The Trachiniae
 9004011994, 9789004011991

Citation preview

THE PLAYS OF SOPHOCLES

THE PLAYS OF SOPHOCLES BY

J. C KAMERBEEK Litt. Dr. Professor o f A ncient G reek in the U niversity o f A m sterdam

COMMENTARIES PART II T H E TRACHINIAE

LEIDEN E. J. BRILL 1970

R E P R IN T E D

1970

Copyright 1970 by E, J, Brill, Leiden, Netherlands

All rights reserved. No part of this hook may be reproduced- or translated- in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, microfiche or any other means without written permission from the publisher PRINTED IN TH E NETHERLANDS

P R A E F A T IO

Nimis longo temporis intervallo mihi contigit ut hanc secundam partem operis mei absolverem — ‘absolverem’ dico ? ‘concluderem’ dicere debebam. Magis magisque enim Sophoclem interpretanti, poetam inter paucos ‘classicum’, terminos laboris non extare perspicere didici. Rationem commentandi quam in Atace secutus sum non multum immutavi, de eventu, quem sane longiore usu rerum necnon censuris utilibus edoctus paulo meliorem fore spero, alii iudicent. Commodo lectorum inservire studui nimias copiosas disputationes nimiamque brevitatem pariter evitando. Duplicem commentarium, cuius altera pars in rebus grammaticis, ad stilum pertinentibus etc., altera in arte dramatica et poetica versaretur, consideravi, sed malui unitatem officii philologici quantum fieri potuit conservare. Omnes enim illae res artissime inter se cohaerent. Sophoclis peritis nimis simplicia explicari nonnumquam videbuntur : reputent, quaeso, hos commentarios studiosis quoque usui esse me voluisse. Quod autem attinet ad linguam Anglicam quae hic rursus ad­ hibita est: ipse textum Anglice scripsi, singula quae opere proce­ dente scripseram ad D. A. S. Reid, virum benevolentissimum, in Universitate Amstelodamensi linguae Anglicae docendae adiutorem, detuli; postremo opus perfectum T. B. L. Webster v. cl. auctore ad Claram Campbell (Cantabrigiensem), mense Aprili MCMLVIII, misi, quae pro sua sagacitate multa correxit, plura suggessit. Utrique nimirum maximas gratias hic agere libenter volo; quae­ cumque auribus Amglicis in hoc libro non displicuerint, ea illorum beneficio se debere existiment, vitia autem mea esse. William M. Calder III, nunc Universitatis cui nomen Columbia socius, sponte sua mihi tabulas, omnes locos qui in ‘Kiihner-Gerth’ ad Trachinias pertinent continentes, misit, quod auxilium more vere Americano oblatum grato animo commemoro. Santpoort, mense Aprili, MCMLIX

j. C. K.

HISCE LOCIS TEXTUS AB OXONIENSI QUEM CONSTITUIT A. C. PEARSON DIFFERT (in siglis adhibendis Alexandrum Turyn secutus sum) 12, 13 τύπω / βούκρανος codd. : κύτει / βούπρωρος Strabo 4 5 $, multi edd. post Brunckium, Pearson : τύπω / βούπρωρος Kuiper. 53 το σόν■ 66 φέρει codd. : φέρειν Valckenaer, al., Pearson. 79 ώς oi L R (accentus variant): ως ή A, edd., Pearson. 80 τον ύστερον codd. : τό γ’ ύστερον Reiske, edd., Pearson. 88, 89 retinentur, εΐα Vauvilliers, edd.: έα codd., Pearson, qui versus seel. Hermannum secutus. 108 φέρουσαν codd.: τρέφουσαν Casaubon, al., Pearson. 117 f τρέφει, το δ’ αυξει βιότου y codd.: στρέφει Reiske, al., Pearson. 122 άδεια codd.: αιδοία Musgrave, al., Pearson. 159 ούπω A, οΰπω L: ούτω Tournier, al., Pearson. 161 οτι: ο τι Pearson, al. 164 τρίμηνον codd.: τρίμηνος Wakefield, al., Pearson. 179 χαράν LA : χάριν R K (= Laur. 31, 10; cf. Turyn, Stud, in the Manuscript Tradition of the Trag, of Soph. p. 168), Pearson. 188 πρόσπολος codd. : προς πολλούς Hermann, multi edd., Pearson. 189 κλυών. 205 άνολολύξεται Elmsley: άνολολύξετε codd. : άνολολυξάτω Burges, al., Pearson. 206 έφεστίοισιν Radermacher: έφεστίοις codd., Pearson, άλαλαϊς L A R : άλαλαγαΐς Thom. Mag., al., Pearson. 220 ύποστρέφων codd. : έπιστρέφων Pearson. 233 Ήρακλέα codd. : Ηρακλή Pearson. 236 ποϋ γης, πατρώας, ε’ίτε βαρβάρου ; λέγε. 243 ξυμφορα L: ξυμφοραι A, multi edd., Pearson. 266 λίποιτο L RE^: λείποιτο A, Pearson. 267 φωνεΐ rec. : φώνει LA : φωνή Pearson. 271 κλειτύν. 2J2 θητέρα. 326 δακρυρρόει LPC: δακρυρροεΐ fortasse Lac, Pearson, al.

V III

H I S C E LO C IS T E X T U S AB O X O N I E N S I D I F F E R T

328 αυτή γ ’ L R A al.: αυτή γ’ Zr (= Marc. 616), Pearson. 334 έγώ δέ L R: εγώ τε A (teste Dain), Turneb., Pearson, al. 337 έκμάθης θ’ L R: έκμάθης Τ, Pearson. 362-364 retinentur: τόνδ’ rec. (cf. Jebb): τώνδ’ LA, Pearson, qui τήν . . . πατέρα secl. Hartung secutus. 365 καί νιν Brunck, Dain-Mazon: καί νυν codd., Pearson. 366 ώς codd., Hermann: ές Brunck, al., Pearson. 368 έντεθέρμανται codd. : έκτεθέρμανται Dindorf, Pearson. 377 ώ, δύστηνος Dain: ώ δύστηνος codd., Pearson. 379 φύσιν ; 382 έφώνει, 422, 425 κλυεΐν. 470 πείθου codd. : πιθοΰ Dindorf, Pearson. 475 έννέπει · 5i l άπό. 520 άμφίπλεκτοι codd. : άμφίπλικτοι Pearson. 526 Ί' έγώ δέ μάτηρ μέν οΐα φράζω- j 528 ελεεινόν codd.: έλεινον Porson, edd., Pearson. 554 λύπημα codd. : λώφημα Jebb, Pearson. 564 ήν L: ή ’v Cobet, Pearson. 602 f τόνδε γ ’ εύυφή j LAA : possis τόνδε τον άϋφή : τόνδε ταναϋφή Wunder, al., Pearson. 621 ουτοί, L: ού τι A, Pearson. 623 ών έχεις codd. Σ~: ήν λέγεις Blaydes, Pearson. 628 αυτήν θ’ L: αύτή θ’ Koechly, Pearson. 636 Μηλίδα codd. : Μαλίδα Blaydes, Pearson. 639 καλέονται codd.: possis καλεϋνται: κλέονται Musgrave, edd., Pearson. 647, 8 πάντα codd.: παντα Nauck, Pearson. 654 έξέλυσ’ codd. : έξέλυσεν Pearson. 662 συγκραθείς codd. : συντακείς Blaydes, Pearson, επί προφάσει θηρός codd. : θηρος υπο παρφάσει Pearson. 673 λαβεϊν LA: μάθειν ΑΣΤΡ, Pearson. 675 έχριον άργήτ’, codd.: έχριον, άργής Blaydes, Pearson. 682 ούδέν codd. : ούδέν’ van Herwerden, Pearson. 684 retinetur. 696 retinetur. 747 κλυών. 7&7 προσπτύσσετο codd. : προσπτύσσεται Musgrave, Pearson. 770 όδαγμος codd.: άδαγμος Phot., Pearson.

H I S C E L O C IS T E X T U S A B O X O N I E N S I

D IFFE R T

IX

788 Λοκρών ορειοι codd. : Λοκρών τ’ ορειοι Diog. L. X 137, Pearson, άκρο«, codd. : άκρα Diog. F, Pearson. 816 καλώς L A al. : καλός T, Pearson. 829 επίπονον Gleditsch, Jebb. : επίπονον codd., Pearson. 834 ετεκε codd. : έτρεφε Lobeck, Pearson. 837 φάσματι codd. : νήματι Pearson. 839 Νέσσου ύποφόνια Gleditsch, Jebb: νέσ(σ)ου θ’ υπο φοίνια L Α: φόνια Schneidewin, Pearson. 841 άοκνον codd. : άοκνος Musgrave, Pearson. 8431 4 t τ “getting over” cf. ύπερτελέσαι μέγα δουλείας γάγγαμον Ag. 359 but since τέλος, τελείv “ful­ filment” , “fulfil”, “completion” , “complete” can easily be heard in the word, this idea may be implied by the context. έφυ: not different from έπλετο, έστι. 3 7 . ταρβήσασ’ έχω : this periphrastic perfect is often used by Soph. (Goodwin § 47) *2). Beginning and continuation of the action or the state expressed by the participle are united in the phrase ; it is not entirely equrvalent to the simple perfect. If τετάρβηκα often means "I am fearing” implying “I started to fear and now am in a state of fear”, the same is explicitly expressed by the periphrasis. 3 8 . έκτα: cf. note ad Ai. 230. Iphitus’ murder is related infra 270 sqq. For the moment we are left in the dark as to its circum­ stances; Deianeira does not know of the servitude to Omphale, the penance for murder imposed by Zeus. 3 9 . ήμεις: Deianeira and some (?) of her children (cf. 1151-1156). ανάστατοι.: driven from home (i.e. Tiryns). ! 4 0 . ξένω παρ’ άνδρί: since Soph, did not intend to assign a rôle to Ceyx, king of Trachis, nephew of Amphitryon, in his play, he leaves out the name altogether. The fact of D.’s not living at her own house is indeed of small consequence in the play and seems almost forgotten infra 920 sqq. It is perhaps the easiest supposition (but the text is silent about the matter) to think that D. does not live in Ceyx’ palace but in a separate house, ξένω παρ’ άνδρί does not necessarily imply “living at his house” . όπου: needless to read οποί with Brunck, since βέβηκεν = οίχόμενος κυρεΐ or the like. 4 E u r. I o n 1549. 2) S chw yzer I p. 812.

COM MENTARY

39

41. πλήν: often used after negations in the sense of “except (that)” ; here it amounts to Latin nisi quod, nisi tamen: “La seule chose sûre, c’est que . . . ” (Mazon). 4 1 . 4 2 . προσβολών: προσβάλλειν “assign to”, “procure for”, “cause something to somebody” in malam or in bonam partem is common in classical Greek. 4 2 . ωδίνας: fig. painful and anxious tension. Cf. Ai. 794 ώστε μ’ώδίνειν τί φής, where see note. αύτοϋ: genitive of the object. 4 3 . σχεδόν . . . έπίσταμαι : cf. Eur. Troad. 898 άτάρ σχεδόν μέν οίδά σοι μισούμενη. 4 4 . βαιόν: cf. note ad Ai. 90. 4 4 , 4 5 . δέκα / μήνας προς άλλοις πέντ’ : the interval of time after which Heracles’ fate will be sealed; but the significance of this is only revealed by 76-85 and 164-174. άκήρυκτος: ού μηνυόμενος δπου πότ’ έστιν, “with no tidings” ; a rare usage. 4 6 . Note the increasing vehemence of her expression of fear. "Yes, there must have been some terrible misfortune” (Campbell’s second rendering, preceded by Jebb’s “ Yes” ). τοιαύτην: as often, τοιοϋτος introduces the cause of the preceding statement. 4 7 . δέλτον : the word is common in the 5th century but unknown to Homer; doubtless πίναξ πτυκτός denotes the same. τήν: among the Tragedians Soph, makes the most frequent use of the forms with τ- as relatives. Possibly with him it is an ionisrn; metrical necessity is here wanting. 4 8 άρώμαι . . . λαβεΐν : the interpretation advocated by Schn.-N.Raderm. (“ D. wünscht, sie möge jenes Blatt ohne Schädigung für sich in die Hand nehmen . . .” ) is certainly wrong. The aor. inf. expresses an action anterior to the main -verb. Correctly among others Campbell: “I pray that no ill may follow my having re­ ceived it” . The Nurse who, we may naturally suppose, has been present on the scene from the beginning, keeping somewhat in the background and watching Deianeira, probably reacting by gesture to her words, now steps to the front. 4 9 . πολλά μέν: since πολλά μέν . . . νϋν S’ form an antithesis, it is natural to take πολλά adverbially: “often” . It is possible, but in my opinion not necessary, that πολλά goes with the cognate

COMMENTARY

accusative πανδάκρυτ’ όδύρματα: cf. Phil. 1456-1461 οδ πολλάκι δή τούμόν έτέγχθη / κρατ’ ενδόμυχον πληγήσι νότου,/πολλά δε φωνής της ήμετέρας / Έρμαΐον όρος παρέπεμψεν έμοί / στόνον άντίτυπον κτλ. 5 0 . πανδάκρυτ’: cf. note ad 5 ° 5 >6. -δακρυτ’ = full of tears (neither “active” nor “passive” ). 5 0 . 51 . κατεΐδον . . . γοωμένην : the context lends κατεΐδον, to a small extent, the well-known connotation of περιοράν and εΐσοράν: cf. Eacch. 306, 534. 536 and passim in Eur. 2 5 8 . κούχ ήλίωσε τοόπος: words are like missiles or darts; cf.l l ) Die N o m in a des sophoklei sehen Wortschatzes, th e sis N ijm eg en 11)49, p. 18.

COM MENTARY

79

Aesch. Eum. 676, Eur. Ilec. 334, my note ad Andr. 365. It is clear that Soph, modelled his words on Horn. II. XVI 737 ούδ’ άλίωσε βέ­ λος. Among classical authors only Horn, and Soph, have the word; neither Aesch., nor Eur. use αλιος (O.C. 1469, άλίως Phil. 840). δθ’ άγνός ήν: the poet does not tell us whether by a formal κάθαρσις or by the effect of the δουλεία. Apparently, however, the latter is meant (cf. 276) and Soph, does not know, or ignores, the stories we find in Àpollod. II 129 sq.x) 259. επακτόν: συμμαχικόν, οόκ ίδιον; cf. Aesch. Sept. 583, but the cases of Polynices and Heracles are far from being the same; for Oechalia is not Heracles’ native country, as Thebes is for Polynices. Heracles’ exile is of small account in this context; he enlisted an army of allies from several tribes or πόλεις and that is all. έπακτός was the term reserved for an alien or mercenary force. 2 5 9 , 2 6 0 . πόλιν / τήν Εύρυτείαν : cf. Τελαμώνιε παΐ Ai. 134. τω Λαβδακείω παιδί Ο.Τ. 267, φόνον / τον Λαΐειον 0 .7 . 4 5 Η cf· Ι 2ΐ 6, θρόνοις / τοϊς Κρεοντείοις Ο.Τ. 400, Πηλέα τον Αίάκειον fr. 487.1 Ρ. The words being completely equivalent to Εύρύτου πόλιν, Lichas proceeds with τόνδε. μεταίτιον : cf. αύτός σύ τούτων ού μεταίτιος πέληι, / άλλ’ εις τό παν έπραξας ων παναίτιος Aesch. Eum. 199 sq. Zeus was αίτιος, Eurytus, alone of mortals, μεταίτιος (= in prose, συναίτιος) ; cf. infra 1234. 2 6 2 - 2 8 0 . In the following account it must not be forgotten that Lichas shirks speaking the whole truth. Without lying he omits so much that his tale becomes hardly understandable. I think it probable that the involved construction of 262-269 reflects his efforts at concealing the truth from Heracles’ wife. Starting from the insult offered to Heracles by Eurytus, he does not mention the fact that Heracles visited Oechalia in order to conquer Iole with his bow. The murder of Iphitus was his revenge on Eurytus. The sack of Oechalia was his second revenge after the humiliation at Omphale’s palace. But Lichas again omits to say that it was his passion for Iole that drove him to the deed. 2 6 2 . ός: it is impossible to settle the question whether Lichas wishes to be thought of as reporting Heracles’ comments or as stating his own view of the affair. The Greek, never consistently expressing oratio obliqua, admits of this ambiguity. In any case he speaks for himself from 269 onwards (ών έχων χόλον). g I I 6. 2.

So 262, 3.

COMMENTARY

έφέστιον, ξένον παλαιόν όντα: εφέστιον goes closely with έλθόντ’, but the two appositions, placed the one after the other, stress the invidia of the outrage, εφέστιος with verbs of motion occurs already in Homer. 2 6 3 , 4 . έπερρόθησε: with acc. only here, in the sense of “rage against”, “abuse” (L.-Sc). Cp. το-.ΰτα . . . έρρόθουν έμοί Ant. 290. The verb has almost the meaning of κακώς λέγειν, δεννάζειν, λοιδορεΐν, ύβρίζειν and so their construction. πολλά μεν — πολλά S’ : a zeugmatic construction, as advocated by Jebb (έπερρόθησε implying ύβρισε in the second member of the phrase), seems too harsh. The anaphora of πολλά adds emphasis (cf. Campbell, Essay on Language, § 40, p. 76). The meaning is only: λόγοις καί άτηρα διανοία (“intent” ) πολλά αυτόν ύβριστικώς έπερρόθησεν. λόγοις . . . διανοία forms a hendiadis. Jebb’s objections to this (“the antithesis would require an epithet for λόγοις” and "the formula πολλά μεν . . . πολλά δέ would be out of place” ) can be answered thus : άτηρα may be thought of as going with λόγοις also ; διπλήν μεν . . . διπλήν δέ Phil. 1370 sq. offers a similar emphasizing antithesis. (Cf. also Ant. 200 sq.). άτηρα: ambiguous. It is “mischievous” (against Heracles), but implies also the άτη that will result for Eurytus himself. The con­ cepts of “delusion” , “guilt” , “ruin” , “ill-fate” are always simul­ taneously present in άτη. Eurytus’ demeanour was ά.τη, and ά.ρχή of the things to come (II. VI 356). Cf. Agamemnon speaking (II. XIX 88 ) φρεσίν έ'μβαλον άγριον ά.την ; ότω φρένας Θεός ά.γει προς ά.ταν A nt. 624. There is no antithesis λόγοι — φρήν, as in Phil. 1271 sq. 2 6 5 - 2 6 7 . λέγων . . . μεν — φωνεΐ δέ: transition from participial to finite construction. (Denniston, G.P.2 369 n. 1). μέν is preparatory for δέ 267 (as if φωνών was written) ; its place is apparently deter­ mined by metrical convenience, its function slight. There is no antithesis χεροΐν μέν ... δέ. Those who read φωνή, supposing an antithesis modelled on έ'ργω . . . λόγω, obtain only a forced sym­ metry at the cost of a very unsatisfactory sense, forgetting that Sophocles is not Isocrates. As stated before, Lichas’involved and asymmetric sentence mirrors the embarrassment of his state of mind. Moreover, the almost stumbling clauses do justice to the vehemence of the scene and the talk recorded. "Apollodorus” II 128 1) says: άφικόμενος ουν εις Οίχαλίαν καί τή 1) I I 6. i . 2.

COMMENTARY

8l

τοξική κρείττων αυτών γενόμενος ούκ έτυχε του γάμου, Ίφίτου μεν του πρεσβυτέρου των παίδων λέγοντος διδόναι τώ Ήρακλεΐ, Εύρύτου δέ καί των λοιπών άπαγορευόντων etc. Now, if Heracles had really surpassed Eurytus’ sons in archery, it is improbable that εχων has adversative force. So Mazon’s translation seems correct: “Si tu as en main des “traits infaillibles’’, tu restes par là même inférieur à mes fils dans un concours d’archers” . 2 6 6 . ών: δς suus (dir. and indir.) five times in Soph., twice in Aesch., one certain case and a few dubious ones in Eur. λίποιτο: reading thus (with L) one makes Eurytus say, after the bow-trial, that as Heracles had unerring arrows he had been inferior to his sons (i.e. in skill, though he had beaten them) : εχων άφυκτα βέλη έλίπου. I see no reason to prefer λείποιτο (έ.ά.β. λείπη). προς: in respect of. It does not differ from εις or έν in this context, (lit. when it came to the bow-trial). λείπεσθαι to lag behind; to be inferior to. 2 6 7 . φωνεΐ: the better tradition has φώνει, and the syllabic augment might be omitted, as Lichas’ ρήσις is αγγελική. But the hist. pres, φωνεΐ fits much better into the context. (The hist. pres, is a secondary tense, so the opt. can follow, Goodwin § 171). “ Cried aloud” . The details are characteristic of a symposium, where host and guest get drunk. δούλος άνδρος . . . ελευθέρου : that he—Heracles, slave of a free man (Eurystheus), . . . . 2 6 8 . ραίοιτο: was (always) being crushed (direct speech ραίη) ; had (always) to suffer (at the hands of others). It is not necessary mentally to supply όπ’ αύτοϋ and impossible to take, with the schol., the genit, as a genit, auctoris (λείπει ή υπό). Eurytus, in conformity with this utterance, thrusts Heracles from his doors, as the under-dog he deems him to be. δείπνοις: “at a banquet” . For the plural cf. O.T. 779, El. 203. 2 6 9 . ών : ών ενεκα. 2 7 0 . αύθις : hereafter. Cf. Ai. 1086. Iphitus came to Tiryns in search of the horses which Eurytus accused Heracles of having stolen (Apollod. II 129 x)); but Auto­ lycus was the culprit, according to Apollodorus. In Homer (Od. XXI 22-30) Heracles was the thief and held the horses, after murdering Iphitus. It is impossible to say which version Sophocles had in mind. b B u t he is sp eak in g of βόες; I I 6 .2 .i. K a m e r b e e k , Trachiniae

6

COMMENTARY

271.

κλειτύν: we have to write it thus 1), as appears from Herod. II 416.20 and LG. XII 5, 1076.38 τά έγ Κλειτυϊ and the MS reading Eur. Ba. 411 ; Limenius 2 also has δικόρυψον κλειτύν. The word is rather rare (Horn., not in Aesch., twice in Soph., five times in Eur.). “Slope”. The wording T. πρ. κλ. is not ornamen­ tal but prepares for άπ’ . . . . πλακός. νομάδας: impossible to say whether the adj. is to be taken as fern, or masc. The suffix -αδ denotes the masc. also in early com­ binations 12). But animals in the plur. are very often fem. The sense required here is "roaming” , or even: “gone astray”, “lost” . έξιχνοσκοπών : Problably Aesch. coined the simplex ίχνοσκοπέω (Cho. 228); since έξιχνεύω meant the same thing (“to track out” , τάς βοϋς όπη βεβάσι lehn. 160), έξιχνοσκοπέω could be readily formed by Soph, (the middle occurs at Ai. 997). 2 7 2 . τότ’ : in correlation with ώς 270. θητέρα: It is perhaps better to follow the tradition of L here and O.C. 497 than to read θατέρα 3) ; cf. Ar. Lys. 85, Eur. Rhes. 449. τη έτέρα: aliorsum. άλλοσε . . . . θητέρα: perhaps variatio. Cf. El. 739 τότ’ άλλος, άλλοθ’ άτερος κάρα προβάλλων. The metrically difficult έτέρωσε is not used by the Tragedians. But the question arises whether άλλοσε and θητέρα form an antithesis, as stated by Jebb (cp. Mazon: “au moment même où il avait l’oeil d’un côté, l’esprit d’un autre” ). If it is right to assume with Raderm. that Iph. “späht von der Berg­ kuppe aus vergebens nach ihnen und versinkt darüber in Ge­ danken, wo sie sein möchten” (and it is hard to imagine another meaning for the words), then it follows that the direction of δμμα and νους (“attention” ) is one and the same. Thus θητέρα specifies the more general άλλοσε, implying "the wrong direction” (cp. έτέρως “otherwise than should be” ): he should have been on his guard. Masqueray’s translation,,ses yeux étaient tournés ailleurs, comme son esprit”, though somewhat shallow, comes nearer to the truth than Jebb’s and Mazon’s. The schol. τότ’ άλλοσ’ αύτόν ομμα: άλλαχόσε τον νοϋν έχοντα καί ούδέν δεινόν πείσεσθαι προσδοκώντα etc. does not solve the problem ; perhaps it is truncated.

1) See W ack ern ag el, Spracht. Unters, zu Hont., 1916, p. 75, S chw yzer I 5 °6 4. 7. 2) S chw yzer I 507.6. Cf. O.T. 467. 3) Cp. K .-B . I 223, an m . 2, S ch w y zer I 401.7.

COMMENTARY

83

2 7 3 . άπ’ . . . . πλακάς: The hill of Tiryns is not very suitable for this exploit. But Jebb and others are, in my opinion, quite right in considering ■άκρα πλάξ as the flat top, not of the hill, but of one of the buildings, a tower for instance. There is then a slight and quite Sophoclean abusio in πυργώδους; "du haut d’une terrasse des remparts” (Mazon) is the best rendering I know, -ώδης indeed so often becomes merely a suffix that πυργώδης can surely have the function of πύργου. Mythographic tradition always shows us Heracles flinging Iphitus from a tower or from the walls of Tiryns : Pherec. F 82 b J., Apollod. II 6. 2.2, Diod. Sic. IV 31. 3. 2 7 4 . έκατι : cf. infra 353, Phil. 669; denoting ope, propter, quod attinet ad in Aesch. ; very frequent in Eur. It takes the place of ένεκα owing to its metrical convenience and not being a word used in prose it shows “doric” ä J). 2 7 5 . ό των απάντων πατήρ: implying that Zeus is bound to up­ hold δίκη and that Heracles’ slavery is to be seen in this light; cf. 250 sq. 2 7 6 . πρατόν: “for sale” ; only here in classical Greek. ούδ’ ήνέσχετο: paratactic parenthesis instead of a causal clause; ούδ’ = ού γάρ. As the dependent clause with άνέχεσθαι is always in the form of a partie., a genit, with partie., or (rarely) an infinitive it is better to take όθούνεκ’ = “because” going with πρατόν viv έξέπεμψεν than as dependent on ήνέσχετο. ήνέσχετο is absolute or one might supply either something like τούτο συγγιγνωσκων or (viv) τούτο ποιήσαντα. (Not, with Campbell: “And would not endure it, that” ). 2 7 7 . αύτον μοΰνον ανθρώπων: Zeus’ wrath is the greater because Heracles transgressed his own standards of conduct, δόλω by its placing has the full emphasis. 2 7 8 . ήμύνατο: “had revenged himself”. (The note in Suidas άμύνασθαι Θουκυδίδης μέν αντί τού άμείβεσθαι, Σιμωνίδης δέ άντί τού χάριν άποδιδόναι, Σοφοκλής δέ άντί τού άπαλεξήσαι does not suit this passage, nor O.C. 873). 2 7 9 . χειρουμένω: used as e.g. at Eur. Her. 570 τω καλλινίκω τωδ’ οπλω χειρώσομαι. ξύν δίκη : The revenge itself was ξύν δίκη. The words mean : Zeus would have consented to his justly punishing him. The possibility1 1) Cf. G. B jö rck , Das A lp h a I m p u r u m , p p . 122 sq. ; sp e c u la tiv e sem asiology in L e u m an n , Homerische Wörter, p p . 251 sqq.

COMMENTARY

of taking χειρουμένω as a passive form with Iphitus as subject has very little to recommend it. 2 8 0 . ΰβριν: this, of course, refers to Eurytus’ misconduct. στέργουσιν: as often, the sense approximates to “tolerate” (cf. Ant. 292) or even to “acquiesce in ” (cf. infra 486). ούδε: any more than men. Cf. Denniston G.P. 2 194. With εί γάρ..........δαίμονες, and especially with the last line, Lichas’ speech returns to the fate of Eurytus, his sons and his town. Of course, it is not the poet who takes side with Heracles’ behaviour; it is Lichas, who rather akwardly tries to give a plau­ sible account of his conduct, leaving out his passion for lole. One may ask whether 1. 280 is not, by the poet, meant as double-edged. 2 8 1 . κείνοι δ’: Eurytus cum suis-, remoteness, not only in place but in time also (fuerunt), seems to be implied. ύπερχλίοντες : the verb belongs to the same region of ideas as υβρις. χλίειν superbire Aesch. Clio. 137 oi S’ . . . εν τοΐσι σοϊς πόνοισι χλίουσιν μέγα, έγχλίειν insultare Aesch. Suppl. 914 'Έλλησιν έγχλίεις άγαν, χλιδάο) Aesch. Suppl. 833 (?), fr- 3 Ι 3 - Prom. 97 L Soph. El. 360, and often in Eur. “to live delicately” , “to pride oneself” , “to show insolence”, ύπερχλίοντες, the rarer form, is to be read here, έκ γλώσσης κακής "with reviling words” (Campbell) goes with ύπερχλίοντες, denoting the manner of the insult; the participle represents the imperfect tense. 2 8 2 . 3 . αύτοί μέν . . . πόλις δε : formally a distributive ap­ position, but the second clause expands the original subject; cf. Ai. 1387. £,Αιδου . . . οίκήτορες: cf. ad Ai. 396. 2 8 3 . τάσδε: in the acc. by attraction to άσπερ. 2 8 4 . εξ ολβίων: εξ in formulae denoting a reversal of fortune is quite common. A paraphrase should run thus: "being formerly happy they now have found instead of their happiness an unen­ viable life”, “from their former happiness they have fallen into an unenviable life” . Cp. e.g. Eur. Heracl. 796, 939 sq. έκ γάρ ευτυ­ χούς . . . άνδρα δυστυχοϋνθ’, infra 1075· 2 8 4 . άζηλον: ο ούκ άν τις ζηλώσειεν Suid. ; Aesch. Prom. 143» Cho. T017; El. 1455, infra 745; Eur. I.T. 619 άζηλά γ ’, ώ νεάνι, κούκ εύδαίμονα, ib. 650. 2 8 5 , 6 τε . . . δέ: “The explanation of the irregularity probably is that the idea of contrast is added to the original idea of addition” (Denniston, G.P.2 p. 513). Cf. infra 333, Ant. 1096, Phil. 1313.

COMMENTARY

85

286.

πιστός: loyal and obedient; cf. schol. ώς προσετάγην. 8. αυτόν δ’έκεΐνον: “ as for himself” . The words announce viv (289). άγνά: not simply “holy”, but “purifying, expiatory” : δταν διά της θυσίας καθάρη αυτόν άπό τού φόνου (schol.). By the sacrifice Heracles will be made ritually pure 1) ; but at the same time it is a votive-offering for the capture of the town; the genit, άλώσεως is to be joined with θύματα, or possibly as a causal genit, with θύματα ρέξη. πατρωψ Ζηνι: the words convey no more than: “his father Zeus”, (not the patron of his tribe). 2 8 9 . φρόνει νιν ώς ήξοντα: prop, “think that (as you may assume) he will come”, i.e. “be assured that he will come”, "ώς only adds emphasis to the expression” *2). Cf. Phil. 253, 415, 567. For cases with genit, absol. cf. ad Hi. 281. γάρ: it is not quite correct to say here: “γάρ gives the motive for saying that which has just been said” (G.P,2 p. 60). We may as­ sume that these last words have a final ring (accompanied with a gesture of finality) and that γάρ explains his stopping here. Jebb’s rendering “indeed” is not incorrect. 2 8 9 , 2 9 0 . As Radermacher rightly observes, Lichas gives a personal turn to the conventional λόγος λέλεκται (cp. Phil. 389). καλώς : refers not to the speech but to its auspicious contents ; for the meaning of καλώς cp. supra 26. 2 9 1 . σοι τέρψις εμφανής κυρεΐ: either: “manifest joy comes to you” (thus Ellendt, cp. O.C. 1290 τοϋτ’ άφ’ υμών βουλήσομαι κυρεΐν έμοί, Eur. Rhes. 7 4 5 ! κυρεΐν = contingere) or “now your joy is (prop, turns out to be, happens to be) manifest” . 2 9 2 . τών μέυ παρόντων . . . τά δέ πεπυσμένη : combination of genit, abs. with a participle in another case. τών μέν: the maidens before her, who are evidence of Heracles’ victory; cf. 223 sq. It is needless to remark the poignancy of this dramatic irony. Victory, offerings, booty: they will prove only destruction for man and wife, and Heracles’ coming will only crown the misery. Cp. the antithesis 947-952. 2 9 3 . Deianeira’s hesitation in accepting the happiness that seems to come to her forms part of the very elaborate individual 287,

h O n άγνός etc. cf. P . C h a n tra in e & O. M asson in F e stsc h rift D e b ru n n e r

(1954). P· s 5 sqq. 2) G oodw in, §916. K .-G . I I p p . 93, 94, S ch w .-D eb r. 397.

86

COMMENTARY

characterization lavished on her by the poet’s art. It is of course impossible to say how far this is due to the situation in which he places her and how far the reverse is true. 2 9 4 . πραξιν: either (with εύτυχή) “faring well” (L.-Sc.) x) or “achievement” (with εύτυχή = “success”). πανδίκω φρενί: “with a heart that has every reason to rejoice” (Campbell), μετά πάσης δικαιοσύνης (schob), πάνδικος (adj.) occurs only at Aesch. Suppl. 776, but the adverb is fairly frequent in Soph.; the normal wording would be πανδίκως τη φρενί (Campbell). 2 9 5 . τούτο: το εμέ χαίρειν. τη δ’ : τη ευτυχεί πράξει. συντρέχειν: “to coincide” . 2 9 6 . ένεστι: cum dat. pers. and inf. : “it is in the nature of . . . [Ant. 213 ένεστί σοι “it is in your power”). 2 9 7 . τον εδ πράσσοντα: proleptic acc. of the object. Cf. Aesch. Niob. 116.19 sq. Mette [άλλ’ οΐ γάρ] εδ πράσσοντες ου ποτ’ ήλπισα[ν] [σφαλέν]τες έκχεΐν ήν έχουσ’ [εύπραξίαν], The schob cites : καί τούτο τούπος έστίν άνδρός ευφρονος δταν καλώς πράσση τις, έλπίζειν κακά. (ad. 46° Ν.2). For these misgivings cf. Hdt. I ll 40 (Amasis and Polycrates). Here they are aroused in Deianeira by the sight of the captives, which reminds her of the frailty of the human condition. 2 9 8 . εΐσέβη: cf. Eur. Hyps. 1 IV 19 (Italie) κάμε γάρ το δυσχερές / τοϋτ’είσβέβηκεν ·. More usual is έμπίπτειν: Phil. 965 έμοί μέν οίκτος δεινός έμπέπτωκέ τις, cf. O.C. 942. Eur. Hel. Ι 395>Η ec. 857, Ι·Α. 8ο8, or εισέρχομαι: Med. 931 είσήλθέ μ’ οίκτος εί γενήσεται τάδε, Or. Ι 324 > Ι.Α. 492 άλλως τέ μ’ έ'λεος της ταλαιπώρου κόρης / έσήλθε, Hdt. I l l 14.11. φόβος, έλεος, έρως, οίκτος, πόθος are the subjects. 3 0 0 . άπάτοράς: not “de eis, quarum patria non esset” (Ellendt), but simply “fatherless” : the fathers are dead (282). άοίκους άπάτοράς τ’ : one of the numberless instances of adjectives with ά-privans following in succession, creating a pathetic effect (here enhanced by the rhythm, often (esp. with Eur.) by asyndeton). 3 0 1 . πριν μέν ήσαν . . . . άνδρών: To take exception to these words on logical grounds is inept, because 1) ’ίσως is regularly used de re satis certa (cf. Ellendt), 2) ήσαν έξ ελευθέρων άνδρών implies that their position was in keeping with this fact. 3 0 2 . δοΰλον: for the adjectival use, cf. supra 53. 3 0 3 . ώ Ζεΰ τροπαΐε: not to be explained, with the schob, by: 1) Cf. A i . 790, 792; su pra 152, in fra 375.

COMMENTARY

87

αποτρεπτικέ, άλεξίκακε but as: “ giver of victory”, “ Zeus de la Déroute" (Mazon), just as at Ant. 143 (thus rightly Jebb and Campbell). 3 0 4 . προς . . . χωρήσαντα: in hostile sense, like προς ... στείχοντα Ant. 10, χωροϋσιν έφ’ Eur. Rhes. 672. ποι: the adverb denotes in this context “on any occasion” . 3 0 5 . Properly speaking the words do not convey more than what has already been said : for τήσδέ γε ζώσης έτι is implied in είσιδοιμι. τήσδε: δεικτικώς άντί του έμοϋ Χ) ; cf. infra 1013,' the substantival usage is not common. δράσειας or something like that has to be supplied after μηδ·. 3 0 6 . The line closes the passage that begins at 1. 298. There is “Ring-Komposition”, particularly as the concepts of οίκτος (δεινός) and δέδοικα are much the same. Psychologically and "morally” οίκτος (έλεος) and φόβος are akin and they are often interchan­ geable *2). For οίκτος takes hold of one’s soul at the sight of misfor­ tune at the same time as the fear lest the misfortune may happen to oneself, οίκτος as it were places man on the verge of an abyss, the abyss of human destiny. Again, dramatic irony, a savage one, plays its part, pervading all her words; Deianeira cannot realize, how fearsomely true her sentiments are. In her ignorance, but also driven by intuition (and Sophocles’ portraiture is true to life) she accosts lole. 3 0 7 . νεανίδων: maidens or young women (cf. Eur. Andr. 192). 3 0 8 . άνανδρος, ή τεκνοΰσα : the question is asked with true Greek "directness” . MSS have τεκοϋσα and as a v.l. τεκνοΰσα. With Brunck most editors have τεκνοϋσσα (τεκνόεσσα). I am not so sure that this is right, because 1) τεκνόεις is not very well attested, and the contraction would be an exception (cf. Chantraine, Formation des Noms, p. 272). 2) it would mean “well-provided with children” . 3) τεκοϋσα makes good sense (“did you already bear a child, are you already a mother?” ) 4) τεκνοΰσα itself does not seem impossible ; τεκνόω, it is true, is normally used with the man as subject (“to be­ get” ), but a) τίκτω is indifferently used for “to bear” and “to engender” b) τεκνόω is properly speaking “furnish with a child” or with children Eur. Her. 7; so τεκνοΰσα could mean: (are you alb Cf. W . S ch ad ew ald t, Die Niobe des Aischylos, S itz. b er. H eid elb . A k. 1934, p . 14 n. I . 2) Cp. W . S ch ad ew ald t, H erm es L X X X I I I 1955, p p 129 sqq.

88

COM MENTARY

ready) “furnishing (a man) with children” i.e. (are you already) "married?” (Cp. 536). 3 0 8 , 9 . προς . . . τις : The usual explanation of these words is this: “from your looks all this (—i.e. marriage and motherhood—) is strange to you. But you are noble” 1). Now, with this interpre­ tatio n 12), the antithesis implied by μέν . . . δέ is very strange. Commentators did not fail to notice that but their comments are far from being satisfactory. Even if one assumes no antithesis, the combination: “you are not married and you are noble” strikes one as bizarre. Moreover, in that case, γάρ must refer to άνανδρος, ή τεκνοϋσα, which is not easy to explain (Jebb, Masqueray, Bowra, Reinhardt3) leave it out in their translations; one could try “indeed” but would have to confess that άλλά προς φύσιν would be much easier). Therefore, in my opinion, there is much to be said for Mazon’s unorthodox rendering of the passage: “Tout ton être répugne à pareille misère. Serais-tu pas de noble sang” . That is to say, Iole stands before her, beautiful, silent, self-possessed, the picture of an unbroken maiden of noble birth. Her bodily appear­ ance strikes D. as belonging to one who, hitherto, did not know the miseries of the moment (πάντων τώνδε). γάρ refers to the fact of Deianeira’s accosting her, and the combination of “ignorant of misery” and “of noble birth” is natural (γενναία implying also: “of noble character” ). φύσιν: “appearance” ; φύσις = species, μορφή, μορφής φύσις (Aesch. Suppl. 496) 4) ; O.T. 740. προς, as often, “to judge by” . 3 1 0 . As lole remains silent (just as Cassandra does at Aesch. Ag. 1035 sqq.; the scenes are comparable in some respects), Deianeira asks Lichas. ποτ’: repeats ποτ’ vs. 307 and underlines D.’s anxious desire to know. 3 1 1 . ό φιτύσας πατήρ: a formula, cp. Ai. 1296, Eur. Ale. 1137, I.A. 1177. 313. οσωπερ καί φρονεΐν οίδεν μόνη: much better rendered by Mazon: “d’autant qu’elle est seule à se dominer” than by Kitto 56) 1) T h u s B ow ra, Soph. Trag., p . 123. 2) O ne cou ld co m p a re H a b ro to n o n ’s p a th e tic w ords Men. E p itr. 302,3 K .3 ούδ’ εγώ τότε, / οΰπω γάρ, άνδρ’ ήδειν τί έστι. 3) Sophokles1, ρ. 54· 4) Cf. D. H o lw erd a, Comm, de vocis quae est Φύσις vi atque usu, th esis, G roningen 1955, § 13 B. 6) Greek Tragedy, p. 146 n. 2.

COMMENTARY

89

“inasmuch as she alone can understand her situation” . Surely φρονεΐν = σωφρονεΐν. One has to bear in mind that Lichas’ descript­ ion of lole’s demeanour during the journey is false; the antithesis construed by Jebb ("While the other captives are comparatively callous, she appears to D. as one whose sense of the calamity is such as might be looked for in a maiden of noble birth and spirit” ) is not justified by the text. On the contrary, we must imagine the other captives lamenting without restraint in contrast to lole’s selfcontrol and we must not forget that the latter is entering Heracles’ house as his mistress. οσωπερ: a dative “mensurae” as if πλεΐστον occurred in the relat. clause also; the superlative notion, indeed, is implied in μόνη. 3 1 4 . κρινοις: cf. supra 195. καί: stresses the content of the verb: “Why should you ask me?” (Denniston, G.P.2 315). Cp. Ai. 1290, 0 .7 '. 1129 ποιον άνδρα καί λέγεις ; Lichas’ state of mind is to be compared with the Θεράπων’β O.T. 1144 sqq. 3 1 5 . γέννημα . . . ύστάτοις: cp. O.T. I167 των Λαΐου τοίνυν τις ήν γεννημάτων, (γέννημα “child” is a vox Sophoclea ; not in Aesch. and Eur.). The construction of the words is not certain: is it γέννημα των έκεΐθεν ούκ έν ύστάτοις ον (as the schol. has it) or γέννημα των έκεΐθεν οΰκ έν ύστάτοις οντων (Radermacher) ? The former is doubtless the more natural (we understand έκεΐθεν better), των έκεΐθεν may be a genit, originis (Jebb) or a partitivus (Campbell: supply γεννημάτων) : the latter seems more probable as D. does not want to know whether lole’s parents are Oichalians (she knows), but whether she is of high birth or not. So we have to construe: ΐσως γέννημα ούκ έν ύστάτοις (= εύγενεστάτη) των έκεΐθεν (γεννημάτων). In this case it is hardly right to say that έκεΐθεν = έκεΐ. 3 1 6 . μή των τυράννων: Note the anxiety expressed by the inter­ rogative μή. των τυράννων: (she did not belong) to the royal family (did she). Εύρύτου σπορά τις ήν : It is impossible to have D. ask the question : "had Eurytus any issue” (for the whole of Lichas’ story dealt with this) and equally impossible to assume that σπορά has the special meaning of female offspring. So we have to interpret: “was she Eurytus’ offspring” (prop, an offspring of Eurytus’) (as to the imperf. tense cp. supra 301) or we have to write: Εύρύτου σπορά τίς

go

COMMENTARY

ήν; “Who were the children of Eurytus?’’ x) (or: μή των τυράννων, Εύρύτου σπορά ; τίς ήν ; who was she ?) 3 1 7 . It is just possible that D. passes over L.’s “ούκ οιδα”, if the interpretation given supra is correct, whereas it is inconceivable if D. has asked: “Eurytos avait-il des enfants?” ούδ’ άνιστόρουν μακράν : he did not go a long way (he did not go out of his way) to investigate. Cf. O.T. 220, Phil. 26. 3 1 8 . των ξυνεμπόρων: those who made the journey with her (her companions). Cf. έμπορος viator O.C. 25, 303, 901. εχεις: you have been told, yop know. Cf. Phil. 789. 3 1 9 . Lichas, making the best of his awkward situation, plays the part of the faithful servant. There is a touch of comedy in these virtuous words; a Daos could have said them, άνύτω (esp. Attic form of άνύω) to finish, to accomplish (a journey, a task). 3 2 0 . ε’ίπ’ . . . . σαυτής: “Well, tell me yourself, since Lichas cannot” (Denniston, G .P 2 p. 13 (3)). It is clear that άλλά refers to έκ σαυτής (thus already Campbell). 3 2 1 . και ξυμφορά τοι: “really a pity, you know” , “an actual misfortune” {G.P.2 p. 297) (one of the many cases of και “even”, “actually” in a causal clause, here adhering more closely to the following word than to the conjuction). τοι is persuasive (“a caress” G.P.2 p. 541); Meineke’s το is a needless conjecture, which impairs the sense. Of course the words are deeply imbued with tragic irony. The knowledge will seal D.’s fate. Cp. the very tragic words infra 459 το δ’εΐδέναι τί δεινόν ; 3 2 2 . 2 3 . ου........ γλώσσαν : If one takes διοίσει γλώσσαν in the sense of: “she will speak” (or if one writes διήσει γλώσσαν “she will open her lips”, "she will speak” ), one has to choose between: “she will, I grant you, just as before (hitherto) not say anything” (ως ούκ έλάλησε πρώην ουδέ νυν λαλήσει, second schob ad 322) and “ that will not be at all in conformity with her former behaviour” (εάν αίδουμένη σε φθέγξηται κατ’ ούδέν άρα έξ ίσου τω πρόσθεν χρόνω προκομίσειεν αυτής τήν γλώτταν, first schob). The second course is, in my opinion, the best; for 1) with the first interpretation one would have expected something like : άλλά τω γε πρόσθεν εξ ’ίσου ού διοίσει (or διήσει) τήν γλώτταν. It is more natural, as Jebb saw, to take together ούδέν έξ ’ίσου. If it is objected that Lichas speaks after some moments of silence and that his words1 1) F o r th e in te rro g a tiv e follow ing th e su b je c t cf. 459.

COMMENTARY

91

mean “you see, she will not say anything”, my answer is that, in that case, the present tense would be more natural than the fu­ ture. 2) Lichas’ anxious desire that lole should keep silence shows more clearly. 3) His insistence on Iole’s silence during the journey is stronger; his turn of words is typical of a liar who insists on having spoken the truth. G. Hermann’s interpretation (διαφέρειν = to differ): “Just as hitherto she will maintain an even tenour as to her tongue” 1) is very improbable. If διαφέρειν cannot mean virtually the same as διιέναι — “carry the words (= γλώτταν) ” or: “put in motion” (L.-Sc.)—we have to read διήσει (Wakefield, Jebb, Pearson and others). Perhaps the sense “put in motion” can be defended as a weakening of the sense known from such cases as Eur. Suppl. 715 οπλισμα . . . λαβών / δεινής κορύνης διαφέρων έσφενδόνα, Ι.Α. 1195 ή σκήπτρά αοι / μόνον διαφέρειν καί στρατηλατεΐν μέλει; Βα. 1087, Or. 1261. And compare the στρεπτή γλώσσα of II. XX 248 and γλώσσαν . . . νέμων Aesch. Ag. 685. 3 2 3 . ήτις : “ who, indeed” . . . 3 2 4 . προύφηνεν: in the sense of dicta proferre (E.) is rare (not in Aesch. and Eur.). ούτε μείζον’ ουτ’ ελασσόνα: neuter pi. ; a good instance of Sophoclean “polar” expression. 3 2 5 . ώδίνουσα: cf. ad Ai. 794. 3 2 6 . It is a question of some importance whether we ought to write δακρυρρόει or δακρυρροεΐ; L A E (έδάκρυεν) have the imperfect tense and that is as one would exspect, to judge by 313 ; it is, in fact, inconceivable that lole stands weeping before D. The missing augment could be excused by considering Lichas’ words as part of a herald’s speech; the perfect λέλοιπεν is no objection. If we read δακρυρροεί, we have to take the form as praesens historicum (instead of imperf.); or else Lichas says, without heeding lole’s real behav­ iour, now any more than in the past: “she is always weeping etc.” One has to admit that the imperfect makes things easier. 3 2 7 . διήνεμον: schol. έρημον, υψηλήν · ‘Όμηρος ήνεμόεσσάν φησι. Jebb calls it far-fetched to follow the first interpretation of the schol., as Hermann did, but I must say that διήνεμον (a hapax legomenon) as epitheton ornans seems very otiose; so I accept Mazon’s translation: “dispersée aux vents” . (Cf. Aesch. Ag. 818820).1 1) C am pbell’s ren d erin g .

92

COM MENTARY

327. 8.

τύχη: (this) state to which she has been reduced by illfortune; cf. εν τοιάδε κείμενος κακή τύχη Ai. 323· 3 2 8 . μέν . . . άλλά: “the second clause states a consideration which goes someway towards invalidating the first” . (G.P2. p. 5). It is better in my opinion to follow L in reading αυτή than to read αύτη (αύτή would be preferable), because with this reading γ’ is more natural. συγγνώμην έχει: habet cur ignoscas, “gives cause for forbearance” . Cf. Eur. Plioen. 995 τούμόν δ’ούχί συγγνώμην έχει,/προδότην γενέσθαι πατρίδος. έχειν = to involve, admit of (cf. L.-Sc. s.v. A n ) ; Eur. Andr. 244 τά γ ’ αισχρά κάνθάδ’ α.ίσχύνην εχει. D. acts accordingly. 3 2 9 . δ’ούν: “permissive” δ’ούν, "all right then” . έάσθω: not sc. χαίρειν (that would be unkind), but “let her be left in peace” (Jebb). 3 3 0 . ούτως όπως ήδιστα. : in whatever manner is most agreeable to her. κακοΐς / τοΐς ούσιν : the τύχη of 327. 3 3 1 . άλλην . . . λύπην λάβοι: the conjecture of F. W. Schmidt (Radermacher, Mazon) διπλήν (λάβοι) has something to recommend it: lole’s recounting her former state would in itself double her grief, it would indeed be a case of renovare dolorem. But I think the mistake by anticipation (λύπην instead of άλλην or perhaps διπλήν) more plausible. So I prefer the Triclinian άλλην (πρός γ ’), with Campbell, Jebb and Pearson; λοιπήν seems a bad make-shift. λάβοι: there is nothing to be said for Blaydes’ and Jebb's λάβη: it destroys, to some extent, the gentleness of D.’s words. 333. ως σύ θ’ οι θέλεις / σπεύδης: a technical device to prepare for Lichas’ returning to Heracles ; in the preceding lines we did not hear about Lichas’ desire or duty to return. Therefore one cannot be absolutely sure that L’s θέλης is mistaken. 3 3 3 . 4 . Θ’ . . . δέ: one case, out of many, where the MSS reading τε . . . δέ has to be restored (cf. ad 286). 3 3 4 . τάνδον έξαρκή τιθώ: (j’irai) “tout ordonner, comme il con­ vient dans la maison” . The woman is responsible for τά ένδον (cf. Xen. Oec. VII 22). έξαρκή “that they may be satisfactory” , “that they meet the circumstances”, a rare word. 3 3 5 . άμμείνασ’ : it would seem that the v.l. έμμείνασ' is simply a corruption that arose from failure to understand the apocope. (Cp.

COM MENTARY

93

Radermacher, Rhein. Mus. 73, 454). For άναμένειν morari cf. El. 1389. γε . . . άμ,μείνασ’: before you go, you must wait a moment. (Sup­ plying χώρει one may paraphrase the force of γε with the aor. partie.: “yes, go, but not before having waited” ). For βαιόν, pan-, lisper (= χρόνον βαιόν supra 44) cp. O.C. 1653. 336, 7 . L and R have the metrically impossible ουστινας without τ’ or γ’, A the senseless σ’, some MSS γ ’ (a make-shift), Trick conjectured τ’. In 337 L and R have έκμάθης 0 ’, A έκμάθης γ ’. I think it unsafe not to follow L in 337 and I prefer to construe (with Campbell) : όπως μάθης I° ουστινας άγεις έσω, 2° ταΰτα ών ούδέν είσήκουσας, καί οότως έκμάθης ά. δει, supplying with Trick τ’ in 336, but not omitting Θ’ in 337. Thus έκμάθης, the compound after the simple verb, has a summarizing function, the placing of τ’ affords no difficulties, and the two things the Angelos is eager to mention are neatly correlated by τ’ . . . τ’. Of course Θ’ after έκ­ μάθης does not ask for a corresponding τ ’ after μάθης. άνευ τώνδ’ : with a gesture in the direction of the house. 3 3 8 . πάντ’: adverbial, “in all respects” going with the whole sentence, τούτοι depending on έπιστήμην. For the postponement of γάρ cp. G.P.2 p. 96. (I fail to see in it a characterization of the Angelos). The objections to the text as stated by Radermacher and J. Jackson1) do not convince me (Jackson’s τούτων — έχω γάρ πάντ’ — έπιστήμων έγώ strikes me as very shrewd indeed, but also very tautological). Even if we were compelled to take τούτων πάντ’ as direct object of έχω έπιστήμην (= έπίσταμα.ι)—which we are not—I should be inclined to accept the words as they stand. 339. του . . : βάσιν : τίνος ένεκεν την πορείαν καί την είσοδον ίστας καί κωλύεις; (schob). This is the course adopted by Jebb, Campbell, Mazon and others; έφίστασθαι is causal (not found elsewhere in pres., it is found in the aor.), τήνδε βάσιν is accus, of respect: “in this move­ ment” ; the active έφίστημι in the sense of "make to halt” is com­ mon. The other possibility is to take τήνδε βάσιν as cogn. accus, (referring to the Angelos’ step) and με as object of τήνδ’ έφίστασαι βάσιν in the sense of ώδε επιβαίνεις, "why do you come upon me in such manner?” But έπιβαίνειν with acc. of the person is always metaphorical (cp. e.g. Ai. 138). One could say that D.’s feels the hurried approach of the Angelos as an attack and compare προσx) M a rgin alia Scaenica, 1955, p. 130.

COMMENTARY

94

βάλλειν πρός Men. Epitr. 27. lehn. 168 (= VII 10) cannot be alleged in defence of this interpretation (as it is by Radermacher) for there Pearson is probably correct in writing [ά]φίστω. It seems, then, necessary to accept the first interpretation, (unless we read μοι instead of με (Madvig)). Perhaps σταθεΐσ’ (340) is in favour of it, but I do not think that τήνδ' can afford us an argument. 3 4 0 . 1 . ούδέ . . ούδέ: Jebb is right in stating that ούδέ . . . ούδέ is not = ούτε . . . ούτε, but the corresponsion is nevertheless the same as if the wording had been ώσπερ ούδέ τον πάρος, ούτως ούδέ νυν (cp. PI. Ale. 2.141 a) and the element “even” in the first ούδέ is pleonastic in the same sense as καί in many relative and other clauses (cp. the examples G.P.2 p. 324.2 and the discussions pp. 193 and pp. 195 sq.). So I fail to see why this is “not a case of para­ taxis” (Jebb): “ούδέ, appearing in both limbs, takes over . . . the function of corresponsive καί” (G.P.2 p. 196) 1). 3 4 1 . μάτην: i.e. "without the event proving the truth of my words” (Campbell). δοκώ: sc. σε μάτην τον μύθον άκούσεσθαι. 3 4 2 . δήτα: For δητα following interrogative particles cf. G.P.2 p. 271 (4). αύθις πάλιν: The combination of these two is fairfy frequent in Soph, and Eur. ; they intensify each other; πάλιν denotes “back” (retro), αύθις “again” (rursus \ i.e. “de re in pristinum statum restituta” Ellendt). 3 4 4 . σοί ταΐσδέ τ ’ ούδέν εϊργεται: σοί ταΐσδέ τ ’ έξειπεΐν ούδέν εΐργεται: “I do not feel at all prevented from making things known to you and these maidens”. Or perhaps: “ Nothing is kept away (lit.) for (i.e. from) you and these” = “I have no secrets for you and these”. Cf. schol. άντί τοϋ ούδέν ούτε προς σε ούτε προς ταύτας άπόρρητον. έ'α: perhaps Deianeira is thought to make a gesture as if she would enter the palace. 3 4 5 . καί δή βεβασι: καί δή denotes that the requirement implied in τούτους δ’έ'α has been satisfied 2) ; so the Messenger can proceed with his tale. I think it probable that there is also a certain corre1) T h ere is som e in c o n siste n c y in D e n n isto n ’s s ta te m e n ts p. 193 a n d p. 196 as to th e recip ro cal re la tio n of ούδέ . . . ούδέ.

2) G . p .2 p. 251 ( n i ) .

COMMENTARY

95

lation between the two xoc'i’s ; in any case the paratactical structure of the sentence has the force of: “since they are gone, you can now . . . ό λόγος σημαινέτω: “ Now then let your speech declare your meaning” 1). D.’s anxious concern for the tale makes her personify it, just as often in Plato the λόγος (although in another sense) is personified; here there is hardly any difference between μϋθος and λόγος (the speech, the story told, tale in the sense of account of the matter). 3 4 6 . άνήρ 68’: The Messenger indiscriminately refers to Lichas by 68s or οδτος, just as e.g. Thuc.. refers to the war he describes by όδε and οδτος. 3 4 7 . δίκης ές ορθόν: “conformably with the straight rule of honesty” Jebb, who rightly compares Eur. Hec. 602 οίδεν τό γ’ αισχρόν κανόνι του καλοϋ μαθών. φωνεΐ : it is better to take this, not as a praesens historicum, but as a present of duration; the words in fact mean “there is no truth in what he said” . So, in my opinion, we have to supply εστι with κακός and take νϋν in its proper sense. The meaning of κακός (“dishonest” ) is brought out by ού δίκαιος, δίκη itself meaning in this context “honesty” , "uprightness” . 3 4 8 . πρόσθεν: έν βουθερεϊ λειμώνι etc. 188 sqq. 3 4 9 . παν όσον νοείς: precisely “tout ce que tu as dans l’esprit” (Mazon). 3 5 0 . à μεν γάρ έξείρηκας: either direct object of άγνοια1 2) μ’ έχει = άγνοώ or one has to supply τούτων depending on άγνοια; the words mean: “I fail to understand” . μεν: Denniston G.P .2 p. 377 ranges this usage under the heading: "The μέν clause is contrasted with what precedes, not with what follows” . But I think μέν is here emphatic, not elliptically antithe­ tical. 3 5 1 . 2 . ώς goes with λέγοντος. πολλών παρόντων μαρτύρων: very emphatic and consistent with 188. 3 5 2 . 3 . της κόρης / ταύτης : the characteristically Sophoclean enjambment heavily stresses the phrase. 3 5 3 . κείνος : Heracles, εκατι : cf. ad 274 supra. 1) C am pbell. 2) T h e a is long, as so m etim es in p o e try (Phil. 129); cf. o n -iS a n d -ιά S chw yzer I 469, C h a n tra in e , Formation des N om s, p . 91.

96

COMMENTARY

3 5 4 . ύψίπυργον: in Soph, only here; Aesch. Eum. 688, metaphor. Suppl. 97. (One of the typically Aeschylean words occurring in the dialogue of this tragedy, cp. F. R. Earp, The Style of Sophocles, p. 40). 3 5 5 . μόνος θεών: cp. μόνον βροτών 2 Ö I and Ζεύς οτου πράκτωρ φανη 251.

θέλξειεν: Soph, has the verb only here and infra 710 χ). The “spell” of Eros is spoken of in Horn. Od. XVIII 212: έρω δ’άρα θυμόν έθελχθεν, cf. ib. I 57 i Aesch. Suppi. 1004 δμματος θελκτήριον / τόξευμ’ επεμψεν; Eur. Hipp. 1274 θέλγει δ’Έρως, Bacch. 404 θελξίφρονες . . . ’Έρωτες, θέλγειν with inf. Aesch. Prom. 865 ίμερος θέλξει τό μή κτεΐναι; the sense is “to persuade by charming”, “to beguile into doing” . αίχμάσαι τάδε: καταπράξασθαι τη αιχμή “to perform these feats of arms” (L.-Sc.) ; the usage is somewhat different at Ai. 97. 3 5 6 . 7 . ού τάπί Λυδοΐς ουτ’ έπ’ Όμφάλη πόνων / λατρεύματ’: πονούν λατρεύματα forms a whole; so the construction runs: ού τά επί Λυδοΐς ούτε έπ’ Όμφάλη λατρεύματα. Note the derisive amplifi­ cation of one and the same thing. The reading is uncertain; but the objections to ουτ’ (ούδ’ A among others) are unjustified, cp. G.PS p. 509. I do not see why επί could not have the sense of “at the bidding of”, “in the power of” with Λυδοΐς also, nor why it could not have the locative meaning in the first instance and the sense of “in the power of” in the second (as opposed by Jebb, but advocated as a second course by Campbell). But we have to bear in mind that επ’ is in rasura in L and though ύπ’ was probably not L’s first reading, this conjecture of Herwerden’s makes things easier; if one accepts it, one is free to read ουθ’ or ούδ’ (the latter has ms authority) ; υπό has the sense of: "in subjection to” *2). πόνων λατρεύματ’: πόνων is a genit, explicativus 3). For λάτρευμα “service” , “servitude” cp. λατρεύειν supra 35, λάτρις jo, λατρεία infra 830. 3 5 7 . ο ριπτός μόρος: cf. Ant. 36 φόνον . . . δημόλευστον, Ai. 254 λιθόλευστος ’’Αρης. For the cognate accusative (“ριπτειν μόρον” ) underlying this phrase Campbell compares Eur. Or. 990 sq. Μυρτιλου φόνον δικών........ x) I t occurs six tim e s in A esch., fo u r tim e s in E u r. 2) I h a v e to re sist a m ild te m p ta tio n to re a d oil τά π ί Λυδοΐς, oü / ύπ’ Ό μ φ ά λη etc. 3) “to ilso m e se rv itu d e ” Je b b

COMMENTARY

97

The use of θέλξειεν is of course somewhat zeugmatic ; we have to supply the idea of urging or goading on with the last three subjects. 3 5 8 . ov: refers to ’Έρως, παρωθεΐν has the sense of “putting on one side” ; the metaphor is of the same kind as that in πρόσχημα “pretext” , and the like. έμπαλιν: contra atque ante; prop, “turning in an opposite direct­ ion” -1) (cf. πάλιν έρέει II. IX 56). 3 5 9 . φυτοσπόρον: άπαξ in Soph, and classical Greek, typical of the όγκος of this Messenger’s speech. 3 6 0 . κρύφιον . .. λέχος : predicate, being the object. For ■the metonymy of λέχος cp. Ai. 211 σε λέχος δουριάλωτον . . . άνέχει . . . Αΐας; κρύφιον λέχος means παλλακή, concubine. 3 6 1 . έγκλημα μικρόν αιτίαν θ’: another amplification. With these slighting words the Messenger refers to Lichas’ story. Of course the two versions are not mutually exclusive. We have to assume that, according to Sophocles, Heracles had been thrown from Eurytus’ palace, had murdered Iphitus and had been Omphale’s slave as a punishment for this murder; only Lichas left out the main motive. But we have to confess that one point is not made very clear. Did Heracles ask for lole before the whole lamentable story told by Lichas, or afterwards before falling upon the town? If one con­ siders that in the original myth lole would have been the reward of the victor in the bow-contest, the first alternative is much more probable. 3 6 2 - 3 6 4 . There are some difficulties in these words but not so great as to warrant Hartung’s (and Pearson’s) bracketing of την ταύτης . . . . πατέρα. “........ they are in character with the speaker, who, like the Φύλαξ in the Antigone, has already shown a fondness for false emphasis and superfluous words”. Thus, rightly, Campbell. In order to avoid the reproach of falling a victim to “documentary fallacy” 12), we may say that the wording is part of the poet’s art of bringing this character to life as an individual in this situation. πατρίδα τήν ταύτης, έν fj : the words are meant to bring home to Deianeira that it was only because it was the maiden’s country that Heracles attacked Oichalia3). 363. είπε: the subject is Lichas; the change of subject is harsh, but nobody could mistake the meaning. 1) F o r th e fo rm a tio n see S ch w y zer I 619. 2) Cf. A. J . A. W ald o ck , Sophocles the Dramatist, 1951, p p . Ti sqq. 3) T h e fin e st c o m m e n ta ry is E u r. H i p p . 545 sqq. K a m e r b e e k , T rach in iae

7

COM MENTARY

τόνδ’ : though τώνδ’ is not altogether impossible, it is perhaps better to accept this lectio facilior. (If τώνδ’ is read, one may take it as depending on δεσπόζειν θρόνων = βασιλεύειν). 3 6 4 . It does not make any difference to the authenticity of κτείνει . . . . πατέρα whether D.’s words 377 sq. really inquire after Iole’s name and identity or not. For D., in her bewilderment, may very well be thought of as asking again about what she finds difficult to believe. Jebb’s: "So she must have understood άνακτα in 364 to mean, not "the king”, but some (minor) "prince” or “chief” ” is really a case of “documentary fallacy”. Nobody could mistake άνακτα for another than king Eurytus after the preceding line. 3 6 5 . viv: This conjecture of Brunck’s, adopted by Dain-Mazon, seems very probable, because 1) we want an object going with πέμπων and it is hard to supply it mentally 2) after the king and the town we expect lole to be mentioned with a certain emphasis 3) vGv is rather otiose, viv satisfies all the requirements. ήκει: h.l. he (Heracles) is coming. It is a mistake to assume that ήκειν everywhere has the force of a perfect tense. 3 6 5 . 6. δόμους / ώς τούσδε: G. Hermann was probably right in his defence of ώς *) ; the house includes the inmates of the house (thus, rightly, Campbell); cf. also O.T. 1481. The words go with πέμπων. 3 6 6 . ούκ άφροντίστως: άντί του ούχ ώς έτυχεν άλλά διά πολλής φροντίδος έχων αυτήν καί άγαπών (schob ). 3 6 7 . ώστε: this adverbial use is very frequent in the three Tragedians, but alien to attic prose. μηδε προσδόκα τόδε: the vile character of the man, the obtrusi­ veness of his πολυπραγμοσύνη is strikingly revealed by this as by his other comments. 3 6 8 . ε’ίπερ έντεθέρμανται πόθω : with Campbell and others I fail to see why we should read with Dindorf έκτεθέρμανται; just as ένθερμος is good Greek (cf. μειράκιον ένθε[ρμον] Com. Ad. 24.9 D.), so is ένθερμαίνειν, with the sense of εντός θερμαίνειν. We may ask whether the poet here means a sort of dramatic irony. In any case there is a structural connection between this traditionally metaphorical phrase 2) 1 and έθαλψε μ’ άτης σπασμός άρτίως 6δ’ αύ infra 1082. εί'περ: as normally in Attic, siquidem, "since” . 1) T h e u sag e is a c c ep ted b y S c h w y z e r-D e b ru n n e r I I 534. 2) Cp. e.g. A esch. Prom . 590, 650, (θάλπειν).

COM MENTARY

99

3 7 0 » τοΰδε : cf. ad 346; the v.l. ά (Π ί1)) has something to re­ commend it; after the collective το παν it would be very natural and a corruption ά < δ is easier to understand than the reverse. 3 7 1 . He insists on the many witnesses; cp. 352, 188, 194. 3 7 1 . 2 . προς μέση . . . . άγορά: The place must be the same as 188: έν βουθερεΐ λειμώνι. But does άγορά here denote the place? Schol. explains: άθροίσματι and so among others Radermacher and Jebb (though he translates: “in the public place where the Trachinians were assembled” ). I cannot understand how the listeners could be said to hear in the midst (or near the centre) of the assembly; of course it is possible mentally to supply αύτοϋ λέγοντος, πρός μέση άγορά going with , but this is rather intricate and less probable since 423 presents the same difficulty. We shall have to assume that άγορά means public place, but not market-place, not forum to the thought of as forming the centre of the town ; the usage is the same as in Od. Vi 266 (cp. ib. V I I I 16). I think the difference between προς h.l. and έν 423 is negligible. Τραχινίων depends on άγορά, not on πολλοί, as the latter passage shows. 3 7 2 . συνεξήκουον ωσαύτως έμοί : another instance of the pleonastic, disagreeable emphasis by which the poet characterizes this man. It is vain to ask whether έμοί depends on συν- or on ωσαύτως; it depends on both. 3 7 3 . ώστ’ έξελέγχειν: subject πολλοί, object Lichas, εξελέγχει has its full force of: convincere (“convict” ), “überführen” . 3 7 3 , 4 . εί δε μή λέγω φίλα, / ούχ ήδομαι: the old man is in­ sincere, as a comparison with his words at 180 sqq. shows us. 3 7 4 . το ορθόν: "the truth”, cf. 347; O.T. 1220, O.C. 518 etc. 3 7 5 . που . . πράγματος: cf. Ai. 314 and the note, πράγμα is to be thought as belonging to the sphere of intr. πράττειν and denoting “faring”, state or fortune = πραξί,ς12) (Ai. 790. 792, Aesch. Prom. 695). 3 7 6 , 7 . τίν’ ........ λαθραΐον: The construction of these words is not at all sure. The alternatives are: 1) τίνα πημονήν is the object, ύπόστεγον going with the verb as a prolepsis, λαθραΐον being in apposition to (τίνα) πημονήν. 2) τίνα is the object, ύπόστεγον going with the verb, πημονήν λαθραΐον in apposition to τίνα. 3) πημονήν ύπόστεγον forms a whole, τίνα πημονήν ύπόστεγον is the object, λαθραΐον its apposition. 1) P a p . O x. 1805. 2) O r: πράγματα A esch. Prom. 971. C f. supra 152, 294.

COM MENTARY

4) πημονήν ύπόστεγον forms a whole going with the verb, τίνα is the object, λαθραΐον is a) either its apposition b) or in ap ­ position to πημονήν ύτίόστεγον. We have to bear in mind that τις is not used in exclamations x) ; the question is rhetorical just as that preceding it is (I cannot be­ lieve that she inquires after lole’s identity). All things well con­ sidered I prefer the first interpretation; it gives the best account of D.’s outburst of feelings. 3 7 7 . ώ, δύστηνος: thus rightly Dain: an exclamation. άρ’: as often the particle has the force of nonne (άρ’ ού), here with ironical and perhaps sarcastic or bitter overtones. ανώνυμος: schol. άρα άσημος ούτως έστί καί δυσγενής ώς μηδέ το δνομα αυτής γιγνώσκεσθαι. We have to assume that D. did hear and understand the Messenger’s words 362-364; so her question comes to this: “we see clearly, do we not, that the maiden is nameless” . There is some ambiguity in άνοονυμος, as it means “without name” and “nameless, inglorious” as well. D. wants the Messenger now to mention the name ; his answer refers to both meanings of ανώνυμος. 3 7 8 . διώμνυτο: this is of course an indignant overstatement of Lichas’ words; but cp. Ai. 1233. 3 7 9 . With Pearson and G. Schiassi1 2) I follow L in giving these words to Deianeira, reading with Heath ή κάρτα. But then it is, in view of 308, much more satisfying to take φύσις, just as there, to denote lole’s physical aspect3). ομμα is to be taken literally: eye (or “glance” ). In my opinion πέφυκεν does not tell against my interpretation of φύσιν; it can stand even if πέφυκεν denotes more than έστιν, which seems improbable. Those who give the words to the Messenger have some difficulty with ομμα; therefore Jebb and Dain read with Froehlich ονομα; perhaps this is not necessary (Radermacher, Campbell, Masqueray retain ομμα) — ομμα however strikes me as more poignant if the words are D.’s. For it points to the erotic power of the eye; cp. infra 527 and PI. Phaedr. 253 e 5 το ερωτικόν ομμα, which Hackforth and Yerdenius 4) mistake for “the person of the be­ loved” (cp. ib. 254 b 4). 1) In th is re sp e c t I p a r t c o m p a n y w ith M azon’s tra n sla tio n . 2) "le p a ro le assu m o n o in b o cca di D . u n to n o che v o rre b b e essere ironico e riesce so lta n to doloroso e a m a ro ” . 3) D. H o lw erd a, Φ Ύ ΣΙΣ, th esis G ro n in g en 1955, is n o t su re w h ich m e a n in g φύσις h a s h.l. (cp. p. 133). O f course, it could d en o te origin, b irth , etc. 4) Notes on Plato’s “Phaedrus” , M nem osyne 1955, p. 282.

COMMENTARY

ΙΟ Ι

3 8 0 . μεν: “solitarium” : it is as if “the Messenger meant to add further details” (G.P.*2 p. 380). γένεσιν is ace. limit., Εύρύτου genit, orig, going with οδσα, πατρός is used predicatively. “Taking lineage from Eurytus for her sire” (Campbell). ποτέ : it is not correct to say, as Jebb does, that this belongs only to ’καλείτο; it belongs to οδσα as well, cp. 301, where see the note for the imperfect tense ’καλείτο: i.e. “they used to call her” . 3 8 1 . ούδαμά : as the temporal sense of the adverb seems to be firmly established, I think the possible meaning “not at all” deri­ vative from it (just as in Engl, “never” ). We may perhaps think that ούδαμά . . . έφώνει implies: “he never could be prevailed upon to say’ (cp. the use of the imperf. of πείθειν with a negation). 3 8 2 . βλάστας: See infra 401 and cf. O.C. 972 βλάστας γενεθλίους πατρός. The usage at 0 .7 '. 717 is not the same. δήθεν: δήθεν expresses contempt and indignation, conveying the untruth of ούδέν ίστορών. Here it precedes the words it qualifies, as it does at Eur. Or. 1119, Rhes. 719; so we have to put a comma before it. (Cp. G.P.2 p. 266 and Jebb’s contrary opinion; this fairly fre­ quent but abnormal placing of δήθεν may be founded on its ety­ mology, if Wackernagel is right x)). As the words surely' echo Lichas’ ούδ’ άνιστόρουν μακράν (317), ίστορεΐν must have the same sense as άνιστορεΐν there (“because he had not been inquiring” ; thus rightly Jebb). 3 8 3 . 4 . ολοιντο . . . . κακά: the best rendering is perhaps Masqueray’s: “Périssent, je ne dis pas tous les êtres malhonnêtes, mais celui qui etc.” (The scholion’s interpretation ολοιντο μή πάντες άνθρωποι άλλ’ οί κακοί καί όσοι κτλ. is impossible). Compa­ rable, but only to a certain extent, are Phil. 961 ολοιο μήπω, πριν μάθοιμ’ εΐ καί πάλιν / γνώμην μετοίσεις· and Eur. Med. 83 ολοιτο μέν μή · δεσπότης γάρ έστ’ έμός· άτάρ κακός γ ’ών ές φίλους άλίσκεται. We may' ask whether the meaning of the optative could be concessive (a Homeric usage cp. Schwyzer-Debrunner II 625, 322, K.-G. I 228.4 2)): “For my part, there is no need for all bad people to perish, but the man w h o ........ ” . There is no question of “eine ironische Spitze” 3) against the informer. η Zeitschr. f. vergl. Sprachf. X X X I I I 23, G .P .2 264. 2) G oodw in § 13. 3) R a d e rm a c h e r a.l.

COM MENTARY

3 8 4 . μή πρέπονθ’ αύτώ : as these words are not so very striking in relation to Lichas, it is possible to surmise that the coryphaeus (i.e. Sophocles) is thinking of Heracles more than of Lichas; this does not mean that we must assume an aside. ασκεί . . . κακά : cf. Aesch. Prom. 1066 κακότητ’ άσκεΐν, Eur. Bacch. 476 ασέβειαν άσκοϋντ’. With λαθρα'ΐ’ . . . κακά as an object the meaning becomes: μηχανασθαι. 3 8 5 . ώς: “for” . 3 8 5 . 6. λόγοις / τ ο ί ς νυν παρουσιν: with great, tautological (νΰν) emphasis. The παρόντες λόγοι are at the same time τά παρόντα, the situation of the moment, which for Deianeira conveys αμηχανία, απορία. 3 8 6 . κυρώ: cf. ad Ai. 314. 3 8 7 . πεύθου : the verb occurs in Soph, only here and O.T. 604; the sense warrants the present tense. ώς: causal. σαφή: the truth; on the omission of the article cf. K.-G. I 608; cp. El. 1223 έκμαθ’ εί σαφή λέγω. 3 8 8 . κρίνειν: see ad 195 supra, προς βίαν: this occurs in O.T. 1x52, not here 1). 3 8 9 . άλλ’: “expression of willingness to act in a required way” . (G.PA 17). Cf. 86, 490, 600; Phil. 645, O.C. 1284. καί γάρ: “for indeed” (“in fact” ). ούκ άπό γνώμης: ούκ άνευ συνέσεως (sclioL). The second inter­ pretation of the schol. τούτο κάμοί άρέσκει is less satisfactory, be­ cause D. at the moment had no γνώμη of her own. άπό*2) has the same sense in άπ’ ελπίδων El. 1127: the origin of the phrase clearly shows itself in ού . . . άπό σκοπού ούδ’ άπό δόξης Od. Äl 3 4 4 i άπό τρόπου, άπό σκοπού, άπό καιρού occur in Piato. 390 . G. Piermann was certainly correct in attributing the line to the Messenger (against L, vainly defended by Campbell). 3 9 0 , 3 9 1 , 2 . The transition to the following scene is cleverly managed, D. makes a step in the direction of the house, the Mes­ senger asks his. question, not -wanting to be overlooked; enter Lichas, who had no further business in the palace and is in a hurry to return to Heracles. Lichas’ haste to a certain extent confirms the Messenger’s charge. The “Dreigespräch” is properly speaking a brier dialogue between D. and Lichas, a longer one between him and the b Cf, J . H ein z, Z u r Datierung der Track., H e rm e s 1937, P- 275. 2) Cf. also m y n o te a d A esch. Isthin. 91, M nem osyne 1955, P· 11 : άπό in all th e se p h ra se s lit. m e a n s: “ a t a, d ista n c e fro m ” .

COMMENTARY

IO 3

Messenger, followed by "rheseis” of D. and L. The Messenger is lost sight of after 435 : the same holds good for the Φύλαξ in Ant. after 44.5· There is some awkwardness in this, but none in the fact that the three present on the stage do not partake in the conversation at the same time; for it would have been an offence against style 1) and dignity alike if D. had intervened time and again. Of course, her mere presence lends to the dispute between the two men its true dramatic force. 391, 2 . ούκ έμών υπ’ άγγέλων / άλλ’ αυτόκλητος : polar expres­ sion. The verbal element (= κληθείς or κεκλημένος) in αυτόκλητος explains the phrase ούκ . . . αγγέλων, the latter elucidates the function of αΰτο- = ύφ’ εαυτού. Aesch. Eum. 170 has the adj. 12) with just the same sense a nullo vocatus, = sponte veniens (Italie). 3 9 1 , 2 . 68’ άνήρ . . . πορεύεται: “here he comes”, as Ant. 155 άλλ’ οδε γάρ δή βασιλεύς χώρας . . . χωρεΐ, Ant. 526, O.C. III πορεύον­ ται γάρ οϊδε δή τινες, O.C. J 2j ; cp. with ούτος El. 1432 i K.-G. I 642. 394. ώς έρποντος είσορας εμού : It we consider these words as a confusion of two constructions (ώς είσορσ.ς έμε έρποντα and ώς έρποντος εμού), as Campbell does, we may as well take είσορας as a parenthesis; for the difference is slight. I do not think the objections to this are very convincing; for if όρας is normalfy used as a paren­ thesis, we can accept είσορας ; that δρίχς (ορατέ) has in that case an interrogative ring is no difficulty: είσορας can also be taken as interrogative, but to me that seems not necessary. Of the other theories, viz. είσορας -|- genit.3), or ώς, έρποντος εμού, τούτο είσορας, or (with asyndeton) ώς έρποντος εμού, είσορας only the last seems at all possible, provided 4) that we make τί . . . . λέγειν dependent on δίδαξον and put a colon before ώς. In that case the asyndeton is causal5), as it is at Phil. 667, O.T. 1061, O.C. 741, Ai. 581 (in all these cases an imperative precedes) ; but then we have to assume that a verbum videndi has the same construction as is familiar with 1) Cf. S chm id, Gr. Lit. I I 59 n. 1 ; cp. j . H einz, o.l. p p . 273 sqq. 2) T h e sam e fo rm a tio n is fo u n d in Soph, o n ly in αύτόκτιτος, αύτόσσυτος, αύτόγνωτος, cf. N uchelrnans, Die N o m i n a des soph. Wortschatzes, th esis N ijm egen 1949, § 4. 3) Cf. R a d e rm a c h e r a d Ar. Ran. S15; th e a n a lo g y w ith αίσθάνεσΟαι is n o t v e ry strik in g , th e less so as Soph, h a s αίσθ. + gen. + p a r t, o n ly once (El. 79). 4) Cf. L o b eck a d A i . 281. 5) K .-G . I I 3 4 4 8 .

COMMENTARY

the verbs έπίστασθαι, γιγνώσκειν, είδέναι, cf. Ai. 281, K.-G. II 93ß and that remains very questionable. είσορώα’ (Nauck-Radermacher) does not help at all. ώς όρσ.ς (Wakefield, Jebb) strikes me as flat. Mazon-Dain accept the parenthesis. 395 . έκ ταχείας: cf. εξ εκούσιας = έκουσίως infra 727. One can supply ορμής. σύν χρόνω βραδεΐ: σύν χρόνω and χρόνω express “after a (long) time”. The time of the seemingly good tidings was, for D., slow to come; there is a pointed antithesis with ταχείας, cf. O.C. 1602 ταχεΐ . . . σύν χρόνω. 396 . ασσεις: the verb stresses the swiftness, the suddenness of his departure (cf. O.T. 1074). κάννεώσασθαι : καί άνανεώσασθαι ; Hermann’s reading for καί νεώσασθαι is probable x) in view of the schol. (άνακαινίσασθαι καί αδθις όμιλήσαι ακριβώς έκ νέας) and Eustath. 811.20. The usage of the verb at the only place where it recurs in Tragedy (Eur. Hcl. 722) is different. “Even before I have conversed again with you” . πριν . . . καί: "even before” (before even). 3 9 7 . ίστορεΐν: cf. 317, 382, 404, 418, 415. For άλλ’ cf. 389. πάρειμ’: “I am at your disposal”, “service” . 3 9 8 . ή καί: the usage of καί is not the same as supra 246. The idea is “also” . . . . Nauck’s νεμεΐς is certainly right; the verb does not mean “observe” (L.-Sc.), “maintain” (Campbell, wrongly referring to Aesch. Ag. 685 γλώσσα έν τύχα νέμούν), but “allot” cp. e.g. 1238 (to her as her due); thus rightly Jebb. (“Will you tell me the truth, as I have a right to it” ). το πιστόν τής άληθείας : emphatic periphrasis of τήν πιστήν αλήθειαν. In τής ελευθερίας τω πιστω (Thuc. II 4 °·5 )> τού πιστού τής επιστή­ μης (id. VI 7 2·4 ) the two parts of the phrases have more inde­ pendent value. 3 9 9 . γ ’ : limitative, ών . . . . : τήν αλήθειαν τούτων ά. Or perhaps the genit, depends on έξειδώς, as if it were an adjective (thus L.-Sc.). Soph, makes Lichas speak with the emphasis of a man who is on his guard. 4 0 0 . δήτ’: connective, but also emphatic; it “does not immedia­ tely follow the. interrogative word”, as sometimes in verse (G.PA P- 270 (3 ))·1 1) A nd a c c e p te d b y m o st ed ito rs, b u t n o t b y C am p b ell; w ith H e rm a n n ’s re ad in g th e re is apocope as in άμμείνασ’ 335; cf. K .-B . i 1S0.

COMMENTARY

IO 5

4 0 1 . The answer is evasive (Εύβοιίς answers a question τις γυνή, not τις ή γυνή) and ambiguous; ούκ έχω λέγε tv has two meanings, έβλαστεν: cf. 382. 4 0 2 . οΰτος: hens tu, cf. ad Ai. 71. ώδε: “hither” , a usage esp. frequent in Soph., once found in Aesch. {Suppl. 744), once in Eur. {Ion 208 ώδε δερκόμεσθα). 4 0 3 . έρωτήσας -1) έχεις: “periphrasis of the perfect” does not quite do justice to the implications of the phrase; Soph, could have said: τι τοϋτο έρωτας or τί τοϋτο ήρώτησας, hardly ήρώτηκας. We must say that the asking of the question, a moment before, and the questioning attitude of the Messenger now, are compressed together in this phrase. Of course, there are many cases of this construction (frequent in Soph, and Eur. cp. K.-G. II 61.11 12)) where it denotes hardly more than a perfect (cf. ad Ai. 22), but it seems worth while to make distinctions; O.C. 817 ποίω σύν έργω τοΰτ’ άπειλήσας έχεις is a perfect parallel. σύ δ’ : on the note of indignation in the connective δέ cf. G.P.2 p· 173· 404.

The Messenger’s attitude is defiant throughout; so I think the words he uses have to be taken in their full force, τόλμησον: “dare” (not "have the goodness” ), εΐ φρονείς “si du moins tu es sain d’esprit” (Mazon: not “if thou comprehendest the question” Jebb), 6 σ’ ιστορώ going with εΐπεΐν (as is clear from εΐ . . . . μάταια 4 ° 6 -7 ) ■ 4 0 6 , 7 . 0 ’: the function of the particle, in my opinion, is this: in correlation with τε 407 it links δάμαρτα Ήρακλέους with δεσπότιν τήν έμήν, both being appositions to Δηάνειραν, Οϊνέως κόρην. So an alteration of Θ’ into δ’ (Blaydes and others) has to be rejected. 4 0 7 . λεύσσων μάταια: μάταια (internal or adverbial accusat.) has the sense of “delusive images”, “vain phantoms” or the like, μάταιος infra 863 = inani specie deceptus. δεσπότιν: just the same as δέσποινα; the latter already in Horn., the former here for the first time ; they are used in turn for metrical convenience only, δέσποινα remaining the normal word. Once Soph, used the artificial δεσπότειρα {fr. 1040 P.). 1) T h e read in g έρωτήσασ’ is d u e to a w h o lly m ista k e n d is trib u tio n of th e lines, for w hich cf. th e schol. a d 402. Cf. J . H ein z, Z u r D atierung der Track., H erm es 1937, Ρ· -752) G oodw in § 47. B esides H es. Erg. 42 we h a v e now as an e a rly in sta n c e S a p p h o 98.3-4 L .-P .

ιο6

COMMENTARY

4 0 8 . The man’s asyndeta and anaphora underline the eagerness with which he leaps to corner Lichas. For the anaphora cf. O.T. 1013 τοΰτ’ αυτό, πρέσβυ, τοΰτό μ’ εΐσαει φοβεϊ (cp. Webster, Intro­ duction, ρ. 159)· τοΰτ’ αυτ’: “that is just the thing . . . 4 0 9 . δίκαια γάρ: “yes, for it is true” (sc. that she is my δέσποινα) ; δίκαια not differing from δίκαιον, cf. ad Ai. 887, 1126 (δίκαια). 4 1 0 . τί δήτα; δήτα has logical connective force. άξιοΈς : with its full sense of : "think . . . worthy" ; “think . . . fit” ; cf. Pherecr. 93 τί σαυτόν άποτίνειν άξιοΐς ; Ar. Ran. 1012 τί παθεΐν φήσεις άξιος είναι. 440, 1 1 . δίκην and δίκαιος take up, in a pointed way, Lichas’ δίκαια. Cp. e.g. Ant. 742 sq. Creon: ώ παγκάκιστε, διά δίκης ίων πατρί. Haem. : ου γάρ δίκαιά σ’ εξαμαρτάνονθ’ όρώ. δίκαιος: cf. 348· 4 1 2 . ποικίλας: From Hes. onwards ποικίλος denotes “subtle”, “artful” , “wily” (L.-Sc. I ll 3 c) ; it is used as the reverse of άπλοϋς; cf. O.C. 762, Phil. 130. The verb occurs in its metaphor, sense for the first time here (and infra, 1121) ; cf. O.T. 130 ποικιλωδος Σφίγξ; ύφαΐνειν is of course to be compared. ποικίλας έχεις: the phrase is here very near to mere periphrasis of the perfect (cf. ad 403). 4 1 3 . τοϋτο ορών: ποικίλλων. 4 1 4 . δ’: = γάρ. Jebb, Campbell, Mazon take πάλαι with κλύων ; in my opinion it goes with μωρός ή ; the imperfect tense expresses a fact which is just recognized as such by the speaker. Usually this imperf. is accompanied by άρα (Goodwin § 39). μωρός (ή) . . . κλύων: “a fool ... in listening” 1) ; for the personal construction cf. ad Ai. 635. 4 1 5 . ού: you will do nothing of the sort, ούκ άπει. βραχύ is to be taken άπο κοινού, but primarily with ιστορούμενος (= έρωτώμενος). 4 1 6 . Cf. Eur. Suppl. 567 λέγ’, εΐ τι βούλη· καί γάρ ού σιγηλός εϊ (Theseus addressing Kopreus). καί γάρ: “for . . . in fact . . .”. 4 1 7 . έπεμψας: in the "Homeric” sense of “conduct”, “escort” , as Phil. 913; cf. ib. 133 Έρμης 6 πέμπων; fairly frequent in Aesch., e.g. Suppl. 219. P C am pb ell.

COMMENTARY

IO7

Note the placing of την αιχμάλωτον at the beginning of line and sentence and the almost demonstrative force of the article. 418. κάτοισθα δήπou: “you know her I presume” (in questions δήπου suggests an affirmative reply; the usage is rare in Tragedy — cp. G.P.2 p. 267 (2) — but commoner in comedy : this is in keeping with the general tone of the Messenger’s words) i.e. “ when I speak about the captive, you know whom I mean, I suppose?” 4 1 9 - 4 2 0 , ουκουν . . . έ'φασκες: “why, did you not say . . . On ουκουν in questions, “characteristic of the emotional style of tragedy” cf. G.P.2 p. 431. ην ύπ’ άγνοιας όρας: if these words are sound, they must mean ; "at whom you look as if not knowing her” . On ύπο c. genit, denoting accompaniment and so even manner (h.l. : acting as if not knowing her, i.e. not knowing her name and parents) cf. Schw.-Debr. II pp. 530 sq. El. 630 ουκουν έάσεις ούδ' ύπ’ εύφήμ,ου βοής/θϋσαί μ’, Eur. Hipp. 1299 ώς ύπ’ εύκλειας θάνη, Her. 289 δειλίας . . . . ύπο, Time. I ll 33-3 ύπο σπουδής. The real difficulty7 lies in όρδίς; Iole is not present and the word must, refer to Lichas’ attitude in the preceding scene. The words would sound less strange if the Messenger said : ήν ύπ’ άγνοία.ς άγεις : “whom you bring here in ignorance of her name etc.” ; then, the present expressing duration would be more natural. It is possible tha.t the neighbourhood of άγειν and, on the other hand, the ending of 418 (ΐστ-ορεΐς) have caused the reading όρδίς (the rhetorical avoidance of άγεις . . . άγειν does not hold good for Soph. ; cp. e.g. Eur. Med. 7 7 7 sq.). J. Jackson’s x) ουκουν σύ ταύτην — μή μ’ ύπ’ άγνοιας ορα — is certainly7 witty, but not convincing. 4 2 0 . Εύρύτου σποράν: cf. φυτοσπόρος 3 5 9 , 3l6. 4 2 1 . τίς πόθεν: On “mehrzielige Fragesätze” cf. Schw.Debr. II p. 630.2. 4 2 2 . παρών: ironically7echoed by the Messenger at .431; of course Campbell, Pearson, and Dain are right not to adopt Bothe’s πάρα, as Jebb and Rademiacher do. It goes with κλυειν (cf. 431) and 1. 431 also makes it probable that we ought to write κλυειν (inf. aor.). The rhymie μολών . . . παρών lends a false rhetorical pathos to Lichas’ words; τίς πόθεν has a similar effect. — In μαρτυρήσει Lichas unwittingly7echoes the Messenger’s μαρτύρων 352. 4 2 3 . πολλοΐσιν αστών: not πολλοΐς έν ά. (Wakefield); one may7 ) M arg in a lia Scaenica, 1955, ρ. m o .

ιο8

COMMENTARY

supply έν from 421. For the circumstances cp. 188 sqq., 351 sqq. έν μέση κτλ. : again emphasis is brought about by the asyndeton. Cf. ad 408. In view of the general forcefulness of the words, we should perhaps write πολύς σοϋ. τίχυτά γ ’: em phatically repeats τούτα

422.

425.

Lichas does not as yet realize that the Messenger himself had been a witness to his words. ταύτο δ’ούχ'ι γίγνεται: γίγνεται is more forcible than έστί: “it does not come to the same thing” . 4 2 6 . δόκησιν . . . λόγον: "to tell what you fancy and to make an exact statement ”. I think λόγον does not refer to ειπεϊν (in that case the meaning would be: “to state a fancy and make true your statement” ; but then λόγον should have the article). The main antithesis, as Jebb puts it, is between δόκησιν and έξακριβώσαι, but all the same there are also antitheses between δόκησιν and λόγον, between ειπεϊν and έξακριβώσαι and even between ειπεϊν and λόγον. The words are highly pointed, and perhaps betray sophistic influence; one is reminded of Prodicus’ επί. τοΐς όνόμασιν άκριβολογίαν (Prodikos A 9)· πότερα γάρ μου κατηγορείς είδώς ακριβώς ή δοξάζων Gorg. Palavi. 22 (B I I α 22).

έξακριβώσαι: άκριβόω occurs in Eur. in a context where sophistical eloquence is censured: Hec. 1192 σοφοί μέν ούν εΐσ’ οί τάδ’ ήκριβωκότες (sc. εδ λέγειν τά άδικα) 1). έξα.κριβόω does not recur before Aristotle, ξύνεσις ήκριβωμένη Ar. Ran. 1483 means: perfect faculty of comprehension, perfect intellect. 4 2 7 . ποιαν δόκησιν: a colloquial phrase, very frequent in comedy; cf. V. Leeuwen ad Ar. Ran. 529 (Ξαν3-........ τοΐς θεοΐσιν έπιτρέποκ Διον. ποίοις θεοΐς: not “which gods do you mean” but “quid deos loqueris” ). “ Une opinion, allons donc!” (Mazon). Cf. Eur. Hel. 567 and Ed. Fraenkei ad Aesch. Ag. 1119. έπώμοτος : “on oath” , only here ; ένώμοτος Ai. 1113. The impression conveyed by the phrase έπώμοτος λέγουν is of a more formal oath than it is possible to visualise in this case. But cf. 378. 429. δάμαρτα: δάμαρ is the old, poetical word denoting the legitimate wife ; Lichas had used it a moment ago referring to Deianeira. Perhaps we have to suppose he did not use it in reference to P T h e w o rd lias a glorious h is to ry in th e tr a d itio n of g ra m m a r a n d sch o larsh ip in g en e ra l: cp.e.g. X e n . M em . IV 2. 10 a n d C cd ren u s Hist. comp. P .G . C X X I 485 c άκριβοϋν τά αντίγραφα.

COMMENTARY

IO 9

Iole and that there is an element of δείνωσις in the Messenger’s reminder. εγώ δάμαρτα : note the expressiveness of the ellipsis. 4 3 0 . ο ξένος : there is a ring of scornful disdain in the use of the word. 4 3 1 . παρών: cf. ad 422. ταύτης : ~ τησδ’ 433 : cf. ad 346. πόθω is dativ. causae. 4 3 2 . πόλις . . . πάσα: not “a whole city”, but “the whole city” : on the omission of the article see note ad At. 1105. ή Λυδία.: Omphale; i.e. his grudge at the όνειδος of his enslavement to her. 4 3 3 . φανείς: “having arisen” (Campbell). The aor. implies the suddenness of Heracles’ passion. 4 3 4 . άποστήτω : cf. Eur. II el. 1023 εγώ δ’ άποστασ’ εκποδών σιγήσομαι. 4 3 5 . ληρεΐν: only here in tragedy, frequent in comedy and Plato, διαλέγεσθαι νοσουντι results in idle talk (λήρος) ; the sense of ληρεΐν is proleptic as determined by its indirect object; the construction is determined by the underlying idea of διαλέγεσθαι. — For the genit, cf. Schwyzer-Debrunner II p. 123 sq. νοσουντι: the sense is clearly brought out by its antithesis σώφρονος, “of sound mind”. ούχί : does not go with σώφρονος but with the omitted έστιν. 4 3 6 . On Ζεύς Οΐταΐος cp. ad 200 supra. πρός σε του etc. : σε προς τοϋ . . . Enclitics stand near the beginning of the sentence 1). Cf. Phil. 468, Eur. Med. 324 2). Without σε El. 1208. 4 3 7 . καταστράπτοντος : the compound only here in older literature. Of course the words imply a warning against lying; Zeus’ lightning might strike the liar. εκκλέψεις λόγον: “disguise the matter” . 4 3 8 . τούς λόγους: “your words”. κακή : with full ethical meaning. To show her dismay, the bitterness of her betrayed love in the presence of Lichas is completely impossible for Deianeira; he is not her confidant (as the Paedagogus is Creusa’s in Eur.’s Ion), but Heracles’. It would be απρεπές (as it is not in regard to the maidens of the chorus), it would go against the very instincts of womanb W ackernagel, I . F . I 333 sqq. ; S ch w y zer 1 388. 3) S c h w y z e r-D e b ru n n e r I I 316.

no

COM MENTARY

liness (and D. is the most female of Soph.’s major characters), it would be contrary to the instinct of self-preservation. So she shows herself the wise, dispassionate, understanding wife to whom Lichas may safely entrust the whole truth; she plays that rôle only too well because she has often had to condone Heracles’ love-affairs. In all this, Sophocles shows her as a creature not crafty and deceitful, but human and dignified. The next scene will make it clear *) that this time her own fading youth, lole’s beauty and the fact that she has to admit her into her house do not permit her to be resigned ; for once she will seize at the means of self-defence she imagines to be at her disposal and so, unwittingly, she fails on this day of destiny, through that very power, Eros, against whom it is in her own words useless to fight. 4 3 9 . ούδ’ ήτις: “and not such a one who . . . .” τάνθρώπων: “the condition of man”, τά άνθρώπεια πράγματα. 4 4 0 . For this motif cp. supra i sqq. and above all 126-135; 297 sqq. (see also 473). If we take τάνθρώπων in the above mentioned sense and think of these lines, we should take χαίρειν . . . . άεί as follows: “it is not in the nature of things for the same people always to be happy” . Thus inter alios Campbell and Schiassi. Of course the words admit of another interpretation: τάνθρώπων = “human nature” could be taken as subject to πέφυκεν, τοΐς αύτοΐς neutr. pi. going with χαίρειν as a dativ. instrum. (Jebb, Raderm., Mazon). In the first case she is referring to herself, in the second to Heracles; the former interpretation yields a deeper meaning, the latter is, grammatically speaking, more natural and easier. (Perhaps one can follow Jebb’s construction, but then confer a double meaning on the words, viz. that they apply to Deianeira as well). 4 4 1 . To a certain extent D.’s argument is akin to Ajax’ Ai. 666 sqq. Like Ajax she is dissembling with a purpose and up to a certain point, but the element of deception is less and there is but a small amount of ambiguity (441-444). Again, like Ajax (666), she professes submission to divine power, but we get the impression that she is not, as Ajax is, wholly at variance with her own words. Note that κάμοϋ γε (444), in its ambiguity, points to the main­ spring of her future behaviour : for her act will be performed at the same time in revolt against and in submission to Eros. P H e r re a l se n tim e n ts we k n o w a lre a d y fro m 375-379.

COMMENTARY

III

μέν νυν: not different from transitional μέν ούν; cf. O.T. 31. άντανίσταται: for the first time and only here in classical Greek; to be taken with ές χεΐρας. 4 4 2 . πύκτης όπως: a remarkably suggestive image to denote the idea of the θεομάχος. ές χεΐρας: to close quarters; cf. Aesch. Sept. 680, O.C. 975· Jebb is right in noting that the resemblance to Anacr. 27.2. D. ώς δή προς ’Έρωτα πυκταλίζω is only verbal.—The structure of the sentence becomes more difficult, if we put a comma before πύκτης (Fraenkel ad Ag. 1316), than if ές χεΐρας goes with άντανίσταται (Jebb). 4 4 3 . Cf. Anacr. 28.3 D. δδε καί θεών δυναστής, δδε καί βροτούς δαμάζει, Ant. 7S1-801; Xen. Cyr. VI 1.36. καί θεών : instead of the expected καί βροτΐον, there follows with a pathetic directness κάμοΰ γε. Perhaps we should not forget here that Heracles is a demigod. 4 4 4 . οΐας γ’ έμοΰ: οΐα γ’ έγώ είμί, or ώς γ ’ έμοΰ; the attraction has as it were swallowed the whole relative clause. 4 4 5 . Do we delude ourselves if we hear a certain mental con­ straint in these disagreeable alliterations on τ? τ’: in correlation with ή 447, cf. G.P.2 p.514 (IV); Groeneboom Aesch. Eum. p. 170 n. 4. 4 4 6 . μεμπτός: active, and of two terminations; “throwing blame upon” (L.-Sc.). This is the only instance of the active sense. 4 4 7 . ληφθέντι: λαμβάνειν is used “of fevers and sudden illnesses” (L.-Sc.): Hippocr., Thuc. II 49.2; έρωτι Xen. Cyr. VI 1.31. μεταιτία: cf. 260, 1234. Here, in any case, not “quae in culpa est” (E.), but “quae unä in culpa est” (the normal sense in Aesch. cf. Eum. 199) 1). 448. έμοί: n o t of course to be tak en άπό κοινού w ith μηδέν αισχρού, unless th e m eaning of th e dative should be: "in m y eyes” .

It is not clear whether here Deianeira is deceiving herself or others. μαθών / μάθησιν . . . έκμανθάνεις: a rather frigid play upon the words. ούκ έστι ταΰτ’: “There is no such thing” (Campbell). The im­ plication of dangerous jealousy on her side is thus dismissed. 449.

P I t is im possible to u n d e rs ta n d w ith J . H ein z (o.l. p. 2S0) : “ d as nicht sch u ld ist, w enn ih r se lb st ein αισχρόν u n d κακόν w id e rfä h rt, (schuld ist v ie lm e h r E ro s)” .

COMMENTARY

4 5 1 . αύτόν 1 2) : = σαυτόν; cf. Aesch. Cho. 1014, Ag. 1141, O.C. 966; a common usage in Indo-European languages, K.-G. I 571 sqq., Schw.-Debr. II 197. 4 5 2 . γενέσθαι: “to prove yourself” . οφθήση: φανήση, εύρεθήση, just as at Ant. 709 ; cf. also PI. Phaedr. 239 c. 4 5 4 . κήρ: “disgrace” ; cf. Fraenkel ad Aesch. Ag. 206; or “ble­ mish” like a κηλίς, or μύσος; cf. the plur. PI. Leg. 937 d τοϊς καλοΐς olov κήρες έπιπεφύκασιν 2). A reputation for lying attaches to a free man as a stain on his shield. But in κήρ “doom” is also heard; so perhaps there is tragic irony. The dative ψευδεϊ by attraction. 4 5 5 . όπως . . . γίγνεται: emphatic for: ούδ’ εσθ’ όπως λήσεις. 4 5 6 . πολλοί: the predicate, with ellipsis of είσίν. οΐ : and they . . . 4 5 7 . ού καλώς ταρβεϊς: “your fear is senseless”, δέδοικας— τοφβεϊς : variatio. έπεί : at the end of the line (as very frequently in Soph., esp. in O.T.) at the same time achieving a supple connection be­ tween the lines and bringing out the statement of the next line in full relief. 4 5 8 . το μή πυθέσθαι : μή because the underlying thought is : εΐ μή πυθοίμην. τοϋτο: takes up the subject emphatically: "that is the thing, that would . . .” . 4 5 9 . το δ’είδέναι τί δεινόν : these words are as it were a brief sum­ mary of the tragic implications of the Oedipus Tyrannus. We should not forget that later in the play Deianeira, at the moment when she does know all about her own fate and Heracles’, commits suicide. 4 6 0 . πλείστας άνήρ εις : άνήρ είς, in apposition to the subject, inten­ sifies πλείστας by contrast. Cf. O.T. 1380, many examples in Fraenkel’s note ad Ag. 1455, and unus with superlative in Latin. εγημε δή : a case like this proves that the vèrb γαμεΐν in itself does not denote “lawful wedlock”. The Athenians were as monogamous as any people. 4 6 1 . κουπω: οΰπω: never yet. 4 6 1 , 2 . λόγον κακόν / ήνέγκατ’ : somewhat more forcible than ήκουσε. 1) αύτόν L is im possible. 2) Cp. W ilam o w itz, Gl. d. Η . T 270 sq.. M alten , R E S u p p l. IV S90.

COMMENTARY

US

φέρεαθαι “to carry away with oneself” is more often used of good than evil. Campbell compares PI. Leg. VI 762 a ονείδη ©ερέσθωσαν and the ironical καλόν άρα το γέρας . . . ήνέγκατο Resp. I ll 406 b. 462. ήδε τ ’ ούδ’ άν εί : τ’ : Campbell supposes τε to have been written here instead of δέ for the sake of euphony. One may ask whether there is not some correlation with καί 459. The treatment of καί . . . τε in G.P.2 p. 535 is not wholly convincing. In my opinion ήδε τ’ has the sense of: "and so this g irl. . . ” . The words are elliptical and stand for: ήδε τε άν ούδ’ ε'ί έντακείη. 4 6 2 , 3 . έντακείη τω φιλεΐν: In the debate on the problem whether the subject is Heracles (schob, Campbell, Masqueray, Bignone, Schiassi) or lole (Jebb, Radermacher, Mazon), I unhesitatingly side with the former. Jebb’s remark implying that for Deianeira to believe lole in love with Heracles would mitigate rather than increase what she suffers as a wife is in itself correct; but that is just what ούδ’ εί forbids us to assume. The change of subject is rather harsh, but not uncommonly so. Above all the remarkable phrase έντακείη τω φιλεΐν x) should be considered in the light of Heracles’ subsequent fate, cp. 833 προστακέντος ίοϋ, 836 δεινοτάτω μέν υδρας προστετακώς φάσματι. The robe was meant as a φίλτρον! έντήκεσθαι. means lit. “to be poured in while molten” , “to sink deep into”, “to be absorbed by” ; the usage is still more forcible than with Κύπρις as subject: Fr. 941.7 έντήκεται γάρ πλευμόνων δσοις ενι / ψυχή · 4 6 4 . ωκτιρα κ.τ.λ. : cf. 312 (whether οικτίρω or οίκτίζω is used is determined by the metre). 4 6 5 . οτι I ........ διώλεσεν: this was not the cause of D.’s com­ passion expressed in 313; but it may be implied there too; the feel­ ings underlying 307 sqq. are complex. Moreover it should be noted that D.’s sentiments in regard to lole are enforced by her personal experience: cp. supra 25. 4 6 6 . This statement of D.’s is only possible now she has heard Heracles’ real motives in sacking Oechalia. 4 6 7 . 8. αλλά . . . . ούρον : not a nautical metaphor, but rather an image “of things drifting along a surface-current made by the wind” (Campbell). For the moment she dismisses the discussion of lole’s plight and its implications for herself, οδρος is “wind” , not “fair wind” ; at the same time one may hear in these words: “fate must b colliquefactum inhaerere alicui G. H e rm a n n . K a m e r b e e k , Trach iniae

8

COM MENTARY

take its course with these things” x). Cp. Aesch. Sept. 690; cf. also Hdt. IV 163.3 (oracle). 468, 9 . The structure of the sentence is paratactical, the first phrase conveying the meaning: “though you may be false to others” . The verb άψευδεΐν occurs here for the first time. 4 7 0 . πείθου: “be persuaded” . It is quite unnecessary to alter the reading of the MSS into ταθου (Dindorf, Jebb, Pearson, Raderm.); D.’s words (άψευδεΐν άεί) do not call for an imper, aor. on the part of the Chorus. ού μέμψη: “you will not be dissatisfied with . . . ” 4 7 1 . κάπ’ έμοϋ κτήση χάριν: “ Der Hinweis auf den zu erwartenden Da n k . . . . rechnet mit der Gewinnsucht des kleinen Mannes” (Radermacher) : this comment is wrong; for the Greek mind behaviour towards others is always determined by χάρις. 4 7 2 . άλλ’: assentient (“alors” ), cf. ad 389. 4 7 3 . θνητήν φρονούσαν θνητά: these words form a whole; they mean primarily that D. being a mortal does not revolt against divine power, that she acquiesces in the condicio humana, cf. fr. 590.1 P. (Tereus); secondarily that she understands the plight of other mortals. άγνώμονα: may be neut. pi., but I prefer to take it as fern, sing., with the schol. and Raderm. (inter alios) 12). The meaning is pri­ marily άσύνετον (thus the schol.), secondarily “inconsiderate” 3), “unfeeling” (cf. e.g. O.C. 86). The words refer to D.’s 438-445. The parallels to θνητήν φρονούσαν θνητά are many: fr. 590 θνητά φρονεΐν χρή θνητήν φύσιν, Aesch. Pers. 820, Pind. Isthrn. Y 16, Epich. 263 K. θνατά χρή τον θνατόν, ούκ άθάνατα τον θνατον φρονεΐν, Eur. Bacch. 396. Ale. 79 9 > Μ· Antiphanes 289), trag. fr. ad. 308 άνθρωπον οντα δει φρονεΐν άνθρώπινα. Aristotle’s criticism (Eth. N. X.7.1177 b 32) does not do full justice to the implications of these maxims; no tragedian would have denied that man should πάντα ποιεΐν προς το ζην κατά το κράτιστον των εν αύτω. Moreover, as we see clearly in the present context, the words state a rule of be­ haviour not only for the individual in respect of his own state and fate but also in regard to his fellow-creatures. 1) "W ell, le t w in d a n d w av e ta k e t h a t ” . (W ebster, Sophocles' Trachiniae, G reek P o e tr y a n d L ife p. 169). 2) B ecau se of th e fo rm u la ry c h a ra c te r of Ο.φρ.θ.; m o reo v er th e s tru c tu re of th e line p o in ts to th is in te rp re ta tio n . 3) w ith even an u n d e rto n e of “ reckless” .

COMMENTARY

US

4 7 4 . The polar character of φράσω ουδέ κρύψομαι is well brought out by the fact that logically παν τάληθές can only be the object of κρύψομαι, as well, if we consider φράσω ούδέ κρύψομαι. as a whole. κρύψομαι: for the middle cf. Ai. 647. 4 7 5 . Dain rightly puts a colon after έννέπει, which makes the asyndeton clearer. 4 7 6 . ο δεινός iίμερος: Jebb is right in rejecting the idea that ό δεινός here means “very potent”. We may then relate ό δεινός ίμερος to the words of the Messenger (that overmastering passion of which he has spoken) or we may assume that the words mean: the mighty passion (such as that with which Eros inspires man, and esp. a man like Heracles). ταύτης: τήσδ’ 477, cf. ad 346. Ηρακλή: Ήρακλεΐ L is impossible with διήλθε; it could stand with επήλθε. 4 7 7 . διήλθε: as if it were a fit of an illness, the convulsions of madness, cf. Phil. 743. πολύφθορος: full of misery, abounding in ruin. 4 7 9 . τό προς κείνου: “what is in his favour”, “ce qui est à sa décharge” (Mazon) (the usage is quite understandable as derived from the primär}^ meaning “on the side of” , cf. Eur. Ale. 57 πρός των έχόντων . . . τον νόμον τίθης, perhaps Ο.Τ. 1 3 4 )· 4 8 0 . είπε: iussit. 4 8 1 . 2 . τό σόν . . . στερνόν: to be taken with δειμαίνων and with άλγύνοιμι as well. 4 8 3 . τι: acc. adv. τήνδ’: by attraction instead of τόδ’ (“this proceeding of mine” ). νέμεις: “to deem”, “to reckon” , as often. 4 8 4 . γε μέν δή : on the combination cf. G.P? p. 395. It should be rendered by “however” . 4 8 5 . κοινήν : the word sums up and stresses κείνου and σήν ; έξ ίσου denotes that the participation of H. and D. in the χάρις will be equal and so emphasizes κοινήν. 4 8 6 . 7 . λόγους / ους είπας: 329 sqq., 447 sq., 462 sqq. έμπέδως: so that you will έμπεδοϋν “make good” those words. 4 8 8 , 9 . To a certain extent, he echoes D.’s own argument 441 sqq. εις άπανθ’: the same as παντάπασι. Cf. Ar. Nub. 1081 καί εκείνος (Ζευς) ως ήττων έρωτός έστι καί γυναικών · 4 9 0 . άλλ’ : with assentient force cf. 389; καί following the de-

ιι6

COM MENTARY

monstrative: “such is just my way of thinking” (cf. G.P.2 p. 307). It “marks the correspondence between Lichas’ advice and D.’s state of mind” (Campbell); at the same time ώδε prepares for ώστε ταΰτα δράν. 4 9 1 . επακτόν: αυθαίρετον, ultro contractum. Cp. Dem. XIX 259 αύθαίρετον αύτοΐς έπάγονται δουλείαν, έξαίρεσθαι is known from Horn, in the sense of: “carry off for oneself”, “earn” (L.-Sc.) ; its use here in malam partem seems natural. I reject Mazon’s interpretation: "Je n’irai pas par des charmes attirer aucun mal sur lui” : the middle is against it and the normal sense of the verb too 1). 4 9 2 . θεοΐσι δυσμαχοϋντες : cf. ad 441, but the phrase has wider implications; strife against Eros means strife against the divine powers in general, against nature and Fate itself. (It is just the thing for doing which she will be crushed). For δυσμαχέω cf. Ant. 1106 άνάγκη δ’ούχί δυσμαχητέον ; the verb means “to fight in vain against” . It does not occur in Aesch. and Eur. 4 9 3 . λόγων έπιστολάς: “a verbal message”, έπιστολαί (always in the plur. in the Tragedians) may be verbal or written; λόγων moreover has a certain antithetical force as opposed to δώρα. εΐσω στέγης: message and gift are to be given to Lichas in the next scene, not in but before the house. We could imagine a scene in which D. and Lichas come out of the house, Lichas carrying the άγγος and D. bidding him farewell; the dialogue between D. and the Chorus could have followed Lichas’ departure. Such a scene would have been wholly consistent with these words. Of course, Sophocles could hardly have made Lichas wait for the queen out of doors during the stasimon. Still less could he represent the handing over of the robe indoors. But this very dramatic moment had to be brought before the eyes of the spectators; all its impli­ cations could only be understood after D.’s dialogue with the Chorus, in which Lichas could not partake. So the course followed by the poet was unavoidable and the slight inconsistency between these words and the action of the next scene had to be taken as part of the bargain: D. must provide some motive to make Lichas enter the house. J T h o u g h επακτός could m e a n “ a ttir é su r la tê te d ’u n h o m m e p a r u n e o p é ra tio n m ag iq u e ” , M azon, R ev . de Philologie, 1951, p. 9, q u o tin g R. W ü n sch , D e fix io n u m tabellae atticae p. X X I I I ; cf. επακτόν “ spell” G. D . I. 3545. A sim ilar, b u t obscure, e x p la n a tio n of th e w o rd s is fo u n d in T h. Z ielinski’s Excurse z u den Trachinierinnen (Philol. L V p. 533,4 a n m . 14).

COM MENTARY

117

4 9 3 . 5 . φέρης . . . άγης: there is no difference here between the two words (cf. 602). 4 9 4 . άντί δώρων δώρα : among the δώρα is Iole, a costly gift : cf. 5 4 0 -5 4 2 . προσαρμόσου : in my opinion the poet means us to understand that Deianeira has already conceived her fatal plan; the verb προσαρ­ μόσου makes us think of the peplos or of the philtrum (cf. 687) or of both; at the same time the verb, with δώρα, can be understood as meaning: “to make a suitable return-gift” . 4 9 5 . καί ταϋτ’ : taking up δώρα with a certain emphasis, κενόν: empty-handed (already in Homer), δίκαιά: = δίκαιόν. 4 9 5 , 6. κενόν . . . συν πολλω στόλω: with these words, which point back to the beginning of this epeisodion, its end is meaningfully rounded off. Deianeira and the spectators have learnt the full significance of this στόλος ; her words convey a bitter irony.

F irst stasim on 497-530 If we compare this stasimon 12) with the parodos, the affinities in structure are conspicuous. Here too we have a strophe, with antistrophe, in which dactylo-epitrites or the like combined with iambic metres form the metrical pattern. Here too, as at the end of the parodos, an epode, mainly iambic, winds up the song. There is not much to be said for Wilamowitz’ way of making the epode more iambic by reading 517 : τότ ’ ήν χερός πάταγος, ήν δε τόξων and by dividing 520 sq. thus : ήν δ’ άμφίπλεκτοι κλίμακες / ήν δέ μετώπων όλόεντα πλήγματα2). In my opinion the dactylic cola in the first period of this epode link it, metrically speaking, more closely to the preceding strophe and the parodos and this is the more welcome as the contents of this stasimon also corresponds with that of the parodos in many respects. There attention is focussed on Heracles’ staying away from home, here on Deianeira’s former lot, her loneliness being already manifest at the time when the contest for her hand was fought. The two themes which in their mutual relation represent an integral part of the play’s substance (they appear together in Deianeira’s mono­ logue 1-48) are dealt with in these two choral songs in the specific­ ally choral manner. 1) “ Im gan zen Sophokles ein U n icu m , v o n b a lla d e sk e rz ä h le n d e r . . . A rt” (R e in h a rd t, Sophokles1, p. 253). 2) Gr. Vsk., p. 528.

Ιΐδ

COM MENTARY

4 9 7 . 8. έκφέρεται: “carries off”, cp. El. 6o κάξενέγκωμαι κλέος. We have to reject Campbell’s interpretation: “Aphrodite ever advances unchecked in mighty conquering force” . σθένος νικάς: “triumph” . This is implied in σθένος alone, as also often in κράτος 1), and νίκας is genit, explic. Cp. Ant. 781 ’Έρως άνίκατε μάχαν after the scene with Haemon. Here also the words of the Chorus are closely connected with the preceding scene: cf. 354, 431, 433, 441 sqq., 476, 488. The Chorus proceeds to illustrate the truth of the first sentence, manifest from Heracles’ demeanour, by another instance. By means of a praeteritio they point out Aphrodite’s power over the gods: Zeus, Hades and Poseidon yield to it; mythology here undoubtedly has cosmological meaning: she exercises sway over the universe. Cp. Sophocles’ very impressive words on Aphrodite’s power fr. 941 P. and more particularly Eur. Hipp. 525 sqq. But this is only introductory (echoing vs. 443) ; the Chorus wants to tell of Aphrodite’s power at the time of Heracles' and Acheloiis’ contest for the bride, expatiating on D.’s words in the prologue. Thus, in a very subtle way, this song is woven into the texture of the play. The passion of the superhuman creatures, inspired by Aphrodite, is grimly and somewhat gruesomely depicted in their bitter fight ; in consequence the more pathos attaches to the picture of the fair bride, passively waiting for its issue. In so vehement a way, we are meant to understand, Heracles fought for Deianeira; with .the same vehemence he fought for Iole; and it was all Aphrodite’s doing. 4 9 8 . τά θεών: “what happened with gods” . 4 9 9 . παρέβαν: A thought or a feeling that has been made the object of reflection is often stated in the aor., where modern languages use the present tense. Cf. Ai. 693 εφριξ’ ερωτι. I doubt whether Jebb and Campbell are right in quoting a.It.I. Pind. 01. I 35 εστι δ’ άνδρί φάμεν έοικός άμφί δαιμόνων καλά 12). I do not think Sophocles considers it a shame for the other gods to be deceived by Aphrodite nor a sin for himself to mention such happenings and if he did consider it so, the sin would have been committed with a vengeance by this praeteritio. 1) A w ell-k n o w n H o m eric u sag e; cf. T riim p v , Kriegerische Fachausdrücke im griech. Epos, 1950, p p . 202-206. 2) Cf. W e b ste r, Introduction, p. 21 a n d n. 2.

COM MENTARY

HQ

Κρονίδαν άπάτασεν : one thinks of course, in the first place, of the Homeric Διος άπάτη, but the occasions were many. 5 0 1 . ‘Άιδαν: we only hear about his love for Persephone; Po­ seidon’s love-affairs were numerous. It is possible that the use of άπάτησεν is to a certain extent zeugmatic. 5 0 2 . τινάκτορα : h.l. for the first time, cf. II. XX 57 and Aesch. Prom. 924 γης τινάκτειρα νόσος (P.’s trident), Horn. Hymn. XXII 2 γαίης κινητήρα (quoted by Jebb). 5 0 3 . έπί: used with the thing (or the person, as here) one seeks to obtain. άκοιτιν: a proleptic predicate. άρ’: goes with τίνες, supplied from the schol. by Hermann. (Σ εκείνα δε λέγω τίνες ήγωνίσαντο). The placing is exceptional (cf. G.P,2p. 40 ; Denniston (39) remarks on άρσ. with the interrogat. : (it) “forecasts the effect of the enlightenment which the answer will bring” ). As to the interrogative form used emphatically to introduce the characters of an action, cf. II. I 8 τίς τ’ άρ σφωε θεών and the numerous cases where before a battle-scene it is asked who killed whom first etc. 5 0 4 . άμφίγυοι: in Horn, always epith. of έγχος “double-pointed” ; Horn, also uses άμφιγυήεις, either: “with both feet crooked” , or "with strong arms on both sides”. The most probable interpretation is: άμφότεροι ίσχύοντες τοϊς γυίοις. Cf. Ai. 252 δικρατεΐς Άτρεΐδαι “the two commanders, the Atreidae”, Ant. 145 δικρατεΐς λόγχας “two spears, both triumphant” . Of course it is possible that each champion separately is called άμφίγυος. κατέβαν: the old Homeric form. For the sense cp. descendere, καθήκειν Aesch. Cho. 455. 5 0 4 . πρό γάμων: not "to win it” (Jebb and Schwyzer-Debrunner II p. 506, but neither O.T. 134 nor El. 495 are really comparable), but “before” *). 5 0 5 , 6. έξήλθον: cf. 159. The schol. correctly explains: άντί του διήνυσαν, έπεξήλθον, ήγωνίσαντο. λέγει δε οτι παν είδος άγωνίσματος κατ’ άλλήλων ένεδείξαντο. άεθλ’ αγώνων : = άγώνας ; άθλον often denotes the contest itself, cf. Phil. 508 πολλών δυσοίστων πόνων άθλα.1 1) T h u s in te r al. E lle n d t, M asq u eray , M azon, Schiassi.

120

COMMENTARY

πάμπληκτα παγκόνιτά τ ’ : “wherein all was full of blows and dust” , παν- tends towards merely intensifying the second part of the compound; so we may render: “full of vehement blows and clouds of dust” . Jebb rightly warns against explaining it as referring to various kinds of blows ; cf. supra 50 πανδάκρυτ’ οδύρματα. (We find in Soph. 64 compounds with παν- or παντο-, ten of which are formed from adj. verb, in -τος; these two occur nowhere else 1)). 5 0 7 . ποταμού σθένος: Cf. II. XVIII 607 έν δ’ έτίθει ποταμοΐο μέγα σθένος Ώκεανοΐο, and periphrases with βίη, μένος, ί'ς. But the phrase is not a formula here and emphasizes Acheloiis’ actual strength. 5 0 8 . τετραόρου: schol. τετρασκελοϋς. Elsewhere the word means “yoked four together” . Probably the poet lent the w'ord a new' sense by etymologizing thus: επί τέσσαρσιν άειρόμενος 12). In this he w'as not followed. (The reading in Eustathius τετράορον has all the appear­ ance of being a rhetorical smoothing). ύψίκερω: cf. Od. X 158 (a deer). For the accentuation cf. Schwyzer 1 392; 5 0 9 . φάσμα ταύρου : of course much more than a periphrasis. The effect is the same as that produced by φοιτών εναργής ταύρος ; there is an interplay between the meanings monstrum, prodigium, phan­ tasm, spectre. Φάσμα is said of the Sphinx Epigr. 1016.3 Kaibel, of the Hydra infra 837; ονείρων φάσματα Aesch. Ag. 274; El. 644; in the sense “spectre” , "ghost” cf. the title of Menander’s play. 5 1 0 . Οίνιαδάν: Οίνιάδαι is a town on the Acheloiis; it is balanced by Θήβας. (Probably there existed some relation between this name and that of D.’s father). Βακχίας: it is very natural that in a tragic choral song the con­ nection of Thebes with Dionysus is stressed (cf. Ant. 1122). 512. παλίντονα: "resilient” (I find the interpretation given by L.-Sc. viz. “bent backward, i.e. the opposite way to that in which they w'ere drawn” hard to believe; and even if it is correct, the implied meaning must be just the same, “resilient” ). Cf. Stanford ad Od. XXI 11 and Groeneboom ad Aesch. Cho. 161 Σκυθικά παλίντονα βέλη 3). 1) Cf. J. C. F . N u ch elm a n s, Die N o m i n a des soph. Wortschatzes, th esis N ijm egen 1949, p p . 95, 96. 2) Cf. L. K ugler, De Sophoclis quae vocantur abusionibus, th e sis G o ettin g en 1905, p. 67. 3) I t w ill n o t do to co m p a re H eracl. fr. 51, for th e re παλίντροπος is th e b e tte r tran sm issio n .

COM MENTARY

I2I

λόγχας: two spears, as is the custom with the epic heroes. We may note that in Homer Heracles’ weapon is the bow, in Pisander the club, and that here he has both and λόγχαι too. Θήβας: sing, and plur. occur in dialogue and lyric passages indis­ criminately, so we may suppose that the sing, is preferred here in order to avoid monotony in view of Οίνιαδαν. -ανάσσων : there is nothing to be said for the v.l. τινάξας occurring in Z n 1) Par. 2787 and Zg 1) Laur. 32.2 (Thomas’ recension). Note the very refined chiasmos by which the antagonists’ mutual approach is rendered: ποταμού σθένος παΐς Διάς, ύψίκερω τετραόρου φάσμα ταύρου παλίντονα . . . . τινάσσων άπ’ Οίνιαδαν Βακχίας άπο Θήβας 5 1 2 . τινάσσων: with τόξα the use is slightly zeugmatic (but its range of meaning is rather wide). Note the word of the same stem in the strophe. 5 1 3 , 4 . Also answering the corresponding words in the strophe in sense. άολλεΐς: the schol. has two interpretations 1) καταχρηστικάς εΐπεν επί δύο το άολλεΐς· επί πλήθους γάρ λέγεται· 2) ή άολλεΐς άντί του λίαν άλέντες ■ 'Όμηρος οί'μησεν δε άλείς. The meaning here may be approximately rendered by “coming to close quarters” , άολλεΐς ΐσαν is more graphic than όμόσε ΐσαν. “Together” is a misleading trans­ lation ; in Horn, the word is used of men of the same army going into battle etc., but here the two adversaries stride to attack each other and close with a terrible clash of their struggling bodies. Something like that is implied in άολλεΐς, as Campbell saw; cf. άολλήδην = όμοϋ (of two persons) Mosch. II 49 and άολλεΐ = συνάγει Hesych. 5 1 4 . ίέμενοι: έπιθυμοϋντες. Ahrens distinguished between Ρίεμαι and the middle of ΐημι, but certainly, in Attic, linguistic conscious­ ness did not do this (the aor. έεισάμην does not occur in Attic). Their related meaning furthered the fusion of the two. 5 1 5 , 6. εΰλεκτρος: “the goddess of love” , "bringing wedded happiness” (L.-Sc.); the usage is causal: cp. ‘Ύπνε, εύαίων άναξ Phil. 829, εύκαρπον (giver of fertility to plants) Κυθέρειαν fr. 847 P., εύχλοος O.C. 1600 (of Demeter), and not quite the same as in εύλέκτρου νύμφας Ant. 796 sq. P T u ry n ’s sigla.

122

COM MENTARY

Aphrodite is said to be the regulator of the contest, herself present; we may surmise that Soph, means us to understand that both rivals acted under the spell of Aphrodite. 5 1 6 . ραβδονόμει: only here1); ραβδονόμος = “umpire” Hesych. ραβδούχος “umpire” in a contest PI. Prot. 338 a. The βραβευτής has a ράβδος in Philod. de vitiis p. 25 Jensen; the δικασταί of an Athenian court carry a βακτηρία (Dem. XVIII 210; ci. Arist. Άθ. Πολ. 65.2): We are also for a moment reminded of the magic significance of the staff, but should reject that idea: έν μέσω stresses her rôle as an umpire, as perhaps μόνα too (in contests more than one umpire was the normal thing). So the schob: μόνη δέ ή Κύπρις παρούσα εβράβευεν καί διέτασσεν is right. The very precise image that rises before our eyes from these words makes it almost certain that Soph, had a work of art in mind when writing them down. It was not the group in the Megarian θησαυρός at Olympia (Paus. VI 19.12, cf. Jebb) ; perhaps it was ή προς ’Αχελώον Ήρακλέους πάλη of the throne at Amyclae (Paus. I ll 18. 16) ? 5 1 7 . χερός: not meant literally in the singular, any more than e.g. γόνυ Eur. Hel. 894. 5 1 8 . πάταγος: of falling trees (II. XVI 769), of thunder (Ar. Nub. 382), of clashing weapons (Aesch. Sept. 103, Eur. Heract. 832); crepitus. But it is not entirely clear how we are to understand τόξων πάταγος; probably it denotes the thud of bow and arrow during a shot, for it would be άπρεπες if Heracles delivered blows with his bow. 5 1 9 . άνάμιγδα: “therewithal” (Campbell); but perhaps we must take it as describing the confused noise of the three sounds together. (The ordinary form is άμμιγα infra 839 or άναμίξ; for the formation cf. κρύβδα, κύβδα, φύγδα). The horns are Acheloiis’ weapons. 5 1 7 , 5 2 0 , 5 2 1 . ήν . . . ήν . . . ήν . . . ήν: an impressive anaphora; in 520 we find schema Pindaricum (verb in singular followed by subject in the plural) caused by the desire not to interrupt the anaphora; moreover the subject is felt as a collectivum and perhaps we may add that ήν is the old plural form surviving in Doric. 5 2 0 . 1 . κλιμαξ: Hesych. κλίμακες: πάλης είδος. After turning the adversary round with a shove the other mounts his back (G. Hermann, Campbell among others). Ov. Met. IX 54 Impulsumque manu / Protinus avertit tergoque onerosus inhaesit, άμφίπλεκτοι 1) W ith o u t a u g m e n t, as so m etim es in ly rics a n d in M essengers’ speeches (cf. P ag e a d Med. 1141).

COMMENTARY

I2 3

“intertwining” (“active” use of the adj. verb. x)) denotes the effect of the act of mounting. Ov. l.c. 58 vix solvi duros a corpore nexus. Pearson’s άμφίπλικτοι, which is due to άμφιπλίξ fr. 596 and to Hesych. πλίγμα = “crossing the legs in walking or wrestling” , is quite unnecessary, though there are cases that indicate con­ fusion between πλέκειν and πλίασειν in antiquity; cf. Hesych. περι­ πεπλεγμένα- περιπεπλεγμένα τοΐς σκέλεσιν and Gow’s discussion ad Theocr. XVIII 8 (here he chooses περιπλέκτοις). Cf. περίπλοκα! esp. metaphorically used of λόγοι but surely a metaphor derived from wrestling. 5 1 7 - 5 2 1 . There is a peculiar effect of sound and rhythm in the sequence: τόξων — κεράτων — μετώπων — άμφοΐν. 521. μετώπων . . . πλήγματα: Ον. l.c. 45 frontem fronte pre­ mebam. 5 2 3 . εύώπις: only here in Soph., not in Aesch.; Eur. has εΰωπός Or. 918, Io 1611 (in a more general sense); “fair-eyed” or “fair­ faced” . Od. VI 113 of Nausicaä, Find. 01. X 74 of the moon. άβρά: suggests the delicacy of her virginal beauty; it is in Sappho an epithet of the Graces fr. 128 L.-P. 5 2 4 . τηλαυγει παρ’ οχθω : τηλαυγής is “far-shining” or “far-seen” , but for the Greek mind these are two aspects of the same idea: αύγάζειν is “illumine” and “discern” , αύγή is “light”, “gleam” but in the plur. used for “eyes”. Another possible interpretation is “farseeing”, i.e. “whence one can see far”, τήλε πέμπουσα τάς αύγάς των ομμάτων (thus Campbell), “dont la vue s’étend au loin” (Mazon) 2). οχθω: “rising-ground” , “hill” or “high river-bank” ? As a rule the latter is denoted by όχθη. But cf. Sappho 95. 13 δχθοις Άχέροντος 3), Aesch. Ag. 1161 Άχερουσίους οχθους, Eur. Suppl. 655 Ίσμήνιον προς δχθον. The use of παρά with the dative perhaps argues for this interpretation : Od. VI 97 δεΐπνον . . . είλοντο παρ’ οχθήσιν ποταμοΐο. But I fail to see that Nonnus XLIII 13 makes D. watch the fight from the bank of a river (see jebb) : we find nothing of the sort in Nonnus. 5 2 5 . τον δν άκοίταν: “the husband who was to be hers” (Jebb).* ) P B u t cp. W ack em ag el, A esch. A g . 12 a n d 238. *) Cp. th e A ttic ep ig ra m Καλλιμάχο Ουγατρος τηλαυγές ·’ ) T h e read in g is a lm o st

Vovl. über S y n t a x I 288 a n d E d . F ra e n k e l ad ( ± 4 0 0 , P e e k , Griech. Vers-Inschriften 1961. 1) μνήμα . c e rta in .

COMMENTARY

5 2 6 . εγώ δέ μάτηρ μέν οία φράζω: locus conclamatus1'). Schol. L: εγώ, φησίν, ενδιαθέτους (i.e. “from the heart” *2) cf. Hermog. Id. 2.7) ώσει μήτηρ λέγω. Campbell defends this interpretation: “they feel a mother’s tenderness for her” . The obvious objection to it is of course that the Chorus consists of young maidens (cp. 143 sqq.). But of the many conjectures none is convincing: θατήρ Zielinski accepted by Raderm., Masqueray and Dain-Mazon is in my opinion frigid, μάρτυς (Wilamowitz accepted by Perrotta and Schiassi) a little better, Jebb’s άγων δε μαργα is unworthy of its author, and so forth. In the Triclinian scholia the words ως μήτηρ λέγω are followed by παρεΐσα τά πολλά, τά τέλη ?\έγω των πραγμάτοΰν. It is possible that these words point in the direction of a varia lectio lost to us, meaning something like: “I relate only the main points of the story” (could τά τέλη mean that?), but the conjectures based on that assumption, e.g. Wecklein’s εγώ δε μάν τέρματ’ οία φράζω are unsatisfactory. Jebb rejects with contempt another explanation of the words as transmitted, viz. “I tell the story as her mother told it” , but is it too absurd to suppose that the Chorus says: “I tell the story as my mother told it me” ? (thus, with misgivings, Tournier). But if this interpretation is correct, we should not take the words as a paren­ thesis but as leading up to the next sentence. Cf. perhaps Eur ,fr. 484.1. 5 2 7 , 8. άμμένει: the present tense may be taken as a praes, hist., but I think Wilamowitz’ 3) comment is right: “ Nicht nur da sie auf den Gatten wartete, tat sie das; sie wartet immer noch, mag sie auch jetzt keine νύμφη mehr sein. Und sie hat plötzlich von der Mutter fortgemusst, wie das Kälbchen von der Kuh. Plötzlich ist sie damals geschieden, aber ώστε πορτις έρήμα ist sie noch, in dem Hause des Gatten, der sie einer neuen Gattin zuliebe verstossen kann. Dass man den Gegensatz der Tempora scharf auffasst, ist die Hauptsache, dass man das Ethos fasst, sich nicht daran stösst, sondern freut, wenn der Moment, wo sie dem Gatten und zugleich einer ungewissen Zukunft ausgeliefert war, wo sie von der Mutter schied, zusammenfliesst mit der Gegenwart, in der sie immer noch τέλος άμμένει und έρημα ist” . The Chorus means : “I tell my mother’s story, it is true, but D.’s present condition, now visible to us all, is the outcome of those past events” 4). Past and present are seen as q 2) 3) 4)

25 co n je c tu re s a re g iven in C a n ta re lla ’s e d itio n (1926). T h e w o rd n e v e r m e a n s “ p a re n th e tic a lly ” as J e b b (A pp.) w ill h a v e it. Gr. Vsk., p p . 529, 30. Cp. th e re m a rk s of A. B eck, Der E m p fa n g Ioles, H erm es 81, 1953p. n n . i.

125

COMMENTARY

a whole and the relevance of this choral song to the dramatic context is greatly enhanced by this interpretation, which is the more probable since Deianeira’s prologue-speech shows a similar texture. Cf. also 648-652, where άμμένειν, one of the play’s key­ words, is used. 527 . άμφινείκητον : cf. 104. It is possible that Sophocles etymo­ logizes her name in these words. As love is kindled by the ομμα, άμφινείκητονΤ going with it, is not merely a rhetorical device, ομμα νύμφας: much more than a periphrasis, cf. Ai. 139, 140. 5 2 8 . ελεεινόν : since Men. Sam. 156 has this form, nothing prevents us retaining it here ; then we have the metrical unit cf. O.T. 1209 θαλαμηπόλο» πεσεΐν and Wilamowitz’ τέλος, supplied in order to avoid the strange becomes unnecessary, άμμένει is “absolute” and ελεεινόν is probably in apposition to ομμα. Jebb and others prefer to take it as an acc. adv. But “awaits (the result) with a piteous look” seems rather strained and Phil. 1130 is not a good parallel (ή που έλεινόν όρας). 529 . άφαρ: cf. 133. βέβαχ’ : the perfect states that the action is completed at the present time; D. is still έρημα, as she was after the parting from her mother. (If Wilamowitz’ interpretation is not accepted, we should regard βέβαχ’ as a perfect in the function of a hist, pres., cf. SchwyzerDebrunner II 287 quoting Xen. Hell. VII 1.41). The simile shows some affinity with Anacr. 39 D. and with Sappho 104 L.-P. To a certain extent Ov. l.c. 46 sq. is a reminiscence. Second Epeisodion

5 3 1 -6 3 2

Deianeira’s real state of mind is revealed in the first scene. Chorus and spectators are informed of her scheme, of the nature, origin and history of the δώρον by which she is going to regain Heracles’ love; the present situation is linked with the weird past, just as in the prologue and the preceding stasimon, by Deianeira’s story of Nessus, and the fatal action is launched by Nessus’ counsel and gift becoming operative through D.’s desperate decision. The uncanny details of Deianeira’s receipt of Nessus’ present lend a threatening gloom to the scene of Lichas’ departure. 531, 533 . ήμος . . . . τημος: Soph, alone among the Tragedians uses the epic τήμος (only here), Aesch. does not use ήμος either, Eur. only once. (Hec. 915).

126

COM MENTARY

5 3 1 . ξένος: rather loosely used: “our guest” (thus rightly J.). θροεΐ: “is conversing with” . 5 3 2 . ώς επ’ έξόδω: “with his departure in view” (Campbell). 5 3 3 . θυραΐος: very frequently of persons who pass or have passed out of doors. Of two terminations also El. 313. λάθρα: Λίχου. 5 3 4 . 5 . Her intentions are performed in inverse order from that in which they are announced. Such chiastic devices are only natural, and very frequent. χερσίν is by position rather sharply contrasted with πάσχω. άτεχνησάμην: the connotation “cunningly” is almost always implied or may be heard in the verb (cp. e.g. Ant. 494). 5 3 5 . συγκατοικτιουμένη : in order to lament with you over my misfortunes. 5 3 6 . κόρην . . . . ούκέτ’ : cf. 308. Her inference is natural and true: cf. infra 1225; έζευγμένην opp. κόρην. παρεσδέδεγμοα: παρα- has a connotation of something slipping in by stealth, secretly. 5 3 7 . φόρτον ώστε ναυτίλος: i.e. an extra cargo, surreptitiously brought aboard, ruinous for ship and master. 5 3 8 . έμπόλημα: “thing trafficked in” in apposition to κόρην . . . . έζευγμένην (for it is better to take φόρτον ώστε ναυτίλος together; to consider λωβητόν έμπόλημα as an apposition to the action — Campbell — makes things needlessly difficult). λωβητόν: in an active sense and with a genit, of the object (τής έμής φρενός) : “qui doit m’empoisonner le coeur” (Mazon) *). This seems better than making τής έμής φρενός depend on έμπόλημα so that the words would mean : ‘‘malam officii erga Herculem praestiti mercedem” (E.).έμπόλημα does not mean “reward” and the close connection of the metaphor with the preceding simile would be lost, τής έμής φρενός is more than a periphrasis of έμοϋ; Ant. 1063 ώς μή ’μπολήσων ϊσθι. την έμήν φρένα is not comparable in all respects. 5 3 9 . 4 0 . With graphic and rather cynical bitterness the situation is summed up. δύ’ ουσαι: more forcible than άμφω and in vivid contrast with ~ 9\ μιας -1). μίμνομεν: “dobbiamo attendere” (thus rightly Schiassi).12 1) O r, w ith tra g ic irony, "d e s tru c tiv e of m y w its” (cf. W e b ste r in G reek P o e tr y a n d L ife p. 172). 2) Cf. e.g. A n t. 13, 989 a n d also O.T. 1505.

COMMENTARY

I27

μιας ύπό χλαίνης: cf. Pearson ad fr. 483 and Gow ad Theocr. XVIII 19. μία χλαΐνα is, as it were, the symbol for a pair of lovers1) ; the two women will have to share the one χλαΐνα of Heracles’ love. ύπαγκάλισμα: Eur. has the word twice: Hel. 242 Διός ύ. σεμνόν ‘Ήρα and Troad. 757 ώ νέον ύπαγκάλισμα μητρί φίλτατον ; in both places it means ‘‘that which is clasped in the arms”. The same holds good for παραγκάλισμα Ant. 650 and for άγκάλισμα Luc. Am. 14, Lycophr. 308 (but metaph. = “embrace” Tim. Pers. 91) ; εναγκάλισμα “that which embraces” Secund. Sent. 2 (L.-Sc.). It seems impossible to take ύπαγκάλισμα here in apposition to the subject in the sense of “object of embrace”, nor as object, with μίμνομεν, in the sense of “one that embraces” ; it must be the object of μίμνομεν, but in the sense of “embrace” . In Ionic the ending -μα is often used in the function of -σις 12). Only in this way can we feel that “the sense of μιας is continued” (Campbell). Jebb’s translation is in accordance with this interpretation, but in his commentary he refers only to Ant. 650 n. Ellendt’s rendering is right: amplexus. The only alternative to this, it seems to me, is that Heracles is the “object of embrace” , but in my opinion this is hardly acceptable. 5 4 0 - 5 4 2 . τοιάδ’ . . . οίκούρι’ : the asyndeton renders the words more forcible and is in keeping with their bitter and sarcastic ring. οίκούρια: reward for taking charge of the house; for the for­ mation cf. ζωάγρια. του μακροϋ χρόνου: genit, as in μηνός μίσθος and the like 3) ; sc. της οίκουρίας, but as they stand, the words have a pathetic ring; the article retains some demonstrative force. Cf. Eur. lier. 1371-73 σέ τ ’ ούχ ομοίως, ώ τάλαιν’, άπώλεσα / ώσπερ σύ τάμά λέκτρ’ εσωζες ασφαλώς, / μακράς διαντλοΰσ’ έν δόμοις οίκουρίας. 5 4 1 . 6 πιστός ήμΐν κάγαθός καλούμενος: Ο.Τ. 385 Κρέων ό πιστός, ούξ άρχής φίλος, ήμΐν goes in the first place with ό πιστός κάγαθός, then with καλούμενος and is to be supplied with άντέπεμψε. 5 4 3 - 5 4 6 . In these words the singular character of Heracles’ faithlessness in this case is clearly stated. In themselves, Heracles’ many passions are no cause of anger to D. She feels herself threaten­ ed in her position of housewife. I think it probable that Soph, imagines her situation as that of an Athenian housewife’s, who is threatened by the intrusion of a παλλακή. νοσοϋντι is not hypothe­ tical-concessive, as Schiassi will have it. 1) Cf. A sc le p .d ,P . V 169 όπόταν κρύψη μία τούς φιλέοντας /χλαΐνα. A lciplir. IV 2) Schw yzer I 523, C h a n tra in e Form ation des N om s, 189 sq. [11.4 Sch. 3) T he genit, m a y also d e p e n d on άντι-, cf. E u r. Ale. 340.

COMMENTARY

5 4 5 . αύ: reinforces the antithesis; το . . . ξυνοικεΐν, at the be­ ginning of the sentence, brings out in full relief the cause of her indignation. 5 4 6 . κοινωνοΰσα των αυτών γάμων: sharing the same marriage (i.e. the marriage with one and the same husband). 5 4 7 - 5 4 9 . She, the woman past her prime, will, she fears, be worsted by her young rival. 5 4 7 , 8. ήβην τήν μεν . . . τήν δέ : respectively Iole’s and D.’s “flower of age” . But she expresses her meaning in almost general terms. ερπουσαν πρόσω: going forwards, i.e. still growing towards its acme. For έρπειν “grow” ci.fr. 255-3 P- βότρυς / επ’ ήμαρ ερπει. 5 4 8 , 9 . ών: ηβών; genit, partit., άνθος = το άνθος τής άνθούσης ηβης. τών δ’: genit, separat.; the women past their flower are meant; the personal plural instead of the expected τής S’ — τής φθινούσης ήβης. οφθαλμός: the lover’s eye. It is not necessary to take as the subject of ύπεκτρέπει the lover himself, because ύπεκτρέπει πόδα may mean either: “shrinks back from” (πόδα being the foot of personified Love, implied in οφθαλμός), or “causes him (the lover) to turn aside” (πόδα denoting the foot of the lover). The imagery is in the tradition of Mimnermus’ ήβης άνθεα άρπαλέα (ι.η D., 2.3 and 7 D.). For the sentiment cf. PI. Symp. 183 e (ο του σώματος μάλλον ή τής ψυχής ερών) άμα τώ τοϋ σώματος άνθει λήγοντι, ουπερ ήρα “οΐχεται άποπτάμενος” and also id. ib. 196 a, b. (Radermacher’s τώνδ’ with which the words would mean "Gewohnheit tötet die Liebe” would be necessary only if we had to read with A ύπεκτρέπειν). 5 5 0 . ταϋτ’: “For this reason” (thus rightly Jebb), but gram­ matically it is an internal accusative with φοβούμαι, referring to what precedes: “These are the reasons for my fear lest . . . .” ; it does not announce the clause with μή. 5 5 0 , 1 . πόσις . . . άνήρ: In this context πόσις (rare in prose) “lawful husband”, “spouse” is contrasted with "mate” with its physical implications, άνήρ has the same crude ring as in Eur. Hipp. 491 ού λόγων εύσχημόνων / δει σ’, άλλα τάνδρος. ή is not to be supplied with άνήρ. 5 5 2 , 3 . Referring to 543 and 445 sqq. όργαίνειν intr. cf. Eur. Ale. 1106; tr. O.T. 335.

COMMENTARY

I29

553 , 4 . ή . . . τήδ’ . . . φράσω: “the way in which I have . . . I will tell you exactly”. λυτήριον λύπη μα: a) schol. ad 551 2 τής λύπης ίαμα; schol. ad 554 άντί του τής λύπης. If this is right, we have a verbal noun, used substantively, governing an accusative as in Aesch. Ag. 1199 παιώνιον governs πήμα γενναίως παγέν1) (but most editors reject the reading) ; cp. in general Schwyzer-Debrunner II p. 73 c. b) If we take λυτήριον as an attribute of λύπημα, the words mean : “a delivering pain” , i.e. "a painful remedy” and may be regarded as an oxymoron. But it is hardly possible that D. refers to the philtre or to the garment by the word λύπημα, unless we could take it in the sense of: “an awkward thing” ; then the words would mean “a remedy, be it an awkward one” . c) We may consider the interpretation “how I find that my pain is remediable” 2) (λυτήριον = λυτόν), but it distorts the meaning of εχω. d) G. Hermann and Ellendt interpret the words thus: ή δ’ εχω λυτήριον , λύπημα τήδ’ ( = Iole), ύμΐν φράσω. I am not as sure as Jebb and others are that this would be "wholly unsuited to Deianeira”. On the whole I am inclined to accept b), if a) has to be rejected, λυτήριος liberatorius occurs thrice in Soph.’s Electra (447, 635, 1490) ; cf. Aesch. Eum. 298, Suppl. 1073 λυτηρίοις μηχαναΐς, ib. 268 άκη τομαΐα καί λυτήρια, Eur. Mel. S. 17 άκη πόνων . . . καί λυτήρια. 555 , 6. ήν . . . θηρός: παλαιόν δώρον: “a gift received long ago”, ποτέ “once” may be considered as going with the idea of “giving” implied in δώρον, but since αρχαίου does not refer to Nessus’ age but to his living long ago 3), we may equally well take it with αρχαίου: “once living long ago”. But of course the words are a complex whole stressing the many years since her reception of the gift. 556 . θηρός: “the Centaur” or "a Centaur” ? The question is unanswerable ; if we consider that Deianeira tells the story as a tale of olden times unknown to the maidens of the Chorus we shall prefer “a” ; but if we only imagine Deianeira remembering things past, “the” is better. Commentators disagree. 1) See m y p a p e r M nem os. 1939 49-57. S olm sen (Phil. N .F . X L I 1932 p. 11 ) accep ts J e b b ’s λώφημα. 2) C am pbell is inclin ed to a c c e p t it; M asq u e ra y tr a n s la te s : “ c o m m e n t il p e u t ê tre rém éd ié à m o n m a lh e u r” ; it w o u ld th e n b e b e tte r to w rite, w ith P aley , εχει in s te a d of εχω. 3) “ L ’a n tiq u e C e n ta u re ” M asq u eray , a n d n o t “ le v ie u x C e n ta u re ” M azon. K a m e r b e e k , Trachiniae

9

COMMENTARY

λέβητι: “urn” cf. Aesch. Cho. 686, Ag. 444; El. 1401. (I do not think the translation "casket” —L.-Sc. — is justified). 5 5 7 . δασυστέρνου: cf. Hes. Op. 514. Centaurs are shaggy, cf. II. Π 7435 5 8 . Νέσσου : According to Apollod. Bibi. II 5.4 Nessus fled to the river Euenos after the battle of the Centaurs against Pholos and Heracles; since this feat of Heracles’ is mentioned by him 1095 sq., we may not be far wrong if we consider Nessus’ assault as an act of revenge. εκ φονών: while φόνοι is not found in the sense “blood shed by slaying” , φοναί on the contrary which is not used in the sing, often has this sense. Bergk’s reading must therefore be accepted. “Je l’avais recueilli sur la plaie sanglante de Nessos” (Mazon). 5 5 9 , 6 0 . πόρευε: with double accusative (object and space traversed) as at Eur. Ale. 442 sq. As D.’s story has here to a certain extent the character of a Messenger’s speech, it is hardly necessary to write ’πόρευε. τον βαθύρρουν Ευηνον : in accordance with the facts. The Ευηνος passes through Aetolia and enters the Corinthian Gulf. 5 6 0 , 1 . χερσίν . . . νεώς: he carried men across, in his arms, not in a rowing- or sailing-boat. We may take έρέσσων as expanding the dativ. instrum, πομπίμοις κώπαις or as zeugmatically going with λαίφεσιν νεώς also. πομπίμοις: as in Aesch. Sept. 371 σπουδή διώκων πομπίμους χνόας ποδών this is mittens, not comitans ; it is said of that which makes you reach your destination. λαΐφος: in the sense of “sail” since Ale. Z 2.7 (cp. B 1 (c) 4) or Horn. II. Ap. 406; thrice in Aesch., not elsewhere in Soph. 5 6 2 . τον πατρωον στόλον: "cognate” acc. to έσπόμην -1) ; στόλος has the sense of “being sent away” ; so the words are equivalent to ύπό του πατρος σταλεΐσα, άποσταλεΐσα ; it comes to the same thing, to state that έσπόμην takes the function of έστάλην. For στόλος “journey”, "departure” cf. Eur. Suppl. 1048 τέκνον, τίς αύρα; τις στόλος; O.C. 35§ τίς σ’ έξήρεν οί'κοθεν στόλος; Phil. 243 S — )> but the a is possibly lengthened and perhaps we should read ίa- with synizesis ; cp. ίαχείτω Eur. Or. 965, where ίαχει- corresponds to ίώ ίώ and Eur. Phoen. 1301, where στενακτάν ίαχάν corresponds to ίώ Ζεΰ, ίώ γα. Cp. Ellendt s.v. So Elmsley’s correction is not quite certain. καναχάν: of the αύλός Find. Pyth. X 39, Bacch. II 12. 6 4 2 , 3 . θείας άντίλυρον μούσας: either “ (a sound) responsive to the lyre, of divine music” (when the music imagined would consist of αύλός and lyre), or “ (a sound) of divine music, equal to (the music of) the lyre”. Jebb’s “a sound of music made to the gods” has to be rejected. The genitive θείας μούσας may depend on the idea λύρα in άντίλυρον: “sound equal to the lyre, of divine music” or “ of the divine Μούσα” . 6 4 4 . Triclinius’ omission of τε after Άλκμήνας is perhaps re-9 9 B u t n o t C an tare lla. a) F o r th e fo rm a tio n cf. C h a n tra in e , F orm ation des N o m s , p . 27. K a m e r b e e k , Trachiniae

ίο

146

COMMENTARY

quired by the metre and Jebb is right in stating that Άλκμήνας κόρος forms a single notion (“Zeus’s Alcmena-son” ). 6 4 5 . σεϋτοα: a radical present, comparable to κεΐται, στεΰται Schwyzer I 679; Campbell and Dain are right in not adopting Elmsley’s change into σοϋται. (My note ad Ai. 1414 σούσθω should be corrected; σου, σοϋσθε, σούσθω, σοϋνται are to be derived from *σο5 όομοα). “is hurrying home” . 6 4 5 , 6. πάσας άρετας /λάφυρ’: “spoils, such as are the meed of supreme valour” (Campbell). On λάφυρα see n. ad Ai. 93. 6 4 7 , 8. πάντα: I fail to see why we should read παντσ. (the word is not found elsewhere in Soph.) ; if we divide after πάντα 1) (thus L) we have, at the beginning of the strophe, two “telesilleia” with resolved base and expanded, the first by a spondee, the second by a bacchiac. Then we may connect πάντα either with χρόνον ("a whole twelvemonth” ) or, (better, in my opinion) with άπόπτολιν (“absolutely absent” ) : cf. El. 301 ό πάντ' άναλκις, Ai. 1415 τού πάντ’ άγαθω, O.C. 1458 τ°ν πάντ’ άριστον. (Not different from *παναπόπτολί,ν). ον άπόπτολιν εΐχομεν: “whom we had far from our town” i.e. “who was absent from us and our town” *2). άπόπτολις: always in this form (for the formation cf. άγχίαλος, φρούδος, άπόθεος etc. Debrunner, Wortbildungslehre, § 50). 648. δυοκαιδεκάμηνον : at 44 Deianeira mentions a fifteen-month’s absence, 164: fifteen months is the term at the end of which Heracles’ fate will be sealed. On the other hand Heracles was given an oracle in Dodona, twelve years before his death, purporting that the end of the twelfth year would bring the end of his toils (cf. 824 and 1169 sq.). The δέλτος entrusted by him to Deianeira fifteen months before (46 sqq.) was founded on this oracle. The stay with Omphale (69, 248, 253) and the siege and sack of Oechalia covered these fifteen months. The words of the Chorus may either be thought inaccurate or taken to refer to the year with Omphale only, or to the last of the twelve years: cf. 824 sq. The emphasis J) As m a n y e d ito rs d o ; of w hom som e n e v erth eless re a d τταντδ (Jebb, R a d erm ., Schiassi, D ain ). 2) A. p e rip h ra stic c o n stru c tio n εΐχομεν . . . άμμένουσαι is n o t p ro b ab le, since th e use of th e p a rtie , p raes, w ould be e x c e p tio n a l: b u t cp. leur. Troad. 317, a n d th e p a rt. perf. Phil. 600.

COM MENTARY

I47

of δυοκαιδεκάμηνον χρόνον is such that, in my opinion, carelessness on the part of the poet is not likely 1). 6 4 9 . πελάγιον: if this could mean “across the sea” , it would point to the stay with Omphale and δυοκοαδεκάμηνον likewise; but the natural sense of the word is “a wanderer over sea” (Jebb). All the same, the word may refer to Heracles’ departure over sea, fifteen months ago, to an unknown destination. Now they know that he went to Omphale and that he stayed with her for exactly a year; εϊχομεν refers to a past period and δυοκοαδεκάμηνον in close relation with πελάγιον (he was no longer πελάγιος when besieging Oechalia) limits the period of their anxious waiting in the light of subsequent knowledge, ϊδριες ούδέν: Ox. P. XXIII 2369 Col. II 3 (Inachus) ταυτ’ ούκέτ’ ϊδρις είμί. 6 5 0 . ά δέ: the pronoun announces the subject, as often in Horn. ; cf. Eur. Hel. 1025, Her. 1039, El. 781, Hipp. 47. The contrast of the wife with the husband is stressed, οί has possessive function; the hiatus is Homeric. 6 5 1 . τάλαιναν: the correction is metrically necessary and im­ proves the sense. For the figure of speech cf. supra 613. 6 5 2 . πάγκλαυτος: in active sense. 6 5 3 . 4 . ’Άρης . . . άμέραν: the schob paraphrases rightly: μανείς ο περί τήν Οίχαλίαν πόλεμος έξέλυσεν ημάς της ανίας ήν έφ’ έκάστης ημέρας εϊχομεν. οίστρηθείς: “stung to madness” (οίστρος is the “gad-fly” by which lo was driven to madness). The words are only superficially similar to Ai. 706 ελυσεν αίνον άχος άπ’ όμμάτων "Αρης *2) but the relation between subject and object there and here is analogous. There Ares = Ajax’ infatuation, which swept away the cloud of sorrow from his eyes, here Ares = Heracles’ bellicose fury, which and not ού δήτα as assumed by Mazon (“ Certes si, quand on songe à ses crimes passés” ). Now τοΐς γε πρόσθεν ήμαρτημένοις must be a dat. causae to be rendered by “in view of . . .” , “on account of . . . .”, “if one considers. . .” (cf. Pearson’s note ad Ichn. 153 sq.). If we take τοΐς πρόσθεν ήμαρτημένοις to mean “her past crimes” referring to the poisoning of the robe etc., Heracles’ reply is sarcastic and amounts to: her crimes should certainly not be kept silent. But then there is a difficulty in the antithesis τοΐς πρόσθεν X τοΐς έφ’ ήμέραν. For both Deianeira’s deed and her suicide have taken place in the course of this very day. If we render the words (with Campbell) by: “ Certainly there is no cause for silence on account of her former errors”, i.e. “No blame requiring silence attached to her until to-day”, Heracles would be here (and here only) shown recalling D.’s blameless life. Then the connection with the next verse (ούδέ . . . τοΐς γ ’ έφ’ ήμέραν) is clear, but we have to take τοΐς πρόσθεν ήμαρτημένοις as a res pro rei defectu and it must be admitted that we expect from Heracles a sarcastic x) Cf. C h a n tra in e , F orm ation des N o m s p . 318.

COMMENTARY

comment rather than any attitude that comes near to yielding. However, he does yield in so far as he after all does not turn a deaf ear to Hyllus’ words. 1128. άλλ’ . . . έρεΐς: άλλ’ ουδέ μεν δή τοΐς γ’ έφ’ ήμέραν έρεΐς. τοΐς έφ’ ημέραν hodie jactis (Ε). έφ’ ήμέραν prop, “for a day” , i.e. “for this day” , i.e. “to-day” (“perhaps tinged with a sad irony” Jebb). άλλ’ ούδε μέν δή : ci. Ai. 877, El. 913. άλλα . . . μέν δή, in the “split form” is Sophoclean, cf. supra 627 (G.P.2 394, 95). 1129. Cf. supra 1064, 65. 1130. άρτίως νεοσφαγής: cf. Ai. 898 Αΐας οδ’ ήμΐν άρτίως νεοσφαγής / κεΐται. So άρτίως goes with νεοσφαγής. Cf. also Ant. 1283. 1131. τέρας . . . έθέσπισας: schob άπιστον γάρ διά δυσφήμων ώσπερ έμαντεύσω. Most modern commentators follow suit, but Campbell, comparing PI. Resp. VI 494 d άρ’ εΰπετες οί'ει είναι εΐσακοϋσαι διά τοσούτων κακών;, translates “amidst and rising above” evils. But since Heracles is not the subject of the sentence, this inter­ pretation however attractive can not be accepted. For διά cp. Eur. Hel. 309 πόλλ’ άν γένοιτο καί διά ψευδών έπη. διά κακών does not yet, in my opinion, imply Heracles’ anger because his vengeance has been baffled (thus J. ). The words are excellently rendered by Mazon : “Le merveilleux oracle que ces sinistres mots!” Cf. Aesch. Ag. 1132 sqq. 1132. αύτή προς αυτής: cf. Ai. 906 αυτός προς αύτοΰ, Ο.T. Ι 2 3 7 έκτοπος: peregrinus > alienus > alius χ) ; “by no one from without” i.e. “other than herself” , έκτοπος in the sense of όθνεΐος opp. οικείος: the words amount to προς οικείας χερός {Ant. 1176, cf. Ai. 919). 1133. However we interpret 1127 and 1131, here Heracles speaks in the same savage vein as supra 1067 sqq., 1108 sqq. Strictly speaking the words convey the logically impossible τέθνηκε πριν θανεΐν (cf. note ad Ai. n o ) but 1) there is a considerable distance between τέθνηκε and θανεΐν 2) έξ έμής χερός has the full emphasis 3) we may supply a vaguer term than τέθνηκε 4) above all, Heracles’ frenzy is very well expressed by the wording as is Ajax’ l.c. We cannot be sure whether we must take the sentence as a question. 1134. το παν: “all the facts”. Cf. El. 680, Phil. 241, O.C. 889, supra 369.1 1) T h u s E lle n d t; cf. L. K u g ler, De Sophoclis quae vocantur abusionibus, th e sis G o ettin g e n 1905, p. 41.

COMMENTARY

233

στραφείη : the metaphor, meaning of στρέφεσθαι “turn and change” (L.-Sc.) is very rare. I do not know of other examples in classical Greek, only LXX 1 Ki. 10.6 στραφήση εις άνδρα άλλον, (“si convertirebbe” Schiassi). Cf. μεταστρέφω, common since Homer, cf. e.g. II. X 107. 1 1 3 5 . δεινού : as often the sense lies in between “awful” and “strange” . 1 1 3 6 . άπαν . . . μωμένη: the schol. evidently read the sentence without punctuation ζητούσα, φησί, χρηστόν τι διαπράξασθαι του όλου πράγματος ήμαρτεν. Thus also Pearson. But it is much more satis­ factory to put a colon (or a comma) after χρήμ’ and to consider άπαν τό χρημ’ (“the whole matter is this” ) as introductory to Hyllus’ fundamental statement about D.’s behaviour and deed; doubtless these words also contain the poet’s own verdict. μωμένη : this is the reading of Pap. Ox. 1805 and of K (Laur. 31.10 ; here according to Turyn, Manuscript Trad. p. 168, a conjectural correction, but in my view, here also the reading may be authentic) as against μνωμένη in the other MSS. Heath had already made the correction without knowing of K. The form recurs O.C. 836, Aesch. Cho. 45, 441 ; it is probably one of Aesch.’s dorisms (μώσθαιx) is used by Epicharmus and Theognis) adopted by Soph, τω καλόν τι μωμένω is a convincing emendation of Nauck’s fr. 938.1 P .12) The verb means the same as ζητεΐν as is stated by schol. ad Aesch. Cho. 441, Hesych. and elsewhere, μνωμένη (“sue for” , “sollicit for” ) is both inferior in sense and metrically hardly possible, since it would violate the regula Porsoniana. — Cf. on the woman acquitted by the Areopagus Arist. Magn. Mor. 1188 b 35: έδωκε μεν γάρ φιλία, διήμαρτε δε τούτου. 1 1 3 7 . χρήστ’ . . . δρά: correctly paraphrased by Campbell: λέγεις δεδρακέναι. The present tense δρά here does not differ in sense from δέδρακε; cf. άδικώ in the sense of “I have been unjust” 3). κτείνασα: for he is convinced of the finality of the deed. 1 1 3 8 . προσβαλεΐν: whatever we take προσβάλλειν to mean supra 580 and 844, here it means “apply” and we must supply σοι, to be taken from σέθεν. 1) Schw yzer I 675.8. 2) καί μώμεναι ή μετοχή παρά Σοψοκλεΐ H ellad . ap. P h o t. bibi. 531 a 4 B ekk. o u g h t to be in clu d e d a m o n g S o p h .’s fra g m e n ts (th u s rig h tly P e a rso n in a p p a ra tu ). 3) G oodw in § 27.

COMMENTARY

στέργημα: hapax leg. = στέργηθρον; the -η- can easily be ex­ plained on the grounds of analogous formation, cf. Chantraine, Formation des Noms p. 178. 1139. άπήμπλαχ’: the rarer verb takes up and intensifies ήμαρτε. The compound with άπο- (“fail utterly” L.-Sc.) only here, άμπλακεΐν Ant. 554, 910, 1234. 1 1 3 8 . γάρ: “c’est que . . 1 1 3 9 . ώς . . . γάμους: the clause with ώς goes with στέργημα γάρ δοκοΰσα προσβαλεΐν (these words have the main stress). In a trans­ lation δοκοΰσα should be rendered by a finite form. τούς ένδον γάμους: a discreet phrase to denote lole, Heracles’ paramour received into the house. Though γάμοι is not exactly “the bride” "the paramour” , the metonymous tendency is again there (cf. supra ad 843). 1 1 4 0 . καί: “why” . . . . (denoting a strong degree of surprise G.P.2p. 310 (b)). φαρμακεύς: the word is rather ra re 1) but prob, very old (in dactylic poetry its use is excluded by metre). τοσούτος: “so potent” (J.). 1 1 4 1 . 2 . Every word in this adamantine sentence contributes to its effect of stating the hard and irrevocable facts. Note the bitterness of τοιώδε φίλτρω and the very strong word έκμήναι. The result of the φίλτρον was μανία indeed, but in the sense of 1. 999. For πόθον cf. 631 sq. 1 1 4 3 . ίου ιού: used by Sophocles when the speaker discovers his own or another’s terrible condition: Ai. 737, Phil. 38, O.T. 1071 (ιού ιού, δύστηνε), I l 8 2 (ιού ιού- τά πάντ’ άν εξήκοι σαφή). (Cf. also Aesch. Ag. 1214). 1 1 4 3 , 4 . οί'χομαι. . . . ολωλα: cf. e.g. Ai. 896. φέγγος . . . "μοι: cf. Ant. 808, 9 νέατον δέ φέγγος λεύσσουσαν άελίου. 1145. φρονώ δή: “The emphasis conveyed by δή with verbs is for the most part pathetic in tone, and it is peculiarly at home in the great crises of drama . . .” (G.P.2 p. 214 (8)). But some temporal force is also present: “now surely” ; El. 1482 Όλωλα δή δείλαιος, Eur. Hipp. 1401 Ώμοι,· φρονώ δή δαίμον’ ή μ’ άπώλεσεν, Idee. 681 Οΐμοι., βλέπω δή παΐδ’ έμον τεθνηκότα. φρονεΐν = “to realize” . ξυμφοράς ίν’: cf. Ο.Τ. 367 ούδ’ όραν ί'ν’ ει κακού, ib. 413« Ι 4 4 2 ,3 ϊν’ έσταμεν / χρείας, El. 9 3 5 >6 ούκ είδυΐ’ άρα / ον’ ήμεν άτης; Eur. Hel. 1) I t occu rs here for th e first tim e a n d n ow here else in T rag ed y .

COMMENTARY

235

1445 ήξομεν ίν’ έλθεΐν βουλόμεσθα τής τύχης. — έσταμεν = εστηκα. The fact that Heracles does not utter a single word of amends to Deianeira must be considered as the poet’s deliberate indication that she does not mean anything to him; “our impression of her desolation is not relieved” (Campbell). 1 1 4 6 , Ϊ0 ’: to be connected with κάλει; the words πατήρ . . . σοι form a parenthesis. (There are a dozen examples in Soph, of exhortatory ΐθι, ΐτε). 1 1 4 7 , 8. κάλει . . . κάλει: the repetition enhances the pathos of the appeal. 1 1 4 8 , 9 . Διος / μάτην άκοιτιν : cf. supra 19, 97 ■ —'140, i8 i, 5 ϊ 3 > 566, 6 4 4 , 826, 956, 1268 sq. The uselessness of Heracles’ descent from Zeus and of Alcmene’s high union, in so far as these did not preserve Heracles from his dire fate, is one of our tragedy’s major themes. By the enjambment and the clash of Διος X μάτην the point is effectively brought home to the hearer. 1 1 4 9 , 5 0 . τελευταίαν έμοϋ / φήμην: schol. τήν περί τής τελευτής μου φήμην *). There is nothing in the Greek that tells against this interpretation, which indeed seems more plausible than the alter­ native preferred by Campbell, Jebb and others: “my last (dying) utterance of” what oracles I know. The oracles Heracles proceeds to relate (1159-1163 and 1164-1173) are solely concerned with his death; τελευταία φήμη “message about death” is comparable to άλώσιμον βάξιν Aesch. Ag. 10 “tidings of capture” 12); φήμη is specifically the utterance, the saying, the message of oracular voices and is more aptly used of the oracles themselves than of Heracles relating them. We must then take έμοϋ as a genit, object. = περί έμοϋ and translate: “the message (or prophecies) about my death as conveyed by such oracles as I know” , φήμη θεσφάτων = θεσφάτων βάξις 86 sq. 1151. άλλ’ . . . άλλ’: On άλλά twice in a line cp. Denniston’s excellent remarks G.P2 p. LXII. 1 1 5 1 - 5 3 . οϋτε . . . . δε: G.P.2 p. 511 (add perhaps Eur. Med. 443). The second clause does not here express a contrast ; we may supply ούτε παΐδες ένθάδ’ είσίν ■; if this had been expressed, the next clause would have run τούς μέν γάρ . . . In fact as the words stand there is a mild sort of anacoluthon. 1 1 5 1 . έπακτία: cf. Ai. 413. Epitheton ornans. 1) A ccep ted b y E lle n d t. 2) Cf. K .-G . I 261 sq.

COM MENTARY

1 1 5 2 . συμβέβηκεν . . . έδραν: the words amount to the same as τυγχάνει κατοικούσα τήν Τίρυνθα. For (seemingly) redundant ώστε cf. Phil. 656. (K.-G. II 13 anm. i i ). 1 1 5 3 . ξυλλαβουσ’: “secum habens” (E.). 1 1 5 4 . Θήβης: cf. ad 1. 512. άν μάθοις: the nuance of this is very well rendered by Mazon: “les autres, je puis te le dire, habitent la ville de Thèbes” . 1 1 5 5 . ημείς δ’ όσοι πάρεσμεν: Hyllus means primarily himself; we cannot say for certain whether the poet is thinking also of other children as present in Trachis : 1. 54 does not give a definite answer to the question. Nowhere else, in fact, does it appear that other sons or daughters are to be supposed to live with Deianeira in Trachis; at any rate the poet could not use them in the economy of his play and Hyllus’ words here strike us as a sort of retrospective explanation of their absence. The plural, then, refers to Hyllus and his (and Heracles’) attendants rather than to Hyllus and his brothers. 1 1 5 6 . κλύοντες έξυπηρετήσομεν : ε’ί τι χρή . . . πράσσειν is the object of έξυπ. and also of κλύοντες. His willingness and obedience are emphatically expressed *). It is of course very natural that Hyllus supposes Heracles to want to utter some last words about the dispositions he had made, though the latter did not say so expressis verbis. 1 1 5 7 . 8. Before proceeding to relate the oracles Heracles refers to Hyllus’ readiness and to the task he is going to entrust to him : the two are inseparably connected since the fulfilment of the oracles does not allow of the least doubt that his death is imminent ; on the other hand this certainty urges him to make his last dispositions. 1 1 5 7 . S’ ούν: permissive: “all right then” (G.P.2 p. 467) ; σύ bears no heavy stress. τοΰργον: by this word (and the following sentence) the hearer is brought into a state of suspense as to Heracles’ intentions. έξήκεις . . . ΐνα: “you are now in a situation wherein” , “the circumstances are such that they offer you (ample opportunity to show . . .” ). (O.T. 687, O.C. 937, O.T. 1515, 953 are only superficially comparable). 1 1 5 8 . όποιος ών άνήρ έμός καλή: i.q. όποιος άνήρ εΐ, έμός καλούμενος (you who are called my son) ; cf. infra 1205. Cf. Ar. Vesp. 530 (with Starkie’s comment).9 9 N o te έξ-.

COMMENTARY

23/

1 1 5 9 . προφαντόν: "foreshown” (by an oracle). Here for the first time this oracle is mentioned. 1 1 6 0 . προς των πνεόντων μηδενός θανεϊν υπο: most editors either read with Erfurdt των έμπνεόντων x) or with Musgrave ποτέ (in­ stead of ΰπο) ; but though the transmitted text yields a rather harsh construction, it does not seem impossible ; we may indeed say that the words represent an intensified way of saying πρ. τ. πν. μή θανεϊν: “that I should not at the hand of living creatures, in fact not by the act of anybody alive, perish” . We may assume a confusion of constructions resulting from the desire for emphasis. θανεϊν: for the aor. inf. cf. K.-G. I 195 anm. 7. — 1 1 6 1 . άλλ’ δστις: “but by one who . . .” . "Αώου οίκήτωρ : cf. ad Ai. 396. Cf. Lycophr. 51 and the prophecy in Macbeth. πέλοι : probably oblique for άν πέλγ], since it seems likely that the prophecy was given before Nessus’ death. (Cf. Jebb’s remark). 1 1 6 2 . ο θήρ Κένταυρος: cf. supra 680. 1 1 6 2 . 3 ώς . . . προφαντόν : it seems best to take προφαντόν substantially, with θεϊον as attribute. 1 1 6 3 . ουτω . . . . θανών: cf. Aesch. Cho. 886 τον ζώντα καίνειν τους τεθνηκότας λέγω, Ant. 871 θανών έτ’ οϋσαν κατήναρέσ με, Ai. 1026, 7 είδες ώς χρόνω / έμελλέ σ’ "Εκτωρ καί θανών άποφθίσαι 12), El. 1420. We may hear in these words an echo of the αίνιγμα in which the oracle was expressed. (There is no Greek tradition as to the wording of the oracle, nor as to the place of its deliverance; Seneca Here. Oet. 1473 sqq. represents it as originating from Dodona as well as from Delphi3)). On this conception (“the dead reaching out to kill the living” ) cf. the excellent remarks of H. D. F. Kitto, Form and meaning in Drama p. 193. 1 1 6 4 . τούτοισι συμβαίνοντ’ ϊ'σα: ϊσα going predicatively with συμβαίνοντ’ reinforces the idea of “being in harmony with” conveyed by συμβαίνοντα; τοϊς πάλαι ξυνήγορα restates and intensifies the preceding words.

1) των π νεόντω ν των ζώντων (schol.); th u s o n ly h e re ; it is co rre c t t h a t έμπνέων = ζών is fa irly com m on. 2) Cf. G. A. L o n g m a n Soph., El. 1478, Cl. R ev. 1954, 192-194. 3) Cf. P a rk e a n d W orm ell, The Delphic Oracle I I p. 196, w here it is w ro n g ly s ta te d t h a t in Soph, “ o n ly D o d o n a is m e n tio n e d in this connection". (italics a re m ine).

COMMENTARY

1 1 6 5 . ξυνήγορα: used in the very literal sense of "of the same tenor with” (L.-Sc.). These μαντεία καινά refer to the oracle men­ tioned or alluded to time and again in the course of the play (46 sqq., 164 sq., 648, 824 sq.). 1 1 6 6 . On Dodona cf. ad 171 sq.; NilssonG.G.R. I2 pp. 423-427. 1 1 6 6 . 7 . χαμαικοιτών . . . Σελλών: II. XVI 234 sq. Σελλο'ι . . . χαμαιεΰναι. [Lucian] has χαμαικοιτέω (De Dea Syria 55); the adj. does not recur. Σελλών: Nilsson o.l. p. 423 n. 3. 1 1 6 7 . είσεγραψάμην : either “je me suis fait écrire” *) or “I noted down for my use” (Campbell), sc. εις τήν δέλτον. Elmsley’s έξεγραψάμην, accepted by Pearson, is a needless conjecture. 1 1 6 8 . προς... δρυός: “sous la dictée du chêne” (Mazon). If we are right in considering the Πελειάδες (172) as the priestesses, Mazon’s interpretation of είσεγραψάμην is to be preferred. We note that Soph, calls the “oak” φηγός as well as δρυς. πολυγλώσσου: refers to the leaves of the tree; the rustle of the foliage is implicitly compared to the roar of a crowd, “manytongued”, “many-voiced” . (Different meaning El. 641, 798). 1 1 6 9 . χρόνω τώ ζώντι και παρόντι νυν: a most striking phrase to denote the tragic moment .of time in which destiny is to be con­ summated. Time is felt as a living agent. For ζώντι cf. O.T. 481, 2 τα δ’ (μαντεία sc.) αίε'ι ζώντα περιποτάται. For χρόνος as a living agent operative in the life of Man cf. O.T. 1213 έφευρέ σ’ άκονθ’ ό πάνθ’ ορών χρόνος, O.C. 7 χώ χρόνος ξυνών μάκρος διδάσκει. Cf. supra 79-82; for παρόντι νΰν Ι74· 1 1 7 0 . 7 1 . μόχθων τών έφεστώτο>ν: laborum impositorum. (Cf. the usage of έπειμι L.-Sc. s.v. Ill), έμοί has to be taken άπό κοινού with έφεστώτων and τελεΐσθαι. τελεΐσθαι is inf. fut. pass. — Cf. the prophecy in Plut, de sera num. vind. 10, 555 c. 1 1 7 1 . κάδόκουν: "and so I lived under the delusion. . .” ; cf. Hdt. I ll 64.4 and Reinhardt, o.c. p. 73. 1 1 7 2 . τό S’: το λύσιν τελεΐσθαι. θανεΐν εμέ : “my death” . The inf. aor. is used without any reference to time, simply to denote the action of dying in its finality. Cf. O.C. 9 5 4 θυμοϋ γάρ ούδέν γηράς έστιν άλλο πλήν / θανεΐν. 1 1 7 3 . Cf. O.C. 9 5 5 . El. 1170, Aesch. fr. 255.3 άλγος δ’ ούδέν άπτεται νεκρού, Eur. Ale. 93 7 . Plut. Cons, ad Ap. 15, 109 f. q M azon.

COMMENTARY

239

1 1 7 4 . ταΰτ’ . . . λαμπρά συμβαίνει.: ταΰτ’ may refer to both oracles, συμβαίνει either conveying the meaning “are borne ont” or “are borne out in harmony with each other” . But ταΰτ’ may also refer to the oracles and that which has now come to pass, while συμβαίνει denotes at the same time the fulfilment of the oracles and the congruence between them and the congruence of the events with them, λαμπρά in apposition to the subject has to be rendered by an adverb. 1 1 7 5 . αύ: “once more” Campbell, followed by Schiassi; this seems more appropriate than Jebb’s "on thy part” (vicissim E.). γενέσθαι: "to show yourself” . 1 1 7 6 . καί . . . στόμα: "and not to tarry so as to goad my tongue to anger” or “and not to wait for my tongue to sharpen (incite) you” (or, at a pinch, "for my tongue to grow fierce”). The second course seems best (thus Campbell) in view of the contrast with αυτόν εΐκαθόντα; moreover, if στόμα were to be taken as the object of όξΰναι, the words could mean: “and to make no delay to goad my tongue to anger”, which is absurd; an acc. and inf. with μένειν is common, a “nom. and inf.” not (for instances cf. Steup ad Thuc. I ll 12.2). (The schol. has: καί μή άπειθήσας μοι παροξύνης εις λοιδορίας κατά σου, also άπειθοΰντά μοι; perhaps this rendering may warrant our supposing a v.l. καί μή ’πιμείναντ’ άμόν όξΰναι στόμα. The diorthotes of L added αν supra ’π, which may point to a v.l. άναμεΐναι, but the letters may also originate from a v.l. έπιμείναντ’). 1 1 7 7 . αυτόν: of your own accord. εΐκαθόντα: aor. partie. Cf. Phil. 1350 sqq. πώς απιστήσω λόγοις / τοΐς τοΰδ’, δς εΰνους ών έμοί παρήνεσεν- / άλλ’ είκάθω δήτ’; 1 1 7 7 , 8. νόμον . . . πατρί: we may construe without a comma after έξευρόντα: έξευρόντα πειθαρχεΐν πατρί (object) νόμον κάλλιστον (predicate), or, with a comma, take πειθαρχεΐν πατρί as an apposition to κάλλιστον νόμον (“that best of laws” Jebb), conveying the contents of the law (we may even saj/ that πειθαρχεΐν πατρί is oratio obliqua for: "πειθαρχεί πατρί”). The verb πειθαρχέω does not occur elsewhere in Tragedy, but Ar., PL, Xen. among others use it; Aesch. Pers. 374 has πείθαρχος, Sept. 224 πειθαρχία “obedience to command” ; Ant. 676. πειθαρχεΐν means exactly: “obey the authority of” ; Heracles in his relation to his son reminds us of Creon’s manner towards Haemon. 1 1 7 9 . ταρβώ: absolute. “I entertain apprehensions now that I

COM MENTARY

have reached.. ταρβώ . . . έπελθών is simply more forcible than ταρβών . . . έπήλθον. λόγου στάσιν: Campbell and Jebb are certainly right in rejecting the meaning “strife of words” (thus e.g. Nauck-Radermacher quoting O.T. 634); στάσις must mean “position”, "situation” and Jebb’s rendering of the phrase “such a situation in our converse” is convincing. 1 1 8 1 . έμβαλλε . . . μοι: cf. Ar. Nub. 81 (Strepsiades speaking to his son), Ran. 754; Phil. 813. 1 1 8 2 . ως προς τί: ώς refers to Heracles’ intention: “with what purpose in view” . Cf. O.T. 1174 ώς προς τί χρείας, Phil. 58, Thuc. I 62.5 παρασκευαζομένους ώς ές μάχην, K.-G. I 47*2 anm. 1. πίστιν τήνδ’ . . . επιστρέφεις; “. . . . do you urge this pledge (of laying his hand in Heracles’) upon me” , άγαν “all too vehemently”, “so vehemently” ; it intensifies the middle of έπιστρέφειν (“pay attention to” ) Phil. 598 sq. έπιστρέφειν has the meaning of an intensified έπάγειν [ingerere, inculcare E.); intrans, supra 566. 1 1 8 3 . ού . . . . μηδ’: cf. note ad Ai. 75 x). θάσσον: cf. Ai. 5812). οϊσεις: πίστιν or χεΐρα, the former being more appropriate to the verb. απιστήσεις: άπιστέω = άπειθέω (frequent in Tragedy), a key­ word in this scene (1224, 1229, 1240). 1 1 8 4 . προτείνω: τήν χεΐρα. Cf. Phil. 1292. The verb is used for stretching forth (as a suppliant) and offering, tendering (the hand) as a pledge3). άντειρήσεται: cf. note ad 587. 1 1 8 5 . If we put a full stop at the end of the line, Heracles is claiming absolute obedience without intending to disclose before­ hand what he is going to ask of Hyllus. If we put a comma, such a purpose can be surmised. But after Hyllus’ question his reply again amounts to a claim for unreserved loyalty. It seems, then, better to put a full stop and to consider 1187 as his reaction to Hyllus’ question, not as the continuation of 1185 as if he had not finished his sentence there. 1186 is not “ein Füllvers unter dem Zwange der Stichomythie’’ (Schn.-N.-Raderm.). 1 1 8 6 . ή μην: “in oaths and pledges, usually in indirect speech” b A dd G oodw in, M oods and Tenses § 299. 2) Cf. H . Thesleff, Studies on Intensification § 172, p. 123. 3) Cf. F. L asserre, Les Epodes d ’Archiloqiie, in his c o m m e n t o n A rch . />. 130 B. προτείνω χεΐρα καί προίσσομαι, p. 240.

COM MENTARY

24I

(G.P.2 p. 351 (2)). καί τόδ’ έξειρήσεται; it is absolutely necessary to punctuate in this way (“cela aussi, le diras-tu?” Mazon), since the sense with a full stop (thus inter al. Pearson) would be: “this also will be said (sc. by me)” and at 1188 Hyllus does not add anything of the kind. 1 1 8 7 . το λεχθέν εργον: cf. τουργον 1157 (where, as here, το εργον is “the thing to be done” ), το λεχθεν: δ αν λεχθη. If we ask whether the aorist denotes any relation of time, the answer is that λεχθεν has to be considered as denoting time past with reference to έκτελεΐν; if the reference had been to ομνυ, λεχθησόμενον would be the form we should expect, λεχθεν cannot denote time past with reference to the moment of speaking, since the εργον has not yet been specified. 1 1 8 8 . έπώμοτον: here “as witness of my oath”, i.q. όρκων; cf. supra 427. 1 1 8 9 . εί . . . . έκτος ελθοις: ει παραβαίης τούς όρκους (schob). Jebb quotes PI. Sy mp. 183 b έκβάντι των όρκων (or τον δρκον). πημονάς: cf. ad 48· 1 1 9 0 . The tripartition of the line lends a pathetic emphasis to the words. 1191. oOv: purely connective, introducing the next point; as often, in a question: “well”, “eh bien” . υψιστον: Pearson inter al. accepts Wakefield's needless conjecture ύψιστού. Ζηνος: sacred to Zeus. 1 1 9 2 . θυτήρ: cf. 659 and 733; its function is not different from θύων; ώς goes with σταθείς: lit. “as having stood” . σταθείς: cf. 608. 1 1 9 3 - 9 7 . ενταύθα . . . έξάραντα . . . έμβαλεΐν: we must understand “on the pyre” with έμβαλεΐν. ενταύθα “there” has to be taken with the whole sentence in the sense of ibi and moreover with έξάραντα (“to lift up and carry” ) in the sense of in eum locum (certainly not in the latter sense with έμβαλεΐν, as Ellendt will have it). 1 1 9 4 . αύτόχειρα καί ξύν: “with your own arms and with the aid of . . . . ” . φίλων : the word does not help us much to establish the meaning of 1. 1155, since Soph, could use it in its Homeric sense; but the interpretation “friends” is more natural and so ημείς H55 may refer to “I and my friends” . 1 1 9 5 , 6. κείραντα: “lopping”, “cutting off” . As contrasted with the wild olives he will not have to fell the βαθύρριζος δρυς. We may 16 K a m e r b e e k , Trachiniae

242

COMMENTARY

take it as certain that Heracles’ precepts as to materials of the pyre are in accordance with the actual rites on Mount Oeta x). In the mythological context the oak and the wild olive are the natural kinds of wood required: the oak is sacred to Zeus and the wild olive was brought to Greece by Heracles; the crown of the victors at Olympia was made from it (Paus. V 7.7, Find. 01. I ll 13 sq.). 1 1 9 6 . πολλον: a rare ionism (πολλον neuter Ant. 86), not to be found elsewhere in Tragedy. αρσεν’ : refers to the rough and hard wood of the κότινος. 1 1 9 7 . έμβαλεΐν: as remarked above, it goes without saying that to έμβαλεΐν we must mentally add: “on the pyre” (built with these materials) ; έμ- = thereupon. The repetition of σώμα τουμόν is very natural in this strict and emphatic instruction. 1 1 9 8 . 9 . The somewhat rhetorical paraphrase for the torch leads up to the very impressive πρήσαι, which by its placing and its briefness (the compound with έμ- is the normal word in prose) and also by means of the pause after it dramatically suggests the bursting into flames of the pyre and the body. Note the similar effect with πρησαι Ant. 201. 1 1 9 9 . είσίτω: Jebb (and implicitly Campbell also) rejects the interpretation είσίτω sc. σε; thus also Mazon “Mais que nul pleur gémissant n’intervienne” . Campbell notes: sc. τω έργφ. Possibly right, but the succeeding words do not convey a general prohibition of wailing: they are especially addressed to Hyllus: he must show himself the true offspring of Heracles. If the other course is pre­ ferred, we may compare I. 298 supra, Eur. Or. 1668 and render: “let never the thought of weeping, bound up with lamentation, enter your mind” . That γόου δάκρυ must amount to γόοι καί δάκρυα is proved by άστένακτος κάδάκρυτος and cp. the frequent combi­ nations of the two in Eur. (e.g. I.T. 860, Andr. 92, Or. 204 etc). 1 2 0 0 . άστένακτος κάδάκρυτος: cf. Eur. Ale. 173 άκλαυτος άστένακ­ τος, Hec. 691 άστένακτος άδάκρυτος άμέρα. εΐπερ εϊ / τοϋδ’ άνδρός: cf. supra 1074· Cf. Aesch. Eum. 738, Eur. El. 1103. 1 2 0 1 . τοΰδ’ άνδρός: cf. 1175; fifteen instances in Soph. (cf. Ellendt s.v. όδε B i e ) . έ'ρξον: stands out in relief by its placing.1 1) Μ. P . N ilsson, Der Flammentod des Herakles, A rch. f. R eligionsw . X X I 1922, p. 310 sqq. = Opusc. I p. 348 sqq.

COM MENTARY

243

1201, 2. μενώ . . . βαρύς: the most plausible construction espe­ cially in view of the relation of the words to the structure of 1. 1202 is : μενώ σε εγώ, καί νέρθεν ών, άραΐος, είσα,εΐ βαρύς. μενώ σε αραιός amounts to: ή έμή άρά μενεϊ σε "will await you”, cf. Aesch. Cho. 103 τδ μόρσιμον γάρ τόν τ’ ελεύθερον μένει. The words do not mean: "I shall, in Hades, wait for your coming thither”, but “though in Hades, I shall be a curse to you” . The curse will, it is true, be operative both during Hyllus’ lifetime and after his death, but above all Heracles’ power to do evil to Hyllus from below is stressed; that the curse will not cease after Hyllus’ death is only implied in είσαεί. είσαεί βαρύς, in apposition to αραιός or asyndetically on a par with it, expands the ideas of hostile doom con­ veyed by άραΐος and of eternity implied in καί νέρθεν ών. αραιός, a word "almost confined to Tragedy” (L.-Sc.) is used in both a passive and (as here) an active sense. Passages like Ap. Rhod. I ll 703 sq. ή σοίγε φίλοις σύν παισί θανοϋσα / εϊην έξ Άίδεω στυγερή μετόπισθεν Έρινύς are more strictly parallel than e.g. Aesch. Eum. 175, 3 4 °- The άρά (or Άρά, embodied in the Erinys) of the dead punishing the living is too familiar a concept to need further elucidation.—We note in passing that Heracles thinks of himself as staying in the nether-world after his death, not in heaven. 1 2 0 3 . τί είπας: thus L, and the hiatus should be accepted: τίν’ A and τί μ’ T are worthless conjectures made in order to steer clear of the hiatus : but τίν’ neut. pi. is an impossible form in Soph, and τί μ’ does not yield a satisfactory sense. Ci. note ad Ai. 873 and Phil. 100, 917 (τί είπας), lehn. 199. The question does not refer in particular to Heracles’ last words but to his order as a whole. οϊά μ’ εΐργασαι: lit. "what things have you done to me”, sc. by requiring this. 1 2 0 4 . όποια δραστέ’ έστίν : sc. ειπον ; the words refer to τί είπας. 1 2 0 4 , 5 . εί δέ μή . . . ετι: cf. Eur. Ale. 636 sq., 667 sq., 737. Hyllus will show himself Heracles’ παΐς ετήτυμος (1064) only if he follows his father’s orders unhesitatingly. Heracles’ unreasonable violence is reminiscent of Oedipus’, Aiax’ and Creon’s, showing us a certain aspect of the typically Sophoclean hero x). 1 2 0 5 . The tone of scorn is intensified by the staccato rhythm of the line (word-end coinciding almost everywhere with end of P Cf. J . C. O p ste îte n , De Tragische H eld bij Sophocles en z ijn Dichter, in De A n tie k e Tragédie, 1947, passim .

244

COM MENTARY

metrical unit : but the line is metrically saved by the fact that του follows γενοΰ; moreover there is the elision of μηδ’). 1 2 0 6 . Cf. O.T. 1317 οΐμοι μάλ’ αύθις- g i ’o v είσέδυ μ’ άμα. For μάλ’ intensifying αύθις cf. O.C. 1731 Μ wôSs μάλ' αύθις. έκκαλη: έκκαλεϊσθαι “call on one to do” x) does not, in this sense, recur in Greek of the fifth century; προκαλεΐσθαι, being a bit less strong, is common, οΐα is cognate acc. 1 2 0 7 . φονέα γενέσθαι . . . σέθεν: epexegesis of οία. καί παλαμναΐον : “and thus defiled by blood-guiltiness” ; σέθεν goes with the whole phrase φονέα καί παλαμναΐον. παλαμναΐος is not only ο αύτοχειρία τινά άνελών, but also ό ενεχόμενος μιάσματι οικείοι (Hesych.). The schob notes άλάστορα, μιαιφόνον, αύτόχειρα. Cf. Aesch. Eum. 448. 1 2 0 8 . ού δητ' εγωγ' : sc. σε φονέα γενέσθαι έκκαλοΰμαι. ού . . . εγωγ’ = “not I ” (G.P.2 ρ. 123 and for δητα “giving the lie to a positive statement” ib. p. 275; ού δητ’ εγωγ’ άλλα recurs O.T. 1161, Phil. 735). 1 2 0 8 , 9 . παιώνιον . . . ίατηρα: in a sense παιώνιον corresponds to παλαμναΐον, ίατηρα to φονέα. ών έχω: It is not wholly satisfactory to interpret & έχω, since by “supplying” τούτων των κακών in order to render the structure of the sentence logically clear we make the words much less natural than they are and blur the intensifying effect of των έμών κακών. (Hermann’s ως, adopted by Pearson, is a needless conjecture). Better, then,to say that ών έχω = τούτων ά έχω, without adding . Since Hyllus, by setting fire to the pyre, will be the agent of Heracles’ death and since only Death will deliver Heracles from his sufferings, Heracles can call Hyllus the παιώνιος and ίατήρ of his miseries, provided he obeys. Thus the phrase is another instance of the τόπος of Death the healer: cf. Aesch. fr. 255 μόνος γάρ εί σύ των άνηκέστων κακών / ιατρός (see note ad Ai. 854), Myrnvid. P.S.I. 1211.5, 6 (Suppl. Aescll·. 73 Mette) εύπετέστερον δ’ έχοις / . . . . βροτοΐσιν ιατρόν πόνων. For παιώνιος cf. Aesch. Ag. 512 νυν δ’ αύτε σωτήρ ϊσθι καί παιώνιος, Suppl. 1066 χειρί παιωνία; it does not make much difference whether we take the word as substantive or as adjective, ίατήρ instead of ιατρός in Tragedy only here and prob. η L.-Sc.

COMMENTARY

245

Eur. Hyps. fr. 66.3 (Italie), borrowed from Horn. For the meta­ phorical use cp. also Soph. fr. 698 άλλ’ έσθ’ ό θάνατος λοΐσθος ιατρός νόσων, Eur. Hipp. 1373 g01 θάνατος παιάν έλθοι, Diphilus fr. 88 K. τούτων (sc. των χάχων) ο θάνατος καθάπερ Ιατρός φανείς / άνέπαυσε τούς έχοντας. 1210. ύπαίθων: poet. = ύποκαίων (αϊθειν and its compounds are rare in prose). σώμ’ ίώμην : Hyllus has not grasped the full meaning of the preceding words. 1211. άλλ’: “well then” introducing an alternative suggestion. ((HP.* p. 9). γ ’ : A’s reading ; L’s μ’ is hardly defensible. 1212. φθόνησις: άπαξ λεγόμενον; “refusal”. 1 2 1 3 . πλήρωμα: γενήσεται. On the interrelation of substantives formed with -μα and -σις, whose difference in sense is sometimes slight, cf. Chantraine, Formation des Noms pp. 186 and 287. A full paraphrase of these words would run ή καί πυράς πλήρωσε ως φθόνησις ού γενήσεται; But Jebb is right in stating that πλήρωμα “expressing the result, is equally correct here” . 1 2 1 4 . όσον γ’ άν αύτος . . . χεροΐν : with άν supply πληρώσαιμ,ι or πράξαιμι. “ Dans la mesure où je le puis, sans moi-même y mettre la main” (Mazon). ποτι-: in dialogue only here and Aesch. Eum. 79 ποτί πτόλιν (προσψαύω recurs in Soph. Phil. 1054, O.C. 329). 1 2 1 5 . κού καμή: “you will not have to complain” , “you will not meet difficulty” . Since the active form of the future does not exist, Ellendt’s and Campbell’s reading (κάμει) and interpretation (“shall not flag” ) are impossible. τούμον μέρος: quantum in me est, cf. O.T. 1509, O.C. 1366, Ant. 1062. 1 2 1 6 . άλλ’: expressing “acquiescence” ; “well”, “very good” (G.P,2 p. 19) ; cf. Ant. 98. πρόσνειμαι: the middle has intensifying function as e.g. at Aesch. Suppl. 216 συγγνοΐτο. 1 2 1 7 . βραχεΐαν: “small” corresponding with μακροΐς and μακρά I2l8, διδούς : Jebb and Radermacher are possibly right in connecting 1) H orn, h a s 6 in sta n c e s of th e “ A c h a e a n ” ίητήρ, cf. C. J. R u ijg h , L ’élé­ ment achéen dans la langue épique, th è se A m ste rd a m 1957, P· 126; C h a n ­ tra in e , F o n na tio n des N o m s p p . 326, 330.

246

COM MENTARY

this very closely with προς μακροϊς άλλοις (“sc. αυτά” ) but|to me it seems more natural to consider it as an amplification of πρόσνειμαι with χάριν understood; προς μακροϊς άλλοις goes with διδούς rather than with πρόσνειμαι; we could put a comma after βραχεΐαν. 1 2 1 8 . κάρτ’ : stressed by its placing. The way in which Hyllus, by Heracles’ words, is led into this imprudent expression of willing­ ness may be considered one of the many devices by which the poet seeks to maintain variation and suspense in this laborious scene. 1 2 1 9 . Εύρυτείαν: cf. supra 260. δητα: connective; on δήτα in questions without an interrogative pronoun or particle cf. G.P.*2 p. 271 (5), K.-G. II 133.4 “kennst du gewiss?” 1 2 2 0 . ώστ’ έπεικάζειν : most editors accept Schaefer’s ώς γ ’, but in view of Hdt. II 10.1 and PL Phaedr. 230 b it seems possible to retain ώστ’, with the function of the common ώς (K.-G. II 508,9) with “formulary” infinitive; of course the conjecture may be right. In either case the meaning is: “so far as I may guess” = “if I am not mistaken” *). On the slight difference between έπεικάζειν and άπεικάζειν cf. supra ad 141. 1221. τοσοϋτον: just this, the χάρις βραχεία of 1217. έπισκήπτω: with two accus., cf. Eur. I T . 701; K.-G. I 328. 1222. εύσεβεΐν : both observance of pietas towards his father and standing by his oath 2) are meant. 1 2 2 3 . πατρώων όρκίων: “the promise exacted on oath by your father” (Campbell). μεμνημένος: the partie, stands in causal relation to εύσεβεΐν. 1 2 2 4 . προσθου: προστίθεσθαι “take to one” (as a friend, ally etc.) ; only here with δάμαρτα “take her to wife” . μηδ’ άπιστήσης πατρί: cf. 1183. 1 2 2 5 . όμοΰ: “close to” ; τοΐς έμοΐς πλευροΐς depends on it. 1 2 2 6 . λάβοι: though there is something to be said for Elmsley’s λάβτ; (Jebb, Masqueray), the passing from command to the ex­ pression of a desire (and back again to command in this case) is very natural, cf. supra 331. 1 2 2 5 , 6. Though it is probably true that Hyllus was lole’s husband according to old saga tradition, this does not help us to understand why Sophocles makes Heracles thrust his paramour on his son. For in this tragedy Heracles did not ask for lole’s b T hese in fin itiv e s a re lim ita tiv e , S ch w .-D eb r. I I 378. 2) Cf. J . C. B o lk estein , Ό σ ιο ς en Εύσεβής, th e sis U tre c h t 1936, p. 32.

COMMENTARY

247

hand on behalf of Hyllus; the tragedy indeed turns on Heracles’ own desire for her; his nature, regardless of another’s feelings, urged him to conquer the object of his desire. It is in keeping with this unhuman or superhuman character of one for whom nothing is of any interest except his own glorious deeds, his own excessive desires and his divine descent that he requires his son to comply with his shocking wish. It would be, according to his selfcentred notions, a diminution of his glory, if lole were to become the wife of anybody lower than his own blood. The thought that she is the cause of Deianeira’s death does not for a moment enter his mind; Hyllus’ distress does not affect him, any more than Deianeira’s loyalty did when he sent lole to Trachis. So it appears that the poet, as we expect a great poet to do, skilfully utilized one of the elements of the saga (Hyllus’ marriage with lole) to achieve his own dra­ matic ends. Heracles’ last expression of his will completes the picture with a stroke which intensifies and elucidates the character we have come to know in the course of the play. 1 2 2 7 . τοϋτο κήδευσον λέχος: κηδεύειν “contract a marriage” Aesch. Prom. 890. τοϋτο λέχος “this marriage” is cognate accusative, (κηδεύειν with dativ. pers. Eur. Hipp. 634). “ C’est à toi de former ces liens” (Mazon). 1 2 2 8 , 9 . πιστεύσαντ’: = πιθόμενον; the sense is contextually determined by the contrast with άπιστεΐν = άπειθεΐν. Cf. also 1251. σμικροίς: dativus respectus (thus Jebb; this seems better than the alternative “to disobey a trivial command” ) ; cf. e.g. O.T. 25 φθίνουσα μεν κάλυξιν κτλ. συγχεΐ: “make of none effect”, cf. II. IV 269 Ιπεί σύν γ ’ ορκι’ έχευαν/ Τρώες and cp. εκχέω “frustrate” Phil. 13, Eur. fr. 789 N.2 όκνών δέ μόχθων των πριν έκχέοα χάριν. Cf. Αρ. Met. V 19: ceterum incuria sequens prioris providentiae beneficia conrumpet. γάρ τοι: cf. G.P.2 p. 549 (3). 1230. το . . . νοσοΰντι θυμοΰσθοα: “to be angry with a sick man” (Jebb) and thus most commentators and translations. Wakefield’s νοσοϋντα is accepted by Schn.-Raderm. : then the meaning is: “dass ein Kranker in Zorn gerate . . . ” and 1240 sq. would seem to recommend this. Indeed the interpretation is also possible with νοσουντι : “for a sick man it is a bad thing to be angry” (and Heracles will be angry if I do not comply with his wishes 1) ). 543 sq. are not 1) Likewise the schol. : το θυμουσθαι εί μή πεισθείην αύτω (add. Papageorgios).

248

COMMENTARY

conclusive in favour of the usual interpretation, but the wordorder is perhaps against the other alternative. 1 2 3 1 . ώδ’: ώδε κακώς; άφρονοΰντα. όραν: with the idea of “standing by and making no protest” implied. 1 2 3 2 . ώς έργασείων: cf. note ad Ai. 326 (δρασείων) ; the verb recurs Phil. 1001 τί δ’ έργασείεις; in general cf. Schwyzer I 789. 1 2 3 3 . 4 . μέν . . . τ’: cf. supra ad 1012; alteration is needless. 1 2 3 4 . μεταίτιος: cf. 260, 447. We may understand: sharer of the blame with Heracles (Jebb) 1), with Nessus (Campbell), with Eros, with the gods, with Zeus. The term μεταίτιος does not occur in the other plays ; its recurrence in the Track, may be due to a preoccupa­ tion on the part of the poet with men’s liability for each others’ destinies; the subject-matter of the play preeminently calls for such a preoccupation. · 1 2 3 3 - 1 2 3 6 . If it were less charged with the pathos of indignation, the sentence would run: τις γάρ ποτέ ταύτην, ή ........ , αν ελοιτο, or perhaps τις γάρ ποτέ ταΰτα άν έργάσαιτο ταύτης μοι............ μεταιτίου (or ταύτην, ή . . . ., έλόμενος). As it is, the relative clause represents the object of the verbal idea to be supplied with τίς γάρ ποθ’, e.g. λάβοι, at the same time giving the reason why nobody could do such a thing ; moreover it has to be noted that he passes from the general (τίς etc.) to the particular (μοι etc.); the simple idea: “nobody could take to wife the murderess of his mother and father” lies at the bottom of the words expressed. With τίς ταΰτ’ άν . . . ελοιτο he sums up the ideas implied in the preceding words; ταΰτ’ “all this” ,—“the horrors which, for him, are embodied in Iole” (Jebb). The sentence as a whole is a striking instance of expressiveness by means of syntactical anomalousness. 1 2 3 3 . μοι: probably better taken as dativus possessivus than as ethicus. θανεΐν: τοϋ θανεΐν would be regular, but cf. Ant. 1173, K.-G. II U and 12 (with anm. 10).—On the relation of the tenses (μεταίτιος θανεΐν) cf. Goodwin § ιοί. 1 2 3 4 . ώς εχεις εχειν: a considerate phrase to denote Heracles' awful plight; K.-G. I I 436 gives many instances of comparable phrases with relative pronouns or adverbs. 1 2 3 5 . νοσοΐ: opt. by attractio modi K.-G. I 255. 1) Improbable, in my opinion; Ed. Fraenkel ad A g. S11 (sharer of the blame with Deianeira herself) is wrong.

COMMENTARY

249

έξ άλαστόρων: “by the agency of avenging deities” (τις αν ταϋτα πράττειν ελοιτο εκτός ών μανίας καί θεηλασίας; schol.); έξ Έρινύων would amount to the same, or έκ κακού δαίμονος (cf. Aesch. Pers. 354) ; the plural is generic. For νοσεΐν έξ άλαστόρων cf. Hippocr. De morbo sacro i in fine; for άλάστωρ cf. Ed. Fraenkel ad Ag. 1501. 1 2 3 7 . τοΐαιν έχθίστοισι: generic plural, referring to lole, cf. El. 594· συνναίειν όμοϋ: the pleonastic phrase, όμοϋ echoing όμοϋ 1225, ex­ presses Hyllus’ horror at the idea of intimacy. Note moreover the distant connection with 545 τό δ’ αδ ξυνοικεΐν τήδ’ όμοϋ τις αν γυνή / δύναιτο . . . . 1 2 3 8 . άνήρ οδ’ : Heracles first gives vent to his irritation by speaking of Hyllus in the third person; then he addresses him again with threats. ώς εοικεν ού νεμεΐν: on the confusion of constructions (ώς εοικεν ου νεμεΐ, εοικεν ού νεμεΐν; it occurs often in Hdt., rarely in Attic prose, not frequently in Tragedy, cf. Aesch. Pers. 188, 565) cf. K.-G. II 581 1). Brunch’s correction νεμεΐν (νέμειν MSS) is perhaps un­ necessary. 1 2 3 8 , 9 . νεμεΐν . . . μοίραν: cf. Aesch. Prom. 291 sq. χωρίς τε γένους ούκ έστιν οτω / μείζονα μοίραν νείμαιμ’ ή σοί; μοίρα = “the respect due” ; see Groeneboom’s note a.l. 1 2 3 9 . άλλά τοι: G.P.2 p. 549 (1). 1 2 3 9 , 4 0 . θεών άρà / μενεΐ σ’: cf. 1201,2. That the gods’ Άρά will await him is another way of saying that he, Heracles, will be a curse to Hyllus. The gods invoked at Hyllus’ oath are entrusted with the execution of Heracles’ curse ; the curse itself is represented as a power, a divine agent; at O.C. 1375 (quoted by J.) Oedipus summons his άραί to be his σύμμαχοι. 1241. οΐμοι . . . φράσεις: there is some ambiguity in these words. They could simply mean: “you will tell us that your trouble is returned” (thus Campbell) and so Heracles is supposed to take them. But Heracles’ bodily νόσος is at the same time a mental one. In Hyllus’ eyes his order to marry lole is the outcome of a distem­ pered mind (so much is clearly implied in 1231 and 1235). So the signs of Heracles’ returning pains are, for him, also the symptoms of his growing madness : still worse is to be expected. So the words are also meant to convey: “soon you will show how utterly insane P Cf. also D. Tabacliovitz, P h é n o m è n e s Mus. Hclv. 1946, p. 156.

b a ss e ép o q u e ,

d u v i e u x gre c d a n s le grec de la

250

COMMENTARY

you are” ; ώς in itself is ambiguous (=οτι or = δσον). “Hélas! tu vas, je crois, parler comme un dément” x) (Mazon). 1 2 4 2 . σύ . . . κακοϋ: σύ με . . . άναταράττεις άπό του καταπραϋνθέντος κακοϋ μή πειθόμενος (schol.). εύνασθέντος: for the metaphoric use cf. supra ιο6, κατευνάζει (with πόντον) Ap. Rhod. I ι± 5 5 >εύνάζειν τήν ταλαιπωρίην Aretaeus (Medicus) C.A. 2.1. 1 2 4 3 . τάπορείν έχω: more emphatic than άπόρως έχω. The words express strikingly his predicament of conflicting loyalties. εις πολλά: cf. supra 489 εις άπανθ’. 1 2 4 4 . δικαιοΐς . . . κλύειν: cf. Ai. 1072. τοΰ φυτεύσαντος: the aor. partie, is used just as in δ τεκών, ή τεκοΰσα etc. 1 2 4 5 . άλλ’ . . . δητα: the combination of particles lends the question a vehement tone of rejection. Cf. G.P.Z 276 (II). δυσσεβεΐν: cf. 1222; why marrying lole would be δυσσεβές in Hyllus’ eyes (and indeed in the view of everybody of sane mind) is clearly stated 1233 sqq. 1 2 4 6 . ού δυσσέβεια . . . εί: for the type of phrase cf. Phil. 902 sq. άπαντα δυσχέρεια . . . όταν. κέαρ: 5 instances in Soph., always as last word of the trimeter, thrice in Eur. (same place), 15 instances in Aesch. (7 in Prom.) (same place in trim., but also in lyrics). 1 2 4 7 . πανδίκως: There is the same difficulty as in 611. If we take the word with πράσσειν the question means : do you order me to do these things “with full justification” ? i.e. will my act be fully justified if I obey your order? Jebb prefers this interpretation but it seems more natural that πανδίκως goes with άνωγας: “Is it your full and authoritative command . . .” (Campbell), “Ainsi ce sont là tes ordres formels?” (Mazon). πανδίκως,it is true, is not exactly the same as παντελώς (cf. Groeneboom ad Aesch. Cho. 681) but it often comes very near it (Lat. prohe, prorsus, cf. Italie, Index Aeschyleus s.v.), cf. e.g. Aesch. Sept. 670 ή δητ’ αν ε’ίη πανδίκως ψευδώνυμος / Δίκη . . ., Eum. 804 πανδίκως υπίσχομαι. Heracles’ answer έγωγε is an indication that άνωγας, not πράσσειν, has the main stress. Hyllus’ words 1249 sq. amount to: I will do the deed on your responsibility. 1 2 4 9 . ποήσω κούκ άπώσομαι: polar expression of the type και b Cf. Masqueray’s: “Hélas! bientôt, je crois, ton langage va montrer comme tu souffres”.

COM MENTARY

251

φημί δρασαι κούκ άπαρνοΰμαι τό μή. Tor άπωθέομαι “decline” , “refuse” cf. Eur. fr. 789.2 N.2 καί τούς παρόντας ουκ άπωθοϋμαι πόνους. 1 2 4 9 , 5 0 . τδ σδν / θεοΐσι δεικνύς εργον: though the form of the words would seem to be in favour of Jebb’s interpretation (εργον denotes the act of Heracles in prescribing the marriage and the words mean properly: “pleading before the gods the constraint which you have put upon me” ), the use of εργον and the analogy of a passage like O.T. 572 τάς εμάς / ούκ αν ποτ’ είπε Αα'ίου διαφθοράς (these words amount to: he would not have said that I am Laius’ murderer) lead me to prefer the alternative course *) : τδ σδν though forming part of the object is to be considered as an anticipated predicate, the whole phrase being a condensed way of saying: θεοΐσι δεικνύς τδ εργον (i.e. the marriage) σδν είναι. So I accept Mazon’s rendering: “mais ce sera en dénonçant aux dieux l’acte comme tien” . 1 2 5 1 . σοί γε πιστεύσας: the sense lies in between “trusting” and “obeying” ; Jebb’s rendering “for loyalty to thee” is excellent. Cp. 1228. 1 2 5 2 , 3 . καλώς τελευτάς: in the end you show the right spirit. κάπί τοΐσδε: επί τοΐσδε either insuper (cf. τάπί τούτοισιν quod superest Aesch. Ag. 255 and Hdt. IX 78.2 σύ δέ καί τά λοιπά τά επί τούτοισι ποίησον) or, more closely connected with ταχεΐαν, (quickly following) upon these words. The latter seems better, since επί would be rather otiose besides προσ-, if the former course is pre­ ferred. Indeed the idea “moreover” is expressed by προσ-: προστιθέναι χάριν does not mean “render a service” but “add a service” . Since the predicate ταχεΐαν bears the full stress the meaning of τήν χάριν ταχεΐαν πρόαθες is: “let quickly follow the rendering of the (promised) service”, “add quickness to the promise of the service” . 1 2 5 4 . σπαραγμόν: cf. 778. οίστρον : h.l. of the maddening smart of pain, access of fury. τιν’ : prob, also to be taken with σπαραγμόν. 1 2 5 5 . άγ’: without distinct reference to number, cf. ϊδ’ 821; Hyllus and the attendants are addressed. έγκονεΐτ’, αίρεσθε: cf. note ad Ai. 811. 1 2 5 5 , 6. παΰλά τοι κακών / αυτή : παύλα esp. used of end of disease, pain etc. Cf. Phil. 1329, Hippocr., Gal. Note that the cremation1 1) T a k e n inter al. b y C am p b ell w ho c o m p a re d O.T. 572.

252

COM MENTARY

means to him solely death and deliverance by death. The following words, in apposition to the predicative παΰλα, strongly emphasize this. For παΰλα . . . αυτή cf. O.C. 88 ταύτην έλεξε παύλαν. Cf. also ανάπαυλα Phil. 638, 878, El. 873. 1 2 5 7 . τελειοΰσθαι: amounts to an intensified τελεΐσθαι. 1 2 5 8 . έπε'ι κελεύεις κάξαναγκάζεις : the second word shows clearly how much Hyllus feels himself to act under compulsion. 1 2 5 9 - 1 2 7 7 . The end is composed of anapaestic systems running to about the same length as at the end of the Ai ax. The final section in anapaests is somewhat longer in O.C. and Phil., much briefer in Ant. and El. and is absent from O.T. But in every instance x) the Coryphaeus has the last word. Now the MSS and the scholia are divided as to the question whether 1275-1278 were recited by Hyllus or by the Chorus (that is to say, in any case, the Coryphaeus) and so are modern editions and commentaries: Jebb, Pearson, Kuiper, Schmid 2) and many older editors assign these lines to the former, Radermacher, Masqueray, Dain-Mazon and Bowra {Soph. Trag. p. 158), Weinstock (Sophokles1 p. 137), Webster (Introd. p. 33), Opstelten {Soph, and Greek Pessimism pp. 66, 134), Pohlenz (.Erläuterungen2 p. 89) and others assign them to the latter. Things are complicated by the fact that the παρθένος addressed in 1. 1275 creates another problem, and that the schol. offer a v.l. επ’ instead of the MSS text άπ’. However these problems are solved, it seems preferable to give the lines to the Coryphaeus, since the very farreaching last line, though not in formal contrast with Hyllus’ bitter complaint, strikes a different note, a note indeed of resignation rather than of rebellion3) and so better suits the Chorus who proclaim the poet’s own view. 1 2 5 9 . άνακινήσαι: I accept the opinion of Campbell and Rader­ macher who take the verb as intr. (“before this trouble re-awakens” ). Other compounds of κινεΐν are so used and to take σε (i.e. ψυχήν) either as the subject or as the object of άνακινήσαι is equally unsatisfactory. 1 2 6 0 . ώ ψυχή σκληρά: ψυχή is not often addressed in Soph. (cf. Phil. 712), nor in Aesch. ; it is in Eur. Or. 466, Io 859, I.T. 839, 881, Ale. 837 v.l. Cf. Find. Pyth. I ll 61. b I do n o t sp e a k fo r th e m o m e n t of th e p ro b lem s raised b y th e e n d of O.T. 0 I I p. 3S3 n . 4. 3) See O p ste lte n o.l. p. 66.

COM MENTARY

253

σκληρά: here: “hardy”, "hardened”, whereas at Ai. 1361 the sense is: “harsh”, “stubborn” , “intractable”. 1 2 6 0 , 6 1 . χάλυβος . . . παρέχουσ’: ψυχή σκληρά is asked to supply a bridle-bit in order to prevent him from crying, χάλυψ “steel” also Aesch. Prom. 133. λιθοκόλλητου is explained in various ways: “set with stones” (either to make it more drastic or as ornaments) ; κολλάω is used in the sense of "joining one metal or other substance to another” x), cf. Pinei. Nem. VII 78. Soph, has χρυσόκολλος “inlaid with gold” jr. 378, cf. Eur. fr. 587 (χρυσοκόλλητος id. Phoen. 2) and there are some other compounds with - κολλητος, among which are χαλκόκόλλητος and «λιθοκόλλητος (“not cemented” ). If the λίθοι are meant as ornaments, the epithet here is irrelevant, if not, it is difficult to see how they could reinforce the curbing action of a steel b i t *2). Jebb has the subtle interpretation: “a curb of steel, to keep the lips set as stone to stone” , λιθοκόλλητου then has causative force and with λίθος a new image is introduced; in view of άλιθοκόλλητος this is possible. But perhaps G. Hermann’s rendering ferreum saxo­ rum frenum, “iron clamps, used for binding stones together” 3), "le bon crampon de fer qu’on scelle dans le marbre” (Mazon) is still better; in either case two images are welded together. Or we may say that, with G. Hermann’s interpretation, the whole phrase λιθοκόλλητου στομίου is metaphorical, στομίου being used because the lips of the στόμα and not the stones of a building must be bound together. 1 2 6 2 , 3 . ώς . . . έργου: since with the MSS reading τελέως the words will not construe (unless indeed we should accept the very clumsy interpretation: ώς (“for” ) έπίχαρτόυ τελέως άεκούσιου έργου), and since reading τελεώσ' would involve us in similar difficulties (nor will τελεώσαι εκούσιου do), I accept Billerbeck’s τελέουσ’ (with all modem editors). But I approve of Campbell’s protest against the usual interpretation of the words as amended, viz. that ως should be taken with τελέουσ’ ; for this introduces a note of joyousness into the passage, entirely inconsistent with Heracles’ mood and indeed with the tone of the whole scene. So I follow Campbell’s rendering: “Performing an unwilling deed as q

l

.-S c.

2) Mr. IT. L lo y d -Jo n e s, Notes on Sophocles' Antigone, Cl. Q u. 1957, p . 15 p u ts fo rw ard a c o n tra ry opinion. 3) See Je b b , A p p e n d ix .

254

COMMENTARY

a thing to rejoice at” . "To rejoice at” only in so far as death, the «εκούσιον εργον, will release him from his sufferings. 1 2 6 4 , 5 . μεγάλην . . . συγγνωμοο"ύνην : συγγνωμοσύνη (only here, hardly differing in sense from συγγνώμη “lenient judgement” , "allowance”, a formation used for the sake of contrast with the following αγνωμοσύνη 1), a common word) is requested by Hyllus for his deeds because he is compelled to them, μεγάλην, strongly emphasized by its placing, well reveals his awareness how appalling they must appear in the eyes of normal people, as appalling indeed as the αγνωμοσύνη “the want of feeling” , “the cruelty” shown by the gods who, in the last resort, are responsible for all that has happened and is happening. Of course this passionate outburst is not to be considered as the poet’s last word on Heracles’ tragedy; but the way in which the outburst is worded is such as to justify our feeling that he sympathizes with his character up to a certain point; these are the words, we feel, an inexperienced young man would speak, when confronted with the mysterious tragedy of life. The gods are cruel and powerful, Hyllus cannot see further than that and he is not therefore to be thought the worse of. The poet has shown Heracles’ tragedy, the outcome of the inextricable inter­ connection of the hero’s character and destiny; he passes no judgement on Hyllus’ words nor on the gods. What Hyllus says subjectively and by way of an only too human, passionate protest, is, in fact, objectively and dispassionately restated by the Cory­ phaeus (1276-1278), so much so that in the last line of the play the “moral” is drawn, or rather, the human condition in its dependency is stressed and one side of the poet’s credo appears. The context de­ monstrates that this credo, at the date of the Trachiniae, came closer to sombre, albeit wise, resignation than to cheerful acceptance θέμενοι συγγνωμοσύνην: periphrasis of συγγνόντες (cf. Ant. 151), here used for the sake of pointed parallelism with the following lines (perhaps another instance of the πικρόν and κατάτεχνον of Soph.’s second period). On άγνωμων cf. note ad 473 and see Dodds on Eur. Bacch. 885; αγνωμοσύνη combines the notions of ruth­ lessness*2) and iniquity; cf. Dem. XVIII 207 τη τής τύχης αγνω­ μοσύνη τά συμβάντα παθεΐν (schol. άδικία), ib. 252 την αγνωμοσύνην αυτού και βασκανίαν. b See o n th e fo rm a tio n s w ith -σύνη C h a n tra in e , F orm ation des N o m s pp. 211 sq. 2) ‘' R ü c k sic h tslo sig k e it’’.

COMMENTARY

255

1 2 6 6 , 7 . θεών . . .έργων: “ of the gods” (gen. subj.) “in the deeds” (gen. obj.). On two genitives dependent on the same noun cf. Schwyzer-Debrunner II p. 135 1). The v.l. θεοΐς (Vat. Palat. 287 and T s.l.) is prob, a Byzantine conjecture (we could explain its meaning by equating είδότες to συνειδότες)12) ; Nauck’s acceptance of it and bracketing αγνωμοσύνην είδότες έργων, is wholly unwarranted. των πρασσομένων: prob, also including Deianeira’s death; briefly for των πραχθέντων καί τών πρασσομένων. 1 2 6 8 . οΐ: it appears from this relative clause that θεών is “ge­ neric” and that Zeus is meant. The plural has the same amplifying force as at O.T. 1406 sqq. κληζόμενοί.: "being called and invoked as” . Hyllus could have said with Eur.’s Alcmene (Heracl. 719) εί S’ έστίν δσιος αύτος (Zeus) οίδεν εις εμέ. 1 2 6 9 . έφορώσι: “look on” (with indifference). 1 2 7 0 . τά μεν ούν μέλλοντ’ ούδείς έφορα: Wakefield’s άφορα, accepted by Pearson, is an unnecessary alteration ; the same word may recur within a brief space with a different meaning. This is not a hint at Heracles’ apotheosis 3) but only a slight reserve in Hyllus’ con­ demnation of Zeus: the gods are powerful and anything may happen ; by this reflection the hopeless and, for them, shameful present state of things is expressed with the more poignancy. 1 2 7 1 . τά νυν έστώτ’ : τά νϋν καθεστώτ’ “the present state of things.” Ci. Ant. 1156 and 1160. 1 2 7 3 . δ’ oùv: cf. G.P.2 ρ. q6i (“the consequences to Heracles are what really matters” ). 1 2 7 4 . άτην: cf. 850, 1002, 1082, 1104. Here the idea of “ruin” is foremost in the mind of the speaker, ύπέχειν sustinere, with notions like κακόν, ζημίαν etc. as object. 1 2 7 5 . παρθέν’: some commentators (but not in Antiquity) have thought of lole (e.g. Radermacher, Webster and Bowra). Without going so far as Mazon 4), who says “Quant à supposer que παρθένε puisse désigner Iole, c’est une fantaisie qui ne mérite pas d’être prise au sérieux”, I agree with his conclusions. If Iole were meant, we should verite επ’ οΐ'κων, but the MSS reading is άπ’ οΐκων. This 1) A nd cp. for a n o th e r c o m b in a tio n supra 1191. 2) P olilenz’ in te rp re ta tio n (E rläuterungen1· p. 89) 'ih r h a b t völligen M angel an V e rstä n d n is fü r die G ö tte r bei ih rem T u n ’ is h a rd ly possible. 3) As m a n y critics w ill h a v e it ; am o n g th e m Polilenz, G r .T r .1 p. 208, B ow ra, o.c. p. 160. 4) R ev u e de Philologie 1951, p. i l , cf. also Polilenz, E rläu teru n g en 1 p. 89.

256

COMMENTARY

can only be explained if the maidens of the Chorus are addressed and summoned to stay away no longer from their homes. The reading επ’ οίκων (T Σ) arose from somebody’s misunderstanding (he thought of the palace ; it is not possible, as suggested by Camp­ bell, to take μη λείπου = επου and retain άπ’ οίκων by that forced device). So the words mean: "Toi, non plus, jeune fille, ne reste pas là, loin de ta maison” (Mazon). For λείπομαι άπό Mazon com­ pares II. IX 437 sq., 444 sq., Od. XV 10. 1 2 7 6 . θανάτους: possibly another “generic” plural; but the Chorus were virtually witnesses of Heracles’ death1) as well, νέους: “ter­ rible”, “dread” (Jebb) *2). 1 2 7 7 . καινοπαθή: “quod numquam quis pertulit”, “inauditus”. (E.). One of the άπαξ λεγάμενα of our play. Cp. καινοποιηθέν supra 873, καινοπήμων Aesch. Sept. 363 and νεοπαθής Eum. 514; see for καινός and νέος v. Wilamowitz Eur. Eerakl. 2 II p. 243 (quoted by Groeneboom ad Sept. l.c.). The reading καινοπαγή, adopted by Pearson, seems inferior, though it is the best transmitted one. 1 2 7 8 . κούδέν τούτων 6 τι μή Ζεύς: ούδέν τούτων ούδείς έπραξεν εί μή μόνος ό Ζεύς (schob, Campbell) or ούδέν τούτων ο τι μή Ζεύς (Jebb, Raderm.). But this divergence shows only too clearly the inadequacy of such supplements. Indeed, it makes small difference whether we assume that Zeus is or does what happened; neither statement covers the whole truth. The happenings are the will of Zeus, Zeus himself, if you want to put it thus, the spirit of the κόσμος, embodied in material events.—Cf. in general A.esch. Ag. 1485-1488. The words present us with the most sublime last line of Sophoclean tragedies, though those of El., Ant. and O.C. come near to it in weight)/ conclusiveness. It is inconceivable that they are spoken by Hyllus. x) μεγάλους = δεινούς, m ore easily u n d e rs ta n d a b le if H e ra c le s’ d e a th is also m e a n t. 2) O n ίδοϋσα· e x te n d in g from th e first m e tro n in to th e n e x t cf. E . F ra e n k e l a d A g . 52.