The Fragments of Sophocles, Vol. 1/3

3>
THE
FRAGMENTS
OF
SOPHOCLES
IN
THKKK VOLUMES
VOLUMI
7y o
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS

C. F.
Hontion:
fEBinburglj
CLAY, Manager
FETTER LANE, E.C.

ioo PRINCES STREET
#fto gorft: G.
P.
PUTNAM'S SONS
MACMILLAN AND CO.,

DENT AND SONS, Ltd.
ombao, Calcutta ant fHaoraa:

(Toronto:
aTokno:
J.
M.
THE MARUZEN-KABUSHIKI-KAISHA
All rights reserved
Ltd.
THE
FRAGMENTS
OF
SOPHOCLES
EDITED
WITH ADDITIONAL NOTES FROM THE PAPERS OF

SIR R. C. JEBB AND DR W. G. HEADLAM
BY
A. C.
PEARSON, M.A.
FORMERLY SCHOLAR OF CHRIST'S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE
VOLUME
Cambridge
at
the University Press
1917
iS
PREFACE
THE
book has been delayed by various

on the occasion of
its appearance.
It is well known that Sir Richard Jebb intended
ultimately to include the Fragments in his edition of Sophocles;
and in pursuance of this intention he delivered at Cambridge
in the Michaelmas Term of 1895 a course of lectures on 132
productiort of this
causes, which require particular notice
ed fragments.
The Ajax,
seven extant plays, appeared
in
the last to be published of the
it was
Fragments would be
But the discovery of the Bacchy-
the
autumn of 1896; and
anticipated that the publication of the
in due sequence.
papyrus drew the editor's attention in another direction,
and, during the remainder of his life, the time which he could
spare from public duties was mainly devoted to the preparation
comprehensive edition of the Poems and Fragmej
which was published by the Cambridge University
undertaken
|lides
in
1905.
Thus
it
fell
out that,
when
after Sir
Richard
Jebb's death the task of completing the edition of Sophocles
devolved upon
ise
Dr Walter Headiam,
the material available for
consisted solely of the notes prepared for the lectures
idy mentioned.
Once again mi-fortune attended the

schen
re
of the
premature death of Dr Headiam
nscquence of the
he was able to put into >hapc the preliminary labour
whi< h for a
I
prosecution
number of months he had expended upon

end of 1908
the
was entrusted by the Syndics of the
University Press with the pa[>crs of both sih-.iars,
in
order that
the work bo long deferred might be brought to a conch

1
will frankly admit that, though
III of having assumed
PREFACE
vi
a serious burden,
magnitude or the
I
am
did not at
adequately realize either
the
afraid that, after these preliminary remarks, readers
how
be disappointed to find
will
first
difficulty of the task.
small a share in the contents
by my predecessors
Headlam, according to his wont, set to work thoroughly tc
explore the ground which he was preparing to develop, but hi
left very little evidence of the results at which he had arrived
and hardly anything in such a shape as could be adapted readil)
for publication. Yet even the adversaria of so eminent a scholai
are of considerable interest, and not a few instances will be founc
where his insight has pointed out the way leading to the solutior
of a puzzling problem. Jebb's notes were of an entirely differen
character. Although well fitted to introduce to an undergraduat<
audience the salient features of some of the most interesting
fragments, they were obviously unsuitable for reproduction a;
containing the matured judgement of their author upon th<
critical and exegetical questions which these fragments raise
They were chiefly the record of first impressions drawn up wit!
the skill and taste which we have learnt to expect from such
of these volumes has been
contributed
source, but
or a
full
made without much
exercise of independent research
recognition of the departmental literature bearing upot
it was at that time accessible.

To hav<
printed any considerable portion of these notes would have beei
the subject, so far as
both misleading and
gone too
Indeed,
unfair.
far in including so
much
am
doubtful
if I
have no
as will be found below
with the greatest reluctance that
anc
have in several case

quoted Jebb's notes, where I felt bound to argue in favour of
different conclusion.
But my guiding principle has been this
The obscurity of the text of these fragments is so great, and s<
little has been done to dispel it, that we can only hope to arriv<
it
is
by a patient sifting of the clues suggested by com

and an editor may often best recommend th<
solution which he considers probable by canvassing the views o
other workers in the same field. Anyhow by this method th<
reader is the better enabled to form his own judgement on th<
issues submitted to him
securus indicat orbis terrarum.
at the truth
petent authorities
It will
now be apparent
that not only the responsibility fo
PREFACE
everything that appears
in
vii
these volumes
entirely
is
but also the bulk of the commentary itself

explain the lines upon which I have worked.
my
own,
must therefore
The general plan,

modified only so far as was required by difference of subject-
was prescribed by the character of the earlier volumes,

my predecessors had not advanced far in the
appointed track, they had at least made it plain that the chief
feature of the book should be a thorough and searching exegesis.
Translation was less essential than in the complete plays and
often impossible
but in some of the longer fragments I am
fortunate in being able to quote renderings made by J ebb and
Headlam. In the elucidation of fragmentary and corrupt texts
criticism and interpretation are complementary of each other.
matter,
and, although
have therefore endeavoured to present the
critical
data
accurate a form as possible, taking Nauck's edition as
and
my
verifying, supplementing,
and correcting
opportunities permitted.
It
its
my
in
as
basis,
results so far as
has not been possible for
me
to
obtain unpublished information concerning the readings of the

f
authors which have not been edited
the requirements of
cannot
feel
a field.
.1
with
but
In this respect not
md
e's
accordance with
confident of having surveyed every part of so
much has been done
ranee of Nauck's second edition.
<s,
in
have endeavoured
published results, although
criticism
make myself acquainted
to
I
modern
It
is
since the
true that editions
two of our most important

have been completed by Hense and Bernardakis. But
results had been already communicated to Nauck. tad
Plutarch's Moralia,
the character of Bernardakis's edition

entirely useless for the present purpose.
Boost important scholia
is
still
is
such that
it
is
Our knowledge
almost
of the
imperfect, although progress has
been made, especially in regard to Aristophanes and Pindar.

WeodeTs edition of the scholia to Theocritus appeared while
Much might be learnt
passing through the press.
from a critical edition of KiMathius, which is scarcely to be
at
an<l
now
firm printed,
But the lexicographers are the moat
present
and
II.
have been attached to the notes of Jchh and Hradlam
their full
names are
retained in references to their published
PREFACE
viii
and, though a good deal of work has
promising
field
been done
in sifting their records,
of
all,
very
of
little
it
has seen the
Bethe's Pollux and de Stefani's Etymologicum
light.
Here too the recovery of
are both incomplete.
from unedited sources which
may
be
still
Gudiamim
fresh material
preserved in the libraries
of Europe has been shown to be more than a possibility by the

labours of Reitzenstein, Rabe, and others.
The
actual increase of material that has accrued in the last
twenty-five years
not completely measured by the fact that
is
almost exactly ioo more fragments than

were published by Nauck. A considerable proportion of the
accession comes from the recently discovered commencement
this edition contains
of Photius, published by Reitzenstein in 1907. But the most

important addition of all was of course the fragments of the
Ichnentae and Eurypylus contained in the ninth volume of the
Oxyrhynchus Papyri.
The
discovery was
the greater part of the present

I
am glad to
be able
made
at a time
commentary was
now to express my thanks
when
written,
and
to Prof. A. S. Hunt,
who was kind enough to allow me to inspect the sheets of the

new fragments before publication, and has more than once replied
to my queries concerning the actual readings of the MS in
must also acknowledge my indebtedness to
Egypt Exploration Fund and the Delegates
of the Clarendon Press for permission to include the Oxyrhynchus
doubtful cases.
the Committee of the
fragments
in the
pages of this edition.
In the General Introduction I have endeavoured to describe

the literary history of Sophoclean tragedy, to estimate the extent
and variety of its activity, to discover the vestiges of the material
with which
it
worked, and to show
how
its
monuments were
transmitted to posterity until they passed into oblivion and how

finally its scanty relics were preserved for the instruction of our
own
why
their
times.
In this
way
have
tried to
the majority of the plays were
fragments survived.
It
will
lost,
answer the questions,

and by what means
be evident that the third
main the lines which have been sketched

in various writings by Prof, von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff.
In
dealing with the sources of our existing fragments I have entered
at some length into the history of Greek philological literature
section follows in the
PREFACE
ix
Roman and
during the
Byzantine ages, confining myself parconnexion with the study of Sophocles. This is
ticularly to its
an arid region
yet
am
selves acquainted with
its
convinced that those
who make them-
chief features will return not only with
a clearer understanding of the limits within which the criticism

of the Greek poets must proceed, but also with a deeper respect
for the
honest labours of generations of workers
who
struggled
against the forces of barbarism to keep alive the purity of the

e*
So much misconception prevails as to the signimade by these writers that no apology is

the space which has been devoted to them. The
speech.
ficance of quotations
needed
for
only work of reference

literature
is
Sir
J.
in
English which touches this branch of
E. Sandys's History of Classical Scholarship*
Shortly after the printing had commenced,
was decided to
advantage of the occasion by the preparation of a comprehensive index to the whole of the ten volumes. For this purpose
Prof. Jebb'fl seven volumes have been carefully re-read, the old
indexes have been consolidated, corrected, and considerably
enlarged, and the entries so collected have been incorpo:
with tlv.se relating to the three volumes of Fragments. The
work was at first undertaken by Mr G. V. Carey of Gonville and
( aius
"ollege, who re-indexed the Ajax and Antigone; but, W hen
he obtained a commission in the Army on the outbreak of the
European War, the responsibility for the remaining portions
passed into my hand-..
the new indexes will
It is hoped that
tudentfl not only as a better means of accc
it
the information which the volu
tain, but also as a
of Sophoclean usage for anyone who may attempt further

phere of tragic vocabulary and grammar.
ame time
their users should
ything
comprised
be warned that they do not
more than
record of the
maj
an attempt to provide by
of the language would bav<
eady
addition to a labour uht< h
the commentaries;
an <n.rm. .us
'y
in
re-
At
for
arduous
have elsewhei
modern
ised
and tabulated the researches of
scholars irho since the close of the cight<
century have laboured directly on the fragments of Sophocles,
PREFACE
and
it is
to them.
unnecessary to repeat here the nature of
Most of this
or contained
literature
is
in dissertations which
In this connexion
my
my obligations
scattered in various periodicals

are even
more difficult of access.
thanks are due to Prof. R. Reitzenstein Of
Freiburg for supplying
me
with information respecting the con-
one of his dissertations which I had been unable to

procure.
Nor must I forget to mention the singular kindness of
the late Dr Siegfried Mekler of Vienna, the editor of Dindorf's
Sophocles in the Teubner series, who, hearing that I was engaged
on this work, sent me a number of notes bearing on various
points of difficulty.
This will explain the occasional references
Dr J. B. Pearson and Mr R. D.
to Mekler's unpublished views.
Hicks have kindly permitted me to print extracts from certain
notes formerly communicated to Prof. Jebb in reference to
Notwithstanding the considerable output
frs. yj6 and 1128.
tents of
of labour directed to the criticism of the fragments, the attention
which they have received is scanty in comparison with the

mass of comment which has accumulated upon the extant
plays.
Hence I have been often compelled to rely largely on
my own resources. This is, in fact, the first systematic effort that
has been made to put together a continuous commentary, though
I have the best of reasons for knowing that its imperfections
are not due to that cause alone.
I must warn readers that the
printing of the book was seriously delayed by the stress of
recent events and that it went to the press at the beginning of
Everyone knows the difficulties and inconsistencies that
191 3.
are apt to occur in such cases, and that they cannot be satisfactorily cured by the list of corrigenda.
I desire to acknowledge the generous support which I have
throughout received from the Syndics of the Cambridge University Press, although the work has grown to a size which neither
they nor I contemplated at the time of its inception.
A. C.
February, 19 16.
P.
CONTENTS OF VOLUME
PAGtt
V X
ACE
iKdUUCTION
i.
The number
2.
The subjects of the plays
3.
Ih
4.
The
$ 5.
Bibliography
lkAC.MENTS Of
tradition of the text
sources of the fragments
XX11
xxii
xlvi
xlvi
-xci
xci
NAMED PLAYS
Introductions, text
xxxit
xxxii
XU1
of the plays
and notes
270
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
The number of
i.
The anonymous
t/ie
plays.
Life of Sophocles 1 records on the authorh
Aristophanes of Byzantium that 130 1 plays were attributed*
Sophocles, but that 17 of these were spurious.
The
state-
coming from Aristophanes; and it

n referred with high probability to his work entitled Trpos
Not much is known of the book in
KaWifxtixou 7uVa*a<? 4
tion, but it may be taken to have contained corrections and
is
entitled to credit, as
enlargements of the well-known irivaKes of Callimachus, which

not merely a catalogue of the books contained in the
irian library,
but included biographical details conccrnand in the case of the Attic drama the
the various authors,
dates of the production of the several play

of interest
drawn from the
'
SiSaaicaXiai of Aristotle 8
Suwlas, however, reports that Sophocles produced 123
and according
to
some
may be
rmation
authorities
reconciled with the Life
the adoption either of
makes the
xi p.
hv
total
Ml. f x
considerably more.
BoeckhV
113 (pty
ti ipdfiara,
ut
eî*
pi..
This
two
correction of Suidas, which
place of
in
in
ner
picy'),
'Apurro+drnt, rfarir
or of Bcrgk
r(&K*m, rrirm
r"S0iTa( StKaewrd.
> pK'
cod. A.
Confusion of the
I
was
Other mss give pi', Udh il the vulgate. There was clearly *
hkIh atcs that the numlwr
Sal* A and A, and the evideno
on
i.ô
rather than 104.

r.ce
to
an established authority.
The
valg. typaifa should be
<l.
.rf
-,
*
Ar. Byt.
an.l others.
p.
K.. r the w..rk
itself
see Susemihl. Ml.
MfC
See schol. Ar. Nub. 533; Susemihl. |

7>. Gr. prim, j>. no.
In the Preface to his text of Sophocles (1858).
Caltim.
p.
II
306.
xiv
substitution of 7 for
proposal
is
17 (' for t") in
the Life.
palaeographically the easier, and the
agrees better than
The latter
number 123
13 with the remaining data, as will presently
appear.
Number
victories.
The number
of
of his
victories
is
also
variously
recorded.
According to Suidas, they were twenty-four according to the

Life, which followed the authority of Caristius of Pergamum
twenty and, according to Diodorus, only 2 eighteen. The lastmentioned statement is now confirmed by the evidence of a
recently discovered inscription 3
Further, we are informed by
the Life 4 that, in addition to the twenty victories, he several
times gained the second prize, but never the third. Cratinus 5
intimates that on one occasion at least Sophocles was refused a
chorus altogether but, even if the statement is literally correct,
it is impossible to determine whether the plays written for that
occasion were or were not included in the total number assigned
to Sophocles by Aristophanes.
It is conceivable, though not
very probable, that the number of victories recorded by Suidas
included occasions on which Sophocles received the second
prize 6
Others have thought that the inclusion of Lenaean
victories is the cause of the discrepancy
and a parallel has
been found in the case of Cratinus, who, though credited with
only three victories at the Lenaea in the inscription already
quoted, reaches the total attributed to him by Suidas by means
of six others gained at the City festival 7
This view is sufficiently
plausible, and it would perhaps be unnecessary to look further,
if it were not for the comparative unimportance of the Lenaea
;
He
belongs to the second century B.C.
5i5a.(TKa\iu>v
2
'
3-
CIA
11
13-
xxxiv
4
(Athen. 235 E
977
a,
FHG IV
The
reference
is
to his treatise irepl
359).
where [2o^>o]k\^s AITII was restored by Bergk {Rh. Mits.
298).
p.
li
Blaydes.
fir. 15 (1
16 K.).
Cf. the use of vikcLv in the fifth
The
explanation was
first
Argument
to the
Nubes
(Arist.
fr.
621 Rose).
put forward by Bergk in Rh. Mits. xxxiv 298.
It
accepted by Haigh, Attic Theatre*, pp. 28, 46 ; but by a curious slip the number
the victories won by Cratinus at the two festivals is inverted.
The text is thus
variance with the inscriptions quoted on pp. 363, 364.
p. 106.
is
oi
al
See also Wilhelm, Urkunden,
THE NUMBER OF THE PLA YS

tragedy
in the history of
At the same
1
.
we must not
However
corruption*.
time,
xv
where numerals
are concerned,
neglect their constant liability to
suffer
this
may
be, eighteen victories at
the City Dionysia, where tetralogies were always produced.
Of the remain-
involved the performance of seventy-two plays.

ing fifty-one in the Alexandrian
even when we bear
list, it is
reasonable to suppose,
mind Sophocles' extraordinary popularity,

if not more
consisted of plays
in
that at least nine tetralogies
The
which obtained the second
prize.
room
Lenaea, so that,
for exhibition at the
calculation leaves
little
performances at
if
that festival are used to account for the twenty-four victories
mentioned by Suidas, it would follow that the titles of many

of the plays which Sophocles produced were unknown to the
mdrians.
Objection has been taken* to the number 123 on the ground

that it cannot be divided into tetralogies.
But several explana-
Thus, since the evidence concerning the
are possible.
Lena-
to establish the fact that tragedies were produced
Jn groups of three rather than of four, the inclusion of such

plays might account for the odd number.
the Oedipus Coloneus
that
the death of
that he
Mrst tetralogy,
it
it
is
was not produced
possible,
a->
and that Sophocles the younger added the
uripides 1 were not included in the official
For the
known
and
fifth
century
\: cf.
I'lat.
rofla
,..
fourth.
lists
of tetralogies
quite possible that similar exceptions
is
among
the authentic works of Sophocles.
we have no evidence except
Symp. 173
the latter
The Lenaea was perhaps

Jr.
it
to exist
in his thirty-
almost certain that the Archelaus and Andromache
\a
(BiBaa-KaXiai
until after
Dindorf suggested 4
only three plays ready to be included
left
Further,
author,
its
Or, again, sine-
it
A),
i*
and the
the record of Agathon't victory
in
19
ami 418
inferred that each poet ul>milted three play*.
reserved for inexperienced or mediocre playwright* (llaigh,
18).
I'.rr^k
thought that
'
in
the Life might be an error for l\
aturgnek.* p. .05,, where the Ulernent of Ariato*

is
now
accepted.
ed. i860, p.
Vit. t-Ht. p. 4 I)inl
\
;
Ihe
{peculation, which need not detain u here.
latter
paaaagc
XVI
Early loss
of plays.
In the next place,
it
will
be observed that, whereas
in
the
we have a definite statement that 78 plays outl

number of 92 were extant at Alexandria no similar
case of Euripides
of a total
information
general
is
available
in
relation
as the analogy
of the case, as well
probabilities
Yet the
Sophocles.
to
of!
the history of the other tragedians, forbid us to believe that
Aristophanes had access to copies of all the plays whose titles

were taken into account in his calculation of the total. The
conclusion
is
assisted
by the fact that losses of certain dramas

some of the extant Arguments 2 Elmsley
are actually recorded in
has shown 3 that satyr-plays
in particular often failed to survive,
so that their existence was only

in the 8t,8acr/ca\iai
whether his criticism
Sophoclean tradition
Numbers
in
will
be considered
is
their
appearance
applicable to the
later.
further question arises in regard to the puzzling statement
assigned
to certain
plays.
known from
the
Argument
the thirty-second 4
to the Antigone, that the play
The
figures recorded
is
reckoned as
for the Alcestis, the
Aves, the Dionysalexandros of Cratinus, and the Imbrians of
and some figure between 71 and 79 reexamination in the same connexion 6 but
for the present purpose we must confine ourselves to the
Antigone. The extant Aeschylean catalogue suggests that the
figure might refer to the alphabetical order, and some critics
Menander,
17,
35, 8
spectively, require
have inclined to this view". Inasmuch, however, as some twentythree titles beginning with A are known, in order to satisfy an
alphabetical arrangement we should be obliged to assume that
at least nine others were lost, and to place the Antigone last in
1
For an elucidation of the tradition see Dieterich
See the Arguments
On
Eur. Med.'2
to the
in
Pauly-Wissowa VI H47.
Medea, the Phoenissae, and the Acharnians.
p. 239.
See Jebb's Introduction, 22. P'or XeXe^rai as indicating a reference to a

logue see Wilamowitz, Anal. Eur. p. 133.
5
cata>
There
is a discussion of the whole subject by R. C. Flickinger in Class. Phil,

But the data have since been enlarged by the publication of Oxyr. Pap. 123s
(x p. 81 ff.), containing Arguments of Menander's plays.
From this it appears thai
the Imbrians was numbered e^8ofii]KO<TT[T]v /ecu
1-18.
Eur.
So approximately Susemihl,
p. 135).
The
latter,
33848,
who
professes to follow
on a compromise between alphabetical order and

d.
gr. Tr. p. 150).
Wilamowitz (Anal
however, thinks that the library arrangement was basec

similarity of subject (Einleitung it
THE NUMBER OF THE PLAYS
xvii
The improbability of the double assumption

we must look elsewhere for an explanation of
order or nearly so.

is
so great that
But the chronological solution
the numeral.
objections of considerable weight.
As
is
open to
also
the plays were produced
it is strange that the Antigone rather than a satyrplay should have been reckoned as the last play of the eighth
in tetralogies,
tetralogy
in
the
Further,
surprising that he should have written as
is
it
ninety-one
in
the last thirty-five (or thirty-six).
argument
latter
Sophocles only produced thirty-two plays
twenty-seven (or twenty-six) years of his dramatic
first
career,
if
is
many
as
However, the
not entirely convincing, since several reasons
which might favour an increased productivity

in the poet's later life.
Flickinger, who has made the most
recent examination of the problem presented by these dramatic
are conceivable
us
to be justified in concluding that their original
function was to record the arrangement of the volumes in
presumably
some
each play of which

the library possessed a copy was distinguished by a numeral, it
arbitrary rather than
Is unlikely that their arrangement was
library.
the Alexandrian.
If
For the purpose supposed

becomes the more probable, since se
the early plays may have been lost; but we should still be
some
ling to
rational system.
a chronological basis
of
infer
to
that
Sophocles
increased
the
rate
of his
should
It
output subsequently to the date of the Antigone*.
i'led that the recently discovered evidence respecting the
ins
of
Pphabeti(
al
An
Mcnander
entirely confirms this conclusion.
solution
absolutely excluded by the remaining
is
and moreover, since the roll to which the fragment

belonged seems to have contained an alphabetical series of
the fact that the numerical order of the plays
recorded
clearly
The lenacan hypothec*
will
wt
points
to
some other
principle
nerve here, since tragedies were not performed
440 (Capps, A.J. A. iv 86). Bergk avoided the difficulty

the Argument to the AtUigomt: fcMaxra* M r* tp&p* nSm rpi*t#Ts>-
festival until after
ling in
%*&rt/>o%
1
<
f)9
>
tually
Jcl>l>
Flickingei
is
has given good reasons for rejecting his proposal.

in seeking to minimize the importance of (his increase,
perhaps right
occurred
plays were
but why
known to
<loes
he assume
(p. ij) that
the Alexandrians?
only one hundred of
xviii
On
of arrangement.
Imbrians
Number
of extant
titles.
may
the other hand, although the date of the
be open to argument 1 the chronological solution

,
would not involve any serious difficulty.

Now that we have examined the external evidence bearing
_
\
on the number of the plays, we must enquire how far the numbei
of titles actually known to us from quotations corresponds with
the total of 123 plays said to have been recorded by Aristophanes,
The number of actual or ostensible titles of which we have
.
information, including those of the seven surviving plays,
is
al
hardly any doubt that this total must be

reduced for the purpose of ascertaining the correct number oi
but there
least 132,
is
the plays which the
double
titles
adopted above,
Navcritcda
rj
titles
represent.
Five certain cases
have been counted as single plays

'Arpevs
i.e.
HXvvrptai,
rj
in the
MvKTjvatac, Maj/Tet?
'OSutrcreti? dtcavdowXr)^
r)
ol
reckoning
IloXutSo?,
NiTrrpa, Uav-
rj
These double titles were chiefly, if not

adopted by the grammarians in order to distinguish plays bearing the same title but written by different
authors 2
It will be observed that in each case, except 'OSvaaevs
8a>pa
l.^vpotcoiroi.
rj
entirely, a device
aKavOo-rrXr)^
rj
name
the
Nt7TT/ja,
combined with a
of a leading character
name taken from the chorus

among the titles
may be
and
view
oi
of Aeschylus,
it
the prevalence of the latter
is
in
conjectured that the chorus-names MvKrjvalai, NavTeis,
IlXvvTpiai,
and
by Sophocles.
were the original designations chosen

sometimes happens that this practice of the
Tcpvpo/coTroi,
It
grammarians, instead of tending to precision,

of confusion,
when quotations
other of the alternative
titles,
are
is
actually a source
made by means
so that, unless there
of one or the
is
independent
evidence of the combination, two different plays appear to be

cited.
Thus it is highly probable that the AlOioire<; should be
identified with the Mepuvwv (i p. 22), the Ka/zt/cot with the Mivw<t
(II p. 4),
iirl
and the 'HpatcXrjs (but not the
Taivdpo) adrvpoc
(i
p.
167).
'l&iriyovot
with the 'EpKpvXrj
'Eiriyovoi
is
name
not a
'Hpa/eXetcr/eos) with the
The probable
(I p.
identity of the
129) only differs in so far as
given to the chorus, but serves, like
'Ettto, eVi rjfias, as a succinct description of the subject-matter,

1
Oxyr. Pap. x
Haigh, Tragic Drama,
p. 83.
p.
399
f.
THE NUMBER OF THE PLA YS
the second expedition
against Thebes.
fications of the AoXo7re<? with the <t>oivtg

Q>ii>v<;
with the Tv^nraviarai
with the 'Epfiioprj
(11 p.
(II p. 3
306), are
xix
The proposed
identi-
I20), of the
second
(I p.
and of the
f.),
much more
<J>0ta>rt8e?
disputable.
still
more frequent source of error was the substitution for the true
title of the name of one of the principal characters
but, though
scholars seem sometimes tacitly to approve such combinations
;
they are not really instances of
as Oti'o/zaof
>5
double
deliberately adopted
titles
'iTnroBdfieia
result* of lapse
1
,
by author or
critic,
but the
of memory, carelessness of citation, or con-
fusion by a copyist.
The matter is of so much importance not
merely to the present investigation, but also to the arrangement
and interpretation of the Fragments themselves, that we must
beyond the
stablish
possibility of dispute that such errors
Now, the Orestes of Euripides

MSS (see e.g. C.R. II 172),
are not infrequent.
sometimes
is
entitled Elcctra in late
just as con-
versely Longinus trepl evpeaews (Walz, Rhet. Gr. IX 589) refers
to El.
1 1
22 as spoken by Electra
Hence we
as the Hecuba*.
is
Similarly, the
the Orestes.
II
172), the Baccliae as
the Hippolytus as the Phaedra*, and the Troades
\u//ieus*,
ii,i us
in
appears as the Oedipus {C.R.
nssae
are not surprised to find that the
once as the Hippodamia*, the Daedalus once

the Heracles once as the Cerberus' and the Tyro
cited
as the Tales*,
Pelias*.
It
difficult
is
to
avoid the conclusion
p. 23), and
Ton wtm an alternative title for the Crcusa
tlytatmmstra either for the fpkigmiaot the Aegisthus{\ p. 219)
but hesitation is pardonable before we accept the identification
of the Theseus with the Phaedra (or the Aegeus: I p. 184), of
the Acrisiui with the Dawu (I p. 38), of the Aides with the
th.it
me
11
p.
73
).
of the
Andromache with
>eus with the
Aides
(II
the
p.
268)
It
(I p.
78),
happens
ionally, though much less frequently, that a play is cited

by the name not of a character, but of a person who is described
The tide i o printed by Dindorf and Nauck [TGF p.

So cod L and the codd. of Stob. /lor. 36. 9 and 74 *
So cod. Land Etuuth. //. p. 490. 23.
w.lck.r. Gr. Trag.
fr.
p.
7
I
fr.
114
jj>.
**i
'
'
xx
We do
or referred to by one or more of the speakers.
enough about the Licymnins of Euripides

misquotation of fr. 472 in Bachm. anecd. I
from the Heracles
doubt
is
an error of this kind
regard to schol. Plat.
in
rep.
361
not
know
to feel sure that the

p.
;
B,
412, 7 as
coming
but there can be no
where Aesch. Theb.

A similar example
AlaxyXov
$79
probably to be found in Soph. fr. 731, where, following
Hartung, I have suggested that iv 'la-fifty covers a reference to
the Triptoletnus, and the mysterious title "Boavrjcpopoi (fr. 452)
ff.
are cited as
e^'A/xcpiapdov.
is
may
perhaps be explained as an allusion to a particular scene
in the Laocoon.
An
of a play to the
error more easily detected

wrong author, that is to say,
the ascription
is
to Aeschylus or
Euripides instead of to Sophocles, or to Sophocles instead of to
Aeschylus or Euripides.
difficulties
In the result there
may
be occasional
respecting the genuineness of individual fragments
1
,
but the discovery of the mistake seldom effects the removal of a

title
from one tragedian to another.
Relying on the existence
of this source of error, scholars have refused to credit the state-
ment that Sophocles wrote a Prometheus 2 and similarly Welcker

conjectured that the titles Ixion and Sisyphus belonged exclusively to Aeschylus and Euripides 3
Important additions to
;
the text of Sophocles, which result from the recognition of an

error in the statement of authorship, will be found in
and 684.
Another cause of disturbance
is
581
frs.
the doubt which
number of plays corresponding to the titles

Atreus and Thyestes, and Phineus and Tympanistae and it is
uncertain whether the titles 'EXevrj, 'EXeV^? airaiTTicris, and
E\evT)<; aptrayrj, imply the existence of three, two, or only
exists as to the
one play.
When we
have made allowance for all these disquieting conshall probably be disposed to deduct some twenty
from the 132 mentioned above, so that of the 123 known
siderations,
titles
1
we
For examples see on
frs.
14, 1080, Eur. frs. 474, 515, schol.
buting Aesch. Ag. 282 to Sophocles), Hesych.
p.
2o<poK\rjs 'l<piyevelqi rrj 4p Av\18i (i.e. Eur. I.A. 993).

769 and 941 have been assigned by some to Euripides.
irapOtvois.
Schol. Pind. Pyth.
the Ko\x'5es
8
See
(fr.
5.
35,
oil
Hence
(attri-
irpiirovTa
frs.
583,
where however Schroeder suspects that a reference to
340) has fallen out.
p. 213, 11 p. 185.
Horn, r 471
227 awapOivevra-
THE XUMBER OF THE PLA YS

to Aristophanes of
Of
112.
Byzantium we are
these there
all
Iberes\ of which
is,
still
so far as
xxi
able to identify about
can
see,
only one, the
might be thought that it no longer existed in

the Alexandrian epoch; and even of it we can only say that
there is no positive indication of its survival.
It has already
been remarked that we have no record of the number of
hoclean plays which were preserved in the Alexandrian
Now, if Boeckh's hypothesis* were correct, it would

we are still able to trace practically all the genuine
library.
it
that
plays as having passed into the keeping of the Alexandrians.
But
in the highest degree improbable that copies of every

one of them survived throughout the interval between the fifth
and third centuries. On the other hand, if we accept 123 as the
is
it
actual total of the genuine
some
that
titles,
we
are
now
in
a position to say
10 of the plays to which they belonged were
he students of Alexandria.
It
known
reasonable to infer that
is
there are very few indeed* of which Alexandria has
us no
and the result is a very remarkable testimony t<> the
and comprehensiveness of our sources.
The information available respecting the satyr-plays is n<t
left
e,
such as to disturb the previous calculation.

plays
in
these
we need not
admitted or
ar-
proved to be satyric
strictly
hesitate to
There
add AotoaXov and
'
To
4
.
lpaic\et<ncos.
/The Tj-aôv and Ivvteitrvoi were either formally satyr- plays, or
belonged to the same category as the
at least
they might have served as substitute

suitable for inclusion in a
Hi<TV(f>o<,
and
<l>aia*es
list
tl
tyr-plays in the last
Of the other
e of the tetralogy.
Alcestis, so
those which seem
titles
of satyr-plays are Movant,
and, since the return
<(
I'crseus after hi>
enturet was a favourite subject in this kind of drama'.

1
The relevance
to Sophocles of
now
ilt-putctl
Christ-Schmid. c;
(Hi.
1
It
10
powibfa that wc know them
a hirh were preserved

4
The names axe
<c
all, juot
a*
we can identify alt tboae of

ly-Wiaaowa VI 134M.
as follows: 'Afivfot, 'Aîtf^wi,
'.\x>Ww ifmarmk, A*rv#<.
'KVkt,? ydnoi. 'Kf*i, 'HpacXrp, Tx""'rat, KtfdaXi**, Kpiaii, Kuôl, Maiwt, lla#&-pa,
.
>t,~TPptt.
Satyr-
Pta y-

xxii
perhaps more to be said for Meineke's conjecture concerning

the Aavdi) than the particular evidence relating to it seems to
is
suggest 1
It
is
possible that
we should add
reasons given in the Introductory Note.
produced at the Lenaea
but even
if
the Chryscs, for
Satyr-plays were not
we make
a liberal allowance
performed at this festival, it

seems clear that several satyr-plays were lost before the time of
Aristophanes. This is no more than might have been expected,
for the inclusion in the list of plays
view of the scantiness of the information concerning them
in
which we owe to the Alexandrians 2
The
2.
of the plays.
The subjects chosen by Sophocles for the composition of his

we re taken exclusively from ancient legends. When we
Classifi-
cation of
subjects
pi a y S
seek to analyse and arrange them, various methods of classifica-
Thus the
tion are possible.
locality to
which each particular
story belonged might be adopted as the guiding principle of
and such a course would be justified, if the dramatic

upon oral tradition, gathered directly or
But,
indirectly from different quarters of the Hellenic world.
division
stories rested chiefly
except incidentally or when belonging to Attica

material of tragedy
is
itself,
the
not drawn from myths of merely local
was shaped from the ic\ea dvhpwv which rhapsodes had sung from time immemorial throughout the length
and breadth of Greece tcaO' 'KWaBa fcai fieaov "ApYo<j. Not
that local associations are entirely to be neglected the dramas
whose scenes were laid in Attica, Boeotia, or Aetolia, tend to be
grouped together, even where some other link has been chosen
Genealogical affinity is a more promising
for their connexion.
Every noble family could trace its descent,
point of departure.
circulation.
It
pp- 3 8
The
effect of schol.
Ar. Ran. 1124 seems to be that Aristarchus and Apollonius
disregarded the satyric play in speaking of Aeschylean tetralogies (or trilogies) like
The Proteus itself was familiar ground to the Alexandrians {TGF

They knew of only eight of Euripides' satyr-plays, including one of doubtful
authenticity.
The marginalia to the Ichneutae are very meagre. See also p. x\i 3
the Orestea.
p. 70).
THE SUBJECTS OF THE PLA YS
xxii.
rough
generations of heroic ancestors, back to Dorus, XuthttS,

ami Aeolus, the sons of Hellen. The cherished unity of race
was maintained by a network of relationships stretching from
dy
and from
to Sparta,
Orchomenus.
Elis to
would
It
be easy, with the information at our command, to distribute

among the chief houses the tales of the sufferings and achieve-
ment s of
To
their successive representatives.
we
matter
not merely treasured in family chronicles

of the glorious beginnings of
linked indissolubly with
'
this aspect of the
But the mythical p
shall presently return.
Greek
the tale of
supplied the record
it
history.
Troy
Pelops' line' was
'
The
divine.'
orderly
which preserved it as the common

heritage of later ages, was mainly the work of the epic poets.
phoclea the legends of Hellas were permanently embedded
in its poetry
and the task of cataloguing his plays will only be
disposition of the early saga,
adequately performed,
in
so far as
we succeed
discovering
in
their literary sources.
Although the data available for the reconstruction of the

lamentably scanty, we are generally in a position
ze the chief features of the stories which Sophocles
The
ige.
testimony of
blighted
/.oilus,
surviving
titles entirely
the speaker in Athenacus
1
,
confirm
tin
that 'Sophocles
the epic Cycle to such an extent that throughout
in
hole of a play he would follow closely the epic narra:
To
the
same
effect the
author of the anonymous
follow in the tracks of
Homer, and
he produces an exact copy of the Odyssey.'

tructure of his plots that
a follower of
Homer.
Life':
'His
in several of his plays
Hut
Soph
it
is
was not
considered
In the delineation of character
and
in
the artistic expression of his thought the writings of Sophocles

ive the
compared the
1
art of
charm of Homer's
isaubon's note on iIh^
ip. Iiv HI.
ptnage ace
The word* which precede
tftf
4
;
and
Pole
f ;.
*r
*Opqpt wr6p{t) are
one might aUo tttggot 'Qpnpt
wrondjVro.
:.
(pfjraj,
Homer
(no ri> fti*
licrgk proposed ofrorojut for Jn>6fia{r
Aristotle had
poetr)'*.
Sophocles with that of
XIII
p. Iv
HI.
'OMtyMK^r (KtiarrbfitPot
* foel.
,\.
Wovoui
6i a<
wottiWti ai
roil
>t*V* rr\>
X<ifx*.
hi
influence
" f n,,I,ur
xxiv
Academic took an equal pleasure in Homer and in Sophocles,

Homer was an epic Sophocles, Sophocles a tragic
the
declaring that
Homer
It
was
chiefly in respect of his diction that Sophocles
but his most

his refusal
was
Homeric
spirit
intimate point of contact with the
to employ his art for the purpose of fostering religious enthusiasm, of promoting a purer morality, or of freeing the mind
was called
'
Homeric
the most
'
of Attic poets
from conventional shackles, while he laboured to create afresh

the heroic figures of ancient legend, and to present under
conditions
the
majesty of the
which
life
Homer had
new
first
portrayed.
The Homeric element
Sophocles' style
in
is
easily recog-
which establishes his close adherence to*

Homeric models must not be taken to imply that, as a dramatic
We infer simply
poet, he was deficient in inventive power.
that, in erecting the framework of his plays, Sophocles selected
Homeric material to a larger extent than his fellow tragedians.
For this purpose no distinction need be drawn between Homer'
and the poems of the epic Cycle. Down to about 500 B.C.
nizable, but the evidence
'
rhe Epic
Cycle
no doubt had arisen that the latter were actually written by

Homer 2 and the popular conception remained unshaken until,
When Aeschylus said that his tragedies
a much later date.
were slices from Homer's ample feast 3 it is beyond question that
he was not referring to the Iliad and Odyssey alone. Indeed, it
epic Cycle or even the!
is extremely unlikely that the phrase
notion which it expressed had come into existence during the
lifetime of Sophocles 4 What then precisely was the epic Cycle?
The answer is given by certain extracts from the direstomatJiia
of Proclus the Neoplatonist 5 which are preserved partly in the.
,
'
'
Diog. L.
See T.
4. 20, Suid. s.v.
W.
Allen in C. Q.
HoX^/xwv.
II
88; the evidence
is
given by Christ-Schmid, op.
cit.
p. 92.
3
4
or
Athen. 347 E.
Monro, Horn. Od.
p. 346, pointed out that there is no evidence of kvk\os eirCiv,

any such phrase, having existed before the time of Aristotle. Christ-Schmid, op.
cit.
p. 92,
same
now
take the same view.
field is asserted in Isocr. 12. 263,
The
inferiority to
Homer
of his rivals in the
and the transferred sense of kvk\ik6s
at
Alex-
andria (Callim. ap. A. P. 12. 43) indicates that the notion of 'cyclic poetry' had been
taken over from the Peripatetics.
5
considerable controversy has arisen in
recent
years
over these extracts.
THE SUBJECTS OF THE PLAYS
an
Photius (f. 318 B 21) and partly in

Homer, i.e. chiefly in Ven. A supplemented by the
What is called the
Kscurial and other less well known copies.
according
commenced,
to
Proclus,
with the fabled
epic Cycle
union of Uranus and Gaia, and contained all the myths relating
to the gods as well as such historical facts as emerged in the
It was the work of various poets, and
course of the description.
came to an end with the landing of Odysseus on the coast of
Proclus
Ithaca, when his son Telegonus unwittingly slew him.
adds that the preservation and currency of the epic Cycle were
bibliotheca of the patriarch

>f
be ascribed
to
much
not so
sequence of events which
The
to
merit as to the orderly
its
contained
it
(tt)i/
dicoXovBLav
twi>
eV
which are on a larger

scale, relate to the subject-matter of the Cycle, and comprise
what purports to be an abstract, beginning with the Cypria and
ending with the Telegony, of six epics covering the period of
the Trojan war. The character of Proclus's evidence and the
avrtp Trpayfiurtov).
later extracts,
were materially affected by the

very of its affinity to the mythographical handbook which,
h known as the bibliotheca of Apollodorus, was certainly not
the work of the famous grammarian of the second century B.C.
MblwtktCOx a^ formerly known from the available mss, broke
value to be attributed to
it
bniptly in the course of a description of the adventures of

t>ut the discovery in 1 885 and 1887 of an abbrev;
form of the conclusion

i
that
seus 1
[Trojan
it
originally
Now
itory,
in
these fragments, so far as they comprise the
agree so remarkably both
c view* are represented
refuse* to
Allen
acknowledge
C. ('
11
two separate but parallel fragments

extended as far as the death of
64. 81,
Th.
in
<m the one hand by Bcthc (Unm. \\w .,.). who

any value at all, and on the other by T W
who eeim
fifth
to I* almost alone in holding that th.
century
grammarian and the NeoptotOBitl were

1007.
substance and
that they have
epic* arrived until the
3pkW
in
identical.
^Hy
Sec \V\ Schmid
admitted that the

in A'k. Mitt.
XMX
f.
Wagner from a Vatican

fragment* were published respectiv
'enth century, and by l'apadopul-Kcrameu in fit.
M%
Mm
They
I Jerusalem MS.
u.n.r
the
will I* feud, whether with the extract* of

Tcubner Mytkogrnphi Crtti (ed. It Wagner).
'
xxvi
language with Proclus's epitome of the six Cyclic epics that
them a common
drawn that there lay at the basis of
the mythographical compendium which was produced, whether
by Dionysius the Cyclograph or another, in late Alexandrian
times, and was the common source of the extant mythographical
there can be no hesitation in attributing to
The
origin.
inference
is
literature,
known
a composition
described by the epic poets
as the
'
cycle of the events
rwv eTroiroiaiv laroprr

From the inclusion of their works in this cycle the
tievos).
term Cyclic was transferred from the handbook to the poems
themselves' The Alexandrian kvkXos was not intended to serve
(kvk\o<; inrh
'
a literary purpose, that
to say, the provision for readers of
is
the old epics of detailed information about them, but rather to
supply people of ordinary education with a succinct digest of

mythical history based upon the writings of the ancient poets.
Proclus indicates that the
poems themselves were valued
chiefly
as authoritative records of the events which they described 3
We
should not therefore be surprised
particularly in the form in
which
it
if
the ostensible epitome,
has come
down
to us,
is
found to contain some elements foreign to the original sources,

or even at variance with the other vestiges of our fragmentary
knowledge concerning them 4

1
Diod.
3.
66
to,
/card tov
Now,
a passage often quoted
is
ixvdoirodas' oOros 70.^
Kai
to.
'WiaKov
it
will
be observed
Aiovvfltp r<p awTaâaei-w rds 7ra\cuds
re ireplrlv Auwvcrov Kai rds 'A/xafyvas, 2ti 5e rovs 'Apyovavras,

irdXe/xov irpaxOivra, Kai 7r6XX' erepa avvrtraKTai, irapandeis to.
iroirifj.a.Ta.
tuv apxaioiv,
refers to
Dionysius Scytobrachion, the writer (among other works) of a
Argonautica,
is
who
is
rCiv re fivdoXoyoiv Kai tQiv ttoit)tCov.
This quotation however

'
romance
frequently cited by Diodorus and the scholia on Apollonius, and
sometimes confused
Cyclograph.
that,
(e.g.
See Susemihl,
by Christ-Schmid,
op.
cit.
p.
93) with Dionysius the
45, 57; E. Schwartz in
Pauly-Wissowa V 928, 932.

There were of course several such kvkXoi, among others that of a certain Theodoras,
whose account was followed in the Tabula Iliaca.
2
11
This account chiefly follows the
article by E. Schwartz in Pauly-Wissowa

2875?;
prominence given to the subject for some understanding of the development of mythological literature between Hesiod and Hyginus
2886.
is
No
apology
is
needed
for the
necessary to a correct appreciation of the evidence touching the subject-matter of
the several plays.
The
reference must be assumed to be to the time
in circulation,
4
perhaps in the
first
These discrepancies were used by Bethe
flagrant instance
is
when
the iwiicbs kvk\os was put
century B.C.
to assail the trustworthiness of Proclus.
the statement in the epitome of the Cyfria that Paris captured
xxvii
although we have in Proclus a complete summary of the tale of

Troy, we know nothing whatever about the epics from which
the beginning of the cycle was made up. The analysis of the
poems which covered the period stretching from the marriage

>f Uranus and Gaia to the opening of the Cypria is entirely lost.
It is unfortunate that the gap cannot be filled up with material
prawn from other quarters for even though we might learn but
of their distinctive versions,
little
would be instructive to
it
names of those poems which Alexandrian Scholarship regarded as the most authoritative documents concerning
the early myths. The reference in Athenaeus to Sophocles'
fondness for the epic Cycle follows immediately upon a quotation from the Titanomachia, which suggests that that poem was
discover the
included
claimed
pom
in
the Cycle.
for
a Cyclic
But the
first
place in order of time
Theogony, which
is
to be distinguished
The only other poems

which by general consent are assigned to the epic Cycle are the
Thebti
'.-quel the Epigoui, and its precursor the Ocdipodea.
The
work of the same name
is
k-siod's
relation of the \\^<f>idpea) efe'Xao-ic to the other

:ently to the Cycle,
>'i\tt>vis,
>rk
some favour
Thcban
The
quite uncertain*.
the inclusion of the OtôXta?
of the r/icmis, and of the Danais', but the supposed
antiquity of their origin
There
is
is
is
the only reason for their selection.
a general impression that the Trojan series was the
nd moat important part of the Cycle, but it rests upon

no other evidence than the accidental preservation of I'roclus's
The Ionian epos, it is true, culminated in the '!>.<
iCt
but.
it
u*\ov was such as ur have Mipj>osed, it most

taken notice of Heracles and Dionysus, of the Argonauts,
th<
hrut
Epics, in addition to those named

Theseus.
above, on these and other subjects were written by Kumelus,
:
Sidon
after the abduction o(
itwiUHtaadfag ihc
;
i
wa preferred
cm
MM.
j.
117.
handlouk here In other rate.

nee of the existence of thi work. See
now
for the
}.
t)w KVK\tKip Oij/5oia, Athcn. 465*.
Mi.'
r.
Fkotniititt, p. xix.
hiiu.l. op. ,//.
haracter.
p. 100, treat
thee a* outride the Cycle, owing to their
'
xxviii
Cinaethon, and Asius
and
these, as well
as the
anonymous
some
Phoronis, Alcmaeonis, and Naupactia, must have exercised
influence upon Sophocles and the other tragedians.

We may
add the Aegimius, which is sometimes ascribed to Hesiod but
in their bearing upon Attic tragedy the most important of the
Hesiodic poems was the yvvat/cwv /caT<i\uyo$.
;
Classifi-
it
cation of
myths.
appears from this discussion that, except
statements of Proclus,
impossible to
it is
literary sources so as to
map
plots are derived from them.
make
directly
or
at
all
list
rely
on the
of Sophocles'
alternative has been adopted
sequence of events
'
(d/coXovdlav tgov irpa^fidrayv) as established

It
the case of the
out under each the plays whose
The
of arranging the plays according to the
pseudo-Apollodorus.
in
we can
rojan epics, and of these only in so far as
by the handbook of
true that this does not rest either
is
upon a
series
(vfrodeaeis) of poetical literature
follow particular tragic authorities,
of
abstracts
or arguments
and even where

it
merely
it
seems to
reflects the influence
upon the current conception of mythical history

But the general outline which it presents corresponds in the
main with the order in sequence of the myths as it was apprehended in the fifth century and the genealogical framework by
which the various episodes were held together must ultimately
be traced to the influence of Hecataeus, of Acusilaus, and above
all of Pherecydes of Leros, the somewhat older contemporary of
Sophocles. The genealogies, again, though fixed and distributed
by these chroniclers, were derived by them from early heroic
poetry, perhaps above all from the /caTaXoyo? of Hesiod 2
I.
Theogony. In the earliest age of the world/ before the
power of the Olympians was firmly established, was set the scene
of tragedy
of the Pandora, the Cedalion, the Triptolemus, the
and the
II.
Thamyras,
Ixion.
Issue of Deucalion
the Aeolids.
The Aetolian
princes
traced their origin to Aeolus through several generations de-
scending from his daughter Calyce.

1
The
The Aetolian
TpaytpSo^/xeva of Asclepiades of Tragilus
was
just
plays are
such a handbook of
tragic mythology.
The fragments indicate that if it had been preserved it would
have contributed little to our knowledge of the works of the tragedians.
2 Rzach
in Pauly-Wissowa
Christ-Schmid, op. cit. p. 123, describe the
1213.
vm
Ka.T&\oyos as
'
a versified
text-book of heroic history.'
xxix
Conns, Mc Lager, and Hipponous.

Among the sons of
Aeolus were Sisyphus, Cretheus, Athamas, and Salmoneus.
JHere then belong the plays (a) Sisyphus, Iobates (6) Athamas
(first and second), Pluixus; and {c) Salmoneus, Tyro (first and
second).
Cretheus, the husband of Tyro, was also the father of
Pheres and Aeson, so that we may add (d) the doubtful plays
AJvictus^ and Eumclus\ and (e) the series of plays containing
various episodes of the Argonautic adventure: Lemniae, Amycus,
Phincus (first and second), Tympatiistac, Co/chides, Scythae, and
mi.
The Argonautic saga comes next to the Trojan in
variety and extent
but, though there are several allusions to
the Argonauts and their adventures in Homer, and many more
siod, none of the Hesiodic poems, unless it be the third
book of the KardXo'yo*;*, appears to have contained a complete
the
Of
narrative of the voyage.

Corintliiaca of
later epics the Naitpactia,
Kumelus, clearly related to
and the
this subject.
I>sue of Inachus.
In the play entitled hiachus Sophohandled the intrigue of Zeus with Io, and the result of the
jealousy of Hera.
Epaphus, the son of Io born in Egypt.
tber of Helus and Agenor, who were the ancestors of the
Ill
:les
which the Inachidae were subsequently divided.

p) Helus was the father of Danaus and AegyptUS, from whom
x-scended Acrisius through Lynceus, the son of Aegyptn>.
into
Here then belong

Acrisius, D<r
The grandson of Perseus u.i-> Amphi-
fed Hypermnestra, the daughter of Danaus.
plays containing
:he
umdfvmtda, LarissacL
ryon, the
putative father of Heracles.
H*radiscus
>.'/>/tifn<>//,
but
wc cannot
The Heraclean
II
The
tnd I niihiniae.
>ld 4
story of Pcrseu->
the
,>tp
Danae and Perseus is undoubtedly

any epic poem ;b the principal
subsequent tradition started. The
story of
identify
iocument from which the

Dat/ais, which has already been mentioned, seems
I
the story of the Danaids.

les
and
his labours
The
believed to have bet
is
See
K/.ich in r.iuly-WiMow Vlli iioj, 1105
The
fi.
If!.
identification
loin.
Jiy.
t>
'!
by no mean* certain
:i
'
II&
have
kernel of the story of
n. <>n
plays
oinvpot)*,
f.
tec p. 167.
Ined
xxx
Dorian epic which disappeared at a very early date and;
in a
consequently exercised no direct influence on Attic tragedy 1 /

Aristotle's
slighting
reference 2 shows
existed in his time were not of
should perhaps be
made
in
of the chief sources of the
the Ionian Creophylus
that
the
poems which
An
account.
favour of the Olâ\ia<;

Tracliiniae,
(d)
much
exception
a\a)<ri<;,
one
which was attributed
toj
Europa, the daughter of Agenor^
became the mother of Minos, with whose story are connected;

the plays Daedalus, Camici, Minos*, and Polyidus (Mdvretn
Cadmus, the brother of Europa, whose journey in search of hi*
sister brought him ultimately to Thebes, was the traditional
The following plays are:
ancestor of the Theban dynasty.
connected with the fortunes
of- his
descendants
Dionysiscus,
Niobe, Oedipus Tyrannus, Oedipus Coloneus, Ampliiaraus, Antigone, Epigoni (or Eriphyle), Oecles,
and Alcmaeon.
The Theban
epics have already been mentioned.
IV.
Pelasgus, according to
some the son
but by others reckoned as sprung from the
of Zeus and Niobe,

soil,
stands at the
head of the Arcadian genealogies. The Arcadian plays are the

Aleadae, Telephus, and Mysi.
Arcadia was also the scene of the Ichtieutae, which
V.
however occupies a separate class in view of its relation to the
fortunes of Maia, daughter of Atlas the Titan.
VI. TheAsopids.. We are here concerned with the adventures
of the descendants of Aeacus, the grandson of Asopus.
The
'A^tXXe&)<? epa<TTaL belongs here rather than to the Troica, but
there
is
much doubt
respecting
the subjects of the
Pelcus,
and Phoenix.
VII. Cecrops the earth-born was the earliest figure in the
mythical sequence of the Athenian kings. The Attic legends
were favourite subjects with Sophocles and Euripides, and here
if anywhere they were indebted to local traditions at least as
much as to literary models. No doubt the outlines of the chief
stories had been fixed by previous writers, but we know scarcely
Phthiotides, Do/opes,
Wilamowitz, Eur. Her.-
See Jebb's Trachiniae,
of the Heracles
4
myth
is
69
f.
p. xviii.
In the previous pages (xv
discussed.
Perhaps an alternative
title
see p. xviii.
poet. 8. 1451' 20.

ff.)
the literary history

{EGF
anything about the Theseidis

sinus
29.
(9.
The
1).
Creusa
by a
attested
is
plays
and
Attic in substance, and entirely in
The
VIII.
Terms, Preens,
Tantalids.
The Oedipus
Phaedra.
Theban
Co/oneus, which in form belongs to the
Cycle,
largely
is
spirit.
Here, as
in the case
of the Asopids,
not possible strictly to separate the legends of the house of
is
it
and the Atthis of
quotation of Pausanias
question are the
in
Theseus,
AegettSy
(Ye//),
217*.
p.
solitary
Atreus from the Trojan Cycle, but the Tantalus, Oenomaus

(Hippodamia), Atreus, and Thyestes (first and second) clearly
Belong to the earlier period.
IX.
Thanks
Troica.
to the evidence of Proclus,
we
are
able to arrange the remaining plays under the titles of the epics
which
the Trojan
contain
hris.
Mounts,
Crisis,
cycle,
'EXinjs
'Axaiiov ovWoyos, Iphigenia

.
fiaivofievos,
C/ytaeuinestni), St/pfenryot,
(/')
(Memnon),
Ai#<o7n<?: Aethiopes
11
Criati
\\lov
.
TTp<ri<;
P/iryges*.
II
(*) *IX<fo
unpyius,
Troy, &
./;/r. P/ii/octetes, Philoctetes at
'OSuo-ereu?
ydfios,
h/drouiaehe), 'EXevns nVaiTj/at? {apirayrj), Troilus, Fata-
unties.
fiiKpii
A/exandir
Kvirpta:
(a)
Laoeoou, Siuou, Priaiuus, Ante-
{/ax, Atj^/taXom'Sec;,
Polyxcua.
(#)
Xoorot
Nar-
icaTaifkeuiv, Nai/7r\to9 irvpicaevs, Aegisthus, F/eetra, Aletes,
Erigonc,
<
,-*{/<?
The
(iKavdoTrXt)^.
subjects of the following playi are entirely
the
number
prised
unknown:
>7(u,'Tf3pt<i, 'TBpo<p6poi.
If
Teueer, Eurys
g) TijXeyoPia: Furya/us,
Tyndarcus,
Ifennione,
Chryses,
OSvaaela: Xausieaa, Pfah
112
in
is
tea
a probable total
the preceding
<l
be noticed thai
belong to the Trojan Cycle.
list,
it
will
43 of them, or over 38 per cent.,

A similar calculation applied to the plays of Aeschylus and
Euripides yields percentages of 23 and 21 respectively.
remarkable
tirely
fi|
Sophocles' Homeri
;o
his play should in

liui
it
and if the limits were enlarged

whose subjects lie on the borders of
;
to include the plays
KricfMM have been
associated with class
would 1* inconvenient to separate

t
These
the evidence relating to
confirm
of the play
is
it
V:
cf.
ApolUI.
from ihc other Trojan plays.
extremely doubtful
tee
II
p. |tf.
fc.
xxxii
Homeric domain, the
the
Want
ttik6<;
plays.
would be even more
striking.
kvkXos prevents a closer enquiry.
Tradition
of the
extant
result
of information concerning the character and extent of the
3.
The
tradition of the text.
The seven plays which still survive have been handed down
number of MSS ranging from the eleventh to the]
to us in a
sixteenth century, of which the oldest and best
Laurentian, written in the
first
is
the well-known
half of the eleventh century.
But, whereas twelve MSS contain
all
the
seven
plays, either
complete or with lacunae, and fifteen others four or more but]

less than seven, no less than seventy are restricted to the Ajax,
Electra, and Oedipus Tyra?inus alone, or to one or two of them
The preponderance of the three plays is readily explained by
1
their exclusive use for educational purposes during the Byzantine
period.
The
existence of this selection
as far back as to 500 A.D.,

treatise
may
perhaps be traced
we may judge from
if
the
title
of a
written by Eugenius, head of the imperial school at
Constantinople under Anastasius I (491

518) and predecessor
of Stephen of Byzantium in the tenure of that office 2
The work
.
was
entitled KcoXofierpia roiv fieXiKcov
FivpnrlBov cnrb Spa/xdrfDv
doubt following
ie'
3
.
That
Ala^vXov
is
ôcpo/cXeovs
koli
to say, Eugenius,
no
earlier scholars, published analyses of the lyrical
parts of the three tragedians similar to those which Heliodorus
constructed for Aristophanes, but limited his activity to fifteen

plays,
three of Aeschylus,
Euripides 4
three
of Sophocles,
The number chosen corresponds
and nine of
to that of the
plays selected from Aeschylus (Prometheus, Seven, and Persae), as

well as of those taken later from Euripides (Hecuba, Orestes, and
and each of these groups consists of the first three

an earlier and larger collection.
The history of the Euripidean tradition is more complicated, and
Phoenissae)
plays, according to the order of
does not concern us here, but the earlier collections

1
The
Steph. Byz. p. 93,
So Cohn
figures are taken
in
Hist. CI. Schol.
from Jebb's text-edition of Sophocles,
1.
p.
made from
xm
f.
Suid. s.v. Evyevios.
Pauly-Wissowa VI 987; Christ-Schmid, op. cit. ir' p. 879; Sandys,

Wilamowitz, Einleitung,
402; and C. H. Moore in C.R. XIX 12.
P- I97i52> thinks the statement obscure.
THE TRADITION OF THE TEXT
xxxiii
works of Aeschylus and Sophocles undoubtedly comprised

plays which still exist.
It must be recognized
therefore that the survival of particular plays is due not to the
accidental preservation of this or that MS from which all other
copies were derived, but rather to the educational needs which
prompted scholars to prepare annotated editions of select plays
the
the fourteen
Of
the use of schools.
for
the circumstances attending the
of the earlier collection
publication
An Argument is attached to
md Antigone bearing
and
the former he
in
hardly a trace remains.

each of the two plays Oedipus
the name of a certain Sallustius,
described as Sallustius Pythagoras.
is
was a
In
him
Pythagorean the follower of Iamblichus
and author of the treatise irepl dtwv teal tcoafiou*, who belonged
probability therefore there
all
Sallustius the
with
tradition identifying
to the latter part of the fourth century.
same man
the
been
km
with
identified
ril>es
This writer
is
probably
as the friend of the emperor Julian, and has also
the
sophist
Sallustius
to
whom
Suidas
commentaries on Demosthenes and Herodotus*.
if .Sallustius, the editor
as the second half of the fourth century,
it
was the
It will
compiler of the selection*.
first
Now,
of the select plays, lived at so late a date

is
unlikely that he
be shown
later
that the direct quotation of tragedies other than those contained

in
the select edition died out at the end of the second century.
Farther,
may be
it
inferred,
from the precise correspondence
in
subject between the plays chosen from each of the three great
tragedians which contain the stories of Oedipus and Orestes,

that the whole selection
this
is
it
single person.
impossible to determine either author or date.

<
ired that
was made by a
thin
Argument
is
given in
B<
Wilamo-
as vaXovcriov v *v0ay6pov.
Dtl
wv6ay6pov was the blunder of someone who did not perceive that
t'-vMttti, but the view ..f Wikmowta as stated above is
Cumont, AV:-. dt Philot. xvi ;.$, rejecting the identification, points oat
was a Neo-Platonist.
work and its author see Gilbert Murray, Feur Stops 0/ Creek h'tligum,
\tt.
*
grammarian SalluM
is
quoted
in schol. Ar. Plul. 715.
Cumont
assigns
him
sixth century.
4
Wil.unr wit/.
.
<>/.
cond century
nt. p. 1991
(<
I'm*, a
!. of>.
commentator on Sophocles, who is assigned

mentioned in schol. Ai. 408.
.it.
xxxiv
who
witz,
has once for
all laid
down
the conditions of the problem,
arrived at the conclusion that the selection was first made in the
age of Plutarch, and after the lapse of a century secured universal
acceptance
1
We shall now proceed to give some account of the Sophoclean

tradition in antiquity in order to prepare the
way
for
an exami-
nation of the sources from which our knowledge of the lost plays
The
derived.
is
existence of written copies of Attic tragedies
can be traced back to the period of their production, that

say, to a date not later than the close of the fifth century
is
to
B.C.,
is proved by the well-known passage in Ar. Ran. 52 where

Dionysus speaks of reading to himself the Andromeda of Euripides and the force of v. 11 14 of the same play is very much
impaired if we do not understand it as implying that the text
of the tragedians was studied in literary circles.
The learning
by heart of tragic pr)<rei,<; is mentioned by Plato 2 and Alexis
includes tragedies in a list of books which are recommended
for the improvement of Heracles, who however chooses a cookerybook in preference to all of them 3 The earliest recognition of;
as
the necessity for maintaining the integrity of the tragic texts

to be found in the law of
Lycurgus the
orator,
is
which required
that an official copy of the plays of Aeschylus, Sophocles, and
Euripides should be preserved in the archives, and that in future
performances the actors should adhere to the text of this copy 4

It has been suggested that the official text only contained such
plays as
still
kept the stage in the fourth century, but, as the
plays of Aeschylus were seldom reproduced at that time 5
it
was probably more comprehensive. In fact, if such an official

copy was ever made, although its primary purpose was not so
much
may
directly critical as to check the licence of the actors,
it
be presumed that the net was cast as wide as possible, and

most authoritative sources were consulted 6
It is
that the
Wilamowitz,
hgg- 811 a:
Plut. vit.
op. cit. p. 202.

cf.
Herond.
X oral.
p.
3. 30.
84 1 F.
fr.
^5,
The documents were no doubt
11
345 K.
preserved in the
Metroum
5
(Frazer's Pausanias, 11 p. 68).

Haigh, Attic Theatre 3 p. 76.
,
Wilamowitz,
op. cit.
p. 131,
hardly allows so much.
But
his
view that the
xxvs
supposed that this was the copy subsequently borrowed

Ptolemy Euergetes, when he left a deposit of fifteen talents
His professed object was to make
s security for its return.
but, when this had been done, he
transcript for his own use
ent back the transcript to Athens in place of the original, and
he Athenians were obliged to content themselves with a forfeit
It may be open to doubt whether the reference
f the deposit
Euergetes I (247 221 B.C.) or to Euergetes II Physcon
f to
;enerally
>y
146
17 B.C,)*,
although the former
is
generally preferred
he historical truth of the story
is
he inferences to which
Thus the
leads.
it
but
acquisition of the
copy was certainly not regarded as having
fficial
of less importance than

settled the
ext of the tragedians, for otherwise the conjectures of Aristophanes would not have been recorded in our scholia.
lore important fact to which the story testifies
f tragedy
in
zeal.
still
of the Alexandrian Pleiad, and as the place
the study of the old tragedians
/here
the migration
the third century from Athens to Alexandria*,
home
the
>oth as
is
It
to Alexandria that
is
was pursued with the
we owe our
existing
and almost the whole of the information that can be

eenvered concerning the lost pla\
Aesthetic and historical criticism of the tragedians had been
by the Peripatetics in pre- Alexandrian

With the former we arc not immediately concerned, but
lursued almost exclusively
the historical side the publication of Aristotle's SiBaaxaXiat
>n
This work was a collection of
considerable importance.
from the archives giving the dates and circumstances

f production of all the tragedies and comedies recorded in the
lists.
The particulars which the archon registered were
t9
-f
the competing poets and their plays,
>>(
the chorcgi,
nd of the leading actors, and the order in which the competitors

The concluding sentences of the
laced ly the judges.
was probably
ineffective
is
to be preferred to Rutherford** contention that
inconsistent with the references to actors' readings in the scholia to
it
(Annotation, pp. 57-00).

"/ HiffHxr. tpidtm, lit
(XVII
I.
607 K.).
History of ClatiitaJ Scholarship

n
Susemihl, op.
ilaigh, Tragic
n't.
Drama,
p.
11
M-.
439
AT.
p. fj.
The
but see ibid. p. 681.
later
date
advocated
''"
xxxvi
Argument
to the
Agamemnon
of Aeschylus had been recognized
as a fragment of Aristotle's treatise
and a remarkable confirma-
tion of the accuracy of our tradition
came
to light in 1886,
when
an inscription was discovered on the Acropolis, recording the

production of the Orestea, and agreeing exactly in the facts which
2
But the stoneit mentions with the text of the Medicean MS
.
inscription
was not the
original record
for,
so far as the contests
were earlier than Aristotle's time, the details to be inscribed

were taken from his book or were otherwise due to his researches 3
Aristotle also wrote a treatise in one book entitled irepi rpayw8i<ov, and another also in one book entitled vl/cai Atovv&iaicai*.
Of the former nothing whatever is known, and there is no pro5
bability in Mueller's view that it was related to the BiSaa/caXlai
listed
We
as a part to the whole or vice versa.
dark regarding the pikcil

jecture that it contained
Aiovvo-caicai,
lists
but
it
are equally in the

is
a plausible con-
of winners in the various contests
more elaborate
comedy alone, is proved by inscrip-
at the Dionysia, the existence of which, beside the
records relating to tragedy and

tions 6
Dicaearchus of Messene
interest than his master
in the
(e.
310
B.C.)
displayed no less
province of dramatic
criticism.,
His work virodeaeis twv EvpnriSov ko.\ %o<poK\eov; fivdcov was

an investigation into the subject-matter of the plots of the
various plays of Euripides and Sophocles, and especially into
the sources from which they were derived, the extent of their
deviations from the traditional versions, and the reasons which
prompted such individual treatment 8 Traces of the handiwork
of Dicaearchus are to be seen in the first of the existing Arguments to the Alcestis and the Rhesus. Another of his works,
7
fr.
618 Rose.
CIA
iv 971;
first
published in 'E<pr)nepls 'Apx<uo\oyiKrf, 1886, p. 267.
scription belongs to the class of victors' lists
and
is
The
in-
therefore not to be connected with
the 5i5a.<jKa\lcu.
p.
Wilhelm, Urkunden dramatischer Auffiihruiigen in Athen, pp. 13
Diog. L.
CIA
47
7
971 as contrasted with 972,973, 975.

Reisch in Pauly-Wissowa v 398.
FHG
11
11
5. 26.
FHG
15.
11
182.
See further Haigh, Attic Theatre 3,
247.
The result was established by H. Schrader, quaest. Peripatelicae, Hamburg,

1884. The work of Dicaearchus was more scientific than the rpayi^SoOpLeva of
8
Asclepiades, the character of which has already been explained
(p. xxviii).
xxxvii
the Aiowcr la/coi ay&ve$, probably a subdivision of the more

comprehensive title irepl povcriKwv ijmvttv, contained various
items of information relating to the history of the Attic stage.

less account is Hieronymus of Rhodes (c. 290
230 B.C.),
who
another Peripatetic,
quoted once or twice by Athenaeus

as the source of certain anecdotes relating to Sophocles and
may be compared with Dicaearchus as having been responsible
for the statement that the plot of Euripides' Phoenix was drawn
from the annals of a village community 1
is
to Alexandria,
we
an early date (c. 285 H.c.)

shared with Lycophron and Alexander Aetolus the task of putting in order the books in the
ii)L,r
Kenodotus, the
find that at
librarian,
first
and that to Alexander was assigned the
library,
duty
special
of ftuperintending the arrangement of the tragedies and satyr-
iimachus,
who succeeded Zenodotus, completed
guc which his predecessor had begun and published
books under the

tyuvTuiv
title irivaices to>v iv
div f-vveypayfrnv.
teal
than a catalogue, since

of literary
tices
it
history,
drawn from
.)
in
iraag iraiSeia BiaXap.-
This celebrated work was more

contained biographical and other
case
and, in the
of the dramatic
Aristotle's St&ao-icaXiai* relating to
the production of their plays at the Dionysia.
Krat<>>thenes
confined his studies in the Attic drama to the pro-
of a work on
the
it
.bancs of
comedy
apâum
(irtpi
*o>/io>/av),
but
Byzantium, who became chief libianan on the
death
1.
was the
first critic
who laboured
continuously on the text of the tragedians, and by his investigaa secure foundation for the benefit of later generations.
laid
We
have already had occasion to refer to his work irpb<i rovs

rrections
KaWtfjuixov irivaicas, which seems to hi
of and additions to the treatise of Callimachus*. Hut his influence
in the
sphere of textual criticism was of
ins
FHG
11
450
n.
See alto
vit,
St/k. rl
*
much
Ar. AV-. 551.
For the whole
liooli
Kri.-i.u-k in
w entitled
wtfi *tr>.
Pauly-WiMWWi
ce O. Schncxlcr, CW/*M'A**,
*ttl>ject
P. s.
greater importance.
no doubt whatever that he edited Euripides, for the

to him in the scholia do not admit of any other ex-
Aihen. 408
r.
<
Alex-
S"!!
xxxviii
There
planation.
is
also responsible for
no similar evidence to prove that he was

but,
editions of Aeschylus and Sophocles
;
since no other assumption accounts equally well for the existence

of the vTToOeaei^ attributed to him which are attached to plays
three tragedians 1 recent scholars have been unanimous in

It may be added that the discovery of the
so concluding 2
with marginal variants attributed to Aristopapyrus,
Ichneutae
of
all
Wilamowitz
phanes 3 makes strongly in the same direction.
by a comaccompanied
argued that the virodeae^ were not
mentary on the text, and that the edition of Aristophanes was
,
4
Howintended rather for the general reader than for scholars
ever this may be, there is evidence that he wrote a viro/xviifia
.
what we should
lecture-notes
on the Orestes, as well
call
and much of the aesthetic criticism which is
found in the scholia to Sophocles and Euripides has been
We must not forget his lexicographical
attributed to him.
studies, plentiful remains of which are to be found in Eustathius,
and less patently in Hesychius, Pollux, and Athenaeus, not to
mention the excerpts still existing in medieval MSS which have
These studies
been published by Boissonade and E. Miller 6
were entitled Xitjets 7 or yXwaaai, and were divided into two main
or
as on other plays 5
'
'
classes:
(e.g.
It
ovofxdrcov).
7reffl
was probably
His name appears
at the
him
reasons for referring to

Phil., or at
2
this
in
p.
irepl
avyyevuccov
work that Aristophanes
unless the reference should
head of a virbdeois to the Antigone, and there are good

anonymous Arguments to the 0. C, EL, and
also the
any rate parts of them.
Wilamowitz,
Sandys,
rfkiKi&v,
6iofjLaaia<i
explained iâaxakiadr} in El. 445 s

1
variants, (2) varieties of
(i) collections of dialectical
subject-matter
128
145;
p.
Cohn
in
Pauly-Wissowa
II
998;
Susemihl,
44::
f.
His name appears
This conclusion
have no scholia
is
(e.g.
in schol. Ichn. 73, 137, 140, 215.
based chiefly on the

the Supplices)
fact that those plays of
nevertheless
show
Euripides which
traces of the
learning of
Aristophanes.
5
Wilamowitz,
Boissonade, Herod. Epim.
p.
151
ff.
p.
283; Miller, Melanges de
best account of Aristophanes' lexicography
is
285374.
xil
Schol. Eur. Phoen, 684.
Suid. Phot. s.v. /xaffxaXlo-fxara.
lit.
gr. p. 427
by L. Cohn vajahrb.f.
See on
fr.
623.
ff.
cl. I'hilol.
The
Suppl.
THE TRADITIOX OF THE TEXT

be taken
to
Electro 1
Callistratus,
oris
indicate that he published a vtroyivqua on
the
a pupil of Aristophanes, followed up
his master's researches in the dramatic sphere, and, although
his
name
is
known from
better
its
frequent occurrence in the
and Euripides, there is evidence that he

also wrote commentaries on Sophocles'.
Aristarchus (210
144 B.C.), the most renowned of all the Alexandrian critics, wi
a fellow-pupil and rival of Callistratus. The fame of his labour>
on Homer has thrown into the shade his work on other poets;
but Dionysius Thrax* testifies that his familiarity with the tragic
so great that he was able freely to recite them from
mory.
We meet with his name here and there as a witness
for a particular fragment 4 and fr. 449 and schol. EL 6 (Hesych.
scholia to Aristophanes
si . Xvkoktovov Ocov) are sufficient to prove his interest

interpretation of the text.
in
the
Nevertheless, as compared with that
of Aristophanes, his influence upon the course of subsequent
With Aristarchus should be named hi>

distinguished representative of the 1'crgamene school, who wrote upon Aristophanes
aiul Euripides, but is not proved by extant quotations to
ilight
chief opponent Crates of Mallus, the most
given
attention to Sophocles*.
reached
I10W
period
in
Supremacy of Rome began to exercise an
which the
attraction
intellectual activities of the Hellenistic world.
politi<
upon
tl
At the time when
rchus was acknowledged to have reached the fullne

his
critical
id
powers the glories of the kingdoms of Ptolemy,

Hitherto fa Italy, although
Seleucus had passed
there
We amount
confined to a limited
circle.
of colloquial familiarity with

the Greek speech, the cultivation of Greek letter-* had been
Ennius (239 169 B.C.), who u..s

and earned his living by his skill as a
ek by birth,
and writer, came forward as a propagandist of Hellenism.
with the ^tipj>ort of Publiua Scipio and other leading nobles.
;
ily
irinrifua qootod
!>>
t<
be uppoed that he
KfeoL
I.
the Author of the anonjrmottt
on fff, 488.
ilt,
dt Cotlistrato. p. 314-
55-
ilr<xlucc<l hi-
name by emendation
in
KfaoL 0. C. IOO.
t a

xl
His tragedies were for the most part adaptations of Euripides,

and he was followed by Pacuvius (219 129) and Accius (170
105), who constructed their plays with greater skill and included
Sophocles among their models. Unfortunately the fragments
of these writers are so scanty that they are very seldom of
service
in
the
Romans were
reconstruction
of
the
Greek originals
1
.
The
thus familiarized through the stage with the form
and contents of Greek tragedy before they were trained to study

But after 146 B.C. the assimilation of Greek
as literature.
That which was at first the exclusive
culture spread rapidly.
circle became in the next generation
Scipiom'c
possession of the
The everthe common heritage of every educated Roman.
increasing demand for instruction brought the learning of
Pergamum and Alexandria into contact with the ruling class of
Educational requirements not only gave an
the imperial city.
enormous stimulus to the multiplication of copies of the most
famous Greek authors, but grammar and criticism themselves
were internationalized. Alexandria ceased to be the home of
the most learned professors, and gradually lost its supremacy in
the world of letters, although, as the birth-place of Didymus,
Herodian, Harpocration, and many others, it continued for three
them
centuries to preserve
philological
its
erudition.
more than
editors,
reputation as the ultimate source of

is
not surprising, in view of these
name
of Didymus, who, after the lapse

comes next on the list of Sophoclean
should be associated with a change in method calculated
circumstances, that the

of
It
a century,
adapt his lucubrations to. the requirements of the
to
Roman
world.
Didymus.
Didymus is the most important name in our survey, not so

much in consequence of his individual merit, although this has
perhaps been undeservedly belittled, as because we owe to him
more than
to
any other single person the preservation of such
fragmentary knowledge as we possess respecting the lost plays of

the Greek tragedians. The extraordinary industry of Didymus,
which earned for him the epithet xaXfcevrepos, may be estimated

by his performance in the field of literary criticism alone, in
1
The
leading authority on the plots of the
Rdmische Tragodie, Leipzig, 1875.
Roman
tragedians
is
O. Ribbeck, die
xli
which he undertook the interpretation of Homer, Hesiod, Pindar

and Bacchylides, the tragedians, Aristophanes and other comic
poets, and the Attic orators.
The importance of his collections
to modern research becomes apparent when we learn that large
portions of the existing scholia to Pindar, Euripides, and AristOphanes are drawn from the commentaries of Didymus, and that
his writings are the ultimate source of the scholia to Sophocles.
It
names of the older
that in these, while the
significant
is
Alexandrian grammarians are scarcely mentioned or else are

replaced by such general descriptions as 'the commentators','
Didymus occurs
of
that
at
mentaries were not simply
nine times 8
least
virofxvijfiaTa in the
These com-
sense previously
accompanied by a text*. The older gramhad lectured to their pupils from a plain text, but
conditions were now very different, and the wider public for
\\ 'Ik -in the editions of Didymus were intended could not dispense
with explanatory notes.
The function of Didymus should not
be misconceived. He was neither an original thinker nor an
pendent investigator: his province was to collect the result^
indicated, but were
ns
make them
garnered by earlier scholars, and to
serviceable to
the needs of his contemporaries and his successors.
It
has been
inferred that these books were the prototypes of the class after-
nted by the medieval MS9*
which the
in
inding the text are occupied with exegetical
in..
comment
md
Recent discoveries of papyri, which have been

sufficiently numerous to familiarize us with the form and aspect
4
critical variants
have only partially confirmed this conclusion.

true that critical and explanatory notes are found in them,
of the papyrus
It
ii
Cohn
tbowi
:
in
th.it
This
v.
roll,
is
to be
proved
p,
<>f
Sophocles aee abo
added to the passages
schol.
l>y
166,
II.-
tiii.K
At.
in
In
Kultur
in
15.
ft.
718.
opinion
Gtgtnwtrt,
tym. Gmd.
which Didymus
4 f.
it
p. 81.
referred 10
is
by
The account given above follow.

0. C, beside* the work of
to the
inclined to rcfrr this part
The same
d.
Anl.
chiefly to the eiplanation of antiquarian
!.c.
.','.
id-
Dtdymua, traces of a wt6m*jm devoted

mythological details.
in tchol.
mua.
'ulymus as an interpreter
.Mtz,
There b a good instance
I'auly.\Viw>wa v 451.
they were antcn
is
maintained in
viii*(i9<>7) p. 96.
'
abo
Du jfrA.
and
to Dtdyrou*.
Littrrtur Stt
Soe alao Saaemihl.
it
101.
xlii
and particularly in the Paris fragments of the Partheneion of

Alcman, which are ascribed to the first century A.D., and the
Oxyrhynchus papyrus of the Paeans of Pindar, which belongs
But they are very scantily
to the early part of the second.
represented in the Hypsipyle and Ichncutae papyri, and there are
obvious reasons why a continuous commentary was less suitable
for inclusion in the papyrus roll than in the parchment book of
a later age.
It
follows that the existing scholia, although in
substance based upon the results of Alexandrian learning, are

not formally and directly the completion of an original Alexan-
The growth
of the various collections cannot
in detail, since for
the most part the secure support
drian nucleus 1
be traced
of names and dates
is
wanting 2
of Sources will show that
many
glance at Nauck's Index
of the fragments are quoted in
the scholia to the writers enumerated above, but a
number
The
is
still
greater
derived from the lexicographical labours of Didymus.
prefatory letter to Eulogius, which Hesychius placed in the
forefront of his lexicon, refers to the separate vocabularies of
comic and tragic diction (Xe'fet<?) which Theon and Didymus

had composed. According to recent critics 3 the meaning is not
that Theon was the author responsible for a /ccopt/cr) Xe<5 and
Didymus for a rpayt/cr) \ei<?, but that each of them made a
,
collection of the idioms
and phraseology of both branches.
scope of Theon's activity

information, but
Didymus
we
is
So far
ample evidence elsewhere
shall presently return to him.
concerned, there
is
The
obscure in the absence of further
is
confirm the statement of the letter that he published a

Xefi? as well as a rpayiKr)
X,et<?.
The
rpayucr}
Ae't<?
as
to
/ca>pi/cr)
was arranged
according to the alphabetical order of the words, and divided
which Harpocration quotes the twenty-eighth 4

Further, it should be noted that the lexicon was closely connected with the separately published commentaries to the tragic
into books, of
poets.
1
is
The issue
White
2
It
a natural assumption that
involved
is
fully discussed
contained a series
with the result explained above by J. Williams
on the Aves of Aristophanes, pp. liii lxiv.

position of Sallustius in regard to Sophocles has already been mentioned
in his Scholia
The
it
(p. xxxiii).
3
Cohn,
I.e.
461.
p. 134, 2, s.v.
fypaXoKpew (Soph.
fr.
494).

of lexicographical
expressed
the
in
\e'ei<?,
from the commentaries, and the

proved by examples of the same matter
excerpts
identity of treatment
only the
xliii
is
same words by the lexicographers, who used

and the scholia, which derive from the com-
Didymus 1 Of course the lexicographical notes

Didymus were largely a compilation from the Xefei? of
mentaries of
of
Aristophanes, from the 'Arnicai Xe<? of Crates of Mallus, and

other authorities too numerous to mention.
in
Xef*?,
turn,
its
plunderers to
rifle.
ceases to be
left
succeeding
became a
for
successive
Wilamowitz remarks', soon
lexicon, as
intact, as
generation
Hut the rpayuci)
treasure-house
a private possession
befits
reconstructs,
abbreviates, or
each
enlarges,
Pamphilus of Alexandria, who belonged

to the middle of the first century a.d., and was the last of the
according to
its
needs.
-tarcheans, incorporated
ninety-five books.
in
the rpayt/cr}
his encyclo-
in
Xc'f*?
yXcoaawv xal ovopdrtav
treatise entitled Xeifuov or irepi
lic
Pamphilu*.
His object was to collect and enlarge

in their vmriow
departmental labours of his predecessors
The
vinces.
the "lexicons
and
first part of the work (nrepl y\o><r<ra>v) contained

devoted to particular authors, branches of literature,
dialects*
and the second
was divided
6vop,nro>v)
(yrepi
according to varieties of subject-matter (cookery, shipbuilding,
and so
In the reign of
forth).
oiofuna)
\\t)i>iKu
But
books'.
Hadrian appeared an epitome
by Julius Yestinus, probably
for practical
Shortly afterwards
insufficient
in
thirty
purposes even this reduction

DtOgenlan,
in
bulk
native
of >cniut.
I
Pont us, produced another epitome in five books

under the title \ft<? naôBa-rnj. He reduced the whole collection to alphabetical order and is the first author of a general
Heraclea
in
which had the benefit of this arrangement 1 The desired

;<d by the removal of most of the quotations,
.
:.|Ic*
%cc the .sources quoted for

il
is n..!
fr*.
pretended that Mrict

*
p.
ording to the emendation
Hence
n.
'Att.o1
oi
511.619,
j6, *j. go* j;j. 4>.
priM.f ii possible in
\^*n
<"<
I'
in
each case.
Athen. 494
.t>.
r.
*" *
X' for I*
in
t.V. 0#lTll>0.
'>e author divide* the
Mm. xiiii 456 tT. In tkJ
lexicography from the Alexandrian* to SukIa* into four periods. Pamphilu*
izenstein in Jih.
y
<f
logenian belong* to the second,
and Hesychiu*
to the third.
xliv
and by a severe restriction of the explanatory material. The

work of Diogenian, notwithstanding these deficiences, proved
adequate for its purpose. It was widely used as a handbook of
reference so long as the classical authors continued to be read,
and
its
existence can be traced in the Byzantine period
down
to
So completely was Pamphilus superseded

that
Athenaeus and Herodian are almost the
by the epitomator
only writers who made use of the fuller collection. For us
the twelfth century 1
the iravTohairrj
Hesychius.
X,et<y
of Diogenian
is
especially of interest as the
source from which Hesychius drew most of his material
for
the weight of authority inclines strongly in favour of the identification with
of the TrepiepyoTrevrjTes which Hesychius ascribes
it
Diogenian
to
in the prefatory letter 2
chief extant authority through which
Thus Hesychius
we can pass back
is
the
to the
of Didymus, but the extent of the loss incurred

epitomizing process can only be judged by the rare
instances where a complete fragment of Didymus has been
rpaytfcr) Xeft?
the
in
preserved 3
Theon.
made to the statement

Didymus was the author of
and comic poets. The conjecture of Xaber'
Reference has already been
of Hesychius that
Theon
lexicons to the tragic
as well as
Theon was the compiler, and that he put them together

from the material scattered throughout the commentaries of
that
Didymus,
fails
to account
for
the
explicit
references to the
But Theon is of importance for other

reasons.
His services to Alexandrian literature were similar to
those rendered by Didymus to the earlier poets: he is mentioned
in the subscript as one of the sources for the existing scholia to
Apollonius
and it is sufficiently established that he devoted
lexicons of Didymus.
considerable attention to the elucidation of Theocritus, Calli-
machus, and Lycophron, and published annotated editions of

poems 8 Nevertheless, it has come as a surprise to find
his name several times mentioned in the margin of the Ichneutae
their
Cohn
"
Objections to the identification are stated by
1320.
in
The
Pauly-Wissowa v 781.
strange
title irepiepyowivriTes is
e.g.
Phot. lex.
Wilamovvitz, Texigesch. d. gr. Bukol. p.
the note on Achelous in Macrob.

1
H.
Schultz in Pauly-Wissowa
explained as
'
the
book
5. 18.
p. 9.
no;
vm
tor poor pedants.'
Schneider, Callim.
11
37.
'
THE TRADITIOy OF THE TEXT
xlv
papyrus as authority
for a variant adopted in his edition

For
no other evidence except the statement already quoted
from Hesychius to connect Theon with the tragic poets*, and
the character of his edition and its relation to Didymus are
equally obscure.
It should be added that another grammarian,
whose name may have been Xicanor, is quoted in the same
papyrus but cannot be identified 3
After the time of Didymus and Theon there is no further
there
is
of editions of the tragedians.
In fact, after the lapse of
a century, the need for such comprehensive studies
The age
of literature was rapidly disappearing.
in this
branch
of Hadrian, so
often celebrated as an era of renaissance in literary taste, was

actually that in which the causes of ultimate decay begin to be
The days of
bible.
me
creative genius were past.
and every
self-conscious,
king to express his
own thoughts
prime object to fashion

models.
al
and the
Literature had
aspirant, instead of
literary
in his
own way. made
it
his style according to the recognized
Rhetorical sophistic, of which Aelius Aristides
Philostrati are the
most
characteristic representative.
flourished exceedingly throughout the reigns of the Antonines.
The
vices of this literature
excessive elaboration
and
maxim
its
its
were
its artificiality,
indifference to reality,
and
affectation,
and
entire sacrifice of matter to form.
its
hollow
Quintilian's
pectus est quod discrtus /<// was forgotten;
and the
researches of the Atticists from Aelius Dionysius to Phrynichus

Were directed primarily to the practical end of assisting the art
of public speaking 4
scieutiiK
rs,
The
last
thing they had
tragedy and lyric poetry were the

cles
'
Theon
The
f course, a
BMJf
l>c
was a
common name,
suffer, not that
their high place, but
so that omc other cniic than the too of
intended.
reference! to bis studies on Pindar are also rare
:i 4
4
to
first
and Pindar were dethroned from
i,
'in.
view
In these conditions,
ulapted to rhetorical requirements.
in
study of the Attic dialect; and, besides the Attic

only those authors were cultivated whose vocabulary
see schol.
Mod.
01.
Die grammatische
WpoTapaeKtvJ)
arlieit
Wilamowitz,
des
a.
jahrhunderts
ist
im grunde
nkhU
als
##****
Tin-
f '"
xlvi
in
must submit
a busy world they
to exercise their
for a selection, since the

scientific investigator
sway
Hence arose
within the walls of the school-room.
chiefly
the
nee<
schoolmaster does not claim to be a
who
requires constant access to the
whoh
There is thus good reason for the conclusior

adopted by Wilamowitz that the selection of seven plays came
of his material.
into being during the course of the second century, althoug
name
the
of the selector has not been recorded.
It
does not
course follow that the appearance of the selection led at once

in the public libraries,
professional students.
transcripts
on papyrus
which might
We
know
rolls still
on general
still
have been consulted b
also that the multiplication
continued
elsewhere, so that readers must

certain circles.
Copies of them were preserve
the loss of the remaining plays.
still
in
Egypt ,and no doub

J
have been forthcoming
ire
But, as demonstrating the loss of their influenc
culture, the subsequent absence of direct quotation
decisive.
4.
The Sources of
the Fragments.
Now that we have followed the course of the tradition b

which the plays of Sophocles were transmitted through Alexl
andria to the Roman and Byzantine eras, we are in a better
examine the character of the documents
the surviving fragments are preserved.
These may be
position to
which
in
classified
(1) fragments of Sophoclean

and (3) indirect quotations. The
third class, which is by far the most numerous, includes every
case in which the author of the extant source owes his informa-
according to their origin as follows

papyri
(2) direct quotations
tion not directly to Sophocles, but to
The papyrus fragments
Papyrus
some intermediate
writer.
are very few in number, and, except
those belonging to the Eurypylus and Ichneutae, not of

intrinsic importance.
avWoyos have
1
is
See below.
now
effect
Still,
settled the
vexed question relating to the plot of
The parchment fragment
assigned to the
fifth
Wilamowitz, Sappho
it.
much
the lines recovered from the W-âuov
century
of the Melanippe of Euripides
but that
Simonides, p. 288.
is
an exceptional case.
To
(fr. 495)
the same
THE SOURCES OF THE FRAGMENTS

that play
xlvii
some bearing on
and the fragments provisionthis edition, if they are the work
the scanty relics of the Niobe have
1
;
Sophocles' handling of the story*

ally assigned to the Tantalus in
>ophocles at
all,
raise a question
of considerable interest*.
All these, except the Niobe fragments, which are attributed to
the third century
second century
B.C.,
A.D.,
are believed to have been written
so that their date
is
the
entirely consistent with
the conclusion reached in the last section 4
more
in
matter to decide which are the latest

direct quotations from the lost plays, because we cannot always
be certain whether a reference which purports to come direct
It
is
difficult
from Sophocles has not in

authority whose existence
To
fact
is
been borrowed from an earlier
not acknowledged
take a capital instance, no one
now
in
tions of his
the
swarms
certain
which Clement of Alexandria
writings were due to his immediate acquaintance
tions with
with
the source.
believes that the

fills
We
text of the authors cited.
shall
subsequently
how he came by them.
explain
The sources which beyond
dispute show a first-hand
all
acquaintance with the text of Sophocles are a small proportion

of the total.
Of those which arc altogether or almost contemporary the most numerous and important are the plays of the
Aristophanes refers to the Niobe by name and to

8
and at least sixteen
^the Tereus and Tyro in unmistakable terms
comic
poets.
ns
to or parodies of the
SophodWB
ed by the evidence of the scholia*.
text arc war-
curious
is
It
th.it
five
belong to the Pilau, a play not otherwise much quoted

of the same group is further echoed by a comic writer,
who may have been AristOphanea himself, and was at any rate
tary 7
The Old Comedy is also represented In
.
itions of Philonides,
'
,,
pp.
4
if
p. </>f.
<n(, 109 ff.
The papyroa
mtirh,
Eupolis, and Phrynkhuf*, and
at all,
of the HyptifyU (Oxyrh. Pap. no. 851)
anterior
t>>
considered to be not
joo A.V.
Ai
.
f<ll).
7IO. 7 17.
668, 68 j
H</>.
fr.
491, Hit, 890.
xlviii
At
Menander copied a famous trimeter which was ii
everyone's mouth
and another imitation of the same lin(
appears in the collection of monosticha which passes by the sam<
writer's name.
This miscellany, which was not put together
until Roman times, while containing much that Menander certainly did not write, includes a number of lines which appear
to follow the tracks of Sophocles.
Here or there may be an
instance where Menander deliberately repeated a tragic verse
the Middle by an interesting parody of Antiphanes 1
later date
but most of them, whether transmitted through his agency or
become current
that of others, had
as publica materies, having I
long ceased to be recognized as subject to the private dominion

of Sophocles 3
We
pass to the prose-writers of the fourth century.
Two
Sophoclean fragments have been traced in the

dialogues of Plato, but neither is free from doubt 4
On the
other hand, by a curious error, which he shared with Aristophanes and Antisthenes, he attributed to Euripides a line which
certainly belonged to the Locrian Aj'ax 5
Demosthenes in a
well-known passage mentions the appearance of Aeschines in*
the title-role of the Oenomaus.
Aristotle in the poetics refers to
allusions to
the Enrypylus, Lacaenae, Niptra, Peleus, Phthiotides, Tereus, and
and perhaps
Tyro,
to the Polyxena; while in the rhetoric he cites
and Tyro 6
Reasons have also been
given for supposing that he has wrongly ascribed to Aeschylus
the
Teucer,
Xvi'Secirvoi,,
a fragment of considerable length which actually
Tereus 7
The
plot of the Aleadae
came from
the
was detected by means of
indications afforded in the Odysseus attributed to Alcidamas.

1
&. 754-
should be added that the alleged quotations by Aristophon (fr. 198),

and Philemon (fr. 918), are extremely doubtful.
Similarly the Greek original which no doubt lies at the back of Plaut. Stick. 522
fr.
Alexis
3
319.
(fr.
It
895),
cannot be proved to have been imitated from

4
5
ment
frs.
See
in
fr.
88,
1.
256, 662.
n.
on
fr.
14.
Attention should have been directed to the significant state-
the Aristophanic scholia, that the play of Euripides in which the words
occurred was not preserved.

6
Here, and generally throughout the present section, the reader
Nauck's Index of Sources

7
See on
fr.
581.
is
for the verification of statements not otherwise
referred to
vouched.

rhis work
f
not
>e
a sophistic exercise of uncertain date; but, even
is
composed within the
placed
xlix
much
later
limits of the fourth century,
it
cannot
1
.
much to be said of the literature of the following Roman

we reach the Roman age, since the learning of ,Kr
Alexandria is known to us almost entirely at second hand. An
deception should perhaps be made in favour of the Kara art piafioi
There
is
not
acnturies until
Eratosthenes, in which the various constellations are
enume-
connexion with a series of poetical legends.

The
kitome which has come down to us is a miserably distorted
copy of its original, but the trend of recent criticism favours the
new that some such treatise was actually written by Era
thenes, and that a residuum of his learning is to be found in the
rated
in
In that case the information respecting the plot
existing text'.
of
the Andromeda* comes
direct from a
The fragments of
century B.C
attributed to Dicaearchus
handbook of the
third
a description of Greece wrongly
from So-
yield a single quotation
These interesting extracts have now been identified

as the work of Heracleides 6 tcpiTi/cos, whose name has been
from a quotation by Apollonius, the collector of
Nothing further is known of the author, and the
wapnhoâ i
his book has been variously dated between the
of
imposition
PolyWus, who makes a vague allusion to
limits 289
171 i-'V
stands on the threshold of the Roman epoch.
In an examination of the Greek and Roman literature of the Indirect
which respectively precede and follow the opening q
of the Christian era, there is no longer a pre umption in favour
phocles*.
immediate derivation of a quotation from its source.

iry production had become a well -organized profession
There was a vigorous demand for
branches,
OtmopoHtaa culture
>f all kinds, in the inter- -t of
Philosophy, science, and the
the mote easily attained.
.1
Attiuht fhrohamktit,
I'.Uvs
A summary
of th.
y-WlMOWa
to
cootrovtuy
Ki^nviy,
to
p.
3I3.
i Bjfrrta
!>y
Knaack
in his article
on EratosihcMf
vi 37.
*
Sac
II* p.
fr.
773.
hist.
I'auly-Wwuowa vni 484
ft".,
mir. 19 (Wcstcnnann, p. 109).

W. M. Duke In Ettmyt frttmttd
anl
T
ff.
p. SS.
art of rhetoric
must be
distilled to serve the
needs of the
In addition to the stimulus imparted
robust intelligences.
less
by
the requirements of the higher education, there arose a spirit

of general curiosity in polite circles, which contributed towards
Such considera-
the literary splendours of the Augustan age.
explain that, where dependence upon authority was

universal, its frequent acknowledgement became tedious and
unnecessary a reference or allusion might be borrowed without
tions will
any
sacrifice
witness
of literary candour.
a most material factor
is
in
But the character of the

the valuation of the record,
and it is also essential to remember the particular object which

he had in view. At first sight there is no reason to suspect that
Ovid's reference to the 'A^tAXe&K ipaaTai and Horace's to the
1
Peleus 2 were not inspired by their familiarity with the texts of

But we cannot so conclude with any
the Greek tragedians.
,
abundant evidence of Ovid's dependence on

the mythographical tradition, and the Ars Poetica is known to
have been based upon the treatise of Neoptolemus of Parium 3
A specimen of the manuals available for the use of the Augustan
poets is preserved in the booklet of Parthenius of Nicaea 7repl.
As its title indicates, this was a collection
ipcoTifcoov TraOrjfinTwv.
of love-stories with unhappy endings, each of which is prefaced
certainty
there
is
with a statement of the literary authority or authorities

sponsible for the form of the narrative adopted
was dedicated
4
.
re-
The work
and was
memory, if
to Cornelius Gallus, the elegiac poet,
written expressly for the purpose of assisting his
he chose to employ the material in future poems. The Euryalns

of Sophocles 8 is quoted as sole authority for the tale of Odysseus'
love for Euippe and
Cicero and Gallus,
sophers.
its
fatal issue,
different footing to
p. 104.
Meineke, Anal. Alex.
p. 360.
than to the text of Sophocles

4
to Parthenius, if not to
most of our informants
us to the secrets of his workshop.

1
and
the play was probably familiar.
Hercher
in
(fr.
Herm. xn 306
Cicero stands on a
;
for
Cicero was undoubtedly a
A. P.
96.
Catull. 70. 3 refers rather to a familiar proverb
811).
ff.
contended that the names were a
but their trustworthiness in general was maintained by Bethe

is
possible that they were taken from Pamphilus' Aei/nov.

8
P- 145-
he has admitted
[ii.
later addition,
xxxvin 608 ff.).
It

student of the text of Sophocles.
In this connexion the allusions
to the Latin versions of the Erigone*
Quintus sent to
his brother
and the Ivv&tiirpot' which

from Gaul are more significant than
the casual quotations in the letters to Atticus'.
Hut when he
Compares the treatment by Pacuvius and Sophocles of the scene
where the wounded Ulysses is carried home to die 4 when he
,
recalls the line of the
Epigoni with which Cleanthes rebuked

the apostate Dion) sius 5 and when he offers a Latin rendering
of the speech in the Teucer moralizing on the hypocrisies of
,
consolation*, it is not difficult to guess that the references to

Bophocles were suggested to him by the Greek originals from
which he put together the Tusculan disputations. In the post-
Aristotelian schools there had aiisen a custom which, if not originated by Chrysippus, found in him its chief representative, that
of enveloping their arguments with a cloud of poetic witnesses.
To
this
custom we owe the quotations and allusions of PhiloEpicurean, even if he did not borrow all of them
the
source.
No such hesitation is IKreunify in
regard to Seneca 7 whose maturates quaettumet were hugely drawn
earlier
U1
idoniua through the
name
the
of Philo of Alexandria
list
":
of
itext
The
Asclepiodotus.
39 A.D.) occurs only twice
(c.
one case
in
opbocles at all;
rcferr:
medium of
is
it
in
not certain that h
the other the Stoic colour of
in
SO dearly manifest that the origin of the quotation
i>
ireely doubtful.
The writers on the art of rhetoric are open to a similar
Writer* 00
thrforir
it
of having borrowed from their Peripatetic pre*

trius
his
in
,/,
elocutume
treatise
authorship and date are both uncertain, but which recent
mewhere
sj.
!
r.
it
p.
48-50.
Laarentiai Ljrdu
* fr.
o 1.
Tus<.
1.
sum Seneca.
116
Id
ff.
tai
6}6, 66i, 768.

* fr.
00.
tradition nTfrfTTTrilH the cause* of the

p.
ci
within the limits 100 B.G and 100 A.D.,quotes
on the authority of Theophrastus*, just as he
1.
whose
576.
Fur the hitfory of the doao*
MMM ming
of the Nile s*e Diets,
Apollonhw khodius are, of course. Ml tn.lcpenrash to assume that Seneca translated fr. 665 in the HtrtnUt
The
scholia to
fr.
04 Wiromer.

Hi
No such declared source is forth515 from Praxiphanes.

allusions
of
the
author of the de sublimitate or
coming for the
fr.
of Dionysius of Halicarnassus in the de compositione verborum
The
in
1
.
miscellaneous learning recorded by the last-named author
the
first
book of the Antiquitates Romatiae,
in
connexion with
the Oenotrians, the Tyrrheno-Pelasgians, and the flight of Aeneas
by Varro 2 The
book irepl rpoirwv, which passes for the work of Tryphon, is
a garbled extract from the grammarian who was a younger
contemporary of Didymus 3
Strabo (c. 63 B.C. 23 A.D.) owed his geographical informamore largely to books than to the records of his
tion
own observation. His two chief sources were Artemidorus of!
Ephesus 4 (c. 100 B.C.), the writer of a periplus of the Mediterranean Sea in eleven books, who in his turn compiled from
Agatharchides, Timosthenes, Eratosthenes, and others, and
Apollodorus of Athens, whose commentary on the Homeric
catalogue of ships was not the least remarkable of his critical
labours 5 Thus at least six of the fragments preserved in Strabo
may be referred to the authority of Apollodorus 6 one at least
appears to go back to Eratosthenes 7 and Demetrius of Scepsis
(c. 1 50 B.C.), whose work on the Trojan catalogue (Horn. B 816
877) was used by Strabo as well as the better-known treatise oil
from Troy, was collected
any
in part at
rate
Apollodorus, has been identified as the original source of the

1
frs.
768, 774.
See also Introductory Note to the Polyxena
of pseudo-Longinus
The
is
now
later rhetoricians contribute little.
illustration <pi\av5pos
(fr.
(il
p. 162).
with general consent assigned to the
Hermogenes
(b.
1111) from an earlier t^x v V'j
duces Sophocles into a discussion of hymns called
first
The work
century A.D.
160 A.D.) probably took his
Menander
diairoprjTtKol (fr.
(c.
809)
270 A.D.)
;
intro-
and Phoebam-
mon, a contemporary of Synesius, repeats a familiar example of epanalepsis (fr. 753),

which recurs in John of Sicily (nth cent., according to Krumbacher, p. 191).
2
Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 30614. The appearance of fr. 270, 4
frs. 598, 270, 373.
in schol. Ap. Rhod. is significant.
3
See frs. 487, 963. Cocondrius and Polybius of Sardis of course followed the
rhetorical tradition.
4
in
Susemihl,
Suid. s.v. Tpv<pwv assigns the rhetorical
book
to the
grammarian.
695.
5
For the particular sections of Strabo attributable to Apollodorus see E. Schwartz
Pauly-Wissowa I 2867-2870.
6
frs. 24, 41 1, 522, 957, 1086, 1 no.
7 frThe reference to the Triptohmus (11 p. 243) is also derived ultimately
959-
from Eratosthenes.

information
curious
relating
to
Idaean
the
naturalis historia of the elder Pliny (23
liii
The
Dactyls'.
69 A.D
is
a work
The
elder
,l,njr '
which to an even greater extent was made up of excerpts taken

from previous authors.
No fewer than 146 Roman and 327
foreign writers were utilized for the purpose
and so little was
;
Pliny disposed to conceal his obligations that he prefixed to

each book a list of the chief authorities upon which it depended.
Of
the fragments which he cites from
Sophocles 1 the first is

the course of a passage borrowed from Theophrastus,
inserted in
and the manner of
its
introduction shows that Pliny had ac
to the tradition of the didascaliae
the second
is
a botanical
memorandum, which came immediately from Sextius
may have been drawn
but
Niger,
ultimately from the piûrofiiKou of
Diocles of Carystus, a distinguished physician contemporary
Dion of Prusa
with Plato.
he
in
usually styled, belongs
is
under discussion.
tragedians
His devotion to the study of the great Attic

by his well-known essay on the treat-
attested
is
ment of the
Pithynia, or Dion Chrysostom, as DionChrytmtom

to the end of the period now
story of Philoctetcs by Aeschylus, Sophocles, and
We
uripidefl respectively*.
hand
to quote at second
should not, therefore, expect him
but his testimony consists only of an
allusion to the J/tyestes*, with perhaps another to an important
of the Alcadae*.
lent
Last of
all
ph*
conns Plutarch (46
one of our most valuable sources, whose quotations

are those of a first-rate artist steeped in the knowledge of his
literature.
Although he sometimes quoted from memory.
120
A.D.),
the line had
ilarly if
ne
become somewhat hackneyed*,
doubtful that
Schwartz
'oo.
is
in
B30.
in
Paoly-Wiaaowa IV 1S09.
'I.
11
p. 66.
Otherwise liethe
in
Hfrm. xxiv 411.

which show*
particularly interesting example,
\cly the second-hand character of Pliny's infoimatioo, l rrfured to

=
104
Am.).
For a deacriplion tee Jebb't Pki/<xMt<
by Jebb
JJ-
(II
it
most cases he drew from the originals.

7
occasional coincidences with Stobaeui and Clement are
insufficient
to
prove
lental, and are anyhow quite
Here and
Plutarch habitually made use of an anthology.
quotation which he must have found In his
ly
examples ee
fr*.
fr
81, 88, 636, 770, 771. 919.
fr*.
66j, 776, 840.
liv
source.
873
Fr.
is
a clear instance,
that in
some of the
the irepi aperr)?
made more conspicuous by

and one may suspect
Appian
the repetition of Dio Cassius and
ethical treatises, such as the
which by
KaKia<;,
/cal
7re/3i ri/%J7<?
an d
style betray the
their
influence of the philosophical schools, the quotations were taken
over together with the text which they served to illustrate
1
.
in the book tt(j)<; Bel rhv vkov iroc^fiaTuv

borrowed extensively from a work of Chrysippus
probable also that
It is
a/covetv Plutarch
similarly entitled 2 although the limits of his obligation cannot

,
Atticism.
be accurately fixed.
The second century A.D. owes such importance as it possesses
in the history of Greek literature in large measure to the classical
known
revival
as Atticism.
It
was, as has been already pointed
out, the product of an age to which substance had hecome
essential than style,
limited
We
by the
and whose study of the ancient
classics
practical object of fostering rhetorical
shall presently describe the efforts
less
was
ability.
of the lexicographers
provide the studious with the necessary material for the
to
cultivation of purity of diction
the general literature,
include under this term the representative sophists,
importance
for the present purpose,
The most famous names
of the
and
if
we
of minor
will
not detain us long.
Hellenic
renaissance which
of Hadrian, and lasted for more than a
started in the reign
century, are Lucian, Aristides, and the Philostrati.

to the Locrian
is
AJax 3 perhaps
,
Lucian refers
and quotes
also to the Cedalion*,
a fragment from the Meleager without
naming the play 5
Aelius
Aristides shows his acquaintance with the text of the 'EXevrjs

7rtyu.o?
6
,
and compares the treacherous beacon of Nauplius with
the work of incendiaries at Eleusis 7

1
The remark
ence to
applies to
r]6os as irnyrj,
borrowed from Zeno

involves (see
2
4
p.
II
frs.
373, 843, 844.
The
Philostrati scarcely
should be observed that the refer-
It
which almost immediately precedes the quotation of
203 Am., fr. 146

note in loc.) are perhaps the
(1
202 Arn.
P.).
The
difficulties
373, wj
tes
result of a confused epitome.

*
8
II p. 9.
fr.
which Plutarch's
p. IO
fr.
401.
Phot. bibl. p. 438 s 6, and Choric. pro mimis 6. 27 (Revue de Philol. I

For fr. 756 see note in loc. The repetition of two familiar
222), follow Aristides.
6
tags
7
p. 126.
(frs. 14,
fr.
435-
733)
is
unimportant.

come
into the account.
from
the Oedipus
lv
Philostratus the Athenian quotes only
Tyranuus, Oedipus Coloneus, and Antigone.

in the Life of Apollonius, and from the Electra in the Lives of
the sophists, sufficient evidence surely that in his day tin replays had a certain degree of celebrity above their fellows.
In
the heroieus and imagines, which are ascribed to his kinsman
and contemporary known as Philostratus the Lemnian there
1
may be many
reminiscences of tragedy, such as the passage
quoted by Nauck in illustration of the discoveries of Palamedcs';

but they are seldom acknowledged, and have in consequence
generally ceased to be traceable.
Philostratus,
who
The imagines
by an
the mother's side, are separated
Lemnian
interval of seventy or
from the publication of the earlier
ars
of the younger
describes himself as grandson of the
the Oidipus Coioneus and the Philoctetes,
series.
and
He
qtlOti
his allusion
Sophocles' description of Scyros as wind-swept', and
to
his descrip-
tion of the meeting of Phoenix with Neoptolemu-, suggest that

he was acquainted with the Seyriems. Hut the general character
of his work, apart altogether from his date, makes the inference
extremely questionable 4
Aelian, who survived the death of
Caracalla (222 A.D.), was a contemporary of Philostratus the
.
Though
Athenian.
in
intention a stylist, being at the
.\elwn.
sat:
pne
an industrious collector of unconsidered trifles, he

the preference of his age for spurious learning to independent
The fragments
on
resting
his
authority are taken
from the de rtatura anitna/itun, and were derived by Aeh

through his source Alexander of Myndos (before 50 aim from
mtium and others
m
-
Aelian we
pass
whom we owe more

the
t<>
<>f
Irian
an important Athc
Ath-
than
sources from which
[UOtations,
nee J. S. l hillim..ic N rh>l.ir,,t,a,

tstribation at the extant works i* recommenced
trati
'
08
he
pp.
\xxiv
\i v
-<-hmiil, 0/.
ff.
!> 43J.
'
Ath
1.
* tti
Wilamowiu, EinUihmgind.gr. Tr. p. joi.

especially nal am. 7. 39 ad fin.
The reference to Ari%totle (
m the unic direction, since Alexander's chief source ws Aristophanes' f*ins$
1
of Aristotle's zoological teaching.
4%
lvi
abundant supply of quotations is rendered unusually difficult

by the fact that the Dcipnosophists has come down to us in an
abbreviated form, and by the tendency of its author to interrupt
the course of a borrowed extract with material which he had
It is admitted that he was not merely
gathered elsewhere
He had studied widely in the ancient texts for the
a compiler.
purpose of illustrating his various topics, and a considerable
proportion of the numerous passages taken from the plays of
the comic poets was undoubtedly due to his own researches.
Tragedy was less likely to provide him with material and he
At any
was content to accept its evidence at second hand.
from
the
character
his
quotations
of
rate, a careful scrutiny into
Sophocles will confirm the judgement pronounced by WilamoAlthough
witz 2 that not a single tragedy was quoted directly.
the nature of Athenaeus' book, even apart from its tradition, is
1
such as unduly to favour the impression that it largely consists

of glosses unskilfully strung together, we shall hardly err in
many of the Sophoclean
concluding that
fragments were derived
That the glosses were taken from ai

betrayed
by their alphabetical order, as
sometimes
from the lexicographers.

lexicon
may
is
be seen from the
list
of cups given in the eleventh book,
It has
where the name of Pamphilus occurs several times.
already been mentioned that Pamphilus, who was perhaps the
chief lexicographical authority of Athenaeus, had incorporated
Athenaeus often disthe results of Didymus' rpayi/cal Aefet?.
name
closes the
of his authority,
the ultimate,
may
it
be, rather
than the immediate source. Thus, fr. 718 was derived from the
commentary of Didymus, fr. 324 from Speusippus irepl ofiolwv 3
,
28 from Cephisodorus the pupil of Isocrates,
fr.
Tryphon 4 and
,
fr.
1 1 1
from
12 from Aristoxenus' Life of Archytas.
In
Clear instances of such interruption will be found in the quotations relating
the polypus and the
fiav-qs
inserted at 513 c
and 487 D
respectively.
op. cit.
This was a survey and classification of natural history.
the older
4
fr.
p..
176.
Academy,
p. 56728 E.
The statement
regard to
fr.
of the text.
suggests that he
606 a neat point

It
is
clear that
See Zeller's Plato and
tr.
arises
was
which
also the source of

is
frs.
137 and 230.
In
not without a bearing on the criticism
Athenaeus and Pollux both used the same source; and,
apart from the evidence of the Philetaerus (of which
more
presently),
irepl
fiov.
\Q.

other cases the source
Thus
conjecture.
Apollodorus
Trepi
fr.
may
502
Ivii
be identified by inference or probable

shown to have been derived from
is
haiptov by
its
recurrence in
Harpocration,
448 may be referred to Chamaeleon fr. 765 to Satyrus or

Hermippus, fr. 121 to Clearchus irepi ypi<p(ov, fr. 474 to the same
writer's tpayriicn, fr. 307 to his trepl irapoip.iwv*, and fr. 735 to
Sometimes the ownership of the
Theophrastus trepi /zc'&j?.
borrowed material is no longer traceable*, or the quotation
the appearance of having been made independently for
But an example will show that
the position which it occupies 4
1
fr.
appearances are not always to be trusted.
on the use of fivpov and
-ion
Athenaeus interpolates as a reason
In the course of a
its effect
upon the
senses,
for anointing the breast the
ient that the vital principle (^\fxn)
ls
situated in the heart*,
766 amongst other

awl appeals to the testimony of Soph.
The names of two physicians Praxagoras
poetical authorities.
and Phylotimus are mentioned as holding the same opinion,
and at first sight it might be inferred that Athenaeus either
took his quotations from one or the other of them, or collected
them himself in corroboration of their view. But the dogma
fr.
that the principate {jjyepoviKov) of the soul, that
mind, resides
hool,
19,
quoting Aesch.
fr.
for believing that
good reasons
to say, the
is
was strenuously maintained by the

and Chrysippus supported it by thousands of
in the heart
Hut there art

111, suggests that this was HlludiM,
Athenaeus did not use Herodian see Kaihel on JJ t.
:
union source must therefore be earlier than his time, and we shall find aubaequently that thi* conclusion may l>c recommended on other ground*.
which relates to the same subject, occur* in the neigh bourhood of two
i
345,
fr.
It may 1* inferred
which are repeated in Plut. amat. | p. 75 C.
and Athenaeus were indebted to the same original. IMutarch then proSappho
i'vth. 1. 41, and illustrates it by the same fragment of
1
ceeds
v Pindar's scholiast,
.)i;a.
r.
3. 10.
Am
760 and 761 come from a rhetorical discussion of tura+opi after

evpwot*<d, frs. J77 and 537 front a
ff., fr. .i;s fr..m some ur.icr of
141 1'
fr*.
dis-
on the game cottabua,

111
M remark
139. 4i,and 411 perhaps from the
Imrpui J#iV*
4H1).
applies especially to such case* as
re the quotations
<e 687 B.
fra.
fr*
*d 7J7.
belong to the framework of the dialogue.
lviii
quotations from the poets
Now, a good
suspicion.
Here then
1
.
enough
is
been preserved by Galen, and our suspicion
we
to
confirmed when
is
the two separate lines which Athenaeus quotes
find that
from the Odyssey appear at the head of the
of Homeric
list
Galen repeats after Chrysippus 2

doubt remains concerning the source of Athenaeus,
quotations which
by the
sipated
it
is
any
dis-
further discovery that Chrysippus appealed to
who made
The
If
authority of Praxagoras in
the
writers
awaken
deal of Chrysippus irepl ^rvxv^ nas
scientific
opposition
to
those medical
the head the centre of the nervous system 3

and departmental writers who flourished in
the second and early part of the third century shared the general
failure of
independence which characterized their epoch, and
show of learning
their
is
even
outside their proper sphere.

Gellius
.testifies
less to
It is
be credited when
a rare exception
it
falls
when Aulus
to his personal acquaintance with the text of the
Galen professedly owed his poetical illustrations

of the word 7re/j.<f>i<yl; to the ypafifxariKOL 5 from whom also
Sextus Empiricus quoted the Phrygian ftaW-nv 6
The same
source may be confidently assumed for Rufus Ephesius, the
Locrian Aj'ax 4
writer on anatomy, from his agreement with
the scholiast on Aristophanes 7
Achilles, the
Hesychius and
commentator on
Aratus, drew his material from Posidonius through Diodorus of
Alexandria 8
Diogenes Laertius quotes two of the fragments 9
one of these he derived from Antigonus of Carystus 10 (third
(ll
E. V. Arnold,
Galen Hipp,
907
3
i
5
Am.) we
Galen
id. 1.
14.
Cf.
fr.
frs.
Roman
Stoicism, p. 24538.
et Plat. plac. 3. 2 p.
7 p.
fr.
145
695.
M.
He
337, 338, 538, 539.
(11
fr.
897 Am.).
he heard Peregrinus quote
states that
Wilamowitz,
with Photius in regard to Aesch.

6
From id. 3. 4
(11 906 Am.).
were included in the collection.
260 M.
learn that tragic quotations
fr.
op. cit.
p.
fr.
p. 2 Si
M.
307.
Note the coincidence
176.
170.
7
515.
fr.
596.
With him goes the anonymous writer who quotes fr. 752.
432, 737, 738.
In regard to all this class of literature I transcribe the caustic judgement of Diels
8
frs.
(Doxogr. p. 19)
'scilicet turn
ea ars, quae vetera furando nova scripta gignebat non
inventa quidem, sed consummata esse videtur.
neque
frustra
Clemens Alexandrinus
ipsum descripsit
ipse fur callidissimus furtorum catalogum congessit sive potius et
Strom. VI
lJ
frs.
2.'
477, 873.
10
Wilamowitz, Antigonos von Karysios,
p. 74.

lix
century B.C.) and the other from Diodes of Magnesia (b. 80

Artemidorus, who wrote on the interpretation of
70 i;.< ;.).
dreams, cites fr. 860 without the author's name and obviously at
second hand
Porphyrias (233 304 A.D.) quotes fr. 398 in the
stinctttia
fr.
879
in
the de antro nympharum, and
As
the qtuustumts Honurieae.
familiar with grammatical learning, and, though he
enough
108 in
fr.
a Homeric critic he was of course
was
skilful
the appearance of an independent writer,
to present
Bernays showed that the de abstinentia was largely composed

tracts from Theophrastus trepl evae&fias*.
Hyginus the
mythographer
is
of importance rather
in relation to
the plots
<f
The date
the lost plays than as a witness to the fragments.
of the handbook can only be determined in so far as
it was
was translated into
Greek*; but the scholarship of its author may be gauged by his
iption of Melanippe as daughter of Desmon, no doubt after
i.uripidean title Me\aj'<7r7TT/ 17 6e<rfiwri<;*.
is beyond
It
on that he derives from a Greek original belonging to
ime stream of tradition as that which pseudo-Apollodorus
ed*.
The sources of the second book of the poetiea astroanother work passing by the name of Hyginus, have
been examined by Robert": it is sufficient to say that the chief
authority used was the Karaarepiafioi of Kratosthenes, but that
certainly written before 207 A. I).,
when
it
r,
also
be found of Parmentscus, Aadepiadet of
to
and some
us,
Servius, the Vergilian
others.
comment
to the Laocoon of Sophocles 7 for a mythological d
which no one supposes that he had learnt by an inspection of

iginal; but from what source he derived this and his veiled
allusion to the Lacaenac* we are not in a position to determine.
work of An< miilorus see Susemihl,
the
'.
868.
imi^ktil
itophrastM S<hrtj.
He
Hcrlin. 1H66.
nionstratcd that the pa*agc in which the Sophoclean extract occur*

'-
in
accordance with the plan acknowledged

ting the
p.
man
m whom
&
hinxlt'H edition
Of the earliest
r.xf/ienis
Mr
whose ra wpbt rat

;i|
p.
l>>
He
of the argument.
itpovpylai
IV.
mythographical handbook see Susemihl,
catasttritmorum
fr
Alhen.
it <|U<>tcd l>y
relii/uiae, Berlin.
.:.d
tl
actually
end of
grammarian
at the
PorpbyfJOi
identifies the
nh Amtomenta, who wa
Porphyriu* got the quotations
of Hadratn, and
crane
ha*.
is
a freed-
15 A.
/#. 186.
50 and
inf. p. i.
Varro were among hia
GENERA L INTR OD UCTION
be
The
interpretation of Vergil gives Macrobius occasion to cite a

remarkable fragment from the 'Ptôro/xot of Sophocles, which
he supposes Vergil to have copied
but it is impossible to
allow Macrobius himself the credit of making the comparison.
1
The same
writer reproduces the whole of Athenaeus' note on
Kapxnviov, and, as included in
The names
by
it,
the quotation of
660.
fr.
of Servius and Macrobius have been introduced
Though
anticipation.
neither of
them wrote
are both representative of the last stage of the
in
Greek, they
common
Graecoimmediately preceded the centuries of

Byzantine decadence. In its various branches Nonnus, Libanius,
Heliodorus, and Proclus were the chief pillars of the dying
Greek literature. But, except in the mechanical repetitions of
Roman
culture which
successive generations of grammarians and lexicographers, or in
the traditional quotation of a stock passage by sophists and
memory
rhetoricians 2 the
,
The
extinct.
of Attic tragedy was almost entirely
partisans of Hellenism were fighting in a losing
and the efforts of the best of them, praiseworthy as they

show how narrow and superficial was their acquaintance
cause,
are,
with the works of the ancient masters.
Julian never quotes

Sophocles by name, and none of the fragments so far as we
know has the support of his authority 3 It would be too much
.
was not acquainted with a single one of the

plays for phrases occur which are reasonably regarded as echoes
of the Antigone and the PkiloctetesK
But Homer and Plato, the
to assert that he
;
I'
534-
fr-
clear that he followed one of the ancient
's
both here and in his comparison of Aen.

Conington's Vergil,
and
Statius,
trated
go back
by Macrobius
xlviii
p.
f.
4.
commentators on Vergil
698 with Eur. Ale.
These Vergilian
See Nettleship
73.
scholia, as well as those
to
Greek sources (Wilamowitz,
is
the ritual sanctity of brass, and Sophocles
op. cit. p. 167).

is
The
in
on Lucan
point
illus-
the only Greek
author cited.
2
Such is the quotation of fr. 940 by Gregory of Nazianzus. Echoes of frs. 662
and 929 are found in Nicephorus Gregoras and Ioannes Chumnos, who lived as late
as the fourteenth century.
A familiar instance is the wearisome recurrence of Eur.
fr.
484,
ovk
i/j-bs
6 fxv9os d\\d...in Julian
and
others.
Fr. 14
is
quoted both by
Libanius and Themistius.

3
The
passage quoted by
Nauck on
fr.
811
is
obviously not an allusion (except
indirectly) to Sophocles.
4
132 c
d(cris
ae\lov (Ant. 100);
Sandys, Hist. CI. Schol.
447 B rbv <f>l\raTOv, ws 0tjj, dvi/xuv (Phil. 273).

from the fact that O.T. 614 is followed (338 c)
p. 359, infers
fad
study of whose writings was kept alive by the lectures of the

Peoplatonists, are the only ancient authors to whom he freely
refers
Libanius (314393 A.D.), the foremost man of letters
1
of his age,
although
hardly in a better case than his imperial patron,
is
reading was naturally wider*.
his
acquaintance
with
Aeschylus,
It
vouched on the authority of his
true that his
is
and
Sophocles,
latest editor
Euripides
but
it
is
not
is
evident that this implies a wider knowledge of their text than
open to a scholar of the present day.
is
p.
[]
224) does not prove that he
allusion to the
ill
treatment of Minos on the stage was derived
Plutarch or the pseudo- Platonic

sole authority for
fr.
of a familiar currency
is
His reference to the

the play, and his
knew
Minos 1
Though Libanius
808, the sentiment there expressed
and the appearance of two parallel

ês from Kuripides in the immediate context su^
all three were borrowed from an anthology.
Nor is the
that
character of his other references to tragic fragments such as to

inspire confidence in the extent of his
knowledge* Synesius,
and survived
Libanius by some twenty years, is one of the most attractive
figures <.f his age.
He is the last representative of the genuine
Hellenic spirit, never ceasing to urge upon his hearers the
importance of literary' and philosophical studies 7
But his own
ledge was neither deep nor wide, and the preponderating
raa born a feu years after the death of Julian
nee of
Homer and
Plato
is
even more clearly marked than
vords wi wapb, rZip luxpoaB** fyrutur, that the
known, and
that
Sopbodcs was evidently no longer
(are e.g. 445 b) are confined to the li,u,hat, Fhoeithtat,

1
He had
name
of the author wa un-
Mis quotations from Eur.
read.
and
Ortstes.
ami Thcophrastos : Sandys, p. 357

ThcmUlius (tv
71) mentions Thuc, Isocr., Dem., Plat., and Artst., as the five
classics chiefly studied at Constantinople, and elsewhere (xxilt 350) adds Aristophanes
h.
also studied Aristotle
I.ihanius
trr
in
(lii.
Rh.
438) speaks vaguely of his reading* in the porta.
Mm.
xxxil 87.
Unger
litB, 311 a; Hut. Thts. 16; Iil*n.
[I
Caw,
was one of the plays

aa an overbearing and cruel tyrant.
that the
lit,. 50/..
Aesch.
cleverly
lit
emended
64.
It i
4*.
1198 from
highly probable
illustrating the tragic coootptk
fr. 340 and Kur. fr. 934 are among the more favourable
R. Volkmann, SjrmiiH, pp. 134136.
of
lxii
in Julian 1
He
can hardly be cited as a witness for
a vague reference to At. 1146
is
fr.
948, and-
almost the only indication
of]
an acquaintance with Sophocles.
The immediate sources of the greater number of the frag

ments are the collections of scholia, the Byzantine lexicons, and
The most important of the scholia
the anthology of Stobaeus.
are found in the MSS of the three tragedians, Aristophanes,
Homer, Pindar, Plato, and the Alexandrian poets. The labours
of Didymus in relation to Sophocles and Euripides have already
been mentioned, and his services to Aeschylus, although less
clearly attested, are believed to have been of a similar character 3
The remaining scholia, so far as they concern us here, will next
.
be
briefly described.
The
scholia of Aristophanes, although for obvious reasons
their evidence
more
often touches Euripides, are nevertheless,
we have seen
The citations from ancient poets were due almost entirely to
Didymus who here as elsewhere drew upon the learning of his
predecessors. The extent of his influence is not to be measured,
of considerable importance for Sophocles.
as
comparison with others, by the sixty-four explicit

name 6 Phaeinus and Symmachus, who are
mentioned in the subscriptio of the Venetus to the Nudes and to
the Pax, have been identified as the immediate sources of the
except
in
references to his
Symmachus, whose name occurs some
extant collection.
times in the scholia, was an Alexandrian
who
forty
lived about
century after Didymus, and shows himself to be capable of

exercising
regarded as
W.
judgement 7
Phaeinus, by some
an early Byzantine, is of no importance except as
an independent
S. Crawford, Synesius the Hellene, 1901, has a useful
the literary quotations in Synesius.

2
frs.
Quoted by Jebb, in
loc.
It
579)
list (pp
522
must, however, be used with caution.
of
For references to Euripides, such as they are, see
300, 723.
3
Cohn
4
in Pauly-Wissowa v 451.
p. xlvii.
His commentary is mentioned by Athen. 67 D AiSv/ios 5' i^TjyoviJ.evo% rb
A good account of it is given by Cohn. I.e. 455.
(Plut. 720) Kri.
No
less
iafxêiov
than thirty-three are in the scholia to the Aves.
treats Symmachus as the first compiler of our collection of scholia.

Williams White, however, as we have already seen (p. xlii), holding that such collections were not anterior to the age of the parchment book, takes a somewhat different
7
Wilamowitz
view of the
activities of
Symmachus.

and may have been responsible
mpiler,
Ixiii
for the inclusion of
the colometry of Heliodorus, and of extracts from Herodian and
Symmachus.
owe twenty-two valuable quotations
other authorities later than
to the scholia on
These may be assigned without hesitation to Didymus,
wh<; was responsible for practically the whole of the learned
\\ e
Pindaric
MAM
Pindar.
Our
material preserved in these commentaries'.
collection goes
back to an edition of the Epinicia in the second century A.D.,

which repeated the substance of Didymus' work without adding
much of importance. The date is approximately fixed by a
quotation fn>m Amyntianus*, a writer
.
who
dedicated his history
lexander the Great to the emperor Marcus.
we
at least
are able to
go beyond Didymus
In
two instances
the illustration of
was taken from the Trepi irapoip,ia>v of Aristides

Miletus, which is dated in the second half of the second
century r.( \ and the proverb dtp' earias apxwQat was discussed
by Aristocritus, who belonged to the same period*.
The minute study of the Platonic dialogues was not seriously
undertaken before the age of the Roman empire, and received
Our scholia,
hief impulse from the Neoplatonic movement.
(yXn'uraa
words
rare
of
explanation
deal
with
the
however,
than
rather
proverbs
(trapoip,iai\
phrases (Xt'etO, and
and
the
the exposition of the philosophical argument;
rpiwp
et>
which contain quotations from Sophocles are repreitivc
of the general character of the collection.
It
is
not
Hesychius\ since Diogentan,

quoted four times in the scholia, must have been
f both.
But the majority of the quotation
find coincidences with

i^
introduced to illustrate proverbs which occur in the text of

ltd the scholia derive from the same sources as the
i
corpus, to which
ographic
1
Wilam
-v* it/-,
o/
<//.
;..
presently
return.
" fr.
908.
\n, Crtwfas, Anal. p. 79. Steph. By*, p. U9-

j3wrior xoXxttw) how* that he w later than Polemon, from whom
i
shall
157; C<>hn, / 4*0.
3. j.
Pind. 01.
we
p.
l.
FH
frs
%
of Byzantium.
cf.
also
it.
408, the MiUtance of which got* back to Aftao.
Platonic
lxiv
Thus Didymus
referred to on
is
384 A
Cratyl.
with the proverb yahzira ra icaXd, and
him
to
connexion
in
rather than to
Tarrhaeus were due most of the quotations

1
It
in schol. rep. 337 A.

should be noticed that the explanations of the Platonic scholia
and
are generally fuller
is
to that of
In
all
may
purpose the most important,
for the present
together.
The
richer than the text of the corpus.
scholia to the Alexandrians, of whom Apollonius Rhodius
The
of
Didymus
them Theon 2 occupies a

in
be taken
position analogous
the criticism of the tragedians and Pindar.
MS of Apollonius
subscriptio to the Laurentian
states that
the scholia are taken from Lucillus Tarrhaeus, Sophocles, and

Theon. This is interpreted to mean that Sophocles put together
the collection in the fourth century from the earlier commentaries
of Lucillus and
name
Theon
3
.
Irenaeus (also
who
known by
the Latinized
mentioned four times in the

scholia as the author of a commentary {virofivqixa), seems to
have belonged to the latter part of the first century A.D. Theon
of Minucius Pacatus),
was the
sole source of all
that
is
is
valuable
in
the scholia to
Wilamoby Amarantus, an elder

attached in the Etymo-
Theocritus, but our collection belongs to a later date.

witz conjectured that they were edited
contemporary of Galen, whose name
Magnum
logiawi
assumption agrees with the

the opinions of
Munatius
is
to the views expressed in the scholia 4
a certain
This
fact that the scholia often controvert
Munatius,
who
is
Kpnucos, a native of Tralles and a
identified
with
member of the
375, 10 we read
Herodes Atticus 5
In Steph. Byz. p.
that Theon, Plutarch, and Demetrius Phalereus were the names
of the commentators on Nicander. The last-mentioned is unquestionably an error for Demetrius Chlorus who is referred to
6
in several notes as supporting views subsequently rejected by
Antigonus lived in the early part of the first
Antigonus.
century B.C., as is inferred from the position in which his name
circle of
Cf.
fr.
160.
According to Cohn, in Jahrb.
f.
cl.
Tarrhaeus was the immediate source of these scholia.

p.
94
f.
Is
Phil. Suppl.
K\eirapxos an error for KXtapxos (Crusius, Anal.

3
See
See Etym. M.
Philostr. vit. soph.
p. xliv.
p. 273, 41, as
1.
25. 16.
Wilamowitz,
compared with
xm
at p. 84c
See however Crusius, Ana

p. 83) in schol. rep. 337.
op.
cit.
p. 187.
schol. Theocr. 7. 154.

6
Ther. 377, 585, 748.

occurs
we
the preface to Erotian 1 so that
in
in
bw
the case of Nicander
On
are able to pass back to sources anterior to Theon.
other hand, with the exception of Theon, tradition

ecting
is
names of those who worked on the text of
the
>phron until the time of Nicetas, the bishop of Serrha,
copied out the codex Marcianus 476

It
in
who
the eleventh century.
unnecessary for the present purpose to examine
is
detail the history of the
Homeric
scholia; for
it is
they contain rich stores of Alexandrian learning.
From
manifest.
in Homeric
notorious that
Even
the
in
is
the subscriptiones at the end of every book
it
limited field of Sophoclean quotations the value of Venetus
appears that the collection, which was perhaps
m\
the
silent
made
in
the
A.D., was based upon an amalgamation of exDidymus' irepi tt;? Wpiarapxîov Siopdaxreavi,
century
irom
tonicus' irepi
twi> tt)? 'IXtaSo*? teal rrj^ 'O&vtrtreUis*,
o-rjfieitov
and Nicanor's vepi

The works of Didymus, Aristonicus, and
'OfiTjpucTJ*; <TTiyp.TJ<i.
Nicanor belonged to the department of textual criticism and
of the ten quotations and allusions which rest upon the authority
Herodian's
irepi
tt)<
()p,r)piicfj<;
irpoatphlat,
of W11.
may be conjectured to owe their survival to

The explanation of ykvaaai and \ec\ where the
five
Hcrodian*.
are found to be in
lia
agreement with the extant lexicons

name is mentioned
largely the work of Aristarchus, whose
with Apion and Heliodorus
Eulogius.
The
in
Hesychius' prefatory
lexicon of ApoHonius, which depended
-ame sources, survives only in an abridged form, so that

elsewhere*.
it
is seldom of value where a fuller version
we are referred to the authority of Crates of MalluV.
In
(hi. idation of mythological details was the principal subject
of Didymus' virofivnfuira\ and many notes of this complexion
in the scholia are attributed to him by name.
connexion with the scholia the Homeric commentaries
1
1 )
p. 3J.
his
wm
used by him in
Conn in I'auly-Wiaaow* 1 i*
AmtarchuV explanation
Klem.
a digest of
hi*,
of the critical rignt (obelus, ftc)
edition.
01, 1036.
flii 7 8 5. 793 96.

ard\ .juote* A 414 (fr. H98) for tarimiwl.
T
Schol. * 4 may be an example
ApoHonius
fr .
1060.
t.v.
(l
p. 14')-
E*
lxvi
(irape/cftdXai
e/<?
tt)v
'Ofvqpov 'WidZa \^Qhv<T<reiav\) of Eustathius
must be mentioned. They were written at some time before

1 175 A.D., in which year their author was appointed Archbishop
of Thessalonica by the emperor Manuel
books consists
I.
The
value of the
enormously rich store of extracts from

philological writings which have now been lost
for it is quite
certain that the quotations from the ancient classics were all at
second hand, and that the plays of Sophocles outside the selection had perished long before the time of Eustathius
Nor does
Eustathius seek to conceal his dependence upon earlier sources,
although he often succeeds in hiding their identity by the use of?!
such vague expressions as (paai, Kara iovs TraXaiois, Xeyerai,
But, although this lack of precision and still
and the like 2
more the tendency to garble his extracts by abbreviation are to
be regretted, the main channels of tradition which Eustathius
followed are either obvious or have been definitely ascertained 8
Thus, he borrowed large blocks of material from the Deipnosophists of Athenaeus, and is in no sense an independent witness
in their
the quotations
for
of the earlier writer 4
It
should also be
noticed that his text of Athenaeus was the epitomized version-
represented in the MSS
known
C and E
Strabo was copied

almost as freely as Athenaeus, but only twice where Sophocles
6
is concerned
Next, it is certain that much of Eustathius is
as
nearly related to the tradition of the Homeric scholia.

Iliad he employed a
1
This
fact
was
first
clearly recognized
O. T. 1264 and on Ant. 292
(at p.
Bacchylides
which
f.
Jebb on
<pa<rl
frs.
goes back to the older authorities from
166, 237, 702, 791, 794, 1006.
Xdyerat:
In the following account
frs.
M.
derived.
it is
Wissowa VI 1452
4
337
at first hand.
It is clear, also, from the remarks in hi!
he took the same view of citations by such writers as Stobaeus
Rutherford in his New Phrynichus (p. 84) does not appear to havi
108, 1046, 1049, 1087.

3
(p. 76) that
Priscian.
by Valckenaer, Opusc.
250) gives the impression that Eustathius' quota
observed that the evidence of the Etym.
frs.
For the
a collection of scholia which
were usually made
tions
and
MS containing
1489.
much
fr.
Kara, roiis TraXcuovs
(<t>a.(riv
01 ira\atoi)
1105.
use has been
made
of Cohn's article in Pauly
19, 28, 111, 127, 154, 181, 314. 275, 318, 329, 378, 395, 565, 718, 760.
For examples see the nn. on frs. 154, 181 (where A has tt4ttov), 318.
6
See fr. 1086, I p. 86. Eustathius frequently quotes from an epitome of Stephen
of Byzantium, but there is no such instance in the Sophoclean sources.
5

bore the names of Apion and Herodorus
the same sources as the scholia
1
,
lxvii
and was derived from
the extant Mss.
in
Thus, the
Eustathius sometimes coincides with \'en. A*, sometimes
B or Townl., and is sometimes supplementary to both.

an instance of the last-named alternative we may quote
with Yen.
As
fr.
one of several examples of TrapaXeiyfns given

by the Paris MS 2766 of the thirteenth
addition to those appearing in schol. BT.
In the
458, which
is
istathius as well as
century*
in
Eustathius followed a similar course
exiting scholia to the Odyssey are much
but, since
the
and important
than those to the Iliad, the value of the tradition represented by
ahius becomes comparatively greater. Fr. 108 was found
istathius in his MS, amongst other illustrations of the word
<\o9, as part of a note of Porphyrius which is also preserved
4
in the 'Quijpuca ^ryfiara, whereas in our scholia the reference
m Archippus' is the only one of the post-Homeric quotations
To
remaining*.
Porphyrius should
less full
probably be referred
comes from an allegorizing

which explained Athena as <pp6i>T)<ri$ and Poseidon as
interesting
fui/rL'^09 7
fr.
790, since
The
the
original
it
vyp6rrf<:
sometimes
sred by the severe curtailment of the Odyssean scholia.
Thus, his allusion to the Euryalus of Sophocles 1 is part of a note
rich in genealogical details attested by references to Hesiod,
We might well
Helianicus, and the Cyclic epics.
.
origin of the material in Eustathitll
how Eustathius became possessed
speculate
ton of the earlier part of the note

thing
known
See
inform. 1-
not that the bare
preserved by schol. Q*.
of that
ficti-
name.
43, 04, 10
frs.
Cramer,
a>u<<t. /\i>. Ill J74.
rnd
Hut
See Cohn,
>)).
cf.
fr.
61
1.
in
1"-
1483.
I.e.
ill 5) was copied from

Mime remark ap;
Par.
consequently worthless
Horn. i 319.
Porphyrias note appears also
,'K
it
of these person* except their runic*, which are possibly
Apion cannot be the Alexandrian graoHMriafl
tious.
is
is
much
of so
lrawn from ancient authorities, were
is
Etjrm.
.1/.
p. 357.
fr.
ift,
37,
with
687 K.
the
all
Ante quota*
lions except that from Sophocles.
'
ffior-
bt
.mi.
1.
Unification was St
t.
11, Cic. n.d.
1.
40.
Kuotath. Od. p. 1796, 35 lorio*

oi'tou ii
6n -jinaXoyovfi
ai Xa\Kom6oi'<TJii \a4prifp-
rod it al
AiAi ixi* ai
'AmXWl
BAp tUi
'Os
rrfa
'A^tti-
of
ni
lxviii
Eustathius seldom referred to the scholia on other authors, so

that
would be wrong
it
him from the

context
fr.
895 was borrowed by
An
examination of the
to suppose that
scholia to Euripides.
Eustathius reveals that he has introduced into his
in
commentary a long extract from the work of Suetonius irepi

The same origin is to be attributed
tu>v Trap "EWrjcri -naihtcov.
The name of the author is not given by
to frs. 429 and 479.
Eustathius, but is mentioned by Suidas who records the existence of another work by him entitled irepl Svacptj/icov Xeêcov
1
Kai iri'dev
7]tol (3\aa4>7)/juwv
owed
Eustathius
at
To
kKacrrt).
his acquaintance with
the
irepl ftXacrtyrj/jLicov
720 and 885.
frs.
It is
sight surprising that these little-known works, written in
first
Greek by a Roman historian of the age of Hadrian, should have

survived and continued in use until the late Byzantine era.
No
striking than the survival of Suetonius,
less
course, the depositary of earlier learning,
who
was, of
the appearance in
is
Eustathius of a number of quotations ascribed to Aristophanes of
Byzantium 2 The latter were held by Nauck in his monograph

on Aristophanes to have been derived from the Homeric scholia;
but the publication by Emmanuel Miller in 1868 of the contents,
of a remarkable MS formerly at Mt Athos 3 showed that these as
For
well as the extracts from Suetonius had a peculiar history.
.
the
MS comprises,
besides the collection of proverbs attributec
to Zenobius, short excerpts from
Zenodorus irep\ T779 'Oprjpoi

from the Aeet9 (irepl ovofiacrlas r)\i/ciwv and so forth]
of Aristophanes, and from the works of Suetonius ahead]
avvr]deLa<;,
Each of them contains passages closely parallel to the

names Aristophanes alone of
quoted.
text of Eustathius, although he
n.r)ve\6irrjs
T^Xûax 01
' '
avrov Si Kai HoXvk&o-ttjs
ij)...'Api<TTOTe\T)S Si iv 'IdaKijaiuv
(fr.
TriXtnaxb" <pa<n âvaiKaav
ypaipas Kvprjvalos
rj
HvXiSafiov
iic
(EGF
s.v.
Now
etc
k Si IlrjveXdirrjs Trj\i/xaxov Kai
Horn,
it
118
'
TyXiyovov
ApKe<rL\aoi>
'Ap.veicrios
64)
See
6 Si tt)v TrfKey6veiav
vibv 'OSvacrei avaypcupet
Kara Si Avaip.axov
kt.
W'pvoSias Kai Ai6s, Aaiprqs
T-qXeixaxov Kai HoXvk&o-ttjs Ilepo-iirToXis.
Paris, suppl. Gr. 1164.
{FHG
tov Hepo-tirroXov rives Si
KipKtjs viol icad' HaioSov {Theog. 1013) 'OSvcaei
p. 58) iK p.v KaXv\j/ovs
TpayKvXXos.
tticTopos TlepaiirroXiv, us HcrioSo
506) Kai 'EXX&vikos Si
Si KaXvtf/ovs HavaLdoos Kai ~Sav<rii>oos.
Contrast with this schol.

Xa\KOfjieSovo-ris'
(fr.
yijfiai tt)v 'AXkii>6ov Kai yevvrjcrai
Kai toioijtois \6yois ivevKaipovaiv.
"Aypios Kai Aarlvos,
ttjs
woXirda
frs.
See also
fr.
454.
792, 793, 1062, 1069.
See Miller, AManges de
litt.
gr. pp. 407
436
lxix
the three authors, and even in his case sometimes substitutes

<f>aai or Kara tov? ira\atov<:.
Thus the nature of the evidence
to the conclusion that Eustathius
(Detracts in
had before
character to the Athous, but giving the
question in a much fuller form.
Among
the chief sources of Eustathius must be included the
irresistibly
him a MS similar
in
Atticist lexicons of Aelius
Dionysius and Pausanias, but, owing
unfortunate methods of reference already described, it

has become a question of some difficulty and complexity to
determine the extent of territory to be assigned to one or both
of them, and in a less degree to distinguish the boundaries of
his
t<>
So
their respective provinces.
me
of Aelius Dionysius
of the fragments,
But that
is
not
far as
is
Sophocles
is
v ,ius
?
and
,,
us*,,i**-
concerned,
not given as authority for any
whereas that of Pausanias occurs four times*.
all
for
it
is
certain that
many
them are introduced by the formulas
concealed
refer-
Kara touv
ev prjropiKU) Xegucto*, ev Kara aroixtlov Xe<*oj
and
There is a large number of instances in which the
of the Atticists is repeated by Hesychius', and various
to
<f>a<ri,
File
like.
n
explanations have been given of
their
agreement.
Thus,
it
argued both that Aelius Dionysius borrowed from

Ian. and that Diogenian plundered the Atticists.
lint
Diogenian and the Atticists were contemporary writers,
i
more
likely explanation that the coincidences result from
used the same sources'.
having
Hesychius
than
fuller
7
,
and
it
is
Eustathius
is
usually
deserving of attention that
adduces Didymus .is his authority for the explanawhere Hesychius is silent'. Herennius Philo, to HrreaahM
uc shall return in another connexion, is mentioned by
twice as the author of the work trtpi
ly
whom
dpyffxa,
lias
<
Dionysius
c get
fr.
(p. j 54
Schwahe)
considered lo have been the wxirce from
1087.
*
1093.
*
ut
The
the
fr.
clearest instances ar<
!i:
i>
not intended to
lie
400.
;,
ehau*tivc of the potata
<.f
contact
1006, 1046, 1084;
Mwcen
Mathius.
11
in
Pauly-Wiwowa V 99a
See especially
fr.
ic.
"
fr.
ijj.
Hesychius
lxx
8ia<popa>v <rr)fia:vofxev(0v.
This book, which survived until the
Byzantine age, was the source of various lexicons of

synonyms which were current under different names and that
such was the history of the extant lexicon of Ammonius irepl
ofjioicov kclI hicupopwv XeEewv is shown by its agreement with the
late
fragments of Herennius preserved by Eustathius.

therefore, belongs the distinction
between
which occasioned the quotation of

in
i7Ti<]>aTo<;
relation of
We
1048.
fr.
fr.
730
To
ecr-âpa
1
,
Herennius,
and
i3wp.6$
and the record of
are not here concerned with the
Eustathius to any of the technical grammarians
except Herodian
and the coincidence of his text with the

Kavovwv i/c twv HpcoBiavov, edited by
a Heidelberg program of 1887, supports the view that
;
iirtrop.^1
ru)v ovojxaTLKwv
Hilgard
in
'
such excerpts rather than the complete treatises of Herodian
were alone accessible to him 2
Before leaving the subject of Homeric exegesis, some reference
eirc-
fiepifffio
.
mus
|-
k.
m ade
to the im/jLepiafioi, class-books of grammatical
applied
analysis
to
the
text
of the
The
Homeric poems.
analytical process must, of course, have existed from the earliest
days of literary study 3 but in Byzantine times, as the circle of

such studies continually narrowed, the professional teacher relied
more and more upon the practical manuals variously assigned
to the most eminent grammarians, and revised according to the
needs of the age by their successors. Examples of such books
,
have come down to us and some of them were published by

A. Cramer in his onccdota. The earlier type was so arranged
that the verbal explanations were made to follow the order of
the text 4 but we are more immediately concerned with the cla
I
in which the lemmas are arranged in alphabetical order.
J.
fr.
From
564,
2
the
same source Eustathius derived the excerpt from Alexion quoted on
2.
There
is
a reference to these excerpts in
p. 168 (Hilgard, p.
n,
3).
The
epitome was also published by Cramer {anecd. Ox. IV 333). A similar epitome ire,
clkXItuu pijudruv AiXlov 'Hpwdiavov (ibid, iv 338) appears in the same program a
connects Herodian with fr. 164.
3
Sext.
Emp. math.
1.
161 speaks of 6 Kara. ypafifiaTiKrjv
/j.epurfxos
as requiri
subtraction (to d<paipeiv) and addition (to TrpooTidtvai).

4
An example
294370.
is
cod. Coisl. 387 (tenth century) published in anecd. Paris
THE SOURCES Of THE FRAGMENTS

remarkable representative
(XIV cent.) published
which
quotes
authority
for
in
vol.
lxxi
New
College Iffi 298

of Cramer's anecdota Oxonithe
is
Sophoclean fragments' and is the

The grammatical sources
frequently named are Herodian and Aristonicus, and
amongst others we find mention of Apollonius, Alexion, HelioSeleucus, and Tryphon. The latest in time are Philoponus,
znsui
sole
five
of them.
four
Orion, and Charax
name of Choeroboscus is
be assigned to the early part of the
and, since the
may
absent, the collection
Charax and Choeroboscus'.

works were based largely on the results
of Herodian's labours, and several of them circulated in his
name, although their authenticity is open to question*.
The name of Herodian, known as 6 reî/t/ccv for his eminence
them, introduces us to the technical grammarians, ypapfiaTiKi'i was a comprehensive term, embracing the various branches
sixth century, between the dates of
It
i>
certain that these
much
scholarship, ami, although Aristarchus paid
attention to
and 6p0oypa<pia, the great Alexandrians lived before

me when specialization had succeeded in cramping the
grammarian's functions. Dionysius Thrax, the pupil of
irpoorrtia
grammar
the father of
the
in
nan
use of the
although his activity was not limited within

ire
bounds'.
its
not concerned with the immediate development of the

\pollonii
Hadrian.
tgt of
[>l
us of Alexandria,
who belongs to
among the
the earliest of our authorities
is
was extraordinary, and

not too much to say that from his writings and those of his
dian the later world derived the whole of it-, grammatical
His particular province was the function, of tl e
ledge*.
I
influence
lis
upon
of speech, and he was the
>mi xxxiii.
"ccrtaincfl to
n in
book
t<>
belong* to the
ln rftrf, <">c of
colic.
have been the authority followed
He-
,74.
in the ncholia
3) iiroltatily,
I'auly-Wisaowa
writer of a tn
Kcit/cnMcln, Gack. d. Rtymei. io*.
h fragment* are quoted

'i>. f/>
750.
first
of which have been preserved'.
l>ortions
entx,
posterity
wM
harm*.
in the citation of
fi
Ilerodkn
7*1
11
quoted
fr.
753.
Fr.
'
en*rate work
Wat.
t 2
#H
Technical
gram
maiun-.
lxxii
rodian,
who was born
at Alexandria, but lived subsequently at
Rome and
enjoyed the favour of the emperor Marcus Aurelius,

made himself supreme in the domains of morphology and
His reputation, continually enhanced by the
accentuation.
passage of his writings through the centuries, was earned by
the skilful reconstruction and careful elaboration of the results;
which his predecessors had garnered, rather than by his successin establishing
new
principles of general application 1
Thus
the
2
and his great
irepl 6p6o<ypa<f)La<} was derived from Tryphon
work, the KadoXitcrj irpoo-cpSia in twenty-one books, was founded
on the writings of Aristarchus, Tryphon, and Heracleides o|
,
Miletus 3
The book
is
known
to us chiefly through excerpts,
appropriated by Theodosius and Arcadius, and

placed in regard to
the small tract
all his
we
are similarly
other writings 4 with the exception of

,
irepl pbovrjpous Xe'|to)?,
which has survived intact
No
fewer than fifteen valuable and independent quotations from

the lost plays of Sophocles are preserved in this little treatise*,
and it is a remarkable fact that it contains no others from any
tragic author,
excepting two from Aeschylus and one from
One might not unreasonably infer that

own use a collection of these Sophoclean
had access to a list compiled by some one else 7
Aristias of Phlius 6
he either
made
instances or
The
for his
from which is quoted

the exceptionally interesting fr. 799, has nothing to do with
Herodian the grammarian, although he is known to have made
rhetorical
same
use of the
1
treatise irepl a^rjpaTcov,
Reitzenstein, op.
title 8 .
cit.
There has been some controversy as

2
311.
ibid. 302.
Sandys,
to
p. 321.
His fragments were collected and edited by A. Lentz in 2 vols., Leipzig, 1867For the excerpts published by Hilgard after Cramer see p. lxx.
1870.
5
See Nauck's Index. In fr. 521 Herodian is, of course, the source of the otl
Two
authorities, and in fr. 46 his tradition is independent of Hesychius and the rest.
quotations
282
ft.),
(frs.
360, 586) are repeated
It is
(Cramer, anecd. Ox.
ill
extremely unlikely that Herodian could have read Aristias, whose memorj
scarcely survived outside the irivaKes.

7
in the irepl dixp^vwv
perhaps an excerpt from the KadoXiKi] irpoaySia.
It is
worth notice that there
is
See also on
fr.
362.
no quotation from any of the extant plays.
8 Christ-Schmid, op. cit. ll B

p. 709; Schultz in Pauly-Wissowa VIII 970; Lehr
Herodiani tria scritta emendatiora, p. 422. The writer clearly borrowed from
learned source he quotes after our passage Eur. fr. 132, and shortly before it Arc!
:
fr.
69 and Anacr.
fr. 3.

Ithc
lxxiii
authenticity of the severely curtailed OtXeVaipoc, which
is
printed at the end of Pierson's edition of Moeris (pp 431453

of the 1759 edition). The little book is undoubtedly of the
and has much
Atticist class,
in
common
with i'hrynichus and
the lexicographical sources of Pollux and Athenaeus.
It
is
generally considered that Herodian had no affinity with the

Atticists'; and, although the possibility of
been advocated by Reitzenstein*, neither
its
genuineness has
nor
title
contents
ppear to support his view*.

The edifice constructed by
the labours of Herodian and hi^

was continually patched and repaired, enlarged or allowed
partly to fall into decay, by the various workers who succeeded
them but the plan was never remodelled.
It is needless to
a list of these worthies, but mention must be made of
father
who
Alexandria or Miletus
lived in the fifth century at
or at both 4 since the lexicon Messanense edited by

,
Rabe baa
been identified as a fragment of his work -rrepl 6p0oypa<pia$ 9

John Philoponus of Alexandria, who belonged to the age of
Justinian and is well known for his commentaries on Aristotle,
.
old except the <tvht6ckm>.

*
Gts<h. J. gr.
Lehrs
(p. 4
Etym. pp.
n)
377, .<KS 396.
thought that here and there might

I
in 400.
observed that the reference to
who
fr.
606
is
Now, Aesch.
to by Athenaeus and indicated in the 4>tX/ra<pot,
At
iu*. X/{. p. 35, 19.
first
sight
this
passages are examined with their context,

n the w. ixo.
od
M{. are entirely
/.<-.
97.1-
It
should I*
is
fr.
will
different
l.c
i*
fuller
referred
quoted precisely by Herodian
appears con
it
ill, which
ut,
when
the various
found that the surrounding
from those
in Pollux
ami Athenaeus,
whereas the lexicographers were dealing with vocabulary, Herodian was

lc establish a rule of morphology.
Cohn's theory, which Keitiemtein com-
that,
kirK
bats, that
Atticism was derived from the Pcrgamcnc scholars, or more particularly
from Alexander I'olyhUtor,

the \/><uflot
480) and
in
See
a trace of Herodian.
undoubtedly an abridgement of the
Account preserved by Pollux and Athenaeus.
*.
l>e
followed by Schultx,
is
is
another matter altogether.
In Naock's /Wjr F<mti*m
run together with 4k rfir 'liphdiaroc also printed by Piervm f pp
Lobeck's Phtynifknt,
p.
451
ff.
That also
is
a work definitely
Atticist
character.
ties
Atitiattidft (de
^H**e also
'
that
put him about
frs.
two centuries
earlier (sec Christ. Schmid, 0/
Mi work *ara +p*txov rare ffrxK. sometimes identified

Fee
Borries. Phryn. frtup. sofh. p. XXX v), of which later.
I
69, 333.
Keitzenstein, of.
Orus adapted an
fit.
p.
389
ff.
The
value of the quotations
Atticist lexicon to his purpose.
is
dae to the
fsct
lxxiv
But he was himself a

grammatical
tradition,
and fr. 461 appears
representative of the
in his extant work irepi rwv 8m(f>6pQ)<; rovovfievoov fcai hintyopa
Five fragments are preserved by Priscian, who
cnjfiaivovTwv.
was a contemporary of the emperor Anastasius (491 518).
quotes
526, apparently from Orus.
fr.
Though
depended largely upon Greek

his dedication that it was his
a Latin grammarian, he
authorities,
and acknowledges
in
intention to translate into Latin the rules of Apollonius Dyscolus
and Herodian.
In
much
fact,
of the Institutes proves to be a
reproduction of extant works of Apollonius and of the scholia

to Dionysius
work de
Thrax
Fr. 880,
which comes from the minor
Teretitii metris, is of interest as
branch of learning.
now securely dated in

who quoted Sophocles'
metrician,
source
Priscian's
belonging to another
was Heliodorus the
the middle of the
first
cen-
from the commentaries

of Seleucus, the Homeric scholar and contemporary of Tiberius*.
George Choeroboscus, perhaps the latest in date but by no means
the least, distinguished of the classical grammarians, occupied
a professional chair at Constantinople in the early part of the
Several fragments of Sophocles are preserved
sixth century.
tury A.D.,
in his lectures
iced pr)fjL'iT(Dv
on the
line
elo-ayayyacol icavdves irepl vXiVetu? ovofi/irayv
of Theodosius of Alexandria, which were afterwards
There is no doubt that

works of Apollonius Dyscolus, Herodian,
and Orus, but he seems to have used them only in intermediate
sources, especially the writings of Philoponus and the grammarian
Zenobius 3
Choeroboscus is also our chief authority for two
quotations drawn from his commentary on the Enchiridion
of Hephaestion 4 in which he represents the tradition of the
published from the notes of his pupils.
he depends upon
lost
Teuffel-Schwabe,
Warr,
tr.
II
Bekker's third lexicon (anecd. 117

frs.
696, 739.
In
its
irepl
180)
present shape
The eighteenth book of the Institutes

dwrd^ws Cohn in Pauly-Wissowa 11 139.
may be mentioned in this connexion: see
p. 523.
corresponds to the third of Apollonius
it
is
very
late, as
the quotations
show
but
it
and was originally based on collections made from the

speeches of Demosthenes and Isocrates.
2
Hense in Pauly-Wissowa vm 28, Susemihl, op. cit. II 22621.
also contains old material
:t
Reitzenstein, op.
Now
cit.
published in
361.
full
in
Consbruch's Hephaestion, pp. 177
254.
Parts of
taken from the inferior codex Saibantianus appeared in Gaisford's posthumous
editi

ancient
metrical
descended
learning
from
lxxv
Aristophanes
of
intium.
The
noticed
influence of the paroemiographical tradition has been Paroemioto the scholia on Pindar and Plato and the e^phe".
in relation
sources employed by these writers will next be described.

It is
unfortunate that the proverbial corpus is still accessible only
in the edition of von Leutsch and Schneidewin published at
in 1839A
For the publication by Emmanuel Miller
Athoan Ms mentioned above 2 threw an entirely new light
on the history of these collections.
It has been shown by Otto
Crusius 3 that the vulgate MSS used by the editors of the corpus
represent later collections made in alphabetical order, and con-
Gottingen
of the
taining either 552 proverbs attributed to Zenobius or about IOOO
without an editor's
value
their
name 4
But, though these MSS
supplying the gaps
in
earlier corpu-.
is
it
certain that the
still
have
our knowledge of the
in
Athoan and other Kf
which have since been found to belong to the same group

represent a more primitive attempt to form a corpus in which
the pr<\erbs of Zenobius were retained
In the archetype of these
which the
first
MSS the corpus was divided
by the name of Plutarch and entitled

and the fifth a collection
Wcl-avSpevai irapoim'tv
lr*chclmann
(A'A. A/us.
',
wu the
xxxvi 300)
to recogniie the author-
first
since confirmed by the heading of cod. K.
oiicus,
into five
three contained the proverbs of Zenobin
fourth those passing
order.
in their original
The two passages
Choeroboscus (frs. 140. 705) are adduced in the same conmund in

the Anonynius Amlrosianus tie rt mttrita edited l-\ SV. Slu
ly
l<
icmund's anttdota
n
1
<if
the
anonymous
This book, which
?.///./.
writer to
is itself
pp.
illSf&
is
<
am
not aware that the
has l>ccn investigated.
not easy to procure, *upcreded fur practical purposes
iKford K)xf..r.!, 1836).
In the ptescnt
work except where

,
for special
has been necessary to refer to MilU-r ' M/langu, the notation of the
iigen
corpus ha* lecn preserved
in preference to the
numbers of the Athoan
'.
ad parotm. Gr.
(Leipzig. 1883), p. 16
* The Paris Ms
3070b (xn cent
and the Bodkfea (xv csatt.) of the latter.
reproduction
ibiitrutti
<(
(I
jircscntativc of the former class,
Gafcfostfi cdin.-n
Mill valuat
the Bodleian; for the gottingen editors transferred to an
y 40;)
t
if
as were not found in tie

'
p.
flf.
Aff*n*%M
only Mich proverb* liclonging to the anonymous collection
separately edit
Ieipgi 1887.
lxxvi
made by an unknown
show
even
that Zenobius
1
date for use
a late
sophist at
rhetorical schools.
in
the
reference to Nauck's Index Pentium will
within the limits of the Gottingen
most important of the paroemiographers

as a source of quotations from tragedy and although Macarius,
Gregory of Cyprus, and Apostolius are not entirely valueless as]
witnesses to the tradition, they belong essentially to the same
group, and do not represent an early collection independent of;
Zenobius.
The same remark applies to the collection of 776
Zenobian proverbs which passes by the name of Diogenian but
has nothing whatever to do with the lexicographer of that name 2
Zenobius, the author of the collection which lies at the base
of all extant records, was a sophist who lived in the reign of
Hadrian, and his work is described by Suidas as liriToyJr] to,v
Lucillus
jrapoifimv AiSvfiov teal Tappalov iv /3<ySX/ot<? <y'.
Tarrhaeus we have already encountered as one of those responsible for the scholia to Apollonius Rhodius
but, though
corpus
is
by
far the
materials are lacking to determine the exact date of his literary
labours 3 the character of the two passages where he

,
verbatim, apart from the
fact
that,
while
is
quoted
Didymus wrote
in
thirteen books, Tarrhaeus as well as Zenobius wrote in three 4
shows that Tarrhaeus cannot have been the intermediate source

between Didymus and Zenobius 5
We must rather regard
Didymus, with whose methods we are now familiar, as having
provided Zenobius with the bulk of his material and especially
with his quotations, while additions of moderate length were
made from the stories relating to various localities collected by
Tarrhaeus in the course of his travels. Thus we have seen that
Didymus rather than Tarrhaeus was the source of fr. 160 6 and
the same is doubtless true of the remainder of our fragments,
.
Cohn
3
It
should be remembered that the Appendix proverbiorum
Their ascription to Diogenian

in
C. Mueller
(FUG
little
iv 440),
Helladius ap. Phot.
Crusius, op.
See
p. lxiv.
cit. p.
bibl. p.
93
also Zenobian.
See also
p.
has collected
all
the notices relating to him,
or else his contemporary.
530* 10.
f.
His name
811 see Crusius,
who
Didymus
older than
is
explained by Crusius, Anal. p. 23.
Pauly-Wissowa V 783.
makes him a
fr.
is
78;
is
and
expressly recorded in connexion with

for
fr.
37
ib.
p.
142.
fr.
981.
For

although his authority cannot
Ixxvii
every case be directly traced.
in
Didymus, of course, made his collection from the earlier writers

who had occupied themselves with the investigation of proverbs
either current in speech or recorded in literature.
Of
these the
most important were Aristotle, Theophrastus, Clearchus, Demon,

Chrysippus, Aristophanes of Byzantium, Dionysodorus of Troi,
and Aristides.
But Didymus was not merely a compiler:
while he brought together the explanations previously given, he

exercised his judgement freely in selecting from amongst them,
them all in favour of another suggested by his

Hence the fact that Zenobius often records
of explanatory glosses, although the names of their
Thus Aristophanes of Byadvocates are seldom preserved
zantium, whose name is recorded in connexion with fr. 1044*,
or in rejecting
own
researches.
-
and who, according to the reasonable inference of Crusius,

the source of fr. 198*, was rebuked by Didymus for charging
Fr. 406 was one of the proverbs
the old poets with plagiarism 4
.
and Demon, who belonged to the

explained by Chrysippus 5
of the fourth or beginning of the third century, certainly
discussed the proverb 2aprSoi//o9 7e\aK, although he is not the
;
source to which
\\
t
we owe
the reference to the Daedalus*.
pass to the lexicographers, the most copious,
not the lxx *"
The supreme imsource of our information.

in relation to the tragedians can easily be
fruitful
|x>rtancc of
if
Hesychius
by consulting the references to him in Nauck's Index

but the history of the development which explains the comition of his work has been treated in the preceding section,
and sundry explanations bearing on other lexicographers have
already been given and need not be repeated here. Aristophanes
intium was the founder of Greek lexicography; and his
isurcd
strictly to his
immediate followers, adhering
example, confined
iyXoaaai or X'), not

phrases current in a
words
and
the
necessarily alphabetical, of
to a particular art.
appropriate
or
literature
ticular branch of
to the compilation of
cxamplei ice Zeiwl.
160), 6.
"
Arniin
See
ill p.
p. lxiv.
lists
Ami
101; Ousiu*. op.
fit.
p. 150.
\
1 1
(fr.
908).
*
iM
Ixxviii
An early example was the yXuxraai of Nicander, frequently

quoted by Athenaeus, which seems to have been intended to
explain obscure terms of local currency
to readers of Athenaeus,
was the
another, also familiar
oyfraprvriKal \ett<? of Artemi-
and several collections of dialectical and literary words

were made by Tryphon.
A favourite subject was, of course,
the explanation of Homeric y\waaai, in which all subsequent
The
workers drew largely upon the labours of Aristarchus.
in
mentioned
extant lexicon of Apollonius has already been
The awaywyr) rwv Trap 'lirTroKpaTei \e%eu>v
this connexion
of Erotian is one of the most valuable remnants of Greek lexicography, and alone preserves a number of tragic fragments, though
The author belonged
often, unfortunately, in a corrupt form.
to the second half of the first century, and his book was dedicated
to Andromachus, the emperor Nero's physician. His chief source
was the Hippocratean glossary of Baccheius of Tanagra (c. 200
B.C.), which is quoted 64 times, and through him he derived
much grammatical learning, including many quotations from
the poets-, from the Xeet? of Aristophanes of Byzantium 3
dorus
But Erotian also
Heracleides of Tarentum
treatise in three
on other
relied
books
(c.
B.C.),
75
7rpo9
authorities,
amongst
whom
the author of a grammatical
BaKêlov
'IrnroKpaTow;
roup
Trepl
The coincidence
of Hesychius
fact
that
Erotian
was amongst
the
due
to
550
5
Diogenian
An
explanation
of the
consulted
by
the authorities
found
condition
of
our
in the
greater fullness of Hesychius is to be
Xegewv 4 deserves special mention.

,
and Erotian
in
is
fr.
See
Although
p. lxv.
fuller version is usually
in frs. 729,
1092 Apollonius gives more than Hesychius, a
preserved by Hesychius and other Byzantines.
such a version were published from an Egyptian papyrus by E.
W.
Fragments of
B. Nicholson in
C.R. xi 390.
he
tovto fxaprvpias
Erotian p. 31, 12 (of Baccheius) iroWas wapade/nevov
His influence can be established in other passages than the seven or eight where
For the use made of him by Baccheius see Klein's Erotian,
cited by name.
is
et's
ttoiijtQv.
p. xxiv.
4
rities
Erotian, p. 22, 19; 32,2.
now
The date
obsolete) in the n. on
misinterpreted;
Pauly-Wissowa
for,
11
fr.
of Heracleides was wrongly given (after autho-
236.
But Erotian,
149, 2790) twice
books against Baccheius.

5
So Cohn infers from the statement
Diogenian collected t&s 7ropd
p. 32, 2,
has been strangely
Wellmann (in
makes Apollonius of Citium the author of the three
though Klein's statement
(p.
xxvin)
is
quite clear,
in the introductory letter to
rots larpoh X&feis
(Pauly-Wissowa
vm
Eulogius that
547).

text of Erotian, which
lxxix
has been proved by Daremberg's
d:
covery of extracts from Erotian among the Vatican scholia to

Hippocrates to be a mangled abridgement of the original work.
1
of 'Arrttfat \ee/e was put together
.Aristophanes' collection
with the object of elucidating the sense in which they were
and we may account in the

found amongst the writings
attributed to Crates of Mallus, Demetrius Ixion, Philemon,
and others.
Hut the 'AttwcoI \ee? of Dorotheus, of which
Athenaeus quotes the 108th book 3 belonged to the class of
encyclopaedic compilations which were characteristic of the
century AD, and of which the joint work of Pamphilus
and Zopyrion was the most famous specimen.
The earliest a
lexicon*.
representative of Atticism in the narrower and stricter sense,
i.e. the school which aimed at the maintenance of a pure
Attic
style in contemporary literature and conducted its researches
into classical usage with this express purpose in view, was
employed by
way
authors
classical
the
for
similar titles
.....
Irenaeus, the pupil of Heliodorus the metrician*,
by
name Minucius
Latinized
the
appears clearly
in
.1
PacatUS.
known
This
also
tendency
fragment of Irenaeus quoted by Socrates,

historian of the fifth century, in which the
a
meaning of vTruaraaa is condemned as ffopftapov,

because the word was used by Sophocles as equivalent to
philosophical
who
in the age of Hadrian,

published two editions,
and
books,
which were recognized by Eustathius*. The wrk was
Aelius Dionysius,
pa*.
wrote 'Arnica ovoficna

l>)th
<.f
well
known
who
to Photius,
and
btbliotkeca*,
its
lived
in five
ibove particulars
giv<
in h
upon Byzantine lexicography was
influence
Pausanias, a Syrian and a COntempOl

a similar work, which in the time of Photius
extensive.
irded as a
md up
rm.
companion volume
with
p.
XVII
lingly 7
it
fr.
t.
hibl.
The
the earlier lexuon, and
was
was
difficulty of distinguishing
ff.
The tame
1
t<>
dale
Od.
|.
indicated by the fact that Erotian quoted
'cod
00d. 153 drtytfrtlhi ti iw
ry
mirr$ t-
him
lxxx
them has been
increased, as
of Eustathius
but
we have
general
in
by the carelessness
seen,
may be
it
inferred that Aelius
Dionysius was more nearly concerned with questions of form

and expression, whereas Pausanias dealt with the technicalities
relating to public and private antiquities, and especially with
the explanation of proverbs
tradition
is
followed
is
Though
1
.
the general line of their
from doubt, the identity of the sources actually

often obscure
for it is uncertain how much they
free
how much from
took direct from Aristophanes of Byzantium, or
Didymus, Pamphilus, and Irenaeus.

has already been considered 2
Their relation to Diogenian
In spite of the difficulty involved
in tracing the influence of lost works,
enough
Eustathius has revealed
them as one of the chief sources

followed by Photius in his lexicon, and to establish their claim
to the ownership of a number of glosses in the sixth lexicon
included in Bekker's anecdota?. Evidence bearing on both these
points will be found in the glosses which contain some of the
Sophoclean fragments
The survival of part of his work has
made Phrynichus the best known of the Atticists to modern
scholars.
He lived in the latter half of the second century, and
his great work the ao<piaTiicri irpoTrapao-icevr) was composed in
thirty-seven books.
With the exception of the fragments which
can be recovered from other texts, the only part which has come
to enable us to identify
down
to us
ao(f)i<jTi,Kr)<;
the extract (e tcov
is
7rpo7rapa<T/cevrjs)
345,
and published as the
(pp.
74).
together
^pwiôv
rov 'Apafiiov
first
lexicon in
Bekker's anecdota
has recently been re-edited by
It
with a collection
rr)$
preserved in the codex Coislinianus
of the fragments.
J.
de Borries 5
Much
better
E. Schwabe in his edition of their fragments (Leipzig, 1890) made no attempt

between the two writers.
to distinguish
2
p. lxix.
pp. 319
476.
p-qropwv ttoWQv.
It
The
is
entitled crvvaywyij \4i-ewi>
part published by
of Dionysius occurs at p. 362,
XPV^^^"
^K
8ia<p6pwv
Bekker only covers the
letter a.
<ro<f>Qiv
re
/ecu
The name
3.
For Photius see frs. 1087, 1093. The name of Pausanias appears in connexion
with frs. 268, 877, and may perhaps be inferred in relation to fr. 420. p-qropiKov Xeîxdv
is quoted for frs. 138, 748
and oi iraXaioi (fr. 994) is probably Aelius Dionysius.
;
many
Leipzig, 191
1.
The book
is
unfortunately disfigured by numerous errors, and
of the fragments are assigned to Phrynichus on unconvincing grounds.

known, however, owing to the editions of Lobeck and Rutherford, is his earlier and shorter work in two books, which was
Phrynichu
entitled ixXoyij pijfui-Tcop teal ovofitircov \\ttikwv.
and framed
his canons
el
accordance with the usage of Aristophanes, Thucydides, Plato,
and Demosthenes; so that his appeals to Sophocles were occa-
to the severest school of Atticism,
in
sional
in
upon
his successors
sixth lexicon,
in
when examples of the poetic style were

The influence of Phrynichus
way of illustration
character,
introduced by
recognizable for us chiefly
is
where
name
his
is
any other ancient document*, and
ship has been
much more
Bekker's
in
quoted more frequently than

in Photius.
This relation-
clearly established since the recovery
3
of the early part of Photius, to be mentioned later
Phrynichus
by no means a mere copyist or epitomator he was diligent
collecting material from the sources available to him. and he
.
in
exercised an independent judgement in the general .inferences
which he drew from
His eminence
it.
is
shown by
with Julius Pollux for the favour of the emperor
his rivalry
Commodus 4
although he failed in his candidature for the professorial chair

Hut it is altogether
at Athau which was given to Pollux.
as to gather
so
far
went
ible to suppose that he
of his illustrations directly from the pages of his Attic
models 4
Thus, it
himself of the help of indexes and lexicons.
probable that he profited by the work of Irenaens
\\\(%nvhpetav 8ta\(KTov, in which an attempt was

that the Alexandrian usage
Hut we are not
Attic".
is
cannot believe that he discarded the labours of his preany more than a modern scholar would refuse to avail
left
made
is
highly
-rrepi
to
was the direct descendant

to rely upon conjectm
t}*
show
of the
there
direct evidence that he used the lexicons of Diogenian and
'">
leu than nineteen of de Homes'* fragment, contain reference* to Sopbock*.
^11.
As de IW.ics seems
to suggest
the statement (p. XXVI
pot*.
vcral of
at pp. 157. ao*.

4
illustrate this
* good example.
UMM lfr. 5 j, 68. IJJ, 134. I46, 144) ' uncertain or.
Scarcely veiled instances of the conti.-virsy will be found in Rutherford'* edition
two from the U\vy*i,
iS and 1064, the only
357
fr
Rutlicrfi.ril,
|.
47<>; <!c
rr-
-.
(..
on pp.
xil, xxiii,
though he sule*jently
lxxxii
Aelius Dionysius
Helladius, the author of a miscellany of
1
.
composed
useful information
in verse,
who belongs
to the early
part of the fourth century, survives in the prose version preserved
by Photius
in his bibliotJieca.
He
has so
many
points of contact
with Phrynichus that the ao<piariK7) TrpoTrapaaicevr) has some-
regarded as the sole source of his grammatical
times been
information
The
but the conclusion
second
Antiatticist, the
in
not
is
generally accepted-.
order of Bekker's lexicons 3
represents a reaction against the severest school of Atticism,
and was written with the object of showing that numerous

words and phrases which had passed under the ban, were in
The authorfact employed by Attic writers of the best period.
ship is quite uncertain, but it was probably first put together
before the time of Orus, to whom Ritschl and others have
assigned it 4
The author's method was to take illustrations
from earlier grammarians of repute, and to quote the reference
.
to the ancient text.
It
has been argued that his chief source
was the 'Am/cal Xeêa of Aristophanes of Byzantium 5 and

several of our glosses show points of contact with Diogenian'
and Herodian 7 There are two cases in our collection 8 showing
an unexpected agreement with Phrynichus, but these may be
due to the mutilation of our text. It should be observed that
;
the Antiatticist quotes twenty-five fragments from Sophocles as

against twelve taken from Euripides and four from Aeschylus.
Just as Euripides was for obvious reasons the favourite of the
anthologists, so Sophocles, not because of any preference based
on literary grounds, but owing to the character of his diction,
was the tragic model selected by the ypafM/xaritcoL
Schol.
Hermog.
ap. Walz, Rhet. Gr.
v 486 (praep.
soph. p. 115, 23 de B.).
For
Aelius Dionysius see also Rutherford, pp. 132, 209.

2
in
Gudeman
in
Pauly-Wissowa VIII 101.
811, but not in
fr.
fr.
There
is
a coincidence with Phrynichus
734.
Bekk. anecd. pp. 75
Christ-Schmid, op. at.
116.
n5
p.
f.
cl.
696; de Borries, p. xxxv.
Our
version
is
clearlv
an epitome.
s
See L. Cohn
p. 91,
in
Jahrb.
Philol. Suppl.
xn
Observe the agreement of
292.
16 with Ar. Byz. ap. Eustath. Oct. p. 1761, 31.
6 frs.
169, 517, 6 1 6.
280, 518, 612.
frs.
frs/
408, 669.
THE SOURCES OF .THE FRAGMEXTS

The
lexicons
uitines as
|
'
hitherto
rhetorical
needs, but there
tical
which had
We
for
its
is
'
discussed
owing
Ixxxiii
known among
were
the
to their subservience to prac-
Rhetorical
lex,con *-
another class more properly so called
object the elucidation of the Attic orators.
are chiefly concerned with
Harpocration, whose ultimate
Didymus on
sources were the commentaries of
the orators, and

composed by various historians. He seems to have
employed immediately the same onomasticon which was epi1
'
Atî'Scc
the
tomized
Bckker's
in
fifth
Harpocration
lexicon*.
identified with the teacher of the
emperor
usually
is
L. Verus, although
some authorities place him as early as the reign of Tiberius.

The citation of fr. 502 is the occasion of a remarkably puzzling
coincidence between Harpocration and Athenaeus.
Both u
have been confused by compression, but in a different way
;
and, according to a recent explanation,
it
appears that the codex
of Harpocration was interpolated from Athenaeus at a time

when the Deipnosophists existed in a fuller form than is represented by the Marcianus*.
conjecture 4
ck's
Claudius Casilo, who, according to
was a sophist of the fourth century,
The fragments published by
nearly related to Harpocration.
from the Athous* bear a close resemblance to the glosses
er
In
the margin of the
Cambridge Harpocration \ and
possible
is
it
Claudius Casilo, whoever he was, was also the editor of that
collection.
Julius Pollux, the rival of Phr> nichus,
!>e
new fragments
Mfftt îrroptai
(fr.
in Pollux.
510) comes from a papyrus containing a portico
musthene*.
Bckk. anetd. pp. 195318.
whose ovofiaariKov
For an example tee
fr.
449, origin*
ally attached to a passage in Lysias.
See
II.
Schultz in i'auly-Wissowa
-sion here, since
vn
1415.
l>c
rejected in v. j.
was interpolated from Athenaeus, so
iOfl
lie
superior,
will
it
The problem
is
too intricat.
ha* no bearing on the lest of Sophocles, unless
w+rpa* should
.oration's
would
it
Hut, though
it
we
infer that
hrlil that
llarpo-
that the authoriiy of the biter's text
he observed that on Schult/'s hypothesis the accidental

may have been due to the epitornatnr of the Dtifm-
substitution of d*pa for wirpar

ists.
I.
C&kfl
in
Pauly-WissowaSuppl.
397 f.
The Ux. Cant, was
,
Ji*.
p.
Porson's Photiut.
first
edited by Dobrec, and published as an Appendix to
lxxxiv
ten books published between
was an
166 and 176 A.D.
He
Atticist of the milder type.
Aelius Dionysius and Phrynichus had rejected

object
construct
to
precedent set by Telephus
aim not so much

.
He made
for
it
was
his
But, while following the
his alphabetical
in
irepl xpr/crea)<;,
twv a\\a>v ot<? ^pd>p,0a, he professes

comprehensiveness as at purity of
ijTOL 6voix('n(ov ecdfjTO*; /cat
diction 2
extant,
complete vocabulary of Attic names
arranged according to subject-matter,
to
still
is
admitted much that
at
use of various sources in the composition
of the different books
the preface to the seventh book he
in
speaks of the numerous writings, both verse and prose, which
he has consulted, and
in those to the ninth
and tenth books he
refers to the disappointing character of the information to
gathered from the ovoixaa-riKov of Gorgias 3 and the

of Eratosthenes.
Thus
in
be
aKevo<f>opiKo<;
the second book he followed the
anatomical treatise of Rufus Ephesius 4 and his close agreement

,
with Athenaeus in the passage from which
fr.
241
is
taken pro-
bably indicates that Pollux drew from Juba's dearpiKt) lo-Topia

or from the monograph trepl av\dov ical 6p<ydvwv constituting the
book of Tryphon's irepl ovoixaaiwv. The fragments of

comprise some 36 for which Pollux is our sole
authority, and 15 in which he is supported by Hesychius either
alone or with others.
Fr. %jy shows that the quotation ultimately goes back to the common source of Pausanias and
Diogenian in all probability to Didymus, whose influence can
be detected in regard to frs. II, 36, and 482. Fr. 89, if not also
fr. 734, goes back to Aristophanes of Byzantium
and the same
writer's work irepl irpoaooTroiv was probably the source of Pollux
4. 133
154, from which we learn interesting details respecting
the masks worn by the actors taking the parts of Thamyras and
Tyro 8
6
that Eustathius quotes a
It has already been mentioned
of
work on synonyms by Herennius Philo of Byblus, whose period
of activity was late in the first or early in the second century.
third
Sophocles
Stephen
Suid. s.v.
1. 2 irecftLkoTlfiriTai
The
identity of this writer
See
p. lviii.
ov roaovrov
is
ets TcXr/dos biroaov ets
doubtful
1
Susemihl,
p. 177, 11 p. 271.
KdXXous (K\oyt)v.
II
501181.
6
p. lxx.
lxxxv
his works, which was entitled irepi -roXetov teal

avTwv ivSogowi ijveyxe in 30 books, is of much
greater importance, since it was the principal source followed
by Stephanus of Byzantium (c. 530 A.D.), who even in the extant
But another of
ofc
etcria-i)
mentions Philo's name 33 times. From

is mentioned by Stephanus 82 times
and Artemidorus about 80 it has been inferred that both were
epitome of
his etknica
the fact that Apollodorus
To
extensively used by Herennius.
these authorities
we should
add Hecataeus and Alexander Polyhistor, whose names

occur 300 and 100 times respectively. The position of Strabo
(cited 200 times) is more doubtful, since Herennius would have
no occasion to follow the copy when he had access to the
at least
Stephanus, of course, did not follow Herennius ex-
originals.
clusively
but
matters of etymology and vpoarohia
in
had
recourse to Herodian (cited 80 times) and Orus (cited 14 times)*.
An examination
of the context in which the quotations from
occur, favours the conclusion that the majority
iiocles
reached Stephanus through Herodian.
in
to the
attributed
lexicon
rhetorical
xandria exists
Patriarch Cyril of Cyril
numerous mss exhibiting various recen-
but has never been edited except in extracts arbitrarily

In these circumstances neither the date of
nor the sources from which
ition
the
in
mi<
<
mi
its
com-
derived have been
admitted to have played an important

Byzantine lexicography.
r-Mve developm<
ascertained, although
Thus, a
it
it
is
was the
Cyril -glossary
basis of
the avvayatyrj \i(av
published from cod. Coislin. 345 in Bachmann's <///rvglosses beginning with a and taken from the same
Ms hid already appeared as the sixth lexicon comprised

M
irse
Ii
lii.
Imt one might guess that
fuller text see
above
baldly poaribl to place the Sopboclean
i>
It shouM
579 came from A[>oll<xiorus.
most part only in an epitome.
be rcmemi>cr<-<1 that Stephanus c\
;
authors see p.
in
facts
Cramer, ant
are taken
d.
Par. iv
fr.
460.
nan's article in
177 ot
5. all
on
fr.
(frs.
390, 391
Pauly-Wtaiowa vut
comes from an
the fragment* appear also in !*hotias.
Zortarss
Cyril -glossary with etymological addil
lxxxvi
Bekker's anecdota
The
x
.
earlier condition of the first part of
the avvaywyr) which corresponds to that of the letters
Bachmann can be
by Boysen from
edited
of the original
/3
in
seen in the fragments relating to the letter a

cod. Coislin. 347 2
a-vvaycoy/j,
An
enlarged revision
which, with abbreviations and inter-
was incorporated by the writer of Bekker's sixth

lexicon, was one of the chief sources of the well-known lexicon
of the Patriarch Photius (c. 820 c. 891) 3
but the main constituent has been enriched with numerous additions from other
polations,
sources, especially Aelius Dionysius, Phrynichus 4 Harpocration,

,
and the lexicons

purpose
his
Aefef<?
Homer and
to
Photius announced that
Plato.
contrast with Diogenian was the collection of
in
from prose writers, but
in practice his quotations
poets are scarcely less numerous.
The
lexicon of
from the
Photius
preserved only in the Cambridge codex Galeanus (xil
which
mutilated, especially
seriously
is
in
the
is
cent.),
earlier
part.
certain portion of the early gaps has been supplied (a) from
the Athenian
MS
which contains two short fragments

in
1896 5 and {b) from
1083,
published by Fredrich and Wentzel
MS
the Berlin
(cod. Berol. graec. vet. 22) of the late eleventh or
early twelfth century, which contains the
commencement of the
The latter, so
lexicon and extends as far as the gloss airapvo^.

far as
it
relates to Photius,
was published by R. Reitzenstein
in
1907 with the title Der Anfang des Lexicons des Photios. It has
brought to light an extraordinarily rich increment of tragic and
comic fragments, no
less than 37 of which belong to Sophocles.

enlarged o-viaywytj was also incorporated in the lexicon
The
by
their
See
959), whose agreement with Photius is explained

employment of a common source. Suidas, of course,
of Suidas (912
p. IXXX3.
Lexici Segtteriani avvayuryij Xiêwv xPV ff L(iwt' inscripti pars prima ex codice
Coisliniano 347 edita, Marburg, 1891.
2
L.
Cohn
in
Iwan Mueller's Handbuch,
11
p. 699.
Observe that the newly recovered opening of Photius

4
The
Reitzenstein, Photios, p. xlvi.

entitled
KvplWov
Kal
recognition of the extent to which Photius was indebted to the
irpoirapaaKevr)
One
is
was one of the chief surprises of the new Photius

is the gloss aKovvai 6pyw, in which fr. 25
of the best instances
Nachr.
d.
Kgl. Gesellschaft
glosses comprised are
d.
'
Aftpafjuaios
(Reitz. p.
is
and dyxLarpevei
xxxix)
quoted.
Wissenschaftoi, Gottingen, 1896, p. 309
dydatiei
Qwriov
<ro<pi<TTtKri
'Adpdcrreia.
ff.
The

lamassed much material of a
we
different character, but
concerned with the historical and biographical
Ixxxvii
are not
owing
articles,
to
work bears some resemblance to a modem enc)

which
paedia.
He also borrowed many of his glosses on points of
grammar and lexicography from the paroemiographers and from
the scholia to Aristophanes, Sophocles, and Thucydides
A few words must be given to the Etymologica. The etymohis
were
logical speculations of the Stoics, especially of Chrysippus.
contested by the Alexandrian grammarians of the
Roman
period,
and above all by Philoxenus, a contemporary of Varro*, and

Tryphon, who together developed the formal classification of
as Trapayvyat ranged under their respective vpayrorvtra.
tvmological lexicon known to us was compiled by
Orion in the first half of the fifth century, and is still partially
in
an abbreviated form.
be clearly owed
fr.
whom
Besides Philoxenus, to
621, the predecessors to
whom
he most
fre-
quently refers are Heracleides, Herodian, and Soranus*.
Several
centuries later the reviving interest in classical literature
shown by
inent people, as well as generally
by the church, led to the
appearance in successive redactions of encyclopaedic collections

in which etymology was ,1 leading feature.
The oldest of these,
known as the Etymologicum gtnuinum in accordance with the
>n of its discoverer Trof. K. Reitzenstein, was completed
in
the
first
half of the ninth century.
and o.d.
-
I.aur.
S.
may
statement
e
Marci 304 4
on the authority
),
..11
come from PhijaidlU \f*Hf<
MttffxW/i4t go back.
The
fact thai
Suida*
The same remark
applies !>
fr.
not.
" "'
fr.
1
14
It.
'/-o
perhaps
longed to the age of Trajan and Hadrian.

*
-iun\oy iai
to>-
Kr. o;
'ofh.
|>.
43.
whom
.1
all
Ml Inmdi
CUM
S
The
fr.-n.
(*
the
i</>.
refer*
iTwjiaroi row ifdfnirWOV.
Ti.
i>
Phot. p. J4y 19 did not completely reproduce
j^r.
but has not been published".
ultimately derived from An.iophanc* of Byzantium, to
.i
source.
rests
be illustrated fr->m f^. 15, 165, 508, 596, 8bj.
the gloss appear* to
It
the tenth or eleventh century (cod. Vat.
.f
which extract* were published by B. MihVt
77.
> hare been separately published by Re

mmunicatcd by him to others. Hence il has partially ousted the Stjrm.
such books as Kaibel's Cam
md Diels's Vertakniiktr.
./
Etymo
g,ca
lxxxviii
numerous sources may be mentioned Orus, Orion,

Herodian rrepl iraOav, and various annotated MSS of classical
authors.
The Etymologicum Gudianum, so called after a formt
owner of the MS from which the edition of Sturz (1818)
printed, was compiled independently of the geuuinum, but froi
Among
its
similar sources.
It
appears
in three distinct recensions repre
sented by various MSS 1 and has a very complex history whicf

,
cannot be described here 2
was edited by Gaisford

twelfth century.
The Etymologicum Magnum, which
in 1848,
belongs to the early part of the
The author took
as the basis of his
of the genuinum, which he describes as to
fj,iya
he also made use of the Gudianum {to a\\o

a
number of
additional authorities 3
The most important

number and
of
all
work a copy
irv/xoXoyiKov, but
eTv/jLoXoyi/cov)
and
the sources in regard both to the
to the character of the quotations preserved in
it is
His date can only be ascertained

by reference to the authorities quoted, of whom Iamblichus is
possibly the latest 4 and, since he also shows no sign of Christian
influence, it is unlikely "that his collection was put together later
than the fourth century. As known to Photius, the work was
the Anthology of John Stobaeus.
making two volumes ("rev-^y but

and confusion of its order in the middle
was treated as two separate works, distinguished as
and fiorilegium. The eclogae is actually the first two
comprised
owing
ages
four books
in
to disintegration
it
eclogae
books, considerably mutilated, of the original avOoXoyiov, while

the third and fourth
original
made up
the so-called fiorilegium.
The
form of the work, with the correct order of chapters and

it can be restored from the best copies, is only
extracts, so far as
1
See
For further
fr.
789 {Eiym. Sorb.),
390 {Etym. Paris.).

Etymologica see Reitzenstein in Paulyimportant to observe that each scribe adds some particulars
fr.
details respecting the chief
Wissowa vi 812 ff. It is

and alters others, so that the work is continually in flux. The first part of a new
edition of the Etym. Gud. by Al. de Stefani has recently appeared.
3 The
Etym. Voss. (Voss. gr. 20, xm cent.) occasionally cited by Gaisford contains the so-called fj-eydXtj ypa/j-fiaTiK^, a reconstruction of yet another
Etymologicum
which passed by the name of Symeon (Reitzenstein, I.e. 816).
4
The supposed quotations from Hierocles the Neoplatonist really belong to
Hierocles the Stoic,
VIII 1479).
5
Bid/, cod. 167.
who
lived in the reign of
Hadrian
(v.
Arnim
in
Pauly-Wissowa

to be found in the recent edition of
lxx\.v
Wachsmuth and Hense
1
.
ho have followed the present discussion will not need to

>ured that Stobaeus did not gather his select passages in
own
urse of his
reading, although he
for the addition
-îble
of
Tomaria of a
often refers to the
If
A conclusive
iven
by Diels some
iddressed
He
certain Aristonymus.
use of earlier anthol<>
ago from the coincidence

the
Christian
by Theophilus, bishop of
Autolycus
to
180A.I1
(c.
forty years
well have been
later extracts.
those which appear in
of his quotations with
Antioch
made
proof that Stobaeus

8
may
some of the
Exactly the same kind of coincidence
bserved in the case of
Clement of Alexandria.
Thu^,
cannot be due to chance that three quotations on the same

topic which appear in the same chapter of Stobaeus, and in close
it
in immediate sequence
though one of them is attributed to Aeschylus with
ignificant addition 4
But, though the existence of such
anthologies is thus brought back to the second century A.D., and
mity to each other 4 should be cited

,
<
!lement,
nable inference to a
mmended
much
making of
the
earlier date*, and,
though Plato
selections from the poets, so that
from their works might be committed to
memory
as an
is no express reference to their

and no record of the names of their authors.
moral instruction 7 there
to
ition
Only within very recent times has evidence come to light Earl? ni{ofpe*
ls the tradition represented by Stobaeus as al
In the Journal of
current at least 600 years before his time.
use's
concluding volume
is
still
of the JioriU^mm have been retained

1
'
Rk.
.1/
use's
fr.
unpublished.
The
reference* to the vulgatc
the present edition as being more generally
pages have also been cited.

ff.
h assign
in
no
to
The clearest case is

nuoutmn of three distinct
loss in the anthology of the lemM
|>. 5;. 4 ff. *"h Wachsmath's note*.
Aeschylus as well as to Sophocles.
philus to Aeschylus as a tingle
passages which have run together owing to the

ing to the
two
latter: m.-c ft
961.
11. 13, 14
f
ir
!.(.
At.
U&.
8ll A.
contact between Stobaeus and Clement will be fonad
relation see
WiUmowit*, Ri*Uit*ng.
p.
t;i
W. Hasluck published from an
which was found at Kermasti in the Cyzicus district
dated about 300 B.C., a long list of aphorisms, such as
fiorjdet, dv/xov /cpdrei, aSi/ca <J>evye, and so forth, obviously
Hellenic Studies for 1907 1 F.

inscription,
and
is
cj>l\oi<;
intended for the moral edification of those
When
immediate neighbourhood.
the
who
frequented the
is
compared with
list
the collection of the precepts of the Seven
Wise Men
attributed
abundantly clear that the

former, if not the original, is at any rate an early version of the
latter 2
Even more remarkable in their relation to Stobaeus
to Sosiades in Stob. flor.
3.
80,
is
it
were the fragments of

texte,
2 pp. 123
florilegia published in Berl. Klassiker-
130, from
extracts 9 and
two papyri
(Berl.
9772 and 9773)
Thus 9773 not only contains
of the second century B.C.
the
69 next to each other though

the reverse order, but also the title yfroyo<; yvvcwcwv, which
1 1
of Stob.
flor.
in
is
same chapter of Stobaeus. Though the text

of Stobaeus may thus be shown to depend upon very ancient
authority, it cannot be considered to possess the same weight as
prefixed to the
the text of an extant play which can be traced to the Alex-
andrian edition.
In fact,
when
a comparison
is
possible between
the two, the differences are often such that they cannot entirely
be explained as the deliberate modifications of the anthologist

made for the purpose of adapting his quotations to their place.
In dealing with the Berlin fragments Wilamowitz suggested that
the text of Euripides might have
come from
a bad actor's copy,
while at the same time he pointed out the possibility that the
anthology was
edition 3
constituted
before
the date of Aristophanes'
But, whatever the defects of his text, Stobaeus
precious a witness that one would willingly barter
much
is
so
of the
lexicographic material for an increased supply from the antho-
more fortunate, as has

Apart from Stobaeus and his copyists
the only extant authority in this department is the dvdoXojiov
yi'VfAwv addressed to the empress Eudocia by the grammarian
logies.
In this respect Euripides was
already been mentioned.
xxvii 62
This was
f.
first
See also Vorsokr.

3
pointed out by Diels in Sitzungsb.
n3
p. 214.
See also his Sappho u. Simonides,
p. 270.
d. k.
pr. .4k<ni. 1907,
p. 457.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Orion
alone
440
[c.
which
A.D.),
for three
xci
fragments stands entirely
1
.
Bibliography.
5.
The
scholars of the centuries
immediately following the

were occupied with weightier matters than
the collection of the scattered remains of the ancient masters,
which the nature of the texts then available would have made
revival of learning
All the more credit is due to

by way of excursus to Athen. 277 E',
of exceptional difficulty.
<
ubon
for constructing,
a catalogue of
all
the
titles
of Sophocles' plays of which he could
Bentley once dreamed of the project of editing
find a record.
the fragments of
all
the Greek poets, and the Letter to Mill and
the contributions to Graevius's Callimaclius were foretastes of
he might have accomplished in this sphere.
Hut
it
the latter part of the eighteenth century that attention
itil
to be directed to those of Sophocles in particular.

In
Benjamin Heath (1704 1766) published at the Clarendon
cries of notes on Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Kuripides,
112) critical comments on a numb

(pp. 93
igments taken from Grotius's excerpts from Stobaeus*.
including
ntribution of a similar kind
Toup
philologer Jonathan
17 1 3
was made by the well-known
1785)
his Epistola
in
C'rifioi
iddressed to Warburton and published in 1767; and in the same

appeared L. ('. Valckcnaer's Dint rib,- in Euripidts /
,
ir
dramatutn
to
which incidentally discussed se

Sophocles.
Valckenaer had in fact devoted much
these latter, and it is clear from the Preface of Brunck,
reliquias,
tor, that
(
the collection contained in hi^
1786) was
acknowledged
iiom a
Wli
;i
to
contributed from hitherto

f
by Schnciilcwin from
edits-
Dutch critic.
David Ruhnkcn,
the
to
his obligation
number of quot.u
:47, 303.
<l
indebted
largely
Orion
Vienna Ms.
only a scanty fragment. lu.h

It
i*
alv> printed in
Mrmcke'i
SUkit us IV 349466.
Schwcighaucr'ji Athentnut, IX
"*,
quae
i6ij.
in
|>p.
17
31.
Eclogi* torn in Florikgio Stolwcu*
<ifrrt.
rcccm
xcii
unedited lexicographical sources.
The arrangement
of the editio
somewhat inconvenient. The plays in alphabetica

order with most of the longer fragments attributed to them came
first
then more than ioo fragments 'ex incertis tragoediis'; anc
lastly a number of glosses from the lexicographers arrangec
alphabetically as Lexicon Sophocleum,' and containing complete lines as well as isolated words and phrases.
Nevertheless
Brunck's edition, which was reprinted several times, held the
field for more than forty years, during which period little was
done either for the increase of the collection or for the better
understanding of the fragments which had been already printed
Mention should, however, be made of a paper by Blomfield ii
Mus. Crit. Cant. I (1826) 141
149, containing addenda t<
Brunck's collection and critical notes on several passages
Blomfield's results were incorporated by W. Dindorf, who, ii
his Poetae Scenici of 1830, was able by recasting Brunck's work
to issue it in a much more convenient form with various corrections and enlargements.
Dindorf acknowledged in his Preface
that he had taken slight pains to improve the work by his ow
investigations, and lamented that there was no prospect of a new
edition adequate to the needs of the time. Hasty and superficia
as the book was, it shared the popularity which Dindorf s publi
cations enjoyed for about half a century, and in its latest form
as represented in the fifth and greatly improved issue of the
Poetae Scenici (1869), it is probably still in more general use
than any other edition.
A new epoch in the progress of knowledge concerning the
literary output of the Greek tragedians was opened by the
princeps was
'
publication in three volumes of F. G. Welcker's Die grieckisch
Tragbdien mit Riicksicht auf den epischcn Cyclus geordnet, Bonn

This was an exhaustive examination of all the evidence
1839.
which could be discovered bearing upon the literary history of

the plays of the three great tragedians, and especially on the
contents of their plots. The plays were arranged according to
the order occupied by the events which they comprised in the
series of the epic Cycle.
Welcker's book is as readable to-day
as when it was first printed.
He had spared no exertion in
sifting the whole of the data provided by the mythographical
BIBLIOGRAPHY
authorities,
and
in
xciu
comparing them with the relevant indications
of the tragic fragments.
On
the basis of this evidence the plots
were reconstructed with remarkable acuteness
and the results,

[hough necessarily often conjectural, can be checked, even where
they fail to convince, by the openly displayed material of the
sources quoted.
It should be added that the satyric plays had
been separately treated by Welcker in an earlier work entitled
Xcic/itrag zu die Aesch. Trilogic Prometheus, Frankfurt, 1826.
Wclcker's work gave an extraordinary impulse to philological
activity, and the following years witnessed the appearance of
;
a number of
critical papers in the various periodicals by Bergk.

Nauck, Schneidewin, and others, directed to the emendation and elucidation of the tragic texts. The influence of
Welcker is more directly visible in editions of the tragic frag-
eke,
ments which began to appear in the course of the following

This applies to F. H. Bothe's Poetarum sccnicorum
m quorum iutegra opera supersunt Fragment*, Lip
1844 1846', to F. W. Wagner's Poetarum tragicorum Graecorum
decade.
1852, and to E. A. I. Ahrens's

of the fragments of Aeschylus and Sophocles in the
menta, Vratislaviae, 1844

edition
Didot scries (1842), which was prepared with the avowed object
of popularizing Wclcker's results.
Martung's Sophokles
J. A.
unite (1851)
but
his
was a more ambitious effort upon the same

though sometimes ingenious, are
speculations,
seldom such as to command absent.

In 1S56 appeared the first edition of A. Nauck's Tragicorum
w Fragmtnta, which was the earliest systematic attempt
produce an edition acceptable to the requirements of modern
to
criticism.
His aim was
critical
rather than explanatory, and
was the provision of accurate information

concerning the textual data of the sources. Even where these
had not been satisfactorily edited, as was the case with Stobacus,
Nauck succeeded in procuring collations of the material readings
of the l>cst MSS.
Nauck's second edition, enlarged and revised
if
his chief merits
so as to include the
1
lal
ailable material,
In 1806 Bothe published an edition
menu
were reproduced from Branck.
work
is
of
<.f
Sophocle*
in
appeared
vol*
second edition appeared
much independent
value.
in
in 1889,
which the frc
in ii6.
Neither
xciv
and has remained the indispensable foundation of all subsequent

work.
In the meantime Lewis Campbell had edited the fragments after Nauck in the second volume of his Sophocles (1881),
excluding those which consist of single words or of very short
phrases.
Campbell contributed some useful notes, but did little
to elucidate the difficulties which the fragments present
and he
evidently considered that they did not demand the same measure
of careful criticism which he applied to the text of the extant
;
plays.
In the course of the twenty-five years which have elapsed

since the appearance of Nauck's second edition a considerable
mass of fresh material has accrued, and the extraordinary

development of the various branches of Classical learning which
has taken place during that period, while it has thrown welcome
light on many obscurities, has enormously increased the difficulty
of focusing its results so far as they bear upon the scattered
texts.
There has been no fresh edition of the whole of the
fragments but, since the publication of the papyrus remains of
the Ichncutae and Eurypylus in 19 12, a convenient text entitled
Tragicorian Graecorum Fragmenta papyracea nuper reperta has
been edited by A. S. Hunt, and x the additions to Sophocles
brought to light in recent years have been collected and edited
by E. Diehl as Supplementum Sophocleum, Bonn, 191 3. The
Ichneutae has been separately edited by N. Terzaghi, Firenze,
There is also a German translation by C. Robert, Berlin
191 3.
;
[second
ed.],
191
3.
The
following
list
contains
all
the occasional
contributions which have been consulted for the purpose of the
some marked by an asterisk which

have not had an opportunity of examining.
present edition, as well as

I
Bakhuyzen, W. H. van de Sande.

phanis.
Bamberger,
De parodia
in comoediis Aristo-
Utrecht, 1877.
F.
schweig, 1841.
Conjectaneorum in poetas Graecos capita duo. Braun[Reprinted in his Opuscula pkilologica

see pp. 163:
165.]
Benecke, E.
F. M.
Anthnachus of Colophon. London, 1896. [On the
Phaedra of Sophocles at p. 201.]
BERGK, Th. Commentatio de fragmen (is Sophoclis. Lipsiae, 1833.
De duodecim fragmentis Sophoclis. Marburg, 1843/4.
Nachtrage zu den Fragmenten des Sophokles. Zeitschrift fur Alter-
tumsvvissenschaft, XIII (1855),
p.
108.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
[On the Mode.]
BLASS, F.
xcv
Literarisches Zentralblatt, 1897, p. 334.
Rhein. Mus. lv 96-101.
Adversaria in
F. H. If.
Halis Saxonum, 1894.
BLAYDBS,
Tragicorum Graecorum fragmenta.
Adversaria in varios ftoetas Graecos et Latinos.

Soph. frs. at pp. 158-165, 201.]
Spicilcgium Trngicnm.
Halis, 1902.
243]
[KRKR, F. Zu Sophokles3 Ichneutai.
Coniectanea.
It.
[On Soph.
xxxix
CAMPBELL,
L.
[Letter in reply to R. Ellis:
of Philology, ill 128.
frs.
156-163,
pp.
Woch., 1912, 1107C
Herl. phil.
Rhein. Mus.
[On
Halis, 1898.
274.
American Journal
v. infra.]
Collectanea Critica. [De nonnullis fragment is Tragicorum,

C.
Lugduni Batavorum, 1878.
pp. 187-208.]
Epistola critica de auibusdam Aeschyli Sophoclis Euripidis

\, J.
fragmentis.
Oxford, 1852.
[Reprinted in Miscellaneous Writings^
1872: see 11 pp. 455-457]
Tragicos Graecos. Hermes, II 142 ff.
Ad
Der
JUS, O.
Sophokleische Dionysiskos.
Rhein. Mus. XLVIII 153.
Drome
satyrique sans Satyres.

Revue des Etudes
grecques, xu (1899), pp. 290-299.
kk, \V.
Vermischte Aufs&txe.
Philologus, xu 188-192.
I.e
Cambridge, 1843. "

FragmeiUen des Sophokles.
P.
Adversaria.
H.
y.n den
ke, P.
PP- 51-55Philologus,
136
ill
13*.
her die Fabel

iv 785-792.
it,
der Aloiden.
Zeitschnft
R.
On the fragments of .Sophocles
Philology, iv 251-271.
.
On
11
the
411
and
Alterthumswissen-
f.
Journal of
Euripides.
American Journal of Philology,
fragments of Sophocles.
ff.
l\
144-154.
Some em
maw,
Herm-
rum Fragmenta.
lilaydexs
.ttlicn.i,
R.
^f the Greek 1
Archdologische Studien
/-holies
IX
.-
Rhein.
[(r. 88].
d,n Tntgikem,
Mus will
537
105*
Hcrlin, 1900.
ff.
A.inolttiones ltd Tragiiorimi i.f.tecorum fragmenta.
1863.
/.um Laokoon des Sophokles. Vcrhandluntfcn der 4<

sammlung dcutscbei I'hilologcn u. Schulmi
rornb 88*; [ pp. 43aikk. K.
43 x
jo.
l-
Art\tphanit fragmenta.
Ih
^.pkociis
Kostochi. 1836.
TeUgonie und Odyssee.
Neue Jahrb.
U. Altertum, xv
3 1 3-333h.
Zu den gr.
Trngikern
Khein. Mas. XIII 477
'
schriftstfiler [pp. 4
5 J-
Wh,
1875.
DU
Br%
Wien,
tinnier.
tragiker
1878.
und
Cobets
neuette
kritisthe
xcvi
Gomperz, Th.
Wien,
Nachlese zn den Bruchstiicken der gr. Tragiker [pp. 4-17]-
1888.
Athene Ergane. Classical Review, vm 270.

J. E.
Pandora's Box. Journal of Hellenic Studies, XX 99
Sophocles Ichneutae Col. IX 1-7 and the hpatfitvov of Kyllene and
the Satyrs.
Essays and Studies presented to William Ridgeway
Cambridge, 1913.
[pp. 136-152].
Haverfield, F. A fragment of Sophocles. Classical Review, 11 324.
Harrison,
flf.
Hayman, H.
Proceedings of the Cambridge
Emendations of Sophocles.
Philological Society, 1882, p. 30.
Headlam, W.
Various Conjectures
G.
XX
Journal of Philology,
I.
294-
3Various Conjectures III.

Critical Notes
xm
Review,
Journal of Philology, XXIII 260-323.
Tragicorum fragmenta
I.
ed.
Aauck.
Classical
ff.
Emendations and Explanations. Journal of Philology, XXXI 8-10.

Heimsoeth, Fr. Kritische Studien zu den gr. Tragikern. Bonn, 1865.
Hense, O. Exercitationes Criticae. Halis, 1868.
Herwerden, H. van. Exercitationes Criticae [pp. 10-30]. Hagae Comitum, 1862.
Entendatur Sophocles ap. Stob. Flor. 26. I. Mnemosyne,

Ad poetas scenicos Graecorum. Mnem. VI 280-282.
Epistola Critica
Mnem.
ad Nauckium.
Ad Tragicos. Mnem. XX
312.
XVII 265-267.
432-434.
Lucubrationes Sophocleae [pp. 77-83]. Trajecti ad Rhenum, 1887.

Analecta Tragica. Appendix in Eur. Hel. [pp. 101-103]. Lugduni
Batavorum, 1895.
Ad tragicorum Graecorum fragmenta. Melanges Henri Weil
[pp. 179-
Paris, 1898.
191].
Novae Observationes ad Tragicorum Graecorum fragmenta.

Mus. LVlli
Mnem. xxvn
Varia ad Varios.
De
HlLLER, E.
V.
Bonn, 1864.
GAERTRINGEN,
Berlin,
tinentibus.
390.
Sophoclis Phaedra et de Euripidis Hippolyto
Liber miscell. philol.
HlLLER
Rhein.
138.
F.
886.
R. Die Sage von Daidalos

schule in Leipzig, 1902.
Zu
34
und
priore.
ff.
De Graecorum
HOLLAND,
HOLZNER, E.
p.
fabulis
Ikaros.
den Fiagmenten des Sophokles.
ad Th races per-
Progr. der
Thomas-
Wiener Studien, XVI
324-328.
Zu
den Fragmenten der griech. Tragiker.
IMMISCH, 0.
Klaros
Ad
[p.
Ein
Sophoclis Epigonos.
180
ff.].
Jahrb. fur
cl.
Sophokleischer Vers [fr. 768]

Stil in der Schrift vom Erhabenen.
J EBB, R. C.
und das
Urtheil iiber Clitarchs
Rhein. Mus. XLVlll 512-528.
Adversaria in Sophoclis fragmenta [p. 121 f.]. Album Gratuhonorem Henrici van Herwerden. Trajecti ad Rhenum,
latorium in
1902.
Philologus, LV 566-568.
Philologus, XLVlll 554.

Philologie, Suppl. Bd XVII.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
KaLKMANN, A
De
xcvii
Hippolytis Euripidis quaestiones novae.
Phiiologus,
KE1L, H. Sophokles [fir. 432}
157 ff.
Kn vack, G. Ckamabon. Neue Jahrb. fur Philologie,
Bono, 1882.
KOCK, Th.
Verisimilia.
Kramkr,
De
A.
Jahrb.
fiir cl.
Pelopis fabula.
cxxxv 318,
Bd VI.
800.
Philologie, Suppl.
Diss. Halle, 1886.
Klrkkss, A. De Sophodis Imiagatorum fontibus. Mnem. xu III

Lidwich, A. Zu Herakleitos Homerischen Allegorieen. Mil einem Anhang
su gr. Dichtcm [Soph. fr. 391]. Rhein. Mus. xxxvn 434 ff.
[On Soph. fr. 812.] Berl. phil. Woch., 1902, 766.
1".
Zu den neuen Klassikertexten tier Oxyrhynchos- Papyri (vol. IX).
phil. Woch., 1912, 1075 ff.
Review of Hunt's Tragicorum Gr.tecorum Fragmtnta Papyracea.
1.
Deutsche Literatur-Zeitung, 1912, 2781-2785.

Phiiologus, I 670-677 [ReEtnendatiotus per saturam.
J. N.
printed in Opusc. acaii. p. 699 ff.].
Fragmtnta aliquot poetarum Graecorum quae apud Athenaeum ex;// emendata.
Melanges Graux, Paris, 1884, pp. 71-78.
Marx. Fr. Die Zeit der Schrift vom Erhabenen. Wiener Studien, xx
IfADVIG,
169
at p. 191
ff.
MAYER, M.
ff.
Mythistorica.
Hermes, XX vn 489
iTereus.
inalien.
Zeitschrift
ff.
Alterthumswissenschaft,
fiir
293,
in 1066, vim 500.
ibid,
Zu
Phiiologus, xix 144.
den Fragmenten des Sophokles.
Neue
Miscellanea,
Lectio num
S.
ff.
1'hilologus, xvii 558.
Mist ellen.
MEKLER,
Jahrb. fur Philologie, lxxxvii 369
novmva\m}t
[fr.
Graecarum specimen
555].
Phiiologus,
I.
[fr.
88].
Wicn,
1882.
IV 376.
Progr. des CommunalLncubratioHum capita quinout [fr. 432].

Obergymn. iin 19. Beztrke, Wicn, 1895.
ExtgetUch-kriHscht Beitrifgt ~u den Fragmenten der griech. Tragiker.
jahresb. d. Elisabeth-Gymnasiums in Wien, 1903.
Peri. A/ Uber die die griech. Trogiker bttrt tndt Utmmr mr Jahrc
1898-1902.
Burriaaa Jahresbericht, exxv 180-184, cxxix 29-32.
Pencil t liber die die grid/. Tr.igiker betreffe tide IJteratur der Jakrt
Borstals jahrcstx-ri<
1903-1907.
.7
Sophoclea.
Zu
i-123, 277 ff.

Rhcin. Mus. i.xix 170-190.
lit.
Sophokles Ichneutae.
den
Mnem.
ix pp. 241-244.
Fragmenten der griech. Trogiker.
Phiiologus, iv
543
Zu
tien
Fragmenten
tier
griech.
Phiiologus, VI 384-401.
Zu
Phiiologus, XII 193 iA
<
in.
This
is
to refer to
difficult
Joachim.
urn
Grmtcorwm fragments.
Progr.
Berohni, 1855.
not s complete lut of his published work on the Fragments; bet,

tie founl in hi* co>wl edition, n did not steal worth while
all
the scattered
of access.
publications, which
sre
partly saperscded
sod often
xcviii
Zur
NAUCK, A.
logie,
Neue
Kritik griechischer Dichter.
Jahrb. fur
cl.
Philo-
CV 803-807.
Tragicae dictionis index spectans ad Tragicorum Graecorinn fragmenta. Petropoli, 1892. [The book contains an important supplement
see especially pp. XI-xiv.J
to the edition of the text
:
Neumann, W.
Die Entwickelung des Philoktet-Mythos mit besonderer
Beriicksichtigung seiner Behandlutig durch
Gymn. Coburg,
PAPABASILEIOS, G. A.
Sophokles.
Progr.
des
1893.
x a P MV
Biopdoiais
2o(poic\(ovs
Tlapvaaaos,
<re.
513,
KpiTiKai tTapaTrjpi)<j(Lv rpayiKU>v.
A0rjvd, VI
65-73-
PAPAGEORGIUS,
P.
N.
npiriKa
'EXXrjviKaiv TpayiKwv
diopdaxTtis els
tci
ical
epfxrjvtvTiKa
els
drrocrTvaapara ratv rpayiKoav
333 ff., 34i ffBeilrdge zur Erkldrung
ra an oa n da par a
ru>v
Lipsiae, 1880.
TroirjTcav.
und Kritik
Adfjpaiov,
iroirjTtov.
des Sophokles.
Pars
I.
IX
Jenae.
1883.
*PAUCKER,
Doppelpalladienraub nach den Laconerinnen des Soph, anf

Mitau, 185 1.
C.
einer Vase von Armento.
Notes on Sophocles, Ichneutae and Eurypylus.

C.
Review, xxvi 209-212.
Classical Review, xxvm 223 f.
Alrvdios KcivOapos.
PEARSON, A.
*Peppmueller,
.
Seehausen
i.
R.
A.
In poetas Graecos [Soph.
Progr.
d.
Gymn.
Halle, 1887.
Andromeda.
Petersen, E.
126].
fr.
Classical
Journal of Hellenic Studies, xxiv 104-112.
Atreus und Thyestes nach Sophocles. Progr. Dorpat, 1877.

*PFLUGK, J. Schedae criticae. [In Sophocles Iphigeniam.] Gedani, 1835.
PILLING, C.
Quomodo Telephi fabulam

Halae Saxonum,
Adversaria [p. 215 f.].
tractaverint.
et
scriptores et artifices veteres
1886.
Cantabrigiae, 1812.
PORSON, R.
Powell, T. U. On Recent Discoveries. Classical Quarterly, IX 142 f.
Rabe, H. Lexicon Messanense de iota ascripto. Rhein. Mus. XLVii 404-413.
Reitzenstein, R. Inedita poetarum Graecorum fragmenta 1, n. Ind.
lect.
acad. Rostoch.,
890/1, 189 1/2.
Die romische TragddU im Zeitalter der Republik.
RlBBECK, O.
Leipzig,
1875.
RlZZO, G. E.
Studi archeologici sulla tragcdia

xxx 462 ff.
et
snl ditirambo.
Riv. di
filologia classica,
Theaterdarstellung
Archaol. Instituts,
und
vm
Bild und Lied
Robert, K.
Kiessling
u.
Tragbdienszene.
Jahreshefte
des Osterr.
824.
Wilamowitz].
[vol.
v of Philologische Untersuckungen
Berlin, 1881.
Niobe auf einem pompejanischen Marmorbild. Hermes, xxxvi 368Hallisches Winckelmanns

[Revised and separately published
387.
programm,
1903.]
Der pergamenische Tries. Jahrb. d. Deutsch. Archaol. Instituts, II

ibid. Ill 61 ff.
246 ff.
Hermes, XLVII
Aphoristische Bemerkungen zu Sophokles 'ixvevTai
;
536-561.
BIBUOGRA PH Y
Robkki,
xcix
Pandora. Hermes, XLIX 17-38.

liemerkungen zu griechischen Papyri.
K.
\CH, 0.
1912, 1460
UEuripilo di Sopkocle ed
.M. A.
\
Bollettino di filologia class., SIX 1560".
un frammento
Neue
Wrmischte Bemerkungen.
RlKHi., F.
Woch.,
Fieri, philol.
f.
epico adespot<>.
cxvu
Jahrb. fur Philol.,
3'5-
Zu
nki., H.
SCHMIDT,
lies Sophokles.
Hermes, XLvm 153-156.
Kritische Studun zu den grieck. Pramatikern. [Sec
Berlin, 1886.
pp. 247-2S2.]
den ixrfvrai
W.
F.
especially
IMIDT, M.
Variae Lectiones.
Philologus, VII 749.
Philologus, viu 112.
Vennischtes.
[From an elaborate review of Nauck's

Alterthumswissenschaft, XIV 534-547-
Zu
den gr. Dramatikern.
Kritische liemerkungen.
first edition.]
Philologus, XII 748
Philologus, XVIII 229
Zeitschrift fur
ff.
f.
Y'erbesserungsvorschldge zu schwierigen Stellen griech. Schriftstellet

Rhein. Mus. XXVI 207-218.
W.
F.
Coniectanea Critica. Gottingen, 1839.

at p. 98 ff.]
Rhein. Mus., II 296 f.
[Spieii
fragmentorum Sophoeleorum,
Lanx
Sniura.
Terms
Sophokles
Schkokdkr,
Zu
P.
fr.
241
646].
[fr.
Philologus,
[On Soph.
O.
senschaft, vii 1275
Philologus,
583].
[(r.
Ueber Soph. Aietes

Ueber Soph. Tyro.
ill
567.]
fr.
11
755.
Philologus,
111
89.
168.
Zeitschrift fur d. Alterthumswis-
f.
Sophokles Phaidta.
Neue Jahrb.
f.
Philol.,
CXXI
408.
ShYf PERT, M. Zu din Fragmenten d. gr. Tragiker Ton A. Nauck. Rhein.

XV 014 ff.
Zu den 'l X vvTtu des Sophokles. Rhein. Mus. lxviii 307 ft
Si ami J M.
.
Thrakmkk. Ed
tria
xvn
Leipzig, 1888.
Ptrgasnos.
upon the Fragments of Sophocles.
Further Adversaria upon the Fragments of Sophocles.

in 245
:.
pari 4
ties
xvn
Suppl. Pel
Sophokles.
[On
fr.
85.]
A.
Voi-i
Berlin, 1835.
tertius.
1074 sqq.
Classical Quarterly,
[On
(I
Neue
Jahrb.
f.
Philol.,
pp. 165-209.
Sopkoti
v.]
Athenaeum
the 'Ijruvrm of Sophocles.]
[On
1
Miscellaneorum criticorum fasckulus
Class.
f.
VaLOIMIOU, M.
Class. Rev..
189x191.
fr.
679.]
Studi
Ad
Melanges
x
<
iraux, p. 99.
Ital. di filolog. class.,
Soph,
[Contains several notes on
1-6.
'galores.
1894, P- 298-
Mnemosyne,
Xt.ll
81-90,
'77-
immonis Tetsgonia.
Mnemosyne, XXIX
23-58.
Wagener,
Un vers de Sophocle. Revue de PInstruction

xxxn 171
W. Zu Sophoklcs. Rhein. Mus. vn 149
A.
Belgique,
Wagner,
X
F.
f.
Kritische Aehrenlese.
15 f., 412-414.
Zeitschrift
Niobe von Sophocles.
Wagner,
publique en
f.
Ibid.
d.
fiir
IV (1837), nr
Alterthumswissenschaft,
12.
Accedunt curae
mythographae de Ap. fonlibus, etc.
Wf.CKLEIN, N. Ars Sophoclis emendandi. Wirceburgi, 1869.
[Review of Papageorgius, op. cit.] Philol. Anzeiger, xi i8ff.
Zu gr. Schriftstellern. Rhein. Mus. XXXVI 141.
Zu den Fragmenten des Sophokles. Rhein. Mus. XXXVlll 136 f.
Ueber die Textueberlie/erung d. Aeschylos u. anderer gr. Tragiker.
Sitzungsb. d. Kgl. bayr. Akad. d. Wissensch., 1888, 11-327-374 [pp. 356R.
Epitoma vaticana ex Apollodori
Bibliotheca.
Lipsiae, 1891.
358].
Dramatisches
Sitzungsb. 1890,
Zu
Sophokles.
u.
1
kritisches
1-57.
Neue
Jahrb.
zu den Fragmenten
f.
Philol.,
CXLV
d.
238.
Ueber die dramatische Behandlung des Telephosrnythus
Dramen
Zu
Munchen,
Kd&tpot, 2vv8tnrvoi.
den 'ixvtvrai des Sophokles.
Weil, H.
ques,
'OoT-oAd-yot,
Bl.
f.
III
quelques fragments de Sophocle.

339-348.
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U. von.
mentis.
De
u. iiber die
1909.
Gymn.
bayer.
Sur
Tragiker.
gr.
191 3, 437.
Revue des Etudes grec-
tragicorum Graecorum frag-
Gottingae, 1893.
Die Spiirhutide des Sophokles.
Neue
Jahrb.
f.
d.
Klass. Altertum,
XXIX 449-476.
Einleitung in die gr. Tragodie. Berlin, 1907.
edition of Euripides, Herakles (1889).]
Wolff, G.
Zu
Kritische Bemerkungen.
Sophokles.
Wordsworth,
Chr.
Philologus,
[Reprint from
Philologus, XVI 527.
xxvm
543 f.
Conjectural emendations.
London, 1883.
first
5O0OKAEOY2
A0AMAZ
A AND B
There are two famous stories connected with the name of

Athamas, which are recorded by our authorities with great
variety of detail.
One of these, the escape of Phrixus and
Helle. was the starting-point of the Argonautic saga; and,
though the evidence of the tragedians is the earliest to which
we can now appeal, it must have been related in the
Athamas, king of Thebes, by his union with Nephele,
an immortal, had two children, Phrixus and Helle.
He subsequently married In<>, who bore to him Lcarchus and Melicertes.
MU
too
jealous of the children of Nephele, and, when a drought
occurred
produced, according to one version, by the cunning
of Ino herself she bribed the mi
it
ra who
by
Atha as to consult the oracle at Delphi, and persuaded them
to give a false report.
They accordingly announced that the
god required the sacrifice of Phrixus as an expiation. Athamas
obliged against his will to consent, but Nephele succeeded
iving her children by means of a ram with a golden fleece,
whirl) Hermes gave to her.
This ram, placed among the flocks
ha mas, was not only endowed with the power of sj>ccch,
so that it was able to warn Phrixus of his impending danger,
but also rescued him and his sister by tak
n <>u it-, back,
and flying away with them across the sea.
Helle. unal.
her seat, fell into the sea, and gave her name t<> the
espont but Phrixus escaped to lolchis, where he sacrificed
ram and presented its fleece to Aeetes. Such is the ge:
\pollod. 1.80 83,
r of the mi
h. fr. 3; {///(, i;i } 1 >, schol. rec. Aesch. Ptrs. 71,
and there is some reason for supposing
ind othns
<
ripides
l\ p.
made
th<
626), possibly with
its
the
some of the
basis
of his
v. n lati- >u I
rkt
lUCOfded by
ib. 2.
d although
two p
preserved arc almost entirely insignificant, we
MTTOte
the
dire,
11
<>f
the story given above.
them was omenied with

But the central incident
.t
in
I0<1>0KAE0YI
Sophocles was not the rescue of Phrixus, but the subsequent

This appears from schol. V Ar. Nub. 257
Athamas.
(obcnrep fie tov AddfiavO' ott<o<; fir) Ovaere) rovro Trpos top eTepov
6 yap tov *5.o<poKXr)<;
'AddfiavTa 2o$o/cXeoi>9 dnroTewofievos Xeyei.
7r7roL7)K tov AddfiavTa io-T<pav(0fievov Kal irapeaTOiTa too ftwfiw
tov Ato<? ft>? o-<payiaa0r]o-6fievoi>, Kal fieXXovTov (-t<x cod.) diroacpaTTeaOat avrov irapayevofievov 'Wpaickea, Kal \tov\ tovtov
davdrov pvofievov. The recent scholia, partly reproduced in
Apostol. 11. 58 {Paroem. II 529 f.) under the lemma firj Beds
fate of
'
avdpcoirov &>9 Wd/ifias, add (1) that the punishment of Athamas

was brought about by Nephele on account of his conduct to
her children (2) that Heracles saved Athamas by announcing
The latter point is also mentioned in
that Phrixus was alive.
;
The
Suid. s.v. Wddfias, who omits the reference to Sophocles.
rejoinder of schol. R, to which some critics have attached too
much importance, is merely an ignorant objection eo? dypoiKos
A0dfxavTa elTrev dvTi <$>pl%ov dvrl tov el-rrelv tov *$>pi%ov tov
'AddfiavTa elirev cu? aypoiKOS dyvooiv t9 io-Topia<f ov yap
y
For the tradition that
A0d/jba<{ i(po<vvdr)>, dXXa ^/j/ô?.
:
sacrificed does not depend upon this evidence

recorded as a local legend, which was current at
Alos in Thessaly, by Hdt. 7. 197. His narrative is not at all
clear, but so much at least is germane to the present discussion,
Athamas was
alone, but
is
that Athamas was sacrificed KaQapfxcv tj}? X^PV? iroievfieimv

'Aâjwy k deoirpoiTLov, and that Cytissorus the son of Phrixus
Several questions will
arrived from Colchis and rescued him.
at once suggest themselves in reference to the dramatic treatment which Sophocles may have applied to this material, but to
most of them no answer is possible. It is, however, a legitimate
observation that the means by which Nephele compassed the
sacrifice of Athamas, together with the arrival of Heracles, the
delivery of his message, and the release of Athamas, were amply
I infer that the
sufficient to occupy the whole of the action.
history of the plot against Phrixus, with all its dXoya, although
iv tgh<? Trpdy/xacriv, to use Aristotle's language {poet. 15. I454 b 7),
was nevertheless etu 7779 Tpaywhlas. It seems to follow that
Athamas must have supposed Phrixus to be dead, although he
was not slain at the altar and, since Helle actually perished,
that she cannot have been included in the design aimed at her
brother.
The religious questions connected with the sacrifice of
Athamas, which are discussed by Frazer (Pausan. V p. 172) and
The date of thfs play must
others, do not concern us here.
;
have been
than B.C. 423.

other story mentioned above Athamas was the
apparently innocent victim of the wrath of Hera. She afflicted
In
the
earlier
A0AMAI
him with madness, because Hermes by the command of Zeus

had given Dionysus to Ino and Athamas to be reared as a girl
see Hygin. fab.
was
that
5,
Apollod.
I.
84,
3.
28, Pausan.
1.
The
44. 7.
Athamas, believing that he was hunting on
Cithaeron, mistook his elder son Learchus for a lion (or a stag)
killed him with his spear
and that Ino, distraught with
frenzy and grief, took the other child Melicertes in her arms
and threw herself into the sea. Hence the proverb 'Ivow a\r}
in Zenob. 4. 38 and Horace's flebilt s Ino {A. P. 123).
The story
can be traced to Phcrecydes (Schol. Horn. 2 486:
I 84);
and Seeliger (in Roscher I 670), and more doubtfully Escher
(in Pauly-Wissowa II 193 1), identify it as the subject of the
second play of Sophocles
Apart from the general probabilities
of the case, it 1- possible that frs. 2 and 9 refer to the delusion
of Athamas
Ov. Met. 4. 420
elaborates this version of the
story in his usual manner, but the following touches (512 ff.)
ir to be taken from his Greek models
protinus Aeolidts
furibundns in aula clamat to, contites, his re tin tcnditc
hie modo cum getnina visa est tnihi prole leaena!
See
r. (r. adesp.
and
/3pvaovo-r)<i XeaiV*/?, which may ju
well belong to Sophocles as to Aeschylus. Cf. Plut. de snperst. 5.
c o o" 'Adafias (i(iovi (sc. \pffTO hv<rrv\ia) ko.1 1) \\7a1 r/
/3\7roj/T
TKva Vil roix; avvtjOtu) 04 \ovra<: Kai
i\a<f>ovs\
I here
is nothing to show whether Athamas used
<ow (Stat. Theb. I. 12), or whether the scene was inside the
as in Ovid, or on the mountain side (Stat. 1 lub. 3. 186),
Iced eiwr\a fr. 8 has any significance.
Furthcer has observed, fr. 4 suits the final plight <>f Athamas
and realising the extent >f his losses.
would precede his withdrawal to another country. f>r
which cf. Apollod. 1. 84. But none of these indications are so
strong as that of fr. 5, where we can hardly fail to see an allusion
t<> the miraculous power of Dionysus,
Unless then the reference
to the influence of the god is t<< he explained by his nurture in
the palace of Athamas (cf Lucian dial. n/at. <i.
it would
n tlu\ play, as in the Ino <>! Euripides (Hygin fab. 4), the
>f Athamas had joined the Mai -n. ids to share their mystic
hip on the hills.
rally believed that in that play
It
-to, the third wile of
Euripides introduced the story ol
Athamas who plotted against the children of Ino as cruel!)
as unsuccessfully as Ino had plotted against those of N< pi
although
is noth
ophocles with t!
iame of Themisto was freely used by later writers as the
and
FHG
flf.
'
.'
1.
*hi
n suggests that Cic. h.irusf. rtif. 39 ilia <
a reference to tragedies may be an aJfunion to the play of Sophoews.
IO0OKAEOYI
cause of the ruin of Athamas' household

see Athen. 560 D,
Westermann Mythogr. p. 345. The evidence which connects
the play with the Dionysus- motive is clear enough, and allusions
to the madness of Athamas and to the final catastrophe may
fairly be inferred
but beyond this we cannot go. There is
nothing to show that the fragments of Accius' Athamas can be
legitimately used to elucidate the plot of Sophocles 1
It should be observed that the progress of the Athamaslegend shows the gradual combination of at least three stories,
which were originally entirely distinct, and belonged to different
The subject cannot be pursued here but an illustralocalities.
tion may be given from the fragment of Philostephanus (Schol.
Horn. H 86, cf. Pausan. 1. 44. 7), the pupil of Callimachus,
who omits the Bacchic influence entirely, and attributes the
death of Learchus to the retribution exacted by Athamas for
:
AD
I no's
treachery.
See also Introductory Note to the Phrixus.

Dindorf held that 'A#a/ia? a and /3' were not separate plays,
He applies the same

but different editions of the same play.
principle to other similar cases, but in the absence of specific
evidence of revision the presumption is strongly against him.
Karayvoyvai
p. 421 Karayvwvai eiriyv&vai, p.efx\j/ aadai.
Zo<poK\r)s 'A8ap,avTi
1
Hesych.
II
'
rpdirovs,
'to find out to another's detri-
construction-.
A
7. 51 KareyvioKdruv ijdrj /j.t)k^ti Kpeiaabvwv elvai, where the
inf. takes the place of the ace. of the thing,
It should be observed that KarayiyvwaKu
occasionally appears without the innuendo,
being precisely equivalent to dirty iyvw<rKW
Xen. Occ. 2. 18 koX Oolttov ko\ paov koX
KepdaXewrepov Kariyvuiv Trpdrrovras.
ment,'
with
various
good example
a'.
few lines before Hesych. has the

gloss KarayivdoffKU) ixip,<pop.ai. einyvibvai
is added as an explanation, because the
sense 'to find out' was common in later
Greek: see e.g. Plut. Philop. 12 iiri'
yvwffOeiaijs
eiriôvXrjs.
7-77S
Thus
tcarayi-
as observed by Neil on Ar.

oCros Karayvovs rod yipovros rovs
yi>w<TKU) is,
q. 46
is
Thuc.
epKeat
2
Hesych.
11
p. 192 Zpicevi-
8iktvois.
The same
gloss
occurs in Phot. lex. p. 14, 12 without the
name of author or play.
'EocpoKkrjs
Addfj.ai>Ti
'
/3'.
Cf. Etym. M. p. 375, lotpKos .ai)p.alvu

koX to. 8lKTva ws t6 6t 8t] irapa \ivov ?/)et
.
iviv'Sriûin (a
468).
mi.
confused quotation of Horn
sense occurs in fr. 431,
The same
Ar. Av. 528 Zpur], ve<pe\as, SiKrua, wtiktAs,

Pind. Pyth. 2. 80 <pe\\6s wr virep ipKOt.
P'or a possible explanation of the allusion
see Introductory Note.
made as to Accius' sources are mutually destructhought (Escher in Pauly-Wissowa II 1933) that his play comprised
the material of Hygin./<?rf. astr. 2. 20, which Sophocles may have used in the Phrixus.
1
tive.
The
conjectures that have been
It is
now
'
AOAMAI
3
i\j/ia
Hesych.
TaiSid,
x^ ( vy-
n p. 249 tyiV yi\m,

(<po6o%~ dro roil (veffdai.
There wis. however, some wavering

31.
as to the breathing; and on this account
an alternative derivation from trot was propounded : schol. Ap. Khod. 1. 459 i$i6~
unrcu.
wapa Hft> iif/iar, t) tart Sid X&ywr
xaiSid' olo* (rteia nt oiVa" rapd rb trot.
did Kal î\orra. ori Si Saavurat, drri rod
a/coXovdoCair.
So <fn\iîot was distinguished as meaning QikoralypM* or 0<\6\oyot, according as the second syllable
was <>r win rmt aspirated (Elym. .>/. p.
406, H, Suid. s.v. tyla). Some nx*lern
scholars have favoured the view that 4- is
prottutic, and that the word is to l>e con-
-o<poK\i)t 'AOd/xarri S(vrip<p.
OfixXia.
Outside the lexicographers, the word

.iily to occur in Xic.
Th
oripn' 6\o6v KPldr/t, iJ0' (\f/iri ftrXcro kovpots, where the schol. explains it by roiypiof.
The verb ifiaoOat, with its com-
tad- and d<pt\fid<rOai
ia\-
(I:
somewh.it more common. There are also

to be taken into account the gloss arjtiou'
ioprai.
Adders (Hesych. p. 347) and
i\(\f/iot (a proper name
/'//. 177.
hoi.), wpoat^td (Hesych.).
The history of this
obeenre and obsolete word was much
led by the grammarians, although
i>
a general agreement as to its
is
nected with îdBSorrt = /(//////, in A

1302 this was adopted by Curtius (G. E.
:
11
The authority
).
hiiu follows derived it from
tuottai tracing the transition (ttpo&ot) of
.ining to raiSid
'>fu\la
ense of (<po&oi ( = ///. an 5
tot clearly recognised by I..
see Pint. mor. 1055 F, Diog. L. 6.
re
ciTTais
,/.
assumption that ipid was another

Monro on Horn, p 530 takes ail
entirely different line, holding ihM tyidofuu
'implies a noun t\pit, from a root ir-,
Indog. /'/,/. seen in tjmt> /.
I
Kayvvai^
vaina,
p.
[=p.
>
olo
ard\ij^"ii>,
arau
ijr
'iii
2.
ipxwTi.
I
' f
..driartot'
io~roQain)% (fr.
.)
irtSvpAov (JpitWrrot.
5
/
:.
405
It
rat
f.
<rir
nap
^/xi*'
iHonq. Utk.
putf
Mm.
irv\\a(trj
luarri (attdvar. col.
Ak.
h. /./,
COTT.
Cnm yap kWi* dxXwM dp* ra<.

8 passage is expressly
was
7.UI-
aîktyos apa v$.
;dp cod.
to// II.:
rip \
Our
idea; for varpipa ictla

the sacred centre-point of fusil) lifi
ncr.d
7.5
dyvrrpr dyvro", ^pvtn\ot (fr. 19

Si ' rr/XiKovrocl yipur drau dyvuna, 6par,i-
olvut
dyvvad;
or
rfwyivatxa and the
have no nominative in existence, at

intcd out by LotMek on I'hivn. pp.
dvivrio% MM no doiil
rowed bom 1. .111. 63 da\pifrmp,it4iu9T9t,
At *o\4nov tparmt
drio~ri6% iari* (ntlrm,
dputriKov y'oii, dca5<x T TV"
Ivii
jcdfe'crrioc;
tfx\<r>i-aiM,
like
1304) to yvvcu$ ovk îvraro dpatmtoD yiSi rp o-vntttatt irnSij yivtrat
wapa
to
aria.
Uiv
o9
""0 wwJ however IbrbON
''
I/>beck\
speculate on the derivation.
(/'a//i. El. 151) notion that tyla was 'a
game played with f*N>Us' rests on the
meaning ('amusement
P .594
dx*^^* M &P*
!
'
for the hm- of
$.
do
not
know
should hivr %hiunk from

Hut in that case ydp *m
writing d>a.
and should probably
be replaced by wup' foiir {ifi*}.' The
I04>0KAE0YS
apa (for apa) is clearly
seen in 0. C. 409, 858, and may be taken to
be established see on fr. 931, Eur. Hclid.
Mekler {Eranos Vindob. p. 208)
895.
The verse refers to
conjectured d5pd vq..
the miraculous draughts of wine provided
by Dionysus for his votaries: Eur. Bacch.
inferential use of
5' oiv(p.
ib.
143 pel 8i ydXaKTi ire'Sov, pel
707 Kai Trj8e Kpfyijv iâvijK' otvov 6e6s.
Such an allusion accords well enough
with the story of Ino

Hygin. fab. 4
postea resciit Inonem in Parnasso esse,
quae (quant Muncker) bacchationis causa
eo pervenisse.
Nonn. 9. 247 ff. Cf. tltt
:
Eur. Bacch. 229, Med. 1284. Thus,'AxAused for water, as in Eur. Bacch.
625 Sfj.u<rii> 'AxeXyov <pipeiv ivvt'iriov, and
<pos is
elsewhere. V( for derivatives from

root cf. fr. 270 vdrop, fr. 621 vapd.
:
this
\evKTjv rjixepav
Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.) p. 106, 33

dyadi)v.
2o0ok\tjs
ijfiipav tt]v
'Add/xavri.
Cf. Phot. lex. p. 217,
5
XevK7]v
\evK7) ijnipa'
EiSiroXis
ij
K6\ai
dyadr).
(fr.
Kai en
174
- '
evrppowuvr).
306 K.).
same occurs in Suid. s.v., and

MSS H,o<poK\i)s is substituted for
in
The
some
EOttoXis
Kd\ai ; but A i. 672 f. follow immediately.

Zenob. 6. 13 (Paroem. I 165) Kai M^vavdpos 84 <prj<riv eu AevKa8i(p (fr. 315 III
90 K. ) tt]v dyadrjf rjp.e'pav XevKyv KaXe?<rdai.
Herodian. Philel. (in Moeris ed.
Pierson, p. 477) XevKrjv rj/j.e'pa.v Siayayelv,
iXapdv.
'Xewcr? rffjiipa, lucida (Eur. /. A. 156
XevKaLvei r68e <pQs rfftr] Xd/x7roicr' 'Hws),
\evK6Trw\os, \evK6weir\os, meant properly
the silvery grey of dawn in contrast to the
night (Aesch. Ag. 673 ZireiTa 5' di8r)v irovXevKov kot' rj/xap ktL),
Tiof irecpevy&res,
and so might be said metaphorically of
relief, cheer, comfort, as in Pers. 304 f/uots
Kai XevKbv
jxev euros dwfxacriv (pdos p-tya,
this is how
fip.ap vvktos eK fj.\ayxôv
T7]v 7]8e1av Kai
may have
used it.' (II.) So

Aeu/crj
XevKOv evdp.epov <dos in Ai. 708.
i)V.tpa is used proverbially much as we say
'a red-letter day' in Eunap. fr. 28 Boiss.,
The purpose of the
Aristaen. 1. 12.
Sophocles
rical usage, which is found also in Latin

Catull. 8. ^fulsere quondam candidi tibi
contrasted with Hor. Sat. 1.9. 72

soleni tarn nigrum surrexe miAt!
There is no need to seek for any artificial
explanation, such as that which Suidas
soles, as
huncine
(s.vv.
XevKri
iifiepa,
rCiv
eh
<pap4rpav)
quotes from Philarchus (FUG

based on an alleged custom of the
Scythians to put a white stone into their
quiver at night-time for a day spent
happily, or a black in the other event.
Plin. n. h. 7. 40 tells a similar story of
the Thracians, and some such practice is
alluded to in Hor. C. 1. 36. 10, Pers. 2. 1.
Catull. 68. 148.
Plin. ep. 6. 1 1.
Plutarch
gives another explanation, relating that
Pericles during the blockade of Samos
allowed such of his soldiers as drew by
lot a white bean to be relieved from
discipline and enjoy themselves as they
did Kai <pa<rt toi>5 iv evwadeiais
pleased
I
yiyvopiivovs XevKrjv Tjuipav iKeivrjv dirb

rov XevKov Kvdfxov trpoaayopeveiv (Per. 27).
Ttffl
Is it merely a coincidence that Eupolis in

the K6XaKes referred to this siege (fr. 154
I
Horace speaks of Genius
299 K. )?
as albus el ater (Ep. 2. 2. 189), i.e. eiSaifiwv or the reverse.
grammarians was to mark the metapho-
ayxypys
7
Hesych.
p.
36 dyxypv* (dyxvPV-
2o(poKXrjs 'Add/xavTi.
cod.) 6 6771''?.
The correct reading is preserved in Etym.
M. p. 15. 33 dyxvpv*' iyyA*.
vt)S
The termination, usually connected with

dpapiffKu,
rpirjprjs,
fiearjpris,
is
the same as that found in
irodif)pr)s,
Tvufflpw,
KarriprjS,
irXeiGTriprjs,
Kiffff-qpr)*,
reixypys,
irvpyripris,diA<pT)pris and
others.
The history
of some of these words is not free from

doubt, but the force of -vpvs as an element
of composition seems to have been reduced,
so that in the time of the tragedians it had
become productive as a merely adjectival
suffix. See also Wilamowitz on Eur. Her.
243-
AOAMAI
8
U.irpocr. s.v. trirXo* p. 81, 10 ra

trir\a \4yovci, Trjp
Kara
rjr oiniav attfa)
tla*
ixiw6\aiov
Sivanirrjv.
t*o8c put on hoard'). The
word means moveables ; but it is an elastic
term, and is sometime-, restricted to what
we call furniture )( dresses or jewels, as
for
yivaixtia,
r)
xfii\na.T<k,
f)
<TKtvr\,
Dem.
in
tA
27.
10.
Ktymologically
it
may
be connected with 6WXo-t, sim-ples and

our three-fold: set- BruKinann, Comp. Gr.
d\X' (Ttr6\aia. Suidas who

has three separate glosses on the word, is
much to the same effect, but gives alter-
yA\ lyytia,
111 p. 50 K. tr.
The fullest discussion of
the word is in Pollux 10. 10 (
TTLcri.yfiaTa
Etym. M. p. 3
ivtPvfattto aiyx'forrat (*orp(**iP roin
i/rat csi ra #/>>tt ir Tf Kimttytaioti i-wiatarov xa.Wrai.
In /'Ail.
conjectured rovrUriyfxa for rot'riaa-îa.
It is suggested that tins rates to the death
of Learcnus, hunte<l as a stag by his father
Atham.is ApoBod. ,\- 18 'AMâi pJ* t6
wptefivrtpov wai&a Atdpxo* wt /Xa^Vor
Hetych.
It
170 ixurrijyuaTa'
p.
^wpwcXtft 'A0d>a-r.
masias emended to iwutriynara, and so
must have written, as the
alphalx tii .!
m%\ but that inclyfiara was the form used by Sophocles
red not merely by Moeru p. 196, 34
Vrt9taf ATTinoi' /urriai "KW771
also by the
Cf.
/. 704 k$0' tfrar o&rot y' iirierl^ri,
the schol. Au^/wr *ai ol wtpi
'KparoaOtVT} ri twaipUrai rat *i)ra iwtai29 ai{a S' vXanrtir wtr
nd rf tvfi. Said, iwialftt' rotd* rt*a
ilX*
t*ioiOTW
<ffiara.
Oripfveai
II
p.
imimiPtw.
shouM I* added
ictory
Hesych.
107 lias also irleiyfia- /rr-ycAoyui
nd ewieiâf /ra^f.i Vrl 6/>mV $
It
that
iVitfrifat.
10
IO
II
ycb.
<r9if.
11
p.
148 ixptmarUi^-
Lo0oXijt
'AOdMaj-T
Tr.
fr.
adrp.
275 x/**!** '***'
"*
*t
I04X3KAEOYI
AIM AOKPOI
Ajax, 'OtX?}o? raxv<i vios, is introduced in Horn. B 527 as
Locrians who dwelt opposite to the coast of
Euboea. He is often mentioned in the Iliad in conjunction
with the Telamonian Ajax
and, though inferior in strength
as compared with his namesake, is nevertheless a distinguished
warrior who comes especially into prominence at the battle round
the wall (N 46).
The circumstances of his death are related in
8 499 ff. He was one of the victims of the storm which overtook
the Greeks on their return from Troy, and, when landing on the
rocks at Myconus known as the Gyrae, was hurled back into
the sea by Poseidon and drowned, in punishment for a boastful
speech that he needed no divine aid to escape. Homer says
that he was e^66pevo<; 'Adrjvy, without explaining the reason
but, if we accept the explanation of Strabo (600), this merely
implies that he was involved in the common fate which befel
the Greeks for abusing their victory in the sack of Troy.
Homer, he says, has not mentioned any outrage committed
against Cassandra, and knows nothing of her violation by Ajax.
Yet, even in Homer, the character of Ajax showed traces of a
cruel and savage disposition, and his arrogant contempt for the
gods led to his destruction. It is clear, however, that an act of
leader of the
'
sacrilegious violence committed by him was described in the

see Proclus chrestom.
p. 49) Kaaraavhpav
oe A fa? Ot\e&)9 irpos j3iav atroaTroiv auvecpeXKerai to Trjs Wdr)i>as
Iliupersis^
{EGF
oavov e<' a> irapo^vvdevre^ 01 ''EWê? KaroXevaai /3ov\ovrai

rov AXavra. o 8e 7rl rov t?)<? 'AOrjvd'i ftcopdv Karacpevyet, ical
SiaacoêTai e'/c rov eirncetiMevov /avSvvov.
To the latter part of
this corresponds Apollod. epit.
5. 25 o)<? 8e e/xeWov airoirXelv

Tpolav, viro KaX.â^T09 KaTel-ôvro, fitjvUw Wdrjvav
avrois XeyovTOS 81a rrjv Aiavros daeêcav.
koX tov p,ev Aiavra
KTeivetv epueWov, (pevyovra Be cttI ficopuov elaaav.
Cf. schol.
Horn. 7 135. Welcker (p. 162) rightly observed that the Homeric
story does not seem capable of dramatic treatment but in the
extracts just quoted the possibility of a tragic conflict is manifest.
It can hardly be doubted that we have here part of the frame-
iropOi]cravT<;
On
the question relating to the overlapping of the Little Iliad and the Iliupersis
whether there were or were not two poems with the latter title, composed
by Arctinus and Lesches respectively, see Frazer, Pausanias, v p. 362 ; T. W. Allen
in CI. Q. 11 84.
and as
to
AIAI AOKPOZ
work of the Sophoclean
plot, more especially as the account

bf Apollodorus explains Eur. Tro. 69 71
AH. ovk ola-6*
vfipiodeiadv pe Ka\ vaovs e'/xoi/?;
TTO. o*5' rjviic Afa<? dXtee
Kaaai'Spav ftiq. AH. Kovhev y
Ajât&v erradev ovS* i]KOV<r
viro.
P'urther details are given by Pausanias in his description
of the painting by Polygnotus in the Lesche at Delphi ( 10. 26. 3):
Ajax the son of Oilcus stands by the altar with his shit Id.
taking an oath concerning the outrage on Cassandra
while
mdra is seated on the ground clasping the image of
Athena, as it seems that she overturned it from its pedestal*
when Ajax dragged her from the sanctuary.' Robert (Dit
Iliupersis, p. 63) thinks that Ajax was swearing to atone for
his crime by sending two Locrian maidens annually to the
temple of Athena at Troy. He thus connects the oath with
the temple-story (Toepffer in Pauly-VVissowa I 938) which
to explain the historical custom by reference to a heroic
id.
The chief authorities for the Locrian tribute, which
until shortly before the time of Plutarch, are Timaeus
'
Tzeti
aj>.
schol.
Lycophr. 1141
\\) Horn.
(FUG
207),
66 (n 126 Schneider).
and Callimachus ap,

See also Holzinger
on Lycophr. 1153.
But Robert's explanation of the oath

.meuh.it far-fetched, and it is simpler to suppose
that there is a reference to the exculpatory oath which is
ins of jurisas a mode of trial by primiti
prud
In any case, the tn
W'yse on Isac. 12. 9.
Ajax before tin- council of elders provided an occasion
It
formal debate (\07wv ar/v) SOCh
the tragedians loved.
is SOi:
:!er u.s.) that the erotic n
and the violation of the
did not belong to the original
story, but wen- tin- invention of later writers (r.^r Dfo ( hrys.
11
The conclusion is questionable and it is worth 11
153)
KaffitvBpav op&V
Apollod. */,
TOVTO TO
rrjr to, gom
tioin
|>i<
goapn
hich is 1..
ions
avei
its
t!
account
of
cactly in
of the gaze of the image with Lycophr. 361 f. (cf. Strabo 264).
hcogn.
d by
appearance ol the motive is als
by
'
<
Hiatus peya* m\tro 6' Afav 4<*0\os

"Eparof) dra*$a\Uu* M well as by the
timings collected by Furtwai
s s.
,1,i
/w//. Mu nchen
p
</M.
|
ojiotv (w.
sum
ippe in Ihirsuiti J
the above
//////'.
he effect of
outlines of tl
known to Sophhi .1- ever from being able to fill in the deta
I
'
<\\WI!
the
termine
U
!
tnc
I04>0KAE0YI
io
process by which the tragic irepnreTeia resulted.

No doubt the
outrage in the temple was outside the action of the play, and
the two chief moments that fell within the time covered by it
were the acquittal of Ajax by the Achaeans, and his subsequent
death at Gyrae. It was impossible for the latter to be enacted
on the stage, and it must either have been related by a messenger
or foretold by a god.
The former alternative is clearly to be
preferred, but involves the assumption that Ajax sailed before
the rest of the Greeks, and that his death was reported at Ilion
before the other characters in the play had started.
It is more
difficult to conjecture how the acquittal of Ajax was procured.
possible suggestion, based on the lawless character of the
accused and the oath mentioned by Pausanias, would be that
he escaped death by a brazen act of perjury, but was required
as being ceremonially unclean to withdraw from the rest of the
army. The retribution of the offended deities was not long in
coming; but even so the shadow of impending disaster hung
over those who had connived at the crime of Ajax.
It may be
inferred from Pausan. io. 31. 2 that the chief opponent of Ajax
was Odysseus.
The
version of the story adopted by Philostr. heroic. 9

certain features which suggest a dramatic origin,
although we have no means of identifying it.
According to this, Ajax dragged Cassandra from the temple,
but offered no violence to her, and kept her in his tent.
Agamemnon saw the girl, fell in love with her, and took her
from Ajax. When the spoils were divided, Ajax claimed her,
but Agamemnon refused to give her up and accused Ajax of
sacrilege.
In order to excite odium against Ajax, he also caused
a rumour to be spread through the camp that Athena was
incensed in consequence of the outrage, and would destroy the
army unless Ajax were put to death. But Ajax, fearing injustice
and oppression, if he submitted himself to trial, secretly withdrew
by night in a small boat and was drowned off Gyrae.
From Lucian de salt. 46 icaff" eKacnov yovv twv eVet {i.e. at
Troy) Treaovrayv Spd/xa rfj aKrjvfj TrpoKenac...^ Kara II aXa/xr/ 8 oi/<?
presents
rj NavirXiov opyrj real r) Al'avTos /xavia real rj darepov

rat? TreTpais aTrcoXeia, Nauck is justified in inferring an
allusion to the present play.
Hygin. fab. 1 16 cannot be used in
support of Hartung's view that the story of Nauplius was combined with that of the Locrian Ajax in a single tragedy.
7ri/3ov\r) /cat
ev
AIAI AOKPOZ
II
KOLTaarTlKTOV KVVOS
o~iro\a<;
Aiftv<r<ra, Tra.pha\r)<f>6pov
11.
11
SdloL Ar. Av. 933
yo\d3o, 5ti SttptHpa owoiaovr.
Alam
\oiep$
Xi<rrparat
'
KaTaariicTov
should read rap&aXiji ctxktop tytor and

KaTaarlKTOv kv*6i as a gloss.
Hut
this is contrary to all analogy, and there
is bo Bote difficulty in the transference
of the epithet than e.f. in Kfpae<p6px>n
ttji
eject
KaX-
SeppLaTtvor.
x iT ^9a Stpe-dTtrov. wap-/)x^V

law* in tov i-KKpiptoBwi, ovk 4dr <Pt$G>to Si -cxpOKXaor iwl roe
a$tu biQdipuw.
topiiaroi uprfTai tov npiua.pJrov xpot ttj
tov 'Airijropot olnlq..
This note appears
Et'-tppdvioi ii
<rr6pdvyya% fr. 89, ii<pi)<f>6poii dywrat

Aesch. Cho. 582 or KieooQbpou ir flaWu
Kur. Hacrii. 384.
Much confusion in the
treatment of compounds would Ik avoided,
if critics would pay more attention to the
simple ami logical methods of the Sanskrit
grammarians: sec Peile, AofttoH Tali of
Xala p. 3 ff , lirugmann Com/-.
in an abridged form in Suit I. s.v. awoXit,

and v. i is quoted by Pollux 7. 70 with-
name of the play.

o-iroXas " iy be conveniently ren-
out the
dered 'jerkin.'
1'ollux (I.e.)
speak
<(>opor
assumed
at
will.
-iis|>e< ts
S
that
hung
I..
and S. rive rapiaX^followed by Campbell, who
'the bide the leopard wore,' as
l>e
tr.
reference is to the leopard-skin

outside the house of Aatenor,
order that it might l>e identified and

spared when the Greeks cat
iii. 608, a passage to be quoted in
connexion with the A tit, norid.it. Ilartung
thinks that our fagment actually came
from the las'- named play ami is WlUttlj
it
the
attributed to the Lterit
incident might well ha\c In-cn mentioned
in a play which was so closer]
sack of the
with the circunist.
city, perhaps, as Wagner *ugg<i Cassandra accusing A
.ire
ild
V..
The
&'pos
and
92
p.
as a leathern cu
tened at the
shoulders, and Photiiis [lex. p. aat, 17) as
Stpn&Ttor i<pawT<liOt%, suitable for u-e in
nietiincs described as \iTi! t
h. ; but the
'ion (wap-rix^V^ according to the
m, lay in the mode of
a leather coat could
iropSaXr)
not !* strapped with a girdle.
ôpov
(TtoXo oaicivooa
~o<pOK\ijt
.Mpos.'
I^hhttop
ofor
rpAi
8c'/3oc,
we
12
to xpv<rOi> S Ta? AiVa? SeSopirei'
ofifia, rbv 8* ahitcov d/xeiêrai.
12.
12
Z04>0*\r)1
ro4.'
1 rat iUa:
\t0JfTi.
The
ppattgC
t6
is
\\.
xptf*os-...<UMtp<-
i*0pw*on
4>po*tlr
attribal
iff
mUwoti
t-
irripxorrai (Su>
.1
Justice* became proverbial:

iyb. 13. 10. 3 rara rip wapotpJar
iftvxov
iplulu*
r)t
or
la
r .
Philemon).
Aiv *>*aX**
Wotfwr wpofu*ov
tr*r#"
sytf^ff > *ltwt re>* Af*>f.

Airir*
'
eodd
ftntf o+0*\pJ*.
a<
wontrrri 4<p(H~fiaTo (Kur. fr. <Ko) <5ia<o

aiVot to xfH'Otor wpoaurrof' <a wdXtr
'rA x/H'fffor 6pi.ua to rai Auai,' whrre
nter appears wrongly to assert that
notations are from the same
<
ten
!>! 6+*a\MOl)
.1!
rf
\ih.
das
ss^f ra>r r
fr.
to|
4V
4>df
sVf
*W
>)*...
n i> piiwot
s>aX^t areraAsfr4 ;
r* A.i
In Eur. Sm/ft.
.'*
IO<t>OKAEOYI
12
564 to
cpdos
rfjs AIktjs oip'guv
is
Similarly Tr.
doubtful.
Occasionally it is varied to the eye 'of

Zeus' or 'of the gods': Tr. fr. adesp. 485
6<p0a\/j.6s, iyyvt 8' iarl
oi>x evSei Aids
Kaiirep wv irpbau, 491 6i)s Oe&v 6<p6akp.bs
els ret irdv^ ISelv, 499 fitya yap 0fip.a
oh
SaifMovwv,
75, 659.
Eur.
fr.
Tr.
fr.
555 d\X'
seems probable that two iambic

are comprised in the words
quoted.
In that case the second line is
defective, and I would suggest that we
should read
< e > a/uei/Jereu, a word
suspected without any cause in Aesch.
Prom. 239 KaKalai ttoij'cus Taiabi p? O-tiixelyparo.
The trimeter would then be
704, Ant. 184, El.

adesp. 43, 278. Cf.
SIkt]
T)
yap
Kal 81a o~k6tov
The
addition of xpvaeov, still

more boldly applied by Eur. fr. 486,
suggests a comparison like that of Pind.
01. 1. 1 to the searching rays of the sun
{Ant. 103, Aesch. Ag. 300, Eur. fr. 771):
cf. 6 iravra Xtuacrwv tjXios O.
C. 869.
jlXtirei.
5"
it
trimeters
Zeus
t'ivovo'' dfioiftds Kaicutv.
all-seeing: O. C.
AlKas
500
The metre cannot be determined exactly,

but
is
adesp.
fr.
O-iXafixf/e Oeiov <paos.
T. 653.
Headlam (/./'.
preferred to arrange and read
rd xpv~ eov 8* T ^ J AUas 88opKev
rbv aSiKOf 8' d/xei/3ercu.
Blaydes conjectured tov t\
parallel to O.
xxxi
thus
8)
6/j.fia,
13
av9poiiTo^
icrTL
13 Stob. Jlor. 98. 48 (IV p. 840, 14

Hense) 2o0okX?)s Alavri (sic MA, Aiavn
om. S) av0puTr6s...p.6vov.' The line is
in
referred to this play, as not being extant

in the Aj'ax; but it is not unlikely, as
connexion, mere breath without
More familiar is dVeuos of

things variable: Suid. s.v. avt/xov irai8iov,
777 irfTToirj/xai.
Leeuwen suggested,
the ascription Mavn is an error.

thought that Mavn was due to
a slip of memory on the part of the
anthologist, who had in mind Ai. 125,
and that the true source of the quotation
cannot be ascertained (de Ai. Soph,
that
The
this
any substance: cf. Phoenix Coloph. ap.

Athen. 530 V eyu Nieos TrdXcu tot iytvbp.7)v irvtvfia,
vvv 5' ovk r' oi'84v, dXXd
Dindorf and van
cr/aa fxovov.
nvev/JLa /cat
Eupolis
376
fr.
8\edpos dvOpwiros.
latter
stantial, is
tL
5'
common
d\\o ;
358
(1
<p(j)VT)
K. )
dvep.os
<TKid, of things
:
fr.
Kal
945.
cr/ad
Eur.
Kal
unsubfr.
509
yipuiv dvr\p.
125 bpui yap T)p.ds ovbev ovras dXXo

TrXriv
el8w\\ offovirep fa/xev, 77 $ov(pT)v
o-Kidv.
Eur. Med. 1224 rd 6vr}Ta 5' ov
vvv irpwTov Tjyoufjiai o~nidv.
Or the notion
fr. 659,
is emphasised by some addition
6 (n.) el8w\ov aKias, Ant. 11 70 nairvov
criad.
Pind. Pyth. 8. 95 eirdp.epor ri 8e
tls ; t'l 6' otfris; <r/cis ovap dvdpioiros.
For con Burney conjectured I0O1.
Ai.
ait t lien tia, p.
119).
The epigram marks by two images the

emptiness and unreality of human life:
'Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher.'

In Eccl. 1. 14 the R.V. has 'all is vanity
and a
/uaros
wind
striving after
LXX).
But
'
{irpoaipeo-is irvev-
irvevjia
is
rarely used
14
Tvpavvoi tcov
cro(f)ol
1
The
by Libanius
verse
is
assigned to .Sophocles
epist. 33.
fuller tradition
gives the name of the play and discusses

Plato's error: Zenob. 5. 98 (Md'er, Melanges, p. 363 ; Crusius, Anal. p. 153) tovto
1,0(p0K\iovs io-Tiv i% AlavTos tov AoKpov.
UXdTiov 8i
/Setoj'.
yap
<f>r)oiv
Evpnridov elvat to
lap.-
Kal ovStv 6avp.ao~Tov avixirlirTovcn
d\\r)\ot$
oi Tron}Tal.
This
is
almost
(rofyoiv
^vvovcria.
identical with schol. Plat. rep. ;68 A.

The schol. on Ar. Thesm. 21 adds that
Aristophanes in the "Hpwes (fr. 30IS 471

K.) distinctly attributed the line to
Euripides, and that Antisthenes as well as
Plato did the same; he is quite at a loss
to account for the confusion, but mentions
the view of some (wcnrep virovoovai Tives)
that the two poets by a coincidence hit on
1
'
AIM AOKPOI
the same line.
who
liind.,
and Aul.
See also
(Jell.
n p. 373
view a> an error,
the facts.
Adam (on rep. 568 a),
while pointing out that such an en
more likely to take place in ancient time-.
than it would l>e now, thinks that the
cant use of ao<p6% in Kuripides, made it all
the easier.
The point of the line is that kings
profit by the discourse of the wise men
Aristid.
treats Plato's
13. 10. 1,
who adds
'3
for
to the
confusion by substituting the Thtaetitus for

the Theages as the dialogue containing the
misquotation. On the other hand, Plato's
to Euripides is accepted by
Stob. Jior. 4 K. 5 (IV p. 151, 10 H
and hesitatingly by Themist. p. 72
Kipnri8r)i yj ojtii dj wort i<m 6 ron/pat.
late authorities, references to
which will lie found in Xauck, cite the
line without giving the name of any
author.
The circumstances detailed above r.u>c
a curious literary question, viz. why Plato
stance is that of Simonides, who sojourned

successively at the courts of lltppias,
Scopas, and lliero. Aristotle relates the
anecdote that Simonides, questioned by
(m
see wise
attribution
who
Tii
The typical
flock to their courts.
wife whether
r
lictter to
is
it
rich, replied in favour
on the ground
in*
be
of the latter,
he was accustomed to
that
men spending
their time at the

gates of the rich [rhtt. :. tf>. 1391* 8ff.i.
Poets are often called aofoi in respect of
their technical skill, but Simonides had
considerable reputation as a moralist, .111.
in this capacity he appears as giving advice
i" Hi- 10 in Xenophon's dialogue of that
name: cf. [Plat) epmt. 1 rtpl l<pu>roi
6ra 6ta\4ywrrcu oi drttyxwot kcU Hoicaviov rod A<ur<5a<ôi-.oc, ~r,aipot<cri rir
assigned
a line to Kuripides which was in fact

written by Sophocles.
may leave out
of account the possibility of coincidence,
although Didymus is thought to have
been responsible for this suggestion in
criticising
Aristophanes "f Byzantium,
ive this v. as an instance of *Aos-i)
We
(Nauck, Arist.
It is possible
Bjrt. p. 2S0).
not very likely that one poet was
quoting from the other; soth.it an error,
rendered still more remarkable from the
fact that it was common also to A
phanes and Antisthenes, is the only
supposition remaining which will account
but
ZtfiwviSov tvwovaia* wapa^porrtt

(rpait
tlwt
Ktti
dn
gene*
.00 aofov rap' ir&pbt
A'Aes.
rally
rpot a
XP'I
<T(Xp6 Ti fUUr$&*tl*.
15
'
Tt trot 6
1
15
/<i,,
p. .570):
t6
'
rl
<frr)at
Macar.
iuddpurt* Plut.
olof
'
AvoWup
got 6
roC rl a cm ifuurti/coLJo.
fr.ir.
d*Ti
To the same effect
and
7.
1.
KtKiOdpiKtr;'
Macar.
H.
37,
recogniicd that Ah-vi'-Xoi was a

' for lo0on\7)t, as the form
War Ao*p6%.
write a pla>
ihoald
'Af4\W, which
im^pioLttp
which Dindorf
ol*-l (foil. int. p. 1*7), who
horum est Bopfcodl (lignum
1.
says 'nihil
it
iomi.
p.
ai>b"
lyyii,' actually proposes to read ti
bifO'
o Qoifht
not
Hit' 'ArtSXXwr <rot r*$piaKtr

vuck. following him,
inarrtioaro- uit
Suid.
AurxiAo* iv AiavTt Ao*py.
t
Pint,
lira*
14 (Miller, Melanges,
<r 6 'AriXXu-r KtKiBdpittr;
6.
>l>.
KfKi8dfH*'i>
'
\iro\X<iiv KtKiOdpiKtv
IHiM J
I do not share these

harp and the Imw are
fetbei with ih<
h<-
function as thcihicf prerogatives of

in
lb .in.
ft,
.//
KdnTtAa
.'*,
is at least
<pl\il
a.
generally considered
.;round
that fi0<i/-<.icles at Delphi were delivered by
trwcri
A6i vitfUftrivL pov\*p.
rl
more
<roi i'
metrical.
is
It
.lliia.
wlm
rwr art/ifidrur ;
|.
403) nnjeclored rl
!
'
rAfsv
Uptal
Callim. h.
ivirpdwtrai
ri^tt,
*i*+pii r*
XP*I*
*'
>***
where C-emoll
Ap. 44 +*** t*f
oi
do
<H
-i
Mis -1... U
tup**!* and td\i. and as sacb pi
accompanied by the <*#<f, and refcned
.rl of music and snog: seetiruppe.
Thb eonncx
irth. p. ii.m.
. knowledged
by Plutarchi
cx|.b..tly
*a
*iarrt.
IO^>OKAEOYI
'4
Pyth. or. 5 p. 396 C
0e6s,
Kai
tjttov
avT$ Kakbv
77
XoyidrTjTos
rrjs irtpi p.i\r)
ev<pu)vLas /xere'ivai.
ib.
art both as KtOapur-ris and

should be said KiOapifeii' in his
mantic capacity. The citharoede is the
interpreter of the citharist, as the irpo^T^s
interprets the fiavrn. Cf. l'ind. fr. 150 (of
sented
p.oxKTt)yiT7)% 6
tcalroi
\eyop.tvr)%
T77S
ov\
Kai u>8as
6 p. 397 A rdxa
llvdiav, 8ti V\cujkt]s ov
5tj fj.(/j.\f/6/j.eda tt)v
in
Kidapipftds,
<p6tyyerai ttjs k iO apujoov \iyvpwrepov.

If the Pythia was KidapipSds, it is not
surprising that Apollo, who was repre-
the
muse of the
poet) fiavreveo Motcro,

Blaydes conjectured
'A.irbXhwv 001 KKiddpiKfv viov ;
irpxpartvau
t'l
vw
5' iyib.
16
/cat
xAw]
16 Schol. Eur.
...Tovricri
perd
mon later sense of prose for the passage

of Sophocles was quoted to illustrate the
text of Euripides which proceeds pi\ipouai
l"'> ^ v T
dXi/pois
Kad' iirTaTovbv r bpdav
k\{outs i)p.voi$, and the critics are no doubt
right in referring the later words to the
Ale: 446 ovpeiav

Kai wapa 2o<o/cX
Xi'pas.
ev Ai'acrt AoKptp
This
7rea /cat c/>op/xt/cra
'
Kai Trefd Kai (popp.iKTa.'
x^
usually regarded as the only extant
is
example of the word
7ref6s
being applied
rhythmical verse unaccompanied by

But the same use actually occurs
in Plat. soph. 237 A dpxbpevos 5e /ecu 5td
to
music.
tovto
riXovs
avep.apTvpa.TO
rhapsodists.
as Plato's
(\lapptvL5-qs)
ypdp.p.aai,Tois pev ptTa piTp<jjv(legg. 810B),
7r
we
dXXd
lex.
and
10).
should interpret otherwise Com. fr.

III 516 K. iravaat. peXipbovcr',
adesp. 60
7rejSJ
clear,
poi <ppa<rov, or the gloss of Phot.

17
7rety
The meaning
Xvpas.
ydy
here
&vev avXov
is
though Campbell seems

word may have
to think that the
tration
(see also
p.6axovs
and
to.
77
Phot. lex. s.w.
irz'$as
and Etym. M. p. 658,

which the adjective was
irefr),
avpirbaia (ponwaiv.
Blaydes suggests (poppiyKTa, comparing

(raXiriyKTrjs but Meisterhans 3 p. 84 shows
that inscriptions always have <7o\tuktt]s.
perfectly
inclined
its
Aristotle's if/iXopeTfia {poet. 2 1448 s

The schol. adds a pertinent illus-
36), according to
jestingly applied to hetaerae: Kai irefai hi
Tives tTalpai Xiyovrai, at x u P<s bpydvov eis
405,
p.
ire^d (^jtij) is the same

Tropins (Pliaedr. 278 c), or
dXvpa TroiTjTiov xeipeva iv
Thus
xf/iX-r]
p-ad-^/xara
tV T && eK&ffTOTf X^ywe Kai perd

p.er puV ov yap pA\iroTe tovto daprj, <pt]oiv,
kt. (fr. 7 d), where the commentators unnecessarily suppose that oral teaching is
referred to. Nor is there any reason why
'
com-
17
'EXAas
17 Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.) p. 97, 4
'EXXds* 6 avi\p. ~Zo<pqk\t\$ ktavTi Ao/cpy. H.
shows that this is an error of the Antiatticist,
in which he does not stand alone. 'EXXds
is a fern, adjective similar to iredias, opyds,
$0ids, 'Attiktj, and so
Tpifi&s, 'Acrtds,
forth ; and it is difficult to believe without
definite proof that it was used (or"EXXr]v.
The cause of the misunderstanding appears to have been that ovO' 'EXXds ofae
fiapfiapos or rfa 'EXXds 17 fiappapos, with or
without 777, were phrases commonly employed
J3dp(3apos
Tyr.
Dem.
tt)v
9. 27
oW
77
'EXXds oHO'
77
X WP6 '- Max.

yivoiTO rrjs 'EXXdSos fj
The transition to the
TrXeoveîav
6. 3 et irov Kai
tt}s (3ap(3dpov 777s.
idea of a person is found in 7'racli. 1060

0(50' EXXds oOt ayXuxxo-os oM' 6o-t)v iyu>
j
yaiav KaOaipwv
yvvi]
a synonym for
24 odd' Istw ovtw
iK6p.riv e'Spacre' irw,
where
dt...,
8.y\u<ro-os is
(3dp(3apos (Pind. Isth. 6.
Here
j3dp/3apos ovt Tra\iyy\o)<ro-os ttoXis).
evident that what is to be understood

with 'EXXds is yaia, but since the meaning
is no i/ihabitant of such a land, the transition to a person is easy.
So in Eur.
it is
Phoen. 1509
7^po^^dpot0
ris
'EXXds
77
{Hdpfiapos
rj
twv
evyeverdv l-repos irXa...;

pass to erepos, we shall hardly
although we
doubt that rts EXXds='what Hellene
land?
Yet there the scholiasts vary one
:
'
rightly says rts 'EWijuikt]
777,
another has
St)\ov6ti yvirq,
77 pdpfiapos,
another tfyovv ris tujv dvdpjjwuv, 77* EXXt7'
17 jidpfiapos, yet another, yp. Tts"EXX77J'.
ris ''EWtjvikt]
AOKPOI AITEYI
AIAI
18
Sarovfieuos
18
:i p. 65, 7
SchoL Aeschin. :
kokupop oiaipovfiivot t6p
\byop] oioPti craipux \iywp xal oVru'pi*
i
)ind. ditfiaWt Si
nard 6taLpto ip nai ipapfpCof ff irwofitpifWP

SiafidWuy (5ia\afiftdpvp conj. Nauck)
na'i
Wf -(HponXrji Atom <pdo*up SaToi/iMPo*''

TO yap ai'To Svparai.
Schneidewin (Coni. Crit. p. 101) condaded that the scholiast had made a
Mistake, and that the passage which he
really had in his mind was Track. 791 to
'
bvaxdptvpop Xiicrpow fpSaroifxtPot <rov rrjt

ra\ai'Tjs.
Dindorf was of the lame
opinion; but their inference is too hasty.
There is do reason why Sophociei should
not have used daToiifitPos in the same
j
and we have no
ground for suspecting the scholUe error. The metaphor in
as ifiaroOfxtyot
t
irSartlatfai
n
is
clearly explained
Troth.
I.e.
aipoSpuit
l>y
the
\oiSopov-
yap otpobpCn iaOUur.

Kara fiipox tup
\tyofUruiv avaKa\u)V ivSartiaBat yap to
fupleoffOai,
ii fi.tra<popa awb tuip iatpv-
fuwof
tpSartlff $ai
\otdopuir,
ntu<pbnivoi,
i)
To
fUvwp.
Hesych.
briefly
Htplfti
(1.
hut more
p. 89 irfarcirae a-
same
the
11
Nauck was wrong in conjec6\a\afijidpup in schol. Aeschin.

The annotators there doubted whether
Staipoi'fjLti'ot meant accurately defining' or
'dividing up and so censuring,' and quoted
darovutrot in Soph, in support of the
latter view.
The words of the scholiast,
as printed in Diadoffl /Wf. .SVrw</, are
clearly that
turing
'
unintelligible,
fouKot koI oiofti a*uj| \4yur oipoSpwi.

iairdt.
t
[Tbese extracts show
to a strange dj
There
is
the Mss, except that cod. F does not

contain the t*COM part of the note. J
LjCOjphr. 155 t6p ufXtPlTifp \bp6pop <&aTovfUrt), 'chewing the shoulder m
s to the literal meaning.
through the ideas of repetition and insistence, is developed the metap
sense of 'to dwell upon,' as appliid to
s 01 to s|>cech: see \
in
and Tucker on Aesch. Tfuf>. 565. The

notion of hlame is not cvsenlial to the
figurative meaning of <paartia8ai, and the
same was probably true of the simple
Uhoegk
The
I. .11
in
in
ti"
phrases
like "iir
effect
i'Totupifci) ...IrJarot'pf'Of* fttpt-
owing
lion of their order.
dij'
':
a different way
cf.
biaavpw.
>lvcrve
also that the English 'to mince' acquired

the sense of 'to aepfedate (
yet another coarse of development.
AITEYI
to have thought that the
related in 1'lu?
oecen
adventure oi
But, as
the subject-matter of Sophocles' play.
4) remarks, the material is only lumcient for the beginning
of a tragedy.
Of tin- six fragments which arc cited from the
clearly refer to the journey made by Thcsci.
,s for the purpose of discovering his father, and the dai
win. h he encountered before his identity was established.
fact
ittle doubt as to the period covered
and
probable that t!
f the action rather than the death t
agree frith
is thus impossible to
It
the return from Crete.
licke (m Pauly Wissowa I 954) that the contents of this
>on
on Athcn. 122 F seems
I04>0KAE0Y1
16
unknown and it rather appears that Ahrens

supposing that the plot was similar to that of the
Euripidean Aegeus, which culminated in the recognition of
Theseus and the discomfiture of Medea (Plut. Thes. 12). But
the new fragment (fr. 25) relating to the capture of the Marathonian bull is of peculiar importance, as showing that in
Sophocles this adventure preceded the recognition, instead of
occurring at a later period according to the account of Plutarch
{Thes. 14).
In the Hecale of Callimachus it happened in the
lifetime of Aegeus, but was subsequent (it would seem) to the
recognition
see CI. Rev. VII 429 Bô-eix? ov% ea<? vio<; air
^coov dycov tov ravpov, and cf. Diod. 4. 59,
evvSpov M.apada)vo<;
where Aegeus receives and sacrifices the bull. But in Apollod.
epit. I. 5 Medea warns Aegeus to beware of Theseus, who is
on the victorious return of
accordingly sent against the bull
Theseus, the attempted poisoning and the recognition follow.
Ov. Met. 7. 434 gives the same order of events. Thus, Apollodorus confirms the statement of Myth. Vat. 1. 48 that Theseus
was sent against the bull at the direct instigation of Medea, and
we may conjecture that Sophocles adopted this version. The
disappearance of Medea's agency in other accounts is attributed
by Gruppe (p. 58o2 ) to the influence of Euripides, who did not
The considerations which
include the Marathonian adventure
have been mentioned justify us in restoring fr. 24 to the Aegeus,
from which Nauck in his second edition separated it and it is
probable that fr. 905 also belongs here.
play are entirely
was right
in
19
Tavpecov
19
19
irdua cod.
Athen. 122 F to 5e THavpeiov vdup
Aiyei (ii> yai cod.,

corrected to iv Aiyei by Casaubon, to
Aiyei by Schweighauser) onrb rod irepi
wv6/J.a.<rev...'Zo<poK\fjs
Ipoi^rjva irora/Mov THavpov, Trap'
To
Kai Kptyrq
the same effect

but without the name of the play Eustath.
//. p. 881, 22, who copied the epitome of
Athenaeus. With the help of Athenaeus
Casaubon corrected the corrupt gloss of
Hesych. IV p. 133 Tavpeiov irbp.a- awb
alyeiravpov iroTap.ou ?L,o<poK\rjs Tpoifrjva
Trapa Kai KT7)vt) 'T6eoaa to SoiôkXjjs Aiyei
awb Tavpov worafMou <nepi> Tpoiffiva,
irap' if Kai Kpfyi) 'Tbeaaa.
From these facts it has rightly been
tis 'T6e<r<ra /caXetrat.
corr.
Nauck
inferred that the lemma of Hesych. represents the text of Sophocles, but irwfia
(Nauck) should be restored in place of
the later substitute irb/xa: see Cobet,
N. L.
p. 455,
preferred
V.
o-rdfia.
L.
It
p. 85.
M. Schmidt
should be added that
Athenaeus shortly before (122 a), after

f., adds ov yap av
quoting Ar. Eq. 83

etiroipu Tavpeiov v5up
Tneiv, 6irep aii oiik
Brunck strangely inferred

that Athen. and Hesych. were really
quoting fr. 178, which he accordingly
supposed to have belonged to the Aegeus,
oloda
ri <ttiv.
substituting irwfxa Tatipeiov for alfia ravpeiov.
Pausanias
(2. 32.
R. Wagner's theory {Epit. Vat. p. 125) that Euripides

with Medea is altogether improbable.
1
it
Trcofxa
was
7)
mentions that the
the
first
to connect
AITEYI
source of the river Hyllicus, which was
originally known by the name Taurius,
was to be found on the mountain path
leading to Hermione, and that in the
same neighbourhood was the rock called
after Theseus, l>ecause he found beneath
17
the sandals and sword of Aegeus. This

enough to show that an allusion to the
river Taurus b appropriate to the subject
of Sophocles' play.
Poi the situation of
the Hyllicus ->ee ! ra/er '< /';// imas, III
it
is
279.
p.
20
KtcTTpq (TiSrjpa nkvpa kou Kara
p<JL\t.v
naicov arrqXo^crc
2 waiuy
20.
ij\<)T)<Ta
&xr)\6i)Cf scripsi:
M. Schmidt,
r/Xorjaa
(vel -) Xtioc
20
I'olluv
1}0\t)O( (vel
icai
Kiarpa.
jipa\tU ...a<tpnis
to
Hygin.
otpipai ri tl6ot eiiripat, wt iv Aiytl ~<xpollesvch. II p. 470

k\t)1 'utarpa.. w\tiof.'
K0T)>iat ffitqpai
no doubt
refer to
v.
Alcmau
Tvrtotpitotit,
Soph. O.
In- view might Ik- supported

dauruv
tpoUod. 3. j 7, where his weapon
but two
is described as Kopv*r\* aiitjpar
1
his victims to the l>ed
who
but
Hf
fr.
is
wXdor is
in
M>:-
very uncertain (tM

any case untenable,
tad Caaaaboa'i *aiv has a high
fitted
OOddd
rjaat
other hand, i;X7sy

too good to bt <luc to
In the
is
. .iixl die imt rc may be restored

by an alteration in the ordet of the
and the tnt r< xhu ti- >n
provided for them
weapon,
i: 7,4,
of probability.
by rutting ofl the extremi*

r lio were too big, or by hammering
out the Ixxlics of those who were too
cor responds
small. Thedupli
His
to the doable function.
e for the beating-out
10. 3H xaplrteal ri ai <tvp

Bar. Hclid. 756. PAoen. 184,
The reading
cr. n.);
Minorities
recently
lieyund doubt that the allusion
1.
Similarly
12 Qoiraii to nai if 6tao9ir,
fr.
.Win.
I'inil.
,h
Irvwrtr.
tiniuiihus suppositis tx-
Kara must Ik- taken dro Kowoii

1
with w\tvpa as well a> with pax*". Cf.
whom Theseus overthrew in

not far from Kp
the
:S
Jal-.
tenekbat.
Schol. Lur. /////
hising Sink and Procrustes, says of the
former: ptra <r<pt pat dwiKorrt roin 6<5at.
1,
Just
but the explanation has fallen out.
he has Kiarpa' apwriipiov 8r\o*.
atpC-p*.
Ilartung interpreted these words
as referring to I'criphetes, called also
of
'
Mekler
160
10.
^Xaw* roiw CasaulHin,
vXctor codd.,
iiXofjaat
^Xi^ra) ranvv Nauck, ^\nwe waium Hcrwi rden,
und
52
j)
iryiXodSriatf.
hu
<*d (A
of the crashing
k
at
hurled
him.
at
assumes that the
M<
lines are tn
missing at the beginning
IloXwrâ bants
;
Moroi rt gapTtpa* fffvpar i(ifia\<ir Upourat.
Apotlod. tpit. I. 4 roin pA*
Imt
til
not
seem
21
kXvoj p.kv ovk cycuyc, \0ipiT7)u 8'
21
21
I.
X*piriji, it
X*P* P> "Wdr6 rov ttpa iopirifi, io*ipa
iT*piTJ)1.
linpn-
K, J*\vontr vulg.
'
X ttP^ T1f *
bpv.'
but without
MpptJ
'r%>
'
>/,<
M'"
d. K.
I04>0KAE0YI
18
But the emphasis so thrown

Blaydes preon i-ywye seems unnatural,
The meaning
fers x w pL r V* 3' bpq. (or bpG>).
of the text may be 'I do not learn by
O.C. 139, 1642, Phil. 1412. Meineke,

however, thought that in reply to a
remark by his interlocutor that he heard
the sound of shouting, the speaker said
that he himself had heard nothing, but
now saw a native approaching. x^p'Ttjv,
a fellow-country titan
cf. Aesch.
Eum. 1035. For the word see on fr. 92.
his arrival.
hearsay, but see with my own eyes that

native,' with the same contrast
as in Track. 747, Phil. 681 and elsewhere;
or 'though I don't hear your voice, I can
see' etc., in which case we might compare
you are a
22
22
bSovpbv
oTos
ohovpbv 0109
&7}0'
7T&>5
iêfirjs
Valckenaer: bSovpwv (bSovpbv CI')
\a6o)v
codd., bbovpCov crurjvoi
8/xoios
Nauck
22
Schol. Pind. Pyth. 2. 57 ireiparas

\17crras
iriXayos
\4yofi.ev,
Kvplus be revs iv 65cp Kanovpyovvras'
8 5tj /ecu bbovpovs airrovs "S^yovcnv.
Tta.p'
~Evpiiri5T]S ev 'ApxeX&v (fr- 2 ô) 'firavo-'
bbovpovs \vp.euvas.' /ecu Soc/xj/cXtJs ev Alyei
1
Staircase' (Eur. Hclid. 860
Truis...\a.dcbv
to be supplied with f^3i?s.

Less
probable conjectures are bbovpQv ofA/xar'
(Wakefield), bdovpwv otfiov (Kock), bSovpbv 6/xopos (R. Ellis), bbovpwv 5/j.adov
(Mekler). oSovpov, highwayman. Later
may be taken to refer to Sciron,

infested the Scironian cliffs in the
neighbourhood of Megara ; and e^^rjs
(c55' l(3r]s conj. Blaydes) would then exThis
who
press the successful crossing of the
Other-
noun
'
'
n.).
wise, Nauck's bSovpHv ff/jiTJvos, 'nest of

robbers,' is an attractive conjecture, and
bdov or the like might have been the
Kara
Toil's
synonyms were
bSoidbnos
Evil
and
oSoot&ttis,
became obsolete
but bSovpbs soon
cf.
ovpos, eirlovpos, <ppovpos.
23
axTirep yo~p v <f>6WoL(TLu alyeipov fxaKpas,
kolv
aKXo
KLpyjcrav
23.
scripsi
23
ftrjOev,
a\\<x rovKeiviqs
ev<pv\\onv
1 ev (pdWotaiv
KavaKov<pi$ei
Ktvrjo~r}<: avpats codd.
:
Schol.
Oil.
17
106
alyeipov... eCiKivTjra pabius
to.
nal
cf>\\a tijs
iiwb
(ttJs)
rvxovo-qs (the addition of rrjs is Nauck's

correction) avpas, ws Zoc/io/cXtjs ev Alyei
(so Heath for evapyws or ev "Apyei of the
i
Kapa
avpas KavaKovfyiêi mepov
MSS) uairep...wTep6v.''
1 f.
The last line is certainly corrupt
(see cr. n.), and has not hitherto been
The following
satisfactorily emended.
points should be observed: (1) it appears
to be certain that aXXo |rn8tv and Kcipa are
both accusatives, so that the subject is to
be looked for in v. 3. At any rate, the
order of the words shows that TovKeiv-rjs
Kdpa bears the main emphasis, and is
co-ordinated and contrasted with aWo
rrjs
Brunck
tethnft
Kivfjffav
avpas
avaKovtpifei codd.
see n. on fr. 940 el adfia 5ov\ov,

d\\' 6 vovs e\ev$epos, and Headlam on
Aesch. Ag. 357 ff.
(2) With Kav must
be supplied Kiv-qo-ri or whatever may l>e
the verb in v. 3: cf. Ar. Ach. 102 futp-fifiv
elpijvqs
rprjo-ov
(3)
ti
The words
cv
/lot,
koLv
irivr'
cpuXXouriv
Inj.
have a
awkwardness; and clearly they

do not qualify the clause Kav aWo p.i)bev.
Thus the general sense would be 'even
certain
if
the breeze
else,
it
But
it
is
so light as to
stir
nothing
sways the poplar's head amidst
foliage,'
its
in summer as well as in winter.
is
difficult to see
how
can be made to cohere with
ev <pv\\oi<riv
irrepov, if the
latter is interpreted leafage (L.
and
S.).
AITEYI
Hence conjectures like F. W. Schmidt's
tWaiawyap, and several of Blaydc-.
K&pa
-sicd,
is
if
It' oi>x
<Hi
rering of poplar leaves in the breeze

1. 7. 54 /// aim fwf>ui<.:
::mi tomas. Her. 14. 40); but their
truth to nature, as interpreted above, is
within everyone's observation. Dindorf's
conjecture
elegant
tu
/rtrei
which seems inevitable) is

acceptk, bat it does not get
over the difficulty of vrtp6i>.
The same
remark applies to Tucker's Ingenious supplement to DiodorPiCorrection, reeV atfrin
Kdpa for roi'KCirip tapa. Hlaydcs, making
ndpa subject, pro|>osetl Kivyfdif aPpaii wi
wrtpof Kovipifcrai (or rip thii^r avaxTtpoi),
well as several other alternatives. Herreads xXivrc ru aCpa *draKoi'^tf<t
wtob, where *Xir<(, although otherwise
less suited than KtPti to supply
a verb to *dr a\\o wii*. See also Boor.
'omnia tolluntur') is condemned

by the awkwardness of wrtpi*. II.. who
thought that the subj. Kirhaj/i was due
,1a tOr rjfiCJf iftfiot
A*pa
is none
wind-gods such BJ
{i.e.
an
Boreas were regularly represented in fifth

century art as winged.
In I-atin literature there are many parallels: cf.
Met. 1. 164 madidis Xotus exolat nits, and
see Thesaurus i 1465. 50.
It is possible
that this was If. Schmidt's view, who in
Phiiol. xvill 319 f. proposed to read
*rep< for rr*p6r, but he gives no explanation of his conjecture.
Wecklcin's
myri
aOpa, **d>ra Koiipifai xrtpor
Kopaxovipi^ti,
refers
The metaphor
490, Phil. 380).
too bold for Sophocles
(with
at'po
corrupt, and
to the
lie
it
'Wtagi of tM wind' (see Psalms iX. 10.

104. 3). reading Kivijcar aCpat, and making
aCpat rrtpof the subject to draoi-etf<i,
which is merely emphasized by coi (TrtuA.
t* ipotyiov <ra\ov.
Thus the
more than the schol. states,
Am.
>v.
altered vrtpim to p4*o*,

to s-dXtr.
Hut I do not think
that wrtpbv i> likely to

prefer to suppose that
[IvdGi*
"'
W. Schmidt
V.
Gomperz
the object of avaKoixplfci

not required, by 0.7'. 23
(woXti) aa\(i'tt K&ra*ov<pi(Tai K&pa
19
tar in
to
the previous line, suggested

but wc cannot do without
atpti;
Ktrrifftt
aCpa.
Kirfyr-g.
24
U>pUT(V
aKTas
p.kv
ifiol
npeafiela
rrjcrSe
fet'/ia?
24.
1 warrip wf*a<v Strab.
iai aibi. II.
8 ffra suppl<
<
Strabo 39a of r o*> tt\p 'AT$lia

roXXd ota^wroirrrf, tovto
y* 6no\oyovoiP, at > \tryw d{to, Sri tup
01
Aiôf *a
6Vrwv,
llaWacrut
irrucift tt
rot
X ((Tatar.
-o Trjr
dd '\c6p.oi>
avroC
1
6pa/rioi
rV
Ti\p
>p~i)tn
w#.lioi
with
who
la
|goi
bit
it
iwot-
"i
the
in
MripCHM
now
if
not to the Jefnti. especi-
have lwen enlarged

regant to the scope of the play: see
Utrodoctorj
Pallas jxiinis in ihc
rot/
rirrapa diaco-
but
edhtaa followed
'MfnteUt*'
that our data
fi*xP* T<"
"Ardpw*
cannot see to what play the words are
4>tX6x oput <///</
IldWat.'
rmerly assigned lo
.KW
noki
ally
^r"*"
M^", dWurr dXXwi tlpykdrw, &p*ti rarra

*apd ZoôKX/off \a(ku>- <pjjai &' 6 Aiynt
tri 'o waTJjp wptotr ifioi n*r a
drd ri)<r6* ^^f Tptlfki* mua%
a
Strab.
mind, and miiIimui giving any reason
his
appropriate,
apx*l*'
yijt
thecommon opinion, subsequently chugged
rOrapa
M>afWJa Xdx M
T^jr o' *
th drdt r$ri*
Aly4**t rt
a< T#rdproi'
'BXcivirot *al
&i trfXJ*
>
vku>
iftoi p.iv a. .
24
Ttrrapunr
drroiKifTai,
>a
Mrineke
\ii
evyypaifravTii,
IlariiOfirtvK
clr
TTCLTrjp
<
-yr}<;
may be
seen from
same
I'lut.
lefcreoce to
directitw, a
Pht
mm h
direct evidence.
apart from this passage of BCiaho, MMM9sV
of
diMMon
fourfold
Attica between
ing die
vplicii
the sons of P.umIi.h.
1
HhsL
statement lo l* found elewhere 1*
\i
/
il SiipntQ y*t i *' viptUi
Arr..i)
llardiW y*p laM*
aXaiir
Mrot r*r K4*por* (ImttXtim*, *p~rr+
*dfirof 9i itU rM MiyptU, trmpt r+r
1
r>
XWx" "'* **'*'
' **
M^pw
Ai>Wt>
aa
ZO0OKAEOYI
20
tqv avTL-rrXevpou Krjnou Ev/8ota? v4p.eiNtcrw Be rrjv 6jxav\ov eâtpel ^dova

iKLpajvos a.KTr}<;' T779 Be yrjs to 7rpb<; votov
6 o~K\rjpb<; ovtos /cat yiyavTas 4kt pe<f)(ov
eLkt)ye LTaXXas.
4
i/ûei
Coraes: vipnav vulgo,
et 8fia\ov al.
T7)v
iraph
AiaKpiav,
AvKip 5
tt]v irapaXlav,
Ntrif)
tt)v
tt)i>
The
Daphne
"Aleyapiba.
allusion to the Pythion in the

pass, where a monastery afterwards stood,
indicates that Philochorus is the ultimate
Briefer but to
source of the scholiast.
the same effect, though without the words
Vesp. 1223.
fj.expt llvdlov, is schol. Ar.
The schol. on Eur. Hipp. 35, who derives
other parts of his note from Philochorus,

has a garbled account, omitting Lycus,
and giving no explanation of the divided
A somewhat different version appears in Apollod. 3. 206, which agrees

with Pausan. 1. 5, 4. 39, 4. According
to this, the four sons divided the country
between themselves after the death of
Panel ion, when they had returned to
Athens and expelled the Metionidae
Apollodorus illustrates Soph, by concluding with the words elx 5e rb irav
Kparos Aiyevs.
rule.
'Aegeus speaks: irarrip is Pandion.

Aegeus obtained the capital, Athens,
1.
with the Athenian plains, and the coast
of those plains which was specially called
'Aktti (Diet. Geo.
p.
322
cp. Strabo 9
p. 391), the dcrrv, the webids, and the o.ktt).

2. Lycus got the Aiaicpia, the highland
N.E. of Attica, between

Parnes, Pentelicus and the sea.
3. Nisus
got Megaris, where he founded Nisaea
district in the
the sea port.

the
vbrov
i.e.
Sunium
to
4.
Pallas got
southern
to
coasts,
irpbs
from
Cape Brauron on one
side
(the E.) and to C. Zoster on the other

the trapaXia.
This legendary division must have had
After the Megarid had
a basis of fact.
been reft from Attica, the three other
divisions are found corresponding with
political parties in the sixth century B.C.
the IleSiets, the IldpaXot, and the
AictKpioi (Hdt. 1. 59: Plut. Solon 13,
Did.
Geo.
11
p.
cod. A. m. sec. suppletis
8p.av5ov
ZneLpwvos Strab.
rb acrrv p.ixP l llffliou,
Trepl)
(1.
llaXXavri 8
litteris fiuv in
324).'
(J.)
1 ff.
These lines cannot be restored
with any certainty, more particularly as
tradition
of Strabo is mutilated see
the
:
cr.
Meineke (followed by Xauck)
nn. (i)
gave
p.h Cbpiacv
/j.oi
8elv Tjjcrdf yrjs...
irarijp
d\rds d?re\-
irptffPeia.vd/xas' tiro...
He
would fill up the gaps with

and devrepip. (2) Casaubon
and Brunck edited irarrjp 5' direX-
Avicif).
irpocreo-iripovs
conj.
dtiv wpttr' eis d/crTji' l/iot,

irpeffêta veifxaz
rijaSe yrjf r1
to
be
kept.
(3) J. suggests either p.oi piv apx^-" [ot

dpxV) w/>r' 's dcrds Trarr/p or /aoi /n^**
tlpiaa'
irarrip
KKT7jniv(f>.
Tvpcwveiv
or
djcrds
avdcrcreii'
rijcrbe yrjs
Blaydes
conjectured
(4)
epotKeiV for djreXtfeu' and
wished to introduce
Lycus
irapa.KTias.
was subsequently driven out by Aegeus

(Pausan. 1. 19. 3).
4 avTiirXtvpov, opposite, c. gen. Strabo
speaks of Attica as a triangle with three
irXevpai (or ir\evp&)
the second which is
firjvoeid-q^ extends as far as Oropus in
Boeotia,
tovto 5' earl rb bevrepov irXevpbv
Upov rrjs 'Attiktjs (p. 391).
Ktjirov, 'domain,' as in fr. 956, 3.
5 ofiauXos is similarly applied to persons in a satyr-playof uncertain authorship
(Ox. Pap. 1083.fr. 1. 8): see also Hesych.
Ill p. 201 has 8p.av\ov 6/j.6koitov, bfj.ov
a.v\i6/j.ei>oi>, and cf. fr. 717, Aesch. Cho.
caipi the act.
597 vvyovs 5' bfiavXlas.
is used of the donor, and the middle of the
recipient. See Jebbon Track. 245. Hdt.
;
4. 161 t< fiacriXh Bd.TT(f> reixivta itêXuv.

6 Sxipcovos Akttjs. The genitive is
governed by
8/j.avXov
as
= "ye/roj o.
,
For
the Scironian rocks see on fr. 905. The

route extending for about six miles along
the cliffs between Megara and the Eleusinian plain, and known in modern times
as the 'Evil Staircase,' is described in
Frazer's Pattsanias, II p. 546 f. For the
form l^Kipuiv (not ~Keipwv) cf. Callim. fr.
378. That the form with 1 is the older is
attested by inscriptions on stone (CIG
7723) and vases (Gruppe, p. 5yo ). to
Blaydes should not have
irpos votov.
jectured vbrov, for the accusative is well
established: see Kuehner-Gerth 1 515.
7 f. The fifty sons of Pallas had
(i
AITEYI AiniGOS
already plotted against Aegeus before
the appearance of Theseus, wishing to
secure for themselves the succession to
the throne (Pint. Thts. 3). Subsequently,
I'allas
and his SODS revolted against
1.
IS. 1), but were
mail.
fed l>y him (Apollod. ff<it. 1. 11,
Thes. 13, I'ausan. 1. 18, 10, Kur.
I'lut.
Hipp. 35). The description of Psllas'a
very remarkable, and
may note,
the reax>n is not plain.
however, the following coincidences which
link the legend of the battle lietween the
giants and the gods with the defeat of the
slew a giant of that name: Suid. /..-.

IldXXa*, Etym. M. p. 640, s 4 cf. Apollod.
1. 37.
(2) As the Chudak Pallene
the scene of the giants' defeat, so Theseus
destroyed the I'allantidae at the Atti.I'allenc (Hut. I.e.).
(3) Two
were named Clytus and Butes (Ov.
500), two of the giants ( lytius and
liotes.
It is further to be observed that
TzetzeM.itranga 11 5S0 calls
Aegeus and Hippolytus giants.
It may
l>e,
however, that the I'allantidae arc
called yiyarret in virtue of their insolent
QppOM*Uoa to authority; in the case of
Capaneus (Aesch. Thtb. 411, quoted by
J.) the significance of the name is obvious.
;
WM
MM
We
I'allantidae (Gruppe,
Myth.
O'r.
(1)
Athena was
called I'allas because she
25
K\(ocrTrjp(TL xtipoiv 6pyd(Ta<;
Karrjvvcrt
crtipala Secr/xa.
25
ybpiwi rov
AUiTi' *ai
AiVx'Xoi
naXarruv
t^p dtpSwoXip i\daai *ai $unt Xtyrrai rp
Phot ed. Reitz. p. 64, 8 dcoeVat

KCL0b\oV ii TOwiXwi XP^"fT(u T V &" '
OfTful'
The words "f Sopbo

0*y.
the preparation of the cords by which the
bull
KXtMTTTJpOl X ,l fM* v '"
kd.
hand- madt twisting* (of wi
Pollux 7. 31 cXwcrrô oCtu
rai rjr
TtpwrpoQi,* tou \Ipov Ei'/xrtfljt wr6pa*r
<
WM
rou Taiorra
ZoôaXtji 6i iv Alyt't
&rfo4a OTpi$o*T9. ai fxa\dr-
riOtKri,
rorra roin Xiryoif woirjecu
wt 'Apx'^X 0,
/{cXarrr ir Kol
hi fri
> top
<f>r)oi
/fy/at,
dtfffjA
r$
\irov xXitsrTijpa ntptfifm
Xo7Vo. 537 k\u9tou &' dn4*(U>Xoit \Umo, of the ro[)es used to pull the
horse into the city.
I r dfyatrat
1001),
(fr.
The
pw*.
extract cl<arly relates to the adventure of the Mar.-1thoni.1n bull, and

that it formed a part of
of the AtgttU'. see Introductory
did not kill the bull on the spot,
1
Kur.
cf.
481, 787 and
frs.
for
ortipoii
toil (TiV ry -)/porTi &*fft& OHpaiwr

<Ut>roM*" *7>dt iora.
keit/enstcin thinks that the Htl
made from a somewhat lengthy discussion
of 4p>dfw, and assign* it to I'hrynichu*
on the strength of Bckk. ant
//>'.
Ppdxw
but captured it and drove it back to the

here it was subsequently sacrificed
Apollo: of. Pint Thes. 14
X'ipwtfdufKot 4wti*l(aro (uirra 6id rov
dfrioi i\daat, tiro, ry 'Aa-6\Xwri ry A'\r.ui>an 1. :;. ) rbr
0*(y t/Oi'it'.
r
Mapalwri ravpo*
'
rat'py.
ofarun' 'K\ucTij(xn...Stfffid.'
and
p.
i). 31.
C-artpop iiv
Aimooi
The evidence conm<l<.tit)ttul
that
ophoclea with
it
i^
idle
t<>
--i><
<
play bearing
hi^
I.ivms Andronicus wrote an Atgutnus which apparently wai

>n the Homeric venion o(
mnon'i murder; .nl
Ribbeck, / A7ell as a Ctytatmutrm
also
tpkigmUu
Ntc
to
the
1,
Introductory
161.
See
Pl>.
x

IO<t>OKAEOYI
22
26
r)\iG)TTO<s
26 Philodem. depiet. p. 22 G. < Alax'"Xos> 5' iv 'H\td<(jiv rbv> Ala Kal

ai$4<pa X^yei K>ai yrjv koI <otipavb>v
'
Kal ra irdv<Ta Kal v>irp ra irav <t
Evpnrl > 5t/s 5' iv Mixffots Kal>rbv Ala
Kal <.oipau6> v TjXiuirdv,
<Ho<f>oK\r}$>
wdvra X^7 1 tuv^' inriprepov

evidence of Philodemus has
effectually silenced the doubts of those
who thought that Clement was handing
down a false tradition. It has now been
shown that the pantheism of Aeschylus is
due to Orphic influences, and that such a
Zevs toi
the
5'
r>bv
Such
is
at first sight.
Eor the connexion of Helios with Zeus

ij\iwir6s does not occur
see on fr. 752.
elsewhere, but belongs to a class of ad-
is
doctrine flourished in Orphic circles in

the sixth century or even earlier: see
Gomperz, Greek Thinkers, I p. 97 E. tr.
Perhaps then the hinted identification of
rfKiwwbs ovpavbs and ijXiwirbs Zei/s is less
remarkable in Sophocles than it appears
Ala.
the restoration of Gomperz as
given in his edition and it is evident that
the latter part of the extract is very doubtful, and that both the name of Sophocles
and what he said rest upon an uncertain
conjecture. Wilamowitz (Anal. Eur. p.
) also reads < ~Zo<poK > [\]r)s S' iv Mucrots
1 6
above. This is the more vexing, as there
Kal
"
t<x
and
<ovpavbv fx>bvov, iv Olivet 5i
Alyl<rd(f}
ovpavos
no extant passage of Sophocles with a
pantheistic import so clearly marked as

the fragment of Aeschylus (fr. 70), or
Eur. fr. 877 dXX' aldrip tiktci <re, K6pa,
Zfus 5s avdpwirois ovofidêrai, fr. 941 6/>s
tov vxj/ov tov5' Aireipov aWipa
...toutov
cf. frs. 839,
vdfJLtfc ViTjva, rbvS' ijyov Oebv
911. The lines of Aeschylus are pre-
jectives
etc.)
(Koikuirbt,
which
eupwTris,
common
is
in
WKTfpwirbs
tragedy.
In
many cases the second member of the

compound had so weakened that it
became a mere
by Sturtevant
suffix, as
has been shown
in Class. Phil, vti
428
ff.
In ijXiwirds, however, the meaning 'appearance' can still be recognized (ibid.
served by Clement of Alexandria: Zetfs

iffriv aW-qp, Zei)s Se yfj, Zevs 8' ovpavos,
p. 422).
27
appvd/xcov
27
Hesych.
p. 293
dpvdnwv
do-vp:-
SoôkXtJs Alyladip (so Musurus

corrected the MS, which gives alyl Sw
Dindorf conjectured Alyet or Al0lo\f/i,
Bergk Aldwvi).
appvOfios may be either without rhythm
<pwvwv.
3. 8. 1408
24, where it
with ifiperpos having the
as in Arist. rhet.
is
contrasted
13
rhythm of
verse, and is said to be unlimited (dwipavrov); or else kerning bad

rhythm, discordant, as when it is cc1
trasted with to eSpvdfiov (Plat. rep. 400 r.
It was employed in the latter sense r*
'
Sophocles, and so metaphorically c
Eur. Hipp. 529 /j.tjt' Appvdfxos Atfois (
Aphrodite).
AI0I0T7EI
Heyne
title should be identified witnP

mentioned with other Trojan plays in the
Argument to the Ajax (p. 3 J.). He is followed by Welcker
(p. 136), and is probably right, although anything in the nature
the
conjectured that this
Memnou which
of proof
is
is
of course impossible.
The
outline of the plot
may
Ainzooi AioionEi
23
EGF
case be gathered from Proclus chrestom. (AMioirfc,

33) Mefiviov Be 6 'Hot/<? vio? e\wv lfaaioroTevKTov iravo-rrXiav
trapayiuerai tois Tpaxrl ftotjd/jaa)!" <a\ fteVtc. to> TraiBl rd tcara
top y>\fivova irpoXeyei.
/cat <rvp.fSoXtj<i yevofi(vjj<i Wvt iXoxps Otto
in that
p.
eirena \\-îXXev<i Mc/xt'ora mtWmi" ttai

Atov aiTrjaafxem) adavaaiav Sibtaari.
iiylus also wrote a play entitled Memnon (TGF p. 41
and
made the death of Memnon the subject of his H'trôo-raota.
Wagner thought that Strabo 728 made a slip in quoting
Aeschylus <fr. 405) as his authority for the statement that
Memnon's mother was a Cissian woman, and that it ought to
have been attributed to Sophocles.
nvaipelrat,
Me'ui'oi'ov
Hok
p.tv
irapa
),
28
TOiaUTCt Toi (TOt 7T/X>5 X**/31 *' TC K ^ ^ l
Xeyaj- crv 8* avro? aj<nrp oi ao<f>ol to. ficu
roO 8e Kephaivuv fyou.
StVat' cVaiVet,
28
\ "(.
a. 111 c e0/XH Tit 4* Owo tw

i}
xai aotpiarCiv \ rj 6vo
yoif worr/pwi tifrquia, ola vapa
^.otftotXtt
to i* Al6lo\(>iy tifrt)fiiwor 'roiavra fx ov -'
V. 1 f <ri ' 0' ai roj ./x<w 'c also quoted
d\\wf rotifrwr
tath. //. p. 753, j
the epi
1 toi
1,
who drew from
Vtbenaeus.
attached to the DTOOOUB with
determinative force: Me Jchb on .-//.
Kocboer-Gcitb, | 506. 6. -irpo
X^fHV
is
and not 10
5 1 av s-pot X^P " *'' **
V*t, where it is the person
(Mi.iile
'['.
Va/wf
0'
iscd
II
\6ytf>
JtwjioTOi trX/owrt* ^ pit*

^ s- pot fog fat *od-
*ti<rai>Tti dftir,
oot
x^P1 ' "afat
o*'
dreuTff
Ocm.
rtrpoi't.
8.
'Torrat AVarrat ufa* s*/ot

Ix^pa* wottiaOtu \6yop uijdVra >^r pot
the emphatic tautology cf.
j
t /x rf*wr.
'*6i'Ta
>' ai'ror,
ttXXA
S*pot
'
rfwr,
0(a the
w*-
parpOM
tw
whom
ivaW
'
Ktp&aUmr ri ^XXot.
For t sain
See also on fr. 154, 4.
larly placed at the end of a
ltJ7 ri flip dX>i<rr*. and for the Mn
in the ute <<( the artidc and ai
i.'s nn. on Ant
409, /'*//. |I1
fa-aim implies what we CKore**
4r Kpttidntrot
wh<> hints at the
'iijffftft
This appears to be a
a f. <ro4>oi
reference t<> rontemjMirary Soph ist
its
fortaenee on Sophoclea see Nestle
in C/ats. Phil. v. 154.
Athenaeus also
refers to El. 61, and quotes from Thco-6 KtXwur pit s-X/or fx*'*. 1*Oirtir
to too*.
Ktcoeles expresses a similar
sentiment in Kur. PHmh. 509, where see
<|ii<'tt>
r.
II
fr. adesp. <j rofi iii*
n.
t I fpya r*9
itKcuov H)r 4<Wi?<rcr &pr\-eo,
dowrrot #ctfa cfooartit, aixl thinks thai
our passage may belong 10 OdyM
tl 7*
II
damn
uilh
taint ft
*opr<a
rV 6\iiv' o>""r, ntyd\l *'
W*ai. Cf Juv. 1. 7 4 frMtmt Ummtmr
l.inati..n
./*o
not merely
pate an obj
'
is
ifnTi/p
imilnr that the Stoics
imt
made
ioo, jo. I'lut. Sf*.
virtur
101) thought that Sophocles

rritten
(U* as
'
longe cot
'pot
x*f**
Tl
Thin
-
is
*"''
an
are of
and dnrjrstppos employed

to deduce therefrom tl
,-
p.
it
>s
art
"f fate
110 Be).
IO0OKAEOYI
24
29
TeTpdnrepoL yo.p voirov kv oecr/xw/xacrt^
a(f>r)Kol KeXaLvopives
2
29.
M.
KeXaipopwes Phot., Etym.
D:
cod.
ii.t\aivbpivi%
M.
vulgo ap. Etym.
editur
29
twv
dirb
p.iaov
e<T<pt.yiA{i>oi'
kXtJs
Aidto\f/i
rrj
aapudxrei'
385,
3,
ffcpriK&v,
(vdev Kai 6
explanation
/card
II
are found in
but without the
Etym.
In the absence of the context

to connect tv Seo-jiw|ia<riv with
<r<f)T|Koi,
'
of the
gives the
cr<pr\Kwaa.To
Kai
avveacptyixivoi.
Poll.
Seafii^.
2.
ovk
25
A. P.
ovk tvSerov.
t.a<t>riKU)p.wr}v,
Hence Naber, in his

proposed to restore
2o0o/cXt?s kidlo\pi <v<f>i)Kov i Ka\el> rovs
i<x<piyp.4vovs fivp/xriKas < Kaiov Ktx v /M ^ vovi >
dXXa
best
it is
'pinched with strapping': cf. Nonn.

Dion. 1. 192 84fffiiov Avdpo/xtSriv iripif)
Af.
name
p. 1 14 ffcprjicoi
Kexv/J-tvot rrj crapuwo-ei,
ov
fivpuvZ- R Holland in Koscher

in fj.vpnr)Kes an allusion to the
2656 sees
Myrmidons.
2o#o-
fivpfxriKas
TerpdirTepoi...Ke\ai.vbpivei.'
Hesych. iv
play.
ol
<r<p-r)V
{ff<piyntvovs
toi>s
The same words

p.
was called
Phot. /&r. p. 22, 15 ea<pt)KU)tJ.ivov
i<r<f>iy[iivov,
raj djKvfi6\ovs irepiTjyias
16. 195
a<p-i)Kwot
S^crd/xevos
ff<prjK6s appears to be an adjective with
Ar. Plat. 561
the sense of <r<p7)Kw5r)>
edition of Photius,
Xti-po.%,
inrb
OTi/Jap(p
k'iovi
iax"oi Kai <T<pT)Kwdeis Kai roh ^x^P' s

aviapoi is well illustrated by Heliod. 10.
31, where a wrestler is described as o\ov
rb <rwfj.a <T<(>i)KU}<ras, 'with all his body
aapKwffei, and. ingeniously conjectured

that the words formed part of an allusion
rrj
to the giant Indian 'ants' described by

Herodotus 3. 102
105, as being smaller
than dogs but larger than foxes, resembling
braced.'
the Greek ant in form, and pursuing with

exceeding swiftness the Indians who come
These
to gather the gold-bearing sand.
animals, he thinks, were mentioned in a
description of Mesopotamia, the home of
Memnon, to which belonged the epithet
dpOo-rrrepos (fr. 33).
Nauck, who accepts
Naber's view, would prefer to alter ko.1 6
Lobeck
<x(f>^v in Photius to /caXei (t^tjkoi'S.
<r<t>7]KToi
wrepos
Ttjpvbvri
Cf. fr. 341.

or <r<piKToi.
is
Blaydes suggests
The
tragic
parodied in Ar.
TeTparrriKif)
(see
on
Ach.
fr.
rerpd-
1082
11 27),
which refers to a locust.

For allusions in Soph, to Herodotus see
JebbonO.C.
337.
Dindorf restored KeXaivoppives, but no

see
rule can be laid down for these cases
e.g.
Aesch. fr. 300, 2 XtiXos iwrdpovs.
:
The epigraphic evidence is also
(Pkryn. p. 674) took an entirely different

view of the meaning and found a clue to
it in the fact that a cestus with metal studs
Meisterhans 3
fluctuating:
p. 95.
30
avapKTOv
30
avapKTov is given by
in Aesch. Emm.
529, where most editors substitute dudpXfTov (Wieseler) for metrical reasons.
181 HvapKrov avvirbraKTOv, <ou> ovdeh fjpi-e (ypt;ai cod. av

ap$eie conj. Blaydes).
2o0okXt?s Aidioxf/i.
ov
Hesych.
p.
was added by Musurus.
31
av
ivOofio CTKOV
31 Hesych. I p. 203 dvOofioo-Kbv (cod.
dvdofibcKov)' dvdoTpb<pov (qu. dvObrpotyov).
2,o<poK\rjs
AWio\pi.
L. and S. render
nourishing, growing flowers; but, apart
authority,
from
I
should have thought
that the
word must mean flower-fed, unless
can be shown that fibaKeiv dvdyj was

applied to a gardener. But, as an epithet
it
of the bee, the
compound agrees with
normal usage of fibcrKv,

Neil on Ar. Eq. 255, inf.
for
fir.
the
which see
140.
It
is
perhaps superfluous to quote Horn. B 89,

Eur. Hipp. 77. Ahrens, however, finds a
reference to Anthemusia in Mesopotamia,
which he supposes to have been the home
of Memnon.
AlOIOnEI AIXMAAQTIAEZ
*S
32
a7ricrrct
32
Hesych.
(Stallhaum on .//v/. 391 I; but is otherwise unknown to Attic prOM. For dViTot
:.|i da-Mrr*?' iveifttt.
p.
<xf>OK\j)i Aidioipi {alOio^/ end.).
see on
the sense of to disobey is

Sophocles: see Ant. 219, 381,
Harpocration quotes Antiphon
i-rtaTtlif in
common
656
(fr.
etc.
Jt) as using
and
it,
it
occurs
in
617. On the other hand vurobty is rare: Jebb on Tra<h.
fr.
Tti'tiv for to
in
ui8.
I'lato
33
opdowTepov
33
;>.
446.
19 6pd!>irrtpov
noXwroif
to -yip iit Pôt a^x o>rra *Ttpd IXtyof
koI Ttt xtploTya.
Remrch.
p. 119
explains the word but does not refer to
Sophocles as using it 6p06rrpos' fi*yaZtxpoKXffi AiOio-y/iv 6pdoCn Ixo^ra
Xoit
*o\u>>o:'i
TTcpA yip
{fityaXw. ovt cod.) txovaa-
Ttt tl% fof/oi
i^x o,rra
V /"<7*Xttf
fôiâ vtpiffTifavt (rcraoin cod., vtpiffrv1
The corrupt
oinoioft&i.
text
the meaning is easy: 6. would l>e like

rtplwTtpot an epithet of *a(Jt, signitying
flankdi with columns. The word wtplxrtpot occurs several times in Atben.
K. ami m.in interpreted by (asau105 A
bon with the help of \ itruv. .?. 3. 6.
describing tustyli ratio, wrtpbv is properly
applied to the projection of the ceiling of
the colonnade winch stretches out from the
cella on either side and re-ts upon the
pillars; it thus follows the analogy of the
name itrdt, as given to the gable: Gobi
Inf. jJUduûr/orai
and Koner.p. 21.
Mlh, with Jebb'sn. (7) Hut (DC
graphers appear to assert that Sophocles
0M to 6p$bwr*pw the meaning. 'with
lofty hilK.'
It is impossible to say what
iiion. if any, they had for making
this statement.
Kllendt mentions without approving it a

proposal to substitute J/joi't far Ktk
ti
in Phot., thus giving to the adjective a
mt
meaning
similar to that
But there can be

irripos
a>
ti~<-.i
of
u'fn'artpvoi.
doubt that 6p66

Sopb.in
little
i.y
building,
'.
(i) In the latter
case
AIXMAAQTIAEZ
Welch
of th
17'
cHul
ipared with Eur. /> n><>
\l
that the death of Astyanaxwas the central incident
that the Astyamu of A
N
nicnt of this play (pp. 171
and unconvincing
From
fr.
.1
from
do not show any point ol

At
and no other model iu
whi.h Wel< kei thinks was
nt9
the
to be justified
.
in
th<-
of the
with
A<
1
venifout
w tr<> little <>f his methodj
y corroboration ia using
uncertain in the extrenu
ab
AstyanoA
for
the reconstruction
<f
the
ZO<t>OKAEOYI
26
At^/xa\o)Tt'5e<?.
The title obviously suggests that the plot was
but the fragments are unfortusimilar to that of the Troades
nately indecisive, and the only certain fact is the statement in
the Argument to the Ajax that the play belonged to the Tpcoucri
it pay /xare La.
There is nothing whatever to support Ahrens's
;
guess that the plot is to be found in Hygin. fab. 109, which

deals chiefly with the story of Iliona.
On the other hand, A. Schoell and Bergk conjectured that the
play was largely concerned with the demand for the restitution
This view
of Chryseis as related in the first book of the Iliad.
was mainly based on frs. 40 and 43 but Hartung, who accepted
it, unwarrantably assumed that Chryses was an alternative title
for the same play on the ground that frs. 38 and 730 should be
1
identified.
Brunck strangely thought that the AtÂiaXtwriSe? was a satyrThe reason which moved him is no longer applicable,
since it is now admitted that the line which Harpocration appears
play.
to attribute to Sophocles
(fr.
is
34)
actually a fragment from a
comic poet.
More
recently O. Rizzo 2 endeavoured to reconstruct the play,

with the help of a sepulchral relief discovered near the Porta
Salaria at Rome, and of the fragments of Accius.
He concludes
that Odysseus was the chief character on the Greek side, and
that he announced to Andromache the impending execution
The latter was not a child, as in Euripides, but a
of Astyanax.
full-grown youth.
34
(rrpaTov KauapTT)<; KaTTop-ayixaroiV
34
Harpocr. p. 28,
2)o0ok\^s
tSpis'
ev
Kai iraKiv
awonaTTwv...
'orparoO...
Alx/*a.\wTL<n
Seivdraros airo.uaKTris re
'
The second extract

Harpocration was printed by the earlier
editors as a fragment of Sophocles, but
Nauck is almost certainly right in attributing it to a comic poet.
The lexicographer's note is attached to Dem. 18.
259 (part of the famous description of
Aeschines) nadaipuv robs reXovuevovs
fieydXicv avfifpopHv.'
in
Kai a.Trofia.TTCx)v rip wrjXip Kai tois ttltvpois.

1
wepi.p.6.TTUv
and
airopaTTeiv
are
Alternatively, he argued from schol.

been the oirXwv Kpiats. See Jebb, Ajax, p
S/H5
both technical terms in connexion with

ceremonies of lustration and purification.
The former, according to the explanation
of Wvttenbach (on Plut. de supers'. 3
p. 166 A), denotes the smearing of the body
with the magic substance, and the Litter
the wiping off, 'sed utrumque promiscue
de tota lustratione dicitur.' Hence both
words are sometimes coupled with Kadairotwrycf. Etym. M. p. 573, I.
fiara is strictly the offscourings (ra &ttoKaOa.pp.aTa Bekk. anecd. p. 431, 31:
7repi0eiw,uara Hesych.), and it is unneces-
aipetv
Hom.
\ 547 that the subject might have
xvi.
2
O. Jh. viii 824: the article became known
Bursians Jahresb. cxxxvn 157.
to
me
from Gruppe's summary
in
AIXMAAQTIAEI
sary to follow Campbell in making it
equivalent to 'acts or means of purification.'
Cf. Menand. fr. 530 ill 152 K.
( = Phasma
54 p. 205 Korte) *tpttia(druxrdf <r' al 7i*euVe 4 *r/tXy,
kqX rtpifftuxraruaaf.
The description woulil fit
27
Hartung, following Schoell's view that

the subject of the play is the same as that
of the 1st Imk)W of he Iliad, thinks that this
line bl part of an appeal for a prophet who
shall be COSapctettI to save the army from
the plague.
Weleker holds that the
reference is to Calchas.
1
35
atrrri? fitv
35
ey:
\1yS09
17/^77
Nauck
T)ni\ifSot
Tvurunari AH, rrvKvbr ward
\i~,6ot
Tjurf
rodd.,
35
4axo\tixtrai,
rpvirfmara.
*Xijj t<pi) if A/;r>ia\u>r<Mt
TO
fian.'
fieniue) is described by Kluemncr

Tethnolozie, IV p. j8o.
In Phot. lex.
p. 12$, 6 \iy60s is not clearly distinguished
from the melting-pot or crucible itself:
Xwrot rprjuaTa lx wr <"' y *XV f4apa (leg.
\lyiot
y\l8ov x ***11
alludes:
udrwv.
3M
t>.
4*
\iyhw
D*
6) rapax\^jia, it' wr 6 xaXcot tflttrat.

Hoth meanings appear in the glosses preserve<l in EtttatK Otl. p. IOSO,
Dion. fr. 2i<) Schw.), the last of which
4^4
ri'-Tott
t.,fo xoaVrjj, *ai
\1y80v x4*V'
Xv**voirt*.
t)
Xioa
p.
.-
rat r6 4 rjj X^"V

T ^"f *** T VT)ua hi *-rjXo*oi.
2io0o<i\
III
''*
'
ry
aarii... tvkp<1>-
passage Hesych.
this
'
agrees with I'hotius: fowt 6i 4k rotot'Tov

rirbi rpjwov xal My&ot wapd AfX/y nmitif
6 x^'* *- x 'f* >' *" 4r4py plTopt*v Xfjtcy
Oina
r\
rd
ypdip'rai
rii d/ryi'piujf.
speaker describes )u- shield

riddled with holes, like a Xf-y?o.
No
nnd
clay
take
S.
this
it.
metal to
lie
w:i
poured
left
in.
'
\iy801
voniapdTut*
64, on \ly6ot
dXXy
aXot^.
xurrfta
X^ "
T 'tif* a -
'
"
mould covering the wax models whfo h

picntly melted and poured
way room
*it).
gwrot rp-fuxara /x wr av**Xy **a/X^*

ry 3, 8C wr âXxif i/Otlrat. And in the
epics it is the x^" 9 ' "hah 1- v.u<l to le
**<lM>rcd with h
repot wr
r4x*V îr a^f*^ vwi T '* r ^ ,r*
rot' xoai-oio 8a\^>8tit, Apill. Kh<l. $.
rp^rotîf <
[90 "t 4' or'
traditionally explained by the

chius) as the
out through holes made for the a

on the upper surface of the XZ-yoot.
6n
xw'
hiarvwutcit (?
right in interpreting
referring to the holes made by the
spears of the enemy and not to eyeletis
xal
Kai \lytoi'
.is
Weleker was
XfySoi
rwrouuoro"
are
(fil\iy8oi codd.) *aAetra(* 68tw xal cpo'
Leopardus
Xi>oot
('
I'ollux 10. 1 89 aiTO 84 to wfjkipor,

T(pnl\itft* ra xXaadivTa. n-ifpiva, a card
rvpos Tpo<T<poftdy rijereu xai wo\\a
intiftf)
TrvKuofifianl
wc.
ijftlw
Xodroiair
ipiijtu
I
xaXr^w
.ues rfrqpa*
which occurs in I'.ur. Aniir. ;o, and
t-Xi;ârr in Acsch. fr. to6.
irvKvo(ifvariv HI
In
r^.
the molten
The process (en
for
36
<tov,
v<j>-flpcdrj
36
<roe Poll.:
.
ichnl.
*-oschol.
Ar.
uowip
Kaikafifx;
Ar. (aov cd.
Ar. Kan.
jji cdXaMot
Schol.
roO xiparox vvtri8tre rg XiJoa.
oi 6tA roi'to 4k /Ti-rrjfttlai /raXauor xaXotVi
ii-rl
ir/oat,
Ioô<X^t
*V
4>Qp48tl
AirMaXwr,^,
si 3ora<a 4/ rtca roXi5pior

*wwroi
ri\ai Arrl
uponafor in
*rp&Tw ivoTittin'ror rtui Xi'pait' Wf
I,.-;,.,. \.,
..-,,,
U.
<nx o. Dfakd.)
*/<
I'oll.:
There
i*
trace
iVo\i>'or- waXai
ykp
*>m.
the
of
\h.
mentar
<>
*4ra
ra4>vp48ii
Xepaf.'
nlirs
t
it
Schw.), the
t..
Aebu.
AtoMWMt
rtrwr wi *>< < re swaXV"l> '*'
lOÔKAEOYI
28
yap iraXaibv dvrl rov
Ka.Xa.ixov.
as fixed in the shell to form a framework

over which oxhide was stretched so as to
produce a sounding-board. (Allen and
Sikes's reference to the passage of Pollux
is based on a wrong assumption that icipara
in his text = 7T77xe<*-) And, in spite of the
traditional opinion to the contrary, such
may have been the meaning of KaXanos
both in Soph, and in Aristoph. In either
case, whether /caXawos is the bridge or part
inrerldevro
roiovrbv ti Kal 6
tciparos
5e
i/iifiaivei
iv llarpdxois, uiroXvpiov tiirixiv

Sdvana.
There can be very little doubt
that the note with the quotations goes
back to the best days of Alexandrian
scholarship, and it would also appear
that at that time the mention of dbva^
(or Ka.\afjLos) in connexion with the lyre
was an obscure matter. The explanation
they adopted wis that the bridge over
which the strings are stretched so as to
keep them from adhering to the soundingboard was a reed instead of being made
of horn, as in later days. (This is entirely
distinct from the common use of nepara
= 7T77xs f r which see on fr. 244.) In
other words, K&\a/j.os was to be understood
as the equivalent of fiaydSiov (Lucian
dial. deor. 7. 4 kox fiaydSiov virodels), and
the same interpretation was adopted for Ar.
Kui/xiKbs
Ran. 233
of the sounding-board, the meaning of

our line is clear: 'you are like a lyre
which has lost its reed.' Campbell, who
reads o-oi, renders: 'a reed, as it were,
has been abstracted from your lyre,' and
thinks that it is appropriate to a chieftain,
perhaps Agamemnon, who has had his
yipas taken away.
Rut it seems more
likely that the subject to i<<pi)pidri occurred
in the previous line, and I have accordingly
placed a comma after aov. The comparison
is with that which, seemingly intact, is
yet so maimed as to be deprived of all its
virtue.
Thus of Cassandra, after the loss
of her honour, it might have been said:
</co to 6eo-rrieiv o~a<p7J> v<prjpidi}...Xvpas.
Herwerden, reading <roi, thought
that the words referred to a man 'morbo
aut senectute aut vitae denique calamitaHe quoted
tibus pristino vigore privato.
wap(^r]v\r)fiivos from Ar. Ach. 682 and
the well-known Eq. 513 (of Cratinus).
irpoaeirLripirerai 5' 6 (popfiiKras
'AiroXXuv 'ivena dbvaicas, &v viroXvpiov

h'vbpov iv Xl/xvais rpi<pm.
are not in
a position to say whether the Alexandrian
view is correct; but it is not altogether
satisfactory, inasmuch as it fails to take
account of the description of the primitive
lyre given in the Homeric hymn to
Hermes (4. 47 ff.), in which there is no
mention of a bridge and bovaxts KaXafioio
J
We
occupy an entirely
'
different position, viz.
37
iv TravTL
yap
tol crKopTrio's
37
Schol. Nic. Ther. 18 viroKaru} tQv

KpvwrovTai, o>s ^,o<f>OK\rjs
iv Aix/âXwriffiv (aixv-aXuirois A) 'iv...
xie v :
This was an old proverb to enforce the
warning 'don't trust appearances.' Hence
Ar. Thesm. 528 ti\v irapoi/xiav 8' iiraivw
tt)v iraXaidv virb \i0if) yap iravri irov xpV
where the schol.
p.ri daKy p-fjTup ddpetv,
refers to Praxilla (fr. 4) virb iravri Xldtp
XiOuv
01 o~Kopirioi
anopirlov,
eralpe,
(pvXdcraeo.
It
is
amplified in the scolion (23 B. 4 ) quoted by
A then. 695 1) virb iravri Xidif) o~Kopirlos, w

irdip\ inrobverai.
<ppdeo fir) ae (3a.Xrj' ry
|
5'
d<pavei
iras 'eirerai
nat. an. 15. 26
et
56Xoj.
yap rovro
Cf. Aelian
fj.i)yivoiro [i.e.
the road for the Great King's journey is

not thoroughly examined beforehand), 6
if
X&pos aj3ar6s iariv
virb iravri
Kai pibXtj) irdarj aKopirios iari.
yap
Xttfy
The
lexi-
<f>povpel Xi0a).
cographers and paroemiographers apply

it iirl rdbv KaKor)du}v: see Phot., Hesych.,
Suid., Zenob. 6. 20, Diogen. 8. 59.
Nauck thinks that in Zenobius the words
ravri)$
fj.jAvi)rai.
2o#ok\7js which are at-
tached to the previous proverb (see on fr.

814) should be transposed to follow this.
For the similar saying $va Xidov dpas wivd'
i'wrjo-av o-Kopwiot see Preller on Polemon
It has been well remarked by
fr.
151.
Weir Smyth {Greek Melic Poels, p. 485)
that the Greeks did not expect fair dealing
from strangers.
Blaydes would read virb iravri Kri., as
in the authorities quoted, but the objection to iv as the equivalent of 'under'
does not appear to be well founded. Cf.
Horn. Z 521 50i o-<piav el/ce Xoxv<? aL * v
irora/j..
Plat. legg. 625 B dvdiravXai iv
rots viprjXois bivbpealv tiai aiuapaL
,
AIXMAAQTIAEI
29
38
/cat
38
fiojfJLialov
l<r\apa% Xa/8cur...
Stcph. Byx. p. 191, 8 puttol ..Kai

6 rowot Tiic divturr, 6 rpot tt,p
.iuavi
iax&p*
"ai ..Xa/Juw.'
>i <J at the end of the line, l>ut Cunpbtlll

suggestion of pdOoop is |>erhaps l*Mtcr.
He remarks that the words may have applied to a suppliant taking refuge at the
altar, and might have quoted Ear. /. /'.
961 ("/to fiiv Qdrtpov \apup fl&ffpop, of
on his trial lnrfore the Areopgus.
h as I'hut. Ux p. 13, 3 fox&pa' tj

yip fori* <TTpoyyu\ott8ri\\..d 61 fiwitot to
iarl wpoi (tvoiar oUoiop-rjiia, and
.
Khol.
l.ur.
Pkettt.
274 icria.6 ixl
Specific,
a sacrihcial hearth level with
'
913 proposed h X^/*t

Xa^w' titb*.
fiwiualot docs BOt .ip|)ear to
The distinction made
occur elsewhere.
nanus U tween fiwn6$ and /axapa
by other ancient authorities
A'/its.
(1)
fluctuates
more
the
in verse (c fr. 730) and occasionally in

prose ami inscriptions. Here of
the explanation >>( Stephanus h.
reference to the text of Sophocles, for ttrXa/Mf appears to be a possessive geni ivc,
and ftufiiaiop relates to the structure : the
ndaed (|>edestal) of the altar.' >>iinilaily
in 1 Air. Ph<xu. 174 (n.) tiwmoi ioxdpai are
'the structured altars'; but in ./</>.
I13K pwfiov KtPibffat itîfiii\oP i<j\apa*
the meaning is rather 'the sacrificial slab
ofthealtar (mound).' for it is unpoi
say whether the form <>r the char.i
lor further
fiwud* is the more prominent,
information see RoKB in I'auly-Wuiaowa
sur
gem rally
the ground, (1) a movable hrjzier, (3) a

hollow on the upper surface of the altar;
but just as /Sw/i6t is sometimes employed
in the two former of these senses so itXapa takes the place of puii!>s frequently
Ileineke supplied \16op as the mitring
Vater on
is
meaning
iaX^pap Sidtpopos' * M^* "Y&P oiKodonriTOt,

to towim6p fiwfiioi Kai Kara
fj di arrij.
TapaywyT)* fiwiuatoi. otpo<\fjt A'xauxXwriffi
The usage of both words
poit.
yfjt
vi
(i60poi, frtfa irayifovot roit koltu tpxopi-
614
ff.
39
/cat
I'lycrtwra?
/cat
/xa/c/sas
39
For uatpat Broach conjectured iiaKptir,

I. lien It fiaKpdt, Hcrgk d tiaxpai
Camp*
bell, however, remarks that the succeeding
may have leen otaocrrai ,
Xpv<rr)v.
/cat
town, to which the temple

if
*6\n rov 'Aw6\\vroi
ôtpogMfi AiîWai;
.mi
of xj
n in
lie
Vk6 r
lip*
ard<r
W*
on
lite
hnnus has
<
Xpi'Oqp &H<pitM,1->lKai
lilt
LektaR.
HifP.'
rfvV'i
ln\
e)
ind
with th<
KiMar
"
neighbourhood of the gulf
M ho otlKl
indicate
Stephanos
tol thn
It
is
the
MM
h"fwi,
SO0OKAEOYI
3Q
one of the captive women.

In the latter case a participle such as
Hartung's iXwv would follow Xpvoi)v he
takes the speaker to be Achilles.
extremely awkward to conruct Tavrrjv

with the place-names; and I think it is
more
likely that
placing a
TavTrjf refer to
Hartung was right in

i~y<ii, and in making
comma after
41
el
jiLKpos a)v ra <f>avka
41
VLKujoras eô>
ferred that the ^^ya-category was not part

of the original note, that the Sophoclean
example was probably cited under the
category named to dadcvis in Bekk. anecd.,
and that the words iirl rod fieydXov are a
corruption of iiri tov ivavrlov t fxeydXtp
or something of the same kind.
But, if it
seems incredible that the line of Sophocles
was ever seriously quoted to prove that
(pavXov was a synonym of piya, some
other explanation must be sought for the
persistence of the category fiiya in Eustath.
//. p. 1356, 64 and schol. Plat. Alcib. II
p. 147 L> to <pavXov iiri Tcoodpuv ivvoiQiv
Phot. lex. p. 643, S <pav\ov...rtdeir)

2o0o/c\f/s
dv Kai iiri tov /xeydXov.
1 ne same words
kixv-aXuTio iv el..Jx u -'
are found as part of what is substantially
the same article in Etym. A/, p. 789, 43
and Suid. s.v. <pav\ov. Nauck adds schol.
Greg. Naz. in Piccolomini's Studi difilol.
gr. 1 p. 166 and lex. Vindob. p. 187, 8,
where the line is quoted without the name
of the play.
The statement of the lexicons that <pavXov = p.iya is incredible, even when supported by the gloss of Hesych. IV p. 234
giving dbpbv and fiiya among the explanaBut it does not seem
tions of <pavXov.
possible to account for the error either by
supposing (1) with Campbell, that the
words are used ironically, or (2) with
Ellendt, that the grammarian who made
the quotation was so stupid as to take
It is
<pavXa for the antithesis to /xiKpbs.
much more likely that the words e7ri tov
/j.eydXov are the result of a corrupt tradition.
In favour of this conclusion it
should be observed (1) that in Etym. M.,
though not in l'hot. and Suid., the catalogue of meanings and examples is introduced by the words <pavXov ariixaivei 8c Ka
(2) that the tenfold division is recognized
in the abbreviated list without examples
given in Bekk. anecd. p. 315, 1 to <pavXoi>
8'
rdcraeTai,
vo/mivuv.
/car'
iiri
ivavTiOT7)Ta
poadivriv
27) ov
(19. 30, cf. 3.

(pavXois vfiels irpooTaTais
tov irraivov Evpuri8r)s

p.eyidovs,
irapaXapfia-
airXoTriTos Kai evrjffdas A77-
<f>avkov
xpV ff ^ e
'
yap
'
""'
5e
iiri 8i
473).
dvri tov /^ya.
(fr.
o~rbp.a
iiri be /*i/c/>6rr/Tos ktc.

Stephanus understood (pavXov 0-rbp.a as an ugly mouth
but perhaps âOXoy was interpreted powerful as being injurious: cf. Eur. Phoen.
94,
Andr. 870.
Ellendt well suggests that the words

quoted may have been preceded by /xjj
6avp.d^T, 'don't be surprised that I who
am naught have won
ffrjfxaivei
a paltry victory.'
are a particular application of proverbial wisdom: cf. Pind. Pyth. 3. 107
o-puKpos iv ofjiKf-ois, fiiyas iv peydXois
l*OLTOS
iooofiai.
biKa, iiri tc irpocrilnrov ko.1 irpdyTb KCLKGV, TO /JUKpOV Kai TO CVKaTa<ppbvr)Tov, ko.1 to dodevis, Kai to aSoôv,
Kai to dirXovv, Kal to
A'cu to avbnyrov,
Tairuvbv Kal iirl tov 7reVr/ros, Kal iirl tov
ivavTiov rij) o~irov8a'up, Kal iirl tov cvtcXous (3) that the last-quoted list, which
contains ten categories but has nothing
corresponding to /xiya, agrees generally
(though not exactly) with the lists of the
three other lexicons, and that all alike go
back to a common original Boethus, the
author of a Platonic lexicon, according to
Naber.
From these facts it might be in-
They
So in another connexion ttjv

Kara oavrbv ZXa. 1x1 <f>av\a is an internal
ace. rather than the direct object cf. Eur.
Air. 1029 t<x fiiv yap Kov<pa rots vikG)ow...
Toiffi 5' aC to. fxeiova vikwgi, fr. 1034 to
vikolv
T&vbix' us KaXbv yipas,
ra uh
StKaia 5' ws diravTaxov KaKbv.
Wecklein
[Sitzgsb. bayr. Ak. 1890 p. 28) proposed
to substitute yavpa for <paDXa, but there is
no ground whatever for suspecting the
text of Sophocles.
Blaydes boldly sug-
gested to. /xeydXa.

For the periphrasis
with ?x w see on fr- 489.

AIXMAAQTIAES
3'
42
42
Si bol.
Diiul.
<It>
So] b. c. /: 750 (00

41) /i<uuf '5wt cU-rl tov
less as they stand
\l\fi.a\u'i-}i
and probably, though

Bergk proposed
corrupt.
rtainly,
p.
laictio~a....&*v-
ukrre StiTtpay with <nror&i) in the follow-
rtpa.'
Suid. t.V. ttaiai. xai fiaijv iSiun
drri roP *rt ~oôX^f 'woTtpo*' kt(.(O.T.
ing line |M. Schmidt rejx.rts him as proposing 6tvr4pat), and Bernhardy b% ra
btCrrtpa.
But Herwetden's elegant tira
Stvrlpat is much more attractive, if any
<V Ai'xMaXwrtirn' 'loTuaa ..itvHere belongs a badly corrupted
ripa.'
gloss of Hesych. I p. 353 (iai6- 6\iyor,

fUKpjr. ôôxXijt 3< )t'<5nro5i Tvpdvvip cwri
rov d</.tfo>ot ral -oXX6?.
(diri toO d in-
change
$4p*iyap'r) roXXotV M. Schmidt) ypdfifia

Bai&r)\ oI*ot fsaC.
oi
fiaiwf (KfiaXuir.
uaXurruri tkuov, <r (dai6v fc M.
Schmidt).
The words r btirrtpa are meaning-
/taidt
is
be made: there must have
to
make
vli a context a> to
<
e, single' at
rrji'
oirti
itiTJpa
used of >i/e as in
âpr)r:>).
(e.g.
Baids
is
0ad.
Satrit
186 0of
Aech. Pers. 451 fifcot
(rr^yj,
inrb
,)hr.
ii
/Said
the mean-
least a possibility for

/V/7.
fr.
4k
fipax<iat
43
MVVOV
43
49Schol. A
111.
I.
~o*t>oK\r)i
laoavW&ftwt
ffrpifoi
the play
1
,.u-.ford:
10,
Ml
A vprtfooov oiawoftfrpai rai

dJ A* Mt/njr* tft*\<r *a.
i-iVai
CTpofo*
4yx*vifui>pon,
Ki'-vmo
IrXijridJai drarot, and T IQJ (lament
1'atroclus) i' Mp' ipA*
of Dlioill om
iMAAsti titrmrv , wipct* ii s-dXtr
ustath.
attributes the genihocles.
The name of
in Thtodos.
who
given
.--p. 158,
is
40,
13
l)r) tir>i,
Minjt
Ililgard
jwr yip 1o0o*\j)i

Ai'xuaXwTKTir (Artie
Mi'iriTTof 6
ficXim"
'Mi^roi
draXo-yun
Krrr^0oi/
>,'
&
yt OOdd.
by Achilles when he sacked the Iowa,

Bod Briseis Iwcame the yipai of the con*
jueror.
The Homeric passages are B
t*\w...o
yii'pov r' 'EwtI
017.
p.
'
VjiriCTT po<f>ov
(
\oi to yoi* Mi'rijf
i pir wonrrrtt wtp^roavWdfiwi
**iio
MiVijTot
^s
Stral-
meshus was the
ot>rrr)t
M r'firrot.
the
'led as being
Tophus
OOS of Kuenus an<l CTi ndsOOl of Selepus.
roogbok) of Ectioo.
was king
!'th brothers
were
Botb
ithnf the Trailon the Adrainyttian
hus-
plain.
slain
44
irarrfp he
44
il
ych.
xpvahvs
p 161 d^\tra Kpoi>ViX>MXwri0i (A/xmaXw-
'irifp
(XK.fa\a.'
irrupt
has been directed
fragment
attention
elm
a/xr/n'Xti/a
Bcrgk
Kpoviraka
Spt-en*
M**0"4 w X^TSÎm
riTv ^'X^ fc^t
d>t^X<ra. M Shtmdt
('pulling on hi UmHs
wari)p
Iiell
right the
&'
v>ui;ht at the
'tfjrt
DirUi.
same nwn
prosody nf d>eWXir hy reading
waTT)p 64 Xp-<nr* d*^*X'r ^**^. .

'the wim)I rnwrcathed clg of tl
>efeieOC IO Hot*.
on lii weptrr,
S04>0KAE0YI
32
14
Headlam (J. P. XXX

J. M. Edmonds
f.
lowed
xxvii
4,
of dfitpiXiva by Antiph.
(
word conceals an
allusion to the elabofashioned shoes of the oriental

monarch with their decoration of gold.
So xP l"r00"ttj'5oXo' t\vos of Helen and
of the Muses in Eur. Or. 1468, /. A. 1042.
Pollux 7. 86, 92 mentions advbaXa TiypyviKd as having wooden soles and gilded
straps, and adds that Phidias represented
Athena as wearing them. Duri> {///(,'
11 477) ap. Athen. -535 F, describing the
shoe of Demetrius Poliorcetes tovti^ Si
316), folC. A'.

endeavours to defend the long 1
by
Athen. 455
!')
fr.
49
rately
in
II
30 K.
TfjO<paXi5as re XivoffdpKovs
rvpbv Xeyw and other passages,

but the evidence is too weak to count
against the numerous instances to the
contrary. However this may be, it is improbable that Campbell was right in
eliminating the reference to some kind of
shoe: Hesych. II p. 540 has xpovirava6Xt.va inrodri/j.a.Ta, but Kpovirefai is the
better-supported term (Cratin. fr. 310 1
103 K. ovtol 5' eio~lv gvo$oiu)toL, KpovireôIf this be so, it is
(pbpov yivos dvdpQv).
worth considering the suggestion of M.
Mayer that the line refeis to Priam, making an attempt to escape from the Greeks.
But inreicbvs will not account for xpi'c5i5s,
and I cannot help thinking that the corrupt
jna.vda.vfis ;
Xpvffov ttoXXtjv e"vtj<f>aivov iroLKiXiav dyrlffu

Kal tfx.it poo dev eVieWes oi rexvirai.
Pai rhasius had golden shoe-buckles
Athen.
:
543
d/j.(pi\iva
F.
would
refer to
thongs
of linen, fastening the shoes round the

ankles, and themselves embroidered with
gold.
The metre might be patched with
Xpvaa
ira.TT\p
iraXa, but the
bus
dfupiXivd
< re >
Kpov-
corruption probably
lies
deeper.
45
45
45
Kepidbos.
Hesjch.
Xvdis cod.
p. 345 dxvrfv
Zo<poKXrjs Alxf-aXibrois.
I
Avdijs
axvrjv
to &Kpov Kara, ttjv e'pyaaiav anpus ^X 0l '< V

eVri yap Xaftirpd
dirb 777s daXacralas axvr]S
'
ypdQerai be /ecu Ix""1)holds that the last words

have nothing to do with Sophocles at
all, but refer to the place called "Ixvai
in Hdt. 7. 123, of which Steph. Byz.
says: "lx v V "irbXis 'MaKeSovias...'EpaToThey do
ffdivrjs be "A\vas avThjv <py)<n.
not appear in Proverb. Append. 1. 44
Kal
5ta<pavrjS.
M. Schmidt
6.X vr) Avbrjs KepKidos' to dupov, dwb

ttjv ipyaaiav aKpus Zx l "> V a 7ro T V*
tov
&a ~
XaTTias &.xvt)S. . It is idle to emend txvq
{t)xV v Nauck formerly, dicfn)v Blaydes).
The most comprehensive gloss on &x v V
is in Elyui. A/, p.
18 r, 50 axvrj rrdaa
Cf. Suid.
XeiTTOTTjs vypov re /ecu ^rjpov.
s. v. Kal
&x v V iXbs, T0 XeirrbTaTov tov
1 his will
vbaros, b d<ppbs ttjs daXdoorjs.
explain its use for teardrops ( Track. 849),
for dew (O. C. 681), for spray from the
sea (Horn. A 426), for smoke (Aesch.
fr.
336), and for chaff (Horn. E 499).
The colloquial use in Ar. Vesp. 92 cor-
responds: i,v 5' ovv KaTafivar) ko.v axvyv

'even a wink.' Here the reference is to
the delicacy or glossiness of the material
the fine-spun product of the Lydian
There is no reason to find fault
shuttle.'
with Hesychius' explanation, but the sug'
corr.
Musurus
gestion that this use of &x v V arises by

direct transference from the meaning
spray is unnecessary. &Kpu>s is a common
word in the scholia to Sophocles
see
schol. O. T. ri8, 0. C. 1695.
Hippocrates used axvrj for fluff or shreds
of linen, the substance of lint
Erotian
p. 50, 1 2 a-xvi) odoviov to trap' rjfuv Xeybfievov vff/j.a, t' 0$ ylyverai fiords.
So
axvrj Xtvov Hesych., Etytn. M. Suid.,
Bekk. anted, p. 474, 29.
Richness and luxuriousness of dress are
often attributed to the Lydians, whose
fashions were copied by the Ionians of
Asia Minor at the time when Sardis was
the capital of Croesus.
Cf. Aesch. fr. 59
bffTis x iT & vas fiaoadpas re Ai/5ias
eêi
rrobrjpeis, Xenophanes fr. 3 dfSpoavvas be
:
fiadbvres
dvw<j>eXeas irapa
AvbQv...rjeo-av
wavaXovpye'a <pdpe' ?x" Tes

There is a double implication, Lydian
ornament as well as Lydian harmony,
in Pind. Nem. 8. 15 Ai'5iai fiiTpav KovaXaba ireiroiKiXfievav, although it is not
recognized by the editors.
Hence Ar.
Ach. 112 (Blaydes) etc. Av8t}s, here for
Avhias.
So conversely Avdia for Avbrj in
Track. 432.
Welcker interpreted the words as referring to the clothing in which Astyanax
was buried see Introductory Note. Cf.
'larpiaiiSuv v<prj fr. 210, 67.
els
dyoprjv
AIXMAAQTIAEI
33
46
46
Herodian r.
il
fio*.
X<.
p.
9,
-apTTjSoroi. ttr 6 yjpun,
apinjSijj*
edon is tx>th a personal and a

place name, and Sarpedon, the son of
n, who is to be distinguished
from his famous namesake, the son of
Zeus, was the eponymous hero of the
Thracian promontory (schol. Eur. A'hts.
He was slain by Heracles on his
19).
return from Troy (Apollod. 1. 10* >.
1 he
occurrence of the name in these parts has
been connected with other evidence of
the settlement of Cretans on the X. coasts
of the Aegean (Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. joo).
Our authorities also mention a rocky
island Sarpedon in the Ocean si ream,
which was the home of the (iorgons
see Cyf>r. fr. 31 {EC, I' p. 31).
10
tlrt
virpa, tlrt r\ &.ktx), tlrt i) vrpof wt

ZotponXti t* \l\fia\itrrlatv (cod.
rood
TT/aw) ttfnjTai apwi)5u)i> oktt).
Other authorities fur the Sarpedon ian

promontory an- Ilesych. IV p. n ~*proxof
irijowr ottt)- cwti tov ~apwr)6oi>ia.
hi
ovrot
Qp^xtfi
(xw
Kai
The
lloetidwvot.
occur in Zenob. 5. W>.
itpdr
KvfiaTififuroi,
same words
tcMdurai
dtl
Phot.
:02. 3
Said. t.V. -apri>3u>i' &.KTT)'
dV/xx TTjf Qpqjcrif
K-pdrtrt rrp nty&\i)v.
mean. I sup|>osc, that
The 1-
Crates of Mallus described Sarpe<lonia

as 'the great' promontory.
Its powtjoa,
between the mouth of the Hebrus and
the I hracian Chersonese, is fixed by
i'i.
Hdt. 7. 58.
331 fr. 51.
on
further
fr.
637.
47
aXyjx.i\tto%
47
47
HeSTCD.
u'x>ul\wrot.
No
p.
a/x/toforot
(a'x>ia ^<*rT '7 <"*'
found
*eu a'xu<iVroi
MnU
M.
l.tyii.
in
>
cod.).
a<x>io\rrof,
is
the place of a/;rjt6d<rof or a*X>*A" ot.

I
prefer the latter, which is due t' Meincke's
iopiA-rrjrot,
oooiXijrroi,
ooconjecture: cf.
atXMit'Toi
\lxM^fl<ftf
-o<pon\i)S
tai
p.
which
otdWroi.
If alxweoVret is ri^ht.
very unusual compound, since i':
memljcr should express an instrument
Kllendt seem* to
rather than a cause.
be conscious of this when he renders
kiista ligattu, but the meaning reputed
is of course 'MWl m war' (L. and v|.
41, 3 X/7ra
II'
a^wWoi.
well enough (cf. toputartft, Jobut could not have been glossed
by aiyjlaXwrot and it is out of place in
Ijc
where
I/,
it
Mcincke
c<
has probably taken
48
dkirpia
48
Hesych.
inapria.
ai
p.
i\iTpla
134
iXtrpoai^yf
2oô\$f
Ai'xjui
.MxnaKurlair) \iyn.
is a rare one, ami only ocean
707 iwtp ritfa*or
AXiTfHai s-oWat s-Wr, -a monkey full <>f
XuiTifttir
(1.
word
iXirpla
drl
tov
iiâpr ia
'
A ptaro+drrri.
proposed to restore AAtrplmt in

t>ut, a JeM remarked, the
I,
lengthening of the second syllable
f
permissible.
Nell
01
cognate XirVot
word of grave import, and it may I* in
that m A>h. I.e. iXtrpim is mock
heroic (
ttttftd in tin).
|M.int out that the
. :
IO<pOKAEOYI
34
49
49 Hesych. I p. 199 dr/icis- drjxov.
2o0okXt?s Ai'x/xaXum'crti'.
avoids, which
is required by the alphabetical order,
was restored by Musurus, and dv-f/Kearov
(for oltjkov) by Pierson on Moer. p. 78,
who compares ira.va.Kr)s, and the glosses
vpoiraK^s and XijdrjKis.
This is better
than M. Schmidt's suggestion dvrjpis'
dvrjKrjs
does not occur elseavrifiov.
where, but
related to &kos as dira6f)t

to p.ivos, dvayr)s to
The long
0170$, d<rdevr)s to adivot etc.
2;
vowel, for which see Monro H. G.'1
to
the
influence
of
dvTjKearov.
is
due
(8),
Cf. Moeris p. 191, 2t dvaids di-vrfous
'AttikoL, ws Kal EiVoXij Alîv (fr. 21 I
263 K.), ddepdirevrov "EXX^ês.
to
wddos,
is
Sva/jLevr/s
sj
50
50
Hesych.
ra/cTos,
see on
airiaros
p. 230 direidris- dvvird(direiaros conj. Nauck
627).
SoôkXt)* Ai'xMaXwr/crii'
fr.
(-<l}TT)<riv
tragedy, though otherwise common

enough. Matthiae on Eur. Or. ji exploded the view that dirt6i)s was the Attic
form.
Pindar employed dwei.di)s as an
epithet of tvxv (fr. 40).
in
cod.).
This word
not
is
extant
elsewhere
51
apravq
51
Bekk. anecd.
p. 447, 7 dprdvrj
(so Ellendt : ctard
Kvpiws /j.ev t) < Sid >

Blaydes) twv KaXipdlwv dyxbvrj, ^>o<poKkr)s
He5i iv Alx/J-a^wriaiv iirl tov deap.ov.
sych. 1 p. 291 dpravrj- i] did KaXipdiwv
5'
> iv AlxjiaKwTiaiv
dyxbvy, < SoôkXtJs
To
(77 cu'x"*Xu>T7j<ns cod.) iirlrov decp-ov.
these testimonia should be added Ely 111.
M. p. 150, 2 dprdvrf 7? 4k tGiv KaXifidluf
>
dyx^vr), 1,o<poK\rjs di < iv AixfJ-a-X-uTlfftv

iwi 5e<rp.ov, iv 'Avriydvy (v. 54) ' 7rXeK-
dprdvaiciv dyxbvais.
The reason
for the supplement will appear presently.
apTdvr\ means a rope, noose, and is
'
rdlffiv
always applied by Aesch. and Soph, (it

does not occur in Eur.) to a death by
hanging.
It must not be supposed that
in the Aixp-o\(jrlhe% Soph, was referring
to a rope used for any other purpose,
although at first sight such an inference
might appear legitimate.
For the articharacter of the note can be tested

by the scholia. Thus on O. T. 1266
ficial
X<iX$ Kpp.affT7]v dprdvrjv we have dpravr/v]

Sea p.6v .tt)v dvapTyyriKijv (i.e. Kpep.a.<TTr)v)
Kvpiuis hi dpravr) \iyerai i] iK rwv KaKifi
.
Slav dyxovrj, but on Ant. 54 wXeKTaicriv

dprdvaiffi Xw/Jarai filov the comment is
dpTavaiffi] dyxbvais.
lects arbitrarily
fixed
The
annotator
se-
one or the other of the
synonyms.
52
52
Hesych.
p.
297 daeirrov
dffefiis.
^,o(pOK\r)s AlxjJ-o.\b}rl(riv ( at'xMaX wTot s cod
Cf.
)
.
Bekk. anecd. p. 451, 19 daetrrov to
dcreês.
(whence dceirTetv Ant. 1350)

occurs also in 0. T. 890 el /xt) twv daiirtuv ipZerai, and in Eur. Hel. 543, Bacch.
d<rirros
It belongs to the list

890, /. A. 1092.
of verbals in -tos collected on fr. 210, 8
which have an active, or at any rate not
a passive force.
Tucker
&e\irr') in
restores dffeirT' for aeirr' (vulg.
Aesch. Suppl. 920 (876).
AIXMAAQTIAEI
35
53
ifinXevpov
53
Hesych.
t&
il
p. 8o iixir\tvpov
(tvaXotVit cod.) rdj xXtvpdt.
o<Pok\tji kixnaXtirriaiv (-umiaut cod.).
is n<> other trace of the existence
of ifixXtvpov*. The meaning would seem
yaoripa rtix iripdaw toua.% 4raHlaydes proposes inxXtvpov, in

place of inxXtvpov.
At hr-vt sight this is
|)lausil>le. hut it appears that tux\upoC*
follows the analogy of yradovr (Befck.
to be 'dash against his ribs,' 'charge him,'

if we may judge by the usage of i6\Xtff$at, for which cf. Plut. /.urn//, r i tovto
anted, p. 8;, 9
yr&ffo* rirrrti.
&r) to \ty6v(or, tl% -n\ yaaripa traXXo/Urov, non posse

sec. Epic, i
ev.
iidWov
tit
ri)i>
Xtiodai.
vo&h-
Arri rov njr

4>pvnx<x Mororpory.
'
P- 437). ffaXaiovr (Marc.
4), and the Homeric 71101V.
'
j.
54
eVdrrat?
54
54
hinut COfLl
of earrings by women in Homeric time*

see a 1 82 and I<caf in loe. In the classical
period the practice was extremely
mon, and is attested by a variety of names,
such as frwrw (also <Vy&a on
II p. 1 11 irurraif cVurriocr.
4*\6wcut.
ô<poK\fft Alxua\uni<Tir{-wrif<rt)>cn<\.). l:tym. .)/. p. 344,
47 f'rovaif roit ivurrlotf ix6 rov <tV>
rati rwv Jrrwr 6wai% Kticffat 2o0oxXi;t.
tvo-iran was restored by Bentley on
In place of $1X67.
IS conjectured iioxaxt, a word
al-o meaning farrtHgi an<l found in Ar.
or the wearing
j
10 (t 474 K).
tj}
corr. Bentley
[aqreb.
xpoaw&a wi
*
wMarpa, iXiKrijpti, and (later) /Wdfita.

See I wan Mueller. Pnvata/ter;nnur %
/V. A Ant.
1001.
p. 111;
MnpOWsdl
from o>>). 'hole,' cc Slurtcvant in Class. Phil, vn 411.
55
eVi/xacrtrcTai
55
II
jrch.
II
p.
100 inn&aotrai
roQ pdaaofoi, 6
at iwl xX4ot>, ds*6
'on jMKpoTifxiv.
^Xo-
ot it i^dif/trat,
ov X</utari, AXXa nal

rpoetxtudoatrai xXtlu.
ZotWXfo Ai'xaXwriffir
(jrjfirir cod.).
are giv.
Hffri.
otor
f)
was emended by
and wpoct*i(iaai)C*rai.
Be absence of context we cannot
-t
the
dew
that the
second explanation
it
o,
is
Sophocles adopted
future ( iwtpmlvuu in the
same sense which it

fjrV twtfiitwi
hears in
A n/OiUoi
W twi0M"
4"
**.
L, and S., on the other hand, refer it lo

Jwin&oou. to knead afain but in A. P.
7. 730 Stadtmucllcr returns SO the Ms
3f(trr^ ^x
rarifp
nAaatxTo ifwtttilaro Keiske. i*in&*ff*t
Jacobs), and twit*0wm should |>rih*ps
disappear from the lexicons (fn
1
In
tell
m
'i
th.it
rt
ijurtffi
It
the Hoinifi.
hi*
alone
pimm
ZO0OKAEOYI
36
56
lawa
56
Hesych.
Aixp-o-XwrLffi
p.
{-wT7)<n
338 "lappa
foreigners as the Persians. Timoth. Pers.

161 'Idopa yXQiooav iixvevwv, where the
curious broken Greek of the Persian is
quoted. The prevalence of the archaic
form indicates an attempt to represent
the Persian pronunciation: 'in Persian
all Greeks were called Vauna' (Starkie
on Ach. 1. c).
The effeminacy of the
Asiatic Ionians prejudiced their kinsmen
in Greece against the name
Hdt. 1
eV pAv
"LotpoKXtovs
cod.)
diridoaav 'EXXt/vikt), iirei (iiri cod.) Tappas

"EXX^âs Xkyovcriv iv 5e T ptirroKt flip
(fr. 617) fVi yvvaiKds, ws ical iv Yl.oip.ioi
roll's
(fr.
519)-
Tivis 8k T7]V 'EXf'PTJP.
Se oi fidpfiapoi tovs
yovaiv (Xiyovoi
(fr.
63
iTTlflKWS
"EXX^pas "Iwpas Xe-
p.ev cod.), Kai
[) fi6.pfia.pov Qpr\vt\p.a
rb
iv TpwlXtp
ial.
rj
ovop.a
yvvaiKds.
To orientals who came in contact with
them, and especially to the Persians, the
Greeks were known as Twpes, Tdotes,
'laves.
Hence Ar. Ach. 104 ov Xr)\pi
Xpvoo, x a v ''^ 1^ P UKT, 'lo-ovav with the
7rdpras tovs "EXX^pos Tdopas oi
schol.
k&\ovv.
Aesch. Pers. 181
fidpfiapoi
'labvuv yrjv otx^rai wipcrai 6iXuv, ib.
952 'Jdvuv yap dirrjvpa, 'Idpwp vaixppaKTOs
"Ap7)s, ib. 1014, 1027.
There is the same
intention in Suppl. 71 'laovloioi vhp.oi.ai,
where the schol. has rightly dvri too
(puvrj 'EWriviK-rj, but the editors have
sought for a more subtle explanation,
forgetting that the Danaids are as much
143
oi
<pvyov
p.iv
to
dXXoi Twpes Kai

ofivopa,
oil
oi
'Adrjvaloi
fiov\6fievoi "luves
In the extract from Hesych.

stated that Sophocles used "lappa
(1) as an adj^'EXXîK^ in the At'xp.aXwri8ts, (2) as a description of a Greek
woman, or specifically of Helen, in the
Triptolemtis and Iloip-ives.
In place of
"lavvas it seems almost certain that we
ought to read 'Iapas with L. Dindorf,
KK\TJo-dat.
it
is
Lobeck, and others (Tdopas Casaubon).

Similarly,
Lobeck {Path. Pro/,
p. 32)
as Ellendt
prefers) in place of "lappa in the lemma.
Blaydes strangely prefers Tatpa.
would give
(or 'lappa,
'lavrj
57
iepdXa?
57
Hesych.
2,ookXt)s
11 p. 347 iepbXas- ioiovs.

AixP'O.XwTois. ws Kai tov yipovra
yepoiddv r) yepovvTos Xiyei (Xiyovot conj.

Blaydes).
For tffio-vs Heringa restored Upevs, and
For
nothing better has been suggested.
yepoiddv J. Pearson conjectured yepoirav,
altering iepbXas to iepoiras accordingly,
and this view, so far as concerns yepoirav, was approved by Lobeck (Path.
On the other hand, DinPro/, p. 387).
dorf proposed yrjpbXav to correspond with
the lemma, rj yepovvros baffles the critics
altogether, and is rejected by M. Schmidt
Heringa's rj yepovas a marginal gloss.
It should be
riav has no probability.
added that a few lines before the MS of
Hesychius gives iepbp.as- tQv iepwv iirijj.eXovp.evos. Musurus restored iepoKopos, but
M. Schmidt combines it with the present

glossthus: iepbXas- twv iepwv iirip.tXovp.evos.
'
tepoXas icriavs' 2o<poKXrjs Ai'x/xaXwricrt, 8s
Kai tov yripwvTa yrjp6Xav Xiyei.
may be
But what
but it
belongs to a class of words more appropriate to comedy than tragedy, and, if
used by Sophocles, was probably contemptuous. The best-known of its cognates
are patvdXrjs (Sappho), and OK0}irT6Xr]s
is
loiovs?
iepdXas
(Ar. Vesp. 788);
such as
right,
some are mere vulgarisms,
0^6X17$,
iTTdXrji, 6irvi6Xr)s
oi(p6Xrjt,
;
ffi<f>6Xr)s,
koi6Xi)s, said to
Kopv-
mean a
is obscure.
Lobeck (Phrynichus,
613; Path. Pro/, p. 129) adds the proper names Mio-y6Xas, 'ApybXas, $ei86Xas,
HvOdXris.
The formation, though not
primitive (Brugmann, Coinp. Gr. II p.
211), is not compounded from oXXvpu.
priest,
p.
'
AIXMAAQTIAEI
37
58
LKTOpV<T0IJLV
58
Hoych.
imp.
11
p.
is derived from the form brrw/>, which

appears also in the compounds ifltrup
'ucrtptvo-ofup
354
o<f>o<\rif At'x/taXwrotr.
Voss restored iKToptvcofUP.

U< TtOoofi.tr.
iKtrofKvaontr
ibid. p.
This
Is.
and wpooUrup.
331
verb
59
<TTpvofxai>Ti<;
59 PoUaa : 16 J *cd oTtpvbuavTiv

Zo$OK\rrt t6k ca\oiV'oi' iyyoArrplnvdop.
1.
II
|>.
107 tpoTtpPOfuwrLaif iyyacTpifwOoil.
o<pOK\ijl .KixMaXwriaiy
this
i-.
rightly corrected by
no doubt
:
Xauck
to artppottdrriti
JyyacTpifivBoi.
iyywTpifivdoi. iyyovrpLpapm
6r pvp rwtt Hi Hwa, ~<xpoK\i)i ii OTtpScho!.
Soph.
pouoptip.
Plat151 C
iyyturrplnvBot
ân* 6 4* yaerpl hoptovtop top iyyaffTpi(tai>Tu>
rtv6fitP0i.
%
WvduwA. <;>acri, -oô(X^t Si
-
<TTtpv6uarTir.
lo<ô\vi
bi
p. 368
UTtpfbfiarrw ptTwrdftao'tr.
I
..
'hot.
ef>ist.
64
was acquired
at
'luring the tunc of tin- I'clopon-
war
ncsian
<,
by
named
power of
a ventriloquist
who
professed the
by means of a familiar spirit.

Aristophanes producing his plays
through others compares himself
V'ttp. 1019 mni)0&fi*vot rr/r V.v
vavriiav fai didroiar.
wcr' d\Xorptat yacripat irii'i Kuifjupdixd woWa.
ays that the
X*aOat.
Plat. 5
lion
end
:
of
their
nvicted
pr.
own months:
btthn
i-*o-
p8ryy6p.*pop ucwtp top &towop V.vpi>K\*a

{'(.
l'lul.
*'(HipiporT<t del woptiorrai.
4
m *ombr)
wawf>
roi'f
4 R tCtjdtt yip ion nal

t6 oitattai top OtOP oa>t6p
iyyaOTptuvBoii,
Y*>p%m\i*%
x/xi/ww
shaking
tpuvatt
bind.,
dpydpoit.
Aristid.
ipbvbfit pop tit
V9O+$4yyto0*i,
to.
wpoaayoptuQuJHm.
fib/MTa tup wpo^ftrStP
jpo.1
roit
ittipup orofiaai *al
;o
the inspiration of
h'imsiis, ixpifUtTTtpop EiipvicXloff raV5o6tp KaTaXa/jifidpup, indicates, in the
same way as Plutarch, that F.urycles
I
was a generic name given to spirits

temporarily occupying the body
man. There is nothing in these passages
which is not satisfied by the simple inference thai Kuryiles alleged his oracles
to be the voice of a demon lodged in
Ins
own
yap
lini.
flat.
I.
V.i>pvK\ffl
nra
4p rp ywaTfx fatt*,
top 4yKt\tv6fiPop avTip w*pl tup h*\\optup \4yttp, and s<hol. Aristoph. reivi^
Jibuti balfiopd
(taPT*v6(UP0i bid toO ipvwdpxoPToi
Such
ainu
proceeding corresponds
exactly with the method., of savage mabj
B. Tyloi m
Enty<l. Brit? vu 63 -cheating so;
6oiftopot.
.1
name
whirl)
(.is
to
caused
In-
ilic
its
l.y
.r original kind,
implies) is supposed
v. .10- of a demon
the
Imdy of the
s|>caker,
who
really
Icignrd human \>

hiMliug torn s thought
in saw
suitable to the thin-bodied spirit \
mneccssary thrref.>re to suppose
in any
irycles was a vr
other sense, or to accept Campbell's in
i'lat. /.,.) that 'he made his
d bom within the person
outvl
r>>t further 11 ( r mat ion
consulting him.
himself talks
in
.1
'
of
sec (iruppe,
</V.
.1/rM. p. v >s
IO<t>OKAEOYI
38
AKPIIIOI
Jacobs identified this play with the Danae, supposing that
it
349) was inclined to

agree with him, while reserving the possibility that the same
material was used over again by Sophocles for the production of
It should be added that Meineke (on 0. C. p. 275)
a satyr-play.
also held that the Danae was a satyr-play, but there is little
Alternative titles are not common
to justify the assumption 1
and should only be accepted where the evidence is quite clear, as
in the case of the Qpvyes or 'ETopo? \vrpa of Aeschylus (
Besides, it is not likely that a play would be named
p. 84).
It
alternatively after one or other of the principal characters.
would be more natural to suppose that the citation of the play as
Danae was a mistake, due to the identity of the subject-matter
with that of Euripides' Danae and the greater celebrity of
For similar errors see Introduction, 1. It must,
the latter.
however, be admitted that the error, if such it was, was more
persistent than is usually the case, and had infected even the
best critical tradition.
Brunck, on the other hand, considered that the Acrisius must
be identified with the Larissaei, and that its subject was the
accidental killing of Acrisius by Perseus when throwing the
discus.
The variation of title would be more natural than in the
other case, but Jacobs appears to be justified in arguing that
frs. 64 and 65, at any rate, are more suitable to the story of
Danae. See also Escher in Pauly-Wissowa IV 2086.
If the identification of the Acrisius with the Danae is correct, it
contained the story up to the time of the discovery of the birth of
Perseus, when Acrisius sent mother and child adrift on the Aegean
in a \apva%.
Perseus was known to Hesiod as the son of Danae
{Scut. 216), and is mentioned as the son of Zeus and Danae
in Horn. S 319 f.
The fullest and best account of the legend
depends on the authority of Pherecydes in schol. Ap. Rhod.
Sophocles refers to the imprisonment
4. 1091, 15 1 5 (FHG I 75).
of Danae in the brazen chamber in Ant. 944.
There may be
a reference to our play in Menand. Sam. 244 ovk dKi]icoa<;
XeyovTcov, elire p.01, Nt/o/pa-re, ro)v rpaywBayv, a><> yevop-evos ^pfcro?
Zei>? eppvr)
Bid reyovs, Kareipypevrjv Be TraiB' eôiêvaev irore
had an alternative
title
and Welcker
(p.
TGF
See
n.
on
fr.
165.
Meineke
also relied
on
frs.
166, 167.
<
AKPIIIOZ
39
60
60
60
fleVconi. Kllendt
Hesych.
iwi\f/a cod.
375 fUSv"
p.
'
corr.
t)
Maussacus
cor.
(or w ^wlffrarat
\f/d\\oi
Xrtr),
'
are not adequately distinguished
the
in
The concerted playing of

lyre and flute
Athen. 617 v ill
this front Kphippus fr. 7 (ll 154 K.).
So
schol. Ar. Eif. o fivauXia Xeycreu 6Vr
Ki.6a.pa *ai ai'/XAt oinfwrrj, schol. Greg.
Naz. II p. 00 \4yofiP 54 awavXiar oi
(i)
ffo&jjf Kfn\ol (cor-
KpoOfid ti.
cod.
ÂXwith i5ot *poi>tarot in the gloss.

uvav\iav has various meanings which
Axp uritf >

wt...
iivatMew'- AWotftHtw. Kor the last word,
which is otherwise unknown, Nauck conj.
oi
(ii>&Tfr, comparing ibid. p. 405 fivioinovauoi
/3iii;rra
|
'
1o<Pok\t)i
KpoOfxa.
Muslims
wcrtftti
tl&ot.
1.
rected by Fungius to -oôX^t 'Aicpioiif)).

Nauck thinks the second passage undoubtedly Inrlongs here, hut Dindorf,
while admitting this to
l>e pi mil ill

prints
.
under the title Kpitrtt a.s fr. jja of
Mauck's view is the more
xtldpat
dyta
avyKpovofUriti
*ai
aV\^>
symphony of flutes
<xvfttpOyyof^fr}i. (*)
schol. Ar. Ac. fcravXia xaXccrcu ora> 3i-o
probable.
VTO
ft)*
172
p.
Hesych.
rd atird X/ywtfir.
avXirral
the right reading,

Pi8r|v, if that is
evidently puzzled the COpVtStl as is shown
by the variants recorded above.
If
Kpovfia is the correct explanation, it means
note played on a musical instrument,
strictly on the lyre; and iri\f/a\\nv shows
Hut
that the lyre is in question here.
what kind of a note? No answer can be
given, and it is idle to enquire whether
fiiiijf, pi'drp, l&ffvr or some other form
should be preferred, since they are all
equally obscure. Pvfii* obviously suggests
itself, but, although it is sometimes exA/.),
plained by icarwt (Hes
i
there is no trustworthy evidence of its
usage otherwise than as = cotifertim.
i (anting, who supposes that pt'Srir was a
of fivtrp, iscertainly not justified in
in muffled tones.' iwiîWuf
ably only a strengthened form of
i/^Wmj'to play on the lyre,' as in
I'ollux 4. 8| there is no author]
[m and s.\ translation 'to a company
with the lyre.'
Bbpdes
5l'0
ill
iwiTl\0Vfti7f afXlfffl*.
rai tfwai-Xia th
Pollux 4. 83 'Atr^nî
îraXro' crvufuuria rif oi'ttj twk V Ham-
ffwai'Xwrrwr.
(3) The accompaniment of the voice by the flute, differing from aiXifttia in this respect, that no
articulate words were sung. Such appear*
to Ik- llie meaning of the definition given
hy Semus ap. Athen. 618 A n* rtt iyi*
tfjâioit
avXov col
dfiotfiaici
X^plt \6yov rod wpo0fu\tîoOirT9%.
same effect hut less precisely 1'olln
oiHipuviai
oi
iriraiXiar ilios
rii*
oforrat
Ttjr av\iffSlar .
ii>t
frv9t*ov
To
the
wpo<rav\fai**l
The IkM account
of the word
is to be found in I lemsterhuis
l.ucian dial. mar. . 1. who proceeds
to show that it is often used ngurnlivrlv
to express conifttt or harmony. So far as
is pottlbk to
it
have used the word in the first sense.
011
The
verse
a trochaic tetrameter with

at the end.
is
iambus wanting
,tii
6l
NO.
;
61.
Si
''
fbt
(in
tol Ttp
extract
rf>o/3ov(j.i>to
rdrra SMA:
p.
\/4<riot.
fofrt.
to'
fidrqi' vXaKTut
77
yap
tkxvto.
61
n?,
finy.
olkomt
340.
13
fi9
>baeu* alone prethe symlK>l of the

n aasiiled
by
many
U-avoiircd to
\f/o<f)l.
as-arra vulgo
restore
two
senarii
(Xacrw
I,
by read
(oning'-
and
ami
<
'tniK-rx tlamtot'tr' for
for
stiiutcd
*4rifr
i'Xo'w
II
Acitirr'
I'orvwt
*ub
Halm 4 *4nr
M^'f ^. Vaterf jmIhw
n XdtfM nAr^f.
Nalwr 4
<
o.str'
'
IO<t>OKAEOYI
40
Nauck r\ pdTijv dXvKrQ. Wecklein

approved the restoration of /3o tis ovk
CLKovtr ; fj fidrt)v kXvu ; diravra ktc. Hense
thinks the original may have run clkovt''
(schol. \j/o<pober)s <TTpaTu!rrr)i, pijbi
KTvirei,
ttjs
'
<u
'
"
and b^bopKa was accepted by J ebb on

T. 186, Phil. 215; but we must
Bopbs,
O.
surely read bebotKa
cf. 235, iX~, Agam.
1535, Soph. 0. C. 1462 KTviros, (be, pdX'
:
and paxpvXdKav yXQo~o~av

Observe the appropriateness of the metaphor from .a dog
barking at a sound or shadow by night.
'To fear a sound' was proverbial (note
fr.
\J/6(pos
o5' ipeiirerat
105,
7.
Sappho
orafci cV urrtav
Tfi'x^wv
rivd ktvitov ; AI. ovk, d\Xd beo-pd itwXikwv
e dvrvywv
xXafet fftbrjpov Kdfxe tol, irpiv
beo~pu>v dpaypbv IttitikCov, tbv
r)O~0bnT)v
In Aesch. Theb. 97
<pbfios.
100 the
panic-stricken maidens are made by the
MSS to cry dKovtr' rj ovk dKover' dairibuv
ktvitov ; ... ktvitov bibopKa irdrayos ovx ivb%
Ktvos
'
New.
ptyas
27.
Suid.
s.v.
Dr
dXiov...
5t6/3oXos d<t>aros (so I read
a gloss, as
is
may be
rls odros;
yap
roXpQiai betvd (palverai, which closely

resembles the present passage.
H.
writes
ôtpoberjs was the title of one of
Menander's plays, from which, I suspect,
'
(LvdpaKa Kal
A. P.
11.
210
irapaftveTai b arpadirocr<pLyi;as pr/Xiva Xuparia
bd<f>vr}v
ASXos
tiwtjjs
detail in
100 irdrayos ov Ktvbs bopos, which is very

in my opinion, except that I
would rather punctuate
was borrowed a
Xeipt <rvv Kevy bopos, conjectures in Theb.
nervous or baseless fright

Hence Eur. Phoen. 269 dii)
ktvitov (frofiovpeda; diravra.
probable
seen from
S ov yap
comparing Rhes. 784
&<paToi)- ...biboiKa
Verrall,
rot in v. 3) of a
cf. fr. 314, 1 39.
f)
\f/6<pov
bd<pvq% <pipeiv bwdptvos), "stuffs his
ears against the crackling of cinders and

of laurel in the fire with the fringe of his
military woollen cloak."
Cf. Hesych.
ptvtKrviros
6 pi) \j/o<pobcrji.
Eur. Hee.
oi> piffwt 8be ktvttos.
1 r 13 (pbflov irapiax'
Rhes. 565 OA. Aibprjbes, ovk fiKovoas ij
yvvaiKes> ; y\ pdr-qv K76.,and accepts

the vulgate diravra. They quote El. 1 406
The
flog, rts Hvbov ovk aKover\ u <piXai ;
objection taken to \i.drr\v riXaKTw appears
to be ill-founded, and the connexion is,
Do ye hear ? Or am I but an idle
babbler? For in my fear it may be that
I hear a sound where there is none.' H.,
who justifies the text, quotes for pdr-i)v
u\a.KTeiv Aesch. Ag. 1672 paratojv rCivS'
vXaypdruv (Clytaemnestra of the Chorus).
Plat. legg. 967 C robs <pCXooo<povvTas kvo~1
paralais direiKdôvTas xP^nivaiaiv vXaKah.
Tryphiod. 421 (of Cassandra) pdrr]v
vXdovaa. Dion Cass. 46. 26 7ro\\d yovv /ecu
fxdrrjv vXaKrels.
So pa\(/vXdKas in Find.
in
irdrayos ov Kevbs
ktvitov beboina
Similarly in Eur.
Suppl. 179 Tyrwhitt corrected bebopKevai
for bebotK^vai of the MSS.
In an epigram
quoted by Meineke Anal. Alex, p. 397
read ripa rbv crepyovra, iraXiarpo<pa b'tpya
beboLKUS (for bebopKuis)
ireipddijri <ppovdv
pr/bev inrep to perpov.'
bopbs.
62
dAA' ovSev epireL xjjevhos
62
Stob. Jlor.
Hense)
cod. Voss.
omitted
The
12.
(in p. 444, 6
'
S, ~Lo<po. 'A/cpt
'AXevdbais B: the extract is
1,o<po
in
A.Kpio-7 (so
MA).
sentiment,
'aXX'.-.x/xôu.'
that falsehood
is
a
be
sickly growth which soon decays, may

illustrated by Aesch. Ag. 625 ovk taO'
ottws Xiâipi rd \pevbrj KaXd
es tov itoXvv
(piXoiai Kapirovffdai XP 0V0V Arist. cth. N.
b
1. 8 1098
II T(p f/.tv yap dXrjdei irdvTa
cvvabfi rd vwdpxovTa- Ttp-bi \j/evbei Taxv
|
biacpuvei TaXT)de$.
Theophr.
fr.
153
W.
K biafioXrjs Kal (pQbvov xpevbos iir' dXiyov

laxvo-av direpapdvdri.
Menand. monost.
Xavddvei iroXvv
ovbels
Similarly xP^ voi beiKwaiv dvbpa
(O. T. 614 etc.). Nauck, objecting to
'his conthe phrase yijpas XP^ V0V
This is
nexion, altered yrjpas to pfjKos.
547
\J/evb6ptvos
Xpwov.
yfjpas ^povov.
et?
an arbitrary proceeding, which destroys a

characteristic subtlety of diction.
Tr.
'
no falsehood lasts through time's decay.'
XP 0V0V follows Aesch. Prom. 1013

dXX' iKbibdaKfi irdvd' 6 yrjpdtTKwv xpt> v Si
yrjpas
Eum.
286
XP^> V0% Kadaipet irdvra yqpdo-Kbjv
W. Schmidt added Tr. fr.

adesp. 508 perd ttjv o~Kiav rdxicrTa yypdo~Kei xpo" ** an d Lucian amor.
1 2
ovb'
avra yipovTos jjbrj xpbvov iroXia Kadijvaivev.
bpov.
F.
It might be thought that yijpas should be

attributed to i/'eOSos, and that xpt> vov could
But the omission would sugbe spared.
gest the meaning that falsehood is ever
young cf. O. C. 954 Ovpov yap otibiv
:
yrjpds
o~Tiv
dXXo
Theb. 669 ovk
daveiv,
Aesch.
yrjpas rovbe tov pido-yrjpdaKeiv as implying decay
For
Wilamowitz on Eur. Her. 1223.
paTos.
see
irXrjv
Hctti
AKPIIIOZ
41
63
OrjXov yap-
Kwkov
63
cV Sccr/i-ouri hpairTT)<; ari)p
Tro&icrdeis trav Trpbs r)&ovr)i> Xe'yct.

the order of the words is against taking
5jj,W as a grammatical qualification of
the clause tV...X*7c, a> if it were an
adverb or a parenthetical adjunct (sal.
iarlr).
He quotes ./. 906 cu/rAt wpit
avrov, irj\oi>, fr. 585 a\ytwo, IIp<i*rj.
&ij\oir.
So some take O. C. 321 ^6tnf% t6&'
i<rrl &t)\o* 'Xop-lpri* nip*.
Add Theocr.
But, so
10. 13 '* vltiw arrXtit irj\of.
used, Stj\op could not stand at the beginning of the sentence.
2 irpdt tjSotrrjv means the same as
''^ with which
xpbt xoipif (cf. x a PiT y^ u>a
it i> interchangeable: see Dem. 4.
Cf. El. 93 1 ov wpdt ifiorii* \tyw rait
ov ** M<> *"/* ôrijr
Eur. Med. 773
Blaydes needlessly
\6yovt, fr. 18 (n.).
cf. 0. C.
conjectured kwX' (nwohiatiut
jtor. 62. 30 (IV p. 4:7, 10

-<xpoK\4oii 'AKpuTii?.
'iJJXor...
>:..!>.
The situation supposed, that of a runlave who having been caught says
all he can to win favour, is exactly reproduced in Eur. Or. 1498 ff. in the case
of Orestes and the Phrygian, who says of
himself ipairirrjp yap iiiicXtwrw *V
Orestes taunts him (1514)
56fiv* w6ia.
i*i\ia y\uaarj X*p'fl7> Ttlrflor ovxo&rw
and threatens him (1516) ifioao,

kt*u> at, fiii Xtytir (nil* X*P i
have followed Nauck in putting
1
a colon after SrjXov -yap the asyndeton
ftpon*/*,
ti
fi-fi,
"
in the
explanatory clause
ner<ierth,
to
usual,
and the
if/Xof it, oiintiov to,
ot)\qi>
is
<S
4"o. 1).
iovXov, and
Brunck and Diadotf.
like
Mx
(Kueh-
Grottos altered
was followed liy

H. points out that
IK3-
64
fipaêia T019
prjcris
auH^pova.
<f>poi>ov(Ti
irpbs tovs TtKovras koX tf>vTtv<Tawa.<; irptnti,
a\Xo>? T
64.
/cat
64
2,o<po*\4on
Koprj t xapyeicf. ycVos,
K6pjj...Kapy*ia
Meineke:
'Afptotif).
'
pi)Oii ...
U.jlor. 74. 28 (IV p.

Ilensc) ~<xpot\iri 'AKpifflif, '4 Wart Jwrj.'
' latter extract.
Meineke
-
w.
1,
to vv.
3,
4,
the
two
licing separate extracts in St<>-
ts
hey
together so exactly
has a high degree of
fit
ifiainov
ical
Ppa^tio.
proposed
[ifia&tia
<<g
<l't
W. S.hmidt. COfOri f., need

for the vena arc more
F.
a speech >
retmkc iddraMd
to
roit c^povowri <ri$pova
J5 J
Ant. 73, with
TiKOvrai Kal $vruo-avTat
tologous, but intended to emphasi/e the
El. II Wp6t ##t
Kaaiyv^nn, AeSJCh.
wartpwf rt cod T6rTwr, Eur.

6
//<
\î rtxuir i'uat wart)p, Suffil.
<p<'<rai
109}
icnt *>iti oas tai rt wr rtana*, /:'

w nn T, p. w rrowr'. It is unnecessary to
the te*t. as some CtitJcj
M
nj. rs*t
sec Nauck.
MN
r6rrat
*i
1314
Xox'i'-ffa'Toi,
comfMnng
II 19.
aTXXwt r% xa(
diWwt
.uid
OOOm bJm
in
Eh
14.
in^s iXXsn r rarrsn *U in

/>**. 661 f. ***
roiVa
iVevfysysM x*>r
tpyop, let
aXXwt r< <irrwi <ai a(>^r4i
hi*
wstfryetf.
.
So
nsbip.
hi.
1
*apyt,a rodd.
Kdpij..
4 (iv p. 613, 17
/i>xvX4rya
was charsctn
the Dorian*, of the Argives a* well as
4*eti

I04>0KAE0YI
42
cus /cocr/AO?
i]
17
0-4717
avyr) re kci
tol
navp
A
eirr).
et primitus
als. For the plural

see on Eur. Hel. 440 and add Plat. rep.
ar^pyei 7r6\is, z'<. 206 f., Soph,

fr. 462.
yivos for the ace. of respect see
Jebb on Phil. 239.
4 koo-(aos cf. Ai. 293 yvvaui k6<t/jlov
i] aiyr) <pipei.
In this and similar phrases
the idea of personal ornament seems to
be conveyed (fr. 846) one suspects that
0-17^ k6<tho$, silence a jewel, was almost
proverbial: cf. Eur. fr. 219 K6o~p.os 5e
atytj <Tri^>avos (<TTeyavbs Herw.) dvSpbs ov
kclkov, Bacchvl. 3. 94 irpdl-avTi 5' ev ov
prjcriv
re] aealyrtrai
(ptpti KO<Tfj.ov ffiuwd.
oil
554 A
Bt)<savpoiroib% dvr)p'
oOs
ktL
11.,
who
thinks that the speaker is Acrisiu>,

renders
Short speech for those of proper modesty
Is seemly toward the parents that begat
them
The more so for a girl and Argive

Whose ornament is silence and few
born,
words.
65
ra
Bdpcrei, yvvctv
hewwv, ovap
7ro\\<x rotv
irvevcravTa vvktos, rjfxepas fxaXdacreTaL.
65 Stob. Jlor. 108. 56 (iv p. 971, 13

llense) ZotpoxXiovs 'AKpioiy (so
S
'
omits the name of the play).
#dp<r...
irviwv
dwpbvvKTOv dfifibafia,
where the language has several points
of similarity, makes this explanation
(jLaXdo-aeTai.'
doubtful.
Kaibel (on El. I.e.) suggests
that the metaphor is taken from the
breath of the voice a dream is a message
heard. It should be added that /xaXdo-o-trai
is not an apt word in relation to a gale
its usual application is rather to express
the assuagement of an emotion. Anyhow,
there is no occasion for Blaydes's <pav4vra
The daylight was be(for Trvevo-avTa).
lieved to be effective in purging the evil
Eur. /. T. 42 a
influence of dreams
MA
(1)
The metaphor
is
k6tov
generally taken,
by Ellendt and Campbell, to be that

of a gale which blows for a time and then
subsides.
simile will be required in
English
most of the terrors that come
in dreams are like a wind that blows by
night and sinks in the day-time.' Thus
irveiv used metaphorically would connote
a certain degree of vigour or violence as
in Ar. Eq. 437 ovtos r)8r) /cctiKi'as r) ctvko(pavTias irvti, and would be contrasted
with fia\do-o-erai. Phot. lex. p. 321, 23
Trvevaas' o~(po8pus 6pyiadeis.
Suid. s.v.
as
Hesych.
'
II
p.
348
irvevo-as'
dirb /xercHpopas tCov dvefiuv.
(2)
Xe'fw
refers
fragment to a significant dream of

Danae or her mother, and compares
Naevius Danae fr. V ainnis niveo fonte
lavere me mer/tini tnanum, where he finds
an allusion to a dream.
dpyiffdeis,
this
But the
with dreams in El.

480 db~virv6wv KXvovaav dpriws dveipdrwv
and in Aesch. Cho. 33 ropbs yap 6pft60pi!vnvov
bbfj.uv 6 v e 1 p bfxavTis e
<p6f3os
association of
8' iJKei
wv (pepovaa (paffâra,
irpbs aldip', et ti Srj t65' tar' olkos.
Ribbeck, A'om. Trag., p. 55,
Katvd
-rrveiv
66
tov
tfiv
yap ovSeU w?
66
Stob. Jlor. 119. 7 (iv p. 1076,

{sc.
o0oK\e'ous)
3 Hense) tov clvtov
'AKpio-iij}.
toB^.^!}.' In Stob. for. 115.
(iv
]>.
1022, 8 Hense) the line is
9
attached to a passage from a comic poet
(Antiphanes fr. 238 11 116 K.), and
appears again in Stob. Jlor.
16. 39 (iv
p. 1046, 7 Hense) 2o<poic\e'ovs.
'f9r...
'
6 yrjpdcTKcou ipd.
For the sentiment see on fr. 298.

ovScls <is, none so muck as,' is like ovSev
olou, for which see on fr. 556.
The con'
verse ws ovSeis,
in
Plat.
ws
clvt6$.
apol.
'
more than
any,' occurs
35 u.
Cf. Eur. fr. 320

ovk tariv ...b~vo<pvKa.KTov ovbev ws ywr).
Aesch. Cho. 848 ovdiv d-)yi\u>v o-devos
I
AKPIIIOZ
43
67
to
yap,
tyTjv
67.
fidior
Meineke:
67
om.
nal, travTo% rfaiov ye'pae/
in
yap ovk eêcm toU avTolai
Oaveiv
Stoh. flor. 119.

(iv p. 1074,
:i>e) loônXfout 'Axpurlov
S).
No man can
<lic
twice
and
that
codd.
ij5iov.
correction
have accepted Mcinckc's
common
for the
confusion of
comparative and superlative terminations

s-arrot rj&urro*
see Cobet, N. I., p. 1 19.
cannot be defended either by the anomalies, mostly corrupt, collected in KuchnerGerth
ji f.
or by s-arrdt fidXiara
quoted by Stephanus from Dion. Hal.
ant. Rom. 1. 14, 1. 75. 3. 35 and other
passages, where it takes the place of the
t6 {$r...tCr.'
'
jjSutto*
819.
makes
the sweeter, as an experience that

can never be repeated. The second line
is a variation of the saw often remodelled
iliiii. I 40X &v8(6s 8i r^vxh wdVir
ikfftir o&rt \rjiffTt)
oOff i\(H}, twtl dp K*v
ipKo\ 6N>*Twv.
f.
Aesch. Kum.
65 araf Qarderot oCrtt tar' dvdoraatt.
Kur. //</. :o;.
^/r. 1076.
Suf>fl. 771
life all
Platonic rtojrrtn (idWor.
Illaydcs pre-
ferred waair (or wov Vrir) ijoiffTo*.
etc.
68
kidos
'\ktltt)<;
68 Hesjrch. I p. to dVruTji (d*r>7f,s

Cod. corr. Musurusj \IH01 dwo rrjt iv Iff
\OTOV*T)OV duTTJf. Z<Ht>OK\T)t 'AtfHtTl^. (f.
'A*t/tou \19ov KaraantvaaBtlaa, tov

UtrrtXiKov (? UttpaifoO).
In Tr. fi.
adrsp 467 from Stcph. Mw. p.
t6
'A/tWrryt, / or
"AiETsVw wirpa' 4* rjf
rpa-ywii^ drrl tov 'AttucoQ Nauck is
*4rpm.
probably ri^ht in
The s.ine of the Atrium was laid at
Argos, and this fact confirms the statement of HcsychiuH that Sophocles referred
to the l'elo|>onnc*ian Acte ; for tft
also the name given to the east roast of
Algottl lictween Troczcn and Kpidauruv
rot)
Harpocr.
10,
p.
/xoipa
wtpl
tt)%
'Aktt) 4wi$a\arri^6t
"ATT.^f
Tapi\ovi
rod
"Twtpiiijt 4
rip
6 i*Tinjt
but without
the reference to Hypcrides, Hekk. anted.
'
une
Xffoi.
50t*
Kal
effect,
.v.
'Aktxttjs Xt9o$ was the name given to

the limestone taken from the quarric*
at At '. ill-- |>nm ul.i to the S.
of the Pcireeus and lying U-twecn it and
the bay of I'halerum.
t.'f. CIA
11 1054,
'ônr)cti 84 Toit tw'xoi'1 tt trxttw#>Jijt *a roit Kt'orat 'Ak riroi' Xifof.
Sec
I
The
is
to
stone
that
imported
171.
IOS explains dreua. sup

posed to be a kind of mortar, 1
p.
MMON
he
from
mistaken.
tod thai H
For the torm dxrinrr, which wool
{city he applied to an inhabitant of Acte,
sec on
alternative
to
was alluding
69
Ma/ncvc. d\ot/xof
69
ii
9+ok\t/%
',.
4j
&\oifiM
rdi
iwa\tii{"it dXot/Mvl f\t-)or.

Ma, i" r d\oiu6i
Jwdfui
if
grammarian of uncertain
rikl
'
'
rod 0aXdfiov yariaetwi inttoa 4 to.'

\8*w<pavi rraXoKTiT odoa iw orr^v
formation
n .,
OfML
p.
S.MoiartAi/>
\od\*iibtW*M*c<*l.)-
So0oX)i 'A0i#<v
7.
<\>'
%ycfc. I
x*m*i*v*>
'if*, p. !*.
9 d\<Kii- ri rA- rLx* &**<

The reference Is to a method of
wall-
'
I04>0KAE0YI
44
decoration by a process of polishing or

varnishing, which was connected with
the name of the Cyprian town of Marion,
It was
afterwards known as Arsinoe.
situated on the N. coast of the island
between the promontory Acamas and the
town of Soli (Strabo 683). The site is
described by Munro and Tubbs \nj. H. S.
xi 1 ff.
Orus explained the process by
comparing it to veraXuxris, i.e. the layingon of gold-leaf. See Plato's description
of the walls of Atlantis
Criti. 116 B kox
rod fj.ev irepl rbv O-utcltw rpoxbv relxovs
XCl\k$ irepitXdp.fiavoi> irdvra rovTrepibpofioi',

olov dXoi<pij irpoaxpiiififvoi
ibid. D wdvra
'
irtpi^Xeixpav rbv vtuiv dpyvpy

icri.
No doubt such ornamentation was
associated by the Greeks with the art of
5t ii-wdev
the heroic age, rightly enough as recent

discoveries have proved
see Jebb, Introduction to Flomer, p. 61. [Arist.] mir.
ausc. 41 mentions a stone called fiapuvs,
which takes fire when water is poured on
:
it.
But
in
Hesych.
ill
p. 72 this
and not contrary

and S.
/uapifetfs,
betical order, as L.
is
named
to the alphastate.
70
tAActSas yovd<;
70
Hesych.
II p.
356 IXXdbas yovas-
av<7Tpo<prjv, irXrjdos.
p. 29 etXofie'i'wv
'
av-
dyeXaias (so Musurus for dyeXeids cod.)

~EvpnriSy]s <&pli;tp (fr.
kcli ras <rv<rTpo(pds.
o~Tp(<pontvu)P
837) Kal 1,o<Pok\t)s
44 explains the Homeric IXXdbts (H 572)
Ta|eis.
'AKpifflcp.
'herding produce.'
-yoyos,
adj. is aptly used of the cattle crmod-
IXXdSas
The
id.
crvcrpocpi).
(so
elXadbv.
s.v.
Hesych.).
Hesych.
ffvvecTpa/ifJi^vws.
II
356 fXXai-
Etym. M.
p.
361,
'
nark
ti\7]86v.
s.v.
av(TTpo<pal.
p.
01 crvveTTpa/jifidvoL ifj.dvres.
It appears,
then, that L. Dindorf (Thes. II p. 711)
should not have deleted the words xai
ras o-v<XTpo<pds.
He went on to explain
t'XXctSes 701'ai as referring to plough-oxen,
comparing Ant. 341 IXXo^fvwv dpbrpwv.
I presume he took LXXddes as = turning
to and fro,' but this is hardly conceivable
without the addition of (e.g.) dporpots.
For the meaning of IXXtiv Buttmann's
article (Lexil. 44) is still worth reading.
For the concrete use of yovas cf. Aesch.
fr.
194 'iirirwv ovwv r' oxea * a ' raupuv
yovas.
Here the adj. takes the place of
a genitive (dyeXuv), as in Ai. 71 aixp-a-
<rv<rTpo<pr)v
iro\ifHfi.
as
ing or pressing together, as they are

I have very
driven.
Cf. Horn. 8215.
doubt that this was Hesychius'
little
explanation, and that we ought to read
For <rvdyeXaias Kara ras avo~Tpo<pds.
<TTpi<petv, avarpo<p-i) are regularly used by
the lexicographers in glossing lXXuv
(eiXXuv) and l\r)
schol. Ar. Ran. 1066
rod irepieiXrjdels r)
irtpuXXbixevos] dvrl
tXXeiv yap to (rvarpicpeiv.
avarpoKpds.
dyiXas rj rdêis...t\r]
Suid. s.v. t\as.
yap
ev
\uTi8as x*P as (Jebb).
p. 28 ci'X^v
71
71
Kal
Hesych.
<&>
ovk av
p. 47 d5ocr wapddoâ
486âo-(v.
2o0okX?)s
d86i;a<TTos (fr. 223), deXirros, dvtXirto-TOS.

In spite of its rarity, ddotjos must have
Phot. ed. Reitz,
been well-established as = improbable

for it is so used several times by Aristotle
ns
'AKpiffiip (dupicriv cod.).
in
79 de B.) In the same

sense Sophocles employs also ddoKrjros,
(=Phryn.
'
'
p. 33, 7 (Bekk. anecd. p. 344, 27) &doa

ra irapddoâ, & ovk &v tis do^daeiev.
the topica:
see (e.g.) 9. 12.
rots de iroXXois &5oov to j3a<rtXia
fr.
173^ 26
fj.i]
eudai-
fioveiv.
72
avTCLLav
72
Hesych.
XaXeirrjv.
p.
'SotpoKXijs
stored 'AKptoty).
209 dvralav
rio-lw
'
Iktottov,
(Musurus
The meaning
re-
of dvraios
is
discussed on fr. 334.

Zktottov mea
in the sense of 'startling.'
'strange,'
Hesych.
II p.
54 Zktowov xo-^tov.
e"vov.
AKPIIIOI
45
73
arroyhpofiov
73 Efesych.
p.
245 dxodponopi\*TToi-nto twj dp6/JUHt. 7) ra\tv6f)ou.oy.
itavubov.
IcxponXijj
M<r'
dxprfcitf)
4
k<hpvp
Musurus).
This is 1 ilUlMiJj
and l-'.llendt corrects fur iwav-
6iov, with
the intention,
accommodating
Our
717, i\, Otf. p. 1593, 56, ]). [788,

u->tathius takes his information in
[>art from Alcxion, a grammarian in the
atter half of the first ccnturv A. P., who
drew from the best Alexandrian sources.
According to Kustathius dr68pofiot was
!
in two senses
)
(
&rd tup 8p6nup. This
:
cir
may
one who was
to
refer
We
too weak to compete in a race.

can
hardly go further, but the alternatives lead
me to suspect that dwoiponot was cmHartung quite
ployed metaphorically.
unjustifiably interprets 'a runaway
xtxavufrop
on the analogy
As a name given
(1)
lesych.
roit ipdfioit
ribed to
'certain of the ancients'
of iw6naxo%.
ijd-ij
It
was an error for wapd

does not quote Kustathius
nor would Eustath. throw any light on the
obscurity of llesych., even if Schmidt's
conjecture were right.
It is
perhaps
more probable that Soph, used the word
in the former of the two senses recorded
and Hesych.'s iXarrovntPOP
bjf I.tistath.
p.
nsed
utTixu'.
He
Kprjal.
only other authority for droSpo/xot it to

be found in certain passages of Kustathius
(//.
ipdfiup
dtpTiffLy in
suppose, of
to raXifSpofAof.
it
twp
may
here
be mentioned that M. Schmidt thought
'AxfHaitf)
ol>scure,
did to nrjfc wu
by the Cretans,
t<t>vfioi
and compares
fr.
63.
to the
74
74
i|.
rai>0tif f>
ZoôxXip 'AKptalip.
;;;
dwo<f>cupov<rai
<fn-aip
see
avroO XiVot tâ^trift iylrovro. and

ioj.i.
fr.
tt\p
75
dpcjfjLara
75
tiecjrch. I p. 195 dpJuara [Ap6ftara cod., against the order of letters:

OM)' dporptdnara (or |>crh. rather
dpoTfuJuara, as M. Schmidt conjectured).

o drb (iwl cod.
iorr.
dpo< * to d\<fxTa o&ru \lytrat.
loôXr)t
'hMpialif {dtpioi cod.
corr. Mu
1
c to be drawn from this is

phoclcs used d/>w/iara in the sense
IiniJ, not
for dVtfxra v* In. b
Would hardly l>c credible.
*
woiourrot kui4*\oC>i>toi toO #toC
ripi/nara, where the Kbol. makes it
that the mention of dXaVra in
1.
actually refers to a passage of
t4 dporpidtiara, wapd rd dpo :
rputi'P. rd TpotipoTptwfiJpa. \tyovfi oV #>tot
cat rd a\^ro ai top Xtfkworrop dpwuara.
wt wap' Ei'w6\i6i (fr. .104
316K.) ' oi
<
J* dftufidrup,' drrt rov
TUP
dX^t'rurr.
The
word
it
di-nurt
IMOTO A|mi||. l(X
from
entirely
dpu/H'-
p. 4
nee \WW.ant>J.\K 450, ijapwâra

ffeptdâra
meal
oh ra
a\Xi ra UvaptUp*. With Eupotts wc
arc not concerned, but it might lie thought
that croft rather than tilth M the meaning
o\
'A
inferred for s..|.hcle.
caXowtfU',
That
thi
ibowa bf ucian Isxtph.

l/>wii /* X*> r a^wpa ra. wnhfoH
rt tbpo* 4p avroii wtfimirm, where the
^ hot has ifitiftmrm Si rh iporpv /{i/r>#is
not thecav:
is
tUp* witia, Aelian w. a. 7. K Pi t* ron

dpwMa't ^hoa<m. 1 6. 14 t^ rott 0*0t*tr
oVwtuwir. For the late form apo#ta, which
/
i to I* rejected. c Cobet. '
b)
II
illu*iraie-l
MoVltOfl
111
('
ûltimate in
the paprri
fr -n
A'.
Will
10H.
I04>0KAE0YI
46
76
acrro/xos
76
Hesych.
8vvdp.evos
affTOfioi,
p.
X^-yeij'.
elsewhere
horse
306
Affrofios' 6
/xr?
'AKpifficp.
ô<f>OK\rjs
of a hard-mouthed
here a synonym of
(.7. 724), is
avavSos, &<p6oyyos, dfiwvos, oli)/6$7)tos etc.
This is possible because ffrdiia had become familiar in the sense of speech
'
ffov
7'
ets
t65' ii-e\d6i>Tos dvbffiov
'
ffrdfxa
In Strabo 70 oi Tovsd.ffr6fx.ovi
appivas iffTOpouvres and in Lucian
15 0X07101' ^/uiv e'jurdrTeis u>s
dffTofiois ovffi ko.1 direyyXuTTifffitvou the
O. C. 981.
re
ical
Lexiph.
meaning
But
cf.
is
different,
Epict. diss.
'
without a mouth.'
24. 26, Achilles
2.
reduces Odysseus and Phoenix to silence

(dffT6p.ovs ireiroiriKt).
AAEAAAI
The mistaken correction of the title to WXcoaSai was due to
Hemsterhuis on Lucian Charon 3 p. 494, and was supported by
an explanation of fr. 89 from Apollod. I. 55, where Artemis
takes the form of a stag, and by a stratagem induces Otus and
But kt)\o<; is inconsistent with
Ephialtes to shoot each other.
this view.
Subsequent investigation has decisively shown that the

subject of the play was the fortunes of Auge and her son
Telephus, and the credit of establishing the truth belongs to
Fr. Vater, who in his dissertation die Aleaden des Sophokles,
Berlin, 1835, first pointed out the significance for the present
purpose of a passage in one of the declamations attributed to
Alcidamas (Odyss. 13 16, p. 187 Bl. 2 ).
It is there related
how Aleos, king of Tegea, went to Delphi and received an
oracle from the god, warning him that, if his daughter bore a
son, his own sons must die by the hand of his grandson.
Accordingly, on his return home, Aleos made his daughter Auge
priestess of Athena, vowing that he would kill her if she ever
became a wife. It so happened that Heracles came to Tegea,
when on his way to Elis to attack Augeas, and was entertained
by Aleos in the temple of Athena. Heracles saw the girl, met
her in secret, and left her pregnant. When Aleos discovered the
state of affairs, he sent for Nauplius, king of Euboea, and handed
over Auge to him, with directions that she should be drowned 1
However, on the journey from Tegea, Auge gave birth to
Telephus on Mt Parthenius
and Nauplius, disregarding his
instructions, sold mother and child to be conveyed across the sea
Teuthras, who was childless,
to King Teuthras in Mysia.
married Auge, and adopted her son, to whom he gave the name
1
Cf. the similar story of Aerope, related in the
1295, Apollod. 3. 15.
Kpfjffffai.
of Euripides: schol. At.
AKPIIIOI AAEAAAI
47
The
story was current in several versions, but the

account preserved by Alcidamas is that he
alone refers to the oracle given to Aleos, and mentions this
as the reason why Auge was entrusted to Nauplius.
Tli
once explains the title of Sophocles' play.
Confirmation of
Alcidamas is to be found in Proverb. AppttiJ. 2. 87 (Pannm. I
412) as well as in Hygin. fab. 244 Telcphus Herat/is filius Hippothoiim et Neaerat aviae suaefilios (sc. oeeidit)
1 1 will be seen that
the name of the other son is lost, and Hippothous is nowhere
else mentioned as a son of Aleos.
Apollod. 3. 102 calls the
sons of Aleos and Neaera by the names Cepheus and Lycurgus,
whereas Pausan. 8. 4. 8 and Ap. Rhod. I. 161 ff. make them
three in number, Lycurgus, Cepheus, and Amphidamas.
As contrasted with the account of Alcidamas, that of
elephus.
in
mportance of the
'.
Apollodorus
(2.
146) mentions temple-defilement and consequent
\o//xck (<>r Xt/Mos, as in 3. 103) as the
causes which induced Aleos
hand over Auge to Nauplius and to expose her child.

Diodorus, however, whose version is more rationalistic, simply
to
relates (4. 33) that Aleos discovered his daughter to be pregnant,

and sent her away in disgrace, not believing her story that >h<
with child by Heracles.
In regard to the circumstances of the
birth of Telephus, Sophocles and Alcidamas followed different
versions for the latter allows no place for the suckling of the
infant by a hind, which is clearly referred to in fr. 89.
Here,
therefore, the Sophoclean plot approximated to the story as
;
related in
Hiodorus, Apollod.//.*?., Pausan.
8.
4X. 7, 54.6*.
It
enable to infer that, according to Sophocles, Telcphus was

by the herdsmen of King Corythus", or by C'orytluis
if; and that the question of his birth in some way or other
presented itself to him, when he was grown to manhood.
ding to Apollod. 3. 104 and Diod. I.e. he went to Delphi to
It will
enquire of the oracle, and was sent by the g<xl to Mysia.
be observed that the above-mentioned authorities do not give
i
any information concerning the return of Telephus to the palace

The gap
os, or the manner in which he killed his uncles.
can only be filled by conjecture, and there is nothing to help us
that frs. 86, 8; appear to belong to a scene in which
Wernicke (in l'aulytion of doubtful birth was canvassed.
n 2302) inferred that Telcphus was mocked by
t
'
The
text is corrupt, lmt
in
/A.
143 Sttitra
M.
S< hmi.lt
it
doabtlti
rifjhl
trstociag
S faentf for
froPter Hifpoihoi Jitii martrm (c.

(.Ink. Jakrb. in 60 t<> read l\rta for
A utolya f.tia
ra
'Uiorum in J4.1.
** hardly a late invention, an Jahn mippmcd
^>(H4tU
in
Arcadia
(I'auvan. H. 45,
Kraaer .
it tfi*
Ntrm
r**m*.
'
I04>0KAE0YI
48
Hippothous and his brother for the obscurity of his origin, and
them in anger that subsequently Aleos demanded
his surrender from Corythus
that in consequence of the
explanation given he recognized his grandson and that he then
required him to consult the oracle in order to learn how he should
expiate his blood-guilt. Robert {Arch. Jahrb. Ill 61 ff.) thinks it
more likely that the strife between Telephus and the Aleadae
arose out of some incident similar to the Calydonian hunt in the
legend of Meleager.
He points out that in that case fr. 84
suitably describes the overthrow of two princes of the royal
house by a foreign bastard. This carries the story to the period
which is covered by the action of the Mysians. Welcker (p. 413)
preferred to suppose that Heracles appeared as dens ex machina
to clear up the dispute, and ordered Telephus to go to Mysia
that he slew
should be observed that an entirely different version of the

story was adopted by Euripides, to the effect that mother and
child were cast adrift together in a chest by Aleos, but ultimately
reached the mouth of the Caicus, and were rescued by Teuthras
(Strabo 615). Such at least was the account given in the
for in the later Auge Telephus was
prologue to the Telephus
separated from his mother and exposed (Wilamowitz, Anal. Enr.
The simpler story, which is parallel to that of Danae,
p. 189 f).
was given by Hecataeus (Pausan. 8. 4. 8), and is believed,
although the reasons assigned are hardly convincing, to have
been derived from the Cypria and Little Iliad (Wernicke, u.s.
The Pergamene dynasty established by Attalus traced
2300).
their descent from Telephus, and the people claimed to be
Arcadians sprung from the band which crossed with Telephus
Thus they were precluded from giving official
to Asia.
It
recognition to the Xapvag-story, and followed in preference, as

has been shown exhaustively by Robert {Arch. Jahrb. II 244,
Hi 45, 87), the versions of Aeschylus and Sophocles. See also
Frazer, Pausan. II p. j6.
77
ivravda
/ca/col?
77
Stob. Jior.
fxei^Tot
otolv
Travra Tavdpuiriov vocrel,
Bekcocnv laadai
37 (in p. 228,
17
evTavda...KaKa.
The extract is omitted in SMA, ed.
Trinc. gives as above, and 'AXeddais is
added after 2o^>okXôi'S by two of Schow's
Hense)
4.
"2o<poK\4ovs.
'
So
/ca/ca.
mss known as B, C. For these see Hense

in HJk. A/us. XLI 59 f.
1 cvTavOa looks forward to the following clause: cf. Eur. fr. 497 ical yap
evrtvOev voael ra twv yvvaiicwv ot /xfr kt.
|
also Fr. Vater, op. at. p. 25.
AAEAAAI
06 i*
ToWal
Tip8( yiip K&fiwovffiv al
where Jebb gives other illustrations.

See also on fr. 854. I'lut. de garrul. 4
ridti,
wiiktu,
6ra* rii kt(.
//el. 581
i*u
roaovjuv, trt id/xapT aWrjy tû,
/. T.
1018 Ty5t ydp o<rtl ritrrot rpdt oIkovs
looks backward.
For the use of 6tcw
|
p.
xxxni
l./.P.
iacdai
cf.
Soph.
Kcucd,
kolkw 5i5ovt
fr.
aVot
J
(s<:
6 a66\t<rx<n),
rijt
rovov
fia p<-
where the doctor
hmiM-lf rather than his drugs is at fault.

Similarly Fur. Batch. 839 axt 9r\pa
kukL, Aelian nat. an. 3. 47 (of Oedipus)
p.i) rip oUip Kai rip 7î>(( KaTapJ/fxtPOf tlra
nirroi Ktucip dftjKtffTip laatiai *o4 to IfSif
rapf\06rra.
418.
For the proverb k*k6*

Aesch. fr. 349 ni) xaxoU IQ
Kcucoit Kri.
icaxip
504 H (art it Bipartite*
rtpoi
49
589, At. 363 fit) xaitb*

w\iw ri Trjfia ttji drijt
78
yap
T019
dure^LU ov pa&iov.
Sikcu'oic.
78
Suppl. 437 ** 3' 6 ^tr/wr r&r niy* tint'

(\uv.
Fur. fr. 584 ft tcx &Vatot fivpivr
Stob. ftor. 9. 4 (111 p. 346, 14

1&po*.\iov\ (Et/ptsrldou A) 'AXed(dVatddat If, d\wdSat A).
'rt...
iai
oi'K
(vdUwy
rV
Kparti, rd 0ftor
I
Mijr rr
These are variations of the

simple theme in Fur. fr. 343 ddpon' rd
rot di*cuoi> '<rxi' M^7>See also fr. 80.
pi ho*.'
in \\a,**ijf.
'Might
on a on
1-
verse of our proverb

Cf. O.C. 880 Toff rot
Fur.
'*? fidyar.
Kiglit."
^w ppax*i
79
KCLKOV TO KV0LV KOV 7T/30? ai>8/X>S CUyVOV?.
79
79
Stob.
/lor.
(
in
3 (ill p. 444, 8
2.<xpo*\(ovi) 'Wtdii.
\i.
vc.
The
rtyooCi.
'<a6i'
co(/Gesner: ai S
extract
S only of Hcnse's
is
con-
MSS.
With
hide one's true thought.

.12 4x0pbi t^p A">* KtlfOS OflUft
'Atiaa wi'\r)cir,
61 %' lT*po* W* KM-By
Ktvfciv.
i.e.
t<>
iAXo 64 ttwy.
ylides
Irtpor K*v0<nt Kpa&lj) rtor, d\\*
iyoptiwr. Sail. Cat. 10. K>r the absolute
use of i"fiii in the transitive sense cf.
48
<
7'raih. 988, Aesch. C*o. 101 n'i\ cW#rr*

/rio* Kopiiar ^<V*v rir6t, 'don't practise
nii&'
addition,
the
nohltHt
oblige,
cf.
(Jhaeremon fr. 17 {7'GFp. 789) f-**9 M

roif io<i\oloi oi> wp4wu \4y*i. ~ wpit
:
(proccetling from).
'lcfiiting'
F>r
dm
my n. on Fur. ///. 950 awl

So fr. 31-,
Klaydes on Ai. 319.
gal and p6 confused Campbell refer* to
Troth. 10
idi-mi see
80
mu yap
hiKaia yXtoara
so
.7,
<
10
A\aii (F has /{
'AX#diw without the poet's
name
al >ap..
Xtft
m^7-
\i Kparos fitya.
For the tcntiment see n

referfed to alw> in /'hi/. Iaa| f *' *' ^*
0writ o*rf >>ur<.i #o^4> | aXX' tl .
'
ZO<t>OKAEOYI
5o
81
irai,
co
cricoira'
81
81
ovyr;
(m
Stob. flor.
p. 678,
33. 3
1iO<poKXiovs 'AXedSais (cuXeaert
TroW* eêt
et
PIuL
the
10
ciwttt)
Such at
be avoided.
was the ordinary man's morality
must
truth
M,
Hense)
but S omits the name of the play, and A
'w.../caXd.'
Plut. de
the whole extract).
garnil. 2 p. 502 E etnupev irpbs rbv dbb-
least
Arsenius p. 737, 9
(=Apostol. xviii 62 a) assigns the line
to Menander, but Dindorf and Hense
point out that this is due to the fact that
Menander is the author of the verse immediately preceding it in Stobaeus.
The verse is not a general recommendation of silence; and the context would
probably have shown that silence was
enjoined in painful circumstances, where
dpwirq) vorjaai,
\e<rx ov
Kakd.
criyrj
see Pind.
Nem.
5.
16
otfrot airacra Kcpbloiv
<palvoi<ra irpbawirov dXd&ei'
rb aiyav ttoWcikis
'c3.../caXd.'
fr.
iarl
drpe/frjj'
<jo<pu>
180 tad'
rarov
Kal
dv-
fire 7rt<rrordr<x
aiyds 656s Kiv\rpov 5e pd\o.% Kpartcrrevuv X670S.

Aesch. fr. 188 iroXKols yap
i<rn Ke'pSos 7) 0-1777 {jporwv.
Ag. 553
TrdXai to aiyav <p6.pp.aK0v /3Xd/3r;s lx u
should be compared with Carcin. fr. 7 wo\XQv yap dvOpuvoicn <pa.pp.aKov KaK&v
0-477).
iroXXd...KaXd in place of the more
usual 7roXXd Kal KaXa: see Jebb on Phil.
583.
82
ravra ttoWcov prffxarcov er ecrri
rd yap irepiacrd iravrayov Xvinqp'
tC
82
Stob. flor. 36.
Hense)
n (m
Socpo/cXe'ous 'AXedficus.
p.
l
12
dpidprjaai
rl... Zttt).'
(Pierson's
692,
ctol
enr).
Herodian
erxoXas.
Philet.
475) 6X1777$ ian

8i8a<rKaXlas, dvrl rov, dXiyuv deirai irpbs
1
'Why should this still need many
words from you?' Herwerden conjectured
prjpdruv iiraiois, but eYi is indispensable
(better eV aj-iois, as Hense says) and the
genitive (descriptive, = requiring many
words') is idiomatic: Plat. Gorg. 461 A
ravra oSv #71-77 7rore ex, 0VK bXlyys ffvvovH.
ffias icrrlv dicrre iKavws biacTKiipaadai.
quotes Pind. Nevi. 10. 46 paKportpas yap
pa6ri<nv.
o'iirep
Euenus
459
p.
fr.
1,
5 rovs j-uverovs...
pq.<rri)s elo~l Sidacr KaXirjs.
irpi<r<rd is
1034
'
Kal
Moeris,
used as
irepi<r<ra KT)pvo-<reiv.
irepKTffb.
in
Aesch. Theb.
Cf. Eur. Suppl.
Med. 819 trepitTcrol

But in 0. T. 841
means 'remarkable, of
<pwvGiv,
irdvres ovv p(o~<p X6701.

irepio-abv
Xbyov
special note.'
83
fjirf
83
83
Hense)
ipevva'
rrdvr
Xaddv KaXbv Blomfield
Stob. flor. 41. 4

Ikxpo/cXeous
rroXXd Kal \aBelv koKov.
(in
'AXedSais.
p. 758, 5
'py... Ka-
Xbv.'
XaXei> KaKbv codd.
Tavrav (TKOret Kpvirreiv ZoiKev, Eur.

460.
See on fr. 64, where the phrase
it is worth notice
04777 Kb&pos is discussed
that, in the passages there mentioned,
Bacchylides takes the conventional view,
whereas Euripides advocated the dignity
of silence.
Blomfield's correction
strongly supported by Eur. Hipp. 465 iv
<ro<poi<Ti yap
rd8' itrrl Ovrjrwv, XavOdvtiv
ra py) KaXa.
Blaydes thought roi preferable to Kal; but see on fr. 23.
ri>XV<
fr.
The verse
is a pendant offr. 81: 'Silence

good, where there is a skeleton in the
house.' On the other hand, good fortune
should be proclaimed to all. Cf. Pind.
Pyth. 3. 83 ra KaXa rpiipavres . fr. 42
Ka\uv ptv iv polpav re rep\wvwv is peaov
Xph iravri Xa$ deiKvvvaf et 84 ris avdpibdebffdoros drXdra KaKbras
wpoairoiai
is
AAEAAAI
51
84
kovk otS' otl xpr) npos ravra Xeyeii/,
orau ol y ayaOoi irpb<; rutv ayevatv
KaravLKojvTaL.
av raS' eWy/coi
nolo. 77-0X19
84.
-/
Valckenaer:
t'
codd.
84 v
flor. 43. 6 (iv p. 1, 1 j Hense)
ZoftarX/oer (toO aiTov S) AXcddat. 'koi/k.
Gerth
Also in <w]0. Par. 716 Elter,

omitted in v. 1.
The non-committal punctuationadopted
by Dindorf and Nauck, who, keeping r'
i4yK0i;'
with
dyrrrwr codd.
matic: sec Neil's Equittx p. 190, Kuehner 509, 9 (<), and cl. At. 715, Phil.
II. points out that a similar ques1099.
'
o\ytpQ>p (irotius:
tion arises in Phil. 45ft,
x/)J>
where
7'
as a variant for 6' in 1. and is the reading

of several other MSS.
But, independently of authority, the cav.- for <i' is strong
there.
Robert, retaining r', assumes a
Hense suglacuna after carwurwrro*.
gests ol Xaps-pol or the like.
2 f. For the political conditions assumed, the overthrow of the nobles by
the masses, see on fr. 191. aytvmv shows
v. 7. print commas after Xfyetr and

KarewiKQfTai, leaves the connexion of the
obscure.
Hut r* does not seem to
be in place as a connective, whether or
not a heavier stop is placed after \iytip.
I have followed Valckenaer in giving y'
for t\ and in joining the 6rat> clause with
ffldl which precede it.
The suborIause then conveys a causal impli451 tov xp'l riBtadat
raCna, wov &' air up, 6row
rd $tV rVairurr
Tovt Otoin tOpu ttiKoii;
For 6ra* so used
see my paper in A.J.P. XXXIII 416 ff.
appearance of yt, as after Irwin*,
twov, (whM), tbrt and the like, is idio-
in
that in o/yoJoi the political meaning is

KaraviKavrai the compound
fori-moM.
does not seem to occur cl>cwhcrc {rii*
or wo\6 rurwrra* conj. Blaydcs, pdy*
:
Herwerden).
viKutvrai
trpds:
ft.
MI,
rdS, 'tiling like these.' of what has

been mentioned: cf. Thuc a. 71 tuo nip
rifur waripti ol vfUrtpoi tiovar.
85
hoKQ) fUv, ovSeiV aXX* opa fir) Kptlaraov
teal BvcrcrifiovvTa t)v ivamiwu Kpartlv
i) hovkov avTou ovtol tu)v 7T\as k\vo,v.
85
St.!..
(lor.
ji
54.
(IV
p.
351
ZoQotXlovi 'AXcadurr (dXeaiwr M,

d\foia3wK prnnitus A),
'to*
1
receding sentence mu
iriinglybeirTeligious?"
tii \* bit* f\otro 6v0fftfii)l tlrat;' (II.)
\y wished to alter
in other authors are collected
comedy
an
it
must not
-.ttnguished: in the
one case
ifxx.
Somi (Uv:
"f
for
/'.
1051
-dp introduces the
see Stark ie on Vttf. 77;
rators
aatflhi.
Wyse on
Im r i\ fl
Jebb on Phil.
ence
ti>
the
/*/.
and "thrr verbs
cl.
O.C
ny examples
and
for
1.
Hot the subjunctive Me

It uc here in prefer-
30.
indicative
peak"
shows
that
the
ng forward to the
circumstances of the particular case than
weighing the general application of the
-
maxim.
a t. Several
antithesis
to
critic*
have missed an
which they
*V*/*arra
frfl
for
anying
/ing *o*w
'
by Blaydes
tUp loluatium in
oiiih
7}
airop AVra Cobct suUtitutrd f
>chmidt
Wôrr
pflrra, Vitelli
f"
io. Vor i* *-
m* #MW
Aai*rt
t.-
4rra and
'
IO0OKAEOYI
52
Weil rj SoOXov dyvbvbvra; Papageorgius

changed SovXov to xP y) <jr ^v anc^ Nauck
But the
conjectured beCXbv for SoOXov.
presence of ko.1 and avrbv shows that these
justifies dSiKia,
#a
ydp
etrrep
Kepbaivovra KeKXijffOat Koucbv
fj-e
<rou
yap
rj
KpeTff-
olfiovra robs OeQv vbp.ovs
virra valeiv Sbâv r]ij.woXr)KbTa,
W-
and with
v.
3 Eur. Hel. 730 Kpetooov yap rb8' {i.e. to

be a loyal slave with a mind free) rj bvolv
&' 6vra
KaKoiv
xPV (r ^ ai i Ta * <ppivat t'
f.
laid
is
'
524
as here stress
corrections are misconceived the thought

It is better to conquer one's foes
is,
even by foul means than to be so reduced
To a freeas to be the slave of others.'
born Greek slavery is the worst of all
evils
hence the arrogant note in avrbv,
which contrasts as in Phil. 316. For the
It is
<pv<rei 80OX01 the case is different.
not so much slavery that is contrasted
with sovereignty, as degradation with
AXXwv t' aKoveiv dovXov

viXas. Add Ant. 479 ootu
SovXbs Am rwv xAas. Gomperz, who at
one time was inclined to follow Cobet in
^X eiV KaKai,
ovra
In Eur. Phoen.
power once enjoyed.
much
on slavery as the extremity of misfortune.

In Aesch. Ag. 478 the Chorus pray for
the middle state nrp-' etttv 7rroXnrbpdr]s,
^177-' oiiv ai/Tds dXovs vw' &X Xu> /3ioe xarL5oifj.i.
H. compared Trag. fr. adesp. 181
dSiKetv XPV* rvpavvidos
KaWiffTov dSiKeiv r&XXa 5' eiioefieiv

Xpeuv, sovereignty is taken as the supreme
limit of happiness, the attainment of which
tQiv
suspecting the text, subsequently defended

it
on similar lines to the view taken
nipi.
above (Nachlese,
p. 5).
86
KarapKel Tovhe KK\r}<r0ai narpo^,
Travcrai.
TrefyvKa
elirep
to toi voixio~6ev
2
86.
86
Gesner:
/xelwv
Stob. flor.
76.
(iv
el
fieifav
SA,
p. 610,
Hense) ZoôkX^s 'AXeadais (dXedSes A).

'
Trade ai.. k par el.

.
We may
perhaps assume that these

words were spoken by Telephus in reference to the supposed parentage of Heracles
(or Corythus).
1 kk\t}o-0cu iraTpos: cf. fr. 564 (n.).

cf. Track. 1 105 o rijs dpiarris
For the gen.
fiyrpos tbvo/xafffj.iyo$.
2 ciirtp 7r<j)UKa y'

For the meaning
of etrrep )( et ye see the exhaustive discussion by E. S. Thompson in his edition of
the Me no, p. 258 ff. Here etrrep bears its
common meaning of si modo (fr. 104 n. ),
but the addition of 7' changes the tone.
It is impossible to reproduce the nuances
of Greek particles in English; but the
speech-stress, which we indicate by the
use of italics in printing, may serve roughly
to convey the difference between etrrep
.
Tri<pvKa,
'
If
am his son,' and

I am his son.'
Xiyeiv
etrrep rre-
Cf. Plat.
ov ToXfj.w<n
.ws oi>xh etrrep dSucovcri ye, 8oriov
<pvKd y',
'If
Enthyphr. 8 C toOto yap,
oI/mil,
he
pnq,
p.eioiv
rfjs dXyj$eCa<;
fieiôv
biK-qv.
Eur.
fiXa/Stf.
Kparel.
3
For
toi] ti
etirep
piimitus
ye in dialogue see on
Phoen.
p.ei(uv (JXaPrj:
725, 1652.
i.e., to be called the son of such a father
rather than to learn the truth.
3 to toi vo|iwr6iv xre. Cf. the wellknown conclusion of Gray's ode On a
distant prospect of Eton College, 'Thought
would destroy their Paradise, No more;
j
where ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be

wise.'
So Eur. fr. 205 <ppoi>> 8' 8 rrdcrx^'
Kai rb8' ov <r/j.iKpov nanby to fir) elbivai yap
|
fivd vooovvra' atpSos 8' iv

dyvuola.
Apollod. Caryst. fr. 10
(ill 284 K.) oi yap druxovvres rbv xpbvov
Kep8aivop.ev
brroaov dv dyvowixev rrrvxyKores.
This comes from the Hccyra,
which was translated by Terence, and the
corresponding lines in his version
286 f. nam nos omnes, auibus est alien m;
r)Sovr]v e"x i
Kaicois
aliqnis obiectus labos,

omne quod
es
interea tempus prius quam id resell it
lucro est. See also on fr. 583. 5. At. 554
\
p.7] (ppoveiv yap icapr' dvw8vvov Kaicbv

Eur. Bacch. 1259 ff. Or. 236 Kpelaaov
rb SoKetv, k&v dXr/deias airy.
to
AAEAAAI
53
87
87.
A.
oS\
B.
anau to
if, " Kripd
Nauck
corr.
87
p66o<s
el
8' tl
codd., 6
odtvoi
ti<j,
yvrjcriois Icrov aOc'vct.
ywqoiav
\pr)<TTOv
vulgo
8i)
yprâiap Stot>.
Stob. yfor. 77. 9 (IV p. 6i
/x"
^vaiP.
second line
('
Tis only
good ') is after the manner of

Kuripides: El. 384 rjj 8' 8/u\ta (iporoii
to l>c
KpuHtrt
xad
roii
ff9tai
Top' d7atfo<ffi 8' dr8pwr.

Simiwith tpectal reference to the stigma
of bastardy: Amir. 038 rM re woXAoi
4
tup yprjcluv
p66oi)
the lines to a single speaker, re:

' Hut
he, though in ont war A;
But the
copes with the legitimate.'
translation as italicized is hard to justify.
K. Kllis. on the same assumption and
with
comma at oS4p<h, proposed
pdfilp
fr.
108 &p6uo.ti fienrrdp rd
<pian 3' tVj.
fr. 377 fidnjp ti
QnjToi Toi'i p60ovi Qu'iyoiv' Apa
ra<5at
îTi'ir
06 ro0flf -yip 1* xpt\aTo\ <pv-jf,
roffoiVif.
pWop,
i)
oW
6 8' tl.
Hut no satisfactory meaning
could Ik- elicited from this, unless xpnrrbp
bore the sense of ivaytpit. Blaydes conjectured (inter alia) ** 8* p661 rt.
tl for
ro/i' airrov rijr <f>i>cny b**4>6*pt\.

l
f.
"gnizc
'
helween
that the verges ibottld be divided
two speakers, but
ynpioit
larly
(sc.
rott
rta ppoTu>p
$ai'fiaarit (sc. ^{*Wmand the well-known attracted examples At. 488, 0. C. 734. Sec also
Kuehncr-Gcrth 11 573. iieadlam on
Aesch. Ag. 119. CampUll, who gives
y4tia,
SM, ru
Clem.
irtro),
fr.
ypi)oiup ifitlrortt.
fr.
yiip oviiy 5pt*i irOttti
t'hp toifp
tvytPtit.
6 (Up yb.p (<jO\bt tvytrrfi tftoty'

53 oi/K far in r raxourcr t6-
irrip.
roll
<f>vcrii>.
rai% yrrtcioti
first line should lie read as a question (oi>

O) pMoi ti%...9$4p*i ; 'surely a mere hastard is not the equal of the well-Umi?'
with ov 817 interrogative as in Track. 668,
Phil. 900) throw* an unusual emphasis
on the indefinite pronoun. I have reverted to the reading of th.
58' for b t' (see cr. n.): 'he, as no other
bastard ..." Cf. TraeA.8 Skpop SXyiarop
lax "' <f T ' AirwXit yvrh, O. C. 1 664
11
'A\td8au (-8< A,om. S).

'6 S'.-ipvair.' The second v. is quoted
mi. Alex, strom. f> p. 74
2o0ocVoi't 8< < AXtuaiwr 'arar r6 XPV ffT0 "
Zo4>ok\rft
Hjr laiji'
\i
his suggestion that the
88
to.
avBpoittoicnv
-^pijfxaT
avOis 8e
88
88
passage
iv
.
>pear
>Uo*\io<
in
</<
I'ltit.
p,
.iu,i.
nee
uv
Vv. 6
500,
coni.
439.
/'horn.
he inten.lc!
Nauck
refers to Plant. Mi.

!i
>>.
thought that
this passage
is referred
io> in the word* rati for*
th t&p Wtqt tipHtliPmi.
7.
with-
;l<rv%,
1061.
2 <f>sXMt
tuggested that
tken the
original i\fdr**, com|nng
Hut
etc.
listurbing the r>
,,>,',,
i
name of the |'lny. I'lut. :

5 p. 497 B attr
\t<TTn'
DC follows with Hvrafiir
>*dpwwoit t%n* (Photn. 4401.
<f>i\ov$,
tMi
clear that
10 H<
Krles
r ol.
IO
11 H
well-
p.
was a
p. 770,
l>y
Menander monott.
9
quotcl
pott. 4
1
tag:
is
itpi<TKtt
vTreprdT-qq
rrj?
a i*i] Nauck
740. 17
Wtddai.
tha
Tip-d*;,
winch
lu'i
'
IO<t>OKAEOYI
54
TvpavviSos Oclkovciv ayyicTTiqv e&pav.

enetTa 8' ovSel? i)(0pb<; ovre <verai
77/309 -^pruxaO* 01 re <iWe<? apvovvrai crTvyeiv.
Seii>os yap epweiv 7t\ovtos es re raySara
/ecu
Salmasius
0aoO<n'
rjdi<TTr)v
77^00?
B, <rxa rrl v
fiefirfka,
t'
yoiiroOev
dôwd' A,
SM:
dyxicrr]v
Hense
del.
sq.
dvrjp
Trivr)*;
SM
&kov<tiv
M. Schmidt
A,
ôs
al<jxi<rrr) v
Seivds Plut.
raâra. (r' d/3ara

s re Gesner: eVrcu Stobaei codd., tt/j6s re Plut.
SM, 7^joj
7 0<f?;\a Vater: rd /Sard Stob. Plut.
codd. Plut.)] rd /Sard Stobaei codd.
3 See
have
cr. n.
Other conjectures which

Bothe,
less probability are rayovo-iv
OdKrjaiv Fr.
Vater and Meineke,
daKoicriv
Ellendt, deoiatv Weil and Wecklein. The

reading of B looks like a bad conjecture,
adopted by Dindorf (and Blaydes,

0. T. 541).
For the confusion of aferxtCTOs and e <rx ar s see Cobet,
Var. Led. p. 144, where he corrects
Lucian Pise. 27. In support of eax& T7) v
fjSt] yap
fr. 907
eSpa Zeus
J. refers to
Cobet, Coll. Crit.
ev iffxdrri deGiv (n.).
p. 188, perhaps rightly, prefers dyxlo-Trjv,
but
is
who compares
thinking that rich men whose influence

is greatest with monarchs are said ri)s
rvpavvldos
Mekler conj.
vireprdr-qs
dyx^^W
daiceZv
/j.aKapiarr]v
and
H8pav.
Wecklein dpx^v. Gaisford approved
ix6^T7)v, another word sometimes con-
fused with alaxi-CTriv.

4 f. are considered by 0. Hense to be
an intrusion, and Nauck agrees. ivtira
8*, in the next place, distinguishes from
the general advantages bestowed by
wealth the particular fact that no one
seeks to oppose its influence.
Not only
does no one become the foe of the rich
man, but even his former enemies dis'
semble
their
txovres
is
denoting
(cf.
Tr.
'
hatred.'
Meineke's 01 r'
wide of the mark. <|>vtcu,
it
fr.
<f>tjerai irioTT)
those
in
no one's nature
to be
543 oi>K iv yvvai^l
xdpis), corresponds to <puvres
is
adesp.
whom
the condition
is
realized.
For the strong aor. in this sense (which

L. and S. wrongly say is rare) see Ant.
721 (frvvai rbv &vdpa irdvr' iTno~T-/)fii)s
ir\iwv ('prove to be'), O. C. 1444 ravra
5' iv T<fJ dai/J-ovi
Kal rfjde (pvvai x aT ^P a
('to be realized'), and many other instances in Sophocles. For re co-ordinated
with oCre see Jebb on O. C. 1397 f., and
Eur. Hel. 156, Hclid. 454, Phoen. 891.
7 f. See cr. n. Other conjectures are
ye rd /Sard Blomfield (rd /3ard ye Blaydes),
to. j3d<rifj.a Nauck, teal rdvpoffiKta Camp|
rd âid Schwartz, rd \evpd Hense.

For the word pifir)\os see on fr. 570.
There can be no reasonable doubt that
rd /Sard was a gloss on (54pi)\a: see schol.
on O. C. 10 /3e/3^Xo] (farois, Suid. s.v.
bell,
dKddapros.
rbwos
dKddapros Kal /3ar6s. Bekk. anecd. p. 323,
Schol.
13 d/3e'l3r)\a rd dfiara x^R*- Aesch. Suppl. 518 i$y\\ov d\<ro$] rb
fHfi-rfkos rdiros: 6 /Saros iraai ical
Etym. M.
irdci
v. /Se'/ST/Aos
s.
Kal
fiarbv
lepbv.
fir)
lepbs
firj
We
might
equally well have found rd f3dffi/j.a, another scholiastic word, which Nauck
actually wished to put in the text.
Madvig [Adv.
it still
further
Crit.
p.
614)
depraved
by proposing xwirot 8i\ef
dvrjp.
It will be observed that
the addition of /3e/3??\a is redundant to the
sense, and serves merely to round off the
expression. The Greek love of antithesis
was sometimes indulged at the expense of
logic
El. 305 rds ov<ras ri f/.ot Kal rds
dirotjaas iXiridas 8ii<p6opev, Ant. 1109 ' T
5'
irtv-qs
'
Xt 6ir doves,
o'i
ovres
r'
o'i
r' dirovres.
See
my note on Eur. Hclid. 182 (with

which passage Andoc. 4. 7 should be
compared), and add Alcman fr. 23, 44
also
ep.e 5'
oSr* eiraivTJv
otire fiwur/ffdai viv
a K\evvd xopaybs ovS' d/xwj ep. J. quotes
Tr. fr. adesp. 436 SovXe, Se<nrorwv &Kove
Kal SiKaia Kadixa, and 437. The subject
is treated exhaustively by E. Kemmer,
die polare Ausdrucksweise, 1903.
\toiro0tv ktc.
The general sense is
And to such places where the poor man
could not even obtain access so as to
realize his desires.'
The rich man alone
j
'
has the entree to influential quarters. We

may illustrate by 0. T. 597 f., where
Creon parades the value of his influence
vvv ol aidev xPV$0VTt *
with Oedipus
iKKa\ovo~l fie- rb yap rvx^tv avrolai
irav evTavd' ?vi.
Either ov8' or fj.r)5'
:
would
serve,
and
J.
preferred the generic
quoting Track. 800 ivravd' birov

but it seems
fill tis 6\f/erai fiporiav
fxr]8\
fie
::
AAEAAAI
ovo
kcll
ivrv\oiv hvvaiT
yap
av
55
ipa Tvvcif.
<Lv
Suo-eiSes (rw/xa /cat Bvacovvfiov
yXoKTCTY) (TO(f>OU Tl$Tq<TlV Vfl0p<f>6l> T ihtlV.

fx6v(t> ok yjxlpeiv k<xv vocrtov vvov<rla
IO
irapzcniv avTu> K(i.TnKpxnTT.o~dai KaKa.
8 ovd' im<xi}v Plut. /iij5' ttirvxCo* ( wr A) Stobaei codd.

9 divutVt xal vCifta
Svjivrvfw: v. con, in.
II cdr vixswv (wovaia Meineke xai roatir tfovoia
codd.
12 K&*iiepirTTt<T0at Klaydes KdriKpi-âadai SM, Kd*tKp6\f*<r$cu A, **<>KpvTTtodcu Nauck
:
more
by
likely that ov64
would be supplanted
than vice versa
see Colwt, Var.

!' 47. .?5ivrvymv is used in the
special sense of interviewing, obtaining
firfSi
an audience:
cf.
Dem.
175 atrrdt <5
19.
oW
liia t&ptcl top x/x5ror irvyxdvw

otioCv iwavcaro îXivrip.
This sense
became very common
in
Greek
later
hence trrt vtt, ivrtvKTiic6t, dvoifTtvirros,

and even <VTi,'eW (a petition). The
careless repetition of redes' after irrvxu*
is excused by the meaning of the latter
Eur. //</. 674 (n.).
Meincke's oiS' tvyToxwf is unnecessary. The negative
qualifies both the participle and the
main verb, as in Aesch. Ag. 302 I V
O0rt pAXwr ovb' dQpaa p&w% Omxp
ruruifut>ot wapfiK( a.;~(i\ou pAptA'. see n. on
Kur. //WW. 813.
The explanation reoded above is confirmed by the
WIlllMM which falls more strongly upon
ovh iwTvxv* than spoil tvxuo.
).. how-
to itipot,
interpreting:
know, how to obtain the objects of
re in quarters from which the poor
ild not obtain those objects, ever,
roe in his way.' In
ins its way to places which are
And
<
Hut even
to |K)Verty.
1
other
fV
'1
I (p.
which poverty
may chance
access, wealth succeeds
where the
lex proposed mi^' t* y'

'.
liangc
poi,
unncccs-
Gerth
338. Swwwpov in this conrise to much suspicion
11
text has given
Meineke
thus
vTDirwr,
t.
<W<ur' A* something like tbpl~

i alif olitp is needed.
79 n.)
and to Blaydes (sec
fa
cr.
ivaOpov* <rr6na, comparing

63 dvaffpoov <wrat r
speech' of Barror, the stammerer). But
in not convinced that Jtvifrt-por is unintelligible, though it cannot mean, as
Brunck suggested, prove loquenttm. The
Eiroposed
<tai
/'.
'nid.
4.
description exactly (its the personality

of Thersites. whom Sophocles may have
had in mind: he too was * hated for his
tongue," cf. Mom. H j jj r<j 5' dp' 'Ayatoi
ikway\ut Koriorro 9tn<o<jr)d<ir r h\ 0t>py.
>n tins view y\\l>ceft should be connected
with ii<runfiof. which is an epic word
and is employed 111 the ejnr sense
i
<
Hit Hi
hand
'Oiwriôt
7
iveiAmvfUH
'that accursed day
at
p.'
4iJt *loi
olxov dwotrxfa"
is
Note the chiasmus, by which

relates to tivtMt, and oo+6 to
....'
iQuj>p<t>o
lNwnp<9<
lit. kAv vivmv {wowuf See cr. n.
There arc several other conjectures (o4
rootlv Klltndt. dâtptlf ai r6#M furot-<ria
<
1-
1.
fiuai/wi - ai rcW* {i*av-
(riaf llol/ncr, d>otfir /{oicria
tfiwf or tdl>pjU9 iiovci*

tf&ir
r6aoit
t(ova,
Bergk, AroS< hmidt,
W.
><U
rotfoiVr'
none vi satiswhich J. u
points out that the Greeks
/{oixria I'apabasilcios), but
accepted. II.
did not say toi-ola wdptart but n
vdptori or jfayr t, or i Lot* la (4*rt)
he
fore /(ouria cannot stand.
sense rnq dbw not xmlfiur ai r*ei# Imt
:
n.).
ipa Tvîiv M I
al yap Svo-i8*a nri. Observe
aoalihc* the following
;h in such cases it is
be postponed (cai
rati. 9a gal yip
viripy rby tv wpdoeti* ntplot tn*a\a,
e also Kuehncrp to
substituted yijpat
vio for ykiwft troîv. coll. Kur. fr. 575 ;

klein changed yXwaffj) to yrufiifr,
with iwTttirj for ivatitot ; Blaydes read
K&vSpo. SiiTTopo* for Kol Svaum-iio* ;
J.
factory as
that after
lioldly
vai/Hir ai ro*oi>r, or, in a
phrase, oi Ay twt*r%
re#e> ##>trro
MO#> ftrofc
synonymoes
0. T. 303 f#
ro'i a\ *##
-.
'07y ra*r f| *#!
rXê#M r#
{iwr, /'*;/. 510 ra
Wealth can be happy
ro#ov {i*i<.
in spite of sicknes* because it ean aftotd
KWOKAEOYI
56
He also urged, as against Nauck's

reading, that iirucpvirreaOai. rather than
&iroKpt!nrTeo-Oat is the vox propria in the
sense of to cloak but the inference is by
no means certain. Cf. Eur. fr. 416 (Stob.
flor. 4. 9) r<p dpaael ras ffv/icpopds frfrovo-'
dfiavpovv tcdTrucpinrreeOai (Trine, kclttok.
to pay physicians for a cure : Eur. El. 427

ffKoww to. xP'hpo-P ws ?x et M^7 a oOtvos,
ivois re bovvai aQfxd r is vbaovs ireabv
\
So in a Comparison of
Wealth and Virtue (Stob. flor. cj\. 33)
di'Op&irtov StopWealth io~ep.v{ivero XP C
bairdvaiat aQcrai.
6ovv,...wpiireiv
av&pioiroi?
iv
5'
Oepaireveiv
irapix^v,
5'
XpriP-druiv.
x^ iy
elalv,
vbffwv
itf
5e
TroXifiois
elprqvrj,
/j.ev
MA, Nauck)
.v6<roi
ttAvto.
Wecklein's change of x a
'
fr.
/cat fir]
is
tivOpuTros
5'
rb TroXXd Kee\yxcTai.
kclkois,
dW
fr.
iicp.apTvpelv
553
Ti>x a *
iirucpvirreaOai
irdvras
In
Kpvtrrovra
o~o<f>bv.
irepicrrelXai /caXws
simple verb
Trdcn KTjpvo-ffeiv rdbe, the
Bruno Keil (/Perm,
found.
xxm
379)
42 in support of Nauck's
For the moral precept which
reading.
enjoined the concealment of misfortune
see on frs. 83, 653.
Krrjadai- ra
XPV
adduced
i<TX rl Kfv
460.
5'
rb
dfiadis,
^P lv
unnecessary.
For the general sense H. quoted Menand. fr. 90 (ill 28 K.) irXovros 5i ttoXX&v
eirLKaXv/x/j.' ioriv KaKuv, and fr. 485 (ill
140 K.) rovro fibvov tiruTKOTei /cat 8v<rxa.1 iraaiv oh
yevela /cat rpbtvov Trovrjpla,
to
/ca/cd.
yap &vbpa ras avrov
del
Isocr.
1.
89
vojxas Se Tt? KepovcrcT
opdioiv irayoiv
(XTr
xaBeipirev eXa^>o?
apacra [xvâs
(TTopdvyyas elpcf)'
89
Aelian nat. an.
7.
ocrot
39
/cat
Xeyovai
drfXvv iXacpov icipara ov (puetv, ovk aldovv-
rai rovs toD ivavrlov /xdprvpas, 2o(poKXia

p.ev
'
elrrbvra
'
vofids...iXa<pos
apacra... eKr/Xos.'
/cat
irdXiv
/cat
'
raOra
[lev
rod
iv rots
'AXedSats.
V. I is
partly quoted by Etyni. Gud. p. 317,
12 (Elym. Paris, p. 1444 e) and Zon.
Zo</>tXXou
Kepbeis
lex. s.v.
n 86
p.
vb/j.os
Si tl Kepovaa'-
iradQv,
and referred
'
tQ>v
iXdcpwv
5i
(fr.
olov
<'Hpu5iavbs> irepl
to by Pollux 5. 76
d/ce/)ws
p.iv
8i b\ppi)v Kepucpbpos,
virb
Kepovcraa,
/cat
i)
OrjXeia,
xP v<T KP ui
dXcws.
/cat
'AvaKpiuv
fftpoXXerai Kepbeo-aav iXa<pov
'H/>a/c\eoi>s
51)
fj.iv
Tpoffenribv,
Kepovucrav rrjv
referred to by
Pollux 2. 72 7rapd 5e 2o0o/c\et /cat âi
/cat
~o$>o/cXt7S
V. 3
TrjXicpov rpocpbv.
oi fivKTrjpes
is
old re vefipbv veodrfXia

yaXadrfvbv, bs t'
iv dXrj Kepoiao-qs
vTroXeupdels virb pirjrpbs
\
Kepoiccra
Add
Simonid.
evpipev
ovk ixei t)
Pind. 01.
icipara
OrjXeia
Zypaif/ev,
schol.
7rot7;Tat
yiteXws
ot
icipara
i'x 01
"'
drjXdôvo-av
rr\v
tt)v
fr.
/xarevuv
30 ddvarov
Eur.
iXdcfxp,
Her. 375 rdv xpvw&pa-vov dbpica. The

zoologists and grammarians were eager
to point out the blunder
Arist. h. a. 4.
11. 538 b 18, poet. 25. i46o b 31 ZXarrov
ydp (sc. dfidpTrnj.a) el fx-q 7?<5et 8ti fXacpos
:
dp-ip-rrrus
el
3-
dr)Xeiav
j2 ejrtZXacpov
elvayovaiv, icaOdirep /cat

rbv Tr/Xecpop ypdepovo-t.
The mistake is generally

Kal irXdrTovcri.
accounted for by the consideration that
legend loves the miraculous, and is not
content to follow the prosaic limits of
science ; but Ridgeway in Early Agt
of Greece, I p. 360 ff., holds that the
story of Heracles reflects a knowledge of
the existence of the reindeer in northern
Europe. In that case we must suppose
other miraculous does were given antlers
on the analogy of this famous quest.
roaming.
See Jebb on O. T.
vojids
1350.6p9ia>v ird^wv. Dindorf quotes
:
Ant. 985 bpdbirobos
KiKXrjvrai.
1 Aelian continues his evidence from

the poets by citing Eur. fr. 857, fr. 740,
Pind. 01. 3. 29, Anacreon fr. -;r dyavws
iirro-qdri.
Kepaa(f>opov<;
e/cr^Xo?
Wagner
inrep irdyov.
suggested as a supplement
TrjXicpov viov rpo<pbs.
= /j.vKTT)pa$. Cf. Phot. lex.

fivâv airrbv rbv p.vKrrjpa /caXovoiv, oi'X' t6 vypbv oOrwj 'Aptcrroâvr/s
Similarly Hesych.
(fr. 820, 1 580 K.).
3
(i.as
p. 280, 3
p.
128.
Meineke,
who would have
preferred p.vurrrjpe but for the evidence

of Pollux, fills up the gap by reading
Blaydes supplied bevpo.
fit/gas <v\pi>.
KEpao-(f>6pov$ observe the transference
of the epithet, and see n. on
fr.
it.
AAEAAAI AAEEANAPOI
57
90
90 Hc-ych. 11 p. 144 i<pvfi(U' iwi&tit.

SoôkXî 'AXtdSait.
tyvpvuv is to chant over, and l>oth it
and (TQduy may be construed with ace.
of the theme and dat. of the person af-
It is probable that the verb was

used here with the same simple sense as
in Aesch. Eum. 903 ri oJV p' AWyat rjjo'
fectecl.
tyi7x*)7<ru
x0orf;
91
<f>pouelv
91 Krotian gloss, //if/wcr. p. 84. 1

KaTt$p6(- nartvott.
Qpovtiv ybp l\tyov
oi *a\aioi t6 yo* tv, un icai Evpurliijt iv
'Arriowij <fr. 10$) <pdoKtc '<f>povw S" 6
wia\w
koX roi'
tou Kod
codd.:
piifi
oC>
Zo<pOK\rjt
fuicpov kclk6v.'
'Wfdian
iv
curr. Schlcasner) xal
(fr.
iv
statements are made by Elym,

800, 43 <ppovtiv oiâlvtt rcu to
votiv and Hesych. IV p. 259.
There are
several such passages in Sophocles: Track.
lorafitv, io.
1
45 <ppovu oil (cô/xit
2M9 ippovti viv in ijforra. Ant, 49, 996,
O.C. 871, ami others. The examples are
MM wi.ll arranged in Kllendf.
Siniil.ir
M.
tUprt)-
p.
(dxaidjt
\pupia'
119).
AAEHANAPOZ
93 confirms the view generally held that the story of the
to be found in Hygin. fab. 91, and is therefore similar
to that of the Alexandras of Euripides, which was put on the
with the Troades in 415 B.C.
When Hecuba was pregnant
with Paris, >hc dreamed that she gave birth to a flaming torch,
from whit h a number of snakes crawled forth. The diviners held
that the welfare
>y depended on the destruction of the child
to be born.
Consequently, when Alexandras was born, he
but hi- guards pitied him and
y to be killed
content to expose him, with the result that he was discovered by
pherds, who
him as their own son, and called
him by the name Paris,
to maturity among the
Pai
on Mt Ma. and m
pedal favourite of one of the
bulls.
At length Priam determined to celebrate funeral e,.>
in honour of his child long since lost, and sent some of his
its to choose a bull as prize for the victor in one of the
The bull of Paris was selected, and he was so much
down to the
in consequence that
(I for the coi
defeated all his opponents, inch*
ww brothers. Deiphobus 1 in anger at the success of a
Fr.
play
is
<
Or
Hector, according to Serrloa.

IO0OKAEOYI
58
clown, drew his sword upon him but Paris took refuge at the
altar of Zet<? eptceios.
Cassandra then declared that the newcomer was her brother, and Priam recognised his son (by means
of certain crepundia 1 according to Serv. on Verg. Aen. 5. 370),
and welcomed him to the palace. Of course there is nothing to
connect Sophocles with any particular details in the above
account and we are not in a position to distinguish the treatment
of Euripides from that of Sophocles.
Robert (Bild und Lied, pp. 233 239) undertook to show
that the story concerning the dream of Hecuba and the exposure
of Paris, his rescue and ultimate restoration to his home, was
not, as Welcker believed (Ep. Cycl. II 90), contained in the
Cypria, but was the invention of the fifth century, and in all
probability of Sophocles in the Alexandros, in the composition of
which he was largely influenced by the Herodotean account of
the youth of Cyrus (1 108 ft".).
He had an easy task in
demolishing the argument by which Welcker attempted to
establish the indispensability of the story to the narrative of the
Cypria, viz. that the circumstances of the judgment of Paris
presuppose his residence on Ida, and that this in its turn implies
his escape from exposure
for his adoption of a pastoral life was
in no way inconsistent with his recognition as one of the princely
family of Priam. But there is a wide gap between the admission
that the origin of the story cannot be traced to the Cypria
and the conclusion that Sophocles was its author.
Even if
;
from Tro. 919

and Androm.
passage Euripides followed an older and
simpler version, according to which Hecuba refused to surrender
Paris to death, notwithstanding the vaticinations of Cassandra
a conclusion which is by no means certain
it helps very little
towards the result which Robert desired to establish. Moreover,
the discovery of the fragments of Pindar's Paeans has destroyed
there is an
the foundation of Robert's theory for in 8. 27
unmistakable allusion to Hecuba's dream. But, apart from this,
the onus of strictly proving their case lies on those who seek to
show that any tragic plot was invented by its author if even
Euripides, so far as we can tell, never dared to do anything
of the kind, we may be quite sure that Sophocles was far less
likely to make the experiment.
It will be observed that Hyginus states that Alexandros was
the name originally given to the child, and that Paris was
Robert is correct
that in the
293
fif.
in his inference
fif.
latter
fif.
The detail is suggestive of a tragic origin, and is referred by Ahrens to Euripides.

the other hand, there seems to be no reason for tracing to Sophocles the statement of Asclepiades {FUG in 303) that the slave who exposed Paris was called
Archialos (Agelaus, according to Apollod. 3. 149).
1
On

AAEEANAPOZ
59
substituted by the shepherds. The exact opposite is asserted by

cf. Enn. trag. fr. 38, Ov. Her. 16. 358, and perhaps
Eur. fr. 64
Eur. LA. 1293 (Murray).
Apollodorus (3. 150) says that the
shepherds who originally found him called him Paris, and that
his exploits subsequently earned for him the name of Alexandros.
Arc we to infer that Hyginus followed Sophocles rather than
:
Euripides?
92
ov yap
0o~p.a rolaiv aoTirai? 7r/>cVct
tl
92
Steph. Byr. p. 139, 19 6arv...6

wo\irr]t curr6% *ai (Uttjj, a< aorb*.
ivo
rov iuarbt rb Umrijt.
Zo<poK\rii 'AX(tt*-
doriTcut.
bpy 'ov ydp.xptrti' xcd
is
(fr.
93)
'
to vwpirijj
rinji
porijpa
The
68).
obscure.
formation
is
analogous
50J), a*history of these won is
31), at/Xtnjf
According
to
(fr.
Krctschmcr
in
KZ XXXI
..-,dp;
oi yip
(fr.
The
(fr.
is
343 the long t is original {wo\trati ToXf-i) and is retained under the in-
a favourite combination in
n sometimes cjualifying a
word, sometimes the whole clause.
on
See
Eur. IIt lid. 193, Photn. lit.
Its exact force cannot be determined here:
ft. 1.143- 0.7'. 433. Ant.
Wecklein's view that the line is
450.
interrogative is therefore improbable.
tragedy, with
fluence of the accent.

(Cf. rp**/9vnyt:
wp4opH-%.)
Then passed to other stems.
Besides 6X/r>> and otWnif other examples
are ai'finyf, At){rr>7t (Pausan. 8. a6. l),
kindle
durwibirtft, eurTpirrfi,
TTft,
Tw^Wrrjt, bpirrn, ibpi-
iffwtplnft, iffSfdrnt.
93
fioTrjpa vlkov
93
Quoted by Steph. By/.

yntax
avhpas
see on
fr.
ambiguous, but the order

makes the meaning absothe emphatic word
/ltnan the
townsmen too!' Cf. Aesch.
is
!ear:
mil
Xfyw.^
188
tfp4
[Asra xaiftip roil r<pV*>orat

that Tr. fr. adcap.
H. remarks
was
yr>o<ro <rara/9aXru>
rir ffOr
quoted by grammarians as an
Zi".
md
'..
adds 'I
the meaning, he must
n perfectly
porrjpa
is
acquainte<l
Paris,
who
was habitually called /fcrtmjt or ftovKb\ot

I'llam on Aesch. Ag. 7 liIff.
1
ry see the
Introductory Note.
dcrriVa?.
tl
yap
The
dvSpas Atrrvras.
addition of Aripat
probably complimentary, although

it might l>e the reverse, rmpliasiring, as
It is
praise or
it does, either
depreciatory in V.T. 1 1 18 tin rojufo a>^>.
and in Ant. 690 irbpi inner*
on Ar. A'</. 159, S
MM
Ach. 168.
Blaydes >.n Ar. / '. 30M. t< vaf* when
used in a continuous speech, challenges
I
contradiction.
So
What
else?*
'What
1134 ***>
W >*>; "V
#or* W iij ftvAvoiyifV^r.
In answers it becoo
virtually a formula of assent: see t.g.
The words art
Plat. ft***, too a.
obviously appropriate to the circumstances
'
victory in the a>ir.
then?'
in
Aesch.
Ag.
lOÔKAEOYI
6o
94
(TTlô)V 8'
94
Schol.
Horn.
2o0o/c\et iv 'A\ti;&i>8pif)
<jtt)v
6y\ov irapuvviAov.
'
ay pO)(TTV)V 6y\ov
would complete the
158 to 8e irapd
oreixw 5' dypibThe same is found
in Eustath. //. p. 533, 40,
who omits 5' after
ti]s,
fioipa irpds traiSbs Oaveiv.
Phil. 141,
with
evp-?i<reis
dypbrrjs and &ypu>shows a non-essential a which comes
by analogy from the verbal class. Wecklein (on Eur. Khes. 287, Her. 377) wishes
to restore dypurrjs eve 17 where in tragedy,
and Murray adopts aypurrcus as better attested in A'hes. 266. In Bacch. 564 aypvras is read by all. There seems no reason
to doubt that both forms existed, but it is
difficult to choose between them when the
copies differ.
Hesych. 1 p. 31 has dypQipydrai, drjpevral, where the second
o~rai
interpretation suggests a derivation from
aypuxreru); and this is the meaning in
Apoll. Rhod. 4. 175. In tragedy however
the word always means 'countryman.'
See also on fr. 314, 33.
areixuv and gives 'AXei-dvSpa for 'AXefdi"

The word dypwo-T-qs is introduced
5ptf).
as analogous to the Homeric XVP 030"1'^There is nothing to indicate that oxXov
is related to crrtlxî' as the goal of its
action: 'approaching the rustic crowd.'
But the construction is quite possible,
although less common than when the ace.
is a place-name: cf. O.T. 713 ws avrbv
fjôi
line
fiiyav or the like.

d-ypuicrTqs beside
'
Jebb on
314. 238, Eur. Phoen. 977

(n.), Hipp. 1 3*7 1 Bacch. 848, Pind. Isth.
2. 48.
There is in any case no need to
alter the text {arelxovT Nauck formerly,
o-ripyw 5' F. W. Schmidt).
Mekler
fr.
95
dfAakOeveiv
95
Phot. ed. Reitz. p 86, 9 dp.aX0e6eiv

2o0okXt?s 'A\e^dv5pif>.
tvdev
as a
,..Tp(peiv.
Kal
'
7/
A/idXdeia.
The existence of dfiaXOeveiv was previously known only from Hesych. 1 p. 137
dp.a\8ever irXijOvvet, TrXovrlfci. f) rpecpti.
Etym.M. p. 76, 38 duaXdevaei wX-qdei a# ei.
The authority of the word is considerably
strengthened by the new evidence; and
there is no longer any probability in
Gruppe's suggestion (p. 341 1) that it
was formed from the name Amalthea.
Rather we should suppose that the noun
and verb existed side by side, and that
the idea of abundance or plenty was personified or deified in the various forms
familiar to Greek legend.
It should be
observed that the earliest allusions to
Amalthea (Pind. in schol. Horn. * 194,
Pherecydes fr. y,,FHG I 82) represent her
nymph
in
whose possession was the
horn of plenty, and that the Cretan legend

of the goat Amalthea which suckled Zeus
is attested only by later writers.
That is
to say, the name Amalthea appears at a
comparatively late date to have been
transferred to the nameless Af| ovpavla
(Zenob.
j.
26, 2. 48).
Further, the fact
that Ktpas d/xaXdeias was an attribute

of various deities (Wernicke in PaulyWissowa I 1721) indicates that Amalthea
was not a distinctively conceived perso-
The etymology of Amalthea is

uncertain, and the suggestions which have
been put forward (collected by Gruppe,
But the
p. 8249) are not satisfactory.
meaning points to a connexion with dp.aXos and dfidXr] ( =i] Tpixwv ai!|j;<m Etym.
nality.
M.).
96
96
Hesych.
p. 542 8v<ravXor 8v(xav-
SoôkX^s AXedv8pevyeiv J34X7], where the
Xiaros.
schol. 's note is 8v<rx e P*i T0V eiravXicrfibv

ttoiovvtuv.
Aesch. Ag. 560 fibxôvs yap
'
el Xiyoi/ju
Kal 8v<ravXias.
perhaps to the shepherds'
The
life
reference is
Mt Ida.
on
'
AAEZANAPOI
61
97
97
Steph. Byz. p. 189, ig"E4>aot...ri
idriKOv
'EcWtrtos.
o0rw yap
ii<pd6yyoV
<5td
xai
evprfTcu
ib.
Cf. Br-cjp<not in
fr.
But why did Stephanus reconl the

neut. plural, if it was used merely as an
adjective?
Did Sophocles by an anachronism refer to the Pan-Ionic festival
Ephesia
(Thuc. 3. 104)? An alluof the
sion to the magic letters is unlikely.
'A\($ar&p<p
iv
3345 'Eip4ouot.
707'
E<pi<jtia
SoôkXj/j.
The form 'E^<reot is also found occasionally on inscriptions : see e.g. Hicks,
Manual r.si, 10 arayytiXai rolt 'E#,
cdott, C/G II 1118 Apr4m8i 'Ejufftlr),
98
dr)\dcrTpi.a
98
W
pi%.
llesych.
fan
p.
II
314
hi 'laxif.
This fact is
applied to the mother.
DOtked in Suidas and I'hotius, for whose
readers the ancient usage required ex-
t)jj\darpia- rpo-
A\tdy-
Zo<poit\fjs
Hence PhoUus (p. 90, J4)

planation.
explains 6i\\a9Tpiar by rp îfXdVenU
Tit from the point of view of his own age,
and his gloss on tfijXaf*"' sufficiently
accounts for Hesychius calling 9t(Kaarpia
9i)\aa-rpia. For the formation of these

feminine nomina aortitis see Brugmann,
$^\dcrpia is
(/r. 11 p. 330 K. tr.
formed from 0jXafu>, and may be compared with tvf^rpia (beside tvvffrtipa for
tinrifTtp-^x) and av\^rpia.
The word is
front the comic poets, ami is
!y n->t exclusively Ionic in usage.
<r that in the *otnJ the
''nXdfw
although
came
in classical
mean
to
Greek
it
Ionistn
rb rpi+tt* rip -yaAacri oi
apxalot warrtr oOrwt jiaXttfTB ol'lurti.
Ahrcns suggested that the word was
an epithet of the she-bear which
an
sutk,
to
was regularly
99
fiauvrptav
99
AnHctt. (Bckk. anted.)
tar"
Aft I
roi>
p.
108, 31
ZoôxXijt
naiai.
iptp.
The meaning
rptap as
is that Soph, used ftcutt-nurse, although Photius (ttx.
p. j 4 1, 9) shows that the Attic use of

>uua for a midwife was well known to
For the formation see
the grammarian*.
on
fr.
08.
100
100
urnarJpy.
Antiatt.
rt}r
The
^<xpon\ft% 'AXftd*-
same gloss
..
ithotit
play.
The word
aneid
llckk.
nrr)nij.
is
assigned
p. 171,
the
17
name
to
ami
of a
and
no means uncono ground for Naack's

AXsgaVJ* U a conepUc*
is try
there is
suggestion that
'
HXV.r^. U. with a
391 fUovHroi wapiti*
for
reference lo
oi swsser I
EL
IO<t>OKAEOYI
62
AAHTHI
The
only quoted by Stobaeus (floril.\ and by him

tragedy with the title 'AX^t^s is attributed
to Lycophron by Suidas s.v.
It is generally agreed that the title-role belongs to Aletes,
the son of Aegisthus and Clytaemnestra, and that Welcker
(p. 215) was right in finding the substance of the plot in Hygin.
The story there related is as follows. Electra received
fab. 122.
a false message that Orestes and Pylades had been sacrificed to
Artemis atTauri. Aletes, the son of Aegisthus, on learning that no
survivor of the race of the Atridae was left, usurped the sovereignty
Electra set out to Delphi to enquire of the
at Mycenae.
On the same day that
oracle concerning her brother's death.
she reached her destination, Iphigenia and Orestes also happened
and the same messenger who had brought the news
to arrive
about Orestes pointed out Iphigenia as his murderess. Hearing
this, Electra snatched a blazing brand from the altar, and in her
ignorance would have blinded Iphigenia, but for the timely interrecognition followed, and they returned
ference of Orestes.
Here Orestes killed Aletes, and would
together to Mycenae.
also have slain his sister Erigone, had not Artemis carried her
away and made her a priestess in Attica. Orestes then married
Hermione, and Pylades Electra.
Welcker conjectured that fr. 646 belongs here, thinking that
Tyndareus appeared as the guardian of Aletes, and held that frs.
104, 105 are part of a dialogue between Aletes and Orestes.
Ribbeck {Rom. Trag. p. 469) finds the same plot in the
title is
always as
'AXeiV?/?.
Agamemnonidae of Accius.
Whereas Welcker saw in Hyginus

two tragedies, Ribbeck preserved the unity
of place by supposing that Aletes and Erigone went to Delphi
in furtherance of a plot against Orestes and Iphigenia.
Comsufficient material for
paring frs. 101

103 with Agamemnonidae fr. II he thinks that
Aletes was represented as a hypocritical and specious talker.
Fr. 107 suits the circumstances of Agamemnon's and Aegisthus'
children.
For the proposed
identification with the Erigone see p. 173.

originally made by
Hense has recently revived a suggestion
late play. He is thus able to account

Euripidean tone of fr. 107.
He points out that et'9
eXeyxov Ikvai (fr. 105) is used by Sophocles only in the Philoctetes
and Oedipus Coloneus, and that fr. 104 echoes O.C. 75.
Bergk that the Aletes was a
for the

AAHTHI
63
101
ipv)(r)
yap evvovs
(fypouovcra tovv&lkov
/cat
Kpeiacroiu cro(f>icrTov ttclvtos

3
101.
101 Stob.
flor.
3.
(III
p.
194,
Hensc) Soô/tXij* 'AXdrn. 'rf/vx^-.-tvptrit."

The extract is not in S.
'A loving heart and an honest purpose
will learn the truth sooner than any adept.'
Ellendt thinks that rarrot is neuter and
dependent on tvptrit ; but the meaning is
the same in either case, and it seems
unnatural to sever ff&ptffrov warro*. The
rhythm is the same as in El. 76. ro<j>uj-TTJt has no exact English equivalent.
>ss T&.1 Ttx'trrti (T'hot. lex. p. u8,

<-s the best general interpolation
but the remark of the same lexicographer
rb bi raXcuor aoipitxrifjt b crcxpdt '*aXiro,
;
which
I.,
and S. have adopted without

must be understood
restriction,
it
kpitto
t<>
apply to trained intellect as distinguished from natural ability. At an early
stage of civilization the attainment of a
h general culture as the
admit wears the aspect of a specialit is from this
ized branch of learning
:
ivperis.
<ttli>
tvptrin
point of view that Thales and the rest

(ffVPtrol rtret Kal vofioBtriKOi
Diog.
I..
1.
40) were called ao^fnaral (Udt. 1. 19)

Men' rather than 'wise men.'
With the present passage cf. Eur. fr. 905
ao<piCTTi>r,
writ oi'X curt? <ro*pbt.
fuffQi
The thought that character is more
effective than
wisdom may be
illustrated
471, 7 Mi 13; K. rpbwoi

Cf.
to(P b wl0u>y toC Myorrot, hJ \670t.
Plut. Phoc 5 Demosthenes called Phocion
the kowIi of his speeches. dXXA rowro ftfp
latin vpbt rb %0ot apourritw 4vtl *al pf/na
Kcd rtvfia fibfOf iripbi Ayatiov mpiott
iwvvfi^fiaffi xal wtfHOboif arrlppoTor tx tl
xianw, Demoith. 10, Slob. /lot. 37. 34.
It may lie added thit the parliamentary
influence ascril)cd to the late Delta of
diire was of a similar character.
vprK. The accentuation is disputed
see Chandler, | 38, who decides in
of tvptrti because of the ace. JpflV in
iy Mcn.mil.
fr.
Diod
t.
15.
102
fipa\el \6y<*> 8e TroXXa np6<rKt.Tai
102
102
5(
ft
(til
Si
p.
ro\\a
688, 8
SM
1 -o\XA
permanent
txof/xx.
A
The
qualities.
nearest parallel
1143 r^r
me
ur.
'ppax**--
18 <to<pov wpbx alf>6% Sent

xoXXw't a\u>i otot rt avtriu!>revity
and Polon
fr.
4f,tpa\'i
;
of the play).
oi't,
90I.
woXXd
VoXXd
arxpa
0-0+d. as woXXA oAd

I
vhere see Jebb. -pd-ciTai
sometime* merely a synonym of wp!*ri, btUmgi to; and so is applied to

is
//'//>
<>7 r* *' *****
wpocKtiturov, Kkti. 166 i)
J*y
CI
mfinin ******
rbW
dyp*m*i
wpbanurtu fpW, >h. 107 AAA* *'

dXXo wp6**uT*t y4(**, *i M* *dx**.
hi* u*ge i
nin bi pov\<rcud
md
(fi
d/*otW
fU',iaror drbpl Wpbamirtu kom6p.
In .///
Hi)
S.
'
** M**v.
poncment of
is
VI
i?o
St**
I"" ,hc
C55r
normal (hut. f/ttid.
proposed 0p*X"
I04>0KAE0YI
64
103
yap ooris
dvrjp
iJSercu Xeycov del,
Xekrjdev avrov rot? ^vvovo~iv oiv fiapvs.

103.
103
1 yap
SM:
Stob. fior. 36. 16 (in p. 694, 6

i
Hense) 2o0okX?)s 'AXefrr;, dvr]p...papvs.'

1 See cr. n. Although 5^ is constantly
corrupted to ydp, the converse case rarely
occurs: see Porson on Eur. Med. 108}
(1087).
2 XcXijOtv avrov... wv.
In
this
5'
Xêiv S
and see
tiresome.
Kuehner-Gerth
So
Eur.
etr]
&r]/ji6Trii
re
ko.1 i-dvot.
|3apvs,
894
66ev ftapvs
j-pi<TTT)s tQiu \6yu>i>,
av
50.
II
Suppl.
ovS'
ndXior'
Plat. Theaet.
jUapvt
rots <rvvov<ri /cat rjnepuiTepos.
H. rendered: 'The man that will be
210 C edv re
tcevbs
77
t)ttov tirei
j,
idiom
the partic. is always nom., never ace:

contrast %woi5a. i/xavrqi, after which either
the nom. or dat. participle is legitimate,
talking
his
still
forgets
That he
is
tedious to
company.'
IO4
dW
eiirep
7re<f>VKo<;
104.
104
Hense)
yevvalcx;,
el
a><?
avro? Xeyets,
yJaTrodev to yap /caAais

ovSets av p,idveiev Aoyo?.
otov r
(jrjlLa.iv
el birbdev
el
SMA,
el
x' wirbdev B,
Stob. flor. 88. 11 (iv p. 722, 1

2o0okXj)s 'AXelrr).
dXX'...X6l
70s.'
If you really are noble, as you say,

declare your parentage and your home
for good birth will not be shamed in the
telling.'
There can be no reason for a
noble to conceal his identity, rather the
contrary: cf. Arist. fr. 91 Rose evyeveias
/xev ovv (prjolv (sc. Lycophron) a.<pavh to
k&Wos, iv Xbyy be to aefx.vbv. The
meaning is quite simple, and there is no
need for R. Enger's conjecture \byy in
v. 3, still less for Wagner's \J/6yos or
Holzner's tt6t^.os.
The fragment is supposed to come from a dialogue between
Aletes and Orestes
see Introductory
'
Note.
1 ilirtp.
The force of this conjunction
has been exhaustively examined by E. S.
el ko.1 irbdev
Thompson on
Gesner
Plato Meno,
p. 258 ff.
86 n. ) is the
principal, but not the only meaning, and
that there are many instances in which
(as here) elirep assumes the truth of the
He shows
that si
modo
(fr.
supposition it introduces. For the present

passage cf. At. 547 elirep ducaiws tar' i/ibs
Lach. 197 C <pr/p.i yap

Adfiaxbv ye, elwep (cTe
avSpeloi.
Ellendt erroneously gives siqui*
dem as the equivalent of elirep everywhere
in Sophocles; but the examples readily
refute him.
2 f. otov t' el \unr69fv: the usual
questions put to a stranger after Horn, a
Cf. Phil. 56, Eur. Hel.^ 83, Phoen.
1 70.
KaXus irf>vKOS:
123, El. 779, Ion 258.
cf. EL 989 frjv aiaxpov cuVxpws rots KaXwj
to. Tra.Tp6dev,
<re
Plat.
elvai <ro<pbv, Kal
irecpvKbcriv.
AAHTHI
65
105
aXX aûus
y4voq
yap
r]\eya<; ouS' r)pli> niKputs'
eXeyôv
19
eioi> tcakbp
evKketau av KTrjcraiTo pak\oi>

105.
MA,
1j\ty$at
Bergk: fXrfat codd.
ovi' ifiol Porson, oii8i
nV
Hrunck,
105
Stob. flor. 89. 8 (iv p. 738, 1

ZoQoxXfjt 'Wti-rrj.
Tôyo*.'
s been often remarked that these
verses appear to be a reply to the previous
fragment.
This consideration recomthe substitution of IfKeyât for
A<atir. v. 1 ('thy questions are justified'):
the change is a small one, and the imment sulrstantial.
The correction,
which occurred to me independently, was
made long ago by Bergk, but has been
ted by recent critics.
Hartung is
&W
'
wur(seecr. n.),
which was independently suggested by
Knack. Tucker proposed ovtiv ifiTuepdm,
but tli
good, apart from the
'it
ofot'6'
the form.
(\yxov
lis
'when if
Ale. 640
ifur Hartung
aycw Blaydes
ovS'
oiib"
test,'
01'* (o&ii*
as in Phil. 98 *v
i'
tit
A) niw
Aeyx*
And in Kur. Her. 73

4XXot &Wo0tv rirrur is
'one after another questioning me
Philem. fr. 03, 3, 11 507 K. The object
to be tested, if expressed, is put in the
genitive: 0. ('.
:<,7 otV tit fXryxor
Xetpot Oi54' tpyov fxo\w.
Her
conj. y4poit..iiiwf...Kr^ffvuo, but
this
leaves aaXor unexplained (aaJUti Blaydes).
The strong compound t"^t\4yxu, often
'to lay bare another's weakness,' occurs
in a similar context
Bar. / |J iht**')
wart pur ni M esiji-oiwr iwo yty>9i8i) tovto y' 4(t\ty\opai, where see
oil
koXov, which is used as
Keene's note.
i(tun
6pu> *W.
ot 0" tit (\eyxop
<.;'.
4iov,
to meet the
\\ioyov.
r)
in
Kur. ///// 034 /niOftVat raXoit
'
xalpun antral Tupar X/yot,

must l>e joined with yirot.
HI.
conjecture \6yuin is unnecessary.
thinks that aX6i> was substituted by the
yauppoio-i
I8tiat
iX* '4*X0w* At rf, Pint. Phatdr.

f ^'yx" l** rf pl * typa^tSo
'
in Kur. Hipp. 1310 tit IXtyxov ***** is
'to be
the
wlirase may
il
equally well -i^'nify, 'coming to apply the
anthologist for to c6.

KTTJoTu-ro is like igrtpfy 0i&i
r'ffffar' 6pytiP Ai. 776.
it-
106
av nor
ri<?
r)
okf&ov ov fieyau
crfiLKpbu
ov yap nor
106
f)
r^.
106
sV
Nfeineke:
n/wîw
s:..b. /ter.
>>e)
105.
avToiv ovhku <V ravroy fieWi.

codd.
ftf)
Cobct
f&poTiov
Oeirj
ratu fj.rjhap.ov Ti/xo*yxcVo>i/
r)
1)
row
ov scripsi:
41 (IV p. 040.
Zo+o*\ioi* 'AXiinjt
t)
codd.
TitxJfitfop codd.,
Pporir A:
SM
BporoS
Heath
*iroA...TKnwntro*
permanent good, nor, again, as something

SO transitory a* to Ik- trifling ; nor, lastly,
it altogether out
Such was also substantially the
can we leave
*
ho retained *
--,
in v. 1 and accepted
a proposal of Cobct, for tiiya.*
Who
would
the prosperity of men as a great

thing, or as a trifle, or as a thing to lie
utterly daspiaad '
l or good and bad
uially succeeding
We
other.
P.
can never regard
it
each
as a
Gompcr/ (Uru.kitUike,
ept
p.
>). t.ut
For, if
small nor of
it.
am
i>nH|icrity
is
no account,
And in what
neither great n.-r

ll?
how are we
aflain
a the (asti
H. a
establish this negative result?
thoroughly disaatifir<l with the test, and
'
IO<t>OKAEOYI
66
suggested tentatively in the second line

r)
ffp-iKpbv ; t)v twv ktL, or tcrTw...Tip.wor t)
<ov> twv .np.wp.ivwv
Blaydes makes several guesses, none of
p.evov,
which has any probability.
believe
that Cobet's attractive piy' ay has led to a
darkening of counsel, and that what
Sophocles really affirmed was that great
prosperity is of little or no account because of its instability. This meaning is
obtained by substituting ov for the first 17
with
Meineke's av for
alteration in v. 2.
br)
and Cobet's
The sentiment
is
then
exactly the same as that of fr. 593 ov xpv

tot' dvdpwir wv p.iyav 6\(3ov awojSXêu * Tavv<p\olov yap laapApio% < <pti\Xoiaiv > aiyelpov fiiorav awofiaWei.
Cf.
1
646, [Isocr.] 1. 42 vbp.ife p.r)8ev elvai twv

avQpwirlvwv pipaiov oisrw yap oUt' evrvx&v
idL TrepixapTjs ovre Svvtvxwv irepiXviros.
In the same connexion H. refers to
Eur. fr. 618 Tbv okjiov ovSev ovbap.ov
Kpivw ftpoToiS,
ov 7' iâXelfei pq.ov rj
ypa<t>r\v 6e6s, fr. 1041, Aesch. Ag. 1326.
Although everything mundane is fleeting,
a peculiar degree of insecurity was proverbially ascribed to Wealth
cf. Eur.
Hel. 905, Phoen. 558 and a full list of
illustrations collected by Headlam in
fourn. Phil,
276 f. For the confr.
xxm
fusion of AN and Ah see H. Richards in

C. R. vi 338, Bywater in J. P. xxxil
225. It should be mentioned that Cobet,
Nov. Led. p. 501, while contending that
8r) has frequently been altered by scribes
to &V, adds
etiam contra peccatur sed
rarissime.'
For 6c(r|...<r|UKp6v, 'regard
as trifling,' cf. El. 1270 daip,bviov avrb
For the partitive gen. formTidrnj.' iyw.
'
ing the predicate J. quotes Plat. rep.

424 C i/xi...0ts twv ireireio-pivwv, ib. 437 B
rrdvra to. TotavTa twv ivavriwv dXXTjXots
delr/s (&v).
pnScqiov is not
nowhere
honoured,' but a genitive of price 'held
in no esteem,' valued at nil.
H. quotes
Eur. fr. 360, 49 IloXXds 5' ovbapov Tipr)ffTai, O. T. 908 ovbapov Tifialt AirbXXwv
ip.<pavr)s, Aesch. Eum. 627 pLrrrpbs p.rjb'ap.ov
n/xds vip.eiv, Menand. fr. 405 III 118K.
ttjs fiepiSos wv tt)% ov5a/j.ov TtTayp.ivrys.
So
ovdafiov Xiyeiv (An/. 184), vop.ifciv (Aesch.
Pers. 498, Eum. 426, Ar. Nub. 1421).
See also on Eur. Phoen. 1464 oi>8ap.ov
vIkt) rriXoi.
In regard to Heath's ijroi J.
observes that r)...r)rot is not found in
tragedy (Lobeck on At. 177), though it
occurs in Horn, r 599, Pind. Nem. 6.
On the other hand t)toi...t) is not
4 f
uncommon: e.g. Ant. 1182, Trach. 150. -
'
'
Blaydes proposed rj Kai...Tipwp.evov.

/
3 avTwv cannot refer to fiporwv but
used vaguely in reference to 6X(3ov, as
it were twv toiovtwv.
So often in Thucyi
dides
e.g. 2.
43
tt)v ttjs ttoXcws bvvap.iv...
on
ToXfiwvTes Kai yiyvwbiovra Kai iv rots Zpyois aiffavrb. iKT-qaavTo, 6.

Xw6/j.evoi dV5pes
ovrw yap...av8pes
10 cnrovdai icrovrai
firpai-av aura.
For the tendency to
pluralize see Shilleto on Thuc. 1. 7. For
similar instances see Adam on Plat.
Crit. 44 c, Starkie on Ar. Ach. 438,
and Roberts on Dion. Hal. de comp. verb.
qv%\v iv TavTu |iVi Nauck
14 p. 141.
refers to Eur. Ion 969 to. dvriTa roiavd''
ovbiv iv ravT$ pAvei.
The phrase iv t. p..
occurs also in Eur. Tro. 350, Hel. 1026,
fr. 201.
ivdvp.ovpivovs
ckovtcs
to.
'
107
htivov ye tovs fxeu
107.
Bergk
Seiv6v
r" inseruit
ye Gesner: deivbv S,
2 pXao-TwvTas
107 Stob. Jlor. 106. 11 (IV p. 951,

12 Hense) 2o<pot<Xiovs 'AXe/rT/s. 'beivbv...
7670)$.
It has been conjectured by F.
\Y.
Schmidt that this fragment has been
wrongly attributed to Sophocles, and that
really belongs to Euripides.

The
moralizing tone is certainly suggestive of
the latter, but the thought' itself was a
it
ko.ko>v oltto
Sv(rcre/3el<;
fikacrTovTa^ eTra rovcrSe
fjcev
irpdcrcreLU /caX&i?,
Setvbv fiiv
MA,
beivbv
8i
post kokwv
commonplace, and might as well have

proceeded from Sophocles as from Euripides.
Theognis had dwelt at length on
the injustice of the divine government
see vv. 373386, 73. 1
Cf. Eur.
752There is nothing in the language
fr. 293.
which points decisively one way or the
other, and the indications, such as they
are,
are
perhaps slightly in favour of
AAHTHI
67
row? o ovras icrOkovs k tc yi>uaC<oi> dp.a

yeyaira? cira SucrruYct? TT<f>VKvat.
ov xpfjv raS' ovrw Oaxpovas dv^qroiv iripi
i\prjv yap tovs p.kv curTC/Seic, ftpoTwv
Kephos ipi<f>av<; deans irdpa,
ovtcls aoiKovs toI(to ttjv ivaaniav
TTpdarcrf.lv
e^cit'
ti
tovs o
olktjv KCLKUiv Tifuopbv fx<f>ainj riveiv
KovSeis av ovT<o<; iqvTvêi k<xko5 yeyax;.

xm*
eirrvxn
ti
t^- <xaîaj'
M,
Sophocles.
l
Tdaatw Gomperz
roiait A: rovcit S,
xpn M, xph A
IO jjiTt'xet Heath: tiTvxti Trine, n"'rvxS,
Ilcrwerden
S:
ti/rix?;
See also Introductory Note.

^c It is highly probable
the opening line of a speech,
8iv6v
i.
that this
it
is
7 has
its
usual connective force

See Neil t>n A
cf.
wapa row 3poTon
oix^for
firitowort
ti
Sometimes the
poorqati waXir.
effect
<>f
runner emphasis on the

adjective than in the instances just cited :
see Tcbb on Phil. 1215.
The addition
of r (see cr. n.) after *awr has met with
general approval, but I believe it can l>c
unnecessary, if not actually
harmful.
Presumably those who accept
r reganl SuaatfitU and caarwr iwo p\aa
r6rrai as co-ordinate, and the whole phrase
by the articular rovt. I tut
"sequence, though this has not been
ike lira tolccisti
though Sophocles frequently cmplafter a participle

V I, heCOOld DOl do so whenthe participle is Attributive and not circumI
lie fart is
be taken alone,
that roil utv should
=w)( ro&i
nd biwrtfUit coalesces with

to part of the predicate.
iXacrdru
parallel
Cf.
is little
At.
1304
tfit0TO,
lien of wi<
mi^ht
hare
l>ecn
used,
others
A/.
it
is
r}r
riifttfi
I
SiSuffi warpi, ripi* ai>H)
and Tr. fr. adesp.

ples with fir and ainot\
Xd/fot
jH.
|6>.
The examT. J4N, j;o.
Trach. 187) are less emphatic- See also

on Eur. Phot*. 4^8, Kuehner -<
660, M.iet/ner <>ti l.ycurg. j;.
|ia is suspected by Nauck, but I
can see no mote objection to it here than
e.g. in Ai. 1008 <rdi warrfp i/th 9' ana
4k is used indifferently with dwo in v. 1.
or the ordinary distinction see Jebb on
Ant. 192.
6 irpdtrtrnv (see cr. n.) is used of
divine action in Jit. 100 tlr' at* oVot
qr o raOra wpAatum and in
tlrt pporQr
Trach. 167 AiryaXip to ttalt iyrittftotrvrrir
tliortt tpfttr rtV wpaoaopirid*.
Its occurrence in another sense above is not a
l\r*\* ( hc augmented
form occurs only here 111 Sophocles: see
Jebb on Phil. 1061.
7 Jp+avtf a favourite word in Sophv\ho uses it 14 limes as against 8
impides.
OCCUii
roio-8*. I have accepted this reading with Dimlorf.
Nauck adopts m*to
and incline* towarU 1 1 enrerden's trajUr
n.
I-
/JXotfrorrat
re
IjT
6"
ttotfitit k<x ti-cipwv (iXaffTOfrai, but
unnecessary to introduce it rovo-Ss resumes roin fiitr with a certain rhetorical

impressivencss. Cf. Troth. 819 rip to
T4pfnw
El. 34 5tir6r yi <x* oiVar

rorpot ov tri wail (Qvt Ktiyov XtXifffOai,
169 towor ft row KTipvKa. rbr
ind
stantial.
10
440,
more than
and in the
Aptrroi 4
>*,rn as the
(see cr. ")

S6c|v
Kaavv r i pmpir. The a<lj.

generally anpliol to |>eron, but is an
-,(> to* *ir
epithet of w? ia
warpi* roiato rmttphf 4rip, a* well
Mm
as
I'lat.
UfX- 716 A, 871
ft.
5 t
IO<t>OKAEOYI
68
AAKMEQN
no doubt that the correct form of the name in
was 'AA./e u.e&>i> rather than 'AXtcfialav, as can be
proved from the inscriptions both on stone and on vases see
the evidence quoted by Meisterhans 3 p. 35.
Alcmaeon was one of the stock heroes of tragedy (Arist.
poet. 13. I453 a 20), and is represented as the typical madman
cf. Timocles fr. 6 (II 453 K.), 8 7-01)9 yap rpaywhov? irpunov, el
There
is
classical times
fiovXei, (jKoirei
eatce-ip-ciTo.
C09
j
axpeXovai irdvTa^.
.0
voaSiv 8e p.avi/coi)<; 'Wtcfieaiv'
There are two considerations which enable us to
narrow the enquiry relating to the contents of the plot: (1) the
Sophocles also wrote plays 1 entitled 'Ettljovoi and
'EpicpvXr)
(2) fr. 1 08 shows that Alcmaeon had not yet recovered
his reason.
We may safely infer that the events on which
the play is based were subsequent to the death of Eriphyle,
while her son was still pursued by the Erinyes of his mother, and
before he was finally released from suffering.
Welcker (p. 279),
who with high probability refers fr. 880 to the prologue of this
play, builds on it a reconstructed plot with greater confidence
than the facts warrant. Nevertheless, if we examine the legends
with which Alcmaeon is connected, and exclude for the reason
already given his revenge on his mother for his father's death,
and his share in the expedition of the Epigoni, as well as the
Corinthian episode dramatized by Euripides in his 'AX/t/ieW Bia.
Kopivdov (TGF p. 379) as being entirely disconnected from the
healing of the hero's madness, we are forced to conclude that
Sophocles must have utilized either the adventures at Psophis or
If we admit the relevance of fr. 880, only
those in Acarnania 2
one answer is possible
but, even apart from that, there can
be but little doubt as to the higher dramatic value of the Psophisstory, which Euripides also treated.
It is conjectured but not
proved that it was contained in the epic Thebais, or rather in
the Epigoni, which is now regarded not so much as a separate
fact that
poem
as a subdivision of the Thebais (Bethe, Theb. Heldenlieder,

Our principal sources of information are Pausan.
3
ff. and Apollod. 3. 87 ff.
From them we learn that
137).
8. 24. 8
p.
1
Or a play entitled Epigoni containing the story of Eriphyle: see Introd. to
Epigoni, p. 129.
2
So also Ribbeck, Rom. Trag. p. 501, for similar reasons.
3
Ovid {Met. 9. 409 ff.) refers briefly to the story, as if the details were familiar
vultibus Eumenidum matrisque
attonitusque malis, exul mentisque domusque,
\
AAKMEQN
69
Alcmaeon, pursued by the avenging spirit of his mother, came to

Psophis in Arcadia, where Phegeus the king purified him and
gave him his daughter Alphesiboea (Arsinoe, according to
Apollod.) to wife. Alcmaeon gave to her the famous necklace
and robe of Harmonia. His madness, however, was not allayed,
and Alcmaeon was commanded by the Delphic oracle to settle
in a new land which had been left dry by the sea since the
Accordingly he went to the delta
pollution of the murder.
of the Achelous, where new land was continually being formed
by the silting of the river and there he settled and married
But his new wife
Callirrhoe, the daughter of the river-god.
sighed for the necklace and would not be comforted, until
Alcmaeon promised to return to Psophis and fetch it for her.
Arriving at Psophis, he pretended to Phegeus that the oracle
;
required the dedication of the necklace at Delphi as a condition

Phegeus believed the story
of his release from the madness
and handed it over. One of Alcmaeon's attendants, how
betrayed the secret about Callirrhoe, with the result that he was
waylaid and killed by the sons of Phegeus at their father's
bidding.
To Propertius (1. 15. 15) we owe a dramatic touch
which does not appear in the other authorities, although
Apollodorus gives a hint of Arsinoe's disagreement with her
brothers A/p/icsibor<i sitos ulta est pro coniuge fratres, sanguinis
'. vincula rupit amor*.
Perhaps then, as Welcker
Alcmaeon was given a more creditable rdle than is indicated by
It may be added that fr. 108
account of Apollodorus.
\y fits the situation, if we suppose it spoken by Phegeus or
Alphesiboea in answer to Alcmaeon's request for the
when he alleged that it was required for the god. If the right
view has been taken above, it is clear that Valckenaer (Diatr.
If
p. 150) was wrong in referring Tr. fr. adesp. 358 to this play.
written by Sophocles at all, the verses belong rather to the
1
Libbeck (p. 495) thought*.
mm
coniunx fataU ppoi.erit aurum, tognatumau* latmt

goes on to describe the prayer of Callirrhoe thai her
immediately brought to manh><id, in <>rlcr to avenge thctr
se|ucl is related \>y Apollodorus, l>u; i- hardly relevant to the play of
onbrit,
dome
He
sons mi^ht Ikmurder. The
dea.
;j r,
tber
where the oracle is given.

aa we have *ecn, make
authorities,
death.
Unfortunately
ltttlt-
vertheleaa,
<>r
nothing
is
Calltrth.K-
known
the
avenger
of
DM At<m**m and
Welcker and Ahren* have endeavoured to
Lueonatrurt the plot of Sophocles from his fragments, o.m-ludmg {e.g.) from Aifkt*.
td mmgtutat* imluiam at taxis, u/maitdam that Alphesiboea was imprisoned
from svenging Alcmaeon's death.
//.
iff,
IO<t>OKAEOYI
70
108
eW
ev (fypovrfcravT
imj/SoXov Ka\o)v
108
Porphyr.
t?7r?j/3o\os er)p.aivei
to 5e
qn. Horn,
i
tov iiriTvxv Kal iyKpaTrj
fidWeiv .2o0ok\^s
Eustath. Od.
...ff.'
dirb rrjs PoKrjs Kal tov

l
'AXK/Aaliovi.
eW
p. 1448, 6 tirqfiokos 5t ov ttoitjtikt]

Homeric) Aû, d\\a 'Attiktj Kara.
TraKatovs,
Kal
oJ
eicrihoifxi
irpocptpovat.
(i.e.
toi>s
2o<po-
kXtjs
etd'^.o-e.'
Nauck remarks that the
present passage may also be referred to
by Eustath. II. p. 625, 38 ovrui 8e Kal
'
'
<ppevu>v i^^7|ô\os.
that I might see thee, with

thy wits restored, the master of a clear
brain.'
The reading has been much
canvassed, and Campbell condemns the
unmeaning tautology of the text. Thus

Cobet ejected e5 (ppovr/ffavr' as a gloss,
Ribbeck corrected it to evTvxw aVT \ F. W.
Schmidt to ov <ppovf)aavT' Wecklein to
'
'
Gomperz
and Nauck
to
e5 (ppovrjcrais,
(in his earlier edition) to eS
(ppeyibcravr'.
It is
perhaps presumptuous
to ignore such a chorus of suspicion, but

the text does not seem to me, if fairly
interpreted, to be in any way abnormal.
should be observed
It
aavr'
231
(1) that ev <ppovf]-
as in Plat. Phaedr.
7rws av ev (ppovâavres ravra kclKQs
is
<f>peva>v
^X eiv vyfi<rcuvTo
(Jebb's
649
ingressive,
n.).
Bacch. 1259.
and not ef'
so
0. T.
Eur.
(ppovqaas in
Mekler
adds
(2) that iirl\flo\ov

<ppovi\o<xvT^
orav
(
(orra.),
ev
dependent on elaiioipx for

the omission of <Zv as a supplementary
participle see Eur. Hclid. 332, Phoen.
1 163, Her. 516, Goodw.
91 1, Starkie on
Ar. Vesp. 1526.
There is thus no necessity for DindorPs Kal in place of ttwj, or
<ppovT)<rrii), is
Mekler's
'Would
a.<f>povr)ffavr'',
tt<os
ere.
t' after (ppevQv.
So
far as the
redundancy of expression is concerned,

it is hardly more
remarkable than in
Ant. 492 XvcrcrCxrav avrijv ov5' tirqfioXov
<ppevG>v. Sophocles may have taken this
touch from Herodotus see 3. 25 ota 5e
:
euv Kal oil <ppev^pt]S, 35 irapa<ppove"eiv Kal ovk elvai voi)p.ova.

See also
on fr. 28, Jebb on 0- T. 58. For the
ep.fw.vqs re
word
see Jebb on Ant. 1. c. and

to Aesch. Prom. 452
The form (for iirlf3o\os) is sup(460).
posed to be due to metrical lengthening :
Giles, Manual of Comp. Phil. 220. Cf.
irapal(3o\os, /carcujSarqs, KaTTj{io\7i (Eur.
e"irrif3o\os
Blomfield gloss,
fr.
548
p.i)
614).
rl
For
rrjs
<ppivas
koXuv
j>pcva>v
evfj.op<pias
Ka\as
cf.
ocpe\os,
Eur.
orav
fr.
rtj
<?XT?-
iog
aivoi
109
Hesych.
p. 81
aiVw
wapaiTov/xai.
Kal iiraivG).
'AXKpaliavt (corrected by M.
iraplrfpi,
1i0tf>0K\9j%
Schmidt
for
Bekk. anecd. p. 358, 28

cod. aXpuxlwvi).
and Suid. alvQ>' irapaiTOvpai. So</>ok\^s.
Kal iiraivw.
Suid. adds to this Kal alvu
ae.
Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 55, 5 alvw'
TrapaiTovfiat
is
Kal
more usual
iiraivto.
2o0o(c\^j.
It
to find iiraivw in the sense
of a polite refusal
which is equivalent to the Latin

benevocas: tarn gratiast (Plaut. Men. 387).
In Phil. 889 aivQ> to.8\ w irai, Kal pi'
firaip' wenrep voe?s, as may be the case
with our 'thank you,' the words accompany an assent. On that passage Jebb
refers to Hes. Op. 643 (quoted on fr. 28),
which the scholl. explain by jrapane'io'dai,
as does Plut. poet. aud. 6 p. 22 F.
eiraivQ,
Ar. Pan. 508 k&Wktt',
IIO
apauas
110
jSe/ods.
Hesych.
p.
269 dpaias' p\a-
2,o<poK\ijs 'A\Kp.aiuvi (so
dX/fytiaf
Cf.
p.
134,
14
f)
i)
fiXaflri'
Kal
irapa to
dpaios, meaning fraught with a curse,

has a double aspect like irpoorpoiraios
(see my ed. of Eur. Heraclidae, p. 148),
cod.).
Etym. M.
dpd
dpala
CO
for
&peo$, j3\avTiK0v oVtos,
Musurus
/St'aia,
detvd, xaXeird, 68vvt)pd.
AAKMEQN AMYKOI
For the meaning
a curse upon
aXeurrwp, Ta\a.fivaiot.
us,
i.e.
bringing
c(. 0. T.
291 Aifwf 56uou dpatot.
Track. 1:0: koI vipQtv wv ipaiot ttaatl
flapvi, Aesch. Ag.
147 <f>06yyor dpalov
ofrott, Eur. /. T. 778 rf trots apala 5<juacru>
ytrnaonai, Hipp. 1415 tW f/v apatov
.
71
Salmxrt* $porQ>w ytroi, Med. 608 *ai aa*\

Apala y' ovaa Tvyx&*w MptM.
See also
on fr. 399. The sinner and his victim
are both dpaloi as implicated in dpa, and
possible sources of pollution the so-called
' active ' and ' passive ' senses of the adj.
have a common starting-point.
:
AMYKOI IATYPIKOI
This play related to an incident which happened on the
outward voyage of the Argonauts and is recounted among the
Amycus, the inhospitable king of the

of Polydeuces.
Bebrycians In Bithynia, used to forbid all strangers to land on
and fetch water for their ships, until they had fought a
Hitherto he had always killed his
rig-match with him.
Opponents, but when the Argonauts arrived he met his conqueror
The boxingin Polydeuces (Apollod. I. 119, Hygin. fab. 17).
match is described by Apoll. Rhod. 2. 1 97 and Theocr. 22.
Whether these writers took any hints from Sophocles
27
134.
is impossible to say, but one point in which they differ is
it
vine of notice. According to Apollonius, with whom most
of the other authorities agree, Amycus was killed by Polydeuces
but Theocritus (131 rT.) represents Polydeuces as sparing his life,
and merely requiring him to swear an oath by his father
Poseidon never to maltreat strangers in the future. Similarly.
according to BChoL Ap. Rhod. 2. 98, both Kpicharmus (fr. 7 K
and Periander Stated that he was put in chain* Such an ending
We may conjecture that
suitable to a satyr-play.
atyrs were his slaves, and were liberated after the defeat of
their master
Ill
yipavoi, ^cAwi/cu, y\avK<i, IktXvoi, Xayoi
111
n. 400 n tb
tAt Xa-yir irtKJj
ftirwraf d6Xoi4i ion* i wap* 2<*X
MifoaTiptKvwXittivvTiidiironaJTtA';
HH...\ayol'.. {c) oOtwi (jr. \ayii) t'
iXpdltaro rî^tutr, ai 'K*<xaj>0Of (fr. 60

*al 6 rati Kftwrat
!)
voiVat. thd 4<rri tA id* 'Iaor XavA
KaTHpMow
r
wlti rAr 0a\d*ffir,'Vo ii
\ayii r*p4fat
Xaywf 'Arri4f.
\dyoi-ci
N #ai 'Arrwoi \Ayt, in Z * Xfr'
VfiM^ tHn<
n.
far. IV
vmpt
1
VY*-
limn.
p. la*,
2#*MrXi*
amsrd.
jiO"Oamer
p.
M
'
P.ir.\,
f*
>Xa.i.
Xayî.'
\*-,6i
amtrm.
tC-^trnt
farrfol
ftuUlh.
p. IJ j 4 , 13 quote* from Athenaeiu, gmag

a* from Sophoclet lh wontt 'tXafcw,
Urirn, \mym.'
Se Introductory Note to the lth*tul*$.
ZOÔKAEOYI
72
Whether KopQvai in the second quotation

of Athenaeus is a mistake for xeXwfas, or
vice versa,
and
was
what connexion this

cited, it does not seem
in
strange list
possible to determine.
Xavo is the plural of the Ionic \a76s,
answering to the Attic Xcryws. The fact
that it appeared in tragedy does not, of
course, justify its use in ordinary Attic
(Rutherford,
New Phryn. p. 173).
Phrynichus says X(ryu>s, 6 'Attik6s. 5ta
6 "Iwu (p. 186 Lob.)See Weir
dt tov
Smyth, Ionic Dialect, 478, K. Z. XXIX
:
109. The nom. \ay6s is evidenced by the

ace. plur. \a76s in Hes. Scut. 302 toI 3'
)Kviro$a%
Xa-yds
ypevv
avdpts OrjpeiTal.
Meineke thought that Sophocles must

have written Xcryy.
112
(TLayovas re
112
Athen. 94 E criaybvos
Pos...Kal 2o0okXt?s
'A/xi//c<f)
'
'
/xa\#a/cas Ttdrjcn
S77
8e Kparlffiaydvas...
Porson proposed to make an

iambic trimeter by placing 5r) after Tid-ycn
and 8rj in this position and with temporal
meaning occurs in Track. 460, Phil. 1065,
and elsewhere (Eur. Hel. 134 n.). Mekler
thought that the metre might be trochaic
tetrameter.
Blaydes preferred the order
rldTjai fiaXdaicds, with <rov for 5t).
H.,
however, suggests that p.a\0aKa.s Tl6t}<n is
an ithyphallic following a trimeter, as in
Aesch. Prom. 610 yeyv/xvaKacriv, oi)5' i\ w
1
ridriai.'
/MadeTv 6irji
wrinovas d\i)|w.
clearly describe the punishment inflicted

by one pugilist upon another. H. quotes
Herond. 8. 8 ft-ixP 1 ffev Tra.pa<rTdi<7a rb
\
fipty/xa T< (tkIitwvi /u.a\6a.Kbv dQfiai.

fr. adesp. 125 (ill 432 K.) B.v fiy
wiwova p.aCTiydv 6\ov,
av /xtj
|
Com.
ttoitjo-w
Tronjero)
irpbawwov.
Plaut. Aul. 422 ita fustibus sum mollior
magis qtiam ullus cinaedus. Add Plaut.
Mil. 1424 mitts sum cquidem fustibus,
Ter. Eun. 1028 utinam tibi commitigari
videavi
sandalio caput.
So perhaps
ff-rroyyias
fj-ahd^ris
(jLakaKwrepov
in
to
Ar. Eq. 389.
The words
AM0IAPEQX ZATYPIKOI
Tragedies bearing the title AmpJiiaraus were composed by
Carcinus (TGF p. 797) and Cleophon (Suid.), as well as comedies
by Aristophanes, Plato, Apollodorus of Carystus, and Philippides
(Kock
396, 604,
III
280, 302).
guess which part of Amphiaraus' story was

suggestion has been made in the
suitable for a satyr-play.
note on fr. 113, but there is no other evidence to confirm or rebut
it, and the words of the fragment itself are exceptionally obscure.
An alternative subject, which has perhaps more claim to consideration on general grounds, would be the part taken by
Amphiaraus in the events which led to the founding of the
Nemean games. In that case the plot would cover the same
ground as the Nemea of Aeschylus {TGF p. 49) and the
Hypsipyle of Euripides {Ox. Pap. VI p. 21 ff.). The story of
the death of the child Opheltes or Archemorus, in whose honour
the games were founded, is told practically in the same form by
The locality, a remote
Apollod. 3. 64 66 and Hygin. fad. 74.
fountain guarded by a dragon, was especially suitable to a satyrplay and the subject was clearly capable of lighter handling
than the fortunes of Amphiaraus at Argos or at Thebes.
It is difficult to
AMYKOIAM<t>IAPEQI
71
113
6 TTlVOTTJpr)? TOvSc fldvT(t)^ \Op6$
113
113
Tirrori)^t cod.
Schol.
corr.
Dindorf
Ar. Vat. 1510 *trro-
ri
TiJp77t...itop*i'i6r
tVn
ovrvoptov koX del
rainy xpoatxbtiLivov (wpoobtx^f* a* cod.).

2o#0K\rft A^x^xa/xiy '6 TtMrHipr/i.. .xopov.'
The taluilou-. story of the wuwrâtft is
several timet referred to, but not always
told in the same way. According to I'lut.
dt soil, an. 30 p. 980 A it caused Chrysippus to waste a great deal of ink, because
ided him with an excellent illustration of xpbroia.
His account is preserved
by Allien. Sy D (11 729 a Am.), quoted
from the 5th book <>f the treatise xtpl rov
*a\ov teal T$ 7)<5or>;t: tj wlrrr), (f'ljoi, nai
'
i wtrywriip-iji ovtnpyd d\Xi)\<Mf, *ar'
lilatf
96 ovrdpuva ovfiisJrtw.
17 fxir ot* vlrrri
6fTp*6r ioritt, 6 5i wtrror-tipTji Kapulvot
nai i) rivrrj iiaarfyxaoa rb ScrpafMKp&i.
KOt> rtairxd^ttryipovifaTd. iwtiaiorra (gli/dta,
6 to wiPwoHifnit Ta.ptaTu.-i, Stop tlot\9rj rt,
idty'i
uxjrtp o~i)nairu>v, ij to Jtrv.Otloa Hfufivti- teal o&run to dwo\rf<pt)ir

trior KartaOloiKH kow%.
(ic. //. </. 7. ISJ
ibt comes ultimately from ("hrvand there are other authorities
airr-fftf,
sune
But in C'xc.fn
at tlla, i/uar in concha patula pinn dicitur,
is(/nf. i/ui mat e concha, qui, i/tioit earn
pi not! res Ptcatur, in candemqut
cum sc rcccpit, iniluditur, ut t idea fur
mounts /-, ut eaveret...alioruni
cauui qtuudntn /'a. inn/, the pea-crab does
DOt assist the liivalvc tO olitain nouri-heffect.
bat warns
!
this
is
against approaching
the version given
in
the English Cyclic
it
(00 m.
faeaHa, which
it
by Mayor
of particular int.
that in the mi.hllc of \h

the I-evantine Greeks conl
to resale strangers with the same Cable
ceslors had giv.
reney more than 1000 years before,
coognizes the fact that
the pea-crab habitually resides in the
pinna, but d.-cs not countenance the rest of the story.
It remains
to ascertain how Sophocles made the
rtg
xP* Meineke: xf>" cod*
allusion relevant.
Ellendt,
who
is
fol-
by
lowed
Campbell (keeping xP)

supposes that a number of
ndrrtit appeared in the play, and that
the shortest of them by a ridiculous
comparison was called ruvoî. So
L. and S. interpret a tittle parasitical
But there is not the slightest
fellow.
reason to suppose that Aristophanes was
parodying Sophocles, although, when the
comic poet says of the sons of Carcinus
{tht Crab)
here's the wwoHjptri of the
absurdly
'
not difficult to infer that

the "baby-crab' is meant.
There was
no Carcinus in Sophocles, and, as we
can hardly refer roCSt ixdrrwi to anyone
but Amphiaraus, it seems likely that
family,'
it
is
Mcineke was right in restoring xf***

Even then the point of the
for xPv-
obscure; but the only situation

Amphiaraus, so Car as it
is known to us, which might possibly
account for it, and would at the same
time 1* suitable for treatment in
allusion
is
in the story of
play,
fab.
is
the incident related by

(cf. Serv. on Vtqg. Acn
II
I
Myth. Vat. 151). how that Amphiaraus,

knowing that he would perish at Thebes,
concealed himself from Adrastu* and (he
Ic, ami
rest with the connivancwas subsequently discovered in consequence of the treachery of his wife, who
was bribed by her brother with agolden
1
According to Stat. T%eh. j.

570 ff. (cf. 606, 619), Amphiaraus hid
himself in his house, ami refused to tell
> supthe result ol
pose that in such circumstances thr
chorus was posted outside >
necklace.
give timely warning to the seer of the

approach of danger? Wcl.-ker {MteAtr.
I) also conjecture. on the strength
I
of thiv fragment that the satyrs wer.

by Amphiaraus into his service as attenMerck
dants in the ntc of divmati >ti
thought that a crow. I following at the
ver was meant, and

was the seer in question.
heel* of the
thai
I04>0KAE0YI
74
114
aypavXos /3otos
evS* ovte 7re\A.i5 01
114 Cramer
anecd. Oxon. I p. 344, 8

iroXiolo
ovk dyvoovp.tv ttjv aKpi^r) ypa(pr)v
irapa rb 7reXXa;
7reXtoro.'...7reXioO
oftv
(TreXX6s Schr.eidewin)
4vd'...f36ro$.' 2o
'
'
'
4v
<Pok\t}s
Afjupiapacp
For
aarvpiKip.
Erotian gloss. Hippocr. p. 109, 7, which

appears to quote the word 7reXXos as
occurring in this play, see on fr. 509.
The text is desperately corrupt. Lo-
beck elicited from it ivffoQ re niXXrjs olds

AypavXov fiorov, and from him Nauck
adopts irfWrjs olbs,

words untouched.
leaving
other
the
which
for
/3otos,
substituted f3orr)p, is anyhow

corrupt.
Schneidewin preferred ivbvvra
7rXX^s pivbv dypavXov /Soos, which Dindorf approved with the exception that he
proposed tvSus re in place of ivbvvra.
Cramer
For
7reXX6s
(or iriXXos)
on
see
fr.
509.
dypavXoio fSobs in Horn, fl 81 (cf. M 2 = 2)

perhaps lends some support to Schneidewin's correction of the last two words.
"5
a
er
cocrnep ctXteus TrXrfyels
115
115 Schol. Plat.
TrXrjyds vovv <pvffu.
KtOTperjovra,
t'xfli/j',
rrj
Symp. 222 B 6 aXuvs

(pad yap dXte'a 07(nrdcrrj t$ Xlvqi rbv
iireibdv
irpocayaybvra
XîpX
Karx elv
4"uyrf rovro 5e o-vvr)dws noiovvra

virb (TKopvLov TrXriyrjvai Kal elirelv (vulgo
ei7re) ' TrXrjyels vovv </>i/<reis,'
Kal fir/K^ri
iva
fir]
npoodyeiv t
pwip Xiywv
iiceivov ttjc xeipa.
'ZoQokatjs eV
rrj Trapoifiia
vovv
ytis
litt.
ofoei
<(f>p>evcov otSctcr/caXo?
Zenob. 2. 14 (Miller,
gr. p. 371) aXtevs irXrj(an <pi>crei?)...p.ipivriraL
avrrjs 2o<pOKXrjs.
This is the Greek equivalent for our

'once bit, twice shy,' and is one of the
many proverbs which attest the value of
a hard experience.
Plato, whose words
are Kara rrjv irapoifilav, uxrwep vr)mov
Ahrens
I.
Horn.
Hes.
Op. 2 [6 rraduv 84 re vfjmos Zyvu. See
Cf.
also schol. Aristid. ill 681 Dind.
Aesch. Ag. 186 rbv (ppoveiv pporovs 65u>yvCivai,
P 32 pexêv
is
referring
to
di re vr)irios i-yvu or
ffavra, rbv nddei fxddos
Eutn. 524
Of
...evwv 5i5da7caXos.'
Milanges de
rradovra
KixP r) Tal
Ap.<piapdip o~arv-
er' a5...aj<T7re/) dXieiis irXrjyels
'
cppev&v restituit E. A.
Oivra Kvpiws ex*'*''

vwb arivtu
vp.(pipei croKppovuv
the attempts which have been
made
to supply the missing words, the best is

Headlam's: eiaavdis [t2<nrep] dXievs <etaorfnirupla yap
fiai > irXyyeU < (ppovelv '
Here the serijov <pp>evwv SiSdffKaXos.
\
cond
any
line at
rate
fits
admirably with
It is of
the requirements of the case.
course possible that wairep is a gloss, but
tl<ravdis
the first line might also run
:
aXuvs
wcrwepel
suggested
w\t)y(h viro
:
(ppovui.
Kock
wcrwtp dXiei)s crKopirlov

iroXXoU yevr)o'ei kt.
<ni
I
irXrryth
7'
Il6
ayi>L<TaL
116
cod.)
fr.
Hesych.
p.
314).
Kal
26 dyvicai
(ayvrjcrai
Eur.
SoôacX^s tv
anecd. p. 339, 8
dTroOv<rai.
Bov<rlpi.5i
{i.e.
8ia<pdeTpai.
'A/M<piapd({).
Bekk.
dyvlaar rb Ovcai, 8ia<pdeipai, Kar' dvri<ppaaiv.
ovrw 1,o(poKXrjs. To the same
1
effect
Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 19,
dvrl<ppa<ris,
(iKprifj.io-p.6s,
which
is
For
17.
sometimes entitled
see Rutherford, Annotation,
p. 270.
Eur.
The
best parallel
T. 705 diupl fih>p.bv dyvio-dels

<pbv(p, of Orestes supposed to be sacrificed
at Tauri. Cf. Snppl. 12 1 o-&p.aQr riyviadrj
TTVpi.
So Headlam explained A. P. 7. 49
(Bianor's epitaph on Euripides) -rjyvio-e
rdv dvardv ffdp.aros ioroptr)v, i.e. destroyed
the inscription which described Euripides
See also
as mortal (C R. xvi 438).
Ant. 08 1 kiWs Kadrjyvicrav with J ebb's
is
/.
a-yvfrrtu,
times
sacrifice of a victim.
'to
involve
consecrate,'
destruction,
may someas
in
the
Blaydes would prefer

Kadrryiffav in Ant. I.e.
n.
d>(<rat,
and
AM<t>IAPEQI
75
117
a\ea.L0piov
117
Hesych.
Btpuoy (TKtwaatxa..
p. 117 aXttaiOpiov
Zo<poic\rji 'Anfrapdy.
The word was
doubtless modelled on
see on fr. 1
\tifidnva. The latter part of the compound suggests the cold of a clear frosty
ineric d\(^dvtfj.ot
night
cf.
fr.
49, 3
wdyov âWrrot
at-
358 oWaiJWr r&yut* i*alBp*ia

Aesch. Ag. 347 ** vTaiBpiw*
Blaydes needlessly conjectured
Bpiov, .-int.
.../3Ar;,
r&yu*.
&\i(<iiBpor.
Il8
Tpacrui
118
Zonar. lex. p. 174J rpaolai- o

t4 avica srjpairtTai, wapa t6
rtrwot ffffa
rtpoaUtw to
ry
Zfipairtiy.
6 Si Z<xpoic\fii iv
oarvpucip (iripio cxl.) 'Au0xprf<f> irl
rrjt
aXw riBunt
tV
The same
\ii,i.
ex-
tract occurs in schol. Ael. nut. an. 3. 10

with the variants rpaeii (which is right)
wapa rov rpaoalrttr for xapa rS rtpeairtw,

and the omission of ry aarvputy.
rpotria is rightly explained as a dryingpla<e, but Sophocles is the only authority
who used the word for a threshingThe name is suitable, as a dry spot
quoted
floor.
exposed to the wind was selected for

threshing Ml the commentators on Verg.
:
Georg.
rpttîa
178.
plied to the drying of
1.
is
particularly ap-
figs.
Aelian
I.e.
hedgehog: iavror ir rmt

Tpaeiaii kv\Ui koI rwr togaowr rat rtp*-
relates of the
waptleat, at s-oXXal iitw^ypwrat rait **aSuid. 1. 0b alto

Bait, rtovxn KOidfti rri.
speaks of the drying of cheeses.
119
<f>pOVLU
110
Kmtian
testifies that
used by Sophocles
in this
fpovtU was
sense of
vtw
see
fr. ;
play with the
120
wpaKiaa-ai
120
\r. Ran. 481 woa*taoau

Schol
M'/trai to inrS $6pov <*xptao*i
dw6
<Lpa o< {"(-.
rovro Si oôX$t
'Autptapdy aarvpuif. to u>xp*aaai
BXtfiouirijt rift tapSlat
toC'to it S*oXXf
r>l occurs twice in Arisjoi) in the sense
Si
11
wpamdf Mrrurdf,
f
X'troi/'t'x**''
this
'BXXipc-
obscure w
gave two exas a by-fand (j) as derived from Cip*

Dts
it
(1)
The former was the Ale* r

we learn from the scholiast on
m, who av* that Kratosthenes,
al*ifn*.
view, as
ing
from
i^ttiir wa
the antecedent
Lycophroo, held
that
the pallor, but

ducinesa arising from
hough! that the
fsintness.
scholiast attributed to Sophocles the foam
ipault**, which must hare fallen out
the esplanation ** t$ rV iom
*Uitu. He sup|*xU his view by JSeym.
- '3. JtJ *f**it*. * * W|W*
r*jr wpar.
I
tly
I04>0KAE0YI
76
121
[%o(f)OKkr)<;
ra y/aa/x/xara napdyet 6pyovyivov\
121
Athen. 454 F, after quoting

passages in which an illiterate
person is introduced giving a description of the letters composing a particular word, and amongst them the wellknown fragment of Euripides (fr. 382),
koX So0ok\^s 8i toi/t^ irapaproceeds
certain
ir\-q<nov 4irolr]<Tev 4v
'
Afj.<piapay crarvpiKi^
irapdyuv opxovfxevov.
The expressive character of Greek
dancing is abundantly warranted ; it
was above all the demonstration of an
to, ypdfjL/jiaTa.
idea.
volas
Lucian de salt. 69 ical yap

ra yiyvbfxeva ?x et
4iriSeiîv
(TWyitariKTjs a<XK7)(rews
816 A
810
p.i/x7]ixis
evtpyeiav.
dia>
Kal
Plat. legg.
tCjv \eyofxivuv
ax^fJLaffi
yevofiivr; ri\v
6pxv^ Tllc V''
vi\v %vfnra<rai>.
ttt.pydcraTo ri\-
Plutarch (gu. conv.
9. 15)
divides dancing into <popd, irxô, and

8e?ts, and says of the second (p. 747 c)
6rav ...<rxv^ a Siadivres ivl rod ffu)/iarot
ypa<piKuis
p.
748 A
rots
elSeaiv
woirjffiv
eirifiivoxn.
yap ehai
aiuiruxrav, Kai (pdeyyo/j^vrj"
ttjv
ibid.
opxyvi*
PXW" Ta\w
Lucian de salt. 63, Demetrius said to a dancer: d/couw a woids,

oi>x opw nbvov, a\\d /xoi SoKeU rats x e P <rLV
Athen. 22 A: Telestes,
airrcus \a\etv.
the dancer of Aeschylus, was so skilful,
when dancing the Seven against
t' 13 1
Thebes, he expressed the whole plot by
tt)v Troiyaiv.
'
his art.
AM4>ITPYQN
Euripides wrote an Alcmena, about which we have better
information than has been preserved concerning the Amphitryon
of Sophocles for scholars are agreed that the chief dramatic
innovation introduced by Euripides was that Amphitryon
punished Alcmena for her supposed unfaithfulness by burning
her on a funeral-pyre, and that only the timely intervention of
Zeus rescued her from destruction see Nauck,
p. 386,
Wernicke (in PaulyWilamowitz, Eur. Herakl- I p. 54.
Wissowa I 1573) infers that Sophocles followed the earlier
version recorded by Apollod. 2. 61, according to which the
deception practised by Zeus and his intercourse with Alcmena
were made known to Amphitryon through the agency of Tiresias.
The old guess that the Amphitryon was a satyr-play (Osann in
Rh. Mns. II 312) has nothing in its favour, unless indeed Porson's
view of fr. 1 127 is adopted. Accius wrote an Amphitryon, which
is thought to have been adapted from Sophocles, principally
because the only other tragedy so entitled was written by the
Alexandrian Aeschylus (TGF p. 824). In any case, the plot
may be taken to have covered the same ground as the wellknown travesty of Plautus. Hartung and Schoell maintained
that both Sophocles and Accius dramatized the story of Euripides'
Heracles under this title, but their view was rightly rejected by
;
Ribbeck
(p. 557).
TGF
'
AM<t>IAPEQI AM<PlTPYQN
77
122
8e /3\cl(ttoi, tgjv rpitov fiiau \a$eti>
i-irei
cvcrotai/ apKti.
122 Scl. :. Soph. 0. C. 390 tvrolat

X&P**] i* foh arayKuiorffKHi rCiv &ptiyp&tfxoy ypatptrai tirttat xdpiv, 6 xai ol
inrotLijfiATiaantvoi aiov<riy
tfootav i4
foai ri)r tvtttrtia* (ticrtiivtiav Suid. s.v.
efoota) KaBawtp kox if \KntfnrpCun>i 'ivtl
make no
difference, unless apttl is taken

be a dynamic (prophetic) present.
Bearing this in mind, I cannot help
suspecting that the word, may refer to
the miraculous growth of the heads of
the Lernaean Hydra (anQlicpaium xal wa-
to
Kvra Kur. //</'. 1 174)

'and,
grows, it is enough that one
of the three should l* preserved.' The
details of the story are variously ret
Alcaeus (fr. 1 18) spoke of nine heads,
Simonides (fr. 203) of fifty, and F.uriiNK) of a hundred
pides (H,i
and the
later authorities have the same or similar
Thus
would
it
not l>e surrarlltiOMi
XinfiXaff-ri)
tvaoiat has been restored to the text of

C. from the schol., but the word
does not occur elsewhere. The adj. 0-
Theocr. 34. 8. Cf. Hesych.

p. J33 tCvota- ti>0i)via, aurripla.
ffoot is fount! in
II
The meaning
of this fragment
is
ob-
Wclcker (p. 372) interpreted:

'when he is grown, to receive one of
scure.
these three provides security.'

tie supposes that Zeus promised to Heracles
three safeguards to protect him amidst
the 'Lingers of hi.s life, one of which
be at any time sufficient to keep
him unharmed ; and compares the golden
hair of I'terelatis. son of Taphius (Apolhxl. 1. 51), and for the triplication of the
three prayers of Theseus.
Hartiu
it suffices to find one
of your three roads to safety,' but refrains
from explaining his meaning further.
Neither of these versions takes due account of i-wtl p\d<rroi, which must be
regarded as a clause of general assumpuh. 93 gal yap itrripy r6 7'
0 wpdffftw, iwti wMotro, xlfiioi i(iro\$
1.
To substitute pkaarj), as Ellendt and others have proposed, would
whenever
it
prising to find that Sophocles mentioned

an outcrop of three heads at a time, one
of which always survived.
And there is
a further detail in the mythological handbooks which would help to explain the
Besides the ordinary version that

for every one cut off,
Ap.illodorus (a. 77) relates that of the
nine heads eight were mortal, but the
middle one was immortal {rat fUf 4rw
tfrrrrdt, tt)v 6i /idffrff Hfdfaror) : see also
if>. Ho,
Pcdias. 7.
Similarly, Aristonicu*
of Tarentum (F/fG IV 337), a writer
of uncertain date, said that the middle
head ' was golden.
For the short vowel before /JXeVrm see
Jclil) on Phil. 131 . -Memckc thought
that fuap was an error for mat,
text.
two heads grew
'
123
dftr/are'p/iojc;
123
It-
lot ift+iTJpfU/t
uarutnirwi.
k
thinks
this
lofxxMjl
form
'A/*-
incredible,
'her dn<piTtt>ud*vi
to
or
<iu<><-
conclude
the evidence that has been adduced (see

Brugmann Comf. Gr. 11 p. >.
the sulntitution in compound* of tcm
cf. n(np*rt. 4*ii60*9ar.
in *
Ik- Added lhAt the preceding
It should
,, an^tTtppum l-rffsw
cod.)' 4r#<rt>T*fMrt#^s'.
Id
l>e
rash in view of
'
IO0OKAEOYI
78
124
aTfirjTov
124
Hesych.
2,o<poK\r)s
p.
315 drpavpLaTLffTov
&T/xr)T0t>
'AfupLTptiuvi..
dpi-
puxrov.
Inasmuch as drpav/xdriarov is entirely

out of place in the alphabetical order,
and has no explanatory gloss, the conseems
clusion
inevitable
that
&t/x7)tov
has dropped out before it, and that

Sophocles used this word in the Amphitryon with the meaning invulnerable.
This was practically the view of Salmasius, who arranged the words drp.t\Tov
2. 'A. The
dtiipurrov, drpavnaTiffTov.
gloss dp.ipi<rrov is probably a reference
to VXdX.^Phaedr. 277 B.
That drpav/idtkttov was a possible word of explanation
is shown by Etym. M. p. no, 52 dvovraros- 6 dTpau/idricrTos.
Nauck's suggestion that 2o0. Ap.<p. refers to a previous
gloss dT/xi)<xi<ppuv ovdefuds t6\/*tjs Hvvoiav
And
Hx 03 " has very little probability.
that is actually an error for dr\ri<ri<ppu)v
(Headlam on Aesch. Ag.
438).
[ANAPOMAXH]
is no other reference to a play of Sophocles bearing
But, as there is
than that of fr. 125 quoted below.
independent evidence that Sophocles employed the word
7rapaad'yyr]<i with the meaning 'messenger' in the Uoifj,ev<i (see
fr. 520), and as Andromache is a character who may very well
have appeared in that play, Welcker (p. 113) concludes that
there was no such play as the ÂvSpofid^rj, and that fr. 125
For errors due to the citation of a
really refers to the Tloifieves.
character in place of the name of a play see p. 38, and the note
There
this title
on
161.
fr.
125
Tra.pacrdyyr)<i
125
adyyai
Etym. M.
'
p.
652,
irapa-
13
t& rptaKovra crrddia irapa Uipaais

5'
i^-qKovra.
Aiyvirriois
irapd Si
Soô/cXet iv 'AvSpo/xdxv f*"i rod dyyiXov
etprjrai.
To the same effect Etym. Gud.
p. 452, 31 with the reading iv 'Av8po/j.dxv.
Trap'
Nauck in his first edition conjectured

that iv 'AvSpop.iSa should be read, but
now rightly inclines to Welcker's opinion
referred to above.
For the word irapaadyy-qs
and cf. fr. 183.
see
on
fr.
520,
ANAPOMEAA
There
is
some
direct evidence of the events comprised in the
Andromeda.
mann, Mythogr. p. 250)
See Eratosth. Catasterism. 16 (Wester-
plot of the
Yâaaietreia.
tuvttjv icrropei 1o(po/c\rj<; 6
'
Av8pofx,eSa iplcraaav irepl /cdWovs rals

Nrjprjlcnv eiaeXOetv els to a-v/jLirrcofia, ical TloareiZwva 8ia<f>delpai
rrjv yj^pav #77x09 eirnrefxâvra, 81 rjv <alriav> irpbiceiTai to5 fct'/ret
T779 Tpaya)Btai> <eir>e7refMyjre Kr)<pet Sid to
ot/ceift)?.
36 K77T09.
Kao-aiiireiav
eplaat
irepl
icdWovs rals
Nijprjicriv.
Uep<Tev<i
6"
AM0ITPYQNANAPOMEAA
79
avro avetXe,
/cat 01a tovto ft? rd darpa eridr) inrofiwjfia tijs

avrov.
taropel Se raira HoôkXi)* 6 rtov rpwytphtiav
TrotT}TT]<i iv t Wv&popeda.
The same version is followed in two
passages of the scholia to the Aratea of Germanicus Caesar
see R. Ellis in/. P. IV 267, and now E. Maass,
(p. 138. 9, 21
Comment, in A ration, pp. 215, 257).
Hygin. poet, astron. 2. IO
de hoc Euripides et Sophocles et alii complures
p. 443 Cassiepeia.
dixerunt ut gloriata sit se forma Nereidas prae stare, pro quo facto
inter sidera sedeus in seliquastro constituta est.
Hut the play
cannot be reconstructed to the same extent as is possible with
the more famous Andromeda of Kuripides.
The plot of Euripides
s nothing of a previous betrothal to Agenor (or Pbineus)
Cepheus refuses the proposal of Perseus on other grounds, and
^position is overcome by the appearance of Athena dim
fir}ât/ij<i.
It has been suggested
that Sophocles followed the
>n of the denouement adopted by Hygin. fad. 64, according
to which Cepheus and Agenor lay in wait for Perseus in order
to slay him, but Perseus by showing them the Gorgon's head
turned them into stone.
But it is difficult to understand how the
of Sophocles found its way into the astronomical handbook,
if there was nothing in his play to support the statement that
the chief characters in the story were turned into stars.
1:
should be observed that although the story of Perseus and
Andromeda is not old at least there is no trace of it in literature
e the fifth century
it was already current at the time of the
an wars, if we may lay any weight upon tin- statement
of Herodotus (7. 150) that Xerxes claimed kinship with the
Argives, as the descendant of Penes, the son of Perseus and
Andromeda.
It is improbable that I'hrynichus had introduced
Andromeda into one of his plays, as Dobrce inferred from
Ar. Xub. 556.
The reference there is to a comedy see schol.
Starkie's note.
Brunck, following Casaubon, considered that Sophocles'
Andromeda was a satyr-play; but his opinion was founded on BO
r
er reason than the evidence afforded by fr. 136.
Ribbcck,
,
the same view A'om. Trag. p. 163,6,), thinks that
7 has a comic tone and also refers to fr. 132 but his mam
is that Euripides' play would not have been regarded
as a startling novelty
if
as it undoubtedly was
Sopo
had already treated tin subject in a serious maimer. Hut the
Trpdgetos
of Euripides was rather in the romant*

'^sen' endeavoured to reconstruct th
1
Pauly'Winowa 11*6.
in. the
aUo K. Kuhncrt in Kmchcr Itl
irkc in
(
sec
1904) pp. 104
meda of
identification
had been made by cutter
IO<t>OKAEOYI
80
Sophocles from a hydria in the British Museum (E 169) which is

undoubtedly earlier than 412 B.C., the date of Euripides' play,
and is consequently inferred to have been influenced by Sophocles.
The painting shows Perseus arriving on foot, whereas in the
works of art which follow Euripides he descends from the air
Cepheus weeping for his daughter's fate posts being fixed into
the ground, to which Andromeda is to be lashed
and funeral
offerings carried by slaves, as if the king's daughter were already
dead.
But most stress is laid upon the figure of an effeminate
oriental supported by two attendants, who is identified with
From these
Phineus
the plighted lover of Andromeda.
;
materials Petersen draws the inference that the characters of the

cowardly barbarian who abandoned his betrothed, and of the
heroic Greek who rescued her, were brought into strong contrast
at an early stage of the action, and that the subsequent conflict
between Perseus and the barbarians was due not to the opposition
of Cepheus, but to the renewal of his claim by Phineus after the
Petersen further contends that Accius
rescue of the heroine.
followed Sophocles in his Andromeda, whereas Ennius had as
usual copied Euripides
but even if he is right, the Latin
fragments are. too ambiguous to assist his general argument.
The value of the archaeological evidence must be left for others
to determine 2 but the attempts by means of it to establish a
connexion with Eur. Ale. 611 ff., and to interpret fr. 130 as
referring to funeral vases, and fr. 133 as a description of Phineus
yoked to his attendants cannot be approved.
;
126
Kovpeiov
SrjfjLLotfvTov
tois fiapfidpoLS
yepas /SpoTetov
126.
Tifiiovrbv
nem verborum
fipbretov
126
in
apxy&c
Hesych.
cod.
corr.
Tucker
modum
is
Musurus
xbpiov codd.
p.
526
sq. ordi0wr)Tro\eii'
Kovplov.
.
190),
Kotipeiov
'
xvil
Zo0okXt?s 'Avdpo/xiSq.
thuuovt6v .Kpovy.'
The best correction of the corrupt
1
qfiiovTov
noXei'
disposui
vbfios yap iari rois /3apj3dpois
Kpovtji cod.
3 ytpas Buttmann ytpos cod.
hunc
yipos
rjpidiq
yap icmv dp^qdev vofxos

to Kpovco Ovrj-rroXelv.
5r)p.i66vTov (C. R.
which H. was inclined to
Tucker's
prefer to his own TipL^dvrov or ti/ju66vtov

Both were partly
(C. R. xiv 113 n.).
anticipated by M. Schmidt's iepjdvrov,

Diels's aXLdvrov 77 and Mekler's fitaiffvTov.
Less probable conjectures are alixbppvrov
Scaliger, iviatiotov O. Hense, ypuv di<rbv
Campbell (perhaps better rj 5' (kOvtov),
rjuiv T68' ovv J.
On the assumption
that Kbpiov could stand, which is most
1
So the name is given by Ovid and Apollodorus {7. 44): Hyginus (fab. 64) calls
him Agenor. Others consider that the figure represents Andromeda.
2
See the contrary view taken by Engelmann in Arch. Jb. xix 143; but his
conclusion is criticized unfavourably by Gruppe in Bursians Jahresb. cxxxvn 394
'
ANAPOMEAA
improbable, Herwerden proposed dftwov
('culpa vacans ^ to k6(.ow.
For the Attic
Kovpciov, an offering
made
connexion
in
with the ceremony of introduction to the

phratries lee Pollux 8. 107 ko.1 tis i}\iKiai>
TpOiXOvVTUV tV TJj KaXoifxdfJ) KOVptWTldl
rjtupa Owip fiiv Tu)f dppivw t6 KovptLO*
tffvof, vrip d* tw* (hfXtwv tt)i> yap.rjXiaf.
For the difficulties of detail which have
to l>e overcome in reconciling the conflicting statements of our authorit
- Isaeus, p. 358, Toepffer in I'aulyThe word has been
from adpw, as signifying

either
no offering made on cutting the hair, or
m ko/xw (Kovpot). Both dern
appear to have been put forward in
( 1 )
antiquity (Suid. s.v., Etym. M. p. 533,

51): for the latter Wyse refers to the
bclphic rcuWiia. In the absence of more
evidence it is idle to speculate
ring this passage has on the
what
significance of the Kouptto* in primitive
Kf
md
whether the animal-victim wis
the surrogate for a
human
sacrifice.
a f
[t ia fairly certain that these lines
have suffered confusion owing to B dislocation of the original order, and that the
ement was caused by the df
ribe to arrange the words according
to their grammatical constructs:
frit.
Obct,
H. in C. K. XVI : 4 .But their rcarrangment is not so
simple a matter, and there are several
from which
have chosen
iii its
what seems to au
\ roiffi papfidThe <.i
pott
Kpbvif OuifwoXtir ftp&rtio* dpxv^t"
7#>t, apart from the introduction of
.
CM
;.
first.
Tucker, who regards d^\ri$tP as
corrupt and thinks that the articles were
Iditiont, proposed: 6pM% ydp in
pappdpois tfiirroXctr
<.60ot> (tpdrtior,
auptOir ytpat Kp6*<p.
for the
dpxtj9v
history Of this word see the admirable
account of 1 .0 beck, Phryn. p. 93, who
KBOWI that it and other -dtv forms, after
|
arc (1) the position of dpx^c ;

(J) the distribution of emphasis, win. I.
makes it unlikely that $>6pu>t ydp ian came
yiroi,
themselves
failing to establish
became
common
fairly
in
11
Greek.
late
The only objection to
the word, apart from

its position in the sentence, is the statement in Bekk. atutd. p. 411, 5 oi>k ten
wapd rots 'AmiccSt stXt)* rap' Aiex^V
rap' 'Upoi&np 8i ten *oi
(fr. 416 N.).
Hut
Tolj'ltaxri.
it
would be dangcious
to
the word 10 Sophocles on this

ground alone. yip*i is the certain correction of lUittinann (7^>o Scaliger, Bipot
Gonqx
M nine as a ytpat of the
refuse
god
Aesch. Cho. 256, Achacus
cl.
fr.
I,
Tr. fr. adesp. 118.- In spite of the

frequent occurrence of human sacrifice in
ck legcixls, it is always Spokefl of
in literature as something abhorrent to
Greek feeling and only suitalile to
barbarians: cf. Eur. /. /'. 464 AV(at
At 6 Tap' tyur 6p.o% ov\ oetas
Ovelai,
drcupa.i>
p.
The
tl.
Stengel, A
irccks idem
whom
with Moloch to
sacrificed children:
[Plat
14
Myth.
humai
Mm.
315
>
13. 86, ao.
Gtupj
'ces of
of Kpona and
lUnsians fakr'"
D festivals
<
iruppe
IXXVII 544
147
Pho<
the
I)iolor.
p.
Saturnalia see
81
'
in
I
"
ff.
is an an
1 here
II
p. 30*.
present writer on Humai
in the ntyth/Httd$it of Rtligivn
and
Ethi
127
liriTOKTiv
Ku/x/8ai<rt
tj
127
Aihen. 48a K in 6i tai rXoior

Io^*X^t if 'AiropofUia ^n/s\
'Iwwotm* x"'ja
EttSttlh. /A p. H05,
50 tihovto* a< l<xpon\ioii ro 'twrotew...
X^<Wa.' Tovrivrw lTrorift ^**ti n 8A
:.
w\o.o.
taken to hav.
but hardly by
nola. who must have seen him
whether the occasion was
)>e
lie
determined
sec
Iiitr.-oi:
n attribute* the line (0 I'hlMM,

who, he think*, might well have u
..
icOrpn
t'Mf loôXî.
rseua,
vavo-ToktU xOova
the banquet which wmic of the authorities

e a part of the sequel, cannot
is
correctly given
by Ivusuuhiu*,
the passage for another
puri*,
in<lr|Ttid(-nt of AfhefUMrttS.
ugnw. imc ri*not
fit
twwotair
cf.
BOf.
I04>0KAE0YI
82
Bacch. 687 yvuixivas Kparijpt Kal Xwtov

Tpotpip,
Aesch. Prom. 21 &>' otire <f>wvr)v
oOre tov
(JpoTwv
ixop<f>i)v
Cope on
ox//j),
KV(J.pai<ri
probably
Athenaeus
not a native Greek word.
here adds that Kvppa for a // was said
by Apollodorus to be a Paphian word.
Cf. Plin. n. h. 7. 208 ctimbatn Phoenices
(invenerunt).
Torr, Ancient Ships, p.
H2 f., not only holds that the use of
kvij.$i) indicates that a Phoenician vessel is
meant, but also that iirirot was the name
given to Phoenician merchant-ships bearing a horse as figure-head.
He quotes
Strabo 99 (a figure-head recognized as
Arist. rhet.
1. 4. 6.
is
belonging to Gades) tovtuv yap tovs
fJ-ev
ifiirbpovi puiyaXa ffre'XXeiv w\ola, tovs be

irivr\Tas paKpd,
a KaXeiv
lirirovs curb
and
iv rais irpippais iiriarinui',
twv
refers
to
708 and other passages where

But this
ships are compared to horses.
ingenious interpretation is hardly convincing.
x^ vtt i s of course, ace. termini,
Horn.
<
and
not, as L.
S. strangely sugg'
It
cf. Eur. Med. 682.
surprising that E. Mueller, quoted by
Hartung, should have taken the use of
vavoroXelv to be evidence of the satyric
character of the play.
space traversed:
is
128
fxrjhev
128
Phryn.
Ruth.)
ttoXXt)v 5tar/)i|8r)j'
(Hdt.
Kal
etc.)
evpiffKero
'
'Aubpofiedq.
/jlt]
'
Trp6cr(pa.Tov
SocôkXtjs
bt
ovtw
ridels
'
'
iv
ry
fj.ribkv...iTn<7-
ToXds.'
Rutherford preferred the variant qboand there is nothing to decide for
el<xOe,
Naber
one as against the other.
out,
is fairly
ever,
etriiTKOiroiJ-
TTpbcHparos veKpbs
'
Lobeck points
should, howthe metaphor is
phorical sense, which, as
tovtov
irepl
eirot.riadfj.7)v ,
Xiyerai
89
2.
irpayfjia.
Kal
TrpocrcfxxTOw; eVtcrroAa?
374 Lob. (cccl
epit. p.
irpb<r<pa.Tov
fievos el fibvov
(frofieicrdaL
plausibly
suggested that the words fi-qbkv <pof$el<rdcu

are part of Phrynichus' statement, and do
not belong to Sophocles at all ; but in
that case some alteration of the text
would be necessary.
It is curious that Phrynichus should
have had so much difficulty in finding

an example of irpoo-Qaros in the meta-
common.
It
be observed that
vigorous in Aesch. Cho. 800 Xvaao-6'

alfia TTpoacpdroLS biKais, and in find.
Pyth. 4. 299 evpe w a y b v dfi^poclwv iiriuv
it poffeparov
of fresh
Qrifia ei>w0els,
water, where all the editors take irpba<pa.Tov as an adverb, although Lobeck had
indicated the true view. So in Dem. 21.
112 irp6cr<f>aTOS is contrasted with ?w\a
Kal ipvxpd, but in Lys. 18. 19 in tt}s
bpyqs oSo-qs Ttpo<T<t>drov the metaphor is
full-grown. Even to Zeno and the Stoics,
who defined Xbirri as 5o<x irp6o<pa.Tos KaKov
irapovalas (fr. 14$ of myed., I 212 Am.),
the metaphor was probably still living.
In later Greek it became worn-out see
\
Holden on
Them.
Plut.
24.
129
lOOV ok
(f)OLVLOV
[xdcrdXrjTa hiyovov
129
Ibov
be
Brunck:
(polviov
Ibov
be
Etym.
<f>oivbv
blbov
A/.,
ba<poivbv
lex.
Sabbait.
129
fj.dff6\T)s
Etym.
'
AI.
tt)v fia<pr\v tjv toiovtos,

a'ipLaros
iK^xP ucrT0
272,
p.
bt-irXovs Ifjids'
f)
blyovos
8ti ov fj.6vov icard
dXXd Kal
dirb tov
2o^>o/c\^s 'Avbpo/xe'bq.
tov ptjTopiKOv
6 bbo
An abbreviated
Xpu>ixaoi Kexpo)/J^yos.
form of this note appears in Hesych. I
6 biwXovs, 7)
503 blyovos ndadXrjs
p.
'
lbob...5lyo^>ol'.
'
eic
'
bvffl x/>W/ua<" Kexpipe'vos
xexpupe'vos
referred to
proposed
Hesych.
bipfia
(Kexp^^vos cod.,
Campbell had
Etym. M., he would not have
Musurus)
l/xao~i
if
Kexp^fJ-evos
in
Hesych.
p. 73 fido-dXi] Kal fido-OXtjs'

Kal virobrifxa (poiviKovv.
Kal 7]via.
bupOtpa.
fj.d<T0XrjTas
TOfAovras
(rofxovs'
(fxaadXT) rdy cod.)

ras Wecklein) yjvlas.
ANAPOMEAA
al
yap
(idadXri [ifiduj$\r}
if
Bruno
Keil).
50, IX.
5ivovov had received two

nal explanations, (1) a_s a double
lash, (1) as a lash stained with Mood in
|ui<r4Xt]Ta
addition to
its
original colour.
it.Uc to
We
prefer the formet.
need
which
lisned by At. 141 ftdya* iwwoSirrtv

raiet \tyvp<f puaartyt dir\jj.
It appears from the epithet X7pp that
\a0wr
ftvrijpa
and that Leaf (on + 387) is mistaken

extending the inference which he draws
from Homeric usage to the language 0/
igedian-..
On the other hand, it
will be observed that these passages do
task,
'AfSpontSa *ai tvda tv<m. For

he last extract see Ir. 571.
The quotation,
without lemma or explanation, U found in
-cxpo/cXr/i
:hfhlit. p.
83
oderstood the HomericitdVrtj

as a whip rather than a goad see I
ttStaadtog the contrary opinions of
Verrall and Tucker (on Theb. 595), it
impossible to avoid the conclusion
that <5r\j; pAaityt in Ag. 647, and ofw\ifl
napayrrp in Cho. 374, refer to a double
:
in
not relate to the driving of chariots, and
goads (El. 71H, Eum.

A. uo. Phot*.
ij, Utt. 881, 949) with a double point
(0. T. 809) were employed for that purpose. The only passage in tragedy where
it nu^lit plausibly be urged that tidart^ =
Kt*rpo is At. 1153; and there
J ebb
it
certain that
i>
ir.
> it
/lift. 1194, /.
Herwcrdcn \Mnem. xvu
whip.
765) proposed hirorw, not without reason

for there is nothing in the use of blytmot,
Tpiymoi, 3t0nj, etc. which supports ihcir
extension to other than natural multiplication.
130
avro^ctXc'crt krjKvdoi?
130
Polio*
t<pij,
o**o\>ji
conjectured
5'
ir
(XlOott
\t)kv8<hs
SijXuw d\afid<rTovi
H-n^'trluu
XyjtvOoti,
and
;
no
aCTox'Hiei
'AfipouiSa
Xi>itfot
10.
oJwu
Kpnrfipa
rot
dpyi'ptot oi \torirarat,
Kttpaarrat,
Wakefield ai/To*<JXXott
is no ground for these
avroxX*Vi indicates that

.
fr.
pwoXWon.
but there
^ch.
airroM&oari
the rim of the flask or pot was of the

same material as the rest of the v e ssel
It was the custom to gild the edges of
silver cup, or to cover horn with silver:
Xp<
But the practice was as old as

<5
1H5 dpyvpriXdroii
tipaot
co or6pua wpotrptfiXruUfoii, (|Uoted by
Allien
Athcn.
ttvripa QiXtTTiKuir /'//
ays that the kings of the Baconians
adroit
fuydSa
ywofiiwwv
Twr /Sow* ruir Tap'
tipara <h)ctui', wt x^P* 1 " rpt'tt tal rirrap-it x oai itwufiara Tottif ii arrwc ra
TtptapyvpoCrrai tat xPvao*" Ta%
.
131.
xpvov&'l*-
Thus
ihe
compound
natural rims,' ami th<

exactly parallel to utrUnrw*
means with
'
phrase
is
weapons whose
one piece with the blade,
similar are ovto*tItoui 6<Wvt fr. gI (
fU\ij in Aesch. Cho. 163,

hilt
is
in
ai-roTlrpov /irjuarot O. C. 1 93, *frr6it>\6*

7' Uwu>na Phtl. 35, and other instances
in the n. on Kur. Htl.
avrox'iMet i* the regular accentual
Blaydcs poitttl -ui < ( h.mdler, 1 608 ft.
:
HOI and Dindorf print tti'roxefWs,

suppose, the ttadilion in
I
>
ti>.
II
Ttrvypulto*.
following,
I'ollux.
hat
dinaiy gljooak
the wonts form an orline.
131
dfuftLirpvfivov rrXoiov
131
Voior
rlesych. 1 p. 104 ampi'pi tu>o*

itaripwrtr, wpvn*a\ lx"2o*>otal ra iwi oumipla
KftpofUia.
ihe
Totura nor
last
clause
Schmidt's ft 'i\y
MksMM
gbt on the mystery. I.uebeck

thinks that boats
|
us arc meant.
aV+lwpvpvov.
which
to vessels
for various reasons
wave
so constructed that I hey coold be propelled

I>i
in either direction without turning.
Cass. 74. n. dcacrilitng the siege of
By*antium by Scptimha Severn

T,ra aTiSr (-\W*r) Uar4p*4*r tat it t^%
rfc rptppmt s-f4sX/it
wppiunfl tml
Vir Ivwt wit* i**l itrntrp i ftnt t
6 >
IO0OKAEOYI
84
Kal iwiirXiwcn Kal dva%u<pCxn, Kal tovs

ivavriovs Kal iv t$ Trp6o-irXtf> Kal iv ry
<r(pdXXw<n.
Germanicus
<r<pu>i>
airdirXif)
such boats for his campaign Tac.

4. d plui es adpositis id) iniquc gubernaeu/is, converso ut repente remigio hinc
built
Ann.
vel
Mine
They were
adpellerent.
also
used by the Germans (Tac. Germ. 44)

and by the inhabitants of the coasts of
the Euxine (Hist. 3. 47). Athen. 204 A, E
mentions certain vessels of Ptolemy Philopator, one of these a state barge, which
he describes as Siirpypoi and

and it is inferred that they also were
of this kind, although Schweighauser
thought otherwise (vol. xi p. 232 on
489 B, where a dijrpippos is compared to a
cup irapaKeifiivws e'x 0VTa T<* wra). I take
this opportunity of remarking, in view of
diirpvixvot
the explanations still given in some books,

that the meaning of dp.<pr)pts dopv in Eur.
Cycl. 15 and aKariov dp.<f>r)piKop in Thuc.
4. 67 is fixed by the schol. on the latter
tu>v iXavvovrwv
they were sculling-boats,
and were named dn(pVPV because each
one of the crew propelled the vessel on
both sides.
See also Blaydes on Ar.
Ecel. 1 09 1.
Is it possible that the kijtos
passage
(iv
diKwiria ipirTfi)
liraoTos
was compared to an dp.<plirpv/xvov irXoiov,

because he could so readily shift himself
to meet an attack from any quarter? He
is compared to a ship rushing through
the waves in Ov. Met. 4. 706.
[I have
since learnt that the suggestion has been
anticipated for the same reason by Petersee Introductory Note.]
sen
:
132
dix/3\v<rKL
132
Hesych.
iâtijiXoi (iâirXoi
Kvpius di
iirl
p.
cod.
dp-wiXov.
141
dp.f3XvcrKei'
corr. Salmasius)
Kal iKTirpdiffKei.
2o$ok\t?s 'AvSpofxeda (dvdpo cod.).

M. Schmidt maintained that the form
ap.fBX6<TKw was an error, and that either
anfiXia KW (Plat.) or d/i^Xuxr/cw (Suid.)
should be substituted.
p. 210, refused to
Lobeck, Phryn.
condemn
d,u/3Xi)avcw as
a possible derivative from dp-fiXO? ; and

the evidence does not warrant a dogmatic
conclusion.
All
we can
say is that
are the bestattested forms, and that iKTirpwcKeiv is
Ionic and Hellenistic. Both Lobeck and
Rutherford (p. 289) make the strange
mistake of assigning iKTirpdioKeiv to
Sophocles on the strength of the above
passage of Hesychius. But it is obviously
part of the explanation attached to
dfnj3Xl<TKU)
and
iâp.f3Xovv
d/x(!Xij<rKt (or d/ifiXlffKet).
Cf.
Hesych.
II
iKTiTpd><TKop.(v.
115 iâva^Xovp.ev (?)
Suid. iâpf3Xl<r KeiV iKTirpuMTKUV.
p.
133
133
Hesych.
II
feiMrds Xaos
(feiTcrfys
virefevyfx.fr 01
elffl
p. 256 fei>|iXew5
Xaov Ellendt), r\ $
Xaol.
2o<poKXrjs (<ro<pws
Menex. 240 a
iv
p. 401, 11 evlXeii)s etprqrai irapd rots fied'
ov8' ?ti
'
Oixypov 6 fiaoiXev's.
The description refers to an oriental
despotism, where the subjects were
crushed beneath the yoke of slavery
al de yvwp.ai
dirdvTWv dvOpunrwv r,oav,
Av8pop.ida. Cf. Phot. lex. p. 53, 8

(=Suid. s.v. feuiXews) fevîXews
$
Eustath. //.
vireevyp.evoi eltrlv 01 Xaol.
cod.)
'
Isocr. 4. 151 tAs Si ij/vxds Bid rds p.ovap(x 0VTi - Plat.
Xi'as raireivas Kal irepideth
avrrj
7-f)
Tai/7-77
dyeiv.
''EperpievffLv
BeSovXw iievai.
ibid.
C 'Adrjvaiovs
dvdyKy fetii-avTas
Aesch. Pers. 594
yXCxraa fiporolaiv iv <(>vXaKah'

Xabs iXetdepa /Safety,
ws
XiXvrai yap
j
in
For the metaphor

general see Jebb on Ai. 24.
eXvdr)
vybv
dX/cds.'
ANAPOMEAA
85
134
otT^ra?
134 I'imt.
roit
*wâj.
Hcsvch.
lex.
<i;,
p.
ot'i)ra-
'Ardpo^da.
ôiôkXtjj
181 00770*- KwurjTuiif

(oiara*- xoM^rwf cod.) ofat (oi coti.) yap
a, *a.uai.
ihid. p. 183 olrjrap
KUfiTfrQf
Ill
p.
'
(KOflf)TUf CO(i.).
The word
A poll.
dXciMii
olai
j?o"
J
Oe* was the name

(O. C. 1061, with Jebb's
iavui is inadmissible.
for a village occurs
oo;
Rhod.
corresponds to the Laconian i/3d, a

division of the country (Gilbert,
Staalsalt.'1 p. 45), in which
appears
to represent F.
See Curtius, Gr. El. 11
hut the connexion with
p. 214 EL tr.
It
local
111
138 vipdorro ybp ^/xir
1.
Tr\fjJo% h-yip
of an Attic
n.),
deme
and also a place-name
in
Thera.
vwb Sovpi Avkoho.
135
craprjTou
135
k\tji
-ych. iv p. 6 (raXirrdv Zotpo'Arrirarpoi (dvrl rarpbl
.Kfbpopjiiif..
grammarian
ned
x 1 **.
tfapthOf
aCrbf hax
aiprjTof
And
'
teal
at
bi
adpawtt,
rted
name
is
p.iob\tvKov
koX
See however
tl.
JOI,
p.
tpaal.
this
<>f
Ar. Av. 1403) 0ap-
in schol.
ibid. p.
x tT ^"^by Phot lex.
tlbot
odpJirof papfkifHKbl XiTwr.
I\ p. 10 adpaw llf/xrotdr
Xir^r n*<r6\tvK0i, wt Krrftrlai. Poll. 7. 61
o bi adparii, M^wf rA <p6prft*a, wofxpvpoOi
lu*6\tiKoi x lT ^"Phot. /fx. p. 500, 7
tfdparu
x iT <** H'peiicbi ft*o~b\tvicot.
Ct.
Hetjcn.
"
515 C ffapdrttt
p.T)\u>oi
icai
TofHpvpoi ai
XckkoI, oi d* bXovpytU.
Such n tunic was part of the royal

apparel of the Persian king : Xen. Cyr.
8. 3. 13 bp6i)* ?x wr T 'V Tidpap coi
irvptpvpovr nta6\tvK<*,
dXXy 4* ode '{m
M'troXri'xor fx ,tr
' (
was adopted by
Alexander when he assumed tin- Persian
dress: Athen. 537 k, Plut. Alex, si
(where omWitot is used for tuai>\
.
IN, where we find it worn by upstarts

and importers, such as Lysia* the
Epicurean philosopher who became tyrant
of T.irsus (Allien, lift C), or Alexander
the false prophet in I.ucian Alex.
II,
I36
1
36
roin <r*rb-
in koI TOOT ZciAipoiW

*oi 1 1 drat, wt Aiaxi'ôt pAv i
-
^tlovt <pr\uir.
\rbpofrf&<f.
N.iuck, with-
the opening words as robi tarbptvi oi

w\tlo*4% ifmaty, an
Ktd aartpio-Kon robi lloVaf oi w\tia*i
&vriir,
tit
ai
2etXiroOT
print, roin
rotVf
'in'l'iil
>/t
<pa<Jtf.
roi
rcbl
irarrooit
where the
Md
ithority of
Aev:hylu
arts"
quoted, as other evidence shows, for
ins.
Hut he subsequently admitted (Indtx, p. xi) that the
hit ion bad *>een found by W<
{SittUHgib. d. A*. B. A bad. 18901
and that we ought to read rot* II
carbpovi, as printed in Ahrens's nod
r. In ions.
The psunagv in
Ziegicr*
rb rot ybvt i ZmrvpiTheocritus runs
iyyblfp ! Il4r##i fMomHttmtiP
<piab*i.
So soon as wo oonaider what
is
is likely to Hot* been mado

on these words requiring the
parallels, it becomes clear that Mm
possibly Theon himelf. was defend
use of llaVrr in the plural by Tbeocrttaa.
comment
IO0OKAEOYI
86
The
alternative offered by Casaubon's

restoration would be inconsistent with
the
the quotation from Aeschylus,

l'an was
acknowledged by Herodotus (2. 145)
to be one of the youngest of the Greek
gods, and his name hardly appears in
Festivals,
260.
For other early
p.
evidence of the plural cf. Ar. Eccl. 1069
u Ylavts, Plat. fogy. 815 c "So/upas re ical
before the fifth century B.C.

It seems highly probable that the generic
use of the name is actually the earlier,
and that Pan the god is developed and
individualized from the class of demonic
beings with whom the rustic fancy populated the hills and forests of Arcadia.
The same history has been deduced for
fidôvres.
The
crarvpicrKOi,
are
literature
Ilavas
Cicero
dpewv
Warde
see
ical
of
the
Italian
Roman
Fowler,
ko.1 'Zarvpovs iirovcPanisci,

to
parallel
not mentioned before
'ZiXrjvovs
but this is probably

See also A. P. 6. 108 bfrjXGiv
(. d. 3. 43),
accidental.
Ildves,
xopovdiKTOn,
Kpavropes 'Apica5ir?s.
Plop. 3.
t<popot, Ktpaol,
fiovxiXov
17.
conception
parallel
Faunas
Pausan.
34.
8.
37.
2.
ANTHNOPIAAI
The
following extract from Strabo (608) is usually referred

'Sophocles says that at the capture of
was placed in front of the door of Antenor,
to serve as a warning that the house was to remain unscathed.
Accordingly, Antenor and his sons, together with the Eneti who
had joined them, found their way in safety to Thrace, and thence
escaped to the country called Enetica on the Adriatic. Then
also Aeneas, together with his father Anchises and his son
Ascanius, collected his followers and set sail 1 .' The leopard's
skin was also mentioned in the Locrian Ajax (fr. 1 1).
Pausanias
(10. 27. 3), describing the picture of Polygnotus in the Lesche at
Delphi, which set forth the incidents belonging to the capture of
Troy, referred to the house of Antenor, with its leopard's skin
over the entrance in front of it were represented Antenor and
his wife Theano (Horn. Z 298), with their sons Glaucus and
Eurymachus, and their daughter Crino and her infant
The
leopard's skin is mentioned in the same connexion by schol.
Pind. Pyth. 5. no.
In the same account (10. 26. 7, 8) Pausanias states that
Lesches in the Little Iliad (fr. 13 K.) related the rescue by
Odysseus of Helicaon, another of Antenor's sons, when wounded
in the night-battle
and gives reasons for concluding that his
wife Laodice was exempted from the fate of the other Trojan
women. Apollodorus {epit. 5. 21) similarly recounts that Odysseus
and Menelaus, recognizing Glaucus the son of Antenor, as he
was fleeing to his house, saved him by force of arms. Pindar
{Pyth. 5. 83) followed the tradition that the Antenoridae settled at
to the Antenoridae.
Troy a leopard's skin
Cyrene
tyovTirav âXKo^n p îat evoi

1
Strabo
is
extracted by Eustath.
'
T pcoes AvravoplSac
//. p.
405, 29.
crvv
ANAPOMEAAANTHNOPIAAI
a yip fioXov,
87
Ka-rrvaidtlaav trdrpav Art) XBov.
The
family
numerous that its migrations might well have been in

than one direction. Bacchylides spoke of them as fifty: schol.
Hom. 12 496 triOavov fiiav tckciv iff, ov% ok BaK^vXtBrj^ v T)y
'"'t'""' ( i-iroypa<pi iralSa^.
Homer names eleven: besides Coon,
Demoleon, Iphidamas, Laodamas, and Pedaeus, who were killed,
Acan
ior,Archelochus,Helicaon, Laodtxrus, and Polybus
and Verg, Am. 6. 483 has Glaiicuviquc Mcdotitaque Tlhtsi10
locluumjuc,
tris
specified in
Homer P
Antenoridas, though these three are not so

216.
few other names besides those
which have been already mentioned appear in later writ
The reasons which induced the Greeks to accord a special protection to Antenor are recorded in Qu. 13. 291
and more briefly
in
ryphiod. 656 ff. rticva Be teat yet'trjv AvTqvopns dvriditno
fif.
'
ArpelBrff <pv\ae, (piXogiivoio yepovruf,

rfhk rpwrre^rff;
Posthom. 741
/.ctz.
Apyeloi
ei/tV>
Keiptfi,
>}
p.t\iX'V irpoTiprjs rivaiv

Trptjeia Beaixu.
Cf.
pnv <eB(kto yvv>)
oiriv p.tv 'Aprt'jvopo?
ff.
p.vi')ni)v
<f>opovT<;
exelvov,
cipvaamo yfPfOXrjv
TrapBaXxrjv irpoBvpois
He had entertained Menelaus and

when they came to Troy to demand the restoration of
(Horn. T 207), and protected them from injury (schol.
'otov <ri)p.a daXovres.

(
klysseus,
ad
He was the leader of the peace-party among the

and had recommended the surrender of Helen ami bet
H 347 ft. cf. Hor. Ep. \. 2. 9); and his honied sj>ecch
ire
ompared to that of N< StOf ef p.01 to Xearopctov tvyXvxrcov
An.).
ins,
<
\vTijvop6* t rov <bpvybs Bolt) Ot&i (Kur. fr. 899).

The tradition that Troy fell in consequence of the tnachery
has not been traced to any early writer* and there
evidence to show that Sophocles s/ai m quainted with it.
illy admitted that the
It
in Stimbo contains
;
Summary
in brie?
red to
of the plot of the Attitmridai*
annot be traced
the Locrian A/ax;
iree.
for
I:
for the incidents related
otherwise
to be
by Strabo,
in the action, would have been incompatible with the

There is. moreover,
development of the fate of Ajax.
and it is unreasonable to
a pl.t
with the same title
doubt thai it was adapted from Sophocles (Ribbeck, A*.
he Latin fragments arc mora plentiful than the
luded
I..
Inuihyl.
|>.
Ml, Who mentions

llir.
Wuaow.i
was
340,
oiil>
trn, has
where cc
llol/tnjjcr.
lama
WsSJBSi
(<>
I'Mly-
bU
inwi.
early work on ihr Fragment* (dr /r*g. Sf*.
rence waa drawn from th
holding that the Mibatance of StJ
luttmnfrf,
hut he failed t<> give * aatiafaciory accou.
he guccd in contain lh arrival
ngth of the bag
IS51 thinks, thai
it
I.
which,
of khesu*.
;
::
I04>0KAE0YI
88
Greek, and in at least one important particular they assist in

From the story as
enlarging our conception of the plot.
outlined above we receive no impression of a dramatic conflict.
Anterior was saved by the Greeks in consideration of his past
services, and that is all.
But Accius has ad populum intellego
referundum, quoniam horum aequiter sententiae \fuere (fr. i).
From this it was inferred by Welcker that the Greek view in
favour of Antenor was by no means unanimous, and that he was
What
saved from destruction only after a protracted conflict
may have been the arguments on the one side or the other we
have no means of ascertaining
but the association of Antenor
with the Eneti is a circumstance which perhaps bore nearly on
the issue.
In Homer this people are a Paphlagonian tribe
(B 852) under the leadership of Pylaemenes, and are reckoned
among the Trojan allies but the fragments of Accius led
Welcker to conclude (p. 169) that a new leader had arrived with
a fresh contingent of Eneti just before the capture of the city
namque hue em venio ut mea ope opes Troiae integrem (fr. IV); qui
ant illornm copias fundam in campo, aut navis uram, aut castra
:
mactabo in mare (fr. V.).

It will be noticed that, according to Strabo, Sophocles
recognised the connexion of Antenor with the settlement of
Eneti (Veneti) in the north of Italy. We thus get an interesting
link with the Latin authorities
Li v. 1. 1 iam primuvi omnium
satis constat, Troia capta, in ceteros saevitum esse Troianos
:
duobus, Aenea Antenoreque, et vetusti iure hospitii et quia pads

reddendaeque Helenae semper auctores fuerunt, omne ins belli
Achivos abstinuisse, casibns deinde variis Antenorem cum multitudine Henetum, qui, seditione ex Paphlagonia pulsi, et sedes et
ducem, rege Pylaemene ad Troiam amisso, quaerebant, venissc
in intimutn maris Hadriatici sinum, Euganeisque qui inter mare
Alpesque incolebant pulsis, He?ietos Troianosque eas tenuisse terras

prhman egressi sunt locum Troia vocatur, pagoque inde
Troiano nomen est, gens tmiversa Veneti adpellati. Cf. Verg. A en.
1. 242 ff.
Further confirmation of Strabo's evidence is to be
found in Polyb. 2. 17. 6, who asserts that the tragic playwrights
told strange stories respecting the settlement of the Veneti (irepl
(ov 01 Tpay(p$ioypd<f)oi ttoXvv tivcl 7T7roiT)VTai \6yov teal iroWrjv
et in quern
1
Ribbeck (p. 408) interprets differently. According to him, the reference is to a
decision of the Trojan people, after the council had been equally divided on the
question whether a last attempt should be made to secure a friendly arrangement
by the surrender of Helen after the death of Paris; and here Antenor, as on earlier
occasions, was the advocate of peace. This seems less likely. Ahrens thought that,
though Antenor's life was spared, his treachery was condemned, and he was refused
permission to settle in the Troad. Therefore he was sent away with the Eneti, who,
owing to the lateness of their arrival, would feel no resentment against him.
ANTHNOPIAAI
89
Biartdevrai reparelav)
in customs and dress, according to him,
these people closely resemble the Celts, but differ from them
Strabo elsewhere (48, 150, 543) mentions the
in language.
settlement of Antenor and the Eneti as a common tradition, and
in 212 appeals in support of it to the fact that Dionysius of
Syracuse recruited his racing stable from Venetia, recalling
the line in Homer (I.e.) which connected the Paphlagonian Eneti
with rjfjLiovtov yevos dyporepdayv (cf. Eur. Hipp. 23 1 ).
For the
trade route between the Black Sea and the Adriatic see
\
Early Age in Greece, I p. 366.
According to
him, the Veneti were Illyrians, i.c. Pelasgians belonging to
the melanochrous dolichocephalous race indigenous in the
iterranean (ib. p. 377).
The omission of the Laocoon and the inclusion of the Antcnoridae in the list of Trojan plays given in the Argument to the
p. 3, ed. Jebb) suggested to Robert (Bild und Lied, p, 201)
the identification of the two titles
but he recognized that there
:iuch to be said on the other side.
Fr. 373, as compared
with Strabo 608, indicates that the departure of Aeneas may
en mentioned in both plays.
The fourteenth poem of Bacchylides is entitled WvrrjvnpiSai
:
Theano opens the door of Athena's temple

their emba
Od\
evident, in spite of a lacuna, that they are conducted by
"t Antenor, who goes himself to inform Priam.
The
'i7raiTr)<Ti<;.
in
"nlcr to receive Menelaus and
and
I
is
it
>na
to the agora, and pray to the gods

The debate is opened by
of their sufferings.
uis with a brief warning that Zeus is not th<- author of
^; hUij lies within the choice of all, while Sj&Mf, her
are
ins
summoned
for a cessation
and destruction. At this point the ode

Jebb (p. 220) remarks: Blass and Wilamowiu
d the double title of the Bacchylidean poem as making
bable that the \vrifvopiBai of Sophocles was only another
for his
<nraiTT)<ri<i.
Such a second title for the
ly is intelligible, however, only if the sons of Antenor
the chorus; hut, in the case of such a drama, is that
It
may b
that, if this identification were
it would be necessary to find another solution for the
ray>) mentioned in the Argument to the AM* In
ice of the current hypothesis that it is an error for'EX^K
to ruin
abruptly ends.
'
'
I.
204>0KAE0YI
90
137
OpVlVa
ida
137
Athen. 373
C,
r>
kov ov fiovov opviv dXXd

'
'Eo&okXtjs AvTr/vopldais
'
KOLl
Kt)pVKa KCU OLOLKOVOV
iwl hi rod dpcreviko.1 opvida... koL
opvida. .didicovov
.'
The
reference underlying this quotation

Hartung suggests that
is obscure.
(1)
6pvi6a = omn, as in O. T. 52 ([ebb): see
also on Eur. Hel. 1051.
Some slight
confirmation may be drawn from the fact
that Aesch. fr. 95 is quoted by Athenaeus

directly afterwards.
(2) Ellendt holds
is the eagle.
He is presumably thinking of the rape of Ganymede,
and of such passages as Pind. Islh. 6. 50.
So apparently Blaydes, who render- ko.1
KrjpuKa 'both as herald.'
that opvida
138
dêxfjiaa-djxrjv
1
38
Hesych.
a<f>wpil\7)(ra.
p.
334
2o0okXt?s
rivopidais cod.).
'
dipupiacrcrdfiriv
AvTTjvoptdais (dv-
Bekk. anecd.
d<f>e\piaifirjv' d(p(i}fii\r)<Ta.
p. 470, 13
outu 2o0okX^s.
Eustath. Od.
p. 1831, 3 d<peipiaad/xr)v ijrot

ws iv prjropiKip /curat XetK<p
(Ael. et Paus. fr. 389 Schwabe, who how-
dcpuniXrjcra,
without
com-
its cognates
occurs in Horn,
370, Kade\f/iaadat ib. 372, and the
verb in p 530 and the Alexandrian
see on
r 331,
ever prints
ment).
For
i<f>\l'ia<jdfjiriv
word and
this
i<p-^/idadai
fr. 3.
simple
poets.
139
iKfia/3pdau
139
139
Hesych.
eiccraXevcrai.
rrj
e/c/Sa^dfcu cod.: corr.
p. 40 e*|Sa/9dar
2o^>o/cX^s 'AvrrjuopLdais (iv
vopldes cod.
11
).
There appears
to
be something wrong
with the tradition: M. Schmidt conj. e/cdfia%e' ecrdXevire, but a simpler and more
attractive remedy was Pearson's eKXaXrjaai
for eiccraXeucrai.
Hesych. I p. 349 has
a(ideiv to </lo?> di7]pdpu}fiiva Xi-yeiv.
Zvioi 8e /3oa', and several scholars support
Cf.
el fir) (ja(3dei 7' in Ar. Av. 1681.
â/3dKT7js (Cralinus) and d/3a (Archilochus). But Hesych. I.e. has also /9a/3pdwv KCKpayus gvvtovws, and this is supported by Ananias (fr. 5) ap. Athen. 282 B
brav dipos r 77 K-fjx^Tai f$aj3pdu<criv of chirruping crickets.

H., however, thought that iico-aXevcrai
was sound, and restored eK(laftpd%ai with
the sense to toss up as the sea does, or
boiling water.'
He relied on the use of
(Ipdacru, ppdfa and fipvfa, and held that
,
'
fiajipdfa was related to ftptifw as ira<f>Xdfo

The assoto <pXvw, KaxXdfw to /cXi'fw.
ciation with sound (ppvxdo/Mi etc. ) is

paralleled by irepi,S/)i>x'os (schol. An,
to shake
For eicoaXevcrat
336).
see Suid. eKcrdXeucrov avr6. (^4ve-yK0v,
Lys.
read),
'
1028 (where iKcricdXevcrov

and iKaaXdtroa in A. P. 5.
is
23,-.
ANTHNOPIAAl ATPEYI
ATPEYI
91
H MYKHNAIAI
This play cannot be considered apart from the title Thyestes

There is surprisingly little evidence for the existence
of an Atreus-. Hesychius quotes \A.T/>et ; Mu*>/ rats, and a scholiast
(p. 185).
The 'Thyestes is quoted

Mwetfpmlatf.
most part simply under that title; but
chius refers four times to fWo-n;? i*ua>i/to?, once to HueoTijs
6 iv ^.iKvoyn, and twice to &v>jtt)<; Scvrepos, and Orion cites
4k tov a Hvtarov.
On these facts it has generally been held
that Sophocles wrote three plays dealing with the gruesome
Is concerning the two brothers
that the famous incidents
of the golden lamb and the Thyestes-feast occurred in the
Atreus
and that the plays entitled Thyestes related to the
unnatural intercourse of Thyestes with his daughter, and the
011
Euripides
refers
twenty-two times,
to
for the
fatal issue
by which Aegisthus became the appointed
a\
her (Welcker, pp. 357

The problem is unusually
370).
intricate, and it is hardly possible from the existing data t<>
tain which parts of the traditional material were selected by
for treatment.
The fragments themselves, with the
\ception of fr. 247, which seems to refer to the StcyOfldo not give any assistance towards the unravelling of the
plots, and it is scarcely legitimate to draw any inference from
more numerous fragments of Accius, whote Atreus (AuL
Gell. 13.2.2) has been supposed to be an adaptation of Sophoi
<///.
aee especially the
by Cic. //. d.
it
must be remembered that Knnius had
written a ih),
while it is likely that both thc>c
Roman tragedies dealt rather with the central motive of the
than with its outlying incidents, we cannot believe that
content simply to reproduce the treatment of
Sophocles.
Indeed, his known attitude towards his n*
forbids such a conclusion: it is certain that in his Autigotu
he departed widely from Sophocles, and his /*hi/>H fetes depended
on more than one original (Schanz, Rom. I.itt. p. J(
Hitherto it has not been convincingly shown that Sophocles
more than two playi upon the story of the brothen
ning th<- events which occurred at Mycenae, and the other
the Sicyon
Since everyone hearing the name Thyestes
alls the banquet, the other part of his story when
to would naturally lx: distinguished as happening in
ianquet-play were known by thrd, on the other hand.it would not !* unnatural
traditional title may have beet
nquet-play, what-
Sophocles
1,
;;.
IO0OKAEOYI
92
be referred to either as Thyestes or as
by Epict.
A /reus.
This
may
be
32 tcai iroia TpaymBia aXXrjv

apyrjv %X C
A.Tpev<; RvpnriBov rl earn ; to cpan6p,evov, which is
admitted to be a reference to the Thyestes of Euripides. For the
present, however, we may put aside the question of the contents
of the play (or plays) entitled Thyestes, except in so far as that
title may have been an alternative for Atreus.
No one denies
that Sophocles wrote a play covering much the same ground
as Seneca's Thyestes, whatever its exact title may have been.
The general ambit of these plays may be gathered from Dio
Chrys. 66. 6 (II p. 162 Arn.) oti p,ev <ydp Bid ^pvaovv irpofiarov
dvnaraTov <Tvve/3r) yeveadai Tr)\itcavTT]v ol/ciav T-qv TH\otto<; 01
TpayoiBoi (paaiv.
real tcaTK07rr) p,ev rd rov veo~Tov Te/cva, tij
UeXoTria Be
iraTrjp ifii^dr) icai tov AiyicrOov ecnreipev. ..tovtois
Be ovk dîov diriaTeiv, d yeypainai p,ev ov% virb twv rvyovrwv
dvBpoiv, Eivpi7rlBov icai ^LoQoicXeovs, Xeyerai Be iv p.ecrot<i roif
may also infer that the golden lamb was the
dedrpois.
initial cause of the trouble between the brothers, according to
both tragedians, and in this respect they appear to have followed
the author of the Alcmaeonis (schol. Eur. Or. 997). Is it possible
to obtain a better estimate of the scope of the banquet-play?
The answer will depend upon the weight to be assigned to schol.
rec. Eur. Or. 812 (Atreus and Thyestes, contending for the
throne, agreed that whichever could produce some divine sign
should prevail) iv tois iroip.vioi dvBpaSeXcfxp, KXe^jraaa tovto irapeBcoKev avra).
ye<7T?;9 Be Xaftoov tovto icai Bellas toi9 BitaaTais, t?}<> dp^r}?
illustrated
diss.
I.
28.
'
>
We
'
ovv ATpeiis tj]v crvfupopdv, dX\a

ioTepi]Tai t^<? dp^r}?, opov Te tt/v yvvalica
'AepoTrrjv Tip,copeiTai kcit dpcpw, icai oti ipboi\eueTO ve&Tr), kcu
'6ti iceicXocpe to dpviov icai BeBcotcev avTu), piyjras avTt)v et'9 ddXaa'aav,
&)? <f>T]cri HocpotcXfjs, icai toi>9 Tpeis viovs tov Sveo~Tov, AyXaov,
e/cpuTrjcre.
/j,t)
dvao~-%6p,evo$
Bvo-%epaiva>v, oti
dBi/ca><;
Ôpôpevov, teal KdXeov, drroKTeivas 7rapedr]/cev et'9 Tpdneâv tcS

Bi a 6 r)Xio$ p.r) crTepâs to
avTov vo~Tepov dire/cTeivev.
The
Trapdvopov, pbiav rjpbepav e'/c Bvo~p.5)v Trpos eco Bicppevei kt.
notion of Atreus and Thyestes submitting their claims to a panel
of jurymen is certainly not old, but that the lamb was a mark of
divine favour and that its possessor was entitled to claim the
succession are propositions so well supported that they are much
more likely to belong to the original legend than the variant
recorded by Apollod. epit. 2. 10. Cf. Eur. El. 722 Tepas eiacopLfei
tclv Kepoeaaav e\eiv
7rpo9 Bwp.aTa' veopevos B'
et9 dyopovs dvTel
Ace. fr. VIII quod mihi
Xpvcre6p,aXXov kcito, Bcopa irolpivav.
iraTpi, Kal

ATPEYI
93
prodigium
>rtctit caelestum pater
regni stabilimen
misit,
Sen. Thycst. 2ô possessor hnius rcgnat, /tunc cutntae downs

fortuua scquitur. The purport of the reference to Sophocles has
been variously estimated. If it is intended for the At re:,
Dindorf and other scholars thought, we obtain a valuable clue to
the construction of that play; but it may be merely .in inaccurate
reminiscence of Ai. 1295, 'tf indeed the vulgate text of that
s not corrupt (see Jebb's n.).
Nauck evidently attached
no value to the scholium, which he omitted from his edition
of the Fragments. There is, however, a further indication in the
which can almost with certainty be assigned to Sophocles,
and which increases the probability that we have here a rough
outline of his plot.
That is the statement that the alteration of
mi's course was due to the sun-god's horror at the impious
For this very thing is mentioned by Statyllius Klaccus in
epigram in honour of Sophocles (A. P. 9. 98) OiSiTroSes
iei.
ut Kai 'WXetcrpT)
<<
/3api>fj.T)i'i<i
/cat SetVi/ot? i\a$i<{ 'A-rpe'os
The same version was generally adopted by the

<k kt
Latin poets (see, besides Sen. Thyest. 785 AT., Ov. Her. 16. 205,
Am. 3. 12. 39 aversumque diem mensis furialibus A tret) but it is
important to observe that it also occurs in llygin. fab. 88,
which is connected with Sophocles for other reasons (see p. 1S5
and in fab. 258.
For another tale was current according to
after
hyestes by his treacherous and shameful plot had
temporarily obtained recognition as monarch, ZeiU promised to
Atreus that the course of nature should be changed in
and that he might promise this marvel to th<- people as a
Tin
that he was the rightful heir (Apollod. epit. 2. 12).
)ted by Euripides (fr. 861 8<k yap aarptov rrju ivavriav
hhov hrfpov<; T etTftxra Ka\ rvpavvos iô^tjv), and is apparently
Hence
ly Sophocles in fr. 738, where see note.
ker (p. 361) was undoubtedly mistaken in referring it to
x
>.
To
later tragedian.
onomer
It
altei
later rationalists
Strabo 23, Lucian de
Atreus was an early
astral. 12.
seems clear that Aristotle's allusions to hyestes in poet. 13.

to Kuripides,
10 etc., whether they relate to Soph
ni the banquet-play and not the story of Pelopia,
Icker thought thai Mi ^rjvaloi should be restored as the
1
-I he
t,
it
e>
idence
is
very slight, but,
if
the feminine
would follow that Aerope was one of the most
prominent ch
tctt
tttuage w.i
rtooked by Etchct In
that the cpiKT*mmaiit
familiar l<> him.
this
"til
l.y (>.
(niiu
in
J'kiUt.
of
Atrcm
in
the
f'irni
mm!
*w wmply alluding
to the
Mcrf
ZO0OKAEOYI
94
140
fia TYjV
KLVOV SdAUXV,
140.
140
Kara
iyBpQiv 6/j.vvvai,
ws Kal "Lo<pok\t\% iv MvKTjvalais (MuKijâis
AB)
tGiv
fj.a..Jx u'-'
Not so
by the cowardice that is
that man whose heart
a woman's, with men for his foes.'
It
is
important to observe that v. 2 is
subordinate to /36cr/ceTcu, for the main
clause (express or implied) to which fid is
attached must be negative. In Hipp. I.e.
the negative clause is firj fj.e6ôvras 56/xu)i>
'
his daily portion,
is
which depends directly upon foOi

know
that,
however stubbornly you contest it
if you die and abandon your children,
:
'
they will never receive their inheritance,

no! I swear by the Amazon' &c.
The
construction was correctly explained by
Paley, but several editors strangely make
irpoSovcra
supplementary
could only
to
mean 'know
which
you have
laBi,
that
/SoCTKeTai,
8'
appevas (&p<revas
Schol. Eur. Hipp. 307 elwdacrtv
elpwvev6/j.voi
Tj
apaevas
drjkvs [xev clvtos,
fydpovs f^wf.
N) codd.
abandoned'...
p6<rKTai, as usual,
degree
of contempt.
plies a certain
imCf.
591 ftooKei Si rovs nlv fidtpa dvffafiepicts.

R. A. Neil, who examined the
history of this word in an excellent note
on Ar. Eq. 255, pointed out that it is
generally metaphorical in tragedy.
See
OrjXvs, of a man
also Cobet, V. L. p. 67.
cf. 7'rach. 1075, Aesch. Cho. 304 Or)\eia
yap <ppw (of Aegisthus, who is addressed
The taunt is well
as ywr) in Ag. 162=,).
illustrated by Eur. Hclid. 700 aiffxpb"
yap oikov prifj-a ylyverai r65e. roes p.lv
fr.
/j-dxeffdat,
rovs
5t
5ei\ia
fiivuv.
The
so close, that one

may suspect that his father Thyestes is
Ribbeck (p. 200) compared
referred to.
this fr. with Ennius Thyest. fr. v, where
he supposes Thyestes to repudiate the
charge of cowardice.
parallel to Aegisthus
is
I4I
erncnracreL
141 Hesych.
revêrat.
{dirb
p. 168 ewiffirdffef iirt2o0o/c\^s 'ArpeZ }) 'MvK'qvais iirl
Nauck) twv
II
tois Xfi'Ois Xap.fiav6vTuv.
The
use illustrated is the same as that

found in Ai. 769 iriiroida tovt' iri<rird<reiu
The meaning is
k\(os, where see Jebb.
to draw in, as a fisherman secures his
catch
cf.
A. P. 6. 109 Kal icpvcplov
Tpi/cXtocrrof eiriairaaTripa /36Xoio. Solon
ap. Plut. Sol. 14 TrepifiaXwv 5' (Lypav dyaffOeh ovk etrto-iraaev M^ya
51ktvov. Soph.
:
210. 40. Jebb's apology for the use

of the active, that it is prompted bymetrical
considerations, is surely unnecessary.
Though the middle naturally tended to
assert itself, as the metaphorical meaning became increasingly familiar (see
fr.
Wyttenbach on Plut. mor. p. 39 a), no

objection can be taken to the active, at
least so long as its original force remains
prominent. The use of <pipeiv (e.g. El.
692) is exactly similar.
AXAIQN ZYAAOTOI
Until quite recently
it
was generally held that ^XâiSiv
alternative titles of the same

but the reasons which appeared to support that conclusior
will be more conveniently considered in connexion with the
The discovery of fr. 142 has entirely altered the
Svv&enrvot.
conditions of the problem. The internal evidence of the
fragment clearly indicates the story of the play to which it
avWoyos and Ivv&enrvoi were

play
ATPEYIAXAIfiN lYAAOrOI
95
iged and, since the language appears to be that of Sophocles,

pointed out in the notes, the inference drawn by Wilamowitz
that it comes from theWyaimv 0-1/W0709 can hardly be resisted'.
Not only does no other title seem to fit the data, but the words
in col. ii
2 ttov 'ort avWoyos <pi\<ov ; are a strong confirmation
of the proposed identification.
Also k^rdêrat in v. 17 may be
compared with fr. 144.
The chief interest of the plot lay in the relations of Achilles
with Telephus.
When the Greeks first sailed to Troy, through
Here
ranee of its real situation they landeJ in Mysia.
bus, who was king of the country, came out to meet them,
and killed Thersander the son of Polynices. But, fleeing before
Achilles, he became entangled in a vine-plant, and was wounded
;
by Achilles' spear. The Greeks retired, and were scattered by a

storm
Achilles reached Scyros, where he ultimately married
Deidamia.
At length the confederates assembled for a second
s.
Meanwhile Telephus, whose wound refused to
had visited Delphi and learnt from the oracle that he could
only be cured by the hand which had inflicted the wound (6 rpoHTcm
;
Ar. Nub. 919).
(EGF
The
sequel
is
described
in
Kara p.avr(iav rrapayevm\fjyo>< iitrat 'A^tWeii? a>? qyfiova yfW)<r6(J.evov rov WW "\\tov
trXov
and more fully in Apollod. </>//. 3. 19, 20 crwtXBovrtov &
p.
19) eireira 'Vrj\poi>
ftt ai>0i<;
/xera rr)v pr)$tlcrav oteraeriav, iv diropia rov
iroWj) Ka0<TT7]K<rav, *a0T]yfi6va
fir)
e\ovr<t, ov ffV
Ovvarbs
Wvtrin
99 ro
.-WoXXon/oc rore rev^taBtu
'a e%a>i', enrovTos avroj rov
orav 6 rpwaas larpos yivt/rai, rpv\ect,v t}p.<pi*o ft
u<piK6To, xal StrjSeU 'A^tWcoK ml vtrtar-^rffiivos rov
Bflâi
tt)i>
Ypoiav.
k'v
Tf/A.e<oe
fit
e*
t"/v
'
ir\ovv &il-at 6eparreirai >i-jro^vaavro<i 'Av\\tnK t)v

rot lov.
0pa7rv0ei<: oiv I8e rov irXovv, ri
~rinrovp.ivov rov Kn\\avTO^ Sta rfjs eavrov
'809 neXius
II.
of the healing of Telephus lormed the subject
of the famous play written by Euripides' under this title and
ords rpi'X taiV r}p4n*0p*to< m
in 438
Apollodorus appear to be due to Kuripidcan influence (cf. fr. 697,
lit, in
>i
and N
The ingenuity of the p
axed to solve the dramatic difficult) of
lephus, a declared foe, into a trustworthy friend.
1
///. /.
I
!</>;.
.nit
that
the
tfc
1310) did not altogether approve of the
p
>el by
UM divergence of nunc wa* iwolmbljr
iyle la cooaistenl nh a ungk tourcc.
v from the c iîng material ee Wilain
p, <,
and siarkie on Ar. Ath. p.

IO0OKAEOYI
g6
According to one account (Hygin. fab. 101), Telephus, in concert

with Clytaemnestra, seized the child Orestes from his cradle
before taking refuge at the altar, and threatened to kill him
unless his prayer was granted.
When the Berlin papyrus was
first deciphered, Wilamowitz inferred from the reading \)pecrTa
in col.
2 that the incident formed part of Sophocles' design,
but, now that Schubart has restored Trapiara, the inference falls
to the ground.
It had already been argued by L. Pollak (Zwel
Vasen aus der Werkstatt Hierons, Leipzig, 1900) from a vasepainting, which he refers to a date earlier than 470 B.C., that the
Orestes-episode did not belong to the original version of the
story given in the Cypria.
On the vase Telephus has taken
refuge at the altar his right hand covers his wounded foot, and
his left hand is stretched out in the direction of a warrior
(Achilles) who has drawn his sword against him, while he looks
for protection to a seer (Calchas) who is approaching on the
right.
Pollak's conclusion is entirely consistent with the
statement of the schol. Ar. Ach. 332, attributing the Orestesepisode to Aeschylus.
Nauck {TGF p. j6) regards the insertion
of Aeschylus' name as a mere blunder, but, whereas most writers
have agreed in supposing that the seizure of the child was
introduced
if not for the first time
by Euripides, Wecklein
{Die dramatische Behandlung des Telephosmythus, MiAnchen, 1909,
p. 16) has gone so far as to deny that it was mentioned by him
at all, except possibly by way of criticizing Aeschylus.
However
this may be, there is no evidence connecting it with Sophocles,
and it is more agreeable to his usual procedure to suppose that
he adhered as closely as possible to the narrative of the /ci/c\o<;
(Athen. 277 d). It is a fair inference that the action of the
play took place at Argos, and the new fragment indicates
that the reconciliation with the Greeks had already been
achieved.
The words ere yap TeyeTt<?...a\iW iper/icav (col. ii
7
10) may be taken to show that the Greek origin of Telephus
had been established, and that the Greeks had accepted him
as their destined pilot to the Trojan coast in accordance with an
oracle imparted to them by Calchas.
We may compare Hyginus
Achivis autem quod responsum erat, sine Telephi ductu
{I.e.)
Troiani eapi non posse, facile cum eo in gratiam redierunt et ab
Achille petierunt, ut eum sanaret.
It remained only to satisfy the
requirements of the oracle given to Telephus (6 Tpcoaa iral Il^Xe'to?.
Odysseus was
are significant
chosen for his discretion to negotiate with Achilles, who had not
We cannot tell
arrived at the beginning of the play (cf. fr. 144).
how he gained his point, but it seems unlikely that the discover)
i
AXAIQN IYAAOTOZ
97
Telephus' origin was the chief factor in persuading Achilles to

The course of the subsequent denouement
is perhaps to be traced, as Wecklein (p. 20) suggests, in
[yginua
quibus Achilles respondit se orient medicam non tiosse. tunc I 'lixcs
ait : non te dixit Apollo, scd auctorcm vulncris hastam nominal,
quam cum rasissent, rcmediatus est.
The title was well known in antiquity, as appears from schol.
BT on Horn. B 519 \â<T0ai...o0V teal \oy(iSe<: <al avWoyo?
\\acwv. Wilamowitz argues that the date of composition
must have been earlier than the production of Euripides' more
i\c his assistance.
complex
play.
142
col.
desunt duo versus
>
10
\l(TKOV
desunt cetera
col.
ii
^ vor\ov r)] [<f>vp[o]u> StVa

7rc/x[t/>ci Tj/JwaSa? aKTac.
142
142
1 3>a Murray: Sura pap.
Btrlim Kka iJbrU \tt v 1 p. 64.

bore fragments are taken from the
part of a roll 14 cm. high an<t
broad.
The writing tends to
:.
a cursive form, and is stated to

The
the second century A.t>.
lumn was entirely occupied with
*
I
it concluded in OoL
vaplara was restored
lit* Ii
n.
by
read
'O^VffTo, deducing therefrom an important
ng the development of
u baeq uently abandoned.
it-
\N il.mu.wii/.
at
first
some such word as mCpa mutt have gone

suggested rft> ykf
He points out that
in
was not previously
f<<r Sophocles, although +pvyimm
had lcn conjectured in At. 110. lint it
it probable that Murray's correction lira
should Ik- ndoptrd: the same error was
detected l>> Hermann in Actch. /'en.
'it
that U*m should
mean an trying wind is not maintain
er than circular motion
might have l>een expressed by r
Craw **Am
//..
143 ttfiv M l
Wiiajnowiti
ar 6\o
a/ior tt\\a.
the genitive
1
II
Pi
On
the
assumption that
<mo
iponmiov.
I04>0KAE0YI
98
crv T ir[r)h]a\L<oL Trapehpev\a)v]

(f>pd(re\LS t&>]
/caret
Trpa>
< t > />a[i>]
evdvs *l[kio]v TTopov

*A.Tpei[hav t]Secr#at.
yap Tefjyjeans r\pxv,

'EXXag, ov[j(]t Mvcria, tikt.l
ere
vavrav
/cat
AXIAAE
crvv tlvl
Trep.TTTrjp
p,a>v
/cat
r)KeL<s,
cri)
eV hiovri S' fades,
6
If.
/cawos ttovticls drrb ^dovb<;

nov Vrt (rvXkoyos <f>L\<DV
ov XP1 U rjcrvyov KelaOcu 7r[d]8a.
So/cet (rrpareveLv /cat /xe'Xet rots
raS'-
deoiv
'OSvcrcrev;
tl /xeXXer';
OA
Sir)
aXiojv ipeT/xcou.
'Ar/jeto'Sp scripsi
If the restoration of
Wilamowitz
adopted, it is remarkable that, in a

passage where the functions of irpypevs
and KvfiepvqTT)s are so sharply distinguished,
Agamemnon should be identified with the
former and described as subject to the
Cf. Plut. Agis 1 01
orders of Telephus.
is
ifxwpoaOev it poopwfievoi twv

dtpopQcn Trpbs inelvovs xai rb
irpoaTaaaoixevov vir' eKeivwv iroiovaiv. The
look-out man was specially charged to
watch for a change in the wind Ar. Eq.
S^SirptfipaTevffai KaiTovs avifiovs diadprjaai.
Was it likely that Agamemnon would
undertake such a task? Nor do I think
that the text is justified by the metaphorical use of irp{j}pa.TT)s in fr. 524, 1, where
I
hesitate therefore to accept
see n.
'Arpudq. in v. 6, and should prefer to
'Arpetoav.
It is worth notice
substitute
that, although 'Arpeidcu etc. occur in
Sophocles more than 30 times, the
singular is only found in Ai. 1349.
For the metre, bacchiac dipody in place
of Reizianum, see e.g. Eur. Tro. 321.
I am also unable to agree with Wilamowitz in joining ei)0i>s 'lXLov, which he
compares with the isolated Eur. Hipp.
It is simpler to give evQvs its usual
1 157.
meaning, and to treat 'IXlov as an objective genitive: cf. Eur. Cycl. 108 iropdfxbv ovk rjbeiada irarpipas xôvbt /. T. 1066
Horn, e 344 vbarov
777s irarpqias vogtos.
yaiijs QanfiKuv.
So perhaps 'IXiov <tt6Xov Eur. I. A. 816 (England). There is
no difficulty in the combination of such
irpqipeis to.
KV$Stpvt)TQ}v
co
ep re'Xet
7rat II^Xea>5.
Wilamowitz
'Arpeldq.
an objective genitive with the possessive:

see O.C. 729, Eur. Phoen. 934 (n.).
For
lbia6ai
to look out for, cf. Ai.
1165
airevaov KoiXrfv KaireTbv tiv' Ibelv.
Phil.
467 irXovv /jlt) ' airbwTov fj.ai.XXov r) 'yyvdiv
Eur. Hec. 901 fjivew avayKi}

irXovv bpQvTas rjavxov.
Plat. legg. 866 D
iv da.Xa.TTT) riyywv Tovt
o-K7jvijaa.fj.evoi
irbdas ttXovv eViî/XaTTeYw.
o-Koweiv.
7 TeycaTis. Sophocles also employed

the form Te7eas (fr. 1100).
9 <rvv tivi 81} 65v: cf. Aesch. Pers.
167 oXftov, 8v Aapeios rjpev ovk &vev deuiv
tivos.
Eur. Phoen. 16 14 (afore) dveo
dewv tov raOr' efiTixo.vriaa.fj.Tjv.
10 irnirHjp is a new word.
11
n-ovTtas...x0v6s, his island
home
of Ithaca.
Wilamowitz points out that
this use of irbvrios does not occur in
Aesch. or Eur. and quotes Phil. 269 irovTias Xpvar/s.
Pind. Netn. 8. 18 irovTiq.
KvTTpip.
12
o-vWcryos <j>iXv helps to identify

Cf. Eur. I. A. 1545 'AxatGiv
avXXoyos arparevfjaTos.
13 fj<rux. ov ---',n'8a occurs also in Eur.
Bacch. 647 OTTfaov irbb\ bpy-rj 5' virbdet
ijavxov TrbSa, where however it has been
much suspected, and in Med. 217 ot 5'
the play.
&<p'
ijavxov 7ro5os
bvavoiav iKTf}aavro koI
pq.6vfj.iav.
14 toIs cv riXtx. is another slight indication of Sophocles' authorship, since thi;

phrase occurs four times in the extant
plays, but nowhere in Euripides.
AXAIQN lYAAOTOZ
AXIAA
ov fj.rfu eV d/a-ais y io-rl KOJTnjpr)? ot/nxtos,

ovt ovv onXiTT)^ eêrd^crai irapcov.
OA
aXX atrtKa*
AXIAAK
atet
ttot
prj(TL<;
vcjêkel^
iorre
0'
K[dy]&j
7)[k]<u,
ax?
/i,eV,
opai[
never follows p.^ immediately

and sometimes the intervening word or
words alone are emphasized cf. 0. V.
8io ov tkJ\ toy* y' truatp. See also on
Kur. Phoftt. iftzj.
Wccltlein objects to
-,<
KtnrrjpTp o-Tparos, re(|iiiring <rro\ot as in

ind would read inKiKuTtvrai arparos from fr. 1 45.
The objec-
and the proposed

would make bxXlnjt in v.
hy|>ercritical,
ti
unintelligible.
17
^mcc
the time of Klm-ley

scholars have generally agreed in condemning 06. o0re in |>arall<l daOTCT, where
It is given by the Mss of Attic.
ovt' ovv.
(Kachner-Getth
jH.
see
lent:
Jebb on Troth.
received
is
less
-nUiii
Leaf on
165.
argues that oOr' should be

.-
negative
ground that where
strengthened, as here
or by rit, toi or ti, rt may stand in the
lie.
The suggested rule is
but, when he says that <*'&'
.in possible
with ovp
mdoubtedly goes too far cf. O.C.
II 34 oon lywyi at. ovh" orV ii.au.
In
if
the many instances where o*W
has bee
to oi'ti I should preread ov9' here.
I
Spaf
o/aajVJe,
/cat
]<
is
esrXinp < arparoi.

is dkkd. introducing an obj<
.
th
lMX
II
scus
tag, not
.1
ro<
viox\i:
<
Kur. Or. 800

VVilamowitz calls
also
in
*6a<f>.
30prjo-<i,hereotdeliherativespecches;
but the word never developed this as a
technical sense.
Cf. Aadk Suf>pl. 613
rotdfi' iwtiOtr pffffip dp<p' r/fiutp \iywp.
Achilles is the typical man of action, who
finds debate trivial, and pi/atit Xiytw has
the same slightly contemptuous force as
the common \6youi Xtytip (Wilamowitz).
Ko.Orju.tvo*. m.ictive: so I)cm.
d\V ohuu
34
8'
to.
6r\u6>.
natfijurtf' oviip wmovpt

vfUrtp' airrCtP ds-oXcAcor<t ri
4. 9 pJWorrai rinax al tooy-
frfpovt reoMrroijriftTcu.
31
ovoajiov wopivertu. 'in 110 degree

is forwarded.'
The local sense
of odianov is transferred to the moral
sphere (fr. 106 n.), but it has not become
So in I ur. llrr.
equivalent to oOtapMti.
*4 <; fitol flip oio*MoC> and elsewhere, but
/'.
*>* the ordinary meaning is
he passive sense of wptuttHi
(quarter)
..
r,
ill it
:; 4
I. fr,
314, 314.
printed in the e,u/i.<
but Schubert has since reported
It.
2
1
be
pace
is
insufficient
for
that
seems to follow that the

was an error, and that hpArt
should In- adopted, as proposed by Hunt.
fa echoed in Kur. I. A. 818 ra r.i
TWi fa
'Arpi6wr hi )Upi*p mW^ftMra.
not u> mui h limiatioii 4^ involantarv
e. and there are several imib a *./. Kur. AM. i|
lien root hop* 4m*MTpb+mP after
-.
It
1
AW
trwmr
///.
is
our
worse speed.'
f. Phil. 017
(dipiof arovdij topov parrot
.
with
replies
oV
7rXv<r[ouai]
/cat
rXefpd uxt\i)
it an Ionisin.
toi/*o9
pap.
JO
crrpaTov] /xc[X]X7j/i[ara].
10
adversative, (yet...
is
.%/
/xeXXcre,
/cat
oT/aard? re M[vpJ/Lu8cot>,
33
u.tJv.
iv Kaipto -vptotv.
e/cao-ro? p.vpCa<; Kadijfieuos
[Xi7r]a>i/ 'Ar/jei'Safti/
ov
yap
cnrevheLv
ro 8' epyov [ov]8a/xou 7ro^>cvcrat.
Xe'yci,
99
d-ariiXar
718 awtviup
ijyaytp.
tawtvi' ov&ir ttx*

equivalent to awtvtup inaipwi.
d' it'
For other esample*

al**oaTp6+oi.
Hugh, / ragit Drmma, p. 135*.
IO<t>OKAEOYI
IOO
The metres of the choral ode present

hardly any difficulty:
~
-<Alcaic, quatern.
ba. ba.
enhopl. Archil,
<
~
-
w__~~_
_ ^ _
restant tantum
tamen
ut
ia.
sp.
(cf.
At.
197, 400)
glycon.
Alcaic, quatern.
(enhopl.
col.
tigia, ita
cr.
(enhopl.)
pherecr.
paroem. (enhopl.)
pherecr.
lecyth.
iii
personarum nominum hie illic vescmyppvdiav a versu undecimo usque
ad vicesimum et fortasse
latius pertinuisse
ostendant
143
o>5
143
A.xaiQ>v avXXbyip
tbs
a/ceOr)
1,o<f>OK\rjs Iv
<j>s...Tp6iriv.
'375
vii
KV$iepvr)Tr)
Theogn.
ddXaaaav ovbe
cro<p$.
o\(2ios 8<ttis...ovk otbe
oi 4v ir6vT(f) vi>i- iiriodaa. fiiXei.

Here the
point of the comparison is lost, but we
may guess that stress was laid upon the
risk run by every sailor at night, even
when wind
(ovpiav)
Or
and weather were
may
be that the skill

of the nocturnal pilot, and not the danger
of his enterprise, was the chief motive of
the simile.
See Zenob. 5. 32 oil vvktiirXoeis
iirl tGiv fir) aKpiûis ti toiovvtwv
in his favour.
yap
it
aKpifieoTtpa
vbl-
6 be
rrjs
rjnepas
twv darpuv
Tre\ayo5po/j.ov<n, 5ta ras

tlxreis.
is
TLKTtiv
7/
'
a mistake to suppose that the

Greeks did not sail by night, seeing that
the use of the stars for the purpose of
navigation was attributed to Palamedes
But if the sky was clouded it
(fr. 432).
was necessary to lay to, and the sailor's
dread of night became proverbial. Aesch.
fr.
193 (Cicero's tr.) navem ut horrisono
noctem paventes timidi adnecfreto
tunt navitae. Suppl. 111 <piXei wbXva
It
vavK\r)pia<;
airevOvvovcTiv ovpiav rpoiriv.
Pollux 10. 143 vavTiKa be
K&Xoi...TT7)baXia irXrJKTpa,
,
WKTepov
vao<f>v\a.K<;
7rXi]KTpoL<;
Xpticwnros d<j>eXwv
rots
arjfxei.-
tt)v
'oi)'
vvKT^^Xoeh etwev (Stoic, vet.

fr. Ill p. 202). Strabo 757 the Sidonians
became skilled astronomers largely in consequence of their enterprise in nocturnal
aw6<paot.v
navigation.
1 vavicXripCas.
Campbell
is
probably
right in concluding that the word is used

here for a ship: see n. on Eur. Hel. 15 19
rts bi viv vavKXi\pia
(k Trjab' dirrjpe X^"
v6s;
But we must not lose sight of the
\
possible alternative: 'pilots of a voyage
by night.'
There is in any case a
pleonasm in the combination of vao<pvsee n. on Eur.
Xa/ces and vavKXrjpias
:
Phoen. 1549 Troda Tv<pX6irovv.
is a synonym
for the
They quote Hdt. 1.
itXt)ktp<jiv,
koi
vw6
re
bvo
94
bvo dvbpuv bpdwv eareuTuv' icai 6 fuv Zo~w
fXicei to wXriKTpov, 6 be fw u>$4ei. Cf. Sil.
Ital. 14 401 resident is puppe magistri
affix it plectro dextram.
ir\i]KTp<ns
ordinary
Trrj5aXlots.
idtiverai be
144
cru
vip
144.
codd.
144
yap
8'
ev dpovoicri
1 irrvxas Toup:
iraptOTiv 5s
Bergk
Schol. Pind.
aw6vet.1j.0v dvH
ypappdraju
nTV)â<; k\a>v
ov ndpecTTiv 09 ^vvcopocreu.
et Tt5
codd.
tU codd.
tttv'x'1 *
irdpeaTi
Isth.
tov
2.
68
to
avdyv wdi.
"ZoQokXtjs ev 'Axatwv avXXdytf)'
'<ri>
5'
4v
vip! et ris
dpovoiai
Bergk
dwoveifiov v4p.ei tis
ypauâTuv irT^x a ^ ?X UV
vinei tis
011
HapSe" vtos ev
irdpeaTi tIs
ttj
dirbveifio
^wibfioaev'
'Apr/Ty rd &vei(j.e (dvvep.e
AXAIQN IYAAOTOI
Valckenacr)
1
8.
dir
rod irdyvwdi
< 6 > ftou*6\ot
iuipurri
47
ypdnpara
f.
if/tTcu,
vapuli*
u>j
teat artip.r)
referring to Theocr.
8' i <p\oap ytypa-
rtt
arptiuT) ûptori'
'oifiov n'' 'EXfVai <pvrb tipu'\.

The fragment relates to a muster of the
Achaean chiefs held immediately before
their departure for
The number
Troy.
is to be ascertained by reference
of the suitors of Helen, who had
joined in taking an oath to Tyndareus
<rj
yiwoi.ro Tvr&apii Koprj,
roiVry
I
^t
oi-pauvptir, tl tii 4k doftwv \a,1up
(Eur.
I. A.
Thuc.
6i).
o.
i.
in j,
Cf. At.
ties,
fr.
</>,
40
ff.
ofxotro
Phil. ;j,
\
K/.
II.
In Theocritus
101
the meaning
/.<.
'to read'
to oneself (strictly, perhaps, 'to con

or 'speil out')-- is certain, and we
may
believe that Parthenius (first century B.C.),

a learned poet, is following some such
authority.
In i'indar most editors have
refused to follow the scholiast, l>ut Bury is
inclined to adopt awtifio* with Tyrrell,
who suggests for our line aravd/MW ff rtt
ov rap ot (ivwMOffrr.
But they have
omitted to point out that the Greek for
recitare or reeensert is &pap4p.*o~$cu
11 dt.
I.
173 tipopirov Ht.Mt 4o~rt, *araMi
:
iuirrdf p.r)Tpo$tP col rift p-irrpbt dpaptpjtrtu

rat nijripat.
The schol. on Ar. v. 1 389
suggests that probably Achilles was found
held that dwtrinopro glanced at the meaning dptyipuo-Kop.

To this should cor-
1 v epovowri.
Welcker thought that
the words were spoken by Odysseus to
respond
Agamemnon.
However this may be, the

ullressed appears to be seated on
a high chair for the purpose of taking the
\âmemnon v/as primus inter pares,
r
treated as monarch of t hens,
so that a reference to his
royalty would be out of place.
For the
Homeric Oporos see Ameis-Hense on
o 13a.
Herwerden, thinking of a document kept in a place of security, pro
to 66fUHOi
wrvx/U here metre
accentuation which is now
generally adopted.
See Sandys on Kur.
Batch. 02.
f.
Fur. fr. 506, 1 4p d4\rov
wvxa.li ypatptw tip' at'-rd.
3 v<|i' l Ti. The text of I'indars
-l is unfortunately corrupt, and the
value of his testimony has been variously
'
rimodai
answering to
put down, register,'
which we find in the phrase rlntw woorrdrar: cf. Polyb. 6. 47. H rwr d$\wrQp
roi>t ni) rtPtfiTitrfvon, unlicensed athletes.'
'to
pi/jLtur
mark
citare,
off,
'
So Kararinw
KaraMtlnirrt
Aeschin. 1. ffj Ira i'Mt

rip t pour)* 010 op rdtr
in
tit
Tifiapxo". if>. 159. It is possible th>

that we should read repp, and make the
sentence interrogative ('won't you call

over...?').
But, on the whole, Bergk's
rift' cf ni accounts better for the facts, and
particularly for the interpolation of &*6ptifiop (see cr. n.).
We should render
.ngly: 'mark off on vour list any
who are not present.' Madvig, who
interpreted
it
similarly
There is no doubt that some

of the uso, of rinw and its compomsdi
cstim.itcd.
;>a*srd into current
Ar
The m -holiast
wards became obsolete.

'hat
&wopup.or in I'indar means
.ipparently on the
ground that p4/u*
147 p4fui' ipaytfiiffKti.

arayw<ixrKtu. p4puo' ifaytpuxruu)
and irarimii (cf. Fpioharm. fr. 714 K.)are
used in the same sense by other poeU.
ill
MM'
ays of
let us
('dinu
p4(u,
simply "gi><
'it is
So
hear."'
also
o* wde*mv.
These words are suggestive of a n
roll: sec Tucker 00 Aesch. Cko. 695
vapovfOP 4yypa<pn and Headlam in (
xvii 246.it (see cr. n.) seems to l>e a
bell's rendering 'ol>servc.'
necessary correction, unless the corrupt
Tucker
eper.
p.
(C.A*.
vmi
i<
>n
/o>
proposed eveVcpr, tit waptm; rlt (wn*But that surely would be too
lAootp;
abrupt.
145
eKKCKurrrexrrat
145
itttKurrnrai
4KKtKQTirrai)
'
Zo+onMfi
cr
restored
i.
ov\X6yio
Muwfus).
rc^ccurs-ci/rat,
II
p.
4&tprvnu
ZvMoy*
Mcincke
referring
4wl
Kitnrqi
proposed
4(ôrvrm
to complete the (loss. Nsuck

thought that the simple verb i>tfvtvnu
ought to be substituted, but the fondness
to
400 Kttijvtvrsn orparot.
and
< *tm >
Ar
and with
.
for verbs compounded w.th
slightly intensive force make*
'
IO0OKAEOYI
102
see on fr.
Meineke thought that KeiabirevTcu
524.
a-rpards was taken from a tragic poet,
The question reand so Wecklein.
mains whether ^KKeKdowevrai meant ' is
provided with oars,' or 'is equipped with
weapons.' In favour of the latter, see
the suggestion unnecessary
on Eur. Hel. 1128
p-ovbicuiros
dv-qp
Timoth. Pert. 155 aiSapoKuirot' EXXdv.

But of course the other meaning, which
Hesych. recognizes (11 p. 460 KKwirr)T<u'
cf.
7)
vavs),
is
perfectly legitimate,
if
required
by the context. See also Boeckh, Urkunden, p. 291, who gives from an
inscription twv $vyG>v KfKunrrjvTai P.
and
I46
TTlCVOV(TUaL
146
Hesych. II p. 162 eiriêvovcdaf

2,ocpoKXr)s 'Ax/xapTvpeffdcu, iropeveadai.
atuv o-vXXbyu Kai AiVx^Xos Kp-qacrats (fr.
120).
The
inference to be
drawn
that in
is
one of the passages cited itriêvovcdai was

equivalent to /xaprvpeadai, and in the
other to TopevtoOai.
For the first ( = to
demand good offices), which arises from the
host becoming bail (so to speak) for his
fellow-countrymen,
Aesch. Ag. 1319 iiriêvovp.ai ravra 8'
guest
his
to
cf.
u>s
i-eivobbicos and êivoboKelv are

have been used for tidprvs and
puprvpeiv by Simonides or Pindar see
Apollon. lex. Horn. s.v. and Etym. M.
The other meaning is app. 610, 42.
parently to be on one's travels, or to
0a.vovp.iv7).
said to
sojourn abroad.
6 rb fir] irpitreiv
Arist. pol.
koitols,
occurs in Isocr. ep.
It
eirievovo~dai.
(7).
Etym. M.
6.
rots ttjXi-
1327 s 13,
based upon
p. 470, 47, and is

the phrase iiti îvr/s elvat, for which see
0. C. 184, 563, Eur. Andr. 135.
147
7TLaeiOvcrr)vla$ iwi.:
corr.
2,o<pOK\r}s
x P ''' Z<rfio~av, Eur.

A. 151 irdXw elabpp.a, oelt x a ^ vovi
The transition from iiriaeiciv i/vias to
iirio-eUw rivd is illustrated by Eur. Or.
bp.0KXr)aa.vTts ijvlas
/.
2 55
The action of a driver encouraging his

team by slackening the reins and shaking
them over the horses' backs is familiar
to everyone : see El. 711 of 5" dp.a lirirois
'tiVci^ fioi
f-V
5pa.KovTw8eis Kopas,
dence
of
the
rds alp-arurrovi kcu

The coinci613.
ib.
with
latter
(irio-lytiv
is
accidental.
I48
148
ytvopivas fiavrelat, as 4>iX<5AT)p.rrrpa evpeiv.

I 416)
Xo(poK\r)$
'AxattDv
avXXbyw (avXXoyov
cod.).
The first part of the gloss recurs
in Phot. lex. p. 311, i, Suid. s.v. v/jl-
olwvbs in the wider sense, was the name

given to anything capable of significance
as an omen which a man might encounter
in moving from place to place.
Aesch.
Prom. 502 KXrjdovas re 8vckoItovs
iyv^l)plo^ avroh fvobiovs Tt o~vp.fibXovi.
Ar.
Av. 719 opviv re vonlfere irdvO' Sirairtp
irepi
<pi)pr\
fmvTeias biaicplvei
y vpuv
fibXovs.
opvis
Hesych. in p. 172 f vp.fibXovs

tovs did twv iTTappMv oiwviapiovs IXeyov.
dverldcvTO 8t oStoi Ar)p.r)Tpi.
tiv$ 5e rds
8td tt)s
Xop6s
<pr)p.r)S
<pT]<n
(EZ/G
'
0~tI,
WTa.pp.bv
opvida
KaXeiTe,
opviv,
OtpdvovT''
IvppoXos,
properly
an
adjective
to
vp.f3oXov
opviv,
<puvrjv
AXAIQN ZYAAOrOI AXIAAEQI EPAITAI

wov
There the
103
1. |.j it is implied that <rvpjio\oi

are derived from oi avavTwrrtt.
Several
cea are given in Hor. Carm. 3. 17.
leaving
to
on
the house
So,
Humble
was ill-omened: Tibull. 1. J. 19, The
be observed that liesych. and the schol.

Ar. call wrapfii a case of vvufto\ot,
although Aristophanes keeps them apart,
and thai Hcsych. seems to identify &IM
and a&npo\ot, although all the ancient
authorities distinguish them.
The explanation is that the classes into which
omens are divided are not mutually
exclusive.
A speech (>i}mv> might he at
once ominous in itself, and also avn$o\o%
if addressed to or heard by the person
eagles and the hare are called Mtor ripat
whose fortunes are
Spfip,
bpi.
a definition
i'nfio\or 6<>vir
ffvpfioXoii iwoiovy
schol. gives
> iirj
<pi)aii>,
rmn xpdra (waPTutrat,
Kal 4( dwtwT-fatut Ti Tpocrinalromat, and

then proceed! in words identical with the
first part of Hesychius' note.
In Xen.
num.
Acsch. Ag. 104.
ufioXot in
It
affected.
will
AXIAAEQI EPAITAI
This was a satyr-play, as fr. 153 proves.
It is probable
that the satyrs were themselves represented as unsuccessful
lovers of Achilles, and as filled with indignation in consequence.
Wilamowitz thinks that Achilles was the pattern of the

Athenian 7ratc xa\dc, and that Phoenix (see fr. 153) was his
trai hayoyyos
Another character appearing was Peleus (fr. 50),
wlv> may have warned Achilles that the sports of his boyhood
warrior (fr. 156).
must soon be exchanged for the life of
scr inferred that the scene of the play was laid in the home
of Peleus at Phthia, but the cave of Chiron on Mt Pelfon is
a much more likely haunt of satyrs, and is clearly indicated by
It was moreover in the cave of Chiron
the language of fr. 154.
that Herat les met Achilles and fell a victim to his beauty.
The
was related by Antistbenes in his well-known w rk entitled
m. 40 p. 264 West, Prod. in. Plat
AU p. 98 Cr.), and was doubtless taken by him from older
1
.1
Fast. 5. 381ft*.
It may therefore be conjectured
with -...me confident e that the arrival of Heracles was an episode
iphocles.
There is some authority for reckoning Chiron
bimsell as B lover of Achilles (Dio Chrys. 58. 4 !1 p. 130 Arn.),
but that tradition is !.ss likely to be early. The case of Patroclus
must be
:n the
doubtful. A
P 44)
Achilles as the ipa<rrtj<, and is followed by many
Hut Plat<
.\\. IO)
fist. S. Martial
if>. 18OA rebukes Aeschylus as guilty of a perverse
\ 7S7),
troclus the etdei
on the ground that Hom<
so also
and diK-s not hesitate to call Patroclus the *paart)<
left
Arist.irchus ip.
>
No
inference should be
drawn from
Phil 434.
l>y
i.tcrvc that,
according t"
11
ApoOed
may have
suggests that this
.1
'
ol hi* hliodnca*
Iwen the motive <A the
IO<J>OKAEOYI
104
generally admitted that the play of Sophocles is referred

Trist, 2. 409 est et in obscenos commixta tragoedia risus,
mnltaque praeteriti verba pudoris habet. nee nocet auctori, mollem
qui fecit Achillem, infregisse suis fortia facta modis.
It is
to
by Ov.
149
to yap uoarjixa tovt
av
)(OLfx
clvto
(XT)
icfiLfxepou
ko.kov
KaK(os dneLKoicrat,.
aWpiov yepoiv
KpvcTTaXkov dpTrdcrcoori 7ratSes evirayrj,
rd irpoiT eôvauv rjhovas TroTaiviov<;'
otolv trdyov fyavevTos
8'
Tekoq
ovt
6 ^v/ao? ov#' oVa>9 d<f>y deXeu,
iv yepoiv to Trrjyfxa avjX(f>opou fxeuecv.
vbo-rj/xa Dobree*. fyxoros yap voa-rjua SMA, vbarfp! t-pwros cod. Paris.
Arsenius: <t>r)fx.epov codd. [quod tamen Hense silentio negare videtur]
4 iraibes einrayi) Campbell: iraibiaiffayrj S,
3 x 6 30 "' cod. Paris. 1985 x*P~ lv
iraibiais ayt) (dyg A) MA, 7rat5es affrayrj Salmasius, iraiSias x-P lv Blaydes, iraiSes
6 sq. corrupta
5 iroratvlovs cod. Paris. 1985: ttot iviovs
evayyj Elter
fort. liAvei
7 ir7jyfj.a Gomperz: KTrj/xa S, KTrjp.' d(rvp.<f>opov
Stws
v. infra
149.
1985
1 rb yap
4<pi/x.epot>
SMA
SMA
149
Stob. flor. 64. 13 (iv p. 460,

7 Hense) SoôkXtJs ev 'AxiXX^ws epacrrais.
'
There is an
tpwTos yap...irpoteTat.'
allusion to the passage in Zenob. 5. 58
(Paroem. I p. 1 44) 6 7rats rbv KpucrraXXov
iiri Tibv jUTjre
Kar^x* 1 " bvvapîvuiv pvqre
'
fiovkofxivuv
fiedeivai
/x^pLinjTat
ai/TTJs
irapotfxia
i)
2,o<poK\rj$
etp-qrai..
'Ax^XXdus
epa<r-
Cf. Plut. de garrul. 12 p. 508 D

wffirep ol
7rcu5 rbv KpixTraXXov ofire
KaTix eiv ofa"' a<f>ivai dlXovai.
Tots.
1 The reading of the MSS (see cr. n.)

appears to be due to the intrusion of a
The
gloss.
usual
as
<pTrj/j.epov,
cod. Paris. (Gaisford's B) is

interpolated.
Nauck retains
he formerly prowhich is flat
posed av-f) p.epov from Mosch. 1. 10. J.

thought i<pip.epov clearly right 'an attractive evil, but an evil still.'
There is
probably an allusion to Sappho's descrip-
tion of
6pireTov
Love
as yXvKvwtKpov
dfidxavov
cf. Anth. Pal. 5. 133,
(fr. 40)
Plut. qu. conv. 5. 7. 2 p. 681 B rjdovrj^
dXyrjbbvi fj.ep.iyfiivrjs, r)v avroi yXvKtnriKpov
:
bvop-dôvaiv,
y\vKvs
o~ti
Theogn.
1353
Trttcpbs
icai
Kal apwaXtos Kal aTr-qwqs (Hpios).
The asyndeton
is unusual and has

Blaydes conjectured
?X 01m' &" &vto 5' ov KaKws (or ^x 01 ^1 b'
This is better than
aCr' av fir) KaKws).
Nauck's x 0LP &' &"< adopted by Meineke.
In the next line the asyndeton of the
provoked suspicion.
explanation
MA
(Kuehner-Gerth II 344)
Kaxus go together, like
is
natural.
\li\
p.r)
KaKT) in Track. 722.
3 alOpCov see on fr. 1 1 7. Blaydes
would import x v ^^ VTOi from Phil. 293.
:
'not trickling,' hardobjection to this

reading arises from the ordinary use of
daraKTos, etc., as = "not merefytnckling"
"gushing" or "streaming." Eur. /. T.
1242 dardKTWv p-drrip vbdruv. 0. C. 1646
avraKTl (Plat. Phaed. 117 c). Ap. Rh. 3.
804 rd 8' (tears) ippeev, do~rayes uOrtttJ
With Hense I accept Campbell's
(J.)
einrayr), which was independently prodo-rayi), i.e.,
frozen.
'
The only
posed by Nauck.
5 rd irpftrra adv., as in fr. 966.
iroTaiviovs. novas, as in Ant. 849, Aesch.
Prom.
6 f.
102.
It is generally recognized that

these lines are corrupt, although no satisfactory remedy has been produced.
J.
was inclined to accept Meineke's Kpvubs
for x v P-bs, comparing fr. 507 and Eur. fr.
682, 3, but in other respects to defend
the text.
He construed ot50'...0e\n as
'will not consent to one's letting it go,'
with an ellipse of ns as in El. 697 (n.).
But, even if 7rcus were the subject, ottws
d<prj in place of d<pievai after 8\ei would
there is no
be quite impossible Greek
analogy to the examples collected in
:
AXIAAEQI EPAITAI
105
ovroi Se tow? po)vra.<i avro? i/xcpo?
hpav koX to
S oCtw
codd.
&
firj
Spav noWaKis irpoaUrai.
(oGrw y Gcsner) Meineke: o&rt
Goodw. 571, or more fully by Hale in

Tram. Am. Phil. Ass. xxiv 158. For
reason Meineke suggested o0r' *<plt1
r$*i WXi an> Kock t4\oi bi icpunoit 0W
atpitrai
6 rait
ofir' ...avp^tiptu>
0A.
Similar suggestions are Apelt's oOr' arevrpdiptiai 6d\ti, Hense's o6t' aruxr&^fai
ind
iomperz's o&r' aroo~r*o&ax
irgued that Zenobius'
futftirai tiov\otuU pointed to 000' orur
tudrjt iif. or o6t' i$ fuOiirat.
Herwerden
this
<
6v<in
d'
some words must have fallen

<oiV ara<rx*T6t r4\ti
that
out
xpvftM
a-aifkv
r^.
>
C.
(in
II.
/?.
xvii 193) preferred that the first line

should run rtXas 4" fêt fu> oM'
mit
orun aipr), or T<\of 3' d>uw d^j fr oil^' 6
wan ^x". holding rightly that fx<* ' s
led by the construction. He points
out that the indirect deliberative and
the tnfinitivc after fx< arc combined by
n At. 41H. .////. 271.
There
are two objections to this view (1) that
the change to the singular (6 wait) is
awkward, and (11 that fx'i ,| - not fit
"
With Dobrce's
oW
orut
ffvuii
'lIcMl
Ol
nuc
7 as a separate clause (i/.

Hut it has also occurred to me
may have
that the corruption
rAof
dî'rai,
prose,
o'a'
o"
vri.
It
is
where the idiom
Arm
oi'-x
true that in
chiefly occurs,
1 the second
shows
that
Sophocles
from using
oi>x
Srun, and
cc'
X"/* *
early
'
sage
indupcnsahlc
rtftfopo*
..
)(
oi>64
was
the apodosi*.
tar I
but I cannot help
hat at'nQopot here meant
in
oi'S'
evufopnv* yap rip

X6r a0ai'i>i [/.#. to. fx^]. I'isides ap.
ufop* r riji ipdrpov <nnf)a*at ru tf iptidtur
vrpi ifi/jroti
and in
that case jiVm would le required.
The
posed
and adopted by
7
M*>
rpayp
'
NM
n this
Mcineke
wpotrrai
aovpupofiov uparuv.
irpocKerai. ' And thus desire

often pleads with lovers at once to go on
loving and to abandon their love.
So
J., who remarks that &pa = ipa, as
iputrrat indicates (Martin conj. ipa* fi
Kai nil so Kock with roin fySuVrat i\yot
Iprfpov preceding).
For the use of Spar
in place of a repetition of the lending
verb see on Eur. Phosn. 516. rpoalrrai,
when used in the sense of 'attrn
wins over,' does not appear elsewhere to
be accompanied by an infinitive, but
follows the analogy of such verbs as
rtlOu and rporptru.
For the use of the
articular infinitive as complement (Spa*
Kai rt p\^f ipav Meineke), where the
8pov
'
simple infinitive would lie expected, an

idiom characteristic of Sophocles, cf.
Troth. 545 to 6' aC (ivoimu' rjjd" A/mm* rit
4 yifi) ivvaiTo; Ant. 7H to Si fiia oXitwt
j
Spar l<pv ifiifx<xPot, tf>. I 106 ft6\tt ftdr,

to Spa*, Phil. 1)51
Kapiiat 6' /(iarafuu
aAX' ovbi rot <rp X* l P^ s*W0oâ< to dp*v.
co-ordination
of the simple
bt
infinitive with the articular in th<clausc rf. El. 165 k*\ tC*v&4 not \afUif 0'
bpoiun k*1 to Tifraadat w4\n, inf. fr.
1K8 n.
For the adverbial use of avrot
II. con(zBOtotut) cf. Ph
B
jeetured Toi< y' ipu*Tot in v
| (/. /'.
XXIII 171), and, if that were accepted, the
use of wpoaiirai would be parallel to
|
following rendennj; t- tak<

Thi*
h slight ni.-lili. anon*)
with pain
is no lad image of it ; when the frost
hath come in bright weather, and children
seize a solid lump of ice. at first they feel
delight
but at last the melting
;
com
.-tided
mass cannot be dropped, and vet their

treasure will not rest packed firmly in
.
e,
Ml
at
thu drire often

perseve re ami to
the piece of tee,
J. adds, is
I
Blayde
7>0(7t<rcu
ff^' f"x"
duprj
SUA
first
ven
sight,
which
clr<
the soul that baa one* admitted it \ ami

at the same lime causes such pain that
er often wishes that be were freed
;:
I04>0KAE0YI
io6
150
tU yap
7TVp,
vh(i)p.
Herwerden
1 iireâpei coni.
150
Schol. Pind. Nem. 3. 60 5iu>KOfxivt) yap ujt'

avrov (i.e. Thetis by
Peleus) fieriflaXXe rat fj.op<pas ori p.iv ek
vvp, bri hi els 6r]pia
6 he Kapreprfffas
'
irepiyiyove.
irepl
hi
fiera/JLOptpwcrews
rrjs
avrijs Kal "SiCxpoKXrjs <p7)alv iv TptaiXip (fr.
Kal
618)
'AxiXXius
iv
ipacrrais
'
ris
If.
ts. ..ovtc
ircoraTci.
= 7ras:
on
see
If the reading
fr.
is
959.
correct,
we
is
are obliged to assume that iwiararetv

used in a sense otherwise unexampled
(=to
but corresponding to
that of iirta-Trjvai ( Track. 1 1 70 fj.bx6uv
tQv i<peaTwTwv ifJioi, 0. 7\ 777 irpiv fioL
tvxv roidh' iiriuT-q) and that it is followed
by an accusative of the person attacked
on the analogy of such cases as O. C.
beset,
visit),
ovhels
airrovs.. dv ifiiriaoi. ffiXos.
942
Otherwise the best correction
7T07-'
is
<re>
vhoip
werden's
coni.
iirefdpei
Mekler
(Eur. Phoen. 45 n.)
but, as the metre is not entirely satisfactory, Nauck, who formerly proposed
iirear paretic, suggests rls yap pn < ris
For the
Xt'wv kt4.
fie> .iirefdpei
metamorphoses of Thetis in her struggle
. .
from Peleus see on fr. 618.

here given correspond
to escape
The
ydp...vhu>p.'
4.
kewu
fxoÔo^ ovk e7recrTaret
fie
hpOLKCHV T,
particulars
Nem.
Pind.
to
4. 62 irvp hi irayKparis
re Xebvrwv
ovvxos bvKal heivoTaruv ffxdffais
ftpa<rv/j.a\xdvo)v
t&tovs dKfidv
dhbvruv
â/uey Kri., and to Apollod.
I
70
3.
yivofiif7)v 8i bri fiiv irvp bri di i'hwp
bri 5i Oripiov. Jebb on Track. 10 remarks

that similar powers of transformation are
ascribed to other sea-gods, such as Nereus
and Proteus and that they must be taken
to symbolue the unstable character of the
;
element.
Her-
151
ens vnb
[17
151
UrjXeo)^ XoihopiqOeicra KaTeXirrev avrov.]
Schol. Ap. Rh.
di iv 'AxtXXiuis ipaarais
4.
816
<f>y)<rlv
2o<poKXr)s
virb IlrjXiws
XoihopijOelaav tt\v Qiriv KaraXiirelv avrbv.
The
extract
1068.
is
repeated in schol. Ar. Nub.
Dindorf should not have combined this

notice with fr. 150.
It is interesting to
find the story of the quarrel between
Peleus and Thetis vouched for by Sophocles ; but he is not the oldest authority,
as it is said to have been described in the
epic Aegimius
Pauly-\Vissowa
(fr.
I
K.
963).
see
The
Bethe
schol.
in
on
Apoll. Rhod. u.s., giving the epic version,

says that Thetis used to test whether
Peleus's children were immortal by plunging them into a cauldron of water and
;
that this proved fatal several times. When

it was the turn of Achilles, Peleus stopped
not thrown into the water ; and this

Other authorities
the usual version.
say nothing about the elder children
Apollod. 3. 171 us 8i iyivvijae Oins iic
llrjXius fipi<f)os, dddvarov 0i\ov<ra iroir/irai
tovto, Kpv<j>a \li)Xiws els rb irvp eyupvjiovaa
tt)s
vvktos i(pdeipev 8 rjv avrif dvyrbv
fire,
is
irarptpov, fied' r\p.ipav hi
ixp liv
YlrjXevs he iirir-qprjaas Kai
dfifipoala.
airaipovra toy
Kal Bins
eirl rod irvpbs ij3bi)(re
Kw\v0ei<ra rrjv irpoalpeaiv reXeiUxrai, vrjiriov
t'ov iralba airoXiirovffa ir/ibs "Sriprjidas <x* T 0iralha Ihwv
"
In Apoll. Rhod. 4. 783 ff. Hera pleads

with Thetis to afford good passage for
the Argo she had given Thetis the best
of mortals for a husband, and held up the
wedding-torch with her own hand moreover, it is fated that in the Elysian plain
:
Lycophr.
178, who makes
seventh child, d<t>' ivTa
Medea shall be wedded to Achilles, -who

is now being tended by Naiads in the
home of Chiron, though he longeth for
iralhwv <pe\//dX(p <rirohovfxivwv

/jlovvov <j>Xiyovaav iâXvâvra oiroSbv. Here it will
be observed that the child is burnt in the
thy milk help, then, thy future daughter,

and Peleus himself; why is thy wrath
Thetis accordingly
so firmly rooted ?
her.
So
Achilles
the
'
AXIAAEQI EPAITAI
I'elcus, ami gives him
certain directions, but warns him not to
> her presence to his companions.
lx*, A"j M< XoXwffip w\tiOf tr f) rb

vdpoidtv drrr-Xryûrt IxiXctxras (863 f.).
Then she leaves him in great distress, for
rjxfi b'
he had never seen her since she
wedded couch
left
his
anger, when Achilles

ill
an infant, rj tuv yap pporiat
I
altl xtpi adpxai (bauv
nvKra Sia piaaif*
4>\oyp.^> Tipof fffiara b' avrt
dnjiptxrit)
Xpi*(TK( rtptr bipat, cuppa WXotro
d$drorot, Kai oi arvytpbw xpot y>?pat dXdXx.
aCrrapby' ! (irvijs dard\pAot lotv6t)9tv
wa'tbi <pi\of ffwaipotrra 3<a <p\oy6f fjKt 0'
in
ivrtpf
b'
i<nbwv, pJya rfywiof

rbr put* dp' dp-wdyitiv x a M<J5i
KfKXrjyCrra,
atrH) &i woti; UlXrj
ffup&a\4r}v
if
diovaa
fid\r
107
bipai. t)i't' orttpot,

0ij p" Ituv in ptydpoto
0oC>t,Kal<iH)\aTow6pTOf xwauiry **' r *
3' o0t raXiffairrot Urr' druriru.
There
are two or three touches here, which show
that
AjMillonius and Apollodnrus are
following the same original.
The schol.
on Ar. X'ud. 1068 seems to be confining
two different stories.
It is obvious that
the burning of Achilles in the fin
doublet of the better-known legend of
Deineter and Dcmophon, the bro:
Triptolenius
sec Horn. h. Dem. 331 ff.,
with Allen and Sikes's n. on 139. These
stories have recently been explained as
recording a rite of infant initiation,
whereby the child's hold on life is supposed
to be strengthens
k. Ilaltiday
in C. R. xxv 8 ff.
I
152
hopbs hi\6crTOfxov nXaxTpov
rj
Sltttvôl
yap oSvvai ptu
rjpiKOV
*AîXXi^tov Ooparo*;.
3
152.
s<|.
nr
fjptiKw 'Ax-XXtfoc Bcrgk [f)ptnov
152
4k
SchoL Pind. Mem. 6. 85 ovk

wapadpoprji b( (dKorof tlwt rb bbpv
ii\\Jun...d\\' Srt IStairfpof wapd
I
tA \\a
bUpovw yap
*oriri'aTTo.
bto eux a <-
uara
t* Srjpftci
uxrri
a ' "'? flo\ri [uxrrt] burod

koI ALfX"^>*
dwtpydfcaffat.
'X""
151) ' ndpMMOt tloti ndfuucoi

birXdatof.'
cat LoôX/t iv
.<a*rait
77
bbparoi.'
(fr.
y\^nai)uxx
'
generally admittr tli.it something

g with the tradition, and that the
conflation of two fragments,
of which ends at r\a*Tpor
i
observed by Heath,
as alone l>cionging to
\.
Dobree, however (according
.innot trace the source
nt), denied that any part of
at
'
first
was Sophodean.
same corn
came
bv the scholiast. \i/. Acsch. fr. 131 and

the Utile Iliad \l
fib
wXdxTpov, any striking instrument,
1
whether pointed
to the
-tight
that vv.
j,
critics,
such as the
so the reference to Telephus
might suggest but del
lyric
kdy he prints thnn as
/W<; {PLC HI JJOI.
a*
radition
/'.
no
was
'),.
ny
I
rate
fr.>m
dUogl
still
maintain
it
010. Tktb. 44O.

urxloulKed,
holars arc divided on ihr juration
whether ww ahouhl be re|>iace<l every*
in liiulai.
he papyrus of the
(at* 6 1151 Onus* that the doubt
existed at an early dale. Itarrh yhdr ha*
4|pu(ev 1* intrnitive
tuv only at 10. tit.
p |f| fan i' U#*a>a V*
in lloni
<
wpi botpdt dt#f, and ha misr.pirritly

been altered to J>ior (see cr. n.), nerhaaa
rightly.
tobrec.
1ri.1t,
at
Troth
1 did not
for
tame opinion
Ale. 128 3<i0o\or T\t)KTpo* wvpbt

riov.
(Fur the form of the ihundrrbdt
given in C. A*.
see th<
Ar. ./;. Jgf alp* .\>rrpor,
xvii j;fi.l
tl M^X". of the cock's spur.
2 Sihtvôi 'Iocs not occur el~
s<-e on Kur. Pkotn.
in SoplMKlci
piv is banished from tragedy by most
Sophocles.
iam La DfadOff)
douhlr
spear does not seem to

in the passages quoted
Itut
ttifium'
Eupborion 40 s-Xtippa
k4}tun lU ixt*' "'
3ta
rinn
is
rt
pi*
II
aJ
#daasra
Xr, '-
IU
Vu

I04>0KAE0YS
io8
153
ra Traihi^,
Trarrou,
opas, oTTtoAecras.
o>5
153 opui a anecd. Bachm., bp&a anecd. Par.

153 Schol. Ar. Vesp. 1021= Phot.
When
iv
rots
'AxiW^ws
5'
ipaarais
brjXov
us
t&v appivoiv) ieiXr)TTTai.

iiribbvrwv yap tl twv aarvpwv eh rr\v
(scil.
iirl
yvvaiKeiav
i
iwiOvfiiav
irawal...dirw\ecras.'
Bachm.
anecd.
Par. iv p. 173,
<pT)o~iv
p. 324, 16,
Qoivii;
See also Suid.
Bachm.
the satyrs inclined towards the
love of women, Phoenix taunted them

with treating their necessity as if it were
a matter of choice. iraireu here expresses
more often it is used for simple
scorn
astonishment, as in Plat. legg. 704 C irairdi
Eur.
olov \^yets='you don't say so!'
Cycl. 572 irairai, <ro<p6v ye rb vXov ttjs
Blaydes conjectured uvipas for
dfiiriXov.
cos opas.
lex. p. 369, 4 iraiSiKd ' iwl dijXetojv Kai

apptvoiv ipoipAvwv TCLTrerai rj Xiis...Kal
oCtws
dirwXecrav anecd.
s.v.,
Cramer anecd.
9.
154
crv
'Evaype, Ilrj\iO)TLKbv rpefyos
d>
S',
54
(ipicpos
Athenaei C, Eustath.
154
Athen. 401 D 2o0o/c\^s /xev yap

iv 'AxiXXius ipacrrah iirl Kvvbs t-Tatje
avaypoi) dirb rod <rvs dypeveiv,
Xiywv ' ffii b'^.Tpiôs.'
Eustath.
Od.
crv 8'...f3pe<pos.'
p.. 1872, t2 2o0ok\tjs
From Athen. also are drawn the statements in Gramm. Herm. p. 320 and anecd.
Par. iv p. 245, 20 (A. Kopp, Beitr.
zur gr. Excerpten-Litt. p. 159).
IlT|\i.a)TiK6v.
In fr. 1069 Achilles is
referred to as hunting on Mt Pelion, and
it is highly probable that the allusion is
rotfvofia (set/,
'
It was in his cave on Mt

Pelion that Achilles was reared by Chiron
to this play.
after
(fr.
he was abandoned by
his
mother
151): see Eratosth. catast. 40.
curious coincidence with the account in

Apollodorus (3. 171) may be noted 6
(scil. JLelpwv) Xaflwv avrbv ?rpe<pe crirXdy:
&
<>i s Xebvruv tcai (tv G>v ay pLusv Kai ApKruv

In
p.veXoh Kai wvbp-acrev 'Ax'XXea are.
the well-known description of Pindar
Xv
(Nem. 3. 43 52) we find Kairpovs r'

Zvaipe, but also that the speed of Achilles
that he slew stags dvev kvvwv.
thinks that Steph. Byz. p. 521, 10
was such
Nauck
\iyerai Kai kttjtikov ll-qXiUTLKbv refers to

this fragment. Cf. Stat. Achill. 2. 410.
For rpicpos: 6 pe~u.ua, like bipos (fr. ri):
jSX^ros
bipp.a,
Ar. Nub.
1 1
pXifina, see Blaydes on
76.
155
yAwcr 0-179
155
jxeXicrcrrj
/j.e\i(T<rri
155
Schol. Soph. 0. C. 481 Metros,

/j.e\l<T(T7is] vbaros Kai ptAtros
dirb yap rod
W01OVVT0S TO TTOlOVfieVOV Kai iv 'EpCKTTCUS
-
'
'
y\ibo~(T7)s.
Nauck
.KaTeppv-riKbTi.'
says 'versus corrupti medelam

But for the silence or hesitation
of previous editors, I should have thought
that the remedy was obvious. Campbell,
who half-heartedly suggests yXGxrcrav or
y\u<T(Trj, thinks
that the text may be
construed, 'with honey from his tongue.'
But yXwcrcnjs depends on the verb, and
it is strange he should not have observed
that pelv and its compounds require the
desidero.
'
KaTeppvrjKOTL
tcu
Ellendt
/xeXicr a r) s
codd.
dative (or less commonly the ace.) of the

tpbvtp
16
Eur.
Tro.
flowing liquid :
Karappei, Bacch. 142, Horn.
149 etc.
The corruption of p.eXicro-77 to fieXicrcnis is
hardly to be wondered at. The correction
occurred to me independently, before I
found that it had been made by Ellendt
and Blaydes. Wecklein also (Berlin,
Woch.
philol.
p. 656) proposed
comparing Ai. 9 ndpa
Herwerden's remedy
1890
yXuxrcrav
fieXiffcrrj,
crrdfav
ibpurri.
y\(b<T<ri)s jU.eXiffO'' 5<tt?
wards improved to
bo-t\,
is
ris ippvrjKi
p-iXicraa
<ri}$
unnecessarily violent.
<roi,
after-
Kareppvyx'
The same
AXIAAEQI EPAITAI
remark applies
Gomperz's
to
yXuxrai)t
niXtoaa rdybpot ippvr\ Kara. The metaphor was familiar

cf. fieXiyripvt, fttXi-yXtixrcrot.
In Homer of Nestur (A 148
:
\tyii
dyopyrr^s,
tov *ai
yXwxffiji frfXtros yXviclwr frit* avdj),
llv\iun>
drb
may
who
be the person described here

Kur.
899 ef pah. rb 'Sfarbptiow tCyXwcaov
I^Xi (Barnes for /ilXot) .. Soiij Otbt. Poets
are constantly compared to bees
see
:
fr.
109
Jebb on Hacchyl.
Theocr.
10.
9.
1.
146
xXrjpii to* iArof rb aXor trro/xa, Ovpai,
yinHTo.
Sophocles himself was called
the Attic bee (Suid. t.?.
c kImL Ar.
Vesp. 460), and it was said of him
2<xoK\loif ToOfUXtrt rb <rr6p.a K*xj*<rn4rov
(tit. 1 3).
Xenophon, whose speech was
melle dulcior (Cic. or. 31), earned the
same appellation (Suid. ;.;.).
For
pAXioaa - fUXi see on fr. 1064 Xifiar or.
1
156
6 be Ivff o7r\ot9 appwîu 'H<f>a.L<TTov Teyyjj
56
156
Bergk
dppwu>
Choerob.
<ro<pou
dpuiîv
Choerob.
aild.
Thtod. p. 463, 39
= Be]<k. atucd. p. 1167
Par. j p. 396, 18) ai p.iroi
p.tTarT\aon(yai SvrtKai TXjj6Vrrotai wpo4 H\\^.m\)
cd.
Tapov*ffOai BiXovow olot> wpoftdroit *pbâaif...i-rOTa\fi/yov tov dppHi^w, dewtp

Topd ~o<poK\t if 'AxXX^vi ipaaraU' b
cV trO' ...rtx*iTov' tovto yap Kara pAja~
wXaapJb* dxo tov dpprjKToii yivbp.tvov, tov
rpawirrot tit rb ci, Tportptawarai nal
if
cv wapoîVcrcu.
Part of the quotation is
l
also found in Choerob.
'7 Hilgard)
Theod. p. 367,
tov 'dppwii>
iwXon to appwîr apatwebr ov rtp brXots
rip ov&tripip cvftrdyrf.
h.is been naturally suspected.
6 Si
3 1 (P-
M9<
i-rl
'
Bcrgk conjectured
b o" l* 9', and Lobeck

{/'uralip. p. 387) irov*0\ The latter view,
an
alternative would be 6
tvtin
as applied to Achilles pat|
Choerob.
Mekler
apu>tr
vel
dtur post 'UtpaUrrov
is attractive,
r^x'V Dindorf
rtxîrou
on the armour forged by 1 lephaestus;

but iK<vai is regularly followed by the
ting
ace, and Lobeck can produce no better

parallel than <,)uint. 9. 68 Svoar i |tm<
Mekler suggests 6Xoi*9'. dppiifr y. The
adj., which occurs also in Ant. 151, is
not well suited to the neut. 6*Xon but

to speak of 'metaplasm' is beside the
maik. See on Eur. Hcl. 1301 bpofiib\
nwXip, J'hoen. 1014.
Jebb on Trmtk. 930
;
04i<f>i*Xr)yt <paoydr<p.
abstract for concrete, of a

of art.
So 0. C. 471 Kparrip4\
ticif, arbpbt tOxtipot rYxTi and in Latin
Tixyn
'
\\<>ri.
bit.
farm.
4.
x.
<
divitt
me
tcilutl
artium, quas out J'arrhasius protulii out

Scopasvna other exx. quoted in Thesaurus
This use of r*x7f probably
II 673, 9 ff.
always prevailed in artistic circles, as it is
common in later Greek.
\
157
o/x/xaTa>y drro
koyxas
157 bfifidruf d#o
od.. d&rtotr vel dipt'ii
157
HesTch.
111
l-qcriv.
Xbyxai (^saubon: bnnarowdXoyx* cod.

Dindorf
p.
103
*al
i*
' bfj^tarowdXoyxa
ipacraii
For the remainder of the gloss
#^t>.'
the eyes which
from
.f
inflict the wotted
love
are fully illustrated on fr. 4;.
passages there quoted add Xea. mrm.
laun 64 a< ol tpwrti rnfarai did
rwTo *oX fTot, 6rt gal wpbavtitr ol taXoi
TiTpu>o~K0f<ru>.
I'lat. sytp. 119 (entirely
mitJDIerpreird by StalllMtim) a't^flt unrwrp
<
fUXrf
uft
lêur
Nauck: e^ru-
TtrpQeBu avrbr <}tiiv. Arsen./fwe.

vau6% buna nit ^{w" prf\f.
Aristaen. ^/.
iWrx*i fair efete
MttMCttS 95 *
rwr tti^Twr /SoXoir.
oâXmmo &X(*
>
preferred b*n*T**
I7 Blayrle* to
ll*ur, mrlificl
XtVyxat.
rttf J
X.
'
IO0OKAEOYI
no
AAIAAAOI
The plot of the play is entirely unknown except in so far as
see
a conjecture may be founded on the references to Talos
I believe that fr. 162, which Nauck
the nn. on frs. 160 and 161.
hesitates to attribute to Sophocles, was also an allusion to the
brazen giant.
The only mythical incident connected with the name of
Talos is that which relates to the home-coming of the Argonauts
and is described in Apoll. Rhod. 4. 1638 1688: cf. Apollod.
When Jason and his comrades desired to land in Crete,
1. 140 f.
they were prevented by Talos, the brazen warder, who according
to certain authorities had been given by Hephaestus to Minos,
and whose duty it was to make a circuit of the island three
times a day for the purpose of protecting it from strangers.
Talos pelted the ship with rocks, and the Argo was obliged to
But Medea undertook to remove the obstacle, and,
sheer off.
after invoking the destructive Keres, swift hounds of Death, to
visit his eyes with destruction, made use of all her magical skill
The result was that Talos struck his ankle
against the enemy.
against a pointed rock, and burst the avpiy% which contained his
supply of vital energy e/c 8e oi lx ^P Trj/cojieva) t/ceXo? fw\i(3a)
Fr. 1 61 suggests that this narrative may have
peev (1679 f.).
Talos is
been the central incident of the Sophoclean play.
1
rationalized in [Plat.] Minos 320 C.

The evidence that Daedalus was a representative title of
Hephaestus is slight but, though it is not universally admitted,
there are insufficient grounds for contesting the identification
see C. Robert in Pauly-Wissowa IV 1995, Malten ib. vin 360,
and Bury on Pind. Nem. 4. 59. In Eur. Her. 471, where
Kirchhoff, Dindorf, and Nauck retained AaiBdXov, Wilamowitz
If we assume that Daedalusaccepted Hermann's BaiBaXov.
Hephaestus, as the artificer of Talos, was a prominent personage
;
in the play, there is the more reason for admitting the suitability
of a satyr-chorus in view of the cult-fellowship of Hephaestus
with Dionysus, and of his association with the donkey and the
phallus (Malten u.s. 356, Gruppe, pp. 245, 1306, 131 1).
1
Robert merely says that the Daedalus auf Kreta gespielt zu haben scheint
{Pauly-Wissowa IV 2006). Wagner suggested that the plot was similar to that of
'
Euripides' Cretans.
AAIAAAOZ
158
1
Met
i<TO)
fj.v
r6i>h'
d\akKVT(t)
nedy
158
il.,
f\X /tip (tlWti flip vel tlXXufttp Diets) tlau van Leeuwen: iXX^fUPâv
IWoiftep tlau Xauck, tiXrpofidp ct Nicole
t6p i" la xaXxeiry cod., rjj' a\aX|
:cole
158 SchoL
Gen. Hum.
1H1 Hro\<-
'AaxaXupirtji 4px04pra baaiun' awb

lp<ri)i.
Kpdnjj (i\6tPT ip tttydXip- r.Wfif UaXtip cod.) yap <pr)oip etrai
rb ttp;iy, uxrrt riip tt)i KuXvoiw dUrjy
4to0\rji *a\<i<r0a<...6 -o&okXtji ip AatddXy
tW-qtuptfaw t6p b" fa x^kcwv w46^.'
tXXi.
The question between the
forms t\Xu and itXXw, for tlXui (tiXXui)
and the aspirated forms are to be rejected
given by kutherford, Nexv
is not easy to decide.
1>. So f.
is no epigraphic evidence, and that
of the mss is 1
for even the best
vacillate, and Jebb's inference (Ant., p.
51) in favour of IXXut is weakened by the
fact that K does not support fXXe in Ar.
fiaiot 6
yap rip
'
<
'obct
was emphatic
in
brashing aside all the inere blunders of the

Crit. p. 177, where he
sums up his earlier discussions.
Kutherthat
the
HIW
(for
r(.rat
favoured the genuineness of cfXAw.

n verse error is equally
Kuchncr-Blass
hcd.
which Agamemnon was ensnared by

unestra, and ly Bar. fr. iyt. to the
COtUaJBl imposed by alturt.
K. Holland interpreted CWrirot
an entrance into the island guarded hy
diould rather have guessed that
the Imr ra fcnad to the labjrrtath, which
in
eating iXXu,
follow a good grammatical tradition

in
distinguishing IXXu to wraf
ttXXw to drive: see Simplic on Arist. Jt
caelo 13 i b 11 t6 3* [XXopJpifp ttrt Sia rtt
ypdtpoiTo to 6*StfUpi)P iriXot
t
ttrt Sta
rtji tl Oitptioyyov ypdfotro, koI oCrut tipyofUn\p Sr)Xoi, wt *ai Aiff\vXot 4p Bacadpan (fr. is). I nfortunately, this does
not help us here; for although the meaning is clear
'he confines him with fetters
no Mnith has forged' , we cannot tell
whether the verb shoul
:tten as
to conform to the literal sense of wY&ut
or not.
1 write fXXet, but without much
confidence.
axaXtuvry it<8tj. The same
oxymoron (dxaAcfi)rt Wdcut) is applied
by Aesch. Cho. 491 to the d/xflpX rprpop
(II
413)
it-
prisoners with a
new kind
of
compulsion.
159
TeKTovapxos fiovcra
159
Pollux
117
7.
/t1
oi*d(>novt rixropat "Ofii)pot
(iT(rw
\folit.
(Xûi't
159
V.y
Aa<4d\y
wapa
ttprrrai
yap
fitaia
'
64
oi
roi/t
('/.
i)
ip
HXarurt
ry lo<po
riKTOPapxoi p-ovaa.'
only
licales that I'ollux
ion adopt- :
I,
and Huoiasa
3
/ )
Icrs
/>M.
3.
>a
ptanai
MM
verse:
apuoaap,
mXiyapintr
I
(of the singers)

r4*T0Ptt tfaraXifuop OfirttP.
r/-
yi-fpwaô^tf.
*Jp.wp
\r.
/.
530
Ar. Kan. 1004
of k.
of the-,
machinc
j 4( 4t4i*p mXadtPPu/p,
aoipoi
.
of
Holland that feed a us

e words was invoking the ailance
gi
I'hc
cw
Hearts very little (kutherford,

p,
wvpyJxrai p^nara atprd, refciring to

MilJus. implies magniloquence.
11)' build the lofty rhyme'
Kngh-h.
has familiarixed the metaphor
In Latin <onUrt carmun ami the like
cc 1'kttamrui
were common
I
..-
MMM
building
"i Ins fl)ing-
improlailc
necessarily suggests rttropovpyit on the

strength of Hesyth. IV p. ij rr*rorsf
Kllendt rerxlei
7OI' a>xirfrwr.
arti fabrdi praecst'; but the Muse could
not be described as the pabtmaas of
carpenters.
IO0OKAEOYI
12
1 60
[crapSdvLOS yeXcus]
1
6O
Schol. Plat. rep. 337 a dveKdyxo-ai
Xifiwvlbrjs be rbv
PLG
(pijXaKa
rrjs
vrjcrov
TroirjffaffOai,
TdXwv rbv
ij<paiOTorevKTov
Zapboviovs ov fiovXontvovs wepaiGioai nobs.

Mivwa eis irvp xadaXXbfievov, ws b\v x a ^'
fidXa aapbdviov]...1,ifiwvlbris be (fr.

III
202 A,
524) dirb TdXw tov
Xa\/coO, 8e "H</>cu<xtos ibr) 1x1.0(1 pyr)o~e Mlvip
re
kovv, irpooTepvibp.evov
<8v>
weXdôvrds <pt\ai Karaodev airb tov aearipivai

aupbdvibv <prj<ri
<pX6ya.
rbv
Tpooorepvi{6pie-
(1.
eirixdoKOvras.
The words
PovXo/xevovs and the introduction of
vov)
dvaipelv
ifxtj/vxov ovto. rovs
oil
Kaiovra dvaipeiv.
Zapboviovs are unintelligible.

Bernhardy
(on Suid.), who records other conjectures,
suggests the omission of ov: I would
rather omit Hapboviovs altogether as the
blundering addition of someone who
wanted to bring in Sardinia at all hazards,
as if ewixdoKovras were not enough, and
read tovs (lovXone'vovs for ov ftovXonevovs.
The result would tally with the text, but
it is impossible to regard the account of
Zenob. 5. 85 as anything but a delil>erate
attempt to conflate the two etymologies:
bid
T7jv
XexOyvcu ytXuyra.
6/uoiws
2o0o/cX?)s
/tat
ev AaibdXip.
It is a legitimate inference from this
passage that Sophocles introduced Talos
as preventing intruders from entering
Crete by consuming them with fiery
heat, and also that the phrase oapbdvios
yeXws occurred in connexion with the
Being
grimaces of the scorched victims.
constructed entirely of bronze he was
able to make himself red-hot in the fire,
so that he could destroy with his embrace
anyone who came near him. For the
isolated and obscure phrase aapbdvios (or
oapbdvios) 7AWS, which occurs first in
Horn, v 302 fjLelbriae be 6vp.Q aapbdviov
î/xuvibys bi <pr)o-i rbv TdXw irpb ttjs eis

KprjTtjv d<pL%tws oiKrjoai tt\v 2ap5w /cat
iroXXovs tGiv ev ravrr] biatpdeipai, ofls
TeXevTwvras oeoypivai, kcli k tovtov 6
"Sapbbvios yAws.
The matter is of some
importance not only because Bergk rests

the version of Simonides upon the statements of Phot. -Suid. and Zenob., and
/xdXa toIov, two derivations were current

One of these referred it to
in antiquity.
the island of Sardinia, where a plant was
said to grow so bitter that, when tasted, it
neglects altogether the more trustworthy

evidence of the schol. Plat., but also as
affecting our estimate of the credit due to
caused convulsive spasms and involuntary

laughter (cf. Pausan. 10. 17. 13, Tzetz.
Lycophr. 796, Serv. Verg. Eel. 7. 41 etc.):
the other simply connected the adjective
these authorities,
and more particularly
Although
the source of Zenobius.
Sophocles is mentioned only by the schol.
Plat., the natural inference is that his account of Talos was similar to that of
Simonides.
be added that
It should
Apollod. 1. 140 says of Talos, who is
introduced in the course of the story of
the Argonauts: ol be vtto "H.<paiorov Mivici bodyvai, 5s rjv âX/coOs dvqp.
It is worth while to notice that the
explanations already quoted by no means
exhaust the ingenuity devoted to the
Thus the
elucidation of oapbdvios yeXws.
schol. on v 302 also explains it by reference to Talos, whom he describes as the
to
with ceaypivai.
The first derivation,
although it has influenced the spelling, is
clearly fictitious
but the second may
contain an element of truth (Adam on
Plat. I.e.), although Monro considered
that the phrase must be traced either to
a proper name, or to some foreign
Egyptian or Phoenician word, which
;
had become proverbial. It is further to

be noticed that the phrase is not always
employed in the same sense; for it is
applied not only to the sinister smile of
vindictive triumph (Horn., Plat.), but
also to the forced smile of the sufferer
(cf. Cic. Fatn. 7. 25. 1: the distinction
made in Tyrrell's note cannot be maintained).
It appears from the text that
the latter was the sense in Simonides and
Sophocles. But the other evidence affecting Simonides does not agree entirely
with the schol. Plat.
Thus Phot. lex.
p. 500, 24 = Suid. s.v. oapbdvios yiXws....
watchman made by Hephaestus and given

by Zeus
to
Europa
landing in Crete.
'
to
punish anyone
TrrjbQvra
yap
els
irvp
kcu depfiaivovra rb orrjOos irepnrTvooeoffai

avrovf wv Kaiop^vuv, eneivov oeot)pivai.
As in the text of Homer, the
Sardinia
laughter is that of the avenger.
was brought
who
tells
in
by Timaeus
(FHG
a strange story of the old
199),
men
M
AAIAAAOS
being buried alive and laughing at their
prospective happiness; and by Demon
3X0), who speaks of the most
me captives and the old men over
70 being sacrificed to Cronos, and laughing at their own courage.
Another frag-
Anal.
trit. partem, p. 148.]

Clitarchus
preferred the derivation from <rt<ryfpirai,
explaining that it was the custom of
the Carthaginians, when sacrificing their
children to Cronos, to place them in the
arms of a brazen idol, with a heati
Timaeus
FUG
(schol.
I3
Lycophr. 796,
burning beneath (schol. Plat.

There is a special treatise by L. Merck .
199), describing the sacrifice of

the old men, makes their sacriticers laugh,
1
Die Talossagt u. das sardonische fuithen, Petersb. 1851, which I

have not been able to see. For the
assumed identity of Hephaestus and
Daedalus see Introductory Note.
lin, entitled
while they beat them with "clubs and

thrust them over the precipice.
[For the
reference of this story to Aeschylus' wepi
wapoifudif in Zenob. 5. 85 see Crusius,
'
I6l
[TctXoj et/xa/aro TcXci/nrjcrai]
161 Schol. Apoll. Khod. 4. 1638 6

TdXuit > rod fftpi'pov avpiyya flx tP vftivi
wtpifxofM'v t'- avpty to \iytrai t] report),
tot hi (IfiiapTo at/Tiji rXei/rij<rcu \4yti "Lo<potov to TaXwr rdv </><'\a*a
k\ti% iv TdXcf.
u> rpli pjv iv ilfUpq. wcuraf wtpi.Wo\uf
TT)
KpT^TTJI' Tt)\lKa.l'TTI*
TaXy Brunck substituted i* Acubut this is probably one of the

cases where the name of a leading
character was substituted for the title of
the play : see fr. 1 35.
It
has Inrcn suggested in the Introductory Note that the story of the death
of Talos as told in the Argonatttica may
have been a leading incident in the play.
Apollod. I 140 describes the o~0p<yi thus:
ttx* ti <p\ip* fdar ds*o ai'xlrot lararn*oiv(w axi* apvpuw, card to to hippo, rift
He gives
q>\ftdi nXot toiipurro xaXcoOt.
three differenl versions of the death of
Talos, none of which agrees with that of
Apollonius: (1 he became mad through
ledea; (1) Medea
the magi'- p
For
OVffCW, TlfV
&i (wi)* n6*ov rQip in\j&X!u* r <*>Tov i

9$i-fHf> KtKTrjffOat.
The scholia were edited from the

Laurentianus by 11. Keil in the second
volume of Mcrkel's Apollonius
ire stated in the tubscriptw to be
derived from I-ucillus Tarrhaeus, Sophocles, and Thcon
for the course of tradi|
tion see
The
Wilamowitz, Emitittm*
t<
i"
Wrllauer's
if
HXifi,
promised to make hmi immortal and drew
from the cxll. Flor. ami Paris, often

hews differences of language, but not
out the nail, so that
much important
(<Xuy>)
divergence.
quotes the alx>vc extract from
all
his vital
fluid
escaped; (3) Poeas wounded him

in the ankle with an arrow.
Dfadori
Iirunck.
l62
aXX' ov& fieu
182.
adtoV: 06
162
Schol. Ar. Pat. 73 pJyaXot XiyopTBi tlrtu. ard rV Afrrijc *d*0apot, naprv-
lo<po*\v AaioaXy
wirrui,' \iyti to drrt i'afwr
fovtfir to ol (TixupiOi..
sense
may
n't
l>e
rendered: 'well, it
not one from
beetle,
8t)
Kavdapos
a
cett.
y* addidi
suppose that
lus
was a comment on the

Tslos himself. J ebb on
Airraid! iwl
w\*i- frf&tVf
the A/rroioi tUy\*r* #
was m>t a mere
the Aetnaean breed of horses, bat an
flankM 10 a species of beetle actually
(II
think* that
found there.
mark was made by Talos of Daedas* he flew away;

should rather
I
it
i.incc of
als..
the opposite direction, awl

U) indicate that the joke in the tunc
,t
in

IO0OKAEOYI
U4
of Aristophanes was a somewhat musty

one.
If not, it is odd that the four illustrations quoted by the scholiast are all
of a comic character; that, if everyone
knew that there really was an Aetnaean
beetle, Plato the comic poet should have
thought it worth while to say that it
was reported to be bigger than a man
(fr. 37,
I
610 K.); and also that the
Epicharmus
Sicilian
76 6
(fr.
IIiry/i/}iu'
\o\a-ybs iK tGiv Kavdapuv twv fiefrbvuv oi/j

<f>avTi tom AItvclv fx 6 '") should mention a
\
were big beetles on

The remaining passage is Aesch.
there
report that
Aetna.
233 Alrvaios
(or
from
tcovGiv),
the
any
In
irTpoK\i\iffT7)s.
icdvdapos
i<xri
fr.
(3ia
satyric
trbvuv
2icri>$os
there
case,
is
nothing to justify Nauck in questioning

the authenticity of the fragment.
On
the other hand, I see no reason to disbelieve the repeated statement (Hesych.
I
p. 88 etc.) that the Aetnaean horses
were a big, as well as a good breed see
:
on fr. 672. The starting-point of

comparison was probably k60uv: Greg.
Cypr. 2. 24 Alruaiov Kdvduiva. rbv fidyav.
aXX' ovSi \iiv Stj rejects an alternative,
also
'
as in El. 913, Ai. 877, Track. 1 128 d\\'

oOSe /lev drj tois y' i(p' i)p.ipav ipets. I have
added ye partly for obvious metrical reasons, and partly because it gives to Alrvaluv exactly that slight stress which
seems to be required: see Track. I.e., Ar.
Nub. 126 d\\' oi)5' eylo nivroi Trecrwv ye
Keiffonat,
r-qv
ye
Plat. Sytnp.
fywv
tCiv
197
iroir/ffiv.
*cai
The
p.ev
Hi)
penulti-
syllable of AItvoIuv was probably

shortened: cf. fr. 956 n. -irdvTws more
'certainly
often precedes the negative,
not' rather than 'not anyhow': but cf.
Ar. Pac. 1 147 oi yap o16p r iari irdvTws
oivapLêiv rrifiepov.
Herwerden deleted
the word, thinking that its proper place
Dindorf
is only with A^yei (dicit omnino).
conjectured d\\' ov p.ev 877 K&vdapos ovtos,
coll. El. 103.
mate
I63
yopyaooiv
163
Hesych.
p. 442
duv. Aa.i5d\(p 2o(pOK\rjs.
ai
diiceavLdes.
ai
de'cnrotvai.
The
Zonar.
p.
yopydduv d\idibid, yopyibts'
448 yopydbes-
adj. yopybs appears originally to
meant
have
'flashing'
(Eur.
Phoen.
but the transition to 'fierce,
terrible (to look at)' is easy: cf. Yopy&,
yopyuiris.
Some modern scholars have
used this evidence in support of their
theory that the Gorgons were originally
sea-nymphs (Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. i86 4 )
146
n.),
who
dwelt on the shore of the western sea

(Roscher, Lex. 11 1694); but it is sufficient to say that the epithet is naturally
applied to the miraculous beings of sailor's
stories.
Gruppe (p. 12092) suggests a
comparison with the Haliae, who fought
with Dionysus against Perseus (Pausan. 2.
11. 1).
In Lycophr. 1349 t\ ira\ifj.<ppwv
Yopyds is supposed to be Hera. It should
be added that Gorgo is often mated with
Poseidon.
164
icr<f)6r)P
164
Hesych.
e<refJd<r0T]v,
kXtjs
Acu5d\q>
Phot.
lex.
ffdrjv.
II
i)(xvxa.ffa,
p.
p.
201
e<ti<pdi\v
-âxÔ^v.
(Palmer
for
2i0<fx>-
TraioaXy).
rb itre^din Theod.
20, 23 Hilgard) fftjueiov7 iffitpdriv
19.
Choerob.
1,o<pOKk7)s.
p. 489, 2r (p.
fieda irapa Soô/cXet Kal irapd HXarwvi
(Pkaedr. 254 b) rb iai<pdt)v (cat t6 <re(pdelcra.
effep8r]i>
from Sophocles
erroneously adduced
Cramer, anecd. Oxon.
is
in
IV p. 338, 17.
This is the aor. of the deponent otfioand so is <xe<pdelaa, which is used
p.0.1,
absolutely in Plat. Pkaedr.
=in
adoration
(cf. Porph. vit. Plot. 12).

similarly
isolated form ioefilodi\v occurs in O.C.
636
dy{>3 <rePi<r0els.
The
later i<refid<xdr)v,
recognized above by the grammarians, is

attested by A. P. 7. 122 n.vffay6pr)s ri
Tbaov Kvdfiovs iae^dadrj; The use of the
so-called 'passive' form with an active
meaning is actually a survival from the
time when this aorist form was associated
with the active voice see Brugmann, Gr.
Gramm. 150. For other illustration
:
see
on
fr.
837, 2 bepxdivres.
AAIAAAOI AANAH
"5
AANAH
On the question raised by this title and its relation to the
Arrisius see the Introductory Note to that play (p. 38). Of the
tents attributed to the Danae fr. 165 alone is significant,
and that, while agreeing well enough with Jacobs's assumption,
seems to be decisive against a solution which otherwise might
have deserved consideration, that the Danae was parallel in
construction to the Dictys of Euripides, and was concerned with
the events in Seriphos. For Wagner, who adopted the last-named
hypothesis, failed to show that the words of fr. 165 have any
appropriateness in the mouth of Polydectes, to whom he would
them.
165
ovk oI8a tj)v crrju nelpav
ei> 8' eVi'ora/xcu,
tov 7rcu8o9 6vto$ Tov&* iyoi SioWvfiai.
165 SchoL
Soph. At.
xtipa ydp rj
Aardp cv *... ii6\\vpai.'
The same word-, occur in Suid. s.v. rtipa,
who has ovo" in place of # o\
extract may be taken to come
iron a scene between Acrisiaj and Danae,
in
(JXdfiii,
rai
iv
'
after the discovery of the birth of Perseus,
which Danae had pleaded that she had

been the victim of forcible usage. Acri'I know nothing
ull then reply:
of the attempt you tell me of, but only
in
lives. I am in.
if this child
In Ar. Av. 583 rout 6$9*\n*>in iictofarrwv 1*1 wtifuf. the schol. gives the same
cxj>l.in.iti..[i iwl (i\d(iij.
The verb wtipa*
thai,
is
used
ace. of forcible attempts
c.
women:
Ar. Eq. 517. Phot.

to wtipdftw iwl
><*
upon
lex. p.
<(>dopa
405.
avyovaia' Mi*ar8poi.
Moeris p. 107, 1
reipajr H)* ralda 'AttikoI, srtipdfurr oa"KWrifn.
tftfftlpw*
So the noun in A. P.
I]. 151 vp6ff$t fih arrivpoaunra 0tXi)fiara
ra wpd vtlpat
ko.1
rCi ttjv
oijv cf. El. 1 10 oi>K olia rJ) "V tkifa*''
dXXd tun yipntp ><ir' rri., Ai. 791 oi*
olia rtir atpr wpd$ir, Attwroi 6" Srt...ov
|
*(xw
Oafxru) wlpt.
0V6W
4yw
rb o6i>
Rhtt. 866
ovk olia roit tout oOf \4yut 'Oivwffai
yap'Apyot ou
(n.),
ix0p*p e^w** rtw\^yf0a,

g&yuyt rat <rat pa**ipnt r
Mcineke (Aiutf. Sf<M. a. 174)
al M</pa.
conjee turo r>jt ratMt owrmi râi
posing that Zeus was speaking of his
passion for Danae.
ifttii
0'
Aesch.
iff'
fr.
14
*ai
166
yovoKTi
166
166
Zoa
Xryt
-,6rort scrij.si
'
4V
'
->t
Ka<j>pohi.(riav
(ptucai, ot it) (dV cod.

-
fMijkcav
y6oto* cotl., ybpof rt Musurus,
dfpo&tala iy pa\<f
y opotof Ay par.' ot pir
;.
Attag
corr.
Tor Ka0apfi6 appUttovaw, rg it
-u\" orrrf alpouair abrot'n. <rau*

x*PV >*P aOoipci> oi apviif, dXX'
6 pîi.
\/-y *fr
rV
riir o-wSr 8*4 rd
aro^p^f flVai ro fyo* *p6t
crwovffittJ'.
r* coni.
Nauck
d s-pawa* do rasVw
they are derived from cara|)i^di:
Wv*'* * **
.>rh 11 f 4<>9)-
as-/>d>
(/.*.
aypav
ywip
rot cai
Hjr rdr mty& >rV *iXV. i ># ai

rot>ra r* fy W iwrtornu vpi% r* d^>
I'm4<<rt' J*rc ai /t ^vr ifolf**
phrase d^>o4i#< d>^ is rrfr>
l.ut without any light being thrown
IO0OKAEOY2
n6
on the obscurities of Hesych.
Bekk.
472, 22 d<ppohiaia ay pa- oi

iripdiKes, 5ia rb robs OrjpQvras ry 07j\ela
Eustath. //.
eirifiovXevovTas aipeiv avrofo.
p. 1 183, 19 Xtyerai be", tpairt, Kai atppoanecd.
p.
Kal
Siaia &ypa xada irtpbij-, ovtw Kal <rvs
yap Kai 6 x'P 0S Karu}<pepi}s eh a<ppo5l<na.
Macar. 2. 70 a<ppo8c<ria &ypa' eiri twv
'
a\l<7K0fxif0)V.
tp(l)Tl
The proper inference to be drawn from

the difficult text of Hesychius is that
Sophocles used the phrase a<ppobiola
aypa without clearly specifying in the
context to what class of animal it applied.
Some commentators held that partridges,
'which of course (5i) appears to be used
ironically) are suitable for purification,'
must be meant, because their uxoriousness
But
is made a snare to entrap them.
Diogenianus, if he was Hesychius' oriargued that the partridge must be
excluded, because, though a pig or a
sheep might be sacrificed for the purpose
He
of Kadapfids, a partridge could not.
concludes that the pig (or possibly the
the
animal
intended.
It
is
surely
goat) is
ginal,
implied in this statement that the context

in Sophocles was concerned with a sacrifice of purification, although the words
relating to it are not quoted. The sexual
propensities of the partridge are mentioned in Arist. hist. an. 1. 1. 13, 9. 9. 2;
and in Ael. nat. an. 3. 5, 16; 4. 1; 7.
Cf. Plin. n. h. 10. 33. 100
102.
19.
The pig was the victim most commonly
selected in purificatory rites cf. Aesch.
Eum. 283 Kadap/xois ifXadr) (scil. jAaayua)
XoipoKrdvois, ibid. 453, and see Stengel,
Kultusaltertumer*, p. 145. At Tanagra
Hermes freed the town from a plague
by carrying a ram round the walls on his
shoulder (Pausan. 9. 22. 1).
yovouri.
I prefer this to y6vov re (see
more likely to have been corrupted to ybvoiov, especially with firjXwv

following. I cannot follow M. Schmidt's
cr. n.) as
argument that the words ybvoiov pvrfXuv

ought to be rejected altogether; and his
transposition of the words ot 5e...ap/i6foucrt so as to follow aipovatv avroOs does
R. Ellis
not yield a satisfactory sense.
conjectured yoveia.
167
77,
nlve,
167

avrl rod rj6i...'2i0<p0K\ rjs Aavdy ' fij,
:
ij
<pip(iov.'
irive,
No
doubt the sentiment was Let us

and drink; for to-morrow we die.' It
eat
'
<f)epfiov
of Sardanapallus: iffffie, wive, waife' ws
raXXa tovtov ovk a|x. Hor. Carm. 1. 9.
Sen. controv. 2. 6. 3 convivae certe
13.
tuidicunt: bih amies, moriendum est.
So often in the Anthology: see A. P. 11.
For the imperative r) see
56, 57, 62.
was a commonplace of proverbial philosophy. Theogn. 1047 vvv /xev irivovres
Jebb on Ant. 1169
Tepwu/xeda, KaXa Xeyovres'
exw, and
aoaa
5' fireir'
iarat, ravra deoicri (itXei.

Eur. Ale. 788
efi<j>paive aavrbv, irive, rbv Ka6' rj/jLipav
\
filov
fr.
Xoylfrov ffbv, to.
5'
Athen. 530
B,
196.
&XXa
tt;s
tvxv^-
Kai
fri)
rvpawov
o~xyn'
Eur. fr. 826 5i' ("Xvlbos rj.

Cobet points out (N.L. p. 524) that tffii
is a late barbarism due to the false analogy
of arrjdi.
cf.
from the epitaph
168
avdrjjxepov
168
Hesych.
<rr)>o-i)fiepov ynipa.
Brunck
p.
203 av0rip.epov
SoôacX^j Aavdrj.
restored atiOrifiepbv (avdr/fj-epov

Schrevel).
The error is an early one, as
it is implied in the alphabetical order.

avOynepbv occurs also in Aesch. Pers.
459-
AANAH AIONYIIZKOI
169
ftpd)(i<rTov
169
Antiatt. (Bekk. anted.) p. 85, 18

/Spoxi'Toroi'. Zo0ok\t)t Sturdy.
Ppdx^Tof
'
396
P-
ppdxi<TToi>' iX&xioror.
ppdxteroi is used by Sophocles also in

Ant. 137i and the adv. /Spdxurra in O.C.
Isthm.
1115.
Tin. I.
<ttoj,
and Kur.
The
usual
5.
has V fipaxl-
478 ^* ppaxiorw.
prose form is, of course,
.Su/>/>/.
/Spa^t/raTo*.
170
8eSa LflOVMTfltVOV
170
Antiatt, (Bekk. anted.) p. 90, 31
6ainovi{t<T0at
is
stised: cf. Plut. ^.
wartp
ftayot
yi.p ol
xeXfvoixn rd
elsewhere /?
ar, 7. 5. 4
'Ktfx'cria
essentially different in
ill
/w-
706 D
roil dat/xortfoûroi*
ypd^fiara -rpdi av-
Nor
araXeyt*'.
&
p.
with the conception of Saifiu* avyytrin or

ri'xn avyytirjit ry ounan (id. fr. to. II
It is impossible to say how
481 K.).
vutpivo* cwri rod TtOfuiuifoy.
i>
it-,
meaning
Philemon fr. 191
Sophocles employed the participle, but

the explanation dei/itd is prohabi.
leading, if it is intended to apply to such
a cue as the translation of Heracles.
Blaydes conjectured that t*0*i**(Upo*
('dedicated') should be restored for rtdt-
530 K.) dXXot xar' dXXi;* iaifiofiftrcu

which must be read in connexion
AIONYZIIKOI ZATYPIKOZ
in the title and the three extant fragments it i^ clear that
the Dionysiscus represented the god as an infant in his cradle,
then providing for his worshippers the miraculous gift of
It
was a satyr-play; and the scene was perhaps laid in

land of Nysa, the home of the nymphs who were the
the god, on the shore of the Ocean stream: see note
59.
In view of the recent data, which were unknown to Welcker,

er necessary to recall his guesses concerning
The infancy of Dionysus as the nursling of

described in Horn. //. 26. The subject was often
in works of art
see Gruppe, p. 1435 ,. In Ap. Khod.4.
tVfaeria, the daughter of Aristaeus, received the child
story of the play.
mphs
is
U3]
H.
is,
mes at her home in Euboea and gave him honey

who was probably the speaker in fr. 171, appears
to eat.
a
of the young god also in Pind. fr. 156 6 fapxvfc $

SaXr/*oc
Xopoirviros,
hv MaXet'ryovos idpebt Nat&o? a/coira*
(see howbiod. 4. 4 describes him as
lian
u8
I04>0KAE0YI
TraiSayayyos and rpocpevs of Dionysus.

The title, now correctly
restored for Awvv<riatc6<;, is parallel to the 'Hpa/cXia/cos of Theocr.
24: see Crusius in Rh. Mus. XLVin 153.
171
yap
otolv
Tr\v
ttjv
avTO) npocrêpa) fipcocrLV Sioou?,
plvd
171.
r-qv
cod.)
(TKif)
'
fftiv
6Tal'...5laye\u)v.
283
r.
\j/r)Xa<pai
SoôkXtJs Attwwri-
Silenus is probably the speaker: see

Introductory Note.
1 -rrpoo-cJMfpco, of offering food, as in
fr ' 5 2
for the double accusa1301 fi46es fie, irpbs dewv,

X/a (with Jebb's n.).
3 Blaydes's addition of the article is no
doubt correct, for usage indicates that the
neuter is used substantially.
H., who
made the same correction independently,
quoted Herond. 6. 76 to (paXaupbv Kara-
ri]v pivot
p.*
Kavoi (pepev
(paXafcpov
tive see Phil.
$Laye\cjv.
r)$i>
pivav ev$us \pi\a<pai cod.
f.
t<$ I
xprjXacjxx,
<to>
^P a W/JCfS
171 Lex. Messan.

(\j/i\a</>ai
evdvs
p.'
to add. Blaydes
and Athen. 507 C
Boiceiv yap i<p-r\ tov

\Vka.Twva Kopcbvrjv ytvbp.evov ewi ttjv KetpaXt]v dvaTr7)5rjo-avTa to (paXaKpbv KaTaatcapi<pav. Add fr. 314, 3.59 iravov rb Xelov (paXaKpbv rjSovri iriTvas.
It would hardly be
satisfactory to take irpbs <paXaKpov as ace.
sing. masc. with diayeXwv, although irpos
often follows verbs expressing emotion
{Track. 1211, Kaibel on El. p. 198).
For the ridicule attaching to baldness cf.
Ar. ATub. 540 and the passages collected
by Jacobs Anth. IX p. 423, and Mayor
on Juv. 4. 38, 5. 171. Blaydes's further
conjecture ijdiws yeXQv is altogether need\f/u>aa
less.
172
akvTTOV
TTodeV TTOT
d)S'
rjvpov avdos avias

72.
1 sq. ude evpov vulgo
Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 82, 18 =

Bekk. anecd. p. 385, 23 aXvirov avdos
avlas
el 0Aots earth ivi (Nauck conj.
irepl unnecessarily) tivos irpd.yfj.aTos 8 XOitijs
awaXXdTTfi, olhus av x/"? 1110 ws ical
2,o<pOKX7}$ iv r(f> Aiovvo-tanip aarvpiKq (t
aaTvpiKQ Phot. ) iwl otvov irp&rov yevo~a/j^vuv tGiv
Kara tov xP0V cardpwv
4
ir60ev...avlas' ;
bXov 5e rb fieXOdptov
ttoXitikov dyav yiyove.
/uera yap Trjs
aXXrjs ivapydas XeXvuivriv Ixet T V" W"? -
172
1
"
velav Kai fitdvovo-iv app.bTTovoav.
rds
Xdffeis
vorifiaffi
(cat
ttjs
ipnijvelas
p.T]
<r<plyyeiv,
Set
apfioTTuv
Kai
5e
tols
p.t)5ap.ov
wapaTidivai, &XX' d.K7jpaTov ttjv

According to Reitzenis
ultimately derived
from Phrynichus (fr. 162 de B.).
fftivbecrfiov
Xvcnv
stein,
<f>vXa.TTiv.
the extract
Campbell joins aXvirov dvlas, leaving

&V0os isolated and in defiance of the order
of the words.
He accounts for the latter
by strangely interpreting the grammarian
as imputing to the poet 'an inebriate
looseness of expression,' whereas he
the style is abrupt,
actually says that
though clear : see e.g. Demetr. de eloc.
193 5td tovto 5e Kai tAivavSpov viroKplvovTac
'
'
The purpose
XeXv/xevov iv rots jrXet'oTots.
of the note is mainly to illustrate the
transferred sense of aXviros, which a few
above had been glossed by 6 fify
The words of Soph, are not
easy, and Nauck thinks avOos corrupt,
lines
Xvirovp-evos.
proposing &kos, but the resulting sense

weak.
Tucker conjectured &X8os
is
which is approved by
( = <papnaicov),
AIONYIIIKOI AOAOfTEI
r, ;m<l Weil droiat.
I would render
'this sorrow-healing crown of pain,' with
is adapted from Baechyl. fr.

16J. y\vKtV
Ar Ay k a atvofitrar kvXikup 0AXwTfat 8vfti.
For the commonplace to which dAi-ror
points sec on fr. 758.
There is not
necessarily any reference to the result of
excessive wine-drinking, as in Panyassu
rmoron
like ifrntpov kok6 (fr. 149)

Patting in >uch sweet sorrow ':
intiot Awla.% is thus exactly parallel to
licwiat A0o% in Troth. 999.
( Valckenaer
or Juliet's
'
and
Blaydes introduce fiaviat here for

One may suppose that thi
di<l not appreciate the flavour of the wine,
until thev perceived its effect.
But, even apart from this, the potency
of the winecup may be described as
evading: I'ind. fr. 218 d^w-rat <pp{*at
ifirtMfMs r6(oit Safilvrtt. Or it affords
I mixture of joy and sorrow : Alcae fr. 47
uutw fjLtXidStoi, AWora 6'
A^vripu
4 K. xdffai 8' (k KpaSiat Ariat AropC*

rivbfitvQi KarA iiirpof ' vwip
pirpor ii x'/xrw*-, and often in the comic
fr.
Aflat.)
the passages collected

At hen. 36 A foil.
The metre
acephalous Glyconic (Telesilleum)
lowed by a Pherecratean
tu lette
tormtntum
pUrumque
dure, which
fol-
mlar acephalous cola in Sophocles

W. White in CI. Q. til 300.
Schroeder docs not always agree in the
details (see Soph. cant. p. 83), but the
principle may be taken to be established.
We have in fact
same oxymoron as here in
\
in
apvrfintvoi.
inferno admoves
see
exactly the
AXawAû
rpifi6\wv
119
see J.
173
dwÔeU
173
!!-ych.
OwpijxOrii,
ffiaicy.
11
ntffivttfli.
("f.
p.
335
Phot, ttx. p. 99, 13
the origin of this word and its relation to

Oilxrdai
(Ktym. ./. p. 461,
0w<r0at
Xiyovoiw oi Awpuii to (i'ux'io$u, Aesch.
harm,
fr. 49) arc alike ohacnn
6 Z*i't <lrappi*i.
fr.
136 K. 8wot>n<0a
0ux0*i%'
2,<xpOK\iji
Atorv-
0u%0*if
mi liar use of 66pa(, 0wpfaau

if.y;. A,h.
ii.?4, Anacrcon
147, Theognu 884 etc.), which w.is
fa
(At.
fr.
Alcman
Vetp.
fr.
24. 81
0wHif*A
6'
an' iwairti:
Mcsyth. II p. ajj flefOrtlfxa l*w)tnSee also Ilcsych. s.11: 0&rrat,

r-fipta.
(f.
the ancients as Otpuairtir

seems to arise from a sufficiently
>lf metaphor.
0<*>\0tti was con'y Ahrens (Dor. 181) with 0a$ai
from 0h*)V rf. Hesych. 11 p. 300 0aiaipn90ni. ih. p. 301 OaxOr)^'*' 0upiX^V" ai
lutpuh. s.vv. rtOay^foi, ar0aai. Hut
v
0uxraa0tu, 0u0rât, 0ov0tii, 0vt*[In the last twoglosses M. Schmidt

would restore 0^x0* it, but there may have
Ktym. M.
been also a form Iw&it.]
ftîiai,
0tf.
p.
460. II.
t6
*i''wx""m'-
Etym. Gud.
p,
joH.
11
t&
AOAOnEI
The Dolors were a Thessalian tribe, whom PdOQl put
Under the leadership of Phoenix: Horn. I 484 valov B' âx nTl ^ v
Pindar mentions him as the leader
\o7reo-crt avactrtov.
of the Dolopians in war (fr. 1 84), although, as Str.il*> (431 points
out in quoting the passage, their presence at Troy is not
I
the Iliad,
Another link with the A- In'
also
the fact that the inhabitants of Scyi
\nitktm 175 #t Xripi*,
Dolopians (Thuc
So Tj
-mr ri'/rrov. .\vtcofjLi)&<o<; aertv. Building on this very slei
foundation, Welcker (p. 140 fT held that the /'.-/.'/v. and the
ited
nd
in
in
I04>0KAE0YI
120
Phoenix are alternative titles that the subject of the play was
the fetching from Scyros by Phoenix of the young Neoptolemus,
against the wishes of Lycomedes and Deidamia and that the
first elK(i>v of the younger Philostratus follows the Sophoclean
tradition.
R. Wagner (Epit. Vat. p. 224) agreed with Welcker,
without giving any fresh reasons. Inasmuch, however, as there
is now good cause to believe that the mission of Odysseus and
Phoenix to Scyros was the subject of the Scyrians, Welcker's
guess concerning the character of the plot of the Dolopes has
The Dolopians have no place in
no longer any probability.
heroic legends, except as explained above, and only two
possibilities seem to be open.
Either Dolopes was, as Welcker
thought, a secondary title to the Phoenix, but with a plot relating
or, if an independent
to the earlier adventures of that hero
play, it may have been concerned with the concealment of
Achilles in the palace of Lycomedes, and his discovery by the
Greek envoys.
Fr. 174 is too insecure a prop to support the
;
latter alternative.
174
ewaios
1
74
Phot.
exw.'
where
lex. p. 36,
evvaios
So
also
Etym. M.
'
eyice-
'evvaios...
'2o<poK\rjs A6Xo\f/iv
Kpvfifiivos.
BpaneTLv cniyr\v eyoiv
elr)
393, 44,
alone has hpairinv, the others
8pawiTTjv.
p.
Hesych.
11 p. 227 evvaios'
KaTrTr/xys
AdXofi.
(KaTeirT-rix&s Nauck), I p. 507 8po/j.aios
Xayus.
Xaywds'
Cf.
2o0ok\?7S
6 iv opbfiois aXiVKd/jievos' evvaios
de 6 iv Koirri.
evvaios was applied to the hare in

her form )( dpofxaios, with which cf.
Aesch. Ag. 123. So irrCoKa Xaywbv in
Horn X 3 1 o etc. Valckenaer conjectured
that Xa7wj immediately preceded ewaios.
Naber proposed etrjv for etrj, but the
.
context may just as well have required

the third person.
SpaireTiv <rriyi]v, 'a
run-away home,' is one from which the
occupant is continually shifting. For the
transference of the epithet cf. Phil. 208
avda rpvoavup, ib. 695, O. C. 1463 ktvitos
SiopoXos, Ai. 611 x e P 07r ^ aKT01 Soviroi, ib.
55 iroXvKepuv <(>6vov, Eur. Phoen. 660,
A. P. 10. 87 av fiij yeXQjfj.ev
x 35 (nn.).
rbv piov rbv Spairtrrjv is not parallel, since
there life is supposed itself to be changing.
Ahrens suggested that the fragment
described the outcast condition of Phoenix
when an
exile.
175
75
Cyrill. lex. ap.
Schow.
in
Hesych.
781 x alxevv ^' V

"W* KaTatcXiais.
~ô<poKal to raireivbv KXivldiov x a fJLe ^ vrlBachm. anecd. I p. 412,
kXtjs A6Xo\j/i.
p.
28 x a ^ e," va
<V>
'
"raireivri
kclI
evreXris
The word had
icXivr],
already
been used by Aeschylus (Ag. 1541) in the
ical o-Tifids.
figurative sense.
See Introductory Note to the Phoenix.
AOAOfTES EAENHI AriAITHIlI
121
EAENHI AnAITHIlI
The subject of this play is indicated by the title and was
derived from the narrative of the Cjpria, as appears from the
epitome of Proclus (EGF p. 19): tcai hicnrpea&cvovrai 7rpo<?
Tovi Tpwas ri)v 'llXevrjv koX ra KTrjpara ('nratTovvTe*;' ax? &
ov\ wnY)Kov<iav e/ceivoi, ivraida Srj retô^wiôiVn/. According to
Proclus, the embassy was subsequent to the landing on the
coast of the Troad, and to the deaths of Protesilaus and Cycnus
but Apollodorus {epit. 3. 28) and the scholiast on the Iliad
ntly to be quoted make it precede the departure from
dos.
R. Wagner {Epit. Vat. p. 197) conjectured that the
hitter was an innovation upon the version of the Cypria made by
Sophocles himself.
The embassy of Odysseus and Menelaus
has already been mentioned in the Introductory Note to the
AnUncridae (p. 87).
They were entertained by Antenor on
that occasion, as he himself explained to Helen (Horn. T 205 flf.)
rjdij yap koX Bevpo iroT tj\vde &2o<% '08i/<r<rei
aev eve* dyye\ir)<{,
ipT)i<pi\(p MereXaa>*
rovs 8' iyw ifcivuraa teat ev p&ydpoHTi
In spite of the support of Antenor, the mission was a
4>i\iiva.
failure.
Paris actually bribed Antimachus to recommend that
should be put to death
but from this danger
Antenor succeeded in rescuing them (A 139 ft):
\rTtpaxos)
1
<?,
iroT
ei'i
Tpumv ay opf/ WepeXaov
nvtoyev,
ih>Ttt>,ro
l)8vafji,
avBi Karatcrelvai
identified by SchoL
fiijS'
WW
dyye\it)v ektiovra
'Agatovf.
ityfr
&
(fcfptv
A on Honi. P 206: irpd rov

Tpoiav f}\6ov 7ro<r$v; '05i/<r<Ti/9
airairovvTti 'E\ivti* bf oh (o conj. Nauck) r&v
nkXtov avTOV? p*$' v/3p<Eto<; hi<o%(ivT<iiv /ifirov \\vri]vmp epit(
'6t yap etc TeveBou (Trpeaftcvomo oi irtpi MrviXaov,
<f>i\o<pp6vu)<;.
\iTrjva>p 6 \k*tuovo$ vrreSefjaro avrovs xai &o\o<f>oviia0u
voi/Tav eaa>aev.
The scholiast's words need not be taken to
refer
ret assassination
they may simply point to the
Such also appears to be the
ing an envoy.
sub Wo vix
tion of Ovid's <// Paris ct fratres et qui
indas {Met. 13. 202 f.). Accordii
(Ante/torn. 154 ff), who includes Palamcdes,
and l)i
in the number of the envoys, these
event
In the ration.
ii red before the gathering at Aulis.
from the Kg) ptian pi
h Herod
Menelaus and his colleagues arrived at Troy on their
The
occasion is
revcai rov<i"lL\\iivas
ei?
'
with the same
liilc
was written
l.y
nnesithctM,
who
it
only
kmin from
I04>0KAE0YI
122
mission, they received the answer that Helen was not there
1 18).
For the poem of Bacchylides see p. 89.
Engelmann (Arc/idol. Stud., Berlin 1900, p. 16) found a
representation of certain characters in this play on a vase
belonging to the Vatican Museum (Arm. 294), and identified
them as Helen and two of her attendants listening to an
interview between Odysseus and Antenor, which took place at
He concluded from fr. 177 that
a temple close to the sea-shore.
the embassy arrived after Helen had reached Troy, and referred
fr. 176 to Helen or one of her women overhearing the Laconian
Welcker had previously inferred from
speech of Menelaus
frs. 176 and 178 that a meeting took place between Helen and
Menelaus
and that Helen, when her surrender was refused,
being now desirous of returning to Greece, contemplated suicide
(2.
as her last resource.

fr. 180 and the events outlined above
and it does not seem possible that the
obvious
strife between Calchas and Mopsus, and the former's death after
his defeat, were narrated in the play as having already occurred.
We must rather infer from Strabo's statements that the prediction
of his death was either mentioned by Calchas himself, or used
against him to counteract the effect of his own prophecies 2
The tradition ran that, after the capture of Troy, Calchas,
who had accurate foreknowledge of the disaster impending for
the Greek fleet, refused to return home, and, accompanied by
Amphilochus, the son of Amphiaraus, who was himself possessed
of prophetic powers ^Cic. de div. 1. 88, Pausan. 1. 34. 3), after a
period of wandering, settled with his followers in Asia Minor.
The details of the contest with Mopsus are variously recorded,
but all accounts agree that Calchas died from chagrin at his
The preponderance of authority names as the place
defeat.
where the two seers came into conflict the Ionian city of
Colophon, which contained the precinct and oracular shrine of
the Clarian Apollo such was the version of the epic Nosti\ of
A variant,
Hesiod (fr. 188), and of Pherecydes (FHG I. 94) 4
recorded by Servius on Verg. Eel. 6. 72 on the authority of
Euphorion, the Alexandrian poet, locates the contest at the
Herodotus,
shrine of the Grynean Apollo near Myrina in Aeolis.
however, in agreement with Sophocles, preserves the tradition of
The connexion between
is
not at
all
In Nachtr. p. 293 he referred
frs.
176 and 177 to the threatening speech of the
Achaean envoy.
2
been
3
4
Similarly Welcker, p. 123, and Wagner, Epit. Vat. p. 259.

fully discussed by Immisch in Jhi-b.f. Phil. Suppl. xvn 160.
The mention of Tiresias by Proclus is an error (EGF\>. 53).
The two latter are quoted by Strabo 642: see also Apollod.
Lycophr. 424
ff.,
Conon
6.
The
epit.
story has
6.
4,
EAENHS ArTAITHIlI
123
ttlement in Pamphylia (7. 91

so Pausan. 7. 3. 7, Quint. 14.
Callinus (ap. Strabo 668) endeavoured to reconcile the
Conflicting statements by the supposition that Calchas died at
Claros, but that his followers in company with Moptm CTJ
the Taurus, and either remained in Pamphylia or scattered in
other directions.
It would seem that these are the aetiological
read by rival sanctuaries, which attest the successive
immigrations of Greek settlers.
The Argument to the Ajax (p. 3, ed. Jebb) mentions a play
entitled 'YXkvt]^ ap-Trayrj, as belonging, together with the
Antt>ioriiiiu\ AechmalotuUs, and Mt-mnon, to the Tpm/crf trpaya.
On the assumption that this play is meant, N'auck
that it had been confused with the 'E\ivr)<; dpTrayr} of
the poet of the Middle Comedy (II 320 K.).
On the
other hand, Welcker (p. 158 ff.) had no hesitation in supposing
that the subject was the recovery of Helen by Menelaus from
the house of Deiphobus during the sack of Troy
Whether
Helen's rape was a loose mode of referring to'EXhnft dTranrjai?
is not easy to decide
but, if a play so entitled had an ind<
dent existence, I cannot believe that it dealt with any other
matter than the seizure of Helen by Paris 5
Ahrens and Wagner
nought that the 'V.Xcvw aprraytj described the conflict which
after the return of Paris from Sparta, when Aland his part\ vainly advocated the surrender of Helen.
But it
is
improbable that Sophocles wrote a second play so similar
in its scope to the 'EX&vtfi uirairTjafi.
[ermann's view (Comm. soc. phil. Lips. 247) that this was a
satyr-play proceeded on the assumption that Aristidex, in the
iê quoted in the Introductory Note to the 'EXfoff 7"/*"'.
ferring to the 'BXcyip ntraLriiais.
:
'
'
176
yap âpaKTrjp avro? iv yXata'arj ri

naprjyoptl Aafau'o? 6<Tfiaa0ai \6yov.
Kai
176
a*HH T,
ipaadsu
Xiyy
WO
rb*
wp<xrityop*i
AMT
/A
ipnM**u CT, ***> A,
A
PJmti.
,r.
iWr
(st.
301
u ytp
al foivioaai),
oiV y* riff vdrpto* factor
rit+vrHt. Jt XtffwrXfr'BX/iff
\by*v.'
*ai ftp
intrant
'
&Tt)xiw
made another
>
'
locu*
nomlum
<
gucv, founded on ihe altraci of ihc

Trojan* to surrender llrl<
thai Aphrodite <om*ytd her fr-.m tlic (.wn i.> him
exercise of her magic power, and al (he rctiuet of Thetia.
\'a<htr.
p.
f.
ioi.
f-x-
\>.
I'll
he
2<y4
that,
i.
after the rcfiuaJ of the
h, .in.
11.
..n
I-
hi. //</.
o-
ly
th
I04XDKAE0YX
I2 4
and various attempts have been made to

improve the text: (i) Herwerden, who
formerly proposed bacpptaQai for da/naudai,
now also with Gennadius restores avrbOev
yXua-o-qs in v. i ; (2) Hermann conjectured
Gomperz rpavXbs, Mekler &<paand Blaydes aXXos (with u>v yXdxrorjs)

avrbs.
The words are not altogether
aurbs,
tos,
for
clear, but are defensible, if iv yXwcro-g
is
taken after 6<r/j.a<rdcu * the very ring (of

his words) persuades me to scent a trace
of the Laconian speech in his talk.'
For
\apaKTrjp cf. Hdt. 1. 142 x a P aKT VP^
y\wff(TT)s ricrffapes, Ar. Pac. 220 6 yovv
:
Xa-piKTrjp
ijfj.eda.irbs
t&v ptjudruv, and
intended to suggest Kartiyopel, which

belongs to the vocabulary of the Physiognomists : see his n. on Aesch. Ag. 283.
He adds that in Horn. V 213 Antenor
describes Menelaus' manner of speech on
this occasion
ijroi p.kv MevAoos iirirpowavpa fiev dXXa, fidXa.
Xo-Sriv aybpeuev
:
oW
Xty4ws, iirel ov iroMfivdos,

a<panapTOfirrjs in contrast with Odysseus, NrhoM
words were like a shower of snow.
Tucker on Cho. 561 uses this passage
in support of his view that differences of
dialect were actually reproduced on the
stage: see however on Phoen. 301.
|
R. Engelmann, Archaologische Studien,

17, infers that Helen or one of her
attendants hears Menelaus speak, and
recognizes him as a Laconian from his
accent.
See also Introductory Note.
for
the metaphorical use of bop.a.o6ai Ar.

Lys. 619 kcu /tdXtor' 6a<ppaivofji.ai rrjs
p.
Tvpavvlbos, Nub. 398 Kpoviuv

H. thinks that the choice of the
word iraprj-yopei was suggested by and
'Itttt'lov
ofav.
177
yvvaiKa
re
o)<?
8'
tov
177.
eêXo^re?
2
Erotian gloss. Hippocr. p. 77, 3

6pdcr(rei...e'<TTi 8e bxXeL
ws /cat "ZofioKXrjs
'EXivyji
evrjiipjvon
aVatTTJcrei
(prjcri
'
yvvaiKa...
'
M. Schmidt proposed yvvaiKa
de
fyTovvres (or 5' ffan-oDires), comparing

Ar. fr. 451 I 507 K. yvvaiKa 87) frrrovvTes
evdaS' r)Ko/j.ev. For flpdcrcretcf. fr. 1055 (n.).
2 This corrupt passage has been
emended in various ways, but the true
to be beyond recall,
(praef. Eur. Hel. p. xix) :
fuXov
ypacpiSlois
X/NjJfowr'
ivrjfifxivqv,
muliere potiti, quae pingendo vexat marcidam genam penicillis incensam, i.e.
rubentem ope penicillorum.
But evr)fi,u4vr)v in the sense of inflamed is very
harsh the usual word would be kvierpip.jxivt\v.
Welcker, agreeing generally,
preferred to keep yp. ivyj/x/xivois, and held
that 'ewXov must not be pressed too much.
Hartung extracts the same sense but
reads iyy pd<poiaiv ai/xacriv ('mit angemaltem Blut'), comparing Ant. 528
ai/j-arbev piOos.
Ahrens, following Hermann's explanation, thinks that the
couplet came from Antenor's speech
'shall we retain a woman like this?'
(2) Nauck conjectures rpwrov MeviXeia
ypaftiois ivij/xfxevois; M-eviXeuv had previously been suggested by Bergk, and
reading
(r)
appears
Hermann
Opdcr<TL yivvv
iuXof] iwXov C, alwXov F, atoXov
177
ev
rj
[Av ecokov ypa<f>ioL<; ivrj/xfjievoLS.
by J. G. Schneider. H. modified
this proposal by reading rpiarov rather
than Tpurov (J. P. xxin 272). For the
'craven' Menelaus see his note on Aesch.
Ag- 125. Blaydes's tt)v tov ^leveXiu y'
apriws 7]pTra<7Li4vr)v is far from the original
and weak in sense. Helen is described
ypa{3Lois
as threatening or attempting to burn out

Menelaus' eyes with a lighted torch H.
:
compares Hygin. fab. 122 Electra uti

audivit id, truncum ardentem ex ara
sustulit, voluitque itiscia sorori Iphigeniae
oculos eruere.
Prop. 3. 8. 7 tu minitare
oculos subiecta exurere Jlamma !
For the
word
ypdfiiov see Athen. 699 E, where

Seleucus is quoted as giving the following
explanation ypdfiiov ecrnv rb irpivivov 77
:
dpvivov
l-tiXov,
TTepie&Xao~ixivov koX Hare-
ax ia p.ivov i^dTTTecrdai Kai (paiveiv rots

bSoiiropovaiv.
The phrase ypafiiois evrj/xfj.evois
high
has
probability,
but
the
meaning given to the context is less

attractive.
Helen with a lighted torch
recalls Verg. Aen. 6. 518 flammam media
ipsa tenebat ingentem, et sitmma Danaos
ex arce vocabat ; but it would not be easy
to work that idea into the traditional
\
text.
R. Ellis in C. R. ix ro=;
6o~tovv 0' SioXov ypacpidlois ivtip-
(3)
proposed
as a description of a
picking her teeth with a stylus.
ixevois,
woman
'
'
EAENHZ AnAITHIlI
125
178
he XcoCTTOv af/xa ravpeiov trulv
ifiol
kcu
VI
fxr)
n\eloi> tgji/8' eyeiv Sutxt^/xia?.
9 M^ 's"i
1 ravpaor wtmw SakLi Ar.: ravpov y tfr*MU> schol. Ar.
Wccklein olim: /x'fr' (M 1^ * 8) codd., /mJ n Dintlorf, pi) fri Cobct rXtJw 6: t\w
eeteri codd., tXmovj Cobet
178.
178
Ar. F.tf. 84 Itrri yovw

K\(vnt ' 4poi...b'vo4>r)piai.'
rirft 8< ipaai* on -<xf>OKXijl X(pl Qtfuoro\pev5ovrai 64
i\/oi-j tout6 tprjffi.
0C1 yip
dro
Schol.
-o4>OK\<oi>t'
'
Suid. s.<: rfiu> : (after

quoting the text of Aristophanes) vtpl
HUl(TTO.X/oi J OlV ôôaXtjs <pT)ab> 'tfj.01...
The words of Aristophanes (y.
83 f. ) are (UXriaror rjpip atpa ravptio*
6
BtpxoroicXlovi
yip ddwaroi
olptTUTtpoi, and the authority followed
by SaidJU -imply drew an inference from
The origin of
>f Aristophanes.
riOayoy.
fori
ry
now
about Themistocles has
been traced to the misinterpretation of a

m the market-place of Magnesia:
Her
Numismatica
honour of Barclay V. Head) at p. 109,
(in
and
in C.
in Corolla
XM
K.
11
fragment among
of doubtful origin, although he
that it seems to belong to the
those
-
Bat I )in<l<>rf is justified

the
avsigning it to this play
e is <|uiu- a* good as we have in
most cases, and the words are entirely
The play
out of the question.
1
For the belief that
alfia ravptov.
bull's blood was poisonous, and
the
Me explanations of its origin see
n Ar. /.*., Frazcr's Pausanias, IV
'BXVrjjt dwaiT7f<ji\.
.itcly
and Groppe.p. 877,!

According
on of the story, Aeson the
.
driven by I'clias to
this way (Apollod. 1. 143,
a.-u
in
Diod.
4. 50).
= menstrua,
aiSolov Phot.
would be impossible
and, although rXtiu might
be adverbial (J. quotes I'lat. PhiUb. 45 <:
d rXeiu xalpovaiv ol oQoipa rooovrrti rw>
yt (see
cr. n.)
in this context,
vyiaiy^fTwp,
paXXov
417 B wo\i< rXiw
rep.
6f6t6rti rovt trior
f)
rai
roil liw6<t>
xoXtpiovt), the combination of n wXtiu is

Blaydes recomhardly to l>e tolerate*!.
mends Kalp.il V r\iiw...&i-<T<t>T)niar. I
prefer to read iwl wXttor in the sense of

ruiri' masculine with
probable reference to the Trojans. 0. C.
777 firfi' iwl wXtlu 0>rp>o iytiptrt is now
explained as a case of tmesis no doubt
rightly, unless there too we should read
wXuop. (This orrei tion has been
pated by Wccklein, who suggested 'wl
any more, making

1
ff.
this
print",
171 suggests that atpa ravpov
on the strength of ravpor" rb yvwaiKttow
H. Johnson
in C. A'.
irXctor
rt)*o".. .6 voûtpiar),
rdoS' (or
but
wXtlu XpJo* on the

ground that wXtto* is not tragic (cf. fr. 774
II
Mrl
and AchIi. /'<'.. 70.11.
finally preferred
'flfl
arrived at the same conclusion, points out

that 4wl wX4op is frequent in Thu<
e.g. 1. 65 bwm 4wl *X4o 6 oirot arrixv
may hold out longer'; so Hdt.
(obet (Coil. Crti. p. joot ill
.
mom
remarks: 'dvo&Hilai rx* dicitur

passivo, ut atria* tx ,tlf * 6*opa, />atar,
omplura.'
fbyo* 'X"*.
For the ambiguity of such expitstiodl
// lid. 974
nln+i* 1
with pop+d* lx*** in Soph. 4i> tHo, and
see the comm. on I'ind. hlh. 3,
> simili.i Ins alia
XXV
179
(IV (l
179
p. 186 arax**Tl{iu>
draKpofarat
draxXiriV,
Hetycb.
drawo&t\ri.
Kvplm
dt
iw't
rwr Iwr.
SoôXjf 'V.Mvrix dwair+pti.

It
seems
clear that the lemma has dropped oat
c^
before dra*pot'<ra<, i e. d'OX*47 '^**
:
Bekk.
mtued.
ol.
Rcit/. p.
14.
Ut", iranowr,,.
,n
SuhI.
10
/76*
jaj,
p.
d*a*o&l{<i, 4**6wr
(I.
i^x^t**
18 a*axif *
** i*# J
Zcfot\vi
*w*xatri(*t
a*mx-Ti[' Z^MXs}f
IO<t>OKAEOYI
126
The evidence
rb direiOeiv Kai dvrirelveiv.
of Photius and Suidas leads to the conthat
Sophocles
used
clusion
dvaxourifriv
in the sense of avtidelv, and that there is
some confusion in the order of the words
The words
as given by Hesychius.
Kvplus...tirwuv (cf. Dion. H. ant. Rom.
5.150!
tiriroi.
.iiri
rots dirurdiois dvlaravrat
rovs tirifSdras dvaxa-iriaavres

air o<rtiovr at) indicate that Soph, recognized
the metaphorical sense of which there is
iroffl
ical
a good example in Plut. Demetr. 34

us fii) irdXiv dvaxairiaavra rbv Srjp.ov
acrxoXtas
ira/>a<rx*
Cf.
Ant. 291
.
'
. .
Kpv(prj K&f>a atiovres, ovb" irrb
fvyy
\6<pov
Sucalws tlx ov
The explanations dvairo8lei and iyKbirrei no doubt refer to the
usage found in Lucian LexipA. 1 5 avaxairifoi rod Spofiov to p60tov, of checking the
way of a boat. In late Greek dvaxatriêw
is often the equivalent of refrenare (Phryn.
praep. soph. p. 32, 8 de B.).
-
180
[rbv da.va.Tov tov Kd\)(avTo<s els HapL<pv\iav yxercuêpei]
180
Strabo 643
arcodavelv
<pao~iv
\6yiov.
5' airrd
Xiyet
us
diraiTT)<ri,
ol
inrb
de rbv
\uirr]s
on a certain
KdXxaj'Td
Kara tl
of the
Kai
Kpelrrovi
ovtos
be
eavrov fjiavrei TeptrvxVKiXiKtav fxeraipe'pei rr\v

tpiv (scil. of Calchas and Mopsus) Kai rbv
Odvarov rod KdXxo-vros. Cf. ibid. 675
ijpiffav irepl tt)s fjtavriKrjs 6 re KdXxas Kai
6 Mbipos' ravrrjv re yap rr\v tpiv fiera<pepovo~tv <tvioi, Kaddirep Kai 2o<poK\i)S, els
Kai els
rrjv ~K.i\iKlav,
Ka\iaas eKelvos
airrriv
his
to
calculation
be absolutely
Mopsus, and that it was answered

correctly ; but that, when Mopsus submitted the former to him, Calchas failed
in his reply, and died of grief, as the
oracle had foretold.
Further variations
on the same theme will be found in
schol. Lycophr. 427 and 980 ; but it is
impossible to trace the particular version
to
Hap-
(pvXlav rpayiKus, Kaddirep Kai rrjv AvKiav

Kaplav Kai rr\v Tpoiav Kai Avdlav QpvyLav.
Kai rbv ddvarov 8e rod
and
correct.
Pherecydes (FHG 1 95) reported
the problem as concerning the size of the
litter of a pregnant sow.
Other accounts
(see Strabo 643) mentioned both problems,
stating that Calchas propounded the latter
Soô/cXtJs iv 'EX^^y
etr; dirodaveiv,
ei/xapfie'vov
8rav
tree,
number proved
KdXxavros tvravda
adopted by Sophocles. Pausanias (7. 3. 7)

states that the Pamphylians were of Greek
origin, being descended from the companions of Calchas who arrived there in
For
that country after the fall of Troy.
the geographical laxity, by which Pamphylia and Cilicia are confused or identified, we may perhaps compare Aesch.
Supp. 560 (530) Kai Si opuiv KiXIkuv
irapa8i56ao~iv dXXoc re Kai Ho<j>ok\t}s.
The
various versions of the story

relating to the death of Calchas have
already been discussed in the Introductory
learn that the distinctive
Note.
point introduced by Sophocles was the
change of scene for the prophetic contest
from Claros to Cilicia. On the other
hand, in schol. Dionys. Perieg. 850
11 454) Mopsus leads the emigration to Cilicia after the death of Calchas.
According to Hesiod (fr. 188 Rz.) Calchas
propounded to Mopsus for his solution
the question how many figs were growing
We
{GGM
Hafj.<fj\wv re
Siopvv/j.e'va,
with Tucker's
For the common identification of

note.
the Trojans with the Phrygians see J ebb
on Ai. 1054.
EAENHX TAMOI IATYPIKOI

The
11 P-
et
character of the play
399 Dind., where he
oe tis
avTdv
is
is
clearly illustrated
by
Aristid.
speaking of hypocritical rhetoricians.
irepl tt}? ey/cpaTelas SiaXeyo/xevoov diravrtfcpv o-tolt)
Kai <TTp7TTov<i, i/c/3dX\ovai ttjv yXwTrav aioirep

to i$09 (alluding to Eur. Andr. 629: cf. schol. Ar.
EAevrjv Xey(o
Lys. I55)- avTqv fiep yap idv iScoai ttjv 'JL\evr)v,
%&>*> evOpviTTci
Mei/eX.eo><?
'
EAENHI AnAITHIlIEAENHI TAMOI

depdiraivav
fiev
ovv oiroiav 7roirt <T MevavBp&t
127
rrfv <t>pirfiap, tcG
The
ovri Trathuiv aTro<paipov<ri rov< crarvpous rov o<pofc\ov<i.
then, were excited with passionate desire at the sight
Helen's beauty.
According to the version of the Cypria (EGF p. 18), after
landing at Sidon (Horn. Z 290) and taking the city, Alexander
at length sailed to Troy, where he completed the celebration of
Hut, as Welcker remarks, the scene of the satyrhi> nuptials '.
play was much less likely to be at Troy than before a shady cave
should conjecture, therefore, that
I
or near a babbling brook.
iction of the play took place at Cranae, of which Homer
Speaks as the first resting-place of the lovers
<>f"
ore (re irpdoTov AaKehaifiovo^ % ipareivt}^

eirXeop dpiraâ^ iv TrovT<rrr6poi<ri veeaaip,
iv
vr)<T(p S'
Kpavdy
ifliyq* (ptXoTrjrt icai evpp
^443
AT.).
identifies Cranae with a small island off Gythium

3. 22.
Laconian gulf; but Strabo 399 and Lycophr. no understand Homer as shaking of Helena, the rocky island stretching
Pausan.
in the
along the E. coast of Attica (Kur. Hel. 1673 n.).

Welcker suggests that the dance <tkott6^ (rmv (iTroa-KOTrovprtop
see Aesch. frs. 79, 339.
suitable to the occasion
n (j^'ip-a)
Ml
181
TTtTTOiV
aX/3>9 OiV
tptl'OS
5 fipu>(rii>
aXXou? i^tpivdî*; \6yip.

;
await* trot wr a*wt &* iripovt wautove*tai

Hcing uninstructed, how can y
struct others?'
He took it therefore to
mean ' Since you are yourself worthless,
those instructed by your conversation
181
Athcn. 76 c, speaking of >ra

<ria, figs of an inferior quality, says that
Sophocles in a metaphor applied dpw&t,
'
'
y the tree's name, to the (tint

ioô\7t i' b'KXdrifi ydfiift rpowneun ry
Spov 6*6u.a.Ti ror kapwdr itdXtttP,
i
cfrwr*
t/tuw
\6yty.
'
r/rw
6"
tthless too.'
The
explanation of Euslalhius is
accepted l>y Brunck, Sch weight user and
ipwin
ifTt rov w4wo0 ipwof.

Alexis, he
goes on to say, speaks of the ng- sellers
putting ra <rXitfd oi âxtfrjpd riir ovkui*
at the
l.llciidt
p.
the Itaskct, ami ripe ami

tea on the top, and so ipi* avt&oro,
- j\tlr 6fu>vwr
11H. II
(fr.
x,
ih. //.
p.
jo
'
n.
ami
M c nuke's version
practically to the
Tkttcr.*
same
effect
tu ignavac et inutilis caprihei instar alii*

ii.
ignavos et inutiles se praestent
ng avowedly
See
is
<tcl a%piii
oratione persuade
Jr 4t Pp**w as an interpolation. On the
other hand, Casaubon renders: 'tu cum
it grossna mhili et insipidus, ad come*
dendum inutilis. alios verbis incivpas,
tanquam ignavo* et insipidos'; ami (Ml
is also the view of Cobet {V. /.. p. 189),
\thcnacus, says: tn ixttB** *al

fava ipirdftw wapa IsxfxuXn, tr$m to*
KApmbr r<? rov Ufdpov inaXiotv tri/tan,
wapotfuaMOf to
'7<f.'
avro [<ju. airrov] rd worffUk, OMotw ry
1
vti)
on
fr.
itg.
Z04>0KAE0YI
128
who, deleting
dxpeios, explains
paraphrase <pavXos wv blXXovs
by the
iK<pavXieis,
you make out others

to be worthless, speak disparagingly of
'
worthless yourself,
others.'
however, shows that the true

meaning has been perceived by Stephanus
H.,
alone of previous writers

ipse non habet, aliis
:
'
nam
quod
6 epivbs
tribuit,'
i.e.
fnngeris vice cotis, exsors ipse secandi,

you fertilize others by precept like some
see Isocrates ap. Plut. tnor.
Nestor
838 E. Similar is a proverbial line of an
old man marrying (Paroem. I p. 390)
:
yiptov ipivbs ev<ppave1s rovs yelrovas,
i.e.
dXXovs toipeXijaeis.
For
wild figs were proverbially useless (hence
Spohn restored ipivol in Theocr. 15. 50
for the ipiol or ipeioi of the mss).
But,
airros dxpeios dSv,
though useless in themselves, they were

for impregnating the cultivated
see the Dictt. s.w. epivdfa, (pyjXt)Kb6'parrot,
or Stein on Hdt. 1. 193.
The proverb
useful
dveplvaffros el in Zenob. 2. 23 is differently

explained.
The reading in the first line is either
defective or interpolated. Porson, holding
the former view, conjectured
iritrwv
ipivbs
<wj> dxpeios <a.vrbs> dv.
Casaubon's avrbs wv dxpyios is impossible.
Scaliger inserted vavreXtos after ipivbs as
a stop-gap.
On the other hand, Cobet
ejected dxpeios as a gloss, and Meineke,
as we have seen, suspected the whole
phrase dxpeios tov is fipQeiv. So far as
the language goes, neither dxpeios nor
ppGxris is open to suspicion in tragedy,
and is is quite normal.
182
VeVOJTdL
182
FMV
tov
rj
Etytn. M. p. 601, 23 vivurat (so

vivurai vulg. ) 17 Kara (rvyKoiryv
dirb rod vevbi>)Tcu...rj dirb tov vivuiTai
:
yap vto pijua Tpirrjs

which Nauck prefers)
Kara, o~vffToXr)v.
fffTi
av^vylas ws (kcu
f,
irapd "Lo<pOK.Xel, olov'JZXivijs ydpito vivtoTcu.
Hesych. Ill p. 148 vivurai' iv v$ x et

Cf. Anacreon fr. 10 6 5' v^rfXb. vevu/xivos.
-
Lobeck (Path. El.
11
whether vivoucu or
p.
114) hesitated
should
vivtop.au
be
written in Sophocles and Anacreon

but,
as Nauck says, vivop.a.1 is an incredible
form.
For the Ionic contraction of 017 to
to see Weir Smyth's Ionic Dialect, pp. 190,
In the verbs it is limited to /Sodw
267.
and voito.
There is no other certain
example of this contraction in tragedy,
but Dindorf read udm/Hto for Kdiriftba in
Aesch. Pers. 1055. See also Jebb on
El. 882.
;
183
opocrayyai
1
83
Claudius Casilo 7rapd
rots 'Atti-
koIs p-qropo-i fyroijueva in Miller's
de
litt.
gr.
p.
ydp.to
6poo~dyyai p.ev oi
SoôkXijs J&Xivi] < s >
397
crtofiaTO<j>vXa.Kes, tos
kou TptoiXto
Melanges
'
(fr.
634).
The same
appears in Phot. lex. appendix p. 674, 21,

with the omission of 2,o<poKXijs.
Sophocles does not appear to have
used the name correctly, as according to
Hdt. 8. 85 it was the title given to the
King's benefactors
cf. fr. 125.
Priam
appears in tragedy as an oriental despot
(Aesch. Ag. 926), and the customs at his
court are those of the later Persian empire
:
See Dissen on Pind.

(Eur. Tro. 102 1).
Pyth. 11. 33.
H. inferred from this
fragment that the scene of the play was
at Troy, and that the wedding of Helen
to Paris was celebrated after her arrival
there. He quoted Proclus's epitome of the
Cypria (p. 18 Kinkel) : koX irpoaevexQeis
SiStovt 6 'AXiâvbpos alpei ttjv wbXiV kcu
diroTrXaj<ras els "IXtov ydfiovs rrjs 'EXivijs
iireriXe<rev.
p:ov fiiXos
Aesch. Ag. 707 to
iKipdrtos
rbr' iirippewev
tLovtcls,
vvu<pbTi\-
vpiivcuov, 6s
yapifipolo'iv deideiv.
|
however, Introductory Note.
See,
EAENH2 TAMOI EniTONOI
129
184
rravov
184
I'hot.
&wo rod
lex.
wdyra
p.
<f>aivtiv
rayov'
axv^^Tiadivra
377,
32
Kara /i<ra/}o\V
lo<>o*\î 'EVrijt ydfjivThe same
derivation is given by Eustath. //. p.
.'4 tropin awb roC <paivti <rxvn&{<tX^^<iria6(v Nalicr),
0.
rtadtit, <paai, /cord awto/SoXtji' tov

'
xafovxof ilairrtt ^\&ya.'
(Tr.
ip,
ofo*
adesp,
fr.
Mcineke corrected darrt to i\j>at>but was scarcely justified in his con elusion that Kustathius and 1'hotius were
referring to the same passage of Sophocles.
160.)
rti,
EniroNoi
EPI0YAH
The Epigoni of Sophocles was one of his most famous plays
and there is consequently a presumption that, when the title
lone is quoted without the name of an author, the play
of Sophocles and not that of Aeschylus is meant. The inference
l>e strengthened by the following considerations.
It was
Customary in the fourth century, when the tragic art was
declining, and the age of the actors had succeeded to tin
of the poets, to reproduce the plays of the famous dramatists
of the earlier period but it is well known that the practice was
for the most part confined to the plays of Sophocles and
Euripides, whereas those of Aeschylus were considered too
old-fashioned and obscure for the purpose
laigh, Tragic Drama,
Hence, when we read of the actor Andronicus, with
p. 99).
whoi
tudied elocution, having scored | success
<
the Epigoni Athen. 5.S4 I>), we are justified in concluding that

the line quoted from that play
in
6\6fi*ve iraihtov, iroiov
eiprjtcai}
belongs to Sophocles.
idemAndriam
rat. 18
\6yov
at the
it
(Tr.
(jitatit Mtiiamiritm Ugunt, mc

ant I'.pigotios Lotmas r.iiiunt:
fr.
adesp. 2)
result
.\yn,phebos nee
mm
net/
Atiti.pain
same
from
Cic.
dt
minus Terentmm
Andromacham nut
i/nmo linmum tt
on p<>t ins quam Buripidtm et Sophoelent
Ugunt.
Euripides was adapted
is almost
ntwpe by Pacuvius, the u
igoni of Sophocles was adapted by Accius,
Similarly, when Cicero ( Tusc. 2. 60) reports: Cleanthem (I 607
Arn p. 328 1'
mn /><</. t, tram p,r, USStSA
tx Epi&
: dixisu, audisn* //</o. Amp/tiarae, sub terram abti
fr. adesp.
3), we understand at once that the referee
to th< l.pigoni of Sophocles'.
kn<w that the
Andromachi
<>f
<
I,
'
WUamowitz, <//- tr.iûarum

argues briefly lo the ame
1
Gratterum fragmtntts, Gottingen i8yj,
p.
16,
IO0OKAEOYI
130
The
direct evidence bearing
on the plot of the Epigoni, scanty
show that the central incident was the

murder of Eriphyle, followed by the first beginnings of Alcmaeon's
madness.
All the authorities lay stress on the command given
to his sons by Amphiaraus, when forced by Eriphyle's treachery
to join the expedition of the Seven, that when grown to manhood
as
it
is,
is
sufficient to
they should exact retribution from their mother: see Apollod.

But Asclepiades (Schol.
3. 62, Diod. 4. 66, Hygin. fab. 73.
III 305) reports this in the form that Alcmaeon
Horn. X 326,
was forbidden to join the expedition of the Epigoni until he had
put his mother to death and Alcmaeon was said to have fulfilled
Apollodorus, on the other hand (3. 86), makes the
the behest.
death of Eriphyle subsequent to the return of the Epigoni, stating
that Alcmaeon was moved by the discovery of his mother's second
act of treachery in accepting the peplos from Thersander, the son
of Polynices, as a bribe for persuading her sons to join the
1
FHG
expedition, and was also instigated by the oracular command of

From these facts Bethe inferred the existence of two
Apollo.
epic versions in the Epigoni and the Alcmaeonis in the former the
murder occurred after, and in the latter before the expedition
see also Gruppe,
(T/ieb. Heldenlieder, pp. 129, 130 ff., 135 ff.
Welcker
hesitation
in holding that
had
no
272)
(p.
537)Pin Sophocles the murder of Eriphyle preceded the expedition of
the Epigoni and treated the account of Apollodorus, which he
regarded as damaging to the character of Alcmaeon, as the
work of some later tragedian.
This is as may be but it would
be idle to suppose that, if we see reason to place the expedition
before the matricide, we are thereby compelled to accept all the
details in Apollodorus.
Indeed, his story (3. 81) is intrinsically
absurd and dramatically impossible. If Alcmaeon was already
convinced of the binding force of his father's command, how could
he possibly postpone its execution to await the doubtful issue of
the siege ?
And was
If I return safe, I will kill my mother
Eriphyle so favourably placed as to be worth bribing ? What
inducements had she to offer which could have the slightest effect
upon a determined enemy ? Or, if she could persuade him to
spare her life if only for a season surely she needed no bribe
to make her undertake the task.
The whole account is nonsense,
unless we suppose that Alcmaeon was not yet aware of his father s
command*.
On the other hand, Welcker's view has to meet the
;
'
'
1
The work of Asclepiades bore the title rpayii)8ovfitva, and it might seem natural
to ascribe his version to Sophocles without more ado.
But the character of his book
does not warrant the inference that he abstracted existing plays: see Wenzel in
Pauly-Wissowa n 1628.
and
Immisch, however, contends that Apollodorus followed the Alcmaeon of Euripides,

fr. 70 a trace of the discussion between Eriphyle and her son.
finds in
EFTirONOI
131
Erinyes assailed Alcmaeon at once, he must

become incapable of taking the supreme command. After
difficulty that, if the
the death of Eriphyle his first object would have been to procure
expiation
and, if any weight may be given to the fragments
of Accius' Epigoni, it appears that after the matricide Alcmaeon
sought to appease the offended powers by lustration and sacrifice:
see fr. IX upud abundantan antiquam
et rapidas undas
Inachi, x nunc pergam nt suppliciis placans caelitum aras expleam.
Since the Argives are described as eager for war (fr. Ill), it might
be thought that the siege and capture of Thebes took place
during the course of the play a possibility not lightly to be
rejected, for which the Supplices of Euripides provides an
adequate parallel. Nevertheless, Ahrens and Ribbeck (p. 496)
agree with Welcker as to the time of Eriphyle's murder, and
the latter suggests that the Furies postponed the execution of
their vengeance until their victim should have finished his
appointed task.
do not elsewhere find them so obliging
Immisch (Jahrb. Philol. Suppl. XVII 180 flf.), who takes the
same view, is not justified in supporting it by postea as used by
w.fab. 71 {Alcmaeon memor patris praecepti Eriphylen matrem
suam mterfecit. quern postea furiae exagitarunt). Equally unconvincing is his suggestion that Alcmaeon was healed of his
madness by Apollo forthwith, but that it subsequently broke out
;
ammm
We
h.
highly probable that a dialogue between Alcmaeon and

Adrastus, the brother of Enphyle, took place after the catastrophe,
and that the incipient signs of frenzy showed themselves at this
point.
Since it has been shown that the Epigotti of Sophocles
cnown tragedy dealing with the story of Alcmaeon
and Kriphyle, a peculiar significance attaches to the inclusion of
Alcmaeon by Antiphanes (fir. 191, II 90 K.) in a list of famous
characters
It is
&P
ttuvt
r
A \KfjL(oi>a,
to,
eliri)
here
ning
r.
TTiiXlV
rn nrathia
" Tl âv(l ^ t'nrefcrovt

ayavatcTMV 6* "A&paaros
ev&vs etprjx
fiTfrep",
vfei irdXiv r
I
icai
fr.
cvtfeto*
atrtiai.
tore good reason for following Ribbeck

adesp. 358 to this play: see p. 69.
in
and in thfa
tic to tiK Accius in rcconntructini; S..j.lu>cle
Cicero's statement lend* tome justification to the attempt there arc evcral
fragment- which night be significant, particularly those relating to the appearance
of Amphilochiu (tr. IV: cf. Apollod. %. 86, I'ausan. i. .u .0 and Deroonasaa (fr. IX:
.
brilliant conjecture in fr. xvi Hcrj;k introduced
scene of the decisive buttle fought between the Epigoni mad
cue
ins (I'ausan. 9. 9. 4).
9-a
I04>0KAE0YI
32
was Welcker
and important question remains
titles Epigoni and Eriphyle}
Or, in
other words, is this a case where the name of a leading character
for we cannot say that Eriphyle was more important than
Alcmaeon has been substituted for the original title ? A prima
difficult
right in identifying the
facie case
may
be
made
in
favour of separation
there are seven
unambiguous references to the Eriphyle there is no evidence of

an alternative title; and the familiarity of the title Epigoni'would
;
have been against its displacement. On the other hand, there is

much force in Welcker's contention that the tragic death of
Eriphyle must have been described in the tragedy which bears
her name, and there are several undisputed examples of a mistake
arising in the course of the tradition through the substitution for
On the general
the title of a name taken from the text
1
question
see
Introduction,
but
this
not a case
is
of
Rather we should have to suppose that the

double title was introduced originally by the grammarians to
distinguish the play of Sophocles from the less familiar and
differently constructed work of Aeschylus and that subsequently
Fr. 198 might
the anthologists cited only one of the two titles 2
seem to be decisive in Welcker's favour, but, as it is not quoted
from the Eriphyle*, there is no reason why, if the occasion
required, it should not be transferred to the Epigoni.
Therefore
we can only say that no other solution of the difficulty seems so
probable as Welcker's and his identification has been accordingly
accepted in this edition. Jacobs preferred to suppose that the
isolated
error.
Eriphyle related to the earlier expedition of the Seven, that it

comprised the quarrel of Amphiaraus and Adrastus and the
intervention of Polynices, and that the death of Amphiaraus
(cf. fr. 958) was described at the end of the play.
This theory
cannot be disproved; but is it likely that such a play would have
been entitled Eriphylel
There is an obscure reference to the play in Philodem.
de mus. p. 87 to 6 etc twv E,Triy6va>v fie\o<> (v7roypd<po/xev ovtc
(nridavooripav aWrjv Bidvoiav, a\V edo/xev &><? ovros eXa perd Trjs
7ricn]/jLa<rias rov Ka>p.<p8oypd(pov) [LvdiKov eartv.
Cf. ibid. p. 18
UivSdpai ye ypcKpev (y typd<pero Usener) to.koivov Tt? aardov ev
evSia Tt0et<?.'
teal to ^.ofyotcXeovs ev toIs 'JL7riy6voi<;...The context
shows that the opponent against whom Philodemus was arguing
brought forward certain instances in which music exercised a
soothing influence. The object therefore of the ode in the Epigoni
y
'
The problem is none the less puzzling, when we find the titles Epigoni and
Eriphyle also ascribed to Accius.
Ribbeck (p. 489) takes the same view as Welcker.
2
See Haigh, Tragic Drama, p. 399.
3
This point is overlooked by Bethe in Pauly-Wissowa vi 462.
1
'
EniroNOi
was
33
compose the strife which had arisen between certain of the

and probably, as Immisch has pointed out (Philol.
in 554), the reference is to the altercation between Alcmaeon
t<>
characters,
xi. \
and Adrastus
after the matricide.
185
Trai&ojv,
6\6fiei>
185
iroiov elprjKas
\6yov
Athen. 584 n Aviporiicov Si tov

rpaytpbou dw' dyQvds twos, iv < rovi
ovi ItoTi Kriydroit Dobree, vwoxpirbp**oi add. Meineke) finffit pi)*, -wlvtiv
same way
pdWovroi Tap' atTjJ (sc. Tradaip^) col rod

vaibot KtXtvorrot rr)p Y4.6au>a* wpoara\woat, ' dXofurt walduf (a\q ' woior tlpijKai
usage noes not recur in Sophocles (subject

to a possible reservation in regard to
.-////. 840), but is found in Aesch. Prom.
413, Supfl. 855, and several tn
Euripides: cf. //if/. 13J, 385, Photn.
1019, Or. 1364, Med. 1153, Her. 1061
Wilamowitz). For the partitive genitive
ralSw* see on Eur. Htlid, 567.
'
'
\6yo*
The
reasons for attributing this fragadesp. 1 N.) to Sophocles have

îven in the Introductory Note.
6X6p.v. ;.,//;.,/, -a retched, corresponding to 6\<ho, a used adjectivally, in the
ment
(fr.
as the epic ov\6furoi.

It b
inversion of the historical development to
i,
as some have done, that the
participle bore an active meaning.
The
-
186
\audism
(I
i.
Amphiarae, sub terram iMitef]
haec.
186 Cic. Tusc.

007 An
mm pmU
,
Clean them
lerram /vnussisset,
a.
60
'igonis/erunt dixit se, 'attditm

sub lerram ahdite t
also the authorship of Sophocles
is generally admitted ; see Nauck.
suggests that the original was
db'. Ap.<pidpa>, yjt K*60t*r xdrw;
</>H, but Kf>v$tiu\ i> ju>t ;i>
likely). The chthonic cult of Amplr
'
Oropus (Kra/cr, Pausan.

was well k
836
especially at
466
ol&a
ff.),
yap Iraicr' 'ApfiAptwr

Kpv<p$iTa yvvaiKwr
ti
ff.
x/>MTo4/r<Mf
ral rOr vw6

(with Jebb's
ihc appeal to a
an.).
ChthotMC power is illustrated by the fact
i'-anthes struek the ground with Ml
foot : see e.g. Tucker on Aesch. Cho. 31 4,
Headlam in C. A', xvi 53.
Ipttffi
',aiat...wdp\fn-xot
'
dwdoati
Oam
187
AAKM.
avopOKTovov yvvaiKos ofioyiirqs

orv 8* avro\Lp yc fjLTfTpbs rj <r
AA1\
187
de and. poet. 13 p. 35 E
rpayiKOt 'A&paoroi
rov 'AW/ wot
w6rr<>\ Vpil aiVir 'drtpOKTOVOV ..tpvt
Plut.
'
iytlraro.'
de
r 'dbp6
' AApattro*
l'lut.
'd*o
tfvi
Ti
IX'
Wiof
rfb-aro
wpbi
'
row
iKt'troi | / d\X^Tp4f
wpo4nfpw orriboi, 'tfv r...
<f>v$.
iytlva to.
Efligvni see Introductory Nute.

1
drftpoKTOvov, husband- staying \ cf.
1
Plod />M. 4. ijj AoAWidr r *f<.
rcKKwr dr8po+6*t*r.
rente to ntfrpbt
S *t<x'('
:
see
nrpds
J<
r*
oi'r
oc'-ry
61
ff'
/>roro.
Kur.
(>.
19,
^/. 964,
;
:
I04>0KAE0YI
134
188
yap
<f)i\eL
vlkolv
in
BvcncXeua toZs <J>0ovoviavol<;

rj
irl toIs KaXots tt\4ov.
y)
alcr^pols
1
88.
188
T iro (sic)
Stob. flor. 38. 27 (in p. 713, II

tov
avrov iirLirovoL A, S omits the name of the
Hense)
~Lo<$>OK\tovs 'Eirlyovoi (so
play).
'
0i\et. ..irXôi".'
fragment awaits elucidaCampbell, who remarks that the

words are unmeaning in the absence of
their context, adds that the general sense
He who
seems to be represented by
This
difficult
tion.
'
acts honestly
is
down
better able to live
This may well be the right

track
for envy is said to be powerless
Eur. fr. 814 <j>66vov
against a good man
calumny.'
;
ov
<r^3w,
icrOXois,
(pOovdaOai
Democrit.
be
av ew'
0Aoi,u'
48 Diels
fr.
<pXai'>pwv 6 dyaffbs ov iroiHTai
fj.up.eo/j.ivu}!'
The
\6yov.
meaning of our passage will then be the

same as that of an anonymous writer
quoted by Stob. Jlor. 38. 39 <pBbvo% 6 Kara
tu>v 'evboKi/xebvTtav iirl
rols KaXXlcrrois
apy&v Kai aTTpaKTWu tuiv be ayad&v Kai

o'luv re reneev tl nap ecovTuv xP 7 <rT0v ov\
'
'When men
a,irTTai,
are
attacked by
A,
*)
Vi
A2
yp.
envy, disgrace is wont to prevail, if their

deeds are evil and not good.'
tois
<+j0ovo\j|ivois is thus the dative of the
person interested, and with vikolv used
absolutely does not differ essentially from
the dativus iudicavtis (of mental interest
only) in Ar. Av. 445 irdcn vikclv toU
Tucker
and
Kai tois Oea.Ta.is iracriv.
KpiTcus
I
wished to substitute
Wecklein
vtLKelv for vinav
for duaicXua, but in

either case the interpretation of the lines
is hardly less obscure, and in the former
there is the additional objection that
veiKtlv does not occur in tragedy.
Blaydes
proposed r)Kiv for vik&v. For the omission of the article with aiaxpoh, which
bOcrvoia
has the
of emphasising kclXois bycf. Eur. Phoen. 495 dXXa

Kai rdicn (pavXois ivbi\\ ws
effect
way of contrast,
Kai
crocpois
i/j.ol
8okl (n.), ib.
1258
vIkijs tc o'TJ/ma Kai
rb twv r]ffff(i}/j.dvuv, 1. 135 1 otoiv b' baiov

See also
Kai to biKaiov <piXov iv ftioTip.
on
fr.
149, 9.
I89
irav crv ToXjjLijaacra Kai
(h
ovk
kolkiov aAA'
yvvaLKOS, el tl
189.
189
Hense)
om. S)
'
1 yvv/j
MA
7rrjixa
'lUiriyovoi.
(iiriyovoi
ir ai>... ft por oh.'
cf.
Monro H.
Horn.
231
ovribavoicriv
but
on the ground that
measure.'
and
is
<Z
Kai ircpa is a
perhaps excusable
iron crv ToX/xriffacra
virtually identical with
who
5r)p.ofibpos
avdcraeis,
G. 2 163.
frigid hyperbole,
all
{fjei
M)
rt codd.
very
irdvToX/j.os,
hast been wicked beyond

For the connotation of
word,
strong
Headlam on Aesch. Ag.
a5
thou
7rdiToX/uoj,
ijrel
7)
Stob. flor. 73, 51 (iv p. 557, 7
fiaaiXevs,
ZoôkXIous
address:
is
yvvrj,
yiyverai fipoTols.
ytvcu S
1
I think that Campbell was right in
preferring yvvr) to yCvai (see cr. n.), but
I do not print a comma after iripa as he
The nom. is used because the
does.
words are an exclamation rather than an
see
nepa
ecrTLV ovS' ecrrcu ttot
see
There
228.
is
a similar but less patent hyperbole in Eur.

1. 1187 aXacrra fxtXea Kai iripa iradovcra
ctlov tkvu)v viral.
So Jebb takes 0. C.
1745 T0T f fLtv airopa, rore 5' vrrepBev. For
\
irav
roX/xav
cf.
fr.
567
n.
The words
unnaturally been suspected

(1) Meineke conjectured yvvrjs, treating
vv. 2 and 3 as a separate fragment
(2) Nauck required something like w beivd
T<JXfj.T)aao~a Kai bcivwv iripa (cf. Dem. 45.
73, Ar. Av. 416, Thesm. 705); (3) Stadtmueller proposed irepa Xbyov. But the
text is probably sound.
3 ft ti Kri., 'among all the sorrows
have
not
EniroNOi
irfitia lexically belongs
to the principal clause, hut i attracted to
yrji
135
$tovs
iriffrarat
ai^l(ti, ijiV
rifieui
to" vrtfxfHfxi. Track. 8 rvn<ptiutv flwor

AVyurror (txor, it t \irut\h "ywij. Jebb's
objection to the superlative ignores the
development of the idiom, which has
outstripped its logic.
See also on fr. 87.
|
The common
reading is
the
:ic and effective than Tucker's
'wi
II II I
17
to HITI rriixa ylyvtrai
ftporois, which is an anticlimax.
Blaydes
conjectured rfnj. Cf. 0. C. 1006 it rn
protasis.
190
to koIXou
190
190
t6
'
Apyoc. ov KaToiK-qaovr
KaroiK^roPT Blaydes: uarouriârT'
Scfa
Soph. 0. C. y,sico\\axov
Apyot otX6V (pacri, KaBivip xai 4v
m.
pr.)
scholium
requires
correction.
KaroiKô-ovT*.
The aorist (see cr. n.) is
unsuitable to tn, and I have very little
doubt that the future should l>c substituted
cf. Kur. //el. 57 to tcXrcror p.'
In KaToiKJettr w48op Zwdpriji, t/>. U44,
Andr. 858. Supfl. rtSI. This conjecture
has been anticipated by Blaydes. For
the
critical
difficulties
affecting
the
quotations of the scholiast see the n. on
fr. 341.
'TO KOi\...(ri.'
koiXov. A glance at the map of Argolis
will satisfy anyone of the appropriateness
of the epithet as a description of the
hill-girt Arrive valley within the limit- >(
-ituated the ancient towns of
Midea, ami Ttrym
Orneae,
(icaroiKâarTa
this
>-(Mt
ie,
crt
C 378. 1387 with Jebb's n. on the

earlier passage, where the reference to
191
iv Ktvolcriv avhpd<TLV rifirjv \i,
y\o)(TCT
oirov \6yoL crOcvovcri ratu cpyutv n\tov.

191.
191
- ; .til.
pot\4ovt
1
1 4p
'
wold*
II
15. 17 p. iHy. 21
W.
y\dca\..w\4o.'
have adopted
I
Y.(H<pi>\T).
'
Kivoiacv.
Iv
Jacobs: 4v olaw
icons'* conjecture as l>eing
on the whole
of the defective text.

also to have licen made inde
v 1>y
<
oIk-i
l>y
lorfs
^^Kf
enough
/'.
/.
p.
Wachsmuth.
15),
and
1}
iftpdai
V r/ottfi*,
Brunck
t\*i
y\waff'. but
disregards his 4* oTxi
necessary com piemen

is extremely unlikely that two r<
Mses are quoted by the anth<
the main sentence is OtPttted.
'
Wecklein.rc
Kvicala).
fX. read -yXuWffB 90 rotei' 4.

6-rov.
the assumption that 4*
On
oUrtr
retained
is
Hlomheld
But
in
the
to
it
(Wagner) or
DfeviotU
line,
tost
necessary to read r*
prODOStd
rot (F.
substitute
W. Schmidt
Nauck
<iJ>
#xti
a peisonsl
sec Pktl. 456 (rw #*

roi-rovt iydt
X'tfHsr T&ya#ov ntl{b* 94vn
Il-iroi't iricat ob rripW vot4.
6iov ii 4ndcrort yipotro, rrtft **p*\ah
K-.r the sent!/!. fr. 314. 3J4 ff. (.)
antecedent:
-imciently
ment.
common,
cf.
yip X*>#i rtor fU~ ewov

lUfoptp \anvpo* wmtittat it&Mo* 4 roff
ipmpjpon, Kur. .Yw//>/. 007 fiUrtfum ifim
otf
y\nr 4r 49oiaip,
mo' 4' p4m<h*, and
t) V /M>oit lyMJca'
itl
'
w\of<riop,
4>p4*nin*
*xi rtit x*yt, fx*
[ 4*
('
tWi*
tpyoti,
codd. Ear.).
IO<t>OKAEOYI
136
192
ottov he
to.
/xrj
viko.
eêcrTL,
ikevQepws \eyeiv
y^prjcrT
iv TroXeu to. )(e(,poua,
S'
ajxapTiai cnfxiWovcrL tt)u

192.
1 ra xpv a"r
\$<rr Blomfield
'
dfiaprlat.
d/xaprlais
192
MA
a"<tos dydirys, Kal
Stob. Jlor. 43. 7 (iv p. 2, 17

Ilense) rod avrov ([following fr. 84]
SA, 2o0ok\&>i/s M) 'EpuptiXr]. '&irov...
aior-qpiav
crcoTrjpiCLV.
Reisig: rd patera vel rd pdara codcl., rapier Wyttenbach, rd
Metoch.
rd
(x^P
Theodor.
</>'Xfas.
58 p. 341 Kairoi
\iyw,
rl
x e 'P w âTo
fOP XiS-ycw, dei piKp, Ard>

Traffy Kpdaei rwv ivavrlwv rwv dviuvruv
fiaXKov alcrOavb/xeda ; XPV<TT
ar>d X fL P U3V
are both employed in the political or
social sense to express the opposition 01
the conservative and democratic parties,
and the neuter plural might be applied to
their respective policies
Eur. Or. 773
dXX' orav XPVTTOvs Xd/Saxri (sc. Trpoordras
01 TroWoi), xp 7l"ra ôv\tJovo^
del.
See
Grote, Hist, iii p. 45, Neil's Equites,
But here the meaning may be
p. 202 ff.
quite general.
Herwerden unnecessarily
suspects iv ir6\ei on the ground that after
8ttov it is tautologous, and proposes b>
But the paratactic redundancy
X6701S.
is idiomatic
see Jebb's Appendix on
O. C. 434.
e/
.'
1 f.
Reisig's conjecture (see cr. n.)
appears most appropriate to the context.
Cf. Phil. 456 btrov d' 6 x Lp wv rdyadov
Kdiro<pdivei ra xPV~ Ta X *3
p-eiôv ffdivei
rotirovs iyib robs avdpas ov
5eiXos Kparei,
Observe, however, that
irorL
<npi;<j}
here the neuter rd x l P ova is not used for
the masculine, as rd xPV <TTa is there.
The schol. on that passage refers to Horn.
A 576 eirel rd x eP e ^ ova VLK 9- an d to Hes.
Op. 193 (3\d\j/ei 5' 6 Ka>cds rbv dpelova
ra, and the former of these quotations
Homer's phrase
is certainly echoed here.
became proverbial at a later date Niceph.
1
Chumn.
ap. Boisson. anecd. nov. p. 68

irXeoveKrel 5' 6/xws iv rovrip rd X e fy> w * a '
193
yqpa. TrpocrrJKov crcoê tyju evOvfiiav.
193
irpocrrjicov
tws Nauck
Gaisford
evdvfilav
Dindorf
irpoo-qKbirrois
:
ev<pTj/j.lav
A, wpoabvrm M,
193 Stob. Jlor. 117. 3 (iv p. 1055,

'yr/pa...
4 Hense) *Zo<p'oK\iovs 'Bpi^Xij.
(2) eixprjfiiav cannot mean 'silence'; the

last thing that was expected from the old
u<prjfj.iav.'
was
a difficult fragment and involves

the questions, (1) how the second word
other hand,
there is not
This
is
is
to
is
be read, and
sound.
(1)
(2)
whether
ev(prjfj.lav
Brunck
printed yijpus
Dindorf reports him as
irpoabvTos, but
favouring irpoarjKuv, which was adopted
But 717/50 irpoo-tiKuv can
by Hartung.
hardly mean 'having reached' or 'apBergk proposed
proached old age.'
Recently Nauck's irpeirovrus
irpofiKuv.
has won some acceptance, but, although
irpeirbvTws and wpocrriKbvTm were synonymous words, it is improbable that at any
period the former would have been exThe indications
plained by the latter.
are rather the other way see Elym. M.
to irpiirov, Suid.
p. 690, 21 wpoffTJKOv
Blaydes's irapoiK&v has
irpoariKei. irpiirei.
no probability. For these reasons I prefer
:
Gaisford's Trpoo-rJKov as an ace. abs. for

its use in tragedy cf. Eur. Suppl. 472.
:
irpocrbvTos vulgo, irpeirbv-
codd.
to refrain
from speech.
If,
on the
we translate 'good name,'

much point in urging an old
man
to be careful of his reputation

and
there would be no inducement for the
anthologist to include the line under the
title on rb yrjpas dvewaxOis Kal 7toXXt)s
;
alSovs dîov
17
o~t!rveo~is
dwepydfcrat..
We
expect something that is relevant to the

general defence of old age.
F. \Y.
Schmidt's evfiovXlav and evpvdfiiav have
very little probability; and I think
Dindorf's evdv/j.lav is far better, both for
palaeographical reasons and in point of
sense.
Old age is not burdensome, if it
cf. Plat. rep.
is borne with composure
329 D dv /.lev yap Kbcr/xtoi Kal efaoXoi waiv
(sal. oi&vdpwicoi), Kal rbyr/pas /xerpim earlv
:
iiriirovov
el
Si
fir),
Kal yijpas Kal vebrrjs
XaXcirij rip roiotjTip avpiftaLvei.

fr.
53,
II
159 K.
Anaxandr.
ETTirONOI
37
194
8'
apeT-qq fieftaiai,
1
194
Stab. flor.
The
fiora.'
('
<pOK\i)%
1.
(in
'E,)i<pi\r}.
extract
appearing only
94
Naber
n.
i.
'AptTTJi...
omitted
is
elcrlv al
fi6vrp
M.
in
The contract is between the permanence

of aptrii as a natural endowment, and
lability of wealth.
It i> explicit
in
Theogn. 317
dperijt tov it\ovtov,
tt/j
(uTtSor aid,
xpr/fiara S
&*0punrtM>r iWort d\\ot
The posn of d/HTjj is a gift of $601% : see on
ivti
t6
p.iv
#W
\
808 and the
fr.
Headlam in/.
illustrations
quoted by
P. xxill 176, especially
KTijcrtts
fibvai
(jl6vy)<;.
Eur. El. 941 17 yap <pvai% fUfiatos, ov ra

Sophocles, one may think,
XptfiaTa.
would have been on the side of Pindar
with his contempt for Siiaxrai dptrai
[01. 9. 101) rather than on that of
Socrates contrast Critias fr. Q 1
In later
fit\<T7Ji xXtlovs rj pi'fftwt dya$oi.
times the Stoics discussed the question
whether virtue once acquired could be
lost.
The only other in
pVPcuai.
in tragedy of the fein. termination ap|>ears
to I* Eur. El. 1 163.
Blaydes proposed
to substitute $ifi<u.o<..
:
195
avhpiw yap
195
Stob.
>.
/'
ZcupQKXrjt
7.
e<r6\<oi>
crrepvov ov fiakdaaeTat.
(in p. 309, 13
'arSp^y...
V.pitpi'Xr).
fta\dv<rtrai.'
nilar line is
quoted from Menand.
monost. 31 drdpdi womjpov av\ayxrot> ov

fxdXdoatrcu, but theapplicat ion is different.
The good man is unshaken in courage,
bad man is impervious to pity.

\x rememl>ere<l that 0vp.6i
comprehends both anger and courage
-
uld
no's Ovp.ortMf). so that in common

speech the separating line was not clearly
drawn. For the softening of anger cf.
//<. 771
6pyai p.a\Aeaov<j' d*6p6i.
'
The
present passage is more akin to Or.

100 (referring to the cowardly Meiulaus)
Kai fif ioKu>...xp6*nt pa\dZ<i)> aw\dyx*o.
ovrt yip Opaai'1 ovt' dXaupor wj<pi*.t.
I cannot therefore agree with Nauck,
who would restore ovk dWdffcrtrai after
and K. \V. Schmidt.
If any
change were necessary, it would be Utter
to adopt Wecklein's suggestion that the
1
line was interrogative; but the tradition

indirati s tli.it the subject was courage.
The
figurative use of rrtpmow, as applied

ii.ir to Sophocles:
see Trath. 4K1, 0. C.
I96
wcu? ovv fj.d^(ofxaL uv r/ro5 utv dtia TVXV>
rov to heLvbv
196
)
(fr.
90.
L<x;"/ \/o<
is
men
0m
Stob
the
is
o*u-nance of
their solan- in
ti
103 Aif mp&vrt? wapa

in exact parallel to
g as the iss
'
ov&v
<L<f)e\tl
Aesch. .S'//A 101 idrru i' [tc.

\wi6urv df" v^ttvpyv* *
Hut the l>cst Dtastradoo of thr
aporovt.
dl be found in
; &** ti
rovt dyafioii dropat iyx*tp*i* ni* iwaaiw
*a\on, TTjf dyad rjf wpo,ia\\oni*ov% i\rlta, +4p*i* &' <U 6 to%
thinks
Kil.U
itS<^ ytrraiui.
\'i maeon
that these ate llx words of
vcntion
Y.tn<pv\i).
common
94^. and
hvOhw oiVa
ikiris
jo (iv p.
<
hope
ipfifif
it If' draytmwt f\*h

7 a
^f &'
1\*lo" ov xpn rQt rigai k/Umi* wdpot)
himself
to
Ins
but
it
is
powerless against
di
mpanng
niii gtnitorem
Acciu*
mho, tutUttm
fate; and
VI <fui,
ft.
mtit
Smt

lOÔKAEOYS
138
miseriis, infers that
finetn
supposed to require a personal objec ;

but Tucker has well shown (C. P. xvm
197) that this is not the case by quoting
Eur. fr. 274 rb yap emends uxpeXei rat
v/j.<popds
and fr. 714 ttXovtos uxpeXei
this play
in
Alcmaeon was acting according
to the
direction of the oracle, and not merely

in execution of his father's behest.
The
sense is grievously marred by Nauck's

punctuation (adopted by Dindorf and
Campbell), who makes the question end
at t^xVi P u ts a comma after beivbv, and a
vbcrov.
1
8fia tvxj],
'heaven-sent doom.'
Sophocles is fond of this use of Oelos,
The
which is illustrated on fr. 650.
Hence, inasmuch
becomes contrary to fact
full-stop after <b<peXei.
as v. 2 then
meaning of Oeov irXr)yq (fr. 961 n.) is

similar.
For the general sense, the
hope is often serviceable in danger

Bergk and Kock conjectured birov rb
Oeiov, and F. W. Schmidt ottov rb SeLvbv
for
ovdev
eve'wecr',
this
The
<b<peXei.
mistaken criticism
reason
for
that wcpeXelv
is
necessity of submitting to the divine

ordinance, see on fr. 585.
2 tA 8ctv6v is used as in fr. 351, O. T.
1 22 to deivbv ov<poj3eiTO.
is
197
airekde-
197
197
/ctvet?
dweXd'
Clem. Alex, sfrom. 6
vttvov iarpov vocrov.
codd.
eKeiv7)s
741
p.
5' av eK
TrapaXXrjXov...l&vpnrldov
tov 'Opeo-rov (211) iZ <piXov vttvov
diXyrjTpov, iirlKOvpov vbcrov,' HocpoKXeovs 8e
Xdfiois
ixiv 4k
en
'
'EpicpiXr/s
tt)$
'
drreXd'
eKelvr/s
vttvov
Ir/rpov vbcrov.'
corr.
Nauck
text is corrupt, but it is not easy

to decide between Valckenaer's direXd'
i)wvos larpbs
and Nauck's
vbcrov,
The
direX9e- KiveTs virvo iarpov vbcrov.

latter
quotes Eur. Bacch. 690
Kiveiv
54/j.as,
and objects
vttvov
to eKelvrjs
on
br)Tpbv
codd.
the ground, I suppose, that to particularize

For sleep as a
is beside the mark.
soother of pain cf. Phil. 827 "TVy' bovvas
ddarjs, "Tttvs 5' d\7^wi>.
Abel
Xvo~ip.epiy.ve,
avdiravcriv,
The
tKeivris
p.v6iov
kottuv
Orph.
h. 85. 5
rjSetav
exwv
Kai Trdcnjs Xvir-is iepbv irapa-
ipSujv
(al.
fpirwv).
Wilamowitz
(Eur. Her. 2 1 p. 138) plausibly infers that

the reference is to Alcmaeon asleep on
the stage, and that here, as in the Orestes
and Heracles of Euripides, sleep was
introduced as succeeding a fit of madness.
198
/cat
198
Prov.
Melanges de
yap 'Apyetou?
cod. Athoi in Miller,

gr. p. 363 (n 46) Kal yap
Kal avrt) ~Lo<poK\elov icrrlv
lift.
'Apyelovs bpQ)
la/x(3elov /j.epos
'
Treirol-nTai
yap 4Kel'lpi(pvXT]
cod.) irpbs 'AXK/xaiuva Xeyovcra

'Apyelovs bpQ.'
ixip,vT)Tat ravri-s
(irepctp'vXTJ
'
Kal
yap
A\eis iv MvXwdpui (fr. 153, II 353 K. ).

Proverb. Append. 3. 35 (Paroem. I 423)
Kal -)ap 'Apyelovs opas avrt) 1,o<pbKXeios.
TreTrolT]Tai yap 'EpicfrvXij irpbs 'AXK/xaluva
Xeyovcra ' Kal...bpw.
etprjrai 64 4ttI twv
eKTev&s irpbs bnovv ^XeirbvTuv Kal Kara-
'
irXriKTiKbv
ri
Dokovvtccv bpdv.
t2>v els kXotttjv virovoovtxiviov
yap 'Apyetoi
'
oJ
84
eirl
K0}p.Ct)8ovvTai
4irl KXoTrfj, wcnrep Kal ~Zo<pomanifest error for"A\e|iy, according to Crusius) ixpycraTo.
Hesych. I
Suid.
p. 272 'Apyelovs bpu' irapoi/xiCoSes.
s.v. 'Apyelovs bpa~s.
wapot/xla 4irl twv
drevQs Kal KaTaTrXrjKTiKQs bpibvTwv.
kXtjs (a
opaj
Crusius (Analecta Critica, p. 151) explains that the comic poet quoted the
words of Sophocles with the addition
irapd irpoaboKlav of rovs (puipas or something of the kind, so that apyelos bears
He
the meaning of cpavepbs (cf. dp-ybs).
points out that Aristophanes had also
spoken of 'Argive thieves' with the same
4irl
Suid. s.v. 'Apyeioi -bcbpes
intention
tGiv tt poSrjXus TTOvrjp&V ol 'Apyeloi eirl
Apicrrocpdv-qs 'AvaKXoirrJ Koj/xuSovvrai..
yvpy (fr. 57, 1 406 K.). The verbal play
'
'
isofthesamekindaSj9o0sKi''rrptoy(c6x/>iojj,
KaK&v 'IXids {iXtj), dalnwv Alveios (aivbs),
and a number of others: ibid. p. 55.

That this use of dpyos was possible is
shown by one of the derivations given to
diro<paivb/j.evos
i.e. rpavws
Thus, the two
(Hesych. 1 p. 273).
explanations in Prov. Append. 3. 35
'Apyei<t>6vTi)s,
EmroNoi epii
(ttpvTcu ii...ot H...) are
to the <|uotations
txis.
adapted respecfrom Sophocles
The same
critic
\Philol.
616) refers to this passage Aristophon fr. 4, II 277 K. vaXaurrrir vbmeov

Blaydes compares Ar.
\K1rft16r /*' &(>**
'<z$ IrWat hpu), put forward to
explain a cry of pain.
xi. vi
The words were poken by Eriphyle to

Alcmaeon. and were famous as having
occurred at the culminating point of a
scene marked by the most intense form of
139
tragic emotion.
Eriphyle was conscious
of having betrayed the expedition of
Adrastus. and the appearance real t.r
imagined of the Argives was calculated
to fill her with terror.
Rihl>eck, p. 494.
thought that Eriphyle implored Alcmaeon

to stay his hand, declaring that she could
see an Argive army hurrying forward to
intervene in her favour; but this interpretation is excluded by the words rdv
Karar\yfKTiK6w
Iokwvtw*
opar.
EPII
The reading *Ip? in Athen. 6460, preferred by Casaubon,
Brunck, and Bocckh as the title of this play, is now exploded.
Welcker (Nacktr. p. 313), quoting Plat. rep. 379 E $tmv tptv Ti
Kpiaiv bin He/iiTo'c re kcu Atoc, conjectured that the subject
he contention between Zeus and Poseidon for the hand of
blunder is reproduced by Dindorf without
Themis.
Thi
any intimation that Welcker had confuted Themis and Thetis
cf.
Ptnd fstk. 8. 27 Zct)f ftV rifMpi ftcrios nyXai's t tptaav
teat
toav yafitp.
would rather suppose that the "Iv>k wa
play to the KptW, and that its subject
ipanion-
Thetis.
was
the
strife
the three goddesses at the marriage of Peleus and

See Proclus's abstrad of the Cyfria {EGF p 17):
evwyn
i<
TO?5
lIr/X.eaK
T7i)ni]
a2 irpo<i\\\cl~ai'8poi'
ti'"\&i)
\(h)v't
\\,)(i
Kara Afo s irpncna'/nv
Mil
i'd>
\<f>pOOlTtf,
1TpO<
\'\pfiOV
The golden apple which Eria dn>|

on the table with its inscription 'A gift to the fairest is
iected by
mentioned by a number of the later authoril
fovrat mi.
Pauly-Wissowa
vi
4051,
and
several
hum-
have
Though
ed that it was an addition to the original story.
omitted by Proclus, the apple appean in the very much
ibbn riat<
ml in A poll od, tpit. \. 2, and there is nothing to
Ml
not have been mentioned in
obvious that the marriage of Peleus and
was an occasion on which a chorus of satyrs mi^ht
j
well
-n present, and
support the idea ot .1 banquet
nsiderationi which
Tw
in
(!) the
favoui of this conjecture deserve to be stated
ild
It
is
frequency with which
/>*?,
1
especially in conjunction with *pt'<m,
See Gruppe,
p. 665.
Z0<t>0KAE0Y2
4o
appears as a fixed term for the quarrel of the three goddesses, as

rrjv t^? "EpiBos
in the Argument to Colluthus, npirayri 'E\ev7)<;
avy\vcriv /cat epivrrepl tov firfkov. Cf. Eur. Hec. 644 iicpt,0r) 8' epis
av iv \\Ba /cpivei rptcraa<i pbaKapiov iralBas dvrjp jSovtcls. Andr. 276
rpLTTcoXov appua 8aip,6v(ov ay gov (sc. Hermes) to /caWi^vyis, epiBi
Hel. 708 Oetov rpicrcrwv epis.
crTvyepa Keic.opv0fj.evov evpiopcpias.
LA. 183 'Hpa UaWdSi r epiv epiv p,op<pc7? a Kvirpt? ea-êv.
Isocr. IO. 4
ib. 1307 Kpicriv iirl crrvyvav epiv re /caWovas.
lipid fxov
yevop,tvrjs iv 0eoi<; irepl /caWovs e piBo<;, 179 WXeâvBpos
Kareo-TT) icpirrjs.
There is very little doubt that to this list should
be added the passage of Plato quoted by Welcker, seeing that
Themis is mentioned in the abstract of Proclus as taking counsel
with Zeus see Adam's note. (2) If "Ept? is to be taken as a
personification, the incident in question is much the most famous
affair in which she was engaged 1
:
199
iyco he neivcocr
1
199
Athen. 646
Xrwrbv Sid
99
trpiov
av irpbs irpia ySXeVw.
ireivucrayav
irffifi6.Ti.ov
cryo-dfiov kcli fitXiros yivbfievov.
fj,vrjfioi>e6et ai'Tod...'2,o<poK\i)s''Epi5i
l,
iyw...
fSXiiru.'
irp6$ trpia pXtVto, 'cast a longing eye
on the cakes,'
is a less contemptuous form

of the Aristophanic irpbs ravra icexyv&s
(Nttb. 997).
Cf. Plat. symp. 181 B irpbs
rb Stairpdâo-dat. fibvov pXiirovres. Blaydes
on Ar. Lys. 427 quotes Eur. fr. 162
dvdpbs 5' bpQivros els Kvirpiv veaviov,
Theocr. 13. 12 o$0' 67t6k' oprdXixoi fiivvpol
Musurus
corr.
ttotI koItov bpyev.
daopGxn
irpbs
Anacreon
So perhaps Ant. 30
X P LV
L
fiopas.
For
Trpto
17 rjplo-rifo-a fiev Irplov

Kaibel questions
Xeirrov fiiKpbv diroKXas.
whether the generally accepted correction
cf.
fr.
of Musurus (see cr. n.) is sound. It is

certainly not convincing, but nothing
been suggested. Ahrens
has
better
thought that Aphrodite was the speaker,
and that she was bored with Athena's
sage counsel.
200
evcopos ydpiov
200
200
Hesych.
"Zo<poK\r)s
Nauck)
7)
II p.
"EptSt.
oXtyiopos.
Kara avruppao-iv, ws
237
upios
tfroi
ydfios cod.
etiwpos ydfios.
(upalos
oCrw yap Xtyovai

6 avrbs
ev
2Ki'p/at$
561) XPVT"- 1 T V evupidfciv.

out that the interpretation dXlyupos, although wrong in itself,
shows that ydfiov and not ydfios is the
correct reading.
An example of evwpos
in the sense of neglectful is quoted from
(fr.
Nauck pointed
'
corr.
Nauck
Euphor. fr. 102 ovdi rot evupoi dviuv.

Hesych. also mentions eSwpos as an
epithet of 777, i.e. 77 rd ubpaia txovffa.
For the genitive depending on the adj.
cf. Eur. Hel. 12 ewel 5' is yftriv rjXOev
ibpalav ydfuav (n.), and for further illustrations of similar genitives KuehnerGerth 1 371. Pierson on Moeris p. 426.
For ko.t avrtypao-w see on fr. 116.
'
When the above was written, I was unaware that the same view of the contents
of the "Epts had been advocated by Bergk {tie frag. Soph. p. 10). as well as by
Ahrens, who threw out the suggestion that possibly "Epis was an alternative title to
the play known as Kpiais.
The latter identification, for which there is little to be
1
said,
was
also
approved by Wagner.
EPIZ EPMIONH
141
201
201
Antiatt. (Hekk. anted.) p. 108,

'EtxpoavTi rov Kara uiav.
o (day uiav
'
<nca<f>oi, and see Phot. lex. p. 144, It.

Ar. Nub. 1188 ie\io t\iov ripyvptor itl
Antiph. fr. 10, II 15K. utifov

lutfo*. Catull. 64. 275 majp's magis merebrescunt.
Kxamples from modern
ylyrtrat.
V'.mSi.
must be assumed that this was a

Colloquialism for 'one by one,' or 'one
Hrunck compares
and then another.'
p. 213 ri ovk aTacoifiJidijfuy foov
So n&Wov fiaWo* in Kur.
ieo* ariXriv
/. T. 1406 fiaWor 5i fidWo* wpbt Wrpat
It
are adduced in the authorities quoted by

Thumb, die gr. Spr. in Heitalter d. HelUmstnus, p. 118.
EPMIONH
The plot of this play proceeds on parallel lines to that of
Our authorities for the contents are as
Euripides' Andromache.
Kustath. Od. p. 1479, IO o$o\r}c Be, <f>a<riv, fa 'Epniovt)
follow^
iaroptZ ev Tpoia ovros en WeveXdov eieSoBrjvai ri)v Kppuomjv vtto
to")
'Opiorrf elra vcrepov dtpaipeOelcrav avrov
iicho6r)vai -m'SeoTrToXefj.fii Karri ttjv ev'Ypoia VTmayea-iw airov Be
1
vtfoi tnaipedevros vtto Maâtpewv, ore rov \rroXX(o rivvp.ev<^
rov trarpoi tgeBiKei <f>6i>op, diroKaraarrjvai avdis at rijv rril 'Qpeorn'
* (>)i> yei'taffai Tor T laafxevov faptavvums ovto) KXrjBevra rrap
uevovs riaiv, eirei 6 trarrip 'Ope'o-T;c ericraro Toy? 4>ovi< rov
\ya i. uroi 0?. The schol. on B 4 is identical in substance, though
inguage Ifl somewhat different, and the clause oie...<p<'>ov
But vtto TvvBdpeto
Yiaap.tv6v are omitted.
ill that follows
is given in the MS8 in place of Otto MagoiptW, which is restored
ndorf.
The only other allusion to Sophtt les in relation to
:
'
abject occurs in' scboL Eur. Or, 1655 which, after some
ks concerning Euripides alone, proceeds as follows:
<hrpe*t'r5r/<? <^/t/ (hi Id
94) rnj rraiBtov XPrl fffxov alrovvra rov
XeomoXefiov dvaipeO^vai' eirei NcoTrroXfjtov 'Epptavriv yapei rijv
n epx^Tai tk &eX<poi/v Kara ro yjpr)art)piov tcpea

d<paipelrai rd xpea avrovs, eavrov Bit
6 Be ruvrtov ieptvs (avrov Be Kreivei WaâtpVK
1 fuiynipa.
rhv
u rwrt&v l<)>n< Ka't conj. Leopardi] Karopvatret a
8iapTrdty)vra<; rovi
AeXcpcW
ravra ycveaXoyel koI

meaning should be given to th
the last sentence; but I cannot agree with Wclckcr
that w<- are entitled to assume that Sophocles
rov vew.
vhat
utterance
followed
in
unt of l'lurccydcs in-rcspect either (i) to the
IO0OKAEOYI
42
motive of Neoptolemus in visiting Delphi or (2) to the origin

Welcker makes several other
of the brawl with the priests.
that Orestes plotted
assumptions which cannot be justified
that the scene
against the life of Neoptolemus, as in Euripides
that Hermione was forcibly
of the play was laid at Delphi
carried off by Neoptolemus, and sighed for her former lover
Orestes, as in Ovid {Her. 8); that Pylades assisted Orestes in
attacking Neoptolemus and that Neoptolemus in a dying speech
There is
directed that Andromache should be sent to Helenus.
not a scrap of evidence to support these inferences and it is far
better to adhere strictly to the statement of Eustathius, who
A tragedy upon this subject was
is our only explicit authority.
also written by Philocles 2 who is known to us from several
see schol. on Eur. Andr. 32. The title
allusions in Aristophanes
Hermione is also found among the works of Livius Andronicus
and several fragments of the latter's play are
and Pacuvius
preserved, and are used by Welcker for the purpose of reconThe objections to this method
structing the play of Sophocles 3
have been pointed out in several other cases.
The principal facts which emerge from the statement of
Eustathius are: (1) the betrothal of Hermione by Tyndareus,
For this cf. Serv. on
during the absence of Menelaus at Troy.
Verg. Aen. 3. 328 hanc Hermionam quidam dicunt, cum Oresti
esset desponsata, post a Menelao apud Troiam admirante virtlitem
Pyrrhi esse promissam : alii dicunt a Menelao quidem apud Ilium
Pyrrho desponsatam ; sed a Tyndareo Oresti morante apud Troiam
Pyrrho, ut quidam promissam, ut quidam coniunctam tradunt.
Ov. Her. 8. 31 me tibi Tyndareus, vita gravis auctor et annis
at pater Aeacidae
tradidit : arbitrium ueptis habebat avus ;
promiserat inscius acti, etc. To the same effect Hygin. fab. 123.
This is
(2) Neoptolemus was slain by Machaereus at Delphi.
related by several authorities, from whom we learn that
Machaereus was one of the priests of Apollo: cf. Strabo 421
Ma%atpea>$ Ae\(f>ov avSpos dveXovTos ainov, a>? jxev 6 fivdos, Si/cas
alrovvra rov 0e6v rov irarpwov (j>6vov, &><? 8e to el/cos, eiridepevov
1
1
Ribbeck, Rom. Trag. p. 262, agrees with Welcker, and actually attributes the
introduction of the words ravra (or tclvto.) yevtaXoyei to the operation of this motive.
More to the point is his reference to Diog. L. J. 119, where Pherecydes himself is
Wagner (Epit. Vat. p. 2762) was perhaps right in referring the
called yeveaXoyos.
words to the genealogy of Tisamenus, as related at the end of the play.
2 See
p. 760, where it is hinted that the name of Philocles may have been
substituted in error for that of Sophocles.
3 Wagner and Ribbeck make much of Pacuv. fr. 1 quo tandem ipsa orbitas
grandaevitasque Pelei penuriam stirpis subauxit, as confirming the view of Welcker
that in Sophocles Neoptolemus went to Delphi to enquire how he might become a
It is manifest that the words quoted do not warrant the inference that has
father.
TGF
been drawn from them.

EPMIONH
143
Pausan. IO. 24. 4 NeOTrr6Xep,op...6 !epev<; diretcTeive rov

Tryphiod. 642 âdeov hrfKrfp.ova iijov AeXtpot
dvt)p eXdaas lepfj KaTiirtfyve fiaxaipy.
It is important to observe
that the schol. on Pind Mm. 7. 62, quotes Asclepiades'
Tpaya)Soi'p.ia (FHG III 303) in support of his remark that
all the poets agree in naming Machaereus as responsible for the
death of Neoptolemus.
Pindar, in his Paean to the Delphians
(6. 118, Oxyrh. Pap. v 47), had given offence to the Aegim
tepdi.
TToXXtovos.
by the words
<ip.(pnroXoi<; Be
p,oipiiiv irepi Tip.ni*

\
Br}pia%op,tvov
trap 6p.<pa\6v evpvv, which seemed

to them to suggest that Neoptolemus was guilty of sacrilege.
The cause of the quarrel was clearly not so well-known as to
leave Pindar's expression free from doubt
and the newly
discovered scholia give various explanations: rjrot rtav xpetov 17
Iv reptvei <piXo>
KTcivtv
y/ivT<t)v <rvvi)d*
twv
twp
dXXa>i>
eBvaêpave
/cat
erctoXve 816 teal
a Biaptrd^tov els etchiicLav tov irarpos

dvypetfr).
In .Vent. 7. 42 Pindar explains that he meant the first,
iva Kpewv viv virep /za'âv
eXaaev dvrnv\6vr dvrjp payaipa: but
iccount of Eustathius, so far as it goes, suggests that in
Sophocles Neoptolemus was the aggressor. (3) The subsequent
birth of Tisamenus to Hermione and Orestes, and the derivation oi his name.
It is impossible to feel sure that these
come from Sophocles: in any case, they can only have been
mentioned incidentally.
For the fact cf. Pausan. 2. 18. 6.
Wagner llpit. Vat. p. 274 ff.) throws doubt on the account of
quite inadequate reasons, and prefers to follow the
s of Wclcker and Ribbcck to the plain statement 01
only direct authority.
He treats Sophocles as the source of
Apollod. epit. 6. 14, and would accordingly restore viro 'Opitrrov
rather than faro Maâ/pewv for the corrupt imo TwSdpea* in
schol. Horn. 84.
Schwartz, on the Other hand, rightly COflsii
that the fpitome is drawn in the main from Kuripides, but
contains a single motive taken from the HtfWtk
\
ested that, if fr. 872 belongs to this play, tin- plot
may have been similar to the conclusion of Kuiipides' Orestes.
Hut, in view of the evidence already discussed, it is clear that
1 belongs elsewhere.
dvr}pT)Tat
ij
\pi)p.('irwv
<
.-.ily-Wittowa
1879.
IO0OKAEOYI
144
202
aW
a>
Trarptyas yrjq ayvicuov neoov

f&
202
Steph. Byz. p. 22, 4 dy via' t6ttos

8t)\wv tt]v iv ry ir6\ei iropevrr^v 686i>...
2o^>okX^s 'Ep/j.i6vri
ri> tottikov dyvtaios.
to 8k dyvialos ws dpovdXX' ...iriSou.
1
'
palos.
Meineke conjectured ayvicuov, which

would be in accordance with At. 859 w
ZaXayuiVos and
yfjs iepdv oUelas ir8ov
Eur. fr. 558 (J yrjs Trarpyas x a 'P <pi-X.Ta.Tov
But no rigid rule can be laid

Ai. 135 tt?s dp.<f>ipvTov 2aXawhere
fiivos
dyxidXov,
fiddpov
ix wv
Bothe's dyxiaXov has not won acceptance.
See also Elmsley on Eur. Hclid. 7 50.
L. and S. strangely connect this adjective
with Apollo 'A7Wi;s. There is no reason
to doubt that it simply means provided
with streets,' as a town settlement.
iri8ov.
clown:
cf.
'
203
yVOMTTOS
203
yvwarbs

'
olvtI
rod
2o<pokXt)s
yvibpifjios.
'Epfjuovg.
Nauck contends that yvwr6s ought to

be written as in fr. 282; but see Jebb on
He also
O. T. 361 and the Appendix.
retains /cXawrd in O.C. 1360. The question of the origin of this intrusive
0-
was
discussed at length by Curtius, Greek

Verb, pp. 519
526, but his conclusions
are now out of date.
The form in -aros,
where not phonetically justified, must be
attributed to the working of analogy yvu<tt6s is thus necessarily later than yvwrds,
although the contrary view was formerly
held (Blomfield on Aesch. Pers. 403).
EYMHAOI
Eumelus, as Welcker remarks (p. 66), is not a tragic hero
and nothing is known of any person bearing this name which
Moreover, it
appears suitable for the subject of a tragedy 1
for in fr. 204
is only in Harpocration that the title appears
The best-known Eumelus
RvfirjXG) is an emendation for afirjXw.
is the son of Admetus and Alcestis. who actually appears in the
Alcestis of Euripides.
He commanded a contingent in the
Trojan war (B 711 ff.) was famous for his horses {ib. 763 ff.)
appeared as a competitor in the chariot race at the funeral
games of Patroclus ("^ 288 ff.), when he received something in the nature of a consolation prize
and won the
first prize at the games held for Achilles (Apollod. epit. 5. 5).
Later he was one of the heroes in the wooden horse (Quint.
12. 324).
Hence Meineke, concluding that he probably survived
the war, referred fr. 911 to this play.
Blomfield's conjecture
'A/AU/C&) for EvfMrj\(p is improbable.
.
'
'
1
Wagner's extraordinary identification of the hero of
Eumelus of Anton. Lib. 18, Ov. Met. 7. 390, requires no
this
tragedy with the
refutation.
EYMHAOI EYPYAAOZ
'45
204
204
Hcsych.
79
p.
aXfiarotcaoat
alfiarot Kopicrai rb 56pv.
Aprfat
atfiari
7)
fioXOvai
rat xP^ffcu ai'Td* a<r7 *ydp ^

S0tv *ai d&dfiftia. iv y tt)v Acrrjv
fJLT)v60OVTt (ffOfXl.
0<pOK\Tft dfX^\if>.
Kvi*il\tf> was restored \>y Musurus; and
the corruption of tv to a is frequent in
pwapla.
Hesychius,
Blomfield conjectural 'A/wJand Blaydes approved. The gloss
has been further restored so as to read
if>,
alfiarot
dot, iv
'
curat
jj
rr)
Apija...50(v kcU aoa.fj.iv&oijv...(uvv0ovTft iXovovro.
For that is the form in which the lemma

and gloss occur in Suid. s.v., and Bekk.
358, $1, with the addition of the
ttj* ptirapiav utiovprtt after
tkoOovro.
Sui<l. omits t6 S6pv after Kopi<rat, and neither has avr6 after xputaai, or
any trace of ivtopti or of the reference to
anted,
they have driven out the conclusion of the

clause iv 5 kt4., leaving a gap.
It might
he possible to account for ivtopti by reading ifiivi-Qov oi dpxaiot, or even ftivv0tu>
ivtxwptt.
So R. Kllis conjectured furv0wv
avatpti.
But, for reasons already
given, it can hardly be doubted that the
gloss of Hesychius has been mutilated,
and that it was originally identical with
that of Suid as.
See also Suid. s.v. dad-
pivOot.
i]
rv(\ot, if OKd<prf iv alt oi
dpxatoi fKovovro. ovk fjaav yip paXartia.
wapd to ti\v Aorjv pxvvOtiv.
Similarly
Etym. Af. p. 151, 51. Etym. Cud. p. 8a,
p.
ion
words
cles.
few lines below Hesychius has oifj

(potvil-ai.
fiarutoai- (povivoai.
Consequently, M. Schmidt conjectured that
the words following ni)vv0ovrt l>elonged
properly to this gloss, and should l>e
emended Xoirrapilv 2. K. This conjecture
On the other
is supported by fr. 987.
hand, Schmidt is obliged to assume not
words
in
question
have
merely that the
been accidentally shifted, but also that
For the derivation of dadfuvOot cf.

Apollon. lex. p. 45, 6 aadmvtiot. wvtXot.
drd rod Hjr Aatv fuvvdttv, 6 io~riv i\arroOv.
Schol. Horn.
450 dadiuvSot Xiytrai 3d
t6 fuvvOttv xal for d<parl{'<iv tt)v Aoyv
ijroi top pvvov.
To the same effect ylml.
I
There is no reason why SojphodM

should not have introduced the Homeric
{/'/.(,'
Ill
liergk
doafuvOot, although
i i.O is hardly justified in attributing to
him the words fptHfiavdrw 6i rn eurdtiwOov quoted without an author's name
by Etym. M. p. 797,
205
KaOeXatu
205
II 11 poor. n.
04, 18 nadtXiJv ...
drri rov dvtXvv 17 awotrtlvat.
ixjrfa a* T0
oflrw ry 6v6fian naX aXXot, u *ai
lntixopot iv IXioi- ripaiSi (fr. 13) *ol
1
XcôcX^t iv KvfijXu.
Phot lex. p. 113,
I naBtXJjv
Arfnoa0ilvitt (13. 53) arrl roi>
(fr* dwoKTtlvat,
*ai "LtxpotXrit.
dvtXiov
The
is
TLrtfolxopot
xal
Troth. 1063 p&ni p* *if

*a0tl\t <pa*ydvov 6*xa. At, |fj (tuifm)
KodttXtv \toov ftavaoiuoit oin^TOpat. O.C
Sophocles
1689 vara
passage quoted from Derm*:
actually from the text of a law:
droKTiivij iv AOXchi dwr 1) iv doy

a0f \uiv, and no inference should be drawn
In
from it for the usage of Attic prone.
the wider sense of to overthrow |]
amples are more numerous: v. Ic
fU
idv
cf.
fit
^driat
'
AMai
t\o*
war pi
(i-
fiartiv yipaiy.
EYPYAAOZ
of Sophocles is cited by ElMtath. Od. p 1796, 52
\vaifiax ov (^ No^TO'f) vio? avr<~; BÂmy Bo"rpoirwo^
The play
Karri hk
n^patv, hv
aWoi
IffTopcl,
is
told
D
A6puXoi/ â<ri.
hv dtrtttTeiv* TrjXcpax
by Parthmius,
u<nr,it. ,im.
^* t^v a
! In ryalus
After the slaying Ot the
So^kmcXt)^
*'
The story
IO
IO0OKAEOYI
146
Odysseus crossed over to Epirus on account of an

command; and, while hospitably entertained by Tyrimmas, became intimate with his daughter Euippe, and by her
When the latter had arrived at
the father of a son Euryalus.
full age, his mother sent him to Ithaca, with certain tokens
proving his identity. Odysseus happened to be away from
home when he arrived and Penelope, who had previously learnt
something of her husband's passion for Euippe, found an
opportunity to satisfy herself of the whole truth. Accordingly,
when Odysseus returned, without informing him of the real
position, she persuaded him that Euryalus was plotting against
Odysseus was thus induced
his life, and should be put to death.
to slay his own child, not very long before he was himself killed
by Telegonus. It will be observed that Eustathius speaks of
Telemachus and not of Odysseus himself as the actual slayer.
In the concluding words of Parthenius Meineke found a
senarius Tpeodels dicdvdr) Tpvyovos OaXaaaia^, for which see
Wilathe Introductory Note to the 'OBvaaevs aKavdoirXri^.
mowitz, Horn. Utiters, p. 191, holds that Parthenius is an entirely
suitors,
oracular
untrustworthy source for the reconstruction of Sophocles' play,

and that we must not accept his authority for the line recovered by Meineke, or believe that Tyrimmas was the name
given by Sophocles to Euippe's father. But his scepticism has
not found favour with subsequent critics: see the authorities cited
by Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 62 10 Gruppe himself holds that the
story belongs to a stratum of Thesprotian and Epirote legend
Recently, Viirtheim
which was older than the Ionian epos.
(Mnem. XXIX 57) has given reasons for preferring the statement
of Parthenius that Odysseus rather than Telemachus was the
slayer of Euryalus
he urges that the homicide was used by
Sophocles as preparatory for the Niptra, in order to vindicate
the poetic justice of the sequel, and that Penelope's vengeance
would have been incompletely executed unless the father had
been induced to become the slayer of his son.
.
EYPYTTYAOI
The
story of Eurypylus,
of
his alliance with the Trojans,

within the period covered by the
He was the son and successor of the Mysian
Little Iliad.
Telephus, and his mother was Astyoche, the sister of Priam.
Homer (A. 519 fif.), in referring to the exploits of Neoptolemus,
selects as the greatest of his achievements his victory over the
hero Eurypylus, the son of Telephus, who was slain, together
with many of his Cetean followers, by reason of the gifts sent
and
his death in battle,
fell
'
EYPYAAOI EYPYnYAOI
147
to a woman.'
The allusion implies a further knowledge of the
history of Eurypylus, and is variously elucidated in the scholia.
the present purpose it is sufficient to take account of the
explanation attributed to Acusilaus
I
According
103).
{FHG
hearing of the power of Eurypylus, sent a

message to him asking for his assistance. Eurypylus replied
that his mother would not permit him to render it
whereupon
Priam sent as a gift to Astyoche the golden vine which Zeus had
to
this.
Priam,
to Laomedon (or Tros ) as compensation for the seizure

of Ganymede, and which he himself had received as an heirloom.
That this version was ultimately derived from the Little
Iliad is made almost a certainty by the mention in one of the
fragments (fr. 6 K.) of the golden vine as the gift of Hephaestus
to Zeus, and as subsequently passing to Laomedon as the price
of Ganymede.
Proclus* merely states that Eurypylus came to
the assistance of the Trojans, and, after heroically serving their
was slain by Neoptolemus. Pausanias (3. 26. 9) gives the
Little Iliad (fr. 7 K.) as his authority for the statement that
iaon was one of the Greeks who were killed by Eurypylus.
Another notable victim who fell by his sword was Nireus
;in. fab. 113, Quint. 6. 372).
1 he arrival of Eurypylus, his entertainment by the Trojans.
hire for the field of battle, and his immediate successes
are the principal subjects of the sixth book of Quintus
and
uts are related in such a spirit as leaves upon the reader
the impression that the fame of Eurypylus as the last hope of a
cause (Soph. fr. 210, 76 f.) must have been widely celebrated
rlier poets whose works are now lost.
It should be added
Quintus, although he mentions Astyoche (6. 136) as <>t
l'nam and mother of Telephus, says nothing whatever about
the gift to her of the golden vine.
On the other hand, it is
kal)le that Strabo (615 f.) dismisses the story of Eurypylus
and
ins. and the allusion in the words yvvaltov tiimta
Swpvv, as riddles in the text of Homer the solution of which is
Nevertheless, he adds, the grammarians give
>very.
a supply of talcs in their commentaries which arc tedious rather
than convincing.
Among the writings which Quintus may have utilized was
agedy entitled Eurypylus, known until recently only
ataloguc given by Aristotle {poet, 23. I459b 6X of plays
1
> is the father of Ganymede and receives the immortal hones

Schol. X 511 .ucmdingly names Trot as recipient ..f (he golden
Acusilaus is not cited for these details, hut there is no douhl that Laomedon was
The bribe 01*
ti'
.y the author of the l.ittlt lltad (upr.|.
I it bonus, the
father of
1. 480 transferred to
the golden m:
1
in
In
payment.
do
Mmirion.
Aj)ollo<l. tfti. 5. 11
adds nothing of impor
um
IO0OKAEOYI
48
Little Iliad, and classed by Nauck (p. 838)

those of uncertain authorship. The fact that Aristotle
does not name the author is no reason for refusing to attribute
it to one of the great tragedians, since the Adxaivai of Sophocles
and the"OTr\a>v /cpiais of Aeschylus appear in the same list and
Tyrwhitt, in his commentary on the poetics, inferred from Plut.
cohib. ir. 16 p. 463 D that the Eurypylus was written by Sophocles.
This conjecture has now been completely confirmed by the
papyrus fragments published as no. 1175 of the Oxyrhynchus
Papyri (ix 86 ff.). The circumstances of their discovery 1 no
less than the internal evidence afforded by their contents, suffice
to show that a play whose subject-matter comprised the death
and, if Eurypylus
of Eurypylus was composed by Sophocles
was not the title, at least we know of no other which could be
so fitly applied to it.
The papyrus is terribly mutilated, and does not permit any
conclusion to be formed in regard to the development of the
The only part which is continuously legible comprises
plot.
a dialogue between a woman lamenting the death of a Trojan
partisan and the chorus who sympathize with her.
The former,
who reproaches herself as justly punished by the disaster, must
The dialogue is
apparently be identified with Astyoche 2
succeeded by the concluding portion of a messenger's speech,
which detailed the scene enacted over the dead body of Eurypylus
after the Greeks had retired, and the despair of Priam at the
In the column which precedes the
failure of his last hope.
dialogue above referred to, only the concluding letters of each
but it is manifest that it originally conline are decipherable
tained the earlier narrative of the messenger, describing the duel
drawn from the
among
between Neoptolemus and Eurypylus and its result. The fragment preserved by Plutarch (fr. 768 N. s ), which we have already
mentioned, portrayed the stern self-restraint of the two heroes
as they advanced to the conflict, and the words yahickwv ottXcov,
with which that fragment ended, are still legible in the papyrus.
The identification, which was made by Wilamowitz, appears to
be certain for, although the remnants are insufficient in themselves to clinch the argument, the appearance of these particular
;
1
See the details given by the editor at pp. 30, 86, of their relation to the papyrus
containing the Ichneutae. It is worth remarking that Weil {Rev. des .t. gr. ill 343)
had drawn a correct inference from Plutarch's fragment 'II resultc.que Sophocle
traita dans une de ses tragedies le sujet qu'Aristote designe du nom d'EvpvirvXos en
enumerant les drames tires de la Petite Iliade. La mere d'Eurypyle, Astyoche, cette
autre Eriphyle, etait sans doute un des principaux personnages de cette tragedie.'
2 The appearance of Astyoche at Troy is consistent with the legend that she and
her sisters together with others of the Trojan women were taken to Italy after the
sack of the city (Tzetz. Lycophr. 921, 1075).
:
EYPYFTYAOI
words
at the very point

Plutarch's quotation, is
ignored.
149
where we should have expected to find

a coincidence too remarkable to be
The position of the remaining fragments is quite uncertain,

and none of them yields any consecutive sense without the
addition of hazardous restorations
A few conjectures concerning their order and contents will be mentioned below, and
need not be repeated here. It should, however, be stated that
on the Tabula Ilt'aca, immediately before the representation of
the death of Eurypylus, there is an unidentified scene in which
two men stand before an altar and it has been conjectured by
Wilamowitz 8 that one of them is Eurypylus, who is promising
1
deliverance to the Trojans.

Even if he is right, it does not
follow that a similar scene occurred in Sophocles, but it is highly
probable that the earlier part of the play was occupied with the
arrival of Kurypylus and his welcome by Priam.
The younger Philostratus (imag. 11) describes a painting
which represented the duel of Eurypylus and Neoptolemus. The
greater part of his sketch is taken up with an elaborate account
of the shield of Neoptolemus, based upon the famous description
in the eighteenth Iliad; and there is scarcely anything which can
be supposed to illustrate Sophocles, unless it be the opening words
'puTrvXov teal NeoirroXefiov trotij-rlov vfivfl vopos trarp<p%iv re avTovs ajjupa) Kat tt)v
X *P a cv&otcinovs Kar kt^vv tli
The new papyrus, as well as that of the Ichnetitae, is dated as
belonging t<> the latter part of the second century.
<
206
A.
at
Xa\i[i>o
4\06i{t
avrd? of
206.
M
po%t tit (quod ut <HpYr
quoqoe
legi potest) littcrae
in pap. dcletac Mint
In the tditio frinttpt of the papyrus as many as 107 fragment* were published.
* consul of isolate- 1 letters and parts of words belonging to three or fear
or occasionally more successive lines, so that, even where the restoration of a particular
1
.;nincant.
In such OMM, tad !>
ll
legiMr, bat that word is so common that its attribui
Sophocles has no feature of
not thought it ncccary to reiwmt the
Stating vestiges.
It is possible, though not. it would seem, very probable, thai some
unetely
M fragments by combination with other parts of the t|>yr
ticance ; but that result would not be promoted by their reappearance
Ijf
certain,
word
in this
volume.
is
* fifths, p. alls.
I04>0KAE0YI
150
B.
Troia 8e
^KVpOV)
A.
7\_
T0(T0t[
7To\[
B.
d\X[
A.
B.
A.
14 -18
i5
\et7re[t
B.
eX0oir[
A.
povov
B.
Xoyois
[
jx.[
relata
coniectura satis probabili hue
a prioribus discissa
speaker
might have been made by another
Neoptolemus. On the
as well as by
difficulties
other hand, there are obvious
Wilamowitz conjectured that this

belonged
and the two following fragments
Eurypylus and
to a dialogue between
206
the two
involved in the supposition that
it is abunheroes met on the stage, since
represented as
dantly clear that Troy was
the scene of the action.
accordance with
preceded their
the usage of epic poetry,
The reference to Scyros in
encounter.
this view, but
v 8 is thought to favour
Neoptolemus, which,
in
207
^vfxrjv yivo\_
Sct/c^t
Tr)\e](f>ov
KaKo[
v[
rovro
Tf>\6TT0V
]
rt
]eyw
>a
207.
tovtI supra scr. pap.
uncertain whether this fragthe Ichment does not rather belong to

n.) enhances
ntutcu. The variant tovti (cr.
207
It is
In v. 2 4v may be <f>tv,
the doubt.
not certain.
in any case T^Xôu is
and
EYPYT1YA0I
151
208
AS.
a/i,c[
<frwv y*p [
BT.
Kopat; cVaS[
AS.
apuTTos,
ET.
tl
AS.
epyov tl SetXo [
d[X]V ou rt fir) <rvX[
8*
<o
oui/ 6
hvo\rr)ve
aais 8[
.
[<TSi]Xa>i>
208
Mnmjf'i view, that the speakers

rypyloa and Astyoche, is probably
and his restorations in vv. 3
\'.<'<p.
ibt$aur)p rd pr\Qiv
are at'
wt ttpTTot wr *6pa iwqiti parru...'A<rr.
&(HtjToi, w bvGTy)t; ivotpi\fio fiiv off
Hvrikip "Aptot tin 6\w\6ruv.
That
!u- protests against the arguments
iade him from entering into
the contest may be gathered from tt*$alypy to faQi, tpyof 8ti\6v, K6pa IrpoVt
<>n the one hand, and cÂ"?. p*f. <pl\wr
&r)Hli on the other.
a ^T)|iT|
This
a prophetic voice.
meaning is illustrated by Hlaydes on Ar.
S..iiniiiiifs tp^tiri in the naro.
en.se of an oracular utterance seems
i-tinguished from xXgowr, a casual
speech to which a warning significance is
r.
S
4
Hio
n.l.
El. 668.
r Miliar importance was
diviners to the utterances of
tiMffllu.il v:
Kopcu;.
llfl.
djajSJ^Jc;
10
the raven, but his croak was not necessarily inauspicious.

Cf. Aelian not. an.
I. 48 ravrd rot *al narrmoit 9Vfi(i6\ott
dyaOdf oôXoyovai rd* arret* (si. KOpaa),
Kal orrnWral yt wpot rijr ixtlwov $qt\
o<
av*iipTti 6 f>v id
xal TT^fftit aC'Tuir
K\ayyAt
xard \atav x<<pa 4
Kai (Spat nal

17
firci6i, <ut in it.

Here apparently of an encouraging or victorious
strain, as in Kur. El. 864.
5 f. In the conjunction of xdpai with
Kara t*$i&p.
OitjXj)
Wilamowitz found an
allusion
to
the rapacity of the raven, which would

filch the offerings from the altai
Aesch. Suppl. 759, schol. Ar. Nub. 51
Twrot fvorrot Kopaxa ipwdaat *w\qr. See
however
fcbOVA
ov Tl
Murray's
0.C
restoration
quoted
4*0, /rath. 6l.

an addition to the tragic
Ant.
vocabulary, but dnfcW
414, Aescn. Prom. 514.
IO
urj:
ciKT)6rjt is
IO<pOKAEOYS
52
]etva/u,[
JOovcrrf
ayy]ek\ei
209.
209 Hunt
conjectured from
/x[
11 t supra
v.
f.
5 scr. pap. 2
naries of the contest,
that this fragment dealt with the prelimi-
210
Col.
AITEAOS
i.
>a[
dXotSop^Ta &]iaf3e/3\.r)ix[ev
[aKOfXTT
6 ir]ri;vai in marg. adscr. pap. 2

adscr. pap. 2 et infra ]s
8 &ko/j.it aXotddprtra ex Plutarchi loco infra allato hue
revocavi (aKopnr' iXotdoprfrd re Badham itcd/juraa' dXoiSdprjra codd.)
21 0.
T7;]\e/>o(
et infra 6]r)pa<jip.o(
8 f. See cr. nn. Plut.afe cohib.

io p. 458 E kox rbv N eoirrdXefiov 6
ZocpoKXrjs /cad rov J&vpvirvXov birXiaas iubp.21 0.
ir.
'
iraa' dXoiSopT/ra,'
<f>Tj<xl,
'pprj^dTi)v...oir-
The
verses are quoted by Plutarch

as an instance of angry men refraining
from the idle fury of words.
It is not obvious at first sight how the
Xwj/.'
words taken from Plutarch can be satisfactorily combined with the vestiges of
this column, although Wilamowitz identified x] a ^ K ^ wv HirXwv with the conclusion
Hunt placed
of Plutarch's citation.
re after oirXuv, but

a/co/xir' dXoi56pr)rd
admitted the difficulty of joining it with
Hence I
the remaining traces of v. 10.
was
originally inclined to
keep the old
fragment separate from the new papyrus,

relying on the fact that xaX*a 07rXa is not
rare in tragedy (Eur. Suppl. 1152, Tro.
573, Phoen. 1359, LA. 1260, Hypsip. fr.
But this solution is excluded,
1 col. ii 30).
when we
tion
consider that Plutarch's quota-
must have come from the messenger's
speech describing the duel
for that
clearly just the part of the play to
is
which
EYPYnYAOI
10
<r
ippjfidTT)*
kvk\o.
it
Wilamowitz
ex
Plut.
xpina Weil,
(it
1.
fort,
(Soph.
1.
column of the papyrus belonged.

Accordingly, since re is not an essential
part of Badham's restoration (for the asyndeton cf. Ear, Ale. 173 d/tXaixrroj, dartrow-rot), I have placed cLko/xv' d\oiS6pnrra
before 6]ia(i<(i\T)tx[(voi,
understanding
'whose enmity is declared without vaunt
or chiding.'
5\a(id\\u, which is very unsatisfactorily treated in the lexicon-, is
exactly our to set by the ears.
The word
does not occur in Horn. Aesch. Pind. or
Bacchyl., and Herodotus is the first writer
:>es it freely.
In the following
instances, which are confined to the
passive, there is no question (I think)
thai 5iapd\\t<rticu is simply invisum or
urn peri: Kur. ffet. 863, Hclid.
411 (n.), ildt. 1. 118, 5. y?, 07, 6. 64,
Thuc. 8. 81, 83. The original meaning
must have been to be placed opposite to
{apart from), although our evidence only
to an opposition which has pasted
tUity.
he dative, of the person
:y has been con1
is
usually expressed
but,
if dXX)-
Xou was absent from the present passage,

was easily to be supplied from the
it
unfortunate that the idea
become so closely
associated with 6\a(td\\v.
It has nothing
whatever to do with the usage now
under discussion, but has led the critics
context.
is
It
evil has
Thus, in
instances.
1372 cUo/}\i70jrt is perfectly
'take care that you don't get into
with the army." .similarly, Thuc.
boald not be rendered 'lest they
should lose
he case might be
.trengthened from the orators,
but here it must suffice to quote one of the
nstances: Andoc. 1. J4 ovbip ofor
-<u dry do noi AiKcuwT StmStfl\yo0*, 'there is no reason left entitling
harbosjr resentment against
Pint nor. 37 B Still
astray
in
several
'ion is conI'lui
r as
cerned, Hadham's emendation bfonght
light intodarknevs, but has not solved the
ipprftdTr\v
must be
in-
lashed at the orbs of (each

I., ami
comparing bât
(
idi.'*
aXayva &c:
but this will
Bâripov
[.
768 N.
fr.
1
)
10
hue referenda
intellexit
it encOXa)
Under kvk\oi they explain k.

= "a'rcles of armed men"].'
this
tracted,
153
not serve.
&
x(J.)
intransitive use of b^typi'tu, although
accordance with
the
affecting verbs of
motion
V.ur.
973,
Hel. 133511.),
and the best

Ka$'
parallel
oOwor'
Tjjixii
Dobree was the
in
tendency
general
(fr.
as
The
94 1
11,
fr.
is
not well attested,
is
perhaps At. 775

ndxv< which
(xprj^tt
to explain.
But it
seems doubtful whether bytai it can
signify dash at: it should rather mean
burst into or rushed forth to, and neither
Of these meanings will tit *r\a x- & On
first
the other hand, the circumstances seem

to shew that the vv. describe the opening
of the duel, and that xOgXa bwXwr cannot
mean 'groups of armed men.' nwcXa,
which occurs nowhere in tragedy, if not
here, is applied in Homer to a set of
wheels (Monro, H.G. 99*); and it is
unlikely that
Sophocles would have
employed it in a nun- Homeric sense.
I am forced to the conclusion that
at any rate is corrupt.
So far as the
sense goes, Weil's tpina is unexceptionable, but Kpiew would rather be expected,
and the corruption is improbable
ippirjrdrmis Wecklein's
propose oxvXa (.CCCKyA*
attractive
less
Kvfkvfia.
passing to cckykXa). giving to it the

sense o( for (with a view to). aXos8dpnra is active, like many other verbals in
rot: cf. x a *JC ,r *arrof
4 S 4- s"dr#p*
rot ib. Iff, wicrbt O.C. 1031, abrbyrwrm
Ant. 875 (with J.'s notes), and t tkt
prrrot, prone to abn ,, in I'lut. amat. 13.
757 A, fr. 941. 9. {r </". fr M. fr 34Vrhese transitive verbals are discussed by

I'.tshop in A.J.P. xiit 339ft
II. wrote (C. A', xvii j88): 'The natural
meaning of i/*X xaA4vr bm\u* 11
"round shields," as dawlbot tvtXet, ifoXa
rpoowwoi'.KVt\awapiiittlSnnnu\]. Therefore
think we are reduced to two min
p.
1
) they broke th4 boasts (t<f. is(

1
KOfiwaara Kotbopnra) of their enemies a-
pretations
gaimt
their
braun
shields; or
{D they drat
unvaunting, un reviling blows (eê. dvojts*'.

OMbuwaar', aV<o>*-arr'l upon their eat*
In
mies' round braun shields.
would be a play u|>on the phrase k#m or
wounds,
not
and
iim+ri(mt swiir, blows
vaunt*, were all they uttered
(
Pindar, contrasting Ajax, the
man
of acts
I04>0KAE0YI
154
avvu Sophs
7Ta]XaicrixacrLv
]/u.arr
npbs ovpav[bv~]
]v
15
8'
i(TTvdTO
15
o\pyavo)v o~t4vl
7r]a\A.ei
X P 0<S
Jy/xaros <f)vy<ov
]s So/909
20
]
trat Trpocro)
k<xt(o
^\vpr)cra<;
6ixp?\droiv <f>dos
SO
?7Xs v -l- ex aha editione
(&yXwo~<rov /xli* Tjrop 5' aXxtîoj'), with

Odysseus, the man of words, says of them
pkv avo/jLotd ye ddoiffiv iv 6epp.ip xpt
7)
?Xi(ea prjgav.
To do that you have
to break down the defence, dt' ao-irLSos
Oeivew Eur. Heracl. 685, 737, fr. 282,
20: Theocr. 22. 193 woWa p.ev is ad/cos
evpi> leal lirirdKOfioP Tpv<f>dXetav
iroXXd
5'
depromptum
the lead in fighting against one another;

thus winning the congratulations of their
several sides, Neoptolemus as another
Achilles, Eurypylus as another Hector.
In viii they meet, Eurypylus challenging,
138:
ri\v.
Herwerden
conjectured
4ppr]a.TT]v k6kXoio~i
J
77
p.e<ro/j.(f>a-
x-
&>
i-
e-
vff/xivr],
(varna X1Xa.16p.evot
Sacrot
ftoi
fiaxevaodai
devpo k'iov, ndvreaai (f>6vov arovbevr^
fregerunt hastas copti-a clypeos. Campbell

proposed kvkXu/jlo. (adding ovvvopqs x e P^
in the previous line) for ^s kvkXo., thinking
that
Eurypylus
and
d\\d
Neoptolemus
reviling words of their enemies

blows that crashed through their
d/u/u
>'
ae wpds "AiSa Kijpes dpxiXiKToi

<popiovaiv
ov yap rls p.' inrdXvêv iv dpyaXir)
Hvvêv aKpifiris 6p.pLa<Ti AvyKevs

He also suggested ippaJ-a-
<rd*cos.'
Xots S6pr)
ivavrlov
elXijXovOas
ixaxecrdai
roio
irbdev
Tts
Kdarwp,
2
adscr. pap.
e<ph)Ka
met the
kt.,
with
5'
and there
ovk diriXriyov
an heroic duel, 187 roi

dXXd o~(f>ias e'5d-
is
6/jlokXt}s,
that in the narrative of
ifov is da-irldas, 198 p.4ya 5' Zfipaxov d/n(poripwdev deivofxevai peXLycn tot'' dffirides,
Quintus neither Eurypylus nor Neoptolemus refrain from arrogant boasting of

'In vi 384 after
their own prowess.
killing Nireus he vaunts over him, r$ 5'
until Neoptolemus, having gained the

victory, exults over his fallen foe, hardly
more modest than the other, 210 t<j3 6'
imicayxaXduiv p.eydX' e0x eTO -'
shields.
H. points out
'
dp' iv' EvpijirvXos fxeydX' e8x eT0 otjutiivn'
11 avcv Sopos
li
14
vw, having met a better man."

Then he wounds Machaon, rants in the
Ki(x6
same
strain
"d
(413),
koX
evx6fJ.euos
p.iy'
iuv fiiy'
dvra Kies" ktc., continues
afxeivovi (porri
triumphing when he is dead, and wounds
him again in vii 479 he is repulsed by
Neoptolemus and others, but vainglori522 ws icpar" aKpdously threatens, 512
avrov lets ^ttos, and these two then take
avrec
5eiX',...6s oiri5av6s irep

\
fr.
94 1,
15.
ovpav6v, probably of cries

reaching to heaven, as in Aesch. Theb.
429 (of Capaneus) dvrjrbs wv is ovpavbv
irpos
irip.irei
24
7e yw'd
,
ff.
The
7rr\vl
KvpLaivovr' tvr).
reference
is
to the spear
of Achilles, which, as Hunt remarks, had

healed Telephus, and now, in the hands
:
of Neoptolemus.slew Eurypylus,Telephus
son.
Cf. infr.
fr.
211, 10
12.
EYPYT7YA0I
]ou?
155
8'
25
igj/acVt?
T^t)\e<f>ov Xeyoj-
][l)d<raT[oy
]#c
Col.
KadeiX'
ii.
AS.
vovs Ta^v?
ra [Trk]evpa[
<ro)
0I0L0Z.
30
SnrXovs ai/(TTua^[a
XO.
30
J/ ^*
7raT/)o[5
rpiTTjv 8'
eV
AS.
/x[c
7T
iy[
<f>ptv<t>v
Svo'Sai/Liot',
c3
ayôu
XO.
]
a>8i[.]
ktt)(tL<i}v
Sai/zoi^,
to
XO.
ri/3ta]^.09 tSc TKVO)U.
npocrdy[aJy
tVel
pai/' 7r[
AS.
ovp
*c[cu] yd/3
.Jv 8iatVei9,
35
ichvs.
Keipas
c3
poa tin as, ov yap
[i]p-.
e/cros cotojs
crvpei Sr) <f>vphav.
A~.
30
7n(T7rd(Tt
hiKa
40
p..
<xr*Ta{.
}ji'p pap. 1
e supra o et t supra i add. pap.*
83 xj. pxipap vel
o\H<pofw coni. Hunt
84 rpiyi}r pap. deest paragraphia
86 o^t/ com.
Hunt, tii' &' vel w...fm> Wilamowitz &]a*pvt[tt ct infra ffv ybp i't[ in inarg. adscr.
pap. 1
30 ftpiar ex (pvpraw factum pap. <pi>prat> v.l. ex alia editionc rettulit m
:
loorg. pap.
32
34
irarpot:
"i.e.
Telephus (Hunt).
'
Tp(Trjv apparently
rdotCi
t<>
&t*-
\*6t, bat it is not clear whether Astyoche

speoks of herself as successor in misfortune
and Kurypylus. The lint
most be divided between the two speakers.
no paragraphus in the
The scribe usually allots a fresh

new speaker, but >ap orV must
papyrus.
line to a
3J
f.
36 Seecr.n.
j4ai-
'Now
rOtf.
With Hoot's
sMSj
is
It
v***p *l titalmt.
bat on Aeacb. Part. 1039
s-ûo scboi
80
comments iatpvi
thAt thy wits
t6
have strayed
The metaphor which

treats 0*wf as a material possession is
to be rendered exactly, hut there
roaoo for DBdentandmg

irray)
'
KvneUv
a<.
We
tanadi.,pra
F<r
Ktlpat
40
aittadta are called ktjiuit* in
rrve
how
the
A-
Am/. 933
fr. 3141 301 V iyyin ty*m.
Ocwarov roOr' iyyvtirm rctfrot aOtrrtu.
Aesch. Theh. 960 ctxfW raiwr vdl fy^rf9**.
Kur. //'//. 1070 s*p*t frrup &*mp\<v*
r' rfyyiH rJ*.
For rvpss t-f. I'lut.
M.
8 p. || roXfjioi x"^W*v Ist^Srt/r.
vorro
and
Si*rdcu>*
ntto'croel.'
713.
Cf.
should rather
Ant. 1050.
cf.
33 I ayx* wpo^stwat.
Hunt 'thou speak est face to face,' implies
rather 'thy words are near the truth."
**rfrat (roGr) KtKrijffiau 11

01. Or. tj04.fr. <yo<;.
So too **
pDMBOTC
fimiklm
metaphor is enforced by the use of words

expressing local Reparation, when mental
perturbation is described: so tprrwr itorijreu (Kur. Or. ion), l(*6poi (ffif>/>.
Add El. 1316
935) and many more.
Op*!-*** nrrwfupot, Tr. fr. adesp. 175 t*>
^xrwr /{jp' dVw.
37 Saifiov 6wrScupov: cf. Kur. /. 7.
103 Ji6aiMwr Aaipwr, and ace nn. on
Thr m<
<rip%*
al
raVra wmpm+/pm.
>i-ira<ri
i.ij.li.r
will
../,
mr
'
u from a nsherman hauling
in his line: see
on
fr.
141-
IO0OKAEOYI
156
xo.
StKci
dW
AS.
vol
w? raptor
apicrra.
XO.
15
tl <f>T](TOfxev,
AS.
rt
\etjofxev
rt? ou^t Tovfxbv iv Slky) fiaXei
XO.
AS.
rj
/cd/u,/3e/3dcri
yekarr
20
Ar.
Sued"
top \y~\expbv irpbs tw
ov/c
e? toctovtov rj\6ov (D<TT
Trdkaiar/xa kolv[o^v ^ycu^t[tr]ju.iô]t
42
47
Hunt
TjKtfffjJpos in fine v.
17
Taxi-crrtj apiffrrj in
Kd/i/3e/3a(rt scripsi
51
Wilamowitz
sq.
5d/c?; ro<r' scripsi,
52 coniecerat
cf. fr.
753
(n.).
Kai Trpoaefj.^rjvai <re XPV>' Odysseus replies

fxr\ X a 'p'> 'ArpdSr], Kipbeoiv Toh nrj KaXols
Keifuvw
on Ar.
cf.
f.).
The proverbiaW7rf/ct/Jah'ei'
copiously illustrated by Blaydes

Nub. 550. For the simple verb
is
Menand. men. 356
Xovvtl'
koivt]
fir)
yap tvxv-
[a^Xrfkov
46
48
pap.
5okt)t6s
Hunt
5o
o\_tt\o,
8iKai pap.,
d5p6< scripsi,
0^6^
quod
cetera supplevi, nisi
Hunt
47 f. See cr. nn. The messenger's

reply shows that the purpose of Astyoche's
question was not to enquire whether the
Argives had departed.
But the chief
reason for doubting the integrity of (3e[33.ai
is the difficulty of combining f3ia either
with it or with ytX.wr' ?x 0VT *S- The latter
alternative would suggest ayfXaffra irpbawira ftiafonevoi sooner than 'laughing in
another's despite.'
On the other hand,
ip.fiefia.<n...fila ('have trampled violently')
is peculiarly appropriate to the context.
Though a Greek might laugh at his
enemy's misfortunes (At. 79), he would
hesitate to spurn his corpse.
Hence, in
answer to Agamemnon's ov yap davovrt.
(At. 1348
e7ryxai>[e]u>,
marg. adscr. pap. 2
ca2 fiefiaoi
42 ^ TaxLoTr} apiarr) (cr. n.) was evidently proverbial, 'the sooner the better.'
46 8k<j: see cr. n. Wilamowitz
assumed the existence of a present dtKav,
so that the meaning would be 'Fortune
judges thee not.' But the antithesis so
presented is far from being clear, and it is
simpler to accept biica.
Hunt objects
that there is an inconsistency with 41,
but, since Slica is there 'punishment,' the
inconsistency is at most a verbal one.
The rhetorical repetition of 8a.ifj.wv is
Sophoclean:
/ca[/c]w
7rel
pap.
St/ecu
45
e^[o]vT? d[8/9]oi> 'Apyeiot /8ta;
e/cet^rjo veKpol Tv\r~\6bv
41
Kapa;
Saifxajv eKetpev ov Slko. ere Soll/mov.
V/Scuee 8ittv-
Observe how
the position of 'Apyetoi, recurring to the

verb, justifies that of pia.
The order of
the words is against the connexion of avrbv
with rbv veicpbv, and it must therefore be
rejected.
Mekler suggests d/xbv, but I
which cf. Antiphan. fr.

70 K.) adpbv ytXaaat 'to laugh
loudly.'
It is unnecessary to alter rbv
prefer ab'pbv, for
(II
144
vexpbv to rip vtKpip, for the accusative may

well be governed by ytXtjrr' tx ei " after
the pattern of O.C. 223 5ôs lo-x eTe
&r' av8G> (J ebb's n.) or Eur. Or. 1069 lv
Observe that we must not
fj.ofi(pav ?x.
make vexpbv the direct object of ^x "7 65
with yiXwra as predicate for (1) there is
no evidence that yiXoir'' $xeiv nvd could
W?^
"
be used for ytXwra

Tiva
(2)
iroieiffdai (or ridfcrSai)
'to make
ytXwT ix eiv
a mock of another';
should follow the analogy
ahxvvtjv ix eiV otKTov x e "'> bpyr^v

x" and many other Sophoclean examples collected by Ellendt, s.v. ?x w
p. 293 b, thus becoming merely a^substiof
<
For irpos to> kclkw, insult

tute for 7eXa'.
to injury, cf. Eur. fr. 1063, 15 koi
added
npbs KaKOiffL touto
49
St) /j.eyas
yeXws.
The simple verb
tirevxetvciv.
(x<x-
occurs in At. 1227, but e^x '""'' i-s

exclusively comic = to put out the tongue
at' (Starkie on Ar. Vesp. 343). Cf. fr. 3 14,
veiv)
'
344-
51 tvt06v, not elsewhere in Sophocles

or Euripides. In Aeschylus the adjective
occurs twice (Ag. 1606, fr. 337), and tvt06. as adv. in Pers. 367.
EYPYTIYAOS
157
o pets 8[a]ft>7 to<t\ o hk [to] trav [d]<r[v^/i,d']o)5,

[XJu/u-tji/
ok
8'
S19 t]oot/[i/ ^Ki<r/iji/o?.
'A)(at[aii/
K re
Tr\r)[ya>i/
Aea]l Kd[7ra>>
K*/xr;ic]dYa[c.
avlp-ovs 8ta[crTtôPTa9 eiSo/xe" 7nJXa]c.
55
dfJe[rj/)7ro/Li[et'
'ol.
24
iii.
litterae
few
26
25
26
24
22
]
M-
60
dyJKvpatv ert
e]ppr)î/ votos.
65
to Jiavra rroXXcI>[i/ Xuypoji' ep/>[d]#i ord/ia,

7r]oXX^ 8e (Tit/SoW [7roX]Xa 8' 'IaT/îJaw'Stoi/
54
,.
supplevil
Wibunowiu
66
67 <nVcW
Xv76r supplevit Wilamowit*
ex <rwiw factum pap.
62
Neither cWirrcW nor ctt/rT/roi has

Mainly it is difficult to
tee now wtxpin cWirro't could mean 'a
dead man who seemed to be stilt alive.'

Hunt concluded that the two corpses
were those of Kurynylus and one of his
victims, perhaps Nircus or Machaon
iv inference open to us
and th
But in that case it
should be observed that 6 pi* must be the
and 6 64 Eurypylus, although
cms to be of the contrary opinion.
in the
*a*ot
pylus
-o.
ad. l'\th. 1. aj <pvyti*

Kaxa-jopiar, but of course
there the metaphor may be taken from a

sling or a
however, a fair
ch. Thtb. 386 Xôt hi
asttW r' oil oaroixr' drtv bopin, and Cko.
841 ry wpbaStw i\KAiro*Ti ecu o>c1>r<'v
that texot could be used for a spear' of rtoos ('just
wound. Tic
recognised bvihescbol. on 7'rtuk.
-<> cirri Tov bXiyo*.
Cf. II
o" f) rot roWor
niv tx* rrfXof
ill bin finished ')
X 311 rov
<W gal AXXo toco* pi >x" XP* X*X" a
I)cm. 14. 24 to <V (Ti n <.ars#xa.
Xstar >t-,rTeu rcWor cd rAtror.
TO wa is
Kombach sug1009.
gests to o* 4+0mppi*n.
06 rovairra The purport of the pret
of a chieftain in fine linen.
itwf
ceding words was perhaps, *whil-
Cf. Hoc*.
Patroclus) iv \t\itaai hi Q4rrt%
KdXiâf
Xirl
Kaeowtpet
wobat i*
it
*o>i hmmf.
*<>Xfjt,
a 580
a a
IXivop it* frifx' ivptnfrt* rt xiT<Ja,

o<(>pa *4kv* Tindoat boiti oitor&i <pipi*0tu.
I'cnclope is weaving a +dpoi as
Aaiprgrip** racôr. Changes of clothing
were frequently provided, either at the
funeral or subsequently
Kur. Or. 1436,
Hhes. 960, Thuc. 3. 58, Tac. </<
\
linen
igt,
as an alternative he points out that oinrob* would be too long for the gap.
67 ff. It was usual to wrap the corpse
circumstances.
diif6r
our city was like a ship

now a fierce gale
Cf. Tr. fr. adesp.
XvypoV.
lunt suggests s-tcpor
lived,
securely moored; but

has broken the cable.'
robes.
p.
83;
s,-.-
Mudnicaka,
Hermann- Bluemner,
'IcrrptavCeW 6^t) were costly

successive glosses of Hcsy-
Two
chius 0> P. 374) attest that 'I#rinVi

and Irrpidii were names given to the
wrappings themselves (i Zt4urni rrsXtU
rit ruii oOrw \ty6mriu).
Wilamown/, calls attention to ihc anachronis
of introducing work from Istrtan looms
into the Hi..
seeing that Istros
Miletus.
was a colony
It should be
observed that the corrector (see cr. n.) has
placed a second accent over efraV
>
IO0OKAEOYI
158
v(f>r)
yvvaiKOiv dvS[/3o]<? ippLTTT^djêTO
veKpai
o 8'
15
StSeWes
djxcjil
7rar[^/)]
a><êX[o]v)aeVoj.
o[_v8]ei>
TrXevpdis
rrâyatcrt [/cjetêi/os,
/cat
ov, naTpcoa 8* eav8[<a]i>
//ii'
70
7717,
II/3t[a/Aos] e/cXate r6f t4kv(ov 6p.[aC]ixova,

tov [7r]at8a /cat yipovra /cat ^cai^ta]^,
toi> ovre Mva'oi' oure TrjXecftov [/cajXaV
dXX cas cf>vTvcra iXTTLSajv <rcoT[r)pia]i>.
Xpouov êvojdels ov /AOLKpov ir[ok]ko>v [kclXojp
20
Post v. 68 lacunam notavi

Wilamowitz r addidi
|
76
78
irfovbwKas
77
Wilamowitz
KaXQv supplevi:
irCiv et
70
postea
5'
75
p.tyiaruv coni.
irwv Wilamowitz
the intention of substituting Zivduw (StVdoi was the name of a Pontic tribe) for
(TLvduiy.
But 7ro\X?7 shows that ffivbdiv is
right.
The text can hardly be defended as
it stands, although Hunt supports dvdpbs
ippLwrdêTo in the sense of were cast
upon the man,' and thinks that the grammatical irregularity of diSovres is parallel
to Ant. 259 f. and other similar examples.
But the genitive suggests an indignity, as
if the wrappings were hurled at Eurypylus,
and the harshness of this particular
anacoluthon is due to the fact that the
logical subject with which Sidovres ought
to agree is not expressed or even indicated
in the two preceding lines: contrast the
sembles warp^cjv bpKiuv in Track. 1223.

73 would probably have been less
obscure, if we had recovered the earlier
part of the play. Since iraida, in contrast
with yipovra. and veaviav, must, as Hunt
has observed, mean 'boy' rather than
'son,' we may guess that Eurypylus was
in Kuehner-Gerth 493. Ant.

as a case of distributive apposition, is
much easier. Wilamowitz regards 69 as
an interpolation ; but, as this only in part
removes the difficulty, I should prefer
to suppose that a line has been lost after
eppiTTTdêro such as yipas OavbvTos, ota
(Eur. Hel.
Trpoae<pepoi>
1262) <piryts.
This is better than to read 5i56vros and
understand dvfpbs of Priam, as I formerly
suggested, although the apparent contrast
of yvvaiK&v with dvdpbs is somewhat
The thought that the dead
artificial.
receive no benefit from funeral offer-
represented as (iovTais, avriirais like

Achilles in fr. 564 or dvdpbirats
like
Troilus in fr. 619, and Parthenopaeus in
Aesch. Theb. 520. Thus, the meaning
would be
one who, while a boy in years,
was both counsellor and warrior.' Cf.
Eur. fr. 508, Paroem. I 436.
The topic
of the virtues characteristic of the various
ages has recently been handled by
F. M. Cornford in Class. Q. vi 252 ff.,
and it is of course possible that xcus
covers an allusion to (ruxppoffvvr).
For
veavias = invents Wilamowitz quotes Hdt.
Cf. fr. 314, 357 n.
7. 99.
'
examples
I.e.,
ings
266.
Cf. Aesch. fr.

a commonplace.
Eur. Hel. 142 tA t&v davovruv
Tro. 1248 doxO)
dXX' a\Xoj ttopos.
is
oiibev,
8k rots davovai
fflujV
Tit
5ia<pepei.i>
TtV&Tdl
fipaxv,
'
|
KTeptfffjidTWl'.
irXou-
fr.
64O
dairdvas
dv6pwTru>v 5 /xaivovrai (fypives,
OTav davovcrt irkniruoiv nevds. Verg. Aen.
\
6.
213 cineri ingrato suprema ferebant.
o 8'...np(a(ios: Eur. Hel. 1025,
ff.
Phoen.
28.
irXcvpais
kcu o-â-yaio-i,
of
hendiadys, for which see Lobeck on At.
Cf. Aesch. Eum. 247 irpb% alfxa
1 45.
'his
Kai
1 1
wounded
<XTa\ayfj.6v
side,' is a fair instance
For
tKix.ao-Tevop.ev.
<r<f>a-
yal in the concrete sense of 'wounds,' cf.

Rhes. 790 dep/xos 5e Kpovvbs beairoTov icapd
ffepayais
i3d\Xet
p.e.
iraTp(a...?'TrTj
re-
'
75 cKxaXovpevos seems
to
mean
'in-
voking,' as contrasted with kclXQv in the

previous line. The meaning is the same
in Track. 1206, where a subordinate infinitive is added : old fj.' eKKa\ei, icdrep,
<povea yeviffdai Kai ira\apj>alov aidev.
76
ff.
edition
See
cr.
n.
In his
smaller
Hunt adopted Wilamowitz's
irpov-

EYPYTTYAOZ
fivrjfirju
Traptêts rot? X[cXei/z/xeV ]ois *A[pco>9,
80
ovre Me/x.i^cujf ovt 'Ha^pirrjScou ttot
6(T
7rdXX'
d9
59
r^ynv
]o[
ccrva[
!cJ7rct
ok
Jk[
p\_
7ro]XXot<rt[
85
VXti/iMôtt supplevit Wilamowitz, "A/xwi
full stop
should be removed and
that 6' should be introduced after toXXw*.
rpot>i5u;ot, 'thou hxst abandoned us' (cf.
Eur. Hipp. 1454 etc.), would be good
but the words lx u " AtMciw
enough
ournpiar are somewhat more suitable to
1'ii.mi than to Kurypylus, and the clause
Xp&*or...n*Kpi* should certainly qualify
ourrtipia*
-rapiia.%,
whereas
in
the
'I have lost you,'

must be supposed to reproach himself with having betrayed Kurypylus by
inviting him to Troy.
4Xir{$wv <r*TT)piav
is exactly like i\wiiu>* dpwyal, which is
applied to Orestes in El. 858.
Since rt
easily drops out
an error which may Ikillustrated from the same passage
we
should probably read tuyimp r' here.
koXwv is supported by frs. 81, 102, *yi,
I'riain
most be attached to wpoi>8wKai...

awrrjf>iaf, with which it has no logical
connexion.
For these reasons I retain
text
Wilamowit/.
justify the rendering
firfl.uTfr
sq. supplevit
rpoi'5aco a', which has the support of the

papyrus and, since Ant. 1160 wouM not
twnat, which requires that the
after
SO
Hunt
it
93-
211
AS.
-/xi'Sas
xal to[v
'IScuoj/ )8arjt\( rja
05
Upia(Moi>,
Tracr^.
/x[
Karapf[
7TLO-U afioi^
Xl
c[pyo]i> Zpgai^
XO.
fivafioo^vvav
TTpo\l\TTOiU
oviror\
AS.
lot
hopv
10
Tt/X[<
7rai8i <jvvk(\ p<rav

at
[.]
\6y)(a
rt
211
ipeakcrs,
The
divisions
between
the
marked by the coronis in the

Oven according to Hunt's
lowit*,
o~<ot\ i/>a
ouovo~ap\
however, attributes
!c fragment to the Cfl

1
p{8a is doubtless,
Wihunowitx
Nggestcd, the end of ll/naîni.
4 Perhaps *aroparor. Astynchc reproaches herself for yielding to the bnlw

of the golden vine.
7
ft.
Hunt
well
suggests that
lines contmnr.1 a thought similar to that
IIS, 4.
13 o-MTupa
<
fr.
no.
14-
20<t>0KAE0YI
i6o
212
]
]
Aios
]o-at
6av(ov
1 .
[.> vr[vY]eZ
8' [ajirwXero
TraWXaw
Oelaôv ihpvadai to vx\y
.
]<xi
KOLVodaKd Xaoa
T^]Xe<J>ov
gwovaiav
S]ei7n>a irXrjo-iaiTaTOS
8' avai
[
T w8e, i|
]t
]Tl TtKTOUO-17 T[.]
IO
7r]a>os L
ti'Xô-iv o[v
XO.
irpo crr)h[
] bpâvrj
~]hpOTTOV TrXoKOV [
.]vaX']7r[.
.
]eu>[.
-]
15
av
]vov
already lay.
rock-tomb, where Telephus
of
13 Spoirov is probably the remnant
as e65po7ro
passive compound such
com6 Koiv69aKa is a new

known
pound/and Xa?6o S was htoertO fr. i
212
(Timon
sense
'only in the active
DieU
The
The words seem
the
allusion seems to be to
chaplet of flowers
We J>ay
Eurypylus' (Hunt
ot
nfer that the body
nerhaDS
P further
ancestral
was to be buried in an
y p ylus
'
S'of
to
:
cf.
Tepdvris (ivpaivvs K&P9
have described a
Eur. El. 7 7 8^tf
* K0V
'-
213
AX.
.
[
ecro[
(TO-[
if<rr[
aira
Spo|i[-
ea>9
XO.
^XXo[ts
f"
av ii /cpvx/n7[r
eplw T 7ra
\-
columnae prions omisi

was not the
a-,
Kpiyv
error
error, icoM-wre
the
in
wntten
is
213 8 The iota
an
was
there
unless
papyrus, so that,
213
lacinias
original.
161
EYPYFIYAOI
214
'
r\_r
]vy[.]pc
]o>
kai
T/3tVou[
/cat
cU']oia9 8(T7roTat9 [
ci]t -rrdvdos citc r;[
8e XP[] ,' t0,'
]<ra>
7roXX\
]St7
cf
M
214.
(ito pap.
add. pap.
MfC*
supra
I.
add. pap- 1
215
Tq
nao-av v<j>p\oi>
i/w 8' 6 par
Kapa
|Xe'<ov
i/oo" ]r;Xcucra9
X[
/xc
|
]ay/xeVo9 0o[
|Xos f
c[
}y 7ra4
215.
ôtfi>Xi>roi Mipi-lcv.t \N
ilaniowit/
2l6
Jar[.
.J<rov8[
Jap0|
216.
fti^
\o<twt\
Miprm cr. pap.*

1
IO<t>OKAEOYI
l62
Oavoiv aTrav [
Uvaa
]o-ey
fta[
Soj/aciL
fxeyav
appvff\jL
^P"*
10
7 /iwai ex
juucras corr.
pap.
217
~\kOT7)\_
]o ixvpioiv [
1
TO
</>WS
/xot
/)[
7r/30ore[
cr\vvakyova\
]crato"[
217.
283.
ffvvaXyelv occurs in At. 253,
2l8
]l
7TOTfX09'
]Xe'r[
small
After this fragment several
containiiig be*e
pieces of papyrus,
in addition to
there a complete word
the most part only
other vestiges, but for
transcribed in
portions of words, are
21 8
Ox
frs.
Pap. IX
101
114.
and numbered
16-46, 4882, 84-90. 9 2
>
93.
95
thei
Those who desire to examine
princeps
naturally consult the editio
nothing to
Inasmuch as they contribute
play, and the words
the
of
knowledge
our
slight .uteres as
which are legible are of
vocabulary of Sophocle
illustrating the
omit them.
been thought better to
.07
will*
it
has
EYPYT1YA0Z
163
2ig
iCvoa{
aVTLCDV
]ir'
]
a? vvv ova.
TTpOL^LU /a[
7jy)ai9 178c
.
(
Zcv9
]i
yap
aXXa
Jf
6[
/cat
[
10
219 2
3
x'w
a>
dvTiv.
OT
ot>x
erfo?
elsewhere so used by Soph.
perhaps of'foes, though not
220
VTOiV X
.
(
cVoi hva-qKoa
220
same
8vo-iJKoa. probably in ihe
use as
ar>)<roivro in
EL
to hear.
'
The passive meaning is vouched
by Pollux
1407, 'terrible
2.
117
<fKjf)f
Sk^koo*.
Ill
vv ai\
J.
Xt^/x[ a
yap
tos
aX
X*
i<r
221
nes
ami,
seem
th
.<
in the dtafrac* (v. ji) for the

return of a spy who had jut ileparted
was waiting
(i.in
4
Irawn a*
to
1
Mggetted
Ik-
that
wo[
trochaics
most have been placed nearer
if
a<r[
ei nrceve
In v.
tkm.
aiMresaed.
Agamemnon
the
Iroy
(v.
fwttyf.
an
Pkmm,
it).
For the
1 1 ti
i.
Cf. Soph. El. lajf.

11K0.
h. lip. 1 <9 tTityt' w*f*6mt% twtMt.
11 a
IO<t>OKAEOYI
64
8/aJacrw raS'
(B)
&>[
]as /xdXadpa v[
]i>a KLueladaL t[
(Xo.)
>] y^pova) /u.aAx[<7Ta
8]w/xaro)^ cty^t
ywcu
dvS]/305
7jy>o[
\ayer[a]
eVos
<ô]o>So9 e<x#' 6
]
'A^cuolcrii' atcrtar[ar
/a'
TerpaTTTai tov[
77
]a
15
ar]7 tt7\[
V7r'
]a>i>
(Tv^ kolk(o <f>de[ip
/u.77
ôvoTr\r) evvis art[
davojv aêrat /car[
]^[.]i7
a^
ovSJa/xcos eôt/w,'
aVa avhpo)v
0)9]
]
]acr
221.
/. /r.
[.]ira
22
pap.
Keiveiffdai
gave
but
-ov tirX-ri^,
be unsatisfactory, and the

neighbourhood of eCm does not favour
the verb. A compound with -tt\ti^ would
be preferable, but, since o is certain before
v, I can suggest nothing better than Saisaid
is
to
fjLovoirXriZ,
for
which
cf.
dalfiovos
r>^[
y8a#eia[
~\vo(rrj
18 The
SoKaêt
crot T17X0V
et7retv t[
'At/sciSt^?
TrXrjyri
961 n.), Aesch. Ag. 1660 daifiovos

XV^V P&pd-Q 5v<ttvx&s ireirXriy/jL^voi.
(fr.
w? supplevit Wilamowitz
20
antral is more likely than fiferai in

a tragic text, although Hunt thinks that
the latter might have been applied to a
[By an overcorpse exposed to the sun.
sight the words are inverted in the ed.pr\
23 Sokolî, a rare word, explained by
Hesych. I p. 526 as equivalent to nivei,
eiriTrjpeT, Soicd,
Sophron
fr.
quoted from
irpocr5oKa, is
52 K. ir\6ov doKafav.
222
]
]
.]ra Syoacre[re
[.
aAAa
tclvt
iyco
EVpOU OvheTTO)TTOT\j.
]raf TTavXa /cat kolkmv
222
appears to contain reflections on

Wilathe instability of human fortune.
yap fi^ylcrruv
mowitz restored ravr' ^yw
ttigtov e]i
dv-bfi
adprtaas] etipov
Tr[a\ai
to.
[ypuv
oi/deiruiiroTe
\
7&oi]t' av iravXa nal kclk&v
[\vcrts
tCov
p.6.Tw\v
Hunt
t\
ra.xi.ffTa
tvxV M0j<x[raTat <ppovi

tov \6yov [Si rhv t
SeiTj/u.ej', ti
Opaovv
thinks irXeiffruv
t[iv<i.
more
In
v.
suitable thar
fxeyiffruv to the traces in the papyrus.
EYPYFTYAOI EYPYIAKHI
]
!v
1
MTTbiv Y) Tvxrf /xc^tofraTat

Ta\L<TTa- tov \6yov [
'
]
L7)fxeu
el
Trjs TV\r)<;
]vmjfiep[
7
165
5
dpacrvv t\
ava<TTai[
J{Ta[t
ilr\\uv (or tiSdijuev) is clearly irwli-
not been convincingly emended, and 8ol-
the shorter forms are

Attic, as metre shows.
Hut
rd's ri^'itl ostracism (Nno Phryn.
>f the longer forms in the plural
ipa* seems certain in Damoxenus fr. a, 67

(Athen. 103 B).
8 rr{% "rir^vfi was perhaps governed by
waararo (?). C'f. Tr. fr. adcsp. 304
TTwxb* ytvioticu xal S6nwr drdcraro^.
'Cast from his high estate.'
ilthou^h
normal
in
by the evidence. The three

în Kuripides (Cyct. 13a Spyrjutv,
o o aStKoiijfit* Ion 94 3 ^xtirffup) have
I
EYPYIAKHI
Welcker
(p. 197 ff.) proposed to reconstruct the plot of the

from Justin 44. 3 Gallaeci Graecam sibi originem
unt : siquidem post finem Troiani belli Teuerum morte Aiaeis
<i
invisutn patri Telamoui cum non reetperetur, in regnant
tin
eoneessisse atque ibi urban nomine antii/uae patriae
minam
pat ria m
inde,
condutisse.
repetissc.
sed,
aeeepta opinion*
cum ab Eurysaee
patemae
Aiaeis
filio
mortis,
a<
Hispanieu littoribus appulsum loea ubi nunc est

Carthago nova oeeupasse ; inde Galuuciam transissc et positis
mti nomen dedisse. It is of course unlikely that
Sophocles knew of Teucer's settlement in Spain, for which
o (p. 157) is our earliest authority; but Welcker uses tinoi Acorns' Hurysaees, which was probably adapted
Sophocles, in order to fill the gaps in Justin's account.
frohiberetur,
not however successful in establishing that the story was

of such dramatic development as lii^ theory requires.
given to the question: why did Kurysaces refuse
Teucer, who rather deserved his gratitude 1 \
li
nts of Accius are in themselves so inconclusive
Ribbeck {Rom, frag. 419 ff.) is able to give them quite a
ent application.
According to him, Telamon in hi
>le
thai
and Eur)
and that of
who
îrn
qui
sit
out of Salami's, and was discovered by

>\y in Aegina.
By then
the
citizens
he was restored to
1:
tlic iwoXoyia of Tcuccr tr

accept
view, thinks that
may have been deliver*] mi tin* uccaaion rathrr than al h
//;'.
/../.
7.
3 lru..r
ii^Hiftatu), but admits that wc cannot connect the tatemcn( with
1
lOÔKAEOYI
166
Ribbeck's reconstruction of Accius rests upon an extremely

fanciful and improbable interpretation of the famous passage in
Cic. pro Sest. 120
123. The difficulties involved are well-known,
and we do not possess the material necessary for their complete
solution
but Madvig's admirable note, reproduced in Halm's
edition (1845), shows the true way of escaping from the chief of
them, the apparent inconsistency of the words in eadem fabula
(121) with the statement of the schol. Bob. that Aesopus imported
a reference to contemporary politics into his performance in the
Eurysaces of Accius. For it is certain that the quotations
pater and hacc omnia vidi inflammari belong to the Andromache
of Ennius.
In view of the currency which Ribbeck's views have
obtained, the following remarks may be added
(1) It is a
desperate expedient to suggest that Aesopus interpolated into
the Eurysaces a canticnm from the Andromache in order to do
honour to Cicero. (2) The reference to poetae in 123 and the

quotation from the Brutus show that Cicero intended to recall
more than one representation. (3) Since pater in 121 is taken
from a lament for Eetion, who was killed, it is plain that patron
pulsum in the following sentence applies only to the circumstances
of Cicero, and not to the fate of his prototype.
There is no
ground therefore for inferring that the Eurysaces mentioned the
exile of a father, and the reference to Tusc. 3. 39, which concerns
the banishment of Telamon after the death of Phocus, is beside
the mark.
(4) The two quotations in 122 must be assigned
to the Eurysaces, but there is nothing to prevent us from
supposing that Teucer was the exile there mentioned towards
whom the Greeks are charged with ingratitude. (5) There is no
serious objection to Madvig's conclusion that the quotations in
120 and the beginning of 121 are taken from the Andromache,
and refer to a Greek hero whose identity cannot be ascertained.
Pseudo-Serv. on Verg. Aen. 1. 619 points in another direction:
according to him, Teucer and Eurysaces returned from Troy
in different ships; and, as Teucer arrived first without Eurysaces,
Telamon, believing that his grandson was lost, refused to receive
Teucer.
It is at least in favour of Welcker's view that the events
which he introduces were subsequent to the withdrawal of
Teucer to Cyprus.
It does not seem probable that in this play
Sophocles gave a different account of the home-coming of Teucer,
with or without Eurysaces, from that which he made famous in
the Teucer.
EYPYIAKHI HPAKAHI
167
223
dhoâarov
223
Hesycfa.
p.
47
Cf. &5oa
a&6a<TTof
fr.
71 (n.).
Iâter d&jfeurros
became a
employed
knowledge
philosophical word,
being
to express the certainty of
as contrasted with the untrust worthiness of opinion
in this sense
the Stoic w ie man was d64(a<rrot (Diog.
L. 7. 161).
ari\vrTo*. ZoipoxXfn Y.vpvo&KU {tvpvoi.

cod. 1.
To the mum effect Phot. ed.
Keit/. [). 13, 8= BeUt. anted, p. 344, 18,
where the name of the play is omitted
hryn. fr. 80 de B.).
HPAKAHI
Eni TAINAPQI IATYPOI
HPAKAEIIKOI
Of the
eleven fragments collected under these titles three are

from 'Hpa*\r/c. (with or without o-arvpiKos), two from
EmtraivdfHOi, three from fir) 'Xaivuptp (alone or with oarvpiicos
have added the
iiul two from 'H pax Xehr/coc.
I
solitary reference to the Cerberus, which, in view of the subject of
/ Tatnarum, can hardly belong to any other play.
the //
Heracles was a very common character in At) r-plays,
is Welcker (p. 319) showed, although it is generally believed
Ghat the Heracles of Euripides was the earliest treatment of his
Cited
subject for the tragic stage*.
It
quite possible,
ii
Sophocles wrote more than one satyr-play of

and, since the proper reference of
Rrhit h
lera< les was the hero
Xeto-Kos is to the mfant Heracles (see on Aiofi/<7i'a*ov,
with Wilamowitz* in thinking that the play
p.
1171,
mown by that title did not contain the descent at Taenamm,
>re probably th<- legend n lated In the twenty-fourth Idyll
eocritus and the firsl Nemean odeof Pindar. On th< otnei
land, the prevalent opinion that the I
la to be identified
tor that is the most correct of the
'Ti'tTvpoi
is,
however, molt in
It
ry well l>e right.
;th analogy to regard 'Hpeuck^f t) hn 'Ymvap^
that
>re,
1
r.
//rr.U.fi,
p. 98,
liainic
wm. who
thai
first
|>ui.lislieil
rguing against Ihi

'll/\*6r*v was an err.T
ilîXftfot:
llîXirot
SO
in
rid ihai
the Anthology ct
IM*
foi
ll,*ir\<
fu* (iV.
I'
-'/"'
amr
lit.
tl><
"
'*>>
I
the
IO<t>OKAEOYI
68
trdrvpoi as alternative titles adopted by the grammarians, than

(with Nauck) to speak of 'Ylpa/cXr}? eVt Taivdpo) a-arvpi/cos.
Taenarum was situated at the southern point of the pro-
montory which lay to the west of the gulf of Laconia and a

cavern close to the sea-shore was the legendary scene of the
final labour of Heracles, his descent into Hades to carry off
Cerberus from the under-world. This famous story was known
to Homer ( 367, X 623), who, however, does not mention the
name Cerberus but whether it was in the execution of this
task that Heracles is said to have fought with Hades at Pylos
(E 395) is by no means certain.
Taenarum is mentioned as the
entrance to the under-world through which Heracles descended
by Eur. Her. 23 and Apollod. 2. 123.
The incidents of the
adventure are most fully described by the latter (122
126), but
we have no means of connecting Sophocles with any of the
particulars.
It should, however, be noticed that Heracles is said
to have returned by way of Troezen (Apollod. 126, Pausan.
2. 31. 2: cf. Eur. Her. 615)
probably in consequence of the
rescue of Theseus having been effected on the same occasion.
But the conditions of the satyr-play seem to require that the
successful issue of the labour should be declared by the reappearance of Heracles with Cerberus 1
and it is therefore
satisfactory to find evidence of a tradition which brought him
back to Taenarum (Pausan. 3. 25. 5).
From Eustath. //. p. 297, 37 iv yovv tois U pa)8cai>ov eiprjrai
on EiXcores oi eVt Taivapw adrvpot Nauck and Dindorf drew the
This
inference that the chorus in this play consisted of Helots.
2
is an error, as has been pointed out by Decharme
Crusius 3 and
Wecklein 4
the intention of Herodian was to state that the
satyrs described themselves as Helots, and served in that
capacity, just as in the Cyclops they were SovXot, of Polyphemus,
and in other plays appeared as smiths (^(pvpoKoiroi), reapers
;
'
(epi<TTaL),
Nauck
and acolytes
(Krjpv/ces).
See also
p. 71.
W.
Hippenstiel {de Gr. trag.

princ. fab. nom. diss. Marpurg. 1887, p. 17) that the play was
produced in the last few years of Sophocles' life, but does not
explain his reasons.
refers to the opinion of
1
Wagner thought that the whole action of the play was subsequent to the return
of Heracles.
2
Rev. t. gr. xii (1899) 296.
3
Paroemiographica, Munchen, 1910, p. 100.
4
Telephosmythus, Munchen, 1909, p. 6.
HPAKAHZ
169
224
aW
dauovres ipvâyayyovirraL
ol
224
224
- tool,
1.
2!oc&o\jjt
iXfi^tcarofor
drW
drXoi codd.
Aphthon. ed. Rabe

570) if KtpiUpy 8<
in
xii
dXXwi tj \^< (jr.

<prj<ri
yap 'AW
\f>vxo-~t<*y*i*)
oi
Rabe
(so
<1 ydp tup

&ia.Top0ntvou.ii/wi> \nrb rov Xrfpwvot \fnrx_Qf
codd.)...pdyo(.'
The scholium on î'xaycirye'

-ina much shorter form in
Doxapatres (Rhet. Gr.
11
p.
I
.?o,
11
p.
Wak,
.$47
Sp.).
have very
doubt that Cerberus
little
p.6voi.
Kahe
corr.
not the title of a play hitherto unknown,

but merely an alternative name for the
Heracles at Taenarum, in which we know
that the carrying off of Cerl>erus was a
prominent incident.
The words may
is
have l>een spoken by Hermes (of Charon)

in answer to a request of Heracles for
gudttlCfc
Cf. Verg. Aen. 6. 391 corpora
zi-a mefiu Stygia restore carina, net
:ero A let Je n me sum laetatus eunttm
j
accepisse lacu.
225
.
avveXeyou rd v\\
225.
1 iKnavftara Pollux 10.
225
rT)
'
it
roi'Toxt
6i
<fHTpoi't
IlparX
iKKavfidrcou
cos
fiera^v wpocrheTjcreup
fioL
firj
iKnavunra
oo.T\pny 'avri-
2o>
itxKavu,drup
not
fiij
Cf.
10
/'<*//.
J97
elr
ff.
...{'.Xor
rt
rvpi occurs in Ml.

Kuripides uses tuxavfia
4.
134,
135.
fr.
metaphorically (cf. vwimai'Ha)
1031
tKKavua rdX/np Ikopop ion nal 0pdv proposed Tpoadttit iUp. which is
lilaydcs fdls up the
DO improvement.
lirst line with <IW> $i*i)Uyw.
tipavoai.
iKKaittP
to.
226
arpifovoi codd.
pfa
IsxpotXfii
'irrpiipovai
corr.
{i.e.
A ('>.
6<fnr.'
that
tl
r.
Jacobs
we
*oi i*
shou'
X<*pinfl *pdr Acsch.
fr.
at
o<f>w.
whitl
COdd
guarded the fountain

01.
Tli'
if.
10.
I)
for
the
popular Iwliel connecting serpent* with

springs see OS fr. ./>
We may COO-
ec on
,*-nt
crarvpuifi rpiiporot.
tvpirift
yâtpirrftf
p6W*
,.11 x u P*
X<4pirr)t
Hpa*\n
<f>vXaKa
Kprjvrjs
Tpe<f>ov<rt
226
226 >
fr.
91,
ij.t-
this
fountain sh<iuhl
thai
with the magic spring
identified
Taenarum referred to by Pausan. j
Ik-
at
227
KVKkutmov rpo\6v
227
Hi
V'h.
11
p.
550
i'\oi*
Jfoif rd rtixif.
rpoxt" ti r6
20<>'
II
r
a\#i |rpoX/o
noA
tx.
So wr might
!U
!ic
sj>cak of th<
M.aksp. Ktnc J*A

roundurr of your ..Id-faced
if.
.r
instance of rpo%tn
I04>0KAE0Y1
170
only the walls of Mycenae and TirytM

are mentioned as having been erected by
them, although Argos as the name of the
district is sometimes introduced (Ear.
/. A.
See Wilamowitz on Eur.
534).
Her. 15, 945.
Here it may lie assumed
quoted from literature and toixoi is now

read for rpoxol in schol. Plat Ugg. 681 A.
irepiCf. Hesych. IV p. 181 rpoxte'
In Etym. Af. p. 455,
explained ry rpox^P-aTi, i.e.
6 ireptrpixw kvk\60(v otov ariifravos.
Jebb on Bacchyl. 10. 77 points out that
the legend of the Cyclopes as builders is
post-Homeric. So far as I have observed,
f$6\aiov,
reixoi.
52 OpiyKip
is
Mycenae
that
of Eurystheus
referred to, as the

cf Pind. fr. 169.
is
:
home
228
yap
Kpeiacrov deols
228
Orion
Jlor.
5.
47,
p.
fipoTols yapiv
rj
(ftepetv.
xdpis X^P LV y-P 4o~tiv V tiktoi'ct' del, Kur.

Hel. 1234. And the gods may be trusted
to fulfil their obligations, whereas you
can never be sure of a man (Aesch. fr.
399, Soph. fr. 667).
x*P lv 4> P IV l>k*
24 4k
tov 'Hpa.K\ei(TKOV ffarovp'iKTjs.

Kpeicrffov...
<p4peiv.'
Dindorf, in agreement with
Wagner (p. 107.2), held that 'HpaKXeio-xov
here and in the source of the next fr.
was a corruption of 'HpaKXe'ovs aaTvpiKov.
The same line without the mention of
author or play is quoted in Jlor. Alonac.
'
Xaptv ?x e '">
is
'
ambiguous
i;i
and
itself,
may mean
to get a boon, as in 0. T. 764.

Hence there must be some doubt as to
the exact force of 0. C. 779 8t ovSev 7?
102, with detp for deois.

xdpis, a favour once conferred, becomes
a debt due from the recipient At. 522
Xe/H5
X&P 11' 4*P 01
229
tov hpwvTa
229
229
yap
tl
Onori Jlor.
6.
6 p. 49, 13 4k tov
'HpcLKXe'taicov 2o</>okX&>uj.
'tov 8p)VTa...
Pind. Nem. 4. 51
7rapd tovto 6 rpayiicSs ' rbv dpQvrd trot ti
Kal iradelv dtpeiXerai.'
Arrian anab. 6.
dipelXeTai.'
/cat
T(f dpwvri coni. Blaydes
Schol.
tov 84
13. 5 Kai ti Kal la/xêiov eireiirelv
vovv elvai tov la/j-fieiov, 8ti Tip ti dpuivTi
Kai wadeiv 4<jtiv 6<peiX6p.evov.
very
similar line is attributed to Aeschylus
(fr. 456) by Stob. eel. 1. 3. 24 p. 56, 22 W.
and Theoph. ad Auto/. 2. 37 8pd<ravTi
yap toi Kal wadeiv dQe'iXerai. It is not
unlikely that the ascription to Aeschylus
is due to recollection of and confusion with
Cho. 312 dpdo-avTi iradeiv, rpiyipuv p.vdo%
rdSe (piovet.
The oldest statement of the primitive
lex talionis in Greek appears to be the
line (sometimes ascribed to Hesiod) which
Arist. eth. N. 5. 5. ii32 b 25 calls rb
'Fa8ap.dvdvos dlmiov : ef Ke irdOoi Ta 1*
fpet-e diKT] k idela yivoiTo. To the passages
'
iradeiv 6<ei\Tcu.
yap Orion:
irov schol.
Pind.
cited
84
above add Aesch. Ag. 1562
/xlfjivovTos
ev
dpovip Aioy
/xifivei
wadeiv
tov
tpâvTa, Sopli. Ant. 927 pr) wXeiw KaKa

wddoiev 1) Kal Spuxriv 4k8Iku)S e/ne, Antiph.
fr. 58 Diels octis 84 Spdaeiv p.ev oierai
tovs w4\as KaKus, welaeadai 8' of', ov
aui(ppovei.
See also fr. 962.
Blaydes has good cause for proposing

dpQvTi, for which he quotes Eur. fr.
He might
10, besides Aesch. fr. 456.
have made his case much stronger, for
see
the usage appears to be invariable
Phil. 1421, El. 1 173, Eur. Ale. 419. 782,
Andr. 1271 f., Or. 1245, Lys. 25. 11. In
other words, ocpelXerai does not seem to
have become impersonal, like wp4wei,
r<p
and the rest. For the shifting

usage of these verbs see Kuehner-Gerth
II 27, and it is of course arguable that
6<pelXeTat here may have suffered extension
after their analogy.
wpoa-qKei,
HPAKAHI
171
230
roiyap
230
230
<f>vkdai
Cojhr)
xoipov.. Statua*
Athen. 375 D x<*P*
o\oi<ri
ri/r
2o0ocX>)f
B-fiKtuw,
iln
'
'EriTafaploit.
*' oi
*l**n
rcuyip
5e-
Gflivr.'
'hi-,
fully
'
Irpttpo* x*P v * Ttpid^cayrtt.

*vr bi
-Of rdTTaXof, to <p 5to/xt vova 1
uxwi
xai Tpi(poixrw.
Seafiiav
AC
Dimlorf gave roiyap 'Iw bit, an easy

remedy, 11 it were poailblc to see any
ground for connecting [o with this play.
is much more likely that Bergk was
1
fragment has not yet been Hi

restored,
bat Casauboa's x o V"
ivi Oiafiiar i* made all hut certain by
hoi. on
Ar. I.ys. 1073, which
mi cited to 8i x o 'P * M<<
ft>
3rXroi' d>7or tZrai, > <j5 rot't iôm
I
gjcttc
CasauUin: x<Mfot ttaftiuy
lTTu>ya...gai
'
ypipov
[The confusion
note indicated hy Rutherford docs

present quest ion. 1 Further,
Boat scholars have attempted lo extract
in the opening words in order to
a support for <pv\aai, although
we cannot feel suieth.it A thenaeus quoted
I'lcte sentence.
Casaubon c<litcd
TotyapoOr f&ct, which was adopted by
lirunck in his edition of the Fragment*.
I
right in
0i'\da,
making CerUrus the object of

hut his reading rb* yap Iwdif
(venomous) is not altogether convincing,

although the epithet might !* supported
r. Carw. 3. 11. 10 mnittfm wumd
ore trilingui, and more particular!)- hy
the rationalized version of llecataeus
I
1
17) in 1'ausan. .1. 15. 4 dXXd
Etcarcuot fit* 6 MiXiîor \oyo* tip**
ue(na, 6<fn* <pt)ca* < laiapip Tpa<t>rj*ai
bti*i>*, -XtjO ijrot bi " Atbov gvpa, Srt iiti to*
(///(/*
vwb toi" lov'

top S^hp i-wd 'HpacXt'oi-r
brixtitora Tt0*A*ai wapaxrrlga
gal
Toirro* fpri
11. c>>n). rip iti

&Xdrp>ai wap' Kiipvattta.
î-Xatat. ignoring roty&p, which he re
garded as a marginal
Her
gloss.
preferred rl yi.pi 0* iti 4>v\dai,

Itlaydes rotyap avrif* bti.
\
and
231
ay a vov v\ov
231
ed.
ayawo*
aXor,
rrp&Tr,
Keit/.
ix
it,
|..
ApurTo<pd*i)i Auoiual yip adrri gal rturripa
ifi6.
'
KayawJrrtpo*
Tair&pip
iyaror tpr) 6\o* papirrb*h>i to *ara><it,
< rb iwtXdKirro*. ( f. Kustath. //. p. 100,
-,
trijadat
lo4*>*\w
oi
uisan.
w.) ',fa>f>'Tai TaOra'

ifbv
gal
Kwi
pfrropuiip XtfiKif.'
rb ga\6* koi
1.
p. 14 Ayapof to gartaybi aw6
TpowapotdXXov.
Suid. i.f. iyapo*.
t6puh ri gariayin fi'Xor, ^ to +pvy*wi*t
gal tTotac* wpoi rb gartayiffai.
at di TO
ayarbw
wort
to i*ipy
wpncif*4%.
IJTO*.
hr that iyaro* was particularly

employcl lo dwOnbl fire-wood* and waa
l u*ol Mbatandvally like +pt-ya*o*.
<piite clear whether
!
in
oi
arrlfpaaw rb jr.aX#-<Wb*",
gat &ya*o* Tpow*po$tnb*i*% gal
> gartayof Tpayigurrtpo* bi, &!*>,
rb iroua
r.uner, ON
III p.
10
Bekk. ,i
,5.
originally adjectival.
ayaro*
of
gar'
ih'
i)
wpuiTT) 6i mo.
tovto Tpayigiirrtpov rA Smopua

'
p.
It,
10,
I'hrv
gal
a*b%,
.ill
onyaPQt, and
OOrytOM
wood
-.
II.
B.).
Soohodai or U
11.
ng distinguuha
drt tart
\ith
fr.
<i.
part
he hmil.f
d^-aôf from it-
fi'-i4t,
0Tr+a*oi,
For the breaking
to make a fire
9p*G*at.
xj...
whith arc
which was
cf.
All
coincidence
.
X04>0KAE0YI
172
232
akaXuav
232
Ilesych.
wovriplav, araîav.
113 dXaXiav
p.
2o0o/cA?/s 'ETriraiva-
a\a\aya?), explained as
corr.
Casaubon).
infers that this play
was called
piois (iiri iraievdpois
Dindorf
cod.
draîa < tou XaXeiv >

wild tumultuous cry:
irovr/pia
dXaX?)
Pind.
</cai>
was a
208
dXaXai r dpivofiivuv pi\f/ai'xci
abv K\6v(f>, Eur. Phoen. 335.
Now see
Etym. M. p. 55, 48 dXaXi}, 6 6bpvfio<, koX
r\ avapdpos <puivr\...KaX dXaXTrros, 6 Oopvpos,
cf.
fr.
fxaviat r
by the grammarians, who

assumed that such was the name of the
Nauck quotes Cramer, anecd.
satyrs.
Oxon. I p. 59, 8 iiri Taivaptp F,iriTat.vdpios.
L.and S. prudently omit this mysterious
word, and Ellendt's remark 'dictum
'Eirtrau'dpiot
'
KaKoXaXia' is not very helpful.

guess that there is some
dXaXd
dXaXai,
confusion
with
(or
quasi
One might
wapa tt\v dXa-Xfy, r\ Kara,

XaXdv (i.e. inarticulate), 17
olov
6 iroXvXaXos
ariprrjaiv
On
oxXos.
tov
tear' iirWixciv,
the other
hand, dXaXos seems to mean tumultuous

rather than dumb in Plut. def. or. 51
p. 438 B.
233
apyejxoiv
233
Hesych.
p. 272 dpyifxuv t&v

XevKW/j-druiv '
ol
Si
(o<pda\fxu)i>
6(f>da.\fuGiv
ttI
6<p0a\fioh
rots
iv
Taivdpip
cod.).
2o^>o/cX^s
Cf.
Etym. M.
aarvpiK(p.
p. 135, 36 apyefiov, to Kara irddos yevoirapd rd

fievov XevKUifxa ii> rip 6<pda.X/jup
'
Erotian gloss. Hippocr.

dpybv to XevKov.
Eustath. Od. p. 1430, 60
p. 47, 10.
attributes the explanation of the word to
Didymus. Pollux 2. 65 has the form
apye/xos
Etym. Gud.
dpyep-os
p. 73, 6)
to Ka.Xovp.evov AetMWjUa, /cat 6 tout' ix 01 "
(cf.
dvdpuwos
irrdpyefios.
It
was the name of the
dpye/uLos
seems
that
disease,
and
apyepov of the part affected ; and, as

Ellendt remarks, a doubt was raised to
which of the two the word in Sophocles
should be referred. The view taken by
Didymus is to be preferred. Pollux 2.
146 says that the upper part of the nails
was called dpytfxot. In Latin argema is
see Thesaurus s.v.
used as a neut. sing.
:
Albugo and Leucoma are
still
technical
terms in modern medicine.
234
OV
234
KCO(bL
oil
p.
Kwcpel'
oil
566 Kw<pel'
(koXvo.
The
"
Phot. lex. p. 359, 25 ovk w<piêv

ov pXdwrei.
Zck/hwcXtjs iv iiri Tcuvdpip
(repdpwi cod. ) craTvpots. The right reading
was recovered from Hesych.
p. 237
cod.),
pXairTios
and
(iX&irTei,
oil
irrjpot.
Cf. II
KOLKOvpyei, j3Xd7rret, KoXovei
with
irrjpoi,
Kunjyqais
'
KuxprjTios
KdXovais.
Wagner and M. Schmidt suggested
that
the error of Photius might be explained

by supposing Sophocles to have written 01)
H. thought that
the original form of the entry might have
5>
oil Koxplfei
oil fiXdirTei.
been < oil Kw<pei:
KUxpfT $-ivov (or irtvovs).
'
meaning of
original
probably 'blunt,
yap
dull,' as in
Kwcpos
Horn.
was
390
dvdpbs dvdXiaSos oirnO. T. 290 Kuxpd nai iraXai'

eiri).
The common use for 'deaf' or
dumb was a special application, but
the ancient grammarians, and even Porson
on Eur. Or. 1279, reversed the history of
For the wider meaning of the
the word.
verb cf. Anacr. fr. 81 al dt /xev (ppivei
Kui(p6v
davoio.
'
(iiXos
Cf.
'
KKfKw<piaTai.
Etym.
M.
p.
322,
22,
quoting the passage, gives irapaê^Xaufiivcu eiaiv as a paraphrase.
HPAKAHI HPITONH
173
HPITONH
ides
of Sophocles,
that
composed with
this title
we have a
by Phrynichus
record
of plays
Philoclcs, and Cleophon.

shall see.
There is nothing
1
ius also wrote an Erigona, as we

the three references to it in his brother's correspondence to
v the character of the Erigona composed or translated by
Q. Cicero (Cic. Q.fr. 3. 1,6, 9).
Wclcker (p. 215) identified this play with the AUtes* (see
p. 62), on the ground that, inasmuch as Aletes and Krigone
wen- brother and sister, the son and daughter of Aegisthus and
taemnestra, and Orestes was the opponent of both, a divided
action is not to be thought of.
There is nothing in the fragments
ribed to cither title which assists <>r hinders the identification;
but, though Welcker is probably right in his view of the Al,
it by no means follows that the Erigone refers to the same series
in
The name of Krigone was familiar to the Athenians in

connexion with the curious festival known as aiatpa (for whu h
the commentators on Verg. Georg. 2. 389), at which was sung
tin
song known as a\r]Ti<{. Several aetiological legends arose
to account for the obsolete and unintelligible titles, of which
<ed only refer to two.
In the first of these Krigone it still the daughter of
gisthus, but she is brought to Athens as the accuser Of
The most explicit account is preserved
before the Areopagus.
in Etym. M. p. 42, 3 Xeyerai yap "Hptyov^v -rr)r \iyla$uu
tiTiiifivt')<Trpa>i
OvyaTepa, avv TvvBdptip t irn-mrtp tXtfeiv
>
'.\0>)vae,
airo\v6ivra
Karijyopr}<rovaav 'Opiarov
eavrrjv irpoarpoiraiou rots' \\0i)vai<>is
uprtjaaaav
(?
-oc)
8t,
ytvtafiai.
in ably auuTcXeladai rrjv kopit^v. To the same

Par
aid to have
546, where Ore-been tried for the death of Aegisthus, and this no doubt accounts
the appearance of
his nearest surviving relative,
In Apollod. cfiif. 6. 25
accuser.
Cf. Dictys bell. Troi. 6. 4.
said, according to different accounts, to have been
ither by the Erinyes or by Tyndarcus or
is
doubtless appears in two of these
by
passages as claiming retribution for the death of his daughter
it
xpj/afioi/ 8e
Maim
FHG
bftbty iidi the pupil

I
>(
Thcspia: aee
dtMbk tnle'AX^nf
he adduce* are quite uncertain.
ol
lfai|;h,
Wfxy^n
Tragic
Drama,
(p- fy). bal
the parallel* wVefc
IO<t>OKAEOYI
174
According to others, Orestes married Erigone

Clytaemnestra
Lycophr. 1374), and Cinaethon (fr. 4,
p.
197)
mentioned Penthilus, their son.
(2) Another legend made Erigone the daughter of Icarius,
by whom Dionysus was hospitably entertained, and to whom he
gave a wine-skin, with instructions to spread abroad the
Icarius, with his
knowledge of the newly bestowed blessing.
daughter Erigone and his dog Maera, came to Attica in the
course of his mission, and freely bestowed his wine upon the
rustics.
The intoxicating results which followed convinced the
shepherds that they had been poisoned, and they straightway
cudgelled Icarius to death. The dog Maera by her howls guided
Erigone to her father's unburied body and Erigone, distraught
with sorrow, hanged herself on a neighbouring tree. The
punishment of heaven fell upon the guilty Athenians, who at
length appeased the divine resentment by the institution of a
festival (alwpa, oscilla) in honour of Erigone.
See Hygin.
fab. 130, Ov. Ibis 611 ff., Aelian nat. an. 7. 28, Nonn. Dionys.
The literary sources of this story have not been
264.
47. 34
traced to any earlier writer than Eratosthenes, who wrote an
elegy entitled Erigone (E. Maass, Anal. Eratostk. p. 132).
Ribbeck (Row. 7 rag. p. 621) develops the view that the Erigone
of Sophocles was the daughter of Icarius, correcting ev a/j.r)piy6vr]
or cr/xvpiyovr) the reading of the MSS in Erotian (fr. 236) to
1
EGF
(Tzetz.
'Hpiyovy.
He points out that the reception of
his chorus of satyrs by the Attic peasants offered
suitable opportunities for comic episodes.
On the whole, though the evidence is insufficient to determine
the contents of the Erigone, the balance of probability is against
Welcker's identification. Against Ribbeck's view must be set
the fact that the fragments of Accius' play undoubtedly relate to
the story of Orestes, and he himself inclines to the identification
of the Erigona with the Agamemnonidae.
The frequent
occurrence of the title suggests that it was suitable to a tragedy
rather than to a satyr-play.
Maass {op. cit. p. I33 1]5 ) adds that
before Ribbeck's conjecture is approved we must satisfy ourselves
that the Icarian Erigone was known as early as Sophocles'2
iv
craTvpi/cr}
Dionysus with
1
Wagner suggested that Tyndareus appeared in the character of the legal representative of Erigone, who could not have conducted the accusation in person owing to
her juristic incapacity.
On the other hand, if Aletes was adult, there was no reason
for the introduction of Tyndareus into the Aletes, and consequently fr. 646 belonged
rather to the Erigone.
2 The same remark applies
to Haigh's classification of the plays of Phrynichus,
Philocles, and Cleophon (p. 477 ff.).
HPITONH
175
235
8c
&6r] Toiralfi}, tolvt
235 I'lv >t. lex. p. 595, 9 Tordfeu"do* OTOxattodai, irdvutioOat. inrwotif

Kai rapa o<poi<\ti iv Wptyovrj 'A U...
.
the same effect Etym. M.

and Suid. s.r. Tor&ttiv. Cf.
13,
l&elv cra<f><os dekco.
Aoch. Ag. 1368
rd yap Tordfeii' roi; d^'

Similarly Soph. 7Vwi.
ovî yfysvrw,
donrjiri* tiwtlr
xaaK(Hfixjpo<;
236.
236
1 vwo<ppot codd.
rotian. gloss. Hippocr.
<>;<7(r
(leg.
century B.C., whose
.1
The passage in Kur.

i riarurfa.
descnt>es the entrance of Odysseus
into Troy disguised as a beggar : ijia ol
wdpot Kara wo\i* (*ra<ppo* 6pyi f"x wr
tucoi,
\
OrraQpo*)' Kpitpato*, wr
6 Topairjrot (this refers to the
leides of Tareiitum, a
itshed mrdical writer lielonging to
;<por
i avTuiu cw?
Galea specially commends).

yap 6 Z.o<p<n\T)i iv 'Upiyofrj (so
lor Rjbbeck'i
Casaubon fur a p.r\pty6*r)
ss
I.e.
crro.Xo
KTt.
The following
explanations have liecn given
(l)
the face of an idiot, (3) ble.u
rheumy, fj) tear-stained. 4 treacherous
paKoii'Tia
v* V
ItawuXtro.'
(Upjnfrai i avrin Kai l'l<ptyt**ia (fr. 312).
rwotpdrrfi (ck arte 10. VI 18 l.iltr.)
hi
oaaMt woui \lywv ' oitiiv brt koI
-,
uji
'
bwofpo*
(oi'x Orratppo* Hippocr.) nai tx*

6 t>a\dnai.'
The evidence of the
.
of the lexicographers,
CMUO
and of Euripides and
is so
bii
strong in favour of the form C>xa<ppvi (hat
only consider Orofpot to l>e an
The
ti.m.
Tiih
tac
meaning of
which was obsolete and un-
rd
th.it
'In.ui time*.
the authoril
ancient evidence in their favour, apart

from the scholium, is an alternative gloss
llesychius
vy pacta* /jjor *'p.<ptp'i
in
:
[>orted
le
that
mud
scholarly writers.
tradition of
As Sophocles is quoted
Bg reason
1
t
o.
IV p.
joo explain
KpvOMo* and pf) tpawtp'j*

ami the mIi
.1.
traaSpoi i p.i) fartp&t,
ini)
aft
rrixn4****,
iwarUrt iuppn
19
1
'
ij
and
f'Woi/Xor,
711
purajxtp
afpbr
tolltlllll,
om. Phot.);
Rka,
far'
l>y
is
preta-
Baa
** i'*dX*r
Kara* V,,.
'">
"),''>'
'
)(
of the rendering pi>*uof, and there

is nothing against it except that we do
hist- ry
not know IM
of the word.
it
has anything t. do with
meaning, as/, suggests, 'having
foam beneath' (cf. 0ovXot), must rtm.iiii
The restorations proposed,
uncertain.
Whether
a<t>pli%,
tiipti
i\
(llerwcrden), *V9 6
(KllendO, ami <rw^f
C-wa<ppo*, ti at-rJ* fwt
iMiieing.
interpretation
the
rest
balai
<id-
testimony of Hera*
Kt*ftu 9t>
The
dipp^..
forop+woi
stands hi^h b
assume
three
first
that the origin "t the word h to l>e traced

either to &<ppwv or to aftpot, ami the only
*i>w
The
/'?).
tlpf'
4^xr
Si luiiidt),
arc
n"r i' tip*'

J. conjecture* I
'Aafri Pwa+poi, 'In
what
*\>
is
to l>e
tlpwt
made
fyV
of
*'
BfrtV?
(va+001 i(
crhaps
ai-T
insensibly their consciousness tcli thnn.

is-.| from one p to
The M
the other, and the loss of *
Mrrkteo above tl.
a: iv 10*1
k. Kllis (
p. 5.J0I.
thought thai Preeyot wa a mistake
a hollow passage)
vrtt+opot (cf. es*o*w/>d
.
lint this
vie* h.u>ll> gives

>.e that
>ifh. irnt
Cw+poi
weight
existed with
Ham tenia-

I04X3KAEOYI
176
XIII
< Jjv
3).
Blaydes
tis or iyiiuer''
>
vvv
8'
pis
Nauck, comparing Eur. Htl. 106,

was inclined to substitute dvroirtiXero for â7rw\To.
â*-u>\ero, however, illustrates the Sophoclean tendency
to use compounds with i, for which see
on fr. 524, 4.
R.
tively suggested *Ipts ws...i avyGip (C.
774.
vircuppos
e ktc.
Headlam on Aesch.
^.
352
otf
Tap
many
e\6vres audit av0a\6iei> Av quotes

similar phrases for 'the biter bit.'
So
fr.
7'.
715,
OAMYPAI
The scene of the play was the neighbourhood of Mt Athos. as
appears from fr. 237. For the connexion of Thamyras with this
district cf. Eustath. 77. p. 299, 5 kcu oti Iv ry 'Akttj rfj irepl rov
"AOcov dpvpi<; 6 /? e/3acri\evae. Conon 7 9 ttjv Akttjv irapayevopevrj riKiet (sc. vuptprf) Kovpov (H)dp,vpiv 09 i)(3r)cra<; eirl roaovrov
r)K KL6apa>8ta<;,d)<; icai fiacriXea crepwv /calirep iinfK.VTr)v ovra *E/cv0a<i
The object of such stories was to account for the
iroirjaaa-dai.
prevalence of the legend of Thamyras in various parts of the
Strabo fr. 35 p. 331 ev Be rfj d/crf) ravTrj (i.e. the coast
country.
at the foot of Mt Athos) dfivpi<; 6 pa e/3aai\evcre, rwv avrdSv
'
iTrtTTjSevp.aTwv 'yeyovcos
wv
ical 'Opcpcix;
1
.
In Homer, as Leaf has pointed out, Thamyras is a travelling

rhapsode, and, whether by Oechalia is meant the Thessalian
a point about which even the Alexanor the Messenian town
drian critics were divided (Waser in Pauly-Wissowa VI 1360)
the scene of his punishment is Dorium in Messene 2 (Strabo 350,
Pausan.
See
4. 33. 7).
594
600
Acopcov, hvOa re Movaai

dvTOfievat tydpvpiv top p7)i/ca iravaav doi8f}<i,
OiâXiridev lovra Trap' JLvpvrov OtâXtô?*
cttcvto <yap ev-ôpevo^ viKT)aep,ev, elirep dv avral
MoOcrat deihoiev, Kovpai Ato<? aiyioôio'

al Be ô\a>adp,evai irrjpov deaav, avrdp doi8i]i>
6ea7re(rir)v a<$>e\ovro K.a\ eic\eka6ov KidapicrTvv.
The
critics are not agreed whether ir'qpdv means blind,' or is to

be explained by the loss of the power of minstrelsy.
It will also
be observed that Homer does not speak of a formal contest
between Thamyras and the Muses
and his account might
be taken to imply nothing more than that Thamyras was
'
xxm
1
Riese in Jahrb. f. Philol.
233 thinks the inference as to the scene of
Sophocles' play doubtful.
2
follows
Statius
Homer: Theb. 4. 18 r Getico...Jlebile va/i Dorion; hie fretus
dodas anteire canendo Aonidas mutos Thamyris damtiattis in annos ore simul
citharaque (quis obvia numina iemnat?) conticuit praeceps.
|
0AMYPAI
punished
for his insolent boast
iming
the
In [Eur.] Khss. 916 925 the

Parnassus or Pieria, ha
to meet the Thracian Thamyras in the
1
suppose) from
(I
Strymon
Mt Pangaeum
neighbourhood of
(
177
irai,
l'(\'/'/x/ioi/o<?
vftpis ynp,
Toeelv
"1
TT)
n-^rtu
teat
<r<j)7)\,
<ppev6<f
Wovamv
epts
eBrjKe rovSe Svarrjvoi' yivov.
fi
yap
irepaiaa
o-'
Bij
irorapdovs Sid
po<i<;
Xe/erpoi*; Tr\o0i)v ~rpv/jiovo<; <f>vTa\p.ioi<;
or r\\Qop*v 7>)v "Xfiva6^<o\ov e? Xeirat

lluyyaiov opydvoitriv ^T)<TKrfp.ii'ai
MoOaat
teXeivai
p,eyiarT7)v
co^narfj
fivpev,
0?
et<?
epip /xeXo)8ta<?
ftpytci,
i)p.<Jov
KuTv<f>\(t><TapV
ttoXX
ihivvaaev
re^viji'.
Euripides mentions a regular contest, and the punishment of

blindness, but does not state that Thamyras was also dep;
of his musical skill.
There can hardly be any doubt that both
punishments belonged to the Sophoclean story (cf. frs.

see
Both are recorded by Aj>ollod. 1. 17, who gives
r particulars of the conditions ol the contest
it was agreed,
he says, that if Thamyras was successful, the Muse-, would a<
suitor; but that if he failed, be should lose whaf
une effect
llin
ro ill
B y<; *4pa
I
i.
avrq> 8f &piac tt)v p.ev ?/ rT1?? ttjv trrfpanrtv

Trp6oTcp.ov, t/)v Be viKT)>i ynpLov /uv twc MovatHv.
<f>aal Be a
Tore Be
v rov fikv yXavKov tytw, tov Be fie'Xava.
The scholiast means that
dird>\eaev.
,>ov
Thamyras lost the black eye. Although guilty of a ludicrous
(art ^(Xri^/ioj'ov
w'os'-
confusion, the writer of this scholium derived his information

If, therefore, the sources which be
from the histrionic tradition.
other
r, in
dealt with the dramatic aspect of the
the play ol Sophocles, it is perhaps legirJmafl
Is, with
ditions which he mentions go back t<> the
nal.
ription
is explained
by the
Pollux 4, 141 as n
ye cf. the use of yKavxtafut, y\av*
the
medical writers.
L
in
conventional method <>t depicting blindness,
le <>r the
effective by the actor turnin
The allusion
<f
the
mask
ol
ol
the
scholiast
Thamyras
in
/\avK(oois;
which was
made
'
I
-I
rijpAr a~'lilin<!.'
.11.
.w Ihr
HOOM
th.it
i.liixling
a ihc
|>ui>ih-
mui. 1 |i. mji H.

.1 posed a poem on the war of ihc Titan* agaiuM (be Rod*.
iooj.i.
Ilciur,
BOOrdil
I"
I'liii. -it
IO<t>OKAEOYI
78
the blinding of Thamyras, the actor, whose mask could not be

changed, took care to present to the audience the grey eye only.
He quoted Quintil. II, 3. 74 in comoediis...pater tile, cuius
praecipuae partes sunt, quia interim concitatus interim lenis est,
altero erecto altero composite est supercilio : atque id ostendere
maxime latus actoribus moris est, quod cum iis quas agunt partibus
congruat.
We have no indication of the manner in which the plot

was developed. This only is certain, that Thamyras passed
from supreme good fortune to utter misery as the result of
One scene seems to have attained universal celebrity
vfipis.
that in which the wretched hero, blind and
what was even
worse deprived in his blindness of the art which might have
been his solace, in anger snaps the strings of his lyre and
shatters the frame then, desolate and inconsolable, sits surrounded
Such at least is a fair inference from
by the broken fragments.
the works of art described by Pausanias 9. 30. 2 and especially
IO. 30. 8
Safivpi&i 8e 771)9 /cadcop>eva> rod UeXla 8ie<p0app,i>ai
al 6'\/re49
eVi tt}<?
teal
rarreivov
e'<?
dirav ayr)p,(i iari,
rroWrj Be avra>
teal
77
K.6p,r)
ttoWt)
/xev
Xvpa
iv rocs yeveiow
8e
eppirrrai rrpbs rots rroai, tcareayores avrrj<i ol 7n;êt? /cat al ôphal
Ke<paXr]<i,
/cat,
/cciTeppayyviai.
A circumstance in the Homeric account of Thamyras which

has hardly received any attention is his connexion with Eurytus,
from whose home at Oechalia Thamyras is said to have started
on his way to Dorium. Now, Eurytus is the counterpart of
Thamyras in another sphere
taught the use of the bow by
Apollo, he challenged his master and was slain in punishment
(Horn. 6 224 ff.). These kindred spirits are coupled by Lucian
piscat. 6 ecrO o<tti<; ovv ravra ev 7reiTovdc0<; nrap vpSav tca/cdus av
elirelv iiriêiprja-eiev evepyerw; avSpas, dtp' obv elvai rt<; khoêv ;
:
KTO>>
Tai<;
Movcrcu? dvTaheiv, trap dov el/vrjcpe rrjv (pBrjv, rj tw 'AttoWcovl

iptSalveiv, evavrla roêvcov, tcai ravra Sorfjpi ovrc rfj? roîKi]^.
This is probably an instance where the heroes of two similar
stories have been brought into association with each other, just
as Heracles and Eurytus, the rival bowmen, are for different
reasons variously connected.
In Athen. 20 F and vit. Soph. 4 (p.
Blaydes) it is said that
Sophocles himself played the harp at the representation of
It is unnecessary to adopt Welcker's view that
the play.
Sophocles appeared in the character of Thamyras
in fact,
the writer of the Life negatives this assumption by stating
that Sophocles differed from the older tragedians in that he
relinquished the position of an actor owing to his p,iicpo(pa>vla.
1
OAMYPAI
179
For the votive tablet supposed to have been painted by

Polygnotus for Sophocles after the production of this play see
Hauser in O. Jh. 8. 35 ff. There is no literary evidence of
\istence.
The name Thamyras belongs
properly to the eponymous

hero of festal gatherings (Hesych. II p. 300).
In regard to its
form, Hanvpas is said to be the Attic for Ba/xupi<? (C'yrill. I,x. apt
Cramer, anecd. Par. iv p. 183, 14), and is attested for Sophocles
by the majority of our authorities. See also Adam on Plat
620 A.
y
The proverb Ba/ii/pic (or A/zi/ptc) fiaivtrat applied to those
whose conduct bears the aspect of folly, but is really prompted
by far-seeing wisdom, has nothing to do with the minstrel
isan. fr. 201 Schw.
rep.
).
237
)(Tcra.v
237
lath.
pq.Ktit.6t
nai
//.
of fxvfla
rapa
r<ji
fpaai, -o<p<n\r)% iv
::<j), SijXoi,
IfffCW
358, 40 6rt Si
p.
6 "A0wt,
(TKOiriav Zrjvbs '\0toov
OKOTlti*
tlwulf
7jt)fbt
the passage of the Iliad which is

leaves Olympus, an<l
leeds across the snowy mountain-tops
hunt touching the lower
irth. *' 'A06w 5' iwl worm* (fiâtro
In
Athos
Thracian
33 Op7)ori6 r'
Athos, like other high
*n*i*o*Ta.
I
Liwrt.
lorn.
h.
is 1.
nc
"I the
Apoll.
[Grappa, Gr. Myth.

honoured as a san
Ag' '97 'AtfyoK oorot
1104,),
p.
cus
/.ijfot.
was
Aesch.
Il<
p. 66, possibly, as Nauck thinks, with

reference to this passage, has 'A0yw o
iwl toO'AOu tov 6(>ovi i6fnniroi driptdt, 6
iks of the summit
of Athos as always rising far above the
clouds, so that the altar of Zeus remained
untouched l>y r.iin. For the connexion
of Thamyras with this district sec Intro
ductory Note.
238
nrjKTal 8e Xvpai Kai /xayaSiScc,
TO.
238
Aili.n. f>\*
quoting Apollo'AfnaroK\iovt iwtiixupy with reference to the
rj *p6t
\,
T7)
tt&yaiii, lo;.\;j, Si
/>
OatwpQ 'r^rai
IIUlMl!
II
case of a foreign
lccn occasionally lengthened, than that
kc was right in reading ttayaitift.
Ik- noticed that though
It should, ha
In- ace. sing. ii^>tw
the last s)i;
is short in Diogcn
1
<
<f>a\rt*6 6prya<n>.
o&ru ~o<po-
wrjKTal Xvpai ii a periphn

Inch *cc on frs. 141 and
naY<iStS: the first syllable of this
it
hut it appears
whole more likely that in the
;
|H \na;a&T)* itcrgk
able
is insufficient
he material aiaii
for the
pwpOM
bet ween rtarfc and ndyhi;

but both belong to the < Ismi of foreign,
rteged instruments, as
HfWrlng
13
ZO0OKAEOYZ
i8o
cover both the Xvpa. and the xiddpa.

Ellendt refers to Hesych. til p. 171
6ava' ...Kvpiws 5e t& it uXwv ijp.iva
contrasted with the lyre (or tp6pp.iy)

and the later iciddpa. Both TrrjKTis and
see Pind. fr. 125,
ixdyadis were Lydian
Telestes fr. 5. 4, Diogenes fr. 1. 6, Athen.
634 F. As such they are opposed to the
native Greek instruments mentioned in
They were alike also in
the next line.
being played by the hand without the
plectrum (x<<7>'S wXrjKrpov 81a \paXp.ov
Hence
Aristox. ap. Athen. 635 b).
opyava
Hesych. Ill p. 61 p.aya8i5et
xpakTiKa, and Phot. supr.
2 fjdava is not elsewhere applied to
musical instruments, but it seems to be
the intention to give a generic description of stringed instruments, which would
:
XLdwv.
rj
The
lyre
was the
oldest stringed
instrument and was in general use, whereat

the cithara was for the most part employed
by professional musicians. See Guhl and
Susemihl-Hicks on
Koner, p. 201 ff.
;
fol. p. 601.
difference of material
Arist.
There was
also a
the sounding-box
of the lyre was made of tortoise shell, and

that of the cithara with wood or metal.
But it would be wrong to restrict the
meaning of i-oava so as to make it apply
solely to the wood-work of the cithara.
'
239
239
Athen. 183 E
Tpiywvov
to&tov
Kai
p.vrip.ovtvei 5e
iv
2,o<poKXrjs
tov
p.iv
Mvaoh
(fr. 412) .../fat iv Qa/xvpa.

the rpiyuvos see on fr. 412.
240
npoiroSa fxeXea ra8' ocra K\eop.ev
Tpoîxa
240.
/3acrt/xa yjipeai Trohecri
icXionev
1 irpocrwda Ambr. rddi ae Ambr.
2 x eP <7 1 Trodarinv
Choer., K\aLop.ai Ambr.
240
Choeroboscus
cnchir.
60,
p.
rpox^'os 5^
6
[sc.
2o0o/c\7)s
17
in
217,
Hephaest.
9
Consbr.)
Xiyerat 6 xopeios),
iv
rip
Qafivpq,
itrfidr]
(Qap.vp
U,
Trp67ro5a...7r65ecri.'
K) (prjffl
Anon. Ambros. ap. Studemund anecd. I
Bap.vpi8i
'
ws dirb
TrapaywyQs.
6 yovv
Qafivpg. (cro<poK\rjs ra
p. 226, 18 5i6 koX ovtu)S Kii<\r)Tai

tGiv
xopQ)v -xppeios
^.o<poK\rjs
iv
Tip
dd/xvpa cod.) (prjcrt '7r/w(rw5a...7r65e<r(ni'.'

1 irpoiroSa has not been explained
but Campbell, who compares irpoiroSiffif,

not unreasonably suggests that it may
mean "giving forwardness to the feet,"
"inciting to motion."' That is to
i.e.
'
is 'moving forward.'
Mus. II 297) supposed
the chorus, followers of Thamyras,
say, the strict sense
Schneidewin
Herwerden:
'
K\tiop.ev
(K/i.
that
are contrasting the slow processional
chant of the Muses (irpoiroda) with the
vigorous and passionate strains which
they have heard (to. 5' ocra kXvo/j.(v) from
No help is given by the
their master.
gloss in Phot. Suid. irp6iro5e$- /AeydXovs
KXaiop.ev
vel
Ambr.
Nauck suggested irpoaooa.

from the reading of the cod. Ambr., so
that 7rp6ao5a piXea should = irpoa68ia
but there is no evidence for an adj.
Trp6<rodos, and there are other objections.
KXe'ofiev (see cr. n.) seems to projro8as (-xovres.
vide the required sense, and kXvovocli is

given for KXiovaai by the codd. in Eur.
I.
A.
1046.
occurred to
me
The
conjecture,
which
independently, has been
anticipated by Herwerden, Headlam and

Ilerw. wrote irpdiroXe fitydXe,
Tucker.
But the break in the
rdde at KXio/xev.
can rdSe
synaphea is objectionable
Headlam (C. R.
nXeop-tva be right?
XIII 3) formerly proposed TavvcriKvdfiova,
thinking that the corruption was caused
by the compound epithet, a tendency
illustrated in C. A'. XV 17 and in his no.
on Aesch. Ag. 50, 1480. But the passage
of Arctinus on which he relies (p. jr K.)
:
describes the attitude to be adopted in

hurling a spear, and is not relevant ; nor
Subsequently
is the metre satisfactory.
0AMYPAI
have changed his mind for
xvi 434 n. he proposed rd b" 5<ra
K\*oper or K\tvp.tr, or as an alternative,
;
in
A',
id.
With r.ipid movement of arm and

The reference is to the rhythmical
in which the
the leys.
Cf.
Xcn. symfi. 2. 16 oviiv cbryor rov awnarot
tw Ttj 6p\1p*i y, d\\' dfui noi rpaxvôt
kcu ffKiXtf icai x*'/** iyvurdfovTo, and KC
r's
Charities, K. tr. p.
ioj b .
rms xiptoi and wtetai are unique,
of the dance,
ients
re as
important
:is
i8i
sound, but are related to x'pw<n

519) and vb&teoi as \tip*<n to
X*ipt(roi.
So the ordinary form-, fU\toi,
l-rtat are reduced from u<Xf(r<ri, fwtoot:
if
Theog.
(/'.-'
iro, //.
N.uuk
101.
one
at
time proposed to sulstitute xP* r < ***

re, hut trie traditional forms are perhaps
defensible. The metre consists of rex>l\ed
trochaic tetrapodies, such as are occasionally found in Kuripides (Phoen. I0i,o, He!.
348) and Aristophanes [Lyt. 1:79); but
not, 1 believe, elsewhere in Sophocles.
241
yap
oj^wkc
KpoTrjTa TrrjKTihcou
vaos (TTeprjfia
241.
241
Athen.
yirrin
175
^.oiffouMji
I'Xot
1'oilux
ion*
Aiyi-rriuf,
2)o</>on.\ijt
iv tiatit-piti.
lUp
tOprffta
cr thought that the fragment

tided to describe the sii|erscssion
instruments menioned
but it
pposed, that
in
it
is
much more
likely.
it formed part of the

bamyras.
WK<
X
f" r the form lee Jebb on
<j>X
KpoTTVTtt
'songs resounding
from the harp as it is struck* (|.) *ponrra
u*\ may be taken to imply the c\i
if Kportir lUXo% in
the sense of to beat
uce a melody by stnkfUXoi as ace. of result
I
i>
-less
hi
ton 168 (Ufxdii it tobdl.

the phrase, though
1
ide easier l>y the attachment

TTHTiiur, to which upor^ruu' might
have
accommodated
been
(hypallagc).
Minus
160 <ri6S)f*6i rt pattrtipv, KTtrwot (cited by H. in

/
~ \X
KIIWOV UpOTTfTUJlr
III
1. 1.
t
(
ipuATu-f
1,
the n<is<- of the
'.
cars,
ilWCIg-
164 P
ritf>arXa
m'X7
Ai'ji/faXa lit.
I*.
.!
It-
vo\i'^M>rirra
Phrygiaa triasgahu harp

Cf. fi. 412.
IO0 b).
II
6'
rol
4
Kpinof
âX/toit
played without
on
the
ytrbntPa.
p.
107
iter*
.////.
(/>/./.
1
TijrrioW
^'i^wroit
Ai'Oior
tiuvon.
plectrum
IM
It
see note
fr.
p.ovav\oif
ihc avpty( tuwondXaxtot,
or Mute, as distinguished frotn the avpxyi
:
To\vKd\auo<
840 a).
Sec
i|M-
{/)i,t. .int.
II
on
Suscmihl-llicks
also
pot. 3. 6.
\ord\ winch follow are hoiel

mini displcio'
oorrapt
The following conjectures may
k: \vpa nonvkoi
be recorded
9' oil ix**pont Htm.
( ampljell adds for
v. 3 orlpyin' inai
- i)6v Koinqflt r'
do 111. This attractive suggestion recalls
*
fr-
JM.
(>)
7-
b* oto rt'X>,
Uriw ulen: Mpm fiiomvXot
XtlLt*"
KUfutoao' di)pT*<np
either
*** r1fn*<*.
as J. points
nor *yt*a#' is
&****
;
rtptttpa
but,
ig
ftoravXoi
savs:
'I
lotftltsaa'
&t*
Xs>a
had thought of
x' ofMn"
tpiffio*
...
r '*.
or
*#
()
(irffX^Mf of
STO^t fr>VI*or ...,n<fai

thought thai mot coneled
ipabasildos,
flMM
I
Mptrfra
See also on f. 463. The yijktCs was a

Lydiau species of harp, which is asso*
dated with the rpiyutroir (or -or), a
.is
tin m.
10.
Hi/it avyicpoTtioQcu LtijU ovLiwtctir airrcii.
bumping
ird
Comparing
Tâ
otxomt codd.
'
rod it fiurauXov
piv iv Oap.vpa oflrwt
f
KU/lOffdffrjt.'
ipvrjrai <H avrov
Kco/xatxaoTjc;.
vx u K * Herwerden:
fiiXrj,
fd^Xo
with \epot
in v.
>.
iX#>aw attdr rsvsi

Jacolw (an. Schwetghtaser)
>.oi'Xoi
(5)
SOÔKAEOYI
82
conjectured x a P/X0P ^"' tX^ws, and for vaos

crripri/xa something like 56volkos riKvov or
The instrument
<f>{iTev/j.a.
(6) H. wrote
used in the KUfios was commonly the
but vaos looks more like 5p56s,
avX6s
'
which was also its accompaniment. There

are however other possibilities, as 5aX6s
In
or dXaos, or a compound in -(rrepijs.'
J. P. xxxi 8 he suggested SaS6s r' ip^p-ri
iroXXd Kuixaaaaa x^PR Ellis
(?)
eaoi'<s
t'
TriaaoKuvLas "Aprjs.
tprjfioi
Conington, finding ix6vavX6t Tt...fia.vrlm

2, proceeds olvwfiivois (sit) <jTip-r\p.a.
vabt 6" tprrjuot
Kw/jias days.
(9) Blaydes
oiibi kui/xos tar'' Uti.
(10) G. Wolff: Xvpa
in v.
fxdvavXos.
Trot
rixvai T fJ-avrius
fpifixa Ko/xirdffat;
Something
like
vdos t'
x ei M-^
1'
vabs (jnpi\aa.% rjpwaoev Kwn-qXdras

might give the required sense, but the
corruption is too deep to be healed without fresh evidence.
8ttus
(8)
242
koIXov
242 Schol. Soph. O. C. 378 TroXXaxoO

to " Apyos koIX6v (pa<ri Kaddtrep Kal iv
'Etnydvots (fr. 190) 'to koIXov " Apyos ov
Ka.T0LK7]<ravT' tri Kal iv Qa/xvpa (Qafivpia
'
{k /xlv 'Epix0oi>LOu iroTip.dffTiof &rxe#e

Avt6Xvkov, iroXiwv KTtdvwv alviv
Kovpov
L)
'
"Apye'i KolXtf}
'
"Op.r)pos(d 1)
'
ol 8'ti-ov
koIXtjv
AaKeSalfiova.'
No modern
critic
(with the exception
of Hartung and Immisch, who thought

that the verses formed part of the poetic
display) has credited the statement that
the two hexameter lines really belonged

to the Thamyras. To avoid the difficulty
Kirchhoff suggested the transposition of
the words ^myovois and Qa/j.6pa, holding
that by the Epigoni was meant the cyclic
poem bearing that title and his solution
;
accepted by Nauck in his first

edition, hy Dindorf, by J ebb (on O. C.
378), and by Papageorgius in his edition
of the scholia. But it has been completely
refuted by Bergk for the following reasons.
(1) The words iv 'E-n-iyovots in this context
ought prima facie to refer to the play of
Sophocles, and it is highly improbable
that, if the scholiast had intended to
quote the epic, he would have introduced
it
in this way.
(2) The line which
Kirchhoff would attribute to the Thamyras
(fr. 190) is, so far as we can tell, entirely
was
Apyos
unsuitable to that play, whereas it fits
naturally with the plot of the Epigoni.
It is probable, therefore, that if the citation
of the Thamyras was more than a mere
reference, the words quoted have dropped
out of the text.
Nauck lakes exception
to the contracted /cotXos in a cyclic poem,
but he should at least have referred to
Mom. x 385.
are not concerned with
the hexameters, but it should be mentioned that Wilamowitz conjectured i<
p.ev dpa xôvlov to make them agree with
the tradition that Autolycus was the son
of Hermes (ii; ipiovviov rj, Weil). Others
prefer to suppose that Erichthonius had
a son of this name (Dummler in I'aulyWissowa 11 2601). O. Immisch m/ahrh.
f. Philol. Suppl. xvil 155 holds that
the hexameters are correctly quoted from
the play, and that they were part of the
agon which must have been represented
somehow or other in the course of the
action.
He points out that Philonis,
who is the subject to ?<rxe#e was mother
of Philammon, the father of Thamyras,
as well as of Autolycus, and that this
genealogy appeared as early as Hesiod
(see fr. in Rz. y\ riKev Avt6Xvk6v re
For ko'i\ov
îXdfifxovd re kXvtov avSrjv).
"Apyos see on fr. 190.
We
243
KavvafiLS
243 Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.) p. 105,

27 Kavvafiis. ^.ocpoKXrjs Qa/xvpa, 'Hpddoros
TerdpTip.
The allusion to hemp, probfits
the
ably to hempen garments,
cf.
Thracian atmosphere of the play
Hdt.
74
4.
avrrjs
OpriiKes
fiiv
Kal
ei'juara iroituvTat Toiai Xiveoiaiv ofioioraTa,
Hesych.
logie,
11
p.
p.
293.
406.
Bluemner, Techno-
0AMYPAI
i3
244
prjyuvq ^pvcroherov Kepas,
prjyvvs apfioviav -ôphoTovov \vpas
244
Plut. de (ohib. ira 5 p. 455 I)

xai xoXtpion ai <pi\ois rai
Ttr.rwi
yortvci xai Otoii
kcu
Sia
vr)
144
roi
th)f<iM gal i\f/i'xots OKfixaiv, in 6 Bdfivpii

,
Brunck was the first

signed the passage to Sophocles.
'(nrl ^'vi...\vpa1.
t(
a;
refer to the lyre.
3 Herwerilcn reads /jjr>it V see on

Hi lid. 491. 874, Phoen. ib},. But for
the anaphora with asyndeton II. <|UOtes
Xvpai xart-
Tv<p\6y koI
xpwro&trov means 'overlaid with

Ormted with gold,' as explained by
Tucker
|>
fj&ij
iat l<parr6u(voi'.
(in
37
Eur.
auro
/>artc Irra.
The
Bacchyl.
toprvut,
state-
1096 To$ov<r"EXXdruir dybpoit,

s
'ApT(fiii> Xoxor, fr.
Bnrrovx,
ptitdebat larva
tclpas.
/. /'.
toOoiV
Aesch. Theb. 43.

Cf. Tibull.
(<f Apollo)
arth opus rarae,
ttstudine et
36.
fr.
in fidibus
11
p. 158 equates fV>a with
ti)x, but this, if correct at all, cannot
mentions among statues

Mt Helicon Bdfivow pJf
30
in. 9.
on
Cicero also (*.</. 1.

ttstudine resonatur ant
eornu) speaks as if the sounding-board
itself were made of hom, unless (ornu
is to l>e taken to refer to the wb.\ti\.
6fr,ii''fu0a
rUm
3.
QvXa rt BifpQr,
ul* Upi (tovtHna
fiorawtf
15 fipiti
<fn\oi>iau dyiia.
(Sot'-ovai
I
the stringing of the lyre cf. DloChl

irioT ixiy ov >/rfiMr aiVAr, iriort
trt.fiaro driVrat, uoxtp oi \"pioo t pJ<poi
tA ftvpa rtlrovci, wpoeixovnt pi bayj}.
Hence ivrirowox lui. /. /'. 1129 etc.
The metre is logaocdic (aeolicl.
being a glyconic. and v. 2 an asclcpiad
trimeter
ancient authorities relating to

roctore of the lyre are very conhut anyone who will refer to the
Mins figured in (iuhl and Koner
at ]). :o: will Dot hesitate to understand
fpai as referring to the s*i)xt or arms of
which w<re fixed to the soundingted by the JVyA*.
L.
translate the In
king nipax -fiayd8ioy, a view
>n the authority of Pollux 4.
"I
'
See J. W. Whit, in
Schrocder, Soph. cant.
Q.
C.
p.
Ill
83.
245
fiovcrofiautl 8'
i"\"/iai 8'
e\dp,<f>0T)v
Ik t \vpa<;
8'
/c
&t>
tc
kcu to
ttotX
hupav,
vop.iov
ous Hafivpas
tripiaWa
248
fiovcroiroul.
1 .\ai,Hfjf cod.
Pal.,
AWry
tpxofMt
rcll.
24 S
Plot.
"/
"'/
Ipi.tiritm
oft
iOdX+ev
I'orv.n:
oi'
1095 |i, depure delight of
xai derpoXoyiai ai ap/tont^t,
\\U\i\.
rot/tAw /ôiorcu rd M\<ap,

MfVOI rii &;urr ittw dwotoovati', i\*oi-aat
ta$dwtp tiyii roil iiaypd+ifttHTir
wr 6
kck, drwtp ffiwtipoi 9, tA loô
ibww
tioiootiarti
WtpittOtP
MModag
'
acuttfr^
ttx***'
cat
'
"'
Pal. V*,
d\A ante I'orM.num
BM|t
si
'
H.,
txouxa
A"
"
r*^l
A/*
*y\
novoo*
'Apitfracxof ai \p\xnî\%
dr6
ai
optfiv
l.dl.
Brunrk, 4u.dp+ew M. Sdwi
dt . rtf
Af
#x**"'
codd.
p.
><at
/v
it
coni.
Brunck
wit
throat by a
by the lyre
mrWIy
am
and
awl
reading
aut
( X*tmi
comment*
< seised >

n
poc
the *train that Thamjrrat make*
With
Mjrpa*Mngly "-~^.
a
the
-nake ;
tn
muk
W ft mfy
IO<t>OKAEOYI
84
Thamyras but Eudoxus and Aristarchus

and Archimedes
who, as Plutarch goes
on to illustrate with well-known stories,

were themselves possessed with ecstasy
inspired by their discoveries in science
example
Archimedes, for
(1094 c),
:
ivvorjcras rrjv
rod cre<f>dvov
fierpijo-iv olov
2k
Karoxys V ewiirvoias eS-rfXaro fSowv

" tvpriKa," Kal tovto iroXXaKis (pdeyydfievos
tivos
The melodies
of Thamyras
upon the speaker such
as those of the musician Alexander had
dfidBifev.
have had an
effect
the Romans
he created such a
furore, says Athenaeus (183 e), oCrws
iiroirjo'e irdvras 'Pwfxaiovs fj-ovcrofiaveiv wj
robs iroXXovs Kal diro[x.vrnJ.di>eijet.u avrov ra.
Kpova-fiara.
Whatever the verb was,
xoti Seipdv is to be constructed with it,
"/was stricken at the throat" (the part
which is the instrument of singing), as
in Aesch. Etim. 595, where Orestes says
/ sleiu my mother S-Mpov\K$ x ec P L irpbs
upon
S2pi)v reixwv.
The
critics,
except Bernar-
dakis, who accepts etixo/J-ai and supplies

for it an inf. iXS.i' from his conjecture
in the previous line (see cr. n.), reading
have taken irorl Seipdv with it,

" and I come to the mountain-ridge " and
since 8eipdv in that sense has no authority,
Brunck (approved by Ellendt s.v. Seipds)
ZpXOfJ.a.1,
altered it to irorl Sei/jdSa i-pxofj-ai

Campbell too translates "and make my way to
the ridge" but doubts, conjecturing irorl
5' elpav Zpxofiou "and I go to the public
place."
^x.o|xai is used for KarexofJ-ai, as
:
PhiL 305.
x w appears for irpoae'x 03
usual phrases were ov yap ix Movcrwv,
d\X' K Kopvftdvrwi' tivwv Kartxecrde Dio
Chrys. I 682, Kardvxeros e/c Ni>fj.(p(bv
Pausan. 10. 12. ir, Karoxos eK Novcrwv
e.g.
The
Lucian
fiev
4%
11
tQ>v
aWrjs
5.
Cf.
ttoii)twv
Plat.
ii-
iîjprrjrai.
Jon 536 a Kal
MoiVt/s,
5'
dXXijs
dvop.dc~oft.ev
5e
Karix eTac
Ixerat
'
T0
SaKrvXiiov, rwv
av
T)pT7)fi4voi
irovr\rCiv,
Kal
eio~l
rwv
irpdrruv
d\\oi e dXXov
evdovcridfrovffiv,
Karlxovrai
Ofirjpov
0;
fxovrai. ^ v
irapairXi)ciov'
8e 4k Mouo'cuoi;
fxiv 4i~'Op<p4w~~-, 01
iroXXol
eari
$4
4k 84 roijrwv
ydp.
'
oi
oi
re
84
Kal
eh el Kal Karix il
is probably correct,
4 '0^xr|pov.
#x/"- a
and completes the restoration initiated by
Porson (on Med. 284) of the latter part
of the fragment.
But the first line is
desperately corrupt
and I cannot feel
satisfied that Brunck's 8aK4rw, though
cri ')
w'lwi',
'
diplomatically excellent, is suitable to the

present context. It has not been observed
and I inthat fiovcro/jLavei may be a verb
cline to this solution, with irorl Seipdv =
towards the throat, as in Aesch. Ag. 3 40
airoip.tl}C~ovo~i
ovk4t' f 4Xev94pou
S4prjs
(piXrdrwv fxopov.
The sense of the intervening words, which must then contain
the subject, might be given by reading
p.ovffo/j.ai'ei 8' dvacpffev (or possibly even
84 \a/j.<p64v) Xijfi' dveKas irorl Seipdv,
or
as the accent of cod. Pal. suggests, /noixrofiavei 8' Xa<ppi]v qfffi' dverov irorl Seipdv.
Herwerden conjectured in v. 1 f. irorl 5'
ovpavbv atpofiai (so also Wyttenbach) Ik
re Xvpas kt4.
Wyttenbach's view that
Kal r6 are simply the words of Plutarch
linking together two quotations deserves
passing mention.
Mekler conjectured
after daKe'rcp, irorl 5' Ipav epxop-ai Salr' 2k
Kre., i.e. to the banquet of the Muses.
The metre is of the Icnic (choriambic)
type, but for obvious reasons the analysis
is doubtful.
It should be added that H.
was led partly by metrical considerations
The anacloto his conjecture ex.op.ai.
menos -rreplaXXa [xovaoiroiei is a common
clausula in Ionics
see e.g. Aesch. Snppl.
;
1043.
avro
OHIEYI
Welcker (p. 402) holds that the solitary reference to this playThere is
error, and that the Phaedra was the play intended.
no reason why Sophocles should not have written a play entitled
is
an
Theseus, just as Euripides did, who dramatized the Cretan

adventure under that title.
The evidence in its favour is very
but we ought not to refuse
slender, and may be untrustworthy
to credit it without some stronger reason than Welcker is able to
adduce. The subject must in any case be uncertain Welcker
;
OAMYPAI OYEITHI
1X5
Gruppe that it comprised the death of

Theseus in Scyros (Plut Cim. 8 etc.). If the title is an error,
the most probable solution is to ascribe the quotation to the
records a baseless guess by
us
(p.
246
OfJLTTVLOV
246
34?, ir and Sui<l.

ti-iw (flwuo* Phot.) Kt'0o*
filya.
fTjuirof.
?.o<pok\T)i Ojj<r<.
Suid.
ai ofiTviot x*ipy V ""Xotvia, a gloss
les 6utviov *J<poi in
I'hot.
Phot.
U.x. p.
Cf.
Ux.
I'hot.
p.
335, y onirwiov
.
rôtt
206 SurrtLov
p.
Ill
vifovf
ToXXor,
yt^rinivov.
97 Sfirinot x fi P- V wXovaia.
k vi<po%, ft4)a. ro\i\ ifvîffUfof.
The title Demeter inrvia (schol. Nic.
m<7*X<"'>
6.
I,
shows the
V<f>OV<;
original force of the adjective (cf. alma
Certs); and there does MM -com to be
any close parallel to the Sophoclean
phrase, which was preserved as a curiosity
time when
the word had Income

opTnos X''p> a lavish hand.'
much marer to the original. 0|irnor
at a
ol>solcte.
is
tpyov
in Callim. fr. l8j is interpreted as

M.i\ R
not l>e that the
agrieulhtrt.
epithet was attached to r<<po<, because
the rain-cloud
fertili/.e>
the
p
:
earth?
OYEITHI EN IIKYQNI
the possible connexion of the title Thyestcs with the
have there pointed out that, while it is
91.
tble that Sophocltwo plays entitled Tkyisi
as the Atreus, all we can affirm with certainty is that two
of Sophocles dealt with the banquet story and the later
spectively, and that to the latter was
The chief authority now extant fbi
the lal
>ry of the two brothers is \\y^\n./ab. 88, which by
.1!
consent is admitted t<> have been derived from the play
The confused narrative of HygMIUS divides into
rice t<> the turning back of the Sun's
In the first pari
in horror at the impious banquet
untrv
lid to have fled to King Thesprotus, wl
r
We
Atreu
pia
lake Avernus, and theno

had been
on where his daughter

I
le
found
pollute the sanctity of the site by his

thena, an
hid himsell in the ncij^l b 11 ing grove
ft
tun's blood, and withined hei
the nver. Thye
ering Ins head, rushed
it
rid violated her.
PelopfS drew his sword
returning to the temple hid it beneath the
1
tatue of the goddess

I
the
km
mention here
>re
oi
him
tl
On
the next day
to Lydia, Ins native
.en to
Thy
land
There
that the
a
:
IO<t>OKAEOYI
86
son born to him by his daughter Pelopia was destined to be

This essential part of the
the avenger of his brother's crime.
legend appears, however, in the brief and mutilated chapter
which precedes {fab. 87), as well as in the imperfect account of
Apollodorus (epit. 2. 14). Cf. Lactant. on Stat. Theb. 1. 694 cum
responsum accepisset Thyestes aliter malorum remediinn inveniri
non posse, nisi cum Pelopea filia concubuisset, paruissctque responsis, etc.
The last quotation should not lead us to suppose
that in the original form of the story Thyestes recognized his
daughter, although the account of Hyginus is far from explicit
on this point. Anyhow, so far as Sophocles is concerned, it is
hardly necessary to appeal to the testimony of Aristotle (poet. 13.
:
order to refute such an inference being drawn
453 a 9 ri ),
concerning his version. The confusion in Hyginus between
Thesprotus and the king of Sicyon becomes still more puzzling
in consequence of a
in the second division of the chapter
drought at Mycenae, Atreus was ordered by the oracle to bring
back Thyestes.
He accordingly journeyed to the court of
Thesprotus, thinking that Thyestes was there, saw Pelopia,
whom he believed to be the daughter of Thesprotus, and asked for
her hand in marriage. Thesprotus, to avoid any suspicion,'
mysterious comment consented. But Pelopia was already pregnant by Thyestes, and exposed the child when born. The
shepherds, however, gave him to a she-goat to suckle (Aegisthus).
and Atreus had a search made for him, and brought him up as
his own son.
The concluding section in Hyginus is so closely
compressed that it may as well be given in his own words
interim Atreus mittit Agamemnonem et Menelaum filios ad
quaerendum Thyestem : qui Delphos petiernnt sciscitatum. cast*
compreThyestes eo venerat ad sortes tollendas de ultione fratris.
hensus ab eis ad Atrenm perdncitur. quern Atreus in custodian/
coniici iussit Aegisthumque vocat, existimans suutn filium esse, ct
mittit eum ad Thyestem interficieudum.
Thyestes cum vidissct
Aegisthum et gladium quern Aegisthus gerebat et cognovisset qucm
in compressione perdiderat, interrogat Aegisthum, nude ilium
haberet.
ille respondit matrem sibi Pelopiam dedissc : quam iubet
accersiri.
cui respondit se in compressione nocturua nescio cui
eduxisse et ex ea compressione Aegisthum concepisse.
tunc Pelopia
gladium arripuit simulans se agnoscerc (?) et in pectus sibi detrusit:
quern Aegisthus e pectore matris omentum tenens ad Atrenm
ille existimans Thyestem interfectum laetabatur : quern
attulit.
Aegisthus in littore sacrificantem occidit et cum patre Thyeste in
'
regnum avitum redit.

Brunck inferred that the material for two plays was to be
found in the chapter of Hyginus, and that the scene of the
0YEITHI
\%7
was to be placed at Sicyon, that of the later at Mycenae.

Curtailed and abbreviated as the text of Hyginus obviously is,
an scarcely fail to recognize the influence of a tragedian in
the concluding portion, more particularly in the avayvwptans and
the suicide of Pelopia. But the earlier events are inconclusive, and
not well suited, so far as we can judge, to dramatic representaAgreeing, therefore, with Brunck that Sophocles' play
kvo)vi was the ultimate source of Hyginus, I think
it
more likely that the earlier incidents, so far as they were
material to the issue, were made known to the spectators either
in the prologue or in the course of the action, and did not form
abject of a separate drama.
It can hardly be doubted that
\7 alludes to the oracle given to Thyestes, but the words
quite well have been spoken after its prediction had been
earlier
Rossbach
fulfilled.
;)
Abhandl, M. Hertz dargebrael/t,

Hygin. fab. 254 Pelopia Tl/yestts filia in
(Pkilol.
inferred from
(sc. piissima ///it) ut earn vindiearet that Pelopia knew of

trade and recognized her father, but nevertheless submitted
:^race in order to secure his revenge.
Welcker p. 369) takes
a different view, thinking that the subject of the second Tli
and of the I'elopidae of Accius is to he found in Hygin. fab. 86,
Thyestes I'elopis et Hippodamiae filii/s quod earn Aeropa A tret
At is At/e/
concubuit a frat re Atreo de regno est eieeti/s.
patron
<
filium riistltene/n, anew pro sua educaverat, ad Atrenm int<

endnm misit : quern At tens eredens tratris filinn/ esse itnpmdens
This is a pure gtieSS, prompted by the
filtnni sni/ni oeeidit.
itv of finding a plot for the second V'l/yestes, and it is
much more likely that Hygin 86 is based on the l'le/stl/e>,
Euripjdes
TGF p. $$6). Dindorf solves the problem by his
device of a second edition (see p. 4).
- alluded
to
It should be added that the it*
riedlaendcr
tragic subject by Plat. legg. 838 C.
See also
<
on Juv.
7.
92.
247
yap
tro<pb<;
0V0V19 tt\t)V
aXX* 15 0ov
av
Ti/uqi
Kav
oputvra,
$tos.
00075
^to
yij) ovScV <OV V(f>T)yOVITai. 0i
247
It f6 l
>
Ktla' 68onropii> \p<av'
xtXevj),
\f>'>r
<r*
<|u<>ted
<jtov.
MUM
in
tf&, sryffcrt
I
H
*fJ, an<l
nl
rinf
leinckrinlhi
"f
/or.
Jt
Nrack, while condemning Urn
ih.n
the
tin-
mm
Hat oaght
of lhc
(m^d
i" Ml
<
inclined
I04>0KAE0YI
88
no connexion with
F. W. Schmidt
to think that v. 4 had

Similarly
vv. 2, 3.
(Krit. Slttd. 1 254), who rewrites the

passage in order to avoid the supposed
incompatibility of SIktjs with aiaxP"
ovdti>.
But all the lines appear to be
part of an answer to an objection (of
Thyestes?) that, if the oracle pointed to
incest, its injunction must be disregarded:
The reply is that
such considerations cannot be allowed,
since human wisdom is of no avail unless
The attitude
it is blessed by heaven.
towards ffo<pla is similar to that of Eur.
passages
in the
Baeeh. 200 ff. and other
same play ; in Sophocles it does not
surprise us.
For
Beds
riixq.
cf.
Aesch
fr.
169.
2 ff. These lines have been cleared

up by Wecklein's proposal to insert <r'
and
treat iceXevr) as second pers. sing, of

the pass, subjunctive.
The same suggestion was made independently by Tucker
(C. R. xvii 190) and by Blaydes, who,
however, inclined to els Oebv er' bpdv re
Kri.
The insertion of <r' appears to have
been proposed first by Seyffert (Rh. Mus.

xv 615), but he wished to substitute Bebv
for deoOs, in order to provide KeXevrj with
It is natural to
compare the
passage with Euripides' famous line

el
292, 7)
(fr.
deol ri dpiocnv alcrxpbv, ovk elalv
and the contrast
deol,
is
and
two poets towards

Sophocles
ni< >ra!ity
serenely confident that no reconciliation of their

claims is necessary
if morality
to conflict with the will of the gods,
much the worse for it. But for Euripides.
if the gods seem to enjoin an immoral
action, they become untrue to their
nature and are no longer trustworthy.
See Nestle's article on Sophoklts mid
die Sophistik in Class. Philol. v
29 ft.
The present lines would accurately describe the position of Orestes in the
Electra, who has no hesitation in obeying
the command of Apollo, even though it
involves matricide: see v.
1424 tolp
/caXais, 'AiroXXwc el xaXiLs
ddfJLOMTi (lev
iOiairurev, and Jebb's Introd. p. xli.
oSoi-rropetv is used 10 times by Sophocles,
but not at all by Aeschylus or Euripides.
For '4%i>> bitcns cf. Eur. Andr. 786, Bacch.
10 10 ra 5' eô; vofiifia
8Uas ixfia.Xbi'Ta.
Tip.av deovs.
The context here limits SUt]
to the sphere of established or conventional morality.
The conception of fii<cij
as a human institution was as old as
Hesiod (Op. 279): cf. Plat. Prot. 32:1
The word is so applied in accordance with
its original meaning of custom or order,
for which see F. M. Cornford, From
Religion to Philosophy, p. 172 ff.
For
the ace. after u<pr)yel<rdat, involved in the
attracted >v (' where the gods take the
lead, prompt ') cf. Lys. 33. 3 e/cetros p,ev
oiV
v<pr}yri<ra.To,
such was the lead
given by Heracles.
religion.
is
Theb. 703, Eur. Her. 1338 Oeoi 5'

8rav Tifiuxriv ovdlv Set (piXuv.
F. W.
Schmidt adds Hes. Theog. 81, Theogn.
302,
a subject.
attitude of the
significant of the
raW
248
airoTrXrjKTa) iroSi
248
iroSL
Hesych.
p.avi<J}8ei.
p. 254
HocpoKXijs QvecrTri
dTrojrX-qKTip
2t-
For the word cf. Phil. 731 rl drj...

mwirq.s KdirbirXrjKTos w5' eêi ; Ant. 1189
Kairoir\ri<jaop.ai, i.e. 'I faint
21.
143
oi'x
oiirws
ei/x
away.'
&<ppwv
Dem.
ov8'
aTrbwXrjKTos eyw.
34. 16 ovrus ait6ir\r)KT0v
TravreXQs fiaivbiievov.
There is a
similar transference of the adjective in
O. T. 479 p-eXi^ iroU, ibid. 877 irodl
Xpyo-l/J-ip, Eur. Phoen.
834 rv<pX(p irooi,
Aesch. Eum. 545 dQey irodi, Tr. fr. adesp.
/ecu
227 Xaiddpyy nodi.
See also on
fr.
790.
249
a(JLOp(f)(L)TOV
249
Hesych.
p.
151 dubpipurov
d)j.dp4>toTOS,
a8ia.TvwwTov.
~o<poKX?js Ovearr) Tig ev
"ZikvGivi.
Cf. Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 94, 15
ap.6p<pu}Tos
dSibpduros, drrXaaros, dcrxv-
epithet of
fidncrTos.
It
"
treatise
iiXrj
formless, reappears
in the pseudo- Pythagorean
published
under the
Timaeus Locrus, 94 A
is
not
genuine
(vulg.
verbal,
name
of
a/iopfiov).
for
we
OYEITHI
leave out of account the scholiastic
but an amplified substitute for
as the tragedians were
p4>o% such
Similar instances are
ne to coin.
faro* 0. T. 885 beside &<popos, aripbeside drap/ify, XP vao '
r
P<Pjw,
\jitos
Kur. Photn.
189
KaWurvpywTot ftatih. 19 l>eside a\\iwpyoi, afiapTvprrrot Her. 290 l>esi<le

dpApripot,
arfivWvTot
l>eside
299
fr.
See the excellent

WiUunowitz oa Kur. //.r.
further oa fr. 101 4.
a0i'\\ot.
note
of
and
I.e.,
beside x/>r"ro*oXXot,
250
avrd/xoi/jos
250
J50
Hesyeh.
cod.)
avrdftotpos
~o<pOK\rj$
pLoydfxoipos.
iKvuviy |BiV<ttij oiKi-uvia cod.

MuMrttt).
The traditional interD, followed by Kiddell and Scott,
OTtj
r.
Casaubon
aMnoipos
327
p.
h sftiia/ d
nonsense.
ng the analogy of Sifwipot, we
include that pLo6fxoipot as applied
cod.
cu'>r6p.a.pot
to a person means 'having a single share.'

'Sharing alone' is an illogical but emphatic term to express M .le pOSS
(oxymoron)
cf. the use of fiofofup^t.
:
aiToa-d/xwi',
word is
Hesychian
that
if
of
source
the
trUXripw, would
l>e
really
the
avrowona
the nearest parallel.
251
avTo<PopTOL
251
ii'sych.
Ul'ToiidlCOHH.
KlplWI
|>.
329 avr6<poproi'
it
01
Z.O>f,0<\T)t
ffiKvwia
co<f.
if
roil
kU-iitTrj
:
is
:!ie
and
properly
strictly
who voyages
vai-K\iipoi
the other with the merchant who ventured

goods in another's bottom.
In
his
ll/U'W'tlfl
Muslim*).
S8 K.)
24K,
corr.
.artrot r> Xupwn (fr.

a oud ipopTifouJroil i<prj.
avToôpros
l&ioti
cargo on board In
touted on the one hand with
the seaman who carried for hire, and on
aii
ho.
(>-
(TTtixorro
5'
avroipopTov
on* 19 (rayy the speaker describes himself

as a travelling merchant, contrasted with
a carrier. Cratinus, however, s<
have used the word for those who cm
>u< h si least is
1. 11!. in
monies.
huh Kock adopts hut
the latter thinks that the word k<k*os>op:
roi/t
may have
fallen out before tyiy.
252
252
vch. 11 p. 132 ival*ov%' rdt

rdf oi'Ufloi'Mai *ai rat a,
LoôsXijt OiVurj
(dpx'<riai COd.).
II
ietit *oi
11
dX/ot
sal
rait
ircumjTa air
Sparta adhered
age: cf.
'Arpttiift,
(<>
0'
4*1
tin
>f
Hob.
3 rt
I'
ot>
the
n wt tfar'
dWoi
'A\aioi,
Kur. //<//</. Mm arpar6% i' iw^y

Dr. 901 4wtpp60rtCOP 4" of (Jr wt
l\\r
ol 6' ot'n iwt)*OI
..n< hid
\J*/0*,
>
Is
'decisiorui, re-
pport
n.n
to the
!)' may be taken

approval of an assembly
tnd
elected
Such
was
its
.foi-tfi
'i.
p.
100.
yap &t%
'it/ut-
this
respod
Alcaeu*
ii"
iliMil.t
doubt rightly
u*i by Maussac and
110
(fr.
Nauck wbstfcfl
You.
roil
for
rait
only seems
.McaeMvsed
by
Spartan
>
In
)>
officers:
the
ndbook 0/
nig words were
a<H
rai<ru> l C01
rs>air/nrt of a
10 that rait
k's altrrn.V
ifgOjtiom that Sophocles wi

dXd roil /oiWraiir or ton ârTaitfir alone are very unlikely.
'
IO<pOKAEOYI
190
253
a<f)a)<T lco /xeuat
253
Hesych.
338 d<po<riwnivai'
p.
tov baiov yeyevrjpiivai.

Cf. ibid, p. 341
Socpo/cXTjs QvioTji ft.
dirodev tov balov dtyupianive.
d((>ii}cri(i}/j.4ve
dirodev
avoffiai,
'
The important word
common
in the
more
d<poo~iovv,
middle, cannot be fully
The meaning attested by

Hesych. arises from the double sense of
dedication, seen in such words as devotits,
soar, dyos, which has been well compared
by Miss Harrison (Prolegomena, pp. 59,
108) with the condition of the savage
Thus &<f>oo- iovv, to separate from
tabu.
and
the offia, is to make an 0170s or tabu
treated here.
a 0op/xa/c6s would properly Ije described

as dtpwaiwuivos.
Cf. Hipponax fr.
ri
ws ol fiiv dyei Bovird\(f) KarripQvro.
In
this
sense d<poo~iovi> is equivalent to
ivaylfciv, and is contrasted with dcpayvteiv, to remove from the tabu or to disenchant, for which cf. Eur. Ale. 11 44.
and d<ptepovv, which has the same meaning
in Aesch.
Eum. 454 (of Orestes, as
d<payvi$eiv in Pausan. 2. 31. 8).
Hence
commonly =
Holden on
d<poffiov<rdai
(aversari)
4,
see
to
abominate
Plut. Suit. 22.
and Wyttenbach's list of examples

on mor. 63 B.
in
his n.
254
rjyojxrjv
254
Hesych.
interpretation
Xavov,
editors
was
irpiv
fj.01
The
traditionally-
rjyop.7]v 5' dvrjp
given to O. T. 77=;
txiyiaros twv ku,
iiriarr)
rry6/j.r)V
2oq>oa-\7?s BviaTri SevTeptp.
Sirjyov.
same
264
p.
11
aoTwv
TOidb'
T^XV
see the schol. iTpe<p6p.i)v, irvy-
and Suid.
s.v.
Modern
rjybixrjv.
prefer the rendering 'I was

considered ; but there is no gain to the
sense in its adoption, and, if the editors
all
'
Yet rjyofiijv,
does not deserve credit.
'I lived,' seems to be justified by the
corresponding use of the active in Dem. 9.
36 y\v ri. T6re...5 i\evdipav rjye ttjv' EXXd5a
Cf. El.
see also on Eur. Hclid. 788.
782, where Musgrave quoted Philostr.
:
vit.
Apoll.
apron
kt.
42 fj-cXiTTourais dir/yeTO Kai

Several other examples from
5.
Philostratus are quoted
by
W.
Schmid,
Atticismits, IV p. 346.
are right, the present gloss of Hesychius
255
ecTTL
Evfious alcr
255.
yap
tl<s
evakia
rfjhe /3a/cêt09 fiorpvs
L. Dindorf: evfioTjoaaa codd. plerique, EtifioiU aKTJ Meineke
Ei'/3ous ala
pdKxtos Blaydes
255
Schol. Eur. Phoen.
Si
k\tjs
iv
]Lvf3oitvo~Lv
Qvio~Tr)
6/xoiav
iaropet
dp.ire\ov
Uapvafftp, \iy10v oiirws
'
227
Kai
elvai
^,o<po-
7rap'
rijs
iv
e'o~Ti...iroTbv.
The
miraculous growth of the vine is

of the portents which attest the
piesence of Dionysus (Horn. //. 7. 35 ft.)
and this accounts for its appearance at
Delphi and at Nysa. For the facts cf.
one
schol.
Soph. Ant. 1133 v to

dXcos
iv
"Evfiola
to iv llapvaatp' iv dfupoTipots yap t67tois 17 d/x7reXos ij Kad' iKacrTrjv

(pricriv
i)p.ipav irepi
17
nev
ttjv
w ftdrpvas
<f>ipet, irepi
di ttjv
fieo-rjpLfipLcu'
ireiravdeiaa
irepi
5fi<paKas,
ttjv
irpvyaro Si
Steph.
iairipav.
Byz. p. 479 'Svo-ai... Senary iv Evpoia,

tvda 81a /u<ds rj/Aipas ttjv a/j.ire\6v tpaaiv
dvOeiv nai rov j36rpvv irenaiveaOai. Schol.
Townl. Horn. N 21 iv Aiyatt 7-77S Evfioias
Kara yap rds
irapdSoâ iroWa ytverai.
irijaiovs tov Aiovvaov reXerds 6pyiaovo~Q)v
tCov /j.vo~t18wv yvvaiK&v jiXaordvovoiv at
naXovnevai i(pTjp.epoi dpure\oi, a'iTives Zudtv
p.ev rds tGjv KapirQv t/c/JoXds iroiovvTai,
(It
av irdXiv jHoTpvas /SapirraTOKS, Kai
tovtovs irpb p.eo-ripL(3pias ireiraivovffi, irpbs
OYEITHI
tV
191
irpuiTa p.kv \afnrpas <d

^Kcjpbv oivdvdrjs heâs'
LT T]pa.p aV^L fJL(r<TOV Op.<f>CLKO<; TVTTOV,
Kal KkiveTai re KanonepKovTaL ySdr/au?*
eptret.
rjfiap
KK\r)fjidTa)Tau
\anwpat tun B, Xafipaaew A, Xa,9paj II, \afipa8tw MT, \uipdt fu M. Schmidt

olrdrOrjt Barne-: ti>drdr)% I, (i'wOijj B,
^\a>p6- Bergk
Xuipor AMI', X^^ * Ml
6 17^0^ ai"ii I'alnt. 343. fitiap &$ti TAB, qnapd$tt M ^ror
MT
*ai KXlrtral rt B ai xXiVfra/ yt vulgo
|
iawipatr SfxTofjuvai anparor \oprfdro rav XPu *apdiroi*.
}r
oaiîXr; ro
ath. //. p 882, 3.S Ai-ydt

ta X^yt, f>0a ftvVtvtrai to
duWXoif.
root
rat,
TV
hi
iwOtr
vewairovcrt
dxparo*
x("iy*-' ai
TfXoVflJrtjjr
Tl*"'
XPV
arA rat
ipaair,
at,
fitffrififipiap
iaripo.%
*t,
rdt **
1}
From >uch evidence
v t<.
T</>
it
has
Nvtt wa^
neighbourhood of
rred with reason that
immediate
town on
the
the west
ae was opposite to
met
coast
of
we learn that
Anthedon at a
Si rali. 405
of 20 stades across the Karipna,

similar vine on Ml PlIIMsstll is de1
29 olra 0\
or
&
tatia-
top woXvxapwor oirdrffat

1 see on tr. o=<y.
Our M
Puk\Co: >ee cr. n.
tinguishing lictween ftdux 10 *
M. Schmidt's
as i> shown by Ami 154.

219, 510, 704, in alt of which
cs they give form* of fiaKX'tot against
The only certain instance of
in
ipides
/'.
In
105.
rtain in //
Ji
fi"
ind S. for that meaning is oirirffrf

fin the trine itself.
There
se<|uently the less reason for following
J.,
who, taking oirdrffrji oV/Mxr as the vinestiK.k, treated gAwpo? as prolcptic
'the
stock of the vine has put forth green
I.,
lad
381.
rj(*op ffurw,
We
Good
fiicraov
is
t'-rm
c/
icXivrrcU
///(
i/nri/* frafif.
is
undoubtedly
Such eonjcctuics as wtwalrcrai T

(Nauck) and yXvualrrral ft (Mcincke)
arc (juite IktskIc the mark, as was recognitei by GoBtpef! anl mile|KMulcntly by
I Icadhun.
And, as it wane*, the cluster
nV|ht<
empurpled.'
For the use of rt ai in
place of 6rt of contempofancous events
is
iWoit
11
Ant, 11^4 (1186).
NawowtpKovrsvi expresses ih<- lin.d change
MI when the grape is ri|>e: sat n.
on Fur. I'hocH. ii'kj
a good
there
is
1364
(iior
'my
d.nly
3'
tî
/f
nafifayur
Kal
and
lm
'wealth omufHtr
hath unall part
(iopai
see
i$>'
in the
roitp' iifUpar
I<lt. 1.32 oi'

<ya w\<n<cu>i rov 4*' iuipqr
6\ftnartf>h ion, Fur. /'//
nuap fix**' ft*' ofa X* **
I
Kuehncr (ierth, g 516, H (11

II. on Aesch. Mf. 180.
The
231 1,
credit
of IunI .idwtcating the clam.
illustration in A. bill. Tat.
<fa gemmvd cup: {

liorpv*\ warrg wrptgptiUtuHH
6nfi >Ur
the
needs.
tro%
257,
dialogue also at .Int. 1223, 1236.

Bar.
only employs the form in lyrics.
In this
respect the looJam of Sophocles
known: see on fr. 794;, 4. 4p4MUCOt
day
429
-,
rcmler
a dis-
(a0' itiipar)
tW
should not
a0' ifUpar
ttara)
64
grows for a
C*.
tar
|>erfect is gnomic as in
Stop 56novt f\8w<rir aMit,
wXior.
See Glkkl
The
EL
(KTtrifirirTat
'
tvitov. Ih,
and Elmslcy on
held that Furipidcs avoided
fciot, except as the name of the god.
*e facts arc hardly sufficient to warrant
adoption <>f ,1a*xiot, although it may
For ih.- ucentuaright.
rather than (Mux* 101 KC
7 day
based on
1057
4V
is
.,
*<*
(cr. n.)
or<n~iii
ih.
Xippai
a(\as ( Tr. fr. MODa 232).

'
4 K<KXr)|iarwTai
the green vinedMMM puts forth its tendril.' The early
growth of the vine is described distrihutively in respect of each twig.
The
proper meaning of oirdrdij is given by
schol. Ar. .-/'. 588 as i) irpomj tK<pvou
TJ/t <TTa<pv\iji
so Hesych., Suid., schol.
Ar. Ann. 13:0.
It should be observed
that in OOM Of the passages quoted bv
Xifipbr
a\
'
Uatrot tear qr rt 6 tparfo' jar

hx*D* ob*, card puMpbr t fiirpvi
i'wow pdf* rat ai #rfi'\^ r^r
'"
M*o*a
void.
For
this
sense
of
I04>0KAE0YZ
192
oe nacra re^verai /^kaaTovfievrj
8et\]7
OTrcopa kol\co<; Kava.Kipva.Tai ttotov.

7 (iXaarovpAwq
<TTa<pv\r)
cf.
iir4vevo~as
kt.
A. P.
or
'
vix sanutn
303
5.
6p.<pa
ovk
77s
OTa<pv\r),
TrapeTre'p.\fu)
There does not seem to be any
reason for preferring KaiwrepKovrai, as

suggested by Nauck
in A. P. 11. 36
(quoted on Phoen. I.e.) the conditions are
different.
In Chaeremon fr. 12 iroWr\v
:
oirupav KvirpiSos tiaopdv irapriv
anpaiai
irepKCLôvoav oivdvdais xpovov {ytvvv conj.
kclKws dirdipa Barnes
KaKKipvarai
stands: neither Campbell's

attaining a perfect growth,'' nor I.
full growth'
lit. 'growing perfectly*
can be maintained.
Even if the form is
fi\a.<TTovp.4vr)
'
its
legitimate,
)9X.
dirwpa
= the
ripe
fruit
growing) is an odd phrase. The existence

of a transitive pXaorew is proved bj Aj>.
Rhod. 1. 1 131, and that of the
by Philo's fiios p\a<TT-qdels (1 667 M.)
but the present tense is in any case out
of place here.
Bergk's ep\a<rTrjp.(vrj
avoided this difficulty.
7'rae/i.
703
yXavKrjs 6 ir ib pas ware iriovos ttotov
Xvdtvros els yrjv BaKX'as <*"' dpire\ov
j
Kaibel) the text is corrupt, but the reference is clearly to early maturity.
7 f. p\ao-TOv|iVT] is generally considered to be corrupt, but no satisfactory
emendation has been proposed. Meineke's
Kkaarov x ept (' K\a(TTov/x^vT) would be
better' H. [cf. C. A',
243]: alternatives are t^x v V or P-ivei, the latter
suggested but not approved by Herwerden), which he subsequently gave up
dirupoKXdcrTr]
in favour of fiXaarov yovij
Kq.ro., is put out of court by the considera-
xvm
tion that an allusion to the vine-dresser's

art is irrelevant
not trimming the leaves
:
but gathering it
when ripe is the process to which a
reference is required.
Barnes's alteration
in the order of the words
/caXws ondipa
is probably right, and the error may be
due, as H. thought, to what he called
'simple order' (C. A. xvi 245).
On the
other hand R. Ellis conjectured dwwpiaios
for oirwpa Ka\ws.
But /caXws itself is not
satisfactory, at any rate so long as
to let the fruit
ripen,
shows that ttot6v is the juice of the grape,

and we should expect to find some
allusion not merely to the gathering of
the vintage, but to the pouring of the
fruit into the vat or its treading by the
The first requirement would

be satisfied by TpvywpMvrj, the second by
Tpairov/xiuri or TraTovp-evrj
or even by
vintagers.
word
which might possibly have given place to
fi\ao~TovpAvT), but like Tpa.irovp.tvri and
waTovpJvT) cannot be combined with
Tipverai.
Perhaps riftverai, fiaTovpevrjs
8irws OTrobpas KavaKtpvrjTai ttotov.
Observe
how easily 8-irws would have been lust,
which would lead to subsequent patching.
Herwerden proposed fidicxats for /caXws
on the strength of schol. Horn. N 21
quoted above.
fio.Tovp.ivq (cf. \rjvop&TT]s), the last a
256
T7]v
77y)c>s
256
Stob.
~o<f>OK\rjs
eel.
Qvio-Tji.
lemma
dvdyKTjv ovh'
5, p. 71, 20 W.
TTpbs...av6iaTaTai'
4.
K
omitted from the proper

place by codd. FP of Stobaeus, but given
alter the conclusion of the following
extract).
The line is also quoted but
with the corruption ovSels ov8' for 068'
"Apys, in a Pans MS. described by Wilh.
(the
Meyer
k. b.
Sits.
is
d. philol.-philos. hist. CI. d.
Akad. 1890
2, p. 370.
follows Simon, fr. 5, 16
deol p.dxovTai, O. C. 191
The sentiment
dvajKa.
5' oi'de
11
Kai
*Apr)<;
p.r)
XP e 'P
avdiaraTai.
TroXep.wp.ev,
Ant.
06 dvdyKy
ovxl 8vo-p.axyTeov see also on fr. 757, 3.

The theme is varied here by the introduction of Ares, the embodiment of physical
strength
Bacchyl. fr. 36 (20 J.) aKapirTos
5'
"Apijs,
Tr.
Homer's
fr.
adesp.
^x uv
ireXwpios,
129
Aesch.
woXipois
8'
Nauck
fr.
'
74,
A pews
probably justified in thinking that this passage

is alluded to in Plat. Symp. 196 c Kai
dvoptiav "Epwri ov8' "Aprjs
p.r)v
els ye
Kpelo-aov'
dvdio-TaTai.
8vvap.1v.
is
'
0YEITHI
I9S
257
ws vvv Tctô?
257.
s-ot>
Dindorf: us
SMA
rfcV
Si
/.
'
;,,.
(HI p. 6l6, 6
~<Xp0K\(0V1 Qi^ffTT).
'
'
<ln...TOTt.
seems to l>e necessary, wi

rdxt occurs frequently in Sophocles (cf.
Phil. o: 4 0. I. 945t "54* 0. C. 1398,
;S, 593), Imt could not l>e
by vvr. On the other hand, 6s
t>c a final conjunction, since rdxos
ng alone is not used adverbially
by Sophocles. The arguments for the
are similar to those which have
led to its adoption in El. 418, 0. C. 465,
and elsewhere.
or SiKcuas
3
W. Schmidt con-
itfialai
but,
Herw.,
KTt.
was
SiKcdvt,
who proposed Sixaiot or

subsequently inclined to
accept the text.

future
though
is
tycrai:
see cr. n.
The
more idiomatic than the present
after ovk (90' 6wus, unless
at first sight
really ol
c, this alteration
3 antral rort Valckenaer: arrtral
&*v roXXwr rbvij)*. fr. 138 oAk ten*

oant r)5tu)i fyrwv fkodp tOicXuar tlaitTrpar', dXXA XPV WWVi fr. 237 ovtols yap
wr po:0vk*ot ti'K\(i)t dri}p, dXX' ol wbroi
tLktoikh
tt\v
fi'6oiair,
fr.
474 t6vos
yap, cii \4yov9tr, (vxXtias wart/p,
Cf.
Theodect. fr. 1 1 ro\\4 8ti ftox^tf top
vopt' tit twaifof eMUflt'
paOvpia to
npbell,
OTTO)?
ecrd'
brings fame, or that idleness begets disgrace, may be seen in several fragments
of Euripides 1 fr. 134 t OicXtuw fKapw w)
wv, independently suggested
m%
yap
axj/eTal ttotc.
/xcj/xoc,
SMA
257
I
rw
wj
ov
crTLô)fXV'
tnrovorjs SiKcuae;
another nega-
tive qualifies the subordinate
the character of the allusion.

The proverb here paraphrased, that hard work
Kllcndt, s.v.
6wi,
p.
535
a.
258
eêi fiev aXyetV, oiSa-
ftiov
K TtOU TOlOVTUiV ^pTj TIV

258.
1 fxtn
3
taaif
ISB
Itali
d\-,tira
'
iure delet
M,
Bad ham
a\ytu>
108.
11
(IV p.
dv4ffrT).
'
963,
>
The
extract is omitted in
in the archetype of Stoliaei
older anthology from whic h
.1*
further
i^'inal text.
Meineke's
d\yt l*\ otto*
M+epow to 90*
wi pqara raraytala rod
v +ipti*.
The sentiment expressed by
I
be cured must
many form* see
'
in
and
ralicl wor<!
9*9 0a*
J' 6i*un
J 9*0*0*
p*\ti,
0tibp
ri
drd-yxat
ri
tii
exempli causa scripsi: to

XPV T *l' MA, Hi r*
lao~0ai 0{Kt*.
Hut the thought of the
that trouble must !*
present fragment
faced, and if possible a remedy discovered
'*.
is entirch
308
Xi'i; na\i*TA y' ri oia00tlpoiva m*
MB.
ottri) yap ^ 0*6%, XX' Sfttn /AVtpot.
The two passages arc not consccn'
were so placed by Gaisfbrd.
In Mriis\ t. \t they are separatol l>v a
,S. wlinh nmltl the
tabic interval.
has yp. wuquot.v
(Ar9*u to xri written over &n4top*> 94
ucntly thi
to* in
dental similarity of the oj>enin^
tempted someone to combine the two
fragments without regard to then
%
u>\. in order to c<"
90a* with the following line, he MiUtiiutcd
has been a conf
1.
a"
>
\af${lV.
5t( b. /for.
<o*X>;t
tome
lCL(rU>
o/xoj?
<f>tipeii>
ex Kuripidc ortum
ut
<
irzipaadat. 8'
TavayKoLa tov
pq.(TTa
[a*?
xh^ a
farrit
'
'
IO0OKAEOYI
194
XM
5e xP~h f r ^' fy""** or Si ffe or whatever the

original ending may have been (Blaydes
makes the same suggestion). I think it is
likely that xprf arose in this way in
than that Bad ham's 5tJ tip' should be
accepted in v. 3. F. W. Schmidt followed
Badham, and also without necessity gave
Hense thinks that
\k)v for in: tCjv.
v. 3 alone belongs to Sophocles, and that
He formerly conits context is lost.
more
v.
'
Tlv
jectured eVXwrt? xp-i\OTi)v for
ta<rit>, thinking that ttcXveiv was gloC|
by taatv. but see Eur. Or. 399 quoted
above. 2k\v<tii> was introduced in order to
provide a support for ix rGiv toiovtwv,
but the latter is perfectly good Greek for
'in such a case.
Cf. Track. 1109 rrjv
ye bpdaaaav rdSe x fl P *, <rop.ai kolk rCovSe,
'even as I am.' Ai. 537 rl brf^ av air
iic tQvS' av w<peXo7p.i ae;
259
eVeort
yap
\rj07)V
OTCLV TTOIQHTI TGJV OVTOiV KO.K01V.
T19 kolL \6yoicriv rjSovTJ,
259
was regarded
as a formal duty, and the

rules to be observed became a branch of
casuistry : see n. on Cleanth. fr. 93.
Stob. Jlor. 1x3. 12 (iv p. 1015,

'
eVeort
5 Hense) 2o0o/cXeous Qviarrj.
kolkwv.
. .
'
These
f.
lines refer to the consola-
^Sporots
dvdpbs
dis
Kdv
Xbyoi<nv (O. C. 116), a correction

anticipated by Wagner ; but the text may
well be right
cf. El. 369 ws rots XcVyots
tvtoTiv dp.(poiv Kepdos.
Xtjfrnv
cf. Eur.
Or. 213 u> iroTvia Xr/di) tQiv KaiiQiv, ws el
ao<p7).
ovtwv is equivalent to vapbvTwv
Track. 330 p.r]5e wpbs KaKois rots ovaiv
&XXt}v irpbs 7' ipiov \vir7]v Xd^rj, El. 1498
rd r' ovra Kai pLeXXovra IIeXoiradG>i> Kafcd,
O. T. 781 tt)v p.ev owav ripApav /xbXis
cf.
/cat
<piXov
yap
e<rd\ol
iffOXov
irapatveffis,
(papnaKov
aXX-g
/Ail/
fr.
<t>6/3ov
<pdpp.a.KOV
1065
/3porois,
Menand.
fr.
Kelrai vbacf)
p.08os evp.evr)s
317 Xbyip
\6yoi
cpiXiov,
962
&W
Tr.
eVeto-as <pappt.dK^ aoKpuirdr^,
/it'
559, III 170 K. Xvirr)s iarpbs

iffriv dvOpwirots Xbyos
ifsvxys yap ovros
fr.
'
p.bvos
Kariaxov, Oaripq
ktL
6e\KT-f)pi.a.
?x et
adesp.
tr.
eV
\virovp.î'(p
'
Nauck approves Naber's
ko.1 Xoyoio-iv.
Aesch. Prom. 394

opyijs vocrovays eiaiv larpol Xbyoi, Eur.
fr.
1079 ovk iari Xinrr/s dXXo <pdpp.aKov
of friends
tion
5'
iiiv
kt.
Consolation
260
Kaiuep yepoov cow
ctWrx t<o yrfpa
<f)tXel
â) vovs ofAapTeiv /cat to fiov\eveiv
260
1 1
Stob. Jlor. 115. 16 (ivp. 1023,
Hense)
"Lo<poKXiovs Qvicrrrj (the
name
omitted byS). /coin- e/>... Set.'

(fr. 57 K.) is said to have
attributed to Hesiod the line Ipya viwv,
of the play
is
'
Hyperides
/SouXal be
be yepbvrojv.
p.io'div, ei>xai
But
more
often action and counsel are opposed

as the respective provinces of young and
Faroe m. I 436 yeou p.h Zpya,
old
/3ouX&s 5e yepaiftpois, Pind. fr. 199 Zvda
:
yepbvrwv Kai vtwv dvSpwv

dpi<rT(voicnv alxfJ-ai, Eur. fr. 508 waXaibs
ipya pitv vewripwv, fiovXal 8'
alvos
fxovcrt. tG>v yepairtpwv updros.
Cf. Horn.
A 323. Generally, age has a riper intelligence and a wider experience
Diog.
L. 4. 50 (Bion) T77 p.kv dvbpeia viovs 6rras
j3onXat
p.ev
'
<p7]
XPV ff ^ al T V
Set.
Se (ppovqaei y-qpdcrKOVTas
Ant. 1353, infr. fr. 664, Antiph.

fr. 3 (TGF p. 793), Eur. fr. 619, Pkoen.
529 7]fiireipla ix el Tl Xiâc tQv viuu
<ro<j>d)repov (n.).
Hence the rebuke addressed to Creon
O. C. 930 ical <r' 6
vo
irXriOvwv xpb *
fipovd' bfiov ridrjai Kai
aKp-dfeiv,
tov vov Kevbv.

Contrast fr. 949. Wecklein conjectured Kacrriv ytpuiv nev, but for
the irap-lixv 1 * see Neil on Ar. Eq. 533,
'
Lobeck on Ai.
Ellendt rightly
384.
objected to the comma placed by Dindorf
after uv, as if the participle were structurally related to the following words rather
Hense
than to the preceding clause.
thinks that something like ovk drip.b$ e<rr'
dv-fjp
may have gone
before.
GYEITHZ
95
261
aKrjpvKTOv
261
Hesych.
iyvuxTTor.
XaxTor
Si
Gud.
yni.
&yvv<TToi>,
97 iKiipvKToo
Zo^wcXtt Qviary.
p.
dtpartt
p. 25, 51 Aktipvkto*,
Kal /jufya koI eitfidX-
&<(>wror,
dStdWaicror).
The gloss
'unknown' fits Kur. Helid. 89 oi> yip
ff>n'
aK-fipvKTof rdit.
In Track. 45
(I.
XpifOf yap oi'xl /3euor...d* tywrTot (U*i

the meaning is 'without having sent any
menage'
(d<n}uot, / p.i)vop.tvt
6xov w6r'
tan* schol.) and the neuter MCI

have been applied similarly to something
which had vanished from human ken.
;
262
a\oya
262 Hesyi h. p. t$o&\oya' ipprjra.
ZoQotXijt Qviar-r). Phot. ed. Keitz. p. 80,
3=Bekk.
anted, p. 385, 16 dXcry'a
1
ZoôxXip.
no other example of dX<ryot in
rue, In Plat '/'heart. 701 H, when
dppirra.
There
the
is
contrasted with ovWafiiu yrwordi r real

the translation imirthutate perhaps comes nearest
and throughout
that passage I'lato twktl d\oyot to serve
his purpose, hut without affording .1
parallel to Sophocles.
Cf. d*0-yrrot,
jtJirai,
as dXo-ya and dyruxTTa, are
ffT<xjr/'"a,
263
dXwTrds
263
Hesych.
136
p.
dAws-fe-
Whatever be the
right restoration of
nipt text of Mcsycluus, it seems
certain that in the Thytsltt a\vw6t sppeered as an adjective with the meaning
1
'If<XV
ot
a<payw
ydes) nard
ri)
(<x<p**tU
Tpixioîf
{wpiew+ty cod.).
dWr4
d &<pt\i)i
(1.
dôi-tjf)
waroi'pyoi.
ot
nara vpboo^w (-o
al
M.
awp6<ro\fit).
Od. p.
dâ*^
<>'
r)
There is hardly any reputable

authority for the word either as noun or
ive. Uit the accent is recorded l>v
Arcad. p. 67, 13. Cobol lA*. /. p, 170)
that i\utr6xpoi-i in Bckk. mtutd.
'crafty.'
d\u(iiii)i koI
'
-11
> faroptKif X{(p (Acl.
,48
Schw.
o ri^Xii,
dôrip
aXauarr&i.
dXawrot
showed
that
the
giots seetn>
have been wrongly brou;;
mistake
he form
p. 196M, 30.
I
finally
trim-
lie
cuiiniii.
6W#rf
<md>
'Irdxy: for
MM
.!.
*ce the li-t of COgnat

'
u ;!i !, ft
The corres|Knding fern
Hesych. a dXt*rd" A; dv.
I
appear
lbs
|>.
91.
was proverbial ever

uiv f*a<rroi
ice to
1o+o*\in
&\<fHTxpoii'
open to objection on philological
?.
to
I.
ind
for
The same
<?
*Tf\ relate to the lost
The
a\wvft t%p9t /w*<
'
I04>0KAE0YI
ig6
264
avocnjXevTov
264
Phot.
ed. Reitz. p.
144,
9
dvoff^Xevrov Soô/cXtJs QviaTrj.
Presumably the word means 'untended'
rather than 'not tainted with disease.'
'
But
for the fluctuating sense of voo-rj\(ia
see
Jebb on Phil. 39.
fr.
215.
For the verb
cf.
265
avraipovcriv
265
Hesych.
I
p. 209 avrepouaiv
dvraiSoôkXtJs Qviffr-g.
powtv was restored by I. Voss, and its
correctness is proved by the alphabetical
order in Hesychius. dvralpw, which H.
once proposed to read in Aesch. Ag. 543
(J. P. xx 299), does not occur in the
extant remains of tragedy and is severely
Still there is
limited in its Attic usage.
no reason to discredit the statement of
avriXtyovci.
Hesychius, although
I have been unable

any instance where dvTaipw is
used of verbal opposition.
But Suid. has
avraipui. hoTiK-Q <pi\oveiKU, and Plut. em-
to
find
'
ploys the word metaphorically with considerable freedom

Cat. ma. 3 ZicqiriWt
wpbs TT)v 4><x/3(ou
bvvafuv
dvraipovri,
:
Pyrrh.
15
rbXfiri
pw/^5
koX
rrjs
^VXHS
dvralpovra irpbs rrp> diropiav, aud. poet. 9

p. 28 D dvTa.ipuv TTji Tvxy.
266
aneipovas
266
Hesych.
I
p. 231 direipovas
2o(poK\i)$ Qv^ctttj.
dwetpdrovs.
'
direlpuv
Ellendt strangely remarks that Hesychius 'haud dubie dnepdvrovs intellexit,'
and
refers
to
fr.
526.
means
'inexperienced,' and
so used in O. T. 1088 ov rbv
"OXvfiirov direipuiv, w KiOaipibv, ovk
regularly
is
kt.
But dirtlpaTos
267
anouea
267
Hesych. I p. 246 dirbOea' ddta,

4ktos dewv.
So0o/cX^s QviffTT).
diroOca, godless deeds, was a synonym
for
fr.
Cf. aTrdvOpbjiros,= inhuman,

and Hesych. dirbdpit;' dvrjjlos.
See also on fr. 558.
ddea.
1020,
&dpi$-.
268
a.Te\r}
268
Hesych.
p. 312 dreXrj- dbdwava,

ovk e'x 0VTa TeXefffiara.
~o(pOKXr)s Qvearr].
Cf. Pausan.
II. p.
(fr.
881, 26
305 Schw.) ap. Eustath.
= Bekk.
dreXr} rd dbdirava,
iroXvddirava.
lis
anecd. p. 458, 26)

nai TroXvTeXij r&
Suid. s.v.
dTcXrfs thus becomes the equivalent of

by which a schol. on Phil. 842
wrongly interprets it. Cf. Amphis (fr. 29,
II
244 K.) bilirvov yap dreXes ov iroiei
evreXifis,
irapotvlav (Plut.
Alum.
15
bdwvov evreXis
should be added that eirreX-q

and dreXijs are sometimes confused (so
Reiske restored ei/reXiDs in Plut. mor.
irdvv).
It
f), and the earlier editors of Athenaeus

(421 a) gave evreXts in the text of Amphis
on inferior authority. Headlam (J. P.
xxxi 9) remarked that Horace was rendering are Xr/s in his i munis aram si
472
teligit
manns {Carm.
3. 23.
17).
OYEZTHI IBHPEZ INAXOZ
197
269
eVrc'XXco
569 Ant, nt. Bddc anted. p. 94, 8

\\w dVri rov iyriWofxai. So^wkXî
(
f/3-
he active only occurs elsewhere
in
7. 40 pAXor IrrtiXtr <f>v\d{a<r0ai

Sophocles also employs the rare
forms utix***' M- 1037) and
Pind. 01.
xpetot.
active
Anna*
(ibid.
11 19).
IBHPEI
This title is known from an inscription published by Kaibel in
mfgrm.
283 (from the papers of Ph. Bonnarot), which records
the performance at Rhodes in the third or fourth century B.C.
of four Sophoclean plays... ea ô<poK\ou< xal '08u<T<re<a *>ai
'I/Srjpa? teal aarvptKov Ti)\epov>.
The fact of the performance
at that place and time is an important record
see Introduction,
suggested by
The
legend
of
only
subject
Geryon
is
the
3.
the title /Serums, but seems more suitable to a satyr-play than

a tragedy.
For the Geryones of Nicomachus see TGF, p. 762.
in Iberia, where Heracles overcame Glaucus, the
Old Man of the Sea (schol. Ap. Rhod. 2. 767), is still less likely.
xxm
INAXOI
>ry of Io was contained in two epics attributed t<
Hesiod, the A^ptmus and /caraXoyoi, but the information relating to them is so scanty that it is impossible to reconstruct
The other literary evidence anterior to
ttther version in detail'.
Sophocles consists of the incidents recorded in the Suppliers and
schylus, to which there is now to be added the
dithyramb of Bacchylides (18). In Apollod 2. 5 ff. we find a
several respects iroin
>n of the story which
in
Thu
ivlus. and appears to be founded on Hesiod.
not of
that Hesiod made Io the daughter of Pcircn,
ius,
i>
many
mppl.
tragic writers had d
;rther,
rmed
30
Io
into
whereas
a
cow
in
to
r his
the pa
ding to Hesiod /
detected, himself effected the change, and Hera,
;us to watch over
having asked
cow as a present
it.
1<
accordingly tethered Io to an olive-tree in the a\ao0KAE0YI
98
In the Prometheus (707) I

accounts given of the death of Argus.
Aeschylus speaks vaguely of his sudden and unexpected end, and
in the Supplices (309) merely states that he was killed by Hermes.
According to Apollodorus (2. 7), who appears to be following
Hesiod (fr. 189 Rz.), Hermes was bidden by Zeus to steal the
cow, and, failing to elude Argus, killed him with a stone. But
Hermes disguised
Ovid's account {Met. 1 668 ff.) is different
himself as a shepherd, excited the curiosity of Argus by playing
on the pipe, and, when he had eventually succeeded in lulling
him to sleep, slew him with the aptrr). The antiquity of the
latter version is proved by Bacchylides (18. 29
36), who, in
refusing to pronounce definitely on the manner of Argus's death,
mentions, as an alternative, that he may have been lulled to rest
by the sweet melody of the Pierian sisters (see Jebb in loc).
The inference that the Inachus was a satyr-play was first
drawn by Hemsterhuis 1 and the general tone of the fragments
has convinced the majority of subsequent critics that he was
right, although Bergk 2 and Wilamowitz 3 were of a different
opinion.
The latter considered that the play was technically
a tragedy in spite of its jovial character, and compared it to
the Alcestis of Euripides.
I
doubt if the analogy will hold.
The comic element in the Alcestis is slight enough yet the
ancient critics thought it a-arvpiKwrepov, and the general opinion
is summarized by Demetr. de eloc. 169 rpaywBia Be yapna<i fjuev
7rapa\ap,/3avei ev 7roXAot<?, 6 Be <yeXey? eÔpo? rpaytpBias' ovBe yap
iTTivorjcreiev av T19 rpaycoBiav iraiôvaav, enrel adrvpov ypdyfret
dvrl rpaywBias.
So much was this the case that Rhinthon of
Tarentum, a specimen of whose art is perhaps preserved in the
Amphitryo of Plautus, was regarded as the inventor of a new
type of drama known as IXaporpaywBia. Wilamowitz has a formidable argument in the fact that twenty-six quotations from the
play have come down to us without any hint that it was satyric
and it is perhaps not an adequate answer to point out that the
same remark applies to the nine fragments belonging to the
'A^tXXeeo? epaa-rai But the more famous the play the less need
was there to cite it with a title distinctive of its character and
it is common ground that the InacJius was much more popular
than any of the plays of Sophocles which are definitely known
It should be added that the death of Argus is a
as satyric 4
:
'
'
On
Einleitung in
Ar. Pint. p. 248.
Griech. Literaiurgesch.
Ill p.
441.
Trag. p. 8853. Decharme {Rev. des Et. gr. XII 298),

arguing rightly that a chorus of satyrs was indispensable in a satyr-play, thinks that
the Inachus perhaps did not belong to this category.
4 I do not feel the force
are unsuitable to a
of the argument that frs. 270
1
Consider, on the other hand, the cumulative force of frs. 272. 277,
satyr-chorus.
d.
gr.
279, 284, 285, 288, 291, 295.
INAXOI
199
favourite subject in vase-paintings, and on one of these Hermes

roted as trying to kill Argus, who is asleep on the
ground, but as being held back by satyrs'.
Even if this does
not refer directly to the Inachus, it is sufficient to show that the

subject was suitable for satyric treatment.
mething may be gathered from the fragments themselves
Inachus. the river-god, was the
the scope of the play.
father of lo (frs. 270, 271, 284); but there is nothing to show
what part he took in the action. It may be assumed that the
scene of the play was the flowery vale of Argos, rich with
pasture, where lo ranged before her wanderings began
cf. EL 5
ii]s ol(TTporr\ijyo<; aXaos 'Ivriôy fcopijs.
Aesch. Su/>/>/. 538 avOo\i/xa)i>a ôvî\ov, evdev 'I to tcre.
This descrippm/tovi eVro7Trt?,
of the Argive plain (TroXvSiyJriov
see generally Frazer
///. in p. 96) might well excite surprise;
but Headlam has
ted out that it refers to the particular circumstances of the
legend, by quoting Severus in Walz, Rhet. Gr. I p. 537 rifiaxra
It
9 7') r *1 v T v Ato? ipcofiimjv avdos dinJKe rff ffot pe/xeadai.
is perhaps not altogether fanciful to connect the allusion of the
rician with the account given in the Inachus of the blessings
wed on the inhabitants of Argos when Zeus came to visit
To Inachus in particular, as the
10 (frs. 273, 275, 27J, 286).
nourishment for all the dwellers on his bank
S, Tucker on Aesch. Cho. 6), the increase of fertility brought
Hermes and Iris appeared as the agents of
enlarged honours.
and Hera (fr. 2~2). themselves too august personages for
The transformation of Io'took placeduring
representation.
OUrse of the action fr. 279), but whether as a direct result
of Hera's interference must he left doubtful. Wilamowitz argues
frs. 278, 284, and 286 that Hera effected a counter-stroke
:he land to poverty as a punishment f<>r the comby n
A
plicity of its inhabitants in the wrong done t<> her.
:
jxn. and this refeintroduced blowing the

/>and the allusion
taken in onjunction with A<
LCChylides to the fatal issue of his musical tastes, favours the
that his death was brought about somewli.it in the
The play probably dosed with the
mam,
ted by Ovid.
the play
Wilamou i1
rture of I<> on her wanderin
of the Archidamian war, presumably on the strength
-:
fi
<
:,
hoi. Ar.
Av. 1203.
scribed by
O. Jahn
not
in
Btrkktt
J. tit If.
show whether she
Gmtl*
4 ffZmM
VM completely
/ta/rfwt w&pStroi
196.
tnuufoinwd| but. if hc
(Kngclmann in Kotchcr
IO<t>OKAEOYI
200
270
"ivaê varop,
TTOU
TOV
Kpy)V(t)V
TraTpos 'flKeavov, fxeya Trpeafievoiv
Apyovs
1 varop Meineke: yewdrop A,
270
These
vdrop
adduced
are
lines
1.
25
by
580 on
avroi oi 'Apyeioi
2o0ok\t}s iv 'lvdxifi
<pt)<xl
leal T. UeXacryoh.'
1 f. "Iva\
for the course of the
v&Top: in
river Inachus see on fr. 271.
support of his correction Meineke (on
Caljimachus, p. 250) quotes Hesych. ill
p. 137 vairup piuv, iroXvppovs, and p. 141
.
t.âXovvro
5i
/cat
IIeXatr7oi
'
'
varrapiov iroXippovv (i.e. vdrwp' piuiv,

TroXOppovi).
Empedocles fr. 6 introduces
N?7<rm as the representative of Water in
his
of the
list
elements.
four
Cf.
vq.
tow Kprjvwv irarpos.

Cf. Horn. 4>
ii; ovirep wdvres irorap.ol
196 '(i/ceapoib,
fr. 5.
Kai
TrcLffo.
OdXaaaa
Kai Traaai Kprjvai...
Ar. Nub. 271. The rationalizing version is given by Apollod. 2. 1
vdoveiv.
'ilKeavov Kai T7)#i;os ylverai irais "Ivaxos,

d<f>'
ov
woTafibs iv "Apyei "lvaxos KaXei-
irptcrpevwv (At.
1389), followed by
Homeric (perhaps locative) dative (Monro,
rat.
G.% 145, 7)3 "Hpas t ird-yois
ff.
Tvpvrjvoiai schol.
Ap
with pride, as sprung from the

ancient stock of the Pelasgi.
Cp. Thuc.
4. 109, who traces a Pelasgic element in
the Athos peninsula, descended from t&v
Kai Aijfivdv wore Kai 'A^tjvos Tvpo-qvQv
olKijffdvTwv.
In the fifth century the view
prevailed that the Hvpo-rjvoi and Pela>gi
were identical. [In Hdt. 1. 57 tolul vvv
Zti HeXaayGiv tCjv viripTvpcrivuiv KpriarGiva
iroXtv olKebvToiv,
Kpbrwva,
i.e.
Cortona
with KpoTwvtrJTai for KpTjcrTwvtrJTai below

should perhaps be substituted
see
Stein.]
Hellanicus (fr. 1,
1
45)
says that the Pelasgi acquired the name
of Tvp<rwol after their arrival in Italy.
The Etruscans were believed to have come
originally from
Lydia (Hdt. 1. 94).
Herodotus (8. 73) regards the people of
Cynuria in the S. of Argolis as having
FHG
been originally Pelasgic. So the inhabitants of Achaia, he says, were originally

called Pelasgi, and acquired the name
of Ionians only after they left it.
In
Arcadia the first king was Pelasgus
(Pausan. 8. 1. 4).' The evidence which
connects the Pelasgian name with Argos
is particularly strong, and is difficult to
account for as due merely to a mistaken
interpretation of Homer's HeXaffyiKdv
"Apyos (B 681) see nn. on Eur. Hclid.
Aeschylus in the
316, Phoen. 107.
Danaides (fr. 46) traces the Pelasgians to
the neighbourhood of Mycenae, and in
the Supplices (257 ff.) Pelasgus is the king
of Argos after whom the inhabitants are
:
'alluding to the
Argive Heraeum, which stood on a rocky

eminence under Mt Euboea, one of the
heights which bound the Argive plain on
the E. (El. 8 n.) J.
But, as Hera was
the patron goddess of all Argos (Eur.
Hclid. 349, Phoen. 1365 etc.), it is
perhaps unnecessary so to restrict the
Poseidon sent a drought,
plural 7rd7otr.
being angry with Inachus, 5i6ti ti)v x^pav
'
"Upas i/xapTupT}o~ev elvai (Apollod. 2. 13).

See also Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 1829.
race,
2o</>oAr\et
5'
'Ii/dx<f> 5pd.fj.art. dvdiraiCTTov virb rod
Xopov Xeybixevov TreiroirjTai ude '"Ivaxe.lleXaayois' in support of the proposition
that the name of Tyrrhenia was in former
times distributed over different parts of
Greece. V. 4 is quoted by schol. Ap.
1
re Trayois
TvppTjvois codd. Dion. Hal.
Dionys. Hal. Ant. Rom.
Rhod.
"Hpas
Tvpcrrjvolcn, Ylekacryois.
/cat
2 70.
Rhod.
re yucu<?
Tvpo-T]voiori neXao-yois-
writes
'As we know from Dionysius, it is the

They would be
Chorus who speak.
Argives, and here speak of their own
named Pelasgi. See Ridgeway, Early

Age of Greece, pp. 90, 94. It is impossible
within the limits of a note to summarize
recent speculation concerning the Pelasgians and Tyrrhenians, and the relations
of both to the Etruscans.
Those who
identify Pelasgi and Tyrseni explain the
latter name as a descriptive
epithet
referring to the towers with which they
protected
their
settlements
(Murray,
Rise of Greek Epic, p. 41).
Ridgeway,
"
'
'
INAXOI
20
who accepts the view that the importance

of the Pelasgians has l>een much exag-
on the other hand, regards Tyrrhenian

ians as those Pelasgians who having
with the Tyrrhenians (Ktr;
had been more or less influenced by
c. p. 146).
Skutsch (in Paulya vi 730 AT. ) considers the identity
of the Tyrseni and Ktrusci to l>e established beyond dispute, and that the latter
reached Italy from the Kast by sea; but
denies that they have any connexion with the Pelasgians, holding that
they were a non-Greek seafaring folk,
cupicd settlements on the island-,
and the coasts of the mainland. See also
Grttk Hiitory, Eng. tr. 1 p. 60 f.,
gerated, and that their influence was

confined to Kpirus and Thcssaly. J. L.
IIS xxvn 115 traces the
lijra in
application of the name Pelasgian to
Peloponuesian Argos to a misinterpretation of the IlXaff7t*d'*Ap7ot of Homer.
Further, inasmuch as the names Pelasgian
and Tyrrhenian were recognized in the fifth
century as somehow or other connected
(Thuc. I.e.), the latter in close association with the former acquired a general
connotative sense of pre- Hellenic in the
lived
'.
'
Aegean.
271
pd yap an aKpas
Ilivhov Aa.Kp.ov T
15 \\ p<f>ik6ypv<i
271 Stnbo 171, after speaking of

the legend which identified the Syracosan
Arethusa with the AJpbeaa, continues;
ri yi TpottprtuJra adrrara Kal t$ rtpi rov
'IrrfYov nvdy rapaw\T)Oia
pti.. .UlvBov
AcUuot ..'Ax'XfA01
-(xor.\>/t
tyrw*
,
(tai
iroji&i
Mtw...AvpKtlov.'
ptXriw*
i), &$ iôi rb*
-alot (fr. 71, hilt',
4p rott \\fi<fn\6xoit'lfaxoy i* rov Adxftov
p4ovra, <( 06 Kal 6 Aflat ptl, frtpov thai
'
'
'
'
'The
N fabled
to
Ik:
it
by
identical with
mean)
a
I
nachus
rise*
the (northern) extremity of Pindus,

Mt /.;."/,
d of northern Greece,
nd tacmos."
-1
in
link
mountains on
Location,
ng akin lo
Uuif,
"a
\rfcot,
Tr.
,,.)
The Argivc Inachus rises in the

highlands between Argolis and Arcadia,
(2)
the
of
which was called ArtaaaUoo,

eion.
district
winch
flows through
It
bdoagbij
l>eing
the
to
named
fittingly
ICC of
in
note
town of
\rgos),
the text as
in Algotia
anaslrnphc
Rtflei
IIippoiB-v;- .irtitire
genitive after Ait/tmn 'and from
m th<- Perrluebi.' In prote the
dird
docs
not
would
Kuchner-Gcrth
which
is
'
traversed by the
r<
alleys
cleave the
A car nan ia on tin- W.

from Actofia on the K., and flows mto
1! tl><- >\V. extremity of Aiarnania,
[For Achelous. see on
near Oeniadae.
og connected
with
Inacb
river
of Argos, and then, near the NK. Iiorder

of Atarnania, it flows into the Achelous,
which, rising, like the
Inaclr
one part
and an
\pyo\tKOu.
rite*
airb Wtppaifiiov
Kal 'AKapvavas,
to
Uf ppaifKir
*ith
1
'ApîAtixovt.
Amphtlochoa, son
'
of
'"'
"'
Am|
brothei
rai
ion
>uth,
and
lion
its
roughly p.irallt-l with

gh the highland
tebi an I
of
nd
siiid
that
it
w.
of
tin*
W(

IO0OKAEOYI
;'
:'
202
/xicryet
8'
AêXwou
vhacriv rot?
evdev es "Apyos Sia KVjaa reficov

rjKei Srjfxov tov AvpKeiov.
271. 5
Hesych. in
o/flô" els (is) codd.

p.
(ia~Yi is intransitive, for it is
very
improbable that pods or the like occurred

Strabo
in the following verse, which
It is, then, another instance of
omits.
the tendency shown by Greek verbs
expressing motion to become intransitive
see n. on Eur. Hel. 1325 pLirrei 8' iv
irirpiva. /card, dpia
irivOei
Add
iroXwupia.
EL
(Eur.
435
i/j.f}dXXw,
etc.),
idirrw (Aesch. Suppl. 556); and for Latin

examples see Munro on Lucr. 3. 502.
Blomfield, reading koX <yr\v> inroads,
made the quotation from Soph, continuous,

but inroads clearly belongs to Strabo.
5 81a KV|Aa rt\uv for the tmesis see
:
on
et
Lynceus (Hesych. s.v. Avpiclov drjfiov).

There is another Lyrcus also connected
with Argos, and mentioned in Parthen. 1,
where he is called son of Phoroneus.
Pausanias
The
AvpiccCou.
hero's
the place
calls
I.e.
and says that
it
was deserted
Lyrceia,
as early as
the time of the Trojan expedition
hence
would prefer the adjective AvpKtiov

here. But the name AvpKtiov is supported
by Hesychius and Strabo (376), both of
whom state that the township and the
mountain were called by the same name.
No doubt AvpKtiov was strictly the name
of the mountain, and the site of the
village having no separate name was
known
fr. .799, 6.
Avpxiov codd.
J.
7rd\Xw
Avpneiov Tyrwhitt:
57
name was
Lyrcus, and he is described either as a

son of Abas (Pausan. 2. 25. 5), or of
as
AvpKeiov or
fr.
196
8r)p.os
J. quotes
evdiKibrcLTov
Aesch.
.
i)
Avptceia.
r)êis
8i)p.ov
YafiLovs.
272
yvvrj rts rjhe crvk'iqvas 'A/D/caoos kvptJ
272
VN)R,
o-vXrjvas (o-vXrjvds
272
Schol. Ar. Av. 1203

rbv iriraaov ws 6
wv irapk HocpoKKtZ ev
'Ivdxy irt ttjs "IptSos (so R as reported
by Rutherford, but other edd. attribute
ywT)...
the addition of iirl to Aldus)
kvvt) 8i otl
ireptKe<pa\aiav
#X
dyyeXos
'E/3/ix^s
(R
kvvt).'
is
is illegible
evident that this
to by Hesych. I
Ap/cadiKOs ttTXos.
is
p.
after 'ApKddos.)
It
the passage referred
282 'Apxds
kvvt)'
ti
8id(popov
Soping
irpbs
corrected
~Lo<PokXt)s
Hence
rd bfioetdr).
Hesych. 1
p.
270
dpaavv-q' irtieXos to 'Ap/cds kvvtj 7riXos.

It is to be feared that this cryptic
'
utterance cannot be restored in the

Brunck
present state of the evidence.
and Dindorf accept Toup's KVKXds' ApKddos
Kvvrjs,
Aid.,
alii alia
Toup
kvvtjs
(1) KVKXds may be substantival with the

there's a round
sense of brim (so Toup)
Arcadian hat.' (2) KVKXds may be an
adjective, = encompassed or ' covered.
Neither supposition is quite satisfactory.
Nauck prints yvvii tis i}8e yv/j.vds ; 'ApKddos
'
'
'
'
kvvt)
from
his
'
own
conjecture, which
do
but there is something

not understand
to be said for his remark that 'ApKddos
kvvt) ought rather to be ApKas i) kvvt).
;
'
'Ivdxy,
as
dpKaaKvvT)
Scaliger for
restored by
dpKadiKos irivbs from Eustath. //. p. 302,
27 iv rots Ilavo-aviov (fr. 72 Schwabe)
(piperai 8tl 'ApKas kvvt) eXiyerd tis rjroi
'ApKadiKos irtXos, 5id to eêu* ws etV6s
'
kv\t)vo.s
which may be taken
in
two ways
F.
oi'x
Schmidt proposed yvvrj rls i)b"

'EXXds; or ywr) tis rid' ovx 'EXXds;
\Y.
R.
against the evidence of the scholiast.
Ellis conjectured ywr) tis; r) KvXXtjvIs
'ApKddos kvvt); KvXXrjvis is an attractive
suggestion, but no reading will be satisfactory which does not put 'Ap/cds (or
'ApKaSos) in agreement with kvvt) (or
kwt)s).
That is demanded by the gloss
of Hesychius, and is an essential condition
of the problem.
'ApKddos kwjjs.
Blaydes conj. ffreyavos

it may be in-
Further,
ferred from Ar. Av. 1205
6vofj.a
di
<roi
ti
INAXOI
ten; r\oioy
Kivij;
j}
and from the
inter-
pretation of the scholiast that both in

vies and in Aristophanes Iris appeared on the stage in a broad -brim
nilar to that worn by Ismene in
0. C. 313 Kparl 9' riXioffrtpijt nvrij
wpdau-wa, Otcodkl* rv apx<\tt.
Such a
hc.id gear, a travelling hat for a journey,
w.iuld be appropriate to Iris in her
capacity of messenger, being a variety of
the *Vrcwot which was worn
see Guhl and Koner, p. 171.
If we
might assume that ywti was no part of
would be possible to
il
mo
u 'Apudiot nrfi ;
'lermes resented the appropriation
of his own emblem.
For the connexion
mes with Arcadia see Horn. h.
lead
Tit rj5( ffv\r/craad
:
M. Mayer in Roscher 11
etc.
346 thinks that the schol. was altogether
in referring to the viraaot, and
that a high-crowned hat with side-flaps
is meant (Hesych.'s wl\os is right).
But
203
he goes farther, and supposes that 'Iptiot

was an error for 'loft, and that Hermes
alluded to the horns growing fr<>m Io's
head so lie wnuld introduce <reXi>ij or
:
otXrfvit, but
biled to tit it to the \ei-<-.

Rutherford emended as follows >wj fit
f/Se; <
rt't I>
<rv; \r)vit 'Apai $
Kvrrj;
'who are you? An Arcadian
Bacchante or a sun hat?' He held that
yvrrj Tit f/St belonged to a separate line,
and that the note originally referral to
vv. 1 99- 103.
For XijWt he quotes
:
paxxv aptt rdr

3* \r)*al' pdicxai.
'ApKaStt.
Ktym. M. p. 564, 4 fcswft'
crjuaivft riff {JokxW'
He is thus able to
take 'Aprd with l>oth substantives. XtjWi
is certainly ingenious, but the supposed
lacuna and the explanatory addition of
the adjective are less satisfactory.
It
is also difficult to appreciate the resemblance supposed 10 exist l*.tween XiW
Suid.
Xrjyli, \ijyi8ot.
Hcs\ch.
Xijr6*.
and
i)
p.
Ill
nvyfj.
273
Y\\ovt(ouo<;
273
iji'
rjh*
273 &
I Ar. Pint. 727 top HXoiror

a ' Ixt vaifay f) 6ri xal HXoi/ruwa
roKopiffTucut iK&Xtffir (N'auck conj.
'
but the scholiastk
HWruwa, and
attache! to
i*d\t<jty
'
roi6t>b"
the
on
. .
.xdpt*
'
is
simply
the subject to
wi
speaker),
llXoJ/rwros b" iwtiffoios
'
'1*&XV
f)
*'
l.cHpo*\rjt
Kcd w&\ir
j-
(fr.
form see
pares
lloa*iow lloTiidt.
of wealth: cf. Sd
Zona,
*nimm,
and
Zrt>t
thus the giver

t Krifciot' *#
u>t
wKoirroti-
be regarded rather as
ndant minister of Zeus, than
a
Plui.
rify.
.11
is
t.j
to turn.
The
tult of i'lutUv
was particularly associated with

Demeter SI
wll, III
0'
codd.
mained Ar.
Ii. 4881
51 7 K. Kal nJjv rottty
IIXoitwi" >' Ov u.'yond\t to,
tlfitiTiifM\Ti<rr'
1
Whether
l\axc).
made
(cf.
flat.
Crai. 403 A
at, qui /)nts,
(00 earlier instance than Ant. 1 100 i

ami even when
i 11.
I'lat.
IIXot'Twr,
tt criuntiir
rd ii IlXoirruMtn, roero
1. 1.
>u iuaiy. 6n 4k rî

tard ttj
yf/t Kdrwdtydyurat 6 II Xoi>roi, 1wun>ondatiti.
I.ucian I mi. 21, where 'hit us is speaking:
nm dr<xrrAXt fit rap aorofa, arc
fiiy
w\ovToo6rif% nat n*ya\oiu>poi aJ ai* rbt *

brjKoi -foi>y rai r^! oriiwan I, or Îwiliri it
:m illy ISpUed to the g'l who, notinding the extent of hi*
Aid to
It .s a< \\\<*ru>y if
raVrwr aâpr^y 6*tw fiTfUy tlrat 6 m?
avroy KaraTdTTtTto ai ai'rov
KTT)na 7 r. rail, is only the loid ol unsub-
fX^
<
oiiiot Ik-
'letermined.
ml
+O0oi>n*r<H to orotxa [u. "A*>ji] \l\oirrwra

caXwvir aiTor), and comparatively late
was
in
Hades
cnrntic
ice
th<
view of the wealth stored beneath

the earth (Cic. .</ J. 66 ferrwM auttm
vis omnit atque initura />iti f\Uri dtdutUa
1/111,1
I'luton is here introduced simply as the

bestower of wealth (a by-form of IIXorot),
and the allusion is to the coming
cVctcroSos
Porson:
But'*
pr.
i>m
y,'
xi
'the place of iki

Hut I'lutu*
nnproliable.
irXsv-r un>,
i
became oomp
and the name I'luton as
the wealth-giver Esiied 10 urvive as an
utoii
tiatetl,
noon
20<t>0KAE0YI
204
independent personification. The earlier

freedom is illustrated by Aesch. Prom.
83' ot xP <} bpP vrov oUoOfftv dfi<pl vdua
X)
IlXovTuvoi irbpov.
It is in relation to the
gold-mines of Spain that Strabo 147 quotes
a remarkable passage of Posidonius
oti
wXovcrla fibvov dXXct /ecu vwbirXovros i)v,
tprjcriv, i] x^P a Ka-i wa P iKelvois tl)s dXrjO&s
rbv vvoxObviov rbrrov oi>x
"Ai8r)S dXX' 6
HXotiruv KaroiKil. And he goes on to say
:
'
that in the Attic mines men work so

zealously, tlis dv vpocrSoKuivTuv avrbv dvd-
etv rbv UXouruva to bring the

wealth-god himself to the surface.
H. quotes from the lines on the elpeanlivri
attributed to Homer (v. 3) aiiral ipaicXlvtaOt
Oupcu- irXovros yap ?<rei<rtv iroXXcij (Suid.
|
[Hdt.]
s.v. "Ofirjpos,
nit.
Blaydes would prefer
comparing
fr.
Horn. 33).
tar e'uroSos,
r)8'
275.
274
7ra^Sd/co9 ev6crTacri,s
274 Pollux 9. 50 fUp-q Si irbXeus Kal

wavSoKeiov Kal %evwv Kal ws iv 'Iv&xv *&o<po-
is
noteworthy.
8' i/j-rrbpovs
kXt)s, iravbbKos ev5crracns.
TravdbKois %ivuv,
These words are simply the tragic periphrasis for an inn, and the anachronism
vets
Cf. Aesch. Cho. 657 wpa

dyKvpav iv obuoiin
fieditpcu
ib.
evîvovs bb/xwv.
708 ay' avrbv els dvdpu>In O.C. 90 êvboraais
shelter.
275
\jov A109 eiaekOovTos Travra. /xecrra dyadoiv eyeVero.]
275
Ar. Pint. 807 aunsr) i)

ravra be irapd ra (wpbs Tcji [t6]V)
iv 'lv&xv 1iO<poK\iovs, ore (Sri V) rov Aids
Prom.
apTodrjKT)'
when two longer passages
elffeXdbvTos Travra fieara dyaOCiv iyivero.
X408
Ar.
Schol.
Pint.
ffiTnjrj
806 f. are as follows

'an XevKwv dX<pirwv,
:
ueirrri
i)
p.ev
8'
ol
comparing Horn.
I 212), as
are compared
Soph. El. 95, comparing Horn.

Here there is a comparison of
the whole description in the two plays
(cf. fr. 273)
but we need not infer that
Aristophanes was closely imitating or
parodying the language of Sophocles.
Blaydes conj. UXoOrov for Aibs referring
(schol.
ff.).
duipoprjs otvov uiXavos dvOoofilov.
The word irapd is used in scholia much

same way as a modern commentator
in the
would say 'compare (confer)." Thus it is

employed as well when it is desired to
1
illustrate
7,
a single phrase (schol. Aesch.
to fr. 273, but Pluton was introduced in

the course of the description of the wealth
which followed the coming of Zeus.
276
(TLpol KpiQoiV
lie
8.
45)
Schol.
<rtpo?s~\
Demosth.
p.
182, 17 (on
ra Kccrdyeia, Qejiro/xTros Kal
3Zo<t>OK\r)s iv 'Ivdx<f>
'
cripol KptOu/v.'
underground pits used for the

storage of grain and fodder (bpuyuara, iv
cripoi,
Karerldero ra cnripfiara Phot., Suid. ).

silo (through Lat. sirus)
and our ensilage. Bent, Cyclades, p. 454 f.
refers to the practice as still prevailing in
see also Sandys on

ap. Etym. M.
p. 714, 20 testifies that the t was short in
Attic
and his statement is confirmed by
Eur. fr. 827 Kal ur)v dvolai piv cripoi/s ovk
the island of Ceos
Dem.
I.e.
Ammonius
ols
t)Iov,
Hence Spanish
(II
and by Anaxandrides
152 K.) Kipxwv re xi'Tpais
ffLpbv SwSeKdirrjxvv,
rbuîjv.
/cat
fr.
|
40,
27
fioXfiibv re
irovXvTrbbuv
f/ca-
INAXOI
205
277
'
8'
tjavOr)
\dra$
A(f)pohicria
wacriv cVc/ctuttci hoi

)0/xoi5.
277.
rcuaiy ^s-ti/itt
codd.
Heath
cnrr.
(-ratrir)
Nauck',
et
Iwrowel
Meineke
277
Athen. 668 B rwr ipwpivur
i/Ufi-
ffyro, a<t>Uvrt% ix oitou toi'j XeyoAili'Oi't

Sid (cat ô^>o*\J}*
Kocadfiovi.
'Ivdxy
'Afpoiuruw tlprtfKt tt)v \draya.' l a*6ri...
The
chief
the
game
E 668 F,
schol.
authorities
cottabus are Athen. 665
for
Lcxiph. 3, schol. Ar. Par. 343

Su'das s.v . KOTTafUfftir), schol. Ar.
J41,
From these it appears
144.
that the members of the aipurtxrio* were
med to regard the game as a love(
and
that the successful player,

mccess was measured by the
of the sound proceediiu
ash of the falling wine itself, or
from the clatter of the vXatrriyt descending upon the head of the n&njt (fr
by the retention of all the wine in the
wXwTTtyt, or by the sinking of the largest
r
of 6<;1a<pa. was secure in the
affections of his ipwuiri).
Hence the
epithet \<Ppo$iaia.
Xdred; is obviously
used of the drops of wine thrown by the
as L. and S. appear to imply,
of the gam\thenaeus d
the same connexion Ear. fr. 631 wo\it Si
KOffffifiwr
dpaynoi Ki'*jnSot vpoaipSdf
'\ot if ihfLOKJiy, and Callim. fr. 101
oXXoi ted <t\io*Tti 'A6rior 1)k<l tpa{*
-ii 2uXdt in Kv\Uttf XaTo>af.
av$n. describes the red glow of the
wine, as it sparkles in the light.
Hut
el was no! thinking of red wine, as
oracle,
whether
his
>s
conrrulerl with white; still less could the

word signify a light-coloured (yellow)
wine, in comparison with a darker shade.
That 0*061 in certain respects answers to
our use of red may be deduced not only
from Antipater of Sidon'l ai>0&r iptt'-Otrai
(A. P. 13. 97) of a handsome boy, but
also from its application to horses, Item,
and oxen, and especially to fire (this is
the point of Pindar fr. 111 afrc rot x^wpat
\i t1avov (an6d Saxpua
$vfu&rt, and fr.
b
79 aitiofUira Si iat i-o $<w0aifft ntfnuffk
When Simonides applies it to honey
(fr.
47), he is thinking rather of the
brightness than of the actual colour of
the liquid.- Jwiktwu
sec cr. n.
II
points out that a similar error 9W Wt* W
for H Krvwy occurs in Aesch. Cko. 23.
Meineke inferred that the passage
formed part of a description of general
festivity, and of the joys consequent upm
His leading rmcrwrst
a state of peace.
was intended to balance (lpl6u in
\
which he
l>elieved to
He
context.
converse case
belong to the
well points out
the
the
that
abandonment
of
he-
on an outbreak of war is
described in a fragment of Hermippus
(fr. 47,
237 K.) $Mor t ty u rV norrasport
I
fimn*
if
fiarijt S'
roil
dxi'pOi<r
nvXinSofiir^P,
oMi* Xarayv* Uti
metre of the
first
ttri.
For
line see At. 399,
the
O.C
310.
278
vhaifioi'<;
dtfrdirov
278.
yirpat Bcrgk
278
i)o*>.
m'Xw*'] on rflia ra fUXif 2o+o

l/ow wtfxipyun Si rtrit tit ra if ry
War
'
l>y
<
9 Mow
del.
Her K id
rift hr >
1 Kperof {W - fft t\< - od<M>rr rd<rft o0>*t, ut typ*** IIWlt

rip
al 6
<'A\*n 'tvriSa wo1-**i
-
fiiof *al r$t ri-Sat-
ti-Satftorn.. 0*lov.'
looted
ycVfas
[0i'ot/]
7r*ot codd.
Kiovt
foxy wtpi rov &px*lou
ot Tore
Ac^dite?
1'hilodem.
The
d.
firM line
-.
yitrat
tiwJr.
n a
C.oWen
IO0OKAEOYI
206
Age, when mankind lived in a state of

primitive simplicity and happiness under
the rule of Cronos: see Plat, polit. 269 A,
Cratin. UXovroi fr. 165 (1. 64 K.) ols 5tj
8re rots
âo-iXevs Kpbvos rjv rb jraXaioi',
Aprois rio-rpaydXi'ôv are., whence Vergil's
The chief
redtunt Saturnia regna.
literary authority for the fable was lies.
122, from which it appears that
Op. in
o.4>0Ctou does not imply immortality, but
freedom from pain and decay ol p.ev iirl
Kpbvov T](ja.v,OT oiipavo) epfiaaLXevev ware
ing that an ithyphallic occurs after an

enhoplius, except at the conclusion of a
system, he was in error, as appears from
O.T. 196 f., where the scansion is: - -^
*~ !
'A|-'
vbo~<piv
$eol5' afaovd.Krjdta.Oufj.di' txovres,
&rep re irbvwv nal 6'ifuos' ov84 ri deiXbv
5edp.r)p4yr\pa s iirfji' ...Ovfjanov d' tlis virvw
j
voi (116), and after death they became

Salp.oues iffOXoi, guardians of mortal men
(122).
yivvas for the gen. after Xayxdvu

O.C. 450 dXX' oti ri p.7) Xdxwcrt rovbe
avfA.fx6.xov. Blaydes would read rvxbvres.
It is clear that something is wrong with
delov, not merely in respect of its gender,
but also because the metre unaccountably
Bergk read d<pdirov delas Xaxbvres
halts.
withdactylo-epitritic rhythm; but in denyIf.
cf.
in
Jahrb.
Philol.
f.
See Nauck
CV 803
ff.
The
rhythm of Track. 960 f. is similar, but

those lines form the close of a strophe.
Tucker (C.J?, xvm 245) suggested d<pOitov Xaxbvres alovs, taking -yî/va* as a
causal genitive with ev8a.lp.oves. This is
metrically unexceptionable, and is exactly
parallel to Track. 822 f., but it is somewhat
hazardous to introduce the unexampled
On the
alovs by way of conjecture.
whole, it seems safest simply to delete
Herwerden ; for, though it can

hardly have been a gloss, the word may
have been attached to the quotation accidentally.
It is perhaps worth mentioning
that the scholiast continues with Otaaai.
If Xoxoires is retained, Blaydes suggests
ataav for Belov.
The language resembles
Ar. Nub. 1028 evbalp.oves 5' fjaav &p' 01
delov with
Givres tot'
iiri
rQv itporipwv.
279
Kepyyos eâvtorarat.
Tp<xyy<$ yek(j)vt)<$
279
rpaxvs
<
codd.
279
corr.
Elmsley
XXXI
Erotian. gloss. Hippocr. p. 81, 16

trapd tois 'Attikocs Kepxvwdj] dyyeia Xeyerai ra rpaxeias dvoipiaXlas e'x 0VTa > &s Kal
same suggestion
IjoQokXtjs irepl rrjs diroravpovpevrjs
Kepxvos is any kind of hard excrescence

from a smooth surface. Phot. s.v.
explains rpaxv n ev tois evwriois ('qu.
p-eTw-rrots
H.).
See Hesych. II p. 470
s.w. KepxvCocraL and K^pxi'up.a: for do-iribwv
Kepxvwpaaiv in Eur. Phoen. 1386 see note
in loc.
So Kepxvurd (Hesych.) are cups
with embossed lips, cymbia...aspera signis
(Verg. Aen. 5. 267), inaequales berullo
pliialas (Juv. 5. 38).
Add Hesych. 11
p. 469 Kipxava rj Kepxdvea 6ffr4a, Kai pifai
oSbvrwv ('stumps'). The horns of Io are
always a prominent feature in the legend
Aesch. Prom. 613 rds ftovnepw irapOivov,
Prop. 1. 3. 20 ignolis coniibus Inachidos,
Ov. Met. 1. 652. R. Ellis (Hermath. IX
v V*>
which he
153) also defends x e
understands as a reference to the roughness
of the tortoise's corrugated and puckered
skin.
But the cow's hide would not have
been described as nipxvos, and x^"" 7 5
must have suggested the shell rather than
the skin of the tortoise cf. Ar. Vesp. 1292.
'lovs
Elmsley
(so
for
lx&us)
'
(prjaiv
rpaxvs...
eaei(TTaTai.'
For xXwvtjs M. Schmidt conjectured

and Wecklein xeXw^s and Herwerden recast the line as rpaxvs 8e tpuvTJs
Mekler understands
Kepxvos eâvlerai.
Kopwvr/s,
a harsh croaking resounds from the lyre.'

For this sense of K^pxvos cf. fr. 31 4, 128.
But the text aptly describes the growth
of the cow's horns on the maiden's
brow, and the suspicion directed against
1
XeXtifr/s
appears to be unwarranted.
Philostr. vit.
Apoll.
1.
rough
19.
The
Cf.
genitive
as a tortoise
cf.
irrdpvyi oreyavbs,
Xelirei 5^ to ws 'iv' 17
is
where
Cos x c ^" os
This explains the origin of
the MS reading : $ was actually ws, an
explanatory adscript, and ws is itself found
(Paris. 2177).
as a correction in cod.
For the confusion of <j3 and ws cf. e.g.
Pollux 2. 172. [Headlam, making the
is
descriptive
Ant.
14 XevKijs
the schol.
X'ôs
:
examples of
<bs
(J. P.
9),
quotes
from schol. Aesch. Eton.
159, Theb. 820.]

rising
'
'
NAXOI
207
280
ft ov
280
Antiatt, (Bekk. anted.) p. 84,

dfri rod poos. ~o<poK\T)t 'ly&x<?.
ib. in Theod. p. 137, 8 [= 134, 36
Hilgard] tupi$rj rov Pov* ii yei'irJj ov ft6for
(fobs, d\\a Kai rov pov xapa 2oô*Xet if
'lr&X<? kvU rapa r<ji Arx i'*V (fr. 4:11.
The same
extract occurs in
Herod ian
Bov is formed directly on the analogy

of fov, for /Sour and rovt (from root) were
pronounced with the same vowel sound
See Brug() in the fifth century.
inann, Gr. Gramm* p. 52 ; G. Meyer,
Gr. Gramm.* 311; Lobeck, Paraltp.
II
281
'.\py09 TravoirTTqs ahiov fiovKoXel ttjv
281
Schol. Ar. Bui. 80 roC to-jos-toi/]

roi' riijf "Iw 0i>XdrTorror oWneTat hi un
6*to% airrov (sc. rov Jiauiov) dWfio0r\a*oj'
&ra<ptfxi ii Toirro* irl rov wapd 1o<pon\(i
iw 'Irdxv'Apyor.
The lines of Aristophanes are : "V to* Aia rdf ourrip' 4xi~
r/j rov wavorrov itpffipar
rtfitibt y turfy
irrjuaiwox,
ttwtp T( dXXor, fiovKo\tiy t6
Oltuof (tt)i> î)fuu> coni. von Velsen). On
hoi. continues
SovKoXtif ii
wt ri)y 'Iuj 6' Apyot if 'Irdxv o0o*X/o/f.
I
we should
:his
in
Algus
infer that
kcu adofTa avTbr tiffdytf
riwuif Si avrof
590) irifuift r$ rporg' at'XoiVt
yap ixifttfoi roll Toifxfiott ol povtiXoi.
'fiouTar
'
(v.
Thus Argus chanted an ode
in Sopl
but in Ov. Met. 1. 676 ff. it was Hermes
who with his shepherd's pipe lulled Argus
to sleep.
dress of a herdsman
distinctive
thi-
Ioj.]
appeared to attend Io in the Iiuukus. In

Aesch. Prom. 596 Io fancies she still hears
the pipe <>f Argus
i/wo ii Ki)p6w\a<jros
orofifi 56ra dx^ror vxroivraf fiftof, and
the schol. remarks: oôXip i '\vd\y
282
1
in-flueo-
282
Stob. ft"
ladt.
'
KapTa
ck
Zo#oK\io*n
if
199, 6
iTJfftv...
13 liv
46
8\ wa-irep
|>.
'Idxv
5,
MA.
b)
The second
tpostol.
6.
H8<i
but
without the
ver the form

current, but
in
which
its
;a\a
The
wpdrru.
i.
wtuxov
&**
Mifw H
,*5
d6 x"P* w
iwi
''
''*
Kunri)i iwi (Hjpa
of such analogies Btaydes

(on 0. T. 454) proposed 0cuot/ in place of
on ihid. 750 suggPAtcrl
,1aiu>f.
Hut there can be
that patuf was ma.se.
from small
no doubt that it
I'hil. 710 risooipw* 4u>vlieginm
i
fUyai 4k mlfuf. - lo-#v b fol|i>wnl

pendent dnoM wiihout tfn.
ati *al
'it
6 r*
Oti
dwb
droTrou woal nard rip wapotftlcw
;ua WFjo^.rai Aû-i^rit
89 a\fiwt<j<f
ii ddo'wf pif
ripi
siinil.ir
Aitim
dX^tioi' ^m}.
ndfTot tcr*, wdaar

Collection of
rxunplr
by Jacobs,
\tktH.
d]
(suppliiii'
|Ho< ;
M-rp ^ wapoifiia
Ul.
T)f
ifuf
*p*lrrofa,
>lm
rotfowl 7*70*^.
On the strength
foil
applied to th>
94 dwd ppadvan\d>f AVwr
ixi t** dm\ ti'Tr\u>f fUf,
ytP0fi4fi*f intlfuf
ovcf
5.
dwjp.
are
Diogen.
rrapoi/ua,
Xanrpoii <k wtf^ruf ii wXovfflon, it rattifu>f ii voXXi^r X*^Pat Ka ' "6X*wr itavorait.
Dein. 18. 131 i\tvdtpo% 4k bui-\ov al
w\o6<ttoi 4k
Hi
general
such passages as
0'
261 dwo auiKpov
if doaf
-IV /( ovo*
3omo*>, or A
17
fiaiutv yvu>rb<; h.v yivoir
ytrjfiat
-i.T,.
diryina
276,
si ai ^hm^S
the oil;
*d^r' ifrlv, 4pym*8iptT<u, but
in the other e
-en by
ll
Yvrret: lr. 103.
I
,'
.
S04>0KAE0Yz
208
283
toiovS' ifAOV TVkovTwv
283
283
on
fr.
Schol. Ar. Plut.
"ji-j
dfjLefMpias
quoted
is
273.
In the absence of the context it does

not seem worth while to throw suspicion
on the text, although several scholars
have condemned Toi6f5' or ifidv or both.
Thus Hemsterhuis conjectured Toidvb'
and Bergk
ifiol, Fritzsche Toidvb' x w
Toiavb' ifiol UXotfrwe the last to the
But with such
detriment of the caesura.
an addition as yeywr' diratTeiv the trastand.
I have,
ditional words might
however, restored djiefupelas for dfiefi<pLas
which is a questionable form, dfieficpela
is required by the metre in Aesch. Theb.
893, and it is improbable that so rare
>
yapiv
dfjiix<f)eia<s
codd.
a word would (like d/iadia, tvTvxla, or

Trpofirjdia) follow the -0-stems.
That the
forms in -1a are due to Ionic influence
is an error
see Weir Smyth, Ionic Dialect,
:
45, 215.
d(i|x<f>ias
X*P IV ma >
'
Je
rendered provisionally as 'meed of praise,'

although it is equally possible that x<*P l "
The use of dfiefupuas,
is a preposition.
where a word of positive import might
have been expected, is characteristically
Greek. Thus Menelaus, transported with
joy at the recovery of Helen (Eur. Hel.
c3 (pi\T&TT]irp6(To\l/is, ovk ifiifi<p6r)v.
Other examples are quoted in the n. on
Eur. Phoen. 425.
636):
284
y
\va\o^
tov avTinXacTTOv vofxov X et KeKfxrjKOTCJV.
iraTrjp Se
284.
2 ^x L
vbfiov cod.: corr.
TTOTa/Moq
Porson, vofibv ?x ft Ellendt
284 Hesych. I p. 214 dvTiw\ao-Tov

TraT7]p...KfK(X7]K6TUl','
Zo0OkX?)s 'IvaXV
avri tov lebi\\a.<rTov, Sfioiov.
J. writes: '(1) Ellendt (s.v. Kafivw)
understands, similem inferis sedem (vofibv)
"Inachus has a province (or
habere.
realm) similar to that of the dead."
avTiirKauTov (r&v) KeKfirfKOTwv = tov tuiv
sequence of Hera's wrath (' Inachos selbst

ward fast zu einer trocknen Mumie') see
Introductory Note.
Tucker (C.A'. xvn
190) proposed to read Tbb' avTiTrXaarov
bvo/jL ?x et '**
nas tn s name (peculiarly)
with gen.). This might

passage of Inachus under the
earth from Acarnania to Argolis (fr. 271).
observed that Inachus was traditionally

connected with the proverbial 'Ivovs &xv>
a view which is favoured by some modern
authorities (Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 15471s).
Fick connected the word with the He>ychian gloss Ivdaai
/caraxât, and x fw
and others have thought that it contained
the root of aqua (cf. Achelous, Acheron)
kck/jl.
(like 8/xoios
refer to the
"Ina(2) With vbfiov we might explain

chus has a customary tribute like that
paid to the dead": cp. Aesch. Cho. 6
wXbKafiov 'Icdxv GpeirTrjpiov, [rbv bevrepov
:
be Tbvbe TrevOrfT^piov
where the same
comparison between the mourning lock
and the nurture lock is involved, as also
in //. ^ 141 f. ;] and for offerings of
hair to the dead, see on At. 11 73 ff.
Wilamowitz understands a reference to
the parched condition of Inachus in con-
'
'
constructed to signify weariness' as if the

name were derived from Ivts and dxos.
In reference to this conjecture it should be
'
so
Waser
in
>
Pauly-Wissowa vi 2791.
avTiirXao-ros resembles in
dvriypacpos,
ofioios
its
and
by the
dvTafioi(36s,
(explained as =
Ar. Thesi/t. 17).
formation
dvTlfUfios
schol.
on
INAXOI
209
285
vapas xyrpiuajv
285
k<xI rrao-x i/t/>i>
c od.
con L^hrs
'
'
Herodian irepl aw*. M& P- 35. 9

940 Lenta) ra yap tU pot diai'\\a$a,
rntvov t6 d, tffapdt, Xapdf l*9iv
$j)\vk6v Topd Z<xpOK\ti iv 'Iv&xV *a
Egenolff report
a<rxiTf>b>w) Xdpot 0rar' tfiri
Kvfia in pods iiruipjoca. Xdpot dffjp. tvdtv
'
rd oi)oVt pof, ' Xapoe TTVKoip.eOa Sdprof
jSopwo/ura it, ei ical dpatrtitd
vrdpxot rj tfj\ira, oro-TrWi* 6VX rd a,
'
(so
Xdpip 6p*i8i (cuxuif
be
puzzle i-. to extract from this the

phocles. Dindorf conjectured
and
this
Was a COITU]
was accepted by Lehrs,
d
i-t-
until
toaa form the

OtSfioo
clcs; and wcired iy
as vapdt Tt irarpot *i>/tdri iwippoat
approve Schneider'!
will
wapois
<lr
(Callim.
itrl
'Iw to
756)
('rwutxro.
pods
11
nvpuxoiv
are a long way

traditional text, hut the mtrodoci
of rapds (see on fr. 621) is an attra>
I. writes: 'The proposition
"porting is that xuktn
ipoi are accented oxytonc,
reas, when they are
res
usually sh
the
liomerk examples bear
tbil (Ml
the one case the complete line is
vyp*i****
is that
dtufxpvrj) \a.pdi> TtTVKoim6a. ibpwo*

whereas the complete line in the other
case is <m'>ar* Iwur' iwl KVfia Xdpy 6pn9i
;
c that the
\apoatvrn
-1
is
'1i'>'
*.'
i'WI'
\apo.
found
we have
i'ypvW'
here two
My
frag-
who,
nui Her,
Xopoi'f df r)(.,
nao**
i.e.
as
omutsfora-
dulti OJMOJ safer*,

,:
out th<- w.r"U tOrar' iwl ni'tia as
He exinterpolated boat H ><. a {I.
xif/x^w by reference t<> the under-
t.xttii!
Limit
rii
ground course of the lnach

d,
he
lOfMOtei
i>dxp
that iVar' .*
an interpolation deserves ace

and with it mi^bt go Xdpoi (before rV t
is
Xopot dri^p (after iwiiftoaa)
nothing to do
I'
assume that
i-apot
has
irtw 0^\^m6* and
ropdi for ! ##...,
which, however
yicUl* an appropriate sense.
text,
).
probably has
with SphHlcs.
(re
.tie
iai
he
XYTPYNCON,
which
li
10 l>c so,
with wapd I-
or
or x'
is. ical
twur' ill
by some reader
left
suggest,
r^v
are
as
adpx' vypaifun Xapor (4

just meets the case, gMflg
both the long a and the feminine, and
another one which does the same. Vapour
Whr'xpoAt iwwpuoca
ine litiUhus, or only one, and if so,
which, I shall not attempt to decide but
perhaps the first may have bca t!
will be olnenred
It
of a later hand.'
that this Mentation hud Ithat
ed the
vcning
'
on
if,
suggestion
IT!
easy
.-oii.-.KAICAPXYrPAINLU\.
altering Xapot after âpo!

held that Xapot was not in trod
nls Xdpot a"W',
Xapot &nr)%.
'
(xwuoaa, because
XYTPAINCON
that *ol oaaxvrpii'u:!'

<rarepi*<p,
we cannot read
*ai ads xiTpirwr

it does not illusleiodian's point. There was, howwell
as the adjective
word,
as
ever, this
xOrpuros, to account for a scribe writing
XvrpU/w by error ; and the error would
Hut
4k pods
<
'
applied sometimes
to pot-like cavities in which spring

or pot-like holes in rivers; see llesych.
s.vv. xyrpirot and Xt6W x<xt/, Antig. mirab.
\-<t, Arrian
p. 291 Mueller, which are
all quoted at full length in the Thesaurus.
p.
awiXVTpifov*
("apis) et Stadtmueller {xvrpbwir)
The term x VT (^WOi was
285
(M
eircofiocra.
e/c/ooas
iht
dotilrtful,
inpods (rw^lMB.
>
:'
IO0OKAEOYI
2IO
286
8'
TravTa
epWuiV apayvcLV
286
Suid. s.v. dpdxvt] (Bekk. anecd.

442, 5) .etprjrai de dpdxvrjs Kai lra P
"HcrUdip {Op. 777) ko1 irapd Ilivddpy (fr.
168) Kai napa KaXXLq. (II 694 K. KaXXiois
in Bekk. anecd.: 'debebat 7rapd &XXois'
p.
Nauck)...0?;Xi'KuJs
i
2o0okX 775 'IvdxV
8i
irdi'Ta...l3pLdei.'
When
the gear of war is covered with

cobwebs, it is a sign of profound peace
the earliest extant expression of this sentiment is in Bacchyl. fr. 3, 6 J. ev de ffidapodfrots w6pTra!;u> aiddv
dpaxvdv Icrrol
irtXovrai.
Cf. Eur. fr. 369 Keicrdw S6pv
iiXjov
diuptirXe'Keiv dpdxvacs.
Theocr.
fj.01
X4irra
16. 96 dpdxvta 5' els SttX' dpdxvai
\
5ta.<rrr)<Tcui>T0,
Smyth)
Nonn.
38.
ZiceiTO de rrjXbdi
dpaxvi6uaa
(quoted by
Ba*xtas
13
x&PPVS
Cf. Tibull.
r. 10. 50 occupat in tenebris militis arma
situs.
For English imitations see Smyth
eâirijpos
on Bacchyl.
Verse,
p.
substituted
I.e.,
fioel-q.
Headlam, Book of Greek

Meineke,
276.
WXra
accordingly,
for irdvra,
lowed by Nauck.
But
and
is
fol-
surely
hazardous ; for even granting that the
reference is to warlike instruments, irdvra
may have been explained by the preceding words.
And the presence of the
spiders' webs may equally well be a sign
of decay in general.
Cf. Horn, w 34
'OdvaffTjos 54 ttov evvr]
x^ Tel evevvaiwv
kcLk' dpdxvia Keirai xov<ra, imitated by
this
is
/3pida..
Prop. 3. 6. 33 pntris et in vacuo texetur

aranea lecto.
Indeed, if we connect the
line with frs. 273, 275, 276, the words
as describing the
entirely in point
are
emptiness of the storehouses, which the

sudden advent of Wealth will fill again
so Hes. Op. 475 ex d' dyyiuv iXdaeias
dpdxvia, Afran. 410 tamne arcula tua
plena est aranearuin, Plaut. Aid. 84 ita
inaniis sunt oppletae (sc. aedes) at,/ue
araneis, Catull. 13-7 tui Catulli plenus
saccnlus est aranearuin.
Cratinus makes
a ludicrous application of the idea: fr.
190 (n 71 K.) dpaxviw ne<rTT\v x e ! T V V
yaaripa. It appears again in an elaborate
description by Philostratus of a painting
of a spider's web {itnag. 2. 28. 1): oUias
:
'
fj.ev
ev
oi'K
irpaTrovo'rjs wpoirvXaia ravra,
avrr)v
<f>rjo~eis
fe'ov ev
ai &'
is
2p<-9oi
81
roiis
Blaydes
Ppidw is
calls attention
jectured
.dXX'
<piXel
yap to
And
in
the
an imitation of Sophocles
reivovaai
dative.
detriroruiv..
fj.6va.is'
diaicXtKeiv.
77<rux'a
same passage
( 3)
xVP evfiv
oUrjTOS dpdxvais
t-<TTiv
avrCov padifovai
Kexo.Xaap.evovs
twv
ixItuv.
to the fact
that
usually accompanied by the

But he should not have conppuet:
for
Homer's authority
(1
219, etc.) is sufficient justification,
apart from the analogy of the verbs with
similar meaning.
287
inLKpovpa xdovbs 'Apyeias
287
Hesych. 11 p. 158 eirltepovp.arj

emxdpay/xa. did rb irapojvo-
iirlirXr}yp.a
Zpyy'
T<fJ
1,o<poK\rjs 'Ivdxy.
p.dadai
'
iTriKpov/xa...'Apyeias.
means
new
formation from
of striking.
The words of S. mean therefore
the beating of Argive earth
or
possibly ' the solid ground that is struck.'
Cf. Aesch. Ag. 202 x^ ova ftdnTpois eiriKpoutravTas' Arpei5as. This is substantially
the same as Ellendt's view, who thinks
the reference is to striking with a stick
Tucker, who takes the
ot to dancing.
view that eiriKpovixa means reproach,
prefers r dpy$
i.e. "Apyos is supposed
to be derived from dpybs 'idle.'
Bergk
restored the text of Sophocles as eirlKpovp.'
"Apyov x0 v s Apyeias, understanding
iiriKpovfia as the impression of a coin.
'
'to
rbv <TKa(pLTT]v ris
rbv
olov
(is
<pr)V
iptaaovTa., Kai 'ApurToriX^s rbv avriTTjv
f<prj
ttjv oicd-
nbvov avrbv 6vra see also RutherAnnotation, p. 23973.

For the
dative cf. Plut. defort. Rom 5 p. 3 1 8 F rfj
rvxv ttjv dvdpeiav irapuv6/j.ao-ev, schol. Ar.
olov rbv
is
eiracpovu, intended to express the action

'
form a new
word from one already existing.' This
appears clearly from Dem. de eloc. 97
irapd rd iceineva irapovofxdôvra avrbv,
irapovo/xdêiv
that eiriKpov/xa
ford,
Plut. 590 6 de dveXevOepos KaKia trapuvb(muttou rrj dveXevdepibrTjTi. Hesych. asserts
'
INAX01
He accepted Toup's"Ap7<f> for tpy*, /.A. 1041 xpwtoaipicpoucu
6a\or tx*o$ iv 79 xpovovaai, and perhaps
of Her. 1304, it is open to doubt whether
the traditional explanation of Ar. Tkesni.
'
wW
110
21
Aorw
rt Kpovftard r" 'AtrtdSot roil

tOpvdita
<Ppfyiu*
Swttifiara
irapdpvffp.'
Xapirur
correct.
If KpoOnar* are the
of the foot in dancing, A<rid8ot
naturally mean the land of Asia ;
beats
is
'
would
and the interpretaiion of the scholia
might have been due to iciBapt* in the
response of the chorus, which however
the usual accompaniment of the
dancers.
Pollux
Cf.
7.
88.
288
KVafx6/3okoV hlKadTTfU
288
iiKurrljr
KvafiofiiXun
cod.:
Masons,
corr.
Kfapo/SoXor (pro
Kvap.ofJ6\or)
nick
288 II -vrh. it p, 544 Kvd/up warplip'

2o<>oX^f MtXt&yptf) (fr. 4O4), wt *al tQv
AitwKuiv rd dp\ds ci'o wfi'if rK. 5tfK\-f)poi'y
Si ai'rdt Kvi.fup oi 6 rb* (Srav cod.) XtVKbr
Xa^wr Adyxajei*. dra7i 3* roi'-s x/xifoft,
'
lift
Kttl
'Ird^V
</iv
'
Ki'a^*o/3iXwf
Nauck).
words is not
from doubt owing to the
meaning of the
entirely free
to time, and we know

or nothing about the system in vogue
during the middle of the fifth century;
thus the evidence of Ar. /'////. 177 as (0
balloting for a particular court only affects
the period subsequent to Kuclidcs.
changed from time

little
iSiKJO-rT)*
JtAaarj Schow, KvanofioXCj at
(cva/uV36X<f>
iiKaarrjv, conj.
to have l>een the case with the nXifpurral

dpxal (Gilbert, Stoatsalt. 1 I p. 142.).
In order to check the increasing evil of
bribery, the method of appointment was
less of our informal ion respecting

the method of appointing dicasts in the
fifth century.
It seems certain, however,
that xva/io^dXot cannot refer to the voting
of the dicasts, as there it nothing!
able statement in the
to indicate that they
ded their votes by using
beans; and the positive information
Ath. pol. 37. 4 seems to show that a

yearly ballot was held for admission t<> 'he
list of 6000. but by what method
those who succeeded were afterwards
subdivided Into separate panels cannot l*r
determined (Gilbert,
;
(Ar. Vesp. 333,

against
any such liyoo
th' -;-.
mil therefore assume that
MVOfiijioXoi is right an
to the
of dicasts by lot and that at
tome time or other beans were used for
ing
xo*pii>cu
iiti-ly
We
the necessary balloting, as
is
well
known
Thalhcim
$4 if.
p.
in
I.ipsius,
I'auly-W
KcoMorputt
V 567).
Ar. ho. 41
Sijfiot
alludes to the use of beans in elect
office, but its point is said to have
partly derived from the (act that the
chewed beans when silting in court in
order to ward <>lf sleep and keep their
\r. l.ys. 537, 6yo with the
For the anachronism see At.
scholia).
(lebb's nn.).
1
289
Xci/xojfi <tvv 7raXtftr*ctoj
289
rlarpoCTi
p.
.*,.
o.
raX/r<T*ior...
how
grapher* in
that s-dXir in
compo
drrl roO (<nptp<p. I'hol.
Suid. raXiftfuior.. *a< IoV>o*\>;t
PMiwri wa\ir<T*t*
)i\. wa\i*<T*l<p' <t*0Tnry.
iickk.
rot (Hcsiych.
flip'
aXietior' rd vwoetia-
iUfOf
The
ITT* dXXoi'.
<
by the
lexico-
tfrot*
s-dXir
gi-CKtoi,
111
;
CKortwbi, t*4*^f' **
h%a%oO iwlrmtw
n\oi).
>V
>
refers to raXi>ds*jXt ami *aXVsytT#e

as parallel but there the idea
t,
as also in *a\>M*m.~
Nabcr needlessly conjectured \*ytQn.
;
>
>
I04>0KAE0YI
212
290
290
<t>OK\ijs
tuv
Philodem. de piet. p. 23 Kal 2o'Ivd

XV T h v IV" V- < yri > pa
t<v
deCov
<f>7)
< <jlv >
iv TptirroXtfi

>
(fr.
<
fi7jT7]p
fityiffT-q
Orph. h.
26.
Cf.
Sai/xdvuv '0\vfj.irluv.
Tata ded, p-drep /xaicdpwv,
In spite of some
development of her cult at Athens, Ge
never became a divine personality so
distinct as to sway the hearts or imagisee Eitrem in
nations of the Greeks
Pauly-Wissowa vii 478. In Phil. 391
dpearipa 7ra/x/3uJTi Yd, /xdrep avroO At6s,
her identification with Rhea, who in Hes.
Thcog. 470 is her daughter, is implied.
The
Cf. Chrysipp. II 1084, 1085 Arn.
introduction into Greece of the Phrygian
dvriTwv t
dvOp&irojv.
cult of
assigned to the
469'PâJ'
fx.lv
fifth
century
Strabo
cf.
Kal avroi rifiCxri Kal 6pyidfov(Ti
In Eur.
fnjrepa KaXovvres
Hel. 1302 Demeter is called the mother
of the gods, and is clearly, as the sequel
shows, identified with Cybele. On the
other hand, Demeter has many affinities
with Ge: for the evidence see Gruppe,
Gr. Myth. p. 1166. It should be added
that, although the identification of the
dtCov.
TaijTTj,
615) eli<ai>.
According to the Hesiodic Theogony
(v. 45) Gaia and Uranus are the parents
of the gods, and this tradition is carried
on in Horn. h. 30. 17 x a 'P e Ge ^ v P-^VP,
&\ox Ovpavov dffTepotvros, Solon fr. 36. 2
Kal"E<rrlav
is
Mother of the Gods with Rhea-Cybele

extremely common, there is reason to
believe that there was also an indigenous
Greek cult, recognized in the title given
to the Metroon at Athens, of a goddess
is
known simply
as
p.ri T
VP Qe&v (Horn. h.
But there is nothing to connect her

Whether Sophocles
directly with Ge.
14).
here followed the Hesiodic tradition, or,

as in the Philoctttes, meant to describe
Rhea-Cybele, it is impossible to determine.
Rhea-Cybele, Mother of the Gods,
291
cu'cuSeta?
291 Hesych.
173 dvaideias tpdpos

iriwv 2o0okXt?s 'Ivdxv' âpa t6 (Horn.
B 262) x^ a ' ,,{i' t 7j8i x lT &va, Ta T ai'Sw
I
p.
'
dfX(piKaKinrTei.
may
<{>apos
signify
any covering, as in
Track. 916, where it is applied to bedwrappings. For the shortening of the a in
<f>dpo<$
Sophocles see on fr. 360. The mysterious

word iriwv has not been elucidated Junius
conj. x iT &v, Salmasius troidv (to be taken
with (pdpos), M. Schmidt iraifav or 7rap&
"lam.
One might suppose that the dvai:
Seia
which required a cloak was that of
the satyrs
360).
(cf. fr.
292
aeW60pi
292
Hesych.
p.
54 deWddpii-'
ttoiki-
Trvpeupovs Kal ffvi>ex& Hx ov<TCl

ZoôkXtjs
ras rplxas, irapa ttjv fieXXa)>.
X60pi|.
77
'IvdxvIt is not possible to believe that <xXX60pi meant ' with hair floating in the
wind,' as in O.C. 1261 K6p.ij Si arpas
aKTivHTTos gcrfferat.
I
should rather
suppose that it affords an instance of
comic hyperbole, in the sense of ' with disordered hair'; in that case we might correct
Hesych. toirapT)6povs (Palmerius and Toup)

Kal <oi)> trvvtxets, 'straggling and not
closely braided '
cf. Plut. qu. conv. 4. 2.
4 p. 666 a evrovov yiyove Kal ffvvex^
:
ai)T$ Kal TrvKvbv rb fipov. [I have since

found that this suggestion has been anticipated by Herwerden in Melanges Weil,
p. 182, who rightly prefers the form
irapewpovs.
Similarly R. Ellis, who proposed aVwexets.]
'
'
INAXOZ IHIQN
2*3
293
dXw7T05
293
See on fr. 363. As the

us stands, it would seem that
aXunrdt occurred both in the Thytstes and
in the Itiachus.
It is, however, not unlikely that the lemma a\auTi>s, which has
undoubtedly disappeared, was taken from

the fnack tu, and that t!
'\awr6t
Zo<poK\rjt have been omitted after Oi^ffrj.
See also on fr. 410.
294
avaiTa
294
II
xl.
ra
f.rj
avuvTa- iroHptpr),
~otpo-
fitfiptyuira.
di'lfixv Ta f-'1) xtKOfLfiiva \KtKv\vfiiva.

corr. Salmasius).
wapa to alum
-
d*ti* cod.),
riptv cod.).
ie
ion KaraKorrofra xrlaati*

I'hot. ed.
Reit/.
p.
16,
same gloss with the addition of
ami with (KKtKOfiuJra

The lemma of course reprimarily to lloin. ^ Il6, and
adds that Aristarchus read aVara
"Xtfl
>r
:.
ririt bi
(rri\d.
Kijt
~v
after i-f tjXcl,
KtKoti.fi.4wa.
ltd
there:
Eustath. //. p. 11 01. 45..

rare verb abetr a known principally as occurring in the proverb fxoXybr
aUtip, of an impowibflity. The reference
cf.
The
here is perhaps to grain which did not require winnowing cf. frs. 17
place of Salmasius's KtKoufUva Tucker
would prefer ionokvnniva, comparing
Hut the text is clearly right
:
cf.
Hesych.
p. 38l
p.
335
d<pf)a-
Uoâ,
It
fi*r tKO\l>at.
295
KTjfXOS
295
150 ki)u6i 6 irl

>v taiioKOf, tit bv rat 4/rj<po\t Kaditecw
kt biKaoTijpioit.
Kparirot Si ai/rbw i
'
K
<t\oun.*o* 1)9 no*
SfUHt
ofrot yap tylrrro ai rp> wapofioiot
'
lit
cal ~o<Pok
\>ji
to 'Ivdxy.
irely implies th.

he Ki)nbt as runnel-ahaped
3.
113 acaAor, <+> Ki)nb% irJKtiTO, Si
nMrro J) \l>f)<fnt. In the later day* of
and Atvpot auQoptvt. the
ig
part
was
called irl&yna St* opt-
ftiutwoy
(Arist.
Ath.
pel.
col.
36, 8).
the shape
to secure
secrecy, since in the fifth century the
voting may have l*cn open
see Stark ie
0K7, and on the other >u\c
/>.
some doubt whether

of the jju6* was intended
There
is
Suutsmlt.* 1 461.
But, apart
there weie obvious advantages
in the IkhiIc necked opening. The word
occurs in another sense in fr. 504.
The
allusion to the ballot-box n
in the neighbourhood of fr.
<;ilU-rt,
ban
this,
'
IEIQN
notation
only evidence of thceoftbfopiaj
>i<l from it i>> two icholiasti not ultimately m<i
:<
umier
As Aeschylus undoubt<
title, Welcket (p 402) suggest-, not unreasonably th.it the
nee to Sophocles maybe an error (.sec Introduction
is a favourite one;
tnd pi*y bei
tlUttrttUi
(xion were composed also by Muni
.:
thi-^
15).
ami
uiKMtheus (Suid.
I04>0KAE0YI
214
296
296
Schol. Apoll. Rhod. 4. J4 irapa

SliJ/iov <f>-q<rl rb
Schol. Horn. A 171 in
fieft\aiJ.nivov.
Cramer, anecd. Par. Ill p. 162, 25 r)
fi\a(3epbv dirb rod tipiov rj irapa rb t\j/ai.
1,o(poK\r}s iv 'ILovi (iv leplqyi cod. Par.)
Sl\piov Kara ir\eovao fibv rod 8 b~l\piov &rrjcn
rb
t\f/ai
'ZoôkXtjs iv 'J^lovi
PepoXrifjiivov.
Nauck
at
one time thought
that the last three words were a quotation

from some epic poet, but afterwards recognized that Papageorgius had rightly
proposed to substitute
for
them
8i\[/iov
rb /3e[3\a/xnivov, omitting the former

occurrence of 8i\f/iov.
Notwithstanding the absurdity of the
etymology, it is quite conceivable that
8'i.ypiov may have been so used that /3e(3\anp.ivov, i.e. 'checked,' appeared to
(pri<rl
be a suitable gloss
Cho. 184
I-1.01
for
it.
ofxn&ruv 8e
ii;
<rTayove$
atppaKTOi,
Thus
8l\j/ioi
in
Aesch.
iriirrovffi
whether
trans-
lated
'
scant' or
'
thirsty,'
the reference
to be to the tears which refuse

to flow in measure corresponding to the
inner emotion (see Verrall) ; and the schol.
has rrodeival fioi- irpt^-qv dpevaroi. Hesych. I p. 523 has Stxpaf fi\d\(/ai, which
seems
M. Schmidt supposes to be a fiction of

the Alexandrian poets, biipiov fiXdirriKov,
possibly with reference to the present
fragment, and b"i\j/iov "Apyos...rj virb Aioy
(ie($\aniJ.ivov
Cf.
l\f/ai yap to f}\dipai.
Etym. M. p. 279, 55 diij/a- irapa. rb tirrui
to f$\arrru>, fipa Kal Si\f/a, r) f$\dirTov<ra rb
ffu>/xa.
Etym. Cud.
p. 148,
:,-.
IOBATHI
story of Bellerophon appears first in Horn. Z
however, Iobates is not mentioned by name.
Welcker (pp. 416 418) identified the plot with part of the
narrative extracted from Asclepiades (FHG ill 303) by the
schol. on Horn. Z 155
$e TlpolTOS avroyeip p,ev ovk e/3ov\i]6r]
rov BeXXe pocpovrrjv cnroKTelvai, TrefiTret Be avrov et<? Av/ciav 7rpo?
rov rrevOepov To/3aT??i>, dBoK^rcos tcaO* eavrov KOfxlôvra ypd/xfiara.
b Be 7roA.\ot9 avrov eyyvp,vdaa<; adXois, eo? ovk eojpa (pOetpofievov,
vrrerorrrjae rrjv /car avrov crrparrfyrjOeio-av Beivr)v Karafiov\i]v
roaovrov yap Kaicwv 6")(\ov rrj Bvvd/xei Karr\yayvLo~aro. eBco/ce Be
avrw 7rpo? ydfiov rr)v IBiav Ovyarepa KaadvBpav Kal rfjS /3aai\eias
p.olpdv riva.
This is a plausible enough guess, but has no other
foundation than the presumption afforded by the title that the
action of the drama took place in Lycia.
When Welcker
proceeds to assume that the play opened with the return of
Bellerophon from the last of his trials, i.e. the Xo^;o9 of Z 189, he
is
on very insecure ground. Euripides wrote two plays on
the subject, the Stheneboea {TGF p. 567) and the Bellerophon
(ib. p. 443).
The scene of the former must have been Tiryns,
and in the latter the attempt to ascend to Olympus and the
subsequent misfortunes of the hero were described.
The
adventures in Lycia are related without any variation of
substance by Apollod. 2. 3033, Hygin. fab. 57, and several
The famous
155
202, where,
IEIQN IOBATHI
215
other authorities; but it is worthy of mention that Hyginufl

makes the betrothal of Bellerophon to the daughter of Iobates
quent to the fall from Pegasus.
are certainly not
compelled to assume that the treatment of Sophocles was so
distinct from that of Euripides as to ignore the vj3pi$ of
Bellerophon. which Pindar discreetly veiled in 01. 13. 91, but
condemned unhesitatingly in Isth. 7. 44 ff. to Be Trap Bttcar
yXvKV TTlKpOTUTa fll'l TeXfVTd.
We
297
Kal vu>v
297
sail.
ff^wtv..
281
f.
Kabe) lx ft T0
r.
1otpoK\fp
as deciphered
crrjpa
r.
Xapurpov cVSctât
fuiir (rvi
w* *1 T0
cod.,
'lofidr-g (far. <rrr\
by kabe.
tragedy by
Sophocles entitled foeasta is of course
ySt'ou
'*a<l>
ruir ..piov.'
the text is sound, and
the meaning is not clear.
Blaydes well
conjectures <rxvn* for ai)na
cf. Ant.
incredible).
Nauck doubts
if
'X<w'-
169 kcu f^ "rvparro* ffxw
298
yap ovhk yrjpas
tov *\ihav
298
e)
Ai.flor. 110. 6 (IV

2oo*X/oif loffdrov.
p.
hi extract ap|>ears
I
in
by
1076,
'.,
'rbr...
even
A only
SM.
thought that yip was due to an

to make an iambic line out of
an apparently unmctrical quotation: see
\<schylus, p. 111.
Hence he
Mggested rAr < J*> AtSar oirii yrjpai
ofoc^tX'tr. with glyennic rhythm (cf. J. \V.
II
111
193]
Uc that someyip
at after ro* 'Attar
VY.
yip
'Atiifp
Kur.
Schmidt defends his rdr

<p<\tl by quoting
oW 6 yr)p*il\
Sophoclci baa DO other
fi
le
of
'AM 171
in
iambics.
riir fiiw
Hence
yip iiirf
018c (pi\elv.
but the change is much too violent,

if it is ncccs-arv to alter the text at
all.
The thought
that the old cling to life
a commonplace:
i-%
sec fr. 66.
Eur. Ale. 669 pdnp ip' ol
y%pai yjAywrit
y4porr*% tCx " 1 9ainl,
ijr 8" fyyi'i f\9f)
*a fta*por xpo*r filov
QwQffKtw, to yij0dVaroi, oi'dtii 0oi>\trtu
pat 6' ovkIt' tar' ai'roir flapi:
rp4fr. , II 383 K. rim yip rVraror
more than
trie
young
x u'
'wiAw
ôi',
fable of the old

faggots it to the
90 Halm).
$t.\o{Wo^n \jiai.
;
man and the bundle of

same
effect
{Attop.fab.
Ariot. rhtt. 1. 13. i^Kiy
*ai
fidXicra
iwl
rt\<vraia
rjf
hf^P9-
299
atpvWtoTou rrcrpav
299
irpaw
ll-vch. 1 p. 341 iQi'Wvro*

iwofxm {&<popop Toup, iowopo*
d4>r&W, ofar XfhoTtrâr.
.
I'irg.
bar'
ition
may
out any *ign of vegebe either a sheer precipice or
a peak rising above the snow
.v//A8oa
oibppu*
Hrr. 790
w4rp*,-~ of the pfaM
For i+titovrvt see on fr
hjto*
lit'
Wata/'yAiiMp*V.
*p*nii
Vi4t wirpM.
<J
'**
I'amtMM.
Z04>0KAE0YI
216
innONOYI
Hipponous, King of Olenus in Achaia finding his daughter
Periboea to be with child, sent her across the straits to Oeneus at
Calydon in Aetolia, bearing a secret message that she is to
be made away with. Such was the account of Hesiod (fr. 97 Rz ),
who makes her ravisher Hippostratus son of Amarynceus. It
will be noticed that here Oeneus
apparently as dwelling in
a remote and uncivilized corner of Greece takes the place
assigned to Nauplius in the stories of Aerope and Auge.
According to others, Oeneus himself was the father of the child
to whom Periboea afterwards gave birth, and Hipponous was
aware of this when he sent his daughter to Calydon (Apollod.
1. 75).
The Thebais (fr. 6 K.) simply related that Oeneus sacked
Olenus and took away Periboea as his ykpas.
But in Diodorus
and her
(4. 35) Periboea alleges that she is with child by Ares
father sent her to Oeneus to be destroyed.
Oeneus, who had
recently lost his wife Althaea and his son Meleager, had not the
heart to kill Periboea, but married her and so became the father
of Tydeus.
Yet another variant is indicated by the proverb
Tv8ev<i i/c avcf)op/3iov (Plut. prov. I. 5 \_Paroem. I 322]), which is
explained by the story that Hipponous handed over his daughter
Periboea, together with her infant child Tydeus, to the custody of
swineherds.
It is hardly possible to pick out the version of
Sophocles from this medley
but Welcker was perhaps right
(p. 428) in conjecturing that Oeneus himself was the father
of the child, and that a recognition occurred in the course of
1
the play.
There
rpayiicov
is
8'
an important reference to the play

ovk eariv
(sc.
77
7rapd/3aat<>)
'
d\V
in
Pollux
4.
1 1
Ei5pt7r/S^? avro
ev fxev ye rfj Aavdy rov XP v

rds yvvaiKas inrep avrov ri irotrjaa^ irapdhetv, eic\ad6p.evo<; &)9
ical
dvSpas Xeyeiv eTroirjae rw a^fiaTL r/79 Xeêtw? rd<; yuval/ca<>.
ô(pOKXrj<i S' avro e'/c T/79 777309 eicelvov d/iiWr]*; ttolci airavidKL<i,
axnrep iv 'lirirovw.
Nauck and others have drawn from this
passage the inference that the chorus in the Hipponous consisted
of women, who in a particular passage spoke of themselves in
the masculine gender.
But an examination of the context makes
it clear that avro iroiel refers back to the opening of the section,
defining Trapdftacris as the occasion when the chorus expressed
the real opinions of the poet.
Pacuvius wrote a play entitled Periboea, but there is no
particular indication that he followed Sophocles.
ireTTOirjKev ev 7roAAot<? hpdfxaacv.
See
n.
on
fr.
300, from which
I infer
that
Calydon was the scene of the
play.
innoNOYi
217
300
c 'flXevov yfjs
300
vour of Achaea are much strongei

only did Hesiod <fr. 97 Rz.) mention HipEonous the father of l'eriboea as sending
er to Oeiieus from hi- home at Olcnus
Steph. \iyz. p. 707. 14 "OXevor

Axafaf *a< Ai'rwXt'at 0r;Xi'*wj X<7<>-
(itrr)
for
MeiU'MW
..SoôKXijt ^ 'lTT6f(^ (so
ko/luo/xcu.
<f>opfid&o<;
Irdry or {riVy or Ih-tuh of the codd.)
Achaea. but Di<xloru- 14. ja), who tells

the -tory in a form which may well have
been that of Sophocles, al-o implies that
in
have been the words

of iVriboea on her arrival at Calvdon
from her native (Menu-.
The Aetolian
Olcnus is mentioned by Homer (B 639)
l>ose these to
Olenus was in Achaea. It should be

added that the Achaean Olenus was also
the scene of an adventure of Heracles, in
which he avenged an insult offered to the
daughter of Dexamenus by the centaur
Eurytion (Pausan
ifc 1, Apollod. 7. 5. 5).
Bacchylides, hov
placed the incident in Klis (fr. 48 J.),
ROB which the existence of a third Menu- has ben inferred. yi\t dwpBa&os
is 'the land that nouri-hed me' like rj
re iioanovay X* ''
*' "HI TptQvOoy F.ur.
Hi lid. 826. In Phil. 700 >aiat <t>op,id6oi
1- rather 'the bounteous earth.'
together with other Aetolian town-.

It
Ml Aracynthus in the neigh1 of I'leuron, and was desi
by the Aeolian- I.strain) 451,460
cr hand Homer did not mention
'mean (Menus (Strabo 386). It
might be thought that Sophocles would

tic geography, and in
l>ais (fr. 6 Kinkel), where
<
<
riboca as a prize at the sack of

Olenus, the Aetolian town wa- probably
intended.
But the considerations in fa-
301
npbs ravra Kpvnre
Acai
301.
id.
I.
301
i,
ttolut
17,
o?
6 irdvff opuiv
di>aiTTv<r<T(.
n.
Alex,
strotn.
wptt
74
p.
(t
\ww6rov rp6t x/>^ro*

are also quoted by St- .l>. etl.
\\ .. wilh
with the lem
p. </., I VY..
in the margin op 1 M>
ICM in
mil v. of id
and
'
"
to
il
the next
achsmuih, no doubt
i.ma
bcMMJod
rightly,
t.
iln-
2 xpbmn
ravro u
COmbtOI
rrgul.-wly
ejebb
the impcraii*
on At
n. 6
\p6vo$.
StOM
1 6 wdr$' Clem., Stobaei F: ava0' Gclliu-.

mentis
O0o\ot'f ti i
lines
/xt^ScV,
olkoxkov ttolvt
/'.
ISI*
ipur Xl**"-
Xpbro%.
i xpt"
Tr.
fr.
*W "W
wdrtt' ipf.
Mho
brings
10.
it*\4yX**
.
adesp. 500 N
1.
11.
b profttert
p\Htatunt.
prudrntt
hiibtndos duebat: wpo%...xplot.
hiîli,
-"/>
fUtroi
/////
<*"'
WTime b
fi\4ru yip
adesp. 510
diuaturtr or retraUr
%p6*o%
&k*9'6t4p9'
4+*i>pi a'
** r *
*-
ipmv
wrfv**
the
(t
5J 6 r
dXt^nar ir^rvno*
1051 oi-M fkt)vrrtr
Xp6
Xffiiror
Mpmv
*a*" ifwr; fr. 44 1 Xf**"*

Wo. klcin would
wdrr' iXiftvur 4*\>i.
read wi drarrrfVtff.. which i ill
but hardly necessary. C(. El. 639.
bill)
IO<J>OKAEOYI
218
302
(TCJTrjpLas
/3\e\jjai
302
Orion flor.
'l7nr6'ou '2ook\ovs.
yap
io
wpopLTfdla
valour').
is not necessary) that the sentence is

incomplete, and that something like idpdos n^ytffrov followed the words quoted.
tion
is
('
discretion
'A
seems probable (though the assump-
There
is the better part of

saving remedy is not to be
had for the asking ' for the genitive of
description <ra>TT]pias <jxxp|iaKa cf. Eur.
/A/. 1055 cruTTjpias Si tout' <?x t ' v V"
&kos ; Phoen. 893 <pa.ppua.Kov cuTTjpias.
Cobet (V. L. p. 60), commenting on
<p\vapias cpdppaKov in Alciphron, remarks:
roO
firidelq..'
It
ou^t Travrayov
<r(drr)plas...Tri trpo-
4. 2, p. 46,
i
(fxxpjxaK
ndpecTTLV, Iv he ry TTpoyi-qOia...
moreover clearly some dislocation
the text of Orion, as Schneidewin

pointed out. For the profit to be earned
in
from foresight
is
often mentioned
fr.
950.
Eur. Andr. 690 ipol 5^ K^pdos ij irpopvr]dia, Sttppl. 510 koX tovt6 rot ravSpeiov, ij
3,
requires
583.
p\o|/ai, to catch
suspected by Blaydes, who
quam
sight of,
is
quo quid
dicitur id
'usitatius cpa.pp.aKov
efficitur
ei/pelv
contra.'
or bpav.
See also on
fr.
a.
303
dnaXeâcrdaL
303
Hesych.
diro<pv\di;ao~dai.
same form occurs

cdivopev irpbs
Xwpts, Aval;.
p.
225 diraXâadar
Xo<poK\TJs'lTnr6vif}.
in
The
Ai. 165 xpfis ov5iv
dira\ao~0ai aov
Similar forms, requiring a
tciOt'
present dX^xw rather than dXô>, appear

in Horn. Hdt. Hippocr. Xen., as well as
in Aesch. Suppl. 1063 6 pJyas Zev? d7ra\iâi kt.
See also Jebb on 0. T. 539.
304
ajrapdevevTos
304
Hesych. I p. 227 dirapdivevrosKadapd. ô<poK\rjs'linrbvip. Cf.

Bekk. anecd. p. 418,
dirapffivevTos'
aKepaios, KaOapbs (Kadapd conj. Blaydes).
dirap6vvros in Eur. /. A. 993, Phoen.
1739, means unmaidenly, but in carm.
pop. 8 (PLG III 657) <roL, Bd*xe, rdvde
d.K4paios,
p.ovo'av dyXatfopLcv
oiiri rats wdpos

Kexp^P-lvav cpdairriv,
Kardpxop-ev tov i'p.vov
d\\' aK-fiparov
Smyth is undoubtedly right in rendering
virgin.'
Wecklein refers to the use of
tov,
'
KOpeOeiv
(usually
diaKopeveiv)
gmart, but nothing similar
for
is
devir-
recorded
of irapdevevu.
...Kaivdv, dirap8iv<iv-
I4HTENEIA
The character of the plot is indicated by two of the fragments.
The authorities who quote fr. 305 refer to the betrothal of
Iphigenia to Achilles, making it plain that the progress of the
action was similar to that of the Iphigenia at Aulis of Euripides.
It is also known that Clytaemnestra accompanied her daughter
to Aulis, and that Odysseus was one of those who were privy to
innONOYI I0ITENEIA
219
The latter circumstance probably shows, as we shall

Sophocles followed the version of the Cypria more
closely than Euripides.
Welcker (p. 107 ff.) suggests that the
relations between Odysseus and Achilles were of the same kind
as the dealings of the former with Neoptolemus in the Pliiloctctis.
This evidence is confirmed by fr. 308, which may reasonably be
rred to the delay of the expedition at Aulis.
The version of the Cypria, according to the epitome of
the plot.
see, that
Proclus (EGFp. 19), was as follows /eat to Bevrepov -qOpoiapevov

rov (tto\ov ev \v\181 \\yapepvcov ctti drjpas (SaXoav e\a<f>ov
pi)viaacra Be rj deo? erreaêv
inrepfidWeiv etfrijae Ka\ ti)v" \prep.iv
ovtovs rov ttXov %ifM<ova<; errnrepTrova-a
Kd\-vavro<; Be elirovro'i
deov prjpiu Kal 'lcpiyeveiav KeXevo-amos aveiv rfj 'ApreptBi,
ft>9 eirl ydpov aim)v 'A^tWet peTcnrep-tydpevoi Bveiv eiriêipovaiv
"ApTe/xt? Be avrrjv eâpirdaaaa eifTavpovs peraicopL&i Kal dddvarov
irotet, e\a<pov 6*t dim t>)? fcoprj*; irapio~TT)0~i toj (StoprZ.
Apollod.
epit. 3. 21, 22 reproduces this with hardly any addition, except
the statement that Odysseus and Talthybius were sent to
Iphigenia
te with Clytaemnestra, with the plea that
should be given in marriage to Achilles as the price for obtaining
his participation in the war.
Hygin. fab. 98, which Xauck and
tly
suggest to have been derived from Soph
ept that Diomedes takes the place of Talthybius.
shall hardly go wrong in inferring that these extracts give us
:
We
ugh outline oi the Sophoclean play.

the Iphigenia of Aeschylus
TGF p. 31 hardly anything is

Knnius, in his play hearing this title, is believed to have
Kuripides (Ribbeck, p. 94 f.) but from a considerable
fragment quoted by Gellius (N.A. 19. 10. 12) it appears that the
of Argive warriors.
Hence Hergk, followed by
Wekker. conjectured that this feature was l>orro\ved by Knnius
from Sophocles.
It should be added that the substance of
quan:
otio qui ncscit uti plus negoti habit
inent
fr. Ill
mis animus in nrgo/ro) resembles the thou
ishcs Bergk's infercn'
o.X; but th<oincidencc hard
title Clyt(temn,stra, known
njectured tl
illusion
to 11. from a
ingle quotation (fr.
to tin
but it is perhaps more
in cm
tice to the .lrgis//tus, if such a play
:is to have
In-- Agamemnon ol
(p. 21).
n unapproachable model, and. if Sop
aibject at all, he probabl) reverted to the Homeric
<
known.
Iv
'Ipoint.
ambiance
to St.
5A9 (JW'
")
IO<t>OKAEOYI
220
305
av
305
8'
Phot. lex. p. 410, 13 (Suid.
irevdepd-
ti$
vvpicplqi
Kai wevOepbs, 6
xdprjs
tt)s
ij
72
elne
irevdepbv tov
vela.
'OSvacrevs
irepl
'Ax'XX^wy.
<pr)<rl
'
[quoting Eur.
Si rb
ifiiraXiv
ya.fi/3p6i'
iv 'I(piye-
647]...2o</>o/c\^s
yap
loosely for marriage-connexions. In Ear.

El. 1286 tov Xbyy <t6v irevdepbv, addree<l
to Orestes concerning the avrovpybs, ir.
= brother-in-law. So yanfipbs must be
s.v.)
p.r)Trjp.
T&vpiiri8r)S Si 70/11-
ira.T-qp.
fipbv olvtov irapa Taiv \iyei

frs.
Tvyx&vovcra irevdepoiv
fxeyicTTCov
d)
npbs K\vraifirj(TTpav
crv 5'
...TrevOepQv.'
dvrl
tov yanj3pQi>.
Cf. Bekk. anecd. p. 229, 1
and Elyvi. M. p. 220, 40 ~Zo<poK\?is Si rbv
irevdepbv dvrl tov yap.j3pov Ti&eiKev (Xiyei
Etym. M.).
Both irevdepbs and ya/xfipbs are used
rendered father-in-law in Eur. Andr.

641 an:l yafifipol 'parents-in-law" in Hipp.
Notice that irv0pwv is an allusive
635.
plural, if we can trust the statement that
it refers to Achilles
so 0. T. r 1 76 KTeveiv
viv tovs TeubvTas (i.e. his father)
\byos.
the importance of this passage in relation to the
plot see Introductory Note.
See Kuehner-Gerth
18.
For
r/v
306
6r)pbv ayyos ov ixekicTcrova-Oai TrpeneL.
306
306
I
6î]pbv...irpiirei.
440)
fieXiTTovo'dai
27 (Parocm.
fieXirovcrOai
eW
tov dvaîov.
meaning: Plut. qn. conv. 1. 10. 2,

p. 628 D, Democritus enquired the reason
why a cucumber tasted sweet, and the
waiting-woman replied, iyu yap dyvoi)dyyeiov iOifxrjv
o~acra
tS aUvov
els
2o<poic\fjs 'Ifayevela.
The
significance of the proverb is

to Matth. evang.
9.
17 ovSi
fidX\ovo~t.v olvov vebv els do~Kovs iraXaiovs
similar
the vinegar-pot
contain honey.
fr. 61 1.
not fit afterwards to

In the same manner is
is
dqpov d'yyos so o^pov Kepa.fj.10v in Ar.

723 (i 566 K.)i Kwvuip 6i;r]p$ Tepirbfievos Kepd/jU)) A. P. 12. 108.
There is a
similar reference to a homely proverb in
Aesch. Ag. 334 f. o|os t a\ei<pd r' iyxias
"
Tavrif KijTei
5tx o0 raTO ^'' r &" ov </>lXw
:
fr.
'
p.c\io~crovcr9ai
I
irpoaevviirois.
fieXiTTovo'dai in
codd.
4.
Proverb, append.
written
is
the text of the source.
suspected, since
appears elsewhere with this
Hence Nauck (Index

proposed oi>x' p-eXiTovo-dai. But,
as Sophocles uses fiiXiosa in the sense
of fieXi (0. C. 481), there is no reason
why he should not have adopted fieXic-
IxefieXtTUfxivov.
p. xii)
The formation
aovo-dai for p.eXiTovadai.
as legitimate in one case as in

and the
other (cf. ye<pvpovadai)
is
the
-out
became enormously productive with

causative function (Brugmann, Comp. Gr.
suffix
iv p. 297 E.
tr.).
The form has been
307
voei rrpbs dvhpl -^pco/xa ttovXviTOvs ottojs
nerpa rpamecrdai yvqcriov

307.
Reiske:
codd.
codd.
vdei
aCifia
fypovrjixciTOS.
vovv del Porson irap' dvopl Reiske, irpbs dvSpa Gomperz

2 irirpav Gomperz yvrjaiov k <ppovr)/j,aTos C. Keil
!
x/>w/ua
307
Athen.
2o</>o/cA??s
iv
513
'l<piyevela
bp.oiws
*
vbei
(prjcrl
...
Kai
eppovf)-
fiaTOS.'
The
itself
trick of the
from
its
polypus in concealing
foes or in lying in wait for
its
I
prey is often mentioned Aelian v. h.

iWoywai. Si oi iroXtiiroSes Kai tous
:
virb Tais irirpais

ixOvs Tbv Tpbirov tovtov.
KddrjvTai, Kai eavrovs is ttjv etceivwv /ueratovto
elvai Sokovviv
/j.op<povo~i xP oav Kai
y
I4>ITEN EIA
AriM.
Ihrtp otV nai Tttfivnaoiv a< vtrpai.
A. a. Q. 37. 6 22* 8, adding rd 5' avro tovto

toiu nai QopTjdtit, 1'lin. //. h. 9.
mittat ad similitudinem loci et
colore
maximc in nut it, [Arist.] mir. a 11 unit.
dan dial. mar. 4. 3 oiroip dv

TpootXOLiw dpfiotrrj rat jtoriAat ...
Hpxnov dwtpy djerat iavrif, Kai pit-
wirpif.
tKtirri
TOfJttWd
/'.
./.
9.
(*"
XP 0a
rorH
IO. 3 O0TW
wovXiTot).
0* ^>
d.Wat
Plut.
rr^.,
//':
<w/.
ant 111. 27
sollert.
/<*
p.
auomodo adtil. a/> am. intern. S p. 52 K,

df am. mult, o p. c/> K.
Hence the
Miation^
of
the
poly]
23 woXvwoiot
Zenob. 1. 74
and were applied
1.
ro\i xpoov hoop

1.
lex*,
pp. 8, 1X4]!,
1.
man's adaptability to
rily
hi> -ur-
roundings (to roXr/rpos-or), either with

heie and
II j
At
lit'ip
rportpifiuiv
d"
43
fr.
XP WT
rinvop,
towndXiffra r6or
\
wdoaif voMtooiv 6puX>

<Tai*t)eaii itw*
AXXor' dXXoia
\
[FHG
Ah
<t>poirn.
.417
toiXitoWi
mtr.
29)
roof,
'AfifiXox'
t4kpop,
Toictn
tx u "
(<papp.o{ov
Kark> oTJuor Imjoi, <r the reverse, as in Ion fr. 36 nai r6r rtrpaior
**Xrrdraif dalnooi
arirydi p.traXXa*{
ri^pa TovXi'wovp
XP
''
'Apyriuv
ffrpaTip.
different,
lyxot tv wpb%
irovXvwovs
the
for
Ionism see Snivth. limit Dimhtt, 154,

and Jebb on Ant. 96. wfrp^ might be a
lOCJtthre dative [Phil. 144), but
BjMN
in
it
we should
carry on the influence of wp6s from the main clau-e.

Cobet, I'm: I,,/, p. 163 fl"., laid down
the important distinction that, when the
clause of comparison precedes, no prepotition accompanies the noun of the
mam -entence (t.i,'. l'lat. nf>. 4I4 E 6*1
Wt Wpl p.T)Tp6t *oi TpOipOV Tr}l X^'P01 *
ifiVPtir); but that, when the com,
follows, the preposition must appear in
likely that
juently
done.
the fragment of Antipham
>Ap to -fTJpat wanp ipyaarlipio* awarra
Tanttpwirtia. wpo<r<poiTo\ naxa. by writing wt
rpbt ipyao-riiptof.
No doiil.t the <listinction i> Knerally obeervod, but K<>ck
(ll Il6) an<l <i"inperz (Narhl. p. 7) seem
eoad
emended
denying
no need fbf
right in
its
un
There
violent
alterations like
Blaydes's aotpoii wpot drdpoi, or I'dugk's
StwoC wpbi drSpdt fwpjx ot'Xi>roi' rplrto.i
is
fiot,
Vpun,
11
Antig. hist,
(cf.
6ew$ Xiytm i>.

is
somewhat
1'ind.
i<p<\vT),
riov Orfpot wtrpaiov
vaptdm
Theogn.
in
\"Tou 6pyrp text toXutXqkov,

rj -rooooni\t)<rr), roiot
roi
I.
xorl xirpT),
rip
tl/xi
whose view
lfio.rpai
wra/SoXai,
verbs:
'
aitip 7'
Tirpri 7*cXot
In this connexion
ncc of the
rpoxal, and th
ling
thought is what the ToXi'-rpoiroi dc

conceal from hi^ fellow men. irpos avSpi
means a> you approach another,' 'when
close to him'; for which cf. rpot roit
roXt/uoit elyai Thuc. 3. 22, 77, and wpoi
J.,
TT)V
P*p.Ovpt0*
*'>
Xa0g
A*
wt
w4rpat>,
XP oa
TTJf
221
an< ' '" I'lutarch.
waptKTparlaHai yvr)alov $po*r)i*aTo%.
'
iu makes the
structure more
Nyiiiiiictiical by providing an accusative
to balance x/h^MO. but hstrod
tl
son's 90V9
awkwardness of leaving xp**'M to represent 1h>i1i *ow and ippotrrjuaTot, which are
abundant
in sapporl
Ketske's xP**P a f ,n, "> *'"
not also, as j. thinks, completely justify
apparently distinguished. Since rp4wia8*i

is used in the required sense as well al>-
wpit ifdpi.
may
These passages
off-
'I
wiaffeu
means
<
uitln-r,
infer that
rpa-
'to change.' Iieing followed
by fpovt)naroi as an aid. gen. of separation: sec Theogn. 118 Kplaau* rot ootpit)
aTpowirf%. J. however ret
'Be mindful to adapt the hue
real thought to your man, as the polypus
1
to the rock'
>'
but surely his
TtKTCi
308
308
...aia
rxM S:
.
axoXt).'
I
517).
M
QjO
wi:h a limiting accusative,
Obtod whether any change
uxW"
necessary.
Ikrgk's
would avoid
this particular difficulty.
it
is
Cor *ja)
J.
the words were spoken by

Odysseus, who was the agent of Agamemnon's fraud.
Hcrgk, who undci
dripi as 'husband,' thought that ( lythat
tacmncstra was addressing her daughter.
308
yap ovhkv iadkov
tl ai
30 6 (ill p. f/) 4 11
lVi>wit. 'rUrti...
8,6% ii roit dpyofoi* oi> wapiaraI
rai (Tt
real
I)
be
(T\okrj.
eocat'a
da*o\r) (<UrxX<) A)
not hesitate (wit

this line to the
I
>
refer
when the (Week fleet was kept hock by

contrary winds or a calm (Jebb on
ZO0OKAEOYI
222
See also on fr. 479, 4, repirvbv dpyias

F.W.Schmidthadnojustificationfor
proposing TlKTtiv..,elKaia #iXei <nrov5ri,
which recalls Seyffert's oirov5rj fipabvs
Nauck fell foul of tUaia,
in Ant. 231.
564).
&kos.
and conjectured
17
\lav <rx^V (misprinted
But eixala <rx^-V seems an entirely suitable phrase to distinguish an

aimless inactivity (cf. Aesch. Ag. 203
irvoal KaKoaxo\oi, with the schol. iirl
KaKifi rroiovaai ffxo\deiv) from that <rx^V
<r<po\r)).
which is the indispensable condition of

true freedom
see Eur. Ion 633 f., Arist.
pol. 4 (7). 15. I334 a 20 Kara yap ttt\v wa:
et'/couos
The
ov crxoXr/ SouXois.
poi/j.iai',
rarity of
Cf. Ar.
probably accidental.
is
A'/t/i.
44
pios...tiKrj Kflfxtvos.
Hense how-
ever thinks that et'/ccua is probably due to

some philosopher (as Chrysippus) who
only approved leisure as the result of
He quotes Sen. de
deliberate choice.
otio 3, 3. 8, 1.
The line which follows in
Stobaeus as
belonged to the same extract was
first separated from it by Wagner.
It
is found, with the reading dpyoloiv, in
if
it
Menand. monost. 242.

ment see on fr. 407.
precisely similar kind
Apostolius in quoting
Jebb's ed. p. 237).
For the
An
senti-
of a
error
was
made
At.
1252
by
(see
309
aKpovyei
309
Hesych.
dKpov x l
"A.Kpov
p.
107
Si opos
anpovxe?'
(opovs
cod.)
ifi od 'Aprifudos iepbv iSptiMeXdfiirovs Kaddpas rds IlpoirtSas,

ijyovv rats Xdpio~iv.
ZoôkXtjs 'Icpiyeveia.
From this obscure but interesting passage we are justified in inferring that
Sophocles used the word dxpovxeT for
dwells on the heights, and probably that
Artemis was the subject to the verb.
Her connexion with the plot needs no
remark, and there is sufficient evidence
to prove that her cult was often established
on the summit of a mountain. Hence
Eur. /. T. 126 w ttcu rds Aarovs ALktwi*
ovpeia, and the similar epithets dpeifidris,
Tt}s 'A/ryeias,
ffaro
6peal(po(.Tos, dptcrrids, opeids (Gruppe, Gr.

Argos she was
*n
p. 12843).
worshipped under the title of 'Aicpia
Hesych. I p. 104 'AtcpLa- ...(an Si Kai i)
Myth.
"Hpa
Kai "Aprefiis Kai 'A^poSirrj Trpoaayo-
pevofiivr]
iv "Apyet,
Kara,
to
o/jlolou
eir'
At Epidaurus she bore

Kopv<paia from her sanctuary on
&Kp(p iSpvp-ivai.
the title
the top of Mt Coryphum (Pausan. 2. 28.
2).
On the top of Mt Lycone close to
the border of Argos and Arcadia was a
temple of Artemis Orthia (Pausan. 2. 24.
On Mt Crathis in Arcadia was a
5).
sanctuary of the Pyronian Artemis, where
a fire of peculiar sanctity was kept
burning (Pausan. 8. 15. 9). She also
had a sanctuary on Mt Artemisius above
Oenoe (Pausan. 2. 25. 3). The rest of
the gloss in Hesych. is a learned aetiological note intended to explain the origin
of the word dtcpovxe? as applied to Arte-
unnecessary to suppose that

allusion to the daughters of
Proetus in the text of Sophocles. The
story of their madness and its healing is
most fully given in Apollod. 2. 24 29.
In the account of Bacchylides (10. 40
mis.
there
It
is
was any
112) there
Hesych.
is
no reference to Melampus.
the only authority who men-
is
mountain Acrum in connexion

with this story; the scene of their healing
is given either as Sicyon (Apollod., Pausan. 2. 7. 8), the river Anigrus in Elis
(Pausan. 5. 5. 10, Strabo 346), or l.usi
in Arcadia (Bacchyl., Pausan. 8. iS. 8
The last-mentioned alternative inetc.).
duced Jacobs (on A. P. [append. 420] XI
p. 406) to make the violent and impossible conjecture iv Aovaoh iv 'Ap/cdtm' in
place of the words -fjyoiw rah Xdpiaiv.
Unger's^yow rats x/>e ' ais {Theb. Parad.
p. 459) rests on Apollod. 2. 29, where
Melampus is said to have cured the Proetides by the employment of magic dancing
tions the
(fj-er'
d\a\ayfJ.ov Kai vivos ivdiov xopdas).
But the text of Hesych. has been so mutilated that the words may very well be
sound, recording an alternative or joint
cult of the Charites established by Melampus at the time of the healing. For
the common worship of Artemis and the
Charites see Wernicke in Pauly-Wissowa
Wagner wished to substitute
II
1363.
dicpovxc dxpov (xovaa, and M. Schmidt,
who observed that the alphabetical order
is
slightly disturbed at this point, strangely
suggested
*A/c/)'
^x^
4>
rEN E A
223
310
J3a.cri\r]
310
Hen
Xtia (fiaoiX,
i)
h.
p.
j6l
pacrtXr)- fiaai-
(iafflXaa cod.).
ôôa-Xtjj
Utt% 177, refers to

Lent/.
Cf. Up** on
(Meisterhans 3 ,
raff.
In I'ind. Afar,
39 d\\d
r.
9tu>p (iaaiXra,
(to Schroeder: (lael\tia codd.) the word

iabic, however written.
The form
fiaoiXrj is al>o attotcl by Stepli. By*.
.Kyip4t.ua.- Xiytrai 5i *ai Ayap.p.t},
wi wpdapfia xpia^Tf, kcu t6 3acri\fia Kara
owa\opT)
Herodian
Attic
p. 40).
It is
tioning that fiaaiXtia was a
mis
in
Thrace (IMt.
inscriptions
worth men-
of Arte4. 31); but of course

title
there is nothing to show that Sophocles

used padXr) as a divine title.
For the
form see also Usener, Gotlernamen,
|..
:2i,.2
Smyth, Ionic Dia-
ftaaiXri.
311
irvi>8a
311
HeSTCh.
|>.
267 axvrSaKWTOi
loipo/kXijiTpfrToX^fUf) (fr.554).
at,
Mytvtia Tvv&ax* {vtri&Ka cod.)

l$ovf rijr Xaffiji' lip-n.
Eustath. //.
ti<ôn Ti'-i5aa tlpTjKtv,
Si
^-<><pQiiXiji
wiaj
111.
2Hij
*ai
ri\v
Xatir]v
Similarly wvdpi* may be used for the

tttm or trunk of a tree, considered apart
from the foliage : so Aesch. 5m///. i i i
61' auor ya.por rt0a01* rtdu Tv0p.ii*
Xui
dvcrapafiouXouri <pptoi, Cho. 203
cptKpov y4Mr' a* axipptarot piyn% xv$|
urt
<pi\o\
llav-
Schw.).
P-V*.
312
vira<f>poi>
312
phocles in the Ipkigtnia.

where the source is <)u
tun. glott. /////<

word wax used b
that this
See on
313
\\7r6\X(ov
napa tov Ato?
13
,i
'
Xa/i$cu'ei tov? \p"q<rp.ov<;.
3o*r
\wr rapd tov Ai<w XcMi/jdrnr

wt *ai i* 'lîicXtia ('Itfxyt-
rjMtff.
Bpuiwotci
.111.
Atbi
A"/. 19 Ai6i
A.
trfpipTJ*
rfxxprtriri
poi'Xijr,
3'
*!<
conjecture.
probably rtuhl. as 'I<*xXi
;kh. We|< ker.
I IippeiUtiel) U an
cly title: see Introductory N
MM
I'mdorf suggests OUXii as

alternative; but this is less
to have been corrupted to '1+utXtlf
kjIIo, as ijunu, is the ni.iiithpiece
>*siblc
f
^t!
i'
if-
Aesch.
Aoftat
&*
srarpfo. fr. 86 ravra
I
i7sWi Ac(i #<ri*Mra, S>ph. 0, C,
-/*>
's
xpiv
.7/. 131
ft
Hence
7.* i>\
\*
AiOf
rarsy
oiôt *a0fla which has
announced from Delphi is ad*

dressed as i Atit dJus-Vt **n: cf. iW.
In I'm I. Ot. 8. 43 A|>ollo inter498.
preU a portent : Jt tfjts. ***> Xrf>4
wip+Hw fimftrjiotnrm bit.
Kpori4
just l>een
IO0OKAEOYZ
224
IXNEYTAI IATYPOI
The three fragments which before 191 1 were alone associated
with this title were not of such a character as to reveal the
and the guess of Welcker that the Trackers
subject-matter
were engaged upon the search for Europa, when she was carried
off by Zeus, and that of Ahrens that they were the prophets
invited by Minos to search for Glaucus remained equally
unverifiable.
The obscurity has now been dispelled by the
discovery, among the documents which have been recovered
from the dust-heaps of Oxyrhynchus, of a large portion of a
The constituent
papyrus roll which contained the Ichnentae.
fragments of the roll were successfully fitted together by
Prof. A. S. Hunt, and in the result he was able to publish in
vol. IX of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (no. 1 174 at p. 30 ff.) the more
or less complete remains of fifteen successive columns starting
from the opening of the play and containing about 400 lines,
some two-thirds of which are substantially intact. A number of
smaller fragments which could not be located 1 adds little or
nothing to the sum of our knowledge.
The MS, which is carefully written, is assigned to the closing
decades of the second century A.D. A number of corrections,
including marks of punctuation, has been added by a second
hand, and various readings recorded in the margin proceed from
These variants are sometimes quoted from
the same source.
particularly from the edition of Theonspecified authorities
4
besides him, Aristophanes 3 and possibly Nicander (or Nicanor)
appearance
of stichois
the
Another notable feature
are cited.
metric figures, giving the numeration of each hundredth line,
which however do not agree exactly with the requirements
From these circumstances it may be inferred that
of the text.
we have a critically revised text descended from a grammarian's
The MS is a less elaborate example of the type which is
copy.
characteristically represented by the papyrus containing the
Paeans of Pindar {Ox. Pap. v, no. 841).
;
These are not included in the present edition, with the exception of fr. 317.
Possibly the well-known grammarian, who lived in the age of Augustus and
worked on the text of the Alexandrian poets. See Susemihl, Al. Lit. 11 215 ff.
Theon is also mentioned in a scholium on Pind. Paean. 2. 37. Wilamowitz (Neue
Jahrb. xxix 450) declines to speculate on the identity of this Theon.
3 There is a possibility that some of the abbreviated references may be intended
for Aristonicus or Aristarchus; see Hunt on ill 20.
4
By the abbreviation Ni in v. 102 the same authority is quoted on fr. 84 (Ox.
Pap. IX p. 113) of the Eurypylus.
2
IXNEYTAI
225
The subject of the play proves to be identical with that

of the Homeric hymn to Hermes, although the development
of the story proceeds upon somewhat different lines.
The play
ojxmis with the appearance of Apollo, who relates the loss of his
cattle and describes his hitherto unsuccessful attempts to discover
the thief during his progress from Northern Greece to Mt Cyllene
in Arcadia.
He accordingly issues a proclamation to all whom
it may concern, promising a definite reward to anyone who
shall
enable him to recover his property.
Silenus enters in answer to
immons, and offers the assistance of his sons the satyrs,
but stipulates that a reward of gold shall be paid over, and that
id his sons shall be released from slavery.
Apollo leaves
the chorus of satyrs advances.
They are ready
at once to start in pursuit, and Silenus in a short speech invokes
divine and human aid.
Then the chorus, bending on all-fours
and imitating the actions of keen-scented hounds, discover the
confu
ks of cattle pointing in different directions.
Hut,
before the quarry can be run to earth, the pursuers are alarmed
strange sound entirely unlike to any which they have
to known
It seems to issue from the cave towards which
base has brought them.
Silenus upbraids them for their
irdice, and contrasts their degenerate attitude with his own
ngtiished bravery in the days of old.
The hunt is then
ed. and Silenus undertakes to support and protect his
children by accompanying them to the point of danger.
The
e noise is again heard, and for a second time the ardour of
Hut the actual issue of the combined
pursuit is damped.
nndertaking is not altogether clear. I have suggested that
Silenus, just nou bo valiant, proves himself rather more of a
coward than his followers, and by refu
continue the
nture and abruptly leaving the stage, abandons the chorus
1
However this may be, it seems certain that

fate.
qiu ntlv the coryphaeus assumed the position previously occupied
but it
lenus as representative spokesman for his cotm
afterwards reappeared, or, if he u.is
tbable that
it
throughout, resumed the prominence which he had
temporal
il)
aband<
by the chorus to accomplish

suddenly changed by the arrival of
the mouutain-nymph. who comes forth trom her cave*.
lectual efforts
their task, the situation

ne,
rs
is
as
'
beasts
irpose of their
1
have avMimctl that
j>oifi&ot (n.
new
'
(0}p),
labours,
she angrily enquires

silence of
and why the
The
identical with 1>6+t of ijH.

wumi i* indistinctly h<
Miss llsrrivn mfcti from stiff, that (
on 107)
it
cession, becsoae the
^Twwu/csve-d welling: Etiays prtttnttd to

P.
IV. /H4gnr*jr, p.
136
IT.
IO<t>OKAEOYI
226
the glens has been disturbed by their shouts, and the hue and
cry raised for the arrest of a thief. The chorus replies in humble
tones, and asks for an explanation of the marvellous sound which
comes echoing from the upland hollows. Cyllene, somewhat
but
mollified, would have preferred to know their business first
finally, after warning them of the serious consequences which
would follow a disclosure of the secret to others, she consents to
explain what has astonished them.
Zeus, it appears, having
secretly visited the daughter of Atlas without the knowledge
During the mother's illness,
of Hera, had begotten a son by her.
Cyllene has been nursing the newly-born infant. But he proved
for, though born less than a week ago,
to be no ordinary child
his growth has been so rapid that he has already passed from
childhood to maturity.
As his father's command required that
he should be kept concealed within the cave, he had occupied
his time with the construction from a dead beast of a mysterious
In
toy, which produces the strange melodies now in question.
answer to further requests for an explanation of the riddle,
Cyllene describes the making of the lyre from the shell of the
tortoise.
There are some serious gaps in the papyrus at this
point, but, since the chorus immediately proceeds to denounce
the divine child as the thief of whom they are in search, it is
clear that Cyllene must have referred to the ox-hide which had
been stretched over the shell.
She waxes indignant at their
audacity: to charge the son of such parents with larceny is
a monstrous piece of insolence, which betrays the childish
ineptitude of the accusers.
Let them beware lest their foolish
gibes are not exchanged for cries of pain.
Nevertheless, the
satyrs persist, and apparently challenge Cyllene to produce the
cows, so that their identity may be established.
Here unfortunately the papyrus ends, and we can only guess
at the sequel.
It is certain that Apollo returned, and that
in consequence of the recovery of the cattle he rewarded Silenus
according to his promise. The reconciliation with Hermes must
have followed, and no doubt the gift of the lyre placated Apollo
for the outrage which had been committed against his property.
Such is the story of the play so far as we are permitted
to trace it, and it is apparent that it differs in several respects
from the Homeric version,
(i) The theft of the cows here
precedes, but in Homer follows the invention of the lyre.
(2) The cows are concealed on Mt Cyllene itself and not in the
neighbourhood of Triphylian Pylos. (3) Cyllene and not Maia
has charge of the infant. (4) The informer, to whom later writers
gave the name of Battus, is displaced by the satyrs, an essential
;
For other traces of
this tradition see n.
on 266.
IXNEYTAI
227
modification in view of the dramatic requirements.

We know
little or nothing of the intermediate literature
and, so far as
we can tell, the only innovation for which Sophocles was
responsible may have been the introduction of the satyrs,
The
details of the cattle-stealing are less complex than in the hymn,
and the choice of Mt Cyllene as the hiding-place of the herd
is at least as likely to have been a reversion to the primitive
legend as a necessary outcome of the dramatic situation 5
ApollodortlS in the mythographical handbook (3. 112 flf.) follows
generally the narrative of the hymn
but, though he differs
widely from Sophocles, he nevertheless agrees with him in making
the theft of the cattle prior to the invention of the lyre, and also
nnecting the two incidents together as part of the same
tion.
According to Apollodorus, Hermes made strings for
his lyre from the guts of the slain cattle
we cannot say whether
this point was mentioned by Sophocles, but he certainly alluded
to the skins of the cows having been used in the construction of
part of the instrument (307 n., 337, 366).
The latter
a reminiscence of the hymn
but the ox-hide
mentioned did not belong to Apollo's cattle, which Hermes
had not yet stolen, Similarly, the hymn-writer, as contrasted
with Apollodorus, mentions sheep-gut as the material out of
which 11Although Apollodorus
ishioned the strings.
iuch in common with the hymn, it is idle to suppose that be
OUrce, and that his deviations from it were tin
fruit of his own invention*.
The most striking result of the comparison of Sophocles with
the hymn is the combination by the former of two <li
achievem
that the invention of the lyre not only provides
neans of appeasing the indignatioa of Apollo, but also
appears to have been directly prompted by the theft of the cows.
gethcr of these separate threads was .1 dramatic
1
if
it
hich Sophocles observed and appropriated,

originated, as may well have been the case, with one of
\ lOlitarj
"i
fi
\drai 6 nihil*, ai ydp not
front thr
h\mn
of
AlcMH
17*01 tfunpr riw Kopifaio' ir dyrait

1'jus.ui. 7.
Hor. Carm.
10. 4.
1.
Jfr.
5):
x a V K&
Maia >/w*ro
Kpori'a?
10.
connexion
dealing and the
But thi> 1% open
ihnt the intimate
ubr
tradition
\
>t
he lyre wa*
Wtod
un dodbt, a< will presently he shown.
1
Allen
fact,
p.
ire
cattle-
d hy the hymn-writer.
ai
the sou:
U-twccn the
much
tji. "
the ditCttad
the following sentence i relevant.
K nut I U-rkommenem wirt*chaftet un.l
li
ordnet. twidern excerpirr
I
flf.
bemkfcffl
See ibo [auodactioo, 1
hi
ml'
1.
15-a
-lie
I04>0KAE0YI
228
It is more likely that this arrangement,

his literary predecessors.
which involved an alteration in the order of the events described
in the hymn, was the deliberate invention of conscious art, than
that popular tradition had always combined what the hymnwriter chose from a motive not easily discernible to separate
Both in method and in spirit the treatment of Sophocles is
far removed from the work of the hymn-writer, but the extent of
the debt which the tragedian must have acknowledged cannot
be accurately measured owing to the loss of the second half
It would have been particularly illuminating to
of the play.
discover what were the Attic traits added by Sophocles to the
portrait of Hermes, whose precocious trickery is so cleverly
There are enough resemblances in
delineated in the hymn.
detail to show that Sophocles was well acquainted with the
Homeric text, as may be seen from the following instances
oarpaKov h. 33 and S. 305 h. 38 rju 8e ddvys, totc kv p.d\a
koXov aelhovi compared with S. 292 f. <^rfkr]rri vaiovaa
and S. 109, 182
rd ^prjp,ara in h. 400 may have
TraXivKiov answers to S. 265)
//.
suggested S. 44 07ra><? to xpfjp.a tovto croi Kvvrjyeaco
407 f.
dav/xaiva) and deêadai recall S. 271 f., although the application
is different (the same considerations apply to dirovoaîâdai
and hovelv in h. 562 f. as compared with S. 131 and 282);
the description of Cyllene
ftrip,aTa dvria h. 345 and S. 96, 112
in //. 228 answers to S. 215.
The other literary allusions to the story need not detain
1
Philostratus (imag. 1. 25, entitled 'Epp,ov <yovai) makes

the birthplace, and except in one small detail- is
Antoninus Liberalise (23)
entirely remote from Sophocles.
relates the story of Battus for the purpose of recording the
punishment inflicted upon him for his treachery the theft of the
Cows was of secondary importance to him, and the only part
of his narrative which concerns us is the itinerary of the cattle-
us long.
Olympus
drive,
may
which
following
v.
13.
be
used to illustrate
Ovid {Met.
2.
tlie
mutilated
lines
676-707) confines himself even
more strictly to the subject of the transformation of Battus. The

anonymous scholiast on Antoninus, who drew his information
from the
Aeip,oiv of
Pamphilus, prefaces this chapter with the
1
The hymn to Hermes is considered to be the latest
but must be at least as early as the sixth century B.C.
argues that the entire incident of the invention of the
polation in the original form of the hymn, and that signs
produced are
xxxvin
3
He
1 ff.
is
still
visible.
See also Herwerden,

'
date of the longer hymns,

Robert (Herm. xli 3890.)
lyre was a subsequent inter-
in
of the inconsistency thereby

181 ff., Kuiper, iff.
Mum. xxxv
See
n.
usually assigned to the age of the Antonines.
on 354.
IXNEYTAI
229
citation of several authorities who had previously written on the

subject.
Nicander, Didymarchus, Antigonus, and Apollonius
Khodius belong to a later age and it is improbable that Hesiod's

K/.) had any bearing upon the subsequent treatfr.
J
ment of Sophocles. The gift of the Ktjpvxeiov by Apollo to
Hermes is indicated in the hymn (529) and expressly recorded
ter authorities
If the tradition was known to Sophocles,
ms unlikely that he would pass it over in silence.
;
However interesting the discovery of the new fragments may

they will scarcely enhance the reputation of the poet. The
dramatic value of the play is insignificant, and the comic relief
not greatly exhilarating.
It is fair to admit that the more
ing scenes probably occurred in the latter part of the play,
when Hermes displayed his cunning and his wit in tricking and
conciliating his accuser*.
Hut the part which is preserved is less
and entertaining than the Cyclops, which has hitherto been
tuple of the satyric drama.
Vet, although it is
isible to rate highly the importance of the play as we
know it, we must beware of pronouncing a final judgment on
uh.it is actually a torso, more particularly as the recovered
lent has merits of its own which may be pleaded in mitiChief among these are direc:
gation of an adverse verdict.
of purpose and clearness of outline, which, allied in general to
a plainness of diction suitable to the simplicity of the action*,
an impression of natural grace and exhibit in a less familiar
I) specimen of Attic versatility.
By a curioul accident the lyrical parti of the Ichncutac have
mutilated to an extent much exceeding the losses of the
-how that th<
tie; but enough of them rem
of the Cyclops in being far less elaborate than
it seems that Sophocles, perhaps
w
dy.
(than Euripides, avoided any attempt ateleva
he lyrical metres, also,
le in com posit ion-, of this character.
tlv vai
the iambic type
In ^<
with some admixture of dochmiacs and anapaests
If the
vie of writing is less colloquial than in the Cyclops.
left out of account, the only obvious colloquibe,
>
alisms arc Tom-t
i.ii
and
H
Ifj
the i60<ri
vat
pa Aia
(1 12)*.
Iff fallow the
There
hymn
is
in tin-
also
mp*
>
'loabt
larrtrtt
risit Apollo.
Philortr.
m.
Ml inf.
marks that 'die hafmlcnc lautigkeit crfreulicher irU
/;,;
Sec ! HW -
'
;v
Ifllfl
IO<t>OKAEOYZ
230
metre of the iambics Porson's canon is violated

several more serious infringements in the
against
as
333,
Cyclops; and whereas eighteen instances of the licence admitting
the introduction of the anapaest into other feet than the first
have been counted in the Cyclops\ there is only one and that
It is rather in the nature
doubtful
in the Ichnentae (122).
of the thoughts expressed than in respect to vocabulary or
structure that the style deviates from the normal character of
Sophoclean tragedy.
The appearance of fr. 294 N. 2 as v. 275 f. is conclusive evidence
on the question of authorship. Wilamowitz specifies as marks
of Sophoclean origin the use of okfMCpiv in 210, of dirovoafyL^w in
131, and of evSetv in 159; and to these should at least be added
General impressions are less to
vecoprjs in 1 50, and fiovvov in 49.
be trusted, but I think that few will hesitate on consideration to
acquiesce in the judgment of Wilamowitz, that the play reflects
Sophocles' earlier manner, and that the occasional harshness and
want of polish must be set down to to ttlkpov koX Karateyyov
which he himself recognized as a blemish of immaturity 2
Some
might go further and contend that there is here and there a
tendency towards bombast which shows that he has not yet
shaken himself free from the influence of Aeschylean 07/co? and
it will be readily admitted that the harmonious blend of mellowness and lucidity to which he ultimately attained is hardly
But Wilamowitz finds unmisperceptible in these fragments.
takable signs of an early date in certain definite peculiarities
that is to say, (1) there is no occasion for the
of technique
presence of three actors on the stage at the same time (2) no
verse of the dialogue is broken between two speakers 3 (3) the
absence of strophic responsion from the opening chorus is
comparable with similar features in the Septan and the Eumenides
(4) the alternation of lyrics with ordinary dialogue and stichomythia in the scene between Cyllene and the chorus finds
its nearest parallel in the ultimately successful attempts of Athena
to placate the Eumenides in the Aeschylean play*.
It may be remarked in passing that the date of the Cyclops is
freedom
in the
in
llaigh, Tragic Drama, p. 3913.

Plut. de virt. prof. 7 p. 79 B.
But see vv. 99, 99.
4
If it is rightly inferred from Pacuvius (293 n.) that Euripides imitated this play
in the Antiope, that circumstance would not assist the determination of the date,
since it is certain that the Antiope was one of the latest plays (perhaps 408: Dieterich
in Pauly-Wissowa vi 1266). Equally inconclusive is the argument which Wilamowitz
deduces from the statement that Sophocles himself played the lyre in the Thamyras
(p. 178), namely, that Sophocles took the part of Hermes, and that consequently the
Robert prefers to suppose for similar reasons
play must have belonged to his youth.
1
2
3
that the poet represented Apollo.
IXNEYTAI
231
quite uncertain, and has been fixed by some critics earlier than
1
If that view were correct, the date of the Uhncutae would
be put still further back for the priority of the latter play is
assured, apart from general considerations pointing the same
way, by the freedom exercised by Euripides both in the division
of his lines between two speakers, and in the employment of
three actors during the same scene.
The action takes place on the barren slopes of Mt Cyllene,
and the entrance to the cave of Maia was the central point
to which the attention of the spectators was directed.
Robert 1
uggested that, since the early part of the play seems to
indicate that no hut or cave was visible amid the mountain
solitudes, Cyllene must be supposed to have suddenly appeared
from an underground cavern J by means of the stage device
known as Xaptoviot *\ifia*<>.
The same critic holds that there
was no back-scene, and that the irdfo<i was represented in the
middle of the orchestra, as is supposed to have been the case
with the Suppliers of Aeschylus.
But the scene of satyr-plays
tor obvious reasons not infrequently located in the open
country, and nothing is discernible with regard to the scenery of
the lilnuutac which either supports or tells against the hypothesis
early date.
in the technical point of view the discovery of a dialogue
ie length composed iti iambic tetrameter acatalectic metre
438
is
ft)
Nothing of the same kind is found

drama, but the iambic octonarii of Roman
remarkable.
k
dy furnish an exact
In botfa
parallel.
e diaere
of the first dimeter is sometimes observed and sometimes

the former type is the more frequent in IMautus, the
worthy of DOtioe th.it both van
occur in the- Greek lyric fragments: contrast Alcm. fir. 9 with
id
Alcae.
fr.
56.
convenient at thil point to call attention to an obscurity

i'art of
the --tory of the play which awaits explanation,
id the sa:
reward promised by Apollo
ration of their freedom (57, 158), and it appears that
It is
in
in
the sequel the proi
fulfilled (445).
What
then
mm
in this connexion
tfM nature of their slaver)
which Cyllene mentions their
to the ob* ure passage (21
ivsus,
rmerly wont to follow in the train
He declines
the fawn-skin and wielding the thyrsus.
to guess at his identity, but conjectures that it was disclosed
1
Kattwl
in
thrm. XXX
iff,
4
I*-
454-
.ln-l
Tiff.
|.il!
Hern, vivii |ff C
.p. 139.
2O0OKAEOYI
232
on the occasion when the slaves were liberated. Nevertheless, he

candidly admits that the audience do not seem to have required
any explanation to be given concerning the slavery in question.
Now it is true that, as in the Cyclops of Euripides, it was not
uncommon for dramatic purposes to represent the satyrs as
in the thrall of some ogre or demonic being, and it was obviously
a useful expedient to account for their presence at the scene
of action. Examples of such bondage are mentioned in the
Introductory Notes to the Amycus, the Heracles at Taenarum.
the Cedalion, and the Pando7'a.
But it is scarcely credible that
this kind of durance would have been employed as an element
of the plot without a single word of explanation.
Apollo
expects to find the satyrs among the inhabitants of the countryside (35), and their slavery is apparently assumed as a
matter of course.
In such circumstances the natural inference would be that the satyrs here as elsewhere (Cycl. 709)
are the slaves of Dionysus.
This is the inference which
Robert actually adopts
and he is obliged in consequence
to assume that a line has been lost after 220.
The hypothesis
also involves the necessity of explaining why Silenus and the
satyrs desired to be released from the joyous service of Dionysus.
Robert recognizes the difficulty, and meets it by suggesting that
the liberation of the chorus was a constant element in the
denouement of a satyr-play, and that, by an encroachment of the
actual conditions of stage-management upon the story of the
events enacted on the stage, the chorus were released at the end
;
of the day's acting,
from
their
i.e.
engagement
after the production of the satyr-play,

to the Choregus or the Archon.
That is
the irovo<i from which Silenus and the satyrs are here set free.
In course of time, he thinks, the device staled, or the public
became too fastidious to be satisfied with it but, in order to
sustain the custom, a mythological servitude (as in the Cyclops)
was invented for each occasion. Whether this bold guess will
meet with general acceptance, time will show
but it is by
no means free from objection.
One might be willing not to
lay stress upon the fact that, if the text of 218 ft. is sound,
the Seo-n-oTijs is distinguished from the god, but it is surely
pertinent to enquire how Apollo could have promised to set free
the bondsmen of Dionysus.
He had received, so far as we know,
no commission to that end, and it is idle to think of him as using
his influence, unless indeed he represented Dionysus in some
fuller sense than is usually recognized.
But the relations of the
satyrs with Apollo rather suggest that he himself is the master to
whom their obedience must be rendered. Nor would it be
altogether surprising that among the wooded hills of Arcadia
;
IXNEYTAI
233
the satyrs should temporarily transfer their allegiance from

the wine-god to the huntsman's patron deity
We need not
dwell on the fact that Apollo Nomios, the protector of flocks and
herds, was known in Arcadia as the son of Silenus 1 except
a< evidence that in his rural aspect he did not disdain an
ation with the satyrs.
That the satyrs should, at the
bidding of the Hunter, assume the functions of keen-scented
hounds*, is in accordance with their constant fellowship with the
huntsman Pan, as well as with their own proclivities 4
None the
light they be expected to welcome the prospect of release
from the obligation of service, which is held out as the reward of
success on the present occasion 5
Lastly, it may be observed
that the subjection to Apollo is not necessarily inconsistent with
the devotion which they owe to Dionysus.
Besides the numerous
|K>ints of contact between their worship 8 the gods themselves
ientified by Euripides in the Licymnius (fr, 477): hkairora
And, if we are
HaKê, waiuv * \troWov ev\vpe.
<bi\6oa<f)i>t
prepared to admit that Apollo was the Bearrorr}^ of v. 218, it
is not
incredible that the god whom Aeschylus (fr. 341)
addressed as 6 Ki<ravi>, i Wax yew, 6 fuivris, should
the fawn-skin and wield the thyrsus at the head of the
other members of the Bacchic rout 7
1
'
314
d-yyc'AAco
\v
314.
/8 j/aorof 19
vttl<t ]\vovfiai
S<op*
1 *f~ft\u> in
314
l fl.
II1111 sappttti via* 0i
as the opening words of Apollo1
speech, tonip.nnn^ v\. 10 and 14: w.imrthat less abrupt would be &koi*t' ffitf
she COadittotM
riaw.
to
Jemand that the new clause, oJ whuh
wtax'oiâi is the principal verb, should
commence .vl the iHîmnti^ of %. j (rty r*
ayyrWw
not necessary to suppose that the
<ai *-d<ru
MMI
likely that
,
Ukd
its
iiairbf fkvQvm or
place in v. 1.
The
.
of the AUeslis shows that
tig
is
it
Apollo Ayptvrtit see O.C.
loo',
tcAcIJ v
corr. pap.*
illo
appeared
in
ipplc
r podtr rather requires s.
ment
Mcklcr * Xf*** Xai#tvr m
Kosshach, accepting v. 1 ft* restored in the td. />r.. supplies roi' Ipy**
4** ' n '. al "' * lr +YYM*' r '<lr ,,r
in }.
Hut the result is unsatiO
It is not aUolutely certain that v
the first of the play (see cr. n. on v. 94);
but Hunt gives good rautoi
sideling it probable.
(ioJ.
'
'
Homd
WoXXor
>*<).
ucx. protr.
lux R. 10.
1.
it, p.
.'4
Anth.
I'
MM
*6-
PofphjT.
,4
//.
Pylh. 18,
(ic
tt.,i
* 6ff-
r.iuly- Wiftsowft 11 ,t.

further discussion of the various pointl involved see n.
on 118
ft
Jebb on
':
I04>0KAE0YI
234
d]iroTrpoOeu'
[
[.
.]o*>[
hvcr^Kofyov
[.
.]ra[
fio]vs d/xoXyaSas
[tido-Jôu?
[...].
]a nopTLOcjv
Ta<j>p[
[Xad^pau
<f>pevl
~\u
I6v\r
iyVOCTKOTTli)
fiov^crTadixov KaTrrjs
T^â[
^\y^ ^ k - v <o6p.r)v
[ovr a]v decou tw[* ovr e(j>r)fx\4p(DV fipoTa>i>
[S/3ao"]<n rdS' epy[ov c5Se] 777909 ToXjxav TTecrelv.
[a<j>a]va>s
10
ow
[ravr]'
5
marg. add. pap. 2
a[ in
supra o v
fiar
rjv[
idvra rfj\e
'Something
4ff.
\eyLa\0ov,
7 5iaa[ in marg. add. pap. 2

Hunt: fort. 16vtwv
9 Tix vo
-<-
like deivbv
yap ôV
may have
stood in 1. 4
But the connexion with the
(Hunt).
following line is doubtful, and the ace.
/SoOs seems to require for its government
The latter
a verb of stealing or losing.
is perhaps the easier to work in
e.g.
Seivdv yap 6X705 r}8e dv<r\o<pov (ppevi (so
(firj
dt 5v<r\o<pov
Mekler) frreo-7-' arpaipeOivri.

probably right in supposing
|
Hunt
is
that the
cattle are divided as milch-kine,' calves,
and heifers, but the restoration of v. 6 is
not easy. The conjectures of Wilamowitz
Tt xai viuv vd/xevpa (perhaps too long) and
veavltvp.a are condemned by their halting
metre, and Mekler's re widv t' dy\dt<rpia
'
is
not convincing.
7 ft. are restored by Wilamowitz thus

airavTa (ppovda Kalfj.dT7}v...
\adpa? Ldvra
TTjXe.
Murray suggests rd<ppwv- virepde
vvv in v. 7.
should prefer Zttit'
I
d<ppovpuv apirayTjv (cf. Ovid's incustoditae).
Hunt supplies Texvaunv &s in
v. 9, but the dative is somewhat harsh
without any previous mention of the
agents.
Perhaps we should read \a6paV
ic tow... TexvdoTtar'
dXX', and render:
'the stealthy artifices of men who have
travelled unseen far from the byre.' dWd
is more suitable than ws to the sequence
of thought.
av (uoprrv ovr' av...ir<rciv.
It may be that the first av belongs to
ip6p.T)v, and the second to ircativ, but it
is certain that both do not belong to
j
ybp-vv,
ireaeiv.
although both may belong to

Cf. Ar. Thesm. 524 rdSe yap
wavovpyov...o{iK av <p6p.r]v iv
ro\p.rj<rai wot' av.
See the
discussion of this question in the n. on
elirelv
ttjv
oi)6e
y)p.lv
/<7rXa,yeis d/cva>
8
aiV
'
in
marg. adscripta \a[
ws Hunt:
fort. re\t>d<T-
1 1 T6\p.rjv pap.
dXX'
eTTeiirep
io
Eur. Hel. 1619. In Lys. 31. 1 &v clearly

goes with the infinitive and O. C. 748,
Antiph. 3 7 1, id. 5.69, Thuc. 8. 66, Xen.
;
3. 4. 7, Dem. 9. 68, Plat. Theaet.

r44 A, as well as Eur. Her. 1355, seem to
require a similar explanation.
But I
would again put forward the suggestion
that in such cases the influence of ay
may extend to both verbs ; and this must
be so in Plat. rep. 443 e ei 54oi rjfxat
dvopoXoyeiadai.-.Tiv av otei ol-qdijvat. rovro
avrov 8pa<rai; and in Xen. mem. 1.5. 1,
unless we are prepared to admit that
num.
may be
followed by an aorist inrepresenting future time,

toXjmiv: see cr. n. The evidence
of our mss is strongly in favour of the
forms r6\p.a and r6\fiav in tragedy, and
they are confirmed by metre.
On the
other hand rb\p\t)v is unsupported, although it was recognized by Phrynichus
(p. 114, 20 de B. = Bekk. anted, p. 66.
irriv.
The nearest parallel in
23).
Sophocles is Track. 705 uar ovk e\u
rd\aiva iroi yvw/Jiris iro~w.
Euripides
uses weaeiv is c. ace. more freely, generally as a periphrasis expressing somewhat
otop.ai
finitive
11
more
forcibly
what might have been
rendered by the aor. inf. of the verb

corresponding to the abstract noun (to\p.T}<rai,
epauOijvai, etc.).
So th tpwra
irlirrftv (='tofall in love') Eur. fr. 138,
and c. gen. /. T. 1 1 72, Batch. 812 ey
tpbfiov -wtaovre Phoen. 69
's tpiv iriirruv
fr. 578.
Occasionally it may be held that
irtoeiv retains the sense of to yield or give
way, as in Eur. El. 982 ds dvav Spiav
ireaelv or Or. 696 e/s opyrjv ttotuv (contrast Tr. fr. adesp. 80).
;
'
IXNEYTAI
j)T
fiaTivoj,
]<w
yap
ayuoeiu raScKVVTjytTio.
e/x/xafrjc;
eVwf
KTjpvyfi
7rai>Te\<;
[^cot]? fiporols re firjheu

\v0Ca
235
15
jaw S' cV^X^[o]i/ t[v]Xa r[ou 7raiToc; <rr/)aT[ov
|kio[
I.....H
J7TCtTa [8c
Htcraakwv
[t]ci
c JTreo-o-vflfryf
Botam'a? re
f
eVci jra
y\ rjs
.]?
[tTo]X[15,
8[
desunt versus fere quattuor

ii
js
Acj/hko[
yci jrof', v6\eu
18
(i.e.
nartvu ex ^larri/wr corr. pap.

tyrd) Wilamowitz : artixv Hunt
15 (ftfiarit ex tfifiiwtii corr. pap.
r6tt) suprascr. pap.-
14
18 nq, cum
add. pap.'
minu.s constat
23
ex duolms fragmenlis oonfects

o" (i.e. ox-rut) babd in marg. pap.
Stat,
16
rdit: o
marg.
de singulorum sede
]tov in
post v. 13 desunt fere
<juatti
13 Jt|Ti partvw: for the rhetorical

asyndeton see on Kur. Pho.n. I10.
quoting 0. C. III, thini
may be right. warrX<
liUT(vu>tr (cr. n.
is perhaps rather authoritative than uuithat is to say, it may be compared
wuli .-////. 1163 Xawr T xw/x" warreX))
Ki\p\jyy.' l\v
*l)pvaV* : see
onfr. 110. 4H.
As a rerb of commanding
it is followed by the inf. with^: the form
proclamation wa* /MfJrit iyvotlru.
01 fT.
15 Wflamowiti rngeaioaaiy fBfiplfcd
(UoXoftfta from (r. 990, as if &*o\ov6la
he use
of the word in hunting may be inl
M<M'a(<xo'.
fr.im
Xcn.
tation are
il.
suggested:
rumours.'
be
'distracted
:ng to h.
might also
by 1
mi.
J.
At any
put them anywhere else.
does
11
there
for
to accept Wilamowiu's 6pew*

id
with dXX* o0Tit in 17. or Hunt's alternative tytycio- in 10 with ff*fi-6wr in 16.
In any case, the combination OmcsV
r. arpa
tribal of the
whole host of Thrsciatt*,' is a chnny

one, and I should prefer to begin with
dpwr (or ,1por*) and to take
rorAt
arparov with what follows, adopt-
fwrd*' r '-
Hunt printed
If so,
rice or of the
ins into these lines, ami I hesitate
lias preserved the

geographical nan
ami little or nothing beyond. The remw. 18 13 are contained in two
separate fragments for their position sec
ApoBott
be any good reason
Xrwi sec Jebb on Troth
HSfl
rate,
A|x>11o' journey
nbed
god which
Thcssaly was the

tiaditumal scene, ami Anton. Lib. J3
describes them as bsaaj in the same
pastures as the herds of Admetus. Therenick unlikely that Sophocles
a,
30
16
So
the
phi:
ov
10
(>.,.
The hcnlsoi
Hunt's note.
Hermes
Ml
fw
trrpurhi
the supplements
*aXr r' tynmjwm, v<M'
and yî roXwir^rott.
36 AwfMCs- no doubt marks the
passage to the I'eloponncsc. Similarly
I04>0KAE0YI
236
TJKco
fw[.]a.[
.30
Kvk\kijvr)<s T ov^crfiaTov
re -^copou es
etre 7roi]/x7)v eir'
[a>9
8'
v[
dypwcr^pa)!'
rt?
17
[/xayatXoKavJrw^ iu Xoyco 7rap[uxTarai
yevovs
dyy\[\&> TaSe,
k . .^(opa tov Uai(ovo<; ootis a\y \dfir),
[....]. to -^prj/xa fALados eoS* 6 Ke[Lp.vo<;.
to>v dpêi(ov vviM(f)oy^vt][rov
[77
rt? eori,
[#7ôai]i>
10
35
77-acriv
33
38
34 /xapiXoKavrQu suppl. Wilamowitz ]v in marg.

tov 0w/>a t&v (twv Wilamowitz) Hunt
fort. to. eXwpa
marg. add. pap. 2
]d[ in
37
pap. 2
add.
avrbxpyy-a-
t<$8
Hunt
Anton. Lib. 23, after making Hermes

pass through Boeotia (v. 22) and Megaris,
brings him directly to the Peloponnese
by way of Corinth. For the adjective
cf. O. C. 695 if to ixeyaXq. AwpiSi vaay
The schol. on O. T. 775 inIIAojros.
terprets Aw/w's as Ht\owowriaio.Kri.
30
Alekler
suggests
plausibly
iV
nix".
32
Wilamowitz was scarcely
f.
fied in altering is to et:
tl
5'
justi-
v\n](3a.Tir)$
Unless, however, 5' is

which the marginal comment (cr. n.) by no means proves, a new
sentence must begin here, which it is not
ivravda
iroi(J.T)v.
an error
for 6',
easy to adjust agreeably with the context.

Some case or compound of v\t) seems
inevitable, but would require a qualiflcation.
There does not seem to be enough
room
in
33 for
^s 5'
i)\r]i>
(io\ui>
T-fjvS"
\
unnecessary to omit the

of d.ypw<TTT)p(j)i>, although there is no
ff
For aypwother example of the form.
"re
/ere.
It
is
on fr. 94.
34 papiXoKavTwv, a brilliant conjecture of Wilamowitz from fr. 1067.
is at hand to hear
v Xo-yw irapCoTaTai,
0-7-175
aypdiTTis see
'
my
words,' supports the soundness of the

MS reading in Phil. 319 roiffSe y.dpTvs iv
\6yois, which has been the object of some
suspicion.
35
For the relavv|j.<f>0YVVTJT0v.

tionship between nymphs and satyrs see
Hes. fr. 44 Rz. e wv (sc. the daughters
of Hekateros [?] and the daughter of
Phoroneus) otiptiai Xi)/U0at deal iêyiyivos ovTi5avu>i> 'SarOpuv kolI
Here satyrs and nymphs
are children of the same parents, but the
anonymous satyr-play published in Ox.
Pap. VIII 63 (fr. I, 7) agrees with the
present passage, describing the satyrs as
vovto,
Acot
d.fj.Tixo.voepyuv.
Si vvfupwv, Baxxtov 6" vwypircu.

Silenus, the lover of the nymphs (////.
Yet satyrs are
149), is their father.
iraiSes
sometimes themselves joined in wedlock

with nymphs (Ov. Fast. 3. 409) while
the Sileni are children of the Naiads
(Xen. symp. 5. 7).
In Norm. 14. 113
the satyrs are the sons of Hermes and
Iphthime, the daughter of Dorus. See
further on 218 ff.
37 The obvious supplement rbv (pwpa
does not fit tov IlatQvos, and Wilamowitz
;
substituted tG>v for tov in consequence,

But it is not satisfactory to alter the text
in order to justify even so plausible a
Hunt
restoration of the lost letters.
suggests to, dupa...&pvvTai as an alternative, .but admits that to. dupa. scarcely
fills the gap.
It is perhaps possible that
daXupa (written to. eXupa.) might stand
llanbv as well as
here cf. Horn. 2 93.
llcuav (O. T. 154) is a familiar iirii(\r)o~is
of Apollo for an attempt to connect it
with Paeonia see C. A', xxvi 249. It is
worth remarking that Usener {Goth'rnamen, p. 154) found in Sophocles the
earliest identification of Paion and Apollo,
But it is curious that Apollo should refer
to himself by this title, especially as the
:
circumstances have
no connexion with
his functions as the Healer.
38
avToxpypo- was restored by

Hunt, but avToxpyno. does not mean
'forthwith,' and is not obviously approFor its special use
priate to the context.
to mark a pun (like irv/Mws etc) see Neil
on Ar. Eq. 78. Probably then we should
t<jJ5'
recognize another instance of to xp^m,

used vaguely as in 44 and 136, and preceded by a participle such as ivfoat or
even eupwv.
IXNEYTAI
217
^lAHNOS
1
to] <tov (jxovrjfxaB

/3oo>]/tos opdioMTi <tvv
ecr
[cr}n-ov8y raS'
[trjoi,
napecm
17
'XnoWou,
ôlfi*
6t\(i)V yV(T0aL T<t>S'
(.ttk\vov
eus
K7)
pvy[IdOî,
40
Trpeo-fivrj]
[fj.adan>,
cve[ pydrr)^
npo(r<f)L\r)<;
ilTi(T(Tv6r)V hp\
OfJLQ),
]
av
to
7r&>5
yap
t[o]
-^prjfia
tovto
Kvv^yf e']cra>.
trot,
yc[ pa]?, /not KCt/xei'oi/ X/:>[ l; ] <roL cr }r
^*M
**5
fia[ Xi jor' V[icrToX]aur[t. 7r]potT0o-v9[ai xpeat \v,

7raI8a5 8* /x[ou]? otTtroicri [. . .]auc[.]^8a[. ][]
r.
39
'a
30
.J[.]
46
Mekler
suppl.
to,
la- to.
i7rcp
I/
47
sq. supplcvi
have accepted Mekler's
aVep
cktcLXJcis
oaaoioi ex oatuct corr. pap. 1
xi'riryTif
41 <rrrov&TJ With iis relative clause

(longs to <jr<r<n'('Tji',aivl the hypcrlxiton
vhich of course goes with na&u*,
And my MMH
CM
cast-
inilar
in
t'
//<!.
)cse forms
1
(./*'.
The seepience of thought ap-
pears to be,
1 expect nn
is
5),
to Ktvyytiv.
46 iT.
have
'
am
ready to
assist
for
tewardod.
only you will
rell
shall aid
it
...
The
luomise.'
to briflg
is
speaker'
ApoUo to business. In this

mdeanmred to restocc 45 f.;
to >dp -ytpai was admitted hy Hunt to !*

a possible reading, but was rejected .is
unsuitable.
orthepalacogra;
his note must be consulted.
47 f. are a
'.
717.
1-
If
7* (KKVinryJocn.
from Kurriytiv, a verb
come
I.
any text
in
way
ur
7'.
(
uji xuhrwr f^"
oU' iwdWvrcu: see also
44 KwrpftVw
itle,
There
tticulty.
newer formal i<.n

which in its turn gave
fiffour as well as the
ipplemcnt (see cr. n.), since w 4>oi/"t of

le /. /r. is admittedly too long, and is
r>t
required so shortly I* fore at.
le unusual position of the pronoun see
uehner'ieith 464, 4 anin. :.
eed
Xc'yct?.
ry remaikahle,
t!>
ml they must be added to the
which
list
it
puzzling problem
the elision p
ightly deciphered, an optative (e.g.
arttXaiu' Ar) i> |iossil)lc.
'Above all,
your behests must Ik: enlarged by the
secure reward for me of a golden
kiu4VOV
the word must 7>c ondd
:
earlier than
aiyiau, a\/<rw, vodicu), woriau!
>
nit
p.
480
ft*.,
Brugmann,
tier
.'
/'.
101
J,
Dtalttt,
iv pp.
'
how-
suggestion,
forward
10751 on the strength
which
<
-aiV drari rjjo* stiff* rat

The pri/.c was fixed
Pind. Isth. I.
or secured for the winner
16 dXX' >' iitdoTy Ipy/tart kuto r/Xet,
where rrWot is equivalent to yipaKpdrti (Jebb's n).
rcdit.
the Ms xA-\'. I- l r '* (and

the possibility that another l<
perhaps represents an original xp v0 '
9Tt^4t, as xt>K *' oaTf i *<** appears in
some mss of Pind. OL 8. 1. In thai
&
seems,
Ita
Juotr
tt
Kuttmann)'
Theognost. ap.
u 20 ra 4id
wvpitau, ipiaau, d v
X+yoiviv.
rev tVw /.ijnara.
$4aau>, nvnryjaou.
Maas points out Inexact parallelism between /*<ra< (Mom.
t
tlptalif
*vnry4n)%,
Kvrtryiaai
V.
yioatif.
:
jploour
passage x/>io-
W T
worth of the not
ally valuable prizes.
>re solid than a wreath.

ronlcal application ol the compound
he passage
well suited to
is
the Oldff
<
is literal,
nrlude
1
figurative
.-rne
Here XP***and the second member

o>m|Hiuud figurative: the satyrs looked
1
ami
kivrfyiaio*
is
presses
possil
>
101.*#' MeAauu
A.
1 .i
MM
IO<t>OKAEOYI
238
25
Col.
iii
[lovvov e/x7r[e'Sov T]aS[e.
All.
%\.
ra[? ySovs dnda) orôi
An.
[cci
SI.
An.
tL
o"<'
6 y'
[.]<>
.xi]puiv
crv 8' e/x7re'Sov
ocrns
ecr#'
^[
[SdVi ]i>. 5
r[ot]/i,[a] 8c.
\e<ro
[
]
An. [...].
a[
rovro;
rt
Si.
An. ikevdepos
Xeyjcts;
7ro[t
yivos ecrrai t4k]v(ov.
crv [irdv re
XOPOS SATTPOX
dye
7ro8a
y8a[<rii>
re
~\v
d7ra7ra7r[at
a*
a,
eirtOi /cXw7r[
virovofxa.
10
6o
o"e rot [
]
k[
SiavvTOJP d[
irarpiKav yap[yv
65
7TW9 7ra ra Aa#/3i[a vvyj.a
52
65
d\X]6Tpta r[
pap.
yr)f>[vv
49
crirov5i)v
sense required.
fiovvov
50
\6yov,
(fr.
852
in
5]tavux(ta) a
inaivQ might give the
Observe the Sophoclean
T. 790.
Some less
required
restoration is then
/.
51 krol^, without definite reference

everythingi* prepared '), is idiomatic.
See Thuc. 2. 3, 10, 98 etc.
'
56 iroutv dwpeau a \K V p is suppliedj
('
by Hunt (ed. mm.).

57 For the servitude of the chorus
dialogue
with
Apollo was
completed,
<rc
toi
in addresses,
is a common combination
with \<?yw or the like fob
lowing: At. 359, 1228, EL 1445, O. C.

r 578The governing verb is omitted
in Ar. Av. 274.
63 virovop-a seems to be used meta.
phorically (=///-). The transference

attested by Hesych. iv p. 2 r 5 inrovo/ta.
kXo
'
65
^ tol
-rraTpiKav
vapwv.
f
'our fathers
voice> , corres ponds to irarptKOs Uyos in

A (the argurnent of Par .
piat soph
menides). The MS has
yrtpvv here and

Several
but ey&pwe in 244.
other instances of ij where a might have
been expected occur (237, 283, 321), and
I have followed Hunt (ed. mitt.) in reThe difficult
storing the Doric form.
question relating to the trustworthiness
of our mss in this respect is thoroughly
discussed by Tucker on Aesch. Clio.
i
58 ff. The remains of the choral ode

are too slight to reveal the general
character of the metre, but dochmiacs
are clearly recognizable in 68, 69 and 72.
There is a certain degree of similarity to
Robert holds that
Eur. Cycl. 656 ff.
the chorus entered ffiropdSrjv before the
his concluding direc-
61
H. Richards conjectures
which would correspond to Spxov
obvious
,
l
jn
and that they heard

tions
see on 102.
n.).
in
ra ix"(v) hi marg. add. pap.*J

in marg. add. pap.'-
Theone primitus scriptum
86criv:
efnrtdw<roiJ.ei>
59
marg. add. pap. 2
66
29<>,
pp. 246250.
IXNEYTAI
nocral
KXep.fj.aTa
av Tvyot, no
narpi r ikevOepou /$[
1">
7ra>5,
vv a/xa
Trot'ovs
#eo?.
239
.j
/xct^.J
dueroj
<f>i\o<;
70
7rpo<f>TJva<;
dpi^rjka ^pvcrov Trapaheiypara.

Oeol
-I.
T 1/^17 /cjat Scu/xof WvurrjpLe,

M 6 Tpdyovs ov hpdpr)p cVetycrat,
[
rv x[ c J"'
70
68
pott liunc v. paragraphum hal>et pap.

HttKM oofrXoaarrrw add. pap.1
<rw corr.
7a dptfrXa in tine v. 71 pap.
73 <[. .]imjp apr in
irg. add. pap.*
74 Tpdyoft ex xpayot corr. pap.*
et (fr ex
lc^> remarkable than

\
140 n.). The supplement
may have been (/jr. ^r.) <titx-
trovcri
rMnri
(fr.
I
60
to Ix.- restored (see

>
particularly as it is not
net her the words arc connected
with the following lines, which are themMM altogether intelligible, and
nay be corrupt, a- Wilamowitz thinks
1
n.),
more
fiioi-f
fiira,
I'ichl.
70 ff.
\in<U.
Taking the b
follow-,:
would interpret
Now that
>ur god has displayed WllfOdM prizes of
{old. let him therewithal at om
our labours.
The gold i-
'
next, let the

t.
write vp iua (rather
I
vina, which belongs to the He!age) as the room breathing of
:he papyrus seems to indicate, although
course, be an instance of
aspiration (fir. (81 a.),
0* is
then adverbial, as elsewhere it
lecure,
rj
fit
^-
mJ ana
Hi.
df((T|Xa.
raOr' tiwuif ariartj
the
in
clear,
ipicuous or striking.
on
9*viiaaTi\
aptftXri
(I
although
<
H
1
&;ar
simply
things
wapaS^Yô.ra.
MOOTi
distinguish the !
n
fr.
T4xi
tin
bajitn
74
Mt
Tv^ji*
Kur.
.1
joo) have inclined lo
tit
finhivi
the CXcUl
idw.
7?.
rucker on
Kuehner-Gerth
19 ti
Aesch. TMtti. 139.ol: ihr
preases the object at which an
directed or towards which desire moires.
The connexion with (9*lyt9$*t
mcric a 300 iruyofurto p Meio. Tii
:
for
cognate*.
Btonfield on A
11
here
of their
17,
Keci-ut
is
was
that Aristophanes wrote fi#wri)/>

than *l9i>T^pit, as restored in the nt. fr.
For the constant confusion of nW-rw and
J80),
tsan. 9. 39.
11
ni.int tea .1
//iff.
p.
i&v*w ami
by ftXst,
II
DOl
lp<fi)Xwrot
influenced
1.
Inn
MM
g.
and other
Kueluur-<crth
!>y
used
rfjt
Um
and in* f T~~i|"nfcii
Mfticipud clause, as in Xtu.anal>.
ifxavrbf xaiia ttji Tt'^ft

t& Si&oiwnt.
Fortune
here invoked as blind chance contrasted
with foresight, although the first beginnings of that sense are to be found
in Attic poetry (O. T. 977. Am.
Rather, she is the divine power to which
all human action is subservient, daughter
of I'mmetheia, as Alcman calls her (fr.
62), mightiest of the fates according ro
l'imlar (fr. 41).
C TV. Ir. adesp. 500
wdrruv rvparvot i) rt'Xif 'en ru $tQr
*re.
Thus the vague itu/tor Wvpt^/hi
should not l>e understood as refel
Apollo, bat as a further description ol
In) ne guiding
63. 7 ol 6i TT)da\ioi> liwKar uparth
to
tt;W\iw di)\oi Sri tufa pry
top Tu avSpurrwv ftto* if Try,*/- id
Observe also that the worship of dya0bt
iaiuwf was 111 it r
-d.it Allienwith that of d->atffj rt% 1
.11.
M
I'htmis,
Myth. p. io*s.
8'
1080 iyii
vifku*
i*ttybtur&i wtp'Apijoi.
I04>0KAE0YI
240
dypav
\eiav
iKKvvqyeaaL
crv\r}\_<r~]iv
75
3>[o]i/8ou /c\[o]7rata5 /3ovs dTrecrTepy)p.4vo\y.

\t\u)v et Tt? ottttJp
25
[f\fiot
[3>oi)8gj
<jTi\y]
\_a]v [e]t>7
dvaKTL
t]'
TravTekr)*;
]a[. .]r[. .]?
kclttJkoos,
77
(ftpdcras roSe,
Trpo<T(f>L\r)<;
euepy[Y]TT)9.
0'
row \o[yo]u
a/xa[
p.rjvv\rpa
Col. iv
xo.
cr[
io)
V7T0[
8'
21.
ovS[
(f>r)(TlV
T19,
OLKV
7]Br)
ay' efa
St)
77
85
/c[
7ras o-[
pivr)\oLT(ov 6ayx[cucri
avpas idv
77
a
tttj
irp\_
olttXovs 6/c\a{w[^
10
78
X[ in marg. add. pap. 2
(i.e.
...<ppa<ras
70
suprascr. pap. 2
rd.Se)
90
]y
Wilamowitz
Trai>Te\T)s scripsi
7'
dp&aas pap.
roSe
irpoareXris pap., awrt\r,$
Hunt
75 XeCav kt. The asyndeton is no

doubt intended to emphasize the climax
It
may be
(Kuehner-Gerth 11 341).
questioned whether <rt)\r)<riv is here concrete, or whether XeLav and dypav are to
be taken, as is quite possible, as no/nina
On the whole, the idea of discovering the stolen cattle seems to be

more prominent than that of punishing
the theft.
In fact, an abstract noun is
sometimes employed, where we should
see on Eur. Hel. 50,
require a concrete
actionis.
80 f. The
reward.
85
<pr\<j[v
f. are well restored by Hunt
ovdds (prjcriv eidtvai rdde ; Hoikcv ijdij
Kai irpbs tzpy' opp-av p.e belv.
He quotes
Eur. /. 7\ 1072.
Tis,
t)
87 a-y tla supports the reading of

the mss in Ar. Ran. 394, where several
editors adopt Bentley's dXX' da, as well
For the
as V's reading in Plut. 316.
1675.
77
200
twv
is
T6v...uirb
demonstrative.
ffip
Cf. 0. T.
(pdiaov Kepavixp.
78
4>pdcras (see cr. n.) seems to be

a necessary correction.
79 TrpoffTeXr/s (see cr. n. ) does not
purport of these lines was
to promise the informer a share of the
which is said
on Horn. I 262
aspiration,
schol.
rows
irpoGt\6ovcrT)S.
to be Attic, see
tt?s
Cf.
5a<ras 'Ar-
168,
fr.
221,
4-
89
scent.
avpas, evidently with the meaning

Cf. Antiph. fr. 217, 22 (11 10: K.i
ZavOcuaiv atfpcus oQip.a irdv dydWerai,

with the savour of roasting.
i.e.
and has no obvious

seems probable, therefore,
that the preposition has been copied by
mistake from the previous line.
Hunt
substitutes <rwTe\r)s, 'contributory,' which
right,
unless
may well be
we should prefer the more complimentary iravreXris
It may be
('all-effective').
observed
that Aeschylus and Sophocles (if we in-
aggerated his
each use the word navreXris

four times, but it is never employed by
Euripides or by Pindar.
For 5i7rXo0s in this

the trail on all-fours.
sense cf. Eur. El. 492 dnrXrjv duavOav /cat
Verg. Aen. 11. 645
waKippoirov ydvv.
occur
elsewhere,
meaning.
clude
It
v. 13)
90
SiirXous
okXcL^wv
terpret as 'bent double.'

plies irddas
with
SiirXoOy,
I should inTerzaghi supbut the chorus
are not exhorted merely to bend their Ugs.

Silenus encourages them to bend over the
track, but it seems from 1 19 that they ex-
command by moving
along
IXNEYTAI
241
vnocrfios iu xpio
[
ovtcjs tpevvav Kal tt\_
.
anavra xprjoTa
*<x[l
reJXetJ/.
HMIX.
0eo5 0eb<; 0eoc fled?-
ea [ea-
X LU coiyfiv
fxr)
HMIX.
HMIX.
HMIX.
tclvt
10
Spcj/xev,
tl
n?
#09
crt'yfa]*
ri
icrxe-
twu
ear' iictLva
Tolo\i] ravr-Q
p[.
.]rci.
95
^/xara.
a7roi[iaa]i/ ayet.
tt)i/
rav
<L
fi[ou)]v r[a]
8eW
to
rj
Sokci
7rais
[a/a']
rjvofiev
00
Theonc scriptum in marg. add. pap. a

04 d in marg. centesimo
xPV*#<u
upturn alterum fa add. YVilamowit/.
06 jHinara V. Maas: o-hfiara
olim Hunt (littera prima in pap. evanida)
oiy
07
ad<i. pap. 1 et paragraphum infra
8 -j<j. secundum Wilamowiuium distrihuti, nisi quod iile choruni
del
paragraphos post vv. 98, 99 (Ins). 103, 104 habet pap.
D divisit.
in
m
turn t delcvit {tTitp [. .]n* in marg. add. pap. 1 )
dp' tyou** Murray:
|
:.
4(1)romt>
transfixa dolorc (sc.

ingens ad
tttmt
ttrram duplicato poplite Tumus. dxAajcir
signifies to crouch, although no doubt it is
often applied specifically to squatting on
the haunches.
Wilamowitz, who reads
diroi j, thinks that AxXafwr should refer
ng ; but how could he then
kasta).
926 mridtl
j.
imoo-jtos Iv xp<j. scenting closely,

th their noses close to the ground.
4*1*11 Kal yap
i
1
roi'Tuv
(via
some
(i.e.
Toppv9ti> avarr? wp6%
u.ttcr
animals)
vwoona
ttip rpoiptjf
ywop-tva, guided by the smell,

is
The
exactly parallel.
vrhnooi
glos
-Tnoi- ie+paip6pAro%
rect,
and may very
is
sub-
well, as
thinks, refer to this passage.
row*
I
6 30, 14 Ihrocfitt' o fareKal vv9wt.

sV xpip cf.
1. 84 * XPV **' "ttâw.Worrff [drrl
rt
<!.).
9*6%
is
ropOstad to
mark the ex
lamowitz
r. Hit.
560 w tfeoi 9t6t yap koI to ytyvtbtKu*
0i\o. t, a passage which shows that even
rsooai a conception as the articular
So
t can be described as 0t6t.
here 0tb* is equivalent to 9t'Uur rt tort*
'
'
..
.;
suggestetl,
gap.
is
ar. whirl
found to I* too long
Hunt
in
the distribution of these lines:
Wilamowitz divides the chorus into three

sections, for reasons which will be discussed in the n. cm 168.
Robert, who
divides into ûÂpto, discovers three
separate speakers in oaflk section, and
so finds an argument in favour of the
view that the satyric chorus always eon*
sisted of 11 members.
The tradi:
against these sulxli visions, but the correct
apportionment of the s|>eeches is nccessarily doubtful.
07 The exact allusion which is
tended
probably irrecoverable.
thing in the attitude of the chorus seems
to have suggested to their minds the
-rii>.ilitie observed on the occas:
the departure of a new colony.
Or, as
Vsuggests, they may have
is
1<
DON
thinking
oi
CmVmm
following the
cow, or the Theracan* enuring Cyrene

behind the raven.
In any case, t*4%
must refer t-. Apollo a the god ..f
made
the
same
for the
correc-
tly.
Hunt
(cd.
is:
d ittlntv
..
vpfitTv
Robert has
00
But imlva. ('here are those steps') is

forcible, and would not be preeluded even if it were certain that (Hinara
or lx prl Iiacl not previously been nirntioned.
Cf. /. I III tout' JmV
e<x<pl%
vpoxitpo* &x#oi ..iipnoum,
ib.
I
1178 rM' (cr' inuro.
have followed
more
colonisation, particularly und
''a.
06
mi
Wilamowitz
mm.) accept eri BnpAvm

Maas also
sec cr. n.
for
iiciiva,
\>
in
na
epx^ycrirt.
'
''
,,|n, l-
fr**
.*
^-
Sec cr. n. (> I. 157 docs oof

nd iiôtup which i mi unusual that
Murray's reading to l>e preferred. The
letter before r is doubtful, but there does
s *i
not appear to be room for
16
ICXpOKAEOYI
242
HMIX.
21
SoKel irdvv.
[y]a>p avO* e/cacrra crr)fxaiveL raSe.
<ra<f)r}
HMIX.
HMIX. adpet
avr
25
HMIX.
Col. v
tovto fierpov
icrrl
^Po^V
.]07T
ird\i[V].
fxdka'
xC^]/361
[.
avrb to)v ouXcju
TOviTLO"r)fAOP
/cat
ISov'
ISov,
poifiSrjfji'
[]/c/A[/u,ay]/ui[y]i>oi>.
Ta [
KCLL
]
.~\.
v c\ov
idv tl raiv
]/xei/o?
[cctgj
irpo]^ ovq
[/A0A.17.
poTBAoc
HMIX. ovk
elcraKovo) wo) [ropa>]s tov <#[ey]/AaTog,
d\X aura
102
exi<rifj.w/j.v
in
105
Hunt
fy[vv) re] ô)
jxyjv
104 i kfie /xay fievov scripsi iKp-erpov^vov

suprascr. pap. 2
Kai corr. pap. 2
Ka
x?l[ ]' P a P2
ex poifideiavn corr. pap. :' poifidoi primitus pap.
?<ru wpos... uoXy
marg. add. pap.
SpofjLwi
107
poi/3dy)fi ecu?
ns
8oKi irdvv
'I'm quite sure of
it.'
Cf. Plat. Enthyd. 305 C irpos 8e rip dvai

Kai SoKeiv tr&vv irapa ttoWois, where it
may be doubted
if Stallbaum was right

connecting irdvv with 7roXXo?s.
100 ' For each actual mark, as we
For
see them (rdde), is a clear proof.'
av8' ?Ka<rra see on Eur. Phoen. 494.
o"r](icuvet is used absolutely as in Track.
345 X& X670S <n)fj.ouviT(j).
102 The occurrence of avros in 100
and 104 favours the adoption of avTO
'
rather than av to.
Here is the very
imprint of their hoofs.'
iirio-rjfiov, eiri<rr)fia are used of the devices stamped on
coins.
On the other hand, it seems
hardly possible that iwio-iixov, if that
word is to be discerned in the marginal
note, could express the rolling gait of
Robert, accepting o-^/xara in 96,
oxen.
supposes that both lines refer to the
mark of ownership which Apollo had
branded on the hoofs of his cattle, and
in
that this mark

bably in 52 f.
104
had been
Kfjtp.tt7(ivov
disclosed, pro-
see cr. n.
The
a serious objection to the reading

iKfieTpovfievov : contrast Eur. fr. 382, 3,
where the present expresses customary
action (~ds iKfierpeirat). Tr.
'here is
a moulding of the very size.' fw'rpov
implies that the chorus measured the
track with their eyes, and observed its
tense
is
correspondence
iX v V
T(*
109
Hunt
scripsi: /Sowy 8i'...\aj3ri
99
rdhe
(ttl/3o<s
cf. Ai. 5 fierpovnevov

xeivov veox^paxO' ottws kt.
:
<m/J ex <rriX corr. pap.
106 Perhaps aKpodi/xei/os, if 107 followed immediately, as was probably,

though not certainly, the case.
The
lower margin is broken off, so that the
end of the column cannot be fixed.
107 See cr. n. Hunt's restoration is
open to two objections. (1) pof$STip,a
is unsuitable, as applied to the lowing
of cattle.
It is true that Monk read iv
poi^d^crei fiovKoXiwv in Eur. /. A. 1086
with this meaning, but none of the subsequent critics, except Paley, has agreed
with him. poi^Si}<n$ there expresses the
whistling of the herdsmen, just as polios
attributed to shepherds in Horn. 1 315.

Following the clue which these passages
suggest, I have provisionally restored as
above.
(2) The usage of tragedy inis
variably requires it' utuv (ut6s) in the

proposed context: see Aesch. Che. ^4,
Soph. O. T. 1387, ^/.*n88, El.
449.
Eur. Med. 1139,
737> x 439> fr- 858.
Rhcs. 294, 566. pdiftdos is irapeinypa<pr),
and appears to refer to the sound of the
lyre which the semi-chorus fails to recognize. Wilamowitz thinks the word could
not be so applied but see on 255. Robert
also explains pciifidos as the bellowing of
the cattle, but objects to Hunt's restoration on the ground that, though the ?rapewiypcHpri follows 107, the sound had
already been heard and correctly interpreted by the first speaker.
109 f. The construction is as follows
avrd re tx vrl Kai 6 (rrt/Sos [i.e. the indi:
IXNEYTAI
243
Ktlvuiv ivapyr\ tu>v /8[o]o>i/
no
fiadew rrdpa.
IIM1X. ea fidka.
rot ual fid Ata rd fSrjfiara
TovfinaXiv hehoptcew aura 8 i<tl&.
f* ecrri touti ; ri9 6 Tponos tov ray/naTô?,
e[s] Toviricroi rd irpoadtv rjXkaKTaL, rd 8' av
ivavrC dWrjKoLCTi o~v/x7r[7r\yJ/xcVa.
7ra\iv(TTpa(f>r}
cs
Sciôc.
nV
SI,
IIS
(1.*.
pap.
tit
ct
sacpius
T)(yr)v
|
Towri) suprascr. pap. s
av pap., undo hibopntv av' rdi' Hunt

wpdyftarot in marg. add. pap. 2
\
idual mark- and the entire trail] Kthnm

/3owr s-dpa [ = raptiai] to5< Ivapyrj
Wilainowit/
(MM time placed

but sulisequently
The
1 full -top before audit*.
of the two,
nit there in no reason why the passage
.hould not lit- contina
nar. val \ui Ala ocean also in
tadtiv.
after
at
orifiot,
Cur.
We may
(.></.
'nav, verily, the footprints are

and face in the opp
i-ai,
'/y.
at ShQleto remarked
p. 185). m.tvis not SO
(Dem.
much
rpose of affirming the preceding

11
the subsequent
ibjection.'
Cf. Xen. Cyrof. 1. 6. 29 ov
pt7ruxr*u 6r< KaKOi'/ryioi rV eiVi KM..,
r\oi"tai ; Koi ua A/', fîj, Hrjplw y*.
2. 2. II roi >id Aia
n,
why, "i course I
>.'
lor the sense cf. //. H<rm. 344
.
'
rjff ir jVr
yip fiovair
it &<t<po$t\6i>
l\ov<sa
Ulnar'
\aiva.
Hunt puts
\nnwva
k6h Altpawt at-
a lull stop after pr)fiara,
ind adopts the circumflex accent of the

by reading * rii' (see cr. n.).
h
But the arrangement in the text is
i^ltsh the emphasis would !>e
npresi
look at them.
mm
lion
i'
114
of
ai'.rot
4*
tixdoai
dnwitrxonat.
toi
dp* i}t]vpe<;,
arv Ty)i\h^
uw
rdptori rait
115
T I/ jSoT/JXarr/f.
KVKrjo-fjLos tx[ c
au
;]
av,
t'iv
114
118
tovtI:
tvptt pap.
laced facing in Opposite directions to

each other.
They reach a point where
the general direction of the trail appears
to lie reversed, so that the forward marks
are now turned the wrong way
besides
tins, manv of the hoof-marks are half
obliterated by others going in the reverse
direction. The language follows !,. Iferm.
77 atria Totijuoi iwXdt, rat wp6a0tf vtic8tr,
rat b" 6wi0t* wp6o$a> Kara 6' faxa\if airrbt Ipawt (Hermes diives the
cows backwards, while he himself walks
forwards).
Cacus carried out the same
trick differently: Vcrg. Ant. s. :iorai/ii
in sptlutuam (ratios vers is,jut via rum
:
bint supports o-vuiriirXiYîvo.

'ing Xen. cyn. j. 6 ra l%rr) 6p6a
I
...rov 6' rjpot
One might
ovu*rw\tyu4pa.
Robert
also conjecture ovuTtfvpfUr*.
takes an entirely different vie* of this
According (0 him the cunning
paaaage.
ues was much more complicated
lie of the cows were driven backwards [111]; (2) others had their front
rolnriatt...
hoots I
^XXaxrui); (3) others again had their
back hoofs hoisted outwards [from'
dx.\f,X<H<ri].
Since, how e ver tillthe parallel
ing cannot be extr
paaaage in the hjmn, Robtfl n
:
that Sophocles was a dcttberaft

The ilifhculty arises from a refusal to believe that arTta s-oo^rat 6w\dt in
1
roiwitu ra wpooQtr ^Wanrai 111

Sophocles, can Inith |je appl ied simply
ami
in .\ristoph.m<s. dors not occur

elsewhere in the text of the tragedians.
Doaunon
It
to the
reversal of the
tin
MMMWI
e.
fir
it does not seem right

more usual and vaguer
Hut
wpdy par ot.

lift
to the back, and
liar. Hunt, reading irtVi^fror

mark of interrogation at tl>
reqoim wpftywatov .. itri)
the
to be
of #a'/aaerr, nhcrras
rather mtw than itmmgr.
1
>nt
marks have
some again
are inter-
n the seaae
wptorwaun
-t
I04>0KAE0YI
244
KVU7)yTLV
Trp6(TTT(U0V (SSc K/cXt/x[eVos]

777)05 yrj
15
rt? vp.G>v 6 T/ooVos
[e]Îvos ws t[i]s
koxfxr)
[tj]
rtq 7ri#i7[/co]s ku/38'
t[i]
ravra
7r[ov]
120
ovy\ /xaudduo).
KeZcrou
7r<T(oi>,
dTrodvfxaivei^ tlpl.
y^? ifxdder
iv 7r[oi]a> roVa)
[(r^/râr', o[v y]a/> tS/3i<? t/xt rou rpoirov.

125
v [5] v 5.
t[i tovt' tvêis ;] Tuva <f>ofirj ; rlv elcropaq ;
XO.
20
ei/
21.
t[i
Set//,'
07ra>7r]a5
tl irore ySa/cêvet? eâji^
d[XX' ov rts T7X 6 ] 1 K ^PX V0<i tf-et/oci[s] fxaOelv

r\l hfJTa cny]a#', 01 7r/3[o tov XaXurrjaroi ;
122 KvftSa dvfiaivus

k(k\ih^vov Hunt, interrogatione intra v. 118 terminata
123 rpoiruH pap.: corr. Wilamowitz
128 vid. comm. eip.eipei[.]
2
129 <nyad' oi Theonem legisse testatur pap. 2 : [aiy]ar
pap., primum e del. pap.
119
olim Hunt
u pap.
For the adverb ('so newly bowed to
Nic. Tlier. 689 el Se av ye
') cf.
earth
^ripa
the analogy of ipurofiavfi^, but would now

prefer irbdov eveis (Eur. Bacch. 851), as a
dypetj-
somewhat easier change and as accounting
Just as the proverb pla \6\^v

ov rp4<pet dvo ipidaKovs (Zenob. 5. n)
implies that a bush offers only limited
accommodation, so here the satyrs are
doubled up as completely as the hedge-
123 rl ravra; see on Eur. Hel. 991,

and Gildersleeve, Synt. 132.
125 v i, which recurs at 170, is an
aKv\aKa$ yaKtris
<tcus
rj
\aiSpr\v
it pociraiov
better for rivl.
121
hog,
when he
large
enough
is
marks
for
crvvrjOeia \eyop.ev.
tucked into a space just

him. The ex'" os cunningly conceals himself for purposes of
self-defence cf. Ion Chius fr. 38, 4 ffrpb/3(\os ap.<pa.Kai>Oov (Salmasius for
d/j.(p'
aKavdav) eiXiôs difias Kelrat Oiyelv re
:
Kai
5a.Keii>
dfjiTjxavos.
122 The exact intention of the allusion

obscure. diro8vfiavis, which, if sound,
provides the only instance in the text of
is
an irregular anapaest (see p. 230),
unknown compound, and
it
is
is difficult
an
to
perceive the relevance of any derivative

of Ovuaivu.
Wilamowitz suggested that
airodvp.a.iveii> was used for dirodv/xidv, and
that the latter was a synonym of dirowtp5e<r6cu.
But the double assumption is
unwarrantable. Hunt, in order to secure
the same meaning, conjectured dtrid/xaivets
from Hesych. 11 pp. 350, 371 s.vz\ 16/j.alvwv

and ifffj-aivei, evidence which fails to
prove that Wâlveiv could be used for
The associations of Kv^Sa are

if we may judge by Ar. Eq. 365,
irepbeffdai.
different,
exclamation of alarm ; not of admiration,

as in Ar. Pint. 895, where schol. R re-
Pac. 897, Thesm. 489 (with Blaydes'sn.'):

in other words, it alludes to trxwta aKo\aarov Kai iraipiKdv (schol. Ar. Lys. 231).
Hence I formerly suggested Trodofiavr/s on
iiripprifj.a 6avp.ao~Tt.Kbv,
Sirep iv rfj
127 ?x wv is colloquial. It is explained by Kuehner-Gerth 11 62 (followed

by Starkie on At. Nub. 131) as originally
transitive (i.e. lx uv governs rt).
Subsequently it became intransitive, as employed in Ar. Pan. 202 ov fir) <p\vapri<reis
It follows
x w "> *b. 512 XijpeZs ix uv
that in the fifth century #x w " wa s no
longer considered to be transitive.
128 f. The supplement of Wilamowitz
-
dyxov
Hunt
tis ijxei
in
both
Kipxvof was adopted by
his editions.
In that case,
would seem necessary also to accept

ipielpu from the same critic
for, as he
says, the chorus have not shown any
it
desire to investigate the sound.
But we
may very well read dXX' ov rls...i(ielpeis

IxaOeXv; as in the text, with tI drjra (Hunt)
in place of tI yv ; rl in the following line.
&XXd
is idiomatic in introducing a fresh

question, as explained by Maetzner on
Lycurg. 144.
For K^pxyos see on fr. 279.
The reading of Theon (o-iyad' ol) is
very much more forcible, as marking the
contrast with their former loquacity.
IXNEYTAI
XO.
tx[iya p.ev
2il.
t[Lv
ear
XO. o[kov
'ol. vi
kou 7rw5
XO.
6/LtOt
a*ot;cr[cti
/xiiSez/Joc,
k\vcjv
<f><t>vr)u
7TL0OV.
Sta>[y/xa y' ov8a]/xa)9 oi^Vcre.
21.
f/x[o*']
XO.
aKovcroi/
.;.-,
av r[o]v XPl llJia ] TL ] XP V0V Twd,

WfXjayeVrc? etâS'] iêvia-ficOa
[ojtiw
rbv
\j/6<fxo
XL
130
;
877. J
II.
ovk]
eKeWe]i> dTrot/oof^t^jct? \iov
ovSe[iJ<;
7r(
<:
^KOLKrcf
aj7ro]r'
fipoTu>i>.
ri fxoL \6]<f>ov ôy8[cio-^c] *a[i] Sci/iouVerc,
avayva
fxd\0r)<;
eKp.tp.ayp.ivoi,
(rco[fi.aJT
KctKicrra O-qpatu orr[c?,
cji/
[Trjacr^
140
cnaa
<f>6fiov /3A.7rojTe<?, 7ra^raJ Sei/xarou/xcvoi,

avevpa KaKopi<TT[a] Kav\ke]vdpa
10
137 \vXa7(/rrct) Aristophaoem, ty$ao' 4tvio futia. Theonem legissc te.statur pap.*:
r[\]ayPTtt
yurfitda (iiwpyioixtOa}) pap.
130 post f60o intcrpunxit
*(.]
140 (K fit nay fit ya Aristuphanem legisse te.statur pap.*
pap.
.
181
an ingeni
Wiiamowitz, after O.
Qirovo<r4>iius.
ii
.if
T.
480 rd ^(T()M0a\a >dt awofoc<t>ii,w parwhere the verb is glossed by tpvyur.

186 Wot the palaeographii .d data
rtia,
The
received suppleTiviucing. and the retort

suggests the repetition of inol {e.g. iiuA b"
')
186 t. aicovorov tri.
SO the
thing for a bit, and hear what a noise....'
by
r ordinate clause introduced
oty>
1 'nch is
takes tl
with
the
genitive
combined
of
normally
following &*ovi*
personal object
the
f. e.g. Phil.
tx alitjuo I
f\ofiai *V 90V *Xi'*tr WuTrpa W6o*rai.
For av rov Maas conjectured
ar6t. but surely the article is n
with x'ffJMarot.
The latter word is used
colloquially, ju-t as we say 'the thing.'
'
UM
lit
rnipt
'
table to the
^lvi<T(6a
1
'twpyi<fn*8a,
if
that *
but the
the papyrus
meaning required ('to l>c asloundt-d '),
which M 608MMM in I'olybius, has hitherregarded as post classical. M. Ant.
8. 15 alcxP * 1 Ti t**l{<e9oA, tl y !>?
f
140
in the
papyrus
The substance
uaX0t)s.
which
intended,
compressible chadescribed as typos n<pa\aypi*os
for its
racter, is
(Bekk.
.78, .3
I
Schw.).
cf.
Ael. et I'aus.
See 1*60
it
appears
I)cm.
ti
be
necessary to admit &-- in 141. I have
retained 4ku4uay|Uvoi here (see cr. n.)
rather than in.n'payp4ra, which is pre
1
by Hunt.
ferred
14 if.
Arra kck
KoinwrTo
read, as
is
unless
difficult,
I formerly proposed.
states, however, that there is not
>r
this reading in the lacuna.
Contrast 147 nbrurra 6yplu* and for
the grammatical principle see Kuehner(lerth I 361.
We can hardly CSfl
rupara, and must suppose that camera
h noininalixed like ra srpvra in Ar. A'a*.
There is a formal parallel in Thuc.
411.
4. 76 frrt
^ Xatpwr-ia Io\*top rijt
1.
Hotwriat.
ijt /Msyr
I do not add
yap To\foir6r*To* rsV r4rrt b-o.
Aa>faoti. for there rilr rArt may be
is
Hunt
neuter.
+6+OV +o0i04
<^pô4r^f see
on
fr.
l>r the pro*

61. The stop
v>
haltsp. J/.
/n the nifkl, imtafimimg umu femr%

taty is a iuth inpfttdl ttmrf
148
180
\pb<pot>
which is placed after

must be an
avtvfm
orat"i
ano|iim'
*|u\<
r>,
htm
I04>0KAE0YI
246
SiaKovovvres, [a"]w[/u.]ar' et[cr]tS[e]tv p,6vov

el Se nov 8er),
Ka[l y]X&j(Tcra fca[t] <f>âk]rjre<s,
ttmjtoL XoyoLcrLv ovres epya (frevyere
roto0[8]e 7J"<xt/3os, (o /ca*aaTa drjpicov,
15
ov 7toAA
oi(Ti
[TTJT-qcrcrovTos,
144
ffxVfia T
'
150
malim
152
pap.
2
corr. pap.
/xivov
17/5179
aXKo
360, 27
irecpvKbTa.
a.AA'
5ei\ov/j.ivov in
alxp-atcriv scripsi:
ir\r]v \j/6(pot /ecu <rxvi*'.
fir) ffx^lfJ-o.T'
474.
TOiovSe iraTpds is isolated.
In
order to show that it is a continuation of
the address from (paXrjres, I have printed
el...(pevyeT as a parenthesis.
148 The exploits of Silenus, his
wanderings with Dionysus, and his share
in the battle with the giants, are recorded
in Eur. Cycl. 2
9.
Wilamowitz (p. 455)
thinks that the present passage refers
rather to hunting adventures (Tagdabenteuer): see on 152.
149 oI'kois vvfitjnKois: i.e. in the
caves of the nymphs.
Cf. Horn. h.
Aphr. 262 Trjffi 5e 1<i\y]voi re kg.1 eiViro-
147
marg. Ni(candro) adscriptum: dov\ov-
Hunt
d.KfjLa?cni>
am
11
eêi\^p]yacrp.4vov
a[l)(][xoucrii>
Gerth
i.5<
TOiv opeiTpofyatv (3ot(ov
aXXcos iv voKet
glad to find that Robert
also is dissatisfied with caviar', but his
conjecture opi/iar' is no improvement.
145 (j>a\f|TS. Satyric choruses wore
the phallus: cf. Eur. Cycl. 439, and see
Haigh, Attic Theatre 3 , p. 294. For the
comic stage see schol. Ar. Nub. 538.
et. St'r), at a pinch.
For the subjunctive
with el cf. O. C. 1443, Ant. 710, Ar. Eq.
698. It is not easy to recover the nuance
of the construction, or to understand
why it was occasionally preferred to the
normal uses. Neil (on Eq. I.e.) seems
to think that it was paratragoedic in
Aristophanes, but it may rather have
been the literary survival of an almost
extinct colloquialism, like our an V please
you.
For other examples see Kuehnerid. fr.
ov 8etX[o]u/AeVov,
kK'ivovtos,
icrfiev
rjcrK^fxeua,
vvfi(j)u<ol<;
144 cro)|xaTa does not seem to be

used alone in the contemptuous sense of
hulks or carcases.
If, therefore, the conditions permitted, I should have preferred
to substitute (rxVM- aT \
mere shapes without substance.
Cf. Eur. fr. 25 yipovres
ovbtv
avopeias vno
jxp-q/xar
olkols
14;
iêipyaa/ie vov ex iêipyatrfxiva
'Apyei<p6vT7]s
7ros
iv
fiicryovr'
<pi\6tt]ti
(Tireiwv ipoivrwv.
pt-i'XV
150
to flight.
1.
cs 4>vyiiv kXivovtos, giving way

For the use of kXIvw cf. Polyb.
KapxySoviw k
27. 8 tQiv ire pi to. ixiaa
trapayyiXuaros k\lv6.ptu)v wpbs (jtvyrjv.

Aristid. I p. 178 iirei 5' ?K\ive ra irpayIn Eur. Suppl. 704 ^cXive yap
fiara.
K^pas rb \aibv r]/j.wv the verb might be
intransitive, although the editors are probably right in making icipas the object.
I
S(i\ov|ivov (see
pointed than
to be defined
cr.
n.)
SovXovfj.ivov,
rather
is
more
which requires
(e.g. by t% yvufirj).
Wilamowitz compares dypiovadai, yavpiovcrdat,
etc.
152 alxfiaio-iv. The plural indicates

different occasions, and by the use of the
word the speaker does not so much refer
to a definite weapon as to martial achievements in general. Thus the meaning is
equivalent to vi
to
5'
ef
et
armis, or practically
Cf. Eur.
in battle.'
at'xM "* "Apeoj
16 Xap-wpoi
re avWbyois.
/uae KaOeararov.
fr.
Phocn. 1273 alxv-W is

Soph. Phil. 1307 kclkovs cWas irpbt
See also Wilamowitz on Eur.
atxnv"Her. 158.
Hunt gives a.Kp.ai<nv with a
colon after ipYao-(ivov, though I do
not understand how his reading admits of
the translation but did deeds of strength.'
But it is surely far more natural to suppose
that the object of eêipyaa/j-ivov is the
antecedent to a (i.e. deeds which) in 153,
than that the relative looks back to fivr)I
'
p.ara in 148.
Nevertheless, Wilamowitz
also takes /Jivr/para to be the immediate
a.
Both he and Robert
from the text that Silenus is boasting
antecedent of
infer
not of his martial exploits, but of his

prowess as a hunter, i.e. (I suppose) the
IXNEYTAI
[a] vvu
[
vpow \dp\np
v<f>
vecLpei /coXa/cj
\\i\6cjxo
247
a\rropp\maivvrai.
Tt\o]0v
TroLfXi>(ov
[rt] hr) <f>ofii(T0 7rat89
npiv
oSe,
155
cio-iSctz/,
ttXovtov 8e )([p]vcr6<f>auTov ia<f>i[e}r

ov <t>ot,fio<; vp.lv enre Kâ^vehcfjctTO
Col.
/cat 7171/ iktvddpioaiv rjv KarflV<Tv

vplv re Kapoi
raOr' a<f>VT<; evBere.
vii
vavo(TTyjo~avT<; cî^fcucrcfTC
el py)
rac, ^8ou5
153
07777 ySe/Satri
/ecu
160
roy $oi>Kd\o[i>,
pp ex wxu* corr. pap. s vToppirrairtrai praetulit Hunt post hunc v. lacunam

Wilamowitz
15* risiipplevi:
169 d&prtt c\ atparrts
WssMPOw Ul
|
>
a p.*
object
of
ii*ipryaofxivo\
'
having
des-
The removal
of the
nakes this assumption unnecessary,
ami in my opinion clears up the whole
passage.
It follows, of course, that
I
.iora.
inception of
as standing on a
plane of morality than the
i
much
loftier
153
See
the Cyclops.
in
f.
dnoppvnalvrrax
is
more em-
thani'woppnreUn.).
Wilamowiu holds that
I lacuna after this line, on the
ground that the dative ^tyy is otl
ibly harsh, unless supported
y
:.
a participle like t*r\ayiprup.

Hut this
is unduly to limit the sphere of the causal
dative, which is not infrequently applied to the influence of
external circumstances in the place of
Sid c. ace.
1117,
ith Jobb'l nn.
Kur. ////.
Andr. 157 arvytO474 n.
6'
Ar&pl fapftdKOiat 00U.
ib.
fiat
147
fuaoir -, warpiSa ar)v AxWwi ^SpioEl.
40 */pa S* xpdr iwl noi'fufior n8tutra Qardrio oif.
dwell u|>n this
I
the more, beca e the examples given by
Cicrth l 430 re not rcpreseota(his aspect of the idiom. - kcSXqki
(instruni'i.:.i!
Ml,
Hunt
if
is
right
in
551
Si ip.ovct car' '\Sav
ijSrf
Soph.
213 ov noXxar ovptyyoi 'xw, wt
Totjiap iypofiirrat. Eur. Hel. 1483 ovptyyi
wtt$6p.tpai
supposed to delude.
at.
Ale. 577 (toorbtan
woifirlrai vntpalott.
likes.
TOifUroi,
transferred
to
the cranes.
What else than the strains
of the pipe can be the 'shepherds
The shepherd pipes to his flock which
obeys him #>. the sound is intended to
sooth* the flock.
Observe how this description of the sound confirms the interpretation given of 107.
Hunt places a
comma at the end of 154. and accepts flr
from Wilamowitz in if j
hut the multinMcorioo of relative clauses is rather to
1
be avoi
155
may be
The child's fear of the unknown

from Plat. Phaed. 77 K
loan in rsj oi 4p ifpup rati 6% ra nxaera
00/ifcrai.
To be afraid l>cfore you have
cause is like crying out before you are
illustrated
hurt U'hil. 917, Ar. Pint. 477).

160 xP wr< avTO ' ,s a ncw
pound,
(f. 45.
167
com-
dv6(aTo is I formal PM
acknowledge, become
undertake,
to
sponsible for.
7.
150
4&
Cf. Isae. 3. 18.
Dem.
re-
33.
7.
Mm: yeff art
idle.
Theappli-
metaphorical
is Sophoclean :
65 &0~r' sag
7*
0*-ry
(Morra m' iityilptrt. 0. C. 307
cation
in
the
0.7'.
i*
ire
Toipana'
Phil.
cc (ipaioi
'
rvKTtftpifiov ovpiyyot lap KaraKOvv.
<Mn.
l OO
((vavorTômrrsa, not to pursue
It
(Hunt) but to return to the pat*
should be remembered that the simple
verb does not primarily or chiefly mean
to return
M Goodwin,
>
inatory condition
the min
f447
IO<t>OKAEOYI
248
kXcuovtcs avTrj SeiXia

5
7ra.Tep,
SI.
yvaxry yap avro? ai> Traprjs ovhev \eyco[v.

iyo) Tra[p]a)v aurds ere Trpocrfiifiu) Xoyat
KvuopTLKOv avptyfjia StaKaXov/xev[o5].
dXX'
JO
irapcov clvtos fxe criyiTroSryyerc^,
ev KOLTLOr)<;
iv
et
rts ecrrt oeiAia.
168
let
in eV corr. pap.
&<pl<rrw scripsi: i<pi<rru
162
'you shall
your very
cowardice is not quite clear. Rather
your very cowardice shall end in noisy
olvtq
whimpering.'
i.e.
so far from
escaping from pain by your cowardice,
it will be the cause of your chastisement. Wecklein's aiirol is unnecessary.
I suppose i|/<>4>TJa-T to have been deliberately chosen instead of fioTjo-ecrde in
Hunt's
rendering
make a noise in lamentation
for
'
'
reference to the disturbing \pb<pos of 154,

as conversely fioav is sometimes
ironically applied to inanimate objects
{e.g. Ar. Han. 859).
It is difficult to say
whether the dative is rather causal or
circumstantial, but the character of the
noun distinguishes this example from
the familiar type of fr. 958.
Maas, however, thinks that \po<pr)<reTe is a vulgarism
for airoXe'iade, on the ground that it is
used with that sense in Byzantine and
modern Greek. Wilamowitz calls attention to the similar development of diatpwvetv (Agatharchides ap. Phot. bibl. 457, 25).
163 rv|Mro8iTYTt this is a new
word beside <rv/jLiro8r]yeiv, corresponding
to iroSrjyereiv iroSrjye'iv.
Cf. KvvrjyeTeiv
just
Kvvriyeiv.
165
prjs,
165
[d]^>to"TOJ Tpi^vyrjs oifxov fidcriv,
et'
\67wf, ut videtur, pap. 2

o'ifiov pap.
165
Hunt
avTos appears to belong to iraas well as to irap&v in 163 and 166.
In each case it bears a considerable

emphasis 'Father, do come yourself...'
:
and so
forth.
166
Xoy<>,
not
'
will
urge you on by my voice (Hunt) but I

will win you over by argument.'
The
is used ironically of a persuasion
that will not derive its force from logical
superiority.
Cf. Ar. Av. 425 irpoaî^q.
\iyuv.
Eq. 35 8 irpocrfiipdfas p,'.
Aeschin. 3. 93 ry Xbyy irpofffiifidfav
'
'
i'fxas.
cL's
168
(<pL<TTu was adopted by Hunt

Wilamowitz, and compared with
Track. 339 rod p tt/vS' i<pL<rTa<rai d<nv,
which would then be interpreted why
The
dost thou approach me thus?'
present passage is rendered take your
and
'
'
stand at the cross-ways ; and, since the

relevance of the remark to the situation
is not apparent, Wilamowitz constructs
an elaborate tnise en scene in justification
Three paths are represented
of the text.
on the stage, converging at the cave of
Cyllene, and possibly rising towards it.
The chorus in the orchestra divide themselves into three bodies, each of which
follows one of the paths indicated.
He
points out that the wooden stage-buildings
'
provided for each performance allowed

considerable freedom to the poet for the
arrangement of his stage. In conformity
with the supposed conditions, he divides *X
the chorus into three rather than two ^
sections in the passage beginning at-r
I
v. 94.
This is ingenious rather than
convincing, and Tpijvyrjs oi'|xov i> too
slender a foundation to support the
superstructure.
I have proposed to restore d<}>CorT, which yields a simple and
appropriate meaning.
To stand at the
cross-roads, i.e. at a point where the
road bifurcates (as explained by Gildersleeve on Pind. Pyih. 1 1. 38 *car' afxtvatbpddv niXevOov
irbpovs rpibSovs iSLv-qdrfv,
iuv to irpiv), was a proverbial image typical
of hesitation Theogn. 911 iv rpibbcp 5'
irpo<r|3ipw
phrase
KT.
(TTT)Ka.' 86'
rt'fw
tovtwv
Halieut.
167 Kvvopnicov o-vpi-yfia may
be
illus-
3.
i<popfiaivuv
aXXore
oi
i)VTe
eiairbirpbadfv 6801 fioc

<f>povOppian
t)vtiv' fw irporiprjv.
dvSpl
êivifi,
eiVeXos
5s iv
501
|
KpaSirj
8e%iTpT)v
j
Kvp-qaas
iroXi'TpLirToiffi
Tpi68oi<Ti
i\6eiv'
trated from the note on fr. 9 iiriaiyp-aTa.

8ia.KaXovp.tvos
the
encouragement
will be given in various (5ta-) quarters.
\po<f>rj[ar]eT.
XO.
Trairraiva
re
01
iirtpdWerai
8'
i/cdrepde,
et'Xetrai,
Kvpia.
aWore
i<rr7)
\atrjv,
|
drpairbv
vbos Si
fuxXa 8' bipi nirjs
wpiâro
Zenob.
fiovXrjs.
3.
\oyi<Tfj.iv.
Hesych.
Suid.
wapoipua.
78.
s.v.
iirl
11
p.
iv rpibSy
twv
no.
elpil
dSrjXaiv xal
IXNEYTAI
iyoj
eV [cjpyois irapfxticjv <t
S'
XO.
v v
v,
vtto
cV
xfj,
iSee.
fx
irpa>T(t)
ip.b<;
i,
Scvr',
ap.
'
ex wr'
fii
a>,
o$e Tp6ir[
xpo7/tdTu;'.
It
is evident,
then, that 'to leave the cross-road is the
same as 'to go straight on,' or, in other
'
no longer
'
and
it
be observed how well that agrees

with the appearance of iwtvtivrw in the
ng line.
Here of course we have
nothing but a figure of speech directed
there was
against the trembling satyrs
-toad on the stage. It may be
assumed that d$io~ru m intransitive in
ince with its usage, and that
&d<rw is parallel to Ai. 42 ttji>3' iwt^riwru ftdaw, and less closely to Kur. //did.
For the compound
801 At/Jdi wbio. (n.).
h three terminations see on
will
of
;iralion
witz
Lent/ ri
iian
qaol
otfsot,
oifiw daatrtrai
546
cf. 4>poi-
fUOf.
too much mutilated to

justify an attempt to distribute the con*
Mitueir
here is a high
degree of probability in Robert's view
the lyrics are a Commos
Silenus and the chorus, ami that
the greater part of litem came from the
lips of Silenus.
Thus the virion
mandsand appeals agree with his pi
and the
the chorus
in 197 is unnatural, if supposed to refer
speakers, but
174
I'lautine
like
f6
It
st.
where, but
fr.
is
<\e\itf*
Hi: see on 125.

sound recalls the
not recorded else-
probably a glyconic.
without a vowel
is
apparently a drover's cry
Wilamowit/
get.
iejw.ll the
arrangement vvfy \f>aa, forms which arc

equally devoid of authority.
171 1 'Why dost idly groan -and
gibber and look askance at me?' wrop<j"w is used by Aelian tuit. <;//
of the noise made by the locust.
*^fw,
to squeak or crcaJk, is used also of the
sound of foreign speech (Ar. ./:. 15 jo)
and of the chirping of a bird
B 314). i'*-o\dfw does not ocm
173
mean
iv
wporry
TfxViry
in the first lap (turn)
'
does
'
30
lines.
The metre com*
(procclrus
Ar. Av. 317. / ft. <Mo. I'ratimu
is
combined with
;.t
raaolvod
ana)aels
this
So rpowoi
i.
189
'direction
in
rierod., tf,
rrrpaftSi wpvxat 6yo\tKoma *al (Karor
however
fUrai rdrra rp6wof.
Robert
.
no.
ue caught.
rp6wo%, referring to
174
t\i\.
17ft avayov: 'off with you

eoaaUci yourself a prisoner, ipiyttr,
1 1
>
Hotdea oa
17C
rpdwot
arrest,
to
friri
illustrated
and
at
by
is.
Robert restores btvrio^

;
is
this
rii 6it
prolal>!\
point
individual satyrs by
6 ApdMti. i Vpdwtt, Oi/Wat,
cMur), Irpdr.ot. KpoMat d (. irif*(af),
addresses
(or
is
71mm.
riut.
fnft rrV..
in supposing that
MMwm
IWgif, which is to be comwith A^cWi on the Brjgee vase and

k&i (lleydcmann. Satyr- av tUskfken-
and
lastly
Kred
namtn,
177
ick as
pnses
1
178
170ff.
["he Chonil bustle to and fro
in a scries of spasmodic attempts to
Apparently they
up the trail.
of each other in their clumsy
and blundering movement*; and there
was an opportunity lor a certain amount
heodrshould
of pantoiiiiinlrbutli>->iirry.
HO doubt be divided between difl
fr.
7179
otfiov
1
'71
iv ex i corr. pap 1
in marg. pap.*: fcirrcpy pap
d^t/MXwf
ite
avdyov.
tic o8e .[....].
176
corr. pap.*
170
cêrou
tic.
6 S/jaKi?, 6
w
airevdwC).
a.
ikrjXvdtv, i\lj\\^V0f
\L'
rir6
\ey o ti 7roi>t5.
vTrexXayes xmeKpiyes
xp
II fia.T7)P
173
249
its
|n
fyai%
correctness
an unknown WOfda but

rendered probablr by
W,b,
presence of >/pas-n.
/y*n. which is il
l
satyr on more than one imm
the
Wissowa
For -r*l
IO<t>OKAEOYZ
250
[o]vpCa<s ovpias <xS[
20
napefirjS'
Jkcis
p.e$v[
otl TTore <f>epe[
ewoyov eyei
crri/Jos 6$eveo-[
25
(TTpGLTLOS CTT/3ar[t05
hevp* eirov
Col.
180
i[.]i>
ti[
]u[. .]
Sp[
r[.]
evi j3\_o]vs evi 7roVo[
viii
jxrj
jxeSfj
/caX[o]i> eVlS[
(TV tl
ayaObs 6
ode y
Kara
r/oefjî?
vop.ov 7rTa[i
<f>Trov
190
icftenov p\_
a jjuape,
ottttottoI'
rj
ra^
ottotolv
aireXevdepos
dXXa
10
185
/c/a[o]/aa[s
/u.17
ye[_
anLr)[<s
cov
6X
7raâ7r\a/c[
eV[i]0' [e]7rex' etcrt^' i#i
195
T [o] Se TrXdyiov eôfx[ev

7r[a]re/3,
rt cr[i]ya9
ov[k e]tcraKo[ve]t,9,
XL
15
180
17
pv
dXiês
KK<o[<f>r}craL,
eiTrop.ev
xjj6(f)ov
o~i[ya.
Theonem
legisse testatur pap. 2

186 fj.e ex 5e corr. pap. 2
pap. 2
193 o\/3 legi posse negat Hunt
197 J3 in
marg. ducentesimo versui adscriptum
vo/ios
192
r):
17
i<6/ioi/
supra
see Hesych.
scr.
445 yp&irtw yrjpas tttiKai tuiv ixdvofitvow.

/ecu
tldos opviov.
Kai pvaadv, airb rod ypa/xfias
?X lv fas pvrldas, odev /ecu i) ypavs r)rv
70s,
rj
p.
8<pews,
Here one suspects
the meaning wrinkled, which is attested also by

Etym. M. p. 239, 31 ypdins' 6 ippvriSufj-tvos.
Similar are Aristoph.'s (rrp6<pis
[xo\6yr)Tai.
(Av. 1604).
nedvets, airopeh, Rossbach.
(N11I). 450), y&ffrpis
179
(ttcjSos
But
irony.
525.
198
ode vios, Rossbach.
The meaning
However,
rj
is
rdxa
is
not ironical
Horn, a 73, 338, 399, but expresses

a solemn warning or foreboding.
194 We should expect TrapawXayxO^s
or napairXayKTos IffOi (yevr)) rather than
J/6<J>ov
was restored by Wilamo-
The hyperbaton
is
not
uncommon
in tragedy: cf. Eur. Cycl. 121

5',
perhaps again
discernible: 'I expect you will soon
regain your freedom...,' spoken with
in
197 p.v is used ironically: 'can it

be that we spoke the truth after all?'
For examples see Kuehner-Gerth 11
witz.
see on 176.
182
192
irapawXaKros.
But TrXayKrbs itself is
sometimes written irXaKrot in our MSS
see Aesch. Pers. 280, Ag. 598.
565
77
ry
Ar)p.r)Tpos
b<ri,
Aidfxrjdes,
ovk
rjKovffas,
aireipovvi
oraxw
17
Kevbs
Jihes.
\j/6<pos
\
6Y utuv Tevxtwv riva ktijitov ; Hel.

719 n.
Hclid. 132 n.
Soph. fr. 764.
Kaibel on El. 1358.
199 ff. The proper arrangement of
these lines has been the subject of some
discussion.
The speeches are divided by
paragraphi in the papyrus, exactly as
they are printed in the text, except that
ffrdêi

IXNEYTAI
XO.
<TTLU
TL
ov
fievo).
XO.
/xeV,
OVK
Si.
100
hue
wcw
choro, ntv
Wilamowitz) Sileno tribuit Hunt

scriptum fuisse, sed /3Aroi- esse Srjj
a paragraph us appears after 210, which

is unnecessary and unusual if the speech
which follows is to bt attributed to the
coryphaeus.
Hunt, however, con*idcring it obvious that 200 203 l>elong to
the chorus, and 204
206 to SUenns,
the division of 199 by combining
rl loriir with olya. as a remark of Silenus,
tinning accordingly.
Being also
nh\
0At
unsuitable
as addressed by Silenus to the cboraa,
and that the repetition of 8i\tn i- awkhat
tl
is
ward if 8>wt) 0Aeu is adopted in 200

though the latter contention can hardly
nitted he accepts Wilamowitz s
I
proposal to transfer ivro. from 200 to

199, and attributes/^/ d BOy? to Silenu-.
ing 911
214 to Silenus, he allows
paragraphus after 210 its usual
If that view is correct, the
upshot of the dialogue will be that the
are again alarmed by hearing the
and propose to withdraw
rch altogether in favour of their
bat that, after three lines spoken

the? forthwith resume their
cannot help thinking

was the purpose of
hi* dramatic instinct was temporarily
in
the first time at v. 198,

so terrified that he resolves to
depart at once and dooj SO, although the
chorus apparently attempt to keep him.
On that assumption, the ironical tone of
\Uv l fk'Xus. do //a;
70a stay? is exactly suitable to the occasion, if the chorus are now aware that
Silenus is rather more frightened than the
Cf. Phil. 730 tp*\ tl
rest of them.
(' 1 pray thee, come on'), and Rl.
0Aet,
hi.ha.i.09 (where the tone
-,dp
is ironical, as here: see Jebb's n.).
In
}oo. so far as the sense is concerned, it is
indifferent whether we read 6wy #>
6*tj tvff (sec cr. n.), but the KcMM
be preferred for the reason that &6raa6*i
union glos1 .on
dstfoM similar to the present. Se<
'.early for
Uld
is
'
OAm
h. Pert. 177 tfAjj" dW rot* bi<rr\Schol. Ar. Ar. 5X1 o' i(tt\^mSchol. A
dr rov ov dvrfatrai.
rai.
t$t\*]
1
As
against Wilamowita, how151 tl. as well as

(be subx-'jiient dialogue with < yllenc
to the chorus and not |o Silenus; and
liiently di
ippose
e.
attributes
vint
ars.
in
alarm directly
See further in (his con-
marg. testatur pap. 8
>
in
pp.
ol>
Hi
|0g,
0*\^ctt.
only
ributing
1
'.owing
speeches
in
Horn. p. 86,
llesych. 11
Suid. t.W. i$t\^rtt, 0Ar,
I'hot.
tor.
grotesque cowardice of Silenus after \vapnunngs in 147 ff. may be illustrated

>r
in the Cyekt>t
(21HH. ), as well a by the general deIn of the satyrs in
N
w&rrti drXr%Mt
121): (* hi *<6<Hnoit
j
roafr nMotoMorrtt
irixToMfioiiH \ayuoi. I have according y

JOl f. by reading
propoin tnoi flo. m*j rKtittTOf #r tt4*or* JulI
rpifku' xP*o*.
acc<>
which
is
consistent
V
in
keeping with
avoid the
I
disappearan.
paragraphus
l
nh
K>lert's
x.ictlv
seriou-
Hom.
Sehoi
ifivo.To.
Apollon. to
1 .
A$l<fnt>yot>Tti 'V.fiti.
v.
and in any case errors in its

employment are frequent (cf. 6s). We
Wppcot, then, that SfleOW hears the
senarii
200 eiccto 0A
chofO tril>uit Hunt
ex
SOOv^.
0Aw
200
06Aci9
\oTTJ)
tl Bvro: (ijikm)
tran->tulit
1
dekeis.
el
dXX' CLVTOS (TV Tdvd'
<TTll>,
tart*; etiam Sileno, ov
rl
251
difficulty
after
W.
it
210
know enough
!,
not
it
miglr
divide
tl>
the
cannot regard as
to
>m the
bc character of Silensa 'him-
melweil
given
mentioned
far
foots
les
ha*
tlir
|x.firait
already been
111 the
as to claim that the speech beginning
rthy of Ajas or any other
I04>0KAE0YI
252
Kai)(veve /cat 7rXou[Tet XaySa/i'
CtfreL re
re *a[t] roy \pvarov [
tols y8ov?
/at)
20
XO.
7rXetcrT[. .]
dXX' ov tl
tl
[.
]e[.]
.]i>[
fjf:
ouS' ^virek\6eZ\v r[
ov[.
elSa>fxev
.]
]ov
/at-]
[>? S [-

6o\y K\6jxol(tiv 6kfiicrr)<;.
25
Col. ix
(f>[ep~\(ov
neSoprov iâvayKaao)
ktv\tt~\ov
KpaiTTVolcri /cat XaKTiafxacrtv
TT^rj^&TjjjLao-Lv
etcra/coucrat
cu[ct~\t
10
Taâ
dXX' eyw
o[S' o]v <a^[etr]at tolo~lw
/cet
Xtav
K(o<f>6s
rt?
et.
208 <f>6eyyfia a<pv<r[e]is in marg. add. pap. 2

sqq. Sileno tribuit Hunt
214 el pap. 77 Hunt
6 5' Hunt qui hunc et sequentes versus Sileno tribuit
204
211
204
|xi] cf.
restored
ikknreiv
is
:
vol
ix
by Hunt
aW
O.C. 450 dXX'
otf
ti
/utj
0$ ti
For ov rt
e<j>r)<To/jLa.L.
Xdxwcri To05e
av/xudxov.
205
unknown
e'|virtX9iv is a hitherto
compound, but see on fr. 524.

The
following words are restored thus by
Hunt
(partly after Murray)

rod wdvov
wpiv y' hv cra</>dJ5 elSQ/uev ovtiv' v8ov 77S'
:
?X fi
205
]<<?
,[, ,
<f)6eyfji' d<uo-[e]ts[
fir)
xpovov.
ffriyij.
208 S.
Hunt from
mutilated.
(^yji.' a<J>ucret.s is restored by

the margin, since the text is
He gives reasons against
212 <j>pwv, bringing into play,

applying to the case. Cf. Eur. Tro. 333
rq.5
eXiffffe
'
eKeiae
fier'
i/u-idev
iroSuiv
"ircSop-rov is
<p4pov<ra (piXrarav (id<Tiv.
a new word, but appears to be a suitable
epithet for the sound produced by feet
Robert
striking against the ground.
however prefers Leo's <pwpQiv (for <p4piav) :
i.e. tracking out the sound rising from
the ground.
But it is surely unnatural
to dissociate ktvwov from tiaaKovaai.
213
irn8ii|Aa<riv.
Cf.
Vergil's
sal-
Comut. 30.
73).
Robert
oi IZnipToi dird rod oKaiptLv.
tantes Satyros (Eel.
5.
accepting d <pvaas (Wilamowitz) and

suggests that d<pvîs may have been the
reading in the text. No parallel is
quoted for the phrase <pdiy^ d<pv<rativ,
but it may be illustrated by yXuxraap
(Kxâs in fr. 929 (n.): the papyrus gives
<f>d4yy/xa here, as well as in 254, 278, 292,
p. 59
seems to be right in rejecting Leo's view,
based on Ter. Euti. 285 and other pas-
and 320, and that form was approved by

Herodian (Crdnert, Mem. Gr. Hercul.
order to emphasize the result
p.
69).
|u<r66v
6\po~ns,
if
joined
as
'produce rich pay,' would be' parallel to

Tv<f>\ovv 2\kos (Ant. 973) and the rest.
211 o8'...a\X' he won't show himself for that
well, then....'
Hunt, who
:
'
prefers 6
and
5',
makes Silenus the speaker,
treats roiaiv as masculine.
But, in
holding that rotaiv cannot be instrumental

(causal), he undoubtedly goes too far
see the passages quoted on 154 and esp.
Antiph. 5. 3 amo-Tot yfvd/jievoi. rots d\r)-
die iv
avrols to&tois dirwKovro.
sages, that XaKTi<T(ia<riv refers to kicks

delivered against the door.
2 14 wo-t' is actually redundant after
eiâvayKaaw, but is often so employed in
(
Eur.
HeL
Jebb on Soph. 0. C. 270). Hunt

substitutes rj for d on the ground that the
But it would
third person is required.
not be unnatural that after rotcnu in 211
1040
n.,
the speaker should turn to address directly

For
the unseen occupant of the cave.
similarly abrupt transitions cf. O.T. 1198,
Robert also questions
Bacchyl. 9. 13.
the necessity for Hunt's alteration, but
thinks that the text is a conflation of two
readings, one of which was uar eioaKovvr)
el.
IXNEYTAI
253
KTAAHXH
tl [rolyhe x\o/>ot>
Orjpes,
ric,
215
>
pap. 5
T\mr),
r)he
fiojj
215
T19 /xeTaoTarric, noviov
a17
\wpo legisse Aristophanem testatur pap.

218 d\t% Wilaiuowii/. htm pap.
iui
ex
fierd/rrcunt
(irrafftt corr.
316 For the description uf the scenery

Hunt's suggessee Introductory Note.
tion that the reading of Aristophanes
s
<cr. n.) was not x&po* but x^ u f^>"
almost certainly correct.
'
210
I- or
the preposition
<p66vy rt tai xoXvyXLteoi?
fiorj (which also illustrates the doable
application of oinr in ill), il<.
283.
cf.
ndyov
vkcoSr)
v\0\ipov wpfirjOrjTe crvv noWj}
<rvv..pVrj.
El. 64
pr) <rvv
217
lalx>uii
pjraVraa'is weVwv, change from

see on fr. 174,
Fof wt>uv
to the rites of Dionysus Robert
well quotes Kur. Batch. 66 s-Arw
rfiv* ttduaTOf r' iVKCLnarov, but his further

i>n that rArot was a technical
lance of the
tragic chorus is not established by the
nee which he cites.
218
ff.
passage
in
the
i|
the text so far as
Dionysus (e.g. ?yfi>o) and the subject

of fi'tdfcro (i.e. Silenus).
(4) It has
already Inren suggested that the &**wbmix
must hive l>een Apollo, since the satyrs
expected to receive their release at his
hands ; and it has leen shown that there
is nothing surprising in the introduction
of Apollo into the Bacchic thiasus. What
is then to be made of o'w 4yy6roi% vvnQai<r?
In answer it may be remarked that
Apollo is often associated with the
Nymphs, and that he bote the
title of X vtiTty4TT)i at Thasos and at
for
Somas (Wernicke
61).
That
mately related
a substitute
it
pa
to.
if
doI
is
it
the Inrtter-known Moivij
for,
(I'ausan.
/Vnjt
most
in
I'auly-Wissowa It
however, must be inti-
title,
1.
1.
I'ind.
5,
has )>cen re-
mi
whose proceedings
tster
rbc general <\

the Introductory
j>oints of detail which
has been discussed

.rtain
il
suggested
(p.
the 6*0w6ttii
in
(t) Hunt
require notice,
70) that Silenus might lie
partly no doubt for

to accept waidur
an<l,
in
n.
iMttide to
led
day.
has
The
in
the
the
how
some master
master'
identity
UM&
hit
\r<ko
the
It
does
emendation of ijj
11.
SimoHuks,
'
yij) ha*
p.
#>->hh does not

that />-,orot is always n~,o*oi.
that
h<
Iain
shown
theo:
'
Apart from
conclusi
well as his
(1)
116).
fr.
respectable auel.fr. 17K.) f..r thest.r

that Apollo
the father of tin
is not extravagant to suppose that he
it
might also have been described particularly in a passage to which his function
<<ij->/r;t is entirely relevant
father Of the Nymphs.
(In ('A'. v\vi
j 10 I enumerated the difficult
n. s,
and threw out
suggestions for their removal.
But
I
exist,
as a last resource, we
in disturbing the text.]
*Xs
gible meaning,
and
Besides,
01
intclli
and Wibuno*
his
inevitable II4*i 11.

an error)
v^pir^. a now word, corrcpoodhsj to ^>ioi. Xdiroi, and many
to put
orwarrl
the
arts
nip.
m.1111
KA&t)IHl4VO%
ill.
r-
Or.
1,
ig
nMrrw
a line has been
igthc verb 11
iat
ntii at
acros* the body
rather than ivf
may be
the examples which
een by coo
I.,
.m.l
S.
<
IO<t>OKAEOYI
254
vfxlu os atet
10
vefipivy Kadr)p,fXu[o]l
o^Xw
irohaiv
/cat
vvix<f>ai<ri
8'
ayvoai to xpfjfjia' iroi crrpo(f>al ve[&j]>

fxavLwv (TTpe<j>ovcrL ; davfxa yap Ka,Te/<\[u]oi>,
vvv
15
6p,ov wpfarov KeXevfid wcos /c[v]i^yeT[oi>]v
iyyvq
8'
ofjiov
219
222
224
vfieiv
p,okovT(jiv
drjpbs eu*>at[ov]
av avrt[s
221
pap.
.]
at
22 5
Tpo[<j>~\rj<s,
(f>(x)p[.
][]
tvidfcr pap.: eMafes pap.

f^(ret) in marg. add. pap. 2
viov coni. Hunt, quia viwv spatium vix continet
2
Wilamowitz
post yap interpunxit Hunt
Traidwis
223
|
KarrfKvdev legisse
Theonem
testatur pap. 2
Cf. Eur. fr. 752 dvpaoici kclI

that sense.
Nonn. 11. 233
vefip&v dopais Kadairrbs.
veppida kcu ^vxpoiaiv iwi
v\j/68ev (Sfxov
oripvoHTi xaddxj/as.
Lucian Bacch. x
may be urged that ifKvdov is not used

elsewhere by Sophocles in dialogue, and
ywaiKts
why Hunt's
.ve/3pL8as ivrjfifiivai.,
Strabo 719
(quoted by Hunt) KaOrffiixivovs vt8plSas

77 5opK&5uv dopds, Eur. Bacch.
24 veQpLS'
tviraXrj, habilem.
A chief
i^dipas xpoos.
characteristic of the thyrsus was itsslenderness ava Ovpoov re rivdaauv Eur. Bacch.
80.
Cf. Lucian I.e. bbpard riva fxiKpd
Zx ov<Tai- C* v Met. 6. 593 umero levis
incubat hasta. Stat. Theb. 2. 664 ncbridas et vagi lis thyrsos portare. tviajt-r'
appears to be a Sophoclean middle, for
which see on fr. 941, 16. See cr. n.,
from which it appears that some critic
thought that the verb was or ought to be
in the second person, and substituted the
singular
as
eviafes
The presence of
him to add 777-.
vfxiv
more
appropriate.
may have
iroSwv
o\X<>,
caused
dancing
rout (concourse of feet).

Cf.
Eur.
fr.
The phrase
322 <pi\t]ndTwi> 6xty.
appears to me quite suitable to a description of the diaaos
cf.
Eur. Bacch.
165 rj5ofj.iva 5' &pa...Kw\op ayei raxtiirovv
(TKiprrjaaat Bdxxa.
Robert thinks iroSwv
impossible, and is inclined to acquiesce
:
though he would prefer kcli

&x^-V or MawdSwi' oxXui.
223 f. I have altered the punctuation:
Hunt prints a comma after xPVM- a with
colons following <rrpi<pov<ri and ydp. He
remarks that there is scarcely enough
room for viwv, but no other supplement
seems to be possible. <rrp6J>ov<ri, of
mental agitation, as in Plat. rep. 330 D
(the stories about Hades) orpicpovaiv
avTov rrjv xj/vxh" f-V d\r]deis liffiv. KarikXvov see cr. n. Against KarrjXvdev it
in
iralduv,
6r)pG>v
>
that
the meaning of the
from
But
compound
is
understand
punctuation (cr. n. should be
considered essential to the adoption of
far
clear.
I fail to
KdW/cXuOJ'.
225
irpt'irov,
Cf. Aesch.
of sound clearly heard.
Ag. 333
olixai
8otjv ap.a.Krov
There is a .similar
transference from sight to sound in 322 f.
and in O. T. 186 Trend? 5e Xafxirei.
iv
ir6\ei
irpiireiv.
226
Gtipos evvatou Tpo<J>TJs

the brood
its lair.
For evvaios cf. fr.
:
of a beast in
74,
and
O.T.
for the concrete sense of rpo<p^
KdS/xov rod irdXeu via,

189 p.y)Kdbwv dpvuiv
rpo<pal.
Wilamowitz, however, reading
evvaias, thinks that den, or lair, is the
meaning required and conjectures <rrpo<pijs
rpoiptf.
rinva,
Eur.
Cycl.
(coll. tirurrpcxpal, dvaarpo<pai).
227 f. are not easy to restore. The

sentence appears to be constructed .similarly to Rhes. 875 oi yap is <ri reivtrat
y\wcr<r', ws o~i> KOfiweis.
Hence I was
inclined to read atrial <pupwv Kara
7X0x7j
cttis
ireivovr'
Terpafj.fji.ivai),
is
k\oitt]v
but atrial
fs
rfviyfiivai
(or
impossible and
irdvo[vr'] is is barely consistent with

the traces.
Hunt thought that the letter
before ai was k (i.e. icai), but could not
find a suitable word to precede it which
might be the subject of ireiver'.
also believed that evai was the remnant
of a perfect infinitive ; but it would be
difficult
to accommodate one to the
He
context,
av appears to be iterative,
avris, which the recurrence in 229 makes
almost certain (av' av\-qv, Murray), is
proved to be Attic by the new Menander
(Epitr. 362, Sam. 281, 292).
See Wila-
'
IXNEYTAI
255
y\a><ro"q<; iretu^. c]t? kXotttji/ [

auric. 8* a[.
.
7}r[.
.
fxivotv [
.J
20
K7)pvi<[. .]
kcu TfaJOr*
K7jpvyfia[.
]a
230
ndfi<f>vp{ r]* eyciri^ta
crreyQ.
ffcatj ravr*
dUu?
/*[
Jav
...[..
Vo[.
XO.
a.v
aKOvcaa
.]<
gjSc irapaireiT<u.<Tp.i\jiiV
Tt VVfl<f>7)jV
yap
ovre
235
aucrat ôXov
tt\
aet>d[ 5
339
pap.'
9 inseruit
avaiTiaV
VtKO? i^/cgj
8a[o]v /xaâs ov8'

-.upplcvit Diefal
voiv v/xas foo'ctJ'
TL TTOtlT
fSadv^cjve
v\)\l<\>o.
^ *M/]
....
[.Jiyf .]
toOS',
238
cVar
7roSojf Xa^TtV/xacrt
trui/
a<f>ei<ra.
[kJAtjooji/ 6fxov
<f><ov
Col. 1
<f>pcju
credev
7roi>
supple**! Murray
s.|.
fvfapT}
mowit/
umgtb. k. Pr. .-/&*</., 1007

Hitherto it has been treated as
Ionic l>y the authorities (Weir Smyth,
I. gives aim*
p. 30M).
in 0. C. J.u and elsewhere, and the
cditoi-. have |>erhaps been too hasty in
ng it. See alio h. 331 The description evidently passes
to the conduct initiated at in. e**V,
restored by Murray where the papyrus
is Bled
issdered l>y Hunt not
in
>/.'
.',
333
irdp^vpT
vrrbial
1,
333
than
[ebb on
rhoni. 31
>
he ad>
with
></
.//.
be oil
the actual circumstances'
1*
(t.g.
waf>airirawrpivv. mad, foolish

-apawaiu, which is also used absorian his/.
Aarror y&p a* roino wapivaio*.
1
Hesych. in pp. 171, 175 ;:. wapdwataita
{wapalwatfia), vapdraurroi.
I
more
Hunt
f.
Wp
dV
is
(he conditions than />;*

suggests some
test as
suitable
if, and
airaioi
states that
t<>
Qpirwr (dai^tSrwr ).
I
r<*i<><\.
1089.
of the lines have been admirably ras tottd bjf
held, Murray. Hunt,
uig-wai>ted
|}I, has since changed Ins mind
and now agrees with Sludnic/ka that the
meaning i* 'slender, with Miiall
(I wan Mueller, Priva/a/t.* p. 8,vi
fkiKi'wvot does not occur in Fair,
:
le inn.ii
remains.
tt.
Soph., and
'phix'les iis<c|
to
epithet
sunnily
it
quite simple,
commentators
il
as u complin:
Iw-auti'ul
proportion-"
and elegant apparel.
33S
tjkw Ûpw!
r)hti
o4 ret
(cf.
for the
>4)-
339
eve'.
If
the text
is
right) oi'*V
intended lOCOStTSBH the second clause

'ay,
instead
would
oCM
See
h Iambic
than
<-tter
s
iiui
intrndeil,
it
the
and Tinker on TM. N50 and ('<'..'

In Pfndai it i applied
at una.
ices, anM the Miise> i<
a. |), and it is a fair inference
it
and the cr|uivalcn
wim -h
in Aescli.
are not agreed whether it is merely an

applicable to any
ntal cpith.t
woman, or carries with it an impl
of luxury and delicate nurture
as appears from (he nuinlcr of
now
is
337
be read. In lj6 the first five Icttc:

the gap are doubtful, and fn Si
said to
and Wilamowit/.
vvu.$a
see mi
that 4* <pptru>y cannot Ixith
ip, is
pap.
may be
Xi>oi^' indrtiaro*).
334
33ft
illustrated
ithyphallic clausula
The ends
in
in.).
ni])4 tr.i\
in
i
commonly found
aci-.
The
(cretic).
>
also Bui
we
o(irn )u\
ith
'4' at*,
It
.1
190.
In
II4I Icbb accepted Klmsley's >,
I04>0KAE0YI
256
yX^Jrxo"' av /Ltdratds
5
p.rj
fxe
fir)
dXX' [evlTrertus /xot
d('
r[*
7r/)OT//aX[a^)79
to TrpdyvepOe yds c58' dya-
Try)[d<ai>or>
fx\ iv [tJottois toIo-\J) rts
iydpvae Bicnrtv avhd[v
crrais
KT,
t<xvt'
10
240
diyoi.
-qfxojv
/ca/cots,
eoV
iKeivoiv vvv [rpoiraiv nenaLTtpa,
245
TotcrSe drjpcjv e/C7rv[#oto /xdXXoi> di/
/cat
dX/cacr/idT[(u]v SîXt)]? [re Treipariqpioiv
ya^p
ip.oi
vvfx^rjs-
ov]/c [dpto-rov
ear
eptv
6pdo\jjd\a.KTov iv [X]dyo[t<r]ti> [icrrdvai.
dXX'
npocficuve /cat /a[t7Ji'u[c p.01
r)o~v)(o<;
drov /xdXtcrTa irpdyixaTO<s ^petav
15
XO.
241
pap. 2
/}
ovveK
fxev
m7
^ pap.
r)\6[o]v varTepov
243
here.
it
is
not clear that ov8'
a|vos,
justified
is
uncivil, as in Plat. soph.
217 E rb Se ad <roi /lit; x a P'L ie<r ^ aL ---^ V o"

ti Kara<paipfTai /xoi /cat ayptov.
240
jiaTcnos,
sumption of rash
sphere)
in
expressing
as
folly,
Track. 565
the
(in
\f/avet
pre-
another
ixaraiais
Such recklessness of speech was

exhibited by Lycurgus Ant. 961 xpavwv
X^pffiv.
rbv 6tbv iv
241
KeprofJLiois
irpoi|/aXdT|s
yXibcrcrais.
:
Here the meaning is

too soon with taunts.'
242
vtttios
see
'
on
don't assail
readily.
So Eur.
me
Cycl.
526 dirov Tidrj tis, ivOad' early evirer-/i$

('contented').
243 vtp0 "yds is of course only a
guess, although it suits the context very
well.
If the sound of the lyre was represented as coming from under the ground,
would agree with koltw dovei (282).
it
Robert thinks that is why the chorus
went on all fours (noff. ): see also
on 212.
244 0t'o-7riv av8dv sounds like a

travesty of Homer's Oicririv doib-qv (d 498),
\\ hich, by a curious coincidence, is applied
by Euripides to the music of the lyre
{Med.
42.-).
245 ff. The
245 249
244
in textu
suppleverunt Murray
et
Hunt
247
dXKo.o-p.dTwv
might
signify
attacks,' since dXicdfeiv' /J.dxeffdai appears in Etytn. M. p. 56, 10;
'
violent
But XaKaff/xdruv (cr. n.), howlwould be much more to the point.

For the gen. (=17 aXxdcr fiaatv) cf. Ant.
66, 10.
'
ings,'
74
6Tre
toIs
irXeiuv xpbvos
twv ivddbe,
bv dei
ovdtv
atipiov
dpioKeiv
fj.'
O.C. 567
Ka.ru)
irXiov
fioi
arou
Kuehner-Gerth
i]fj.ipas.
550.
fr.
o~0evos,
<f)pdo~<o-
Wilamowitz
sq. supplevit
omissum, in marg. superiore add. pap. 2

24 7 XaKCKT (X.6.TU3V coni. Wilamowitz
and
KvXXî^s
T07raj^ dvacrcra Taiv[8]e,
otov
250
Xt<?.
11
tj)$
is
fiireffriv
308.
249
6p0o|/d\aKTOv is interpreted by
Hunt as 'shrill-sounding' (as if for
opdio
The point is obscure owing
).
to the rarity of xpaXdaffu, but it might be
suggested that the force of dpdbs is the
same as in fr. 1077. Then the whole
compound would mean ' violently roused ';
but it must be admitted that this meaning
would not suit 321, where see n.
252 This speech is given by Hunt
to the coryphaeus (see on 199 ff.), but by
Wilamowitz and Robert to Silenus.

Reasons have already been given for
agreeing with the former view, and I
cannot assent to Robert's argument that
in
which
5
fj.ev
is
f\v
254
should have been

For the periphrasis,
also Homeric, cf. Track. 507
case
that
7jX0o/j.ev.
rjXdov
aGt'vos.
iroTduov vdivos.
See
restorations of these lines

clearly satisfy the sense, even if they do
not represent the actual words of the
text.
original.
voice which resounds
cr.
clearly inferior,
n.
Theon's variant
however we
Hunt rendered
'
'
is
interpret the
tell us of this
but, if that is
IXNEYTAI
257
to (f>6eyfia 8' r)filv tox^S''] onep <f>oivei <f>pdo~ov

kol rt? ttot avT(o SifaJâpacrcrerat fiporoyv.
255
20 KT. vfjiaq ftev aurov? xprj ra8' ciSeVcu <ra<f>u><;
a>9 i (fxtveire top X^Jyof tov ifiov,
avToicriv v/x[u> ^Jrj/xia iropitjerat.
Kal yap KKpvn\rai rovpyov iv [^JefGjJf

"Hpav 07TW5 /x[^ 7rv]or[ij9 t^T<x[t Xjoyov.
ehpais,
260
Z[^]? yt^/3 ] xpv4{aCau cs crrcjyr/i/ 'ArXaiîSo?
-''
Jcutraro
Ju
Col. xi
[Kara
Theonem
testatur pap. 5 , rovd' 6
prefer to suppose that ti

>und of the w\ijKTpot> as
>f
the lyre.
ilusion
it
tcraitt
Cf. Plat.
an. 10 p. 974 B 6 64 d/xuwr ry

rim 6$0a\ni>0 ittfiXviirrropra
fiapi fifty
toll.
j*
who
We
6iax<ipdrT(jiv.
aroi
'
in the
World
is
might
setting our
it?'
Compare the
use of tatgut-uraper ami
h; for the humour of
was enhanced by the satyrs'
WOa
lack of musical appreciaimn.
teeth
on edge with
is
the
lik
rcrogrii/r
.
dem
sie
IMusik) durck
rht
but
4.(1,1.
(p.
that the wafXTiypa+i
'
Imit
107) can
1
{pviflhot
ttax*(*t'T**
367
tov
is
used for the soond

lecture a^rA
mistake
If;
Iôv, an emphatic variation
l>e
for ror iiU*, occurs al

rA *60oi> tor rff ipoi.
ifiov
P.
(njila
wop^^Toi
wtpt^vwu
II.
Richards
you, in case you rev

The apodosis to tt fart'trr i> contained in
ropiftrai is unconditional,
f^lfia, and
Cf. l*0Cr. 4. 157 dpat woioOrrcu, tt nt
i
iwtKTfpvKtvtrai llipoati, quoted
win
by Good-
490.
30O oirwf pi), .tfjercu. For the future indicative with 6wut pr) in a pure
linal clause see Goodwin
->phoc!e* is quoted Phil. icioM n*i rtpoog
owui fi)) rt)r r&xv 6\a$$tAnother instance is El. 954 tit

6wut to* ai-r6x' >pa pi)
<ri to) fi\4wu,
<caro*ri^x<it Kraptif, where however Jehli
iat...r)nww
prefers to regard tit oi p\iru as equivalent

to a verb of entreaty, ami as followed by
an object clause accordingly.
292 tt. Hunt supplies rh-6' ij*, d
(iwpa^tw
iftovXn'-aaro,
after
Murray.
Rossi *ch preferred &riyifm, 'ArWnoci

otturrn Ipunot tin iwmf iytifan, \J*pf+tr
atrip... irij\fit XrJ*p
Hut Terughi
ni
h perhaps right in Mquirine

name should lie mentioned
might guess
X^'
*'*'
36*
lh.it
163 nVîft U4*9tu wo6t

^*ai, r^rî rr, m which
for
case #&i would

suggested by k. //rrm.
plvov cannot
as
Iw
taken
'
Jul. 95 rip
if,
'punishment
is
6 9.
with
awloi in the sense of tpmta*. but appafiiilv hclongs to wat6*,~- 'an only rhifd
Cf. fcur. Mmfr. 10H3 (IVIeus refer* lo
Neoptolemu*) rtii n6rov wmtii pint.
366 The association of Cyllerw
as his nure is n
I'hilostcphanu* (
6nT0ov\la*.
3 56
Tp<f><0*
'
ro&ro wi 0wr( lcgissc
objection to this course is that $p&$i> is

not used by Soph, with an accusative of
the direct object in the sense of 'to
It is simpler therefore to regard
in.'
07rp 4xgvi as an
laes 'tell us
Cf. Phil. 550
bit sound mean-..'
Qpaao* 6" awtp y' i\t(at.
O. I
ippdt* ii ri tfrfis.
355 aiTu Staâpao-o-iTai
therewith.'
nt 'expre*
But that is hard
ind I should
dt
^t'Xa?
deas.
X P <ri Ta * 9 cV a ' s ^y^
ming, he was well advised in the

min. to accept A wtfH^turu, the inThe
u correction of II. Richai-U.
<d.
[.]
Trjs fiaBvtfltvov
crne]o<; Be 7rat8' i<f>iTV<Tev p.6vov.
[tovtou Be j
354
\i]0r)
Festu*
"Pi KfXX4nri (///(/ Ml jo).

r.r-. CrlUmm.
Robert (y
17
'
20<t>0KAE0YZ
258
[Kahecr/xja /ecu TrorrJTa /ecu
/cot/u-ryyxara
[7rpos cni\aLpyavoi<; /xeVoucra Xi/ci/iru' Tpo(f>r)v
270
[eev#]eTito iû/era Kai. /ca#' rjfxepau.

8'
[6
a]verat /car
[a7rau]crT09,
10
[ov7rce>
y]<i/5
rjfAap
ovk eireiKora
<wcrre 0avfxa /cat (f>6fio<; fx ej(i.

KTOv TJ/xap e/C7re<ao"/u,eV[o]9
[rv7rov]9 ipeihei 7raiSo9 19
17/8179
olkjxtJv,
[/cdo/)]auei kovketi crôkdêrai
268
Bucherer:
K#5ecr/U.a
273
Hunt
275
was the ultimate authority for the

statement, and that his object was to
avoid the necessity of making Maia
confess to her intrigue with Zeus.
267 x l At*?> T<u * s often applied to
Phil. 1459 'Epnalov opos
physical pain
arbvov clvtItvitov x L fxa ~
trap^Tremf/ev i/jiol
l
206
At.
Atas
OoXeptf
/cetrai
The metaphor, though
Xtip-wvi vo<nt)<ras.
strange to us, was quite familiar to the
Greeks, so that x^'A"**, x 'Mfeff # at etc.

became technical in medical circles. For
examples see Lobeck, Phryn. p. 387.
Epicur. fr. 452 Us. tt)v a&pica to irapov
>
xM *fc"'c
268
Ka8eo-(ia (cr. n. ), as co-ordinate

with the other substantives, is preferable
which Hunt accepted.

The word XIkvov
comes from h. Herm. 21. 150, etc. Miss
Harrison in J. H. S. xxm 294
J. E.
to iSeo-rd,
260
Xikvitiv.
gives reproductions from art of the XLkvov

used as a cradle, in one of which Hermes
is represented sitting up, and looking
The liknon-cradle
at the stolen cows.
is a wickerwork shoe-shaped basket with
two handles.
270 !ev0Tia> is a plausible restoration, although the compound is new.
vvKTa Kai KaO' T||icpav, night and day
Cf. El. 259 /car' rump Kai /car'
alike.
ev<ppbv7]v del, and for the absence of the
prep, with the first noun ib. 780 ovre
Eur. Bacch.
vvkt6s .ofir' e i/fxipas.
'
1009
ij/xap tte vilKro. re.
272
this
airawrros: I have adopted

supplement in preference to ^yia-ros,
as being
273
more
Kktov
prompted by
fityioros
probably right in inferring that Sopho-
ixbvov
airavaTos supplevi
suitable to a#er<u.
rjp.ap.
This is a deviation,
dramatic conditions, from
the version of the
274 ti/ttovs supplevi 7ius

marg. add. pap.e7rt<rxoXdferai Athenaei et Eustathii codd.
correxerat Meineke
cles
on>>q>.
272
Wilamowitz
7)fi4pas Tre<pa<T/xti>os in
Wilamowitz
is
/cdSecrrd
27
hymn
(17
f.),
according
to
which Hermes,
lyre in the
inventing the
after
morning, stole the
cattle
on
the evening of the day of his birth.

For a possible ritual significance see 1- M.
Cornford, Origin of Attic Comedy, p. 87.
The marginal variant (see cr. n. ), in
Robert's opinion, implies that the alternative reading was ivvi' ij/jJpas irt<pacr/xtvos, since no other numeral is adaptable to it. iKtr($a<r\ivos, brought forth,
as in Horn. T 104 arjfxepov fa/Spa. ipbuade
/xoyoarbKos elXdOvia iK<pavei.
274 See cr. n. The objection to
yvlois is not that it cannot be combined
with iraiSds (which then follows 17/3775),
but that the instrumental dative, though
grammatically possible, involves an unnatural harshness of expression.
I formerly
conjectu red txtrpois, but now prefer
which simplifies the construction by providing ipeihei with an object. With r^fwi
n-aidbs, ' his childish mould,' cf. Eur.
Hclid. 857 viwv fipaxibvuv . 77/J77T77J' tvttov.
Aesch. Suppl. 288 yvuaiKeion tvitois.
Soph. Track. 12 (according to the MSS)
.
mow,
tvtt({).
So also Aesch. Theb.tf?,
Eur. Bacch. 133 1
275 f. Athen. 62 F 'Arrt/coi 5' el<rlv
dvbpeitp
oi
Xtyovres op/xevov rbv dirb
tt}s
KpaLifirjs
K&op(fr.
kovk f7rt(7xo\dfrat jUXdaTT)
2
The same quotation occurs in
294 N. ).
Eustath. //. p. 899, 17, but without the
name of the play, and with the variant
oi)/c.
Meineke corrected
Kdi-opLievlfeiv
7ricrxoXdfeTat to in axoXdêrai, and his
view is now confirmed by the papyrus.
For the remarkable use of the middle
i^TjvdrjKbra.
^.oôkXtjs 'IxveiTais
'
'
fxevifti
|opp.vi.
The meansee sitpr. 221.
ing of the word is made clear by the
Phryn. praep. soph.
following evidence.
p. 67, 16 (Bekk. anecd. p. 38, 17) ioptxev-
IXNEYTAI
259
fftkaiom)'] rotovBe TralBa drjcravpbs oTeyei.

AcaTacrxc}ro5 [8* cr]' coti tov Trar/)09 flc'trct.
a<[
XO.
cVc
rftafdtrjoc,
d<f>paa\ro
17801/779
nous /Joa?
\<Tdo\J[_
Toj/[
a<f>[
TO>9 cfe^f
Coi
<X7ra[
J *![*
tfardf-
tos tropi^LV Toidphe yapvv.
xii
KT.
wv a7rtcrT[iJ-
p.rj
yap
ttktjol.
290
<rc TrpocryeXj.
376 ortyti ex rryn corr., ctiam rpiipti in marg. add. pap.*

supplcvi: Jwt/*to Murray
278 iptiryyn pap- 388 /Soift pap.
30O -,j)/h pap.
ol *o\\oi tKpdWti*
yip KaXttrai vwb rQv
'Arnxurr rd Twr Xaxdrwr iai>(H)tiaTa. ol
'ui *cu aftaOtit ravra donapdyoii
to
ifcir
ortp
<*f0ijr,
Xtyovffw-
iiputra
*aXoi-/ic.
Hesych. u
fcavealAnrst,
war
to
S<
p. 127 <op/afWf<tt'
&
I'ollux
<ax<'<7<*-
f^*^j07;<jt,a^ #' .0
J4
\tjkm
Ktôvcwtipntvopuipbuaiop' Kolrbi>w4pupbf
In. m die last
<fcu. iiof>ni*i<so.i.
rtage it seems that tiopfufiiti* might
**<</,
rw
JV
but here we
/o
used fur
should render -imply 'tffimfl forth.'
fr. 34 111 11H K.) MfTQfxi
{p1
lAtnor<\,bi<i\'p'i\ Ta\uHxlp*TOi.
t
po:
m,
.Similarly in
fiiaavpom
t!
Miss
sSjo-av
as a place securely
:itru>ion.
to
is
applied
apancus (iparov).
says to A'idgrway, p.
cave-
II
dwelling was an under -ground storehouse

or granary like the ctfo.
277 KaTdVx.rrat has bc<
t" but'
8.
ground that
word
occur
probably rather
lira
378
285
Xeyet[c,
J-
(fxomjfjâ
poin
(ai/ricrrp.)
J/xa^tcr[
07jpVfxJ[a
tovo
280
*]al /carou oô^ci].
7rat8o[
25
rjp-epa.
c/x77x]ou>7;cra.TO
rotdvSc ^[/309
e/ifiecTTou d[
20
aurojs
66{jif$ti<;,
u7TTia9 k[
rf
fiP*lA. ov
/ii
<f>]6eyp.a pr)X airD
Kal 7r[o\]X'
he palaeographicai data
Ink
ecting
lei a possibility that ihc Ikginning* of the lines 378-180, which are
Oeas
377
cttti.
aTd<rx<Toi
888
rwf pap.
on a separate fragment, should be

In 17H Hunt's d<p**ti
a line lower down.
S' 6 **vtt p tfHypA appears to suit the tonfor, although QtHyna ^>j^<u-i)tforo
text
|
an odd phrase,
is
it
is
justified
by 310.
iKoV<1Xa,r1i ron seems
In
is
for,
inevitable, but
ditticiilt to find a suitable supplement
as
*c\irj;t
Hunt remarks,
On
vincing.'
avdrrot
by
the
'neither nUntt,
nor *6j\vt >the other hand, 9ipot 4k
(Muriay),
WU
same
attd Sovti.
winch were pro|>osed
re highly probable, and

critic's dyyot tvpt (or n*/* ') <*i
an attractive conjecture. Kdrst i.\ in

For iw s>
n.
the Câi^.i
M make a vibrating sound, see Bury on
is
I'ind.
Ntm.
388 f.
h* +*iym
7.
80.
Kossbach proposes impact or

/mm, but that does not fit thr
following words. The lines arc too much

mutilated to be capable of rest or a
301 Foi the incur of this and the
following lines ee Introductory Note,
vw. long before a *
I
wurra
t.
wherewith a
>l
has
vpoe-ysAf implies tfaej
lie emotions of the chorus.
/V,.
rt*JW
vpMtmipn
861
Aesch.
n Asjiw. 153 6*n+\ flponittw mlfUttf pu
wpocyi\^.
Soph. Ant. 1114 iA*i m
#aiwi ^*ryei. Bar. ////* 801 rsSrsi >
.
17
IO0OKAEOYI
26o
XO.
kcll
KT.
ttlOov'
XO.
KT.
XO.
KT.
770105 TtS TfV eTSoS; TTp[o]fJLT]Kr)<S,
7TW5
rov
nWaiixai
d<xv6vro%
<f>6eyfJL<x
tqlovtov
fipeixecv;
yap
0av(ou
ecrê (fxovyjv, ôiv 8' aVauSos
Yj
'iTLKVpTOS,
7)
r?
v 6
fipaycVS
ûr/awS^? 7ro[i]/a\i7 Sopa KareppiKvo)p.ivo<;.

296
alekovpos eiKacrai irefyvxev yj t<os Trop&aXcs
/3pa^(v<s
a)?
TrXeto-ro^
yoyyuXov yap
/u,[T]air
eo-ri
/3pa-
/cat
ûo"/ceXe5.
XO.
ouS'
ok KapKivo)
lyvevrfj npcxrcfrepes ire<f)VKev ovS'
c!)9
10 KT. ovS' au toiovt\_6]v icrTtv, dXX' dXkov riv
iêvpov
rpoirov.
XO.
dXX' ws Kepdar\i)\i Kavdapos StJt
iarlv Atrâtos
3
cf)V7j v
KT. vvv iyyvs eyv\_(o<;] w /x,dXio~ra tt po<T(j)epe<; to kvcoooXov.

XO. t[i S' av to] (a)i>[oi)]i' icniv avrov, rotWo? ^ tov^co,
<f>pdcro\v.
293 tQiv 5' dvavbos pap., ftD? 5

marg. trecentesimo versui adscriptum
2
2
295 x VTP 01
pap., Tpoxot8r)[s] in marg. pap.
^j[05os?] in marg. add. pap.
298 ixvev/i[o]vi pap. secundum ed. pr. corr. Zielinski, ixvevrrj in pap. iam invenit
292 7
in
Hunt
a<pv56vijs
XP vcr V^ TOV ---'n'P oa ffa ^ vovcr ^
Rhes. 55 calvei
'
p.'
M- e -
Hvvvxos <f>pvKTupla (of
something which demands notice). The

fact that the hearer sometimes experithe essential
is accidental
point is that the signs are presented in
a form which compels attention.
292 toO 6avdvTos 4>0t'"Yp.a For the
retention of the article 'that such a
sound can come from the dead
see on
fr. 870.
293 See cr. n. The riddle is taken
from h. Herm. 38 ?)v 8i ddvys, rbre nev
Cf. Nic. Al. 560
fid\a koKov ddbois.
(xeXuvrjv) avdrjeaffav HOr)Kev, dvavbrjrbv
Pacuv. Autiop. fr. IV quadrrep iovaav.
rupes tardigrada agrestis humilis aspera,
brevi capite, cervice anguina, aspectu
truci,
eviscerata inanima cum aniviali
sotio.
For the bearing of the last passage
on the question of the date of this play
see Introductory Note, p. 230.
294 îrCKvp-ros arched.
295 \VTp(o8rjs
pot-shaped.
Cf.
schol. Theocr. 5. 58 7au\oi dyyeta x vT P-
ences pleasure
'
piKvbv
(Tvcpap
ep.bv.
Hunt renders it
'curved,' but see Suid. s.t: KareppLKvoiptvov. <rvve<TTpap.p.ivov Kafivvkov ytvbpuvov,
ippvriSwixivov, where the last gloss apFr. 316
plies to the present passage.
should not be taken to be a reference to
I
this line.
296 aUXovpos- The form is established as Sophoclean by fr. 986.

ts here
clearly = ws.
This may also be the case
in Aesch. Theb. 624, where the edd.
strive to construe it as thus.
See also Ar.
Ach. 762, where the Megarian is speaking.
Stahl however corrects to x&s298 See cr. n. The recovery of the
true reading makes it unnecessary to
consider
KapKivos,
Wilamowitz's lxve6/j.wi> and

which were adopted in both of
ti8ij
ya\a.KTo86xcL-
But
it
is
difficult
to
say whether this word or rpoxwSrjs was

KaTtppiKvcojAtvos
the gloss (see cr. n. ).
shrivelled.
Cf. Callim. fr. 49 vai fid rb
for the fact that ws

Hunt's editions
follows iri<pvKv (iffTiv .<pv7)v) in 296 and
300 shows that here also it is employed
is he not then the
in the same way
I now
very image of an ichneumon ?
think ( with Maas) that ixvevrfy = Ixwup^wv.
Certainly /UpaxvaiceXes suits the ichneu:
'
'
mon, and yoyyv\ov might be explained by

Aelian's iyicvXlcras iavrbv (nal. an. 3. 22).
300 f. This is the climax of absurdity,
and is fresh evidence (fr. 162 n.) that
IXNEYTAI
KT.
J^
261
<rvyyovo<;
.Jo/hitj
tuxu
> <r-
TfHXKOiV.
15
XO. [nolov
KT.
[roi/
& rovvofx ev ]t/c[7ret]? ; tropcrvvov,
#77/30,
x ^ v,/
/xei/
ct ti 7rA.[Y]oi>
\vpau 6
r t^wôJOf 8' au
>
ir[ar? jcJaAci.
305
XO.
Kriavov
tictv[.
Bepfia
]ot>
optun) (t postea deleto) pap.

in
marg. tcstatur pap.*
.]
ipeiheTa^t.
TrXeKTa
803
tlvl;
K\ayya\veL
<S8[c]
\6pu>0KAE0YI
262
24
/cot]XaSo9
"tt,
/c[
21
,,
24
,,
]a/x/xaroj[
25
>>
]<>v[
/cdX]Xo7re<? Se[
desunt versus unus vel duo

Col.
/cat
xiii
tovto Xv7ny[s]
aKecrrpov
ecrr
/cat TrapaxjjvK[j]r]-
p[to^\v
KLV(p fJLOVOV,
X a [C/0ei
^'
ttXvtoV
/Cat
Tt
TT pO(T^)0)v\JjilV
fxeXos
vix(f>covov ea[t]/oet
yap avTov
atoXtcr/u.a ttjs X[v]/3as.
outcu? 6 7rats davovri Orfpi (^dey/x' ifirjâuijcraTô. 3 20
XO.
< /o#o > i//aXa/cro?
/carotYêt ro7rov,
rts 6jx(f>d
(" r/>-)
311
pap.
KoiXdSos supplevit Mekler

321 6pdo\pdXaKTos
6fi<pi)
pap.
313
311 KoiXdSos was restored by Mekler,

as the tortoise-shell sounding-board (rjxeiov).
He cited Bekk. anecd. p. 752, 11
'Epftijs ev 'ApKaSia dvao-rpe<pbfj.ei>os evpe
XeXwv.rjv ko.1 8ia.K6\f/as iiroL-qve KoiXiav
Xvpas.
Gemoll on h. Hertn. 416. This
seems better than Schenkl's neXabos.
312 KoXXoires were the pegs by
means of which the strings were fastened
to the $vybv.
Cf. Horn. <p 407 pijtSiws
iravvaae
vtip irepl k6XXotti
xP^V v
See cr. n. Schenkl suggests

from Poll. 4. 60.
317 f. For the general sense cf.
Shakesp. Henry Fill m. 1. 12 In sweet
music is such art, killing care and grief
of heart fall asleep, or, hearing, die.

aKTTpov: fr. 480.- irapa\|n>KTi]piov is
a word hitherto unrecorded. dXvwv.
The unfamiliar sound is regarded as
a sign of distraction. For the fact see
h.
rj
Herm. 53 irXrjKTpip iireip r)Tiê

crp-epbaXfov
d' virb x el P^ s
/
primum a add. pap.
Kardfj-ipos,
Kovdfiyae'
dirpo^f/dXaKTos
318
dXviusv
Wilamowitz
wpbs Kijivv XaKilv avXbv.

Xvpas, the lyres varied
notes' rather than 'the cunning device of
the lyre
(Hunt).
Cf. Eur. Ion 498
crvpiyywv vir albXas iaxds vfivwv.
Carm.
pop. 8 (PIG p. 657) awXovv pvdfwv
Oppian Hal. 728
Xôvres aid\(f> fidXei.
aydovos aloXo<pwvov.
For the description
as especially suitable to the lyre see Find.
01. 3. 8 <pbp/uyyd re iroiKiXbyapvv.
4. 2
^>/)î'
iâlpoifxt
aloXicrjia
TTjs
'
'
virb
313
Kadafj./xdTwv
supra
Murray: o\paXaKTos pap.,
iroiiaXcxpbp/xiyyos
14 iroiKiXov Kidaplfav.
doibas.
i\'ci.
4.
Plat. legg. 812 D

Xvpas.
rr\v 5' eTpo<pd3vlav ko.1 iroiKiXiav rrjs
321
here
The
short ode which begins

metrically to 362 ff.
similar to 237 ff.
op6o\J/d-
corresponds
The metre
XaKTos,
(see cr.
is
cf.
otJ/clXclktos
loud
249.
n.) is meaningless, and 362 indi'
'
cates that one extra syllable is required,

so that I follow Hunt in adopting Murray's
conjecture, but without much confidence
Wilamowitz does not
that it is right.
explain his dirpoipdXanTos, which, though
debs 5' virb KaXbv aeidev
he has
presumably based on irpoxp aXdffixu (241),

Since \paXis by no means perspicuous.
nothing else to comfort him,' prepares

the way for dXvwv ('he is crazy with
d<r<ru
was unquestionably used for
twanging the lyre (Lycophr. 139 roiyap
which in its turn is justified

Cf. Bekk. anecd. p. 380, 20,
giving iiralpeadai sal x al pe<- v as a gloss on
Horn. f333. There is thus no need for
dinra
\f/aXdeis els Kevbv vevpds ktvttov,
KddwprjTa (pop/jilfuv /jUXti), this meaning
must surely have been the chief element
in the compound (perhaps diroxf/dXaKTos
after Philostr. vit. soph. 2. 1. 14 ij yXuirra
Karoi)^tt)v aKpav 'Ardida diroipdXXei).
rdirov.
The genitive resembles
Vi
iredlojv iirivlcrceTai O.C. 689.
It is descended from the old (partitive) genitive
ireipufxevos.
delight
by
Observe that
e avToaxeSltjs
p.6 vo v.
'
'),
ca(pci.
Bucherer's ddvpwv.
319
Tis
cgatpci, elates.
Cf. El. 1460 ei
avrOiv iXirlffiv Kepais irdpos
e^r/per'
But a still closer parallel
to be found in Eur. Ale. 346 otfr' av
dvdpbs rovSe.
is
IXNEYTAI
<
TrpeuTa
av > Sia tovov
8'
to trpayp.a
265
<J>d(rp.aT
ey-
olirep Troptva) fiaZrjv,
TOV 8a[lJ/iOI/' 00"Tt< 7TO0* O?

335
tclvt T\mj(raT
ovk dMoc. icnlu AcXfWcve,
OUT KLUOV, yVVQ.1, <T<X<f> Icrdl.
&>
S
C*
v
o~v O auTL Tojioe fxrj âAc1<T0L
10
4>0XI%
333
<
ifiol
fxrj
>
8c
Svcr<f>opr)6j}<;.
a? Hunt: wpirra (sic) pap., sed rp reformavit pap. 1

833 /ra*-at legisse Theoncm in marg. tcstatur pap.'
334 olvtp coni. Hunt: oi*f,>
pap. sed Iitteram v seclusit pap.'
330 ifiol firfii coni. Hunt: tpoi 6* pap., p.r<6i
VYtlamowitJ
wptrra
6'
Homeric
of place which sutvives in the
But in both cases the

preposition assists the construction
see
tiutKtcdai xtSioio.
4O4.
See cr. nn.
rth
333
t.
wporrd
in agree-
^do-uAra is supported l>y

1. Ill
p. 369 wpTT&' (parTOLffuara,
tU6**i, wh.
unowits suggests,
ment
wirh
may relate to this

Hunt gives two \
passage.
particular
with fravmtasics flit over

the scene,' like a bird or l>cc from flower
to flower.
I prefer the latter alternative
plucks local images.'
<>r (:)
8fiî intr.i
ke
Theon's
variant,
the metre,
of the
But
i-ra.ytHtiu.sti.
render
be
to
ail
which is
acknowuse
of
prefer
to
intransitive
nt
should
bv the straining
chords are spread around us {lyx uP**
:
'visions revealed
like a carpet of tl
Similarly in Aesch. Lko. 150, where
iwa*9l{tip ' to make to blossom ' is trailhere is the same comparison of
ooad to flowers. The variegated rot*t\la
of the lyre (319) is expressed as d>0â.
rbrot of the lyre {iwrirotun) cf.
'ihl. who thinks that
iwa*9tfti[tt mus\\,
makes o/t<0rf
the subject, and
ads fyxop&a for f>xvpa.
3 24 S. On the as.
ihe
1
Kur. lid. 1070. dace ovwtp would Ikscarcely intelligible.

Where the verb is
in the perfect tense, as in 7'riuA. 40, the
ay be different. (1) I und<
olrtp as having a personal refercn
to TOf bailor' in the following clOM
on fr. 191 and cf. Hdt. 9. t okov Si Ik da
rort yiroiro, tovtovi wapt\dpLftaft Phil.
456 ff., and for the relative clause put first
Kuehner-Cierth tl 4J0 Anm. j.
I"he extraordinary' circumlocutions are due to the
,
chorus Iwing afraid to OCMM 10 tl'

(cf. .uS f.).
iy tov Saipow' is .m anticipated accusative, but instead of being resumed as the subject (or object of a subordinate clause, hulvov takes its place.
nilar looseness of
iotn. 101. (4) Inconnexions^.
which
stead of the
we are looking, there follow* what now
1
ea
the main
sentence,
as
if
tVOi
hich precedes were as much parent hctit

as o-d>" to-fli win
ion.
1117. fr. i8j n.).
(5) oVts trot'* is
strangely substituted for
Sam
vor' h* ot.
an unusual amplification if
InC. /. ,u9 &\oi# Sart% ip St kt4.
If
Vrit.
Hermann
cut out
dXXo
'.
pleonasm
sc>
0* /' y,}, ovStlt At

for the
dvr' <Jkivov
^tarktc
>'
.otind
lie
111
of style and clumsiness of structure are

|uite
unlik*
let>
WibunowiU
character of a thief
'S-rsv
tiut.
arrdr wapiSwsar
'.
Translnte rather
this is
A fUTtpx^fttu,
the point to which I am gradually conto
ducting my search (to wp&ytta
Xpvn* n MS) whoever l>e the god who
devised this trick, the thief i* none
other than he. lady, you may 1st sure.'
(1) otwtp seems indispensable here, as in
:
'
>K
Mf
ttwpi
kmisi
vii
WpQ^tfW,
Willi
in for t and raiV' for rsuV, ma.

wpiypm the anticipated object uf 4t*x
r^raro, with wi following 1*0%.
hinks
820 BOB CT. n \N
that this and the preceding line arc not
part of the strophe, but form tetrameter
I04>0KAE0YI
264
KT.
15
[rt9 exct ir\a]vr) ere
XO. [ov fxd Ata cr\

KT. [tcw 8' e'/c Ato<?
XO. [
KT. [
XO. [
20
c5
Tiva kXotttjv wêtSicr[as
ySXacrrdJt'ra
/caX[ei<?
TâXr)0rj ky[<o.
KeKko]<f)vaL
335
crao/)[
Be fiovs iravv
]a /ca^T7/3[/x]o[cr
^XOV T6/XCOV
]<f>o
KT.
eyx]a<TKOj>Ta
[.
oJuSeV,
cru
[et
8[o]/oa
340
desunt versus duo vel tres

] a pre fiav0dp(o ^povoi
(frrjkiJTrjv
] av avrfj rfj /cXo[7n?.

e]i ye Tct[X]7?#i7 Xe[yt<?.
Col. xiv
330
npea-^/SeLpa, êt/xaêtf [cVXcu.
ow
r\
jKopia.
yapiv.
evoiav e^cov,
tl KepSaiveLv So/cets,
to Aot77ojt' et?
(tol <j)epeL -^dp]/^
'/at}
rfj
ctXXa,
7raiStct9
345
efJL
[oVeus #e'Xet9 /cajâê /cat re'pnov <j>piva'
332
supplevit Mekler
340
non liquet
<pi\r)Ti]v
5opa[ pap.
336
pap.
corr.
catalectic closing the preceding acatalectic

The text is unfortunately defecseries.
tive at
369, where
it
might have decided
8vcr<{>opT|8fjs implies 8v<rthe question.

<j>opeladai, of which there is no trace
except as a variant in Xen. Cyr. 2. 2. 5.
For the passive form of the aorist see on
frs.
164, 837.
331
\ei\i.6X,t\.v, to
TTibp(p
(ill
fUT
lM TTl v see cr n anc^ fr* 933 n
Maas (B. ph. IV. 191 2, 1076) reverts to
the form îXtJttjs, on the ground that it
is also supported by the wooden tablet of
the Hecate, and by the papyrus of HellaIt is certainly
nicus (Ox. Pap. 1084. 3).
remarkable that the text of Hellanicus by
affirming the derivation from <piXeiv seems
to indicate that he employed <pCXi\Ti)s, but
we cannot
the statement
feel certain that
back to the supposed original,

For a similar error see 358 and fr. 171
(xj/ikcHpif.
for \j/rfKa<f>q.).
The word was
particularly associated with Hermes from
the Homeric hymn (292, 446) onwards.
really goes
Besides Hellanicus, see Eur. Rhes. 1

ye <py)\7)Tuv &va$.
CIG 2299
(Kaibel, ep.
88) 'Epp.7}v rov KKiirrTjv rls
1
"Epfirjs, 8s
annoy, vex, distress,

in a less severe sense than in 267 (n.).
The use seems to have been colloquial (cf.
Ant. 391), and is glossed with evoxêiv
by Amnion, p. 146, quoting Menander iv
'Hw6xv (fr. 208, III 60 K.). Cf. fr. 404,
6 (ill 117 K.) dXV iv aKa\vTTT(fj /ecu raXai-
quatenus processerit stichomythia
Robert
ixpelXero; 6epp.bs 6 KXtwrris

riwv (px^ &vaKra <p4puv.
8s
twv
<prj\r}-
333 KXoirfj. Hunt thinks this is

concrete as in Eur. Hel. 1675 (= thing
stolen), and suggests ov 7' evrvx^v Xafioifi
&v.
But we might as well have ical yap
doicei XaOeiv av
for all his thievery (cf.
For the metre see p. 230.
162).
344 f. The gaps are well filled by
Mekler with irovr)pi <r' eyxdfftcovra and
Spas 8' vytes oiide'v.
He supposes that
a new sentence begins with &pn in 343.
346 els ty evSiav e^wv at your ease
so far as I am concerned, i.e. I shan't
interfere with you.
Cf. Protag. fr. 9
Vorsokr? p. 540, 3) evSi-rjs yap

undisturbed.'
he
remained
For eh cf. O.C. 1121 r^vSe tt)v es rdcrde
(Diels,
etxero
p.01
'
r4p\f/tv.
348
Jebb on O. T. 706.
Kd\ae: At. 199.
IXNEYTAI
tov nalBa
8'
26:
o]vra tov A109
Xoycj
(ra<f>el
35o
ftXaTrre klv$ov v v(p viov \6yov.
fi.7)
ovto? yap ovre] irpbs narpos KXeVrq? <f>v

ovt eyyevr)<; fx^JTpojcnv rj kXo7tt) Kparei.
crv 8' aXXotr' ei tJic. cVti, tov kXctttt/i/ (TKOntt
Acat yrjiv a]/ca/37rof tov& 8\ ov nXavq. hofxovs,
au/Jei yeVo?, irpocraTm ttju Trovrjpiav
.5.",.",
7T/3o]9
a[AAJ
16
360 >upplevi
iofun pap., &
OJ/Tl/
aii>
crv 7rai9
ci
350 ar) pXaiTTi kivwv. I have pnferred this to Hunl\ m? iir *-otv,
because to accuse a god of theft is fitly
described as an injurious slander, and
somewhat more apt (see Blaydcs
on Ar. Sub. 1397) than Totu*. 'Stirring
up a new charge against a new-born
child.'
Note the careless repetition of
\6yor in a somewhat different sense, and
see Jebb on O.C
i* (= in reki*C>* is
1092
;<>i
At.
p.y\...i*
to* ip
$apovo~u> v/Jpiffrr)i yip$.
inoi
Eur.
ffpao-vt.
yap
yeoc.
ib.
Philostr. imag.
365
much
oj.
868
iyytv^s
follows
AY.
1328.
Wil.inv.wiu supplied oOr' afrit ip.
xparti
fm-ai/s, i.e. maintains itself.
Cf. Thuc. 1.71 draytri 6i dewtp ri\PVi
dtl ro iwiyiyirbntra KpartiP.
.
353 II
d tv Xon)
leave* the sentence incomplete.
wu suggest'
rlt
474 p-rprr'
4<rn
dXAoc-i
dXW
864 Ka'i yVjv Anapmv: or perhaps

Aypop r' &*ap*oi>.
Hunt reads Awopop
AtapTof, but Atapmop can scarcely U- the
;K.-rw>n. and the grammatical
Ml
vas
;;ivcn in
breathi
the disappear
due to haplography,
tl
than the
Ighsii
If
or. 8,
.*er
<
to
Wil-
unt adopts. The rough

oarse, have been
M Ism likely to have
.
r.
bat
th-it
where smooth breathings

lastly. -yVrof, whether
preceded by ABptt or by n>l
text
better,
if
isolated.
On
quoted
see cr.
and may
ru
rt
ofl
le
ravra
in favour
formerly
I
'respect' is
n.
recommended
Ik-
independently of the reading adopted in

the last line. Cf. Eur. fr. 395 tV iUp
yap tvyiruap airovai* (iporoL Theodect.
'N'auck, p. 806) iyw pi* oOror'
tvyivtia* ijy<o-a. Aesch. fr. 300 -yVrot utr
alvuv innaOwr iwlaraîai \i8towiiot yift.
'
866
t)K.
as
O.C. 738
in
comes
wpotrt)Kti).
oOtx'
fit-
>M
***
yi*u ra tovS* wtrOti* vfoar' i% r\tlcrow vo\tvt, where, as Ellendt has

poi nted out. the passages usually motad
in illustr.ition are not really parall<
Ar. I'lut. 919 (quoted by Hunt) ^ct
\olves upon.' wpfrst: te. wpotawrti* rip worqplar.
867 f. The connexion of thought
appears to lie as follows. ' But, instead
of l>i<l!iK you tu this rnliculou charge is
never cease
your childish ways though a full-grown
I
man'
(*> *taia*
band'
a thick
surfeited
'
in
fr.
-y
310,
no longer
\>.e.
jtfipiH>r
.<
a goat
yon are a
with
I hist k
understands * vou swagger
>llow goat-beard
a
with fr. N4N rt
talk
tv+oppia, and the
6i a+a&o\t,t s-wXot
comparison of wanton conduct to thr
d was
skittishnrss .f an o\
ly familiar.
Cf. Ar. Vtif. 1305
Atdri|XX/, i*ipra, 'w.w6pi*t *ayt\a
wip laxf*'*** opiitof ii'wxW"'- Thcogn.
reading
xnpy
'
Mm
11
than
may
6kph, but afV
ayi*tio%)
tovS
15.
aim;
suggested
tingly,
So rpoi alparot
irpo\ irarp6%.
kti'.:
utv airqp
xtrla bpwp 6 $tbt

of wtipy.
Mtd. 106
\+x tl vpo&orap.
861
OVTCO TTDcVct.
862 Mj.j. inilia supplevi 854 5' ov wXcwp 5<J/iott scripsi: roii-arcu
pra r et spiritum aspenim supra ov add. pap. 1 , 8' ov s-<o7J S6fiot
i66 A0pti Wilamowit/
355
866 3' ex r corr. pap.'
867 ettfi pap.
pap.
Wil&mowitz
lation
OUY
TGjSc 8'
T^KCl*
149
tpiBi*
ti',
*i>
pvtp
tKoplatifl,
atnn
Mf
rrot,
rfel
ivtl
rratpmi
ZO<pOKAEOYI
266
[^y] a>ia ÂAcoi/ &>? rpayos kvtJkw ÂiBas.

travov to \eiov (f>akaKpbu r)hovfj TTLTvds.
[o]vk ck decjv tcl jJLwpa /cat yekoia -^prj
7r
KXaieii' vcrrep
[x]ou>eWa
20
XO.
<
a>?
> eyw
cr
arp(f)ov \vyitpv re p.v$oi<s, birolav OeXecs fidîv evpio~K <xtt6xJjyjktov ov yap jxe ravra Treuxeis
<
>
it cos
360
yeka>
(avTMTTp.)
vtos eipyacrfJLevos
to XPyt*
365
pivoKoW-qTOV a\\(j)v eKXexjjev fSoojv

ttov hopa\s f]~\ Vo TOiv Aoiov.
fxrj fxe ra[crS' e] 6Sov fii/3ae.
desunt versus fere quattuor
25
360
358
kvikwl pap.
eis Oeovs Wilamowitz
\oia XPV in ras P a P 2
puiTeyaryeKo) pap., r supra prius 7 et varepucreyw in marg. add. pap. 2
^7w \4yu Hunt,
363
pap
I
365
0Aeis ex di\ois corr. pap. 2
XPVP
ovtos legisse
The
rjXvdes rjiieripovs.
correction
el <ru
ykp
tSs
biroiav
pap.
Wilamowitz et Murray:
xp7lllaT0VT * ~ P a P-
irws
sq. /ii/0ots
and is scarcely a ponderable alteration.

Hunt, putting a question after (/<rrep',
reads cSs iyui \eyu, and suggests that
Wila<t' should be added after icXaUiv.
mowitz alters ^*c deQv to els deovs, and
ends the sentence with vcrrepus, 70) \yw
(coll. Eur. fr. 499).
For the adverbial
ace. vcrrepa see Kuehner-Gerth 1 310.
362
crTp<J>ov,
shuffle,
Ach. 385 (Starkie's
el.
vcrre-
\jo~rep
forws
testatur pap. 2 :
Theonem
but Wilamowitz, who

insists that Silenus is still on the stage
and must be the person addressed, makes
the violent alteration of veos to 7rd\cu.
Hunt has shown that the young satyrs
are often represented as bald-headed and
that the taunt may be quite well addressed
to the chorus. Cf. Eur. Cycl. 434 veavias
seems inevitable
362
yu X^yw Wilamowitz
voTipuis,
991
363 f.
recalls
Ar.
n.).
359 Hunt renders 'cease courting

pleasure with your bald pate,' but does
not explain the peculiarity of the language.
so, keen-scented, sharp, acute.
No satisfactory result can be deduced

from the interpretation of iri-rvds either
1. 4. 8 emunctae naris (of Lucilius).

Cf.
Lucian navig. 45 kgu'toi evbs rod avayxaio-
as spreadi?ig ox strewing (Hes. Scut. 291).

It is suggested, therefore, that -K'nvr\p.<. is
used here in the figurative sense of to flutter or excite, a meaning which is perhaps
t&tov wpoadei,
by Horn.
justified
fidXiara
that
eKireireTacr/xe'vos if
360f.
160 7rws
cr
8vp.6i> pLvrjcmfipuv ,
See
cr.
n.
is
irerdcreie
and by
read
ib.
<ppiva.s
327.
that
'Take care
the gods don't punish your foolish jests,

and give me cause to laugh at the tears
that will follow.' The order of the words
shows that considerable stress is laid on
ck Occov, for which see 11. on fr. 326. The
final clause ws &y<o yekv ironically represents the natural result of an action as
the purpose of the agent.
Cf. e.g. Horn.
359,
aWiov
atrrtadw
77s
V7j6s...6(ppa
66.vo.tov koX tt6t/xov iirlawrj.
addition of
<r'
ttpbaff'
The
improves the antithesis,
diro\|rr|KTOv
illustration of the
p.wpaivovra,
6$
wiped clean, and
metaphor
The
is
irepide'p.evbv
ere
TroWr/v TavTt)v
tt\v
best
Hor. Sat.
iravcrei
icbpvfav
343 A Kopvfwvra
diro/iVTrei deb/ievov.
Hunt, however, prefers to understand
the word, which does not occur elsewhere, as equivalent to well-groomed,'
airoi-vo-as.
Kal
wepiopq.
Plat. rep.
ovk
'
elaborate; and Wilamowitz gives it

an active sense removing suspicion, exculpatory.
For the redundance of rawTa
cf. O.T. 1058 ovk b\v yevotro tov6\ Situs
i.e.
yu}...ov
365
(fxuvui
tov/jlov yivos.
to xpô. cf. 136. ptvoKo'X.Xtjtov is not complementary to the verb

(proleptic), but is employed in accordance
with the common Greek idiom, which
used to be known as the tertiary predinow, since the thing
cate. Translate
that he made was of glued hides, he could
ff.
"
'
IXNEYTAI
yap
X().
6 Zjcuc.
KT.
6] irals k\o[it
XO.
ci] toi
KT.
kJcucgj? d*ou[eii>
XO.
KT.
e]t
8'
o]u
267
novq[pa Spa, novrfpos wv
ecrr'
aXrjÔrj,
rarS*
/i.77
ov npentL A105
y^prj fie
Kvpi.
375
ydi/<w.
/cat
Xe'ycii'
ra8e.
[citt^?.
KT.
XO.
380
KT.
JOXO.
KT.
XO.
KT.
1:.
385
XO
y.[. ...]a
KT.
7ro[v] #cai y8da<>
XO.
KT.
XO.
7r[X]ioi;5 8c y'
6 7rai9 09 tuhov icrriv iyKtK\rj\p.ivo<;.
KT.
[to]>
Ittt
\L
7TOVrjp\
<*>
ve/iovac t[
i/v/
tJSt;
7rX[
TL
7rai8a 7ravo"cu toO Ato?
n xo.
wfajvot/i' [a]i/ [ei] ra? /J0O5

KT.
77017 pc 7r{ijyi5 *al <rv â[
80O 8? Wilamowiu ct Murray: to3 pap.,
nap
390
[*<!*<<
Xe'ycui>.
ti? e[
t
ariQtv.
fto<;
supra Tauffaj
qoadringentt
wai-ou)
(i.t.
li
add. pap.*
adscriptum
rbf 161
80S
not have to!cn them from any other

Don't try t<> turn
cattle than Apollo's.
For the preme

position accompanying the second noun
ffwOrlt
IId. 863 Ipoiat
r.
*aw6 (iapftdpov x for 61 and see on fr. 20.
68ow the metaphor of the trail is re*
from
this track.'
tfl
'wi.
newe<l froa
37ft If the sense
it
may be
pi* y&p iffK&i

fori*
tTati>6i
is
correctly restored,
by Eur. fr. 336

'fw/' irfo rrV.
illustrated
ii*ann
imawti*
5<rrit
dpi <r tot.
rouror /> n a\"inplctcs

HOMfcftdi
380
with
ft>
Xryt"
tr\a-yidftf trdXir
rp6wo\i
the imc
Mekler suggested
what new trick is
>
ri trXfiorat
'
('
wft[
Bm
Cf.
n.
rAr
amowitz, would
l>e
proposed
in accordance
.fcAt,
083
6 in
if
is.
oi'
marg.
}ytf pap.
rule,
it
desired
to lay the chief ItNBI 00 the genitive.

Iiut there are many example*, where the
attributive genitive follows the governing
noun without a re|>ctition of its article.

Sec Kuchner-Gerth
I 464, Amu. 1.
1
303
impleted the line

with '$*\ar 04\ot, which i Nloptl
Hut wavoip' 4v catmot Ik- intranHunt.
sitive
and
\\
,;ht
of
Xw0*rt 9* y/r*) in .gr),

Iiut
take wai-cai as aor. inf. art.
the variant trai'-ov shows that waiaat was

this
regarded a* an imperm:
Probably then
nt i improbable.
V<., tr...
we should supply rf
1
\vyof)
present infinitive
80S
801
with the general
t6*yri>f
ick, p. 780) yipoii t'

dtrâA/crraroi | *ar' Ar6p'
901
Wilamou
\nvhow il*\i*
i
as
Iwttcr avoided.
.'/.
573
Ifr
1*
with the
comic tone indicated by the use of *
,
1.
Z04>0KAE0YZ
268
XO.
[.
.]Xeto-e7r/3[.
.]v[
i]$\avi^_
desunt versus fere undeviginti

TreXedoLS fiotov
Col. xvi
414
desunt versus fere duodecim

Col. xvii
430
5
XO.
LOV LOV
I
T (p7) [
OVT05 OV <[
t]V
21.
gj
A[oia
tw 8[
10
XO.
Aoia
cS
435
Se[
/ecu 7ra/o^[
T6JV [j6]o6j[l>
An.
[.>
440
e[.]et[
/3o[
15
07T0[
jXLcrdbs
eA.ev#e/)o[
445
21. rov ey[
20
394
a7ro\et
<re
ir]e\tdois (ioQiv
ir[.]7.
coni.
Murray
Theonem
deletae sunt
legisse in
432
414
t ex 5 corr. pap.
word see Blaydes on Ar. Nub.

1036, who shows that it is commonly
For
this
used in the New Comedy as well as in

L. and S.'s account is incomLucian.
plete.
(X<u
For
/36es
394
columna omnino
the contemptuous pronoun

aidev) see on fr. 165.
Murray's cnroXei <re is plausible,
it is difficult
to complete the line,
unless the speech of the chorus extended
beyond a single verse.
414 For the palaeographical data
bearing on the position of this column
see Hunt's note.
431 ff. The remains of Col. xvii
but
appear to belong to a scene in which

Apollo had returned to the stage, and
periit,
431
marg. testatur pap. 2
nisi
quod verba
post lov lov litterae
had
learnt from the chorus of the success

of their search.
Consequently he tells
them that they have earned their rewards.
Probably Silenus also reappeared at this
point, whereas Cyllene had retired discomfited.
might suggest that the
suspicions of the chorus had been confirmed by some visual evidence, which
prepared the way for their triumph.
Hunt concludes that a single column has
been lost between 394 and 431, and so
much space at least seems to be required.
445 (Xeijdepoi 5' <-<re<r6e rbv iravra
Xpbvov (Rossbach), but \oiir6v should at
any rate be substituted for the unmetrical
We
TrdvTa.
IXNEYTAI
269
315
imjXara v\a
TpCyoji<f>a Staro/acvcrat ere Seirat
315
Pollux 10. 34 nipt) Si /rX/njt

iwWKurrpo*, rh \U* ft iwl-
-.}\ara
iced
vwo ' ApurrtHpdrovi (fr. 44, 1

33 K.) tlprjtUfof Lo^xuYip 3' > 'X-^ytviTf (Tarvpoti t(p7j 'iw^\ara...dtiTai.'
<iwrpor
(New Phryn.
Rutherford
167) pronounces these words to be 'too corrupt

to convey any meaning.' The conjectures hitherto recorded assume that the
sense required is ' the posts must be
Ewith
Thus Pauw
nails.'
thuis)
StaroptCffu
conjectured
omitting
6<i,
gave
J)
|iA
< ovpyi >
Tp<y6ti.<poii
rpiyofx<pa
as
oiaroptiv
Lobeck (Phryn.
{</\a.
<m}Xara
alternatives
y6n<pott Staroptu>
ivrfXara if,~f ofi<f>a biarpffjal
the obscure comment
eum
(after
and Yalckcnaer on Phoen.
di\
Il86 (ll 79) trhXara

fft
p.
6u, and
tti, with
fft
fft
spondas prius ad
finem perforates ffvyyofxftiaai.' Hut
'
none of these suggestions is satisfactory.

iv^Xara are the four posts or bars ' bedwhich, when jointed together, form
the framework of the X/#i
they are
supported by the feet, which are screwed
into
tti'
1.
p.
103 tpfura-
arb roO ittlptodat t<# rrr/Xdri^.
witba cXirr/r
Phryn:
states that upeurHipia

is the correct Attic term for /rtjXara, but
there
is
.)
no material
>aning
in
is
to test his authority,
placed beyond doubt by
til 370.
The interprerp.Yoâ and Staropoe-tu is
Pauly-Wissowa
tation
of
mt I think it is possible to
doubtful
get nearer to the truth.
(1) The sense
usually given to rplyoufa, 'fastened with
three nails,' is absurd.
I should rather
I
appOM
that it means 'firmly-bolted,'

that rpi- has the same force as in t/myipvr, rpfdocXot, TptrdXat, rpivcwoGpyot,
rpiffi$\ioi and many others.
(.) dcaro-
and
is
not to bort through, but to
engrave, chase; and, although it may be
an error for biaropfjoai or tmropth fft,
the corruption |g not likely. ( )n the other
hand, the context does not sugge-t an
allusion to To/xt-run)
for, although the
bedstead of Odysseus was adorned with
gold, silver and ivory (Hon. ^ 200), the
virh required here must have been appropriate to (v\a.
Put ropti'tif and its
cognates are constantly confused with
ropftvtir etc.
and ot&ropvtiti*, to finish
off with the lathe, is exactly what we
want
I
suggest, therefore, that we should read something like
itrtfXdrup Tpiyofx<pa SiaropftOotui
(t/Xa
ptC-ffai
ttirat, or pei
haps -.imply
biaropfti-fftrai.
NT.
hist. 14. 7 perhaps diaropptv$ivrt% would be an improvcm

StaroptvdirTtt (cf. iworopm-wi.
I
find
that iilaydcs has suggested irhXar' orr
rptyofjupa ropftOcal fft dti, besides alterand llerwerdcn rViJXara
natives
rwr> rplyofiâ < roXXd - ropptvffai fft
im.
R. Kllis conjectured biarbpti-r' iwo(Offal fft tti.
It should ! added that
Robert guesses that Hermes pad
cealed the lyre in his mother's bed, and
that we should read Sti rpiyofiQ' V*}\ara
In Aclian
<rOr>
iiaroptOffai
(? ttaropifffat)
9'.
the facts were as supposed, the

method proposed for discovering the lost
would be a very strain.
-For Schenkl'i view see on fr. 31 4. 309.
if
316
piKvovcrdai
316
I'hot. far, p. 4H0,
d/TX'?Md'*t.
pucpouff0tu' rd &t4\Kiff0ai cai warrodat-wt

cal
\4yrrat
oiaffTp4$4O0n tar' tltoi.
piKrorortcu (htyroOffvai Phot.) rd -<m*iXo

ylyvtff$ai do-giMidi-Wf *rd ofrovffla*
^'
koI SpX 1
0o*\î
**M*'rorra
'Ixrrvrcui.
;>i*rovff$af
darwt
ar'
<
p.
431
Zo-
deffe'v.
llesych.
d<f\tftfcu ai
&iaffTpi<f>tff9ut
(Idol.
r*>r
i
(iut^ptffvtn
pxroi-0a.-
Ill
rcu-To
cod.)
n>((r0O4
Mori
,mooi>far
.:
rd a>x*>Mdr^t it<Vt>a.
was alv> the iom|>ound
There
diafy-r<H *tfa4
of dances and defined a> rd r^v defdr

ôon-wt wtptayit*. T<> the
effect
Etym. A/. \>. 170. 5. vlsOqtMNi Kêrtff
HUM
(1.
Tp o+wbf (fr. 1
<ai eeddif* i fca i>
Kpanrot)
ff^t^f
lemma
is
not a r efer ence to
fr
II
IO0OKAEOYI IXNEYTAI
270
317
31 7 This scrap is taken from Ox.

Pap. IX 1174 fr. 26, and is reproduced
here, because ^pdêv/xa, an award, some
case of which
the Ichneutae,
presumably occurred
a new word.
in
is
318
/3ovK\exjj
318
fiovicXtTp
Dindorf
fiooiicXexp
31 8
Athen. 409 C r^rpififiai

KticXafifiat A)
Kiic\ep.nat
(C
:
napa
Zo0ok\
A, /3o<k\e^
oiKdrpiij/,
j3ovic\e\l/
Eustath. Od.
p. 1401, 15 to the same effect, but without
the last three words. DindorPs conjecture
is confirmed by Phryn. praep. soph. p. 17,
'Epfj.r)s.
Eustath., poln\e\(/ Musurus
16 de B. (= Bekk. anecd. p. 11, 33).

The discovery of the Ichneutae papyrus
makes it all but certain that 0ovK\tf
The fragment
occurred in that play.
was formerly numbered as incertae sedis
2
(932 N. ).
End of Volume
Cambridge: printed by
j.
b.
peace, m.a., at
the university
press.
BINDING SECT,
APR 8
w3
DO NOT REMOVE
CARDS OR SUPS FROM THIS POCKET
PLEASE
UNIVERSITY OF
PA
U13
TORONTO UBRARY
Sophocles
Fragment*
Y9
1917
v.l
7*

The Fragments of Sophocles, Vol. 1/3

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

The Fragments of Sophocles, Vol. 1/3

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

3>

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS

FETTER LANE, E.C.

MACMILLAN AND CO.,

ombao, Calcutta ant fHaoraa:

All rights reserved

WITH ADDITIONAL NOTES FROM THE PAPERS OF

FORMERLY SCHOLAR OF CHRIST'S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE

the University Press

book has been delayed by various

causes, which require particular notice

seven extant plays, appeared

the last to be published of the

autumn of 1896; and

anticipated that the publication of the

Jebb's death the task of completing the edition of Sophocles

the material available for

consisted solely of the notes prepared for the lectures

Once again mi-fortune attended the

premature death of Dr Headiam

number of months he had expended upon

was entrusted by the Syndics of the

University Press with the pa[>crs of both sih-.iars,

the work bo long deferred might be brought to a conch

adequately realize either

afraid that, after these preliminary remarks, readers

difficulty of the task.

small a share in the contents

made without much

exercise of independent research

recognition of the departmental literature bearing upot

it was at that time accessible.

the subject, so far as

both misleading and

as will be found below

with the greatest reluctance that

have in several case

by a patient sifting of the clues suggested by com

that not only the responsibility fo

but also the bulk of the commentary itself

The general plan,

was prescribed by the character of the earlier volumes,

have therefore endeavoured to present the

accurate a form as possible, taking Nauck's edition as

has not been possible for

obtain unpublished information concerning the readings of the

authors which have not been edited

In this respect not

confident of having surveyed every part of so

much has been done

ranee of Nauck's second edition.

make myself acquainted

true that editions

two of our most important

the character of Bernardakis's edition

imperfect, although progress has

been made, especially in regard to Aristophanes and Pindar.

But the lexicographers are the moat

have been attached to the notes of Jchh and Hradlam

retained in references to their published

and, though a good deal of work has

in sifting their records,

has seen the