« AnteriorContinuar »
Choeph. 170.’Our opinion is that Wakefield's correction is right. Med. 172. Οὐκ ἔστιν ὅπως ἔν τινι μικρῷ Δέσποινα χόλον καταπαύσει. Phoeniss. 1684. Οὐκ ἐσθ ̓ ὅπως σὺ τόνδε τιμήσεις νέκυν. Aristoph. Plut. 19. ̓Εγὼ μὲν οὖν οὐκ ἔσθ' ὅπως σιγήσομαι. 125. ἦλθεν ἕδρας σκοτίους=Αΐδα τε πύλας.
Mr. Monk gives Αϊδαό. We propose the following
Wakefield and Matthiæ read ᾅδαό τε π. But this makes rather an aukward verse. more harmonious arrangement of the corresponding lines in strophe and antistrophe.
εἴτ ̓ ἐπὶ τὰς ἀνύδρους ̓Αμμωνίδας ἕδρας
This Homeric phrase, the gates of Hades, is not common in the Tragedians. It occurs, however, in the Medea v. 1231. ἥ τις εἰς Αἴδου πύλας Οἴχει. Αesch. Αg. 1293. Αΐδου πύλας δὲ τάσδ ̓ ἐγὼ προσεννέπω. We have a common saying, to knock at death's door. Theocritus II. 160. αἱ δ' ἔτι κἠμὲ Λυπεὶ, τὰν Αίδαο πύλαν, ναὶ Μοῖρας, ἀραξεῖ. Lucretius iii. 67. Et quasi jam Leti portas cunctarier ante. Cf. Theogn. 427. 153. πῶς δ ̓ οὐκ ἀρίστη; τίς δ ̓ ἐναντιώσεται ;
· Vertunt quis contradicet? Rectius esset, Quis certabit? We prefer the former interpretation. Infra 1102. Γυναικὸς ἐσθλῆς ἧπλακες· τίς ἀντερεῖ. & 631. Ἐσθλῆς γὰρ οὐδεὶς ἀντερεῖ) καὶ σώφρον ημάρτηκας. Med. 365. Κακῶς πέπρακται πανταχῆ· τίς ἀντερεῖ.
158. “A δ ̓ ἐν δόμοις έδρασε, θαυμάσει κλύων.
Some have θαυμάσεις, but Mr. Monk observes that θαυμάζω is one of many active verbs, of which the Attics always used the future in the middle voice.
204. Φθίνει γὰρ, καὶ μαραίνεται νόσῳ. Παρειμένη δὲ χειρὸς ἄθλιον βάρος, Ὅμως δὲ, καίπερ σμικρὸν ἐμπνέουσ ̓ ἔτι, Βλέψαι πρὸς αὐγὰς βούλεται τὰς ηλίου.
There is a difficulty in the construction of the second line which the critics endeavour to surmount in various ways. · Legit et interpungit Matthiæus, φθίνει γὰρ καὶ μαραίνεται, νόσῳ Παρειμένη γε, χειρὸς ἄθλιον βάρος. Verum conjuncta hates μαραινομέναν νόσῳ infra v. 242. et exponit Scholiasta τὴν ἰσχὺν τῆς χερὸς παραλελυμένη. Probabilis est Elmsleii conjectura intercidisse versiculum post βάρος. We are supprised that none of the doctors should have hit upon the true remedy, which appears to us to be a transposition of v. 205. The passage will run easily enough thus-φθίνει γὰρ καὶ μαραίνεται νόσῳ· Ὅμως δὲ, καίπερ σμικρὸν ἐμπνέουσ' ἔτι, Παρειμένη δὲ, (or τε) χειρὸς ἄθλιον βάρος, Βλέψαι πρὸς αὐγὰς βούλεται τὰς ἡλίου. We remark by the way that the Scholiast and later commentators entirely mistake the meaning of v. 205. which is this, Relaxed, and a lamentable burthen to the hands which support her, viz. those of Admetus, (v. 202. κλάει γ', ἄκατιν ἐν χεροῖν φίλην ἔχων.) Soin the Bacchæ 1214. Επεσθέ μοι φέροντες ἄθλιον βάρος Πενθέως. It is true that we have afterwards 408. ἴδε βλέφαρον, καὶ παρατόνους χέρας.
256. κοῖται πατρίας Ιωλκοῦ. 'Huc retrahenda esse opinor verba Scholiastæ ad v. 292. ὡς μαρτυρεῖ καὶ Δοῦρις ἐν τῇ ις τῶν Λακεδαιμονικῶν, ὅτι ἐν Ἰωλκῷ ἐνυμφεύθη. Ἰώλκους (1. Ιωλκοῦ) γὰρ Πελίας ἐβασίλευσεν. In
stead of Λακεδαιμονικῶν we should read Μακεδονικῶν. The Μακεδονικ of Duris are quoted by several authors. Athenæus quotes the 5th book vi. p. 249. C. and the 7th book iv. p. 167. C. the scholiast on Apollonius iv. 264. cites Δοῦρις ἐν πέμπτῳ καὶ δεκατῳ τῶν Μακεδονικῶν; and here we have the 16th. These collectors of old stories had brazen entrails.
287. ̓Αλλ ̓ ἄνα, τόλμα,
On this line there is an excellent note on the
different usages of τολμᾷν and τλῆναι, which Mr. Monk classes under 5 heads. 1. Το have courage. 2 Sustinere citra pudorem, 3. Το deign. 4. Το prevail upon himself. 5. Τo be cruel enough to do anything. But we think that a shorter general expression will be to bear, which will be found to correspond with sufficient accuracy to every sense of τλῆναι. 1. Τλαίης κεν Μενελάῳ ἐπιπροέμεν ταχὺν ἐόν ; Could you bear to send an arrow at Menelaus? 2. Orest. 1541. Μῶρος, εἰ δοχεῖς με τλῆναι σὴν καθαιμάξαι δέρην. You are a fool, if you think I could bear to cut your throat. 3. Ale. 589. ἔτλα δὲ σοῖσι μηλονόμας ἐν δόμοις γενέσθαι. Bore to be a shepherd. 4. Αδμητε, τολμᾷς ξενοδοχειο ; Can you bear to entertain guests? 5. Med. 812. ̓Αλλὰ κτανεῖν σὼ παῖδε τολμήσεις γύναι ; Can you bear to kill your children? These instances are taken from Mr. Monk's note.
293. Ἐγὼ σὲ πρεσβεύουσα, καντὶ τῆς ἐτῆς ψυχῆς καταστήσασα φῶς τόδ' εἰσορών, Θνήσκω, παρόν μοι μὴ θανεῖν, ὑπὲρ σέθεν· Αλλ' άνδρα το σχεϊν Θεσσαλῶν, ὃν ἤθελον.
The construction of this passage appears to us to require that it should be pointed as follows: Ἐγὼ σὲ πρεσβεύουσα, κἀντὶ τῆς ἐμῆς ψυχῆς καταστήσασα φῶς τόδ ̓ εἰσορᾷν, Θνήσκω, παρόν μοι μὴ θανεῖν ὑπὲρ σέθεν, ̓Αλλ ̓ ἄνδρα, &c. Otherwise we must suppose the words παρόν μοι to be repeated, which renders the sentence embarrassed.
324. Ποίας τυχοῦσα συζύγου τῷ σῷ πατρί; Μή σοι τιν ̓ αἰσχρὰν προσβαλοῦσα κληδόνα Ηβης ἐν ἄκμῃ σοὺς διαφθείρῃ γάμους.
Reiske would read ́ ́Ησοι- διαφθερεί. but Mr. Monk judiciously oka serves, 6 Sana sunt vulgata : ante μὴ διαφθείρῃ subintelligitur δέδοικα, ut in Hom. Iliad. P. 95. μή πως με περισγείωσ' ἕνα πολλοί.” This ellipsis is very common with όπως, but less so with μή. Herodot. v. 3. ἀλλὰ γὰρ τοῦτο ἀπορόν σφι καὶ ἀμήχανον μή ποτε εγγένηται. Plato Phæd. § 15. p. 21. ed. Wyttenb. ὦ μακάριε Σιμμία, μὴ οὐχ αὕτη ᾗ ἡ ὀρθὴ πρὸς ἀρετὴν —μὴ σκιαγραφία τις ῇ. &c.
331. Καὶ τόδ ̓ οὐκ εἰς αὔριον, Οὐδ' εἰς τρίτην μοι μηνὸς ἔρχεται κακόν.
Mr. Monk remarks that here is an allusion to a custom of the Athenians, by which condemned criminals were to drink poison within three days after sentence, and he quotes the following passage from an uncertain writer, ap. Stob. I. p. 19. Σωκράτης-τριών ἡμερῶν αὐτῶ δοθεισῶν, τῇ πρώτῃ ἔπιεν, καὶ οὐ προσέμεινε τῆς τρίτης ἡμέρας την ἐσχάτην ὥραν, παρατηρεῖν εἰ ἐστὶν ἥλιος ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρῶν, ἀλλ ̓ εὐθαρσῶς τῇ πρώτη. Musonius, or Teles, or Juncus, or the author, whoever he is, of this passage, has got hold of a wrong story. We are not aware of any custom at Athens, which gave to a condemned criminal the respite of a fixed number of days. In the particular instance of Socrates, not three, but thirty days intervened between his trial and
death, from the accident of the θεωρία Δηλιακὴ having commenced the day before his trial.* The mistake arose from a passage in the Crito of Plato, in which Socrates relates to Crito a dream, which bad intimated to him that he should die on the third day from its appearance; the intimation was conveyed in this verse of Homer, Ηματί κφ τριτάτῳ Φθίην ἐριβώλακ' ίκοιο. Accordingly we read in Diogenes Laertius, but with a variation as to the name, πρὸς Αἰσχίνην ἔφη, Εἰς τρίτην ἀποθανοῦμαι. I shall die the day after to-morrow. In the next place, so far is it from being true that Socrates drank the poison on the first day, or the first hour of the first day, that it was not tili sunset on the last day allowed him that he took it, Καὶ ἦν ἤδη ἐγγὺς ἡλίου δυσμῶν, says Plato; and the sun was not only on the mountains, but had sunk behind them before Socrates took the cup: for Crito persuading him to wait a little longer, says ἀλλ ̓ οἶμαι ἔγωγε, ὦ Σώκρατες, ἔτι ἥλιον εἶναι ἐν τοῖς ὄρεσι, καὶ οὔπω δεδυκέναι ; after which the servant was a long time (συχνὸν χρόνον) preparing the poison. On the strength of this passage Petit in his Leges Attice has set down the custom above mentioned, which we believe rests on no other authority. Euripides seems to intimate that the day fixed beforehand for the voluntary death of Alcestis was the first of the month; a month probably having been allowed to Admetus to search for a substitute. In the present instance the phrase οὐκ εἰς ἀύριον, οὐδ ̓ ἐς τρίτην is the usual mode of expressing a time actually at hand ; neither to-morrow, nor the next day,—but this very day. So Hesiod. "Εργ. 408. Μηδ ̓ ἀναβάλλεσθαι ἐς τ ̓ ἀύριον ἐς τ ̓ ἑννηφιν, where ἐς ἔννηφιν is equivalent to ἐς τρίτην. The three days are thus specified by Anaxandrides in Athenæus p. 263. C. Πολλοὶ δὲ, νῦν μένε ἰσιν οὐκ ἐλεύθεροι, Εις ταὔριον δὲ Σουνιεὶς· εἶτ ἐς τρίτην.†
Εἰ δ ̓ Ορφέως μοι γλῶσσα καὶ μέλος παρῆν. Ὡς τὴν κόρην Δήμητρος, ἣ κείνης ποσιν Ὕμνοισι κηλήσαντά σ ̓ ἐξ Αΐδου λαβεῖν, Κατῆλθον ἄν.
We think that the conjecture of Reiske, ὥστ ̓ ἢ κόρηι Δ is unquestionably right. Κόρη or κόρη Δήμητρος, for Proserpine, is most commonly used without the article, sometimes with it. In Herodot. viii. 64. we have τὴν δὲ ὁρτὴν ταύτην ἄγουσιν Αθηναίοι ἄνα πάντα ἔτεα τῇ Μητρὶ καὶ τῇ Κούζῃ. but as the Sancroft MS. has Δήμητρι, we apprehend the true reading to be ἀνὰ πάντα ἔτεα Δήμητρι καὶ Κούρῃ. Archilochus ap. Hephast. p. 55, Δήμητρος ἁγνῆς καὶ Κορης τὴν πανήγυριν σέβων. We may remark by the way, that this passage is imitated by Moschus ii. 122. εἰ δυνάμαν δὲ, Ως Ὀρφεὺς καταβὰς ποτὶ τάρταρον ὡς ποκ ̓ Οδυσσεὺς Ως πάρος ̓Αλκείδας, κἠγὼ τάχ ἂν εἰς δομον ἦλθον Πλουτέος. 373. Αλλ ̓ οὖν ἐκεῖσε προσδόκα μ ̓, ὅταμ, θάνν, Καὶ δῶμ ̓ ἑτοίμαζ ̓, ὡς ξυνοχήσουσά μοι.
This is a natural thought: it is beautifully represented by Addison in the following passage of the story of Maraton and Yaratilda, (Spectator, No. 56.) . After many questions and endearments on both sides, she conducted him to a bower which she had dressed with
Plato Phæd; 1. Xenoph. Memor. IV. viii. 2.
† Αγορά κέχονται See Pierson on Moeris, p. 152.
all the ornaments that could be met with in those blooming regions. -Yaratilda told him that she was preparing this bower for his reception, as well knowing that his piety to his God and his faithful dealing towards men would certainly bring him to that happy place, whenever his life should be at an end.'
542. Α· μὴ πρόκλα ̓ ἄκοιτιν εἰς τοδ ̓ αναβαλοῦ.
The conjecture of Wakefield, τίς τότ ̓ ἀναβαλοῦ is plausible ; but we think, with Mr. Monk, that the common reading may be tolerated. εἰς τόδ ̓, viz. τὸ κατθανεῖν.
548. Οθνεῖος ἄλλως δ ̓ ἦν ἀναγκαία δόμοις.
ἄλλως valet aliam ob causam. Conjicit Blomfieldius ἀλλ ̓ ὣς, vel ἀλλ ̓ ὧδ ̓. The meaning of das is rather, in other respects, as in v. 343. Οὔτ ̓ εἶδος ἄλλως ἐκπρεπεστάτη γυνή. Suppl. 419. Αλλως τε, πως ἂν μὴ διορθεύων λόγους, Ὀρθῶς δύναιτ ̓ ἂν δῆμος εὐθύνειν πόλιν ; Theocr. xxi. 34. 'Αλλως καὶ σχολή ἔστι. In these two instances it means, And besides, in other respects. It has the same force in the phrase ἄλλως τε καὶ, both for other reasons and also. Το ἀλλ ̓ ὣς or ἀλλ ὧδε there is this objection, that the conjunction xai would be requisite; as in Homer, ̓Αλλὰ καὶ ὣς ἐθέλω δομέναι πάλιν.
ἐν δὲ κλείσατε Θύρας μεσαύλους.
Brunck on v. 1250, of the Phænissæ replaces the Attic form μεταύλους, but Pierson, in his notes on Moeris, p. 264, remarks that Euripides prefers the to the . He should have said that μέταυλος was the Attic of an age subsequent to that of the Tragedians. 628. Ὑμεῖς δὲ τὴν θανοῦσαν, ὡς νομίζεται, Προσείπατ ̓ ἐξιοῦσαν ὑστάτην ὁδον. Mr. Monk appositely compares Soph. Ant. 807. and Trach. 876. A somewhat similar expression is used by Julian in an Epistle published by Muratori in his Anecdota Græca, p. 326. ἐπεὶ δὲ ἐκείνῳ συνέβη, θεῶν ἐθελοντων, ἐνθέιδε ἐκεῖσε πορευθῆναι τὴν είμαρμένην πορείαν. Mr. Schaefer in his Meletamata Critica, p. 22, quotes this passage, and adds, ‘ubi tirones notent plenam phrasin, τὴν είμαρμέην πορείαν, qua uti proterant qui de Ellipsibus Græcis scripserunt. He did not, it seems, recollect that Julian borrowed this phrase from Plato, in the Menexenus-πορεύονται τὴν εἱμαρμένην πορείαν. But in this passage, and in v. 875. of the Trachiniæ, the ὁδὸς is not to be understood of the funeral procession, but of the journey which the soul made to the shades below under the guidance of its dauor or genius. Hierocles de Provid. p. 278. Καὶ τελευτὴ οὐκ ἀπὸ ταυτομάτου συμβαίνουσα, καὶ μετὰ τὴν τελευτὴν εἰς αΐδου πορεία μετὰ ἡγέμονος, τοῦ τὴν ζωὴν ἡμῶν εἰληχότος δαίμονος. Antiphanes ap. Stobæum. Οὐ γὰρ τεθνᾶσιν, ἀλλὰ τὴν αὐτὴν ὁδὸν Ην πᾶσιν ἐλθεῖν ἔστ ̓ ἀναγκαίως ἔχον, Προεληλύθασιν. Catullus iii. 10. Qui nunc it per iter tenebricosum; Illuc, unde negant redire quemquam. 685. Μάτην ἄρ' ο γέροντες εὔχονται θανεῖν, Γῆρας ψέγοντες, καὶ μακρὸν χρόνον βίον• Ἢν δ ̓ ἐγγὺς ἔλθῃ θάνατος, οὐδ' εἰς βούλεται Θνήσκειν, τὸ γῆρας δ ̓ οὐκέτι ἔστ ̓ αὐτοῖς βαρύ. This is imitated by Crates in Stobæus ; 'Ωνείδισάς μοι γῆρας, ὡς κακὸν μέγα-- Οὗ πάντες ἐπιθυμοῦμεν· ἂν δ ̓ ἔλθῃ ποτε, ̓Ανιώμεθ', οὕτως ἐσμὲν ἀχάριστοι φύσει. Theodectes has nearly the same thought. Menecrates (Antholog. 1. 16.) Γῆρας, ἐπὰν μὲν ἀπῇ, πᾶς εὔχεται· ἣν δι ποτ' ἔλθῃ, Μέμφεται· ἔστι δ' ἀεὶ κρεῖσσον ὀφειλόμενον·
729. Καὶ μὴν Διός γε μείζον ζώοις χρόνον.
Cons Matthiæ, which Mr. Monk adopts, and also expunges av. Quoniam vero imprecantis est oratio, delendum esse à monuere plures: primus autem, ni fallor, vir ingeniosus in Musco Critico, tom. i. p. 272. recte vertens, I wish then you may live for ever, and have your fill of life.' This conjecture, which at first sight is plausi ble, was first proposed in print by Mr. Schaefer in his Meletemata Critica, p. 120. who also corrects Cors. But there is an objection to it; which is, that the particles xaì μv---ys are never used where a wish is expressed, as in the proposed reading of this passage. This remark, we are informed, was made many years ago by Porson, when a learned friend represented to him the above-mentioned correction. The formula xai un is equivalent to the English phrases, and yet—but however, of which the student may satisfy himself by referring to the following passages.-- xai μ---Aesch. Prom. 254. Choeph. 172. Sophocl. Oed. T. 1005. Antig. 526---558---1054---1180. Eurip. Alc: 669. Suppl. 980---1009. Haracl. 119. xal μv---ys Aesch. Per. 266. Theb. 245. Soph. Oed. T. 290---1004-1066. Antig. 221. Philoct. 660. Electr. 1187. Eurip. Orest. 109. Suppl. 393. Incert. Rhes. 184. Yet it is certain, from the answer of Pheres, that Admetus utters an imprecation, which does not admit of the particle av, and, therefore, we are inclined to think that the reading adopted by Mr. Monk is the true one. The same sentiment is exactly pressed by Lucilius (Brunck. Anal. ii. p. 342.) Εἴ τις γηράσας ζῇν εὔχεται, ἀξιός ἐστι Γηράσκειν πολλὰς εἰς ἐτέων Sexádas. Mimnermus iv. Τιθωνῳ μὲν ἔδωκεν ἔχειν κακὸν ἀφθιτον ὁ Ζεῦς, Γῆρας, ὃ καὶ θανάτου ῥίγιον ἀργαλέου.
743. τὸ γῆρας ὡς ἀναιδείας πλέον. ΦΕΡ ἥδ ̓ οὐκ ἀναιδής· τήν δ ̓ ἐφεῦρες ἄφρονα. • Non deterius esset'ý d'oùx ávardýs. et ita, sive consilio, sive errore, Barnesius.' That it was consilio appears from his version. Hæc vero non fuit impudens. And we think this reading indubitable. The same correction has been made in v. 783. and adopted in this edition.
οὐ γὰρ τῷδ' ἰτ' εἰς ταυτὸ στέγος. Νεῖσθ'.
Mr. Monk adopts the ingenious correction of Mr. Elmsley (ad Heracl. 959.)· οὐ γὰρ τῷδ ̓ ἔτ ̓ εἰς ταυτὸν στέγος Νείσθ’. Mr. Elmsley remarks that vioe' is here and elsewhere used with a future signification. We apprehend that from the present véoμat was originally formed the future vésouat, which was, like other futures of the same isort, shortened into νέομαι. From νέσομαι came νείσομαι, which the latter Greeks changed into víosoμar, and used as a present tense. 859. Ἐλθὼν δ ̓ ἀνακτα τὸν μελάμπεπλον νεκρῶν, Θάνατον φυλάξω.
The scholiast seems to have read μenάunrepov, which Musgrave and Wakefield adopt, and in our opinion with justice. Euripides calls a vision from the infernal regions φάσμα μελανόπτερον. Hec. 704.
Τὸ μήποτ' εἰσιδείν φιλίας ἀλόχου—πρόσωπον ἄντω, λυπρόν.
"Ut hic versus antistrophico respondeat, syllaba requiritur. Legit Musgravius яроownov zw' ävra.' But this rw' is very unmeaning. Al