \ > » » . -
ἔνθ᾽ ov Tis μοι ὁμοῖος ἀνὴρ γένετ᾽, οὔτ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ᾿Κπειῶν
622. ἀκοντιοστὴν HP. €cOUceat Ar. 2: ἐνθύςεαι AGH()T Par. ὁ ¢ j: ὑπο-

ϑύς(ς)εαι D Par. e.

ὁπάζΖει καὶ ἱκάνει καὶ Eneici A.
Pap. mt. || €einac () (a altered to €?).

628. Gnaicconrai PR Harl. d and ap. Eust.: énatcconta 2.

632. οὔτ᾽ Gp’: οὐ rap DH (Τ᾽ ἢ).

623. eeUceal: ψεύςεαι J. | ἐπείγει : ἱκάνει CGPR: Eneicin
JSU Harl. a b, King’s Par. a! bd f hj, Mosc. 2, Vr. A:

ὁπάζΖει T Vr. b:

ὝΡ. Kae
625. πτερόεντ᾽ ἀγόρευε Bar. Mor. 626 on.
627. φίλοι Ο Vr.d. || Tr: τε J: τοι U.

629. ΜΟΙ: Tor 4).

substituted for the last, and the chariot-
race does notappear. In historical times
its place was of course taken by the
diskos, and even here it is evidently put
on a different and higher level from the
contests of bodily strength.

622. οὕτως ἐςϑύςεαι (not ἐνδύσεαι)
σχεδὸν ἅπασαι" οὐδέποτε γὰρ “Ὅμηρος τῆι
ἐν ἀντὶ τῆς εἰς κέχρηται, Did. H. does,
_however, use ἐνδύω with ace., but only
of putting on clothes. The sense is
exactly given by our colloquial ‘go in,
enter, for the javelin-throwing.’

626. This line was probably omitted
by Ar. (as by the first hand of the pap.)
as interpolated from A 286, thus avoid-
ing the awkward repetition τέκος
φίλος. The scholia do not say this
explicitly, nor is the line marked, as
we should expect, with ‘asterisk and
obelos.’ But it is clearly implied, as
Cobet has shewn (JZ. C. 318), by the
words of Aristonikos on 327 (ἡ διπλῇ) ὅτι
ἀπὸ τοῦ yap ἦρκται, τὸ αἰτιατικὸν (the
causal particle) προτάξας. The rap does
not, however, as usual anticipate a reason
to be given, but rather continues Achilles’
speech, yes, as thow sayest.

627. The constr. of this line is harsh.
πόδες seems to be added in apposition
to γυῖα as though with the intention of
continuing by the usual phrase 7. καὶ
χεῖρες ὕπερθεν, as in the formal line
77/2=E 122, N 61. But the last part

javelin-throwing ;

of this is expanded and made into a
principal sentence, the negative being
repeated (οὐδέ). Diintzer’s emendation
ποδῶν, φίλος (cf. γυῖα ποδῶν N 512) for
φίλος, πόδες makes all simple, but it has
no authority and is not likely to have
been corrupted ; the text is as old at
least as Nikanor (ἐπεξηγεῖται τὰ γυῖα,
ὅτι πόδες Kai χεῖρες), and probably as Ar.
Franke would omit 628, thus improving
the construction ; and to this the words
of Nikanor may point. The line is
perhaps modelled on Hes. Theog. 150
τῶν ἑκατὸν μὲν χεῖρες ἀπ᾿ ὥμων ἀΐσσοντο.
Xetpec=arms, as A 252, etc.

628. anatccontai, dart out from my
shoulders, in allusion to boxing and
see Hes. Theog. 150
in last note. The vulg. ἐπαΐσσονται
implies an object darted upon, which
is less vivid here ; it is of course quite
possible, but leaves the gen. ὥμων
rather bare.

629. This is Nestor’s regular introduc-
tion to his autobiographical sketches ;
H 157, A 670.

630. The local legends about Amaryn-
keus will be found in Paus. v. 1. 8: 3.
4, His son Diores is mentioned in B
622, A517. ᾿Ἐπειοί, B 615, v 275. .

631. Bounpaciwi, A 756. BaciAoc:
gen. after ἄεθλα, as Hes. Opp. 654 ἄεθλα
datppovos ᾿Αμφιδάμαντος, and compare X
164 ἄεθλον. . ἀνδρὸς .κατατεθνηῶτος.

516 IAIAAOC Ψ (xxit)

οὔτ᾽ αὐτῶν Πυλίων οὔτ᾽ Δἰτωλῶν μεγαθύμων.

πὺξ μὲν ἐνίκησα Ἰζλυτομήδεα "Ἥνοπος υἱόν,

᾿Αγκαῖον δὲ πάληι Πλευρώνιον, ὅς μοι ἀνέστη" 635
Ἴφικλον δὲ πόδεσσι παρέδραμον ἐσθλὸν ἐόντα,

δουρὶ δ᾽ ὑπειρέβαλον Φυλῆά τε καὶ Ἰ]ολύδωρον.

οἴοισίν μ᾽ ἵπποισι παρήλασαν ᾿Ακτορίωνε,

πλήθει πρόσθε βαλόντε, ἀγασσαμένω περὶ νίκης,

οὕνεκα δὴ τὰ μέγιστα παρ᾽ αὐτόθι λείπετ᾽ ἄεθλα. 640

οἱ δ᾽ aD ἔσαν ΩΣ

ξ 5. ,
ὁ μὲν ἔμπεδον ἡνιόχευεν,

634. NikHca RT. || ofNonoc CPQRT

Aristeid. il. p. 374.
πάληιν H: πάλιν King’s.
Schol. A on E 856:

Mor. Bar. Plut. Mor. 6590:
635. ἀγγαῖον P: ἀλκαῖον Aristeid. zbid. || πάλην Ar. Vr. d:
637. ὑπερέβαλον DGHJPQ.
βαλόντες 2. || ἀγαςςαμένω ἔν τισι, Did:
640. αὐτόθι CPR Pap. μ, Mor. Bar. Mose. 2, Harl. ἃ :

φαίνοπος

639. βαλόντε 1 (ἢ)
ἀγαςςάμενοι (2.
αὐτόφι Ar. Q.

635. πάλην most Mss., πάλην Ar,
Both dat. and ace. are used in later
Greek, though the latter is more usual ;
in H. the dat. only is found, except
πάντα ἐνίκα A 389, E 807, where the ace.
is adverbial. ἀνέστη with dat., stood wp
to me as we say, as 677, σ 334 μή τίς τοι
τάχα ἤρου ἀμείνων ἄλλος ἀναστῆι, Soph.
Tr. 441 "Ἔρωτι μέν νυν ὅστις ἀντανίσταται
πύκτης ὕπως εἰς χεῖρας. The phrase is
evidently technical.

637. This Phyleus is no doubt the
son of Augelas ; see B 628.

638. For the ᾿Ακτορίωνε see note on
A 709. As Monro remarks, ofoicin
implies that the list of five contests
here given is complete (see on 621).

639-40. This couplet defies interpreta-
tion. The following explanations of
πλήθει mpdcoe βαλόντε are given Ὁ
Schol. A (Aristonikos?). (1) The Ak-
toriones entered more than one chariot,
and thereby impeded those of their com-
petitors. (2) The majority (of starters)
conspired to give the two an unfair
advantage at the start. (3) ᾿Αρίσταρχος
δὲ διδύμους ἀκούει οὐχ οὕτως ὡς ἡμεῖς ἐν τῆι
συνηθείαι νοοῦμεν, οἷοι ἦσαν καὶ οἱ Διόσκοροι,
ἀλλὰ τοὺς διφυεῖς, δύο ἔχοντας σώματα,
ἩἩσιόδωι μάρτυρι χρώμενος (see fr. 382,
Rzach), καὶ τοὺς συμπεφυκότας ἀλλήλοις.
οὕτως γὰρ καὶ τὸ λεγόμενον ἐπ’ αὐτῶν
σαφηνίζεσθαι ἄριστα: ἀναστάντος γὰρ δὴ
τοῦ Νέστορος ἐπὶ τὸν ἀγῶνα καὶ αὐτοὺς
ἀναστῆναι: εἶτα τὸν μὲν Νέστορα λέγειν
ws οὐ δίκαιοι εἶεν ἀγωνίζεσθαι παρηλλαγ-
μένοι τῆι φύσει ὄντες: ὁ δὲ δῆμος συναγω-
νίζοιτο αὐτοῖς, καὶ λέγοι ὡς εἶεν εἷς ἀμ-
φότεροι καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ὀφείλοιεν ἑνὸς

ἐπιβαίνειν ἅρματος ἅτε δὴ συμπεφυκότες,
καὶ κρατοῖέν γε οἱ πολλοί, καὶ τοῦτο εἶναι
τὸ πλήθει πρόσθε βαλόντες. 1.6. by the
unfair partisanship of the spectators

they were allowed to take advantage of

their superiority in number of limbs,
which enabled them to perform the
work of driving more effectually. The
rest of the couplet is equally obscure,
but seems to mean jealous of (this) vic-
tory because the chief prize still remained
on the spot; i.e. they use every means,
fair or foul, to win the chariot race,
the last chance left to them, because
this, as the most important, would
compensate them for the humiliation

of seeing all the other prizes carried off

by a stranger. Lehrs thinks that the
couplet is the work of an imitator who
had τοὺς σοὺς πρόσθε βαλών (572) before
him. Even so he must have meant the

words to make some sense; and Ar.’s ~

interpretation is as hard to believe
possible in an imitator as in an original
poet. Verrall suggests that the sense
is objecting to my (numerical) superiority
(of four prizes against one) that the
greatest prize stayed at home, i.e. that
they had won after all, as the chariot-
race outweighed all the rest. This
implies a rare use of οὕνεκα, that in
place of because; see note on A 21.
Possibly πλήθει πρόσθε βαλεῖν may have
been a technical term whose meaning
is lost tous. See Addendum, p. xxiv.

641, ἔμπεδον, ἐδραίως καὶ ἀσφαλῶς,
Schol. B; i.e. because his attention was
not divided between the reins and whip.
For the epanalepsis see on T 371.

IAIAAOC ¥ (xxi) 517

ΕΣ ὃ ΄ , > e , Μ ΄ ,
ἔμπεδον ἡνιόχευ᾽, ὁ δ᾽ ἄρα μάστιγι κέλευεν.

/ ᾽ / - ΄, ᾽ ,
ὥς TOT ἔον' νῦν αὗτε νεώτεροι ἀντιοώντων
»“ / \ \ \ os -
ἔργων τοιούτων: ἐμὲ δὲ χρὴ γήραϊ λυγρῶι

/ / > 9 ΄ ,
πείθεσθαι, τότε δ᾽ αὖτε μετέπρεπον ἡρώεσσιν. 645
? > , -“ “.
ἀλλ᾽ ἴθι καὶ σὸν ἑταῖρον ἀέθλοισι κτερέϊζε.

fal δ᾽ > \ , δέ , 4
τοῦτο ἐγὼ πρόφρων δέχομαι, χαίρει δέ μοι ἧτορ,
ef /
ὥς pev ἀεὶ μέμνησαι ἐνηέος οὐδέ σε λήθω

A - , > » Ξ ᾽ a
τιμῆς ἧς TE μ᾽ ἔοικε τετιμῆσθαι pet ᾿Αχαιοῖς.

\ \ \ “ 2 o ᾽ν
σοὶ δὲ θεοὶ τῶνδ᾽ ἀντὶ χάριν μενοεικέα δοῖεν. 650

“δ ΄ (i \ ca , “-

ὡς φάτο, [Πηλεΐδης δὲ πολὺν καθ᾽ ὅμιλον ᾿Αχαιῶν
” ᾽ b) >. ᾽ὔ > 3 > , Τ ok
ὠΐχετ, ἐπεὶ πάντ αἰνον Θπέκλυε Νηλείΐδαο.

>? \ e / Ψ “-“ a ”
αὐτὰρ ὁ πυγμαχίης ἀλεγεινῆς θῆκεν ἄεθλα"
ΤῸ / \ Μ r
ἡμίονον ταλαεργὸν ἄγων κατέδησ᾽ ἐν ἀγῶνι
« lad 10 ΄ -“ 5 / ΄ er
ἑξετέ ἀδμήτην, T ἀλγίστη δαμάσασθαι: 655
n ’ “ / ΄ >
τῶι δ᾽ ἄρα νικηθέντι τίθει δέπας ἀμφικύπελλον.

643. νῦν ὃ᾽ Mosc. 2.

€ man. Tee. ). 653. αλεεινῆς Pap. μ.
654. KATEOHC EN: κατέθηκεν /).

648. μευ: μ᾽ S.
ἧι te Ef. Mag. 758. 43. || ἀχαιοὺς G Ap. Lex. 152. 35.

αἰεὶ JT. || wéunnar Eust. 649.
652. ἐπέκλυςε T (supr.

ἄεθλον CHJPR Bar. Mor. Harl. a, Mose. 2.
655. ἀδμῆτιν G Vr. ἡ.

643, ὥς ποτ᾽ €on, A 762.

644. The scholia remark the curious
fact that this line can be read as
an iambic trimeter with γήραι (γήρᾳ)
for γήραϊ, and compare an anonymous
line σμύρνης ἀκράτου καὶ κέδρου νηλέϊ
καπνῶι.

646. καί, likewise ; as men of old time
honoured their dead with games, so do
to thy friend. It is not copulative, for
ἀλλ᾽ ἴθι is always joined asyndetically
with a following imper. ὦ 336 is a
-possible exception after Back’ ἴθι, but
even there the sense likewise, as thou
dost to others, is admissible. The same
applies to σ 171 ἀλλ᾽ ἴθι καὶ σῶι παιδὶ
ἔπος φάο, say to thy son also (what thou
hast said tome). (Déd.)

648-49. Another very obscure couplet.
The form méunucai for μέμνηαι (P 442)
is Attic, and does not recur in H.; the
-σ- fell out between vowels according
to the rule, and was only restored later
on the analogy of the consonantal stems
(γέγραψαι, etc. So G. Meyer, Gr. § 466).
ἀεί with ad, instead of αἰεί or αἰέν, recurs
only in M 211, o 379, and the F of
FéFouxe is also neglected—all signs of
lateness. As for the explanation, ἐνηέος
must go with wev, ‘you remember me
(as being) kindly disposed (towards your-

self).’. This is not like H., but is pre-
ferable to the alternative which makes
ἐνηέος agree with τιμῆς. The gen. τιμῆς
is also obscure, but is probably to be
explained as a gen. of price, belonging
strictly to the rel. clause, οὐδέ ce AHew
being only a parenthetical repetition of
méuNnHcai—thouw art mindful of me, at
the estimation at which it is right that
I should be esteemed being equivalent
to thow art mindful of the estimation at
which, etc. This is obviously unsatis-
factory, but the alternatives are equally
so. Diintzer’s τιμῆς θ᾽, ‘you remember
me, and the value at which,’ etc. is not
like Homer. Nauck only removes the
difficulty one step by omitting 649 ; we
are then equally bound to ask what the
interpolator meant by his words and
why he added them, unless we assume
that he was a mere mischief-maker.
Brandreth reads ὡς αἰεί, so that évnéos
must agree with τιμῆς, which does not
suit the sense of the adj. Nikanor how-
ever is inclined to join évnéos τιμῆς, ** εἰ
καὶ οὐχ Ομηρικὸν τὸ ὑπερβατόν."

652. αἷνον, praise, as 795, @ 110.
The other sense of the word, ‘a short,
pithy narrative’ (Buttmann; see note
on I 673) is hardly suitable here.

655. See note on 266.

518

IAIAAOC Ψ (xxi)

oh δ᾽ ὀρθὸς καὶ μῦθον ἐν ᾿Αργείοισιν ἔειπεν"
““᾿Ατρεΐδη τε καὶ ἄλλοι ἐυκνήμιδες, ᾿Αχαιοί,
ἄνδρε δύω περὶ τῶνδε κελεύομεν, ὥ περ ἀρίστω,

πὺξ μάλ᾽ ἀνασχομένω πεπληγέμεν.

ὧι δέ κ᾿ ᾿Απόλλων 660

δώηι καμμονίην, γνώωσι δὲ πάντες ᾿Αχαιοί,
ἡμίονον ταλαεργὸν ἄγων κλισίηνδε νεέσθω"
αὐτὰρ ὁ νικηθεὶς δέπας οἴσεται ἀμφικύπελλον."
ὡς ἔφατ᾽, ὦρνυτο δ᾽ αὐτίκ᾽ ἀνὴρ ἠύς τε μέγας τε
εἰδὼς πυγμαχίης, υἱὸς ΠΠανοπῆος ᾿Ιὑπειός, 665
aye δ᾽ ἡμιόνου ταλαεργοῦ φώνησέν τε"
«ἄσσον ἴτω ὅς τις δέπας οἴσεται ἀμφικύπελλον"
ἡμίονον δ᾽ οὔ φημί tw ἀξέμεν ἄλλον ᾿Αχαιῶν
πυγμῆι νικήσαντ᾽, ἐπεὶ εὔχομαι εἶναι ἄριστος.

Δ 3 (v4 e/ / 53 Vp
ἢ οὐχ ἅλις ὅττι μαχῆς ἐπιδεύομαι ;

οὐδ᾽ ἄρα πως ἣν 670

7, τ 5, 7 lal ,
ἐν πάντεσσ᾽ ἔργοισι δαήμονα φῶτα γενέσθαι.

657. ἀνθρώποιςιν Pap. μὶ (supr.
παναχαιῶν ). 659. κελεύομαι Bar.
662. K\iciHeen Ὁ. ||
pepecew 1). 664. ὄρνυτο ἢ Vr. A.

a rei).
|| ὥιχπερ T:
neécow GJPRU Harl.
666. ἥψατο Hal a.

658. ἀτρεῖθαι PR Syr. || ἀριστῆες
ὥςπερ A: cinep Pap. μ'.

a Ὁ ἃ, King’s Par. a, ἐν ἄλλων A:

660. The purely intensive force of the
perfect menAHréuen is obvious here (as
with βέβληκα, see N 60). ἀναςχομένω
is doubt! ess a technical phrase, ‘squar-
ing up,’ denoting the lifting of the body
and arms into the correct attitude. So
686 ἀνασχομένω χερσί, and in the other
Homeric boxing-match o 95 ἀνασχομένω
(but the act. χεῖρας ἀνέσχον, 89, and
χεῖρας ἀνασχόμενοι, 100, are not in the
technical sense). See note on Τ' 362,
and ~ 425. ‘The scholiasts explain the
mention of Apollo as god of boxing by
his victory over Phorbas, king of the
Phlegyai, who beset the road to Delphi,
and, elated by success, challenged the
gods. (See Hymn. Ap. 211.) Such a
legend, however, has ἃ post-Homeric
stamp; it is more probable that the
god is called upon to vouchsafe endur-
ance in virtue of his power as_ κουρο-
Tpopos, giver of manly strength. Cf.
τ 86 ἤδη παῖς τοῖος ᾿Απόλλωνός γε ἕκητι,
Τηλέμαχος. So also Hes. Theog. 347 αἱ
κατὰ γαῖαν ἄνδρας κουρίζουσι σὺν ᾿Απόλλωνι
ἄνακτι καὶ ποταμοῖς. In this capacity
he was later a patron of the gymnasium.
The dedication of boxing to Poly-
deukes—who even in so late a passage
as ἃ 300 ff. is not yet a god, but only
a favoured mortal—is altogether later.

662. Neécow, return happily, is evi-
dently superior to vulg. φερέσθω, which
is not the verb to use when the object
is a mule.

665. Epeios, though famous in the
later legend, from @ 193, λ 523 onwards,
as the maker of the wooden horse, is not
elsewhere named in the Lliad (exe. 839).

666. ἅψατο, as a sign of possession,
reminding us of the Roman manwmn
anicere.

667. The repetition of the last words
of Achilles’ speech is evidently meant to
be ironical, as though the words were,
so to speak, in inverted commas. Gccon
ἴτω, come on, in hostile sense. See on
Ο 105.

670-71. This couplet interrupts the
speech, and may be an interpolation to
excuse the fact that Epeios has not been
mentioned before. Why a man should
excuse bad fighting on the ground that
he is a good boxer it is hard to see.
οὐδ᾽... renéceai is the ordinary type '
of gnomic tag, cf. A 320, N 729 ff.
udyHe Emdevoua, fail in battle, 8685. Β
142 μάχης ἄρα πολλὸν ἐδεύεο, and cf.
δεύεσθαι πολέμοιο N 310, ΕΙΣ ἐπιδεύεαι
ἀνδρῶν ἢ 636, οὔ τι μάχης ἐπεδεύετ᾽
᾿Αχαιῶν 2 385. For ἐν πάντεες᾽ éproici
it is easy to read ἐν πᾶσιν βέργοισι

IAIAAOC Ψ (χχιπ) 519

uf \ »
ὧδε yap ἐξερέω, TO δὲ Kal τετελεσμένον ἔσται"

ἀντικρὺ χρόα τε ῥήξω
κηδεμόνες δέ οἱ ἐνθάδ᾽

/ » > [2] ᾽ /
σύν τ᾽ ὀστε᾽ ἀράξω'
? / /
ἀολλέες αὖθι μενόντων,
Ch / / - e , ”
οἵ κέ μιν ἐξοίσουσιν ἐμῆις ὑπὸ χερσὶ δαμέντα. 67

οι

oO 4 θ᾽ e δ᾽ ” ΄ » \ SEos “
s ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα πάντες ἀκὴν ἐγένοντο σιωπῆι.
Εὐρύαλος δέ οἱ οἷος ἀνίστατο, ἰσόθεος φώς,
Μηκιστῆος υἱὸς αλαϊονίδαο ἄνακτος,
ὅς ποτε Θήβασδ᾽ ἦλθε δεδουπότος Οἰδιπόδαο
> £ ” i! / Sis f, WA
ἐς τάφον: ἔνθα δὲ πάντας ἐνίκα Kadpeiwvas. 680
τὸν μὲν Τυδεΐδης δουρικλυτὸς ἀμφεπονεῖτο

/ » / > > lal / /
θαρσύνων ἔπεσιν, μέγα δ᾽ αὐτῶι βούλετο νίκην.
ζῶμα δέ οἱ πρῶτον παρακάββαλεν, αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα

612. τὸ δὲ Kal: καὶ μὴν Τ ϑγτ. Vr. b, yp. A: καί μιν 7).
678. μηκιστέωο DGHPQ Pap. μ, Syr.

682. μέγα : μάλα Pap. μ.
KauBahken DGHORST Syr. Mose. 2, Vr. A.

677. ἀνίσταται Vr. d.
Ar. Q: ϑήβας DJU Pap. μ, Par. Ὁ.

673. τ᾽: δ΄ DJPR.
679. eXBacd”
683. napa-

(Bentley) or πάντεσσ᾽ ἐν (Fick), but the
change is hardly worth making. The
same may be said of Brandreth’s ov
Βάλις for 4 οὐχ ἅλις (Ε 349).

673. ἀντικρύ, witer/y, as 867, IT 116.

674. κηϑεμόνες, 163. The sarcasm
is evident, ‘let him have his family
mourners ready.’

675. οἵ Ke with fut. indic., see on X
66. There is no ms. authority for
ἐξοίσωσιν.

677. Euryalos, except a passing men-
tion in Z 20, occurs only in the Cata-
logue, B 565-66 (see note), where he is
third in command of the Argives, under
Diomedes and Sthenelos. The former
is his kinsman—first cousin once re-
moved in blood, and first cousin by
marriage. For Adrastos and Mekisteus
were brothers, sons of Talaos ; Euryalos
is son of Mekisteus, Diomedes is grand-
son of Adrastos through Deipyle, whose
sister Aigialeia he has married (E 412).
This explains the personal interest shewn
in 681.

679. For the early form of the Oidipodes
legend (Οἰδίπους is not an Homeric form)
see ἃ 271-80, and Jebb, Qed. Tyr. Int.
pp. xii-xv. Pausanias saw the tomb of
Oidipus in Attica, and on inquiry found
that in accordance with this form of the
legend the bones had been brought there
from Thebes (i. 28. 7, with Frazer’s note,
ii. p. 366). Brandreth takes Oidinddxnc
to be a patronymic, meaning Eteokles ;
but this does not seem tenable. ὅσ, 1.6.

Mekisteus. Oedoundtoc was explained
by the γλωσσογράφοι as identical (ἕν ἀνθ᾽
ἑνός) with τεθνηκότος. This Ar. contro-
verted, holding that the word could be
used only of death in battle with the
clang of armour (δούπησεν δὲ πεσών),
though there is no legend of any war
in which Oidipus can have died. (An
alternative explanation that it might
mean death by a fall from a height
- ἢ κατακρήμνισεν éavtdv—seems to be
a later addition to the scholion of
Aristonikos ; cf. Lehrs, 47. 104.) The
only similar use of the word in H. is
N 426, q.v.; but it is imitated in Ap.
Rhod. i. 1304, iv. 557, Lykophron 492.
Compare also ἐριπέντι Πολυνείκεϊ, Pind.
Ο. ii. 45. Needless to say it cannot be
used of a ‘fall,’ in the modern sense,
from greatness. For the form ef. H. G.
§ 26 (δ). ἐς τάφον, to the burying, goes
with ἦλθε, not of course with δεδουπότος.

683. z@ua, evidently the light girdle
(or rather drawers, διάζωμα or περίζωμα)
still worn in the Olympic contests down
to Ol. xiv. The various stories con-
nected with its disuse mark an impor-
tant point in chronology. See Thuk. i.
6, where the barbarians are said still to
use the garment. παρακάββαλεν can
hardly mean anything but ‘put about
him,’ though the form of the word im-
plies ‘put down beside him,’ ef. 127 ;
‘requiras περικάββαλε, Heyne. The
word may have been a technical term
with a connotation unknown to us.

σι

20 IAIAAOC Ψ (xxim)

δῶκεν ἱμάντας ἐυτμήτους βοὸς ἀγραύλοιο.

τὼ δὲ ζωσαμένω βήτην ἐς μέσσον ἀγῶνα, 685
ἄντα δ᾽ ἀνασχομένω χερσὶ στιβαρῆισιν ἅμ᾽ ἄμφω

σύν ῥ᾽ ἔπεσον, σὺν δέ σφι βαρεῖαι χεῖρες ἔμιχθεν'"

δεινὸς δὲ χρόμαδος γενύων γένετ᾽, ἔρρεε δ᾽ ἱδρὼς

πάντοθεν ἐκ μελέων: ἐπὶ δ᾽ ὥρνυτο δῖος ᾿Ἐσπειός,

κόψε δὲ παπτήναντα παρήϊον: οὐδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔτι δὴν 690
ἑστήκειν: αὐτοῦ γὰρ ὑπήριπε φαίδιμα γυῖα.

ὡς δ᾽ ὅθ᾽ ὑπὸ

φρικὸς Βορέω ἀναπάλλεται ἰχθὺς

/ / / € ἴω ᾽ > ff
θίν᾽ ἐν φυκιόεντι, μέλαν δέ ἑ Kop’ ἐκάλυψεν,

ὡς πληγεὶς ἀνέπαλτο.

ἀτὰρ μεγάθυμος ᾿Ιαᾷπειὸς

χερσὶ λαβὼν ὥρθωσε: φίλοι δ᾽ ἀμφέσταν ἑταῖροι, 695
, ἴω ,
οἵ μιν ἄγον δι’ ἀγῶνος ἐφελκομένοισι πόδεσσιν

as 7, ᾽ /
αἷμα παχὺ πτύοντα, κάρη βώλλονθ᾽ ἑτέρωσε"

684. O@uen J: ϑῆκεν Hi. Mag. 414. 28. || ἐυθμήτους 77) Bar. Vr. A.
689. αὐτόθεν Par. e.
691. é€cTHKeIN Ar. APQT Syr. Bar. Vr. bd: ἑστήκει Vr. A:
692. ὑπὸ φρικὸς : οἱ δὲ yp. ὑπαὶ ῥιπῆς TT. ||
693. eeint Pap. μ. || EN: ἐνὶ QS: ἐπὶ HJ. ||

Eppeen ἰϑρώς J.
Par. b, and ap. Eust.
cicTHKel(N) Q. || ὑπήριφε ().
ἐναπάλλεται R: ἀναπαύεται Vr. A.

688.

| ὄρνυτο GQ). || OToc: θεῖος U Syr.

pukidenta Π΄. || μέλαν : μέγα A (yp. μέλαν) Vr. ἃ. || δέ €: TE € DHIJPQTU

Pap. μ, Mose, 2, Vr. Ὁ A, yp. A. || κῦμα κάλυψεν GHT Syr.

694. ἀνέπαλτο

ἀτὰρ L Eust.: ἀνέπαλτο αὐτὰρ J King’s! Par. ad f: ἀνέπαλτ᾽ ἁτὰρ D: ἀνέπαλτ᾽

αὐτὰρ {).
€pectacan P: Ggpéctacan Lips.

695. χειρι Pap. pl. || Gugéctacan CDRU (an 103): agéctan JLQ:

684. iuantac, simple thongs wound
round the knuckles, the precursors of
the brutal caestus. Cf. Pausan. vill. 40.
3 τοῖς δὲ πυκτεύουσιν οὐκ ἣν πω τηνικαῦτα
ἱμὰς ὀξὺς ἐπὶ τῶι καρπῶι τῆς χειρὸς ἑκατέρας,
ἀλλὰ ταῖς μειλίχαις ἔτι ἐπύκτευον, ὑπὸ τὸ
κοῖλον δέοντες τῆς χειρός, ἵνα οἱ δάκτυλοί
σφισιν ἀπολείπωνται γυμνοί" αἱ δὲ ἐκ βοέας
ὠμῆς ἱμάντες λεπτοὶ τρόπον τινὰ ἀρχαῖον
πεπλεγμένοι δι᾽ ἀλλήλων ἦσαν αἱ μειλίχαι.
(This is with reference to the famous
fight between Kreugas and Damoxenos,
see note on 724.) Compare Virgil’s
description of the caestus, Aen. v. 400-8.

688. χρόμαϑος need express no more
than the grinding of the teeth by the
combatants as they launch their blows ;
and so the scholia explain. Virgil,
however, evidently understood it to
mean the noise of breaking bones ; Aen.
v. 436 duro crepitant sub volnere malae.

690. manTHNanta, the aor. seems to
imply exact coincidence (H. G. § 77);
‘at the moment when he had espied an
opening’; but παπταίνοντα would be
more natural.

-with

692. There is some difficulty here in
the fact that whereas we are first told
that Eurypylos falls ‘on the spot’ (691),
the simile and ἀνέπαλτο in 694 say that
he ‘leapt up.’ The idea must be that
the blow lifts Euryalos clean off his feet,
and he ‘leaps’ with his body arched
backwards, and falls like a leaping fish.
eini must mean the sand where covered
by shallow water; cf. Soph. Ant. 591
oldua . . κυλίνδει βυσσόθεν κελαινὰν θῖνα.
For ὑπὸ φρικὸς Βορέω cf. H 63, & 126,
notes. For ἀναπάλλεται Agar
(J. P. xxv. 87) would read ἀν-επ-άλλεται,
referring the word to ἄλλομαι (= ἅλλομαι).
See note on © 85, which shews how
easily the two verbs can be confused
(the proximity of ἀνέπαλτο here would
aid); and on O 645 for doubt as to πάλ-
Nomar = leap.

694. ἀνέπαλτο.
542.

697. Compare Virg. den. v. 470 for
the truly Roman spirit which ean take
pleasure in outdoing this line in gory
details.

ἀτάρ, see note on A

[ΛΙΆΔΟΟ Ψ (xxii) 521

Kad δ᾽ dddodpovéovta μετὰ σφίσιν εἷσαν ἄγοντες,
> \ > > / / / > /
αὐτοὶ δ᾽ οἰχόμενοι κόμισαν δέπας ἀμφικύπελλον.
nA > » / “ »
Πηλείδης δ᾽ αἷψ᾽ ἄλλα κατὰ τρίτα θῆκεν ἄεθλα, 700
4 -“ ΄, > 7
δεικνύμενος Δαναοῖσι, παλαισμοσύνης ἀλεγεινῆς,
lol ,
TOL μὲν νικήσαντι μέγαν τρίποδ᾽ ἐμπυριβήτην,
Ἁ \ / Tary / a » ,
τὸν δὲ δυωδεκάβοιον ἐνὶ σφίσι τῖον ᾿Δχαιοί:
> \ \ / nm? ΕῚ / »
ἀνδρὶ δὲ νικηθέντι γυναῖκ᾽ ἐς μέσσον ἔθηκε,
\ , > / » / / t ‘ / P= =
πολλὰ δ᾽ ἐπίστατο εργα, τίον δέ ἑ τεσσαράβοιον. 705
fol > 5 Ν fal ? ν᾽ , » 5
στῆ δ᾽ ὀρθὸς καὶ μῦθον ἐν ᾿Αργείοισιν ἔειπεν"
co : 5 Oy \ / Ἀπ , ”
ὄρνυσθ᾽, of καὶ τούτου ἀέθλου πειρήσεσθον.
“Ὁ ” > 9 «Sf ' 7 rT , Μ
ὡς ἔφατ᾽, ὦρτο δ᾽ ἔπειτα μέγας Τελαμώνιος Alas,
> 3 ὃ \ / » ΄ / DN /
av ὃ υσεὺς πολύμητις ἀνίστατο, κέρδεα εἰδώς.
͵, U ͵ ΄ » - a
ζωσαμένω 5 ἄρα τώ ye βάτην ἐς μέσσον ἀγῶνα, 710
? \ 3 UA A
ἀγκὰς ὃ ἀλλήλων λαβέτην χερσὶ στιβαρῆισιν
(3 wv κα. / \ > ,
ὡς ὅτ ἀμείβοντες, τούς τε κλυτὸς ἤραρε τέκτων,

701. OaNaoici: Aagoici (A supr.) Pap. uw
702. ἐν πυρὶ βήτην (): (Tpinoda) nepiBATHN far. 704.
705 om. U.
711. ἀλλήλους PR.
TE om. ἘΣ

(Av. ? see Ludwich).
ἔθηκαν Harl. a, Mosc. 2, Vr. ἃ.
709. ἀνίστατο ἰσόθεος φῶς 1).
Harl. a, Pap. μ. || ἀμείβοντας 1).

698. ἀλλοφρονέοντα, *si//y, see on Ὁ
128, and compare « 374. Fick reads
ἄλλα φρονέοντα.

701. The variant παλαιμοσύνης is sup-
ported by Pindar P. ii. 61 παλαιμονεῖ,
but all other analogical forms have o
(πάλαισμα, etc.).

702. éunupiBATHN, fo go upon the fire
as we Say; see notes on 267, 1122. The
form of the compound, containing a pre-
position with its case, is very rare in
Greek ; cf. ἐγχειρίθετος Hdt. v. 108, and
see H. G. § 124.

703. δυωϑεκάβοιον, cf. Z 236, and
885 below. ἐνὶ cgict implies probably
the rough test of a conversational esti-
mate, as opposed to that of actual barter.
The relation of tion to Tion in 705 is
not clear. Some regard the cas naturally
long but capable of metrical shortening
before another vowel (H. G. ὃ 51. 1);
others take the two forms as representing
the strong (7i-) and weak (77-) root-forms ;
tiw=Tt-jw, Ttw=Ti-jw (Schulze ᾧ. LL p.
355). There is no good ground for intro-
ducing the Arkadian τείω into Homer.

705. Four oxen seems a very low value
for a highly accomplished woman ; La-
ertes gave twenty for Eurykleia (a 451).
But female captives were probably a
drug in the Greek camp.

παλαιμοςύνης J Pap. μ. Par. d f

707. neipHcecee C.JLU Pap. μ.
712. wc δ᾽ AICDJQSTU
re G.

707. neipHceceon, dual because in all
the contests only as many combatants
are invited as prizes are offered ; nemo
mihi non donatus abibit as Aeneas says,
Aen. v. 305. Cf. 753.

709. GN . . ἀνίστατο, an unusual re-
petition of the preposition. The only
similar instance in H. is ε 260 ἐν δ᾽
umépas Te καλούς τε πόδας τ᾽ ἐνέδησεν ἐν
αὐτῆι. B720 ἐρέται δ᾽ ἐν ἑκάστηι ἐμβέ-
βασαν is less harsh, as the first pre-
position goes more closely with the
noun, the second with the verb. The
phrase here is an expansion of the familiar
formula without the verb (I’ 268, H 168.
etc.). Diintzer conj. τῶι for ἀν, cf. ὅς
μοι ἀνέστη 635.

711. ἀλλήλων seems to be governed
by λαβέτην, as though λαβέσθην. If it
be taken with ἀγκάς there is no object
left for λαβέτην. For arxde Fick would
read ἄγκασε, like κύκλοσε, cf. ἄγκαθεν,
Aisch, Zum. 80. But for the short -as
in = 346 we should be justified in re-
garding the word as an acc. plur. (so
Hesych.) and making it the object of
λαβέτην, exactly our caught hold of one
another, As it is perhaps we should
read ἀλλήλους with PR.

712. ἀμείβοντες : δοκοὶ μεγάλαι. ἀλλή-
Nats προσπίπτουσαι ὥστε βαστάζειν τὴν

ΙΛΙΆΔΟΟ Ψ (xxi!)

, n / /
δώματος ὑψηλοῖο, βίας ἀνέμων ἀλεείνων.

nr \ lal
τετρίγει δ᾽ ἄρα νῶτα θρασειάων ἀπὸ χειρῶν
e / an iv \ / Cay ὃ ,
ἑλκόμενα στερεῶς: KATA δὲ νότιος ῥέεν LOPS, 715

\ \ , 2 \ / \ ”
πυκναὶ δὲ σμώδυγγες ἀνὰ TEUPAS TE καὶ ὠμοῦυς

“ , 2 . δὲ 7 3 5.Ν
αἰιματι φοινικόεσσαι ἀνέδραμον᾽" οι € μάλ Qlel

νίκης ἰέσθην τρίποδος πέρι ποιητοῖο.
οὔτ᾽ Ὀδυσεὺς δύνατο σφῆλαι οὔδει τε πελάσσαι,

>

”
OUT

Alas δύνατο, κρατερὴ δ᾽ ἔχεν is Ὀδυσῆος. 720

> / .» 3 /
ἀλλ᾽ bre δή ῥ᾽ aviafov ἐυκνήμιδας Axatovs,

δὴ τότε μιν προσέειπε μέγας Τελαμώνιος Αἴας"

Ν ~ > an
“ διογενὲς Λαερτιάδη, πολυμήχαν ᾿Οδυσσεῦ,

5, 2 > 7 ? Ἂ Sa’ ae \ on 5 A \ / ON 7 3)
Ἴ μ' aVaelp ἢ εγώ σε Ta αυ tb TAaAVTAaA με NOEL.

719. oudelde Syr.
and ap. An.

721. éuxnHuidec ἀχαιοὶ DQ Pap. μ (-e18ec), Syr. Par. ce g

oy

ὀροφήν. οἴτινες καὶ συστάται καλοῦνται,
Schol. A. The two wrestlers leaning
against one another with their shoulders,
but standing wide apart with their feet,
are compared to the sloping rafters of a
gabled roof, like the letter A as Schol. T
says. There is good reason to suppose
that such pitched roofs were familiar in
the Mykenaean age as the national type
for private dwellings, while the flat roof,
which afterwards became universal in
Greece except for temples, was confined
to the palaces of the wealthy (Tsountas-
Manatt, pp. 70-1; Perrot-Chipiez Art in
Prim. Greece, Engl. Trans., 11. 120-22).
For the name compare ἐπημοιβοί, the
cross-beams of a gate, M 456. ὡς ὅτ᾽,
which is approved by Nikanor, is clearly
right ; ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ would give a false com-
parison with 714.

713=TII 213: it may possibly be inter-
polated thence, in which case ἀμείβοντες
might mean cross-beams = ἐπημοιβοί, with-
out special reference to a roof. But the
line probably stood from the first as a
loan in this very late passage.

714. τετρίγει, creaked as the hands
slipped over the skin. ϑραςειάων ἀπὸ
χειρῶν else in //. only of darts hurled
from the hand (A 553, etc., cf. on N 134).
The phrase is evidently a reminiscence
not very appropriately applied, as ἀπό
has no meaning (cf. ε 434 for a successful
adaptation, Op. ἀπὸ x. ῥινοὶ ἀπέδρυφθεν).

716. cudrrec, weals from pinching,
cf. B 267.

717. goinikdéeccal, see on Καὶ 133.
The synizesis may be admitted in the
late portions of the poems. Brandreth

conj. φοινήεσσαι. A more likely form
perhaps would be φοινιόεσσαι (: φοίνιος : :
φαιδιμόεις : φαίδιμος). The corruption
would be natural.

719. The contracted οὔϑει may per-
haps be tolerated here (see P 647).
But Rohl conj. σφήλας οὐδάσδε, on the
analogy of «x 440 ἀποτμήξας κεφαλὴν
οὐδάσδε πελάσσαι.

720. ἔχεν, supported his attacks.

721. ἐυκνήμιδας ᾿Αχαιούς, so Ar. ὅτι
ἀντὶ τοῦ els ἀνίαν ἦγον καὶ ἐχρόνιζον. τοῦτο
δὲ μὴ νοήσαντες μετέγραψαν ἐυκνήμιδες
᾿Αχαιοί. The trans. use is sufficiently
established by τ 323 ὅς κεν ἐκείνων τοῦτον
ἀνιάζηι, While the intrans. is found in
> 300, & 270, 6 460, x 87. Both nom.
and acc. give the same sense, and the
choice between them is merely a question:
of authority.

724. Note that the enclitic w is used,
not the orthotone form ἐμέ. Bekker
lays down the rule (H. B. 1. 220) ‘an
antithesis which is not foreseen and an-
nounced at the beginning of the sentence,
but introduced only by a development,
expansion or change of thought or
expression, cannot be indicated at the
beginning by the accent—in the pronoun
by orthotonesis’ (cf. also Lehrs, Q. Ep.
112). Here the main thought is the
change in tactics, and the emphasis lies
on the verb ἀνάειρε, not on the opposition
of persons ; ‘let us hoist—try you with
me or I with you.’ The idea evidently
is that each in turn is to offer only a
passive resistance, and let his adversary
try to fling him thus. A similar case is
that of the boxing-match of Kreugas and

IAIAAOC Ψ (χχιπ) 533
“4 ’ / 7
ὡς εὐπὼν ἀνάειρε: δόλου δ᾽ οὐ λήθετ᾽ ’Odvaceds: 725
» ΨΜ ΄ ΄ ΄ / iY “-
Koy ὄπιθεν κώληπα τυχών, ὑπέλυσε δὲ γυῖα"
» 7 4
Kad δ᾽ ἔπεσ᾽ ἐξοπίσω": ἐπὶ δὲ στήθεσσιν ᾿Οδυσσεὺς
/ \ ᾽ > “- , , ,
κάππεσε' λαοὶ ὃ av θηεῦντο τε θάμβησάν τε.
΄, C Sate Lael tee’ s a ᾽ ΄

δεύτερος αὗτ᾽ ἀνάειρε πολύτλας δῖος ᾿Οδυσσεύς,

, > » \ > \ , γὼ > » =

κίνησεν δ᾽ apa τυτθὸν ἀπὸ χθονός, οὐδέ τ᾽ ἄειρεν, 730

> \ / / 5 \ \ \ / ν

ἐν δὲ γόνυ γνάμψεν: ἐπὶ δὲ χθονὶ κάππεσον ἄμφω

πλησίοι ἀλλήλοισι, μιάνθησαν δὲ κονίηι.

καί νύ κε τὸ τρίτον αὖτις ἀναΐξαντε πάλαιον,

» \ > \ be 5)... ἢ \ /

εἰ μὴ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς αὐτὸς ἀνίστατο καὶ κατέρυκε:

| “-“

“ μηκέτ᾽ ἐρείδεσθον μηδὲ τρίβεσθε κακοῖσι" 735

νίκη δ᾽ ἀμφοτέροισιν: ἀέθλια δ᾽ io’ ἀνελόντες

””

ἔρχεσθ᾽, ὄφρα καὶ ἄλλοι ἀεθλεύωσιν ᾿Αχαιοί.

726-27 om. U. 126. πηληκα Pap. μὶ (supr. Keo over nH and π over κ). 727.
ἔπες᾽ A (yp. Bad’) Vr. ἃ : ἔβαλ᾽ 2. 128. eauuacan τε Vr. A. 731. γνάψεν
L: Kaduwen DP. κάππεςαν C (G? vy. Heyne). 732. mAHcion 1). 733.
aveic (Οὐ). 735. épizeceon GS: Epidecoon CPT Ven. B. 736. ic’: εἰς Pap.

pe Syr.

Damoxenos at the Nemean games. After
boxing till dusk without result they
agreed that each should in turn hold
up his hands and allow the other a
biow—with the ghastly result related
by Pausanias (viii. 40. 3). For the rare
shortening of ἢ see note on Φ 576.

725. Odysseus is raised by Aias off
the ground, but ‘with his wonted craft’
kicks him behind the knee while in the
air. After allowing himself to be lifted
the combatant it may be presumed could
take any means to throw his adversary.
κώληψ is a word of which the ancients
did not know meaning or gender ; but
the ordinary explanation, ‘the hollow
behind the knee,’ gives a good sense.
Cf. κωλῆ, Kwrnv=thigh. ϑόλου is fre-
quently taken to mean @ ¢rick on the
part of Aias. But there is no trace of
anything of the sort, and it gives the
sense required if understood of Odysseus’
cunning.

727. €nec’ is evidently better than
the vulg. ἔβαλ᾽, as the repetition of
᾿Οδυσσεύς implies a double change of
subject.

730. οὐδέ τ᾽, the τε is meaningless
—we should read either οὐδ᾽ ἔτ᾽ (Monro)
or οὐδέ F’(e) (Brandreth).

731. The exact meaning of ἐν γόνυ

737. ἀεθλεύςωςειν DPT Vr. bd.

rNauwen can only be guessed. It is
evidently a technical term. Possibly
finding the ‘great’ Aias too heavy to
lift off the ground, Odysseus crooks his
knee round his leg, and so succeeds in
throwing him on his side. On the whole
the account is far more intelligible than
that of a modern wrestling match would
be to an ordinary reader. Leptines
read ἕν for ἐν, but this was rejected in
antiquity on the ground that the proper
word would be ἕτερον.

733. Three falls was the regularnumber ;
év μὲν τόδ᾽ ἤδη τῶν τριῶν παλαισμάτων
Aisch. Hum. 589. It 15 not easy to see
how this can be reconciled with the
principle of alternately permitting attack
without resistance.

735. €petdeceon, lit. press, with the
idea of using violent effort ; cf. ἐρεισά-
μενος used absolutely, M 457, II 736, and
Lat. niti. But the variant ἐρίζεσθον may
be right.

736. As Odysseus had put his enemy
fairly on his back, and himself had only
fallen with him on his side, it might
have beensupposed that he was conqueror.
Nor is it easy to guess how the ‘12-o0x’
tripod and ‘4-ox’ woman were to be
equally divided. ἀέθλια ὃ᾽ ic’, ἄεθλα δὲ
Fis’ Bentley.

σι
bo
»-

IAIAAOC Ψ (xxur)

ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα τοῦ μάλα μὲν κλύον ἠδὲ πίθοντο,

καί ῥ᾽ ἀπομορξαμένω κονίην δύσαντο χιτῶνας.
Πηλεΐδης δ᾽ αἶψ᾽ ἄλλα τίθει ταχυτῆτος ἄεθλα, 740
ἀργύρεον κρητῆρα τετυγμένον" ἕξ δ᾽ ἄρα μέτρα

, ’ ͵7] Lal , 5 Ξ
χάνδανεν, αὐτὰρ κάλλει ἐνίκα πᾶσαν ἐπ᾽ aiav

> τὰ / / iN "
πολλόν, ἐπεὶ Σιδόνες πολυδαίδαλοι εὖ ἤσκησαν,

, ᾽ yA ” 3:29, ’ / /
Φοίνικες δ᾽ ἄγον ἄνδρες ἐπ᾽ ἠεροειδέα πόντον,

στῆσαν δ᾽ ἐν λιμένεσσι, Θόαντι δὲ δῶρον ἔδωκαν" 745

υἷος δὲ Πριάμοιο Λυκάονος ὦνον ἔδωκε

Πατρόκλωι ἥρωϊ Ἰησονίδης ᾿Εύνηος.

fel / ia
καὶ τὸν ᾿Αχιλλεὺς θῆκεν ἀέθλιον οὗ ἑτάροιο,

“ 5 / \ n ΄
ὃς τις ἐλαφρότατος ποσσὶ κραυνπνούσι TENOLTO*

δευτέρωι αὖ βοῦν θῆκε μέγαν καὶ πίονα δημῶι, 750

ἡμιτάλαντον δὲ χρυσοῦ λοισθήν᾽ ἔθηκε.

139. ἀπομορξάμενοι DT Pap. μ, Vr. bi A. ||

741. κρατῆρα P. 744, ἐπ᾿ : ἐς S.
149. mocci: re noci ἢ].
πίονα : ἐν ἄλλωι KatTaniona A.

Syr.¢

AUcanto JT Vr. b.
745. ἔϑωκε U: ἔθηκαν J.

|| χιτῶνα 1).
146 οἽ.

750. δευτέρωι : δεύτερα δ᾽ Par. g. | καὶ

739. ϑύςαντο, cf. δυσαίατ᾽ Σ 376. In
the sing. the ‘mixed’ form δύσετο has
the authority of Ar., though numbers
are almost always in favour of δύσατο :
see note on I’ 262, and App. Crit. on A
496, B 578, I 328, H 103, K 517, etc.
We have no right to read δύσοντο with
Cobet.

741. τετυγμένον, wrought, i.e. not
plain but adorned; cf. ποιητοῖο 718.
The phrase recurs in 6615. μέτρα, 264.

742. Cf. Σ 252 ἔγχεϊ πολλὸν ἐνίκα, Ὕ
121 μάλα πολλὸν ἐνίκα παντοίοισι δόλοισι
for the absolute use ‘to be first,’ with
dat. This is the only instance where
the subject of the verb νικᾶν is a concrete
thing ; abstract subjects are found in
604, κ 46 (βουλή), A 576, σ 404 (τὰ
χερείονα).

743. The distinction between the
Sidonians as craftsmen and the Phoeni-
cians as traders is always observed in
H. For the former cf. Z 290-91, 6 618.
The Phoenicians are familiar in Od., but
are not again mentioned in J/. The
difference in quantity between Cid6Nnec
(-t-) and Σιδονίη, -os may be due to
lengthening by metrical necessity in the
case of the latter. We need, however,
rather an explanation of the short c;
Saida is the Semitic name,

C and the
radical ὁ cannot have been shortened

except in a diphthong. The town itself
is Σιδών in 0 425.

745. ctHcan: either they landed, ab-
sol. (sc. νῆας) as τ 188 στῆσε δ᾽ ἐν ᾿Αμνισῶι
(ef. μα 305 στήσαμεν ἐν λιμένι γλαφυρῶι
εὐεργέα νῆα), or they landed it, or set it
up for inspection, or weighed it as a
proof of its value (so Paley). Thoas,
king of Lemnos, was father of Hypsipyle —
and grandfather of Euneos, H 468. They
may have given the king a present in
order to purchase permission to trade in
his country.

746. For the story of Lykaon’s ransom
see Φ 40 ff. Patroklos is not named
there, but it is natural enough to make
him an agent in the transaction.

748. Géedion, ἀέθλια Bekker, cf. @ 4
τόξον... ἀέθλια Kal φόνου ἀρχήν, and
λοισθήϊα below. ἄεθλον βοῦ and ἄεθλον
ἑξοῦ are both metrically wrong. For
the constr. see βασιλῆος ἄεθλα 631.

749. Notice the rare omission of the
antecedent of ὅς when neither subject
nor obj. of the principal verb ; cf. H 401,
= 81, P 509 (with notes). The present
instance is analogous to H 171 πεπάλεσθε

. ὅς κε λάχηισιν, Where the circum-
stances give és the appearance of an in-
direct interrogative, to see who.

751. Aoicerita, last prize, on the analogy
of the later πρωτεῖα, δευτερεῖα (πρῶτα,

qr
τὸ
uw

IAIAAOC ¥ (xxii)

an a? .5 \ \ - > ὦ ΄ ν
στῆ δ᾽ ὀρθὸς καὶ μῦθον ἐν ᾿Αργείοισιν ἔειπεν"
co > “ὁ \ Ἃ 57 / ν᾽
ὄρνυσθ᾽, οἱ καὶ τούτου ἀέθλου πειρήσεσθε.
“Ὁ ” , " > > | oe ee δ 2 -“ 4 v
ὡς ἔφατ, ὠρνυτο δ᾽ αὐτίκ᾽ "Otros ταχὺς Αἴας,
ἀν δ᾽ ἸΟδυσεὺς πολύμητις, ἔπειτα δὲ Νέστορος vids 755
᾿Αντίλοχος" ὁ yap αὖτε νέους ποσὶ πάντας ἐνίκα.
\ \ ,ὔ / \ / > 9 ‘
στὰν δὲ μεταστοιχί: σήμηνε δὲ τέρματ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεύς.
a / »
τοῖσι δ᾽ ἀπὸ νύσσης τέτατο δρόμος: ὦκα δ᾽ ἔπειτα
» 5 ἡ ᾽ » an ‘
ἔκφερ᾽ ᾿Οὐλιάδης, ἐπὶ δ᾽ ὥρνυτο dios Ὀδυσσεὺς

” Ζ -S ΄ a ,ὔ \ ’ , ΕΣ
ἄγχι μάλ, ὡς OTE TIS τε γυναικὸς ἐυζώνοιο 760

753. neipHceceon Zen. () Pap. uw, Par. e: neipHcacee Par. ὁ κα:
ueTactolyel (2,

757 a0, Ar. || μκεταςτοιχί ATU Syr. :
this Pap. μ' adds in marg.

neipHcecea G.
| cHuaine JOR, After
Jecxonon[

GANTIOEON ΦΟΙΝΙΚα ONGONG NaTpoc εΕοιο

wc ueuewde Spomou καὶ GAHTIH anol

759. παρὰ Znvoddrar Exeop’ ὁ ἱλιάϑης Did.
ὄρνυτο ()T Vr. b. || ἀχιλλεὺς U: eneioc Pap. u (swpr. oducceuc).

758. anai L.

δεύτερα in 275, 538). It is used as an
adj. in 785. There was an old reading
λοισθῆϊ, as though from λοισθεύς, justly
rejected by Schol. T, as the hiatus is
inadmissible and the form itself hardly
correct. But our mss, all give it—such
as their evidence is.

756. atte marks the opposition of the
champion of the young men to the
veterans.

757. (ὁ ὀβελὸς καὶ ὁ ἀστερίσκος) ὅτι
μετενήνεκται ἐνθάδε ἀπὸ τῆς ἁρματοδρομίας
(358, q.v.). This conclusion was necessary
with Ar.’s explanation of μεταστοιχί in
jile, and is of course possible in any
case.

758. Cf. 375, ‘the running was forced
from the start.’ The phrase recurs in
θ 121, where see M. and R., ‘viicoa is
exactly equivalent to our word the
scratch, ep. viccw.’ But in 332, 338
it means the turning-post, which can
hardly be the sense here, unless we
suppose with Schol. T that the start of
the foot-race is from the turning- point
of the chariot-race.

760. This interesting simile has been
satisfactorily explained by Bliimner
(Technologie i. 130). The ancient Greek
loom was vertical, the threads of the
warp (ulros) being fastened to a beam
and hanging down. Each thread was
attached (probably by a loop) to one of
two horizontal rods (κανόνες), all the
even threads to one, the odd to another.
On pulling each of these rods forward

(See 359-61).
ὀϊλῆος PR.
760. ὡς ὃ᾽ ().

alternately an opening between the two
sets of threads (odd and even) would be
made, through which the shuttle carry-
ing the spool (πηνίον) of the woof could
be passed. Near as is the weaver's rod to «
well-girt woman's breast when she deftly
draws it with her hand as she pulls the
spool past the warp, and holds it near her
breast. MHNION* ἄτρακτος els ὃν εἰλεῖται
ἡ κροκή, Hesych., the spool on which the
woof is wound. It is probable that the
shuttle, which is not expressly named,
was only a long stick holding this spool
at the end, and requiring to be pulled
right through at every operation. This
will be the κερκίς of ε 62 (see M. and R.).
It will easily be seen how close the
weaver must have stood up to the warp
and its rods in order to be able to reach
for this purpose to both sides of the
loom. Compare F. Maurer Reise durch
Bosnien, quoted by Hehn p. 460; in
Bosnia ‘weaving is carried on without
any shuttle, the woof being pushed by
means of a long wooden needle, like a
netting needle, through the warp, and
then pressed home by a stick.’ For
παρέκ with acc.=puast cf. 2 349 σῆμα
παρὲξ Λοιο ἔλασσαν, μ 276 παρὲξ τὴν
νῆσον ἐλαύνετε νῆα, and παρεξελαύνειν
544, runaikoc ἐἑυζώνοιο, the caesura
is suspicious, though found sometimes
before a word of five syllables, e.g. μετὰ
πέντε κασιγνήτηισιν K 317; see also a
241, 6684, σ 140. Nauck reads ἐυζώνοιο
γυναικός.

596 - IAIAAOC Ψ (Χχπηᾳ[)

, ΕῚ τ 5 / \ /
στήθεός ἐστι κανών, ὅν T εὖ para χερσὶ τανύσσην
> / > , “ἢ
πηνίον ἐξέλκουσα παρὲκ μίτον, ἀγχόθι δ᾽ ἴσχει
/ >’ Ν »
στήθεος: ὡς Ὀδυσεὺς θέεν ἐγγύθεν, αὐτὰρ ὄπισθεν
7 / ΟΣ an
ἴχνια τύπτε πόδεσσι πάρος κόνιν ἀμφιχυθῆναι:"
Ln lal Lal \
cad δ᾽ ἄρα of κεφαλῆς χέ ἀυτμένα dios ᾽Οδυσσεὺς 765
5 / \
αἰεὶ ῥίμφα θέων: ἴαχον δ᾽ ἐπὶ πάντες ᾿Αχαιοὶ
7 € 4 /
νίκης ἱεμένωι, μάλα δὲ σπεύδοντι κέλευον.
> > ee \ / / ὃ / > pee} ὃ \
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ πύματον τέλεον ὄὃρομον, αὐτίκ υσσεὺς
” 3... 9 / ΄ ὃ a \ fa] / 5
εὔχετ᾽ ᾿Αθηναίηι γχαυκώπιδι ὃν κατὰ θυμὸν

“ κλῦθι, θεά, ἀγαθή μοι ἐπίρροθος ἐλθὲ ποδοῖεν." 770
, an J > /

Os ἔφατ᾽ εὐχόμενος, τοῦ δ᾽ ἔκλυε Hadras ᾿Αθήνη,

γυῖα δ᾽ ἔθηκεν ἐλαφρά, πόδας καὶ χεῖρας ὕπερθεν.

> > ee \ / Ὁ) A 3 of, θ BA Or

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ τάχ᾽ ἔμελλον ἐπαΐξεσθαι ἄεθλον,

, » > > 7

ἔνθ᾽ Αἴας μὲν ὄλισθε θέων, βχλάψεν γὰρ ᾿Αθήνη,

τῆι pa βοῶν κέχυτ᾽ ὄνθος ἀποκταμένων ἐριμύκων, 775

f \ > f

ovs ἐπὶ Πατρόκλωι πέφνεν πόδας ὠκὺς Αχιλλεύς:
> ei ὦ a / a
ἐν 8 ὄνθου βοέου πλῆτο στόμα TE ῥῖνάς TE.

a i a /
κρητῆρ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ἀνάειρε πολύτλας δῖος Ὀδυσσεύς,
ὡς ἦλθε φθάμενος: ὁ δὲ βοῦν ἕλε φαίδιμος Αἴας.

an \ / \ \ ” \ 3. ΄ s

στῆ δὲ κέρας μετὰ χερσὶν ἔχων Boos ἀγραύλοιο, 780
ὄνθον ἀποπτύων, μετὰ δ᾽ ᾿Αργείοισιν ἔειπεν"

761. χειρὶ CPS Bar. || τανύς(ο)ει C Bar. 765. οἷ: ἐκ A (yp. oi). || κεφαλη
Ambra|| ye : ἔχ᾽ νι: Α-: 766. ἐπὶ: ἐν //. 161. νίκην PR. || ἱέμενοι (i-)
DPQR Ambr. Vr. Ὁ d A, Pap. uw (Mose. 2 supr.), ἐν ἄλλωι A: ἱεμένωι ἢ ἱεμένων

Eust. 772 af. Ar.
Harl. a, Pap. p:
775. ἔχυτ᾽ Ὁ.

ὄνϑον ἢ ὄνϑου Eust.

ἐπαΐξαςθαι (2. || ἀέϑλου ().
777. ἐν 0: ne’ GJ! Cant.

773. eueAAen Pap. μ. || Enatzecear GHJP (= in ras. 2)

774, WEN OAICeEE: ὥλιςθε ().
|| ῥῖνές U (-i-) Syr. Harl. a. 781.

764. ἀκφιχυθῆναι, i.e. had fallen back
into the footprints. For the next line
οἵ, 380.

768. πύμλατον SpouoNn, fe last part
of the course, as in 373.

770. €nipposoc, see note on A 390.
To the evidence there given that the
word is genuine and not a mere mistake
for ἐπιτάρροθος may be added the verb
ἐπιρροθεῖν = cheer assent, Aisch. Cho.
459, Eur. Hec. 553, Or. 901. But in
Soph. 77. 264 it means revile. Both
senses come from the sense to make a
noise at, Whether in encouragement (ἐπὶ
ἴαχον 766) or abuse.

772. (ὁ ὀβελὸς Kai ὁ ἀστερίσκος) ὅτι ἐπὶ
Διομήδους ὀρθῶς ἐτέτακτο (E 122): ἐν-
ταῦθα δὲ ὀλίγωι λείπεται τοῦ Αἴαντος" εἰ
οὖν τὰ yula ἐλαφρὰ ἐποίησεν, ἐνίκα ἂν

πάντως. πρὸς τί οὖν ἔτι τὸν Αἴαντα κατ-
έβαλεν ; An. rightly.

773. énatzecea, the fut. only is ad-
missible with μέλλω in the sense 7 an
about to. With aor. it means J am like
to have, e.g. N 777, = 362, ὦ 46, 6 377,
ξ 188; just as with pres. inf. it means
Lam like to be doing; Καὶ 326, A 364, a
232, σ 19 etc. (Platt in J. P. xxi. 39\ff. ;
see notes on Καὶ 454, II 46, = 98). This
clearly does not suit here, and Mss. so
constantly confuse these aor. and fut.
infinitives that they may be disregarded.
The expression to dart upon the prize
evidently implies that it was placed
at the winning-point. The incident is
copied by Virgil, Aen. v. 327 ff.

780. κέρας ἔχων in sign of possession
as 666.

ζ

bs |
to
-

IAIAAOC Ψ (xxii)

» , ν᾿ \
““ᾧὦ πόποι, ἣ μ᾽ ἔβλαψε θεὰ πόδας, i) TO πάρος περ
μήτηρ ὡς Ὀδυσῆϊ παρίσταται ἠδ᾽ ἐπαρήγει.᾽
“Ὁ » ᾽ ΄ ’ ” , Fe » “ σον /
ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα πάντες ἐπ᾽ αὐτῶι ἡδὺ γέλασσαν.
᾿Αντίλοχος δ᾽ ἄρα δὴ λοισθήϊον ἔκφερ᾽ ἄεθλον 78ῦ
“ ? 5)
μειδιόων, καὶ μῦθον ἐν ᾿Δργείοισιν ἔειπεν"
ες γὼ ἡ » ᾽ 4 a ,, ΄ » \ -
εἰδόσιν ὕμμ᾽ ἐρέω πᾶσιν, φίλοι, ὡς ETL καὶ νῦν
ἀθάνατοι τιμῶσι παλαιοτέρους ἀνθρώπους.
Αἴας μὲν γὰρ ἐμεῖ᾽ ὀλίγον προγενέστερός ἐστιν,
fol , ,
οὗτος δὲ προτέρης γενεῆς προτέρων T ἀνθρώπων" 790
> / / / > v » / \
ὠμογέροντα δέ piv φασ᾽ ἔμμεναι: ἀργαλέον δὲ
\ > / > cal , \ 9 rb
ποσσὶν ἐριδήσασθαι ᾿Αχαιοῖς, εἰ μὴ Ἀχιλλεῖ.
ὡς φάτο, κύδηνεν δὲ ποδώκεα []ηλεΐωνα.
\ a \ / > / /
τὸν δ᾽ ᾿Αχιλεὺς μύθοισιν ἀμειβόμενος προσέειπεν"

182. πόποι : φιλοι Pap. μ. 785. OH om. Pap. μὶ: of Syr. Vr. A. 789.
ἐμοῖ᾽ 77. 790. “τὸ on. D: δ᾽ JU. 792. moccin: πᾶςιν //. || ἐριϑϑήςαςθαι (ἱ
(-ec) JST: Epiddvcecoai [Ὁ : Epideicaceat Vr. d: ἐρρειδϑήςαςθαι () : EpHdHcaceai U :
ἔν τισι τῶν ὑπομνημάτων €pizdcaceai Did. ἀχαιοὺς Zon. Lex. 1472. ἀχιλῆϊ T

(διὰ τοῦ ἡ, Sch. T): ἀχιλλεὺς King’s.

782. w=pe, not μοι, ξ 178 τὸν δέ τις
ἀθανάτων βλάψε φρένας.

787. uw ἐρέω, the only other places
in H. where the F of Fepéw is neglected
are A 176 ὧδ᾽ épée, μ 156 ἀλλ᾽ ἐρέω.
None of the three can be corrected with
any probability (ξειδόσι πᾶσ᾽ ὕμμιν Fepéw
Menrad). ἔτι καὶ νῦν, fo this day; as
they honoured them when they were
young, so they continue to honour them
when they are old.

789. ἐμεῖ οὐ, so also θΘ 462, cet’(o)
Z 454; elsewhere ss. always read ἐμεῦ,
σεῦ, even before a vowel. For the
elision of the -o of these gen. forms
compare note on λευκοῖ᾿ A 35, and add
Schol. MV on μαλακοί ε 72, κακῶς (?)
τινες περιέσπασαν, iv’ ἣι μαλακοῖο. See
also Αλτα᾽ (ο)͵ Φ 86, Addo’ ἀνάσσων
Pindar P. i. 39.

791. ὠμογέροντα, cf. ο 357 ἐν wude
γήραϊ θῆκεν, where the adj. must mean
premature old age. Here we must rather
understand in early old age. In either
case the metaphor will be from unripe
fruit, Virgil’s iam senior, sed cruda deo
viridisque senectus, Aen. vi. 304. The
scholia prefer to explain the metaphor
ἀπὸ τῶν κρεῶν τῶν ἑψηθέντων μέν, οὐ μὴν
τελείως (‘in underdone old age’ 2).

792. ἐριϑήςαςθαι, ἔν τισι τῶν ὑπομνη-
μάτων γράφεται ἐριζήσασθαι, Schol. T,
which Dod. and Bekker accept. Hither
form is unique, only ἐριδαίνειν and ἐρίζειν

occurring elsewhere in H. with the single
exception of ἐριδμαίνωσιν in a different
sense, II 260. The line is ill-expressed ;
it would naturally be taken to mean ‘it
is hard to match the Achaians in speed,
except Achilles,’ rather than ‘it is hard
for the Achaians, except Achilles, to
match him in speed.’ A yet more
serious difficulty is the form ᾿Ἀχιλλεῖ,
as no similar contraction of the dat. of
nouns in -e’s is found elsewhere in H.
(see on = 115 and 2 61), and the few in-
stances of contraction in the other cases
can easily be removed, if not already
suspicious ; O 339, etc. It occurs in
Pindar (Ὁ. ix. 76, etc.), and of course is
regular in Attic; but that does not
support it here. We might regard the
whole couplet as an interpolation of late
date. But for such an interpolation
there is no obvious motive, and the
omission of the lines would involve 793
also, and make 795 pointless. Various
emendations of more or less violence
have been proposed, e.g. Brandreth
ποσσὶν ἐριζέμεναι Aavaots, εἰ μὴ ᾿Αχιλῆϊ,
Lange (EI p. 559) ποσσὶν ἐρίζεσθαι ἄλλοις
εἰ μὴ ᾿Αχιλῆϊ, Nauck πρός μιν ἐρίζεσθαι
ἄλλοισί γε ἣ ᾿Αχιλῆϊς, Menrad ἀργαλέος 6é |
πόσσ᾽ ἐριδαίνεσθαι ἄλλοις εἰ μὴ ᾿Αχιλῆϊ.
Something of this sort may be hinted
at by Schol. T, ᾿Αχιλλῆι διὰ τοῦ ἡ, and
ἄλλοις seems to be needed to make the
required antithesis to εἰ μή.

528 IAIAAOC Ψ (xxi)

> t ’ > / / » / 53
“Αντίλοχ, οὐ μὲν τοι μέλεος εἰρήσεται ALVOS,

795

> / Ὁ lal Ἂ 359
ἀλλά τοι ἡμιτάλαντον ἐγὼ χρυσοῦ ἐπιθήσω.
a > \ > \ / e \ δέ /
Os εἰπὼν ἐν χερσὶ τίθει, ὁ δὲ δέξατο χαίρων.
> \ BA \ \ / yy
αὐτὰρ Πηλεΐδης κατὰ μὲν δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος
θῆκ᾽ ἐς ἀγῶνα φέρων, κατὰ δ᾽ ἀσπίδα καὶ τρυφάλειαν,

τεύχεα
στῆ δ᾽
“ ἄνδρε

τεύχεα

Σαρπήδοντος, ἅ μιν Ἰ]άτροκλος ἀπηύρα.

800

> \ \ rn > nay / ”
ὀρθὸς καὶ μῦθον ἐν Ἀργείοισιν ἐεεύπεν"
rn 7 > /
δύω περὶ τῶνδε κελεύομεν, ὥ TEP ἀρίστω,
/ \ ΄ /
ἑσσαμένω, ταμεσίχροα χαλκὸν EXOVTE

ἀλλήλων προπάροιθεν ὁμίλου πειρηθῆναι.

΄ / / rat 2 / / /
ὁππότερός Ke φθῆισιν ὀρεξώμενος χρόα καλον,

805

/ / \ ,, e
ψαύσηι δ᾽ ἐνδίνων διά T ἔντεα καὶ μέλαν αἷμα,

lal \ ᾿] \ / / / 5 /
TOL μὲν ἐγὼ δώσω τόδε φάσγανον apyupondov

᾿ - dL δ ΄
καλὸν Θρηΐκιον, τὸ μὲν ᾿Αστεροπαῖον ἀπηύρων"

795. ΤΟΙ: λοι J. 196. ΤΟΙ:

GPQR. 802. ἄριςτοι R.

μοι Rk.
803. ἑλόντες J’, Nikanor: ἐλόντων 10.

799. κατὰ ο΄: ἠδ᾽ J Mor.: κατ΄
804 om.

AtDQTtUt Pap. μ, Vr. d A, Nikanor (see below). || ἀλλήλω U™ Vr. Ὁ: ἀλλήλους

A™ (supr. ON).

805. φϑήηι Cramer Epim. 430. 21.

ὁππότερός κε NpoceEeN

7

(πρῶτος Eust.) émirpayac χρόα καλὸν φϑήηι ἐπευξάμενος did τ᾽ ἔντεα καὶ φόνον

ἀνὸρῶν (ἀνὸρός Eust.) Aph.
808. ἀπηῦρον G: ἀπηύρα |).

795. ainoc, ewlogy, see on 652.

798. We now leave poetry for patch-
work ; see Introd.

800. For the spoiling of Sarpedon see
II 663-65. 801=271, 802=659.

804. The omission of this line in
several Mss. is not accidental. It was
apparently unknown to Ar., for Nikanor
says συναπτέον πάντα μέχρι Tov ““ χαλ-
κὸν ἑλόντε,᾽ οὐ λείποντος τοῦ μάχεσθαι ἤ
τινος τοιούτου. He compares the absolute
use of ᾧ 175 ὡς φάτο, καί ῥ᾽ ἐκέλευσε
Μελάνθιον, where, however, the substance
of the command is expressed directly,
in ‘the following speech, instead of by
an infin. ; and (2 90 τίπτέ με κεῖνος ἄνωγε
θεός, which has the double acc. Neither
is a sufficient authority for taking the
word in the sense summon forth. It is
indeed used of wrging on horses, Q 326,
and cf. A 286 σφῶϊ μὲν οὐ γὰρ ἔοικ᾽
ὀτρυνέμεν, οὔ τι κελεύω, and a few similar
phrases; but this sense is inapplicable
here, as περὶ τῶνδε has nothing to go
with except πειρηθῆναι, and the line is
therefore indispensable, and its omission
would hardly be compensated even if we
read ἑλέσθαι: for ENONTE.

805. peficin, H. G. ὃ 81; we can of
course read φθήηι, see the variant of

806 ἀθ. Ar. || pacer AQ: ψαύει Ht. Orion. 52. 16.

Aph. above.
on If 314.
806 ἀθετεῖται ὅτι ENOINCON θέλει λέγειν
τῶν ἐντοσθίων σπλάγχνων. ἕως γὰρ τοῦ
ἀμύξαι μόνον τὸν χρῶτα μονομαχοῦσι. καὶ

ὀρεξάμενος with acc., see

ἐἐ διά τ’ ἔντεα καὶ μέλαν αἷμα ἐκ τῆς
Δολωνείας (Κ 298) μετάκειτα. It is

obvious that the phrase is a loose and
meaningless repetition from K, where it
is used of walking over the battle-field.
But the line is not therefore to be re-
jected, as it is not out of character with
the rest of the scene. Monstrous though
the idea of a dangerous gladiatorial
combat between two of the leading
generals of the army is, yet it is
evidently contemplated in 816-21. ἐνϑί-
NwN is commonly taken to mean the
internal parts, though some commen-
tators preferred to explain ‘that which
was within the armour,’ i.e. any part
of the body. Thus the combatants might
go so far as drawing blood, but were
not to pierce beyond the skin! The
word does not reappear in Greek.

808. For Asteropaios see Φ 183, and
for the Thrakian sword N 577. How the
armour of Sarpedon is to be a common
possessionis far from clear, and the sudden
addition of the sword is unexpected.

IAIAAOC Ψ (Χχιπ) 529

τεύχεα δ᾽ ἀμφότεροι ξυνήϊα ταῦτα φερέσθων'

/ -~_3 > \ / > ,ὕ ᾽ν
καί σφιν δαῖτ᾽ ἀγαθὴν παραθήσομεν ἐν κλισίηισιν. 810
oh v ’ 2 > , ml , "

ὡς ἔφατ᾽, ὦρτο δ᾽ ἔπειτα μέγας Τελαμώνιος Λἴας,
> ᾽ »Μ rly Ah ᾿ Ἃ Ὁ
ἀν δ᾽ ἄρα Τυδεΐδης ὦρτο κρατερὸς Διομήδης.

΄ > ᾽ \ < ΄ / . , ,ὔ
οἱ δ᾽ ἐπεὶ οὖν ἑκάτερθεν ὁμίλου θωρήχθησαν,
ἐς μέσον ἀμφοτέρω συνίτην μεμαῶτε μάχεσθαι,

΄ > 9 , ? ΄
δεινὸν δερκομένω: θάμβος ὃ ἔχε πάντας Ἀχαιούς. 815
e ,

ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ σχεδὸν ἦσαν ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλοισιν ἰόντες,
τρὶς μὲν ἐπήϊξαν, τρὶς δὲ σχεδὸν ὡρμήθησαν.
» 5 ν \ Μ > > / / > 2,4
ἔνθ᾽ Αἴας μὲν ἔπειτα Kat ἀσπίδα πάντοσ᾽ ἐΐσην

4% »O\
vue, οὐδὲ

Τυδεΐδης δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔπειτα ὑπὲρ σάκεος μεγάλοιο

[Δ] “ » \ »Μ ,
χρό ἵκανεν: ἔρυτο yap ἔνδοθι θώρη ξ'

820
A > > > / lal r \ > fol
αἰὲν ἐπ᾽ αὐχένι κῦρε φαεινοῦ δουρὸς ἀκωκῆι.
\ , / e? » / > \
καὶ tote δή ῥ᾽ Αἴαντι περιδδείσαντες ᾿Αχαιοὶ

/ » , ».» eee) > /
παυσαμένους ἐκέλευσαν ἀέθλια io’ ἀνελέσθαι.
>? \ of a / , a
αὐτὰρ Τυδείδης δῶκεν μέγα φάσγανον ἥρως
σὺν Korea. τε φέρων καὶ ἐυτμήτωι τελαμῶνι.
αὐτὰρ Πηλεΐδης θῆκεν σόλον αὐτοχόωνον,

809. τεύχεά τ᾽ U.
814. ἀμφοτέρω AG:
γι. ἃ A, ἐν ἄλλωι A.
Eust. || iénte ZH.

810 ἀθ. Ar. || παραϑήςομαι JPRSU. 812. én 0° JRS.
ἀμφοτέρων 8). 815. δερκόμενοι 1) Harl. a, Mosc. 2,
ἔχεν eicdpowntac T’, ἐν ἄλλωι A. 816. ἧςαν ἢ ican
817. éndizan H: ennjizen Pap. μ (supr. a). 819. rap:
δ᾽ T. || ewpaz P. 821. én’: ὑπ᾽ Vr. A. || KUpce Vr. d. |) GKooKA(1) D°GJ
(R! 2) Harl. a, Pap. w?: ἀκωκὴ HQ Vr. b (d?): ἀκωκήν 2. 823. ἀνελέςθαι :
ἀνάγοντες |). 824-25 ἀθ. Aph. Ar. 825. KouAe® Di). || φέρειν ᾧ. | ἐυδμήτωι
Vr. AvSeh., 1.

810 ἀθετεῖται, ὅτι ἔδει καὶ πᾶσιν. ἀλλ᾽
οὐχὶ τούτοις μόνον. τί γὰρ τούτοις πέ-
mpaxtac πλέον; An. True; but the line
is worthy of the interpolator.

fulfils the conditions of 805, and duly
receives the promised sword. The usual
translation is kept aiming at, or trying
to touch (conative imperf.). In that

811-16 are all borrowed from other
passages (¥ 708, 290, Z 120, Γ' 340-42,
15). 817 is a vaguer reminiscence (cf.
N 559), and devoid of sense, for it is
impossible to guess what the difference
between ἐπήϊξαν and cxedon DPUHEHCAN
is supposed to be. In 814 almost all Mss,
have retained the original ἀμφοτέρων (the
two armies), which is meaningless here.

820. ἔπειτα seems to be used very
vaguely ; it is not clear whether or no
it is meant to describe a fresh stage of
the fight after the three assaults and
Aias’ blow.

821. κῦρε, to judge from the use of
the word, can only mean kept lighting on
his neck, i.e. kept touching him without
wounding him. Diomedes accordingly

VOL. II 2

case there is obviously no reason for the
award of the sword in 824-25, which
lines Ar. and Aph. accordingly athetized ;
and ἀέθλια io’ ἀνελέσθαι in 823 gives
justification for this course. The whole
narrative is as self-contradictory as it is
obscure. —GkewxAl, the better attested
ἀκωκήν involves an unheard-of constr.
of κύρειν.

825=H 304.

826. ςόλον αὐτοχόωνον is most natur-
ally taken to be a mass of iron just as
it came from the smelting furnace (pig-
iron). Others have regarded it as imply-
ing ‘naturally fused,’ i.e. meteoric iron.
This: cannot be disproved, but such a
mass would be highly unsuitable for
the making of farm-implements. It is

I

90

IAIAAOC Ψ (xxii!)

a \ \ Crys, / θέ fH , s

OV πριν μεν βυπτασκε μέγα σ ενος ETLMVOS

> > » \ » ὃ Ἷ δὶ aN ἈΝ 7

GAN ἤτοι τὸν ἔπεφνε ποδάρκης OLOS χίλλεὺς,
Ν 2 » 3 5 / Ν ” /

τὸν δ᾽ ἄγετ᾽ ἐν νήεσσι συν ἄλλοισι κτεατεσσι.

στῆ δ᾽ ὀρθὸς καὶ μῦθον ἐν ᾿Αργείοισιν ἔειπεν"

830

’ t / / /
“ὄρνυσθ᾽, of καὶ τούτου ἀέθλου πειρήσεσθε.
Ν > / / > /
εἴ of Kal μάλα πολλὸν ἀπόπροθι πίονες aypol,

6 / \
ἕξει μιν Kal πέντε περυιπλομένους ἐνιαυτοὺς

/ e > i, / J
χρεώμενος: οὐ μὲν yap οἱ ἀτεμβόμενὸς γε σιδήρου

3 5 , ᾽ \ / 37
ποιμὴν οὐδ᾽ ἀροτὴρ εἶσ ἐς πόλιν, ἀλλὰ παρέξει.

ὡς ἔφατ᾽, ὦρτο δ᾽ ἔπειτα μενεπτόλεμος Πολυποίτης,
ἀν δὲ Λεοντῆος κρατερὸν μένος ἀντιθέοιο,
ἀν δ᾽ Alas Τελαμωνιάδης καὶ δῖος ᾿Κ'πειός.
ἑξείης δ᾽ ἵσταντο, σόλον δ᾽ ἕλε δῖος ᾿ὑπειός,

ἧκε δὲ δινήσας" γέλασαν δ᾽ ἐπὶ πάντες ᾿Αχαιοί.

840

821. ON: τὸν TU. || πρὶν : περὶ 77.
834. χρεόμενος (). || οἱ om. ().
839 om. V

Grar’ § Harl. a.
after 838, Harl. a, Mosc. 2.

828. népne PR Mor. 829. ἄγετ᾽ :

837 om. Vr. b: placed

τ: ὦ:

curious that the oldest find of iron in
prehistoric Hissarlik consisted of two
‘lumps’ discovered by Schliemann in
1890—much too small, however, to serve
for a diskos ; he conjectured that one,
with a square hole, had been the handle
of a staff (Schuchh. p. 332), αὐτοχό-
wnoc seems to be a mistaken instance of
‘Epic diectasis’ for αὐτόχωνος = avro-
χόανος like ἀστυβοώτης 2701. Schulze
would read αὐτοχόανος, with lengthening
of the a by metrical necessity.

827. ῥίπταςκε should be either ῥίπτεσκε,
ῥίψασκε, or ῥίπταζε: O 23 note. Eetion
was the father of Andromache ; Z 395,
I 188, ete.

832. oi, the victor—a violent transi-
tion. The whole speech is obscure.
ἀπόπροθι may mean ‘far from the city’
(cf. 835), so that his own private store
of iron will be all that he can depend
upon; or ‘far from one another,’ i.e.
of wide extent. In any case the phrase
is an Odyssean reminiscence ; cf. 6 756
ἐπέσσεται ὅς κεν ἔχηισιν ἀπόπροθι
πίονας ἀγρούς, he shall leave behind him
one to possess his fat fields far away, i.e.
apparently ‘reaching far from the town,’
as in the first explanation ; cf. also ὃ
811, ε 80,2 18. Déderlein’s πολλοί for
πολλόν would make the sense clearer,
and is accepted by van. L. περιπλο-
μένους ἐνιαυτούς is also an Odyssean
phrase ; cf. περιτροπέων ἐνιαυτός B 295.

834. χρεώμενος, i use? or in case of
need? For the former cf. φρεσὶ yap
κέχρητ᾽ ἀγαθῆισιν in Od. ; for the latter
κεχρημένος needing, in Od., and cf. note
on T 262. The perf. is the only tense
which occurs elsewhere in H. except in
the sense of uttering or consulting an
oracle. The synizesis may be defended
by that of xpew, but is hardly early. In
any case Payne-Knight’s xpyomevos οὐ
γάρ οἱ is not justifiable in a late passage.

835. παρέξει, ἐξ (the σόλος) or he (the
owner) will supply iron. The idea of
a state of things when the ploughman
and shepherd (7) forge their own tools
from a lump of raw iron has a suspicious
appearance of a deliberate attempt to
represent from the inner consciousness an
archaic stage of civilisation. In Homeric
times the χαλκεύς is already specialized
as a worker in metal, and there is no
primitive industry where the advantage
of division of labour is likely to be sooner
felt.

836. For Polypoites and Leonteus see
M 129 ff.

840. We are not told whether the
Achaians laughed in derision of a bad
‘put’ or admiration of a good one.
Epeios seems to be the representative of
brute strength (see 664), so the latter is
perhaps more probable. Van Herwerden’s
conj. ἢκα δὲ δίνησεν is in any case gra-
tuitous.

IAIAAOC Ψ (Χχιπ) 531

/ 6 "5 > / \ v "
δεύτερος αὖτ ἀφέηκε Λεοντεὺς ὄζος Λρηος,
\ / Φ δ΄ Ψ / ΄, Μ
τὸ τρίτον αὖτ᾽ ἔρριψε μέγας Τελαμώνιος Αἴας
χειρὸς ἄπο στιβαρῆς, καὶ ὑπέρβαλε σήματα πάντων.
- ,
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ σόλον εἷλε μενεπτόλεμος Ἰ]ολυποίτης,
“ / / ’ » / , > 7 me
ὅσσόν τίς T ἔρριψε καλαύροπα βουκόλος ἀνήρ, 845
id \ ΄ / / \ ‘al » ,
ἡ δὲ ἑλισσομένη πέτεται διὰ βοῦς ἀγελαίας,
/ \ » cal ς΄ ΄ \ \ /
τόσσον παντὸς ἀγῶνος ὑπέρβαλε: τοὶ δὲ βόησαν.
, © rn
avotavtes δ᾽ ἕταροι Τ]ολυποίταο κρατεροῖο
νῆας ἔπι γχλαφυρὰς ἔφερον βασιλῆος ἄεθλον.
Ξ ͵ ΄ ΕΞ
αὐτὰρ ὁ τοξευτῆισι τίθει ἰόεντα σίδηρον, 850

841. δεύτερον Vr. ἃ A. || ἐφέηκε ()7 Vr. Ὁ.

πάντα GPQR Harl. bd, Par.adfhj.
om. Vr. Ὁ. || Tie τ᾽ : τις A.
tehic.) HPQRT: ἡ δέ ο᾽ 22.

846. ἡ δὲ Ο (dé) Pap. μ:
847. 0° ἐνόηςαν ().
(swpr. N). || πολυποίτοιο C (-πυτ-) RS Vr. ἃ.

842 om. Ut. 843 ἀθ. Ar.

844. μὲν A (sup. OH) Vr. b. 845
ἡ dé τ᾽ (ἐλ.) D (ἠδέ
848. αςτάντες Pap. μ

848 ἀθετεῖται, ὅτι δυεῖν προδεδισκευ-
κότων ἔδει εἰπεῖν ““ ἀμφοτέρων. μετενή-
vextat δὲ ἐκ τῆς ᾿Οδυσσείας (θ 192): καὶ
ἐκεῖ εὐλόγως ἔστιν “ὑπέρβαλε σήματα
πάντων, πλείονες γὰρ δισκεύουσιν, An.
This again, though the careless repeti-
tion is obvious, is in a passage of this
character no ground for athetesis. The
cHuata are evidently pegs stuck in the
ground to mark the point reached by
each man’s ‘put.’

845. καλαύροπα, no doubt καλα-ἔροπα.
from Fper-, pérw. The meaning of the
first element is uncertain. Curtius after
Hoffmann conn. with κάλος ὦ string ;
explaining it of the loop of string often
used to assist in casting, as it is to this
day by the natives of the Pacific (see
Tylor, Anthropology p. 194, Lex. s.v.
μεσάγκυλον, Lat. amentum). In that
case we should have expected to find
some trace of the device in battle; but
as Mr. Tylor remarks (ibid. p. 193) ‘the
sporting use outlasts the warlike. It
is, however, not unknown on archaic
vases (see J. H. S. iv. 302; v. 221, pl.
xliii.). So Schol. T ἔχει δὲ ἐν τῶι κάτω
μέρει δεσμόν, εἰς ὃν εἴρουσι τὴν χεῖρα...
καὶ ᾿Αντίμαχος ““πάντες δ᾽ ἐν χείρεσσι
καλαύροπας οὐατοέσσας.᾽᾽

847. ἀγῶνος is not clear; it can
hardly mean beyond all the spectators, as
we might expect (cf. e.g. 451). It may
imply ‘beyond all the competitors’ or per-
haps more simply ‘beyond the grownd’
marked out for the contest. Compare
the cast of Odysseus, @ 189-98. ὑπερ-
βαλεῖν elsewhere always takes the acc.,
whether used of person or place.

850. The following contest is in its
way even more confused and obscure
than the sham-fight. The idea of pro-
viding a prize beforehand for the man
who, while failing to hit the bird, should
perform the purely accidental and ridicu-
lously unlikely feat of cutting the string,
is the extreme of absurdity. Virgil (den.
v. 485-521) and Scott (Anne of Geierstein)
have both copied the scene, while avoid-
ing this blot.—The iron is apparently
identical with the axe-heads ; but the
scholia give an interpretation of πελέκεας
and ἡμιπέλεκκα Which is worthy attention,
viz. that they indicated a certain weight
of iron. So Schol. A ἔστι δὲ σταθμὸς
σιδήρου ἔχων μνᾶς δέκα. Schol. T οἱ δὲ
ὄνομα σταθμοῦ ἑξάμνουν παρὰ τοῖς Βοιω-
τοῖς οὕτω λεγόμενον. οἱ δὲ κατά τινας
τάλαντον σιδήρου, κατὰ δὲ ἐνίους ἑκατὸν
μνᾶς. Such a standard of weight is by
no means impossible ; for if, as was the
case with gold and silver, iron was
bartered in the shape of wedges of known
weight, such pieces might easily enough
come to be called ‘axes’ and ‘ half-axes.’
We should thus escape the awkwardness
involved, if actual axe-heads for use are
meant, in their being named first from
their material only. Ar. seems to have
considered the case analogous to the
axe-heads in the trial of the bow in
τ 572, @ 120: ὅτι καὶ ἐν ᾿Οδυσσείαι ὁ
αὐτὸς τρόπος" πελέκεις γὰρ τίθησι δι’ ὧν
παρακελεύει τοξεύειν τοὺς μνηστῆρας" καὶ
νῦν τὸ αὐτὸ ἔπαθλον γίνεται. This is
quite unintelligible. ἰόεντα is gener-
ally taken to mean dark, like loedéa
πόντον, ἃ 107, in place of the usual

532

IAIAAOC Ψ (χχιπη)

5 » ,ὔ ’ γ΄
cad δ᾽ ἐτίθει δέκα μὲν πελέκεας, δέκα δ᾽ ἡμιπέλεκκα,

2 » \ ΄
ἱστὸν ὃ ἔστησεν νηὸς κυανοπρώροιο
fal \ 7 Te
τηλοῦ ἐπὶ ψαμάθοις, ἐκ δὲ τρήρωνα πελειαν

A / aA / - Yay fe
λεπτῆι μηρίνθωι δῆσεν ποδός, ἧς ap ἀνώγει

ἃ / , ΗΝ
τοξεύειν" “ὃς μέν κε βάληι τρήρωνα πέλειαν, 855

΄ Sal: /
πάντας ἀειράμενος πελέκεως oixovde φερέσθω"

τὰ , , ΄ ” ε ΄,
ὃς δέ κε μηρίνθοιο τύχηι, ὄρνιθος ἅμαρτων,

¢ tal ξ / ς , ν᾽
ἥσσων γὰρ δὴ κεῖνος, ὁ δ᾽ οἴσεται ἡμυπέλεκκα.

ὡς ἔφατ᾽, ὦρτο δ᾽ ἔπειτα βίη Τεύκροιο ἄνακτος,

ἀν δ᾽ ἄρα Μηριόνης θεράπων ἐὺς ᾿Ιδομενῆος. 860

κλήρους δ᾽ ἐν κυνέηι χαλκήρεϊ πάλλον ἑλόντες,

Τεῦκρος δὲ πρῶτος κλήρωι λάχεν.

5. Π 5. ἸΌΝ
αυτικα ὃ ον

: > , 5, 9 I ”
KEV ETTLKPATEWS, ovo NT ELAN TEV QAVQAKTL

5 lal Cac \ /
ἀρνῶν πρωτογόνων ῥέξειν κλειτὴν ἑκατόμβην'
> ε e / a: / -
ὄρνιθος μὲν ἅμαρτε' μέγηρε γάρ οἱ τὸ y Ἀπόλλων᾽ 865
ΟῚ Ν e / 4 / n / ’ ”
αὐτὰρ ὁ μήρινθον Bare παρ “πόδα, τῆι δέδετ᾽ ὄρνις"
Ν “ /
ἀντικρὺ δ᾽ ἀπὸ μήρινθον τάμε πικρὸς ὀϊστός. δ

851. πελέκεις G: πέλεκα Π΄: πελεκέα Vr. A. ||
ἐπὶ : ὑπὸ D. || pwaudeoio J: ψαμάθης S.

ἡμιπελεκέα Vr. A.
854-55 om. Ht.

853.
854. moddc:

κατ᾽ ἔνια πόδα Did. || He: AN CD Harl. a, Par. fh: ὧς (ὧς) PQR Harl. d, Vr. d,
yp. Did. || ἄρ᾽ : rap PQR Harl. d, Par. e, yp. Did. (ἧς γὰρ and ὧς rap Ar, διχῶς)

(Pap. u has Hap, swpr. c or r).

855. BGAHI: λάβη C.

856. meAekUac (). ||

Oi1KONOE: κλιείηνδε GPQRS (κλυς-) Syr. Harl. a b d, Par. a ἃ 6 f h 1, ἐν ἄλλωι

A. || φερέςϑαι D and ap. Eust.
-on) Ap. Lew. 100. 1,
865. rdp: ὃδέ Cant. (ap. Paley).

UHPINed (). 867. uHpineou PR.

857. τύχοι D.
864 om. DT Pap. μ. || ῥέξαι P. || KAEITHN : ἱερὴν ὃ.
| τό γ΄:

861. πάλλον : βάλλων (/eq-

τότ᾽ AD( Vr. A Bar. 866 om. Cl. ||

αἴθωνα or πολιόν, Ar. preferred to ex-
plain suitable for making arrows, τὸν εἰς
ἰοὺς εὐθετοῦντα, οἰκεῖον yap τὸ ἔπαθλον
τοξόταις. This might look as though he
took πελέκεας as indicating weight, not
manufactured form, were it not for his
comparison with the axe-heads in the Od.

855. The sudden change from narra-
tive to direct speech in the middle of a
line is quite without parallelin H. The
only other case of a speech not formally
announced is in A 303, q.v.

857. ὅτι βέλτιον ἣν τοῦτο μὴ προλέγεσθαι
ὑπὸ ᾿Αχιλλέως ὥσπερ προγινώσκοντος τὸ
ἀπὸ τύχης συμβησόμενον, An., very justly.
The couplet cannot be omitted, and the
note refers to a διπλῆ, Not an ὀβελός.

861=I 316, see note. The lot is
evidently necessary, for on the conditions

stated if the first to shoot hits the bird
the second lias no chance.

863. ἠπείληςεν, declared aloud, see
note on Θ 150. That ἄνακτι means
Apollo we learn only from the next
line but one.

864=A 102. The hecatomb of lambs
seems to be regarded as Apollo’s fixed
price for a successful shot. The line is
omitted by good mss., but cannot be
dispensed with. No ms. omits the
identical 873, ᾿

865. The constr. of μεγαίρω varies
creatly. in H. We have it with gen.
in N 563 (q.v.), dat. only O 473, dat.
and infin. y 55, ace. and infin. B 235,
infin. only H 408. For rap Bekker
conj. δέ, But in so late a passage even
Fou may lose its F.

IAIAAOC Ψ (xxirl) 533

ἡ μὲν ἔπειτ᾽ ἤϊξε πρὸς οὐρανόν, ἡ δὲ παρείθη
μήρινθος ποτὶ γαῖαν: ἀτὰρ κελάδησαν ᾿Αχαιοί.
σπερχύμενος δ᾽ ἄρα Μηριόνης ἐξείρυσε χειρὸς 870
τόξον: ἀτὰρ δὴ ὀϊστὸν ἔχεν πάλαι, ὡς ἴθυνεν.

, ᾽ , > ,
αὐτίκα δ᾽ ἠπείλησεν ExnBortwe Ἀπόλλωνι

> lal / eZ \ id /
ἀρνῶν πρωτογόνων ῥέξειν κλειτὴν ἑκατόμβην.

ὕψι δ᾽ ὑπαὶ νεφέων εἶδε τρήρωνα πέλειαν"

fol ew ὃ / ΄ \ / a a tr , πε
τῆι p ὅ γε δινεύουσαν ὑπὸ πτέρυγος βάλε μέσσην, 875
5» \ \ fol / Ν \ 3 \

ἀντικρὺ δὲ διῆλθε βέλος: TO μὲν A ἐπὶ yaine

πρόσθεν Μηριόναο πάγη ποδός: αὐτὰρ ἡ

ὄρνις

ἱστῶι ἐφεζομένη νηὸς κυανοπρώροιο

753 ,
αὐχέν ἀπεκρέμασεν, σὺν δὲ πτερὰ πυκνὰ
» \ 5 > / \ / rn 5
ὠκὺς δ᾽ ἐκ μελέων θυμὸς πτάτο, τῆλε ὃ

7]
Niacbev:
, ΄
ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ 880

κάππεσε: λαοὶ δ᾽ αὖ θηεῦντό τε θάμβησάν τε.

869. προτι Syr.

810. ἐξείρυςε. .. 871. ἴϑυνεν : ἐπεθήκατ᾽ ὀϊετὸν τόξωι"
ἐν rap yepcin (yeipeccin 7, πᾶσιν A) ἔχεν πάλαι cc ἴθυνεν,

Mass.: ἐξείλετο

τόξον χερςοὶν ἁτὰρ κτλ. Antim. (in A): ἐξείρυςε τεύκρου τόξον: Xepci ὃ᾽ ὀϊετὸν

ἔχεν κτλ. Antim. (in Sch. T Eust.).
H Syr. || ἴϑε PR:

τῆλε: ἥδε Vr. ἃ.

871. εχον Pap. uw (supr. ε).
ἴϑετο QSU Syr. Mor. Vr. d A: ἴδε de Pap. μ. 875. THI:
THN DGH. || Bade: λάβε Q Syr. || μέεςης C Harl. a (swpr. Nn),
Eust.: μέςςαν 77: μέςςον Pap. μὶ (supr. Η) Bar. Mor.
Maccen Ar. D: AidceH Mass.: λιάσθηι Pap. « (ext by ma. 2),

874. Uno

Mose. 2, and ap.
879. ἐπεκρέμαςεν PR.
880. éntato T.

868. The aor. παρείθη occurs only
rarely (Eur. Phoen. 1377 ἀφείθη, Herod.
vi. 112, vil. 122 ἀπείθη ; subj. ἀνεθῆι
Plato Pol. 2704, etc.). The Epic form
should be παρεήθη (for ἐ-σή-θη cf. Enka)
or παρήθη (with the augment dropped) ;
εἴθη is for ἐ-σέ-θη with the weak root,
whence ἀφέθην, Batr. 87. But here of
course the late form is in place.

870-71. The ancient variants given
above testify to the doubts which this
couplet has raised. As it stands it can
only mean that Meriones ‘plucked the
bow from Teukros’ hand; but he had
been long holding an arrow while he
(Teukros) was aiming’; i.e. both com-
petitors use the same bow, as all ‘put’
with the same σόλος. So Did., ὁ μέντοι
᾿Αρίσταρχος διὰ τῶν ὑπομνημάτων ἐπειγό-
μενον βούλεται τὸν Μηριόνην ἐκσπάσαι
τῆς τοῦ 'Ῥεύκρου χειρὸς τὸ τόξον" καὶ γὰρ
κοινὸν τῶν ἀγωνιζομένων αὐτὸ εἶναι ὥσπερ
τὸν δίσκον. But the idea seems absurd,
the change of subject in i@uvev is very
harsh, and ὡς does not mean while.
The last difficulty might be met by
reading ἕως with synizesis, and Voss’ ὡς

ἰθύνοι to a certain extent makes things
easier (cf. ὄφρ᾽ ἰθύνοι, that he might steer,
e 255); the absurdity of the general
situation is met by nothing short of the
Massaliot reading.

875. The description is hopelessly
confused. ὑπὸ πτέρυγος seems to imply
a side shot, in which case it can only
have been by a miracle that the arrow
fell at Meriones’ feet ; if the bird was
directly overhead it is equally miraculous
that she should have been able to fly to
the mast ‘far away’ (8538, 880) after
letting the arrow through. Virgil allows
the bird to die outright. For τῆι there
(beneath the clouds) a few mss. have
τήν Which is equally good.

876. éni, Nauck évi, the usual and
appropriate word.

879. Maceen, drooped ; elsewhere of
wounded warriors, O 543, ete.

880. αὐτοῦ, either it, the mast—
though how a dying bird on the top
of a mast can drop ‘far’ from it the
poet does not trouble to think—or him,
Meriones. Perhaps the latter is a little
more probable.

δ94

IAIAAOC Ψ (xx)

ἀν δ᾽ dpa Μηριόνης πελέκεας δέκα πάντας ἄειρε,
Τεῦκρος δ᾽ ἡμιπέλεκκα φέρεν κοίλας ἐπὶ νῆας.
αὐτὰρ Πηλείδης κατὰ μὲν δολιχόσκιον ἔγχος,
Kad δὲ λέβητ᾽ ἄπυρον, βοὺς ἄξιον, ἀνθεμόεντα 885
θῆκ᾽ ἐς ἀγῶνα φέρων: καί ῥ᾽ ἥμονες ἄνδρες ἀνέσταν᾽
ἀν μὲν ἄρ᾽ ᾿Ατρεΐδης εὐρὺ κρείων ᾿Αγαμέμνων.
av δ᾽ ἄρα Μηριόνης θεράπων ἐὺς ᾿Ιδομενῆος.
τοῖσι δὲ καὶ μετέειπε ποδάρκης δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς:

ἐξ ᾿Ατρεΐδη᾽

ἴδμεν γὰρ ὅσον προβέβηκας ἁπάντων, 890

ἠδ᾽ ὅσσον Οὐ ΤΕ τε καὶ ρῶν ἔπλευ ἄριστος"
ἀλλὰ σὺ μὲν τόδ᾽ ἄεθλον EXOV κοίλας ἐπὶ νῆας
ἔρχευ, ἀτὰρ δόρυ Μηριόνην ἥρωϊ πόρωμεν,
εἰ σύ γε σῶι θυμῶι ἐθέλεις" κέλομαι γὰρ ἔγωγε."

ὼς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν ᾿Αγαμέμνων. 895
δῶκε δὲ Mnpiovne δόρυ χάλκεον: αὐτὰρ 6 γ᾽ ἥρως
Ταλθυβίωι κήρυκι δίδου περικαλλὲς ἄεθλον.

882. ἐν ὃ᾽ R. ἀείρας LD:
ίντος by τιν. 2). 886. ῥ᾽
ἀχαιῶν 2). 891. ἥμοςιν ὦ) Vr. ἃ.

αεϑλους Pap. μ΄.
HUONEC: τινὲς ῥήμονες Sch. AT.
894. ἐθέλοις AGHJLQU: ἐθέληι Lips.

885. aNeeuoentoc Pap. μ
890. ἁπάντων :

884. The spear can hardly be more
valuable than the λέβης. So we must
suppose that the second prize is men-
tioned first, against the natural order.
This, however, agrees with the fact that
Agamemnon receives the λέβης. Jordan
suggests with some probability that the
spear here mentioned is not a prize, but
the weapon with which the competitors
are to cast; so that éyxos virtually
means the contest of the spear; it
is only given as consolation - prize to
Meriones by an afterthought. Still the
scene lacks clearness and vivacity, and
we might hesitate to rank it with the
older games had not the javelin-throwing
been expressly foretold (622). There is,
however, a certain dignity in the manner
in which Agamemnon is recognized with-
out submitting to a contest in which
his position would not allow him to be
defeated ; and Achilles is at least a
human being in contrast to the wooden
dummies who have occupied the stage
since 797.

885. aneeudenta, adorned with flowers,
as y 440, w 275. Flowers and rosettes
were always favourite motives of My-
kenaean and archaic decoration. See
for instance Helbig H. Μ΄. 386, with the
illustration on p. 358.

886. ὅτι HuoNEc οἱ ἀκοντισταί, ἀπὸ TOU

ἱέναι. τινὲς δὲ ἀνέγνωσαν ῥήμονες, οἰόμενοι
τοὺς ῥήτορας" οὐκ ἔστι δὲ λογιστικὸς ὁ
ae Sy ea : :

ἀγών, An. This extraordinary reading

of course implies καὶ ῥήμασιν for τε Kat
ἥμασιν in 891. Such a contest is entirely
alien to the Epic spirit (see on O 284).

892. ἀλλά, yet forbear to display your
superiority. We should rather have
expected τῶ, therefore take the prize.

894. The indic. ἐθέλεις is here of
course the regular tense after πόρωμεν,
but the opt. may be defended as not
directly assuming Agamemnon’s consent,
and thus being somewhat more courteous
intone. Compare P 489, where a similar
question arises, but the circumstances
are inverted, as there it is more courteous
to assume the consent.

INTRODUCTION
Q

Tue greater part of this book combines with the extraordinary poetic beauty
which places it in the first rank of works of the human imagination, a
straightforward simplicity of plan which has exempted it almost entirely
from the attacks of critics, so far as internal construction is concerned. There
are but few passages which we can reasonably suspect of being later intrusions
into the original poem.

The opening is the most important of these. Out of the first 30 lines
Aristarchos athetized no less than 14. His severity seems to overshoot the
mark ; but the objections to 20-21 and 29-30 are absolutely convincing,
and the whole idea of the stealing of the body of Hector by Hermes may
probably be a later conception. It introduces some confusion of motive
wherever it occurs, and all the lines in which it is mentioned (24—30, 71-73,
109) can well be spared.

Even when we have cut out 23— (or 24—) 30, it must be admitted that the
narrative shews want of clearness ; the transition from the description of a
single night (4-10) to the continued acts of twelve days (12—18) is not even
indicated, and the reference of ἐκ τοῖο in 31 is as obscure as in the same line
in A (493), where the want of precision seemed to give ground for suspecting
the preceding passage. The former fault is irreparable; the latter may be
cured by adding 31, as an interpolation from A, to the rejected lines.

From 32 to 551 no serious objection, apart from athetesis of a few single
lines, has been raised to any passage except 152-58 =181-—87, and as is
shewn in the notes the rejection of the repetition 181-87 will suffice to save
the original passage.

The sudden change in Achilles’ mood in 560, the curious comparison to
a lion in 572, and some rather imaginary discrepancies (e.g. between 580 and
588, 597 and 515), have caused doubts as to the following scene ; but none
of them deserves serious consideration. Aristarchos’ athetesis of 614—17 has
been generally accepted, but, as is indicated in the notes, on inadequate
grounds, The question of the end of the book, however, cannot be so
lightly dismissed.

Diintzer considers that all after 676 is a later addition ; sleep and peace
form a perfect conclusion to the storms of the J/vad, and the curt and hurried
treatment of what follows is inconsistent with the Epic love of detail. But
it is clear that the hearer’s expectation to learn of Priam’s safe return

535

536 IAIAAOC O (xxiv)

requires to be satisfied ; that this should be done in the briefest manner is
poetically necessary after the magnificent climax. The other objections made
are not such as to demand the condemnation of the scene. Difficulties there
certainly are, but we have repeatedly found inequality of treatment in
narrative united with poetry too beautiful for suspicion. It is only with
regard to the dirges of 725-76 that hesitation is likely to be felt. Heyne
was the first to reject them ; Diintzer followed him, finding Hekabe’s words
“weak and flat,” Andromache’s only a feeble echo of her lament in X. Few
readers will agree with him ; as for Andromache’s lament, it has very little
indeed in common with X. The gravest question, however, is raised by the
ἐεικοστὸν ἔτος of Helen’s lament (765-66). Only two explanations of this.
seem to be possible ; either the late legend of the Cycle is alluded to, with
its double campaign against Troy, or we have a purely mechanical reminis-
cence of the twenty years of Odysseus’ absence from home in 7 222. As
there is no justification for ejecting the line, this seems a strong argument for
the lateness of the whole of the dirges—such lateness as is hardly to be
attributed to the rest of the book.

That the book as a whole is late admits of no doubt. It resembles I, K,
and VY, in its kinship with the Odyssey, but to a greater degree than any of
them. Both in tone and in phraseology this relationship is unmistakable.
The resemblances in language are pointed out in the notes ; attention may
be called particularly to those on 8, 33, 38, 230-31, 320, 323, 339-45,
558, 604, 635-36, 644-47, 673, 759, 765-66, where the identity is one of
whole phrases or lines. Among particular words Monro points out the
abstract πρῆξις, ἀεικείη, λύσις, γονή, ἐξεσίη, and words such as ἀνάρσιος,
αἰσυμνητήρ, τετράκυκλος, θυοσκόος, πείρινς, φωριαμός, φαεσίμβροτος,
ἐύσκοπος, πανδαμάτωρ, ἀγαπάζω, with others.

The resemblance to the Odyssey is not merely linguistic. The mythology
too is late ; Hermes appears as the messenger of the gods instead of Iris of
the Iliud ; the Moirai of 49 are a later conception ; the Niobe-myth is Asianic.
The whole description of the hut, or rather palace, of Achilles is inconsistent
with the rest of the Z/ad with the single exception of I.

To that book indeed, as Prof. Jebb has pointed out, there is a distinct
resemblance (Homer, p. 162). Both shew a tendency to the dramatic rather
than to the strictly Epic presentation of scenes; in both the poet’s strength
lies in his speeches rather than in his story. To this peculiarity we may
ascribe the want of clearness and crispness in narration, marking both the
beginning and end of Q, as well as the beginning of Y, which may well be
by the same hand—a hand which may have had no small share in the
Odyssey as well. The ninth book is the climax of rhetorical poetry, the
twenty-fourth of pathetic—both marks of advance from the stern restraint of
the Epic style, and both heralding the decadence in this as they do in other
arts. If in the Μῆνις we have the Aischylos, in this last book we have at
once the Sophokles and Euripides of the Epos.

IAIAAOC Ω

“Extopoc λύτρα.

lal ’ / \ \ \ a ξ΄
λῦτο δ᾽ ἀγών, λαοὶ δὲ θοὰς ἐπὶ νῆας ἕκαστοι

> / , »
ἐσκίδναντ᾽ ἰέναι.

\ \ / /
τοὶ μὲν δόρποιο μέδοντο

ef fa) / > \ > \

ὕπνου τε γλυκεροῦ ταρπήμεναι: αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
a }- e / / > / ef

κλαῖε φίλου ἑτάρου μεμνημένος, οὐδέ μιν ὕπνος

ἥιρει πανδαμάτωρ, ἀλλ᾽ ἐστρέφετ᾽ ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα

Πατρόκλου ποθέων ἀνδροτῆτά τε καὶ μένος Hv,

» ’ € / / \ > an \ / »
ἠδ᾽ ὁπόσα τολύπευσε σὺν αὐτῶι καὶ πάθεν ἄλγεα,

> an / / / ,
ἀνδρῶν τε πτολέμους ἀλεγεινά TE κύματα πείρων"

2. MEN: 8 ()U.
6-9 a0. Aph. Ar.
re Bar.

7. τολύπευε Harl. a, Mosc.

3. γλυκεροῖο TpanHuenal J.
6. ἀδροτῆτα H Par. h': GdpotAta ()U (p. vus.).

2

a

KEN L.
Te om. QTU:
ἄλγη Par. ἢ : ἔργα ai δημώδεις Did.

4. ΜΙΝ: μὲν P:

8. πολέμους CDJPRT Harl. a. || ἀλγεινὰ QRS Harl. a. | πείρων : περνῶν [".

1. The ὕ of λῦτο appears to be due
solely to the license of the first arsis ;
see App. D, c1; we have λύμην with ὕ
in ® 80. ἀλλύεσκεν (8 105, 109) has ὕ
through metrical necessity. Heyne conj.

θοὴν ἐπὶ νῆα ἕκαστος to save the F of

Féxaoros (as T 277, Ψ 3). But if αὐτὰρ
᾿Αχιλλεύς (3) originally followed on Ψ
257, as has been reasonably suggested,
the first three lines will belong to the
ἄθλα, where a neglect of F is less sur-
prising.

3. ταρπήμεναι, epexegetic, took thought
of food and sleep, to have their fill thereof.

6-9. ἀθετοῦνται στίχοι δ΄. ὅτι εὐτελεῖς
εἰσίν, ἀρθέντων δὲ αὐτῶν καὶ ἐμφαντικώ-
τερον δηλοῦται ἡ τοῦ ᾿Αχιλλέως λύπη.
καὶ οὐδέποτε ἀνδροτῆτα εἴρηκε τὴν ἀνδρείαν,
ἀλλ᾽ ἠνορέην (see note on II 857). ἔχει
δὲ καὶ τὸ δυσεξείληπτον (3 the meaning
evidently is awkwardness) “τῶν μιμνη-
σκόμενος καὶ yap ἄνω εἴρηκεν ‘‘ ἑτάρου
μεμνημένος." προηθετοῦντο δὲ καὶ παρ᾽
᾿Αριστοφάνει, An. This makes a strong

but hardly decisive case ; 8 is Odyssean
(@ 183, ν 264), and so is the verb τολυ-
πεύειν (exc. & 86); but this is consistent
with the general character of the book.
The rare synizesis of ἄλγεα may indicate
that the phrase is actually borrowed
without correction from ν 263, where
ἄλγεα is a dactyl ; but we can of course
adopt the old variant épya. The allusion
to the hardships of the sea evidently
belongs to the Od. rather than the 77.

7. 6néca with ποθέων by a slight
zeugma, thinking with yearning; the
slighter because μεμνημένος dominates
the passage. For the scansion cf. « 396
ὀπταλέα Te καὶ wud. The ictus in the
caesura is explanation enough, but see
note on Σ 4. ὁπόσ᾽ ἐκτολύπευσεν Barnes,
after Scut. Herc. 44 πόνον ἐκτολυπεύσας,
needlessly.

8. πείρων, cleaving; this may be taken
with πτολέμους by zeugma, as @ 183;
but the preceding τολύπευσε suggests
rather that both πτολέμους and κύματα

538

IAIAAOC © (xxiv)

lol / N \ δά iB

τῶν μιμνησκόμενος θαλερὸν κατὰ δάκρυον εἰβεν,

» ed γεξϑι 5 \ / rr 8 5 10
ἄλλοτ ἐπὶ πλευρὰς κατακείμενος, ἄλλοτε αὖτε

ὕπτιος, ἄλλοτε δὲ πρηνής"

\ nr? ς 7
δινεύεσκ᾽ ἀλύων παρὰ θὲν ἁλός.

\ > 3 \ ’ \
τοτὲ δ᾽ ὀρθὸς ἀναστὰς

> / ΨΕΝ
οὐδέ μιν ἠὼς

φαινομένη ληθεσ οὶ ὑπεὶρ ἅλα τ᾽ ἠϊόνας, ΤΕ,
ἀλλ᾽ 6 γ᾽ ἐπεὶ ζεύξειεν ὑφ᾽ ἅρμασιν ὠκέας ἵππους,

“Ἕκτορα δ᾽ ἕλκεσθαι δησάσκετο δίφρου
τρὶς δ᾽ ἐρύσας περὶ σῆμα Μενοιτιάδαο
αὖτις ἐνὶ κλισίηι παυέσκετο, τὸν δέ T
ἐν κόνι ἐκτανύσας προπρηνέα.

ὄπισθε, 15
θανόντος

ἔασκεν

τοῖο δ᾽ ᾿Απόλλων

a 3 / 7” oh LoS) » /
TACAV AELKELNY ATIENE xp Oe φῶτ ἐλεσυοη

καὶ τεθνηότα περ περὶ δ᾽ αἰγίδι πάντα κάλυπτε 20

ΕΠ ἵνα 1} μεν. UO! ἑλκυστάξων.

10. πλευρὰ T. 11. δὲ om. 7):

oH A Syr.

ὃ᾽ αὖ Vr. d. || τοτὲ : ποτὲ R.

12. ϑινεύαςκ᾽ 5. || mAwtzont’ ἀλύοντ᾽ ἐπὶ otn’ ἁλὸς ἀτρυγέτοιο Plat. Rep. ili. 388 Α
(Plato does not quote verbally, and adapts 10-12 to the grammar of his whole

sentence ;
Vr. (Ὁ Ὁ: ἀλλά τ᾽ ἐπιΖεύξειεν 7):
GAN’ ὅτ᾽ or ἄλλοτ᾽ ἐπὶ Ζεύξειεν). ||

Syr.: τὸν δὲ, Gacken R: τόνϑε δ᾽ ὥ:
ἐδέσμευεν Sch. T. 18. κονίη(ι) DPR.

TeeNHoTa (A supr.) JPRSU Vr. d A,
(and swpr.) Par. e ji. || καλύπτει S:
χρυςείην Ar. (T supr) Par. e (7 supr.):

but nmAwtzonta seems to dienes a variant).
ah\orenizeuzeien Syr.
ἅρματος ().

Mose.
καλύπτων P:
XpuciHn Pap.

14. ἀλλ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἐπιΖζΖεύξειεν
(ΤΊ seems to have had
17. aveic C. || TON ὃέ τ᾽
Ties δὲ <TON O€> O€acKEN ἀντὶ TOU
Tanucac P. 20-21 a6. Ar. 20.
2: Teeneidta (-@ta) ὥ. || αἰγίδα Ar, Τὶ
ἐν ἄλλωι κάλυψε A. 21.
uw (man, 2). || ἑλκυετάων J.

are co-ordinate with ὁπόσα, as πόλεμον
τολυπεύειν is a favourite Odyssean phrase.
πείρων will then be added as by an after-
thought, to avoid the awkwardness of
the zeugma τολυπεύειν κύματα, so that
καὶ πάθεν ἄλγεα is parenthetical.

12. Up to this point the description
of Achilles’ grief would seem to refer to
a particular night. The five iterative
verbs in -cxw within six lines shew
that it really belongs to a period of
several days; and this agrees with the
twelve days of 31, cf. 107. This is
evidently awkward ; it cannot however
be remedied without great violence, and
must be reckoned among the weaknesses
of the whole opening passage.

13. See note on Ψ 227.

15. The apodosis begins with this line,
cf. B 188 ὅν τινα μὲν... κιχείη, τὸν
δ᾽. ἐρητύσασκε. It might seem better
to expunge 6 in the next line on
account of the F of ξερύσας, and make
the apodosis begin there, as Nauck seems
to propose; but δησάσκετο is hardly
possible after ζεύξειεν, even if ἐπεὶ.
δησάσκετο in itself be admissible; nor

can I find any instance of an iterative
in -σκω in a dependent relative clause,
the regular use of the form being in
principal clauses only. ἐπεὶ Ζεύξειεν,
after he had yoked: the opt. is iterative
as in B 105 νύκτας δ᾽ ἀλλύεσκεν ἐπὴν
δαΐδας παραθεῖτο: compare 8 270 with
note, the only other instance of this:
iterative opt. with éreiin H. See H.G.
§ 309. For the dragging see note on
X 396.

17. TON ὃέ τ᾽ with its meaningless τε
has little authority, and τόνδε δ᾽ is in-
tolerable. Both are makeshifts arising
from τὸν δ᾽ ἐάεσκεν (P. Knight). The
open form has been forgotten as in
almost all instances of the verb. ‘So
in E 802, Υ 408, χ 427 we should read
ἐάεσκον for elacxov. See note on B 165.

19. For the constr. ἀπέχειν τί τινι οἵ.
υ 263 κερτομίας τοι ἀφέξω. It is the
same which is often found with ἀμύνειν.
Toto is gen. after χροΐ.

20-21 ἀθετοῦνται, on the following
grounds : (1) they are not necessary ; (2)
contact with a corpse is incongruous with
the sanctity of the aegis; (3) the aegis

IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv)

A € \ “ a δ /

ὡς ὁ μὲν “Extopa δῖον ἀείκιζεν μενεαίνων"
\ >
Tov δ᾽ ἐλεαίρεσκον μάκαρες θεοὶ εἰσορόωντες,

κλέψαι δ᾽ ὀτρύνεσκον ἐύσκοπον ἀργεϊφόντην.

» > ᾿ a ᾽
ἔνθ᾽ ἄλλοις μὲν πᾶσιν ἑήνδανεν, οὐδέ ποθ᾽ “Hpne 25

οὐδὲ ΤΙοσειδάων᾽ οὐδὲ γλαυκώπιδι κούρηι,

ἀλλ᾽ ἔχον, ὥς σφιν πρῶτον ἀπήχθετο Ἴλιος ἱρὴ

καὶ ΤΙρίαμος καὶ λαὸς ᾿Αλεξάνδρου ἕνεκ᾽ ἄτης,

Δ , ΄, “ . , “
OS νεικεσσεξ θεάς, OTE OL μέσσαυλον LKOVTO,

\ > "“ ἘΝ Ὁ, e / / > /
τὴν δ᾽ ἤινησ᾽ ἥ οἱ πόρε μαχλοσύνην ἀλεγεινήν. 30

24 om. Ut | κλέψαι δ᾽: ἱέναι 1). || ὠτρύνεςκον S. || ἐύπλοκον Ε΄.
25. ἐφήνϑανεν 7).
28. ἄτης : ἀρχῆς Pap. μ (man. 2) Vr. A ‘‘ Vat. 16,” ἐν ἄλλωι A.
| map’ ᾿Αριστοφάνει καί τισι τῶν πολιτικῶν H οἵ

ἀθ. Ar. (see below).
DPT Harl. a.
30. Hinec(c) CD Mosc. 2.

25-30

26 om. Ut. noceidawni (A spr.)

Kexapicuena Op" ὀνόμηνεν Did. || GAEreINHN: ἐρατεινήν Par. c.

is not a skin, but a shield which could
not be wrapped round the body when
dragged ; (4) the aegis belongs to Zeus,
not to Apollo; (5) a different means of
preserving the body is given in Ψ 185-
91. These reasons are amply sufficient
to justify rejection, but (3) is not valid ;
the aegis is a λαισήϊον of skin in H.,
see note on B 447. The passage seems
to be ancient enough to have served as
a model to Ψ 186 ff., where see note.
For airidi χρυςείηι Ar. read αἰγίδα
χρυσείην, for which Did. compares τοῖόν
τοι ἐγὼ νέφος ἀμφικαλύψω = 343. This
would require παντί for πάντα. ἀπο-
Ὀρύφοι, see Ψ 187.

23-30. ἀπὸ τούτου ὀκτὼ ἀθετοῦσι, καὶ
τοὺς μὲν ἕξ οὐκ ἀλόγως. . οἱ ἑπτὰ οὖν
δεόντως ἀθετοῦνται, ὡς ᾿Αρίσταρχος, Schol.
T. Acc. to An., Ar. athetized six lines
only, 25-30, and these only have the
obelos in A, though the schol. on 109
(q.v.) seems to indicate that he also con-
demned 24. His grounds were γέλοιον
τὸ “οὐδέ ποθ’ “Ἥρηι κτλ. τίνες μὲν yap
ἔτι ἐλείποντο τῶν τριῶν σεμνότεροι μετὰ
τὸν Δία τῶν μὴ συνευδοκούντων ; THY TE
περὶ τοῦ κάλλους κρίσιν οὐκ οἷδεν" πολλαχῆ
γὰρ ἂν ἐμνήσθη" καὶ τὸ νείκεσσε οὐκ ἔστι
κρῖναι ἀλλ᾽ ἐπιπλῆξαι ἢ διαφέρεσθαι.
καὶ ἡ μαχλοσύνη κοινῶς ἐστὶ γυναικὸς
μανία: δέδωκε δ᾽ αὐτῶι οὐ ταύτην, ἀλλὰ
τὴν καλλίστην τῶν τότε λένην. ᾿Ἡσιόδειος
δ᾽ ἐστὶν ἡ λέξις: ἐκεῖνος γὰρ πρῶτος
ἐχρήσατο ἐπὶ τῶν Ipoirov θυγατέρων (fr.
53 Rzach, εἵνεκα μαχλοσύνης στυγερῆς
τέρεν ὥλεσαν ἄνθος). This is perfectly
decisive against 29-30, which are
thoroughly un-Homeric. The case is
less strong against the stealing in 24,

for though Hermes is not known to
H. as the thievish god, yet his employ-
ment as messenger later on shews a
different conception from that of the
rest of the /Ziad (see Introd.). If 24 be
kept, 25-28 are not worth expunging.

24. éUckonon, aiming well (or simply
sharp-sighted), used also in 109 and twice
in Od. of Hermes, once with ἰοχέαιρα,
A 198.

25. €HNOaNEN (also y 143), prob-
ably a mere corruption of ἑάνδανεν for
ἐξάνδανεν on the analogy of the later
ἥνδανεν (H. G. ὃ 67, n. 2), like ἐωινοχόει
A 3. Compare also the Attic ἑώρων ete.
édvdave is actually found in the mss. of
Herodotos, ix. 5, 19. For €ne’ ἄλλοις
Nauck conj. ἄλλοισιν, to avoid the short
form.

27. ἔχον, persisted ; οἵ. M 459.

28. ἄτης, a late form for ἀξάτης. We
should be justified in adopting the
variant ἀρχῆς, were we sure of the
antiquity of the line, see notes on TP
100, Z 356.

29. Compare κ 435 ὥσπερ Κύκλωψ Epi’,
ὅτε of μέσσαυλον ἵκοντο ἡμέτεροι ἕταροι.
The phrase seems more in keeping there.
What Neikecce means it is not easy to
guess ; no recognized use of the word
seems to suit. Apparently the author
must have had some such idea as
humiliated (Hera and Athena). See
An. as quoted on 23-30.

30. map’ ᾿Αριστοφάνει Kai τισι τῶν
πολιτικῶν ‘*%H οἱ κεχαρισμένα δῶρ᾽ dvdun-
vev,” Did. This looks like a conjecture
to obviate the difficulty about μαχλοσύνη,
but it leaves the other serious objections
untouched (see An. on 23-30). μαχλο-

540

IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv) .

° , A 7, ,ὔ } 3 2
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δή ῥ᾽ ἐκ τοῖο δυωδεκάτη γένετ ἠώς,

5 5" ΄ “ - 2 /
καὶ τότ᾽ ap ἀθανάτοισι μετηύδα Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων"

/ /
“ σχέτλιοί ἐστε, θεοί, δηλήμονες"

A / . C fal
ov vu ποθ᾽ ὑμῖν

“ΤᾺ ΓᾺ v fal > lal /
LKT@pP μηρι EKNE βοῶν αἰγῶν τε τελείων;

\ ἴω » » / s/ ral
TOV νῦν οὐκ ETANTE νέκυν TEP €OVTA σαῶσαι, 35

- > 5) / 5 7 \ ΄ \ , -~ @
ye T aNOKOL ἰδέειν καὶ μήτερι KAL TEKEL WL

\ / / a / / / Ss
Kal TTATEPL Τριάμωι λαοῖσι TE, TOL KE [LLY WKA

Ξ \ , ,
ἐν πυρὶ κήαιεν καὶ ἐπὶ κτέρεα κτερίσαιεν.

ἀλλ᾽ odode ᾿Αχιλῆϊ, θεοί, βούλεσθ᾽ ἐπαρήγειν,

e Cae x / SEEN 3 v U
ὧι οὔτ ap φρένες εἰσὶν ἐναίσιμοι οὔτε νοημα 40

/ ’ Δ / 5
γναμπτὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσι, λέων δ᾽ ὡς ἄγρια οἶδεν,

’

[χὰ
ος ΠΣ

> \ xX fe / Ni ’ / fal
ἐπεὶ ἂρ μεγάληι τε Bine καὶ ἀγήνορι θυμῶι

33. ϑειλήμονες (). || οὔ NU: οὐδέ A (yp. οὔ νύ) QU Vr. ἃ.
35. TON: τῶ(ἡ)ἡ GPQ Vr. ἃ, Mosc. 2: τοῦ U.

κήςαιεν Lips.
κτερεΐςαιαν R: κτερεΐςαιεν ().
41. rnanton JPR. || εἶδεν Lips.

CUNHN itself is meaningless here; the
use of the word is definite enough, as
will be seen from the Lexica. μάχλος
Ἄρης <Aisch. Supp. 635 is the only
passage which would form any support
for such a translation as vouchsafed him
wanton pride.

31=A 493. Here, as there, the point
of time counted from is obseure ; it must
be Hector’s death, though this has not
been directly alluded to. Three days
are allowed for the funeral of Patroklos,
and nine more for the disputes in heaven
(107).

33. OHAHMONEC, φθαρτικοί, Schol.; else
only thrice in Od., in the phrase” ἔχετον
βασιλῆα βροτῶν δηλήμονα πάντων. In ε
118 we have σχέτλιοί ἐστε, θεοί, ζηλή-
μονες ἔξοχα πάντων, with the inadmis-
sible variant δηλήμονες. It is not easy
to say whether either passage is imitated
from the other.

35, οὐκ ἔτλητε,
up your minds.’

38. This line contains the only two
cases in H. of the 3rd pl. opt. in -acey
instead of -eay, see Curtius Vb. 11. 268,
G. Meyer Gr. ὃ 587. But κτερίσειαν is
implied as a variant by Did., οὕτως διὰ
τοῦ a ἢ παραλήγουσα, κτερίσαιεν, and
Schol. T remarks that it is ‘Ounpexdrepor.
Ar. probably read τίσαιεν in A 42. An.
says ὅτι οὐ μόνον οἱ ἐπὶ ξένης τελευτῶντες
ἐκαίοντο ἀλλὰ καὶ οἱ ἐπὶ τῆς ἰδίας πατρίδος.
It had evidently been proposed to ex-

‘you cannot make

| moe’: και Pap. εὖ.
37. τοί κέ: οἵ τε Vr. d. 38.

|| κτερίςειαν DS Harl. a b, Par. ace f gh j, and ap. Sch. AT:
40. ὧι: τῶ 7. || οὔτ᾽ Gp: οὔτε P Vr. A.

plain by the emergencies of war the
difference between heroic and historical
funeral rites. The phrase κτέρεα κτερί-
cat or κτερεΐξαι is elsewhere purely Odys-
sean. κτέρας occurs twice (K 216, ῶ
235) in the sense of a special possession.
The plural, except in this phrase, is
found only in ε 311 τῶ κ᾽ ἔλαχον
κτερέων, evidently =funeral rites. The
link between the two is no doubt to
be found in the custom of laying the
dead man’s favourite possessions in his
grave, or burning them on his pyre.
xrépea thus passed from the sense of
possessions to that of funeral rites, and
thus generated the verbs κτερίζω (A 455
etc.)=give a funeral, and κτερεΐζειν,
which occurs mainly in the figurw ety-
mologica (also Ψ 646, Q 657).

41. rnaunton, cf. ἐπιγνάμπτει
I 514, and orperrat φρένες O 203.

42. The anacoluthon is surprising, the
two relatives écand ἐπεί having only one
principal verb between them. We have
similar but less violent cases in Θ 230
ἃς ὁπότ᾽ ἐν Λήμνωι ἠγοράασθε, and in P
658, where see note. But there, as is
pointed out, a verb is supplied for ὅς
after all in 664, the original construc-
tion having only been interrupted by
the internal growth of the description.
Here we must supply ἄγρια οἷδεν from
the preceding line—an unnatural arti®
fice. Probably 42-5 are all interpolated.
The last line undoubtedly is ; 42-3 have

νόον

IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv) 541

oes ε΄ lal “ al ,
εἴξας εἶσ᾽ ἐπὶ μῆλα βροτῶν, ἵνα δαῖτα λάβηισιν'
“Ὁδ ᾽ \ ” \ > , os ΄ γον
ὡς ᾿Αχιλεὺς ἔλεον μὲν ἀπώλεσεν, οὐδέ οἱ αἰδὼς
° / ΄
γίνεται, ἥ τ᾽ ἄνδρας μέγα σίνεται ἠδ᾽ ὀνίνησι. 45
, » ,
μέλλει μέν πού τις καὶ φίλτερον ἄλλον ὀλέσσαι.
‘ Cd 4 ev
ἠὲ κασίγνητον ὁμογάστριον ἠὲ καὶ υἱόν"
> 3 v / \ > / /
ἀλλ᾽ ἤτοι κλαύσας Kal ὀδυράμενος μεθέηκε:
lal \ / /
τλητὸν γὰρ μοῖραι θυμὸν θέσαν ἀνθρώποισιν.
᾽ \ “ > “ΤᾺ “-“ > \ Vi 9 > / Ὰ
αὐτὰρ ὅ γ᾽ “Exropa δῖον, ἐπεὶ φίλον ἦτορ ἀπηύρα, 50
a? ΄ ,
ἵππων ἐξάπτων περὶ σῆμ ἑτάροιο φίλοιο
“ ᾽ / e / ΄ Qs 3 ”
ἕλκει: ov μήν οἱ TO γε κάλλιον οὐδέ τ᾽ ἄμεινον"

43, εἴξας : μήποτε διὰ τοῦ ἡ ἐγέγραπτο εἴξηις᾽ Nik.: ἀντὶ τοῦ εἴξας γραπτέον

efenic’, Sch. T. || βοτῶν ὦ.

45 ἀθ. Ar.
γάρ G() Vr. d. μέν mou: γάρ nou μέν Vr. b, Mose. 2.
JPTU Pap. μ, Harl. a Ὁ (-cou-) ἃ, Par. abcdefghj.

γίγνεται P. 46. μέν:
48. ὀδυρόμενος

52. οἷ: οὐ 5.

ἄνορα 0,

all the appearance of an imitation of the
simile in P by a late hand who regarded
the ἐπεί as ‘redundant’ on the apparent
analogy of the ὅτε in the familiar ws ὅτε.
If, as Athenaios states, Ar. held that
ἐπὶ μόνων ἀνθρώπων δαῖτας λέγει ὁ ποιητής,
ἐπὶ δὲ θηρίων οὐκέτι (see on A 5), he
must have obelized this couplet, though
the scholia give no hint of it; it is
ΟΡ believe that he took βροτῶν
δαῖτα together, as Lehrs would have.
(See, however, Ludwich, ii. 88, note.)
βροτῶν is a strange expression but
possible in a god’s mouth. Compare
οὗτος μὲν Φόβος ἐστὶ βροτῶν on the chest
of Kypselos (notes on A 28, 37). The
variant βοτῶν seems to be an old conj.
Nikanor suggests εἴξηισ᾽ for εἴξας, in-
geniously but not rightly ; the lion’s
‘yielding to his impulse’ cannot be
made the subject of a distinct clause
as though it were quite separate from
his attacking the herds, but is only in
place in the subordinate participial con-
struction.

45 ἀθετεῖται, ὅτι ἐκ τῶν Ησιόδου (Opp.
318) μετενήνεκται ὑπό τινος νομίσαντος
ἐλλείπειν τὸν λόγον, An. The decision
is obviously right; the line is suitable
enough in a gnomic reflexion, but is
absolutely senseless here, for Zeus could
not reproach Achilles for having none
of the αἰδώς which is injurious. The
double character of αἰδώς is a sententious
commonplace, see Eur. Hipp. 385 αἰδώς
τε" δισσαὶ δ᾽ εἰσίν. ἢ μὲν οὐ κακή, ἡ δ᾽
ἄχθος οἴκων. The idea of αἰδώς is fear
of what men may say ; this may be κακή,
for it may prevent a man doing what he

knows to be right, as well as keep him
from wrong., Plutarch in his essay περὶ
δυσωπίας, where he quotes this line as
Homeric (p. 529 p), takes the evil αἰδώς
to mean excessive bashfulness.

46. μέλλει ὁλέεςςαι, ‘is like to have
lost,’ i.e. may well have lost ; see Ψ 773.

47. ὁμογάςτριον, the closest tie, a
brother who is of the same mother as
well as the same father, 95. See also
notes on Θ 284, A 257, O 545.

48. μεθέηκε, ceases to weep; we must
supply κλαίειν καὶ ὀδύρεσθαι, as Ψ 434
μεθέηκεν ἐλαύνειν. ‘The verb cannot be

joined with the aor. participles on the

analogy of παύεσθαι κλαίων.

49, TAHTON, folevant; the other
Homeric cases of the active sense of
verbal adjectives in -ros seem to be
ἄκλαυτος ὃ 494, ἀδάκρυτος A415, 6 186,
w 61 (πολύτλητος ἃ 38, a passage rejected
by Zen. and Ar.) ; and even these differ,
as the verbs δεδάκρυμαι and κέκλαυμαι
express a state, so that the use of the
adj. may be derived from this (see on II
7). To these we may perhaps add
ἐπιεικτόν, see Π 549 and H. G. ὃ 246%.
The use has a suspicious resemblance to
the familiar Attic use of such verbals.
(Nauck conj. τλήμονα, as E 670 τλήμονα
θυμὸν ἔχων.) Another mark of late
origin is the use of the pl. μοῖραι found
here only. This implies a distinct
personification of the Fates, which occurs
again in 7 197 Κλῶθες, and is fully
developed in Hesiod (7'heog. 218, 905).
In Υ 127 the personification of alca
is half completed—and that is also a
late passage.

IAIAAOC © (x XIV)

> r rn ff. € id an δε
μὴ ἀγαθῶι περ ἐόντι νεμεσσηθῶμέν οἱ ἡμεῖς
κωφὴν γὰρ δὴ γαῖαν ἀεικίξει μενεαίνων."
τὸν δὲ χολωσαμένη προσέφη λευκώλενος Ἥρη: 55
«εἴη κεν Kal τοῦτο τεὸν ἔπος, ἀργυρότοξε,
εἰ δὴ ὁμὴν ᾿Αχιλῆϊ καὶ “Exropt θήσετε τιμήν.
“Ετωρ μὲν θνητός τε γυναῖκά τε Π πὸ μαξόν'
αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεύς ἐστι θεᾶς γόνος, ἣν ἐγὼ αὐτὴ
θρέψά τε καὶ ἀτίτηλα καὶ ἀνδρὶ πόρον παράκοιτιν 00
Πηλέι, ὃς περὶ κῆρι φίλος γένετ᾽ ἀθανάτοισι.
/ > ’ 7 / / δ᾽ > δὲ \ rn
πάντες δ᾽ ἀντιάασθε, θεοί, γάμου: ἐν δὲ σὺ τοῖσι
oy Σ n ° ’ » »”
δαίνυ ἔχων φόρμιγγα, κακῶν rap, αἰὲν ἄπιστε.
\ 2 5 / / Ν 7 “ tp ς
τὴν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη νεφεληγερέτα Δεύς
“Ἥρη, μὴ δὴ πάμπαν ἀποσκύδμαινε θεοῖσιν" 65

53 40. Ar.
58. WEN: μὲν rap D:
Et. Mag. 24. 45.
62. antidcacee Vi. b:
ὀχθήςας τινές, Sch. T.

(? see Ludwich). ||
rap Ath.

antiaate LP.

NEUECccCHeéwUEN Ar, ||
ix. 396.
59. FONOC: τινὲς ndic Sch. T.
63. ϑαίνυς᾽ U Mor.
65. πάμπαν : πάντα Cramer An. Par. iii. 149. 21.

οἱ om. Q: οἱ καὶ A.
|| ϑήκατο '’: ϑηήςατο ἢ. || μαστὸν
60. ἀτίταλα Harl. a, Mose. 2.
64. THN O€ weéer”

53. Neither ihe form N€MECCHEGLEN
(or -€wuev) for -ἤομεν, nor the position of
oi in the sentence, nor the neglect of its
F, which Foe of all words retains most
obstinately, can be right. - All the
difficulties are happily solved by reading
μή For) ἀγαθῶι περ ἐόντι νεμεσσηθήομεν
ἡμεῖς (-elouev Bekker, -ἤομεν Wacker-
nagel, μή F’ van L.).

54. κωφὴν γαῖαν, the senscless clay.
Compare note on H 99. So Soph. £2,
244 ὁ μὲν θανὼν ya τε Kal οὐδὲν ὧν κείσεται
τάλας : Eur. fr. 537 κατθανὼν δὲ πᾶς ἀνὴρ
γῆ καὶ σκία : Epicharmos (7) in Schol. T
on X 414 (emended by Cobet), εἰμὲ
νεκρός, νεκρὸς δὲ κόπρος, yn δ᾽ ἡ κόπρος
ἐστίν" εἰ δ᾽ ἡ γῆ θεός ἐστ᾽, οὐ νεκρὸς ἀλλὰ
θεός. It is of course messy to under-
stand he outrages the earth by dragging
the body over it ; but sucha thought 15
surely not Epic.

56. Even this thing thou sayest might
be so, if indeed ye gods will set like price
on Achilles as on Hector. The idea of
placing the son of the woman on the
same footing as the son of the goddess
implies a “reductio ad absurdum of
Apollo’s whole argument. Cf. ὁ 435
εἴη κεν καὶ τοῦτ᾽, εἴ μοι ἐθέλοιτέ γε,
κτλ.

58. eNHTOc, a mere mortal. But the
emphasis is on the last part of the line.
γυναῖκα... uazon, the familiar ‘ whole-

and-part’ figure. The scholiasts make
needless trouble, regarding γυναῖκα as an
adjectival use of the subst., as in the
Attic idioms “Ἕλληνα στρατόν, παρθένος
χείρ, νεανίας βίος, etc.

60. Thetis, according to the later
legend, was patronised by Hera, in
reward of her rejection of the amorous
advances of Zeus. Her marriage to
Peleus is elsewhere ascribed to the gods
at large, = 85. καί is very rarely left
long before a vowel ; hence van L. reads
καὶ Ε΄. But see 570, 641, B 2380, 232,
λ 1138, 161, μ 140; the license seems
to be another link between Ὦ and Od.,
the only other case in H. being O 290
(=x 372) where see note.

62. G@ntidacee with gen. as N 215 and
often ; the middle occurs here only.

63. Cf. A 603. The argument that
Apollo should take the side of Thetis
because he was present at her wedding
is a delightful piece of feminine logic.
The feast itself is mentioned by Pindar
P. 111. 93, N. iv. 65 ff. For dainu’(o) some
edd, adopt the variant daévuc(o). But
the σ is always lost in the secondary
tenses (H. G. p. 4). See note on Ψ
648-49.

65. Gnocxuouaine, cf. 592; for the
force of ἀπο- see note on B 772. The
formation of the verb is peculiar, ef.
ἐριδμαίνειν 11 260.

IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv) 543

’ \ \ / »" ΨΚ > \ ad
ov μὲν yap τιμὴ γε μὶ ἐσσεται: adda καὶ

ὕκτωρ

φίλτατος ἔσκε θεοῖσι βροτῶν οἱ ἐν ᾿Ιλίωι εἰσίν:

Ὁ \ ” ᾽ , \ 7, ΄ ΄ ,

ὡς yap ἔμοιγ, ἐπεὶ οὔ TL φίλων ἡμάρτανε δώρων.
/ \ TA

ov yap pol ποτε βωμὸς ἐδεύετο δαιτὸς ἐΐσης,

λοιβῆς τε κνίσης TE’ τὸ γὰρ λάχομεν γέρας ἡμεῖς.

‘ 0

> \ / »
ἀλλ᾽ ἤτοι κλέψαι μὲν ἐάσομεν---οὐδέ πηι ἔστι

λάθρηι ᾿Αχιλλῆος---θρασὺν “Extopa: ἣ yap οἱ αἰεὶ
μήτηρ παρμέμβλωκεν ὁμῶς νύκτάς τε καὶ ἣμαρ.
ἀλλ᾽ εἴ τις καλέσειε θεῶν Θέτιν ἄσσον ἐμεῖο,

» / / e vv Ν ” (v4 > \
ὄφρά τί οἱ εἴπω πυκινὸν ἔπος, ws κεν Ἀχιλλεὺς

“J
οι

δώρων ἐκ Ἰ]ριάμοιο λάχηι ἀπό θ᾽ "Extopa λύσηι."

“Ὁ > 5 \ 4 /
ὡς pat, ὦρτο δὲ Ἶρις ἀελλόπος ἀγγελέουσα,

μεσσηγὺς δὲ Σάμου τε καὶ Ἴμβρου παιπαλοέσσης

68. Tl: Te J.
Vr. ἃ. || €@comen: ἀμήχανον Antim.

νέκυν ἕκτορος Sch. T. || ἢ : κατ᾽ ἔνια εὖ Did.: others ἡ.
14. εἴ : H Cant. || eé@n T: yp. ϑέων Sch. AT.

PQ: τῆι Cant. || πυκνὸν ἢ.

69. βωμός note δεύετο /).

71. κλέψαι WEN: μὲν κλέψαι
71-73 ἀθ. Ar. 72. ἄμεινον γράφειν
13. νύκτωρ Vr. d.
ἑμοῖο P Vr. ἃ. 15. οἵ om.

18. ς«άμου τε: ςάμοιο (A supr.) Vr. ἃ.

66. μία, the same, as T 299, ΞΞ ὁμή, 57.

67. Heyne omits én to keep the F of

Ειλίω. But the omission is not satis-
factory, and we have another neglected F
in 72.

68. ὧς rap, so he was to me at least.
The scholia appear to have read ws yap
ἐμοί γ᾽, as appears to me (in my opinion),
perversely turning poetry into prose.
ἡμάρτανε θώρων, failed of his gifts, i.e.
omitted to render them. ‘The phrase
would more naturally be used of the
receiver; but we may fairly compare
οὐχ ἡμάρτανε μύθων, did
(uttering) words, 511.
48-9.

71-8. ἀθετοῦνται στίχοι γ΄. ὅτι ψεῦδος
περιέχουσιν: οὐ γὰρ διὰ παντὸς συνδια-
τρίβει αὐτῶι ἡ Θέτις. τὸ δὲ ἐάςομεν νῦν
ἀντὶ τοῦ παρῶμεν, οἷον μηδὲ λέγωμεν ὅπερ
ἀγνοήσαντες οἱ περὶ ᾿Αντίμαχον ἐποίησαν
“ἐ κλέψαι μὲν ἀμήχανον,᾽᾽ An. (and Did. 2).
The first reason is futile ; Thetis, as a
goddess who can hear at a distance and
come in a moment, may fairly be said
always to stand beside her son; the
word is similarly used of Aphrodite and
Aineias, All. The use of ἐάσομεν with
infin. =we will let the stealing be is as
ambiguous as the English equivalent ;
this is hardly a ground for rejection, as
the verb is used=/et alone with the acc.
ἀλλ᾽ 7 κεῖνον μὲν ἐάσομεν, I 701; θεὸς τὸ

69-70=A

not fail of

μὲν δώσει τὸ δ᾽ ἐάσει E444. The peculi-
arity lies not in the meaning of the
verb, but in the use of the infin. as
direct object, as though it were a sub-
stantive in the acc. (for which ef. A 258),
instead of as acomplement to an object
alsoexpressed. 70 det be means to permit
or to prevent according as the action to
which it refers is one which will or will
not take place through the inaction of
the subject of the verb; the distinction
is between the circumstances, not
between different meanings in the word
itself. More serious objection might be
taken to the distance of the verb from
its object “Ἕκτορα, and to the neglect of
F of ἔοι. ὁμῶς νύκτάς Te Kai Huap, an
Odyssean phrase (three times).

72. epacun Ἕκτορα, ἄμεινον γράφειν
“νέκυν “Exropos,” Sch. T; i.e. offence
was taken at the use of θρασύς of a corpse.
3ut it may be accepted as a rather
extreme use of the ‘standing’ epithet of
Hector (see on Θ 89). For νέκυς with
gen. see 108.

74. ei with opt. expresses a wish, see
on Καὶ 111. τινὲς τὸ Θεῶν ἐπὶ TOU τρέχων
ἐξεδέξαντο, μετοχὴν παραλαμβάνοντες. καὶ
ἐβάρυναν (θέων): ἀπίθανον δέ, Herod.
Yet von Christ accepts the reading,
comparing μετοιχόμενος in Καὶ 111, and
T 53.

78. See N 12, 33.

δ44

IAIAAOC © (xxiv)

/ / \ /
EvOope μείλανι TOVT@L: ἐπεστονάχησε δὲ λίμνη.
Ν ”
ἡ δὲ μολυβδαίνηι ἰκέλη ἐς βυσσὸν ὄρουσεν, 80
3 7 \ , 3 lal
ἥ τε κατ᾽ ἀγραύλοιο Boos κέρας ἐμβεβαυῖΐα
a 3 ΟΣ / an /
ἔρχεται ὠμηστῆισιν ἐπ ἰχθύσι κῆρα φέρουσα.
\ an a \ , ὩΣ
εὗρε δ᾽ ἐνὶ omit γλαφυρῶι Θέτιν, ἀμφὶ δέ τ ἄλλαι
or ε ε « 2 SAN Yh,
εἴαθ᾽ ὁμηγερέες ἅλιαι θεαί: ἡ 6 ἐνὶ μέσσηις
“-“ / e OO 2 / ches e »Μ ΧΝ 85
κλαῖε μόρον οὗ παιδὸς ἀμύμονος, ὃς οἱ ἔμελλε
7, > > nr 7, ᾿ ΄ χόθ /
φθίσεσθ᾽ ἐν Tpoine ἐριβώλακι, τηλόθι πάτρης.
> a nd / “ ᾽ / 3 2
ἀγχοῦ δ᾽ ἱσταμένη προσέφη πόδας ὠκέα Ιρις
3 / ”
“ὄρσο, Θέτι: καλέει Ζεὺς ἄφθιτα μήδεα εἰδώς.
ΕΣ id /
τὴν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα θεὰ Θέτις ἀργυρόπεζα"

19. μέλανι J. || ἐπεετονάχηςε (: ἐπεστενάχηςε ARST Harl. a, Vr. ἃ : énecto-

nayic(c)e C.JPU Bar: énectenayice ἡ] : énectendyize 1) Pap. μ.

80. uoiBdainH(!)

PORT. || βυθὸν DHPQ Vr. A: βηϑὸν S. || ὄρουςεν : ἵκανεν Plato Jon 538 v.

81. éuueuauta 7) Plato /.c., ἐν ἄλλωι A.

ἔνιαι τῶν κατὰ πόλεις πῆμα Did.: so Plato 7.6.

o ἂρ A (yp. 0€ τῇ C Vr. ἃ - οἱ & U.
τάχ᾽ Rhianos. 86 ad. Ar.

88. eétic Mor.

82. ὡμηςτῆιςι μετ᾽ Plato 7... || κῆρα :
83. εὗρεν ὃ᾽ ἐν CT. || δέ τ᾽:
84. μέεςαις GHP. 85. ὅς Of: ὃς

φϑίςεςϑαι R: φθϑείςεςθϑαι U: geicea S. || ἐνὶ PRS.

= ϑ

79. weidant for μέλανι seems to be a
case of lengthening in a tribrach for the
sake of metrical convenience (see App.
D, vol. i. p. 592). The epithet when
applied to the sea generally has a special
significance as indicating the surface
rippled before the wind, H 64, & 126, Ψ
693, etc. Ancient commentators took

it here as a proper name, the Gulf of

Kardia, N. of the Thracian Chersonese,
being called in later times Μέλας Κόλπος.
This is of course absurd. λίμνη, expanse
of water, Φ 246.

80. With this remarkable simile com-
pare w. 251 ff. ws δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἐπὶ προβόλωι ἁλιεὺς
. . ἐς πόντον προΐησι Boos κέρας ἀγραύ-
Novo, κτλ. and also II 406 ff. The usual
explanation is that a little tube of horn
was passed over the line just above the
hook, to prevent the fish biting it through
(so Ar., and, acc. to Plutarch Jor. 976,
Aristotle), and that some molten lead
was run into the tube to sink it. This
would answer the purpose both of the
‘simp’ and ‘shot’ of modern bottom-
fishing. But Haskins in J. P. xix. 238
ff. has made it prebable that κέρας is
an artificial bait made of horn, weighted
with lead, and drawn through the water
to attract the fish by its glitter. He
shews that such baits are common among
the South Sea Islanders, no others having
been known till the Europeans intro-

duced metal fish-hooks; and they are
still in use even in England. This ex-
planation undoubtedly suits the words
best. The passage is quoted by Plato
Jon 538pD with the variants éupewavia
and πῆμα (for κῆρα), which are also
mentioned by Didymos, the latter on
the ground ἄτοπον ἐπ᾽ ἰχθύων κῆρα λέγειν,
which is absurd. The former is quite
as possible, however, as the personifica-
tion of the eagerness of deadly missiles
in A 126, A 574, 70.

83. cnAt for σπέεϊ, see on Σὶ 402, τ᾽,
Brandreth’s F’ is certainly right. τε is
meaningless here.

84. eYae’, Ar. εἴαθ᾽ for ἦσαν, see on Ὁ
10.

85. ἐν τῆι κατὰ “Pravoy ““ ὃς τάχ᾽ ἔμελ-
dev,” Did. ; a plausible reading, as the
nearness of Achilles’ death would add to
Thetis’ sorrow.

86 ἀθετεῖται, ὅτι περισσός ἐστι᾿ TO γὰρ
ol” ἐστὶν αὐτῶι καὶ τὸ ““ ἔμελλεν ᾿᾿ ἀντὶ
τοῦ ἐώικει συνήθως “Ounpar: οὐχὶ τῆι
Θέτιδι ἔμελλεν ἐν Τροίαι φθίσεσθαι, An. ;
a criticism unworthy of Ar. It is quite
impossible to take ὅς οἱ ἔμελλε to mean
which was destined for him. 86=I1 461.

88. ἄφθιτα μήδεα εἰδώς, a phrase
occurring thrice in Hesiod and Hymn.
Ven. 43, but not again in H. Compare
also Hymn. Cer. 321 Δήμητερ, καλέει ce
πατὴρ Leds ἄφθιτα εἰδώς.

ςς

IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv)

/ “-“ / /
‘TimTé pe κεῖνος ἄνωγε μέγας θεός ;

/ > ’ / » > ” ’ " -
μίσγεσθ᾽ ἀθανάτοισιν, ἔχω δ᾽ dye ἄκριτα θυμῶι.

μὰ /
εἰμι μέν,

> » [2 » »
οὐδ᾽ ἅλιον ἔπος ἔσσεται,

«Ὁ bd -“ a
ὡς apa φωνήσασα κάλυμμ ἕλε Sia θεάων

ys fal , vv / » "»
κυάνεον, τοῦ δ᾽ ov τι μελάντερον ἔπλετο ἔσθος.

βῆ
ἡγεῖτ᾽ "

»,ὕ / \ / > / +
ἰέναι, πρόσθεν δὲ ποδήνεμος ὠκέα Ἶρις
ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄρά σφι λιάξετο κῦμα θαλάσσης.

» \ , > a > > Ν da /
ἀκτὴν δ᾽ εἰσαναβᾶσαι ἐς οὐρανὸν ἀϊχθήτην,
εὗρον δ᾽ εὐρύοπα Kpovidny, περὶ δ᾽ ἄλλοι ἅπαντες

“ ? ς a / \ r\ 7
clad” ὁμηγερέες μάκαρες θεοὶ αἰὲν ἐόντες.

ἡ δ᾽ ἄρα παρ Διὶ πατρὶ καθέζετο, εἶξε

“ \ / \ / > \ “-“
Ηρη δὲ χρύσεον καλὸν δέπας ἐν χερὶ θῆκε

e ” 2 bY r
καί ῥ᾽ εὔφρην᾽ ἐπέεσσι: Θέτις δ᾽ ὥρεξε πιοῦσα.

τοῖσι δὲ μύθων ἦρχε πατὴρ ἀνδρῶν τε θεῶν Te:
“ἤλυθες Οὔλυμπόνδε, θεὰ Θέτι, κηδομένη περ,

πένθος ἄλαστον ἔχουσα μετὰ Aen οἶδα Kal αὐτός"

545
paws \
ALOEOLAL δὲ “0
“ / ” ”
OTTL KEV ELTTNL.
95
Αθήνη. 100
105

> \ \ e ΠΕ rn ’ A rn ΄
ἀλλὰ καὶ ὡς ἐρέω τοῦ σ᾽ ELVEKa δεῦρο κάλεσσα.

> a \ a > > / yy
ἐννῆμαρ δὴ νεῖκος ἐν ἀθανάτοισιν ορωρεν

/
"Extopos ἀμφὶ véxve καὶ ”

Αχιλλῆν πτολιπόρθωι.

92. εἴποι τῇ
99 om. Vr.

90. 0€: rap P.
98. εὗρεν Vr. A.
detp’ Exddecca R.

97. ἐξαναβᾶςαι Ar. καὶ ai πλείους (Did.) [D].
102. pez ἐπιοῦςα |’.

106: εἷς re D:

91. ἄκριτα, see note on B 246.

92. Cf. β 318 εἶμι μέν, οὐδ᾽ ἁλίη ὁδὸς
ἔσσεται. μέν is here used like Attic
μέντοι and sometimes μήν, = however ;
it refers adversatively to what precedes,
not as usual to what follows. This use
is really a case of parataxis ; the opposi-
tion is not expressed, but the latent
sense of it, so to speak, which is sug-
gested by the circumstances, is brought
out by the asseverative particle, emphasis-
ing an assertion which, by the preceding
words, might seem to be negatived.

93. KGAuuua, apparently the καλύπ-
tpn of X 406, ε 232, κ 545, and the xp7-
deuvov of & 184 (see App. G,§ 11). The
use of black as a sign of mourning is
found only here in H. Compare, how-
ever, Hymn. Cer. 42 κυάνεον δὲ κάλυμμα
κατ᾽ ἀμφοτέρων Bader’ ὥμων, where the
κάλυμμα is apparently identical with the
κρήδεμνα of the preceding line. €ceoc is
the generic word. Notice κυάνεον used
as identical with μέλαν.

97. Cf. Σ 68. ᾿Αρίσταρχος
Bdoa” καὶ ai πλείους, Did.
constr. of ἐξ- without a gen.

VOL. II

** ἐξανα-
But the
and with

_

bo

a bare accus. of the terminus ad quem
is very harsh. In the case of ἐξικόμην
(Φθίην δ᾽ ἐξικόμην I 479, θεῶν ἐξίκετο
θώκους Θ 439), the ἐξ- has lost its force
and the verb means simply fo arrive.

There is no similar use in 77.

99. μάκαρες Θεοὶ αἰὲν ἐόντες, an
Odyssean phrase (four times).

100. Athene sits next Zeus as his
favourite daughter; so Pindar (ap.
Schol. T) πῦρ πνέοντος ἅτε κεραυνοῦ

ἄγχιστα δεξιὰν κατὰ χεῖρα πατρὸς ἵζεαι
(fr. 128 Bergk, 146 Schroder). Ar.
used this line to support his interpreta-

tion of Θ 444, q.v.
102. ῥ᾽, Brandreth F’, rightly. εὖ-
φρηνε, cheered her with kind words.

ὥρεξε held out the cup to return it.

105. GAacton, see on M 163.

108. Ἕκτορος νέκυι, a constr. found
only here in H., except perhaps in P
240, q.v. ; νέκυς is elsewhere always in
apposition with the dead man’s name,
for in the old Epic psychology the
corpse is not a part or appendage of the
man, but the man himself (compare note
on αὐτούς A 4). νέκυς ἀνδρός is found,

N

40

IAIAAOC © (xxiv)

/ > / Sf, > - / 5
κλέψαι & ὀτρύνουσιν εὐσκοπον ἀργεϊφοντην

n 3 ae /
αὐτὰρ ἐγὼ τόδε κῦδος Ἀχιλλῆϊ προτιάπτω,

110

a / \ / 7
αἰδῶ καὶ φιλότητα τεὴν μετόπισθε φυλάσσων.

Ξ % 9 \ \
αἶψα μάλ ἐς στρατὸν ἐλθὲ

Ν Cf a 5 /
καὶ υἱέϊ GOL ἐπιτειλον"

σκύξεσθαί οἱ εἰπὲ θεούς, ἐμὲ δ᾽ ἔξοχα πάντων

᾽ / an v4 \ /
ἀθανώτων κεχολῶσθαι, ὅτι φρεσὶ μαινομενηΐσιν

5 ,
"Extop ἔχει παρὰ νηυσὶ κορωνίσιν οὐδ᾽ ἀπέλυσεν,

115

" 3 ΄ 3. τῇ 7
αἴ κέν πως ἐμέ τε δείσηι ἀπό θ᾽ “Extopa λύσηι.

αὐτὰρ ἐγὼ Τ]ριάμωι μεγαλήτορι Ἶριν ἐφήσω
λύσασθαι φίλον υἱὸν ἰόντ᾽ ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν,
δῶρα δ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλῆϊ φερέμεν τά κε θυμὸν ἰήνηι."

ds ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησε θεὰ Θέτις ἀργυρόπεζα,

120

βῆ δὲ Kat Οὐλύμποιο καρήνων ἀΐξασα.

- / ἣν Cs
ἷξεν δ᾽ ἐς κλισίην οὗ υἱέος"

54 3 ” /
ἔνθ᾽ apa τὸν γε

A » ΕΞ
εὗρ ἀδινὰ στενάχοντα: φίλοι δ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ αὐτὸν ἑταῖροι

\ , ,
ἐσσυμένως ἐπένοντο καὶ ἐντύνοντο ἄριστον

ἐπίτειλε (). 115. ὑπέλυςεν R.

Vr. b.

109. OTPUNOUCIN [DG/7] Mass. Chia :
Harl. abd, King’s Par.a be de fg hj: @tpUneckon LS.
(Ar. ἢ JR Mor. Vr. A Mose. 2, Harl. ἃ, Par. αἱ ἃ f j: προτιάψω Harl. Ὁ.
116.
122. ἔνϑ᾽ : ἐν δ᾽ CJPQRSTU Harl. a, yp. A.
ἐντύνοντ᾽ Vr. d. || apjictra Pap. μὶ (supr.

étpUNeckon ACJPQRTU Vr. bd, Mose. 2,
110. προϊάπτω Zen.

112.
e: oP. 119. 07. Pape ἸΔἹ ΟΣ
123. αὐτῶ P. 124.

ON).

however, in Hdt. and Trag.; the use
here is probably a sign of developed
thought—unless indeed we ought to
readExropt. The hiatus though allowed
after the first foot would be likely to
cause the change.

109. See note on 23-30. ὀτρύνεσκον
seems to have crept into nearly all Mss.
from 24. Ar. regarded this line as
original and ‘the source of the previous
interpolation’ (ὅτι ἐντεῦθεν γέγονεν ἣ προ-
διασκευή), Which in view of the conflict
of authorities indicates that he athetized
24 as well as 25-30. Payne Knight
rejects 107-111.

110. τόδε κῦδος, the following solace
to his honour, viz. the receipt of gifts in
return for the body instead of having to
yield it ἀπριάτην ἀνάποινον. ‘The whole
of the ninth book shews that it was in
the receipt of a quid pro quo that the
heroic point of honour lay ; cf. particu-
larly 1 515, 598. κῦδος προσάπτειν is a
common phrase in later Greek (e.g. Pind.
N. viii. 36, Soph. Al. 355 τῶι τεθνηκότι
τιμὰς προσάπτειν, and others in Lex.),
though not recurring in H. ; but cf. ἐπὶ
κῦδος ἔθηκεν Ψ 400. Acc. to Did., Zen.

read προϊάπτω, ἵνα ταὐτὸν ὑπάρχηι τῶι
προϊάλλω, οἷον δίδωμι, προσπένδω, and so
Ar. ἐν τοῖς πρὸς ἹΚωμανόν, which may
indicate that he had the text in his
editions. There is no support for such
a sense of προϊάπτω in H. (ef. A 3) or in
all Greek.

111. τεὴν may be either objective or
subjective, ‘preserving hereafter thy
reverence and affection for me’ or
‘observing mine for thee.’ The phrase
is based on the familiar αἰδοῖός τε φίλος
Te Σ 386, etc.

115. οὐδ᾽ ἀπέλυςεν, did not surrender
the body after stripping it, as Hector
himself proposed, X 259. There has
been no question of actual ransom yet.

116. αἴ κέν πως, in the hope that, an
expression of studied courtesy in the
mouth of Zeus.

118. ἰόντ᾽, 1.6. ἐόντα not ἰόντι, being
closely connected with the infin. ; hence
in 148 followed by οἷον.

124. énénonto, were busy, cf. 6624 περὶ
δεῖπνον. . πένοντο. See note on Ψ 159;
the use of ἀμφί here in the local sense
is little support to the connexion of
τάδ᾽ ἀμφί there. ENTUNONTO ἄριστον MSS.,

IAIAAOC © (xxiv) 547

lal > 57.» / / ’ / Lv
τοῖσι © ὄϊς λάσιος μέγας ἐν KALTINL ἱέρευτο.

Ὁ \ rae ” ’ Ε] a / / /
ἡ δὲ pan ayy’ αὐτοῖο καθέζετο πότνια μήτηρ,

/ Τὰ / ” ’ » ’ ” 5» ? /
χειρί τέ μιν κατέρεξεν, ἔπος τ᾽ ἔφατ᾽ ἔκ τ᾽ ὀνόμαζε'

, / , 5 /
““πέκνον ἐμόν, τέο μέχρις ὀδυρόμενος καὶ ἀχεύων
/ vy es

σὴν ἔδεαι κραδίην, μεμνημένος οὔτέ τι σίτου

tee ? fal
OUT εὐνῆς ;

ἀγαθὸν δὲ γυναικί περ ἐν φιλότητι 130

μίσγεσθ᾽- οὐ γάρ μοι δηρὸν βέηι, ἀλλά TOL ἤδη
ἄγχι παρέστηκεν θάνατος καὶ μοῖρα κραταιή.

ἀλλ᾽ ἐμέθεν ξύνες ὦκα, Διὸς δέ τοι ἄγγελός εἰμι.

σκύζεσθαί σοί φησι θεούς, é€ δ᾽ ἔξοχα πάντων

> ΄ a “ \ ,
ἀθανάτων κεχολῶσθαι, ὅτι φρεσὶ μαινομένηισιν 1

“215 > » \ \ , 50. 5) 7ὕ
ὔκτορ᾽ ἔχεις παρὰ νηυσὶ κορωνίσιν οὐδ᾽ ἀπέλυσας.

ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε δὴ λῦσον, νεκροῖο δὲ δέξαι ἄποινα."

/ /
τὴν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς:

‘ce a 3 » a » ΄ \ \ ”
THLO €l7)* OS aATTOLYa φέροι, Kal VEK POV ayolTo,

ai δὴ πρόφρονι θυμῶι ᾿Ολύμπιος αὐτὸς ἀνώγει."

140

125 om. Ut. || κλιείηια Pap. « and ap. Did. || ἱέρατο Ρ (supr. εὖ).
129. οὐδέ τι AGPRS.
137. deze Pap. ν].

napezeto Pap. μ.
Graeon: καλὸν Vr. A.
Sch. T. 139. THIO’: πῆ δ᾽ PR’. |}

om. P: φέρει HJ. || ἄροιτο S: Gponto Harl. b, Par. a.

126.
130-32 ἀθ. Ar. 130. οὐδ᾽ 1).
138. τινὲς τὴν δὲ μέγ᾽ ὀχϑήςας

ἐν ἄλλωι τῆι εἴη ὃς ϑῶρα φέρει, A. | φέροι

140. anoroi(?) 1).

but the a of ἄριστον is always long, and
there is no reason to suppose it ever
began with a consonant. In 7 2 nearly
all Mss. read évrivovr’. No doubt the
original form is ἐντύνοντ᾽ ἀέριστον,
dept- being conn. with ἠέρι-ος and ἦρι,
early.

125. iépeuto gives us a dilemma. If
it is plpf. there is no reduplication (¢) ;
if it is imperf., the non-thematic termina-
tion is unexplained. A derivative verb
in -εύω is the last place where we should
expect either irregularity. If again we
read tpevro we introduce a rhythm which
is decidedly rare. And in any case
we want the imperf. rather than plpf.,
for the use of this tense in the later
sense, to mean had been slain, is very
rarein H. On the whole it seems best
_ to acquiesce in regarding the verb as
imperf., assimilated perhaps by false
archaism to old forms like στεῦτο etc.

129. Πυθαγόρας παραινεῖ καρδίαν μὴ
ἐσθίειν, Schol. A. Cf. Z 202. θυμὸν
ἔδων occurs also « 75, κ 143, 379 (the
latter passage is very like the present).
For οὔτε some of the best Mss. have οὐδέ,
‘taking no thought even for food.’ This
is Ar.’s reading, rendered necessary by

the fact that he obelized the next three
lines on moral grounds. They are
perhaps unlike the plain-speaking but
never lascivious tone of the old Epos ;
though it is not easy to say where the
line is to be drawn, a not very rigorous
moralist may take exception to such
advice in a mother’s mouth. They are
quoted by Aristotle (th. iii. 13) without
offence. Bentley endeavoured to soften,
though he did not remove, the moral
objection by reading οὔτ᾽ εὐνῆς" οὐ γὰρ
δηρόν, κτλ. This also leaves untouched
the suspicion due to the fact that 131-32
seem to be taken from II 852-53 (q.v.).

131. βέηι for Bie’'(ar)? See on O 194.

3 3—Ibe2Gs

134. ἐέ, see on N 495. Καλλίστρατος
kai ᾿Αρίσταρχος δασύνουσι τὸ πρῶτον ε τῆς
ἀντωνυμίας, Herod. ; this implies a variant
ἐέ, which is very probably right, for thus
€-Fé=€-wé exactly.

137. The form 6é£e’(ac) suggested by
Pap. v is perhaps right: see on Z 46.

139. Thus be it; let him that brings
a ransom take the corpse. ὃς φέροι
virtually =et τις φέροι, while ἄγοιτο is
concessive, he may take. Others take
the whole line together, det him be here

548

IAIAAOC © (xxiv)

ὡς of γ᾽ ἐν νηῶν ἀγύρι μήτηρ TE καὶ υἱὸς
πολλὰ πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἔπεα πτερύεντ᾽ ἀγόρευον.
Ἶριν δ᾽ ὦτρυνε Κρονίδης εἰς Ἴλιον pny:
“ βάσκ᾽ ἴθι, Ἶρι ταχεῖα, λιποῦσ᾽ ἕδος Οὐλύμποιο

ἄγγειλον Πριάμωι μεγαλήτορι Ἴλιον εἴσω

145

an 5 in
λύσασθαι φίλον υἱὸν ἰόντ᾽ ἐπὶ νῆας Αχαιῶν,
ne \ Sf,
δῶρα δ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλῆϊ φερέμεν, τά κε θυμὸν ἰήνηι,
“- δι 7 7 ’ 4
οἷον, μηδέ τις ἄλλος ἅμα Tpwwv ἴτω ἀνήρ.

a / / e a / “ ? Au
Kn pve TLS Obl ΕἼΤΟΥΤΟ YEPaLTEpoOs, OS K ισυνοῖι

ς / N, EL 27 ae \ 5
ἡμιόνους KAL ἄμαξαν EUTpPONOV, nOoE KAL AUTIS

150

5) » a ? /
νεκρὸν ἄγοι προτὶ ἄστυ, Tov ἔκτανε δῖος Αχιλλεύς.
/ tA [ὦ 7 / \ δέ / =
μηδέ τί οἱ θάνατος μελέτω φρεσὶ μηδέ τι τάρβος
- ς " - /
τοῖον γάρ οἱ πομπὸν ὀπάσσομεν ἀργεϊφόντην,

> > ne /
ὃς a&ev elms κεν ἄγων ᾿Αχιλῆϊ πελάσσηι.

, / 2 n
αὐτὰρ ἐπὴν ἀγάγηισιν ἔσω κλισίην Ἀχιλῆος,

5 / ᾿) ” if 5 / Ὰ
οὔτ᾽ αὐτὸς κτενέει ἀπό T ἄλλους πάντας ἐρύξει

148. οἷον : οἷος wp. Did.
yp. A: τε R. || averc CL Lips.

(supr. c). 156. πάντας: αὐτὸς ().

149. οἷ : cor Pap. ν".
151. TON: ὃν J.
153. τοῖος γάρ οἱ πομπὸς ἅμ᾽ ἕψεται ἀργειφόντης ().

150. ἠδὲ:
{ οἱ:

152. T οι Pap. v.

(=come) who may bring the ransom and
take the corpse. This is possible, but
the use of τῆιδ᾽ εἴη in this way is rather
harsh, even when we compare = 107 νῦν
δ᾽ εἴη ὃς. . ἐνίσποι, and the other pass-
ages there quoted. The ancient critics
generally took εἴη -- ἴοι, let him come ;
but there is no sufficient authority for
this form. Cf. iein T 209. The same
question arises in € 496 ἀλλά τις εἴη εἰπεῖν
᾿Ατρεΐδηι κτλ.

141. ἀγύρι, like κνήστι A 640; but
the vowel cannot be resolved here. See
on = 407. The phrase is the same as
νεῶν ἐν ἀγῶνι O 428, ete.

145. “IMoNn εἴσω, constr. praegnans,
whether it be taken with λύσασθαι
or ἄγγειλον. The latter is best, ef.
ὃ 775 μή πού τις ἐπαγγείληισι Kal
εἴσω.

148. οὕτως διὰ τοῦ ν οἷον, Did. ; οἷον
δὲ γραπτέον, ᾿ οὐκ οἷος, Schol. T. The
old variant οἷος thus attested might be
defended by the tendency to revert from
the oblique to the direct command, the
infin. being taken as an imper. of the
3rd person.

149. ἕποιτο. . ἰϑύνοι concessive opt. :

I permit a herald to go with him to
drive.

152. μελέτω, trouble him, cf. K 383
θάρσει, μηδέ τί τοι θάνατος καταθύμιος
ἔστω, and P 201.

154. ὃς ἄξει, i.e. ὅς F’ ἄξει, cf. 183 ὃς
σ᾽ ἄξει. This brilliant discovery was
made by Brandreth, and afterwards (ap-
parently independently) by Bekker and
Cobet. The correctness of the conjecture
when once made is quite obvious. It
is especially important as convincingly
shewing that F was still, at the time
of the composition of a comparatively
late portion of the poems, an actual
independent and still living sound in
the Epic dialect, and that the many
other proofs of its existence are not, as
has been argued, mere metrical remi-
niscences of a lost consonant (H. G.
§ 402). There appears to be an actual
survival of a written F’=€ in an inser.
from Metapontum, of which the last
line is to be read δὸς δέ F’ ἐν (=€p)
ἀνθρώποις δόξαν ἔχειν ἀγαθάν (see van
L. Hnch. p. 258). Barnes long ago felt
the need of a pronoun and conj. és σφ᾽
ἄξει.

-

IAIAAOC © (xxiv) 549

” / 5» ᾿ ” ed ” a ae ᾽ /
οὔτε yap ἐστ᾽ ἄφρων οὔτ᾽ ἄσκοπος οὔτ᾽ ἀλιτήμων,
e / /
ἀλλὰ μάλ᾽ ἐνδυκέως ἱκέτεω πεφιδήσεται ἀνδρός."
“Ὁ τ᾽ \ 5 » /
Os ἔφατ᾽, ὦρτο δὲ Ἶρις ἀελλόπος ἀγγελέουσα.

ἷξεν δ᾽ ἐς ΤΙριάμοιο, κίχεν δ᾽ ἐνοπτήν τε γόον Te:

160

παῖδες μὲν πατέρ᾽ ἀμφὶ καθήμενοι ἔνδοθεν αὐλῆς
δάκρυσιν eipat ἔφυρον, ὁ δ᾽ ἐν μέσσοισι γεραιὸς
ἐντυπὰς ἐν χλαίνηι κεκαλυμμένος: ἀμφὶ δὲ πολλὴ
κόπρος ἔην κεφαλῆι τε καὶ αὐχένι τοῖο γέροντος,

΄ / / tn
τήν pa κυλινδόμενος καταμήσατο χερσὶν ἑῆισι. 165

θυγατέρες δ᾽ ava δώματ᾽ ἰδὲ vuoi ὠδύροντο,

a / “δ \ / \ > \
TOV μιμνησκόμεναι οἱ δὴ πολέες TE Kal ἐσθλοὶ
\ id 5 3 / / \ ’ /
χερσὶν ὑπ᾽ ᾿Αργείων κέατο ψυχὰς ὀλέσαντες.
fol \ \ / ἊΝ » > \ /
στῆ δὲ παρὰ IIpiapov Διὸς ἄγγελος, ἠδὲ προσηύδα

τυτθὸν φθεγξαμένη: τὸν δὲ τρόμος ἔλλαβε γυῖα"

170

“θάρσει, Δαρδανίδη Τ]ρίαμε, φρεσί, μηδέ τι τάρβει:"
οὐ μὲν Yap τοι ἐγὼ κακὸν ὀσσομένη τόδ᾽ ἱκάνω,
ἀλλ᾽ ἀγαθὰ φρονέουσα: Διὸς δέ τοι ἄγγελός εἰμι,
(A » ὙΝ / / »Ὸ» » /

ὅς σευ ἄνευθεν ἐὼν μέγα κήδεται ἠδ᾽ ἐλεαίρει.

, f rn
λύσασθαί σ᾽ ἐκέλευσεν ᾿Ολύμπιος “Extopa δῖον,

175

158. ἐνθικέως 11 Lips. :
163. ἐντυπεὶς χλαίνη Par. e.
ἄμεινον Sch. T.

Eccuuenwe ().

164. κεφαλήν (supr.

160. 0 ἐς: δὲ 1). | κίχέν τ᾽ Ρ.

τιν ἐς yp. ἧι χλαίνηι (Nauck; A χλαίνη Μ8.), καὶ
A)... αὐχένα (supr. Ὁ) T.

165. TH

Pap. ν᾿, || κατεμήςατο PRS Pap. uv, Mor. Vr.d: Kateudcato G: καταμέςατο /7/, ||

ἕῆιςι : φίληςιν Par. 6, yp. A.

170. TON: ἐν LP!.

175. AUceceat (A supr.)

Vr. A. || ce κέλευεν A (ἐκέλευςεν A™): c’ ἐκέλευεν T Vr. d, Pap. v.

157. Schol. B well remarks that the
three adjectives cover the three great
causes which lead men into cruelty ;
stupidity, thonghtlessness and malice.
dckonoc, not aiming, i.e. acting on im-

pulse without consideration. Cf. \ 344
ἀπὸ σκοποῦ μυθεῖται. ἄφρων, cf.
θ 209 ἄφρων δὴ κεῖνός γε ὅς Tes

ξεινοδόκωι ἔριδα προφέρηται.

158. ἐνθυκέως, cf. note on Ψ 90.
The meaning generously, winicably is
clear, but the der. is uncertain.

163. ἐντυπάς᾽ ὅτι ἐν ἴσωι τῶι ἐντυ-
πάδεια, ὥστε διὰ τοῦ ἱματίου τοῦ σώματος
τὸν τύπον φαίνεσθαι, An.; and so Ap.
Rhod. understood the word (i. 264, ii.
861). Qu. Smyrn. (v. 530) possibly
took it to mean tmprinting his outline
in the dust (ἐντυπὰς ἐν κονίηισιν), as
Diintzer and Dod. explain. The word
is in either case strange both in sense
and formation. The primitive sense of
τύπος is the impression of a seal. Hence

ἐντυπόωτείο cut in intaglio; but how
this has any bearing on the sense here
it is not easy to see. (It is worth
remarking that seals are never mentioned
in H., though as we know intaglio
cutting was familiar in Greece from the
earliest times to the latest, being found
abundantly on all Mykenaean sites.
This is a significant warning of the
little force of negative evidence in H.)

164. See on X 414.

165, καταμήςατο, see on Σ 34.

170. TuTeon, lowering the divinely loud
voice. As Schol. B remarks, Priam is none
the less alarmed, προπεπονθυῖα yap ἡ
ψυχὴ πᾶν τὸ μέλλον τοῦ παρόντος χεῖρον
λογίζεται.

172. éccoménn, see A 105, with evil
presage. τόδ᾽ ἱκάνω, = 298.

174=B 27 where see note.
in place here.

175-87 = 146-58 mutatis mutandis.

It is quite

550 IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv)

δῶρα δ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλῆϊ φερέμεν, τά κε θυμὸν ἰήνηι,
οἷον, μηδέ τις ἄλλος ἅμα Τρώων ἤτω ἀνήρ.

ee: 7, cf / 5) ὮΝ
κῆρύξ τις TOL ETTOLTO YEPAalTEpos, OS κα ισυνοι

ς / \ oo» 5.2 δὲ \ 5
ἡμίονους καυν ἄμαξαν ευτροχον, NOE KAL AUTLS

> 5 \ 3 ~ > ,
νεκρὸν ἄγοι προτὶ ἄστυ, Tov ἔκτανε δῖος Ἀχιλλεύς. 180

μηδέ τί τοι θάνατος μελέτω φρεσὶ μηδέ τι τάρβος:

va / \ ες. δ το > “
τοῖος γάρ τοι πομπὸς ἅμ ἕψεται ἀργεϊφοντης,

o , C x” 215) ne ,
ὅς σ᾽ ἄξει εἴως κεν ἄγων Αχιλῆϊ πελάσσηι.

’ » “ 2 lal
αὐτὰρ ἐπὴν ἀγάγηισιν ἔσω κλισίην Ἀχιλῆος,

> N / » / / /
οὔτ᾽ αὐτὸς κτενέει ἀπό T ἄλλους πάντας ἐρύξει:" 18ὅ

” / Σ 3. + Sf we) 7 Sua, ’ ,
OUTE yap €OT ἄφρων OUT ασκοῖτος OUT ANITH MOV,

/ / 5
ἀλλὰ μάλ᾽ ἐνδυκέως ἱκέτεω πεφιδήσεται ἀνδρὸς."

c \ ” 9 WR > fol 2 ΟῚ 3 :3 ὃ 5 ΧΑ μ
ἢ μὲν ap ως €LTOUG ATTEDN TOOAS WKEA PES>

Ε Ξ ΄ ε ,

αὐτὰρ ὅ γ᾽ υἷας ἄμαξαν ἐύτροχον ἡμιονείην

ς / 3. ὌΝ th \ a Pees) San

ὁπλίσαι ἠνώγει, πείρινθα δὲ δῆσαι ἐπ᾽ αὐτῆς. 190

/ /
αὐτὸς © ἐς θάλαμον κατεβήσετο κηώεντα

κέδρινον ὑψόροφον, ὃς γλήνεωα πολλὰ κεχάνδει.

177. οἷος G Pap. w. 118. κ᾽:

Ken (ὦ Vr. d.
DT: ἥ te R: we Pap. v. || Kal: τέ x’ Q. || αὖϑις (Ὁ.

179. HOE: H Ke (A supr.)
181. τάρβει Vr. A.

183. ¢ om. DHPQ. 185. πάντας om. Q (cf. 156). 189. 6 r’: ot Pap. v!.
191. κατεβήςατο DJ Pap. μ: Kateducero P: KatTeducato Lips. Vr. A. 192.

ὑψίροφον Ap. Lew. 154. 29. || κεχάνϑη C Pap. ν΄, Harl. a, Mose. 2 (not Ar.: see

Ludwich): Kxexevee: Mass. (so Sch. A: ἔνιοι. Sch. T): κεχ]όνϑει Pap. pu.

181-87 seem to be wrongly repeated
from above, for Priam is in the sequel
evidently ignorant of any such promise ;
he does not mention it to Hekabe, nor
does he recognize his guide when he
meets him; Hermes has to tell his name
at the last moment. Those who reject
these lines (which were first athetized by
Payne Knight) deal in the same way with
152-58; but for this there is no justifica-
tion. For the sake of the audience the
poet makes Zeus announce beforehand
that Priam will be safe; but that the
old man himself should be ignorant of
this heightens the heroism of his journey,
and holds the sympathy of the hearer
while avoiding the suspense and anxiety
which do not consort with the Epic
style. It may further be noticed that
the substance of 152, the only part of
152-58 which needs to be communicated
to Priam, is already given in 171. More-
over, a precisely parallel structure occurs
in the message of Zeus carried by Thetis;
for she only tells Achilles the end at
which Zeus is aiming, but does not

repeat 117-19 which tell the means by
which it is to be attained—thus bringing
about the graphic scene of Achilles’ sur-
prise at the appearance of Priam in
person. It is far more surprising that
117-19 should not have been interpolated
at the end of the speech of Thetis than
that 152-58 should have been added to
that of Iris.

190. neipinea, πλέγμα τὸ ἐπὶ ἁμάξης"
τὸ πλινθίον τὸ ἐπιτιθέμενον τῆι ἁμάξηι
τετράγωνον, Hesych., rightly no doubt.
It occurs again in o 131 as the receptacle
on the car of Peisistratos into which the
eifts of Menelaos are placed, and is
probably the same as the ὑπερτερίη in
which Nausikaa takes the linen to be
washed (¢ 70, where, however, see M.
and R.; Hayman, App. to Od. vol. iii.
pp. vil.-xi., Helbig, #. #. 145).

191=Z 288, where see note.

192. Kédpinon evidently continues the
thought of κηώεντα, fragrant with cedar-
wood, the smell of which was regarded
as a preservative. rAHNea, see note on
0164. κεχάνϑει, not κεχάνδη, was the

IAIAAOC © (xxiv)

551

γον

ἐς ὃ ἄλοχον “ExaBnv ἐκαλέσσατο φώνησέν te:
“ δαιμονίη, Διόθεν μοι ᾿Ολύμπιος ἄγγελος ἦλθε

/ " [Δ bd > ’ ‘ fal , lal
λύσασθαι φίλον υἱὸν ἰόντ ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν, 195
δῶρα δ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλῆϊ φερέμεν, τά κε θυμὸν invne.

> , ΕΣ / > / / \ μοι 9
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε μοι τόδε εἰπέ, τί τοι φρεσὶν εἴδεται εἶναι ;

, A / ,’ / / /
αἰνῶς yap μ᾽ αὐτόν γε μένος καὶ θυμὸς ἀνώγει

Cte! »/ > \ n Μ \ > \ ᾽ fal ”
Κκεισ LEVAL ἔπι νῆας COW OTPaTov ευρυν Ἀχαιῶν.

wv “4 / \ \ \ > / / a
ὡς φάτο, κώκυσεν δὲ γυνὴ καὶ ἀμείβετο μύθωι: 200

oc a 7, ͵7 v7 > a \ ΄,
ὦ μοι, πῆι δή τοι φρένες οἴχονθ᾽, ἧις τὸ πάρος περ

» 3 Se_ 5; > / / 50» : > ΄
ἔκλε ἐπ ἀνθρώπους ξείνους ἠδ᾽ οἷσιν ἀνάσσεις ;

πῶς ἐθέλεις ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν ἐλθέμεν οἷος,

\ τ
ἀνδρὸς ἐς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὅς τοι πολέας τε καὶ ἐσθλοὺς
υἱέας ἐξενάριξε; σιδήρειόν νύ τοι ἣτορ. 205
> ’ὔ > id / \ > / Ψ lal
εἰ yap σ᾽ αἱρήσει καὶ ἐσόψεται ὀφθαλμοῖσιν,

798. ἄνωγεν Ar.
udeon U!.
re A supr.
204, ΤΟΙ: Tic JES: τι RK.

200. κώλυςεν Bar. Mor.
201. olxontT Pap. wv: ὥιχοντ᾽ Mose. 2.

202. ἔκλυ᾽ Rt Vr. A: ἔκλευ Cant.: ἔκλετ᾽ PR™, || Gnaccec Pap. μ.

205. τινὲς ἐξήναξε, τῆς ἀρχῆς ἐξέβαλε, Sch. T.

ἀμείβετο : ἀνήρετο Ar.
αἷς R: ὡς H. || περ:

ὅτι ὑποτάσσουσι στίχον ἀθάνατοι ποίηςαν ὀὁλύμπια δώματ᾽ ἔχοντες (οἱ οὐρανὸν

εὐρὺν ἔχουσιν, 1 An.

i”

206. écowear Vr. A.

reading of Ar. Analogy, however, re-
quires κεχόνδει, cf. λέλογχα, πέπονθα,
γέγονε, ete., H. G. ὃ 22.7. This read-
ing is in fact attested by the papyrus
here, and is therefore probably original ;
it had already been conjecturally restored
by Fick. The perf. recurs only in Ψ
268, 6 96 οἷκον κεχανδότα πολλὰ καὶ
ἐσθλά.

194. δαιχλκονίη seems to imply pity for
Hekabe in view of the blow which is
about to fall; see on A 561. The usual
tone of remonstrance is quite absent
here, unless we may suppose that it is
assumed in view of the opposition which
Priam is sure of meeting.

200. ἀμείβετο uve, also 424, an
Odyssean phrase not recurring in 7].
Ar, read ἀνήρετο.

201. Fic τό, joe Nauck. For περ we
ought apparently to have γε, the particle
which is used when the present is con-
trasted with the past (P 587).

202. ἔκλε᾽, i.e. ἐκλέεο with hyphaeresis
(H. G. § 5); so ἀποαίρεο A 275, where
see note. G. Meyer, Gr. § 151, holds
that the second ε was not really dropped
but became a semi-vocalic ‘glide.’ But
the instances are so rare that they must

be regarded with the greatest suspicion.
In A 275 Nauck reads ἀποαίνυσο. In
8 202 we can at once write μυθέε᾽ (αι).
Here van L. suggests κλείε᾽ (ο or -at),
Fick κλεύε᾽ (ο)ὴ. The long form of the
verb is found in act. κλείω a 338, p 418,
beside κλέομαι ν 299 (van L. Ench. § 183).
There are no other probable instances of
this hyphaeresis. The reading of two
Mss., ἔκλυ᾽, is worth notice; it would
be the regular aor. form, though not
elsewhere found. But the sense requires
an imperf. For the dat. cf. ν 299 μήτι
τε κλέομαι καὶ κέρδεσιν, and for ἐπί see
T 35.

205. The added line given by An.
(see above) is a good instance of the
class of interpolations designed to supply
a needless verb.

206. αἱρήςει Kai ἐςόψεται, get thee in
has power and set eyes on thee, a perfectly
natural and simple expression. It has
caused gratuitous offence to commen-
tators, who see in it a hysteron proteron ()
and think that αἱρήσει cannot be used
of one who puts himself in his enemies’
power. Hence many of them adopt
Bothe’s tasteless conj. ἀθρήσει, which
gives a meaningless tautology or rather
anti-climax.

552

IAIAAOC © (xxiv)

> \ \ ” ode Ns’ “ A » 2, ΄
ὠμηστὴς καὶ ATLOTOS ἀνὴρ O γε, OV σ ἐλεήσει

ΕῚ , ,
οὐδέ TL σ᾽ αἰδέσεται.

ἴω ,
νῦν δὲ κλαίωμεν ἄνευθεν

ε > 7 ᾿ lal ? er fal \
ἥμενοι ἐν μεγάρωι: τῶι 6 ὥς ποθι μοῖρα κραταιὴ

/ 2 / / “ ΄ ᾽ / 9
YELVOMEVML ETTEVHOE λίνων, OTE μιν TEKOV AUT, 210

’ , / 98 en ’ re /
ἀργίποδας κύνας ὦσαι, ἑῶν ἀπάνευθε τοκήων,

n fal \ / - 7
ἀνδρὶ πάρα κρατερῶι, τοῦ ἐγὼ μέσον ἧπαρ ἔχοιμι
᾽ la fs), , /
ἐσθέμεναι Tpocphica: ToT ἄντιτα ἔργα γένοιτο

Ν > - > \ ”
παιδὸς ἐμοῦ: ἐπεὶ OV
, \

ἀλλὰ πρὸ Τρώων Kat

ἑ κακιζόμενόν γε κατέκτα,
Τρωϊάδων βαθυκόλπων 215

ς [ie ” / / oh) a} ’ lol ”
ἑσταότ᾽, οὔτε φόβου μεμνημένον οὔτ᾽ ἀλεωρῆς.
τὴν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπε γέρων Ϊ]ρίαμος θεοειδής"

“cc / > 52 5. lie » δέ beam
μή pe ἐθέλοντ᾽ Levat κατερύκανε, μηδὲ μοι αὐτὴ

207. ὅ re DGQT Pap. v, Bar. γι. 4 A, Μοβο. 2: ὅς τ᾽ Βὶ : ὅθε ὥ. || ¢ ouK ελεηςει

209. ΠΟΘΙ : ποτε Pap. ν.
| TexJeu[HT]Hp Pap. u.

Pap. v”.
énéAuce P.
γένοντο ()U.

Paps σιν ||nes τε Ε-:

210. γινομένω T Pap. mu (supr. €). ||

211. ἐὼν HJ: ewn Pap. v1, econ v?. 4Σ218.
214. eou Pap. ν (supr. uw). || ἐπεὶ οὔ τι ai κοιναί, Did.: em οὔτι
215. πρὸ Ar. Q:

πρὸς DJPQU Pap. μ ν, Vr. ἃ, Par. beg.

218. κατερύκακε D?PR?SU? Vr. A. || κοι : τι Vr. A.

207. Ravening and faithless man that
he is, he will have no mercy on thee.
The position of 6 re shews that ὠμηστής
ες 6 ye is an independent clause to
which we must supply ἐστί ; the words
cannot be taken as the subject either
of the preceding protasis or following
apodosis, but form a parenthetical ex-
planation. They are clearly not an
independent apodosis logically. We

might indeed make them form part of

the protasis by reading ὅδε for ὅ γε;
but this pronoun is used only of a person
actually, or to be represented as, in
sight. Heyne and Brandreth conj. ὁ δέ
σ᾽ οὐκ ἐλεήσει, which has been confirmed
since by the reading of Pap. μ. But
this is too simple; and the hiatus in
the diaeresis though legitimate would
not have been introduced if not found
originally. It obliges us to put a comma
before ov, and forbids us ‘to read ὁ δέ,
in spite of the analogy of X 123 ὁ δέ μ᾽
οὐκ ἐλεήσει, οὐδέ τί μ᾽ αἰδέσεται. GIUWHCTHC
is nowhere else used of a human being ;
we might almost translate a beast of prey.

208. ἄνευθεν, away from him (Hector),
without trying to bring him; or perhaps
more simply away from the rest, in
private.

209. ὥς, thus. Monro takes it to be
ws, as, and regards the sentence as un-
finished ; as it was fated (so it has come
to pass), but this seems needless.

210. See T 128.

211. acai is epexegetic of ds.
noodac here only for πόδας ἀργούς.

213. So says Beatrice in Much Ado,
‘I could eat his heart in the market-
place.’ Compare A 35, with note, and
X 347. ‘Those who find in such expres-
sions a proof that Homeric Greece re-
tained traces of cannibalism will of
course be prepared to extend the same
conclusion to Elizabethan England.
npocpica, burying my teeth in it; ef.
ὀδὰξ ἐν χείλεσι φύντες a 381, ἄντιτα
ἔργα, so p 51 (=60) at κέ ποθι Ζεὺς
ἄντιτα ἔργα τελέσσηι, and cf. a 379 αἴ
κέ ποθι Leds δῶισι παλίντιτα ἔργα γενέ-
σθαι. This shows that we must regard
the words as a single phrase, work of
vengeance. But the addition of maidec
ἐμοῦ is awkward: we must explain then
might the work of revenge for my son
take place. This is not entirely satis-
factory. Hence Bekker and others reject
214-16; 215 may be borrowed from X
514 (note the variant πρός). κακιΖό-
UENON playing the coward hardly sounds
Homeric, and ἀλεωρῆς shelter (=safety)
differs somewhat from the use in M 57,
O 533. The absence of the lines is on
the whole a gain.—Some divide ἂν τιτά,
which is very unlikely ; τιτός does not
occur elsewhere in Greek, and p 51 is
unambiguous. No dy is required: cf. T
321.

apri-

IAIAAOC © (xxiv) 553

v ἜΝ , \ / > / /
ὄρνις ἐνὶ μεγάροισι κακὸς πέλευ: οὐδέ με πείσεις.

> \ / / ,’ » > , > /
εἰ μὲν yap Tis μ᾽ ἄλλος ἐπιχθονίων ἐκέλευεν, 220
δ ᾿ / x e a
ἢ οἱ μάντιές εἰσι θυοσκόοι ἢ ἱερῆες,

nr / “ / r
ψεῦδός κεν φαῖμεν καὶ νοσφιζοίμεθα μᾶλλον"

a > \ ” a b »
νῦν © αὐτὸς yap ἄκουσα θεοῦ καὶ ἐσέδρακον ἄντην,

φ ¢ » ,
εἶμι, καὶ οὐχ ἅλιον ἔπος ἔσσεται. εἰ δέ μοι αἶσα

\ > A ,

τεθνώμεναι Tapa νηυσὶν Ἀχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων, 225

4 , > ‘
βούλομαι: αὐτίκα yap με κατακτείνειεν ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
? \ e / ’ πος Ce > \ / ? ” WA ᾽᾽
ἀγκὰς ἑλόντ᾽ ἐμὸν υἱόν, ἐπὴν γόου ἐξ ἔρον εἴην.

lal fh /

ἢ καὶ φωριαμῶν ἐπιθήματα Kar ἀνέωιγεν"
lj /
ἔνθεν δώδεκα μὲν περικαλλέας ἔξελε πέπλους,

, , - 4h , , \ ,
δώδεκα δ᾽ ἁπλοΐδας χλαίνας, τόσσους δὲ τάπητας, 230
/ \ / , » al r
τόσσα δὲ φάρεα λευκά, τόσους δ᾽ ἐπὶ τοῖσι χιτῶνας,

219. éni: ἐν JU Mose. 2, Par. Ὁ. || éniuuerdpoici C Pap. wv. || κακὴ (A supr.)

R Harl. a, Mose. 2.

αὑτὴν Pap. (corr. man. 1).
225. XGAKOKITWNWN Pap, v.

καλὰ (2. || κιτωνας Pap. ν].

220. ἐκέλευςεν //().
οἷοι. μᾶλλον δὲ ἢ οἵ Eust. || ϑυοσκόποι Bar. Mor.
224. ἁλίη ὁδὸς ap. Eust. || ἅλιος Pap. ν (supr. Ν).

230. “δώδεκα dinAotdac un. Vindob.,’
231. λευκὰ ACHPT Pap. », Vr. b, Harl. Ὁ, King’s Par. a? g:

221. ἢ of: ἢ εἰ PR?: οἷοι L™):
223. ee@n J. | ἄντην:

Heyne.
λευκὰ καλὰ Par. e:

219. ὄρνις, for the short ζ see note on
M 218. It is well supported here by
the fact that the obvious ἐν for évé has
found so little acceptance in Mss. For
ὄρνις in the sense of omen cf. M 243 εἷς
οἰωνὸς ἄριστος ἀμύνεσθαι περὶ πάτρης. It
is not uncommon in later Greek; ἃ
familiar case is the ὄρνις of Pindar P.
iv. 19 which consisted in the gift of a
clod of earth.

221. The order of the words obliges
us to take ϑυοοσκόοι with μάντιες, not
with iepjes, as some have done; see note
on A 62. The poems do not give us
sufficient data to determine more accu-
rately the relations of the two classes.
θυοσκόος possibly indicates divination
from the smoke of incense, as the words
cognate to θύος imply sweet smell (τεθυω-
μένον, θυόεις, etc.). But here again we
are left in uncertainty. We may be
content to take the line as expressing
the two classes of religious advisers,
those who counsel from omens, and those
who have a general priestly function.

222=B 81, which is probably borrowed,
as Ar. held, from this place; the line
suits the general context here far better,
in spite of the slight harshness of the
change from sing. to plur. (for which see
on N 257).

226. βούλομαι, 7 would rather have it

so, a much stronger expression than
ἐθέλω Tam willing.

227. εἴην, ‘opt. by attraction,’ i.e.
the act is regarded as imaginary only.
We should express the idea by a con-
ditional, not a temporal particle ; ‘let
Achilles kill me, so I might weep my
fill.’

228. ἀνέωιγεν : ἀνόϊγεν Brandreth,
ἀνόϊξεν van L. But see note on 457.

229. πέπλους, usually feminine gar-
ments, and therefore presumably for
Achilles to give to his women captives.
But cf. E 194, where they are coverings
for chariots, and 796 below.

230. ἁπλοΐδας, worn single, opposed
to the χλαῖνα διπλῆ (K 134) or δίπλαξ (T
126, ete.), which was of larger size and
was doubled before being put on. Both
were outer robes, a sort of plaid. Stud-
niczka (p. 86) considers that the φᾶρος
was a particularly luxurious form of the
δίπλαξ, as its use is ascribed only to im-
portant persons. It was, moreover, made
not of wool, like the χλαῖνα, but of the
more costly and rarer linen. Hence the
adj. λευκά which is specially applied
to linen fabrics (see App. G, S§ 7, 8).
The τάπητες appear to answer to our
‘blankets,’ as they are only used in
making beds or couches ; I 200, K 156,
Q 645, etc. 230-31=w 276-77.

IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv)

554

» / /
χρυσοῦ δὲ στήσας ἔφερεν δέκα πάντα τάλαντα,
3 7 \ ,
ἐκ δὲ δύ᾽ αἴθωνας τρίποδας, πίσυρας δὲ λέβητας,
\ ty Ὁ / yA
ἐκ δὲ δέπας περικαλλές, 6 οἱ Θρῆικες πόρον ἄνδρες
> / BS 06 / / ‘ NOE la) στε 235
ἐξεσίην ἐλθόντι, μέγα κτέρας" οὐδὲ νυ TOU περ
ς χὰ \ ’ ” n
φείσατ᾽ ἐνὶ μεγάροις ὁ γέρων, περὶ δ᾽ ἤθελε θυμῶι
7, " CoP. ¢€ \ n \ «
λύσασθαι φίλον υἱόν. ὁ δὲ ρῶας μὲν ἅπαντας
5 a 7
αἰθούσης ἀπέεργεν ἔπεσσ᾽ αἰσχροῖσιν ἐνίσσων"
5 n / "ἢ δ Casa.
“ ἔρρετε, λωβητῆρες ἐλεγχέες: οὔ VU καὶ ὑμῖν
, ” - by Je
οἴκοι ἔνεστι γόος, ὅτι μ᾽ ἤλθετε κηδήσοντες ; 240
> ” “ σ μὰ \ / 3 if
ἢ οὔνεσθ᾽ ὅτι μοι Kpovidns Ζεὺς ἄλγε᾽ ἔδωκε,
παῖδ᾽ ὀλέσαι τὸν ἄριστον ; ἀτὰρ γνώσεσθε καὶ ὕμμες"
ec ar: \ a ? a \ 54
ῥηΐτεροι yap μᾶλλον ᾿Αχαιοῖσιν δὴ ἔσεσθε

235. ézeciHnod’ Lips. Mose. 2 and ap. Eust.: ἐξ ἀεσίης 1).
238. Gnéepren J Par. Ὁ: énéepren L:

234. ὅ: To Pap. ΨΚ.
236. énimuerdpoic C (swpr. in) Pap. μ ν.
anéepren ἢ Gnéepren Eust. || ἐνίεπων S Vr. d (Par. 1 supr.):

ἐνίπτων Hust. (yp.

Eniccoon). 240. ἔνεςτι : enecti Pap. μ: ἐστὶ HP Pap. v. || ὅτε ΤΊ (ἢ) Pap. μ- ||
KHOHcantec R Pap. pl. 241. & τ᾽ S. || οὔνεςϑθ᾽ : SNdcace’ Ar. T: ὀνοςεςθ᾽
Pap. v2: dunocf Pap. μ: οὔνυςθε J: οὐκ ice’ P?R. || ὅτι : oTe Pap. vi. || ἔθηκε

(A supr. ) Woes ἊΣ 242. Uuue Vr. A.

232=T 247, whence it is obviously
interpolated. It breaks the connexion
of the passage, and is quite unsuitable
here, as ἔφερεν, though in place where
the gifts are being brought out of a hut,
is meaningless where the ransom is being
chosen from the chests, and remains for
the present in the θάλαμος (it is only
removed in 275). The weighing, too, is
required only where the exact payment
of a promised sum is in question.

235, €=ectHn (ἐξέσίην A with Ar.) lit.
a sending, i.e. an embassy. So ᾧ 20 τῶν
ἕνεκ᾽ ἐξεσίην πολλὴν ὁδὸν ἦλθεν ᾿Οδυσσεύς.
κτέρας, possession, as Καὶ 216; else only
in plur. of funeral rites. See note on
38.

239. ἐλεγχέες, rather ἐλέγχεα, see on
A 242.

241. otnecee, the reading of the
vulgate, is obviously corrupt. So far
as the sense goes it may come either
from ὀνίνημι or ὄνομαι. If we refer it to
the former the line will mean Are ye
the gainers that grief has come wpon me ;
if to the latter Do ye make light of it,
that, ete. (Note that ὄνομαι always
means scorn, treat with contempt, not
blame as traditionally explained.) Both
are possible, but the former is more
vigorous and Homeric. To explain
the form we must go with Fick to

the old alphabet, and suppose that
ONESOR, taken to be οὔνεσθε, really
stood for ὥνησθε, the correct aor. form ;
ef. ἀπ-όνη-το, ὄνη-σο, ὀνή-μενος. -This
seems satisfactory. Ar. however took
the other course and read ὀνόσασθε, the
regular aor. of ὄνομα. In favour of
this are p 378 ἢ ὄνοσαι ὅτι τοι βίοτον
κατέδουσιν, an unmistakably related pas-
sage; @ 427 οὐχ ὥς με μνηστῆρες ἀτιμά-
ζοντες ὄνονται, ΚΞ, 95, P 25 ἧς ἥβης ἀπόνηθ᾽
ὅτε μ᾽ ὥνατο, where the two verbs are
brought together (see note there). De-
cision between the two is extremely
difficult. On the whole, however, it
must be admitted that Ar.’s reading
looks like a conjecture; it is very un-
likely that ὀνόσασθε would have been
corrupted to οὔνεσθε, and an explanation
on other known grounds deserves the
preference. οὐκ ἴσθ᾽ is obviously another
ingenious conj. open to the same objec-
tions,

242. éhécai: van L. ὀλέσας, on the
ground that the word usually means
destroy rather than lose (Φ 216, ἃ 318,
μ 349, etc.). For the pregnant sense of
γνώςεςθε, ye shall know what this means,
see Θ 406 ὄφρ᾽ εἰδῆι γλαυκῶπις ὅτ᾽ ἂν ὧι
πατρὶ μάχηται, and the passages there
quoted. For the constr. of the next
line cf. 2 258.

IAIAAOC © (xxiv) 555

κείνου τεθνηῶτος ἐνωαιρέμεν. αὐτὰρ ἔγωγε
πρὶν ἀλαπαζομένην τε πόλιν κεραϊζομένην τε 245
ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ἰδεῖν, βαίην δόμον “Aidos εἴσω."

ἢ καὶ σκηπανίωι δίεπ᾽ ἀνέρας: οἱ δ᾽ ἴσαν ἔξω
σπερχομένοιο γέροντος. ὁ δ᾽ υἱάσιν οἷσιν ὁμόκλα,
νεικείων “EXevov te Ἰ]άριν τ᾽ ᾿Αγάθωνά τε δῖον
Πάμμονά τ᾽ ᾿Αντίφονόν τε βοὴν ἀγαθόν τε []ολίτην 250
AniboBov τε καὶ Ἱππόθοον καὶ Δῖον ayavor:
ἐννέα τοῖς ὁ γεραιὸς ὁμοκλήσας ἐκέλευε:
“σπεύσατέ μοι, κακὰ τέκνα, κατηφόνες" ai? ἅμα πάντες
“Ἕκτορος ὠφέλετ᾽ ἀντὶ θοῆις ἐπὶ νηυσὶ πεφάσθαι.

τῷ
οι

ὦ μοι ἐγὼ πανώποτμος, ἐπεὶ τέκον υἷας ἀρίστους
Τροίην ἐν εὐρείηι, τῶν δ᾽ ov τινά φημι λελεῖφθαι,
Μήστορά τ᾽ ἀντίθεον καὶ 'ρωΐλον ἱππιοχάρμην
“ ᾽ ἅ \ » > 7s
“Exrtopa θ᾽, ὃς θεὸς ἔσκε μετ᾽ ἀνδράσιν, οὐδὲ Ea Ket
/ lal Like ” > \ “-“
ἀνδρός γε θνητοῦ παῖς ἔμμεναι, ἀλλὰ θεοῖο"

\ \ 5 ΄ > κν \ 3 Feel ΄ /
TOUS μὲν ἅπώλεσ Ἄρης, τὰ ὃ ἐλέγχεα πάντα λέλειπται,
ψεῦσταί T ὀρχησταί τε, χοροιτυπίηισιν ἄριστοι, 261
ἀρνῶν ἠδ᾽ ἐρίφων ἐπιδήμιοι ἁρπακτῆρες.

244. τεθνειῶτος A (897. Η) CUGQT Pap. ν. 241. ἔξω: eiceo lap. ν'. 248.

viécin R. 250. Gugiponon Pap. v!: εὐτίφονόν P: GNTIPON 1): ἀντίφωνά ()

(supr. ON). 251. τε om. Pap. ν. 252. ἐκέλευςε(ν) PQRT Pap. v, Ambr. Vr. d.
253. κατηφέες Krates, 17). 258. Θ᾽ Oc: Teoc Pap. ν᾽: οὐδὲ :
oute Pap. v!. 259. re: te TU Vr. "Ὁ. || ϑνητοῖο 7).

Tt oc Pap. v*.
202. GNOPON ..

κατήφειαι would seem to point to this,
though quoted as from Ar.

256. Τροίηι ἐν εὑρείηι, an Odyssean
phrase (three times). So évi Τροίηι εὐρείηι,
774 and three times in Od.

257. Mestor appears only here. Troilos
is not mentioned again in H., though he

247. iene, controlled them, brought
them into order. Cf. B 207 ὡς 6 γε
κοιρανέων δίεπε στρατόν. ἕπω implies
managing, and δια- adds the idea from
the midst, as ἐφέπειν is to manage from
outside.

250. For Polites see B 791. In the

next line the scholia point out that we
cannot, in the absence of other notice,
say whether δῖον or ἀγαυόν is the proper
name. Pherekydes however mentioned
Dios as son of Priam.

253. κατηφόνες Ar. and vulg., though
in w 432 all mss. read κατηφέες, with
Krates here. This best suits the
subst. κατηφείη and the verb κατηφῆσαι,
but as the der. of the word is unknown
(see on II 498) we cannot say that
the text, which is so strongly sup-
ported, is impossible. Ar. regarded the
word as a feminine, an _ intentional
sarcasm like ᾿Αχαιίδες οὐκέτ᾽ ᾿Αχαιοί.
It would rather seem to be an abstract,
my disgraces, like ἐλέγχεα. Did. oiovel

is one of the favourite figures of the later
cycle and the vase-paintings. An. says,
rightly no doubt, ἐκ τοῦ εἰρῆσθαι immo-
χάρμην τὸν Τρωΐλον οἱ νεώτεροι ἐφ᾽ ἵππου
διωκόμενον αὐτὸν ἐποίησαν. καὶ οἱ μὲν
παῖδα αὐτὸν ὑποτίθενται, “Ὅμηρος δὲ διὰ
τοῦ ἐπιθέτου τέλειον ἄνδρα ἐμφαίνει: οὐ
γὰρ ἄλλος ἱππόμαχος λέγεται.

258. These words may be illustrated
by K 47-50.

261. wetcra, cf. T 107. yoportuni-
HICIN Gpictol, heroes of the dance, ‘ carpet
knights.’

262. The emphatic word is ἐπιϑήμιοι,
plunderers of your own folk instead of
the enemy. GpN@®N HO ἐρίφων, three
times in Od,

556

IAIAAOC © (xxiv)

3 / /
οὐκ av δή μοι ἄμαξαν ἐφοπλίσσαιτε τάχιστα,
a , ? “- » / e an »”
ταῦτώ τε πάντ᾽ ἐπιθεῖτε, ἵνα πρήσσωμεν ὁδοῖο ;
ἢ 5 e ,ὕ (a \ Ἶ
ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα πατρὸς ὑποδδείσαντες ὁμοκλὴν 20

Ε] ” / τ /
ἐκ μὲν ἄμαξαν ἄειραν ἐύτροχον ἡμιονείην

/ , \ an 5 Ψ 5 ἴω
καλὴν πρωτοπαγέα, πείρινθα δὲ δῆσαν ἐπ᾽ αὐτῆς,

,
kad δ᾽ ἀπὸ πασσαλόφι ζυγὸν ἥιρεον ἡμιόνειον,
/ > / LA ΠΣ 2 /
πύξινον ὀμφαλόεν, ἐὺ οἰήκεσσιν ἀρηρός,
ἐκ δ᾽ ἔφερον ζυγόδεσμὸν ἅμα ζυγῶι ἐννεάπηχυ. 270

\ \ icy

καὶ TO μὲν EU

I b] / SN e an
κατέθηκαν ἐυξέστωι ἐπὶ PULL,

7, " / 5) \ f .“ 7
πέζηι ἔπι πρώτηι, ἐπὶ δὲ κρίκον ἕστορι βάλλον,

\ ὩΣ c ΄
τρὶς δ᾽ ἑκάτερθεν
ς 7 7
ἑξείης κατέδησαν,

»“, ρ νυ) ? / ΠῚ Ν ΕΣ
ἔδησαν ἐπ ὀμφαλὸν, αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα
e \ - ’ ”

ὑπὸ γλωχῖνα δ᾽ ἔκαμψαν.

ἐκ θαλάμου δὲ φέροντες ἐυξέστης ἐπ᾽ ἀπήνης 275

/ .ς / A > 4 ’ ”
νήεον ᾿ὥῶκτορέης κεφαλῆς ἀπερείσι᾽ ἄποινα,

ζεῦξαν δ᾽ ἡμιόνους κρατερώνυχας ἐντεσιεργούς,

τούς ῥά ποτε []ριάμων Μυσοὶ δόσαν ἀγλαὰ δῶρα.

268. ἐφοπλίς(ε)ητε CHP and ap. Kust.: ἐφοπλίςετε D: εφώπλιςςειτε Pap. v!

(-aiTe ν᾿).
Pap. v. || ὑποδείςαντες C!D,
npwtonarA ὦ). || OAcai Pap. μ (swpr. N).
ὀμφαλόεντ᾽ DGPSU Vr. A.

ζυγὸν (). || ἐννεάπηχυν CG() Vr. A.

yp. ἕκτορι Sch. DU, Ht. Mag. 383. 25.

Harl. a, Mose. 2:
(inel. Pap. ν).
ze0= y (fy i

See 7

Ω-
Ζ
oO
Oo

43

268. Cf. ¢57 mamma φίλ᾽, οὐκ ἂν δή μοι
ἐφοπλίσσειας ἀπήνην ; The very different
tone expressed here by the same con-
struction shews how rash it is to put
down certain formulae as ‘polite’ or
‘hesitating ’ requests ; such a connota-
tion belongs to the context rather than
the words.

264. The accent of émeeite is due to
the mistaken idea that the form is con-
tracted from ἐπιθείητε, see note on Τ' 102.
ὁδοῖο as y 476, 047. See H. G. ἃ 149.
and compare διαπρήσσουσα κέλευθον A
483 with note.

267. mpwronaréa, see on E
neipinea, 190.

268-74. For the general explanation
of this passage see App. M.

269. It is curious that so good a Ms.
as P, with its family, should expressly
give the variants ὀμφαλόεντ᾽ and ἀρηρότα,
with the scholion καθαρὸς ἐν τέλει
δάκτυλος. There were however ancient

194.

264. ἐπιθῆτε /7J() and ap. Kust.: eniteiee Pap. v1.
267. πρωτοπαγέα ADHJPQTU Pap. uv}, Harl. a:

|| ἀρηρότα P (καθαρὸς ἐν τέλει δάκτυλος L™),

275. ἐϊξέστου P (p. ras.) R.
énteciepradc U: énreciouprouc GRS Harl. a, Mosc. 2.

265. epaT

269 om. Zen. ||
270.

268. ἡμιόνοιϊν T.

272. ἔπι : ἐνὶ 1]. || ἐπὶ : περὶ T. || ἕστορι :

274. ἔκαλιψαν A (supr. rn) DQTU

ἔγναψαν γι. ἃ A: érAawan Hf (supr.N over A): ErNnauwpan (2

276. νήνεον Mosc. 2. 211.

grammarians who held that ἃ dactyl
could stand in the sixth place. Schol. T
on ots τέκετο Ῥέα, O 187, says οἱ δέ φασι
δεῖν συστέλλειν (‘make the a short’), ἵνα
δάκτυλος γίνηται, ws τὸ ““καὶ πὺξ ἀγαθὸν
ΠΠολυδευκέα ᾿᾿ (Τ' 237), ““ἀνδρόμεα xpéa”
(. 947), ““ ἕσσατο τεύχεα " (H 207). ζυγός
is of course found, though not commonly,
in later Greek; it is unknown to H.
Zen. omitted the line, and Heyne thinks
it interpolated, but without obvious
grounds.

277. éntecieprouc, working in harness,
the first part of the compound being
locative like ὀρεσίτροφος, and others in
Η. G.§ 124 f. e&rea=harness also in
Pind. O. xiii. 20 ἱππείοις ἐν ἔντεσσιν.
Nauck needlessly conj. ἠνυσιεργούς, from
ἀνυσιεργός in Theokr. xxviii. 14.

278. According to the scholia the
Mysians were famous for their mules ;
ἱππόθορον δὲ Μυσοὶ εὗρον μῖξιν ὄνων πρὸς
ἵππους is quoted from Anakreon. They

IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv) 5D7

A \ ΄, “ ,ὔ oe ΄ Η
ἵππους δὲ Ipiduwu ὕπαγον ζυγόν, ods ὁ γεραιὸς

> \ ” > / » / ᾽ \ /
αὐτὸς ἔχων ἀτίταλλεν ἐυξέστηι ἐπὶ φάτνηι. 280

τὼ μὲν ζευγνύσθην ἐν δώμασιν ὑψηλοῖσι
κῆρυξ καὶ Uplapyos, πυκινὰ φρεσὶ μήδε᾽ ἔχοντες"
ἀγχίμολον δέ σφ᾽ HAO ᾿ϑκάβη τετιηότι θυμῶι
ἊΝ »Μ ᾽ b] \ / a
οἶνον ἔχουσ᾽ ἐν χειρὶ μελίφρονα δεξιτερῆφι
υσέωι ἐν δέπαϊ, ὄφρα λείψαντε κιοίτην 285
ΧΡ ᾽ P γν. 285
“- a 4G / v , » » Μ) ᾽ > ,
στῆ δ᾽ ἵππων προπάροιθεν, ἔπος τ᾽ ἔφατ᾽ ἔκ τ᾽ ὀνόμαζε:'

ες n “ \ / \ » Μ ’ Sard
τῆ, σπεῖσον Avi πατρί, καὶ εὔχεο οἴκαδ᾽ ἱκέσθαι

x b] / » a b \ x ΄ ‘
dy ἐκ δυσμενέων ἀνδρῶν, ἐπεὶ ἂρ σέ γε θυμὸς

/ \ fol lal \ /
ὀτρύνει ἐπὶ νῆας, ἐμεῖο μὲν οὐκ ἐθελούσης.

uu ἣν r
| ἀλλ᾽ εὔχεο σύ γ᾽ ἔπειτα κελαινεφέϊ Κρονίωνι 290

’ / . / x r < r
Ἰδαίωι, ὅς τε Τροίην κατὰ πᾶσαν ορῶται,

Μ > Ε] / \ » “ / ΄ > -
αἴτει δ᾽ οἰωνόν, ταχὺν ἄγγελον, ὅς τέ οἱ αὐτῶι

279. πριάμωι: τρωοὺς C: tpwiouc Vr. d. || Unare Pap. μ.
280. éUzéctw(1) HJPQSU Pap. ν, Harl. a.
286. επος τέ μιν αντίον HUOG Syr.
290 om. Syr.t || εὔχευ GS and «ap. Eust. :
292. ταχὺν : τεὸν A supr.: ἐὸν Pap. ν, ἐν ἄλλωι A (EON), Sch.

284. yxepci H.
289. otpuneic Pap. ν΄. || ἐμοῖο P.
εὔχε Harl. ἃ.

Ζυγῶ DY).
282. πυκνὰ T’, 283. ἀγχίμολος '’.
288. ἀνὸρῶν : ἐχορῶν L.

T, Apoll. de Pron. p. 48. 1, de Synt. 155. 25.

were neighbours of the Enetoi ὅθεν
ἡμιόνων γένος ἀγροτεράων, B 852. The
scholia also notice that the ἡμίονοι are
masec. here (τούς) but fem. in 325 (rds).

279. C has Τρωούς for Πριάλιωι, in
allusion to the famous breed of Tros
which belonged to the kings of Troy.
This is not a bad reading, as it avoids
the awkward repetition of Πριάμωι. It
also gives point to αὐτὸς ἔχων, heeping
for his own use.

281. zeurNuceHN, were having the horses
yoked ; ζεύγνυσιν ὁ ὑπηρετῶν, ζεύγνυται
δὲ ὁ προστάσσων, Schol. B. The middle
is else peculiar to the Od. (four times).
So ἀγχίμολον 3€ cp’ ἦλθε comes five
times in Od.

284-86=0 148-50; there Mss. read
ἐν δέπαϊ χρυσέωι, which looks like an
adapter’s alteration metri gratia.

287. TA, see on = 219.

290. The synizesis of εὔχεο is very
rare, if not unknown in the rest of the
Iliad, and is another sign of the affinity
of this book with the Od. ; see note on
P 142. Menrad reads ἀλλὰ σύ γ᾽ εὔχε᾽
ἔπειτα. ἔπειτα, perhaps ‘after all that
has been said,’ to make an end of it.
Bergk remarks that the idea of praying

for an omen is elsewhere peculiar to Od. ;
in J/. we hear only of unsought signs.

292. Brugmann holds (Prob. p. 62)
that both here and in 310 ταχύν has
taken the place of an original ἐόν,
his own (in 310 thine own), i.e. favourite.
When the free use of the pronominal adj.
was forbidden, it was first changed to
ταχύν in 310, and this line naturally
followed suit. The papyrus actually has
ἐόν here, though it has ταχύν in 310,
thus representing the first stage of the
change. The marginal variants in A
recognize ἐόν in both places, and it
has the express support of Apollonios
(Pronom. 48. 1) τινές, πάλιν ἀγνοήσαντες
τὸ μεταβατικόν (capability of transition
from one person to another), τὸ ‘‘ αἴτει δ᾽
οἰωνὸν ἑὸν ἄγγελον ᾿ μεταγράφουσιν els τὸ
“ταχὺν ἄγγελον,᾽᾽ ἢ τὸν ἀγαθὸν ἐκδέχονται
(take it in the sense of ‘good,’ on the
analogy of édwv). It must however be
remarked that though the argument
holds good for 310, in this line ἐόν is
less suitable, for the reflexive use is
sacrificed ; it should here mean asi: for
thine own messenger, not for his. The
license however has good analogies ; see
App. A, vol. i. p. 561.

558

IAIAAOC Ω (xxtv)

΄ nr / ig / ’ \ /
φίλτατος οἰωνῶν καί εὖ κράτος ἐστὶ μέγιστον,
4 \ 5) a 7
δεξιόν, ὄφρά μιν αὐτὸς ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖσι νοήσας
> fa) fa) ue
τῶι πίσυνος ἐπὶ νῆας ints Δαναῶν ταχυπώλων. 295

7 ’ / 4
εἰ δέ τοι οὐ δώσει ἑὸν ἄγγελον εὐρύοπα Ζεύς,

” ΄ 7,
οὐκ ἂν ἔγωγέ σ᾽ ἔπειτα ἐποτρύνουσα κελοίμην

~ >>? 7 7 ὮΝ a ΕΣ)
νῆας ἐπ᾿ Δργείων ἰέναι, μάλα περ μεμαῶτα.

\

τὴν δ᾽ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη [ἰ]ρίαμος θεοειδής"

“ὦ γύναι, οὐ μέν τοι τόδ᾽ ἐφιεμένην ἀπιθήσω" 800
ἐσθλὸν yap Au χεῖρας ἀνασχέμεν, al κ᾽ ἐλεήσηι."

ἢ pa καὶ ἀμφίπολον ταμίην ὥτρυν᾽ ὁ γεραιὸς
χερσὶν ὕδωρ ἐπιχεῦαι ἀκήρατον" ἡ δὲ παρέστη
χέρνιβον ἀμφίπολος πρόχοὐόν θ᾽ ἅμα χερσὶν ἔχουσα.
νιψγάμενος δὲ κύπελλον ἐδέξατο ἧς ἀλόχοιο: 305
εὔχετ᾽ ἔπειτα στὰς μέσωι ἕρκεϊ, λεῖβε δὲ οἶνον

bY] \ > / \ / ” "ὃ us
OUPQaVOV εἰσανιδών, και φωνήσας εαῖος NUOa

εὖ JPT. |i

τι P Bar. || €ON: τεὸν C.

298. λιελαῶτα : μεμαυῖα Vr, A.

293. εὖ (εὖ) : of QR Mor. Harl. a, Mosc. 2, Par. h: οἱ εὖ S King’s: οὗ Zen. :
udAicta A (yp. uericton) C Vr. A.
δαναῶν ταχυπώλων : yp. χαίρων ἐνὶ ound A,

295. πίευνον // (swpr. c). ||
“296. ToL: coi Pap. v:
300. μέν TI

P. 1 τό γ᾽ (A supr.) HT: 140° C. || ἐφιεμένηι : ἀφειεμεν oud Pap. ν]. 302.

ὄτρυν᾽ (U Vr. A.

J. || Q€=zaTo T Vr. b.

303. éntyedcar J Vr. A.
χέρνιβα Mass. ? see Schol. T. || mp6yoon © Gua: ταμίη «μετὰ Mass.

304 40. Ar. || yépniBon :
305 om.

293. καί εὖ, a change to the direct
constr.as A79. To avoid the contraction
Menrad conj. καὶ 60 (Zenod. οὗ), but the
relative is far less Homeric. It would
be better to adopt the Ms. variant καί oi.

294. δεξιόν, see note on M 239.

296. οὐ Seoce: after εἰ, see on A 160.
Here ἐόν is left untouched, as there is
no parallel line to require the change.

303. ἀκήρατον, lit. civiolate, undefiled,
from κηραίνω. The adj. recurs in O 498
οἶκος Kal κλῆρος ἀκήρατος, p 5382 κτήματ᾽
ἀκήρατα κεῖτ᾽ ἐνὶ οἴκωι, both times=
intact ; so ἀκήριος = unharmed. This
is the ordinary sense of the word; for
its application to pure water cf. χεῦμ᾽
ἀκήρατον Soph. O. C. 471, ἀκηράτωι σὺν
ὄμβρωι 690. The similarity of ἄκρητος
early led to confusion with the sense
unmined. Hence we have οἶνος ἀκηράσιος
205 (perhaps a purely metrical lengthen-
ing for ἀκεράσιος), and ἀκήρατον ποτόν
of wine, Aisch. Pers. 613. But this is
not the original sense, and is unsuitable
here. The close connexion of the
ideas injure and stain or adulterate is

worked out by Schulze ᾧ. #. 233-36.
See also note on A 141. The scholia
and glossaries rightly render καθαρόν,
ἀθόλωτον, ἀμίαντον, ἀδιάφθορον.

904 ἀθετεῖται ὅτι παρὰ τὸ σύνηθες αὐτῶι
χέρνιβον τὸ ἀγγεῖον τὸ ὑποδεχόμενον τὸ
ὕδωρ, ὡς ἡμεῖς: τοῦτο δὲ αὐτὸς εἴωθε καλεῖν
λέβητα, τὸ δὲ κατὰ τῶν χειρῶν διδόμενον
ὕδωρ χέρνιβα. ἔνιοι δὲ διπλῆι σημειοῦνται
ὡς ἅπαξ ἐνταῦθα εἰρημένον, An. The
regular formula in Od. is χέρνιβα δ᾽
ἀμφίπολος προχόωι ἐπέχευε φέρουσα Kahne
χρυσείηι, ὑπὲρ ἀργυρέοιο λέβητος, a 136—
37, etc. Except Ar.’s ὡς ἡμεῖς there is
no evidence for χέρνιβον elsewhere in
Greek, though χερνιβεῖον occurs rarely.
Bentley conj. χέρνιβά 7’, but the sense
clearly requires basin and ewer, not
water and ewer. The Massaliotic edition,
from a corrupt Schol. T, seems to have
read χέρνιβα ἀμφίπολος ταμίη μετὰ χερσὶν
ἔχουσα, which is more in accordance
with usage, if the hiatus is admitted.

306-7 =IT 231-32 (q.v.): 808=T 276 ;
309, see ¢ 327: 310-13, see 292-95:
314=II 249: 315=6 247 (q.v.).

ul

IAIAAOC Ω (xxry)

οι
or
φ

ig, lal / / /
“Zed πάτερ, Ἴδηθεν μεδέων, κύδιστε μέγιστε,
, ᾽ > > “-“ , > A Oo? > /
dos μ᾽ ἐς ᾿Αχιλλῆος φίλον ἐλθεῖν ἠδ᾽ ἐλεεινόν,
/ , , / \ A od ‘ > ΄-
πέμψον ὃ OLMVOV, τάχυν ἄγγελον, OS TE σοι AUTOL 310
/ a / /
φίλτατος οἰωνῶν Kal εὑ κράτος ἐστὶ μέγιστον,
/ > \ 5 5 -“ 7
δεξιόν, ὄφρά μιν αὐτὸς ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖσι νοήσας
cr / x fol a , ?
TOL πίσυνος ἐπὶ νῆας iw Δαναῶν ταχυπώλων."
“Ὁ v » > / r ᾽ » ,ὔ r ,
ὡς ἔφατ᾽ εὐχόμενος, τοῦ δ᾽ ἔκλυε μητίετα Ζεύς,

> / > > \ e / r
αὐτικα ὃ QLETOV 1)KE, TENELOTATOV TTETENVOV,

a]
με
wn

/ -“ 2 A \ \ /
μορῴνον θηρητῆρ᾽, OV καὶ πέερκνον καλεουσιν.

¢ 3 e

ὅσση δ᾽ ὑψορόφοιο
> / > “-“ \
ἀνέρος ἀφνειοῖο, ἐὺ

θύρη θαλάμοιο τέτυκται
κληΐϊσ᾽ ἀραρυῖα,

/ γ᾽ » a « 4 » ΄ » /
Togs apa Tov ἑκάτερθεν ἔσαν πτερά: εἴσατο δέ σφι

δεξιὸς ἀΐξας διὰ ἄστεος.

οἱ δὲ ἰδόντες 320

/ \ r > A \ \ + OF
γήθησαν, καὶ πᾶσιν ἐνὶ φρεσὶ θυμὸς ἰάνθη.
/ e fal
sTmepxomevos δ᾽ ὁ γέρων ξεστοῦ ἐπεβήσετο δίφρου,
3 ᾽ » / ’ / S
ἐκ δ᾽ ἔλασε προθύροιο καὶ αἰθούσης ἐριδούπου.

/ \ e / “ / > /
πρόσθε μὲν ἡμίονοι ἕλκον τετράκυκλον ἀπήνην,

309. ἐλθέμεναι ἢ.
Bar. Harl. a, Vr. Ὁ:
312 om. Harl. a, Mose. 2.

A (yp. répwn zectod) Mor. |

310. ταχὺν : ἐὸν ()!(2), ἐν ἄλλωι A.
οἱ εὖ 5: εὖ JT. | wericroc Pap. v': μάλιςτα A (γρ. μέγιετον).
315. πετεεινῶν Harl. a.
318 om. Ut. || ἀφνειοῖο : ἀφνειοῦ καὶ Vr. A.
€IH): €UKAHeic P: εὐκλήηις T (yp. EuKAHic’).
eicaTo: nupoceiato Syr. (swpr. Te over vu).
Mose. 2, Vr. b A, Par. f, yp. A: ὑπὲρ Q.
éneBricato GJP Pap. ν, Vr. ἃ.

311. εὖ : of QR

316. ϑηρητὴν KR Vr. A.
εὐκλειης Pap. ν (sup. HI over
319. Técc’: ὥς R. || πτερά"

320. O14 R Pap. v, Par. a: a” ST

322. γέρων ξΞεοτοῦ : γεραιὸς ἑοῦ

323. €pirdounou ΕΘ),

316. μόρφνον and περκνόν are both
ἅπαξ εἰρημένα in H. Aristotle, H. A.
ix. 32, mentions an eagle called πλάγγος
living in woods and marshes, ἐπικαλεῖται
δὲ νηττοφόνος καὶ udppvos~ οὗ καὶ Ὅμηρος
μέμνηται ἐν τῆι Πριάμου ἐξόδωι. The ety-
mology and meaning οἵ μόρῴνος are un-
known; it recurs in Scwt. Here. 134
(see Thompson (oss. s.v.). It is to
be regarded as a subst., not an adj., as
the aecent, which Ar. approved, shews.
Suidas applies the name to a vulture.
nepxnoc describes the colour, dappled,
spotted with dark ; as ripening grapes
ὑποπερκάζουσιν, 126. The similar
and similarly obscure expressions in Φ
251-53 should be compared.

318. ἐὺ KAnic’ is the reading of Try-
pho, Ar. preferring ἐυκλήϊς (as the Mss.
also have). There is little to choose
between the two. In favour of the text
is the fact that ἀρηρώς rarely stands by
itself, but is almost always joined to a
defining word, either a dat. or an adverb

(πυκινῶς or the like). (In T 396 χειρί may
be taken with ἀραρυῖαν, jitted to his hand.
though it is simpler to take the part. by
itself; see, however, ζωστῆρι ἀρηρότι A
134.) The KAnYOec are here the bolts
which hold the doors, see M 456, = 168.
The fact that only one κληΐς is elsewhere
mentioned as belonging to a door is in
favour of reading ἐυκλήϊς. But no weight
can be allowed to Ar.’s objection to the
elision of the -c of the dat. plur.

320. διὰ ἄστεος, most Mss. have ὑπὲρ
ἄστεος. But ἄστυ is one of the words
which retain the F most consistently ;
out of nearly 120 places where it oceurs
thirty-seven require F, and only four
(besides this) reject it (Knés, Dig. 58).
Cf. 8 154 (αἰετὼ) δεξιὼ ἤϊξαν διά τ᾽ οἰκία
καὶ πόλιν av’r@v.—The last half of 320
and 321 recurs in o 163-64. Similarly
323 is an Odyssean line (three times).

324. τετράκυκλος (also. 242), one of
the few cases in H. of a vowel left short
before tp, cf. φαρέτρης Θ 323, ᾿Οτρυντεύς

560

, “-“ ΕΣ ah Ἂν ΕΣ
τὰς Ἰδαῖος ἔλαυνε δαΐφρων, αὐτὰρ ὄπισθεν

IAIAAOC © (xxtv)

325

iA \ Ὁ , >] / / ὌΝ
(mmol, τοὺς ὁ γέρων ἐφέπων μάστιγι κέλευε
/ \ 7 / δ᾽ ὩΨ / vA
καρπαλίμως κατὰ ἄστυ: φίλοι ἅμα πάντες ἕποντο
ε , ,
πόλλ᾽ ὀλοφυρόμενοι ὡς εἰ θάνατόνδε κιόντα.
- 5 / / > 7) /
οἱ δ᾽ ἐπεὶ οὖν πόλιος κατέβαν, πεδίον 6 ἀφίκοντο,

/
οἱ μὲν ἄρ᾽ ἄψορροι προτὶ ἵλιον ἀπονέοντο,

990

/ Qn
παῖδες καὶ γαμβροί, τὼ δ᾽ οὐ λάθον εὐρύοπα Ζῆν
’ , / Ψ \ ’ 3 / 4
és πεδίον προφανέντε: ἰδὼν δ᾽ ἐλέησε γέροντα,
aia δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ‘Eppetay υἱὸν φίλον ἀντίον ηὔδα:

/
““Eppela, σοὶ yap τε μάλιστά γε φίλτατόν ἐστιν

/ aor, π᾿ 3, Sys
ἀνδρὶ ἑταιρίσσαι, καί T ἔκλυες ὧν K ἐθέληισθα-

[ων]
oo
Or

Back ἴθι, καὶ Πρίαμον κοίλας ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν

ὡς dyay, ὡς μήτ᾽ ap τις ἴδηι μήτ᾽ ἄρ τε vonone

τῶν ἄλλων Δαναῶν πρὶν ΠΠηλείωνάδ᾽ ἱκέσθαι.
ὡς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδ᾽ ἀπίθησε διάκτορος ἀργεϊφόντης"

327.

A (yp. πόλιος). || πεϑίοιο T.

325. Tac: Tac δ᾽ Vr. A: crac ὃ᾽ J.
κατὰ : notiS (T!? κατὰ is 7 ras. ):
εἶ : εἰς DS. || θάνατόν re GRSTU Vr. Ὁ:
330. Gyoppon 1, Ambr. || ποτὶ AGR.

326. τοὺς: Tac Vr. d. || udctira T.
προτὶ (). 328. MOAN’: οἵκτρ᾽ Vr. ἃ. ||
eanaTonte Syr. (swpr. ὃ). 329. πόλεος
331. τὼ:

τὸ (). || Adeen QR Ambr. || 2A (with ν᾿ at beginning of 832) Ar. ACJTU Pap. v? Syr.

(ν᾿ by man. 2) Bar. Mor. Harl. a, Vr. ἃ (see on Θ 206).
333. ἄρ᾽ om. P. || ἑρμείην S.

καταβάντε Chia.
τι Gant. : re Ῥ.

Υ 383-84, and note on VY 84. ᾿Αμφι-
τρύων is excusable by metrical necessity.
ἀλλότριος is the only word where the
shortening is systematic—twice in J1/.,
fifteen times in Od. We should have
looked for τεσσεράκυκλος which should
perhaps be read in ε 242.

325. 8atppwn, prudent, acc. to Butt-
mann an Odyssean use, the word else-
where in 71. meaning warlike (from dais).
it is, however, possible to take it as=
wise in both poems, the difference being
due to areflexion from the martial at-
mosphere of the J/iad.

329. Cf. w 205, where the first part of
the line occurs, but with ἐκ for οὖν ; and
so Cobet would read here—needlessly.

333 =e 28.

335, €Taipiccat, fo be companion to ;
but the intrans. use is strange (cf. the
mid. ἤ τινά που Tpwwv ἑταρίσσαιτο N
450). Bentley reads ἀνέρ᾽ (α) ἑταιρίσσαι,
to make a man thy companion, which
is better. The text however is sup-
ported by Hymn. Ven. 96 (Χάριτες) αἵ
τε θεοῖσι πᾶσιν ἑταιρίζουσι. The hiatus

332. προφανέντε:
597. TIG : τὶ τ ἡ "ΤΕ:

after ἀνδρί may be due to the primitive
length of the -c, or we can read ἀνέρι).
For the dat. ὧι after ἔκλυες see on E115,
Π 515. The phrase is evidently meant
to represent Hermes as a particularly
affable god.

337. For κκήτ᾽ ἄρ tic Bentley conj. μή
τίς Fe, and again Fe for τε, which not
only saves the F of Fiéy and supplies
the object, but avoids the very un-
pleasant and meaningless iteration of
ἄρ (see however Εἰ 89, Z 352).

338. The addition of the local -de to
the name of a person seems to be unique
till we come to Ap. Rhod. with ᾿Αλκί-
voovde and αὐτοκασιγνητήνδε. The near-
est analogy is “Avéécde, where the δῶμα
implied in the gen. makes the constr.
more natural. The fermation is a bold
one, but cannot be taken as a sign of late
origin ; nor is it likely to be a corruption
of IIn\etwvos, which Brandreth reads.
Compare eis ᾿Αγαμέμνονα Ψ 36.

339-45 =e 43-49 ; 341-42=a 97-98 ;
343-44=w 3-4, The whole of this
/ passage, with the employment of Hermes

IAIAAOC Ω (χχιν) 561

»μ) . ΄ Ἁ

αὐτίκ᾽ ἔπειθ᾽ ὑπὸ ποσσὶν" ἐδήσατο καλὰ πέδιλα 340
> U / / / > 4 , ? ΄ \
ἀμβρόσια χρύσεια, τά μιν φέρον ἠμὲν ἐφ᾽ ὑγρὴν

, -" o fal ’
nO ἐπ᾽ ἀπείρονα γαῖαν ἅμα πνοιῆις ἀνέμοιο"

ts: ΄ a > r ᾿ ,
εἴλετο δὲ ῥάβδον, τῆι T ἀνδρῶν ὄμματα θέλγει
e > / \ ’ a \ e , ᾽ /
ὧν ἐθέλει, τοὺς δ᾽ αὖτε καὶ ὑπνώοντας ἐγείρει"

\ 5) / oof 2 ΄
τὴν μετὰ χερσὶν ἔχων πέτετο κρατὺς ἀργεϊφόντης. 845
3 ? ” rly , ὦ 7 »
aia δ᾽ ἄρα Τροίην τε καὶ ᾿Ιλλήσποντον ἵκανε,

ἢ δ᾽ ἰέναι κούρωι αἰσυμνητῆρι ἐοικώς,
ἢ

πρῶτον ὑπηνήτηι, τοῦ περ χαριεστάτη ἥβη.

΄ > 5 ,ὕ fel ‘ ” ”
οἱ δ᾽ ἐπεὶ οὖν μέγα σῆμα παρὲξ Ἴλοιο ἔλασσαν,

fel Y ie / \ A »
στῆσαν ἄρ᾽ ἡμιόνους τε καὶ ἵππους, ὄφρα πίοιεν, 350

2 la) \ \ \ > \ / » cal
ἐν ποταμῶι: δὴ yap καὶ ἐπὶ κνέφας ἤλυθε γαῖαν.

τὸν δ᾽ ἐξ ἀγχιμόλοιο ἰδὼν ἐφράσσατο κῆρυξ

Ξε
Kpyeiav, ποτὶ δὲ Πρίαμον φάτο φώνησέν τε'

--- ---- - - -

340. éneit Pap. v. πέϑειλα Pap. ν, Ambr. Syr.

φέρεν ap. Did. 342. én’: ἐς 8.
ὧν : τῶν Pap. »™,
δ᾽ om. Mose. 2.

343. ΤΗ͂Ι Τ᾽: TAO’ J.
| ἐθέλη(ι) ai κοιναί (Did.), AJ (supr. οἱ over Η) Syr. Cant. ||
345. nétato Vr. A.
(in vas.) Harl. a, Mose. 2, ἐν ἄλλωι A. || Te: re R.

341. WIN: μὲν Pap. v!.
344 om. Pap. νἵ.
346. ἄρα: ἄρ᾽ (ἂρ) ἐς CDHIJQSU
347. αἰσυμινητῆρι Ar. 0:

αἰευητῆρι Apio AGP (yp. aicuunnTApi) R™U (supr. uNH man. 1) Syr. Vr. A
Harl. ab, Par.abedetgh: atcuntopt Pap. νὶ : αἰσυμητηρ᾽ Pap. ν΄ : ἐσυητῆρι J.

348. πρώτωι S.

|| τοῦ : οὗ Ap. Lex. 16. 8.

as messenger, is thoroughly Odyssean.
The mention of the magic wand is
more in place here than in e, for
in 445 it is’ actually used to lull
the sentinels to sleep. This wand is
evidently the origin of the later κηρυ-
κεῖον. Compare the epithet χρυσόρραπις,
e 87.

344. Note the variant ἐθέληι: the
subj. is at least equally good in a general
rel. clause. Unnwontac, a somewhat
anomalous form ; see App. 1), vol. i. p.
595 for Schulze’s explanation.

347. aicuuNHTHp is related to αἰσυμ-
νήτης (θ 258, of the judges at the Phai-
akian games) as κυβερνητήρ (8 557) to
κυβερνήτης, ὀρχηστήρ (Σ 494) to ὀρχηστής,
etc. The obvious derivation is from

αἷσα---μνάομαι, ‘one who is mindful of

justice,’ i.e. a prince ; as all justice in
H. belongs to the traditions of the royal
families (Curtius Δ. p. 716). Compare
the name Αἴσυμνος, A 303; the -v-
is commonly said to be Aeolic. But
some doubt is thrown upon this by the
Doric form αἰσιμνάτας in inscriptions
from Megara and Chalkedon (G. Meyer
VOL. II

Gr. ὃ 62 ad fin.). The name Αἰσυήτης
(B 793, N 427) suggests the existence
of a noun-stem αἰσυ-, where the -v is
radical. From this the alternative read-
ing αἰσυητῆρι may have arisen regularly.
Sut there is no other evidence for it in
Greek. The docus classicus on the word
is Aristotle Pol. iv. 10. 2 τὸ παλαιὸν ἐν
Tots ἀρχαίοις “EXAnow ἐγίγνοντό τινες
μόναρχοι . . ods ἐκάλουν αἰσυμνήτας.

348=x 279, also of Hermes. It is
strange that the description should suit
only the youthful Hermes of the great
age of Greek art; for in works of the
archaic period the god is always repre-
sented as bearded.

349. For the tomb of Ilos see Καὶ 415.
The hiatus in the fifth foot has no
palliation, and no probable emendation
has been suggested. “Ido ἤλασσαν is
too harsh.

351. ἐν noTauadi, at the river, is best
taken with στῆσαν : S521, ὃ 258. Pre-
sumably they cross the river at the ford,
cf. 692, = 433 (note). γάρ explains that
they reach the river at a suitable moment
for crossing into the enemy’s lines.

20

562

IAIAAOC © (xxiv)

“φράζεο, Δαρδανίδη: φραδέος νόου ἔργα τέτυκται.

ἄνδρ᾽ ὁρόω, τώχα δ᾽ ἄμμε διαρραίσεσθαι ὀΐω.

355

3 Uf A 7
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε δὴ φεύγωμεν ἐφ᾽ ἵππων, ἢ μιν ἔπειτα
/ c / / ” > > hi 39
γούνων ἁψάμενοι λιτανεύσομεν, AL K ἐλεησήι.

3 rn
ὡς φάτο, σὺν δὲ γέροντι νόος χύτο, δείδιε δ᾽ αἰνῶς,

lal /
ὀρθαὶ δὲ τρίχες ἔσταν ἐνὶ γναμπτοῖσι μέλεσσι,

στῆ δὲ ταφών.

αὐτὸς δ᾽ ἐριούνιος ἐγγύθεν ἐλθών,

960

an e \ /
χεῖρα γέροντος ἑλὼν ἐξείρετο καὶ προσέευπε"

a & Uy \ e / 72 "
“πῆι, πάτερ, ὧδ᾽ ἵππους τε καὶ ἡμιόνους ἰθύνεις
¢ 5 , \ ”
νύκτα δι’ ἀμβροσίην, ὅτε θ εὕδουσι βροτοὶ ἄλλοι ;
2Q\ / Sy, / / aN /
οὐδὲ σύ γ᾽ ἔδδεισας μένεα πνείοντας Ἀχαιοὺς,

6 / Nee

οἵ τοι δυσμενέες καὶ ἀνάρσιοι
a 5) \ \
τῶν εἴ tis σε ἴδοιτο θοὴν διὰ

> \ »,
eyyus €ace ;

/ 7,
νύκτα μέλαιναν

AN ne EY 7, ΝΥ δή ΄ rT? αὶ
τοσσάδ oveLaT αἀγονταᾶ, τις ὧν ἢ TOL VOOS ELT) ;

" 5 3. \ , 2 / L δ Ω 5) ὃ a
OUT AUTOS VEOS EOCL, YEP@v € TOL OUTOS OTTNOEL,

yy ’ 5) / “ / 7
ἄνδρ ἀπαμύνασθαι, ὅτε τις πρότερος χαλεπήνηι.

354. ἀφραϑέος P: βραθϑέος Rh.
ἐλεήςει Vr. ἃ.
361. ἐξήρετο C Harl.a, Vr. d, Mose. 2.
οἵ τοι: ἥτοι Q: οὔτοι Syr.
Vr. ἃ, Par. b, and ap. Eust.

355. auua Pap. v.
359. ἐνὶ : ἐπὶ A (swpr. N) T Vr. b. || rNantotcr LU Bar. Vr. d A.
362. not L.(P!%). || ἀπιϑύνεις Q.

366. τῶν ὃ᾽ T.
369. énautnacea A (swpr. a) LQ Pap. ν΄, Harl. a,

356 om. Vr. b. 357.

365.
367. ἄγοντα : ἔχοντα JU

Cant. Lips.: ἐπαμείναςϑθαι P: ἐπαμύνεςθαι S Vr. d A: ἀπαμύνεςθαι Mose. 2. ||

tic: τι H. || χαλεπαίνη # Pap. v1.

354. The last half of the line is prob-
ably corrupt. The sense is no doubt
meant to be it is a@ matter (which calls)
for a wary mind; but the expression
is unusual. The neglect of the F of
Fépya is rare and harsh. gpadéoc does
not occur elsewhere in Greek ; nor are
simple adjectives in -7js known in the
Epic dialect (see note on A 235). They
are indeed very rare at all times; ὑγιής
(πλήρης), σαφής and ψευδής are perhaps
the only others. In compounds of
course the formation is particularly
common: ἀριφραδής, ἀφραδής, εὐφραδέως,
περιφραδέως from this stem are all
Homeric.

355. Slappaiceceat, a very strong
metaphor: cf. a 251 τάχα δή με διαρραί-
σουσι kal αὐτόν, and P 727.

356. ἐφ᾽ ἵππων, on the horse-chariot,
leaving the mule-waggon to its fate.
ἔπειτα, as next best. See note on N 743.

358. Sefdie, the perf. is out of place ;
Brandreth’s ἔδδιε (ἔδιε) is no doubt
right.

359. ἐνὶ γναμπτοῖσι μέλεςει, a phrase
found only in Od. and the late A 669—

where, as in \ 394, ν 398, the epithet is
more in place, as it indicates the ‘ flexible
limbs’ as the seat of strength. Here it
must be taken either as a mere epitheton
ornans, a reminiscence from a familiar
phrase, or in the different sense bent
with age. The old man’s sudden terror,
in spite of the courage with which he
started, is a very natural touch.

360. αὐτός, not waiting to be asked.
ἐριούνιος, T 34. As a subst. it recurs
only in 440.

363=K 83; 366, cf. K 394. ἀνάρειοι
only here in J/., five times in Od.

367. ὅτι οὐ πάντως βρώματα τὰ ὀνείατα,
ὡς οἱ γλωσσογράφοι, ἀλλὰ πάντα τὰ ὄνησίν
τινα περιποιοῦντα, ὡς νῦν τὰ δῶρα, An.
Cf. ὃ 444, o 78. This is however the
only place where the word is used in
any other sense than dainties. νόος,
expedient, as I 104, ε 28, ete.

368. For δέ Nauck conj. τε, but cf. H
433 ἦμος δ᾽ οὔτ᾽ dp πω ἠώς, ἔτι δ᾽ ἀμφιλύκη
νύξ, and ν 207 νῦν δ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ἄρ πηι θέσθαι
ἐπίσταμαι, οὐδὲ μὲν αὐτοῦ καλλείψω.

869--π 78, φ 133, where the constr.
of the infin. with the preceding οὔ mw

IAIAAOC © (xxiv) 563

Ψ > \ / s ᾿
ἀλλ᾽ ἐγὼ οὐδέν σε ῥέξω Kaka, καὶ δέ κεν ἄλλον
fal , / / / 4 9.4 ᾽ν
σεῦ ἀπαλεξήσαιμι: φίλων δέ σε πατρὶ ἐΐσκω.
Ν δ᾽ » / ᾽ v / / α΄,
τὸν ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα γέρων Ἰ]ρίαμος θεοειδής"
ee , ge Xe , , , " ᾽ ,
οὕτω πηι τάδε γ᾽ ἐστί, φίλον τέκος, ὡς ἀγορεύεις.
> > » \ ὧν a - ΄ , a
ἀλλ᾽ ἔτι τίς Kal ἐμεῖο θεῶν ὑπερέσχεθε χεῖρα,
ced / > @ e / > n ὡ
ὅς μοι τοιόνδ᾽ ἧκεν ὁδοιπόρον ἀντιβολῆσαι, 375
Μ \ \ / \ 3 » ,
αἴσιον, οἷος δὴ σὺ δέμας καὶ εἶδος ἀγητός,
/ / > ”
πέπνυσαί Te vow, μακάρων δ᾽ ἔξεσσι τοκήων.
\ > 8 “ὁ ,
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπε διάκτορος ἀργεϊφόντης"
\ \ lal , \ - »
“ναὶ δὴ ταῦτά γε πάντα, γέρον, κατὰ μοῖραν ἔειπες.
> » ” / ’ \ \ > / /
ἀλλ᾽ aye μοι τόδε εἰπὲ Kal ἀτρεκέως κατάλεξον, 380
ΝΑ > / / \ \ > \
NE πηι ἐκπέμπεις κειμήλια πολλὰ Kal ἐσθλὰ
» ὃ > ? / ts / / ,
ἄνδρας ἐς ἀλλοδαπούς, ἵνα περ τάδε TOL σόα μίμνηι,
εν πὸ / aN, / » i \
ἢ ἤδη πάντες καταλείπετε ᾿ἵλιον ἱρὴν
ΝθἙὉοῤ ᾽ ΄ ΄ ὁ ὋῬΝ͵ΝοΝ͵ ee =
370. οὐδ᾽ ἄν CR Vr. A. κακά: κακὸν CDHJPQS Pap. v2, Vr. ἃ A, Mose. 2,
Harl. a Ὁ ἃ, King’s Par. ἃ b, yp. A. || καὶ 0€: ἠδέ H Mor.

Eust.: ef δέ U, yp. A: οὐδέ Q. ἄλλον : ἄλλως ().
and ἔν τισι, Did.: δή πη P.

jar. Par. Ὁ and ap.
373. MHI: OH () Syr.
374. ἔτι : ef A (yp. ἔτι) CP Vr. A, Mosc. 2, Harl. a. |/

éuoio GP. 376. αἴσιος Pap. ν!. || οἷον Vr. d. || ϑέμας: μέγας Pap. v.
εἶδος ἀγητός : ἀτειρέα φωνὴν CP. 377. νόον U. 379. €einac CGU Pap. v.

381. πολλὰ : καλὰ C.
τάδε περ P.

382. ἐς : én’ R. || τοι τάδε περ RS Syr. Bar. Mor. Cant. :
383. κατελείπετε CR: κατελίπετε (): καταλείψετε A sipr.

χερσὶ πέποιθα is simple. Here itis less φαίνων, inauspicious, A 381. Or we

natural and rouses some suspicion of

interpolation, though it is certainly not
going beyond the limits of the Homeric
infin. to translate ‘you are not young,
and your companion is old, for self-
defence.’ See also on T 183.

370. οὐδέν " ὅτι τὸ δεν παρέλκεται, An. ;
1.6. οὐδέν, as an adverbial acc., ΞΞ οὐ.
This is, of course, familiar enough ; the
curious thing is that the copyists did
not see it, as most Mss. read κακόν,
only a few troubling to make the
further necessary change of kai δέ to
ἠδέ. -
374. ἔτι: the variant εἴ has curiously
strong support. It can only be explained
as interjectional, as in εἰ δ᾽ ἄγε.

375. τοιόνδ᾽ ἧκεν, τοῖον ἕηκεν van L.
(Ench. p. 267), rightly; for the deictic
forms in -de refer to the speaker, and
τοιόνδε must mean such as 1 am. See
note on I' 46.

376. αἵςιον, for good luck. The word
is dar. Ney., but οἵ. ἦλθον ἐναίσιμον Z 519,
and the opposite, παραίσια σήματα

may understand it to mean ὦ man of
moderation, which is nearer the usual
sense of aica, vide A 418 and ἐξαίσιον O
598.

379=A 286, etc. κατὰ μοῖραν ex-
presses the god’s approval of Priam’s
pious sentiments.

380. See note on K 384.

382. It is practically indifferent
whether we take ἵνα as a final con-
junction =in order that, or a local adverb
=where ; both uses are of course familiar
in Jl., though the latter is doubtless
original. <A local relative after a per-
sonal antecedent is rare in H., but the
harshness is hardly felt, for ἄνδρας is
virtually =country. Cf. y 319 ἐκ τῶν

ἀνθρώπων ὅθεν κτλ., and ν 883 ἐς
Σικελοὺς πέμψωμεν, ὅθεν κέ τοι ἄξιον
ἄλφοι. See also note on P 703.—It is

a question if we should not adopt, with
Bekker, the variant ἵνα τοι rade περ,
that these at least may be saved. The
half line recurs in ν 364, where none of
these questions arise.

564 IAIAAOC O (xxiv)
δειδιότες: τοῖος yap ἀνὴρ ὥριστος ὄλωλε,

39

/ ’ ’ lal
σὸς πάϊς: ov μὲν γάρ τι μάχης ἐπεδεύετ Ἀχαιῶν. 385

> Ζ » / /
τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα γέρων Upiapos θεοειδής"
7 \ / > If / δ᾽ » / Ais
“ris δὲ σύ ἐσσι, φέριστε, τέων ἔξεσσι τοκήων ;
3) Ni 7 35
ὥς μοι καλὰ τὸν οἶτον ἀπότμου παιδὸς ἔνισπες.
> > > se ΄
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπε διάκτορος ἀργεϊφοντης"
‘ a τὶ a) i \ ” ΠΝ OL Ἂ s
“πειρᾶι ἐμεῖο, γεραιέ, καὶ εἴρεαι “lixtopa ὃῖον 890
\ \ b] \ » /
τὸν μὲν ἐγὼ μάλα πολλὰ μάχηι ἔνι κυδιανείρηι
ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ὄπωπα, καὶ εὖτ᾽ ἐπὶ νηυσὶν ἐλάσσας
3 aA Ζ7.. -
Ἀργείους κτείνεσκε δαΐζων ὀξέϊ χαλκῶι,
a \ > \
ἡμεῖς δ᾽ ἑσταότες θαυμάζομεν: ov yap Ἀχιλλεὺς
" , ΄ 7A . ᾿ π
εἴα μάρνασθαι, κεχολωμένος ἈΔτρεΐωνι 395
n / > > a b /
τοῦ yap ἐγὼ θεράπων, pia δ᾽ ἤγαγε νηῦς ἐυεργὴς"
Μυρμιδόνων δ᾽ ἔξειμι, πατὴρ δέ μοί ἐστι Ἰ]ολύκτωρ.
> Ν \ « > 5 / Ἁ δὲ ὃ) - Ἧ ὃ
ἀφνειὸς μὲν ὅ γ᾽ ἐστί, γέρων δὲ δὴ ὡς σύ περ ὧδε,

ἐξ δέ οἱ υἷες ἔασιν, ἐγὼ δέ οἱ ἕβδομός εἰμι"

384. Gpictoc P.

Tic: τι Syr. || τίνων S. || ézecc’ ἀνϑίρωπων Pap. μ.

Pap. v, Syr. (supr. @). || énicne H.
Hipeo C.
NHuci πελαςςας Pap. v.

es ᾽

999: ΟῚ:

385. émdever ACDHJPU Bar. Vr. d, Ven. B.

387.
388. ὥς: ὅς HPRSU

390. neipe Pap.v!: neipar ῬΔΡ. ν΄. || “ueto P. ||
391. πολλὰ : παγχυ Pap. ν.
396. rap: μεν Pap. ν.
ὅδ᾽ A (supr. r) DGJRS Pap. v, Syr. || OH: μοι G.

392 om. LP! Lips. νῆας JP?R. ||
397. O€ Mot: Beuoc Pap. ν.
399. yp. ἕξ δὲ

τῶι A. (ἐγὼ δέ) of: τοι DQRU: τι G: οἵ om. J Par. Ὁ.

385. οὔ τι μάχης énedeveT” ᾿Αχαιῶν,
he was not behindhand (never hung back)
from the battle of (against) the Achaians,
a curious variation of a phrase which
recurs several times (N 310, with note,
P 142, Ψ 670). The harshness is in the
constr. of the gen. ᾿Αχαιῶν. We may
indeed take this not as dependent on
μάχης but as co-ordinate with it after
ἐπεδεύετο, he did not fall short of the
Achaians in battle; ef. Ψ 483 ἄλλά Te
πάντα δεύεαι ᾿Αργείων. But this alter-
native is as harsh as the former and
gives a weaker sense. Owing to this
difficulty it is fashionable to reject the
line altogether. But this resource can-
not be commended ; it is far more natural
that Hermes, having soothed Priam’s
fears, should be the first to shew that he
recognizes him, than that Priam, who is
anxious to pass unnoticed, should acei-
dentally betray himself, as would be the
case if the words σὸς πάϊς were omitted.
There is no reason for Priam to express
surprise at the recognition ; he has been
face to face with the Greek host only a
few days before (in Τ᾽).

388. ὥς μοι KaAG* εἰ μὲν θαυμαστικῶς
λέγει τοῦτο, ἀπ’ ἄλλης ἀρχῆς (we must
make a fresh sentence) * εἰ δὲ μή, τοῖς ἄνω
συναπτέον, Nikanor. The choice between
the exclamative how and the continua-
tive from what you say is, as so often,
indifferent. The variant ὅς, though
strongly supported, is less idiomatic.

390. neipai for πειράεαι is an impossible
contraction in H. P. Knight ingeniously
suggests πείρα (melpa’) and elpeo test me
and ask. But this does not suit 433.
It would be better, at least in the latter
place, to read πείρασ᾽ (αι) as a non-
thematic form, or, to keep closer to the
letters, πείρα᾽ (αι), the same with the
older omission of the σ. (See ᾧ 459 and
note on δαμνᾶι ΚΞ 199.) The imperative
certainly gives a better sense ; with the
text καὶ eYpeat must be taken as=
eipouevos, ‘you ask me only to test
me.’

394. écradtec, idle spectators; cf. B
320, where the first part of the line
occurs.

398. ade, thus as I see thee; hardly
here.

4

IAIAAOC © (xxiv) 565

r / / / > sa?
TOV μέτα παλλόμενος κλήρων. λάχον ἐνθάδ᾽ ἕπεσθαι. 100
lal ᾽ > / ᾽ 5 Ν lal + a) \
νῦν δ᾽ ἦλθον πεδίονδ ἀπὸ νηῶν" ἠῶθεν γὰρ
θήσονται περὶ ἄστυ μάχην ἑλίκωπες ᾿Αχαιοί.
,ὔ “ / \ /
ἀσχαλύωσι yap οἵ ye καθήμενοι, οὐδὲ δύνανται
/ / “- + %%
ἴσχειν ἐσσυμένους πολέμου βασιλῆες ᾿Αχαιῶν.
Ν ᾽ Le / / Ὁ
τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα γέρων Ilpiapos θεοειδής" 105
“εἰ μὲν δὴ θεράπων Indniddew ᾿Αχιλῆος
Φ ” / “ > / /
εἷς, aye δή μοι πᾶσαν ἀληθείην κατάλεξον,
/ \ fee Oy »
ἢ ἔτι Tap νήεσσιν ἐμὸς πάϊς, HE μιν ἤδη
i \ ay \ \ / > , yy
Huot κυσὶν peretott ταμὼν προύθηκεν ᾿Αχιλλεύς.
Ν ’ 9 or)
Tov δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπε διάκτορος ἀργεϊφόντης" 410
3 » / / / 5
“ὦ γέρον, οὔ πω τόν γε κύνες φάγον οὐδ᾽ οἰωνοί,
-“ “ ’ a ᾿ς
ἀλλ᾽ ἔτι κεῖνος κεῖται ᾿Αχιλλῆος παρὰ νηὶ
» > / a 7, ΄ oe
αὔτως ἐν κλισίηισι: δυωδεκάτη δέ OL ἥδε
4 L Os ΄, . \ / Os > \
κειμένωι, οὐδέ TL Of γρὼς σήπεται, οὐδέ μιν εὐλαὶ

m

400. τῶν. . . KAHpwl: yp. τοῖσι 8 πρῶτον ὑπηνήτης Sch. T. | aneceat

Pap. νὶ : ixécear P. 403. of re (A supr.) GJRSU Pap. v: ofde (ofde) 2.
408. H: εἰ AS (supr. A) Ὁ. || mapa AH Lips.: ἐν J. 411. nw: τοι 1).

Tonde GR. | φάγον κύνες AO JU Vr. d. 413. οὕτως JU (ἢ αὕτως U™)
Vr. d, Par. Ὁ}, and ap. Eust. || of: τοι Pap. ν. || ἥδε Ὁ (Ade) JQR (add. ἠὼς R*) U
Pap. μ, Harl. ἃ, Par. b! e, and ap. Eust.: HOH Pap. ν: ἠὼς Q. 414. οὐδέ TI:

οὐδέ τοι JR: οὐδ΄ τι Pap. ν.

400. τῶν is generally taken as de- 407. εἷς (which should rather be écc’)
pendent on μέτα, casting lots amid them. is an intolerably weak word for so
So Ar. understood it. This constr., emphatic a place. In II 515 it is not
however, is not Homeric or even poetical; followed by a pause, which makes
see note on A 51. We can take the all the difference. L. Lange conj. εἰ
gen. better as partitive; and then we δ᾽, cf. 6 831-32 εἰ μὲν δὴ θεός ἐσσι

might write μεταπαλλόμενος, of them, .. εἰ δ᾽ ἄγε μοι κατάλεξον. But the
by casting lots among us, I was chosen. verb can hardly be omitted altogether,

Cf. μεταφρασόμεσθα, A 140, we will nor can it be introduced into 406.
consider among ourselves, for this sense ἀληθείην κατάλεξον is Odyssean (six
of μετα- in comp.—Schol. T mentions a times).

variant τοῖσι δὲ πρῶτον ὑπηνήτης λάχον, 409. μελεϊςτὶ ταμκών is an Odyssean
which needlessly accentuates the obvious phrase, vide « 291, σ 339.

but trifling difficulty that if Hermes’
persona is now πρῶτον ὑπηνήτης (348)

7

412. κεῖνος, deictic, there he lies; I

he cannot have been so ten years before 391, etc.

when Achilles sailed—and indeed must 413. Either ἥϑε or ἤδη must be the

have been a child. right reading. The vulg. ἠώς is quite
402. ϑήςονται μάχην, will sect battle out of place when used late in the

in array, as we speak of a pitched battle. evening (351). It may easily have

Cf. P 158 ἀνδράσι δυσμενέεσσι πόνον καὶ slipped in from a reminiscence of Φ 80

δῆριν ἔθεντο. ἠὼς δέ μοί ἐστιν ἥδε δυωδεκάτη, or A 493

403. οΥ re, the vulg. οἵδε cannot be ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δή ῥ᾽ ἐκ τοῖο δυωδεκάτη γένετ'
right ; the pronoun is merely anaphoric ἠώς. The use of the fem. ordinal adj.
and can have no deictic force. as a subst. in this way is as familiar

404. Ycyein Eccuuénouc πολέμου, see in H. as in later Greek; see e.g. A 425
note on N 315. The gen. is best taken δωδεκάτηι, β 374 πρίν γ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἂν ἑνδεκάτη
with both verbs. τε δυωδεκάτη τε γένηται.

566

4 nan ae /
ἔσθουσ᾽, ai pa τε φῶτας ἀρηϊφάτους κατέδουσιν.

IAIAAOC © (xxiv)

εν / \ n (9 6 ny ς if ,ὔ

7) μέν μιν περὶ σῆμα εοὐ ετάροιο φίλοιο

Ὁ. > / SEN ae OL /

ἕλκει ἀκηδέστως, ἠὼς OTE dia φανήηι,

> / 3 / fa) al ᾽ \ ’ rO ,
οὐδέ μιν αἰσχύνει" θηοῖο κεν avTos ever,

» an \ ? e J
οἷον ἐερσήεις κεῖται, περὶ δ᾽ αἷμα νένυπται,

» ᾿ Us \ > vA 7 »
οὐδέ ποθι μιαρός: σὺν δ᾽ ἕλκεα πάντα μέμυκεν,

Ξ ΄ \ a CLA
ὥς τοι κήδονται μάκαρες θεοὶ υἷος ἑοῖο

415
420
n \ 7.
ὅσσ᾽ ἐτύπη: πολέες γὰρ ἐν αὐτῶι χαλκὸν ἔλασσαν.
,ὔ ἊΝ lal ”
Kal νέκυός περ ἐόντος, ἐπεί ohe φίλος περὶ κῆρι.
ἃ / 7, S377 2S ΄ Ne) / 50 ξ
ὡς φάτο, γήθησεν δ᾽ ὁ γέρων καὶ ἀμείβετο μύθωι
425

“a τέκος, ἢ ῥ᾽ ἀγαθὸν καὶ ἐναίσιμα δῶρα διδοῦναι

> / 5 \ ” 3 IN Pies ” 2 ”
ἀθωνάτοις, €7EL οὐ TOT EMOS TALS, EL TOT ENV YE,

415. KaTédonTai ().

416. μέν : δή Vr. A.

417. PANHH(1) DJRTU? (or

U22) Syr. Pap. ν, Vr. d (supr. et), and ἐν πολλοῖς τῶν ἀντιγράφων Kust.: @pan]ent

Pap. w: φανείη ©.
ecioid (ecioid) ἢ. || anedewn Pap. vl.

én: én’ CDHJU Pap. v, Syr. Vr. d. || αὐτὸν JU Vr. ἃ.
423 a0. (Ar. ?) Sch. T.
θιθῶναι ap. Herod.

Pap. v™: €foc (éAoc) 2.
cegj: ϑοῦναι Par. f:
AS. || éuoi R}.

418. αἰσχύνη H (U supr.). || eHoTé Ar. GL (Cant. supr.):

419. épcreic (Epc-) AH LSU. 421.
422. €010: τεοῖο
425. ὀιδόναι D Vr. A Par.

426. Geanatouc U: ἀθανάτοις γ΄

415=T 31, where it is used of flies,
less appropriately.

417. ἀκηδέετως, see X 465.

418. eHoto, a contraction which may
be admitted in a late book ; θηέοιο van
L., with 7 shertened before the follow-
ing vowel (?). The reading θειοῖο is an
instance of the common ms. habit οἵ
writing εἰ instead of ἡ before o (Hl. G.
App. C), on the analogy of θήηι, θείομεν
etc. αὐτὸς ἐπελθών, a favourite Odys-
sean verse-close (5 times): only here in
il., where ἐπελθεῖν elsewhere always
implies Hostile approach.

419. éepcHeic, fresh, cf. roscidus; he
is not parched by the sun, because Apollo
has spread a mist over him. So also 757.
αἷμα is best taken as an acc. of the
‘external object,’ he is washed of blood;
cf. ¢ 224 χρόα νίζετο δῖος ᾿Οδυσσεὺς ἅλμην,
II 667 κελαινεφὲς αἷμα κάθηρον. . Σαρπη-
δόνα, Σ 345 ἸΙάτροκλον λούσειαν ἄπο
βρότον αἱματόεντα, and note on Φ 122.

421. See Χ 371.

422. éoio, thine own, has the testi-
mony of τεοῖο in Pap. ». (This cor-
ruption is not infrequent in Mss. ; see
App. Crit. on & 223, 249, Φ 305, X 459.)
ἑοῖο is of course not strictly reflexive
here, and refers to to, not to the
grammatical subject of κήδονται (App.
A, vol. i. p. 561).

423. ws περισσὸς ὁ στίχος ἀθετεῖται.
ἐπεί σφι" οὐχ ᾿Ομηρικῶς κεῖται ἣ ἀντω-
νυμία: διὸ καὶ προηθετεῖτο, Schol. T. It
is clear that Ar. and probably Aph.
obelized thé line, but the last reason
cannot be right, as there is nothing
un-Homeric in ogi. Objection may be
taken to the trochaic caesura, though
it falls within the permitted limits (see
on Φ 575); but it is highly improbable,
judging from his silence elsewhere, that
Ar. noticed this.

425. καί seems to imply ‘whatever
else one does,’ it is good to give the
gods also their due. διθοῦναι, a form
which astonished even Eust. (τινὰ δὲ τῶν
ἀντιγράφων ἐτόλμησαν γράψαι διδοῦναι)
and was attacked by Aph. (Did. on
y 358, see Ludwich). The alternative
seems to have been διδῶναι (Herod.),
the Mss. giving only διδόναι. The form
may be compared to ζευγνῦμεν Π 145:
τιθήμεναι is different, as metrical neces-
sity comes in. Schulze ascribes the
lengthening to the license of the sixth
arsis (Q. #. p. 451, see App. D, ὁ 3).
It is wiser to recognize the influence of
the aor. forms δοῦναι, θεῖναι, ete., which
seem to represent 6o-Féva, etc. (H. @.
ὃ 85. 1). So διδώσομεν (ν 358) must be
due to the analogy of the pres.

426. εἴ ποτ᾽ ἔην re, see note on 1 180.

IAIAAOC © (χχιν)

λήθετ᾽ ἐνὶ μεγάροισι θεῶν, οἱ "Ὄλυμπον ἔχουσι"

TO οἱ ἀπεμνήσαντο καὶ ἐν θανάτοιό περ αἴσηι.

ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε δὴ τόδε δέξαι ἐμεῦ πάρα καλὸν ἄλεισον,

αὐτόν τε ῥῦσαι, πέμψον δέ με σύν γε θεοῖσιν, 430
ὄφρά κεν ἐς κλισίην ἸΙηληϊάδεω ἀφίκωμαι."

τὸν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέειπε διάκτορος ἀργεϊφόντης
“πειρᾶν ἐμεῖο, γεραιέ, νεωτέρου, οὐδέ με πείσεις,
ὅς pe κέληι σέο δῶρα παρὲξ ᾿Αχιλῆα δέχεσθαι.
τὸν μὲν ἐγὼ δείδοικα καὶ αἰδέομαι περὶ κῆρι 435

fs / ,ὔ \ ,
συλεύειν, μή μοί TL κακὸν μετόπισθε γένηται.
\ ᾽ x Su. \ / \ » e /
σοὶ δ᾽ ἂν ἐγὼ πομπὸς καί κε κλυτὸν Ἄργος ἱκοίμην,
/ 4. a x \ e /
ἐνδυκέως ἐν νηὶ Bone ἢ πεζὸς ομαρτέων'᾽

,ὔ Ν ᾿
οὔ κέν τίς TOL πομπὸν ὀνοσσάμενος μαχέσαιτο."
3 oh ΄ Ὁ /
ἢ καὶ ἀναΐξας ἐριούνιος ἅρμα καὶ ἵππους 440
> , ec /
“καρπαλίμως μάστιγα Kai ἡνία λάζετο χερσίν,

421. énimuerdpoici C Pap. μ v.
τινές Sch. T. || amouNHcanto Pap. v:

428. τῶ: TON CH Syr. Par. ἃ, Ven. B, and
éneunHcanto AG (P supr.) QR (-ato, supr. N)

ST Pap. μ, Syr. Mose. 2, Vr. Ὁ A, Par. a (yp. καὶ ἀπεμνήςαντο, ὅπερ ἀκριβέστερον)

b? ef gj, and ap. Eust. 429. d€=z0 P.
reuecunode Pap. γ᾿. 4338. ἐμοῖο P.

νεώτερον Vr. d.
axiAAni Pap. v*: GyiA(A)Aoc AGS. || Execea G.

430 om. Tt. || Te: re U: de Pap. ν᾿. ||
434. KEAHI: KeKAH C. ||

435 om. P' (interlined, then

erased, and again added in P™ by man. rec.). 436. μωμεῦειν Pap. v': cuAevel
Pap. v. || γένοιτο D Pap. v, Eust. 437. 0° GN: μεν Pap. v: ὃ᾽ ad 0. 439.

οὔ KEN Ὁ Pap. νὶ Syr.: οὕκουν P: οὐκ
ἐπαΐξας

440 om. Pap. μ. || εναίξας Syr. :
yi: wactirra Pap. ν". || χειρί L.

428. τῶ oi ἀπεμνήςαντο, therefore they
remembered them (his gifts) for him.
Of. Hes. Τ δου. 503 of of ἀπεμνήσαντο
χάριν εὐεργεσιάων. Several Mss. have
τῶν (sc. δώρων), but a pronoun with so
definite a reference could not apply to
anything but θεῶν. There is a well
supported variant ἐπεμνήσαντο, cf. O 662,
P1038. But the passage from Hes. (where
there is no variant) and Thuk. i. 137
αὐτῶι χάριν ἀπομνήσεσθαι ἀξίαν shew that
the sense οἵ ‘ requiting a favour’ belongs
to the compound with ἀπο-.

429. We should perhaps read δέξο for
Qézai with P: seeon T10. dé ἐμέθεν
van L.

433. πειρᾶι, see on 390.

434, κέληι, so Mss. ; edd. generally
κέλεαι, but the synizesis is no better
than the contraction; see on N 818.
The form in -y being Odyssean (see ὃ
812) should not be altered in 2; though
ὃς κέλεαι (as M 235) is an easy change.

ἄν Q. || ὀνηςάμενος P (svpr. o over H).
DJPRU Pap. ν. 441. uacreira Pap.

παρὲξ ᾿Α., behind Achilles’ back, lit.
‘passing him by,’ cf. K 391 παρὲκ νόον
ἤγαγε, ‘led past my sense,’ much as we
say ‘made me beside myself,’ and T 133
μὴ χαλέπαινε παρὲκ νόον, ‘past’ = ‘in
defiance of’ good sense.

436. The variant γένοιτο is defensible,
as rejecting the very imagination of the
act. ᾿

437. For ἂν .. κε ἴῃ the same clause
see note on A 187, H. α΄. p. 331. The
separation of the two by several words
is peculiar to this place. The best
emendation is gol μέν, supplied by
Pap. v, though αὖ, conj. by Peppmiiller,
has now Ms. support (ἂρ Brandreth).
"Ἄργος in the meuth of a Myrmidon
most naturally means the ‘ Pelasgian
Argos’ in Thessaly (see B 681).

438. EnduKéwe, see 158. The syni-
zesis of 6uapTéwn and the dat. Autd6Noic
for τοῖσι in 442 may both be marks of
late origin.

568

IAIAAOC © (xxiv)

5 > yA > “ \ id / / ΨΥ
ἐν δ᾽ ἔπνευσ᾽ ἵπποισι καὶ ἡμιόνοις μένος HU.

? iY fa) \ / “,
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ πύργους τε νεῶν καὶ τάφρον ίκοντο,

ἴω 7
οἱ δὲ νέον περὶ δόρπα φυλακτῆρες πονέοντο"
¢ 5 /

τοῖσι δ᾽ ἐφ᾽ ὕπνον ἔχευε διάκτορος ἀργεϊφοντης 445

lal 3, [ες an ’ fol
πᾶσιν, ἄφαρ δ᾽ wie πύλας Kal ἀπῶσεν ὀχῆας,

) 3 sf / , Ν 5 \ δῶ > 5 Εἰ b /
ἐς δ᾽ ἄγαγε Ilpiawov τε καὶ ἀγλαὰ δῶρ ἐπ ἀπήνης.
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ κλισίην ἸΙηληϊάδεω ἀφίκοντο

¢ f I? yy
ὑψηλήν, τὴν Μυρμιδόνες ποίησαν ἄνακτι
δοῦρ᾽ ἐλάτης κέρσαντες: ἀτὰρ καθύπερθεν ἔρεψαν 450

5) if
λαχνήεντ᾽ ὄροφον λειμωνόθεν ἀμήσαντες"

442. ἵΠΠΟΙΟΙ : ἵπποις τε 1)0.
ὄρουςε 4 Cant. 446. ὀχῆα T.
i.e. ἐπένηςεν) Vr. A. 448. κλιείη P.

445. τοῖσι ὃ᾽ ἐφ᾽: τοῖσιν 3’ Vr. A. | €xeue:
441. ἐπ᾽ ἀπήνης : ἐπήνηςεν (gl. ἐσώρευσεν,

449. ὑψηλῇ P. 451 o7. (ἡ.

443, πύργους νεῶν, the fortifications
of the ships, see on M 258, 332. The
juxtaposition of τάφρον seems to shew
that the space elsewhere conceived as
existing between wall and trench is
forgotten, and that the sentinels are
actually at the gate in the wall, not as
in I 67, K 194, at the trench consider-
ably in advance of it. Whether or no

they are identical with the πυλαωροί of

681 we cannot say. As the text is
punctuated, 444 is the apodosis to 443.
Heyne is, however, perhaps right in
regarding it as an explanatory addition
to the protasis, putting a comma after
πονέοντο, and beginning the apodosis
with 445.

448. The relative construction of ὅτε
is virtually forgotten in the description
of the κλισίη, and it is not till 457 that
we come to what may be called an
apodosis. The κλιςίη of Achilles is
described as a full counterpart of the
Homeric house, with a fore-court and
πρόδομος (673), αἴθουσα (644), μέγαρον
(647), and the whole is called οἶκος (572)
and δώματα (512). This indicates a
complete difference of view from the rest
of the Jiiad, except from I. Even there,
though the scene passes in the same hut,
there is hardly any indication of a build-
ing on this scale ; compare particularly
I 658-59 with Ὁ 643-44, where in ἃ pre-
cisely similar context the former knows
nothing of an αἴθουσα. The μυχός, how-
ever, is common to both (Q 675=I 663).
In the rest of the Jliad the κλισίη is
hardly thought worthy. of the formal
compliment of an epitheton ornans, the
only exceptions being KA. ἐύτυκτος (K
566 Ν 240) and ἐύπηκτος (I 663=2

675)—all in late passages. The whole
conception indicates a poet who is more
familiar with the palace than the camp ;
he has not taken the trouble to consider
how little his spacious dwelling agrees
with the crowdiug of the Achaians along
the shore, or indeed with the first con-
ditions of a naval camp. Heyne would
reject 449-56 altogether, chiefly on ac-
count of the violated F of 449 and 452.
But 565-67 evidently contain an allusion
to 454-56, and the conception of the
house is the same throughout.

449. For ποίησαν here and 452 Bent-
ley conj. δείμαντο, Dawes πονέοντο. For
other violations of the F of Fdvaé see Π
371, 464, 507, 523, T 67 (the only other
irremediable cases are, acc. to Knos, &
40, 395, 438). Brandreth ingeniously
suggests dv’ ἄκτηι on the shore; but this
does not agree with the Homeric use of
ava.

451. ὄροφον, unanimously explained
by the ancients as ‘a sort of reed used
for thatching.’ The word recurs else-
where only in the sense of ‘roof’ (see
L. and S.), but the ease with which the
two senses might be interchanged is
sufficiently illustrated by our own word
‘thatch,’ properly ‘roof’ (Dach), but
restricted in use to a particular covering
with reeds or straw; we can translate
they thatched it with downy thatch
gathered from the meadows, without feel-
ing any need to discuss whether ‘thatch’
means ‘a roof’ or ‘a kind of reed.’
That ὄροφος was a specific name for a
kind of reed is highly improbable, though
Aristotle and Theophrastos seem to have
taken it so; it means neither more nor
less than ‘ roofing.’

IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv) 569

> \ / 46 / > \ / Μ
ἀμφὶ δέ οἱ μεγάλην αὐλὴν ποίησαν ἄνακτι
“-“ “- / ? » ΄ " 4
σταυροῖσιν πυκινοῖσι' θύρην δ᾽ ἔχε μοῦνος ἐπιβλὴς
- / ᾽ ,
εἰλάτινος, τὸν τρεῖς μὲν ἐπιρρήσσεσκον ᾿Αχαιοί,
τρεῖς δ᾽ ἀναοίγεσκον μεγάλην κληΐδα θυράων, 155
lal » 3 \ a] vy? > / ‘ 3
τῶν ἄλλων: ᾿Αχιλεὺς δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἐπιρρήσσεσκε καὶ οἷος"
δή pa τόθ᾽ “Eppeias ἐριούνιος ὦιξε γέροντι,
ἐς δ᾽ ἄγαγε κλυτὰ δῶρα ποδώκεϊ 1]ηλείωνι,
Σ “ > by / pial / ΄ /
ἐξ ἵππων δ᾽ ἀπέβαινεν ἐπὶ χθόνα φώνησέν Te:
ἐς 9 / » by \ \ v ᾽ ΄ a
ὦ γέρον, ἤτοι eyo θεὸς ἄμβροτος εἰλήλουθα, 160
“Eppeias: σοὶ yap pe πατὴρ ἅμα πομπὸν ὄπασσεν.
> > r
ἀλλ᾽ ἤτοι μὲν ἐγὼ πάλιν εἴσομαι, οὐδ᾽ ᾿Αχιλῆος
3 \ Μ \ fs y
ὀφθαλμοὺς εἴσειμι: νεμεσσητὸν δέ κεν εἴη
»2 7 \ e y \ > , ”
ἀθάνατον θεὸν ὧδε βροτοὺς ἀγαπαζέμεν ἄντην"

462. ἄνακτι: €puunnn |).

ἀχαιῶν T. 455. τρις Pap. ν".
énippricacke JU. 459. δ᾽ om. Syr.?
ἄμβροτον ἢ.

454. τρια Pap. mw (supr. ε΄) ν (p. ras.) ὅγυ.
(supr. €). || ἐπειρρήςεοκον P: enepHceckon Pap. ν΄:
ἀναοίγνεςκον It.

We

€neipHceckon [, Pap. ν".
456. ἐπειρήςεςκε L Pap. v:
xeoni «111. 460. GBpotoc Mor. :

453. ἐπιβλής, evidently a long beam
running horizontally through a hole in
one door-post, so that it could be thrust
across the door into a suitable hole in
the other post. The gate in the fortifi-
cations has two such bolts, there called
ὀχῆες, see 446, and on M 456.

454, émippHcceckon, a verb presum-
ably conn. with ῥήσσω, Σ 571, in the
sense of beating, though this is not par-
ticularly suited to express driving home
abolt. Itis used similarly in Soph. 0. 7’.
1244 πύλας ἐπιρρήξασ᾽ ἔσω, dashing to the
doors (ἐπιρράξασ᾽ Dobree; see Jebb ad
loc. quoting Plut. Mor. 356 © ἐπιρράξαι τὸ
πῶμα, slam to the lid; and Plato Prot.
314D τὴν θύραν... ἐπήραξε, from ἀράσσω).

455. KAHida, obviously the same as
the ἐπιβλής above.

457. @ize, a contracted form found
here only, cf. ite above, 446. We have,
however, olfaca Z 89, and ἀνῶιγεν = 168.
The origin of the verb is entirely obscure.
An initial F seems to be indicated by
forms like ἀναοίγεσκον, dv-é-wiy-€, ἀν-έ.
ωιξ-ε, etc., but is nowhere in H. sup-
ported by metre, and in B 809 is in-
admissible. The Lesbian form ὀείγην
(Collitz 214. 44) would point to ὀξείγ-. not
Fovy-, as the root, with 6Fvy as weak form
(G. Meyer Gr. ὃ 475). This accounts
for the usual form dite, and we might
be inclined to read ἀνοείγεσκον in 455

(ανοΐγεσκον Brandreth), ἀνόειγεν 11 221,
ete., were it not that the forms with -ceax
are well supported in Attic. Where so
much is uncertain alterations are useless
(Epyecas ἔρεια F’ wite, Brandreth).

462. This is one of the very few cases
where efcouai is used as fut. of εἶμι, 7
will go. The others are o 213, where the
best mss. (Ludwich’s FG) have ἵξεται,
and o 504 ἐπιείσομαι with variant ἐπελεύ-
coua. <All other cases can be written
Είσομαι and referred to Fieuwa, hasten,
aim at (van L. Ench. § 308). Here
van L. reads ἔρχομαι. But we may
have an early case of confusion of the
two roots, which became closely similar
when F was lost. Cf. note on N 90.

464, G@ranazéuen, an Odyssean word,
‘to welcome’ as host; an immortal
cannot permit himself to become a guest
to men. If we do not adhere to this
sense of ἀγαπαζέμεν, and take it more
vaguely, ‘shew favour ’ (cf. ἀμφαγαπα-
ζόμενος Π 192) θεόν may be the subject,
βροτούς the object; ‘it would cause

jealousy that an immortal god should

thus favour men.’ But this, though
with the order of words perhaps more
natural, does not give so clear and
suitable a sense. Diintzer suggests that
the line is an explanatory gloss of veuec-
σητὸν δέ κεν εἴη which elsewhere always
stands alone.

IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv)

570

τύνη δ᾽ εἰσελθὼν λαβὲ γούνατα [[ηλεΐωνος, 465
καί μιν ὑπὲρ πατρὸς καὶ μητέρος ἠυκόμοιο
χίσσεο καὶ τέκεος, ἵνα οἱ σὺν θυμὸν ὀρίνηις.᾽

ὡς ἄρα φωνήσας ἀπέβη πρὸς μακρὸν ᾿Ολυμπον
Ἑρμείας: Πρίαμος δ᾽ ἐξ ἵππων arto χαμᾶξε,
Ἰδαῖον δὲ κατ᾽ αὖθι λίπεν: ὁ δὲ μίμνεν ἐρύκων 470
ἵππους ἡμιόνους τε. γέρων δ᾽ ἰθὺς κίεν οἴκου,
τῆι ῥ᾽ ᾿Αχιλεὺς ἵζεσκε διίφιλος.
εὗρ᾽, ἕταροι δ᾽ ἀπάνευθε καθείατο" τὼ δὲ δύ᾽ οἴω,
ἥρως Δὐτομέδων τε καὶ "Aros ὄζος Δρηος,
ποίπνυον παρεόντε" νέον δ᾽ ἀπέληγεν ἐδωδῆς

> J, 2ESN
ἐν δέ μιν αὐτὸν

475

yy

fd /
ἔσθων καὶ πίνων: ἔτι Kal παρέκειτο τράπεζα.
Fy y , YU 2 Yj \

τοὺς δ᾽ ἔλαθ᾽ εἰσελθὼν I piapos μέγας, ἄγχι δ᾽ apa στὰς

\ 9. an / / \ / nr
χερσὶν Ἀχιλλῆος λάβε γούνατα καὶ κύσε χεῖρας
δεινὰς ἀνδροφόνους, ai οἱ πολέας κτάνον vias.
΄ ’ Ch? NY yA 3 YA \ / .“ 3 3. ,
ως OT ἂν ἄνδρ ATH πυκινὴ λάβηι, os T ἐνὺ πατρὴν 480

ἐξ: ap Pap. »% || GATO: ἄμεινον βαῖνε γράφειν ἐπὶ τοῦ
γέροντος Sch. T. 471. ἵππους e OT Syr. 472. τῆι ῥ᾽: ἔνθ᾽ Eust. || EN:
αν Pap. ν. 413. ἕτεροι Vr. d. || Kaerato (Ar. 2) C. 414. ὄξος: υἱὸς Pap. v!.
476 ἀθ. Ar. || Kai: rap Mor. 477. δ᾽ ἄρα crac: mapacrac Vr. A. 479.
naidopénouc Pap. ν᾽ in marg. 480. ἐνὶ : ἐπι D.

469. ἑρμείης J.

466-67. Diintzer’s objections to this
couplet are better founded: (1) the Jliad
knows nothing of any son of Achilles
except in late interpolations—see T 327 ;
(2) Priam does not follow the god’s advice,
as he makes no mention of either mother
or son. 465 would form a very effective
end to the speech.

473. ἀπάνευθε, wpart, though in the
same room, see 484. τώ, we can of
course read τῶι, but the nom. accords
with the common use of the article with
numerals to contrast a definite number
with a crowd; H. G. 8 200 6.

474. "Ἀλκιος, the short form (Kose-
form) of ᾿Αλκιμέδων as T 392.

470. €ceoon Kai πίνων, added in a sort
of apposition with ἐδωδῆς, as the verb
is used with either gen. or part. Cf. ε
196-97 τίθει πάρα πᾶσαν ἐδωδήν, ἔσθειν
καὶ πίνειν. ‘The line was athetized (by
Ar.?) on the ground that the tables
were not cleared away after the Homeric
meal. Athenaios (i. p. 12) says that on
this ground the stop should be placed
after ἔτι, not before it.

480. The comparison is to the familiar
scene of a homicide exiled from his own

land and taking refuge with a chieftain
among whose retainers he will enrol
himself in return for sustenance and
protection. GNdpoc ἀφνειοῦ, because
only a wealthy chief will attract or can
afford to keep a retinue of such ‘ broken
men’ (see note on II 573). The only
difficulty is in the word ἄτη, for from
the construction of the sentence the ἄτη
seems to have come upon him after the
homicide. Thus Niagelsbach takes it
to mean the overwhelming effect of
conscience, Gobel the mental disorder
due to his position ; ef. If 805 with note.
I believe that the word can mean one
thing only, the force which impelled
him to do the deed. Then the relative
clause ὅς Te . . κατακτείνας is explana-
tory of ἄτη, ‘as when Até has come on
a man who has slain another’=so that
he has slain another. But the relative
clause has been altered in the course of
statement—the original κατακτείνηι is
put in a subordinate participial form,
and ἄλλων ἐξίκετο δῆμον as the main
thought usurps the principal verb. In
other words the essential thought is
ws ἀνὴρ φῶτα κατακτείνας ἄλλων ἐξίκετο'

᾿;

IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv) 571

φῶτα κατακτείνας ἄλλων ἐξίκετο δῆμον,

᾽ Ν » > r / » » > /
ἀνδρὸς ἐς ἀφνειοῦ, θάμβος δ᾽ ἔχει εἰσορόωντας,
ὡς ᾿Αχιλεὺς θάμβησεν ἰδὼν Ἰ]ρίαμον θεοειδέα"
θάμβησαν δὲ καὶ ἄλλοι, ἐς ἀλλήλους δὲ ἴδοντο.

\ \ / / \ fal Μ)
τὸν καὶ λισσόμενος Τ]ρίαμος πρὸς μῦθον ἔειπε"

485

-“ - lal ’ὔ 5» > r
“μνῆσαι πατρὸς σοῖο, θεοῖς ἐπιείκελ᾽ ᾿Αχιλλεῦ,
, [4 > , > a ΠΈΡΑ / > a
τηλίκου ὥς περ ἐγών, ONOML ἐπὶ γήραος οὐδῶι.
lal / /
Kal μέν που κεῖνον περιναιέται ἀμφὶς ἐόντες
/ ? \ \ \ -“
τείρουσ᾽, οὐδέ τις ἔστιν ἀρὴν καὶ λοιγὸν ἀμῦναι.
> al / / , 4
ἀλλ᾽ . ἤτοι κεῖνός ye σέθεν ζώοντος ἀκούων 190
,ὔ 5 lal ’ . »
χαίρει T ἐν θυμῶι ἐπί T ἔλπεται ἤματα πάντα

ὄψεσθαι φίλον υἱὸν ἀπὸ Τροίηθεν ἰόντα:

$81. ἄλλον GP).
483. ecocidA CQU Vr. ἃ.

482. ἔχεν JU Pap. v, Syr.: ἐχ᾽ Ὁ.
484. ἐς : én’ P.

CGJLQSTU Pap. v, Harl. a, Vr. d (yp. ἐῆο).

489. ἀρὴν : ἀνὴρ 7]. || Kai: καὶ ἀπὸ J. || Kai λοιγὸν : ἀπὸ οἴκου KR.

| εἰςτορόωντα Syr.

486. colo: ἑοῖο R: ceio Zen.
488. ἐόντες : τινὲς ἐόντος Sch. T.
492.

τροίηϑε(ν) μόλοντα ARS (-οῦντα) Bar. Mor. Cant. Pap. ν, Harl. ἃ (}. ras.).

δῆμον. The poet begins, however, for
the sake of adding moral weight, as
though he were going to say ws ὅτ᾽ ἂν
ἄνδρ᾽ ἄτη λάβηι ὅς τε φῶτα κατακτείνηι,
but in the course of saying this he
allows the other form of the thought,
as the dominant one, to mould the
second clause. The difficulty arises from
the peculiar construction of the simile
in having the point of comparison added
independently, θάμβος δ᾽ ἔχει, instead
of connected immediately with ὡς 67
ἄν, as is done in every other simile of
this form. The result of the difference
is that the minor touches are put in
the foremost place, and are continually
in danger of overshadowing the essential
elements.

482. Schol. T says τὸν δὲ καθαίροντα
καὶ ἁγνίτην. ἔλεγον, Schol. B ws εἴ τις

. ἀπέρχεται πρὸς τὸν ἁγνίσοντα, from
which K. O. Miiller has conjectured that
there was a variant ἀνδρὸς és ἁγνίτεω
here. This is possible, but such a
reading can only have been a late one ;
there is no trace whatever in H. of
expiation for blood except by payment
or exile, ritual purification being un-
known. This in fact Schol. T seems to
admit by the remark ἴσως δὲ ἀναχρονισμός
ἐστιν ws τὸ ““ἴαχε cadmeyé,” and we are
safe in concluding only that the scholia
took purification for granted as the
sole motive for the manslayer’s action,

486. «οἷο, not σεῖο, for the gen. is
not used as a mere possessive; σεῖο
φονῆος Σ 335 is of course another matter.
But ἑοῖο, thine own, is a very probable
variant, and it may be questioned if
this was not Zen.’s reading rather than
σεῖο. There may easily have been a
mistake in interpreting goto: Ζηνόδοτος
διὰ τοῦ €, which would be the Didymean
scholion. But the ordinary interpreta-
tion is confirmed by Zen.’s ἐμεῖο for ἐμοῖο
= 118 and Ap. de Pron. 108. 12 (see
Ludwich ad loc.).

487. See note on X 60. ὁλοῶι, van
L. (Ench. p. 200) suggests that this is
a misreading of OAOOI=¢Nooto. The
epithet certainly suits γήραος best.

488. Gu@ic is here clearly used to
mean round about, not apart from, the
regular Epic sense. The variant ἐόντος
is evidently meant to meet this difficulty
(dwelling apart from them). περιναιέται
Gugic ἐόντες, a pleonasm like περικτίονας
ἀνθρώπους of περιναιετάουσι, 8 65. In
λ 495-503 the shade of Achilles expresses
the same fears for his father’s treatment
by his subjects.

492. Tpoikeen ἰόντα must be right
though several Mss. have Tpoin@e(v)
μολόντα ; the v of these case-forms in
-θεν is never omitted, though the adverbs
ὕπερθε and -Gev, etc., are used indiffer-
ently. The phrase Τροίηθεν ἰόντα is
Odyssean (three times).

IAIAAOC © (xxiv)

\ κ᾿ \ , e ’ /
αὐτὰρ ἐγὼ πανάποτμος, ἐπεὶ τέκον υἷας ἀρίστους
[4 lal ’ / lal
Τροίην ἐν εὐρείηι, τῶν δ᾽ ov τινά φημι λελεῖφθαι.
5 εἰ 3) - "} fal
πεντήκοντά μοι ἧσαν, OT ἤλυθον vies ᾿Αχαιῶν" 495

΄ In 9) ΄ ον
ἐννεακαίδεκα μέν μοι UNS ἐκ νηδύος ἦσαν,

Ν 3 v 4 SN / lal
τοὺς δ᾽ ἄλλους μοι ἔτικτον ἐνὶ μεγάροισι γυναῖκες.

a \ na an / ig N 4 5 »
τῶν μὲν πολλῶν θοῦρος "Ἄρης ὑπὸ γούνατ ἐλυσεν"

ἃ / oy vv v \ ” \ Σ hi
ds δέ μοι οἷος ἔην, εἴρυτο δὲ ἄστυ καὶ avUTOS,

΄, - / \ /
τὸν σὺ πρώην κτεῖνας ἀμυνόμενον περὶ πάτρης, 500

“Extopa.

a a Ce 3 ς 7 na aN. rn
του νυν ELVEN LKAV@ νῆας χαάιων,

- 3, / 5 /
λυσόμενος παρὰ σεῖο, φέρω δ᾽ ἀπερείσι ἄποινα.

> a 5) lal > / 3 9 /
ἀλλ᾽ αἰδεῖο θεούς, Aytnred, avuTov τ ἐλέησον

ἴων / 3» / /
μνησάμενος σοῦ πατρός: ἐγὼ δ᾽ €deevoTEpos περ,

ἔτλην δ᾽ οἵ οὔ πώ τις ἐπιχθόνιος βροτὸς ἄλλος, 505

> \ / \ , Vie) 5 ͵,ὔ Σ
ἀνδρὸς παιδοφόνοιο ποτὶ στόμα χείρ ὀρέγεσθαι.

«Ὁ ΄ na ’ ya Ἂς e 5 “ 5 /
ὡς φάτο, τῶι 6 apa πατρὸς ὑφ ἵμερον ὦρσε Yooto:

496. ἑῆς ().
499. ὃέ MOL: ϑέμος G: δὲ μὲν Vr. ἃ.
Pap. ν. 501. εἵνεκ᾽ 1) Pap. μ.

497. éniuuerdpoici C Pap. ν.
| αὐτὸς PQ: αὐτοὺς ©,
502. coto HP. || φέρων τ᾽ Ὁ.

498. Uno: ἐπι C: ἀπό H.
500. κτεινεα
503. aidoto

ΗΜ: αἴϑοιο Vr. A: aideo P: aidéeo Lips. θεοὺς ἀχιλεῦ : φέριετε Θεοὺς Bar.

505. βροτὸς : renet Pap. v1.

506. χεῖρας ὀρέξαι ἢ χεῖρ᾽ dpérecear Hust.

493-94 = 255-56. Payne Knight rejects
494-97 because of the obvious inconsist-
ency of τῶν μὲν πολλῶν (498) with τῶν
οὔ τινά φημι λελεῖφθαι. But the weak-
ness lies rather in 498, which might be
omitted without loss—or indeed with
gain, as the omission brings out more
sharply the superiority of Hector alone
to all the fifty. The rhythm of 498 is
unusually bad and un-Epie.

499. oioc, because beside him all the
other fifty counted as naught. As a
matter of fact not one of Priam’s sons
does anything (but get killed) in the
Iliad, with the exception of Paris, which
rather proves the rule. αὐτός, by hiim-
self. The sense is identical with Z 403
οἷος yap ἐρύετο Ἴλιον Ἕκτωρ, which Schol.
Ton & 424 quotes αὐτὸς γὰρ ἐρύετο. The
vulg. αὐτούς, explained inhabitants as
opposed to the city, is incomparably
weaker, though of course defensible (see
40 ἐγὼ πόλιν ἔπραθον, ὥλεσα δ᾽ αὐτούς).
For the combination of καί with αὐτός
no quotation need be given, as the two
words have such a strong affinity that
there is a strong presumption against
καί being copulative at all in this con-
nexion. For similar confusion see I 562,
= 145, Ψ 277.

500, πρώην in the vague sense, see on

χθιζά τε καὶ πρωϊζά B 303. It was
actually twelve days before. For ἅμυνό-
ALENON περὶ πάτρης compare Hector’s own
words in M 243,

503. aidefo, an irregular form for
aideo, recurring in ὁ 269 ἀλλ᾽ αἰδεῖο
φέριστε θεούς. Cf. ἔρειο or ἐρεῖο A 611.
It should not be altered, but taken as
an early instance of αἰδέομαι which later
supplanted aidoua. We could easily
read αἴδοιο, with a few mss. both here
and in ε.

506. χείρ᾽ (χειρί) 6pereceat, lit. to reach
with the hand, i.e. to lift my hand to the
mouth of him that slew my sons in order
to touch his chin as a suppliant (A 500).
For the constr. cf. Ψ 99 ὠρέξατο χερσὶ
pirnow. It is more usual to read χεῖρ᾽,
1.6. χεῖρα or χεῖρε (Sch. T), and take
ὀρέγεσθαι as though=dpéyew, a use of
which there seems to be no other instance.
Again, as it has not been explicitly said
that Priam has touched Achilles’ chin,
whereas he has kissed his hands (478),
some would understand to move to my
mouth the hand of him that slew my
sons. This gives undoubtedly a better
sense, but is quite inconsistent with the
use of ὀρέγεσθαι. χεῖρας ὀρέξαι, given by
Eust., is what we should expect.

0 ΞΞιὃ 119:

IAIAAOC © (xxiv) 573

ἁψάμενος δ᾽ apa χειρὸς

» 4 “ /
ATT WOaATO Ka γεροντα .

‘ \ / \ / 1 ? /
τὼ δὲ μνησαμένω ὁ μὲν “Extopos ἀνδροφόνοιο

κλαῖ ἀδινά, προπάροιθε
αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς κλαῖεν
IlatpoxXov -
αὐτὰρ ἐπεί

ποδῶν ᾿Αχιλῆος ἐλυσθείς,

\ » Q “
ἐὸν πατέρ᾽, ἄλλοτε δ᾽ αὗτε
al \ \ , ,
τῶν δὲ στοναχὴ κατὰ δώματ᾽ ὀρώρει.

ῥα γόοιο τετάρπετο δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς,

/ e > ‘ / S 3 A 50.» > \ /
καί οἱ ἀπὸ πρωπίδων AO ἵμερος ἠδ᾽ ἀπὸ γυίων,

ΤΣ ἃ καὶ
αὐυὐτικ aTrO

θρόνου ὦρτο, γέροντα δὲ χειρὸς ἀνίστη, 515

5 / / / / /

οἰκτείρων πολιὸν TE κάρη πολιὸν τε γένειον,
/ / f

Kal μιν φωνήσας ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα:

5 I~? “ \ \ fen 7 \ /
“ἃ δείλ᾽, ἢ δὴ πολλὰ κάκ᾽ ἄνσχεο σὸν κατὰ θυμόν.

“Ὁ fal > lal >
TOS ἔτλης ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν ἐλθέμεν οἷος,

ἀνδρὸς ἐς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὅς τοι πολέας τε καὶ ἐσθλοὺς 520

“ε,ὔ » 4 ᾿ς / >
vidas ἐξενάριξα ; σιδήρειόν νύ τοι ἣἧτορ.
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε δὴ Kat ἄρ᾽ ἕζευ ἐπὶ θρόνου, ἄλγεα δ᾽ ἔμπης

5 la] fal / / ,
ἐν θυμῶι κατακεῖσθαι ἐάσομεν ἀχνύμενοί Trep:

οὐ γάρ τις πρῆξις πέλεται κρυεροῖο γόοιο.

“Ὁ , “-“ a 7
ὡς γὰρ ἐπεκλώσαντο θεοὶ δειλοῖσι βροτοῖσι, 525

, > / > \ /
ζώειν αχνυμενοῦυς" QAUTOL δέ

> / ᾽ /
ἀκηδέες εἰσί.

509. ὃὲ : ueN J.
511. αὖτε: αὗτις I.
γύων Ρ".
Pap. ν.

518. ἃ: ὦ ΟΡ.

510. €Auceeic om. Pap. v:

512. crenaxh Zen.: ctenay[ Pap. μ.
515. αὐτίκ᾽ ἀπὸ : auTiKa ὃ ex Pap. μ.
ON: μάλα 77.

ἑλκυςθεὶς P 1,5. : λιαςθείς L.
514 ἀθ. Ar.

anictai Vr. d: ἀνέστη //
κάκ᾽ om. Par. f. || andcyeo CP

Vr. A Harl. ab, Par.abdfj: ἀνάσχου A supr. (4 corr. from €): ἀνέσχεο Par, ἢ:

anéxeo Lips.: acyeo Pap. μ:

519-20 om. Pap. pw.

(Harl. a supr.), ἐν ἄλλωι A.
acdefghj: ἀχνυμένοις ©.

écxeo JR: xcxeo U (ἄν in ras.).
521. ἐξενάριξε LS Pap. v1.
ézou R: Yzeu ap. An. || ἄλγεα : adAare Pap. ν].

526. ἀχνυμένους JOQRSU Harl. a Ὁ, Par.

CON om. I.
NU τοι: ὃέ of 1). 522.
524. πρῆξις: τ᾽ ἄνυεις I

510. €Auceeic, see Ψ 393.

514 ἀθετεῖται: προείρηται yap ἱκανῶς
διὰ τοῦ “᾿ αὐτὰρ ἐπεί pa yoo,” καὶ ἀκύρως
τέθειται τὸ γυίων: οὐ γὰρ οὕτως λέγει
πάντα τὰ μέλη, ἀλλὰ μόνον τὰς χεῖρας καὶ
τοὺς πόδας, An. The athetesis has been
generally accepted, as the yvia cannot be
the seat of yearning. That fear should
depart from the trembling limbs 15
natural enough, e.g. ¢ 140; a rhapsodist
probably had some recollection of that
passage and interpolated the line from
it.

518. ancxeo elsewhere is always imper.
like ἴσχεο. The variants point as else-
where to an assimilated form ἄσσχεο,
which (rather than ἄσχεο) was doubtless

the reading of Zen. See App. Crit. on
B 694, Καὶ 176, Y 587, and Ludwich on
B12. ‘There may have been a variant
ἴσχεο, but the scholia are not clear.

519-21 = 203-05.

522. €zeu, aor., see on N 285.

523, ef. II 60.

524. npHzic, profit, an Odyssean word.
Compare 550 below, and A 562 πρῆξαι
δ᾽ ἔμπης οὔ τι δυνήσεαι, thow wilt gain

naught. ἐπεκλώςαντο (525) is also
Odyssean (seven times).
526. ἀχνυμένους is the regular

Homeric constr. as the participle forms
part of the predication (H. G. ὃ 240),
and it has respectable support; the
vulg. ἀχνυμένοις is a natural corruption.

σι

74 IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv)

\ v
Sovol γάρ τε πίθοι κατακείαται ἐν Διὸς οὔδει
a - « \ Ci A
δώρων οἷα δίδωσι κακῶν, ἕτερος δὲ ἑάων
- /
ὧι μέν κ᾽ ἀμμίξας Sane Leds τερπικέραυνος,

n iy 7 ” 3 > Ae
ἄλλοτε μέν τε κακῶι ὅ γε κύρεται, ἄλλοτε δ᾽ ἐσθλῶν. ὅ80

Fy

Φ rn - Ἂν »
ὧι δέ κε τῶν λυγρῶν δώηι, λωβητὸν ἔθηκε,

/ lal 3 /
καί ἑ κακὴ βούβρωστις ἐπὶ χθόνα δῖαν ἐλαύνει,

521. κατακειαθε Pap. ν»".

ὁ δειλῶν Plato Rep. ii. 879 Ὁ, Euseb. Praep. Ev. Kile Ὡ. ΠΩΣ
531. Aoir@n J (supr. p over r). || ϑοίη 1).

Pap. vi. κακῶν PR. || écoh@n R.

528 om. T. || κηρῶν ἔμπλειοι 6 μὲν Eceh@n αὐτὰρ

530. adAore

532. καί €: τὸν δὲ Plato 1... || BouBpwcic G.

527. This famous passage is a typical
instance of the picturesque metaphysics
of an early age. When the primitive
man asks “‘Whence come sorrow and
joy ?” the answer he finds is that Zeus
keeps a store of them in jars in his
house ; through the accidental opening
of such a jar by a woman all ill was let
loose upon men, Hes. Opp. 94. This is
in Homer not so much an allegory as a
survival in popular fancy of what may
once have been regarded as a real ex-
planation. There have been from ancient
times two different interpretations of the
passage. According to one the docol πίθοι
are both jars of ills, and the jar of boons
is a third—érepos being used instead of
ἄλλος because the first two are regarded
as a unit opposed to the last. According
to the other there are two jars only, one
of ills and one of boons, so that before
κακῶν we must mentally supply ἕτερος
μέν. This is perfectly legitimate, and
is in fact an instance of the idiom found
in X 157 φεύγων, ὁ δ᾽ ὄπισθε διώκων (for
ὁ μὲν φεύγων), where see note. Both
interpretations being linguistically pos-
sible, we have to choose on other grounds.
The first has the advantage of agreeing
well with what follows ; if there are two
jars of evil to one of good, we see how
it is that a man can at best expect only
a mixture of good and ill, and may have
no good at all (531). ‘This is in fact the
sentiment of Pindar P. ili. 81 ἕν παρ᾽

ἐσλὸν πήματα σύνδυο δαίονται βροτοῖς
ἀθάνατο. On the other hand Plato

took the passage in the second way.
Of this there can be no doubt, though
the form in which he cites 528 is a rare
instance in his works of large deviation
from the vulgate. On the whole the
authority of Plato and the general con-
struction of the sentence point to this
second interpretation as the right one.

We must understand from 526 that it
is the gods alone who enjoy the jar of
boons without mixture of ill.—én older
recalls the huge pointed jars of the
Mykenaean age, which are literally stuck
in the floor of the store-rooms.

528. ἑάων, a most obscure word re-
curring only in the phrases θεοὶ δωτῆρες
édwy (θ 325, Hes. ZLheog. 111), “Eppeta
drop édwy (θ 335). Here at least it
means good things, and hence it is com-
monly referred to évs. It can be nothing
but the gen. of a fem. ἑή, and how this
can come from és no one has yet shown.
The hiatus, too, seems to indicate loss
of F, which évs, so far as we know, never
had. (That this trace of F should not
appear in the other passages is natural
enough, owing to their lateness.) Brug-
mann has suggested that ἑή may=sua,
a fem. like ἴση, meaning ‘‘a man’s own
due,” so that the gods are “the givers
of men’s lots.” This explanation fails,
however, in face of the fact that the
present line, which on his view must be
due to a misunderstanding of δωτῆρες
ἑάων, is older than those in which that
phrase occurs. The word must therefore
remain among the unsolved problems of
the language.

529. κ᾽ Guutzac, Mss. generally write
καμμίξας, which is evidently inferior.

530. κύρεται, the mid. appears to
occur here only in Greek. For the dat.
see Hes. Opp. 691 μετὰ κύμασι πήματι
κύρσαι.

531. λωβητός ὁ ἐφύβριστος καὶ ἄτιμος,
Eust., a butt for the insults of men.

532. βούβρωςετις is explained by the
scholia as οἷστρος, a fatal gadfly drives
him over the earth (ἔνιοι δὲ βούβρωστιν
τὸν οἶκτον ἐξεδέξαντο Schol. A: Jeg.
τὸν οἷστρον). Cf. Aisch. P. V. 681
οἰστροπλὴξ δ᾽ ἐγὼ μάστιγι θείαι γῆν πρὸ
γῆς ἐλαύνομαι. The metaphor is a very

IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv) 575

lal ᾽ ” “ / ” -“
φοιτᾶι δ᾽ οὔτε θεοῖσι τετιμένος οὔτε βροτοῖσιν.
. Re. / “-
ὡς μὲν καὶ ἸΠηλῆν θεοὶ δόσαν ἀγλαὰ δῶρα

nr \ > /, re
ἐκ γενετῆς: πάντας yap ἐπ᾽ ἀνθρώπους ἐκέκαστο 53:

οι

, \ /
ὄλβωι τε πλούτωι τε, ἄνασσε δὲ Μυρμιδόνεσσι,
/ nr / \ / v
καί οἱ θνητῶι ἐόντι θεὰν ποίησαν ἄκοιτιν.
> 5 > \ \ lal na \ / “ ͵ὔ ΄ "
ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ καὶ τῶι θῆκε θεὸς κακόν, ὅττί οἱ οὔ τι

\ / /
παίδων ἐν μεγάροισι γονὴ γένετο κρειόντων,
> ] ae lal / / > / / =
ἀλλ᾽ ἕνα παῖδα τέκεν Tavampiov: οὐδέ νυ τόν γε 540
/ / /

γηράσκοντα κομίζω, ἐπεὶ μάλα τηλόθι πάτρης

ἅν / / / > \ \ /
Huar ἐνὶ Tpoine σέ τε κήδων ἠδὲ σὰ τέκνα.

/ \ 4 3
καὶ σέ, γέρον, τὸ πρὶν μὲν ἀκούομεν ὄλβιον εἶναι"

ὅσσον Λέσβος ἄνω, Μάκαρος ἕδος, ἐντὸς ἐέργει

ξ.4. ϑόςαν : ϑέςαν ().
538. οὔτοι Vr. d.

541. κομίζει P. 543. γέρων (RR,

535. ἐπ᾿ : ἐς Pap. v’.
540. παῖδ᾽ ἔτεκε P (€ in ras. 1) Lips.
544. AécBou LR.

537. ποιηςατ ap. v},

TON γε: τόνϑε PR.
μακάρων | (Pap. v

supr.), Plut. Mor. 603, Dion Chrys. xxiii. 9.

favourite one in Greek, as will be seen
on reference to οἷστρος and its compounds
in the Lexica. This gives a good enough
sense. Another explanation also found
favour in antiquity, viz. that the word
meant famine, ravenous hunger, on the
analogy of the later βουλιμία. But this
looks hardly like an Epic formation ; and
as to the real meaning of the word the
late Epics and scholiasts had probably
no better means of judging than we.
The most important piece of information
we get from them is that a goddess Bov-
βρωστις was worshipped at Smyrna with
a sacrifice of a black bull. If the word
really means ‘gadfly,’ this will be an
interesting parallel to Apollo Dywwdéevs
and Παρνόπιος, while a goddess of famine
is not a Greek conception. For the
formation of the word cf. βούπρηστις, a
beetle which poisons cattle.

535. ἐπ᾽ ἀνθρώπους ἐκέκαστο, see
note on T 35.

540. manawpion παντελῶς ἄωρον ἀπο-
θανούμενον, Schol. ; ἀθλιώτατον, Hesych.
The origin of the idea is given in Eur.
Alc. 167 ff. (αἰτήσομαι) μηδ᾽ ὥσπερ αὐτῶν
ἡ τεκοῦσ᾽ ἀπόλλυμαι | θανεῖν ἀώρους παῖδας,
ἀλλ᾽ εὐδαίμονας | ἐν γῆι πατρώιαι τερπνὸν
ἐκπλῆσαι βίον. The word is thus virtu-
ally equivalent to μινυνθάδιος A 352, and
ὠκύμορος A 417. In form it is the same
as πανάποτμος, 255.

543. ἀκούομεν, know by report, see =
125. einai represents ἦσθα of oratio
recta,

844, Cf. Hymn. Ap. 30, 37, 45, ὄσσους
Κρήτη τ᾽ ἐντὸς ἔχει καὶ δῆμος ᾿Αθηνῶν
Λέσβος τ᾿ ἠγαθέη Μάκαρος ἕδος
Αἰολίωνος.. τόσσον ἔπ᾽ ὠδίνουσα ‘Exn-
βόλον ἵκετο Λητώ, which suggests that
ὅσσους here would be a simpler reading
answering to τῶν in 546. 6ccon must
be taken as the not uncommon identi-
fication of a country with its inhabitants.
ἐέργει, bounds, see on B 845, M 201.
Μάκαρος, the name of a legendary king
or hero of Lesbos, which is said to have
been named Makaria after him. The
various legends told by the mytho-
graphers will be found in Roscher Lez.
s.v. They differ so completely as to
shew that there was no real local tradi-
tion ; the name is used merely as a peg
on which to hang theories of colonization
in the form of genealogies. Makar
appears also in Phokis as ‘father of
Amphissa’ (Paus. x. 38. 4. It has
been proposed to identify the name with
Melkart, the Baal of Tyre, who appears
in Corinth as Melikertes; but for this
there is no ground beyond the slight
resemblance in form. The variant
μακάρων is not a mere blunder. It
is found in Plutarch (Jor. p. 603)
and Dion Chrys., and was regarded as
a compliment to the fortunate island.
Other critics have seen in it the name
of a tribe called Mdxapes, whose epony-
mos Makar was. ἄνω, out to sea,
as with ἀνάγειν, etc. ; καθύπερθε, higher,
because forming part of the tableland

576

, Ὁ / 2 /
καὶ Dpuyin καθύπερθε καὶ ᾿Ιλλήσποντος ὠπείρων,
\ /
σε, γέρον, πλούτωι τε καὶ υἱάσι φασὶ κεκάσθαι.

τῶν

IAIAAOC Ω (ἅχιν)

545

a Ὁ» » > /

αὐτὰρ ἐπεί TOL πῆμα τόδ᾽ ἤγαγον Οὐρανίωνες,
» 2 > /

αἰεί τοι περὶ ἄστυ μάχαι τ ἀνδροκτασίαν τε.

, / \ \ / ᾿
ἄνσχεο, μηδ᾽ ἀλίαστον ὀδύρεο σὸν κατὰ θυμὸν
/

> , 7, > 7 @ Clan

οὐ γάρ τι πρήξεις ἀκαχήμενος. υἷος €0L0, ;
\ ” / 5

πρὶν καὶ κακὸν ἄλλο πάθηισθα.

9a7 /
οὐδέ μιν ἀνστὴσεις"

σι
σι
-

τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα γέρων Τρίαμος θεοειδής"
“un μέ πω ἐς θρόνον ike, διοτρεφές, ὄφρά κεν “Extwp
κεῖται ἐνὶ κλισίηισιν ἀκηδής, ἀλλὰ τάχιστα
λῦσον, ἵν ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ἴδω, σὺ δὲ δέξαι ἄποινα 555

, ͵
πολλά, τά TOL φέρομεν.

fal / \ 7
σὺ δὲ τῶνδ᾽ ἀπόναιο, καὶ ἔλθοις

545. φρυγίης Vr. A. || ελλησποντον Pap. ν (supr. c).
Tai) ADJP (supr. Ν) T (supr. n) U Pap. v, Mor. Harl. d.
τοι HJ. || πρῆξις L. ||
551. GnctHcer U.

554. κῆται Pap. v.
556 om. P (interlined, erased, and then added in margin; ef. 435). ||

Vr: A.
rec.):
(με R™):

P in ras.

550. Tl om. Pap. v):
teoio Pap. y™: ἐῆος ὦ).
μή πώ uw A, || diotpogec 77.

546. TON Ar. Q:
549. Gcxeo J: ἴεχεο
ἑοῖο Zen. P (ς add. man.
553. uh δέ nw LOR

555. δέξαι ἄποινα

φέρομαι J Mor. Harl. d, Par. g, and ap. Eust.: φέρωμαι PmR. || τῶν Pap. v}

(supr. 0). | ἔλϑθηις PRT Wares Xe

556-57 ad. Ar.

of central Asia Minor. To a Greek on
the coast a journey either inland or to
sea was ‘up’; so that there is only an
apparent contradiction in the use of such
similar adverbs to describe boundaries
in opposite directions. In Herod. i. 142
ἄνω is used for ‘to the north’; but that
probably implies some knowledge of
maps, and does not suit the sense here.
καθύπερθε Xiovo, y 170, is rather different,
meaning apparently ‘to seaward,’ while
ὑπένερθε (172) is ‘under shelter of.’ It
is to be presumed that Phrygia and
Lesbos, the boundaries themselves, are
included in the space within which
Priam was most blessed; it is a small
thing to say that he ‘surpassed all men’
in the Troad where he was king.

545. ἙἝἭ λλήσποντος must evidently be
taken to include the sea on the W. coast
of the Troad as well as the narrow
channel on the N., to which we now
confine the name. This could hardly be
called ἀπείρων. See also I 360.

546. The variant τῶι seems to be due
to the harsh correlation of τῶν with
ὅσσον (see above). It may have been
meant for a locative dat. there, but no
such use is found elsewhere. The fact
that Kexacear is not elsewhere joined to

a gen. may have had something to do
with it, but the constr. is a very natural
one ; τῶν may be partitive, among them.
πλούτωι Te Kai υἱάει -- ξ 206.

548 is rejected as superfluous by
Kochly ; the sentence is certainly im-
proved by its absence. Cf. H 287 for
the second half.

551. πρὶν . . ndenicea, ere that, sone
other fate shall come on thee, i.e. thou
wilt sooner die thyself than raise him
from the dead. This is of course not
to be taken as a threat on Achilles’ part,
as some have thought. For καί van L.
reads κεν. For the asyndeton with πρίν
ef. “AY 29:

554. κεῖται, subj., see on T 32. Here
we can read κείετ᾽ évi or κείεται ἐν, the
norma! form.

556-57 ἀθετοῦνται, ὅτι ἀνάρμοστοι τῶι
προσώπωι αἱ εὐχαὶ καὶ ἐπαυτόφωρος 7
ὑπόκρισις (their insincerity is palpable).
An. The similar words of Chryses in
A 18—19 gave rise to the same question,
‘how can he thus pray against his own
side?’ A modern reader will be more
in sympathy with the poet than with the
Alexandrine critic. The chief ground of
objection to the lines lies perhaps in the
metrical weakness of 557.

IAIAAOC © (xxiv)

1
~I

or

σὴν ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν, ἐπεί με πρῶτον ἔασας
Ὶ / / \ ¢€ “ / > / ν᾽
[αὐτόν τε ζώειν καὶ ὁρᾶν φάος ἠελίοιο].
τὸν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὑπόδρα ἰδὼν προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς

“ / an rane pee! / / \ \ > ae,
μῆκετι νυν μ ἐρέθιζε, γερον" VOEW δὲ καὶ @AUTOS

560

"Extopa τοι λῦσαι: Διόθεν δέ μοι ἄγγελος ἦλθε

μήτηρ, ἥ μ᾽ ἔτεκεν, θυγάτηρ ἁλίοιο γέροντος"

καὶ δὲ σὲ γινώσκω, Ἰ]ρίαμε, φρεσίν, οὐδέ με λήθεις,

a“ “ / , Φ Ν > \ fol , r
ὅττι θεῶν τίς σ᾽ Hye θοὰς ἐπὶ νῆας ᾿Αχαιῶν.

οὐ γάρ κε τλαίη βροτὸς ἐλθέμεν, οὐδὲ μάλ᾽ ἡβῶν,

odo

ἐς στρατόν: οὐδὲ yap ἂν φυλακοὺς λάθοι, οὐδέ κ᾿ ὀχῆα

e lal / / e /
ῥεῖα μετοχλίσσειε θυράων ἡμετεράων.
τῶ νῦν μή μοι μᾶλλον ἐν ἄλγεσι θυμὸν ὀρίνηις,

557. πρῶτος Mor.: πρῶτος ἢ πρῶτον Eust. ||
οὗτος ὁ στίχος οὐχ εὑρέθη ἐν τῶι παλαιῶι Α.
563. λήςεις J.

558 om. DPQTU® Pap. vt, Vr. ἃ:
560. NUN: μή LL, || γέρων JP).

mic Ε΄: cé Tic L Cant.: τίς GRS Lips.

πρῶτ᾽ ἐλέηςας τινές, Did.

564. eedc Cant. Vr. A.
565. K€: μὲν Par. a f. 566. οὔτε

γὰρ P Pap. μ, ἐν ἄλλωι A: οὔτι γὰρ R. || φύλακας CH Pap. v' and ap. Did. ||

λάθηι T Vr. A. || κ᾽:
ὀχῆας ὥ.

τῶ νῦν: των Pap. μ'ὶ (supr. UN): τῶν νῦν Vr. ἃ.

A. || ορεινοις Pap. ν (NHC Pap. v™).

557. πρῶτον, to beyin with, i.e. from
the very first, without hesitation. The
lengthening of we by position in this
place is highly suspicious, see App. N,
§15; Nauck conj. ἐπεὶ πρῶτόν μ᾽ ἐλέησας,
but then the order of words is wrong.

558 is an interpolation just caught on
the point of obtaining acceptance in the
vulg. It is entirely ignored by the
scholia and even by Eust. (though it
is found in mss. of earlier date),
and is evidently due to the wish to
supply an infin. to €acac, as in T 312,
q.v. How needless this is may be seen
from 569, 684, IL 731, ὃ 743-44, ete. ;
ef. also Eur. Med. 1057 ἔασον αὐτούς,
ὦ τάλαν, φεῖσαι τέκνων. It is curious
that so simple a construction should
have given rise to difficulties and led
to conjectures earlier than the inter-
polation; e.g. Did. wrote éacas, ἀντὶ
τοῦ ἥδυνας, nippavas. ὅπερ ἀγνοήσαντές
τινες (!) ἔγραψαν “ ἐπεί με πρῶτ᾽ éhénoas.”
The τινές include Dion. Sidon. as appears
from Herodianos.

560. This sudden outburst on Achilles’
part has been adversely criticised on the
ground that Priam’s words include nothing
to account for so sudden a change of

VOL. II

567. μετοχλήςειε DJ: μετοχλίοςςει S: μετ᾽ ὁπλίεςςειε Q.

τ᾿ A (supr. x) Pap. μ. || 6yAa Ar. AQT Vr. bd: ὀχεῖα L:

568.
| ἐν GArect: yp. Eni ppeci

tone. The explanation surely is that
the terrible struggle which Achilles is
going through cannot be more vividly
indicated than by his intense sensitive-
ness to even the most innocent word
which can be supposed to imply hurry
or doubt. He must work the matter
out in his own way and at his own time,
if it is to be carried through at all. And
it is thoroughly natural that a man
should feel some irritation at repeated
prayers to do a thing which he has
already, under compulsion, decided to
do.

566. φυλακούς, a heteroclite form
occurring only here in H. (φύλακας I
477) except as a proper name (Z 35,
o 231). It is however attested as a
genuine Greek form by an inscr. on
the ‘ Arkesilas’ vase.

567. μετοχλίεςειε, cf. Y 187 ἀνδρῶν
δ᾽ οὔ κέν τις. . οὐδὲ μάλ᾽ ἡβῶν peta
μετοχλίσσειεν, lit. ‘lever back.’ See on
M 448.

568. τῶ, therefore, because I am acting
under divine compulsion and not of my
own will. For ἐν ἄλγεσι A gives as a
variant the more usual évi φρεσί as o 486.
But cf. ¢ 88 κεῖται ἐν ἄλγεσι θυμός.

2P

σι
-τ
ο

, / ἡ δὲ δ ΤῊΝ b]
μὴ σε, γέρον, ου QUTOV εν

IAIAAOC © (xxiv)

IA
1 κλισίηισιν ἐάσω

« / \ 3 3 / > / 5}
καὶ ἱκέτην περ ἐόντα, Διὸς δ᾽ aditopar ἐφετμάς. 570

a ” 5
ως εφατ,

ἔδδεισεν δ᾽ ὁ γέρων καὶ ἐπείθετο μύθωι.

Πηλεΐδης δ᾽ οἴκοιο λέων ὡς arto θύραζε,

οὐκ οἷος"

- / 4
ἅμα τῶι ye δύω θεράποντες ἕποντο,

ἥρως Αὐτομέδων ἠδ᾽ "Ἄλκιμος, οὕς pa μάλιστα

τί ᾿Αχιλεὺς ἑτάρων μετὰ Πάτροκλόν γε θανόντα. — 575
οἱ τόθ᾽ ὑπὸ ζυγόφιν λύον ἵππους ἡμιόνους τε,

ἐς δ᾽ ἄγαγον κήρυκα καλήτορα τοῖο γέροντος,

cad δ᾽ ἐπὶ δίφρου εἷσαν: ἐυσσώτρου δ᾽ ἀπ᾽ ἀπήνης

ἥιρεον “Exropens κεφαλῆς ἀπερείσι᾽ ἄποινα.

cad δ᾽ ἔλιπον δύο pape ἐύννητόν τε χιτῶνα, 580
ὄφρα νέκυν πυκάσας δοίη οἰκόνδε φέρεσθαι.

ὃμωὰς δ᾽ ἐκκαλέσας λοῦσαι κέλετ᾽ ἀμφί T ἀλεῖψαι,

νόσφιν ἀειράσας, ὡς μὴ Πρίαμος ἴδοι υἱόν,

μὴ ὁ μὲν ἀχνυμένηι κραδίηι χόλον οὐκ ἐρύσαιτο

παῖδα ἰδών, ᾿Αχιλῆν δ᾽ ὀρινθείη φίλον ἧτορ 585
καί ἑ κατακτείνειε, Διὸς δ᾽ ἀλίτηται ἐφετμάς.

569. γέρων ().
eupaze: xaudze L.
eT. 578-79 om. H?.

en Pap. v. || ἀποπίηνης Pap. p.
[G]RU Pap. ν, Vr. d: ϑώ(ηη(ι) Ὡ.

570. O om. AC.

573. θεράποντε S.
Pap. v. || HO’: τε καὶ JPQS. || oUc: ὅν Q.
578. δίφρον R. || €Uc(c)eoTpou DP (éu in vas.)
QRT Pap. v, Vr. Ὁ A, yp. A: éUzéctou ὦ (euL . .
580. ritwna Pap. vi.

583. ἴϑη(ι) CPT Cant. Bar. Mor.

571. gato pijrHcen Pap. μ. 572.
574. αὐτομέθων : αλκιμέϑων
576. ὑπὸ : and Vr. A. || ἵππους

Pap. μὴ). || ἀπ᾽ om. GH:
581. δοίη (A swpr.)
584.

χόλον : ἔν τισι κότον A: ἄμεινον δὲ réon Sch. T (Herod.). || οὐκ ἐρύςαιτο :
οὐ κατερύξει P: οὐ κατερύξη L: ἔν τισιν οὐ κατερύκοι A.

569. κὴ.. οὐδ᾽, see H. G. 8 278.

570. καί is rarely left long before a
vowel; Brandreth xrds, ingeniously.
Διὸς épetudc in a general sense, the
laws of Zeus ἱκετήσιος (ν 213, etc.).

572. οἴκοιο of the tent, see on 448.
The F is neglected (δὲ δόμοιο Brandreth).

575. Cf. w 78-79 where the same
description is applied to Antilochos.

577. καλήτορα, cricr, here only in H.
except as a proper name. Cf. Lat.
calator in the sense of attendant.

578. ἐυεςώτρου, vulg. évééorou as 275.
ἐύσσωτρος recurs in Scut. Here. 273.
The simple σῶτρον felloe occurs only in
Pollux, but is implied in ἐπίσσωτρον.
579=276.

583. νόσφιν Geipdcac, not bringing
him into the μέγαρον, but taking him to
another room. It has been objected that
‘it is not easy to see how Priam, sitting

inside the tent, can see what is going on
outside, as it is night; so that 583-86
seem to be an untimely repetition of the
motive of 568-70’ (Hentze). The simple
explanation given above shews how
groundless this difficulty is.

584. χόλον οὐκ ἐρύςαιτο, ἔν τισι κότον
οὐ κατερύκοι" ἄμεινον δὲ χόλον, Did. “Pia-
νὸς χόλον (so Heyne: ἐανοὶ κόλον MS.),
οἱ δὲ κότον" ἄμεινον δὲ γόον, Schol. T.
χόλον must be right, but κατερύκοι is
better perhaps than ἐρύσαιτο, which is
not elsewhere used precisely in this sense,
though it comes naturally enough from
that of ‘ preserving in the breast.’ This
is expressed in full in 7 459 μή € συβώτης
γνοίη. . καὶ Πηνελοπείηι ἔλθοι ἀπαγ-
γέλλων μηδὲ φρεσὶν εἰρύσσαιτο.

586 is no doubt an interpolation: the
subj. GAitHtai after the historic tense
is indefensible, and shews that half the

IAIAAOC © (χχιν)

579

\ ’ > \ i \ rf \ r > ,
τὸν δ᾽ ἐπεὶ οὖν ὃμωαὶ λοῦσαν καὶ χρῖσαν ἐλαίωι,
ἀμφὶ δέ μιν φᾶρος καλὸν βάλον ἠδὲ χιτῶνα,

’ \ / 5
autos τὸν ¥

᾿Αχιλεὺς λεχέων ἐπέθηκεν ἀείρας,

\ ’ 4 ” 5 / Pee | > / Ξ
σὺν ὃ ἕταροι ἢειραν ἐυξέστην ἐπ ἀπήνην. 590
” / > v9 v , ᾽ > / ΄ “
ὠιμωξέν T ap ἔπειτα, φίλον δ᾽ ὀνόμηνεν ETALPOV"
“ , / , " ΄ὔ

μὴ μοι, Τ!άτροκλε, σκυδμαινέμεν, αἴ κε πύθηαι,

> / aCe , oe “ a ”
εἰν "Αὐδός περ ἐών, OTL“ Extopa δῖον ἔλυσα
\ , τς \ ” > / “ BA
πατρὶ φίλωι, ἐπεὶ OV μοι ἀεικέα δῶκεν ἄποινα.
\ ’ i > \ \ la) ’ ’ / “ ΕῚ >, I pe Paes
σοὶ δ᾽ av ἐγὼ καὶ τῶνδ᾽ ἀποδάσσομαι ὅσσ᾽ ἐπέοικεν. 595

= ΄ / ww. . Lal
ἢ pa καὶ ἐς κλισίην πάλιν ἤϊε δῖος

”

᾿Αχιλλεύς,

ἕζετο δ᾽ ἐν κλισμῶι πολυδαιδάλωι, ἔνθεν ἀνέστη,

/ “- Sans \ \ ,ὔ / r
τοίχου τοῦ ἑτέρου, ποτὶ δὲ Ipiapov φάτο μῦθον"

ἜΜΕΝ \ ΄, , Ἵ - 5...

υἱὸς μὲν δή τοι λέλυται, γέρον, ὡς ἐκέλευες,

tal > / ’ > - /
κεῖται δ᾽ ἐν δ εχεεσα, - ἅμα δ᾽ ἠοῖ φαινομένηφιν 600

ὄψεαι αὐτὸς ἄγων: νῦν δὲ μνησώμεθα δόρπου.

589. αὐτὰρ Vr. d.
Supr. || ἅπηνηι A supr.
αὖ: ἂν 8
ν (i.e. ἄρ᾽ cri).
Hol 0 ἅμα L.

591. 0:

|| TON τ᾽ "1. || GnéexKen P.
τ JPQ Mor.
. || See’: ὧς Pap. vl. || ἐπέεικεν R, 597.
599. ἐκέλευςας J()T Bar.,

590. ἄειρον Ve A. || an’ A
Eust. 594-95 ἀθ. Ar. 595.
Yzeto Lips. | GpéctH ὦ

yp. A: cU κελεύεις CDP. 600.

line has been carelessly adapted from 570.
In that line there is no word of murder ;
it would be offence enough against the
rights of the supplant if he were roughly
driven away ; though Achilles naturally
leaves the lengths “to which his anger
might carry him to his hearers’ imagina-
tion. It is probable enough both that
the poet should in his own person con-
tinue this effective reserve in 585 and
that an interpolator of less delicate taste
should break through it by adding 586.

587-88=6 454-55, p 88-89 nearly.
Of the two ¢dpea (580) one we may
suppose is put as a cover on the bier,
the body clad in the chiton being
wrapped in the other.

593. Note the hiatus before “Extopa.
It is due rather to the refusal to elide
τι than to any reminiscence of an initial
o in“ Extwp (from cex = €x-?).

594-95 ἀθετοῦνται, ὅτι οὐκ ὀρθῶς ἕνεκα
δώρων λέγει ἀπολελυκέναι τὸν νεκρόν. ὑπὸ
γὰρ τοῦ Διὸς ἠναγκάσθη, ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἂν τὴν
ὑπὲρ Πατρόκλου τιμωρίαν δώρων ἠλλάξατο,
An. These arguments are quite in-
sufficient. Though Achilles obeys the
command of Zeus, yet that command
itself is conditional upon the bringing of
the ransom (119, 137-39) ; and it is only
the receiving of the ransom which enables

Achilles to plead that the surrender of
the body is not dishonourable. In our
ignorance of the Greek rites it is not
easy to say how Patroklos was to be
given his share of the ransom; but the
words of Andromache (X 512) suggest
that a portion of the clothing would be
burnt in his honour. Similarly in A 30-
31 Odysseus promises the shades ἐλθὼν εἰς
᾿Ιθάκην στεῖραν βοῦν, ἥ τις ἀρίστη, ῥέξειν
ἐν μεγάροισι, πυρήν τ᾽ ἐμπλησέμεν ἐσθλῶν.
Some of the costly things would probably
be reserved to be buried with his ashes,
when taken back to Greece. The custom
of bringing gifts to the graves of the
dead was as widely spread in Greece as
elsewhere, and the Mykenaean tombs
shew εὐ εῦσ τι evidence of the practice.
See App. L, ὃ 8. Kai τῶνϑε, in addition
to those already burnt on the pyre.

597. The xAicudc seems to be identical
with the θρόνος of 515; and so in A 623
compared with 645. The twoare usually
distinguished, see particularly a 130 ff.,
where it is clear that the κλισμός was a
lower seat. So also in Θ 442 compared
with 436. Such a trifling forgetfulness
is of no critical importance. The little
that can be conjectured about the κλισμός
will be found in Helbig H. #. pp. 118,
122. τοίχου τοῦ ἑτέρου. I 219,

δ80

IAIAAOC © (xxiv)

\ / ’ Sai7. τ > / /
καὶ yap τ᾽ ἠύκομος Νιόβη €uvncato avtou,
7, “ / ”
τῆι περ δώδεκα παῖδες ἐνὶ μεγάροισιν ὄλοντο,
\ ε' 3 Los τ /
ἐξ μὲν θυγατέρες, ἕξ δ᾽ υἱέες ἡβώοντες.

\ \ / b ’ b / al
τοὺς μὲν ᾿Απόλλων πέφνεν ἀπ᾽ ἀργυρέοιο βιοῖο

605

ΕΔ, 5 /
χωόμενος Νιόβηι, Tas 6 ᾿Άρτεμις ἰοχέαιρα,
na We
οὕνεκ᾽ ἄρα Λητοῖ ἰσάσκετο καλλιπαρήιωι"

- > > AY / / 4
φῆ δοιὼ τεκέειν, ἡ δ᾽ αὐτὴ γείνατο πολλούς

\ > » \ , "7 5) 5. ἘῊῊΝ ΄ aN
τὼ δ᾽ ἄρα, καὶ δοιώ περ €ovT, ἀπὸ πάντας ὄλεσσαν.

e \ vy > lal / > 2 / OE i
οι μὲν ap EVV Map KEAT EV povat, OVOE TLS EV

610

κατθάψαι, λαοὺς δὲ λίθους ποίησε Κρονίων"
τοὺς δ᾽ ἄρα τῆι δεκάτη. θάψαν θεοὶ Οὐρανίωνες.

΄ / 3 ? Ν ΄ Uf, /
ἡ δ᾽ dpa σίτου μνήσατ᾽, ἐπεὶ κάμε δάκρυ χέουσα.

602. εἴτου : ϑόρπου (..
C Pap. ν.
S Par. g.
(supr. Θ over @).

605. an’: én’ P.

602. This is the only appearance in H.
of the Niobe legend, so popular in
classical times, as \ 582-92 gives the
only mention of Tantalos her father,
though without any mention of the
relationship, which is probably a later
notion. The localisation of the story on
Mt. Sipylos is doubtless older than the
Theban myth. It is true that the lines
(614-17) in which this, as well as the
allusion to the famous rock-figure, occurs,
have been regarded with suspicion since
ancient times; but as shewn on 613
and 614, the arguments leading to this
conclusion are by no means convin-
cing. The familiar form of the fable
is apparently due to Aischylos and
Sophokles, each of whom wrote a
‘Niobe.’ Sophokles also alluded to
the story in two well-known passages,
El. 150-52, Ant. 828-32. According to
the tragedians the children of Niobe
were seven sons and seven daughters,
while Hesiod, Pindar, and Mimnermos
are said to have spoken of ten of each ;
other numbers are quoted from other
sources (see Roscher Lea. s.v.). The
six sons and six daughters are attributed
in the same words to Aiolos in x 6.

607. icdcKero, here only, frequentative
from *icdw, ἰσάζομαι. According to one
legend Leto and Niobe were once in-
timate friends, the daughter, like her
father Tantalos, having been admittted
to intimacy with the immortals, Aarw
καὶ Νιόβα μάλα μὲν φίλαι ἦσαν ἔταιραι,
Sappho, frag. 31 Bergk.

603. THI: AR:
604. δ᾽ om. 1). || υἱέες : yp. καὶ υἱεῖς : διχῶς οὖν Did. ἡβώωντες
611. καθϑάψαι () Vr. A Pap. ν: Kaedyar R
612. θεὸν (leg. ecoi) οὐρανίωνες ἔϑαψαν J.

ey

HJ: τῆς Vr. d. || éNiawerdpoicin

608. ἡ θὲ γείνατο for αὐτὴ δὲ yelvac ba,
the favourite relapse into the direct con-
struction.

611. We have no means of saying why
the folk were turned to stone. The
allusion is to some form of the legend
unknown to Schol. A, who explains ἀντὶ
τοὺς λιθίνους τὰς ψυχὰς καὶ ἀσυμπαθεῖς:
ἐποίησε πρὸς τὸ μὴ θάψαι. This will
evidently not do, for the gods would not
make the folk hard-hearted in order that.
they might not bury the victims, if they
meant to perform the rites themselves.
Clearly the folk were in some way in-
volved in the offence and turned into
stone in punishment; but the gods,
mindful of their friendship with Niobe
and her father, did not allow Leto’s
vengeance to go so far as the denial of
funeral rites altogether. There is no
doubt a thought of the etymology which,
as we know from the Deukalion legend,
brought λαός and das into relation.

613, πρὸς τὴν διαφωνίαν τῶν νεωτέρων.
φασὶ γὰρ καὶ αὐτὴν ἀπολελιθῶσθαι, Ὅμηρος
δὲ οὔ, An. The two versions are recon-
ciled by the story as given in Apollodoros
and the scholia, according to which the
slaughter took place in Thebes; the
disconsolate Niobe returned to her home
in Sipylos, and long afterwards prayed
the gods to end her grief by turning her
to stone. NON ὃέ nou contrasts this
later period with that of the catastrophe.
But the later forms of the Niobe legend
are so various that we can hardly trace
them back to a definite source, or do

IAIAAOC Ω (χχιν) 581
r / b] / ᾽ ” > /
νῦν δέ που ἐν πέτρηισιν, ἐν οὔρεσιν οἰοπόλοισιν,
/ « » 4
ἐν Σιπύλωι, ὅθι φασὶ θεάων ἔμμεναι εὐνὰς 615

614-17 ἀθ. Aph. Ar.
iva, Ὁ.

more than note their differences from
Homer. It is clear that there is no
absolute inconsistency between the few
fragments of the story which we have
here.

614-17. ἀθετεῖνται στίχοι δ΄, ὅτι οὐκ ἀκό-
λουθοι τῶι ““ἡ δ᾽ ἄρα σίτου μνήσατ᾽.᾿᾿ εἰ
γὰρ ἀπελιθώθη. πῶς σίτια προσηνέγκατο ;
καὶ ἡ παραμυθία γελοία: φάγε, ἐπεὶ καὶ 7
Νιόβη ἔφαγε καὶ ἀπελιθώθη. ἔστι δὲ καὶ
ἩΗσιόδεια τῶι χαρακτῆρι, καὶ μᾶλλόν γε τὸ
‘aud’ ᾿Αχελώϊον ἐρρώσαντο.᾽᾽ καὶ τρὶς
κατὰ τὸ συνεχὲς τὸ ἐν. πῶς δὲ καὶ λίθος
γενομένη θεῶν ἐκ κήδεα πέσσει ; προηθε-
τοῦντο δὲ καὶ παρ᾽ ᾿Αριστοφάνει, An.
The last two arguments are not valid ;
the repetition of ἐν can be paralleled
in X 503-4 (ef. also A 479-80); and
the legend told that the water trickling
down the rock-image actually was a
perpetuation of Niobe’s grief in stone.
The expression €ppwcanto for dunce is
Hesiodean as Ar. said; ef. Theog. 8
χοροὺς ἐνεποιήσαντο καλούς, ἱμερόεντας,
ἐπερρώσαντο δὲ ποσσίν, and also Hymn.
Ven. 261 μετ᾽ ἀθανάτοισι καλὸν χορὸν
ἐρρώσαντο. But this is a very natural
specialization of the Homeric sense move
nimbly, A529, A 50, IL 166, Σ 411, Ψ 367,
y 3,069. It has further been urged that
the expression gaci is not like the Epic
style, for mythological facts are within
the poet’s own knowledge. But the ex-
pression can be paralleled from B 783,
€ 42 Οὐλυμπόνδ᾽, ὅθι φασὶ θεῶν ἕδος
ἀσφαλὲς αἰεὶ ἔμμεναι as well as from
T 416, q.v. Further, Niobe was turned
into stone at her own prayer, not as a
punishment; thus the mention of her
will not deter Priam from following her
example. The arguments for rejection
are therefore quite insufficient. ‘The
connexion of thought will be ‘ Do not
abstain from food on the ground that
to eat is a slighting of the mourner’s
duty; even Niobe, type of the dis-
consolate, ate ; and so far was this from
interfering with her expression of faith-
ful sorrow that, by the favour of the
gods, her grief was actually immortalized
in stone. So mayest thou eat now, and
yet hereafter (ἔπειτά κεν, 619) duly
mourn thy son.’ The lines far from

614. METPHICIN EN: πέτραις ἢ J\):
615. θεάων : τυφώεος Schol. Soph. AZ. 151.

πέτραις H én ‘I’

being superfluous thus prove indispens-
able to the thought. All antiquity
knew of the stone figure of Niobe which
was still to be seen on Sipylos. It has
generally been recognized in ἃ rude
figure in front of a recess in the face of
a cliff near Smyrna. This has owing to
weathering but a distant resemblance to
a human being, but that it is a work
of men’s hands has been placed beyond
a doubt by Mr. Simpson, Mr. Sayce,
and others who have examined it. <Ac-
cording to the latter it is ‘the likeness
of the great goddess of Carchemish, and
the cartouches engraved by the side of
it, partly in Hittite and partly in
Egyptian characters, shew that it was
carved in the time of Ramses-Sesostris
himself.’ An inser. of Roman date
shews that the figure is ‘Plastene,
Mother of the Gods.’ Pausanias, him-
self, it appears, a native of the district,
describes the figure thus (i. 21. 5): ἡ δὲ
πλησίον μὲν πέτρα Kal κρημνός ἐστιν, οὐδὲν
παρόντι σχῆμα παρεχόμενος γυναικὸς οὔτε
ἄλλως οὔτε πενθούσης " εἰ δέ γε πορρωτέρω
γένοιο, δεδακρυμένην δόξεις ὁρᾶν καὶ κατηφῆ
γύναικα. See also v. 13. 7. Another
Smyrnaean, Quintus (i. 299 ff.), gives
a similar description in metre. (See
Jebb on Soph. Ant. 831.) But it is
clear that they are not referring to
what is now called the Niobe; the
description does not correspond closely,
as the figure of which we know never
‘weeps,’ and is said to look more like
a human being from a short distance
than from a great (see Prof. Ramsay in
J. H. S. iii. 61 ff.). It is very probable
that the ancient Niobe is to be identified
with some natural rock further inland ;
a recent traveller, Schweisthal, claims
to have found such a one exactly answer-
ing the conditions, but his identifica-
tion is not satisfactory. A fulland clear
account of the whole question will be
found in Frazer Paus. 111. 552 ff.

615. εὐνάς, cf. B 783, where the
word is more appropriately used of
Typhoeus couched beneath the earth.
Here it seems to mean only dwellings.
The scholia compare Pindar N. i. 3
᾿Ορτυγία δέμνιον ᾿Αρτέμιδος.

582 IAIAAOC © (xxiv)

os

νυμφάων, αἵ τ᾽ ἀμφ᾽ ᾿Αχελώϊον ἐρρώσαντο,
ἔνθα λίθος περ ἐοῦσα θεῶν ἐκ κήδεα πέσσει.
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε δὴ καὶ νῶι μεδώμεθα, Sie γεραιέ,
σίτου: ἔπειτά κεν adte φίλον παῖδα κλαίοισθα
Ἴλιον εἰσαγαγῶν" πολυδάκρυτος δέ τοι ἔσται." 620
div apyvpov ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεὺς

ἔδερόν τε καὶ ἄμφεπον εὖ κατὰ κόσμον,

ἐπισταμένως πεῖράν T ὀβελοῖσιν,

ἢ καὶ ἀναΐξας
σφάξ᾽.
μίστυλλόν T ἄρ᾽
ὠὦπτησάν TE περιφραδέως ἐρύσαντό τε πάντα.
Αὐτομέδων δ᾽ ἄρα σῖτον ἑλὼν ἐπένειμε τραπέζηι
καλοῖς ἐν κανέοισιν: ἀτὰρ κρέα νεῖμεν ᾿Αχιλλεύς.
οἱ δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ὀνείαθ᾽ ἑτοῖμα προκείμενα χεῖρας ἴαλλον.
αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ πόσιος καὶ ἐδητύος ἐξ ἔρον ἕντο,
ἦτοι Δαρδανίδης Πρίαμος θαύμαξ᾽ ANTE
ὅσσος ἔην οἷός Te: θεοῖσι γὰρ ἄντα ἐώικει"
αὐτὰρ ὁ Δαρδανίδην Πρίαμον θαύμαξεν ᾿Αχιλλεύς,
εἰσορόων ὄψιν τ᾽ ἀγαθὴν καὶ μῦθον ἀκούων.

ἕταροι δ᾽

630

αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ τάρπησαν ἐς ἀχλήλους ὁρόωντες,
τὸν πρότερος προσέειπε γέρων Τ]ρίαμος θεοειδής"
“λέξον νῦν pe τάχιστα, διοτρεφές, ὄφρα καὶ ἤδη

635

616. ἀχελήϊον A supr., and ap. Schol. A, Eust. - τινὲς ἀχελήςσιον Sch. T. ||

ἐρρύςαντο Vr. d. 619. αὖτε : ater 0. 622. cpaz’ P. || ἔτεροι R. 629.
BapdanidHN npiauoN J sip. || yp. ZEN αχιλλεὺς J. 630. Te: re(?)T!: χε Pap.v
(τ in ras. man. 2). 631. ὁ om. GHJPRTU. 632. ὄψίν τ᾽ : τ᾽ ὄψιν 1..
633. τάρβηςαν J. 635. NON: on C. || Kai ADGJPU Pap. v, Vr. A: Ken ὥ.
616. Itis not strange to find an Ache- "623-24 = H 317-18: 625-26=I1 216-
loos, otherwise unknown, in Lydia. Ace. 17: 627-28=191-92. 627 occurs many

times in Od.
630. Helbig has well remarked how

to the scholia a stream there was called
᾿Αχέλης, and there were others called

625

ee en ee ee et ee ee ee

᾿Αχελῷιος in Troas, Achaia, Thessaly and
Arkadia ; see Paus. viii. 38. 7, Strabo,
p. 450. The name implies an intimate
acquaintance with the country at which
we need not be surprised in this book.
In our ignorance of the local terminology,
the variants ᾿Αχελήϊον and ᾿Αχελήσιον
have as good claims to consideration as
the text.

617. θεῶν Ex may be takenattributively
with κήδεα, woes from the gods, as EK 64
θεῶν ἐκ θέσφατα. But it is quite possible
to join it with πέσσει,
the gods. Cf. ἐκ Aids ἠείδης X 280,
θεῶν ἐξ aeldne p 518, and often. The
latter gives more weight to the fact that
the turning to stone was a reward, and is

therefore more suitable to the consolation
of Priam.

se. by the act of

the overmasteri ing admiration for physical
beauty which is ‘so characteristic of the
Greek mind has in these lines—where the
beauty of the old man is as vividly re-
cognized as that of the young—one of its
most striking as well as of its earliest ex-
pressions. ἄντα, Face to face, i.e. when
brought into comparison. Cf. A 187
ὁμοιωθήμεναι ἄντην.

632. ὄψιν of outward appearance, as
we use look. So Z 468.

635. Ἀέξον, put me to bed, cf. ἔλεξα,
the reading of the vulgate in © 252.
ὄφρα Kai . . KOIMHEENTE recurs in ὃ
294-95, w 254-55, in both cases with
the variants ὄφρά κεν and παυσώμεθα.
The latter was read by Ar. here, ἀπρεπὲς
yap τὸ λέγειν τὸν Πρίαμον ταρπώμεθα
(Did.), though he made no objection to

welts

IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv)

WA δ A /

ὕπνωι ὕπο yAuKEpaL τωρπώμεθα κοιμηθέντε"

? γ ΄ » e \ / > lal
ov yap Tw μύσαν «ὄσσε ὑπὸ βλεφάροισιν ἐμοῖσιν,
> e ΄-“ 6 \ ae »Μ

ἐξ οὗ σῆις ὑπὸ χερσὶν ἐμὸς πάϊς ὥλεσε θυμόν,

τὰ » » Σιν / \ / / /
ANN αἰεὶ στενάχω καὶ κήδεα μυρία πέσσω,

> a 5 / / \ ,
αὐλῆς ἐν χορτοισι κυλινδόμενος κατὰ KOT pov.

640

lal \ / / 5
νῦν δὴ καὶ σίτου πασάμην καὶ αἴθοπα οἶνον

/ / / \ ᾿ ”
Naveavins καθέηκα: πάρος γε μὲν οὔ Te πεπάσμην.

im, es

ἡ eles

᾿Αχιλεὺς δ᾽ ἑτάροισιν ἰδὲ δμωῆισι κέλευσε,

/ 5 ς » » / / \ εὰὶ] \
déuve ὑπ᾽ αἰθούσηι θέμεναι καὶ ῥήγεα καλὰ

πορφύρε' ἐμβαλέειν, στορέσαι τ᾽ ἐφύπερθε τάπητας,

645

χλαίνας τ᾽ ἐνθέμεναι οὔλας καθύπερθεν ἕσασθαι.
αἱ δ᾽ ἴσαν ἐκ μεγάροιο δάος μετὰ χερσὶν ἔχουσαι,

αἶψα δ᾽ ἄρα στόρεσαν δοιὼ λέχε᾽ ἐγκονέουσαι.

636. παυοώμεθα Ar. A (supr. tTapn) PQT Vr. A Par. Ὁ:
637. πω: nou Pl.
640. κατὰ : περὶ 1).

κοιμκηϑέντε D Pap. ν : κοιμηϑέντες 2.
πέςςω : yp. πάεχω Vr. b.

παρπώμεθα ἢ.
ὑπὸ : éniC. 639.
642. λευκανίης (C supr.)

DS (Pap. ν supr.) Mor. Harl. a, Vr. A (cf. X 325). || Kaeinka H: μεθέηκα C.

643. OucHicin ἔειπε U.
écaceai H. || τάπητα Vr. A.
€cecoat J Pap. μ (supr. a).

enkoneoucal Pap. ν.

645. enBakeein Pap. v:
646 om. LH.
647. Odoc: ϑάϑας PR”.
Ar. AGQT: ἄρ᾽ éctépecan (ἄρ᾽ om. R).

écBahéein H. || Epunepeen
| καθύπερθεν : τ᾽ Epunepoen P.

648. ἄρα cTépecan
enxan[eouca] Pap. μ' (supr. 0):

τάρπησαν above. But the use of παύεσθαι
=to rest, without any specific reference
to some activity to be rested from, is
very doubtful; the authority of Ξ 260,
Q 17 is inadequate ; and in any case we
should need παυώμεθα, the aor. subj.
being παυσόμεθα. As between καί and
κεν, the former is recommended by the
fact that κεν is very rarely found after
the purely final ὄφρα ; see H. (ἡ. § 287 ὁ.
Weber (Lntw. der Absichtssdtze, i. 35)
finds only eight cases, with six of
ὄφρα ἄν, out of 237 instances of final
ὄφρα. καί is to be taken in the con-
tinuative or explicative sense elsewhere
found in relative clauses ; see on YT 165.
It may be translated by our so.

636. Und, best taken in the local sense,
as though sleep were like a veil spread
over a man; cf. ε 492 (ὕπνος) φίλα
βλέφαρ᾽ ἀμφικαλύψας, ἡ 286 ὕπνον κατ᾽
ἀπείρονα χεῦεν.

640. χόρτοιει, cf. A 774.

641. καὶ αἴϑοπα, an unmetrical reading.
καί τ᾽, Bentley. It would be better to read
ἠδ᾽ with Brandreth as in 7 295. καί may
have slipped in from a reminiscence of
μ 19 σῖτον καὶ κρέα πολλὰ καὶ αἴθοπα
οἷνον ἐρυθρόν, and the similar 7 197.

Compare also IL 226, and see App. N,
§ 20.

642. λαυκανίης, cf. X 325,

643=I1 658, 644-47=6 297-300, ἡ
336-39 (and 673-76 are extremely similar
to the following passages in 6 302-5, 7
344-47. Compare also W 289-99; x
497=Q 647). The lines are evidently
more in place as referring to the palaces
of Menelaos and Alkinoos than to the hut
of a campaigner ; their use here is part of
the general view taken of Achilles’ abode,
and does not in itself prove that the Od.
may not have borrowed them hence. The
converse, however, seems more likely.

644. ῥήγεα, see note on I 661.
τάπητες are similarly used in κ 12 εὕδουσ᾽
ἔν Te τάπησι καὶ ἐν τρητοῖσι λέχεσσι. Καὶ
156 ὑπὸ κράτεσφι τάπης τετάνυστο φαεινός
suggests that they form pillows. Cf.
also II 224,

647. Odoc, a by-form of dais, used
collectively, occurring only in the repeti-
tions of this line, 6 300, 7 339, x 497,
y 294, In all cases there is respectable
Ms. authority for (ἐκ μεγάρου ?) δᾶιδας.

648. ἐγκονέουςαι, only in this line in
H., though familiar in Trag. The der.
is doubtful.

584 IAIAAOC © (xxrv)

τὸν δ᾽ ἐπικερτομέων προσέφη πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεύς"
“ ἐκτὸς μὲν δὴ λέξο, γέρον φίλε, μή τις ᾿Αχαιῶν
ἐνθάδ᾽ ἐπέλθηισιν βουληφόρος, οἵ τέ μοι αἰεὶ
βουλὰς βουλεύουσι παρήμενοι, ἣ θέμις ἐστί.
τῶν εἴ τίς σε ἴδοιτο θοὴν διὰ νύκτα μέλαιναν,
αὐτίκ᾽ ἂν ἐξείποι ᾿Αγαμέμνονι ποιμένι λαῶν,
καί κεν ἀνάβλησις λύσιος νεκροῖο γένοιτο.
ἀλλ᾽ ἄγε μοι τόδε εἰπὲ καὶ ἀτρεκέως κατάλεξον,
ποσσῆμαρ μέμονας κτερεϊζέμεν “Ἕκτορα δῖον,
ὄφρα τέως αὐτός τε μένω καὶ λαὸν ἐρύκω.᾽"

τὸν δ᾽ ἠμείβετ᾽ ἔπειτα γέρων Uplapos θεοειδής"
“εἰ μὲν δή μ᾽ ἐθέλεις τελέσαι τάφον "Exrope δίωι,
ὧδέ κέ μοι ῥέζων, ᾿Αχιλεῦ, κεχαρισμένα θείης.
οἶσθα γὰρ ὡς κατὰ ἄστυ ἐέλμεθα, τηλόθι δ᾽ ὕλη
ἀξέμεν ἐξ ὄρεος, μάλα δὲ Τρῶες δεδίασιν.

650

655

660

650. δὴ om. P: τοι L. || λέξον DGJQ (Pap. uw?) Vr. A: λέξαι R: λέξεο S. ||

γέρων R. 652. BoudkeUcouci U.
DS Pap.v: ἐςεῖται C: γένηται 0,

King’s and ap. Eust. || ϑήςεις Vr. A.

654. autixa ὃ Pap. v!.
656. κατάλεξον : Grdpeucon HR Bar. Mor.
658. τε μένω : μενέω Ap. Lew. 151. 34.
662. UAHN Pap. v!.

655. Γένοιτο

660. «κ᾽ om. P. 661. ῥέξας JP

663. δὲ : rap Ar.

HJPRS Bar. Mor. Vr. A Harl. Ὁ ἃ, King’s Par. a. ὦ

649. ἐπικερτομέων, fawniing. This
should be the sense of the word, from
the parallel passages, II 744, x 194, as
well as from the adj. κερτόμιος, see A
539, A 6, E 419. The application is
very obscure, but it is best taken as
expressing Achilles’ tone in speaking of
Agamemnon, as though he bitterly as-
sumed that his enemy would thwart
him at every opportunity. There is no
taunt in his words to Priam. The only
possible alternative is to take the word
to mean ‘bantering,’ a sense which
might be supported by κερτομίοις in w
240, where no malice is implied. We
might then see in Achilles’ words a play-
ful apology for placing Priam’s bed out-
side the hut, though the αἴθουσα or πρό-
douos is the regular sleeping-place for
unexpected guests, as in the parallel
passages of the Od., but this is at least a
serious stretching of the sense of ἐπικερ-
τομέων.

650. λέξο, see note on δέξο T 10.

655. γένοιτο, vulg. γένηται, on which
Monro says, ‘ the subj. appears to express
the certainty of the further consequence,
as though the hypothetical case (αὐτίκ᾽
ἂν ἐξείποι) had actually occurred,’ H. (7.

§ 275. The sudden shifting of the point
of view is perhaps not impossible, though
very improbable. If γένηται is to be
retained, it would be much better to
read ἐξείπηι with Agar (J. P. xxv. 320).
For the subj. in apodosis after ef with
opt. compare note on I 142,

657. moccHhuap, a curious compound
on the analogy of ἑξῆμαρ, αὐτῆμαρ, ete.
There appears to be no similar compound
of πόσος in Greek. The simple πόσ(σ)ος
is not found in H.

658. For τέως as an iambus see T 189.

661. ὧδε must mean as 7 shall say;
it cannot=oiirws, as thow hast said. It
is, however, not actually explained in
what follows, though the required state-
ment ‘by giving us a truce for eleven
days,’ is virtually contained in Priam’s
reasons for requiring that length of time.

662-63 are rejected by Peppmiiller (as
well as by Diintzer on other grounds),
as giving a wrong reason for the length
of time needed, viz. that it will take
them so long to collect the wood ; where-
as really nine days of mourning were
demanded by ancient eustom—which he
illustrates by Plutarch’s statement that
Lykurgos limited the days of mourning

IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv) 585
fol 5 \ /
ἐννῆμαρ μέν κ᾽ αὐτὸν ἐνὶ μεγάροις γοάοιμεν,
τῆι δεκάτη. δέ κε θάπτοιμεν δαίνυτό τε λαός, 665
, r
ἑνδεκάτην δέ κε τύμβον ἐπ᾽ αὐτῶι ποιήσαιμεν,
lel / "» 39
τῆι δὲ δυωδεκάτην πολεμίξομεν, εἴ περ ἀνάγκη.
\ ᾽ 5 , ΄ A 5) ΄
τὸν δ᾽ αὖτε προσέεεύπε ποδάρκης δῖος Αχιλλεὺς"
““ ἔσταί τοι καὶ ταῦτα, γέρον Τ]ρίαμ᾽, ὡς σὺ κελεύεις"
/ , ¢ » ᾽᾽ -r
σχήσω yap πόλεμον τόσσον χρόνον ὅσσον ἄνωγας. 670
“Ὁ fal n
ὡς ἄρα φωνήσας ἐπὶ καρπῶι χεῖρα γέροντος
/ \ lal
ἔλλαβε δεξιτερήν, μή πως δείσει᾽ ἐνὶ θυμῶι.
sont) / /
οἱ μὲν ap ἐν προδόμωι δόμου αὐτόθι κοιμήσαντο,
κῆρυξ καὶ ἸἹ]ρίαμος, πυκινὰ φρεσὶ μήδε᾽ ἔχοντες,
wk » \ a a , > , Ξ
αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλεὺς εὗδε μυχῶι κλισίης ἐυπήκτου" 675
τῶι δὲ Bpionis παρελέξατο καλλιπάρηιος.
ἄλλοι μέν pa θεοί τε καὶ ἀνέρες ἱπποκορυσταὶ
/ a ε
εὗδον παννύχιοι, μαλακῶι δεδμημένοι ὕπνωι:"
> c , / Ἢ >
arn οὐχ “Eppetay ἐριούνιον ὕπνος ἔμαρπτεν,
« aed ἡ > SN \ “ , σι
ὁρμαίνοντ ἀνὰ θυμὸν ὅπως Τ]ρίαμον βασιλῆα 680
fal > / \ e \ /
νηῶν ἐκπέμψειε λαθὼν ἱεροὺς πυλαωρούς.
lal ’ la ΄ \ fal / \ “- >
στῆ δ᾽ ap ὑπὲρ κεφαλῆς Kai μιν πρὸς μῦθον ἔειπεν"

664. κ᾽ : τ᾽ C. || énimuerdpoic © Pap. v. | roowuen Pap. ν. 665 om. ᾧ.
667. πτολεμίξομεν JR Pap. v: modeuizouen 17] Harl. a: πτολεμίζομεν Vr. A.
669. γέρων ἢ. 670. Téccon πόλεμον A (with || and | supr.) GU. || ὡς εὺ ἢ
éccon Eust. 672. ϑεξιτερηι Pap. v. || ϑείςει() ADT Pap. μ: ϑήςει Vr. b:
δείςη(ι) ὦ). 673. of: τὼ © Harl. ἃ. || αὐτόθι : αὐτου Pap. ν. 674. πυκνὰ S.
616. δὲ : δ᾽ ἄρα A (δὲ A™) Bar. Mor.: Bap Pap. μὶ supr. 678. HUOON Pa}. μ᾽ vi.
679. ἐρμείην G. || ἑρμείας ἐριούνιος U (last c over N). || Euapnen P,

Υ

and the funeral to eleven. The inter-
polator, he thinks, being ignorant of
this, held it necessary to supply an ex-
planation of the length of time required.
This is ingenious, and finds some support
in the non-Homeric form dediacin (δείδ-
for 6é6F- being the only perf. stem else-
where found). But it clearly is not
necessary. The couplet may be ex-
plained as a touch of natural pride tak-
ing the form of an apology for accepting
the offer at all. Virchow remarks that
to this day all the wood required for
Hissarlik and the lower Troad has to
be brought by horses from the distant
heights of Ida.

664. μεγάροισι γόαιμεν Fick, as a non-
thematic form (ef. γόαν (1) Z 500 note),
to restore the long form of the dat.

665. ϑαίνυτο, opt., like δαινύατ᾽ σ 248,

see note on ἐκδῦμεν IL 99, and H. G.
§ 83.1. Philoxenos accented δαινῦτο,
regarding the word as contracted from
δαινύατο (plur.). This of course is im-
possible. The word might stand for
δαινύϊτο, but it is not clear that the
two vowel-sounds were ever ‘hetero-
syllabic’ ; more probably they coalesced
from the first.

671. Grasping by the wrist is a sign
of kindliness also in o 258, δεξιτερὴν ἐπὶ
καρπῶι ἑλὼν ἐμὲ χεῖρα προσηύδα (Penelope
speaking of Odysseus). See also H
108.

673. For the npddouoc see App. C.
It forms the guest-chamber- also in 6
302-05, a very similar passage. 675=
I 663. 677-78 see B 1-2, Καὶ 2.

681. ἱερούς, see note on K 56 φυλάκων
ἱερὸν τέλος. 682=B 59.

586 IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv)

ες 9 , v 7 ,ὕ / / e vs) [2
ὦ γέρον, οὐ νύ TL σοί γε μέλει κακόν, οἷον ἔθ᾽ εὕδεις
J , 5 / > / > Μ 3, /
ἀνδράσιν ἐν δήιοισιν, ἐπεί σ᾽ εἴασεν Ἀχιλλεύς.
\ “ \ \ / \ , oj
καὶ νῦν μὲν φίλον υἱὸν ἐλύσαο, πολλὰ δ᾽ ἔδωκας 685
- , fal / lal »
σεῖο δέ κε ζωοῦ καὶ τρὶς τόσα δοῖεν ἄποινα
“ο , / » i) ,
παῖδές τοι μετόπισθε λελειμμένοι, αἴ κ᾽ ᾿Αγαμέμνων
, > Ὁ he , \ / ’ 799
yvone a ᾿Ατρεΐδης, γνώωσι δὲ πάντες ᾿Αχαιοί.
ἃ Μ 3 » ’ e / / » > /
ὡς ἔφατ᾽, ἔδδεισεν δ᾽ ὁ γέρων, κήρυκα δ᾽ ἀνίστη.
a Ae / age? “ e /
τοῖσιν δ᾽ “Eppeias bed ἵππους ἡμιόνους Te,
ev 5 Mv ’ > \ 5. \ / > / ”
ῥίμφα δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ αὐτὸς ἔλαυνε κατὰ στρατόν, οὐδέ τις ἔγνω.
5. ο \ , - a A
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ πόρον iEov ἐυρρεῖος ποταμοῖο,
-- ’' , ἃ 524 7 , γ7χ 7
[Ξάνθου δινήεντος, ὃν ἀθάνατος τέκετο Ζεύς, ]
[ / \ » ’ τ / \ \ ”
Eppetas μὲν ἔπειτ᾽ ἀπέβη πρὸς μακρὸν ᾿Ολυμπον,
>\ \ , , A > 5
ἠὼς δὲ κροκόπεπλος ἐκίδνατο πᾶσαν ἐπ᾽ αἷαν,
e 5 » » fal “-
οἱ δ᾽ εἰς ἄστυ ἔλων οἰμωγῆι τε στοναχῆι τε
A € / \ / / BJ γ᾽ yA
ἵππους, ἡμίονοι δὲ νέκυν φέρον. οὐδέ τις ἄλλος
» / 9 an an
ἔγνω πρόσθ᾽ ἀνδρῶν καλλιζώνων τε γυναικῶν,

690

695

ἀλλ᾽ apa Κασσάνδρη, ἰκέλη χρυσῆξ ᾿Αφροδίτηι,

Πέργαμον εἰσαναβᾶσα φίλον πατέρ᾽ εἰσενόησεν

ἑσταότ᾽ ἐν δίφρωι, κήρυκά τε ἀστυβοώτην'

683. re μέλει : μέλλει T. 854: Ci: 107 BR: 686. «οἷο P. 687. TOI:
τε Vr. d. || kK: r Pap. καὶ (supr. x). 688. γνοίη A (supr. wo) CGSU. 689.
κήρυκα 0° GNicTH: καὶ ἐπείθετο uvew J. 692. izen R. || ἐύρῆος R: eUppxoc
P (ef in ras.). 693 om. ADTU Pap. uw v, Harl. a. 694 om. Rt. 696.
ἔλων : ἕλον Vr. Al: ἔχον Vr. A® || crenayni Pap. ». 697. φέρον : ἄγον A
(γρ. φέρον) PU Pap. μ. 101. ἑστεῶτ᾽ Ar. D: ἑσταῶτ᾽ Harl. ἃ.

700

687. παῖϑές τοι, the Mss. generally
accent παῖδες το. But such a use of
the article is very doubtful. It can
perhaps be explained as used to oppose
the sons left behind to Hector; but
this is not satisfactory. Of course μετ.
AeAewUeNo! cannot mean ‘left alive’ as
opposed to the slain. There is no difli-
culty in παῖδές τοι, ‘the sons thow hast,
remaining behind,’ like τό ῥά of τεθυω-
μένον ἣεν Ξ 172, q.v.

688. γνώηι, the subj. indicates that
the discovery of Priam is spoken of as
something positively expected, whereas
the chance of ransom afterwards is merely
a possibility ; a rhetorical touch to arouse
Priam’s alarm. (γνοίη is obviously ex-
cluded by γνώωσι.)

692-93 == 433-34, 1-2. 695=0 1.

696. eic can mean no more than ‘to,’
‘towards,’ as és νῆας sometimes means
‘to the naval camp,’ not ‘into the ships.’
thon, also 6 2; rather ἔλαν as from

*“€Xnu, a form which does not recur,
though the thematic é\dw is found in
the infin. ἐλάαν -- ἐλάειν.

697. ἡμίονοι, the usual relapse into
the direct constr. in place of ἡμιόνους τε,
φέροντας.

699. For the only other mention of
Kassandra in the /iad see N 366 ft. (she
is named also in \ 422). The scholia
remark that there is nothing here to
indicate that she possesses the gift of
prophecy which played so important a
part in the later Epie cycle. At the
same time there is nothing in the words
inconsistent with such an idea ; and the
fact that the poet—for what reason we
cannot explain—should have thought
fit to make choice of Kassandra to
discern the body first may have sug-
gested it to later imitators.

701. G@cruBowTHN, dr. dey. evidently
for ἀστυβοήτην, though there is no other
case of such an assimilation of 07 to ow.

a

-

IAIAAOC © (xxiv) 587

\ > ΞΡ 5 >4? - , 7 / b /
TOV ὃ ap ἐφ ἡμιόνων ἴδε Κκειμένον EV λεχέεσσι.

κώκυσέν T ἄρ᾽ ἔπειτα γέγωνέ τε πᾶν κατὰ ἄστυ"
“ὄψεσθε, Τρῶες καὶ Τρωιάδες, “Extop’ ἰόντες,

εἴ ποτε καὶ ζώοντι μάχης ἐκνοστήσαντι
5 \ / / 5 5 ͵7ὕ >]
χαίρετ᾽, ἐπεὶ μέγα χάρμα πόλει T ἣν παντί τε δήμωι.

--:
Θ-
Or

,

aA ” 3 > / ΕῚ 5.5 Sek , oe / ,’ > Ν
ὡς ἔφατ᾽, οὐδέ τις αὐτοθ᾽ ἐνὶ πτόλει λίπετ᾽ ἀνὴρ

> \ / / \ POL: “ /
οὐδὲ γυνή: πάντας yap ἀάσχετον ἵκετο πένθος"

ἀγχοῦ δὲ ξύμβληντο πυλάων νεκρὸν ἄγοντι.

a , 3. Ἣν , , \ / / pa
πρῶται Tov Ὑ ἄλοχος τε φίλη καὶ ποτνια μήτηρ 710
, pate yA 27 > ./.
τιλλέσθην, ἐπ᾿ ἄμαξαν ἐύτροχον ἀΐξασαι,

ἁπτόμεναι κεφαλῆς: κλαίων δ᾽ ἀμφίσταθ᾽ ὅμιλος.

») / \ / 5S > WL 4
«καί νύ Ke δὴ πρόπαν ἦμαρ ἐς ἠέλιον καταδύντα

“ / , 9 \ 7
Extopa δάκρυ χέοντες ὀδύροντο 7 po πυλάων,

εἰ μὴ ap ἐκ δίφροιο γέρων λαοῖσι μετηύδα"

πο
—
Or

“ εἴξατέ μοι οὐρεῦσι διελθέμεν: αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα

rn / 55
ἄσεσθε κλαυθμοῖο, ἐπὴν ἀγάγωμι δόμονδε.

ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δὲ διέστησαν καὶ εἶξαν ἀπήνηι.

104. owacee Zen. (ap. Ht. MW. 646. 32). || extopa dio[N Pap. μ.
707. οὐδ᾽ dpa? O]x Tic ent Pap. μ.
πτόλιϊ H.

Pap. v}.
eini G. || πόλει ΟΡ Vr. A:
T: ἄςχετον P.
τῶ O Harl. a.
712. angictae Pap. v:
ὅμιλον Lips.

πόλεϊ T:

709. =UNBAHNTO Pap. ν.

711. ἐφ᾽ ἅμαξαν CHRU Lips. || ἀΐξασα D: Ἡμιονείην U.
augicrar’ P Lips. ὄμιλος P (-oc altered from -on %) :
713. Kataddnai P! Lips.

705. Z@ONTE
| αὐτόθ᾽ : αὐτῶι S: αὐτόθι G.

708. ἀάςχετον : ῥα UcxeToNn
710. τόν γ΄: τόνο᾽ JR: τῶν γ᾽ Τ:

717. αςεςϑαι Pap. v': ἄςαςθαι JT:

Gcacee A (swpr. e over seconda) HR. || kAaeuoio P. ἀγτάγωκμι DG: ardreua P :
ardrowi @ (including A and Pap. μ ν). || δόμονϑε : yp. NdAINOE A.

=

The form is doubtless due to the Ionic
contractions, ἔβωσα, βωθέω, etc., with a
misapplication of ‘ Epic diectasis.” The
title is the same as καλήτωρ, 577.

704. Swecee is most naturally taken as
am aor. Imper., see note on H 212. The
imper. is the mood regularly used in
appeals made with the formula εἴ ποτε,
see X 82 τάδε τ᾽ aideo καί μ᾽ ἐλέησον αὐτήν.
εἴ ποτέ τοι λαθικηδέα μαζὸν ἐπέσχον,
and other instances in A 39, E 110,0 372,
7 98; and the appeal to the past becomes
meaningless if it merely follows upon a
bare statement of what they will now
behold. The ‘jussive’ future expresses
the indifference of the speaker, e.g. Z 71,
and is thus out of place here. There is
some other slight evidence for a sigmatic
aor. from the root ὀὁπ-, e.g. ἐπόψατο,
Pind. fr. 88. 7 (Schr.), and GwWa- εἶδον
in Suidas. Herodianos took ὄψεσθε in

6 313 also as an imper., and this certainly
aives a better sense.

708. GdcyeTon, see on HK 892.

710. TON TIAMEceHN, so Hdt. 1].
61 τὸν δὲ τύπτονται, οὔ μοι ὅσιόν ἐστι
λέγειν, and similarly il. 42, 192 ; κἀπε-
κοψάμην νεκρόν Eur. Tro. 623, ete.
See H. G. § 140. 1; the verb has ac-
quired a specialized sense by association,
and with it the construction of other
verbs expressing the same sense directly.
The use is almost confined to verbs of
ritual. Cf. note on T 254,

716. wo, ‘ethic dat.,’ make me way
Sor the mules to pass.

717. Gcecee, here the ‘jussive’ or
rather concessive future, expressing ‘then
I shall say nothing against your taking
your fill.” The imper. ἄσασθε is here
less suitable. €nHN: ἐπεί κ᾿ Brandreth,
ἐπεί F’ van I,

588

IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv)

΄ , - | \ ΄, \ , Ν \ »
οἱ δ᾽ ἐπεὶ εἰσάγαγον κλυτὰ δώματα, τὸν μὲν ἔπειτα

is ἐ é θέ 1 δ᾽ εἷσαν ἀοιδοὺς
τρητοῖς ἐν λεχέεσσι θέσαν, παρὰ εἷσαν

720

/ δ / ΕῚ IN
θρήνων ἐξάρχους, οἵ τε στονόεσσαν ἀοιδὴν
οἱ μὲν δὴ θρήνεον, ἐπὶ δὲ στενάχοντο γυναῖκες.
5 5 /
chow δ᾽ ᾿Ανδρομάχη λευκώλενος ἦρχε γόοιο,

719. οἱ ὃ᾽: ἀλλ᾽ Bar. Mor.
Harl. a, Vr. Ὁ ἃ A.
ἐν ἄλλω. A:
TAICIN: τοῖσι P, ἐν ἄλλωι A.

121. θρήνους ADP (sup. wn) TU Pap. pu ν,
οἱ δὲ ἢ οἵ Te Eust.
ἄρ᾽ ἐθρήνεον ὥ (ἐθρήνουν Bar., ἄρα ϑρήνεον ναὶ ἢ:

722. OH ϑρήνεον DP Par. ὁ g h,
723.

720. τρητοῖς, see I’ 448. From napa
to γυναῖκες is a passage of great diffi-
culty. The punctuation and reading of
the text are now generally accepted as the
only means by which a satisfactory sense
can be got. And by the bier they set the
singers, leaders of the dirge, who in the
dolorous song led, they the dirge, and the
women wailed in concert. That 15,8 certain
number of singers sing a formal dirge, to
which the women keep up an accompani-
ment of ‘keening.’ The relative clause
οἵ Te . . ἀοιδήν begins as though θρή-
veov alone were to follow; but the form
of the sentence is interrupted in order to
bring out the antithesis between the two
elements of the dirge. That the ἀοιδοί
were professional mourners hardly admits
of a doubt; the custom of employing
them is practically universal in Eastern
countries, and indeed exists in full force
in many places to this day. No more
vivid picture of the scene can be found
than in Mr. Bent’s description of the
μοιρολόγια which he witnessed at My-
konos (The Cyclades, chap. x.): ‘The
(paid) lamenters who headed the pro-
cession broke forth into their hideous
wails. And as it passed by women came
forth from their houses to groan in con-
cert with the others.’ Similarly von
Hahn (Alb. Stud. i. 151) describes an
Albanian funeral. ‘The women sit
about the corpse, and now begins the
dirge proper, in which neighbours as
well as kinswomen take part. The dirge
is always in verse, and as a rule consists
of a couplet sung by a solo voice, and
then repeated by the chorus of women.
These dirges are fixed by usage . . but
it sometimes happens that one of the
mourners is inspired by her grief to utter
a lament of her own.’ ἔξαρχος and
ἐξάρχειν are the technical words for the
leaders of a chorus, cf. Σ 606. The sense
thus obtained is satisfactory, though the
constr. is undoubtedly harsh, and οἵ τε

taken up by οἱ μέν in apposition cannot
be exactly paralleled. But we may fairly
compare sentences like @ 162 ff., where a
simple statement is broken up in the
course of delivery and divided into two
parallel sentences. The ancient critics
took the lines quite differently. The
weight of Ms. authority is unquestionably
in favour of reading θρήνους, ἐξάρχουσ᾽ οἵ
τε στονόεσσαν ἀοιδήν: οἱ μὲν ἄρ᾽ ἐθρήνεον.
This involves taking θρήνους (or θρηνούς “)
= θρηνωιδούς, with the non- Homeric order
of words ἐξάρχουσ᾽ ot te. These two
objections are fatal. We do not know
what the reading of Ar. was, as though
the line has the diple in A, the scholion
referring to it is unfortunately lost ; but
the presumption is that the best mss.
preserve his text. Note that oi μὲν dpa
always begins a clause in H., so that if
we read it we must manage to have a
stop after ἀοιδήν. It is not impossible
that the source of all this difficulty may
be found in the word στονόεσσαν. If, as
may well be, this represents an aor. 3rd
plur. of some verb allied to στένω, the
cause of the corruption would be obvious,
and the sentence would be perfectly clear :
they set the minstrels, leaders of the wait,
who groaned their lay ; so wailed they,
and the women groaned in concert. στονά-
xnoav might be the verb required were
it not so familiar ; if such a verb does
lie hidden, it is more likely to have been
a forgotten form, Agar (J. P. xxv. 322)
points out that of τε is general, and
suggests θρήνων ἐξάρχους, οἵ τ᾽ ἐξάρχουσιν
ἀοιδήν, like ἀθλοφόρους οἱ ἀέθλια ποσσὶν
ἄροντο 1 124 and other similar lines (see
note on © 527). Friedlander thinks
that a line has been lost after 721—a
phenomenon of which there is no clear
evidence in any other placein H. Others
simply reject 721, or of τε. . Opnveor,
for which there is no justification.

723. The various attempts which have
been made to bring the following laments

IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv) 589

“ΜΔ ᾽ , / \ \ ”
Extopos ἀνδροφόνοιο κάρη μετὰ χερσὶν ἔχουσα:
“ἄνερ, ἀπ᾽ αἰῶνος νέος ὥλεο, Kad δέ με χήρην

oC

, ΞΕ > » "
λείπεις ἐν μεγάροισι᾽ πάϊς δ᾽ ἔτι νήπιος αὔτως,
a , , , , / , +
ὃν τέκομεν σύ τ᾽ ἐγώ TE δυσάμμοροι, οὐδέ μιν οἴω
A i \ \ / Ca ? v
ἥβην ἵξεσθαι: πρὶν yap πόλις ἥδε κατ᾽ aKpns
/ i \ / o ᾽ \
πέρσεται: ἢ yap ὄλωλας ἐπίσκοπος, OS TE μιν αὐτὴν
es , > ,ὕ /
ῥύσκευ, exes δ᾽ ἀλόχους κεδνὰς καὶ νήπια τέκνα" 730
“Δδ , / \ > / rn
αἱ δή τοι τάχα νηυσὶν ὀχήσονται γλαφυρῆισι,
\ \ ἽΝ A” chien \ ᾽ a \ A
Kal μὲν ἐγὼ μετὰ τῆισι: σὺ δ᾽ av, τέκος, ἢ ἐμοὶ αὐτῆι
fd » / » » / > /
ἕψεαι, ἔνθά Kev ἔργα ἀεικέα ἐργάζοιο
> ’ὔ Ἂς Μ >? / » ? r
ἀθλεύων πρὸ ἄνακτος ἀμειλίχου: ἢ τις Ἀχαιῶν
135

725. NEON Zen.

νέος... χήρην T® (Rhosos) in ras.

CAPST Mor. Vr. A: 0€ τοι R. || οὕτως UV.

Eust. 732. μὲν : δὴ G. || τοῖσι R.

726. O ἔτι ὃέ τε A (ἐν ἄλλωι ὃ᾽ ἔτι)
131. οἰχήςονται CT Harl. a, Ven. B
734. ἀεθλεύων CGH. οἀμειλίκτου 1":

successful.
tempt was von Leutsch, who noticed
that the lament of Hekabe fell into four
divisions of three lines each, of which he
made two pairs of strophe and anti-
strophe. The same principle he ex-
tended to the other laments by means of
various atheteses. He was followed by
Westphal and Kichly, but the arbitrary
nature of the theory is shewn by the fact
that they none of them agree on the lines
which are to be rejected. Peppmiiller
sees in them instances of the ancient
νόμος, Which was a form of hymn in
hexameters generally in honour of a god,
though there is some slight evidence that
it was used also in dirges. The ‘nome’
consisted of three parts, the ἀρχή or
exordium, the ὀμφαλός or body, and the
σφρηγίς or epilogue. He thus finds in
the lament of Andromache an ἀρχή (725—
30) and σφρηγίς (740-45) of six lines
each, with an ὀμφαλός of nine ; Hekabe
has an ἀρχή and o¢pnyis of three lines
each and an ὀμφαλός of six; Helen has
the same number of lines for ἀρχή and
σφρηγίς and seven for the ὀμφαλός (re-
jecting 772). There is something to be
said in favour of this view, as the three
laments have some appearance of being
formed on the same plan; but our ignor-
ance as to the construction of the nome
is such that the theory can be only a
conjecture. The contents of the laments

naturally give them something of a lyric
character. The themes taken by the
three are Hector’s valour, his piety and
its reward, and his gentleness.

724. ἀνδροφόνοιο, others ἱπποδάμοιο.
Both epithets are commonly applied to
Hector, the former being rather the more
usual,

725. an’ αἰῶνος ὥλεο, thow hast per-
ished out of life, a rather strange expres-
sion. Usually the life is taken out of
man ; T 27 ete. There is nothing to be
said for Zen.’s νέον.

726-27, cf. X 484-85. With this ex-
ception the lament of Andromache is
quite independent of that in X.

729. αὐτήν : αὐτός Platt with much
probability ; see on 499.

730. puckeu, another of the iteratives
so common in this book; it is not found
elsewhere. €yec, ἠτυμολόγησε τὸ ὄνομα
Ἕκτορος, Schol. Τ. Cf. E 473; similar
instances will be found in X 507, ¢ 6,
τ 407, ete.

734. ἀθλεύων, see on H 453. πρό,
before the face of, see on P 667, and
compare Θ 57.

735. This story of the death of Asty-
anax was handled by the Cyclics. Tzetzes
quotes the following from the ᾿Ιλιὰς μικρά
of Lesches :—

αὐτὰρ ᾿Αχιλλῆος μεγαθύμου φαίδιμος vids
Εκτορέην ἄλοχον κάταγεν κοίλας ἐπὶ νῆας.

590 IAIAAOC Ω (xxrv)

χωόμενος, ὧι δὴ που ἀδελφεὸν ἔκτανεν Ἕκτωρ ;

ἢ πατέρ᾽ ἠὲ καὶ υἱόν, ἐπεὶ μάλα πολλοὶ Αχαιῶν

“Extopos ἐν παλάμηισιν ὀδὰξ ἕλον ΠΟΤΕ οὖδας.

οὐ γὰρ μείλιχος ἔσκε πατὴρ τεὸς ἐν δαὶ λυγρῆι"

τῶ καί μιν λαοὶ μὲν ὀδύρονται κατὰ pom. 740

ἄρρητον δὲ τοκεῦσι γόον καὶ πένθος ἔθηκας, ᾿

"Extop: ἐμοὶ δὲ μάλιστα λελείψετανι ἄλγεα λυγρὰ"

οὐ γάρ μοι θνήισκων λεχέων ἐκ χεῖρας ὄρεξας,

οὐδέ τί μοι εἶπες πυκινὸν ἔπος, οὗ τέ κεν αἰεὶ

μεμνήιμην νύκτάς τε καὶ ἤματα δάκρυ χέουσα." 745
ὡς ἔφατο κλαίουσ᾽, ἐπὶ δὲ στενάχοντο γυναῖκες.

τῆισιν δ᾽ αὖθ᾽ “Ἑκάβη ἀδινοῦ ἐξῆρχε γόοιο"

“Ἕκτορ, ἐμῶι θυμῶι πάντων πολὺ φίλτατε παίδων,

ἢ μέν μοι ζωός περ ἐὼν φίλος ἦσθα θεοῖσιν"

οἱ δ᾽ ἄρα σεῦ κήδοντο καὶ ἐν θανάτοιό περ αἴσηι. 750

ἄλλους μὲν yap παῖδας ἐμοὺς πόδας ὠκὺς ᾿Αχιλλεὺς

πέρνασχ᾽, ὅν τιν᾽ ἕλεσκε, πέρην ἁλὸς ἀτρυγέτοιο,

ἐς Σάμον ἔς τ᾽ Ἴμβρον καὶ Λῆμνον ἀμιχθωλόεσσαν:

736. χωμενος Pap. ν". || ὧι : ὧι τινι DGPRST Pap. ν.
740. Kai: κεν OR. || κατὰ : περι Pap. ν].
745. μεμνοίμην P,
éudi: ομοι Pap. v'. || πολὺ : περι Ὁ.

τινα ἢ ὅν τινα Hust. || ἕλεςκε : ἐν ἄλλωι ἕληιςι A.

ἐπεὶ : και Pap. ν.
PR Bar. || οὗ o€ ὕ.

737. HE: H Pap. ν. ἢ}
144. εἶπας

141. toici(N) DP. || αὖ L. 748.
750. οἱ ὃ᾽ : HO’ Pap. ν. 752. ἥν
158. ὀμιχϑθαλόεςςαν P

(R swpr.): sayeaddeccan Antim.

παῖδα δ᾽ ἑλὼν ἐκ κόλπου ἐυπλοκάμοιο
τιθήνης

ῥῖψε ποδὸς τεταγὼν ἀπὸ πύργου: τὸν δὲ
πεσόντα

ἔλλαβε πορφύρεος θάνατος καὶ μοῖρα κραταιή.

λυγρὸν ὄλεθρον, ‘accus. in apposition
with the sentence,’ i.e. expressing the
sum or result of an action, see on A 28.
741=P 37 (see note there). Observe
the sudden and harsh change from the
third person to the second, which is
similar to that in P 679 ὥς Tore σοί,
. el που ἴδοιτο. There, however, the
apostrophe is only a rhetorical figure.
744. πυκινὸν ἔπος, wise word, here
with something more than its usual
force as a standing epithet (as 75).
Paley quotes the words of Tacitus on his
absence at the death of Agricola, excepis-
semus certe mandata vocesque, quas penitus
“nino figeremus.
745. WeuUNHUWHN, see note on Ψ 361.
749. περ here has no concessive mean-

ing; it emphasizes ζωός in order to mark
the opposition to ἐν θανάτοιό περ αἴσηι.

752. mépnacke, cf. noteon ® 40. The
connexion of thought is rather disjointed,
as is natural in an expression of violent
grief; but the idea plainly is, ‘though
Achilles’ treatment of thee has been so
far more harsh than of my other sons,
cruel as he was to them; yet it has
ended only to thine honour.’ νῦν ὃέ
uoi (757) thus forms the antithesis to all
that precedes ; the freshness of the body
is a mark of divine favour.

753, ἀμιχϑαλόεσςαν, an epithet re-
curring in the same phrase in Hymn.
Ap. 36 ᾿Ιμβρός τ᾽ εὐκτιμένη καὶ Λῆμνος
ἀμιχθαλόεσσα. The meaning of the
word is doubtful. It is referred (1) to
μίγνυμι, as = ἀπρόσμικτος, inhospitable,
either from its inhospitable shores (with
which idea the scholia evidently derive
-a\o- from és), or because of the evil
repute of its inhabitants the Sinties—
A 593; (2) to ὀ-μίχ-λη, misty, perhaps

IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv)

591

σεῦ δ᾽ ἐπεὶ ἐξέλετο ψυχὴν ταναήκει χαλκῶι,

Ν τ ΄ ε «a \ a 93 ΄ /
πολλὰ ῥυστάζεσκεν ἑοῦ περὶ σὴμ ἑτάροιο

-.
σι
σι

/ \ ” ’ / / »Ὸ» 7
Πατρόκλου, τὸν ἔπεφνες" ἀνεστησεν δέ μιν οὐδ᾽ ws:

la / Ls ,
νῦν δέ μοι ἑρσήεις καὶ πρόσφατος ἐν μεγάροισι

lal lal A ’ » / > U
κεῖσαι, τῶι ἴκελος ὅν T ἀργυρότοξος Ἀπόλλων

e b al , > / 7 »”
ois ἀγανοῖσι βέλεσσιν ἐποίχόμενος καταπέφνηι.

ἃ » / / 5 / >
ὡς ἔφατο κλαίουσα, γόον δ᾽ ἀλίαστον ὄρινε:

760

τῆισι δ᾽ ἔπειθ᾽ “EXévn τριτάτη ἐξῆρχε γόοιο"

“"Extop, ἐμῶν θυμῶι δαέρων πολὺ φίλτατε πάντων,

φ

ἢ μέν μοι πόσις ἐστὶν ᾿Αλέξανδρος θεοειδής,

754. ἐξέλεο U.

755. puTazecken |’.

757. ἐρεήεις : Eppweic Vr. Δ.

759. @ranoici Bédeccin PS Pap. v, ἐν ἄλλωι A: ἀγανοῖς Behéeccin {2 (βέλεςειν
Vr. A). || ἀποιχόμενος G. || KaTané@nH(1) R Pap. ν, ἐν ἄλλωι A: καταπέφνει

PS (supr. €N): κατεπέφνην Gr: κατέπεφνεν 3).

Mor. Bar. Vr. A.

from the smoke of its ‘Lemnian fire ’—
see note on A 593. In view of this
der. the variant ὀμιχθαλόεσσαν deserves
notice. The difficulties in the way of
either alternative are obvious; of the
two the latter is preferable. In favour
of the former is quoted Soph. Phil. 2,
where the island is βροτοῖς ἄστιπτος οὐδ᾽
οἰκουμένη, but this does not suit the
Homeric view, cf. @ 283 Λῆμνον ἐυκτί-
μενον πτολίεθρον, and H 467, Θ 250.
Perhaps after all the explanation of the
scholia, ἀμιχθαλόεσσαν, κατὰ Κυπρίους
εὐδαίμονα, may contain the truth, though
we have no means of testing the correct-
ness of the statement, and there is no
obvious etymology for such a sense.
Antimachos read μιχθαλόεσσαν, which
violates the rule about position at the
end of the fourth foot (App. N).

757. ἐρςεήεις, see 419. mpdcpatoc
evidently means fresh. It is generally
taken to mean just slain (i.e. προσ-ᾧν-τος
from root ev), a sense which might
easily enough give that of fresh, though
in the literal sense it does not suit here,
the point being that Hector is not just
slain. Schol. B gives an alternative ἢ
ἀπὸ τῶν νεωστὶ πεφασμένων ἐκ γῆς φυτῶν,
ἵνα δηλοῖ τὸ χλωρός. Though not in this
exact way, a derivation from root φα-
or φαν- is possible, and is confirmed by
Pind. P. iv. 299 πρόσφατον Θήβαι ξενωθείς,
Soph. frag. 130 μηδὲν φοβεῖσθαι προσ-
φάτους ἐπιστολάς, and other instances in
the Lexx. where the sense of recent is
not conn. with that of death. It will
thus form the antithesis to παλαίφατος,

760. ὄρινε : ἔγειρε VR Pap. v,

761. τοῖσι P. || 0 ate’ HSU Haznl. a.

and mean newly revealed, i.e. come into
being, cf. A 734 φάνη μέγα ἔργον Ἀρηος,
etc. Either explanation involves the
difficulty of the derivation of the mean-
ing recent from πρός. The connexion
seems to be in the idea of a thing which
happens ‘before one’s very eyes,’ as
though coming upon one with a sense
of surprise ; so πρόσπαιος passes through
the meaning sudden to that of fresh. —

759. A favourite Odyssean line not
recurring in the Jiiad. Cf. M. and R.
on y 280, ‘a sudden death without
suffering is ascribed to the ‘‘ painless
shafts” of Artemis or Apollo, the god-
dess generally bringing death to women,
the god to men. Such a death was easy,
cf. σ 202 εἴθε μοι ὡς μαλακὸν θάνατον
πόροι ΓΑΆρτεμις ἁγνή In ἃ 172 it is
contrasted with δολιχὴ νοῦσος, and in
o 407-11 with any form of νοῦσος. The
generalizing subj. καταπέφνηι seems
better than the vulg. κατέπεφνεν.

762. ϑαέρων, a strange synizesis for δᾶ-
Fépwyv, unless we should read δαρῶν or
davpav=daFpav like πατρῶν, in which
case it will be a genuine old form, not
yet affected by the analogy of daépes
(warépes).

763. The supposed want of connexion
in Helen’s words has aroused the scorn
of many German editors. Most readers
will feel little enough to deride in the

speech. The thought evidently is ‘ Al-
though Paris, not Hector, was my

husband, and therefore I had no claim to
kindness from Hector, such as I should
expect from my husband, yet,’ etc.

592 IAIAAOC © (xxiv)

bs μ᾽ ἄγαγε Τροίηνδ᾽ - ὡς πρὶν ὥφελλον ὀλέσθαι"
ἤδη γὰρ νῦν μοι τόδ᾽ ἐεικοστὸν ἔτος ἐστίν,

ἐξ οὗ κεῖθεν ἔβην καὶ ἐμῆς ἀπελήλυθα πάτρης"
ἄλλ᾽ οὔ πω σεῦ ἄκουσα κακὸν ἔπος οὐδ᾽ ἀσύφηλον'
GAN’ εἴ τίς με καὶ ἄχλος ἐνὶ μεγάροισιν ἐνίπτοι

, ΕΥ̓ ἐ x ’ Υ͂ > / ὟΝ
δαέρων ἢ γαλόων ἢ εὐνατέρων ἐυπεπλῶν,

765

Δ ΄ e \ A ” 3, γι
1) ἑκυρή---ἑκυρὸς δὲ πατὴρ WS ἡπίιος αἰει--- 710
\ / /
Gra σὺ τόν γ᾽ ἐπέεσσι παραιφάμενος KATEPUKES
» > ἊΝ la) ’ - 5 /
one τ᾽ ἀγανοφροσύνηι Kal σοῖς ἀγανοῖς ἐπέεσσι.
“ , ’ ¢ Id \ 3). 3 ” 5 / lo ΗΑ
τῶ σέ θ᾽ ἅμα κλαίω καὶ ἔμ ἄμμορον ὠχνυμένη ΚῊρ
> 7 ΄ 4.1.3 YA SEN T / > /
οὐ γάρ τίς μοι ἔτ᾽ ἄλλος ἐνὶ ᾿Ιροίηι εὑρείηι
» > δὶ , / δέ “ 39
ἤπιος οὐδὲ φίλος, πάντες δὲ μὲ πεφρίκασιν.
A ” , 5) LN ὃ "» δ 5 ,
ὡς ἔφατο κλαίουσ, επὶ ἔστενε δῆμος ἀπείρων.

775

764. drar’ ἐς C. || τροίην (072. 8°) CD. || Sped(A)’ Gnohécear A™DGS Vr. d A,

Harl. a, King’s Par. ὁ d' e h 1, and _ ap. Did.
| énicno:. GPST Vr. A Harl. Ὁ ἃ, King’s Par. de gh:
769. ἢ Oaépon T.
773. @ ἅμα: μάλα P. || ἔμ᾽ : μ᾽ R. || ἔμ΄ ἄμλιορον :

114. Tic οὶ : μοι Tic Pap. ν. ;

énimuerdpoicin © Pap. ν.
éninnoi J) Lips. : yp. éniccor A.
Harl. d: yp. εἶεν A.
οἱ δὲ γράφουσιν ἐμὸν μόρον, Sch. T.

767. ουπως Pap. vi. 768.

770. diet: Hen R Pap. ν"",

A 9. oF:

765. ἐεικοοτόν is a startling word, as
it can only be explained from the legend
of the first fruitless expedition of the
Greeks against Troy, when they landed
by mistake in Mysia, and had to return
to Greece to re-assemble their forces,
thus wasting ten years. This story is
elsewhere entirely unknown to H. It
is, however, as old as the Kypria, at
least in the germ, for the Chrestomathy
of Proklos tells of the abortive expedition,
but not of the ten years lost. It has
been suggested that we may have in
the phrase a reminiscence of the ἐεικοστὸν
éros in which Odysseus returns to his
native land (765-66=7 222-23, and see
w 310); though that of course includes
the ten years of wandering after the war.
The two lines 765-66 form a sort of
parenthesis, and to a certain extent the
γάρ disturbs the connexion of thought
as given above. It is thus possible that
they may be an interpolation from the
Kypria ; but if not absolutely indispens-
able, they are at least in harmony with
the rest of the lament, and add much
force to it; οὔ πω (767) is very weak
without them.

767. ἀεύφηλον, I 647.

768. This is the only instance in H.
of the iterative opt. with εἰ, common

though it is in later Greek (H. G. § 311,
L. Lange, EI, 372). It is evidently a
development due to the analogy of the
opt. in this sense after ὁπότε, etc. Lange
further remarks that 771 gives the only
instance of an apodosis beginning with
ἀλλά after εἰ with opt., though it is often
found after εἰ (dv κεν) with subj. or indic.

772. This line is generally athetized
as tautological. But the repetition of
similar words and forms is common
enough in Epic poetry ; Lehrs has col-
lected numerous instances in Ar. pp.
454 f¥., e.g. x 224-25 ’Ἀθηναίη δὲ χολώ-
σατο κηρόθι μᾶλλον, νείκεσσεν δ᾽ ᾿Οδυσῆα
χολωτοῖσιν ἐπέεσσιν. The dwelling on
the thought is a most pathetie touch.

773. See note on Z 408.

776. The use of ἀπείρων is peculiar ;
with the exception of the late @ 340
(δεσμοὶ daelpoves) it is applied in H.
only to the expanse of sea or land. But
in the Hymns we have ὅμιλος ἀπείριτος
(H. Ven. 120) and πολυπείρονα %) λαόν
(H. Cer. 296), as well as λαὸς ἀπείρων,
Scut. Here. 472. δῆμος too is nowhere
else used in the sense of multitude ; it
properly means a country or local com-
munity (see on B 547). It evidently
cannot mean common folk as opposed to
the nobles (B 198).

IAIAAOC © (xxiv) 593

lal e / lal »
λαοῖσιν δ᾽ ὁ γέρων ἸΪ]ρίαμος μετὰ μῦθον ἔειπεν"
““ἄξετε νῦν, Τρῶες, ξύλα ἄστυδε, μηδέ τι θυμῶι

, 79 , \ , ΝΥ \ > ‘
δείσητ᾽ "᾿Αργείων πυκινὸν λόχον: % yap ᾿Αχιλλεὺς
πέμπων μ᾽ ὧδ᾽ ἐπέτελλε μελαινάων ἀπὸ νηῶν, 780
μὴ πρὶν πημανέειν, πρὶν δωδεκάτη μόληι ἠώς."

A ” I ΄ > ΄ > > ,ὔ 7 ΄ ,

ὡς ἔφαθ᾽, οἱ δ᾽ ὑπ᾽ ἀμάξηισιν Boas ἡμιόνους τε
ζεύγνυσαν, αἶψα δ᾽ ἔπειτα πρὸ ἄστεος ἠγερέθοντο.
ἐννῆμαρ μὲν τοί γε ἀγίνεον ἄσπετον ὕλην"
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ δεκάτη ἐφάνη φαεσίμβροτος ἠώς, 785

\ reek | 3 es \ 7m wl / /
καὶ τότ᾽ ap ἐξέφερον θρασὺν “Extopa δάκρυ χέοντες,
> \ lal ιν ἢ Ν / > 5 » “-“-
ἐν δὲ πυρῆι ὑπάτηι νεκρὸν θέσαν, ἐν δ᾽ ἔβαλον πῦρ.
> hale) , , © , ,
ἦμος δ᾽ ἠριγένεια φάνη ῥοδοδάκτυλος ἠώς,

Lad Si iF > \ \ a tT ” ’
τῆμος ἄρ᾽ ἀμφὶ πυρὴν κλυτοῦ “Extopos ἔγρετο λαός.

(ae) » e / >

[αὐτὰρ ἐπεί ῥ᾽ ἤγερθεν ὁμηγερέες τ᾽ éyévovTo,| 790
πρῶτον μὲν κατὰ πυρκαϊὴν σβέσαν αἴθοπι οἴνωι

“- e / \ »
πᾶσαν, ὁπόσσον ἐπέσχε πυρὸς μένος: αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα

"1 δ
ὀστέα λευκὰ λέγοντο κασίγνητοί θ᾽ ἕταροί τε
/ \ \ / / “

μυρόμενοι, θαλερὸν δὲ κατείβετο δάκρυ παρειῶν.
καὶ τά γε χρυσείην ἐς λάρνακα θῆκαν ἑλόντες, 795
πορφυρέοις πέπλοισι καλύψαντες μαλακοῖσιν"

117.0 ὁ: ὃὲ PR. 118. ἄξατε Harl. ἃ. 182. ὑφ᾽ ἁμάξη(ι)ςει(ν) CUGHR
γι "ἃ Α : ἀπ᾿ ἁμάξηιςιν S. 783. Ζεύγνυον RT Mor. Vr. d. || Arepéeento 77.
784. τοί re: 9H cpin Pap. ν΄. 186. φάνη VP Vr. A. || paectuBpotoc: podo-
δάκτυλος T Vr. A Par. 1, ἐν ἄλλωι A. 787. ἐν 0 ἔβαλον πῦρ: ἐν ἄλλωι
ἀχνύμενοι κῆρ A. 189. πυρη Pap. ν. || κλυτοῦ : κριτος Pap. ν]. 790 om.
ALPST Pap. », Lips. Vr. ἃ A: hab. CDGHR Harl. a. 791. πυρκαϊὰν P.
792. ἐπεῖχε Vr.d. 793. Θ᾽ 0m. DHPS. 796. KaNUWaNTEC: τινὲς καθάψαντες
Sch. T. || μαλακοῖςσιν : μαλλοῖο Par. g.

779. OeicHT’, the ἡ is wrong in the obviously a mere error in transcription :
subj. of the sigmatic aor. Mulvany ELPETO=7ypero from ἀγείρω, gathered
(C. R. x. 27) reads deicere with hiatus at together, see note on H 434. Probably
the end of the first foot. πυκινόν, see 789-90 are late intruders: 790=8 9, @
A 392. But here the adj. is best taken 24, ὦ 421 (cf. A 57).

as cunning. 791. Cf. Ψ 251, and indeed the whole
780. ἐπέτελλε, was giving orders that scene of Patroklos’ funeral, of which

they would not harass us. The constr. — the present is almost an abstract.

is rather mixed, the fut. infin. depend- 795. τά re χρυςείην : the only other

ing on the promise implied in the orders. instance in H. of a vowel left short
There is no possibility of taking ἐπέτελλε before xp is @ 353 οἴχοιτο χρέος. The
=promised simply. λάρναξ evidently answers to the φιάλη

784. ἀγίνεον and gaeciuBpotoc are of Ψ 253; for the κάπετος cf. Σ 564,
Odyssean words (exc. ἠγίνεον 2493). So Soph. Aj. 1165, 1403 κοίλην κάπετον
788 occurs twenty times in Od., elseonly χερσὶ ταχύνετε.

A 477 (in the episode of the return of 796. According to Studniczka (p. 94

Chryseis). n.) the covering was put over the coffin,

789. ἔγρετο must be taken in pregnant ποῦ wrapped round the bones inside it.

sense, woke up and came. But it is He quotes a richly-painted Attic cover
VOL. II 2Q

594

IAIAAOC Ω (xxiv)

αἶψα δ᾽ ap ἐς κοίλην κάπετον θέσαν, αὐτὰρ ὕπερθε
πυκνοῖσιν λάεσσι κατεστόρεσαν μεγάλοισι.

ῥίμφα δὲ σῆμ᾽ ἔχεαν: περὶ δὲ σκοποὶ εἴατο πάντηι,

μὴ πρὶν ἐφορμηθεῖεν ἐυκνήμιδες ᾿Αχαιοί. 800
χεύαντες δὲ τὸ σῆμα πάλιν κίον' αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα

“ / lal
εὖ συναγειρόμενοι δαίνυντ᾽ ἐρικυδέα δαῖτα
δώμασιν ἐν Τ]ριάμοιο διοτρεφέος βασιλῆος.

ὡς οἵ γ᾽ ἀμφίεπον τάφον “Extopos ἱπποδάμοιο.

797. 0 ἄρ᾽: rap R.

799. chua χεῦαν R. || xeon T: ἔχευαν S Bar.

798. μεγάλοισι κατ. Adecci P. || KaTactépecan Pap. v.

800. ἐφορμήςειαν P, 802.

ευναγειράμενοι (A sup.) GP: τ᾽ ἀναγειράμενοι Harl. a, Cant. Mor.: διαγειρό-

μενοι RS Bar.
τινὲς γράφουσιν

|| ϑαιῖνυν περικυϑεα Pap. ν]. 803. ϑιοτροφέος HR.

804.

ὧς of τ᾽ Gugienon τάφον ExTopoc’ ἦλθε 0 ἁμαζΖών,

ἄρηος eurdtHp μεγαλήτορος ἀνθροφόνοιο, Sch. T.

to a wooden coflin of the 4th cent.
found in the Crimea; it is made of
wool, which is also the material of the
πέπλος. In Etruscan graves very fine
linen covers are found spread on the
stools on which stand the urns con-
taining the ashes. Here again the short
form of the dat. nop@upéoic cannot be
got rid of without assuming an equally
un-Homeric shortening of the first syll.
of πέπλοισι.

802. εὖ is best taken with ϑαίνυντο.

épikudéa Oaita, an Odyssean phrase
(four times).

804, The remarkable variant given by
Schol. T is evidently designed for the
incorporation of the “ας into the Cycle,
where it was immediately followed by
the Aithiopis ascribed to Arktinos. This
told of the deaths of Penthesileia,
Thersites, Antilochos, Memnon, and
Achilles. So the continuation of the
Iliad by Quintus opens with the coming
of Penthesileia and her Amazons.

APPENDIX G
ON WOMEN’S DRESS IN HOMER

(1) In discussing Homeric armour (App. B) we found that it shewed
on the whole a decided resemblance to that of the Mykenaean age,
though with various indications that towards the end of the Epic period
there had already come in the changed tactics which we find established
in historic Greece. When we turn to dress, however, the case is very
different. We know enough from the Mykenaean remains to judge of
the manner in which the women garbed themselves; and it is certain
that this fashion stood in radical contrast to that of Homeric Greece,
which was in all essentials identical with that of the archaic age.

(2) Our principal evidence for Mykenaean dress is the great gold
intaglio here given (fig. 1).} We see beyond question that the women

Ε Ἢ IE G

D
Wie. 2

wear a close fitting bodice,? sharply marked off from the full skirt,
which is decorated with several horizontal rows of flounces. This 15
confirmed by several other representations—the painted ‘worship scene’

1 Mr. Evans’s excavations at Knossos 2 The drawing evidently suggests that
furnish abundant confirmatory evidence, the body was naked above the waist ;
which is however still unpublished. but this is hardly credible.

δ96 THE ILIAD

(Tsountas-Manatt pl. xx. p. 294, Schuchh. p. 291), another gold intaglio
(Tsountas-M. p. 171) and various gold gems (e.g. ibid. p. 298), and it
may fairly be taken as typical."

(3) The characteristic Greek dress is of a totally different kind. It
is marked by simplicity and flowing vertical lines. The formation of the
‘Doric’ peplos is indeed simplicity reduced to its very elements. The
peplos is in fact no more than a square woollen blanket folded as in the
diagram (fig. 2), and taken up round the
waist by a girdle (fig. 3). Pins were
passed through IK, LM, so that these two
points rested on the two shoulders, taking
the weight of the dress, while the portions
FI, EK, GL, GM hung down beneath the
arms.

(4) Studniczka, <Altgr. Tracht, has
shewn that it is this style of dress which
is implied by the allusions in Homer.
The most tangible criterion between the
two is the use of the brooch or pin. For
the Doric dress this was essential—it was
πο the only means of keeping the peplos
“ Rok 4 together. For the carefully shaped and
sewn Mykenaean dress it was entirely
eke superfluous. Now there is no doubt that
ἐπ the Homeric dress required pins or
brooches (περόναι, énetai, πόρπαι : [ἃ 425,

= 180, = 401),2 and was therefore not a
Mykenaean dress. We are told that Hera
fastened her dress κατὰ στῆθος (Ξ 180).
The expression is vague enough to allow
us to explain it by a practice which
Studniczka has illustrated from the
monuments; the back lappet of the
peplos was pulled well over to the
breast, and the pin was put In at a point

Lf lower than the collar-bone in front.
: Ae (5) When the peplos had been thus
Fre. 8 pinned over the shoulders, the girdle was
ἄν put on, and a considerable length of the
dress pulled up so as hang down loosely over it. This was the κόλπος,
and from it came the adj. BaeUKoAnoc (compare BaeUzoonoc, I 594 with
note). When Hekabe bares her breast, κόλπον ἀνιεμένη (X 80), it is
imphed that she takes out a περόνη, and so allows the dress to fall
away from her shoulder on one side.

‘ Further illustrations will be found up the open side of the peplos (FC, ED
in /Milchhofer, Anf. d. Kunst p. 86, in diagram) which otherwise left the leg
Studniczka p. 32. exposed, and also to pin up the hanging

* In o 292 there are in fact twelve ends IF, KE, LG, MG, over the upper
περόναι to a single peplos, probably, as arm, and so to form sleeves.

Studniczka suggests (p. 101), to fasten

APPENDIX G 597

(6) The Homeric dress is thus quite different from the Mykenaean ;
and the discrepancy is confirmed by the remarkable fact that no pins or
Jilulae have been found among the remains of the Mykenaean prime.
On the other hand it is significant that a number of them have been
found in the graves of the ‘lower city’ at Mykene (Tsountas-Manatt
p. 163). Whether the two types were co-existent or consecutive we are
not in a position to say. It is possible that the flounced dress ‘‘ was a
robe of quality and occasion, rather, and there must have been in con-
temporary use a simpler and freer garb, more like the primitive type.
This would be worn by women of the lower class, and for this reason
would figure rarely on the monuments” (Tsountas-Manatt p. 174). But
it seems on the whole equally probable that during the prime of Mykene
fashion was dominated by a non-Hellenic influence, whether ‘ Pelasgian ’
as Milchhéfer holds (Anf. d. Kunst p. 107) or Asiatic, as may be
indicated by the Oriental analogues of the flounced dress (Studniczka
Ρ. 34, Milchhéfer p. 103). For some reason which we cannot expect to
guess, fashion returned, at the end of the Mykenaean age, to the older
and simpler dress, which held its ground till classical times. Herodotos
(v. 82-88) tells us how, not long before his own day, the Dorie garb
was again banished from Athens to make room for an Asiatic dress.

(7) There is nowhere in Homer any explicit statement as to the
material of the peplos ; but the epithets indicating decoration or dyeing
with various colours (ποικίλος I 735 ete. : παλιποίκιλος Z 289 etc. :
κροκόπεπλος © 1 etc. : daidaka πολλά = 178) point to wool, which is
easily dyed, rather than linen, which the ancients could not dye except
with Tyrian purple. Wool was as we know the material of the Doric
chiton.

(8) On the other hand the φᾶρος, which seems to have been
occasionally worn in place of the peplos, appears to have been of linen
(λεπτόν β 95 ete, ε 231, « 544; cf. ὦ 148). It is perhaps to be
regarded as a specially stately garment ; only Kalypso and Kirke wear it
instead of the peplos. The λεπταὶ ὀθόναι of Σ᾽ 595 are also presumably
of linen, but we know nothing of them in detail.

(9) We have no means of drawing any distinction between ἐνεταί.
népnai, and περόναι. Various types of pins and brooches from different
Greek and Italian sites will be found in Helbig 47. #. 202, and Studniezka
p. 100, in addition to those from Mykene, Tsountas-Manatt p. 163.
The word énetH occurs only in Ξ 180, and an imitated passage of
Kallimachos (fr. 149). It will however be noticed that the περόνη on
which Kypris is supposed to have scratched her hand in E 425 must have
been straight and unprotected, not a real jibu/a or safety-pin.!

(10) Of the girdle we hear little except that Kirke and Kalypso wore
gold (ε 232, « 545), and that Hera’s was “adorned with an hundred
eucanol.” The word is elsewhere used by Homer only of the aegis (see
note on B 447 and compare Herod. iv. 189). The epithet ἐυπλεκέες in
B seems to shew that these tassels were of twisted wire. Small pendants,
either thin strips of gold or more elaborate ornaments (e.g. Schuchh,
179-181), have been found in abundance on many Mykenaean sites, but

1 See the interesting chapter on the jilu/a in Ridgeway, Early Age of Greece.

ὅ98 THE ILIAD

there is no evidence to shew that they were ever attached to girdles.
Even in later Greek art such decoration is rare,! and indeed it is little
suited to the Doric dress, in which the girdle is hidden beneath the deep
folds of the κόλπος. It seems possible that the author of E, in speaking
of the goddess’s attire, was thinking rather of the divine aegis of
Athene than of a mere human girdle. Fringes were, however, known to
the late Mykenaean age; see the lower edge of the chitons on the
Warrior Vase, App. B, vol. 1., p. 574.

(11) When the Homeric lady goes out, she covers her head with
the KpHOeuNnon, καλύπτρη, or κάλυμμα- {6 three words all seem to
mean the same thing. This was a piece of linen, as is clear both from
the word ὀθόναι applied to it in I’ 141, and from the epithets used in
other places (Ξ 185, Ainapéc X 406 etc.). It is not represented in
Mykene, but from numerous archaic Greek monuments we see that it
was thrown over the back of the head, and hung down the back far
below the waist. One side of it was drawn before the face when a lady
spoke to men (ἄντα παρειάων cyoueNH λιπαρὰ κρήδεμνα a 334, π 416,
σ΄ 210, φ 65). Illustrations will be found in Helbig H. #. 217-18. For
the other headgear, Guunuz, πλεκτὴ GNadécuH, and κρήδεμνον, mentioned
in X 469-70, reference must be made to the note on that passage.

‘ One instance is quoted by Stud- 207-9. The fringed girdle is common
niczka p. 122. See also Helbig H.£. ἴῃ Assyrian art.

᾿
Ἰ

APPENDIX Ἢ
OTPANOC, AIOHP, AHP

Tue generally accepted theory respecting these three words is that held
by Aristarchos ; that ἀήρ is the lowest stratum of the atmosphere, in
which clouds are formed ; αἰθήρ is the stratum of clear air lying above
the region of clouds ; and οὐρανός the topmost stratum of all. The neat
arrangement of this theory is evidently philosophic rather than Epic ; it
will be shewn that it is largely at variance with the Homeric poems, and
1 confess regret that I should myself have adopted it without sufficient
inquiry not only in the first edition of this work, but in the preceding
volume of the second. Fuller examination leads me to propose a different
view, which if less logical is at least based on the Homeric text.

οὐρανός means, as all are agreed, the brazen firmament in which the
stars are fixed. It is the background against which we see all that goes
on in the sky—the flight of cranes (I 3)! as well as clouds and storms.
It forms the boundary of the universe, and is the dwelling of the gods,
for Mount Olympos, their home, reaches up to it—perhaps even pierces
through it, if we press the words “gates of heaven” in E 749. But
Aristarchos rightly showed that Olympos and Heaven are not confused
in the older parts of the poems.

With αἰθήρ the case is not so simple. There is no English word
which will exactly express it. The nearest perhaps is atmosphere. It is
the upper air, the scene of meteorological phenomena. It apparently
does not include the circumambient air in which we move and breathe ;
whether or no the Homeric man recognised that this is the same with the
medium in which the clouds float does not appear. For this lower air,
or for air as an element at all, Homer has no word. Winds are not
αἰθήρ. but they blow through it, see ὁ 293 οὖρον ἐπαιγίζοντα 31 αἰθέρος,
© 556 ὅτ᾽ ἔπλετο νήνεμος aiexp. It is the realm of clouds, see O 20,
192 én αἰθέρι Kai νεφέληιςι. Rain comes from it, as a portent, in A 54,

1 odpander πρό, in heaven, before, isa ecw ΠΟ 364, of the cloud which comes
curiously archaic but quite intelligible into this same field of view ; while πρό
way of saying ‘‘before the face of indicates that the cranes are not in
heaven.” οὐρανόθι, in heaven, i.e. in heaven in the literal sense, but on this
that part of our field of view which _ side of it.
the heaven occupies, answers to οὐρανὸν

99

σι

600 THE ILIAD

Though bearing the clouds, it is itself of course transparent ; hence in P
371 Un’ αἰθέρι is the transparent—not necessarily clowdless—air as opposed
to the fog cast over the battle-field: It forms part of the realm of heaven,
not of earth; both together are the kingdom of Zeus, and he is described
as αἰθέρι ναίων. Sights and sounds are described indifferently as rising
“up to the αἰθήρ or “through the αἰθήρ to heaven” (compare B 458
with > 214).

The meaning of ἀήρ is simple enough ; it means mist or darkness ; it
never means a7 in Homer. A glance : at Ebeling’s Lexicon is sufficient
to prove this. The only passage which can cause even a moment’s doubt

is = 288 ἐλάτη... δι᾽ ἠέρος αἰθέρ᾽ ἵκανεν, on which Aristonikos says’
p

Kae’ Ὅμηρον ἀὴρ 6 ἀπὸ γῆς μέχρι νεφῶν τόπος" ὁ de ὑπὲρ τὰ νέφη
τόπος αἰθήρ. ‘This line is in fact the only basis for Aristarchos’ theory
as to the sense of ἀήρ, yet here too mist is not merely a possible, it is the
only reasonable translation of the word. ΤῸ say that a pine-tree reaches
above the region of the atmosphere in which clouds form is a grotesque
exaggeration ; to say that it is tall enough to pierce the mzst which clothes
the mountain side is a true touch for all who know the hills.

Aristarchos then made two serious errors, misled by the post-Homeric
use of words; he thought that ἀήρ meant αν, and that αἰθήρ must
necessarily be the pure air above the contamination of the clouds. For
neither of these ideas is there the faintest warrant in Homer. Hence his
theory was completely shattered when brought to bear on one passage,
which we are now in a position to approach ; IT 364

e 5 οὐ 9 > 9 9 ΓΖ ΄ BJA 9 ἊΝ 7
ὡς 0 ὅτ᾽ an Οὐλύμπου νέφος ἔρχεται οὐρανὸν εἴςω
. ΄ 4 Vf .΄ ‘\ , th

αἰθέρος ἐκ Ὀίης, OTe Te Ζεὺς λαίλαπει τείνηι.

πῶς αἰθέρος; τὰ γὰρ πάθη ταῦτα περὶ τὸν ἀέρα ευλιβέβηκεν. τάχα
οὖν curyeiTal ὁ ἀὴρ πρὸς τὸν αἰθέρα, ὡς καὶ ἐν τῆι A (54) αἵματι
uudahéac ἐξ αἰθέρος, καὶ Ζεὺς δ᾽ ἔλαχ᾽ οὐρανὸν εὐρὺν ἐν αἰθέρι καὶ
νεφέεςειν (Ὁ 1923)" οὐ γὰρ ai νεφελαὶ ἐν τῶι αἰθέρι, Porph. (Schol. A).
And so also Nikanor: ταῦτα ἑκατέροις δύναται προςδίδοςθαι (i.e. αἰθέρος
ἐκ OiHc may be taken either with ἔρχεται or TeiNHI)* τὸ μέντοι Ζήτηλια
ὁμοίως μένει, ἀέρος rap πάθη ταῦτα. τάχα οὖν κεῖται ὁ αἰθὴρ ἀντὶ
τοῦ ἀέρος. ‘Vox est desperantis,” says Lehrs (Ar. p. 169). ‘‘ Mansit
locus in insolubilibus. . . Ceterum nec hodie solvit quisquam hance
quaestionem nec solvet olim.” The boldness of Lehrs’s zpse dirit is a
match for his master’s. Aristarchos says “there can be no clouds in the
αἰθήρ ; therefore when Homer says there are, he does not know the sense
of his own words”; Lehrs says ‘“ Aristarchos has failed ; therefore no one
else must try.” Yet we have only to follow Homer in admitting clouds
to the αἰθήρ, and difficulties vanish. The cloud comes “from Olympos,”
because there dwells Zeus who sends it; it comes “out of the aietp”
because there clouds are born; it comes “into”—we should rather say
across—“the firmament” because the firmament is the background or
stage on which we see the movements of the clouds. The expression of
the simile is perfectly correct and Homeric ; its appropriateness is another
matter.

To facilitate reference for those who may wish to verify the statements

~

APPENDIX Η 601

herein made, | append a classified list of all the passages in Homer where

the word αἰθήρ occurs.

(a) The way to or from heaven :

B 458, N 837, & 258, O 610, 686,

P 425, Σ 207, 214, T 351, 379, ε 50, τ 540.
(4) The home and realm of Zeus, as raingiver (not of any other god) ;

B 412, A 166, Ο 192, 0 523.

(c) The place of winds, clouds and rain:

II 300, 36D, ο 293.

_ (d) Clear air, as opposed to mist :

Θ 556, 558,) A 54, O 20,

288.08 iol,

—_

It may be added that Ap. Rhod. does not hold that the αἰθήρ must

be cloudless ; see iii, 1265

φαίης κε zopepoio κατ᾽ αἰθέρος diiccoucan
χειμερίην CTEPONHN ϑαμινὸν μεταπαιφάςςεςθαι
ἐκ νεφέων. ὅτ᾽ ἔπειτα μελάντατον ὄμβρον ἄγωνται.

iv. 927 καπνῶι δ᾽ ἀχλυόεις αἰθὴρ πέλεν.

Hesiod uses the word only

as a colourless impersonation (7heog. 124) and in the phrase αἰθέρι ναίων

(Opp. 18).

1 The note on this passage (vol. i. p.
369) requires some modification. The
expression UneppdrH Gcnetoc αἰθήρ at
once becomes intelligible when we under-
stand that the clouds are in the αἰθήρ,
so that the rent takes place in the αἰθήρ
itself as the words imply, not ‘‘in the

veil of clouds under the aiet#p”—a
phrase which has cost me many pangs.
οὐρανόθεν, because all the phenomena
of the clouds are wrought by Zeus.
Read ‘‘the infinite air is cleft beneath
from heaven on high.”

ἈΡΡΕΝΌΈΕΧΟῚ
THE SHIELD OF ACHILLES

(1) ΤΉΞΒΕ is no reason to doubt that the shield of Achilles, like the
other shields of which we hear in the J//ad, is composed of layers of
hide covered with a metal facing (see App. Β, 1. 1). The hides are the
πτύχες of S481. The word itself is ambiguous, and was at an early
date conceived to mean five superimposed layers of metal. This view
was taken by the author of Y 269-72. Those lines, however, are uni-
versally recognized as having no place in the context, and need not bias
our judgment. That the πτύχες are of hide results from a comparison
of H 247 with 220, and is indeed implied in all that we know of Epic
shields. This is, however, taken for granted in >; it is with the decora-
tion of the metal facing alone that the poet is concerned,

(2) It is difficult to speak with equal confidence of the shape of the
shield. It was at one time always assumed that this was circular, the
scenes being distributed in concentric bands over a uniformly curved
surface. This arrangement has one obvious disadvantage—half the
scenes must have had the figures upside down, or else there must have
been a horizontal line of no structural significance along either side of
which the figures were arranged with their heads in opposite directions.
There is the further difficulty that such shields were apparently unknown
at the period to which the technic of the decoration appears to belong.

(3) These difficulties can be partly evaded by assuming that the
shield was of the ‘Mykenaean’ shape shewn in App. B, figs. 1 and 2.
The folds down the side of the shield form a natural division, so that
the upper and lower portions could have most of their figures upright
without the awkward contiguity of opposed position at the sides.

(4) Some such division is obviously suggested by the apparent
symmetry and correspondence which prevail throughout the shield.
There remains, however, a further objection which is common to all
concentric arrangements. It is hardly possible to suppose that the
heavenly bodies with which the description begins (483-89) can have
been placed anywhere but at the centre of the shield. If scattered round
the whole circumference on a narrow ring they would evidently lose both
their effect and their significance ; while the dancing-scene (590-606) is
equally unsuited for the central circle. It has therefore been generally

602

ΡῈ D4
Φ Youths

604 THE ILIAD

asstuned that the description begins at the centre and passes outwards.
But then we are surprised to find that the two scenes of the City at Peace
and the City at War (490-540), though they occupy the smallest of the
concentric circles, are by far the most crowded with detail and with
actors; while variety of scenery and incident steadily decreases as we
pass outwards to the more roomy bands.

(5) This consideration leads A. S. Murray (//ist. of Greek Sculpture
pp- 50 ff.) to suggest that the two cities occupied the outermost band
immediately within that representing Ocean (607-8). The poet after
describing the heavenly bodies in the midmost circle jumps at once to
the outermost band but one, and then works inwards, again jumping
back to the cireumference, when he reaches the band of Ocean which
is outside all.

(6) This supposition is rather violent, but it cannot be said to be
impossible, and it must needs be accepted if any rational explanation of
a concentric system is to be given. The accompanying diagram (fig. 4)
shews how the scenes, with their correspondence, both lateral and
vertical, may be arranged on this scheme.

(7) The circular ‘pinched-in’ shield is, however, not the only one
found in Mykenaean art. We have also the cylindrical or ‘tower-like’
shield (App. B, 1. 5). It is worth while to ask if this may not have
been the shape which the poet had in mind. Here we must think no
longer of a concentric scheme ; our thoughts must turn to the parallel
bands which are the favourite groundwork of elaborate scenic decoration
in early Greek art. The best known instances are the chest of Kypselos,
described by Pausanias, and the Francois Vase which we can still see.
Neither the concentric scheme nor that of parallel bands can so far be
exemplified in Mykenaean work; but while the latter is familiar in
archaic art at least, it is doubtful if any parallel to the former has a
really Hellenic origin. The nearest example perhaps is the circular
votive shield figured in Perrot and Chipiez (Hist. de ?Art vi. 131):
and found in Crete, where there are two rings, the inner one of galloping
antelopes, the outer one of bulls. The silver bowl from Amathus quoted
by Helbig (//, #. Pl. 1.) is of Phoenician workmanship, like that from
Nineveh (Pl. 11.); and we may reasonably suspect the same of the
Cretan. In other words this treatment is distinctly oriental.

(8) As we have then some a priori ground for thinking the arrange-
ment in horizontal lines on a cylindrical surface more probable in a Greek
work of art, we may go on to point out that such an assumption at once
removes the two serious alternative difficulties connected with the
abundance of detail in the two scenes of the City at War and the City at
Peace. These would have the same space as all the rest ; the artist would
devote his best efforts, the poet his most abundant description, to the
upper rows which were nearest the line of sight. Moreover, the curved
top of the shield (well seen in the Besieged City, App. B fig. 10 on the
right) forms a suitable space for the representation of Earth and
Heaven, Sun, Moon and Stars, which are more suitably placed at the top
than in the centre, under the feet of men and women. The appended
diagram (fig. 5) shews how sucha shield may have been arranged. _ It loses-

MOON AND STARS
EARTH SEA

ΕΝ .AT PEACE

MARRIAGE

Procession - Dance Agora - Council

CiTy “AT WAR

Army - Walls - Army Debate March

BATTLE

Siaily Ambush Herds

PLOUGHING

REAPING VINTAGE

OXEN AND LIONS SHEEP - STATION

CHORAL ~ DANCE

Youths Labyrinth Maidens

RIVER OF

Fic. 5

OCEAN

606 THE ILIAD

something in perfect symmetry; but in other ways it seems more
consonant with the principles of early art. It will of course be
understood that the cylindrical shape is flattened out for the purposes of
the diagram.

(9) Recent discoveries have thrown a flood of light upon the technic
of the shield. We are told that Hephaistos fused bronze, tin, gold and
silver (474-75) and later on we hear of kyanos (564), the blue glass
paste which is often found among Mykenaean remains (see on A 24).
The account leads us to expect just such a result as we find in the famous
dagger-blades from Mykene (App. B, fig. 8). “The whole picture is
formed by various metals inlaid on a thin bronze plate. This plate was
then let into the blade. . . The colours are apportioned as follows :—
the lions and the parts of the men shewn as naked are inlaid in gold,
the trousers and the shields in silver, while all accessories, such as
shield-straps and devices, and the patterns of clothes, are given in a
black substance. The ground is coated with a dark enamel, on which the
figures detach themselves admirably ” (Schuchh. pp. 250-31). On another
blade “three lions . . are completely inlaid in gold, but their manes are
rendered by a somewhat redder gold, and the lines on their legs and
flanks by a lighter gold . . the lions were first worked in relief on the
bronze plate, which was inserted in the blade, and this relief was
afterwards covered with the thin gold leaf.” It will be seen that if we
wish to identify the Mykenaean and Homeric materials we have a “ dark
enamel” and a “ black substance ” corresponding to Kaccitepoc and κύανος.
That the enamel or glaze is kaccitepoc we may fairly conclude from W
561 (θώρηκα) χάλκεον. ὧι πέρι χεῦμα φαεινοῦ KacciTépoio du@idedi-
ΝΗΤαῖι, which implies the use of some compound of tin (?) fora glaze.
We are of course familiar with the use of this metal to cover copper—
inetallurgists must say if there is any known means of employing it as
a transparent glaze to heighten the colour of the metal beneath.
Whether the remaining “black substance” is the Homeric kUanoc we
may leave an open question.!

(10) With this correspondence to guide us, we may fairly assume for the
pictures on the shield the eminently free and naturalistic treatment which
we find in the best Mykenaean work—in the dagger-blades, in the siege-
fragment, and notably in the Vaphio cups. We no longer have to go to
Assyria or Phoenicia with their stiff conventionalism ; everything points
to a developed and untrammeled style of art.

(11) The imagery of the shield is as remarkable for its omissions as
for what it gives. It presents us with a brief abstract of the activities of
human life, both social and industrial. But it has been pointed out
that there is a noteworthy absence of any allusions to sea-faring, which
played so large a part in the life of Tonia. Here it is in harmony with
the Mykenaean art ; the remains which we know, though like the shield
they supply us with remarkable pictures of war, hunting, and pastoral
pursuits, very rarely give us any glimpse of a ship—a fact which is the

‘ Of generally available descriptions in Primitive Greece, it will be found in
of the daggers the best is that in Perrot — vol. ii. 223 ff., with the excellent repro-
and Chipiez Histoire de VArt vol. vi.; duction in colour.
in the slovenly English translation Art

APPENDIX I 607

more remarkable because the ‘f common objects of the shore” are favourite
types of decoration on certain classes of Mykenaean vases.

(12) It is still more remarkable that, with the single passing mention
of Ares and Athene in 516, and perhaps of the vague personifications of
535, there is throughout a complete absence of any representation of
myth or religion. Here again we have a remarkable coincidence with
the Mykenaean remains, in which no representation of worship or
mythology can be identified with any certainty. This characteristic
becomes the more striking when we compare the ‘ Shield of Herakles,’ an
early imitation attributed to Hesiod. Here mythology has already
attained the prominent place which it held even in the earliest period
of ‘archaic’ Greece in all comparable works of art.

(13) It is thus impossible to assign the ‘Shield,’ as some have done,
to the latest part of the Homeric period. It is at least much older than
the Hesiodic Shield, and comes from an age when Mykenaean art-works
still held their ground as ideals, and fashion had not changed to the
different conceptions which we label as peculiarly ‘ Hellenic.’ It does not
follow of course that the episode belongs to the prime of the Mykenaean
epoch—the poet may well have had in mind the work of artists older
than himself. And various signs seem to point to the conclusion that he
was thinking of, and imperfectly interpreting, some actual example
perhaps some ancient and famous shield—which was familiar to him, and
even to some of his hearers. But such a deduction can of course be only
of the vaguest. It is evident in many points that the poet allows
himself to be carried away beyond the limits of the plastic art, and it is
often impossible to say where description passes into pure imagination.
We can at most say that in one or two places difficulties can be best
explained by the supposition that the poet is endeavouring to weld into a
whole scenes which were before his eyes, adjacent but independent.

(14) It is curious that the whole episode should have been suspected
in ancient times. Aristonikos on 483 says Ζηνόδοτος HeETHKEN ἀπὸ
τούτου τοῦ cTiyou τὰ λοιπά, Gpkececic TAI κεφαλαιώδει προεκθέξεει.
Ὅμηρος δὲ οὐκ ἂν προετραγώιδηςε τὰ κατὰ τὰς φύςας. εἰ UH καὶ
τὴν τῆς ποικιλίας καταςκευὴν ἔμελλε OiaTtieeceat. Zenodotos’ judgment
appears therefore to have been based on aesthetic grounds alone—he
probably thought the account of the Shield disproportionately long. It
may suttice to say that it is work such as this which makes the laws of
art ; the Shield justifies itself against all criticism. And it must be
added that the linguistic evidence does not in any way bear out the
theory of late origin. There are many curious and unique expressions,
but none which would lead us to refer the language to any period later
than the prime of Epic poetry.

(1 5) Though the main divisions of the decoration are clearly marked,
there is considerable difficulty when we try to form an idea of the groups
in detail. The two cities, one at peace and one at war, are contrasted
in bold lines. The City at Peace is broken up into two main
scenes, the Wedding and the Trial, and each of these again falls,
though less distinctly, into two subordinate divisions—the former into
the Procession (491-93) and the Dance (494-96): the latter into the

608 THE ILIAD

dispute in the Agora (496-502) and the debate of the Elders (503-08).
To the details of the Trial we shall return presently. It has been
suggested that the Marriage Procession should end at the bridegroom’s
house, and that the women who stand ‘‘marvelling at the doors” are his
family, ready to welcome home the bride.

(16) The City at War (509-40) is far more obscure. We can,
however, trace two main scenes, in one of which two armies are besieging
a city, in the other a general fight is going on in the open country. The
two, however, are brought into connexion by 530-32 in a very confusing
way. It would seem that we must imagine a city, represented as in App.
B, fig. 10, with the women on the walls, and on either side a besieging
army—the two armies on either side conventionally representing one
army all round. The division, however, suggests to the poet two allied
armies of besiegers, divided in opinion, as well as in place. It is obvious
that he forgets for a moment the limitations of art when he puts into
the mouth of the besiegers the actual subject of debate, though the
choice is evidently that common in all sieges of the time (see X 118 ff.).
While they are discussing the terms to be offered to the city, the besieged
(513), far from thinking of surrender, are planning a counterstroke—a
sally to cut off a convoy of cattle belonging to the besiegers. Accord-
ingly in front of the city, and conventionally invisible to the two armies,
a line of men are issuing, with two leaders at their head, of greater
stature than the rest. This difference in size is the conventional sign by
which Egyptian art distinguishes royal personages from their followers ;
it is likely enough that the poet had in mind a picture where this was
meant, and that the reference of the greater size to divine origin is only
an interpretation of his own.

(17) We next come to theambush, where a party of men are watch-
ing for the herds. The general description gives the idea. rather of a
border-raid than of a part of the siege, to which the peaceful and
unsuspecting approach of the herdsmen is little suited. It seems highly
probable that the poet is here introducing his recollection of such a scene
without much troubling about its connexion with the siege. But the
references in 531-32 clearly shew that as things stand the herds must
belong to the besiegers, whose debate as to terms is rudely interrupted
by the attack on the convoy; they come to the rescue, and a general
engagement results.

(18) The arrangement of this part becomes more intelligible if we
assume that it is a horizontal belt, distributed mainly in two lines, one
above the other. On the upper line, beginning from the left, we may
imagine a group of men, archers and slingers like those in App. B, fig.
10, shooting at the walls of the town, represented, as in the same figure,
with the women on the battlements. To the right of the town follows
a similar group of assailants, attacking from the other side. After them
stands a group of full-armed warriors, not attacking, but apparently in
debate. These occupy about the middle point. After these again follows
another group of warriors marching off to battle towards the right. The
remainder—the right—of the belt is occupied by a fight, with dead and
wounded men, again as in fig. 10.

APPENDIX I 609

(19) The lower line is occupied at the left by a band of warriors
marching to the right, and headed by two leaders of great stature, with
two scouts in front. About the middle of the belt are some reeds, the
conventional representation of a river-bed ; on the other side of the reeds
are sheep and oxen marching from right to left ; behind them two herds-
men with pipes. Here we have reached the point under the fight on the
upper line. The battle covers both lines, extending from top to bottom
of the belt, so that it can be interpreted as part of the attack on the
herds. Such a scheme is quite consistent with what we know of
Mykenaean art; it is mainly decorative, and we see how a poet might
endeavour to combine into a continuous story scenes which to the original
artist had no internal connexion.

(20) There follow five scenes of rural life—ploughing (541-49), reap-
ing (550-60), vintage (561-72), lions attacking herds (573-86), and
a sheep-station (587-89). The first three naturally suggest Spring,
Summer and Autumn, while the fourth, which is appropriate to any time
of year, might be taken to stand for Winter. But the Homeric year
is not sharply divided into four equal seasons (see on E 5); and we
have the little section about the sheep (587-89) which, though so scantily
treated, seems to be put on an equal footing with the previous four by
the introductory én dé. If we take the verbs into account, ἐτίθει (541,
550, 561) marks off the three first, ποίηςε (573, 587) the two last. This
makes it difficult to class them under any principle of symmetry, but
suggests that we may again have two lines in one belt ; the first containing
three scenes, which represent the chief activities of the main seasons, Spring,
early Summer (θέρος) and late Summer (ὀπώρη) ; the lower shewing
the herding of cattle and sheep, which goes on all the year. We must
not, however, forget the possibility that the sheep-station is a later
addition. If we leave it out of account, the other scenes may be
divided symmetrically between two lines. For the way in which the
cattle and lions will have been represented we may refer to the Vaphio
cups, to the lion-hunt on the dagger (App. B, fig. 8) and to the favourite
pictures of lions attacking, e.g. Schuchh. figs. 177 (p. 196), 261 (p. 260),
266 (p. 264). For the Ploughing, Reaping, and Vintage scenes we are
unfortunately left to our unaided imagination.

(21) The chief difficulty in the interpretation of the last scene, the
Choral Dance (590-606) is the sense to be put on the word χορός.
Does it mean dancing-place, or the dance itself? We must, I now think,
decide in favour of the former. This is the prevalent use of the word
in H. (compare 6 260, μ 4, 318, and the epithets εὐρύχορος etc.), though
the other is found in 6 248, etc. and many passages are ambiguous.
There is no question that according to Knosian tradition what Daidalos
made for Ariadne was not a marble relief of a dance, as Pausanias would
have it (ix. 40. 2), but a dancing-place representing the famous labyrinth.
This is the common blazon of the city on the coins of Knosos, and its
connexion with the dance has been proved by Benndorf! from a curious
Etruscan vase of very early local work found at Tragliatella. The

1 Tn an article Ueber das Alter des Reichel Ueber Homerische Waffen! pp.
Troiaspieles reprinted at the end of 133-139.

VOL. II 2R

610 THE ILIAD

essential part of the roughly inscribed design is here reproduced, together
with the labyrinth from a Knosian coin (figs. 6, 7).

92) Besides the two riders shewn in the figure, there are also seven
warriors advancing with a dance-step. The maze on the right, which

7 x

Fic. 6

is absolutely identical with the Knosian labyrinth, bears the inscription
TRULIA, which shews that the reference is to the Roman Z'rovae lusus,
or Troiae decursus, best known from Virgil’s description (Aen. v. 580-
602), where the Cretan labyrinth is taken for comparison of the evolutions
of the riders. The complicated curves of the labyrinth seem to have
been marked on the dancing-floor in order to guide the dancers in their
mazy windings—possibly there may have been low walls, such as are
still formed of turfs or stones in Northern Europe, where the labyrinth
figure is still used for children’s games, and, still more strangely, retains
in Norway and Gotland the name of Trojeborg
or Tréburg. To complete the chain of evidence
for Greece, we find in Plutarch (Theseus xxi.)
ἐκ δὲ τῆς Κρήτης ἀποπλέων (ὁ Θηςεὺς) εἰς
Δῆλον... ἐχόρευςε μετὰ τῶν Hieéwon χορείαν.
HN ἔτι νῦν ἐπιτελεῖν δηλίους λέγουσι. «πίπηλια
τῶν ἐν τῶι Λαβυρίνθωι περιόδοον καὶ διεξόδων,
ἔν τινὶ ῥυθμῶι περιελίξεις καὶ ἀνελίξεις ἔχοντι
ΓΙΓνοιλένην. We need have πὸ hesitation
therefore in supposing that the Epic poet
conceived the χορός on the shield as a figure of
the labyrinth placed, as the Etruscan artist
placed it, beside the lines of dancers, to indicate the floor on which they
follow out the circling movements described in 599-606.

(23) We now recur to the question of the Trial scene in 497-508,
perhaps the most difficult in the Shield. There are three main questions
on which the rest depend. 1. What is the debate before the people in
the Agora (497-500)? Is it whether blood-money has been paid, or
whether it should be accepted? 2. What is the function of the Yetwp

' For further references see Frazer Paws. v. 205.

APPENDIX I 611

(501) and his relation to the γέροντες of 502-077 3. What is the
meaning of the two talents of gold in 507-08 ?

(24) 1. It is obvious that the scene gains enormously in importance
if it deals not with a mere question of fact, whether a sum of money has
been paid or no, but with the question whether the community shall
decide that the kin of a slain man must accept the blood-price instead of
prosecuting the blood-feud, or forcing the man-slayer into exile. In this
case we have represented a most interesting stage in early law-making.
We can trace in pre-historic times the stage in which the family of the
slain drive out the slayer, followed by that in which they can if they
please accept a money compensation—both are in fact represented in
Homer (cf. I 632 ff.). In historic Greece we find that homicide is a
crime, not merely an offence against the family. It seems absolutely
necessary to assume an intermediate stage in which the community
asserted a right to say in every case whether the next of kin should, for
reasons of public policy, accept compensation ; and this missing link is
apparently brought before us here.

(25) Linguistically this interpretation is undoubtedly tenable.
According to the ordinary Homeric use, εὔχετο ἀποδοῦναι means
claimed to pay—as in common phrases like ε 450 ἱκέτης. . εὔχομαι
εἶναι J claim the rights of « suppliant, υἱὸς Λυκάονος εὔχεται εἶναι 1"
246, and many similar passages where the verb exactly answers to our
claim (clamare = pro-claim), the original sense being of course to declare.
The aor. infin. is certainly admissible in this sense, as after verbs of
expecting, swearing, etc. (see note on I’ 28). It is necessary to insist on
this as J. H. Lipsius! has stated that the words can only mean declared
that he had paid, and that if this sense be not admitted we must have
the fut. infin. declared that he would pay. This would not suit any
interpretation of the passage. And the only places where εὔχομαι is
used with fut. infin. in H. are 4101 (119), p 50 (59) in both instances of
a vow to the gods. Of course εὔχετο ἀποδοῦναι can equally mean, as
commonly taken, declared that he had paid (see X 261 εὔχετο... iadcar) ;
this suits the present explanation equally, for it may well be taken in
connexion with δήμωι migauckwn. He brings with him the proper
blood-price, and “displays it to the folk,” claiming that he has thus made
a legal tender and thereby discharged his debt.? So far there is nothing
to decide whether the dispute is as to the receipt of the money or as to
the right to insist on its acceptance. But when we come to GNaineto
the same can hardly be said. If the case is one of fact, then GnNaineto
must mean dened. But the regular Homeric sense of the verb is refuse.
In two places only is it possible to translate it deny, 1 116, ξ 149:
and in both of these it is used absolutely, not of denying a fact, but of
repudiating an idea. The use of μηδέν for οὐδέν leads even more
strongly to the same conclusion.* We must conclude then that linguistic

1 Leipziger Studien xii. 227, in an *See J. H. S. viii. 127, where the
article which appears to me so superficial question is discussed more fully. I do
that I should not have thought it worth ποῦ recall anything there said.
mention had I not found it quoted with 3 See ἡ. and T. § 685, H. G. § 381.
approval by others.

613 THE ILIAD

evidence, though not entirely decisive, is much in favour of the question
being one of claim to pay, not of the fact of payment having been made ;
though at the same time the inferences drawn as to the development of
criminal law remain purely hypothetical.

(26) 2. The sense of the word ἴστωρ is settled by WY 486, where it
means a referee or daysman, one who knows the facts of the case. It seems
likely that the reference is here a legal formality ; the matter is placed
in the hands of a judge, who on inquiry decides that the matter is one
which interests the community at large, and must therefore be decided
not by an individual, but by the council of elders. So in the Humenides,
where the case is similar, Orestes claims (235 ff.) that, having performed
the required rites, he has discharged his debt (εὔχεται πάντ᾽ ἀποϑοῦναι).
The Chorus, as prosecutor, ἀναίνεται κηϑὲν ἑλέσθαι, refuses any expiation
(299 ff.). Athene appears, and both sides agree to “take an issue”
(πεῖραρ édécear) and refer it to her. On hearing from the statement
that the case is one of murder she says

τὸ πρᾶγμα μεῖζον εἴ Tic οἴεται τόδε 410
βροτὸς δικάζειν" οὐδὲ μὴν ἐμοὶ Θέμις

φόνου OIGIPEIN ὀξυμηνίτου δίκας.

κρίναςα 0° ἀςτῶν τῶν ἐμῶν τὰ βέλτατα 487

ἥξω. διαιρεῖν τοῦτο πρᾶγμ᾽ ἐτητύλχως,
ὅρκον πορόντας UUHOEN EKOIKON φράςειν.

We may take it as certain that this represents the oldest known procedure
of Athens, and that all cases of murder came before the Areopagus by
reference from a judge who had first inquired into the case. The decision
of murder cases seems in Greece to have always rested with the people
themselves, acting through their council or some other representative
body, not with a single judge.!

27) The word πεῖραρ ἑλέσθαι seems exactly to correspond to our
“take an issue,” nefpap being used in the abstract sense of end, consumma-
tion, the αἰτίας τέλος of the corresponding passage in the Humenides (434).
Allen,” however, proposes to take it in the literal sense of rope-end. He
supposes that the litigants symbolically take the two ends of a rope to
typify a contest, comparing the manwm conserere of the Romans. But
this is needlessly ingenious.

(28) 3. The two talents which lie in front of the judges have been
interpreted to mean (a) the blood-price of the man slain; (Ὁ) a deposit
in the nature of ‘costs,’ one talent being paid into court by each party ;
in either of which cases the recipient is to be that one of the two litigants
ὃς δίκην ἰθύντατα εἴποι, who should most successfully plead his cause ; (0) a
fee to be given to the judge who should give the most righteous judgment.
Of these alternatives the last alone now appears to me to be tenable.
The first is excluded, because two talents is a sum far below the price of

' See J. W. Headlam in J. H. 5. xiii, p. 69.
* Harvard Studies in Class. Philology iv.

«=

APPENDIX I 613

a man; and both because ἰϑύντατα and similar phrases are used only
of the decision of a judge, not of the skill of a pleader. On the first
point, the value of the talent, reference may be made to Ridgeway’s
papers in J. P. x. 30, J. H. 5. viii. 133 ff. In Ψ 262-70 two talents
form only the fourth prize, and are evidently far below the value of the
woman who formed part of the first. Similar conclusions follow from
6 129, 6 393, 2 232. So the Sicilian gold talent was equal to only six
Attic drachmae.

(29) The use of ἰϑύς and its cognates is sufficiently proved by the
following passages, which all refer to the nature of a decision, not of a
plea; VY 580 teeta rap écra, Hymn. Cer. 152 ieeinicr δίκηιςιν, Hes. Opp.
36 διακρινώμεθα νεῖκος ἰϑείηιει δίκηιςι. The same is shewn by the
converse use of ςκολιός, see I] 387 with the passages there quoted.
Similar evidence is given by Pindar P. iv. 153 Buin εὔϑυνε λαοῖς δίκας,
Solon 4. 37 εὐθύνει δὲ δίκας ckoAIdc, Herod. i. 90 ἰϑύς τε καὶ δίκαιος
οἷο. The phrase δίκην εἰπεῖν does not recur in acer but there can be no
doubt that it may mean pronounce justice, cf. δίκας εἴροντο A 570. It
occurs rarely in later Attic in the sense of pleading (Xen. Mem. iv. 8. 1,
Aristoph. Hgu. 347 εἴ ποὺ δικίδιον εἶπας εὖ) but this is the sort of
phrase in which it is most dangerous to argue from Attic to Homeric.
Further it may be added that by Homeric usage weTa τοῖςιν does not
mean (plead) before them ; it must be taken with ὅς, who among them, sc.
the judges. Lipsius’s recklessly confident statement to the contrary is
amply refuted by H. Sidgwick in C. A. viii. 2.

(30) It appears then that the two talents are deposited, one by each
suitor, to be given as a fee or reward to the judge whose decision

‘meets with general approval—signified no doubt by acclamation. Sir

H. Maine (Ancient Law 375-77) has ingeniously compared with this
the Roman Legis Actio Sacramenti where a sum of money called saera-
mentum was deposited by each litigant under the form of a wager on the
justice of his cause ; the loser’s stake going to the praetor as a reward for
his trouble and loss of time in deciding. Ridgeway (J. P. xvi. 111),
has explained in the same way Hymn. Merc. 324, where Apollo and
Hermes go before Zeus for a decision about the stolen oxen: κεῖθι rap
ἀλιφότεροιει δίκης κατέκειτο τάλαντα, for there (in Zeus’ court) their
justice - talents were deposited; i.e. they had claimed jurisdiction by
paying in their fees. This is at least as likely as the more obvious there
the scales of justice were laid up for both.

(31) It is difficult in the whole of the Trial Scene to guess what the
poet saw, or conceived, as actually depicted, and what he has added from
his own imagination. The dispute between two men in the Agora, with
the shouting crowds behind, we can well figure. But what makes the
poet say that it was about a manslaying? Are we to conceive the dead
body as lying between the two? Or does the poet put life into a mere
dispute by making it turn on a burning question of his own day? And
the two litigants before the judges we can reproduce ; but it is not so
easy to suppose that the desire to take an issue before a daysman was
pictorially described, or that the two little wedges of gold lying in the
midst were really an important feature in the picture; still less can we

614 . THE ILIAD

imagine with Reichel! that they were so prominent as to mislead the
poet into a wrong interpretation of their meaning. The safer conclusion
seems to be that all the legal significance is the poet’s own addition to
the pictures of wrangle and judgment, and that therefore it was in all its
details a living reality of his own day.

! Hom. Waffen? 158-160. Reichel’s treatment of the decoration of the Shield
strikes me throughout as unsatisfactory.

APPENDIX K
X 202-04

πῶς ὃέ κεν Ἕκτωρ κῆρας Unezépuren eandrToio,
εἰ μή οἱ πύματόν τε καὶ UctaTton ἤντετ᾽ ᾿Ἀπόλλων
ἐγγύθεν, ὅς οἱ Endpce μένος λαιψηρά τε γοῦνα:

(1) How could Hector have outrun impending death, but that Apollo
for the last time came to meet him close at hand, and gave refreshment to
his strength and speed to his knees? This, the usual explanation of this
difficult passage, now appears to me quite correct. The main objections
to it are that Hector did not escape death, and that we ought to have
Unezégeuren instead of the aor. But the poet stops for a moment to
consider not the future but the past. The first stage of the catastrophe
has ended ; there is a marked pause in the narrative. Hector has as a
matter of fact escaped Achilles in the chase—the very field where the
πόδας ὠκύς would have expected most easily to surpass him. This is
discreditable to Achilles if not explained—the Greek poet must save the
honour of the Greek hero. He might have used the descriptive imperf.,
but the aor. is quite in place as resuming the pursuit in a single
momentary view (WZ. and 7’. §§ 56-57).

(2) “Escaped so far” is in a sense implied; however familiar the
story may be to the hearers, the narrator is bound to pretend that they
do not know what is coming, and to make a pause of suspense, while
they think “has Hector actually got away?” He thus heightens the
effect of the succeeding catastrophe (see Platt in J. P. xix. 48, Agar
J. P. xxv. 312). But a feeling that the form of the sentence (πῶς κεν
virtually = οὔ ken), the πη θα! apodosis, implies that the final escape did
take place, has led to various conjectures and alternative explanations.

(5) Fasi and Hentze put a comma after γοῦνα, thus taking 205,
Aaoicin 0° ἀνένευε καρήατι δῖος ᾿Αχιλλεύς, with the preceding εἰ wH.
But Homeric usage forbids this; 205 must be added independently,
whether as a further explanation of Hector’s having escaped so long, or

,

simply as a fresh step in the narrative. Duntzer suggests τώς for

πῶς in 202, “thus Hector would have escaped had not Apollo, who

had helped his running, now withdrawn his aid,” the last idea

being given by the emphasis on πύματόν τε καὶ ὕστατον. But then
615

616 THE ILIAD

the thought is materially weakened by the addition of érrueen, as this
lays stress on the positive instead of the negative side of the god’s action ;
otherwise it might be defended as another instance of the familiar idea of
a suecess which “might have been ” gained by valour even ὑπὲρ μόρον.
but for divine interference. If we could assume 204 to be an interpola-
tion from Y 93, this explanation would be considerably strengthened,

(4) There is, however, a further alternative in the reading ὑπεξέφερεν,
which is given by Syr., and, according to schol. A, was the reading of
Ar. (though this is doubtful, see Ludwich ad loc.). Of this word two
explanations have been given, (1) postponed, (2) outrun. The latter is
supported by Hoffmann on the analogy of y 496 τοῖον rap ὑπέκφερον
ὠκέες ἵπποι and Ψ 376 ποδώκεες ἔκφερον ἵπποι, where, however, the
construction is essentially different. Compare also ὑπεκφέρειν ἡμκέρης
ὁδῶι, to keep a day's march ahead, Herod. iv. 125. For (1) there is no
analogy at all, and the reading is probably only an ancient attempt to
evade a difficulty which has always been felt.

(5) Another ingenious but I think untenable explanation has been
offered by Bayfield. Regarding the lines as embodying the reflexion
of an interpolator, he takes οἱ in 203 to refer to Achilles: “How
could Hector have escaped, unless Apollo had done, what he did not do
—confronted the other (Achilles) for the last time and to make an end—
Apollo who had [as it was] stirred up his (Hector’s) courage and made
his limbs swift?” This is terribly involved with its change of meaning
for ef. Such change is no doubt to be found in H. (see Il 801, 2 33-35),
but always in cases where the context leaves no doubt as to what is
meant ; we have no right to push the license to absolute unintelligibility.
Moreover Gntécear (for the accent see on O 698) is in itself a purely
neutral word, meet ; the idea of friendliness or hostility is imported solely
from the context (compare II 788 with H 22, φ 31); it cannot bear the
whole weight of the idea “unless the god himself had beaten back Achilles.”
These objections seem fatal, even apart from the implication of the
‘unreal’ protasis ei μὴ ἤντετο, that Apollo did meet Achilles—an
implication which Bayfield denies, but which seems to me inseparable
from the grammatical form in usage, whatever logic may assert.1

(6) But though we may conclude that the passage as it stands is
capable of simple and satisfactory explanation, there still remains a doubt
as to whether it stood originally in this place. We have noticed Ar.’s
objection to 199-201; the objections to 202-04 are yet more obvious.
If 205, or rather, as we shall presently see, 208, immediately followed

1 Mr. Bayfield now writes: “My view fair fight. 1 would translate And how

now is that the three lines embody the
reflexion of an interpolator, who, wishing
to emphasise the hopelessness of Hector’s
efforts, states (in effect) that nothing
but conclusively effective assistance from
the god who had enabled him to run so
well could have finally saved him from
death at Achilles’ hands. What form
the assistance might have taken does
not matter ; it might have been that of
enabling him to cope with Achilles in

could Hector have escaped unless for the
last time (ὕστατον), and to end the long
struggle (πύματον) Apollo had stood by
him (H.) in very presence (ἐγγύθεν, com-
pare praesens deus).” This evidently
avoids the most serious objections urged
above, and is tenable if we can take
πῶς KEN as simply enquiring about a
possibility without any implication as
to its realization.

APPENDIX K ᾿ 617

198 the narrative would run with the directness and rapidity which the
situation demands, but which the explanation of Hector’s ‘escape’
awkwardly interrupts. The sudden intervention of Apollo, without a
word of preparation, reminds us forcibly of the death of Patroklos in I]
—note especially the similar use of the word Hnteto. There, as on so
many occasions where a god joins in the war, we had gravely to suspect
later ideas than those of the Manic, and the same suspicions must arise
here. The puzzle of Hector’s successful rivalry of Achilles in speed
troubled the scholiasts, and may well have troubled an early rhapsodist
of scholiastic turn; the lines are in fact little more than a versification
of Porphyrios on 165—ndde δέ, pacin, ὁ ποδωκίετατος πάντων OU KaTa-
λαμβάνει TON Ἕκτορα; πρόχειρον EN οὖν TO λέγειν ὅτι ᾿Απόλλωνα
ἔχει ουμωλαχοῦντα. The scholiast goes on indeed to suggest other less
poetical reasons—that Achilles has been fighting hard, but Hector has had
a good rest, and so on. But the spirit is the same, and the expression
is in any case none of the best. The difficulty in the manner in which
204 follows 203 has already been alluded to. The line is really
inseparable, for it is needed to explain that ἤντετο means friendly
meeting ; but ἐγγύθεν is obscure. Apparently it is meant as a sort of
apology for the want of preparation for the god; he has been close at
hand all through the battle, so deep is his interest in Hector.

(7) We must conclude then with Bayfield that 202-04 are a later
addition, and further I think that 199-201 must go with them. That
passage, like this, is perfectly defensible in itself, but it is obscure in
expression, and the two together break the thread of the-story too near
the climax. And there is undoubtedly grave room for objection in the
repetitions δύναται... δύναται. . δύνατο, φεύγοντα. . ὑποφεύγΓειν
(-. ὑπεΞξέφυγεν), διώκειν. . διώκειν, in the absence of a subject for
the first δύναται, and in the very doubtful metre of ὀνείρωι ov. For yet
further reaching doubts as to the context, reference must be made to the
Introduction to X.

(8) It must be added too that there is something scholiastic in the
lines which follow, 205-07. The same spirit which asks ‘ Why could
not Achilles catch Hector?” asks “Why did not the other Greeks stop
Hector ?”, just as the scholiasts on Φ ask “Why were not the other
Greeks drowned in the inundation of Skamandros?” The answer is that
the other Greeks have been steadily ignored since the end of Y, in order
to concentrate our whole attention on the one great Greek. To have
them brought to mind here is not only needless—it suggests many
awkward questions which there is every reason to suppose that the
original poet would have been careful not to stir. Aristotle himself
felt the difficulty (Poet. xxiv. 8): m@AXon 0° ἐνδέχεται EN TAI ἐποποιίαι
τὸ ἄλογον... διὰ TO μὴ ὁρᾶν cic TON MpdTTONTa’ ἐπεὶ τὰ περὶ THN
Ἕκτορος δίωξιν ἐπὶ cKHNAC ὄντα γελοῖα ἂν φανείη, οἱ WEN ἑστῶτες
καὶ οὐ διώκοντες, ὁ δὲ ἀνανεύων, ἐν δὲ τοῖς Enect λανθάνει. Hut
the concealment should at least be as complete as possible.

APPENDIX L
HOMERIC BURIAL RITES

(1) Tue descriptions of the funerals of Patroklos and Hector in Ψ'
and 2, and the two νέκυιαι of the Odyssey, the visit of Odysseus to the
under-world in A and the descent of the shades of the Suitors in ὦ,
provide most of the material for a discussion of the Homeric view of
life after death. Many ingenious attempts have been made to draw
from them a consistent scheme of belief, but none have been completely
successful. The problem is further complicated when we attempt a
comparison of Homeric burials with such practices as we can deduce from
the numerous and important graves of early Greece, Mykenaean and later.

(2) E. Rohde, in his brilliant essay Psyche, has drawn a sharp dis-
tinction between two conceptions of the departed soul, leading to very
different ways of treating the corpse. One idea is that the soul after
death can still return to its old home and haunt the living ; it still longs
for human sustenance, and is capable of doing vague but terrible harm ;
it must therefore be appeased with gifts of food, raiment, and other
things needed in life. Hence sacrifices to the dead, ancestor and spirit
worship, and hence also mummification, partial or complete, to the end
that the old tenement may still be available for its former owner. This
conception we may call the ghost-faith.

(3) The other idea is that the spirit can be altogether banished from
earth, and shut up, a helpless and harmless ‘shade,’ in Hades. This:
leads to burning of the body, in order to cut off the more completely all
communication between the living and the dead. When this is done no
further interference need be dreaded ; there is therefore no further offering
of gifts to the dead, nor any form of spirit worship. To this belief we
may give the name of the shade-faith.

(4) This distinction is attractive, and probably founded on truth.
In practice, however, it is mainly theoretical, at least for Greece. When-
ever we can test it by literary evidence, we find a constant interaction
of the two conceptions. Men are never so inconsistent as in their beliefs:
about the other world.! Generally speaking the first is the most primitive

' Unthinking people in England — will not be admitted there till the general
appear generally to believe at the same Resurrection. Both views can of course

time that the souls of the pious dead be supported from Scripture.
pass at once to heaven, and that they

618

ι APPENDIX L 619
and wide-spread belief ;! as including ancestor-worship, it is probably
the most prevalent faith on the face of the globe. The second is on the
whole the outcome of civilization and reflexion; it makes way as man
discovers natural causes for the vague terrors which the savage puts down
to the work of ghosts. Hence the second belief has, in Europe at least,
been commonly taught by systematic theology, while the former has
remained a superstition ingrained in the mind of the people at large,
and often manifested in rites and practices too popular to be suppressed
by the recognized authority of religion.

(5) It is to an illogical blending of such different conceptions that
the difficulty of harmonizing the Homeric statements appears to be
due. We must indeed always keep in mind that ‘ Homeric’ covers the
usage of a long period—in all probability some two or three centuries at
least ; and that inconsistencies may well arise here, as in every case where
we speak of the culture of the ‘Homeric’ age, from changes, both
intellectual and physical, within that long lapse of time. But in the region
now under discussion the inconsistency seems to permeate all parts of
the poems, and the arguments which have been alleged to shew a material
advance from the older to the newest portions are far from convincing.”

(6) The Epic is of course pervaded by the ‘shade-faith.’ The spirits
of the departed are εἴδωλα καμιόντων, ἀμενηνὰ κάρηνα, and can do
no harm to the living, at least when once they have received the ‘ pro-
pitiation of fire.’ There is no ancestor-worship, no chthonian cult. Aides
who rules among the dead is a mere nonentity to the world above him,
and his subjects are still less matters of interest. Teiresias alone, by a
special privilege, retains something of his power ofw1 nennOceai: τοὶ δὲ
«κιαὶ aiccoucin (« 495).

(7) And yet, definite and consistent though this view of death appears
to be, we find attached to it observances which can hardly be anything
but survivals of the ghost-faith. The body is burnt, yet we have echoes
from a time when mummification was practised. This is suggested by
the word tapyevein, which is wholly inappropriate to cremation (see note
on H 85). The pots of honey placed by Achilles on Patroklos’ pyre
have been ingeniously explained by Helbig as symbolizing the use of
honey for mummifying. And the means which Athene uses to preserve
Patroklos’ corpse in T 38-39 seem clearly to indicate a knowledge of the
instillation of drugs through the nostrils, so characteristic of the Egyptian
embalmer. It may be too that the fat in which his body is wrapped in
W 169-70 was originally a preservative ; though here there is the possible
alternative that it was meant for food. But the care to cover up the
whole body, so distinctly insisted on, seems to point rather to the
former.

(8) The ghost-faith required that the departed should be equipped

1 But it must not be forgotten that
cremation is found before as well as after
the Mykenaean period.

2 Helbig in particular attempts to
distinguish the older ‘Aiolic’ from
the newer and more sceptical ‘Ionic’
faith. To the former he assigns the

burial of Patroklos in Ψ, to the latter
that of Hector in 2. But the contrast
he seeks to establish seems to me vision-
ary. The materials on which we have
to form a judgment are all late; the
oldest parts of the poems tell us nothing.

620 THE ILIAD

with all that he required while yet alive—slaves, arms, treasures, raiment
and food. For the shade this was all useless. Yet Achilles gives
Patroklos slain captives, horses, dogs for company, and the flesh of sheep
and oxen for food (¥ 166-77), and promises hima share of the raiment
and treasure paid by Priam for Hector’s body (Q 592-95). So too
Andromache will burn garments in Hector’s honour, though they will be
of no use to him while he lies unburied—if they could be burned with
him, he would have profited from them (X 510-14). And the ceremony
with which Odysseus approaches the shades in A—the blood poured into
the trench, whence the feeble dead will suck strength if they are per-
mitted to drink it—is simply the familiar rite of the sacrificial blood
poured into the ground to feed the objects of ghost-worship. The
κοτυλήρυτον aiuaof 34, flowing “around the corpse,” can hardly mean
less than this blood, caught in cups and poured on the ground beside the
body, that the ghost might thus partake of the funeral feast.

(9) The famous passage in VY (57-107) describing the appearance of
Patroklos’ wraith to Achilles stands by itself, not only for its truth and
pathos, but for the difficulty of reconciling it with the rest of the poems.
The idea that the spirit “‘wanders up and down in the broad-gated
house of Hades” (74) till the burning allows it to “pass the gates of
Hades” (71) is obviously self-contradictory, with the inconsistency which
always arises when a new dogma comes in conflict with a deep-rooted
older faith. It contradicts too the ‘Nekyia’ in Δ; for when Odysseus
descends to Hades, the first spirit which meets him (A 51-80) is that of
the yet unburied Elpenor, not excluded from the rest like Patroklos (¥
72) but in their midst—praying for burial in order not that he may
pass the gates but that he may not have to return to plague Odysseus
(A 73) as Hector threatens to plague Achilles (X 358). So too in the
‘second Nekyia’ in ὦ the spirits of the unburied suitors go down to
Hades “ twittering like bats,” but are at once received among the departed,
and converse with them like living men.

(10) It is in fact difficult not to believe that the author of the passage
in W deliberately aimed at inculeating a dogma which was not generally
accepted by his contemporaries. The exclamation of Achilles, Η ῥά τι
éctt Kai εἶν ᾿Αἴδαο ϑόμοιει ψυχὴ καὶ εἴδωλον, the cry of sudden
personal conviction in a matter which has hitherto been lazily accepted
as an orthodox dogma, is as true psychologically as it is poetically
beautiful. But it has a further dogmatic purpose, as is shewn by the
next clause, ἀτὰρ φρένες οὐκ ἔνι πάμπαν. The adherents of ghost-
worship of course declared that the shade-faith was a denial of immortality
altogether, so empty of life were the shades. The poet takes the
opportunity of stating his own belief on the matter, laying down
positively the following theses (a) that the shades do live on; (2) that
they have no @pénec; (c) that they will never return when once they
have entered Hades ; (d) that burning, instead of being disrespectful to
the dead, is their own first wish, for that between death and burning
ee is an intermediate stage of banishment both from Hades and from
earth.

(11) Two of these propositions are not only stated but exemplified,

APPENDIX 1, 021

and deserve full consideration. (a) The shades live on. Patroklos’
shade is ‘‘ passing like himself,” so like that it deceives Achilles; but when
he tries to embrace it he finds that it is but an εἴδωλον, an intangible
wraith. Yet it lives on, for it keeps emotions and affections, and above
all the memory of past life is preserved intact.

(12) (4) The shades have no φρένες, no intelligence. They know
nothing of what goes on since they have left the earth, and therefore
they can neither devise nor execute good or ill for the living. The shade
of Patroklos shews this by the opening words of reproac h (¥ 69-71),
which display complete ignorance of all that has been and is being done
in his honour. It does not even know its own powerlessness, for it asks
Achilles (75) to “give his hand,” which, as the sequel shews (100), is
useless. This of course is a cardinal point of the faith, and entirely
agrees with the conception of the Odyssey, where Teiresias alone is
excepted from the common lot, τοῦ Te φρένες ἔμπεδοί cic’ τῶι καὶ
TEONH@TI NOON πόρε Περςεφόνεια οἴωι menNUceal Toi δὲ cKiai ἀΐσςουςι
(x 493-95).

(13) The thesis has naturally caused difficulties from early days.
A scholion, probably Didymean, says “ἐμφρόνως καὶ ευνετῶς πάντα
διείλεκται ὁ Πάτροκλος: ἐνεέςειεται οὖν ἐκ τῆς Ὀδυςςείας ὁ cTixoc
(104): ἐκεῖ γὰρ τὰς ψυχὰς εἴδωλα cKIdH, φρονήςεως ἀμέτοχα.
ὑπέθετο. ἢ φρένας λέγει οὐ τὸ OIGNOHTIKON, ἀλλὰ μέρος τι τῶν
ἐντὸς εώματος, ὡς καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ “EN τε φρένες ἧπαρ ἔχουςι" (. 301)
καὶ πάλιν “ἔνθ᾽ ἄρα τε φρένες ἔρχαται " (I! 481). ἔςτιν οὖν ἀπὸ
uépouc τὸ ὅλον cua. οὕτως “Apicropanuc ὁ γραμαλατικός. In answer
to this it has already been pointed out that Patroklos has not talked
ἐμφρόνως Kai ευνετῶς, for he has lost his hold of realities. And
course no one will think of translating ‘“‘they have no mdriffs” mean-
ing bodies. Recent critics have endeavoured to use such words as
“principle of life”; but this is no nearer the constant Homeric use ;
φρένες does mean TO διανοητικόν, and the clause must be translated on
this basis. It will be noticed that it is inserted parenthetically, merely
for the sake of laying down a proposition; the γάρ in 105 does not
refer to it at all, but confirms the principal clause A ῥά τι ἔςτι
εἴδωλον.

(14) The two remaining propositions (6) and (41) can from the nature
of the case only be stated dogmatically. Evidently (ὦ) is the newest
contribution. It is an attempt to mediate between the old faith and the
new—to make out that there is something to be done for the dead by
gifts, but only for a time. The intermediate stage, when the ghost can
still reappear to the living, is one to be got over as soon as possible, for
the sake of the dead man himself ; ee while it lasts it does to some
extent justify the old practices founded on the belief that the living
could still help the dead by gifts and rites. It leads the poet to some
inconsistency in language, but his view is on the whole a reasonable one.
Whether it was ever widely accepted in Greece we are hardly able to say ;
but the later combination of funeral gifts with burning of the body,
of which archaic tombs supply abundant evidence, seems to point to
something of the sort. But the old faith always survived. Aischylos

622 THE ILIAD

directly contradicts our poet’s φρένες οὐκ ἔνι maunan when he says
(Cho. 323)

τέκνον, φρόνημα TOU

θανόντος οὐ δαμάζει

πυρὸς μαλερὰ γνάθος,

and there is of course no doubt that the ghost-faith was the most popular
in Athens.

(15) On the whole then this review leads us to much the same
conclusion as that which we have reached upon other grounds—that the
Homeric civilization is based upon the Mykenaean, but represents a stage
of later development. We know from the evidence of Mykene that the
inhabitants of the city at its prime were spirit-worshippers, practising
sepulture and partial mummification. When we next have good evidence,
in the post-Mykenaean ‘Dipylon’ period, we find sepulture and crema-
tion practised side by side. In the interval therefore two beliefs had
come into conflict. It seems that the Homeric poems mark this inter-
mediate point, and it is likely enough that they may have contributed
much to the solution of it.

APPENDIX M
THE HARNESSING OF THE CHARIOT

(1) THE principal passage to be explained is {2 266-74

ἐκ μὲν ἄμαξαν ἄειραν EUTPOYON HWIONEIHN

καλὴν πρωτοπαγέα, neipinea δὲ OAcaN ἐπ᾽ αὐτῆς,
Kad 0° ἀπὸ παςςαλόφι Ζυγὸν HIPEON ἡμλιιόνειον
πύΞξινον ὀμφαλόεν. εὖ OIHKECCIN ἀρηρός.

ἐκ 0° ἔφερον Ζυγόδεσμον ἅμα Ζυτγῶι ἐννεάπηχυ.

καὶ TO μὲν εὖ κατέθηκαν ἐυξέετωι ἐπὶ PUUAI,
πέζηι ἔπι πρώτηι, ἐπὶ δὲ κρίκον EcTopI βάλλον.

τρὶς δ᾽ éxaTepeen ἔδηςαν En’ ὀλιφαλόν, αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα
ἑξείης κατέϑηςαν, ὑπὸ γλωχῖνα ὃ᾽ Exauwan.

It will be noticed that this refers to the harnessing of a wagon; it
is not certain that the gear of a war-chariot would be entirely the same.
(2) The appended cuts (8-10) will shew with some modifications the
explanation which I proposed in J. H/. δ. v. 185 (1884). It is based upon
the drawings of black-figured vases, which are of course of post-Homerie
date! ; and agrees on the whole with that given by Helbig (7. Μ΄. 147 ff.).
The main points are as follows: the pole was curved sharply upwards at
the end, running up to an almost vertical point (nézH). In the actual
bend (nézHi ἔπι πρώτηι) the yoke was laid across the pole. Attached
to the yoke was a ring (kKpikoc); through this a peg (€eTwp) was passed
and fastened into a hole in the pole. The zurédecuon, a rope nine
cubits long, was then used to bind something with three turns to the
ὀμφαλός, the long ends which remained after this being carried back to
the car itself, where they were fastened to an upright post which rose
from the front of the breastwork. This post and the rope from it to the
end of the pole are constantly depicted in archaic vase-paintings, and we
may well identify the rope with the zurédecuon. The chief difficulties
then remaining are these: (1) what was the ὀμφαλός 1 (2) what is the
object to ἔδϑηςαν ? (3) what is the meaning of ἑξείης ἢ (1) Helbig holds
that the ὀμφαλός was a boss on the yoke itself, as indeed is shewn by
the epithet ougadden above, which served as the point of attachment
to the ring. (2) He takes zurédecuon as the object which was tied on
to the ὀμφαλός. This is not a very natural interpretation of the words.

1 See the chariot from the Francois Vase, fig. 19, p. 628.
623

ie. 8

Rres ἢ

APPENDIX M 625

It seems to me more likely that we have to supply πέζην with €dxcan ;
they bound the upright end of the pole to the ὀμφαλός of the yoke
with three turns each way—the zurédecuon being permanently attached
at its middle point to the yoke. The three turns bring us to the upper
end of the nézx, from which the ends of the zurédecuon are led back to
the post on the car. (3) It then follows that ἑξείης κατέδηςαν means
Fastened to the post ; ἑξείης being either the gen. of a subst. ἐξείη, “the
holder,” so called because it was a support by which the charioteer could
hold, or else a corruption of a similar word, changed, when its meaning
was forgotten, into the familiar adverb. Schulze ᾧ. Μ΄. p. 292 adopts
this hypothesis, and would write ἐξίης, comparing €wia’ ἀπὸ τοῦ énecear:
ὁμιλία Soph. fr. 4 (Hesych.). As to the meaning of Und γλωχῖνα δ᾽
ἔκαμ ψαν it is hardly possible to make a guess. It is generally taken to
mean ‘they turned down the end” of the zurédecuon under the knot,
so as to hold it tight. According to the hypothesis given this is hardly
likely, as the zurédecuon would have two ends. γλωχίς appears to
recur only of the barb of an arrow in the epithets Tanurdeoyinec, etc.
(9 297 note), and in Soph. 7’r. 681, and rarely in late Greek.

The meaning of οἴηκες too remains doubtful; they are generally
explained as guides for the reins, rings through which they ran. Helbig
(p. 155) thinks they may be hooks to which the breast-straps (Aénadna)
are attached.

(3) A different view of the whole passage has recently been published
by W. Reichel Das Joch des homerischen Wagens, in Jahreshefte des Ost.
arch. Instituts ti. (1899), 137 ff. He takes the οἴηκες to be handles, and
refers the word to the ends of the yoke, turned up to serve as a
convenient means for lifting it. His explanation of the passage will be
clear from the appended cut (11), where @ is the puude; ὁ, zurén; c,

Fie. 11

6ugahdc; did, οἴηκες ; ὁ, Kpixoc; ἢ, ἕστωρ ; 4, Ζυγόδεσιλον, which after
three turns round the ὀμφαλός is wound about the pole. He assumes
that of the two ends of the zurédecuon one is kept shorter than the

VOL. II AAS

626 THE ILIAD

other, and is completely wound over, so that only one tongue, that of the
longer end, remains to be tucked under at 2. The skill with which this
ὲ | end was tucked in formed the
secret of the ‘Gordian knot’ of
which οὔτε τέλος οὔτε ἀρχὴ
ἐφαίνετο. Alexander undid it, ac-
cording to Aristobulos, by taking
out the ἕστωρ, and slippimg yoke
and knot together over the end of
the pole.

(4) Reichel further holds that
the €ctwp at least, and generally
speaking the Kpikoc, were peculiar
to wagons, when the pole could be
made thick enough to be pierced
for the ἕστωρ without material risk.
In the war-chariot, where lightness
was important, he holds that the place of the ἕστωορ was taken by the
turned-up pole—the nézu of fig. 8. This is illustrated by fig. 12.

(5) The ring which is constantly represented in vase-paintings (ὦ in
figs. 15, 16, 19) is not the Kpikec, nor a metal ring at all, but the end
view of a circular pad wrapped round the yoke to save it from chafing
the horses’ necks; while the peg or pegs (dd), which appear to pass
through it, represent the οἴηκες or handles of the yoke as_ before.
Figs. 13 to 16 illustrate this. It would be natural to identify this pad

ΠΟ ΠΣ

with the Ζεύγλη or yoke-cushion, twice mentioned in the same way
(P 440, T 406) χαίτη Ζεύγλης ézepinodca παρὰ zurén. But Reichel
objects to this that the mane could not be said ἐξεριπεῖν from a cushion
which lay so far back, and clear of actual contact with it. He therefore
turns to Assyrian and Egyptian chariots, where we find a broad cloth
covering the mane, and assumes that this was in use in pre-historic
Greece, though not in the historic period (figs. 17, 18). This how-
ever, besides being archaeologically doubtful, is hypereritical from a

APPENDIX M 627

literary point of view. The yoke with its cushion lies near enough to
the mane to authorise the poetical fancy that the mane is “streaming
out of it” when the horse droops its head ; if this is not admissible, it is

; KBE \
λ ANBOB ER a4
ZA
yom a
Be

i
U to SN

=) € ᾿ a LD

-_-=-

hard to see how the poet is permitted to say that the mane falls napa
zur6én—a question which Reichel does not touch.

(6) The λέπαδνον is undoubtedly the breast-strap against which the
horse pulled—e in fig. 19. The girth proper, known in classical times

as the uacyakictHp (f in fig. 19), is not separately named in Homer,
though it is always shewn in the drawings, and can hardly have been
unknown. It is probable enough that the plur. Aénadna (E 730, T 393—
‘the singular does not occur in Homer) includes both these important
straps under a single name. Reichel thinks that zeUrAn stands for the

628 THE ILIAD

whole of the harnessing gear, viz. ‘‘mane-cloth,” Ἀέπαδνον and
uacyadictHp. This is of course a mere matter of opinion.

.
.
“ Pe

(7) Since the preceding pages were written, Reichel’s article on the
Homeric yoke has been reprinted with the second edition of Ueber

homerische Wajffen—an edition which the author’s early and lamented
death on Dec. 18, 1901 has deprived of completeness, The essay on the

APPENDIX M 629

yoke has been expanded into one on the war-chariot; but Reichel’s
views on the construction of the car seem to me so destitute of founda-
tion, whether in the testimony of the poems, the representations in art,
or the probabilities of the case, that I refrain from discussing them.
There is, however, no substantial alteration in his account of the yoke,
which I therefore leave to the reader without further comment.

(8) A word, however, must be said on the additions to the larger
section on Homeric armour. Several interesting pages are devoted to
the use of boars’ tusks for the protection of helmets, as is indicated in
K 263 ff It is well known that worked tusks were found in large
numbers by Schliemann at Mykene—sixty of
them in Grave iv.! It has often been conjectured
that they came from helmets ; Reichel points out
that the well-known ivory head here given (fig.
20) bears a helmet made of them. We see in
the alternate rows the use of right and left
tusks, placed nea καὶ énea, as the author of
K says. The account of a genuine Mykenaean ;
helmet in so late a book must however be
regarded as another instance of the archaistic
and archaeological tendency so notable in K.

(9) A new explanation of the silver bowl
with the ‘siege’ scene (vol. i. p. 572) is ingenious
and probable enough to be worth mentioning.
Reichel sees in the figure at the extreme
bottom a helmsman with the steering oar in
his hand, and in the triangular marks along =
the edge to the left the conical helmets of Fic. 20
oarsmen; while the irregular curved line at
the feet of the slingers represents the upper edge of a bank. The
scene then is a hostile landing from ships, which the townsmen issue
from their walls to repel; we are at once reminded of the simile in
Σ 207 ff. It is tantalizing to think how much another half inch of the
bowl might have taught us.

(10) With regard to one of his main points Reichel contemplated an
important change of ground. He had felt the force of the objections
urged from all sides against his treatment of the word ϑώρηξ in certain
passages which cannot be regarded as mechanical interpolations—see vol.
i. p. 578. He admits that his attempt to make it mean simply piece of
armour is untenable. He regards the thin gold plates found on the
breasts of the skeletons at Mykene as possibly the funereal representativ es
of metal plates sewn on to the chiton, and thus forming a ‘ prae-Ionic’
corslet. At this point unfortunately his Ms. breaks off, and it is im-
possible to say what conclusions he would have drawn from this important
admission. That something of the sort was necessary is clear, as I
indicated in vol. i. There seems to be no sign, however, that he was
prepared to withdraw from the equally untenable view that the Epos
with all its culture is to be regarded as a unity rather than as the

1 Tsountas-Manatt p. 196; Schuchhardt p. 267.

630 THE ILIAD

successive deposit of many generations, during which armour, like the
other marks of civilization, was continually changing and developing.
This is undoubtedly the chief blot upon his work. He has shewn once
and for all that the ‘Homeric’ culture is based upon the Mykenaean,
but has shut his eyes to the subtle and omnipresent traces of successive
modernization which the text has undergone.

(11) Robert, in his Studien zur Ilias, has endeavoured, starting from
Reichel’s conclusions, to use them as a test for the analysis of the Jliad.
He finds that the portions of the //iad where the armour is purely
Mykenaean are identical with those which can, on Fick’s principles, be
restored to the ancient ‘ Aiolic’ dialect; while the round shield and
bronze panoply of the Ionian warrior go with the ‘fixed’ forms of the
Ionic dialect. But this parallelism has to be established by such whole-
sale and arbitrary alterations of the text that the book itself amply
refutes the theory which it sets out to prove; and we are once more
reduced to the conclusion that early and late elements are combined
in Homer with a complexity which it is beyond our power to unravel
in detail. We must content ourselves with the general statement that on
the whole those parts of the Z//iad which on general grounds seem to
be early have on the whole kept more faithfully to the Mykenaean
tradition. Beyond this it seems hopeless to go.

APPENDIX N

THE FOURTH FOOT OF THE HEXAMETER AND
‘WERNICKE’S LAW’

(1) Tue fourth foot of the hexameter is governed by a number of subtle
rhythmical laws, discovered in modern times by observation solely, and
never mentioned, so far as I am aware, by the ancient metrists. They
were, however, certainly recognized in practice. In Homer they are rules
admitting of exceptions more or less rare; after him they are more and
more carefully observed, till they become rigid laws by the time of Nonnos,
who developed artificial smoothness of versification with amazing skill,
but fell into a lusciousness of rhythm which soon palls upon the tongue.

Of these rules the best known is probably that against the trochaic
caesura in the dactylic fourth foot. For this, and for the conditions
under which it applies, reference may be made to Monro (77. G. ὃ 367. 2)
and van Leeuwen (Zach. pp. 18-22).

(2) The fourth foot is spondaic in only about one line out of four.
This prevalence of dactyls is, however, not peculiar to this place. Accord-
ing to Professor Clapp (Homer’s //iad Books 19-24, Boston, 1899, p. 428)
in the last six books of the //ad, “the dactyl prevails

in the first foot in the ratio of 65 to 35

» second Σ 61 to 39
τ third os 85 to 15

72 to 28”

(in the fifth foot there are in these books 181 spondees in 3754 lines,
or just below 5 per cent). Of spondaic fourth feet, so far as I have
counted, about one-half have caesura, and of the rest a majority are
formed by words which run over into the fifth foot. In the whole //:ad
(15,762 lines) 1 find only 953 where a fourth foot without caesura ends
with a word.

(3) It is necessary to state the principles on which this enumeration
has been made. The text used is the Clarendon Homer (//omer: Opera
et Reliquiae, recensuit D. B. Monro, Oxon, ii. 1896). This edition always
reads Πατρόκλεες for the vulgate Πατρόκλεις, thus reducing the number
of spondaic fourth feet by nine. The treatment of παῖς is irregular. The
word occurs in this place twenty-six times, in twenty-four of which the

631

- fourth Fe

833 THE ILIAD

resolved form is possible: but the text has παῖς twenty times, and
πάϊς six.

Enclitics have been counted as part of the preceding word, proclitic
prepositions as part of the following, when it is the case governed by
them. So too λέων ὥς and even ϑεὸς ὃ᾽ ὥς seem rhythmically insepar-
able, and have been counted as single words. Prepositions following
their case are grouped with it, unless followed by their verb, when
they have been regarded as compounded (e.g. άχης €KNOCTHCANTI, not
μάχης ἔκ νοςτήςαντι). If all these word-groups are to be separated, the
total number of 933 will have to be reduced to 890.1 With these
exceptions a monosyllable at the end of the foot has been regarded as
following caesura, not as preceding diaeresis. There are, however, a
certain number of doubtful cases where there is a distinct break in sense
at the end of the foot. Ina large majority of these the monosyllable in
question is either παῖς or AN, followed by an initial vowel. We can of
course read πάϊς at once; the inference is strong that we should also
read en. The only exceptions which I find are the following :

44 τῶν δ᾽ Ἕλενος, Πριάμοιο φίλος παῖς, cUNeETO θυμῶι.

239 ἕλκ᾽ ἐπὶ οἷ μεμκαὼς ὥς Te Nic, ἐκ 0 ἄρα χειρός.

284 τοῦ 0° ἀγαθοῦ οὔτ᾽ ἂρ τρέπεται χρώς, οὔτέ τι λίην (cf.
N 279).

799 κυρτὰ φαληριόωντα, πρὸ μέν T ἄλλ᾽, αὐτὰρ én’ ἄλλα.

P 129 οεταΐηςαν, τῶν ὃὲ τράπετο χρώς, οὐδέ τις ἔτλη.

Φ. 910 εἴ τοι Τρῶας ἔδωκε Κρόνου παῖς πάντας ohéccai.

Q 706 χαίρετ᾽, ἐπεὶ μέγα χάρμα πόλει T ἦν παντί τε δήμωι.

ΖΡ ἢ

In the first and two last of these the pause is very slight, if any. Ν 284
and P 733 might be regarded as supporting the nom. ypéec which
Ar. read in N 191. It may be noticed that this form can always be
substituted for χρώς except in 2 414 and three times in Od.

(4) The word forming the foot (leaving monosyllables out of sight)
may take any one of the following forms :

A: Ὁ ΞΞ =

οὐλομένην, ἢ μυρί᾽ ᾿Αχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε.
Β i IO

‘\ s , tf Th ~

τὴν ἄρνύμενοι Μενελάωι coi Te, κυνῶπα.
C:--

κλῦϑί μευ. ἀργυρότοξ᾽, ὃς XpUcHN ἀμφιβέβηκας.
DS

éc TON Ndc ἀγορὴ KINHeH~: τοὶ 0° ἀλαλητῶι.

Of these forms I find the following instances in the Jad: of A 559,
B 160, C 182, D 32, in all 933, or about one in every seventeen
lines. If the word-groups spoken of in the preceding paragraph are to
be broken up, the distribution of these forms would be materially altered.

' On the other hand we shall have to enclitic. The number of these is not

add lines ending like λέβητάς τε τρίποδάς large, but I have not counted them.
τε, where the fifth foot begins with an

APPENDIX N 633

Such common phrases, for instance, as ἀφ᾽ ἵππων, an’ ὥμων, here classed
with A, would be transferred to C.

(5) The rareness of form D has long been observed ; reference may
particularly be made to Platt’s excellent papers in J. P. xviii, 120 ff,

150 ff., where the spondaic fourth foot receives an interesting discussion.
My list of molossi in this place is as follows

B 149, 522, A 342, 391, 515, E [163], 182, [620], Z 188, [H 12], 130,
Ill, 555, A 83, ay [844], M 316, N 713, Π [13], 455, 645,
647, 673, 683, [749], = 400, 1 412, Y 245, 296, [461], Χ 331, [ 469].

Of the bracketed passages H 12 is given only for conscience’ sake,
because Monro reads εὐχάλκου: ἐϊὔχάλκου is obviously right. The

remainder are not true molossi, but are formed by a preposition followed
by its case (ἐξ ἵππων etc.). But that Monro reads Πατρόκλεες for
Πατρόκλεις, there would be nine more to add (AP Sa, δῶσ, LL if
126, 584, 707, 754, 839). Even including these, there are only thirty-
two cases of true molossus in the //iad.' If we exclude them, and
read analogically Πατροκλέε᾽ for ΠΠατροκλῆ᾽ in X 331, the number is
reduced to twenty-two.* Four of these are the repetition of a single
phrase, Λυκίης εὐρείης (Z 188, 1 455, 673, 683), to which is mainly
due the preponderance of examples in IL.

(6) Ludwich (Ar. ii. 244) has attempted to explain this as an
instance of a more general rule, viz. that a molossus must always have the
ictus on the first and third syllables, and hence can never end a toot.
This, however, is a merely apparent generalization. A molossus ending
with the third foot is practically forbidden by the caesura—with the
fifth by the rule that a spondaic line must not end with a disyllable. In
the second foot molossi are found—their rarity is sufficiently explained
by the obviously disagreeable rhythm ; the instances are οὐδ᾽ ἔρρηζεν
χαλκόν (1" 548, Η 259, P 44), cUN KeINAICIN NHUci (Δ 181 KeNeRICIN 7),
ac Αἰνείαι θυμός (N 494), ἐν O° ὠτειλὰς mAAcaN (> 351 ὀατειλάς )."
Bat in the last place a molossus is found with considerable frequency,
considering the rarity of spondaic lines. There are for instance eleven
eases of it in A, and ten in 22. ἄνθρωπος alone, with its cases, which is
never found before the bucolic diaeresis, occurs at the end of the line no
less than forty times in the //iad and thirty-nine in the Odyssey. It is
clear therefore that the avoidance of it before the diaeresis has to do with
the general rhythm of the line, not with the accentuation of the molossus
as such.

(7) The rule of the molossus must in fact be treated in close relation
to the general avoidance of aspondee ending with the fourth foot. This
rhythm is at best but little more common than a spondee in the fifth
foot ; if we always write -éuen for -Εἰν, wherever possible, and -oo for

1 Platt says thirty-one, but includes
three cases (N 692,°I1 716, ὦ 696), where

the gen. in -oo for -ov in Θ 120, 11 647,
T 412, we are left with eighteen only.

the molossus is followed by an enclitic,
which I conceive makes all the difference ;
on the other hand he has overlooked B
149, 522, © 120, A 83. I dare not
hope that my own list is complete.

2 By reading κικλησκέμεν in I 11 and

An application of the same principle to
the Odyssey according to Platt abolishes
all but three cases of the molossus (ε 62,
ο 248, φ 15).

3 Van L. Ench. p. 24
ἐυκόσμως, not εὐκόσμως.

: in @ 123 read

634 THE ILIAD

the gen. τοῦ it is actually rarer; and this avoidance is more marked when
we contrast it with the marked tendency to end the foot with a word if
it is dactylie—the bucolic rhythm proper. But the avoidance evidently
applies in very different degrees to the four forms A, B, C and D (§ 4);
and it must be confessed that to our ears it is difficult to discern any
reason for the preference shewn to A, which is much greater than can be
accounted for by the liking for a trochaic caesura in the fourth foot.
We can hardly do more than record the facts. Among them must be
noted the general preponderance in this place of genitives and adjectives ;
and the continual recurrence of particular words. For instance, out of
the 559 eases of A, no less than seventy-two are due to ᾿Αχαιῶν, but only
four to ᾿Αχαιοί, and three to ᾿Αχαιοῖς, while ᾿Αχαιούς occurs only at the
end of a line. mpocHUda recurs seventeen times here, and the twelve-
fold repetition of μέλαιναι νῆες ἕποντο in the Catalogue gives that part
of B a prominent place in the enumeration. Proper names are rare
here ; ᾿Αχιλλεύς, though he comes ten times in the second foot, an
apparently less suitable place, is represented in the fourth only by his
epithet ποδάρκης (twenty-one times). In the Odyssey “Oduccetc ends the
second foot twelve times, the fourth foot never, the sixth foot over 230
times.

(8) In form B the preference for particular words is even more
marked. Of the 160 cases mentioned above, forty-one are groups—
prepositions with their cases. Of the remaining 119, more than half are
due to three words :

μεγαθύμου (Οὐ, -O1, -@ON) 37
πολεμίζειν 14
Μενελάου (-Οἱ) 10

πολεμίζειν is always followed by a vowel, and can, therefore be
written moeuizéuen—often with ms. authority. In form C Platt has
already called attention to the preponderance of a few words—inneon (-ouc)
22, ἀνδρῶν 12, αὐτοῦ 18, ἄλλος (ον, -ων, -ouc, -o1c) 17, ἄμφω 8.
Reference may be made to his interesting papers for a discussion of the
means by which the number of spondees may be reduced.

(9) There is a further rule regarding this place in the line, commonly
known as ‘Wernicke’s Law,’ as it was stated in his edition of
Tryphiodoros (1819) ; but it was known before his time, as it appears in
Gerhard’s Lectiones Apollonianae (1816). Hilberg’s discussion in Das
Princip der Silbenwdgung (1879) is often referred to in this connexion,
but appears to me to have obscured rather than elucidated the facts.
The law was recently the subject of an interesting controversy in the
Classical Review, x. 431, xi. 28, 151. It may be stated as follows :

“When a spondaic fourth foot without caesura ends with a word,
the last syllable must be long by nature, not lengthened by
position.”

In this form the rule appears to be absolute for the late Epic poets.
For Homer, however, it requires certain modifications, as will presently
appear,

(10) The rule at first sight appears quite irrational. It is true that a
certain weakness is introduced into the line by position-lengthening of a

APPENDIX N 635

short syllable in thesis, But it is certain that this consideration alone is
not enough to explain the rule. A count of the first feet in rather over
1000 lines (A 1—B 486) shews that 133 are formed of a single disyllabic
word ; in 100 of them the second syllable is long by nature, in thirty three it
is lengthened by position. This would lead us to expect that of the 933
spondaic fourth feet with which we are dealing, about 233 would shew
lengthening by position ; as a matter of fact we shall see that (excluding
monosyllables) only about twenty shew it. There is therefore some
special influence at work at this particular point of the line. What this
may have been it is very hard to say; but I suggest one consideration
which will explain many, if not all, of the restrictions; namely, that the
fourth foot should not sound like the end of a line.

(11) The hexameter, with its rigid division in the middle of the third
foot, naturally demands elasticity in its subordinate pauses. One of
these naturally comes at the end of the fourth foot, half way from the
main caesura to the end of the line. It is a pause which undoubtedly
sounds pleasant to us, but it involves the danger of a false close, a rhythm
unpleasantly repeated in the next two feet, and involving a certain sense
of disappointment to the ear. So long as the foot contains an unbroken
dactyl, this danger is obviously avoided—hence the marked preference
for the dactyl before the diaeresis. But if there is a pause in the trochaic
caesura, the offence is aggravated ; for prominence is given to the trochee
which is the special characteristic of the sixth foot. Hence the trochaic
caesura is generally forbidden. But it is allowed freely after such
word-groups as ἐπεί Ke, for by no possibility can ἐπεί Ke sound like
the end of a line. Similarly with the great frequency of adjectives in
this place. On this Platt (J. P. xviii. 121) remarks “1 cannot remember
any similar phenomenon in any other kind of poetry known to me; the
termination of the Latin pentameter alone makes any approximation to
it, and then the facts are just the other way about, and besides we can
see good reason for them.” Precisely! The very reasons which make
an adjective unsuitable for the end of a line qualify it for a place
which ought to be unlike the end of a line.

(12) When the fourth foot ends with a spondee, the echo of the sixth
foot is necessarily present. But if the rhythm is rare, it loses nearly all
its offence—the danger lies in the frequent repetition which makes the
ear watch for it. It is the same with rime, which is admitted
intervals so rare that it is dismissed as a mere accident. If rime
occurred irregularly every six or eight lines it would be intolerable—the
hearer would be distracted by the watch for it. So we can easily under-
stand how he would be annoyed by the frequent repetition of such lines
as ἀλλ᾽ Tet NON κατὰ λαὸν ᾿Αχαιῶν. UH’ ἔτ᾽ Epwder—he would lose sense
of his place in the line, and would be reduced to counting the feet, as we
are with blank verse badly recited.

(13) It is a pause in the sense which makes the difficulty—the ear
will not boggle at the check when the mind is carrying it over the
obstacle into the fifth foot. An elided vowel will help; and still more a
following enclitic. But when these are absent, and a pause comes here,
even the slightest, the tendency to check must not be favoured by the

636 THE ILIAD

remotest suggestion of the peculiarity of the sixth foot—that it may be a
trochee. Hence the origin of Wernicke’s law—the spondaic fourth foot
must be an unmistakeable spondee in itself, without any assistance from
the other side of the pause—its second syllable must be long by nature.

(14) We can now discuss in order a list, which I have done my best
to make complete, of the lines ἴῃ the Iliad where a short vowel
occurs in the second half of the spondaic fourth foot ending with a word.
Those which can properly be regarded as exceptions to the usual practice——
we can hardly say in Homer, “contraventions of the rule”—are numbered
consecutively. None of them occur in the first group—

ΙΓ 254 μαχήςοντ᾽ ἀμφὶ γυναικί.
EK 275 ἐλαύνοντ᾽ ὠκέας ἵππους.
Z 384 κατελϑόντ᾽ "Αἴδος εἴςω.
N 799 πρὸ μέν τ᾽ ἄλλ᾽, αὐτὰρ én’ ἄλλα,
X 3890. καταλήθοντ᾽ εἰν ᾿Αἴδαο.
501 φρένες ofxone’ Hic τὸ πάρος περ.

Here the position is formed within the word itself, and the elision
carries us over the pause. None of these spondees can possibly sound
like the end of a line. To this group belong also the cases where the
foot ends with an elided enclitic :

B 842 Πύλαιός τ᾽, ὄζος “Apxoc.

08 412 Διὸς dé cp’ ἔννεπε UEON.

A 8535. ὀλλύντάς τ᾽ ὀλλυμένους τε.
115 ἁπαλόν τέ cp’ ἧτορ ἀπηύρα.

And we can hardly exclude an elided δέ from the same category :
O 189 €xactoc 0 ἔμμορε τιμῆς.

Perhaps we must on the same grounds excuse
M55 ὕπερθεν δὲ «ςκολόπεςει,

regarding the δέ as so closely connected with the preceding word as to
abolish entirely the pause at the endof the foot. But the lengthening
in thesis by n ἐφεὰκ. is rare, and must be regarded asa weakness in itself,
especially in view of the fact that Unepeen is almost exclusively used at
the end of a line. We shall also have to include here

= 484 τῷ καί tic τ᾽ εὔχεται ἀνήρ
if we accept the reading τίς τ᾽ (Monro’s conjecture) for κέ τις or τέ τις
of Mss.

(15) A group which causes some difficulty is that in which the
second half of the fourth foot is formed by a monosyllabic preposition
following its case. The connexion of the Homeric preposition with its
case on the one hand and the verb on the other (tmesis) is so loose that
we can generally admit a pause in the middle of the foot instead of at
the end ; evidently this should be done in

I] 252 μάχης ἕξ anonéeceat,
P 207 μάχης ἔκ NocTHcaNTI,

where many editors rightly read €=anonéeceal, €KNOCTHCANTI.

APPENDIX N 637

But it is more doubtful in

IL 13 Φοίης ἔξ ἔκλυες οἷος.
(2 G17 θεῶν ἐκ κήδεα πέςςει.
115 Ἀεχέων ἐκ χεῖρας ὀρέξας.
And there seems to be no palliation for
O 59 “Extopa δ᾽ ὀτρύνηιςει uayHN ἐς Φοῖβος ᾿Απόλλων (1),

where the verb precedes as well as the case. This must therefore be
reckoned as an exception. So too with the monosyllabic enclities which
stand here :

T 348 ἵνα μή win λιμὸς ἵκηται (9),
X 404. κοτύλην τις τυτθὸν ἐπέςχε (3),
Q 557 ἐπεί με πρῶτον ἔαςας (4).

‘Wernicke’s Law’ is commonly so stated as to allow monosyllables here
without restriction ; but where they are followed by a distinct break in the
sense I see no rational grounds for treating them as privileged. With
regard to (1) it may be pointed out that this is the only case in the //iad
where ἐς follows its government (of course compound phr: ises like δώματ᾽
ἐς αἰγιόχοιο Διός A 229 are different). We have, however, Ἴλιον εἷς ἅμ᾽
ἕποντο, N 717, cf. A 372, 0 541, ὦ 117, and we should no doubt remove
all cause of offence by reading μάχην εἰς here.! Perhaps (4) is the least
pardonable exception in the //iad, the whole of the position coming from
the other side of the pause, and being very weak into the bargain. Such
a lengthening is rare in any thesis—the cases are collected in Hartel
Hom. Studien i. p. 85. The only other instances in the fourth are in
the phrases τὸ κρήγυον A 106, τὸ npin Ε 54, Π 208 (omitted by
Hartel), τὸ mpéceen WY 585, A 629, τὰ πρῶτα « 257, which rhythmically
are treated as single words ; and ἐπεί ce πρῶϑ᾽ ixéreuca p 573, which is
a parallel to (4), and like it must be regarded as very faulty.

(16) The other exceptions to the rule can be arranged in two groups,
according to the syntactical connexion of the words between which the
diaeresis comes. The first group consists of substantives and adjectives
in agreement ; here scarcely any pause can be said to exist, and the
exception is hardly more than apparent. The cases are

B 522 πὰρ ποταμὸν Κηφιςὸν Ὀΐον ἔναιον (5),
A 189 τὸν 0’ ἄλλον λαὸν ἀνώχϑω (6),
204 τὸν ὃ᾽ ἄλλον λαὸν ἄνωχθι (7),
796 ἅμα δ᾽ ἄλλος λαὸς Enécow (8),
Il 5 ἅμα δ᾽ ἄλλον λαὸν ὄὅπαςςον (9),
Φ 126 μέλαιναν φρῖχ᾽ ὑπαΐξει (10).

(5) offends also against the rule of the molossus ; Κηφισοῦ Bentley, which
if written Κηφιςόο cures all. ἄλλος λαός in (6), .. (9) seems to have
been felt almost as a single word. (10) has other difficulties of its own,
metrical and grammatical. We have the variant μελαίνηι φρίχ᾽ (1) at
our disposal.

1 So also with y 137 τὼ δὲ καλεσσαμένω ἀγορὴν és πάντας ᾿Αχαιούς.

038 THE ILIAD

(17) The remaining cases have no special palliation ; but in none
is there such a break in the verse as would enable us to place even a
comma there.

5 Hee \ πέπλον μὲν κατέχευεν ἑανὸν πατρὸς ἐπ᾿ οὔδει (11),

3) tena)

H 337 ποτὶ 0°’ αὐτὸν OciuOWEN KG (12)
4386 ποτὶ 0° αὐτὸν τεῖχος ἔδειλιαν (13),

K 389 ἢ ς᾽ αὐτὸν oULLOC ἀνῆκεν ; (14),

Σ 400 χάλκευον δαίδαλα πόλλα (15),

(15) like (5) breaks the rule of the molossus, but cannot be altered. (12)
and (13) form practically only one case ; we could of course write αὐτώι.

(18) This list purposely excludes the formula Bocomiec πότνια Ηρη,
which occurs fourteen times. Here the 1 has retained its original length
(7. G. § 116. 3), as is conclusively proved by βλοευρώπις ἐετεφάνωτο
ΑΔ 36, where the 1 must be long, Wernicke or no. We ought therefore
to write Boome. But γλαυκῶπις, not being preserved under the glass
case of a single traditional formula, has succumbed to the analogy of the
more common stems in -18-, and shortened the vowel. βλοευρώπις in a
late passage must be regarded as an artificial archaism, but is none the
less convincing on that account. Compare also βοῦν HNIN εὐρυμέτωπον
K 292, with note there.

(19) The statement of Wernicke’s law for Homer seems then to be
as follows: lengthening of a short vowel in the second syllable of a
spondaic fourth foot by position due to a consonant in the succeeding
word is never found where the foot ends with a marked break in the
sense ; it is extremely rare when the foot ends with a word at all, unless
in the case of a monosyllable connected with the following rather than
the preceding words; and it is hardly ever found where the words
preceding and following the diaeresis do not form integral parts of a
syntactical unit. The only exception in the //iad to the last clause
seems to be (11), where the words πατρὸς én’ οὔδει are not essential
to the syntax; perhaps we should add (12) and (13). The practical
result is that we must not read napéctan οἶνον ἄγουςαι in H 467, and
that Bentley’s TirapuHeén (B 751) and Αἰτωλόν (E 706) introduce a
license which is far less usual than a violation of the digamma. The
same may be said of all the conjectural ‘emendations’ proposed by van
L. in Ench. p. 99 note 1, and Agar in C. R. xi. 29-31.

(20) A word must be said on a similar and almost equally rare
phenomenon—a long final vowel or diphthong left unshortened before
hiatus in the same place. The instances in the J/iad seem to be these :

B 202 τά τ᾽ αἰδῶ ἀμιφικαλύπτει,
8 120 Θηβαίου Ἤνιοπβῆα,

A δῦ4 τάς τε τρεῖ ἐςεύμενός περ.
O 29 ἀπὸ βηλοῦ, ὄφρ᾽ ἂν ἵκηται.
II 2206 ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ αἴϑοπα οἶνον.

VY 441] ἄτερ ὅρκου οἴςηι! ἄεθλον,

all of which can be corrected by resolving the diphthongs (aidéa,

APPENDIX N 639

Θηβαίοο, τρέει, BHASO, αὐτόο, SpKoo) and a few where there is no obvious
remedy—

A 410 ὁμοίηι Enoeco τιμῆι,
ὦ 215 φαείνωι ἐν πυρὶ θείην,
484. ᾿Αχαιοὶ ἢ κεν ἄγοιεν,
111 ἢ δείλη ἢ μέςον ἧμαρ,
2 641 παςάμην καὶ αἴθοπα οἶνον,

These should not be attributed, as is done in my note on If 484, to the
effect of the bucolic diaeresis; this does not exist at all in 2 641, and
is practically insensible in A 410, E-215.! And we have seen that the
whole effect of the diaeresis after a spondee is in entire contrast with
the real ‘bucolic’? rhythm where the fourth foot is dactylic. We
can therefore only leave these cases as particularly harsh examples of
hiatus illicitus. There are about the same number at the end of the
second foot; see A 505, A 412, A 484, O 16, Φ 536, X 199 (van L.
Ench. p. 75).

1 The same objection applies of course to Ahrens’s suggestion mentioned on
Τ' 227.

INDICES TO THE

a- intensivum, A 155, N 41

ddaros, = 271

ddew or ἀάζειν, Θ 237, A
340, T91, 95

damros, A 567

das ?, Θ 470

ἀάσχετος, E 892

"ABio, Ν 4

aBAnxpbs, E 337

ἄβρομος. N 41

ἀβροτάζειν, Καὶ 65

ἀβρότη, Ξ 18

ἀγαθός, Z 162

ἀγάλλεσθαι, B 462

ἀγαπαζέμεν, 2 464

ἀγαπήνωρ, N 756

ἀγγελίης, Τ' 206, A 384,
N 252, O 640

ἄγειν not intrans., Z 252,
H 336

ἀγείρειν, see ἐγείρειν

ἀγελείη, Δ 128

ἀγέρωχος, Β 654

ἀγήνωρ, Β 276

ἀγίνειν, aywéev, Σ 4

ἀγκυλοχείλης, Π 428

ἄγονος, Τ' 40

ἀγοράασθαι, Al

ἀγός, Ψ 160

ἀγοστῶι, A 425

ἄγρει, E765

aypetv, A 526

ἄγυρις, IL 661

ἀγχιστῖνος, Ἐ 141

ἀγών, H 298, Ο 428

ἀδειής, H 117

ἀδελφειοῦ, E 21

ἀδηκότες, K 98

ἄδην, ἘΞ 203, N 315

adués, B 87, Σ 124, IL 481, |
| ἀϊκῶς, X 336

T 314
Gdos, A 88
ἄδυτον, E 446

VOL. IL

I—GREEK

| ἀεί, Ψ 648

deipev, K 499, Ρ 724
ἀεκήλιος, Σ 77

ἀέλλη, IL 374

ἀελλής, [13
ἀελπτέοντες, H 310
ἀεσίφρων, T 183
ἄζεσθαι, Π 736, X 275
ἀζηχής, A 435
ἀήθεσσον, K 493

ἀήρ, = 288; App. H
ἀήσυλος, E 876 (v. αἴσυλος)
anrns, O 626

ἄητο, ᾧ 386

ἄητον, ᾧ 395

| ἀθάνατος, = 434
| ἀθέσφατος, Τ' 4
| ἄθλον (for ἄεθλον), H 453

᾿Αθόως, % 229
Αἴαντε, N 46
Αἰγαί, N
alyavén, B 774
alyituy, 1 15
αἰγυπιός, H 59

aldeto, 2 503

ἀΐδηλος, B 318, E 880

| Atdns, A 3, Ψ 224
|" Atdos xuvén, E 845

| ᾿Αϊδωνεύς, E 190

αἰδώς, E787, Ν 122, O 661,
Q 45

ate, A 532, O 252

ἀΐζηλος, see ἀΐδηλος

αἰζηός, αἰζήϊος, P 520

αἴητος, Σ 410

αἴθε, A178

αἰθήρ, P 371; App. Η

αἴθουσα, App. C

| αἰθρηγενής, O 171

αἴθων, B 839

| αἵμων, Εἰ 49
| atvapéra, IL 31

27

NOTES

αἰνίζεσθαι, N 374
aivos, I 673, Ψ 652

| Αἰολίδης, Z 154
| αἰολοθώρηξ, A 489

αἰολομίτρης, A 489; App.
B, iv

αἰολόπωλος, I’ 185

αἰόλος, A 489, H 222,
167, T 404

αἰπύ, N 317

αἴρειν, N 62, Ρ 724, T 247

aioa, A 418, I 378, O 209,
II 780

ἀΐσθειν, Π 468

αἴσιος, 2 376

ἀΐσσειν, > 506, & 126, X
195

distros, & 258

αἴσυλος, T 202

M

| αἰσυμνητήρ, Q 347

| αἰχμάζειν, A 324

αἰψηρός, T 276
αἰών, T 27
ἀκάκητα, 1 185
ἀκαλαρρείταο, Η 422
ἀκάμας, IL 823
ἀκάχησθαι, Ἐ 24
ἀκέεσθαι, N 115, X 2
ἀκέων, A 22
ἀκήδεσεν, = 427
ἀκήδεστος, X 465
ἀκηδής, P 123
ἀκήρατος, 02 303
ἀκήριος, H 100
ἀκηχέδαται, P 637
ἀκηχέμενος, Σ 29
ἀκλεέες, Μ 318
ἄκμηνος, T 163
ἄκμων, O19
ἀκοστήσας, Z 506
ἀκουάζεσθαι, A 343
ἀκούειν, H 129, Ξ 125
with dat., II 515

642

ἀκούεσθαι, A 331
ἀκουή, I 634
ἄκρη, N 772
ἄκριτος, B 246, 868, H 337
ἀκρόκομοι, A 533
ἄκρον, T 229
ἀκτή, A 631
᾽Ακτορίωνε, B 621, A 709,
Ψ 639
ἀλαλκεῖν, & 539
᾿Αλαλκομενηΐς, A ὃ
ἀλαλύκτημαι, K 94
ἀλαοσκοπιήν, Καὶ 515
ἀλαπάζειν, A 750
ἄλαστος, -εῖν, M 163
ἄλεισον, A 774
᾿Αλεκτρυών, P 602
ἀλέξασθαι, N 475
ἀλεύειν 2, X 285
ἀλευόμενος, Ἐ 444
ἀλεωρή, IL 134
ἀληθής, M 433
᾿Αλήϊον, Z 201
adios, 1 125
ἁλιμυρήεις, Φ 190
ἅλις, B 90, I 137, Φ' 319
ἀλιταίνειν, 1 375
ἀλκή, Ν 197
ἀλκτήρ, = 485
ἀλλά, P 645
ἀλλοῖος, EH 638
ἅλλομαι, ἄλτο, A 532
ἄλλος = ἠλεός 2, O 128
ἄλλοτε δ᾽ αὖτε, Σ 472
ἀλλοφρονέων, Ψ 698
ἄλλυδις ἄλληι, N 279
ἄλλως, E 218, Ψ 144
ἁλοσύδνη, T 207
ἄλοχος, I 336
ἀλύσσειν, X 70
ἀλφεσίβοια, Σ 593
ἀλωή, E 499
ἄμαθος, ἘΠ 587
ἀμαθύνειν, I 593
ἀμαιμάκετος, Z179
ἀμαλδύνειν, H 463
ἀμᾶν, Σ 34
ἁμαρτάνειν, Ὡ 68
ἁμαρτῆι, Ἐ θὅ6, Σ 571
ἁμαρτοεπής, Ν 824
ἀμβλήδην, Χ 470
ἀμβρόσιος, Β 19
ἀμείβεσθαι, 1 409
ἀμείβων, Ψ 712
ἄμεναι, & 70
ἀμενηνός, Εἰ 887
ἀμέρδειν, N 340, IL δ8
ἄμητος, T 223
ἀμήχανος, Καὶ 167, N 726
᾿Αμισώδαρος, Π 326
ἀμιχθαλόεις, Q 753
ἄμμορος, ZL 408

THE ILIAD

ἀμολγῶι, A173, X 27

duos, Z 414

ἄμπνυε, X 222

ἀμπνύθη, Ἐ 697

ἄμπυξ, Χ 408

ἀμύνειν, constr., A 11, N
THOS Τὺ; ΤΠ 61. Σ ΤῊΣ
Φ 539

ἀμφασίη ?, P 695

ἀμφέπειν, E 667, Z 321,
H 316, A 474, Il 124

ἀμφήριστον, Ψ 382

ἀμφί, with acc., I’ 146;
with dat., N 489, I1 108,
® 592; with gen., I
825; adv. 2 528, Μὴ 159

ἀμφὶ μέλαιναι, A 105

dugiaxvia, B 316

ἀμφιβαίνειν, A 37, Θ 68, II
66

ἀμφιβάλλειν, P 742, Ψ 97
ἀμφίβασις, H 623
ἀμφιγυήεις, A 607
dudtyvos, N 147
ἀμφιδάσεια, O 308
ἀμφιδινεῖν, Ψ 561
ἀμφιέλισσα, Β 165
ἀμφιθαλής, Χ 496
ἀμφικαλύπτειν, M 116
ἀμφίκομος, P 677
ἀμφικύπελλον, A 584
ἀμφιλύκη, H 4335
ἀμφιμάχεσθαι, I 412, O
391, 11 72; 526
ἀμφιπένεσθαι, Φ 203
ἀμφίς, with gen., Β 384, ©
444, Ψ 393; with ace. 2%,
A 748: adv., Τὶ 115, H
342, X 117
ἀμφιστρεφής, A 40
aupipados, App. B, vil
ἀμφιφορεύς, Ψ 92
ἀμφότερον, 1 179
ἄν with subj., A 205, Β
488; with fut. indic.,
P 515, X 66; with infin.,
1684 ;—and xe together,
A. 187, N 127, Q 437.
(See xe)
ava- in composition, A 22,
Χ 492
ἀναβέβρυχεν, P 54
ἀνάγειν, Ν 627
ἀναγκαῖος, IL 836
ἀναγνῶναι, Ν 734
ἀναδέσμη, X 468
ἀναδύεσθαι, N 225
avdedvos, I 146, N 366
ἀναιδής, A 521
ἀναίνομαι, App. I (25)
ἀνακυμβαλιάζειν, IL 379
ἄναλκις, ® 555

ἀνανεύειν, Z 311
dvavra, VY 116

ἄναξ, ἀνάσσειν, A 38, Z
402

ἀναστῆναι with dat. Ψ
635

ἀνασχόμενος, 1’ 362, Ψ 660

ἀνδράγρια, = 508

ἀνδραπόδεσσι, H 475

ἀνδρεϊφόντης, B 651

ἀνδρόκμητος, A 371

ἀνδρόμεος, A 537

ἀνδροτῆτα, B 651, 11 857,
Q 6

ἀνεμοτρεφής, A 256

ἀνεμώλιος, A 355, Φ 473

ἀνενείκατο, T 314

ἀνέπαλτο, Θ 85

ἀνέσαι, N 657, Ξὶ 209

dvews, 1 30

ἀνήνοθεν, A 266

ἀνηρείψαντο, T 234

ἀνθεμόεις, Ψ 885

ἀνθέρικος, T 227

ἄνθρωπος, IL 263

ἀνιέναι, X 80

dvoxeo, 2 518

ἀντάαν, II 423

ἀντέσθαι, O 698

ἀντί, 8 163

avriaav, A 31, Q 62

ἀντικρύ, E 130

ἀντίος (-ov), Z 54, YT 464,
Χ 195

ἄντιτα, Ὧ 213

ἀντιτορῆσαι, Ἐὶ 337, Καὶ 267

ἀντιφέρεσθαι, -ἰίζειν, & 482

ἄντυξ, Τὶ 728, Z 117, Σ 480

ἄνυτο (opt.), Σ 473

ἀνωγεῖν, Ἡ 394

ἄνωγεν, Α 519

ἀξίνη, Ν 612

ἄξυλος, A 155

ἀοίδιμος, Z 358

ἀορτήρ, A 31

dopro, Τ' 272

ἀοσσητήρ, O 254

douros, Σ 536

ἀπαείρεσθαι, Φ 563

ἀπάλαμνος, H 597

ἀπαμᾶν, Σ 34

ἀπάρχεσθαι, Tl 254

ἀπαυρᾶν, See ἀποέρσαι

ἀπειλεῖν, 8 150

ἀπείρων, Ὧ 776

ἀπέλεθρον, A 354

ἀπηλεγέως, 1 309

ἀπήμων Μ 80

ἀπηνής, A 340

din, A 270

ἀπινύσσειν, O 10

ἁπλοῖς, (2 280

ἀπό, uses, A 562, Θ 54,
213, K 324, A 350

ἀπο- in composition, B 772,
H 416, I 309, N 113, II
390, X 489

ἀποαίνυμαι, N 262

ἀποαιρεῖσθαι, A 230, 275

ἀπὸ δρυὸς οὐδ᾽ ἀπὸ πέτρης,
X 126

ἀποδρύφοι, Ψ 187

ἀποειπεῖν, I 509, 431

ἀποέργειν, Θ 325

ἀποέρσαι, A 356, 2 348, Φ.
288, Χ 489

ἀπομνήσασθαι, 2 428

ἀποναίειν, Π 86

ἀποπτανέουσι (!), = 101

ἀποσκυδμαίνειν, Ὡ 65

ἀποστήσασθαι, N 745

ἀποτίσασθαι, Ν᾿ 745,
998

ἀποτμήγειν, II 390, Σ 34

am’ οὔατος, Σ 272

ἀπούρας, A 356

ἀπουρήσουσι, X 489

ἀπτοεπής, Θ 209

ἄπυρος, I 122

ἁραιός, EB 425

dpapetv, II 214

ἀραρυῖα, Ἐ 744

ἀρᾶσθαι Ν 818

ἀργεϊφόντης, B 103

ἀργεστής, A 306

ἀργέτι, A 818

ἀργός, Ψ 30

“Ἄργος, Β 681, Δ 52, T 115,
Q 437

ἀργυρότοξος, E 517

ἀρειή, P 431

ἄρειον, A 407, Ο 735

ἀρείους, 11 555-7

ἄρεκτον, T 150

ἀρέσσομαι, A 362

ἀρετή, 1 498, Ψ 571

ἀρηϊκτάμενος, X 72

ἀρημένος, Σ 435

ἀρηρομένος, Σ 548

ἀρηρώς, E 744, Q 318

II

“Apns, A 441, E 31, 757, |

909, Ξ 485, & 112
ἀρής, dpew (for ἄρηο), M
334, & 485, P 431
ἄρητον, P 37
ἀρθμήσας, H 302
ἀριδείκετος, A 248
ἀριστερά, 355
ἄριστον, Ὦ 124
ἄρκιος, Β 393, Καὶ 304

ἁρμόζειν, Τ' 333, P 210, T |
385

ἀρνευτήρ, M 385
ἅρπη, T 350

GREEK INDEX

ἽἌρπυια, Z 346, 11 150, T 234 |
ἄρρητον, P 37
ἀρτιεπής, X 281
ἄρτιος, Ἰὰ 326

doa, A 574

ἀσάμινθος, K 576

“Agwos, N 384

ἀσκεῖν, A 110

ἀσκελέως, T 68

ἀσπερχές, A 32

ἄσσον (ἰέναι) A 567, O 105 |

ἀστεμφής, B 544

ἀστερόεις, 11 134, = 370

ἀστεροπή, A 184

ἄστυ, P 144

ἀστυβοώτης, 2 701

ἀσύφηλον, I 647

ἀταλάφρων, Z 400

ἀτάλλω, N 27

ἀταλός, > 567

ἀταρτηρός, A 223

ἀτέοντα, T 332

ἄτερπος ?, Z 285

arn, A 412, T 100, I 502,
K 391, II 805, T 88, 91,
Q 28, 480

ἀτίζειν, T 166

ἀτιμάω, -dfw, A 11

ariunros, I 648

ἄτιτος, & 484

arpexés, E 208

ἀτρυτώνη, B 157

ἄττα, I 607

αὖ, T 215

αὐγάζεσθαι, Ψ 458

αὐδᾶν, Καὶ 47

αὐδήεις, T 407

αὔειν, A 461

αὐερύειν, A 459

αὐίαχος, Ν 41

αὐλός, P 297

αὐλῶπις, App. B, vil. 7

αὖος, of sound, M 160

αὐτάρ, A 133, 282, B 599, |
A 542

| αὖτε, A 202, 340, A 238, |
Φ 191

αὐτόθεν, T 120 |

| αὐτόθι, M 302

| αὐτοκασίγνητος, Τ' 238

αὐτός, of the body, A 4; |
with dat., I 194; =the
same, M 225, Ψ 480;
weak (anaphoric) use, K
493, A561, Π 405, Σ 481;
reflexive 2, Ρ 407, T 55;
enclitic ?, M 204 ; other
uses, A 47, 356, B 347,

| 362, E 880, M 112, ῶ

| 499

| βέομαι, βείομαι,

643

αὐτοσχεδίην, M 192

αὐτοχόωνος, Ψ 826

ἄφαρ, A 418, II 323, Ψ
375

| ἀφάρτερος, Ψ 311
| ἀφασίη, P 695

ἀφέηι, IL 590

ἀφήτωρ, I 404
ἄφλαστον, I 241, O 716
ἀφλοισμός, O 607
adpovéeww, O 104
ἀφυσγετόν, A 495
ἀφύσσειν, A170, Τ' 295
᾿Αχελώϊος, P 194, 2 616
axepwis, N 389
ἄχθομαι. E 361
ἀχρεῖον, B 269

ἄχρις, A 522, P 599
ἀψόρροος, = 399

ἄωρτο, Τ' 272

ἀωτεῖν, Καὶ 159

ἄωτος, I 661

βάζειν, I 58, Π 207
Babén, Ο 606
βαθύζωνος, 1 594
βαθύκολπος, = 122

| βαθυλήϊον, = 550

βάλλειν, intrans., A 722,
Ψ 462; with double
ace., II 511

| βαμβαίνειν, Καὶ 375

βασιλήϊος, = 550

| βέβηκα, A 221

βέβληκα, A 492
βεβόλημαι, 1 3
βέβρυχα, N 393, P 54, 264

| βεβρώθοις, A 35

269, 439
Ο 194, II

βέλος, 8 512, A

852, X 431
βηλός, O 23
βήσατο, βήσετο, T 262
BiBds (-Gv), O 307

| βιβάσθων, N 809

βλάβεται, T 82
βλάπτειν, O 484, IL 660, X
15, Ψ 546

| βλεῖο, N 287

βλεμεαίνων, Θ 337
βλῆτρον, O 677
βλοσυρός, H 212
βλοσυρώπις, A 36
βλωϑρή, N 390
Bodypia, M 22

Boein, X 159
βοηθόος, N 477, P 481
βόλομαι, A 319
Bopéns, scansion, I 5
βοτάνη. N 493
βούβρωστις, 2 532
Bovydios, N 824

644

βουλή, B 53, 194, Z 114
βούλομαι, A 112, Θ 204
βουλυτός, IL 779
βουπλήξ, Z 134
βουφόνεον, H 466
Bots, H 238, II 636
βοῶπις, 1' 144, Σ 357
βράσσων, K 226
βρεχμός, E 586
βριήπυος, Ν 521
Βρισηΐς, Α 184

βωμός, Θ 441

βῶν, H 238

βῶσαι, K 463, M 457

γαιήοχος, 1 183
γαίων, A 405
γαμβρός, N 464
γαμεῖσθαι, 1 394
γάρ, K 61,
Ψ 9, 626
yap pa, A 467
γδουπεῖν, A 45
γεγωνεῖν, M 337
yew ouevos, Καὶ 71
γελᾶν, T 362
γέλος, A 599
yeven, ΚΞ 474, T 390
γενναῖος, EB 253
γέντο, Θ 43
γέρας,
Γερήνιος, Β 336
γεύεσθαι, T 258
γέφυρα, A 371, E 89
γεφυρόειν, O 357, Φ 245
ry yp ele LOA PY 95; 1259
γηθεῖν with ace., Θ 378
γηθόσυνος (-οσύνη), N 29
γήραος ovdds, X 60
ynpas, I 446
ynpas, P 197
γίνομαι, E128
γινώσκειν, form, HE
with gen., A 357
γλαυκιόων, T 172
γλαυκός, 11 34
γλαυκῶπις, A 206
γλήνη, 8 164
γλυκύθυμος, T 463
γλυφίς, A 122
γλωχίς, Θ 297,
App. M
γναμπτός, A 669, 2 859
γνωτός, N 697
γόημι ?. Z 500, Ὡ 664
γόνος, T 409
γόον (verb),
γ᾽ οὖν, II 30
γουνάζεσθαι, A130, X 345
γουνῶι ἀλωῆς, 1 534
γύαλον, E 99
γύης, K 351

X 225

Z 500

127, M 326,

A 118, 299, I 130

128 ;

>

THE ILIAD

γυῖα, Ὡ 514
γυιοῦν, Z 265

δ᾽ for δή, A340, 540
δαέρων, as spondee, 2 762
δαί, K 408

δαΐζειν P 535

δαιμόνιος, A 561, 2 194
δαίμων. 1 420, 8 166

daivuro, opt., 2 665
dais, A 5, Σ 560

δαιτρεύειν, A 688
δαΐφρων, Ὁ 825
δάος, Ὧ 647
δατεῖσθαι, Ψ 121

| δαφοινός, Β 308

-δε, doctrine of the enclitie,
E 252, Θ 139, Q 3388,
375

δέτε, B 456

déymevos, B 794

| δεδάκρυσαι, IL 7
| δέδεγμαι, K 62, Ψ 279

δεδίασιν, (2 662
δεδοκημένος, O 730
δέελον, K 466

det, I 337

δειδέχατο, A 4, X 485

| devdiacec Par, B 190

δείδω ?, 44

δείελος, Φ 232

δεικανόωντο, A 4, O 86

δείλη, & 111

δειλός, E574, P 657

δεῖπνον, O 53, A 86, Σ
560

δέμας, A 115, A 596

δενδίλλειν, I 180

| δένδρεον, dévdpos, I’ 152
δέξο, T 10

δέσματα, X 468

δεσμός. Σ 378

δεύεσθαι, Ν 310, T 122, Ψ
670, Q 385

Δευκαλίδης, M 117

devpw, Τ' 240

| δεύτατος, Τ' 51

Ψ 247

δεύτερος, with gen.,
δέχαται, B 794

δέχεσθαι, intrans., T 290 ;

with dat., A 596
Onew, 1 418
δηθά, ᾧ 131
δήϊος, B 415, 544, I 674
δηλήμων, Q 33
δημογέρων, 1 149, A 372
δῆμος, B 547, A 328, 704,
M 213, P 330, Q 776

| δηρι(ν)θῆναι, IL 756

δηρίσασθαι, P 734
δῆσεν 2, Σ 100
dud. {τ ~), F357

διαιρεῖν, T 280

διάκτορος, B 103

διάνδιχα, A 189, Θ 167,
I 37

διαπλήσσειν, Ψ 120

διαπρύσιον, P 748

διδοῖσθα, T 270

διδοῦναι, Ὧ 425

διέπειν, Q 247

δίεσθαι, M 304, II 246

διέφθορας, O 128

δίζε, IL 713 Ν

δίημι, BD 584

διιπετής, II 174

διίφιλος, A 74

δικάζειν, A 542, = 506,
W 579

δίκαιος, A 832

δικασπόλος, A 238

δίκηι, Ψ 542

δίκην εἰπεῖν, App. I (29)

δινωτός, Τ' 391, N 407

dlov, X 251

δῖος, B 152, Z 160, H 75

δίπλαξ, Τ' 126, ῶ 230

διπλόος θώρηξ, Δ 132, App.
B, vi. 2

dlaxoupa, Ψ 523

διφᾶν, IL 747

δίφρος, H 727, A 748

δνοπαλίζειν, A 472

don, I 230

δοκέω, H 192

δολιχόσκιος, 1’ 346

δόρπον, A 86

δοῦλος, 1’ 409

δουπεῖν, N 426, Ψ 679

dovpara, M 36

δριμύς, O 696

δρυός (ἀπό), X 126

δυνάσθη, Ψ 465

δύο, indeclinable, K 253

δύσετο, -ατο, Ψ 739

δυσηλεγής, T 154

δυσηχής, B 686

Δύσπαρι, I 39

δυσπέμφελος, 112748

δυσώνυμος, M 116

δυσωρεῖν, K 183

δῶ, A 426

δῶμα, Z 316

δῶρα, T 268

éa=7ja, A 321

édav ?, N 315

ἐάγη, A 559

éadws, 1173

édew, B165, E 256, 848,
O 473, X 339, Q 17, 71,
558

éavés, ἑᾶνός, H 734!

éara, [ 194

ἑαυτόν ?, = 162, Ρ 551

ἑάφθη, N 543

édwy, 2 528

ἐγείρειν aud ἀγείρειν con-
fused, H 434, Ψ 287, Q
789

ἐγρήγορθαι, Κ 67

ἐγρηγορτί, Κ 182

lie E 662, H 2

Ψ 3534

édavés, Ξ 172

ἕδνα, Z 394, I 146

ἐεδνωτής, N 382

ἐέλδεσθαι, 11 494

ἐέργειν, E 89, Μ 201, P
571

ἐερμέναι, EB 89

ἑζέσθαι, ἵζεσθαι, N 285

ἐζέσθην, 8 73

ἑήνδανον, 2 25

éjos, App. A, 1. 562

ἕης, IL 208

ἔθειραι, IL 795, T 382

ἐθείρειν, Φ 347

ἐθέλειν, θέλειν, A 277

ἐθέλειν = δύνασθαι, Φ 366

ἔθων, I 540, II 260

εἰ not conditional, A 321

εἰ (al) in wish-clauses, Καὶ
1ΠῚ'

εἰ with iterative opt. Q
768

ae... ov, B 349, I 289,
A 55, 160, T 139

εἰ and # confused, B 300,
349, I 215, E 278, ©
1

ei... ἄν with opt., Β 597

εἴ κεν with opt., A 60, B
125, E 273; with subj.,
A 391; with indic., Ψ
526

εἰ δέ with imper., 146, 262

εἰ δ᾽ ἄγε, A 302, Z 376

el... wep=tf tndeed, O
372, II 618

el mor ἔην γε, 1 180, A 321

elauévn, A 483

eiavés, IL 9

claro, O 10

eldéw, ἘΞ 235

eldoua, N 98

εἰδυῖα, A 365, P 5

ein or εἴηι ?, H 340, Σ 88,
App. D, c 3

εἴη for ἴοι 2, 2 199

elxew, H 217, P 354, 25

εἰκοσινήριτα ? ᾿ Χ 849

εἰκυῖα, Ψ 66

ἐϊκώς, & 254

Ἐϊλείθυιαι, A 270

εἰλίποδες, 1 466

τὸ
oO

"Exatos, A 385

᾿Βλικώνιος, T 404

GREEK INDEX

εἰλύειν, IL 640, & 319

εἰλυφόων, A 156

elvavuxes, 1 470

elvi, 8 199

εἰνοσίφυλλος, B 632

εἰοικυῖαι ?, Σ 418

εἰπεῖν (constr.), Z 480, M
60

εἴπερ, 11 618

εἰράων, Σ 531

εἰρύσσασθαι, A 216, 8 143

els=towards, Q 696; with
gen., Θ 367; purpose,
O 310

elaaunv=speed, A
191, & 8, Ο 415

ἐΐση, A 806, I’ 347

ἐΐσκω, N 446

εἴσομαι, fut. of εἶμι, 2 462

εἴσω, A 71, Ὁ 145

εἰσωποί, O 653

elws, M 141

“Exdepyos, A 474

éxard(v)fuyos, T 247

ἑκατόμπεδον, Ψ 164

138, N

ἐκεῖνος. 1 63-4, A 653, O
94, Σ 188

ἑκκαιδεκάδωρα, A 109

ede’, Ὡ 202

ἔκπαγλος, A 146, Σ 170

ἐκταδίη, Καὶ 134

ἑκών, I’ 66, H 197

ἐλαύνειν, K 537, A 68, II
518

ἐλαφηβόλος, Σ 319

ἐλέγχειν, 1 522

ἔλεγχος, Β 235, A 242, A
314

ἑλεῖν, E 576, A 3

ἐλελίζειν, ix 530,
(see FeNicoew)

ἐλεύθερος, Z 455

ἐλεφαίρεσθαι, Ψ 388

ἕλικες, 1 400, Σ 401

28

ἑλικῷπις, A 98

ἑλίσσειν, N 204 (see ξελίσ-
σειν)

ἑλκεῖν, P 558, Χ 62

ἑλκεχίτωνες, N 685

ἑλκηθμός, Z 465

ἑλκήσω, -vow, P 558

Ἑλλάς, I 447

Ἑλλήσποντος, Q 545

Ἕλλοί, Π 233

ἔλπεσθαι, K 355, N 309, O
110, Il 281, P 235

ἐλυσθῆναι, Ψ 393

ἕλωρα, Σ 95

ἐμβῆναι, Ψ 403

ἐμέο, Καὶ 124

| ἐναργής,

ἐξ, uses, Θ 213, =

ἐξάρχειν, B 273, Q
| ἑξείης, App. M (2)
| ἐξελέσθαι, T 137

645

ἐμμεμαώς, N 785

ἔμμορε, O 189

ἐμπάσσειν, 1) 126

ἔμπεδον, Ὁ 683

ἐμπεσεῖν, | 235

ἔμπης. = 174

ἐμπνύ(ν)θη, Ἐ aor

ἐμπυριβήτης, W72

ἐν νηυσὶ πεσεῖν, ies ae
B 175, I 235

| évalpew, Φ 485

ἐναίσιμος, Z 519
T 131
ἔναυλος, II 71

ἐνδέξια, H 184, M 239

| ἐνδίεσαν, Σ 584
| ἐνδίνων, Ψ 806

ἔνδιος, A 726

ἐνδυκέως, Ψ 90, 2 158
ἐνεικέμεν, T 194
évéprepos, ἢ 898, O 225
ἐνηής, P 204

ἔνθεν, N 741, P 703
ἐνιαυτός, B 295
ἐνίημι, 1 700

ἐνιπή, E 492
ἐνιπλήσσειν, me ie
ἐνίπτειν, 1" A hel
546
ἐνίσσειν, O 197
évveov, P 1]
ἐννέωρος, Σ 351
ἐννῆμαρ, L174
ἐννοσίγαιος, I 183
ἐνταῦθα, 1 601
ἐντεσιεργύς, Q 277
ἐντυπάς, 2 163

447, O

| ἐνυάλιος, P 211

ἐνύπνιον, B 56

ἔνωπα, O 320

ἐνωπῆι, Ἐ 374

ἐνώπια, Θ 435

130, I
668, P 101 ; in composi-
tion, I 61, Φ 213, 2 97

ἐξάγειν, H 336

ἐξαίσιον, O 598

ἔξαιτος, M 320

Ὁ

ἐξελύθη (-θε), E 293
ἐξεσίη, 2 235
ἐξήλατον, M 295
ἑός, see ds (possessive)
(ἑοῦ), ἑοῖ, ἑέ, N 495, =
P 551, Ὡ 134
ἐπαινεῖν, Σ 312
ἐπαινή, 1 457
ἐπαΐσσειν, VY 64
ἑπακτήρ, P 135
ἐπαλλάσσειν, N 358

162,

646

ἔπαλξις, M 258, 397

ἐπαμείβεσθαι, Z 339

érava-, compounds with,
Φ 535

ἐπάρχεσθαι, A 471

ἐπασσύτεροι, A 383, A 422

ἐπαυρέσθαι, A 410

ἐπεί, without apodosis, Ζ
333, N 68, P 658, 2 55, |
Q 42

ἐπεί, as spondee, X 379

ἐπείγεσθαι, ἘΞ 902

ἐπειδάν, N 285

ἕπειν, Z 321, A 474, O 555

Ἔπειοί, B 615, A 671

ἔπειτα, K 166, N 586, 743,
T 113

ἐπελθεῖν, Ψ 65

ἐπενήνεον, Η 428

ἐπενήνοθε, Β 218

ἕπεσθαι, A 424, A 565

ἐπευφημῆσαι, A 22

ἐπημοιβοί, M 456

ἑπήν, 1 358

ἐπηπύειν, Σ 502

ἐπήτριμοι, Σ 211

ἐπί, adverbial, Β 413, P
650, f 35; with dat., A
175, Z 213, I 602, K 48,
Ν 332, = 501, 1 229, ἢ
188; with gen., H 195,
I 602, T 255 ; with gen.
=towards, Τ' 5, EB 249,
A 546, Ψ 373

ἐπι- in composition, A 126,
A 94, Καὶ 332, Ὁ 35

ἐπιάλμενον, H 15

ἐπιβάλλεσθαι, Z 68

ἐπιβῆσαι, Θ 285

ἐπιβησόμενος, ἘΠ 46, Ψ 379 |

ἐπιβλής, Ὁ 453 |

ἐπιβρέμει, P 739 |

ἐπιβώσασθαι, Καὶ 463

ἐπιδευεῖς ?, 1 225 |

ἐπιδεύομαι, Ψ 670, 2385 ᾿

ἐπιδιφριάς, Τὰ 727, Καὶ 475

ἐπιδόσθαι, Χ 284

ἐπιεικτόν, IT 549

ἐπιζαφελῶς, 1.516

ἐπιθύειν, 175

ἐπὶ κάρ, IL 392

ἐπικείρειν, IL 394

ἐπίκλησιν, IL 177, X 29

ἐπίκλοπος, X 281

ἐπιλίγδην, P 599

ἐπιμάρτυρος, Ἡ 76

ἐπιόσσομαι, P 381

ἐπίουρος, N 450

ἐπιπνεῖν, Σ 502

ἐπιρρήσσειν, Q 454

ἐπίρροθος - ἐπιτάρροθος, A
390, Ψ 770

THE ILIAD

ἐπίσκοπος, Καὶ 38

ἐπισκύνιον, P 136

ἐπισπεῖν, Z 321, 588

ἐπισπέσθαι, Ξ 521

ἐπίσσωτρον, Εἰ 725

ἐπιστάμενος, with dat., O
282; adjectival, T 80

ἐπιστέψασθαι, A 470

ἐπισφύρια, App. B, 11.

ἐπισχερώ, A 668

ἐπισχοίης, & 241

ἐπιτάρροθος, Τὰ 808

ἐπιτρέπειν, Καὶ 79

ἔπλεν, M 11

ἐποίχεσθαι, A 31, 50, Z 492,
K 487, M 340, Ὁ 279

| ἔπος, X 454

ἑπταπόδην, Ὁ 729

ἐπώιχατο, M 340

ἐράασθε, 11 208

ἐραννός, 1 551

épya=tilth, B 751, II 392,
T 131

ἔργον, B 303

ἐρείδειν, I’ 358, A 144, Ψ
735

ἐρείκειν, N 441

épevo, A 611

ἐρείομεν, A 62

ἐρεύγεσθαι, O 621, P 265

ἐρέχθειν, Ψ 30, 317

ἐρίγδουπος, A 151

ἐριδήσασθαι, Ψ 792

ἐριδμαίνειν, IL 260

ys

ἔριθος, Σ 550

| ἐριούνης (-ιος), Ὑ 94
| ἕρκος, E 90 ; ὀδόντων, I 409 |
| ἕρμα, A117, Π 549

| ἕρματα, A 486, B 153,

by

182
Ἑρμῆς, Υ 72
ἔρος, 1 442

| ἑρπύζειν, Ψ 225

ἔρρειν, Θ 239, Σ 421

ἐρύγμηλος, = 580

ἐρύειν, ἐρύεσθαι, ῥύεσθαι, A
216, A 138, I 248, Καὶ 44,
O 141, T 195, Ὡ 584

ἔρυμα, A 137

| ἐρυσάρματας, O 354

epvoacbar= weigh, X 351

ἐρυσίπτολις ἃ, Z 805

ἔρχαται, If 481

ἐρωδιός, K 274

ἐρωεῖν, -ἡ, A 308, B 179, II
302

és=as much as, Ψ 523

ἐσακούειν, O 97

ἕσαν, T 280, 393

| ἐσεμάσσατο, P 564

ἔσκετο 2, P 696

| ἑσπέσθαι ?, Ἐὶ 423

ἔσπετε, B 484

ἐσσεῖται, N 317

ἐσσεύοντο, A 549

ἐσσύμενος, N 315

ἔστασαν, aor. ?, M 56

ἐστεφανῶσθαι, EH 789, Σ
485

ἔστην, implies movement,
A197

éornte?, A 248

ἔστιχον, IL 258

éotwp, App. M, 2, 3

ἐσχάρη, Καὶ 418

ἑταιρίζειν, Ν 456, Q 3835

ἑτεραλκής, H 26

ἕτερος, T 94, ἢ 527

érns, Z 239

ἐτήτυμον, Σ 128

ἑτοῖμος, 1 425

ἔτραφον, intrans., B 661,
Ψ 84

ev, Τὸ 72

εὔαδεν, P 647

εὐηφενής (-yevns), A 427,
Ψ 81

ἐυκλήϊς, 2 318

| ἐύκυκλος, App. B, i. 3

eU\npa, Ψ 481

| ἐυμμελίης, A 47, P 9

evval, A 436, Ὡ 615

εὐπατέρεια, Z 292, H 41

ἐύπλεκτος, Ψ 335

εὐράξ, A 251

εὑρέσθαι, IL 472

εὐρυοδείης, Π 635

εὐρύοπα, Α 498

εὐρύχορος, Ψ 299

εὐρώεις, T 64

-evs, declension of nouns in,
A 384, O 339, Ψ 792

ἐύσκοπος, Ὧ 24

ἐύσσωτρος, 2 578

ἐυστέφανος, T 99

| ἐύστροφος, N 599, 716

etre, ἠύτε, Τ' 10, Z 392, T
386

ἐυτειχής, Π 57

εὐφημεῖν, 1171

ἐὺ φρονέων, A 73

| εὔχεσθαι, A 91

ἐφέπειν, Z 321, A 496, T
357, 494, ᾧ 588

ἔφθιεν, Σ 446

ἐφορᾶν, 1 167, X 61

φύρη, Z 152, A 740, O
531

exe =arive, δ 1275 Ni
326, 679; intrans., hold
on, M 488, O 109, I
501 (mid.) ; σχήσω, with
infin., P 181; defend, I
608, P 330

|
.

ἐχεπευκής, A 52
ἐχθοδοπῆσαι, A 518
ἔχνατα, & 410

-ew, Ionic gen. in, II 72
ἕωμεν, T 402

ἕως, A 193, M 141, P 727
ἑωσφόρος, Ψ 226

F represented by εἴ, B765 ;
ignored by Ar., see Aris-
tarchos (Gen.
prothetic ε before, P 571,
X 280

F’ for Fe lost, A 406, Q 154 |

F’ for For lost, E 4 ete.

Fadety, 1) 173

Βαίρειν Ὁ (ἀξείρειν), P 724

βάλις, P 54, Φ 236

Favaé, Z 402, 2 449

Favaooew, T 124

Fapatés 2, E 425

Faorv, Ὦ 320

FeandéFé, confused ?, P551

Feavés, E 734

FeFixvia, Ψ 66

FéFovra, ᾧ 583

Fé@vos, A 724

FetSoua, = 472

Ἐείκειν, H 217, P 354, Σ
520

βεισάμην (Feicoua) = speed,
aim at, see Fier@at

Fexds, E 791

βεκών, Ψ 585

Εελίσσειν and ἐλελίζειν con-
fused, A 530, N 558

Fé\om, Σ 294

Feriev, Ψ 393

βέπος, E 683

Fépyew, 11 481, P 571

Fépyov, A 470, P 279, X
450, @ 354

Fepéew, Ψ 787

Fepiew, A216, = 30, 215

Fiec@ac=speed, aim at, A
138, N 191? & 8, O 544,
> 501, T 280, & 335

FiFdxew, Σ 219

Fixvia 2, Ψ 66

Fittov, Z 386

Εἴρις 2, Ψ 198

Firén, Φ 350

Figu?, Z 478

Figua, BE 556

ἔοι, Z 90, 865

Fés (σός), A 403

Ερᾶ, Fpeta ?, P 462

ζάθεος, O 432

ζάκοτος, I’ 220
ζαχρειής, E525
ζείδωρος, B 548

Index) ; |

GREEK INDEX

ζεύγλη, App. M, 5
ζευγνῦμεν, IL 145
ζεύγνυσθαι, 2 281
ZLépupos, Ψ 200

Ziv, Θ 206

ζητεῖν, = 258

ζόφος, M 239

ζυγόδεσμον, App. M, 2
ζυγόν, 1 187, T 247, Q 269
ζωάγρια, Σ 407

ζωγρεῖν, E 698, Z 46
ζῶμα, Ψ 683, App. B, iv.
ζώνη, B 479

ζωρός, 1 203

(as, E 887, Π 445
ζωστήρ, App. B, vi.

ἡ-τεἔφη, Z 390

ἢ, affirmative, B 289, I 215,
E 278

ἢ and %, disjunctive, 1112,
® 226

ἢ, interrog., I 46, Z 57

ἢ ἄρ τι, 'T 56

ἢ μήν, Β 291, H 393, I 57

ἤ and εἰ confused, see εἰ

# shortened, ® 576

ἤ Te, P 42

τῆι of 2nd sing. mid., N 818

ἠβαιόν, B 380

ἠγάθεος, A 252

ἡγεῖσθαι, A 71

ἡγεμονεύειν, P 258

ἠγίνεον, Σ 493

ἦδος, A 518

ἥδυμος, Β 2

ἠείδης, X 280

ἠερέθεσθαι, I’ 108

ἠέριος, A 497, 7

ἠεροειδής, HE 770

ἠεροφοῖτις, 1 571, T 87

jepopwvos, Σ 505

ἤην 2, A 808

ἤθεα, Z 511

ἠθεῖε, K 37, X 229, Ψ 94

ἤϊα, N 103
ἠϊόεις, Εἰ 36

Ἢϊονεύς, Καὶ 435
ἤϊος, O 365

ἠϊών, P 265

Axa, D 596

ἥκειν 2, Εἰ 478
ἤκεστος, Z 94
ἤκιστος, Ψ 531
ἠλασκάζειν, > 281
ἠλέ, O 128
ἠλέκτωρ, L513
ἠλίβατος, O 273
ἤλιθα, A 677
Atkin, Χ 419
ἠλιτόμηνος, T 118
ἧλος, A 29

647

᾿Ημαθίη, = 226
ἡμεῖς, V 104
ἤμελλον, M 34
ἡμίθεος, M 23
ἡμιπέλεκκον, Ψ 850
ἥμισυ, 1 616
ἡμιτελής, B 701
ἤν, A 353, H 39
ἠνεμόεσσα, 1) 305
ἡνίοχος, Θ 89
ἠνίπαπε, B 245
hus, Z 94, Καὶ 292
qvoy, IL 408
ἡπεδανός, 8 104
ἠπιόδωρος, Z 251
ἦρα φέρειν, A 572
ἤρατο, Τ' 373
ἠριγένεια, A 477
ἠρίον, Ψ 126

uct (subj.), O 359
ἦτορ, B 490, P 535
ἠύτε, A 277 (see εὖτε)

θαιρός, M 459
θάλαμος, P 36, Σ 492
θαλερός, B 266, P 696
θαλύσια, 1 534
θάπτειν, ᾧ 323

θέαινα, Θ ὃ

θείειν for θέειν, Z 507
θεῖος, B 22, Π 798, Φ
θέλγειν, M 255, = 252
θέλειν, A 277

| θεμείλια, Ψ 255

θέμις, A 807

θέμιστες, A 238, I 99, 156,
II 387

θέναρ, E 339

θεοπρόπιον, A 85

θεός, scansion, A 18

θεράπων, E 48

Θερσίτης, B 212-4

| θέσθαι ὅπλα, B 382

θέσθαι μάχην, Q 402
θέσκελα, TV 130

| θεσπιδαές, Ψ 216

θεῶν ἐν γούνασι, P 514
θήκατο, Καὶ 81
θηλυτέρη, Θ 520, Φ 454
θητεύειν, ᾧ 444

θοός, K 394

θοῦρις, A 32, Ο 308
θρασυμέμνων, E 639
θρασύς, Θ 89

θρῆνος, 2 120

θρῆνυς, O 729

θρόνα, X 441

θρόνος, Q 597

θρωσμὸς πεδίοιο, A 56
θύεα, Z 270

θυηλή, I 220

θυμαρής, 1 336

648

θυμοραϊστής, N 544

θυμός, Z 523

θυμοφθόρα, Z 168

θυοσκόος, {2 221

θύραζε, E 694

θυραωρός, X 69

θύσανος, B 447, App. G (10)

θύσθλα, Z 134

Own, N 669

θώρηξ, A 234, 373, N 507,
Σ 460, T 361, App. B, iii.

θωρήσσεσθαι, Σ 167

ia, ἰός, E 603, Z 422,1 319

ἰαίνειν, Ψ 598

ἰάλλειν, A 628

*Idoves, N 685

lave, I 325

ἰάχειν, B 316, =

ἰδέ, Τ' 318, & 175

ἰδεῖν, ἰδέσθαι, A 203

idéw, ἘΞ 235

tein, T 209

iecOac=speed, aim at, see
βίεσθαι

ἱέρευτο, 2 125

ἱερός, of cities, A 366; of
the day and night, © 66;
of sentinels, K 56; of
fish, IL 407; of the
chariot, P 464; of the
place of justice, = 504 ;
scansion, App. D (i. p.
592)

ἴθματα, E778

ἰθύ(νγειν, Z2, 2175

ἰθυπτίωνα, Φ 169

Avs (adj.), App. I, 28, 29

ἰθύς (subst.), Z 79

ἱκμάς, P 392

ἴἔκμενος, A 479

ixpia, O 676

ixwpye?, 1 414

ἵλαος, A 583

λήϊον (πεδίον), & 558

ἼΤΛιος (not Ἴλιον), O 71

ἱμάς, Ψ 363, 684

ἱμάσθλη, Ψ 387

ἔμεν, infin., = 14

ἔμεναι, T 365

ἵνα, Ἡ 353, Q 382

ἵνα yap, Καὶ 127

ἰνδάλλεσθαι, P 214

ἴξαλος, A 105

ἰοειδής, A 298

ides, Ψ 850

ἰόμωρος, A 242

ἰός, see ἴα

ἰοχέαιρα, E53

ἱππηλασίη, Ἡ 340

ἹἹππημολγοί, N 4

ἱππόδρομος, Ψ 330

219

THE ILIAD

immo=chariot, Τ'ὶ 265, A
366, P 504

ἱπποκέλευθος, 11 126

ἱπποκορυστής, Δ 457

immos=cavalry, H 342

imroua, A 454

is, periphrastic, Φ 356

ion, A 705, M 421

ἴσκειν, A 799

ἵστη, imper., Φ 919

ἱστοδόκη, A 484

ἴστωρ, App. I, 26

isxavaay, P 572

irén, ® 350

ἰυγμός, Σ 572

ἴῴφθιμος, A 3

ἶφι, Τ' 375, Z 478

ἴφιος, E 556

ἰχανάαν, P 572, Ψ 300

ἴχνια, N 71

ixwp, Ἰὰ 340, 416

ἰωή, A 276

ἰωκή, A 601

kK =Kal,) 8 288. Zi 260;
W 526

Kay γόνυ, T 458

κάγκανος, Φ 364

καγχαλάαν, Z 514

καθάπτεσθαι, A 582

κάθεσαν, T 280

καθικέσθαι, = 104

καθύπερθε, 0 544

kai, emphatic, B 238, A
406, Ψ 646 ; explan. with
relative, A 249, T 165,
Φ 587

kat. . . kat, N 260
kal. . . δὲ © 105
καὶ een περ; Εἰ 195

καίριος, A185, A 439

κακός not ethical, Ψ 176

καλαῦροψ, Ψ 845

καλήτωρ, Q 577

καλλικολώνη, T 53

κάλυκες, Σ 401

κάλυμμα, Q 98

καλύπτρη, App. G, 11

κάμβαλε!ϊ, Ὑ 458

καμέσθαι, Σ 341

καμόντες, I’ 278

κάμω or κεκάμω Ἱ, A 168

κανόνες, of shield, N 407,
ADDS Β. 11

κανών, of loom, Ψ 760

κάπετος, O 356

κάρη as fem., Καὶ 457

κάρηνον, 1 407, A 309

κάρητι, O 75

καρκαίρω, T 156

καρός, I 378

καρχαλέος, ® 541

κασίγνητος, Θ 284, I 632,
A 257, M 371, O 545
κασσίτερος, A 24
κατά, with acc., A 409,
424, N 737, P 86, 732;
with gen., II 123
καταβαίνειν, Z 288
καταείνυσαν, Ψ 135
καταῖτυξ, K 258, App. M, 8
κατακρῆθεν, IL 548
κατ᾽ ἄκρης, N 772
κάταντα, Y 116 ©
καταρέζειν, A 361
κατ᾽ αὐτόθι, K 273
κατ᾽ évwra, O 320
κατηφείη, II 498
κατηφόνες, 258
κατωμάδιος, Ψ 431
κατωμαδόν, Ο 352
καυλός, Ν 102
καυστείρη, Δ 342
κε with fut. ind., A 137,
175, Β΄ 568; R212
404, I 155, 386, X 66
κε with subj. in prince.
clauses, A 182
κε with participle ?, T 138
κε in wish ἢ, Z 281
κε with infin., X 110
κεδνός, I 586
κεῖται, subjunctive, T 32
κεκαδήσομαι, Θ 353
κεκάδοντο, Δ 497
κεκαδών, A 334
κεκάμω, See κάμω
κεκάσθαι, Ὑ 35, 2 546
κεκαφηώς, Εἰ 698
κεκλήγοντες (-@Tes), Μ 125
κέκληται, pregnant use,
A
κεκοπώς, N 60
κεκρύφαλος, X 468
κελαδεινή, IL 183
κελαινεφής, B 412
κελεύειν, constr., I) 259, Z
324, T 155, Ψ 804
κέλευθος, M 262
κελευτιάαν, M 265
κελητίζειν, Ο 679
κεντρηνεκής, E752
κέντρον, Ψ 387
κέονται, X 510
κέραμος, E 387
κέρας, A 385, Q 80
κέρασθαι 1, A 260
κερκίς, X 448, Ψ 760
κερτόμιος, Ὧ 649
κεστός, & 214
κεύθεσθαι, Ψ 244
κεφαλή, Φ 336
κεχανδώς, Ψ 268, 192
κεχαρησέμεν, Ο 98

κεχρημένος, T 262

κηδεμών, Ψ 160, 674

κήδεος, Y 160

κῆδος, N 464

κήλειος, O 744

κῆλον, M 280

κῆρες, B 302, Θ 70, Σ 535

κηρεσσιφόρητος, Θ 527

κήρυκι, scansion, P 324

κητώεσσα, B 581

κηώεις, I 382

κινυρός, P 5

κίον, imperf. ?, Ψ 257

κληΐς, M 456, = 168,
170, 2 318

κλῆρος, O 498

κλίνειν, E 709

κλισίη, 2 448

κλισμός, Ὡ 597

κλοτοπεύειν, “149

κλύειν, constr. of, I 86, E
118, Π LD

Ἰζλυταιμ(ν)γήστρη, A 119

κλυτόπωλος, E 654

κλωμακόεσσα, B 729

κνῆ, A 639

κολλήεις, O 389

κολούειν, T 370

κόλπος, App. G, 5

κολωιόν, A 575

κορέει, fut., P 241

κορθύεται, 17

κορυθαίολος, B 816

κόρυμβα, I 241

κορυστής, A 457

κορώνη, A 110

κορωνίς, B 771

κοτύλη, E 806

κοτυλήρυτον, Ψ 34

Κουρῆτες, 1 591

κούρητες, T 193

κουρίδιος, A 114, T 298

κοῦρος, ὦ 59, N 95

κράατος, = 177

κρα(ι)αίνω, B 419

κράτεσφι, Καὶ 156

κρατευτής, 1 214

κρήγυον, A 106

κρήδεμνον, II 100, App. G,
11

II

κρῆθεν, IL 548

κρίκε, IL 470

κρίνεσθαι, B 385

κρόσσαι, M 258

Kpvoes, Z 344, I 2

κτανέειν as fut. ἢ, Z 409, =
309

κτέρας, (2 235

κτερίζειν, κτερεΐζειν, Ὁ 38

κυάνεος, A 528, A 282, II
66, Ὡ 94

κύανος, A 24

GREEK INDEX

κυανοχαῖτα, Ν 563, T 224
κυβιστᾶν, 11 745
κυβιστητήρ, Σ 604
κυδάνειν, & 73, Ὑ 42
κυδιάνειρα, Α 490
κυδοιμέειν, A 324, O 136
κυδοιμός, E592

κυκειών, A 624

κυκλεῖν, H 332

κύκλος (of shield), A 32, T |

2
280, App. B, i. 1
Κυλλήνιος, O 518
κυλλοποδίων, Σ 371
κύμβαχος, E 586, Ο 536
κύμινδις, = 290
κυνέη, K 258

| κυνόμυια, Φ 394
| κύντερον, Θ 483
| κυνυλαγμός 2, Φ 575

Κύπρις, E 330
κύρειν, Ψ 428, 821
κώληψ, Ψ 725
κωφός, Δ 390

λάβρος, Ψ 474
λάϊνος, M178

| λαισήϊα, App. B, viii.

Naw npa, X 24 (cf. T 276)
λαοσσόος, N 128

| λάρναξ, Ὦ 795

λαυκανίη, X 324
λέγειν, -εσθαι,
188, N 275

λεῖα, M 30
λειριόεσσα, Τ᾽ 152
λεῖστός, I 408

B 435,

| λείων, BE 784, O 592

λελαθεῖν, O 60
λελαχεῖν, O 350

| Négeo, I 617

λέξο, T 10

λέπαδνα, App. M, 6
λεπτός, K 226, T 497
Nevyadéos, I 119
λεύκασπις, X 294

| λευκός, & 185

λέων, of lioness, P 134, =
318, & 483

λήγω, trans., N 424

λήϊον, 1 125, A 558

λίην, quantity, Z 486

λίθος, M 287

λικριφίς, Ξ 463

λινοθώρηξ, B 528, App. B,
111. 4

λίνον, LY 570

Nir’ ἐλαίωι, K 577

λιπαρός, 1 156, X 406

λιπῆναι 2, IL 507

Ais (dion), E 782, A 480,
O 592, = 318

λίσσομαι, A 15, 1501, Π 46

649

| λῖτα, Θ 441

λόγος, O 393
Nolyia, A 518
λοισθήϊα, Ψ 751

| λύειν, Α 13, Ψ 27,021

λυκηγενής, ΔΊΟΙ
Λυκόεργος, Z 130
λύματα, A 314
λυσσώδης, N 53
λωτεῦντα, M 253 *
μαίεσθαι, seek, I 394
μαινάς, X 460
Maxap, Q2 544
μάκαρ, A 68

μάλα, N 708

| μαλερός, I 242

μάλιστα, = 399
μάν, O 476

μάσταξ, 1 324
μάστιξ, Ψ 587, 500
μάστιξ Διός, M 37
parav, E 233
pareve, = 110
μάχαιρα, I 271

| μάχεσθαι, forms, A 272,
298, 344, T 26
μάχη, A 216
μαχλοσύνη, 2 23,°30

μέγα, A 283, Z 261, X 88
μεγαίρειν, N 563, Ψ 865
μεγακήτης, Θ 222
μεγαλωστί, IL 776

μεθέπειν = drive after, E

329, © 126; =direct, K
516 ; aor. =catch, P 190

μεθιέναι, with ace. and dat.,
A 283; acc. and gen.,
P 539; with gen. of
person, A 841 ; dat. ξ, ®
177 ; abs., Q 48

| μεθύειν, P 390

μείλανι, Q 79
μείλια, I 146
μείρεσθαι, I 616
μείς, T 117
μελάνδετος, Ὁ
By ix.3
μελάνειν, H 64
μελάνυδρος, I 14
μέλας, of emotion, A 103 ;
=dark blue, A 24
μέλδεσθαι, Φ 363
μέλειν, E 708
μέλλειν, A 564, Καὶ 454, N
776, Σ 98, Ψ 773
μέλπεσθαι, H 241, Σ 604
μεμαώς, B 818, If 754
μέμβλετο, aor., T 345
μέμνημαι, forms, Ὁ 18, ®
442, Ψ 361, 648 ; takes

acc., Z 222, I 527

713, App.

650

μέν, A 77, B 203, Φ 260,
Q 92

peveaivery, IL 491

μένειν, O ἘΠ

μέροπες, A 250, Σ 288

μεσαιπόλιος, Ν 361

μεσήεις, M 269

μέσσατος, Θ 223

μεσσοπαγές, P 172

μεσφ᾽, 8 508

μετά, With acc. = among,
B 148, I 54, 2 552, Q
400 ; with ace. = after,
A 227; with gen. =
among, A 51, N 700;
with ablative gen., P
149 ; with dat. =among,
O 118, Ψ 367

μετα-, in composition, 10)
19, 929, A 763

μετάγγελος, O 144

μεταμάζιον. E 19

μεταμώνια, A 363

μετανάστης, 1 648, IL 59

μετὰ νῶτα βαλών, Θ 94

μεταστοιχί, Ψ 358

μετεκίαθον, A 714

μετώπιον, IL 739

μή, in principal clauses, A
26, 1698, K 100, ΣΧ 123 ;
transition to hypotaxis,
Ἂ 20. Κα Fle "ING 198:
without finite verb, A
295; with infin. in
prayers, B 413; with
aor. imper,, A 410; with
indice. in oaths, K 330,
0.41, T2261 ; after verbs
of fear, A 555, K 510;
in relative clauses, B
302

μὴ μάν, O 476

μὴ ov, A 26, K 39, II 128

μηδέν, Σ 500

μήνη, Ψ 455

μῆρα, μηρία, A 460- =

μήστωρ, A 328, EK 272

μιαίνειν, A 141, 146

μικρός, E 801

μιλτοπάρηιος, B 637

μισθός, M 435

μίτος, Ψ 760

μίτρη, E 857, App. B, ἵν

μνάεσθαι, B 686

μογοστόκος, A 270

μοῖραι, 92 49

μοιρηγενής, V πὰς

μόλιβος, A 23

Μολίονε, A 700

μολπή, Ν 657, = 604

μολυβδαίνη, Ὦ 80

μονωθείς, Δ 470

THE ILIAD

μόριμον, Υ 302
μορόύεις, = 188
μόρσιμος, X 13
μόρφνος, 2 316
μόσχος, A 105
Μοῦσα, B 484
μύλακες, M 161
μυλοειδής, H 270
μυρίος, A 2, T 282, Ψ 29
Mvooi, N 3
μώνυχες, H 236

ν ἐφελυστικόν, forming posi-
tion in thesi, O 197, 491

| ναίειν, vaew, Z 34

νέατος, Εἰ 539, I 153

νέεσθαι, = 221, ᾧ 48, X
109 (see νεῦμαι)

velatpa, EH 539

νεικεῖν, (2 29

νεῖκος, M 279

νεκτάρεος, Σ 25

νέκυς, ace. plur., = 180

νέκυς, With gen., P 240, Q
108

νέμειν, B780, T 249

| νεμεσητός, A 649

νέμεσις, 1’ 156, Z 351, N
122

νεμεσσᾶσθαι, O 211

veoln, Ψ 604

vetmat, Σ 150

νεῦρον, A 122, Θ 328

νηγάτεος, B43

νήδυμος, B 2

ynis, Β 865, 2 22

νηπύτιος, T 200, & 410

νήριτος, X 349

νικᾶν, Ψ 742

νίσσεσθαι, Ν 186, Ψ 76

νομός, T 249

νόσφιν, Φ 135

νοτίη, Θ 906

νύμφα, I 190

νύμφιος, Ψ 225

| vuy, K 105

Νυσήϊον, Z 1338

| νύσσα, Ψ 758

νύσσειν, IL 704

vo, E219

νωθής, A 559

νῶϊ, νῶϊν, N 326, Il 97
νωλεμέως, A 428
vapoy, B 578

νωχελίη, T 411

and ¢ confused by Mss.,
N 644, If 830

ξεῖνος, A 387

ξυνελαύνειν, intrans., Χ 129
ξυρόν, K 173

ξυστόν, O 388, 677

Str

ὁ, as relative, A 125, 6 190

6, neut., as demonstrative,
V9

6, as conjunction, P 207

6 ye, Τ' 409

ὀαρίζειν, X 126

ὄβριμος, 1 357, A 453, N
521

ὄγκος, A 151

ὅδε, predicative, E 175, 1
688, T 140

ὄζος, Β 540

ὀθόνη, D 595

οἰγνύναι, Ὧ 457

οἶδα, of disposition, A 361,
E 326, II 72, P 325

οἰέτης, Β 765

ὀϊζύειν, Τ' 408

ὀϊζυρώτερον, P 446

ointa, T 43

οἴηκες, App. M, 2, 8

οἶκος, Ψ 558

οἶκτος, 1 563

᾿Οἱλεύς, ᾿Ιλεύς, M 365

οἰνοχοεῖν, A 598

olvow, A 350, N 703

οἰόθεν, H 39

οἷον, exclamative, B 320,
E 638, N 633

οἰόπολος, N 473, T 377

οἷος, refers forward, = 262

οἷος, as pyrrhich, N 275,
Σ 105

ὀΐω, οἴω, N 262, P 709, Ψ
310

ὀκρυόεις ?, Z 344, 1 64

ὀλέκεσκεν, T1835

ὀλέσαι, (2 242

ὀλιγηπελέων, O 24

ὀλιγοδρανέων, O 245

ὅλμος, A 147

ὀλοιός, X 5

ὀλοοίτροχος, N 137

ὀλοός, 1 365

ὀλοφύρομαι, VY τῦ

ὁμαρτήδην, N 584

ὁμηλικίη, N 485

ὅμιλος, Καὶ 338

ὁμογάστριος, ᾧ 95, Ὡ 47

ὁμοίιος 2, Δ 315

ὁμοῖος, Σ 120

ὁμοκλητήρ, M 273

ὁμοστιχάει, O 635

ὀμφαλός, A 34, App. M, 2,
3 :

ὀμφή, Β 41, Υ 129

ὅμως, Μ 999

ὀνείατα, Q 367

ὀνειροπόλος, A 63

ὄνοσθαι, (2 241

ὀξυόεις, Εἰ 50

ὀξύς, of hearing, P 256, 524

ὀπάζειν, Ἰὼ 834, Θ 141, 341,
A 493

ὅπατρος, A 257, M 371

ὄπις, IL 387

ὅπλα, Θ δῦ, Καὶ 254

ὅπλεσθαι ?, T 172

ὁπλίζεσθαι, Θ᾽ δῦ

ὁπλότερος, = 267

émés, Es 902

ὁππότε, Καὶ 189

ὀπωρινός, ES

ὅπως, with fut. indic., A
136; transition from
modal to final use, A 344

ὁρᾶτο, ὅρητο, A 56

ὀρέγειν, IL 314, 2 506

ὀρεσκῶιος, A 268

ὀρεχθεῖν, Ψ 30

ὄρθια, A 11

ὀρθόκραιρος, 3

ὅρκιον, Τ' 245, A 158

ὅρκος, B 755, Υ 313

ὅρμημα, B 356

ὄρνϊς, M 218, 2 219

ὄροφος, 2 451

ὄρσο, A 204

ὀρχηστής, IL 617

ὄρωρε (watch), Ψ 112

ὀρώρειν ?, IL 633, N 271

és, relative ; ΞΞ εἴ τις, H 401,

= 81; substantive verb |

omitted, A 535, Φ 353 ;

in quasi- indirect ques-

tions, H 171;
possessive (oF és),

“iree” use, App. A;
see also Τὶ 244, A 399,
H 153, I 414, K 398, O
138, © 292, 422

ὁσσάτιος, E758

ὄσσεσθαι, A105, = 17

ὅς τ᾽ ἐπεί, Ὦ 42

ὅς τις, Ψ 43

ὅ τε, adverbial acc.,

ὅ τε and ὅτι, A 244, P 627

ὅτε κεν with opt., I 525

ὁτὲ μὲν...

ὅτε μή, N 319, II 227

ὅτι, 6 τι, cognate acc., A 64,
K 142

ὅττι with superl.,

ὄτριχας, B 765

ὀτρυντύς, T 235

X 129

ὅτωι, Grow, etc., M 428,
O 491, 664
οὐ, in rel. clause, B 338

ov, after ed, see εἰ

ovas, A 109

οὐδὲ.
22, Σ 117

οὐδείς, 0 178

οὐδέν, adverbial, Q 370

O 468 |

. ὁτὲ δέ, Ρ 176

. οὐδέ, Β 703, E |

GREEK INDEX

| οὐδενόσωρος, Θ 178

odds, X 60

οὖθαρ, 1 141

οὔλιος, A 62

οὐλόμενος, A 2

οὗλος, B 6,"K 134, P 756
οὐλοχύται, A 449
οὕνεκα,1) 400, A 21
οὔνεσθε, 92 241

| οὔ πω, I 306

οὖρα, K 351, M 421
Οὐρανίωνες, Ἐὶ 898
οὐρανός, App. Η
οὐρεύς, Καὶ 84

| οὐρίαχος, N 443
| οὐρός, B 153

οὖς, A 109
οὐτάζειν, Π 467

| οὔτε, οὐδέ, Χ 265, Q 129

οὔτε. . . δέ, 868

οὐτιδανός, Α 251

οὗτος, Τ' 178, M 69, O 217

οὕτως, X 498

οὐχί, O 716

ὀφέλλαι, aor., IL 650

ὀφέλλειν, A 353, 510, Z
350, A 686, IL 650

| ὄφελος, N 236

ὄφις, M 208

ὄφρα, in place of infin., A
133, A 465, Ζ 361, Π
653 ;=for a while, O 547;

temporal followed by δέ

in apodosi, Σ 381; tinal
rarely takes κεν, Q2 635
ὄχ᾽ ἄριστος, A 69

| ὄχεα, Εὶ 727

ὀχλίζειν, M 448
ὀψέ, H 94
ὀψείω, Ξ 37
ὀψέσθαι, aor.?, Τὸ 212, Ὡ 704
παθεῖν, A 313, Φ 274
ΠΠαιήων, E 401

᾿ παιφάσσειν, B 450

πάλιν, local only ?, B 276;

metaphorical, A 357;
with gen., = 138

| παλίνορσος, I’ 33

παλίντονος, 8 266

παλίωξις, M 71

πάλλειν, of lots, T 316, O
191, Q2 400

| πάλλεσθαι, O 645, T 483

παλύνειν, > 560

| πάναιθος, = 372
| παναφῆλιξ, X 490

mavawptos, 2 540
πανημέριος, A 472
ΠΠάνθοος, O 522
Tavoudatos, Θ 250

᾿ πανόψιος, & 397

651

mapa, not in temporal sense
in H., 1 470; with acc.
=beyond, N 787

παραβάλλεσθαι, 1 322

παραβλήδην, A 6

παραιβάτης, Ψ 132

παρακάββαλε, Ψ 683

πάραντα, Ψ 116

παραρρητοῖσι, Ν 726

παρ᾽ αὐτόθι, M 302

παραφθάνησι, Καὶ 346

πάρδαλις, Ν 103

παρείθη, Ψ 868

παρέξ͵ | 7, A 486, M
Ψ 760, ἢ 434

παρήορος =loose, H 156, Ψ
603 ;=/race-horse, Θ᾽ 87,
II 152

παρθένιος, 11 180

Πάρις, declension, I 325

πάροιθεν, A185, Z 319, T
437

παροίτερος, Ψ 459

πάρος, With present, A 264,
X 303, Ψ 474

πάρος, with pres.
245

πάρος γε, πάρος περ, P 587

παρώιχωκεν, K 252

mas =6Xos, M 340

πάσσειν, X 441

πάτρη, N 354

παύειν, constr., A 506

παχνοῦν, P 112

πέζη, App. M, 2, 3

πείθεσθαι, K'57, Ψ 48

πεῖραρ, Z 143, H 102, 402,
> 501

πειρᾶσθαι, with ace, Σ 601

teipew, II 405, ῶ 8

πειρητίζειν, with acc., M_47

πείρινθα, Ὧ 190

πέλεθρον, 566 πλέθρον

πέλειν, Τ' 287, BE 729

πέλεκκον, N 612

πέλεκυς, Ψ 850

πέλωρα, HE 53

πελώριος, Καὶ 439

πεμπώβολα, A 462

πενθείειν, Ψ 28 =

πεπάλεσθε, H 171

πέπασθε, I’ 99

πέπλος, Ὦ 229

πεπτῶτα, P 502

πέπων, B 235, E 10981 252

mep=very (not concessive),
A 131, 392, (seeei.. .
περ, καί. .. περὶ

περάζειν, περάαν, Φ 40,

Πέργαμος, A 508

πέρθαι, 11 708

περί, With dat., A 317, 0

213,

infin., =

652

86, IL 568 ; with gen., of
astake, = ; doubtful
if adv. or prep., B 388,
A 46, 257, H 289, P 22
περιδέξιος, Φ 163
περιδόσθαι, Ψ 485
περίδρομος, i 726
περιδύειν, A 100
περικτίονες, P 220
περιπλόμενος, Σ 220
περιστένεσθαι, 11 163
περιτρέφεσθαι, Ἐ 903
περκνός, Ὧ 316
πεσέειν, Z 82
πεφασμένον, & 127
πεφήσεται, P 155
πεφνών, Il 827
méppade, & 499
πεφυζότες, Φ 6
πηγαί, Ψ 148
πηγεσίμαλλος, Τ' 197
πηγός, Τ' 197,1 124
πηκτός, K 353
πηνίον, Y 760
anos, 1 162
mnpos, B 599
πῆχυς, A 375

205
}

π πῖαρ, A 550
πιδήεσσα, A 183
πῖλος, Καὶ 265- 5

πινύσσειν, = 249
πίσεα, T 9
πιφαύσκειν, K 478, Σ 500
πλάζειν, A ὅθ, M 285, &
269
πλέες, B 129
πλέθρον, K 351, A 354, Φ
407
πλευρά, A 468
πλήθει, Ψ 639
πληθυῖ, X 458
Πληϊάδες, Σ 486
πλυνοί, Χ 153
ποθή, A 471
πόθος, Ῥ 439
ποινή, N 659
πολέας (-Us), B 4, N
πολέμου στόμα, Καὶ ὃ
πολίζειν, H 453
πολιήτης, B 806, X 429
πολλός τις, H 156
πολύαινος, 1 673
πολυγηθής, Φ 450
πολυδάκρυος, P 192
πολυδειράς, H 754
πολυδίψιος, A 171
πολύδωρος, Δ 394
[Πολύϊδος, N 663
πολυκαγκής, A 642
πολύκεστος, 1 371
πολύκλητος, A 438
πολύκμητος, Z 48

794

| πρὸ ὁδοῦ,

THE ILIAD

πολυπάμων, A 433

πολύπλαγκτος, A 308

πολύς, Σ 493

πόνος, ® 137

πόντος, Φ 59

πόρκης, L319

πόρπη, Σ 401

πορσαίνειν, πορσύνειν, Yr 411

πορφύρειν, = 16

πορφύρεος, of water, A 482,
Il 391; of death, E 83;
of blood, P 361; of the
rainbow, P 547

ποσσῆμαρ, Ὧ 657

πουλύς (fem.), E 776, K 27,
P 269

πρεσβήϊον, O 289

πρεσβύτατος, A 59

πρῆξις, Q 524

πρῆσαι, A 481

πρήσσειν ὁδοῖο, Ὦ 264

πρήσσειν, used absolutely,
= 357

πρίν, E 288, P 506, & 580

πρό in composition, A 3,
A 569, IL 60

πρό, with locative, I 9,
A 50, App. H, note 1

A 382

πρὸ φόβοιο (=prae?), P 667

πρὸ φόωσδε, IL 188, T 118

προαλής, Φ 262

προβαλεῖν, -έσθαι, A 529,
T 218

πρόβατα, & 124

πρόδομος, 2 649, 673, App.C

προθέλυμνος, 1 541, N 130

| προθέουσιν, A 291

πρόκλυτος, Υ 204
mpokpocoas, & 35
πρόμος, Τ᾽ 44

| προπάροιθε, K 476
m pom po, Χ 221

πρός, with gen., A 239, 336
Z 456, tT 188 ; with ace.
=against, P 98

πρόσσοθεν, Ψ 533

πρόσσω καὶ ὀπίσσω, Σ 200

πρόσφατος, 0 757

προσώπασι, H 212

προτέρω, 1 192, Σ 386

προτετύχθαι, IL 60
προτιβάλλεσθαι, Ἐ 879
προτιόσσεσθαι, Χ 356
πρότμησις, 424

| πρόφασιν, T 262, 302

| προφέρειν, I’ 7, 64

| πρόφρων, A 543

| πρόχνυ, I 570

| πρύλεες, Ἐ 744, A 49, M 77,

ORI,
πρύμνη, Ξ 31

πρυμνός, H 339, M 446, &
31, P 618

πρώην, B 303, Ο 470, 2 500

mpwtov, O 470

πρῶτα, A 235, N 285

πρωτόγονος, A 102

mpwromayns, Εἰ 194

TTEPOELS, oe 455

πτήσσειν, = 40

πτῆται, O 170

πτολίπορθος, B 278, O 77,
® 550

πτύον, N 588

πτύσσεσθαι, Ν 134

πτύχες, Σ 481, T 269
πτῶξ, X 310
πυθέσθαι, A 257, E 350,

Z 465

πυθμήν, A 632

muxagew, B 7/7, O 124,
W 503

πυκινός, A 392
πύλαι, M 120, 340, 454
Πύλος, B 591, E 393
πύργος, military formation,
A 334, M 43, 332
= fortification (not
tower), H 437, © 218,
M 258, 332
πυρετός, X 31
πωτεπως, A 124, 1 506
πωτᾶσθαι, M 287

ῥάβδος, M 297
ῥαθάμιγγες, Ψ 502
ῥαιστήρ, Σ 477
ῥέα, peta, P 462
ῥέζειν, T 150
ῥέθεα, 11 856
ῥηγμίν, T 229
ῥήγνυσθαι, T 55
piyyos, I 661
ῥηξήνωρ, H 228
ῥήσσειν, Σ 571
ῥιγεδανός, T 325
ῥίγιον, A 325
ῥινός, M 263, II 656
ῥίπτασκε, Ψ 827
ῥοδανόν, = 576
ῥοδόεις, Ψ 186
ῥύεσθαι, see ἐρύεσθαι
ῥυμός, Z 40

ῥύσια, A 674
ῥυτήρ, IL 475
ῥώεσθαι, 2 614
ῥωχμός, Ψ 420

od NES Σ 219, Φ 388
| Σάμος, N 12
σανίδες, M 454, Σ 275

σάος, see σόος
σαοῦν, see ade

σαυρωτήρ, Καὶ 159

σάφα, Δ 404

σέβας, = 178

σείω, = 285

Σελλοί 3, IL 233

σεύω (1), A 549, P 463, Ψ
198

σῆμα, σήματα, Z 176, Ψ
326, 843

σημαίνειν, with dat., A 289;
with gen, = 84

σημάντωρ, O 325

σθένος, > 274

σίαλος, I 208

σιγαλόεις, X 153

σιδήρειος, P 424

σίδηρος, A 123, Σ 34

Diddves, Ψ 743

Divries, A 593

σιφλῶσαι, Ξ.142

σκέπτομαι, IL 361

σκῆλαι, Ψ 191

σκηπάνιον, N 59

σκῆπτρον, in assembly, A
234, = 505; symbol of
authority, I 99, N 59,
Σ 550

σκόλοπές, M 55, D177

σκοπιή, X 145

σκότιος, Z 24

σκῶλος, N 564

σμαραγεῖν, B 463

σμικρός, P 757

Σμινθεύς, A 39

σμύχειν, 1 653

Σόλυμοι, Z 184

σόειν ?, 1 424, 11 365

σόος, σάος, σῶς, A 117, I
424, N 773, X 332

σοφίη, O 412

σπάρτα, B 135

σπεῖο, K 285

omépxew, Ν 334

σπέσθαι, E 423

σπῆϊ 2, Σ 402

σπιδέος, A 754

σπουδῆι, Β 99

σταδίη, O 282

στάθμη, O 410

σταθμός, Μ 454

σταίησαν, P 733

σταφύλη, B 765

στείομεν, O 297

στείρη, A 482

στέλλεσθαι, of sails, A 433

στέμμα, A 14

στένειν, K 16

στεροπή, A 184

στεροπηγερέτα, 11 298

στεῦται, > 191

στεφάνη, H 12

στέφανος, N 736

GREEK INDEX

στεφανοῦσθαι, E738, Σ 485

στέωμεν, A 348

στήλη, M 258

oTnoa=weigh, Θ 234, T
247, Ψ 7451

στήσασθαι κρητῆρα, Z 528

μάχην, Σ 533

στιλπνός, = 351

στιχός, T 364

στόμα, K 8, = 36, O 389,
YT 359

στομαλίμνη, Z 4

στρατόεσθαι, A 378

στρεπτός, 1 497, T 248;
χιτών, E113

στρεύγεσθαι, O 511

στρεφεδίνηθεν, IL 792

στρόμβος, = 413

στρωφᾶν, N 557, O 666

συβόσια, A 678

| συλᾶν, A 105

συμβάλλειν, IL 565, T 55
συμβάλλεσθαι, T 335

| σύν, instrumental, II 156,

279

| συναείρειν, O 680
| συνελεῖν, Il 740

συνεοχμός, = 465
συνεχές, M 26

| συνίεσθαι, N 381

συνοχωκότε, B 218
σῦριγξ, Καὶ 13, T 387

σφας, E 567

ope, T 265

opedavov, A 165

σφεδανῶν 1, Φ 542

σφενδόνη, N 600

σφίσιν = ὑμῖν 2, K 398

σφῶϊ, σφωέ, A 8

σχεδόν, M 53

σχεθέειν, A 219, N 163,
608

σχέτλιος, K 164, X 41, 86

σχήσεσθαι, trans. or in-
trans. ?, I 235, M 107

| owe, see σόειν

σῶκος, T 72
σῶμα, Τὸ 29

| σῶς, see σόος

ταγός ?, Ψ 160
ταλαύρινος, H 239
ταλάφρων, N 300

| τανηλεγής, Θ 70

τανυγλώχις, Θ 297
τανύειν, Ψ 324

τανυήκης, IL 767
τανύπεπλος, I’ 228
τανύφλοιος, IL 767

τάπης, Il 224, 2 230, 644
τὰ πρῶτα, A 424

tap, A 8, 65, K 61

653

ταρσός, A 377

ταρχύειν, H 85

Tatra =yes, Σ 128

τάφος, Ψ 29

τάχα, A 205, Ν 676

Te, gnomic, A 218 ; gener-
alises, A 341; marks
correlation of clauses, I
12, A 161, K 224; in
similes, A 424

τε, answered by δέ, E 359

τέγεος, Z 248

τεθναίη, Τ 102

τεΐν, A 201

τείρεα, Σ 485

τειχεσιπλῆτα, E 31

τεκμαίρεσθαι, Z 349, H

τέκμωρ, H 30

τελαμών, P 290, App. B, i.
1

τέλειος, O 247

τέλος, K 56, A 439, T 101

τέλσον, K 351, N 707, =
544

τέμει, N 707

30

| τέμενος, Z 194, I 578

τένοντε, A 521, Καὶ 455, II
587

τεοῖο, Θ 37

τέρας, A 4

τέρην, Τ 142

τερμιόεις, IL 803

τέρπεσθαι γόοιο, Ψ 10

τερπικέραυνος, A 773,
232

τερσῆναι, 11 519

τερσανόεσσα, I

τεταγών, A 591

τετελεσμένον,
195

τετραθέλυμνος, O 479

τετράκυκλος, Ὧ 324

τετραφάληρος, App. B, vii.
3

334

hy

feasible,

τετριγώς. Ψ 101

τέττα, A 412

τετυγμένον, Ψ 741
τετυχηώς, P 748

τεύξεσθαι, E 653

τέως, T 189

τῆ, & 219

τήθεα, IL 747

τηλεκλειτός, -κχητός, E 491
τηλύγετος, Γ 175, I 482
tiew, Y 703

τιθήμεναι, τιθήμενον, K 34
τιθήνη, Z 132

τίκτειν, -εσθαι, Z 155
τίλλεσθαι, with ace., 2 710
τιμή, A 158, 510

τιμῆις, I 605, Σ 475

τίς for ὅς τις, & 192

654

τις, ‘of public opinion,”
B 271

Tis= many ὦ one, Σ 466

τλήμων, E 670, K 231

τλῆναι, EH 383

τλητός, 2 49

τόδ᾽ ἱκάνω, & 298

τοῖον, adverbial, Ψ 246

τοίσδεσσι, Καὶ 462

τόκος, Η 128

τολυπεύειν, & 86

τόξα, Φ 490, 502

τοξότης, A 385

-rés, verbal adjectives in,
Q 49

τόσον, adverbial use, A 130,
= 3/8, Υ 178

τραπείομεν, I 441

τραφεῖν, intrans.,
Ψ 84, 348

τραφερή, = 308

τρεῖν, H 295, A 546, Φ 288,
X 149

τρέχειν, N 409

τρητός, 1 448

τρίγληνος, = 183

τριηκόσια, A 697

ΠΡΟ λίστος: Θ 488

τρίπλαξ, Σ 480

τρίπολος, Σ 541

τρίπτυχος, A 353

Τριτογένεια, A 515

τρόπεον, & 224

τρόφι, A 307

τρυφάλεια, I’ 372, App. B,
vii. 2

Tpwrds,
461

τρωπᾶν %, O 666

τρώσεσθαι, M 66

τρωχᾶν, O 666

τυκτός, Εἰ 831

τυμβοχόης, Φ 323

τύνη, Z 262

τυφλός, Z 138

τῶ, not τῶι, A 418

τῶι, with compar.,

τώς, B 330

B 661,

Tpdios, A 129, E

@ 190

“Yades, = 486

UBBadrew, T 76

ὕβρις, A 203

"Lon, Υ 385

υἱός, as iambus, A 489 ;
declension, N 35
458

“Ὕλη, E 708, H 221

ὕμεων, O 494

viral, IL 375

ὕπαιθα, O 520

ὑπαΐσσειν. Φ 126

ὑπασπίδια, N 158

Σ

THE ILIAD

ὑπ᾽ ἐκ, E 854

ὑπεμνήμυκε, X 491

ὑπέρ, with gen., Ὁ 660;
with acc., I’ 299, P 330

Umepans, A 297

ὑπερδέα ?, P 330

ὑπερέχειν, 1 210

ὑπερηφανέων, A 694

Ὑπερίων, Θ 480

ὑπερκύδαντες, A 66

ὑπέρμορα, B 155, T 30

ὑπέροπλον, O 185

ὑπερράγη, 8 557, App. H,
note

ὑπερώιη, X 495

ὑπερωεῖν, O 122

ὑπό, adverbial, [ 217, A
421, Θ᾽ 4, A 417; with

dat., of instrument, B
374 ; with gen., of cause,
B 465, Π 591, = 220;

with gen., of agent after
neuter verb, Τ' 61; with
local gen., O 625; with
acc., of time, II 202, X
102 ; of accompaniment,

Σ 492, 570
ὑπο-, in composition, II
313, = 5138, 519, & 126

ὑποβλήδην, A 292
ὑποδεζίη, 1 73
ὑποστρέφειν, Μ 71
ὑπόψιον, TY 42

ὑπώπια, M 463

ὑπωρεία, T 218

ὑφηνίοχος, Z 19

ὑψηχής, E772

ὕψι, N 371 ;=afloat, ἘΞ, 77
ὑψίζυγος, A 166

φαιδιμόεις, N 685

φάλαρα, App. B, vii. 3

φαληριόων, Ν 799

φάλος, App. B, vii. 2

φάος, see φόως

φᾶρος, B 43, Θ 221, Ὡ 280

φασί. of common know-
ledge, T 96, 416, Q 614

φέρεσθαι, to drift, & 120

φέρων, pleonastic, H 304

φή, B 144, = 499

φῆητε ἔφη, & 361

φηγός, E 698, Z 237

φημί, parenthetical, I 329

φῆμις, Καὶ 207

φῆρες, A 268

φθάνειν, I 506, K 346, II
861, & 262

φθέγγεσθαι, K 457

φθίνειν, φθινύθειν, = 446

Φθῖοι, N 685

-pu(v), cases in, B 363, 794

| χάλκεος,

A 350, N 588,
696, & 295

φιάλη, Ψ 243

φῖλαι, E117

φίλος, A 167, 491, A 155

φλέγειν, Φ 18

φλέψ, N 546

φλόγεος, E 745

φλοῖσβος, T 377

φόβος, A 456, A 37, 544,
M 46, Ο 327

φοινήεις, M 202

φοινικόεις, K 133, Ψ 716

pods, B 308, IL 159

φολκός, B 217

φονή, O 633

φόνος, 11 162

φοξός, Β 217

φόως (φάος), Θ 282, Ξ' 345,
Φ 538

Τοῦ; Ὁ

φραδής, Ὧ 354
φράδμων, IL 638
φράζεσθαι, A 89
φρένες, App. L, 12, 19
φρήτρη, B 362

pple, H 63, & 126
φρονέειν, Τ' 98, X 59
φύειν, Z 149

φύζα, 12

guy, A 115

φυλακός, φύλαξ, 2 566
φύξηλιν, P 143
φυσίζοος. φυσίζωος, Φ 63
φώς, A194, A 462

᾿ χάζεσθαι, A 539, 585

χαίρειν, with dat., E 683

A 241, 2 222;
370

χαλκεόφωνος, E 785

χαλκοκνήμιδες, H 41

χαλκός, I’ 348, I 865

Χάριτες, & 267, Σ 382

χάρμη, A 222, Ν 82

χείρ, metaphorical use, A
97, Φ 548

χέραδος, Φ 319

χέρης, A 80, A 400, ΚΞ 382

χερνῆτις, M 433

| χέρνιβον, Q 304
| χερνίψαντο, A 449

χεῦμα, Ψ 561

χηραμός, Φ 495

χήρατο, & 270

χηρωσταί, E158

χθιζός, Β 308, T 141

χιτών, E 736, A 100, N
440, = 595, App. B, v.

χλόος, T 421

χλούνης, 1 539

χόλος, A 81, IL 203

χορός, App. I, 21

χράειν, χραῦσαι, Ἰὰ 138, Φ
369

χραισμεῖν, A 28, 567, A
120

χραῦσαι, E138

xpew, 175, A 606

χρή, H 109

χρῆσθαι, T 262, Ψ 834

χροιή, = 164

χρόμαδος, Ψ 688

χρόνος, O 511

xpos, χρώς, N 191, 279,
App. N, 3

χρυσάορος, ἘΞ 509, O 256

χρυσηλάκατος, 1] 183

χρυσήνιος, Z 205

ψεδνός, B 217
ψεύδεσθαι, err, K 534

GREEK INDEX

ψευδής, A 235
ψεῦδος, predicative, I 115
Wipes, ψαρῶν, P 755

ὦ πόποι, N 95, 124, Ξ 49,
ΒΖ

ὧδεπελινε Ἱ, K 537, M 346,
N 3826, Σ 392; distin-
guished from οὕτως, Q
661

ὠκέα ?, for ὠκεῖα, Ψ 198

ὠκύαλος, O 705

ὠκύμορος, O 441

ὦλκα, N 707

ὠμά, Ψ 21

ὠμηστής, A 454, Q 207

ὠμογέρων, Ψ 791

ὥνατο, P 25

ὥριστος, A 288

Ὦρίων, Σ 486

ὥρορε, N 78

ὥς, for ὧδε ?, P 420

ὡςΞεὅτι οὕτως, Z 109, Καὶ
110

ws refers back, A 374

ws, modal passing into
final, A 559; without
finite verb, Φ 282; in
wishes, = 107 ; exclama-
tive, 273, 2 388

ws... ὧδε, T 151

ws... ὥς, Α 512, = 294

ws el re, N 492

ὡς ὅτε, B 394, M 451

ὥς τε, I 42, N 492

ὦσι for ἔωσι, = 274

ὠτώεις, Ψ 264

ωὑτός, E ὅ99-.400

I].— GENERAL

Accents, Alexandrian theory, E 824, Z
289, Σ 191
Aiolic, E 24, K 67, A 414, N 60,
Σ 29
Accusative, cognate, B 273
adverbial, I 115
in apposition with sentence, A 28,
E 303, Q 735
and infinitive, Z 529, IL 620
expressing duration, K 312, 496
expressing terminus ad quem, Z 88,
K 195, 268
of external and internal object, N
623, Φ 122
Acheloos, ® 194, Q 616
Achilles vulnerable, Φ 568
tendon, X 396
Adjectives in -es, E 50, M 269, 283
verbal in -τός, A 649, M 304, & 195,
Q 49
of two terminations, B 742, E 466,
N 625
position in line, N 611, = 422, O
653, IL 104, P 265
adverbial use of, M 446
Adrastos, B 572, 828
Adverbs, predicative use of, A 416, H 424
relative with personal antecedent,
P 703
Aegis, B 447, 0 308, Φ 401, Ὡ 20, App.
B, viii.
Agallis, lady commentator, = 483, 551
Agriculture, 2 541-4 (see Land-system)
Aiantes, N 46, 681, O 301
Aias and Salamis, H 199
shield, H 219
Aigai, N 21
Aineiadai, legends, Ν 460, T 293-8, 307
Aiolic name, Z 154
Aischines, quotation from H., Ψ 77
Aischylos and Homer, X 209
Aithiopians, A 423
Aktoriones, B 621, A 709, Ψ 639
Alkmene, T 105
Alkyone, 1 562
Allegory, 1 502, T 91, Υ 67, Q 527

Alliteration, T 49, = 485, Υ 217
Aloeidai, KH 385
Amazons, 1 188
Amisodaros, 11 326
Ammonios, K 398, T 365, ® Int.
Amyntor, 1 447, K 266
Anastrophe, A 414
Anatomy, Homeric, E 306, N 546, 617,
ΤΙ 316, 741, X 329, 396
Angling, stmiles from, Π 406, 2 80
Antimachos, ® 397, X 336, Ψ 604, 271,
753
Aorist in similes, Γ 4, M 47, N 492
in impatient questions, A 243
gnomic, A 161
used for present, = 95
and imperfect indistinguishable, N
163
sigmatic with thematic vowel, Τ'
103, 120, 262, E 212, © 505, I 230,
A 549, N 47, 2 704
subj. and fut. indic. indistinguish-
able, K 44, Ξ 102, Ο 295, Χ 66
Aphrodite, E 330, O 432, Ψ 184
Apodosis unexpressed, A581, Z 333, P
658, ᾧ 556, Ὡ 42
Apollo and the mouse, A 39
the wolf, A 101
the horse, Ψ 383
boxing, Ψ 660
Apollonios Rhodios, quoted, B 2, A 6,
277, E879, A 62, M 448, N 657, 707,
| 142, Ο 189, 626, IL 170, Ρ 192, 214,
Σ 211, 548, 571, T 76, 242, 314, 343,
229, 421, X 396, Ψ 598
Apostrophe, P 681
Apposition, distributive, M 400, X 157
Archaism, false, K 398 (see Int.), N 714
7194, Ψ 835
Areithoos, H 149
Ares, B 511, E 462, 831, N 301, 444, 521
Argonaut legend, H 468, Φ 41, Ψ 745
Argos, B 108, 560, 681, A 52, 171
Ariadne, Σ 592
Aridikes, Φ 446
Arion, Ψ 346
656

GENERAL INDEX

Aristarchos, his authority, A 572, B 316,

A 235

caution, I’ 262, I 222, K 398

opposes chorizontes, B 356, A 354,
K 476, A 430, Π 747, © 416, 550

supposed interference with text, I
458, = 207, 604, T 76

uncertainty of tradition, Z 76, K
398, P 172, Σ 207, T 365, 130

his ὑπομνήματα, K 362, 398, N 315

ignores digamma, E 791, 0 526, N
28, & 235

vacillation, M 435

on ἀγγελίης, 1) 206, A 384; αἰθήρ,
App. HH; ἀμφικύπελλος, A 584;
ἀνδροτής, IL 857, 2 6; “Apew, Ξ 485;

βαθύκολπος, = 122; βάλλειν, οὐτάζειν,
τύπτειν, A 439, Ν 573, IL 467, © 68;
βεβόλημαι, 1 35 γε μάσσεται for γαμέσ-
σεται, I 3594: γυῖα, 2 514; δαίς, A 5,
Q 42 ; δόρπον, A 86; ᾿ἔσκετο, Ρ 696 ;
μολπή, A 471, N 637, Σ 604 ; νήδυμος,
B 2, If 454; ΠΟΥ ΤΕ: Ε 753 ; ὅς, éds,
use of, App. A; πάλιν, Β 276; πᾶς-Ξ
- ὅλος, B 809, IL 801; πόνος, B291, A456;
στομαλίμνη, Z 4; σφίσι, not of 2nd
person, Κα 398; σφῶϊ, σφωέ, A 8;
σῶμα, I 23; τρεῖν, E 295, X 143;
Tpdios, A 129 ;. φόβος, A 456, A 544,
M 46; ὧδε, Καὶ 537, M 346, Σ 392,
Crasis, A 277, = 458; Greek camp,
Z 4,1 388, M 175, 340, & 35, Ο 449;
neuter pl. with pl. verb, B 36; pro-
nouns, reflexive, Z 490; similes con-
taining post-heroic manners, = 219,
Φ 362, 388 ; synaphea, Θ 206
Aristophanes, more important ioe
A 567, 1.13, 42, Z 148, K 349, N 51,
502, = 44, 474, Ὁ 451, I 313, P 176,
721, Σ 526, T 188, 306, & 130, Ψ 806,
. 230
Aristotle, quotations from H., B 15, I
539, 593, K 153, 252, 457, A 548, O
245, 2 129
on natural history of H.,
350, Φ 252, O 316, 451
on ἀμφικύπελλον, A 584
sundry allusions, B 558 A 521, E
739, 785, Z68, 236, I 648, II 283, Ὁ
234, 269, X 165, Ψ 328, 2 129, 347,
App. K, 8
Arkadians, B 604
Arktinos,' Aethiopis, Q 804
Armour, App. B ; dedicated, K 571
Artemis, Z 205, I 581, Φ 488, Q 759
Article, Homeric uses of, A 11, 185, T
54, 138, E 673, © 430, I 167, A 174,
322, Ο 305, Φ 317, 2 687
later uses, A 106, 576, A 308, H 412,
© 524, I 320, 342, K 231, 236, 363,
N 128, 745, Π 53, 358, T 147, 180,
X 289, © Int.

VOL. II

= 290, T

probably corruption of és (oFés), 1
342, A 142, 763, T 322, 331, 412,
App. A (i. p. 563)

Ashes of the Pa kept in jars, Ψ 243

Ass in simile only, A 558

Assonance, accidental, E 440, & 52

Astronomy, Homeric, = 486-9

Astyanax, ZG 402, Ὁ 735

Athenaios on Homer, A 5
Q 42

Athene and the owl, A 206

and Athens, B 548

her birth, E 880

Trojan, Z 90

Athenian allusions (interpolated), A 265,
B 363, 552, 558, 741, I 144, A 303,
H 149, N 685, T 219

Athos, = 229

‘Attic’ declension, I 30, = 489

Attraction, of relative, A 263, X 115

‘inverse,’ Z 396, K 416, 3 75, 5 192

of mood, = 92, Φ 429

of number, II 265

Augment in verbs in -cxw, N 100, T 135

Augury, M 239

Autolykos, K 267

, 1 203, = 604,

Baldrick, = 404, Il 803, App. B, i. 1
barrows, funeral, Ψ 255
Battle-axes, N 612, Ο 711
Bear, the Great, Σ 487-8
Bellerophon, Z 157, 202
Glood, offered to the shades, Ψ 34, App.
L, 8
purification for, Q 482
Blood-money, 1 632, 648, N 659, = 484,
App. I, 24 ff. (see Homicide)
Boiling in simile, 6 362
Bow, A110, 118, 122, © 266-7, A 375,
App. B, x.
held in contempt, A 385, N 714, 721
Brachylogy, P 51, ® 191
Bronze, I 365
Burial rites, see Funeral

Caestus, Greek and Roman, Ψ 684
Caesura, trochaic of third foot, B 400
see Rhythm
Camp, Greek, arrangement of, O 409, 656
Cannibalism, supposed traces, X 346, Q
213 .
Cap of Hades, Ἐ 845
Catalogue of the Trojans, B 816
Cenotaphs, Φ 323, Ψ 254
Centaurs, A 268
Cestus, = 214
Chariots, use in battle, E 249, Θ 89, 348,
O 352, IL 152, 411, P 610, T 495
epithets, ἀγκύλος, Z 39; βοηθόος,
P 481; ἐύπλεκτος, Ψ 335; ἱερός,
P 464

construction, E 722, 727

127,

Θ 441,

Spur

658
K 475, 504, Il 475, W 335, 517,
App. M ᾿
Chariots, parts, ἄντυξ, E 262, 128 ;

wheels, A 485, Ε 723, Ψ 517; poles, E
729, Z40, Ὦ 270
four horses, Θ 185,
trace-horse, II 152
Cheiron, A 219, I 485, A 832
Chiasmos, A 450, H 275, & 382, Π 630
Chimaira, Z 181, IL 326
Chorizontes, B 356, 649, K 476, A 480,
692, Π 747, Φ 416, 550
Chronology of the poems, T 141, ® 154
Chryse, A 37
Cloud in metaphor, P 244
Comparatives, formation, P 446
Compounds, irregular, A 449, Θ 178, II
792, Ὑ 166, ᾧ 394
possibly separate words, N 477
Conditional sentences, genesis of, B
A 18, 93, K 204, 222
Constellations, Homeric, 2 486-9, X 29
Constructio ad sensuwm, A 690, N 564,
TI 281, P 756, Σ 515, 525, X 84
Contracted forms, 2nd sing. mid., N 818,
Q 390, 434; dat. in -e, © 115, II 792,
P 647, Ψ 792
Corinth, Z 152
Corpse, Homeric conception of, 2 72, 108
Council, royal, B 21, 53, 194, Z 114
Cranes, Τ' 4, 5
Crasis, A 277, Z 260, © 360, Σ 458
Cretan allusions, Εἰ 744, Il 617, = 590 ff.
Cuirass, Homeric, [ 360, EK 99, 112-3,
796, A 24, 234, 373, N 507, & 404,
1 361, Ψ 560-1, App. B, vi.
Cup, Nestor’s, A 632, App. E
Cyprus, E 330, H 221, A 20

Bile

Dactyl in sixth foot, Q 169

Dactylic Rhythin, ἃ 511, Ψ 135

Daggers, Σ 597

Daidalos, > 591-2

Darkness, supernatural, interpolated, E
511, O 668, II 555, P Int., 268, 366,
P 6

Dative, in -οἰισ(ι), -ηισ(ι), A179, Τ' 259,
A 131, 779, M 284, N 426

in -c elided, see Hlision

in -, quantity of, A 86, Σ 407
after verbs of motion, E 327

comitative, M 28, 207
locative, of persons, A 95, I 303, N
216, X 217
with passive verb, E 465, Z 398
Dead, gifts to the, 2 594, App. L, 8
Death, conception of, Ψ 103, App. L
symbolism, E 654, Φ 483
and Sleep, & 231, Π 454
Decoration, types of, Τ' 391, = 370, X
441, Ψ 561, 885
Delphi, 1 404

| Didymos

THE ILIAD

Demeter, % 317
Desiderative verbs, M 265; ἡ
Diaeresis, bucolic, E 484, App. Ν᾿
of first foot, B 87, E 685, A 35, 767
(see Aristarchos), disagrees
ἢ Jeli, ID alte,
contradicts Aristonikos, B 111
contradicts himself, A 549
doubts of Ar.’s readings, Z 76, K
398, Σ 207, T 365
Diectasis, Ψ 826, Q 701
Digamma, see under F (Greek Index)
Dione, E 370
Dionysos-myth, Z 180-2, 1 537
Dirges, Ὧ 720, 723
Divination (see Omens), A 65, Q 221
Dodona, B 749, If 233
Dolopes, 1 484
Doors, 2 318, 453
Dorians, B 653, 676
Dreams, A 63, K 496, X 199, Ψ 103
Dress, E 736, N 685, & 180-5, 214, X
441, 468, App. G
Dual, forms, 8 109, 448, Καὶ 364, A 776,
II 218
of 1st person, Ψ 485
supposed identical with plural, A
567, Τ' 278, 459, Z 112, © 73, I 168,
M 412 (see also Zenedotos)
uses, E 487, 495, 778, Θ 378, 455, M
127, N 46, II 371, Ρ 387, Ψ 413

Eagles, H 59, & 252, 2 316
Ear-rings, & 182
Earth forms substance of man, Η 99, 2 54
Elision, of -o., A 170, If 207
of -o of gen., B 198, A 35, Φ 86, Ψ
789
of -c of dative, Π 854, P 196, 324
of a, Z 260, A 272, & 323
Embroidery, Τ' 126, X 441
Epanalepsis, Β 671, Z 396, 399, 371,
X 128
Epetos, Ψ 665 ’
Ephyre, Z 152, A 740, Ο 581
Epithets, position of, see Adjectives
conventional, I’ 243, 352, H 75, ®
63, Ψ 581, 2 359)
Erichthonios, T 219
Eridanos, If 151
Erinyes, Τ' 278, 1 454, T 418, ᾧΦ 412
Euryalos, Ψ 678
Eurybates, A 320, I 170
Eurymedon, A 228
EHurystheus, O 639, T 106, 118.

Family, the Homeric, Z 242, P 36,
Φ 95

Fat of kidneys, Φ 204
Fate, B 155, © 69, Π 780
Fates, the, Q 49

Felt, K 265

GENERAL INDEX

Feminine adj. used as subst., B 367, N
772

Fibulae, Ἐ 425, Σ 401, App. G, 9
Fine in lieu of serv ice, N 669, Ψ 297
Fish as food, Il 407, 747
Fishing, Ἐ 487 (see Angling)
Floral ornaments, X 441, Ψ 885
Funeral symbolism, T 212, Ψ 34, 135
rites, Z 418, H 85, X 513, Ψ 72,
38, 596, 796, App. L
Future indic. ‘vith dy, xe, A 175, B 258,
Θ 404, X 66 (ef. also 1155, Ρ 241, 515)
indic. and aor. subj., see Aorist
indic. after historic tense, M 59
infin. with μέμονα, etc., H 36, X 195
‘jussive,’ K 442, 2 704, mai
participle, use of, E 46, Σ 309,
120, Ψ 379
forms, A 29, K 365, N 317
(see also Infinitive)

η'

Gates of Troy, B 809, E 789, X 194
Genealogical fictions, Il 177, 180
Genitive absolute, 289, A 458, Ξ 26
local, B 785, I. 400, E 310, I 219,
N 315, II 123
of material, B 415
. of time, E 523
expressing the source, E 265, T 105
after superlatives, A 505
after weyalpew, N 563
after οἶδα, etc., A 658, Σ 192
in -οο, B 325, 518, 731, E21, A 130,
O 66, 554
in -ew, II 72; in -ewy, H 1,
Geography, Homeric, Ψ 227
Gifts, a point of honour, 1 515,
110, 594
Gilding, K 292
Gnomic interpolations, A 218, I 320,
II 387, 250, 370, Q 45
Gods, action of, Ο 242, 694, II 103, Σ 240
disguises of, I 396, A 75, H 59, N
71, O 237, 247, Ὁ 131, 290
language of, see Language
not localised, N 354
names concealed, H 195
imprisonment of, E 385
sons of, Il 445
stature of, E 838,
Gorgon, E739, A 34
Graces, the, = 267, Σ 382
Greaves, Σ 613, App. B, ii.

A 69

598, Q

N 20, 407

Hades, house of, Ψ 72-4

Hair, significance of, Τὶ 273, Ψ 135, 141
Hairdressing, B 542, A 385, P 52
Handclasping, B 341, 2 671

Harness of chariots, App. M
Head-dress, X 468, App. G, 11

Hebe, A 2

Hecatomb, A 66

Llardanos,

Hekabe, 11 717

Helen, B 356, Γ 144, 427, T 325

Hellas, B 681

Helloi, 11 233

Helmets, App. B, vii., App. M, 8, Καὶ
263 ; avA@ms, P 297 ; στεφάνη, H 12;
τρυφάλεια, Τ' 372

Hera, A 8, 59, % 296, O 18-31

Herakles, & 393, 640, 8 363-7, A 683,
= 250, O 639, T 95 ff., 138, T 145

Heralds, A 320, 33

Hermes, B 108, ΞΞ 491, O 214, IL 185,

34, 2 23, 339, 348
Herodotos quotes H., E 63, Ζ
H 125
Herons, K 274
Hesiodean interpolations, Z 181, = 114,
317, Π 387, > 39, 2 45
Hexameter, origin of, B 400, A 403
Hiatus, B 87; in first foot, trochaic
caesura, A 533, T 194; end, A 532, B
105, E723, A 767, = 182, P 444, Χ 266,
WV 71
in second foot, caesura, B 8, Γ 46, A
452, T 288; end, B 87, E 603, H 217,
= 182, T 93
in third foot, caesura,
101 ; end X 206
in fourth foot, end, App. N, 20
in fifth foot, ee Nee K 466, P 196,
349 ; end, N 22, = 285, 358, Σ 4
Hippokrates, Θ 405, N 546
Hissarlik and Troy, I 305, Υ 218, X 147,
165 (see Topoyraphy)
Homicide, penalties, 11 573, = 326, Ψ 87,
Ὡ 480, App. I, 24 ff. (see Blood-money)
Honey as preservative, H 85
Horse, see Poseidon : sacrificed, 131
as symbol of death, E 654
Houses, OE Z 242, 288, 316, Θ 435,
W712, 2 448, App. C
Fyle, B 708, H 221
Hyphaeresis, B 115, H 100, 2
Hypnos, cult of, = 230-1

B 315, M

202

H 135

Ibex, A 105

Ictus lengthening, in first arsis, App.
D, α (1), Τ' 887, A155, E31, K 285,
Il 9, X 236, 379, 2 1; in second, O
478, If 21; in third, Εἰ 293 ; in fifth,
E 446, = 288 ; insixth, App. Ὁ, ¢ (3),
E 203, A 559, 678, M 208

Ida, Θ 47, Χ 171

Idas and Marpessa, 1 557

Idomeneus, T 229, N 249

Illustrations of Homer in Greek art, A
37, P 108, T 1

Images of god, Z 92

Imperfect, uses of, Z 192, Ο 274, Φ 532

Impersonal verbs, X 319

Incense, Z 270, Q 221

660

Infinitive for imperative, 2 62, H 79
for finite verb in prayers, B 413, T
285, E118
expresses purpose, A 22, Ψ 214
substantival use, A 258, I 230, K
174
with ἄν, κε, 1 684, X 110
future, confused with aor. or pres.,
[ 28, 112, 120, 366, H 36, O 246, N
667, II 830, Σ 329, T 208, T 85, X 120,
195, 235
Inheritance, Ἐὶ 158, Z 205
Inlaid metal work, A 24, Σ 478, App.
I, 9
Interaspiration, & 209
Interpolation due to wish to supply a
verb, A 295, Ε 848, H 353, I 44, Καὶ
147, Ὁ 359) 473, T 374, £3,312, ®
570, Ὁ 45, 205, 558
to supply object, B 206
lonians, N 685
Tris, Τ' 121, Θ 420, A 27, Ψ 198
Tron, A 123, Z 48, = 34, Ψ 30, 826, 850
Irrigation, Φ 257
Iterative verbs, N 100, O 23, 2 259,
2 15

Kassandra, N 365, Q 699
Kastor and Polydeukes, 1 237
Kaukones, B 855, K 428, T 329
Kilia, A 37
Kinship, maternal, E 412, Z 205, A 224,
Φ 95

general ideas, Θ 284, A 257, M 371
Kinyras, A 20
Kypselos, chest of, H 133, A 37
Kythera, O 432

Land-system, Homeric, B 547, Z 194,
1125, M 421, ΞΞ 122, Ο 498, 5541, 550

Laomedon, T 145, ® 442 ff.

Lapithai, M 128

Larissa, B 840

Law, Homeric, 1 99, App. I, 23-30

Lead, A 237

Leather, curing, P 390

Leleges, K 428

Lemnos, A 593, % 230, Q 753

Lengthening by metrical necessity, App.
D, a, B; B 337, 305, E 894, K 34,
71, P 697, 279

irregular, A 697, M 26, Π 145, T 365

Libations, A 471, Τ' 300, I 657, A 775

Linos-dirge, = 570

Lions in similes, T 23, 237-8, E161, 554,
N 198, II 752, P 134-6, Σ 161, 318, Ὁ
170, Φ 483

Lokrians, N 714

Loom, ancient Greek, 760

Lykians, A 197, E105, 471, Z 205

THE ILIAD

Lykurgos (orator) quotes H., O 494
(early king), Z 130, H 142
Lyre, 1 187

Maenads, Z 152
Magic, N 59, Σ 376, 418
Makar, Q 544
Marriage customs, Z 394, I 146, A 243,
N 366, 382, II 191, X 50
Meals, A 86
Medeia, legend of, A 740
Medicine, A 515, 622
Meleagros, 1 523 ff.
Menelaos, H 96, P 588
Metaphors, mixed, A 598, T 221, & 464
Mice, symbols of plague, A 39
Middle used reflexively, F 141, M 289}
fut. in pass. sense, K 653
and act. used indifferently, A 203
Milk, B 471
Minos, N 450, = 322
Mixed monsters, ἢ 181
Moral standard, Z 62, 162, Ψ 176, 2 129
Mourning customs, T 282, Ψ 46, 135, ὦ
94, 662
Mules, B 851, A 558, Q 278
Mummification, H 85, T 38
Muses, A 1, 604, B 484, A 218, II 112
Music, 1 186
Mutilation of the dead, = 180, X 370
Myrine, B 811
Myrmidons, catalogue of, IL 168
Mythology, primitive, Q 527
Myths, savage, O 18

Names from sons, B 259, A 354
from callings, E 59, P 324
from rivers, A 474, Ξὶ 443
familiar forms, A 385, M 117, O 526,
II 11, T 392
compound, If 463
etymologized, Z 402, 2 730
National customs, B 542, T 8, A 533, N
41, 1 419, Σ 120% ses
Naval battles, Ο 388 ᾿
Neoptolemos, Τ' 327-32, 406
Nereus, A 358, Σ 141
Nestor, A 250, A 636.; his cup, A 632 ;
interpolations in his honour, B 363, A
303, H 149, A Int. (665-762), 0379, P
381, Ψ Int. (304-350, 615-652)
Neuter plural with plur. verb, B36, N 28
in abstract sense, M 30, Ν 726, 98,
T 180
original quantity of -a, Σ 4, 27
Night, watches of, K 253 ;
Niobe, 2 602 ff.
Nome, Q 723
Nominative in predicate, N 677
exclamative, A 231, E 403, 787, K
547, A 242, 654
‘pendens,’ Τ' 211, E135, K 224

GENERAL INDEX

Nymphs, B 865, 2 420, T 8
Nysa, ἢ 133

Oak, sanctity of, E 693, Ψ 118
Oak-tree, as landmark, E 693, Z 237, Φ
549
Oaths, ritual of, B 755, 1) 245, 270-8, 300,
310, H 411, = 271, T 197, 267, X 254
Oidipodes-legend, Vv 679
Oineus, Z 216, I 529, 537
Okeanos, % 201, T7
Olympian games, A 699
Olympos, E 750, 753, Θ 25, A 184
Omens, 8 250, A 53, M 239, N 823, II
459, P 547, Σ 272, 2 290
Optative (see also Subjunctive) forms, B
4,7 102, A 792, 1197, P 733, 2 473,
T 209, Ὑ 250, 609, 611, 2 38, 264,
664-5
after principal tenses, A 263, H 340,
© 291, P 631, Σ 322, Ψ 494, Q 436
of unrealized past possibility, E 311
iterative, Θ 270, Q 15, 768
potential (without dv), B 687, A 18,
93, E 303, K 247, P 506
after ei . . . ἄν, B 597
by ‘attraction,’ Z 59, &
Φ 429, Q 227
Orchomenos, 1 381
Orion, Σ 486
Oxen as measures of value, Z 236, Ψ 705
used for draught, H 332

92, Σ 464,

Paedonyivics, B 259
Paieon, 401
Paionians, Φ 154
Paragraphos in Mss., Φ 331
Parataxis expresses final relation, X 418,
WV 71
other relations, H 393, K 116, O 82,
Ψ 577, 2 92
Paris, Judgment of, E 715, T 53, Q 23
Participles, co-ordinate, 'T 80, & 204
Patronymics, A 1, B 566, E 59, 412, M
117, = 319
Pedasos (afterwards Assos), Z 35
Pelasgians, B 840
Pelasgian Argos, B 681
Pentathlon, Ψ 621
Peplos offered to gods, Z 90
Perfect, uses of, A 221, A 492, Z 488,
N 60, Ψ 660
subj. confused with plupf., A 483,
IL 633, P 435
periphrastic, Z 488
Personification of abstract conceptions,
A 440, E592, 739, 1 502, A 4, N 29,
= 535, T 390, Φ 548
of weapons, A 125, E 661, A 574, X
329
Pherae, E 543
Phlegyes, N 301

|

{

661

Phoenicians, Σ 570, Ψ 743
Phoiniz, 1 168, 453, Π 168, Ψ 360
Pigmies, V 5
Pindar alludes to H., Z 433, H 199, I
484, O 207, Π 97, P 244
Plato quoted V 448, Z 236, 265, 402, ©
19, 281, 548, P 588, T 91, T 218, Ψ
77, Ὡ 12, 80, 527
Pleiades, Σ 486
Plough, K 353, N 705; Plough-gate, K 351
Plural, ‘ of dignity,’ N 257
‘of indefiniteness,’ Σ 491, 505, Φ
185, 499, Ψ 254
Plutarch and Homer, I 458, 109
Polydamas, M 211
Polygamy, X 48
Poseidon and the horse, Θ 433, Ψ 277,
307, 383, 584
epithets, 1 183, N 563
attributes, M 27
worship, N 21, f 404
attitude in Iliad, T 293
Poseidonios, P 75
Potter's wheel, = 600
Pramnian Wine, A 639
Prepositional phrases used attributively,
N 585, T 258, Ψ 7, 2 617
Prepositions in composition, E 19, H 76,
K 38, N 158
compound, P 760
Present trom perfect stem, IT 633, Ρ 435
Priests, A 62, BE 77
Problems, Homeric, T 313, T 269, vol. ii.
Ῥ: Σὶς
Pronouns, enclitic and orthotone, E 64,
W 724
compound reflexive, Z 490, I 342,
ἘΞ 162, P 551
reflexive ‘free use,’ App. A (see
under és)
see Relative
Prophecies by the dying, IL 854
Protasis, double, E 212
Psychology, Homeric, Z 523, Ψ 103, 2
108
Punishment after death, 1 278
Purification for blood, & 482
Purple, 8 221
Pylaimenes twice slain, E 576, N
Pylos, B 591, E 393, A 683
Pytho (later Delphi), I 404

Quotations trom H., value of, B 15, I
539, O 245, Ψ 77, 109, Q 527

Itace-cowrse, Homeric, Ψ 373, 451
Rainbow, P 547
zors, K 173
Relative and demonstrative pronominal
stems, Ψ 9
with antecedent not expressed, =
81, P 509, Ψ 749

662

Relative adverb with personal ante-
cedent, P 703, 2 382
Repetition of lines, Ὁ 263, Q 18]
of words, E 31, 2 772
‘ Representation’ of another’s thought,
A 229, Ο 274, T 354
thesos, Καὶ 435
Rhianos, A 427, IL 59, 559, = 10, T 92,
Q 85
Rhodes, B 653
Rhythm, A 52, 58, 388, Z 511, I 134,
M 49, Ο 197, Π 789, Ψ 221, Q 493,
App. N
Riding on horseback, K 5138, O 679, 683
Rime, B 311, 1° 133, A 90, 1 236, = 11,
P 570, Φ 523
Rites, symbolic, 1) 300, Il 290
Rivers as κουροτρόφοι, A 478, Ψ 141
sacrifices to, ® 151
personified as bulls, Φ 237
‘Rope’ of war, H 102, 919, N 358, O 410,
P 736
Roses, oil of, Ψ 186

Sacrifices, symbolism, A 459, 460, P 273,
300, H 466, P 521, T 254
Salamis, Β 558
Salt, 1 214
Samothrace, N 12
Sarpedon, ἘΞ 471, Z 199, M Int., II Int.,
δῦ
Scales, metaphor from, Θ 69, A 509, II
658, X 209
Schema Alemanicum, E 774, T 138
Homericum, Z 239
Pindaricum, P 387, 644
Seals, Q 163
Seasons, Homeric, E 5, App. I, 20
Semitic loan-words, I 647, = 142, S595
Sham-fights, 11 810
Shaving, K 173; a sign of mourning, Ψ
135
Shield, shape, A 306, H 219, II 803,
App. B, i., App. I, 2-8
construction, Z 117, H 220, A 32,
34, M 295, 297, N 407, P 314, = 480,
© 269, 275, 280, App. B, i. 1, App.
I, at
decoration, E 182, A 35, X 294,
App. I, 9-10
use In war, H 238, Θ 94, 267, A 545,
593, M 105, N 130, 158, X 4
of Achilles, App. I
Ships, B 637, © 222, I 241, = 77, O 729,
Tali Oso nl 247,
Sidonians, Ψ 743
Sikyon, Ψ 299
Similes, formation of, M 151, N 492, O
629, IL 156, Q 480
multipled, B 146, 455, Il 487, T 374
later manners in, E 487, O 679, =
219, ᾧ 362, 388

THE ILIAD

Simoeis, E774, Z4, ® 307
Sirius, Ε 5, A 62, X 27, 29
Skamandros, © 355, 774, ® 8 ; sources
of, X 147
Slings, N 600, 716
Snakes, X 94, 95
Solymot, Z 184
Sophists, T 269
Spears, Τ' 346, Z 319, K 153, Ν 162, P
297, X 225
Speeches, fixed type of, P 90, ® 552, X 98
Spiral ornaments, 1 391
Spondaic lines, A 130, Ψ 221
Staff, symbolical, N 59 (see σκῆπτρον)
Stentor, E785
Stesichoros, ® 575
Styx, B 755, Θ 369, Ο 36, Ψ 73
Subjunctive =future, A 262, H 87, 1 61,
O 350, P 451, X 418
after historical tenses, B 4, A 229,
E 128, I 495, 691, N 649, & 165, Ὁ 23,
598, T 354, ἢ 586, 655
in relative clauses, Γ 287, H 74
co-ordinated with opt., B 4, I 54,
7 453, © 512, I 245, A 387, = 165, IL
650, = 308, X 351, Ψ 345
after εἴ κε in general sense, A 391
after μή in principal sentence, A 26,
K 100
forms, A 67, 129, 549, B 232, Εὶ 279,
H 72, 340, K 183, 361, A 3548, M 41,
N 234, 381, 0 59, 297, 359, 382, II 243,
590, P 631, T 402, & 467, 536, Χ 381,
Q 53, 779
Suicide, Σ 34
Sulphur, 11 228
Sunrise, geographical argument from,
Ψ 227
Superlative for comparative, A 505, Z 295
Suppliantship, A 500, Φ 75
Swords, N 5/7, O 713, App. B, ix.
Synaphea, Θ 206
Synizesis between different words, B 651,
P 89; of -ta-, B 537, I 382; of -to-,
& 567 ; -εο for -ev, Ρ 142, 573, 2 290;
of -ea, H 207, 263 of -εαι, Q 434

Talent of gold, I 122, T 247, App. I, 28

Temples, A 39, B 446, Z 257, 1 404

Tethys, % 201

Tewkros, Θ 284

Thamyris, B 595

Theagenes of Rhegion, first commentator
one, ἀυ

Theano, Z 298

Thebe, L397

Thebes, legend of, A 406-7

Thematic forms, invasion of, E 880

Themis, T 4

Theognis and H., K 215

Thersites, B 214

Theseus, A 265, Τ' 144

GENERAL INDEX

Thessalian funeral custom, X 396

Thetis, Σ 60, 2 60

Thoas, = 230

Thracians, N 577

Tin, A 24

Titans, E 898, 8 479

Vithonos, A 1

Topography of Troad, E 355, A 498, M
20, = 433, 1 53, Φ 4, 8, 558, Χ 147

of later portions Asiatic, B 461,

15, N12; ef. Ψ 227

of W. Peloponnesos, H 133, 1150, |

A 756
Trees, funereal, Z 419
Tripods, = 373-8
Trotlos, (2 257
Trojan local legends, N 460
Troy, walls of, Z 433
Trumpet, Σ 219, Φ 388
Tydeus, % 216, 222, = 120-2
Tyrtaios and Homer, X 69

Vedic phrases, A 572
Vocative forms, Τ' 150, II 3
combined with nom., I’ 276

Wall and Trench, H 342, © 213,1 87,
M 64, Ὡ 443

War-dance, E 744, H 241, If 617, Σ 590

Weaving, T 126, = 596, X 448, Ψ 760

Wernicke’s Law, Β 751, H 337, 467, A
189, 796, P 306, Σ 357, 400, T 126,
Q 753, App. N

663

Whips, Ψ 387

Wine, used to quench funeral pyre, ¥ 237
Winged deities, 8 398

Winnowing, ἘΞ 499, N 588

Wool working, M 435, 451

Wrestling, Ψ 712, 724, 731, 736
Writing, Z 168, H 184

Zenodoros, 11174, Σ 356
Zenodotos of Ephesos,
tradition, E 249, Ξ 37
confuses dual and plural (συγχεῖ τὸ
δυικόν), A 567, Τ' 278, 459, Z 112, ©
503, M 412, N 627, O 347, Σ 287
on ‘free’ use of éés, I’ 244, H 153,
A 142, Σ 231, T 342, App. A
confuses σφῶϊ and σῴφωέ, A 8
confuses νῶϊν and νῶϊ, X 216
ignores F, N 609, Σ 287
insertion of lines ?, E 808
Important readings, δαῖτα, A 5;
ὑμῖν, A 260; πολῦς, B4; φή, B 144,
= 499 ; φίλον ἦτορ, Z 285 ; das, 8 470 ;
Ἰλιάδης, M 3865; vde, Z 34, N 172:
χρώς, N 1913; μάχαιρα, N 609; Κυλαι-
μένεος, Ν 658; ὄψ᾽ ἀΐοντες, E37; τεῆι
ἐφετμῆι (2), ΞΞὶἪ 249; ἀρῆς, Ξ 485;
ἀνιστάμενος μετέφη, T 76; ἰογάστριος,
Φ 95
Zenodotos of Mallos, N 731, Ψ 79
Zephyros, Ψ 200
Zeus, 1 457, © 296, P 545, & 390, Ψ 43

uncertainty of

| Zoilos, A 129, E 7, 20

THE END

Printed by R. & R. Crark, Limiren, Ldindurgh.

ἌΜΕ Β' — RRR EPIRA ESR BRE ak
7

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY
Los Angeles
This book is DUE on the last date stamped below.

“4 nis 7 a.
τ Ree. Ξ - ΄
g Gorin με ὩΣ ; -
. < é ἢ ; τις τς he "
a . ἱ "ΔῸΣ 5
5 ‘ el “i Z
δ = ΔῈ, Σ᾽
ἢ υ ὃ 2 Γ 5 : \
ἊΝ . τ
% μ i} ἤ ὑ ῃ ἤ -ν γι δ
Β μ᾿ : ἱ 5
i Ἦν:
ἣ ἵ
ie ᾿ ἢ
β' τ Ξ ᾿ :
Ν 3 " iis ; 5 x
a) 3 ae 4 ; ἢ δ - "

ΕΕΒΒΝΟΟΝ eevee ΗΣΗΝΒΊΉΕΟΒΟΙ., Coe eRe ae ot

{ ΠΕ ST ἫΝ